or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Microsoft to reportedly cut Windows pricing by 70% as Apple, Google eat PC marketshare
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microsoft to reportedly cut Windows pricing by 70% as Apple, Google eat PC marketshare - Page 3

post #81 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkse View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
 

You have to be a total computer expert and an invaluable asset to the organization to be allowed to overrule the IT department by bringing in Macs and hooking them up to a Windows-centric network.

Well, not in my place. If you bring a Mac that you paid yourself and dedicate to your work, I'll support it. No sweat. If you keep complaining about poor performance when you browse youtube and gossip on Facebook, I'll ignore you. Simple as that.

we may be going off topic, but its been apparent to me that times have changed.  I've been using my own Macbook Pro on a "Windows centric" network for the past 6 years.  IT does not care as long as I can get my job done and don't get in their way.  I have a stack of unused company issued Windows laptops in a filing cabinet in perfect condition.   Can't say I'm special in this regards, its become quite common for people to use their own Macbook Pro's at work. 

 

sorry, that does not seem to be the case where you work. 

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #82 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkse View Post
 
Well, not in my place. If you bring a Mac that you paid yourself and dedicate to your work, I'll support it. No sweat. If you keep complaining about poor performance when you browse youtube and gossip on Facebook, I'll ignore you. Simple as that.

Well that may be an exception to the rule. I work for a global corporation and regular employees are not permitted to even plug their personal phone into a USB port, even if it is just for charging. No internet radio, Facebook, YouTube, etc. is permitted and is grounds for termination except for departments like mine that work in programming and creative services. We have our own IP blocks and routers which even IT does not have permission to manage. We also have corporate Google apps, email and storage accounts, Dropbox and iCloud and anything else we want, iPhones plugged in etc. None of that is managed by IT, but we are the exception and I am our department's computer and network manager, among or duties. Perhaps our rogue attitude has made us a little unpopular with the regular IT department, hence they won't even give us the time of day, but we don't care because we have the blessing of the president of the world headquarters.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #83 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

We have our own IP blocks and routers which even IT does not have permission to manage. ...

Perhaps our rogue attitude has made us a little unpopular with the regular IT department

Oh, I see. *That* kind of user. Yes, I'd make sure to keep you walled off, that's for sure! Would still like to work *with* you rather than against you, though, just to have a clue about what you're up to in case it affects me or my other users. 

 

To get a bit closer to the topic at hand; the type of computers affected by this price reduction from Microsoft is exactly the kind of trash I'd like to keep far, far away from my network. It happens now and then that co-workers show up with their private laptops in need of fixing. I'll try to help out but I'm definitely not allowing them onto my network! They're mostly infected by loads of trojans, adware and crapware, have an expired trial version of office and the user wonders how to get the machine back into working order. *sigh*

post #84 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkse View Post
 
Oh, I see. *That* kind of user. Yes, I'd make sure to keep you walled off, that's for sure! Would still like to work *with* you rather than against you, though, just to have a clue about what you're up to in case it affects me or my other users. 

 

Well the lack of IT cooperation is what started all this. We asked for a VPN for one of our team while she was on maternity leave and they said something like "having a non-company issued PC connected to our private network is insecure." or something to that effect. I needed some static IPs... " sorry we can't allow static IPs for workstations"..etc. etc. All totally lame excuses because they just didn't want to do it. So I went over their head with my connections in upper management. Now when any of the global offices wants to get some challenging web programming or shared storage project done, they don't even bother asking IT, they come straight to me. And it gets billed out of IT's budget which is why they love me so much...not.


Edited by mstone - 2/22/14 at 1:52pm

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #85 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

Lets pretend for a moment that by lowering the price to 30% of current price, they are able to increase the number of cheap PC's by over 3.33x. This would yield the same revenue they are getting now on those computers.  For this new pricing strategy to be worthwhile, lets say they need to grow unit sales by 4x from current levels.

You have to think about revenue outside of the initial purchase. When someone buys an iOS device, they use Siri, iAds, the App Store, buy iOS peripherals and cables, they recommend other people to buy similar products (if they are happy), they use related cloud services.

By not having high volume sales, Microsoft is missing out on Office subscriptions, ad revenue from Bing services (Cortana eventually) and in-app ad revenue, their own app store, their own cloud services.

