http://draginol.stardock.com/Articles/Madatcommercialsoftware.html
One of my beefs with Microsoft is that they have the rather nasty habit of blunding things into the OS that essentially squash smaller software developers.
Each new version of Windows seems to eliminate more and more potential aftermarket software products. And sometimes it seems almost unnecessary.
Did Windows, for instance, really need a skinnable media player bundled? Or was this really just to zing Winamp? What about disk compression? ZIP?
The biggest criticsm (one that I too tend to make) is that Microsoft's stuff isn't that great. Office includes a mediocre grammar checker for instance. The problem is that the software tends to be "good enough" to discourage third parties from entering that field where they could perhaps make much better versions.
But bother investing the money in a state of the art grammar checker when the market for it is so small and the average user finds the one in MS Word to be "good enough"?
This is the same criticism people make of our company, Stardock. It is not a boast to say that Stardock owns the desktop enhancement market. On Download.com, Stardock has 4 of the top 10 most popular desktop enhancements (link) including the most popular one (WindowBinds).
In the "old days" desktop enhancements were primarily the realm of hobbiests developers. In 1998, Stardock was just starting out in the Windows desktop enhancement as it was clawing its way to safety from the disintegrating OS/2 market. On OS/2, Stardock was the premiere software developer (which is like saying we were the tallest man on Mars!). But by the end of 2000 we had established ourselves pretty firmly and that's where the criticism really began to come in.
As our software reached into some new area, we would effectively discourage freeware developers. This wasn't intentional, but it is very hard for an individual developer, working in his spare time, to compete against a company with a full time dedicated team. You see this in the game industry all the time. Who wants to try to create a fully featured game when you're up against Blizzard with its staff of dozens per game?
So the net result was that freeware development dropped off and hence, users who wanted to customize some part of Windows was increasingly facing either having to pay for a commercial product or use a freeware alternative that was no longer actively being developed and vastly inferior in features (if they could find even that).
This is particularly galling to those who were around from the beginning since they saw all the developers who were busily making various programs only to get "squeezed out" by Stardock. This wasn't intentional, it was just a side effect of creating software that was "good enough".
My particular solution is the solution I'd like to see others do and that is make sure that those making management decisions avail themselves to their critics. Respond to them. Not so much to win them over but so that you recognize the responsibility you have in writing commercial software extends beyond making money. Just as the Walmarts of the world have a moral responsibility to be sensitive to local concerns after they've essentially driven all the mom and pop shops out of business, software companies need to listen to their critics and try to make sure that they stay on top of their products and ensure that it is worth it because of what it does rather than because there's no other alternative.