In the year 1994 when I just got a gob in “Kami”, the absolute leader in the Russian antivirus market was “Dialog Nauka” company with its program called AIDS-Test. It possessed approximately 95% of the market. A share of 2 – 3% belonged to “Symantec” which was just planning to work up the Russian market. Kaspersky antivirus (then known as AVP) popular only among specialists, who at that time didn’t buy antiviruses or any other kind of software. Our sales in the year 1994 amounted to a few hundreds dollars per month.

At the same time (between the year 1993 and 1994) “Microsoft” released a new operational system Windows 3.1 which was different from DOS as chalk differs from cheese. It had two fundamental distinctions: it looked different (windows appeared and the mouse could be used), and it was instable (it used to buzz for any reason). The majority of specialists didn’t like the novelty and somehow mistrusted it. However, ordinary users liked the program in spite of its tendency to buzz.  From the technical point of view, Windows 3.1 was the same DOS  but provided with an interface. Programmers understood that and didn’t try to create new products for this operational system.

- Eugene, I need a new version for Windows.
- Why?
- People want it.
- You don’t understand. The version 3.11 is the same DOS, but with interface.
- Yes, I understand, but they ask me.
- Don’t bother me, I’m working.

We had the same discussions with Eugene Kaspersky for several times. And each time Eugene explained to me in simple words why people don’t need what they want. All the efforts were concentrated on the development of the Novell version, which was also troublesome (see the story called AVP for Novell or how you should not make products).

I think that the story of the new “Kaspersky Lab” would have been a short one but for “Microsoft” company, which issued another version of operational system, Windows 95, which had a better interface, and, what’s more important, was much more stable than its precursor. Even Eugene admitted that this version was different from DOS 6.0. So we started to develop a product for the new operational system! It took us about two years to make AVP for Windows work as it should. But, fortunately, our main competitor, “DialogNauka”, had even a more vague idea about the situation in the market. They issues a new version for Windows only in the end of 1998. So, from 1996 till 1998 people, of course, bought what they could find, and the only domestic product in the market was Kaspersky Antivirus for Windows. That’s how the customers started to recognize Kaspersky and to turn from Dr. Web.

It’s interesting that the decision to develop a product for Windows was an intuitive (as, by the way, were most of our decisions concerning developments), but, as the time has proved, it was right. If we had staked only on one horse (Novell NetWare), we would have lost everything.

Let’s try to analyze the Windows phenomenon. At first few people expected that his operational system would become so popular in the nearest future. In 1992 Esther Dyson (the president of EDventure holdings corporation) said that Bill Gates made a great mistake when he issued Windows 3.1. Many other experts shared her opinion. But the reaction of the market was different. Why? I have my own theory on that problem. It is like that:

When Bill Gates created Windows, he wanted to make computers user friendly, so that common people who don’t have any special knowledge could use them. In other words, the new operational system was created to teach “each housewife to manage a computer”. The Bolsheviks couldn’t make this dream come true, but Gates could! The product was based on ONE parameter only, and this parameter was SIMPLICITY.

Technicians cursed the system for they understood how it worked. But the it was made not for them – it was made for thousands of common users who do not want to see inside the system.

So, having optimised only one parameter of the existing operational system, Gates managed to win the whole market. While his competitors were criticising him and before they understood what has actually happened, “Microsoft” started selling its operational system. (For those who do not remember: as a norm, the customers got DOS together with their PC). The new version, Windows 3.1, appeared in the retail market. DOS was also in the retail market, but it sold badly, for nobody wanted to buy a system which was given as a bonus. But Windows became a bestseller.

The example of “Microsoft” seems to me very significant. You don’t have to make the best product, as many people tried to convince me. You just need to feel the market trend. A good product will certainly help, but at the first stage it’s not the main factor.

As for the green “Kaspersky Lab”, I want to mention that for us the decision to develop a product for Windows was the crucial one. Having taken it, we managed to change the situation in the market and to gain advantage. Of course, we fell behind the Western companies which started the works two or three years before we did, but you should remember that at first our team consisted of only five people, and we had no money to hire additional staff. But still we managed to fulfil our ambition while our main competitor - “Dialog Nauka” – fell another two years behind us!

Most of all a commercial company values its clients. If it can foresee the changes in the customers’ needs and demands, it is very likely to succeed.