Microsoft working on 'Zune HD2' powered by Windows Phone 7 - Page 2

Uhhh.... what enterprise solutions?

Learn to read and stop trolling. Thanks.

LMFAO...

I like this so much I'm adding it to my sig... you don't mind, do you?

They should just rename the Zune the Me2. It's short, snappy and better than AlsoRan.

I see DaHarder's IQ has taken another lurch downwards.

Not sure I know what point you're trying to make. But even if Pink exists inside Microsoft, that doesn't mean it will become a product. Remember Apple's Pink?

lol no i don't mind

Microsoft should move to Detroit.

The one thing about Microsoft is they are persistent, and they have billions to throw at problems until they get it right. Apple messed up by not taking more advantage of the Vista fiasco. There were a few years there that Apple could have really gained more market share than they did. Instead they lost a golden opportunity and Windows 7 is pretty well received now and that window is closed. I even installed it on my Mac Pro and even though I prefer OS X because I am used to it, I can see why people could happily live with Win 7.

As far as Win 7 for the phone, again I think Apple is missing an opportunity by stubbornly sticking with just one carrier in the U.S. Win 7 will be available on all carriers. Mind you the smart phone business is more competitive because they also have to compete with RIM, Android and to a lesser degree Palm in addition to Apple. I am about as loyal an Apple consumer as they come, I have been using only Apple hardware since 1983. I have lost count of how many I have bought, but it is probably nearly enough to buy a house by now or at least a really nice car. But I refuse to switch to AT&T from Sprint. For one their coverage, where I live at least, sucks. I also pay only $50 a month for unlimited voice, text, and data. I am not willing to pay an additional $80 a month just to get the same plan with poorer coverage. I own a HTC Touch Pro 2 with SPB mobile shell installed and it is a pretty solid phone. It does what I need and the iPhone is just not worth an extra $1,000 a year. AT&T is doing everything in their power to keep their exclusivity with Apple because they know that if people could get an iPhone on Sprint's $69 unlimited data plan they would leave in droves. Sprint also has a far larger 3G map than AT&T by the way with free roaming on Verizon.

Sure Microsoft is persistent, but then so is a zombie. Microsoft isn't quite a zombie company, but the point is, persistence and actual life are not necessarily the same thing. News alert: Apple has been steadily gaining market share on Windows over the last several years, so indeed they did take advantage of Microsoft's stumbles, more than anyone had seriously predicted they could. They even made fun of Microsoft's Vista troubles in their ads, for one thing. How could they have done better? By alienating everyone who they might get as future customers, perhaps? Further, the numbers suggest that they are continuing to gain market share against Windows, with or without Win7. The game is only just afoot, hardly over.

Recently Apple's marketshare has begun to slip/http://www.neowin.net/news/market-sh...ome-up-ie-down

I think they could have done more during the Vista time frame by updating a little more frequently for example. I thought the switch to Intel would end the drought for more current hardware. Even now look how outdated many Mac models are in terms of CPU's and especially GPU's. They could also be a little more price competitive. I mean $799 for a 2.53 Ghz Mac Mini when you can buy a Core i7 PC for about the same price. Go back to $499 for the entry level Mini like it used to be. I am not talking about radical price cuts, but Apple could certainly reduce the prices on many models and still make a killing. They seem more interested in profit margins than expanding the user base. That has always been the case, so no big surprise there.

IF they don't want to reduce prices, at least give us more current hardware. When you buy a $5,900 Mac Pro you should be able to get something faster than an ATI 4870 which was just a mid range card when it was new, now it is a dinosaur. Apple really needs to do a better job working with Nvidia and ATI to offer their top of the line cards sooner. The 4850 in the iMac is also a joke. Apple leaves many models stagnant for far too long. I would like to see more frequent minor updates to address these shortcomings. At least bump up the ram, or HD size or God forbid faster CPU's for example when a product is getting long in the tooth.

I also think it is high time to end their ad campaign with that smug actor representing Apple. The PC guy (John Hodgman?) comes across as far more likable, at least to me. It served it's purpose for a while, but I think it is time for a brand new campaign. I think the iPhone/iPod commercials are far more effective than the Mac commercials for example.

I also think that Snow Leopard over all is pretty underwhelming. Yes, I appreciate all the under the hood fixes and advancements, but it seems like they could have thrown in a few more goodies to the GUI as well. The fact that they are selling it at only $29 proves that even Apple thinks this was a pretty minor update. I hope 10.7 really gives us a major overhaul. OS X itself is beginning to look a little dated in many respects and has not really changed a lot since 10.4.

Three problems with the statistics in the article you linked. First, they are based on internet activity, which at best is a crude approximation of actual market share, and says nothing about unit sales. Second, they are comparing only two sequential months, which proves nothing of consequence. Third, the changes between the months are utterly marginal. The real unit sales numbers show something completely different in the trends, which is that Mac sales are growing far more rapidly than Windows PCs in virtually every quarter over the past three or four years.

I don't want to get into arguments over hardware if only because they are endlessly debated here, to no real affect as far as I can tell. As far as OSX is concerned, obviously (to me) Apple has been far more aggressive in developing and releasing new editions of the OSX than Microsoft has ever been of Windows. They were for several years on a 12-month cycle, which they've now lengthened to closer to 18 months. Personally, I think that's even a bit too fast. Apple is on the verge of a have a case featuritus for OSX, which has been Microsoft's problem all along. I don't want more features, I want the ones I use to be well implemented.

As you've implied, aggressive marketing comes with potential blowback. I don't think they could push much harder than they have without making people weary of hearing their message. BTW, I have very powerful memories of Apple's smug yet wimpy and ineffectual marketing during the '90s. They're really improved, to the point where I can't find much to criticize -- and certainly not the results, which have been astounding by any measure.