View source for Embrace, extend, and extinguish

{{Short description|Anti-competitive business strategy}}
{{Competition law}}
"'''Embrace, extend, and extinguish'''" ('''EEE'''),<ref name=DeadlyEmbrace>{{cite news|url=https://www.economist.com/node/298112|title=Deadly embrace|publisher=The Economist|date=2000-03-30|language=en|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180523190053/https://www.economist.com/node/298112|archive-date=2018-05-23}}</ref> also known as "'''embrace, extend, and exterminate'''",<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-996528.html|title=Microsoft limits XML in Office 2003|access-date=2006-03-31| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20050922005808/http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-996528.html| archive-date = September 22, 2005}}</ref> is a phrase that the [[United States Department of Justice|U.S. Department of Justice]] found<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2600/v-a.pdf |title=US Department of Justice Proposed Findings of Fact&mdash;Revised|website=Usdoj.gov|access-date=2016-04-28}}</ref> was used internally by [[Microsoft]]<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2600/2613.htm |title=US Department of Justice Proposed Findings of Fact|website=Usdoj.gov|date=14 August 2015 |access-date=2016-04-28}}</ref> to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used open standards, extending those standards with [[Proprietary software|proprietary]] capabilities, and using the differences to strongly disadvantage its competitors.

==Origin==
The strategy and phrase "'''embrace and extend'''" were first described outside Microsoft in a 1996 article in ''[[The New York Times]]'' titled "Tomorrow, the World Wide Web! Microsoft, the PC King, Wants to Reign Over the Internet",<ref>{{cite news|date=July 16, 1996|author=John Markoff|work=The New York Times|title=Tomorrow, the World Wide Web! Microsoft, the PC King, Wants to Reign Over the Internet|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/16/business/tomorrow-world-wide-web-microsoft-pc-king-wants-reign-over-internet.html?pagewanted=all|access-date=2013-07-25}}</ref> in which writer [[John Markoff]] said, "Rather than merely embrace and extend the Internet, the company's critics now fear, Microsoft intends to engulf it." The phrase "embrace and extend" also appears in a facetious motivational song by an anonymous Microsoft employee,<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.businessweek.com/1996/29/b34841.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/19961019181801/http://www.businessweek.com/1996/29/b34841.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=1996-10-19|title=Inside Microsoft (Part 1)|first=Kathy|last=Rebello|date=1996-07-15|access-date=2018-08-05|publisher=Business Week}}</ref> and in an interview of [[Steve Ballmer]] by ''The New York Times''.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Lohr |first1=Steve |title=Preaching From the Ballmer Pulpit (Published 2007) |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/business/yourmoney/28ballmer.html |access-date=13 November 2020 |work=The New York Times |date=28 January 2007}}</ref>

A variant of the phrase, "'''embrace, extend then innovate'''", is used in [[J Allard]]'s 1994 memo "Windows: The Next Killer Application on the Internet"<ref>{{cite web|title=Windows: The Next Killer Application on the Internet|url=https://www.microsoft.com/about/companyinformation/timeline/timeline/docs/di_killerapp_InternetMemo.rtf|access-date=2016-04-28|website=Microsoft.com|format=RTF|archive-date=2016-04-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160421102553/http://www.microsoft.com/about/companyinformation/timeline/timeline/docs/di_killerapp_internetmemo.rtf|url-status=dead}}</ref> to [[Paul Maritz]] and other executives at Microsoft. The memo starts with a background on the Internet in general, and then proposes a strategy on how to turn Windows into the next "[[killer app]]" for the Internet:

{{quote|In order to build the necessary respect and win the mindshare of the Internet community, I recommend a recipe not unlike the one we've used with our TCP/IP efforts: embrace, extend, then innovate. '''Phase 1 (Embrace)''': all participants need to establish a solid understanding of the infostructure and the community&mdash;determine the needs and the trends of the user base.  Only then can we effectively enable Microsoft system products to be great Internet systems. '''Phase 2 (Extend)''': establish relationships with the appropriate organizations and corporations with goals similar to ours. Offer well-integrated tools and services compatible with established and popular standards that have been developed in the Internet community. '''Phase 3 (Innovate)''': move into a leadership role with new Internet standards as appropriate, enable standard off-the-shelf titles with Internet awareness. ''Change the rules: Windows become the next-generation Internet tool of the future.''|J Allard|''[https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.microsoft.com/about/companyinformation/timeline/timeline/docs/di_killerapp_InternetMemo.rtf Windows: The Next Killer Application on the Internet]''}}

