Embrace, extend and extinguish

From Free net encyclopedia

"Embrace, extend and extinguish"<ref>Template:Cite news</ref>, also known as "Embrace, extend, and exterminate"<ref>Template:Cite web</ref> or just "Embrace and extend", is a slogan used by Microsoft to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely-used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to disadvantage its competitors. "Embrace and extend" appeared in a motivational song by Microsoft employee Dean Ballard about the company's reorganization to meet competition from Internet software companies, particularly Netscape. <ref>Template:Cite news</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref>

The more widely-used variation, "embrace, extend and extinguish", was first introduced in the United States v. Microsoft antitrust trial when the vice president of Intel, Steven McGeady, testified<ref>Template:Cite web (DOC format)</ref> that Microsoft vice president Paul Maritz used the phrase in a 1995 meeting with Intel to describe Microsoft's strategy toward Netscape, Java, and the Internet<ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref>. In this context the phrase means to highlight the final phase of Microsoft's strategy as raised by McGeady, which was to drive customers away from smaller competitors.

1 The strategy
2 Examples
3 See also
4 Footnotes
5 External links

[edit]

The strategy

In most contexts the strategy is a three part process consisting of the following steps:

Embrace: Microsoft develops software substantially compatible with a competing product, or implementing a public standard.
Extend: Microsoft adds and promotes features not supported by the competing product or part of the standard, creating interoperability problems for customers who try to remain neutral.
Extinguish: Microsoft's extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, marginalizing competitors that do not or cannot support Microsoft's extensions and creating an obstacle to new would-be competitors.

The U.S. Department of Justice, Microsoft critics, and computer-industry journalists<ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref> claim that the goal of the strategy is to monopolize a product category. Microsoft asserts that the strategy is not anti-competitive, but rather an exercise of its discretion to implement features it believes customers want. <ref>Template:Cite web</ref>

[edit]

Examples

With regard to web browsers, the plaintiffs in the antitrust case claimed that Microsoft had added support for ActiveX controls in Internet Explorer to break compatibility with Netscape Navigator, which used components based on Java and Netscape's own plugin system. The plaintiffs also accused Microsoft of using an "embrace and extend" strategy with regard to the Java platform, by omitting the Java Native Interface from its implementation and providing J/Direct for a similar purpose. According to an internal communication, Microsoft sought to downplay Java's cross-platform capability and make it the "latest, greatest way to write Windows applications."

There are earlier cases of Microsoft using one-way compatibility with leading competitors to market its products. For example, Microsoft Office has long allowed users to import WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3 files, but saving an Office document to those formats may omit some Office-specific features of the documents.

[edit]