创业与商业paulgraham.com
微软已死（2007）
Microsoft is Dead (2007)
2007 — 2025，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这是 Paul Graham 2007 年的一篇短文，判断微软在互联网与创业竞争中已不再令人畏惧、失去影响力——所谓“死”并非字面倒闭。文章以当时 Web 应用崛起、Google 强势等为背景，讨论创业者为何不再把微软当作威胁。
为什么经久不衰：它记录了一个科技权力转移的转折点，而微软后来的复兴又不断让“微软已死”的判断接受检验，因此成为讨论巨头兴衰的经典样本。
HN 评论精选
微软的问题不只在重大失误，更在大量糟糕的小型用户体验决策，反映出内部官僚与执行问题。
对微软最常见的厌恶通常集中在：如此庞大的公司为何会犯如此巨大的错误。但这对巨型公司来说也许在所难免，也绝非微软独有（尽管最近它犯的格外多）。我真正不满的是那些小地方：比如控制面板里有上百个名称含糊的链接。难道微软没有一个人试着改 Windows 设置，并意识到连找到设置都很难吗？是他们对糟糕体验习以为常，还是有审美追求工程师的声音被官僚体系淹没了？如果高层一路喊“做出能干掉苹果的界面”，我能理解他们最后搞出 Windows 8 那种以应用为中心的外观；但控制面板、选择无线连接、导航极其困难这些小决定如此愚蠢，让我觉得微软内部某处真的出了问题。
primitivesuave查看英文原文
The most common form of Microsoft-hate usually centers around how a company of such gargantuan size makes such gargantuan fuck-ups. But this is to be expected of companies of gargantuan size, and is certainly not limited to Microsoft alone (although recently they've had more than their fair share). My qualm with Microsoft is all the little things that they let slip through. Little things like having a control panel with 100 different links with nondescript names. Is it really possible that not a single person at Microsoft tried changing a setting on their Windows machine and realized how difficult it was to even find the setting? Were they so entrenched in the Microsoft way of doing things that they were accustomed to a shitty user experience? Or did the aesthetically minded engineer have his voice drowned out by the bureaucracy? If the higher-ups were yelling down the food chain, "build an Apple-killing UI!", I can see how they would settle on what became the app-centric look of Windows 8. But blatantly idiotic decisions around the little things like control panels, choosing wireless connections, and the sheer difficulty of navigation, make me realize that somewhere at Microsoft something is really fucked up.
Web 并未如预言取代原生软件，移动应用商店与沙盒机制改变了软件分发格局。
很有意思：2007 年我相信（PG 似乎也相信）Web 最终会取代桌面软件。七年过去，一些最响亮的软件名字（Instagram、Lyft）完全放弃了 Web，转向“桌面”（其实是原生）软件。大量代码直接发布到移动设备，说明集中式应用商店和真正沙盒化安装的威力——一个应用不能搞坏整个系统。我们走了很远。
eldavido查看英文原文
It's really interesting how in 2007, I believed (as did pg, seemingly) that the web would eventually overtake desktop software. Fast forward seven years, and some of the biggest names in software (Instagram, Lyft) have completely abandoned the web for "desktop" (really, native) software. That so much code ships directly to mobile devices says a lot about the power of centralized app stores and truly sandboxed installations where one app can't trash the entire system. We've come a long way.
“死”字是夸张的标题党，削弱了文章可信度；微软只是不再是互联网和创业领域的主角。
这篇文章很有洞见，但没什么比耸人听闻更让我烦。它是标题党，我后悔被吸进去读，也烦自己还得花时间评论。总之，如果还不明显的话，“dead”这个词毁了文章的可信度。微软显然没死，它只是不再是互联网上最大的玩家，在创业领域也不算玩家。
adamconroy查看英文原文
It is an insightful piece but nothing annoys me more than sensationalism. Its click bait and I am annoyed I got sucked into reading it and annoyed that I feel compelled to waste time commenting. Anyway, if it isn't obvious, the article's credibility is killed by the use of the word dead. Microsoft clearly isn't dead it just isn't the biggest player on the internet, and isn't really a player in the start up space.