The addition "extinguish" was introduced in the ''[[United States v. Microsoft Corp.]]'' [[United States antitrust law|antitrust]] trial when then [[vice president]] of [[Intel]], [[Steven McGeady]], used the phrase<ref>{{cite web|url=http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/msdoj/transcripts/1110a.doc|title=Steven McGeady court testimony|website=Cyber.law.harvard.edu|access-date=2006-03-31}} ([[DOC (computing)|DOC]] format)</ref> to explain Maritz's statement in a 1995 meeting with Intel that described Microsoft's strategy to "kill HTML by extending it".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/msdoj/transcript/summaries2.html|title=United States v. Microsoft: Trial Summaries (page 2)|website=Cyber.law.harvard.edu|access-date=2006-03-31}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://reactor-core.org/in-microsoft-we-trust.html|archive-url=https://archive.today/20050419194550/http://reactor-core.org/in-microsoft-we-trust.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=2005-04-19|title=In Microsoft We Trust|access-date=2006-03-31}}</ref>

== Strategy ==
The strategy's three phases are:<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.hr.com/servlets/sfs?&t=/Default/gateway&i=1116423256281&b=1116423256281&application=story&active=no&ParentID=1119278102301&StoryID=1119649742078|title=Embrace, Extend, Extinguish (IT Vendor Strategies)|website=Hr.com|access-date=2007-10-14}}{{dead link|date=September 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref><ref>[http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070108020408557 Expert Testimony of Ronald Alepin] in [[Comes v. Microsoft]] — Embrace, Extend, Extinguish,  ''Groklaw'', January 8, 2007.</ref>
# '''Embrace:''' Development of software substantially compatible with an Open Standard.
# '''Extend:''' Addition of features not supported by the Open Standard, creating interoperability problems.
# '''Extinguish:''' When extensions become a [[de facto standard]] because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors who are unable to support the new extensions.

Microsoft claims the original strategy is not anti-competitive, but rather an exercise to implement features it believes customers want.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://openacademy.mindef.gov.sg/openacademy/Learning%20Resources/Microsoft/words/words_4.htm |title=U.S. v. Microsoft: We're Defending Our Right to Innovate |website=Openacademy.mindef.gov.sg |access-date=2007-03-29 |url-status=unfit |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070329064009/http://openacademy.mindef.gov.sg/openacademy/Learning%20Resources/Microsoft/words/words_4.htm |archive-date=March 29, 2007 }}</ref>

== Examples by Microsoft ==
===Browser incompatibilities===

The plaintiffs in an antitrust case claimed Microsoft had added support for [[ActiveX control]]s in the [[Internet Explorer]] Web browser to break compatibility with [[Netscape Navigator]], which used components based on [[Java (programming language)|Java]] and Netscape's own [[NPAPI|plugin system]]. 

On [[Cascading Style Sheets|CSS]], [[data URI scheme|data:]], etc.: A decade after the original Netscape-related antitrust suit, the Web browser company [[Opera Software]] filed an antitrust complaint against Microsoft with the [[European Union]], saying it "calls on Microsoft to adhere to its own public pronouncements to support these standards, instead of stifling them with its notorious 'Embrace, Extend and Extinguish' strategy".<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2007/12/13/ |title=Opera files antitrust complaint with the EU |publisher=Opera |date=2007-12-13 |access-date=2016-04-28 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120313041237/http://www.opera.com/press/releases/2007/12/13 | archive-date=2012-03-13 | url-status=dead }}</ref>

===Office documents===
In a memo to the Office product group in 1998, [[Bill Gates]] stated: "One thing we have got to change in our strategy&nbsp;– allowing Office documents to be rendered very well by other people's browsers is one of the most destructive things we could do to the company. We have to stop putting any effort into this and make sure that Office documents very well depend on ''proprietary'' IE capabilities. Anything else is suicide for our platform. This is a case where Office has to avoid doing something to destroy Windows."<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/2000/PX02991.pdf |title=Plaintiff's Exhibit : 2991 : Comes v Microsoft |website=Antitrust.slated.org |access-date=2016-04-28 |archive-date=2011-09-30 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110930232927/http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/2000/PX02991.pdf |url-status=dead |date=December 5, 1998 |quote=<br/><br/>[QUOTE:]<br/><br/>One thing we have got to change in our strategy&nbsp;– allowing Office documents to be rendered very well by other people's browsers is one of the most destructive things we could do to the company.<br/><br/>We have to stop putting any effort into this and make sure that Office documents very well depends{{sic}} on PROPRIETARY IE capabilities.<br/><br/>Anything else is suicide for our platform. This is a case where Office has to avoid doing something to destory{{sic}} Windows.<br/><br/>I would be glad to explain at greater length.<br/><br/>Likewise this love of [[Web-based Distributed Authoring and Versioning|DAV]] in Office/Exchange is a huge problem. I would also like to make sure people understand this as well.}}</ref>

