This is the perennial problem every platform maker faces — how to enhance the platform while impacting ISV’s the least.  A stark example of this would be Microsoft’s inclusion of IE in Windows. At the time, the Mac had a browser called Cyberdog, and IBM had WebExplorer for OS/2.  Windows, without a browser, was simply uncompetitive. We knew it, and we licensed the Mosaic code base from Spyglass in the fall of 1994. Then the phenomenon called Netscape happened. So, should Microsoft have remained uncompetitive because an ISV had already implemented the feature?

If you intend to be an independent developing software for a platform you don’t control, then you need to be constantly vigilant about what the platform maker might do.  Some companies have successfully executed this strategy for years — Symantec is a great example.  Symantec is so valuable to Microsoft that Microsoft routinely consults them on all new major OS features.  This is especially valuable to Symantec because they get to see competing features long before those features are released, which provides ample opportunity to build competitive new features.

And similarly, the platform vendor needs to ensure that early information and builds are available to the ISV community.  In the case of this video release, Skype should have released the video components to developers early, and solicited feedback on API’s etc that would have increased the value of video to the ISV community, rather than compete directly.  It’s a small, but important, step in building a thriving ISV community.