About Microsoft
I enjoyed Mr. Clarke's article and am glad to see someone paying attention to this issue, which most of us assumed would pass without notice by anyone but us. Thank you, Gavin.
I'd like to take this opportunity to expand on my characterization of Microsoft's action here. I believe the arrogance of their decision to use the name Vista for their latest version of Windows when it was already the name of our software, and then to use the name M for their latest modeling language when it was already the name of our programming language, I think does not reflect deliberate ill intent. I think it results largely from partly unconscious, partly helpless rudeness.
Microsoft knew full well about VISTA and M before they chose those names. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, principal creator of VISTA, is a major consumer of Microsoft products, including Microsoft Windows, big enough that a special deal has long been negotiated between the two organizations. Further, when Microsoft chose to begin dabbling in medical software, they will obviously have explored the field first to see who their competitors would be. Microsoft understands very well how to enter new markets competitively, and any serious exploration of the medical software market will have turned up both VISTA and MUMPS, along with a lot of other MUMPS-based medical software and a few non-MUMPS-based systems.
Hence, they knew they were taking established names, but they also knew no existing organization was likely to complain. VISTA is public domain, and M is the name of a programming-language standard created by a nonprofit organization for public consumption; neither is the intellectual property of a private organization. They obviously figured no one who counts would mind, and if they did complain things could be worked out later. This had to be a case of being easier to seek forgiveness or remedy than permission, and why wouldn't they choose this approach? Vista is an excellent choice of names for a version of Windows, a very logical name that follows from their chosen metaphor, so why not just take it? As for M, I suppose it stands for "modeling" just as readily as it stands for "medicine."
Yet, I think their arrogance and rudeness in simply taking what they want is more innocent even than my comments here may imply. Microsoft founder Bill Gates is famous for encouraging a rough-and-tumble culture among his upper managers in which they are expected to compete fiercely over their corporate strategy. There is some logic to this approach, since it shakes up complacency.
However, anyone who has worked within a strong culture and then interacted with others will understand the problem—it is all too easy to forget that the rules by which you play internally are not the same as the rules by which everyone else plays.
So yeah taking someone else's product names without asking or apologizing is objectively rude and arrogant, but so are so many things that so many of us do in life. Many VISTA users and developers were offended and hurt when Microsoft trampled them in marketing its latest version of Windows, but it was hardly a cardinal sin. Likewise, most M programmers' reactions to this latest trampling is disappointed resignation, that Microsoft is doing it to them again.
I know that Microsoft has many wonderful and creative employees, most of whom are individually polite and considerate. Likewise, Microsoft generally treats its employees very well; I will always be grateful to them for how they took care of my friend David Ice when he grew too ill to continue working for them. I have become an addict of their XBox 360 platform, and have begun to suspect that some of their most talented programmers and designers are working in their games division. Besides, there are implementations of M that run on Windows, and VISTA runs on M, so Vista and VISTA will be partners for years to come, as will M and VistA, and maybe someday even M and M. My comments are hence in no way any kind of indictment of Microsoft, but yes, their taking my community's names twice now is inconsiderate.
When people are inconsiderate to each other, they can often mend their fences with something as simple as an apology, or prevent problems in advance by asking, or explaining what they're about to do and why and expressing a little simple regret that it is necessary.
Unfortunately, although U.S. law pretends that corporations are people, they are not. For example, if a corporation formally apologizes for anything, they are inviting hordes of lawyers to descend on them like locusts to extract money in compensation, even if none of the parties directly involved want anything of the sort to happen. That's why none of us ever expects Microsoft to be polite about these things—how can they without being punished by the law?
Yes, the need for apologies could be obviated if they simply wouldn't take our names, but clearly they can't help themselves. I take that as a compliment.
Besides, although it's not up to me, I would like to abandon the name M and move back to our language's original name of MUMPS. Microsoft taking M for their own product strengthens my argument for switching back to MUMPS. So they're doing me a favor. Thanks, guys!
--Rick Marshall
Seattle, Washington
PS: Other members of our community do not feel nearly as sanguine about all this as I do, but they will have to speak for themselves.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
