Paul Graham has published another on of his infamous essays on his website where he claims “Microsoft is dead”, the article can be read here. This essay has caused an absolute storm on sites such as Slashdot where comments to the article are now in the hundreds. So why is the statement that Microsoft is dead causing such a storm on Slashdot might you ask? Slashdot is hardly famed as the favourite hangout for Microsoft fanboys. The reason is not the what, but the why. His main reason for this summary is Microsoft’s failure in comparison to companies such as Google, to really take the new world of web based applications seriously.

Although Microsoft have knocked out some cool AJAX based web apps such as Visual Earth and Live Search, they are hardly innovative, as they just replicate what Google had already done years before. They also haven’t been actively acquiring, engaging or even challenging Web 2.0 start-ups with the same single mindedness and determination that Google have. According to Graham web apps are the future, and that as a result of Microsoft “living in their own world” as he puts it, they will likely not be a big part of that future.

More interesting than the article itself are the comments on Slashdot in response to the article. The web app debate is now starting to evolve into a new monster. Before it was all about one side saying AJAX type techniques had been around for years and nothing would change, whilst the other side claimed it was the new dawn. That debate has now ended, and even the most die hard AJAX haters now accept that these techniques have changed the way in which we approach any web based application and there is no going back from the fundamental change. The argument now has moved on to web app vs desktop software, and this is the argument I touched on in my previous article. Although I think that saying desktop software is dead, is taking it way too far, and jumping the gun by at least a decade, I still believe the writing is on the wall for desktop applications.

Just to put my two cents worth in, these are the reasons why I think that server/client web apps will eventually supersede desktop software:

• A few tweaks for several browser peculiarities and you have a true cross platform application.
• The system is interactive and truly live. A change to the source code will affect all users of the apps instantly.
• All bugs can be fixed centrally. No more need for users to perform updates.
• The business end of the system is stored on a remote server, making piracy near on impossible.
• Organisations can make an app available to all of its staff across multiple sites instantly without the need for a single install. Updates can also be made with the same efficiency.
• Businesses can make company applications available to its staff offsite.

I could go on with this list all day.

Obviously there is also a substantial list of negatives, the main one being “What do you do if your internet connection is down?” This issue is particularly poignant in Cambodia where connections are about as reliable as a chocolate frying pan. For this I have no real answer, but in response I will say for desktop software -  “What do you do if you desktop or network is down?”. I know this isn’t a real argument or even a real defence, but it does highlight the issue that internet connectivity and network connectivity are hardware and tech support issues and have nothing to do with the quality of desktop software or web applications, so should be separate to this debate of whether web apps can perform the roll or traditional desktop software.