Start/Stop

There is a poll currently running on the TechCentral homepage on the vexed subject of whether Microsoft should restore the Windows Start Menu. Judging by the results when I last checked, the overwhelming response from those who took the time to vote was ‘yes, Microsoft should restore it’.

Aside from the inconvenience caused to Windows users by the removal of the Start Menu in Windows 8, the whole saga reveals some interesting truths about the IT industry as it is currently constituted which are worth exploring a little bit more.

The clamour for the restoration of the Start Menu and the publicity it has generated demonstrate clearly the continued dominance of Windows in the PC market. The vast majority of desktops and laptops in the world run Windows, so any decision taken to change the OS, such as axing the Start Menu, has ramifications for the bulk of the computer-using populace.

Looked at from the outside, it seems absurd that one change could cause so much upset but the flip side of having a near monopoly on the desktop OS space is that Microsoft also has a near monopoly on angry customers when it gets something wrong.

Not only are they Microsoft’s angry customers but they’re also the angry customers of the people who have made a living on the back of Windows. Angry customers for which they have no means of placating because they have no influence over decisions taken by the high command at Redmond. In effect, channel partners are at the mercy of Microsoft because many of them have invested so heavily in the vendor’s dominance that they have no alternative.

Squeezed middle
To all intents and purposes, they are the squeezed middle between users asking for their old Windows back and Microsoft taking its own sweet time about giving it to them.

The noise generated by the decision to drop the Start Menu also serves as a reminder that having a near monopoly can often act as an inhibitor to innovation on the part of the monopoly owner. We’re all familiar with the argument that organisations enjoying a monopoly often throttle innovation as they work to protect their dominance from smaller rivals.

But you could also argue that trying to move a huge mass of users/customers can be an inhibitor to innovation too because many of them will be unwilling to shift from the familiar to something new. You only have to look how long it has taken Microsoft to move people from XP (and it still hasn’t succeeded in migrating them all yet).

One of the problems Microsoft has in this regard is that it is effectively the establishment, which makes it even harder to make changes and migrate the customer base easily. This establishment mindset probably also contributed to its spectacular failure to make any inroads in the MP3 player market and its stumbling performance in the smartphone and tablet markets.

The problem is exacerbated by the fact Microsoft’s customer base and channel partner ecosystem is pretty much the establishment, too. It’s not that they all necessarily fear change, it’s that they hate some changes. A lot. Especially getting rid of the Start Menu.

And that’s the last thing to note. If you’re going to screw something up by antagonising people, it’s probably not a good idea to do it with the very first thing they notice when they start up the product you’re trying to move them to.

Read More: Billy MacInnes Blog Microsoft Windows