===Java===
The antitrust case's plaintiffs also accused Microsoft of using an "embrace and extend" strategy with regard to the Java platform, which was [[Java (programming language)#Primary goals|designed explicitly with the goal]] of developing programs that could run on any [[operating system]], be it Windows, Mac, or Linux.  They claimed that, by omitting the [[Java Native Interface]] (JNI) from its implementation and providing [[J/Direct]] for a similar purpose, Microsoft deliberately tied Windows Java programs to its platform, making them unusable on Linux and Mac systems. According to an internal communication, Microsoft sought to downplay Java's [[cross-platform]] capability and make it "just the latest, best way to write Windows applications".<ref>{{Cite news
 | author = Matt Richtel
 | title =  Memos Released in Sun-Microsoft Suit
 | url = https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02EEDE103DF931A15753C1A96E958260&sec=&spon=&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
 | work = [[The New York Times]]
 | date = 1998-10-22
 | access-date = 2008-02-22
 | quote = The court documents state that in April 1997, Ben Slivka, the Microsoft manager responsible for executing the Java strategy, sent an E-mail to Microsoft's chairman, William H. Gates, noting 'When I met with you last, you had a lot of pretty pointed questions about Java, so I want to make sure I understand your issues and concerns.' Mr. Slivka goes on to ask if Mr. Gates' concerns included 'How do we wrest control of Java away from Sun?' and 'How we turn Java into just the latest, best way to write Windows applications?'}}</ref> Microsoft paid [[Sun Microsystems]] US$20 million in January 2001 (equivalent to ${{Inflation|US|20|2001|r=0}} million in {{Inflation-year|US}}{{Inflation/fn|US}}) to settle the resulting legal implications of their breach of contract.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-251401.html|title=Sun, Microsoft settle Java suit|website=News.cnet.com|access-date=2001-01-23}}</ref>

Sun sued Microsoft over Java again in 2002 and Microsoft agreed to settle out of court for US$2 billion<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1048246/microsoft-lawsuit-payouts-usd9-billion |title=Microsoft's lawsuit payouts amount to around $9 billion |publisher=[[The Inquirer]] |url-status=unfit |access-date=2010-03-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150530115907/https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1048246/microsoft-lawsuit-payouts-usd9-billion |archive-date=2015-05-30}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/apr04/04-02SunAgreementPR.mspx |title=Microsoft and Sun Microsystems Enter Broad Cooperation Agreement; Settle Outstanding Litigation |website=Microsoft.com |date=April 2004 |access-date=2010-03-04 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100225015449/http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/apr04/04-02SunAgreementPR.mspx |archive-date=2010-02-25 }}</ref> (equivalent to US${{Inflation|US|2|2004|r=1}} billion in {{Inflation-year|US}}{{Inflation/fn|US}}).

===Instant messaging===
In 2001, [[CNET]] described an instance concerning Microsoft's instant messaging program.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/microsoft-messaging-tactics-recall-browser-wars/|title=Microsoft messaging tactics recall browser wars|last=Hu|first=Jim|date=2001-06-07<!--The site says January 2, 2002-->|website=CNET|access-date=2023-03-06}}</ref> "Embrace" AOL's IM protocol, the de facto standard of the 1990s and early 2000s. "Extend" the standard with proprietary Microsoft addons which added new features, but broke compatibility with AOL's software. Gain dominance, since Microsoft had 95% OS share and their [[MSN Messenger]] was provided for free. Finally, "extinguish" and lock out AOL's IM software, since AOL was unable to use the modified MS-patented protocol. 

