Steve Ballmer

So Cameron Myhrvold led the developer relations group basically to try and figure out what do people want out of a platform and how do we provide the APIs for them and the support and everything in order to do that. All the documentation, all the help, everything.

And at the same time, Microsoft basically knew establishing a platform is brutal and requires bootstrapping a multi-sided network of developers, users, and PC manufacturers. And so 3.1 had users excited, but it was still very early. They could have lost that throne. Developers were not really yet targeting Windows. Microsoft sort of had to show, we make great applications for Windows too.

And at the same time, Microsoft basically knew establishing a platform is brutal and requires bootstrapping a multi-sided network of developers, users, and PC manufacturers. And so 3.1 had users excited, but it was still very early. They could have lost that throne. Developers were not really yet targeting Windows. Microsoft sort of had to show, we make great applications for Windows too.

So the applications group really had to start doing Windows 3.1

So the applications group really had to start doing Windows 3.1

Exactly. So you've got this big developer relations group effort that spins up. Meanwhile, there's a huge push with OEMs to get them to install Windows. At this point, they were still installing DOS, or some people were actually installing nothing and requiring users to put operating systems on. So there's a conceded push there. to get the OEMs to install 3.1.

Exactly. So you've got this big developer relations group effort that spins up. Meanwhile, there's a huge push with OEMs to get them to install Windows. At this point, they were still installing DOS, or some people were actually installing nothing and requiring users to put operating systems on. So there's a conceded push there. to get the OEMs to install 3.1.

Okay, so this happened from 1988 to 1994. David, explain the per-processor licensing agreement.

Okay, so this happened from 1988 to 1994. David, explain the per-processor licensing agreement.

Yeah, basically, you're going to pay for two different operating systems, even though you're only putting one on if you ever load a different operating system on. So yes, it very strongly incentivizes you to never, ever, ever ship any other operating systems on your computers as a company.

Yeah, basically, you're going to pay for two different operating systems, even though you're only putting one on if you ever load a different operating system on. So yes, it very strongly incentivizes you to never, ever, ever ship any other operating systems on your computers as a company.

Now, this is, of course, the way that regulators would look at it in 1994, and that would get Microsoft in some hot water, and they had to agree to stop doing this practice. The way Microsoft would look at it is, we're just helping our customers, right?

Now, this is, of course, the way that regulators would look at it in 1994, and that would get Microsoft in some hot water, and they had to agree to stop doing this practice. The way Microsoft would look at it is, we're just helping our customers, right?

Do you really think that these companies want to keep a whole separate ledger of what machines they shipped DOS on or Windows on versus what machines they shipped period? Wouldn't it just be easier if once a month or once a quarter they could just report to us their total shipments like they have to report to their investors anyway? And then we'll just send them an invoice for all their machines.

Do you really think that these companies want to keep a whole separate ledger of what machines they shipped DOS on or Windows on versus what machines they shipped period? Wouldn't it just be easier if once a month or once a quarter they could just report to us their total shipments like they have to report to their investors anyway? And then we'll just send them an invoice for all their machines.

Right. If this had happened earlier, you could see how this would be more of a compelling way to get market share. But by the time they started doing it, they were already sort of running away with the market.

Right. If this had happened earlier, you could see how this would be more of a compelling way to get market share. But by the time they started doing it, they were already sort of running away with the market.

Totally. They wanted to make the stuff that people wanted to use the most, and that's how they would win. Their goal was make the very best products, the best software we possibly can in the ways that people want to use and buy software, and then we'll make a bunch of money.

Totally. They wanted to make the stuff that people wanted to use the most, and that's how they would win. Their goal was make the very best products, the best software we possibly can in the ways that people want to use and buy software, and then we'll make a bunch of money.

And the thing they were sort of realizing is, well, we have made software that people like to use, so they're using it in businesses. They always kind of wanted that to be the goal, but now it was happening. People are doing their work in Excel. People are bringing PCs to the office. Maybe businesses are buying their PCs, but people are actually buying them themselves and using them in the office.