When's 8.1 supposed to come out, again?
"What people" would that be?
I read through this entire thing and I didn't see anyone refusing to accept that Microsoft cannot go down (for lack of a better term).
I give the board much more credit than that.
Microsoft will be around for a long time. Without a proper mobile strategy, though, in 10 years they will be 2/3 of what they are today and 1/2 in 20 years... maybe less.
Personally, I think Microsoft will become a company like IBM. A large company that is a shadow of its former self* but still relevant in the corporate world because of its services.
[ ... but Ballmer doesn't want Microsoft to be IBM... or Apple ]
* addendum - IBM is actually doing quite well... not a shadow of its former self at all. Maybe they will buy Microsoft in 10 years.
I agree and made some revisions before I saw your reply.
... and Microsoft in their own way agrees with you as well. If you see the interview (link above), Microsoft wants to be all things to all people. A fools game that can only lead to confusion and failure, imo. Microsoft will end up chasing smoke.
Ballmer might as well have said,
"I kinda look at that and I say, well, I like our strategy. I like it a lot."
Microsoft won't end up closing shop unless there is a viable alternative to Windows, Apple can't fill that gap because Apple won't do cheap computers and they won't license OSX, so for MS to truly die, something else must take its place, problem is nothing can (at the moment). Linux doesn't have mainstream commercial software or even MS Office, there are many who only will use Office and don't really care about alternatives.
That's an excellent idea, but it doesn't seem like it's something Apple would do.
Well I should say it's not something Apple would have done in the past. In the past they seemed more interested in the creative types, like Adobe, and less interested in the enterprise types like Microsoft and IBM.
But I have a feeling Tim Cook would see this differently than Steve would have.
I don't want to bring up the whole "Steve wouldn't have done it" rubbish, but Steve by his own words wasn't interested in corporate or enterprise and toward the end considered killing all Pro computers and software.
Tim on the other hand has revived the Mac Pro and seems to be bulking up Apple's Pro apps again. Tim probably would see the value of an enterprise suite with a powerful mail and spreadsheet software.
That right there could be game changing and could change this whole conversation we're having about the relevance of Office for the upcoming decades.
Well to be fair, at the time, Apple could afford to burn everything and start over because there were only a handful of people whose careers depended on Macintosh, and, by in large they were not in enterprise. Then look at Windows. 90%+ of the world's businesses, utilities, military, governments, scientific research, banking, and education depend on legacy Windows. When you think back, Microsoft did burn almost everything when they switched from DOS to Windows but the computing install base was much smaller then and they left in the ability to run DOS, much like Apple did with Mac OS classic in OS X. Microsoft has to keep legacy compatibility because so much of the modern world depends on it. To ditch Windows legacy compatibility would be suicide for Microsoft and plunge the business computing world into chaos for years.
There is a difference between Office applications and Windows as a platform. Apple, or anyone can write an app that opens and saves Office file formats but the Windows server applications are another matter altogether. There are millions of person hours invested in proprietary Windows applications in enterprise, built on .Net, C# and VB Script. That is difficult or impossible to replicate with another platform even if the Office documents used by cubical drones could be made compatible across different operating systems.
You specifically positioned the AirPlay thing as one of three versions of iWork, even though it's true that you did not use those specific words.
AirPlay is "projection." It is the wireless projection of a screen image. Mirroring is projection.
You use ligatures (the ellipsis) in this very post and AppleInsider's commenting system supports them as does HTML and every other word processor I've ever heard of. The lack of the ellipsis in particular really screws with the auto capitalisation feature in Pages.
I know that the online version is a beta, I can't imagine they will launch it without supporting the main English language and I will be shocked (and very complainy) if they do. My main fears about it, revolve around the horrible scrolling/cacheing performance and a few really foolish design decisions (like having documents open at a default resolution instead of "fit to width" without letting the user set or alter that default resolution).
I'm worried about the poor performance with scrolling as it seems to be something that might be impossible to fix given that we are talking about document editing on the web. This means that the web version will be useless except for spot edits and that you can't effectively work with any documents over a couple or three pages. I'm worried about some of the crazy design decisions, because Apple tends to really believe that they get that stuff right, so when they get it wrong, it often takes multiple versions before they will come down off the high horse and admit they designed something wrong. So I might have to deal with this weird and irritating default resolution issue for years before they finally give me a choice to display my documents in a sane way.
Overall, I'm just disappointed in the disrespect Apple has shown for what is for me, a central and very important application. The lack of any significant updates or effort on their part, and the lack of attention to detail is atrocious. The idea that they actually think their work is "done" or "good enough" and are thinking of making the whole thing free as part of a loss leader package to sell hardware infuriates me. I've got a lot invested, so that's why I might come across as angry or disrespectful of your spirited defence of them. I don't mean anything personal and if it came across that way I'm sorry.
A lot of users like me *believed* them when they said they were serious about making the iWork apps serious competitors. I think they've let down all those people who actually took them at their word and moved all their creation away from Office to iWork. I think they owe the people like me who have been suffering all this time, a far bigger apology than the one they gave to the few users who lost data on MobileMe.
If the team leader for iWork apps was in front of me at this moment I'd step on his/her foot and slap them on the face. And I say that as a lifelong Apple supporter and someone who has never actually hit anyone in their life.
I think I learned back in 1984 that word processors could not reliably represent professional typography. If that is is important to you then you should be using a desktop publishing program.
Darn I'll miss his rants against Apple. They were my chuckle of the day, even the week sometimes.
He was so ridiculous he actually helped Apple's sales.
Now MS will be very dull, until they find a manager willing risk the sinking ship.
Oh well; there will always be someone willing to take the short term risk for the BIG bucks they'll pay.
I think that is their only option. Agree. Their sever products, although rather proprietary are very robust. Unlike IBM who settled on Linux as their OS, I think MS may have to isolate itself to .Net in order to survive.
Just because IBM has changed its business focus doesn't mean it is a shadow of its former self. Far from it, no matter which really important metric you use. Success is not merely measured by marketshare in the consumer world.
Given that IBM walked away from the PC market a few years before the dawn of the age of tablet (whilst near the top of the heap), the proper perspective is that they were frigging brilliant - one of the most brilliant transitions any large business has ever made. Microsoft has never timed anything so perfectly. Nor has it made such a strategic and successful 90° shift in its history (although Bill Gates would argue IE was one such example).
The interesting question is whether they will hire a business manager (sales or finance person) or a technology guru to run the business.