===Email protocols===
Microsoft supported [[Post Office Protocol|POP3]], [[Internet Message Access Protocol|IMAP]], and [[Simple Mail Transfer Protocol|SMTP]] email protocols in their [[Microsoft Outlook]] email client. At the same time, they developed their own email protocol, [[MAPI]], which has since been documented but is largely unused by third parties. Microsoft has announced that they would end support for the less secure basic authentication, which lacks support for multi-factor authentication, access to [[Exchange Online]] APIs for [[Office 365]] customers, which disables most use of IMAP or POP3 and requires significant upgrades to support the more secure OAuth2 based authentication in applications in order to continue to use those protocols;<ref>{{cite web |url=https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/office/blogs/end-of-support-for-basic-authentication-access-to-exchange-online-apis-for-office-365-customers/ |title=End of support for Basic Authentication access to Exchange Online API's for Office 365 customers |first=Sivaprakash |last=Saripalli |date=September 20, 2019 |access-date=2020-08-02 |publisher=[[Microsoft]]}}</ref> some customers have responded by simply shutting off older protocols.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://kb.wisc.edu/helpdesk/page.php?id=28747 |title=UW-Madison IT dept. help page |quote=Enabling password security for an Office 365 forces modern authentication to be used for all protocols. SMTP Auth is deprecated and is no longer supported. |publisher=University of Wisconsin |access-date=2020-07-01}}</ref>

==Web browsers==

===Netscape===
During the [[browser wars]], Netscape implemented the "font" tag, among other [[HTML]] extensions, without seeking review from a standards body. With the rise of Internet Explorer, the two companies became locked in a dead heat to out-implement each other with non-standards-compliant features. In 2004, to prevent a repeat of the "browser wars", and the resulting morass of conflicting standards, the browser vendors [[Apple Inc.]] ([[Safari (web browser)|Safari]]), [[Mozilla Foundation]] ([[Firefox]]), and [[Opera Software]] ([[Opera (web browser)|Opera]] browser) formed the [[WHATWG|Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group]] (WHATWG) to create open standards to complement those of the [[World Wide Web Consortium]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.whatwg.org/faq/#whattf|title=What is the WHATWG and why did it form?|website=Blog.whatwg.org|access-date=2007-08-25|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070821014820/http://blog.whatwg.org/faq/#whattf|archive-date=2007-08-21}}</ref> Microsoft refused to join, citing the group's lack of a patent policy as the reason.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://channel9.msdn.com/podcasts/MSConversations_wilson_ch9.mp3 |access-date=2009-07-28|title=MSConversations |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080216101506/http://channel9.msdn.com/podcasts/MSConversations_wilson_ch9.mp3 |archive-date = 2008-02-16}}</ref>

===Google Chrome===
With its dominance in the web browser market, [[Google]] has been accused of using [[Google Chrome]] and [[Blink (browser engine)|Blink]] development to push new web standards that are proposed in-house by Google and subsequently implemented by its services first and foremost. These have led to performance disadvantages and compatibility issues with competing browsers, and in some cases, developers intentionally refusing to test their websites on any other browser than Chrome.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-28/google-s-chrome-becomes-web-gatekeeper-and-rivals-complain|title=Google's Chrome Becomes Web 'Gatekeeper' and Rivals Complain|date=May 28, 2019|website=Bloomberg|access-date=May 28, 2019}}</ref> Tom Warren of ''The Verge'' went as far as comparing Chrome to [[Internet Explorer 6]], the default browser of [[Windows XP]] that was often targeted by competitors due to its similar ubiquity in the early 2000s.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/4/16805216/google-chrome-only-sites-internet-explorer-6-web-standards|title=Chrome is turning into the new Internet Explorer 6|last=Warren|first=Tom|date=January 4, 2018|website=The Verge|access-date=May 28, 2019}}</ref>

==See also==
{{portal|Free and open-source software}}
* [[64 bit|32-bit vs 64-bit]]
* [[AARD code]]
* [[Criticism of Microsoft]]
* [[Halloween documents]]
* [[Microsoft and open source]]
* [[Network effect]]
* [[Path dependence]]
* [[Vendor lock-in]]
* [[Enshittification]]
* [[Planned obsolescence]]

==References==
{{Reflist|30em}}

==External links==
{{Spoken Wikipedia|Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.ogg|date=2012-05-11}}
*[http://techrights.org/2009/06/25/bill-gates-office-patents/ Report on Microsoft documents relating to Office and IE Embrace, extend and extinguish]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Embrace, Extend And Extinguish}}
[[Category:Microsoft criticisms and controversies]]
[[Category:Interoperability]]
[[Category:Marketing techniques]]
[[Category:Spheres of influence]]
[[Category:Standards]]