微软正在重建连贯的软件生态，方向比谷歌的分散布局更可取，只是执行尚未成熟。
我的看法几乎完全相反。我不是什么重要人物（至少不是 PG），只是消费者和开发者。若有人在意，我现在对微软挺兴奋。作为开发者和消费者，我对谷歌有意见：它什么都想做，却没有稳定、连贯、可用来构建产品的生态。你搞不清它在 Android 和 Chrome OS、Dart 和 JavaScript、Java 和 Go 之间要往哪走。微软正试图一砖一瓦建立连贯的软件生态，从开发、设计到用户体验都连贯。这个方向对我有道理；只是目前质量和体验还不到位，但我可能会买账。另外我刚看了 Nadella 讲话，他说想解决消费级和企业级软件之间的割裂。结合越来越多人远程或居家工作、工作与私人设备越来越多，这开始说得通。你可能会说我们厌倦了微软的尝试，但他们正把产品整合起来，显然需要更多时间，也需要执行能力，所以才有 Nadella 的新角色。总之，这是我的解读。
BlobbyLaMouche查看英文原文
I tend to think the exact opposite to the "Microsoft is Dead". I'm nobody important (well not a PG anyway), just a consumer and a developer. And if anybody cares, I'm quite excited by Microsoft at the moment. As both a developer and a consumer, I have a complaint against Google. It's going in every direction. Google has no stable, coherent, ecosystem on which you can build your products. You don't know where they are going between Android and Chrome OS. Or between DART and javascript. Or Java and Go. Microsoft is trying to attack exactly that by trying to create, brick by brick, a coherent software ecosystem. Coherent from a development, design and user experience point of view. This direction makes sense to me. I'm just not buying at the moment as the quality and experience is just not there yet. But I could buy. Also I just watched Nadella speaking, and he says he wants to address the separation between consumer and business software. I think that's pretty cool. If you couple that with the fact more and more people work from home, or remotely, and the fact we have more and more devices around for both work and private usage, that begins to make sense. You could argue that we are tired of Microsoft trying. But they are moving all their products together, and it takes more time, obviously. And some skills in the execution. Hence Nadella's new role. Well that's my interpretation anyway. Now imagine he succeeds to make all these products marginally better. Microsoft doesn't need much, it's almost there. This could become an Apple-like come-back before even being gone.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
H&R Block 与 Intuit 游说反对简化报税（2017）
H&R Block and Intuit Lobbying Against Simpler Tax Filing (2017)
2017年ProPublica调查报道梳理了H&R Block和Intuit如何通过游说反对更简单的美国报税方式，尤其是政府预填税表和免费申报等改革。
创业与商业上首页 5 次 · 2017–2022propublica.org你本不该有老板
You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss (2008)
Paul Graham 2008 年的经典文章，论证人类在演化中习惯于小团体协作，而大公司的层级结构和老板制度是人为产物，对程序员尤其有害——因为编程的本质是创造新事物，而大公司…
创业与商业上首页 5 次 · 2008–2020paulgraham.com为什么要在经济糟糕时创业
Why to Start a Startup in a Bad Economy
Paul Graham 的经典短文，论证经济衰退并不是创业的障碍：真正决定成败的是创始人和产品，而非宏观环境；衰退期反而竞争更少、人才更易招、成本更低。
创业与商业上首页 5 次 · 2008–2022paulgraham.com做那些不可规模化的事
Do Things that Don't Scale
Paul Graham 2013 年的经典创业文章《Do Things that Don't Scale》。
创业与商业上首页 4 次 · 2013–2025paulgraham.com编辑精选怎样避免死亡
How Not to Die (2007)
Paul Graham 2007 年的经典短文，讨论创业公司最常见的死法：不是被竞争对手打败，而是创始人自己放弃。
创业与商业上首页 4 次 · 2007–2019paulgraham.com