In the period prior to Win98's launch, with IE no less, the public arena was peppered with satements about grave economic harm to the entire economy and the General Tech Sector if Win98 was not allowed to ship. Even though: Microsoft, The Street, the Tech Sector Media, etc. did not place a heck of a lot of emphasis on it. In fact, MSFT has been telling its business/corporate customers to await the release of NT5 for an upgrade.
But, then again there were those dire statements about the economic impacts if the Win98 launch was delayed or stopped. Problem is, Win98 did launch on 25 Jun 98 to collective yawns. An informal survey, conducted on 27 Jun 98, did not show people lining up to buy the Win98 Upgrade in order to have it "Ready & Running" for Monday 29 Jun 98. Quite the contrary. Anecdotally, we observed and received other reports that there was no mad rush to upgrade to Win98. The breathless media reports notwithstanding. Those "lines" were waiting for the "Special Promotions" in the retailers regarding the first few hours of Win98's launch. Like being able to buy any item in the store for $98, etc. What a way to move inventory, no?
Prior to the launch, CompUSA's executives stated that if the government delayed or stopped the launch of Win98, not only would CompUSA suffer "harm" but also made statements about "harm" to the general U.S. economy. Pretty strong stuff about an Operating System Upgrade. An upgrade that could be likened to Mac OS 7.6 vs. 7.5.
Post launch, another CompUSA official stated that they (CompUSA) weren't concerned over the sales volume of the Win98 upgrade because it was only "a small part" of their business. In other words, if Win98 didn't fly off the shelves, they weren't going to take an earnings hit.
Excuse us, but our hypocrisy and "BS" meters got pegged with that statement. Which is the "truth?" The former or the latter? You can't have it both ways. Either Win98 will be the salvation of the general economy and the general Tech Sector (by sparking a major upgrade cycle) or it's inconsequential in the greater scheme of things. That Win98 has been referred to, by Windows users, as: "Win95 Service Pack 3 -- Retail Version" is more telling which is closer to the truth.
Pssssst! State Secret! While Win98 is an improvement over Win95, it's not mission critical or a "Great Leap Forward" as far as the computing environment goes. Again, it's like Mac OS 7.6 vs. 7.5. An incremental improvement with added features. Improvement yes, quantum leap? No. Now, if we were talking about NT5, then that is a different matter altogether.
And no, this does not signal a shift in our position on the Antitrust suit or a bout of MSFT bashing. Jesse Berst and the rest of the General Tech Sector media have made that a moot point. What they've said about Win98 lo these many months would make anything we said about it redundant.
Yet, both sides of the Antitrust battle have used Win98 as a "football" (Soccer Ball for Americans) getting booted back and forth across the field. And those who use the Win98 upgrade to generate hype and hoopla for their own purposes need a "reality check." Win98 is not on par with Win95. And The Street is waiting on NT5. In fact, an analyst who upgraded MSFT last week did so because of NT and not 98. Telling, no? FWIW, MSFT is still not buying its own stock, and hasn't since it rose past 62 1/2 (split adjusted). That's even more telling.
What's the "significance" of the Win98 launch? Other than a tactical victory for MSFT against the Antitrusters? Ask us again around 25 Dec 98 - 25 Feb 99. But, it's not going to be Win95. That much we can tell you. Even MSFT doesn't expect it to be that. Now, if we were talking about NT5 and NT Consumer, there's a different story. But, even NT Consumer might have a delayed demand as it might not be compatible with a lot of Win3.1/DOS applications.
RFI took its cue vis-a-vis Win98 from the statements MSFT made to analysts, not its press releases or comments to the government and the public. MSFT intimated that it wasn't a make or break launch for the company so we didn't get worked up about it. What we did get worked up about were the government's tactics about it.
In the general scheme of things, as far as the end user goes, Win98 isn't "mission critical" for them but has nice feature upgrades if they want them. And, given the still "hefty" market share of Win3.1, almost 3 years after the launch of Win95, we gather it isn't important to a lot of Windows users either.
Finally. The Win98 launch will do one thing. It will probably give the DRAM market some added sales, but not enough to reverse the price declines of late. It might give them some added sales, but not enough to get them all aglow over their prospects going forward.
Enough said.
Next Story