The revenue from services and apps may be lower per person than profit margin from a purchase but it's recurring revenue. Someone may only buy a new product every 3 years and make Microsoft $50. But Microsoft might make $15 every year per person via services, apps and ads.

1 million customers over 3 years with $50 license = $50m devices + $45m services = $95m
2 million customers over 3 years with $15 license = $15m devices + $90m services = $105m

With enough recurring revenue, Microsoft could afford to make Windows mobile free, which would make it cheaper than Android for some manufacturers as they pay royalties to Microsoft for Android.
post #86 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkse View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

We have our own IP blocks and routers which even IT does not have permission to manage. ...

Perhaps our rogue attitude has made us a little unpopular with the regular IT department

Oh, I see. *That* kind of user. Yes, I'd make sure to keep you walled off, that's for sure! Would still like to work *with* you rather than against you, though, just to have a clue about what you're up to in case it affects me or my other users. 

 

To get a bit closer to the topic at hand; the type of computers affected by this price reduction from Microsoft is exactly the kind of trash I'd like to keep far, far away from my network. It happens now and then that co-workers show up with their private laptops in need of fixing. I'll try to help out but I'm definitely not allowing them onto my network! They're mostly infected by loads of trojans, adware and crapware, have an expired trial version of office and the user wonders how to get the machine back into working order. *sigh*

hawkse,

 

I'm so so sorry. I've always felt It takes a person with immense patience and perservirance to work in IT on Windows. I would not last long in that role. I have made it clear I won't help any of my extended family with Windows issues.  I have lost too many hours trying to keep Windows running and configured correctly, not to mention raising my blood pressure both for work and personal.  Regards.  Life is so much easier and calmer now.


Edited by snova - 2/22/14 at 1:44pm
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #87 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

Lets pretend for a moment that by lowering the price to 30% of current price, they are able to increase the number of cheap PC's by over 3.33x. This would yield the same revenue they are getting now on those computers.  For this new pricing strategy to be worthwhile, lets say they need to grow unit sales by 4x from current levels.

You have to think about revenue outside of the initial purchase. When someone buys an iOS device, they use Siri, iAds, the App Store, buy iOS peripherals and cables, they recommend other people to buy similar products (if they are happy), they use related cloud services.

By not having high volume sales, Microsoft is missing out on Office subscriptions, ad revenue from Bing services (Cortana eventually) and in-app ad revenue, their own app store, their own cloud services.

The revenue from services and apps may be lower per person than profit margin from a purchase but it's recurring revenue. Someone may only buy a new product every 3 years and make Microsoft $50. But Microsoft might make $15 every year per person via services, apps and ads.

1 million customers over 3 years with $50 license = $50m devices + $45m services = $95m
2 million customers over 3 years with $15 license = $15m devices + $90m services = $105m

With enough recurring revenue, Microsoft could afford to make Windows mobile free, which would make it cheaper than Android for some manufacturers as they pay royalties to Microsoft for Android.

you make a good point.  I wonder if cheap stakes who buy @ $250, make for good recurring revenue customers. 


Edited by snova - 2/22/14 at 1:55pm
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #88 of 121
"...In addition, these sub-$250 products do not have to be touch enabled."

Does this mean that Microsoft intends to have Windows installed on sub-$250 traditional PC hardware? Being that mobile devices are pretty much touch-enabled from the get-go, it seems strange that Microsoft is not targeting the mobile market more than they are. And how well will the full Windows system perform on such inexpensive hardware? I think Microsoft has gone batty, they haven't a clue about the new computing landscape. I agree with one of the previous posters, Microsoft needs to let go of Windows as a source of profit and should instead direct their resources toward building cross-platform solutions. This means that Azure and subscription-based services will now the company's source of revenue. Windows is a loss leader, and Office should be ported in its full form to OS X and iOS devices. Linux is a little trickier since there are so many distros to choose from.
post #89 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielsutton View Post

Windows is a loss leader, and Office should be ported in its full form to OS X and iOS devices. Linux is a little trickier since there are so many distros to choose from.

I doubt MS can afford to dumb down Office enough to be compatible across all platforms. Look how much Apple had to cripple iWork apps just for equality across iOS, OS X and the iCloud version.  Not that risky for Apple to do something like that because they don't have so many business users, but if MS did that it would be suicide.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #90 of 121

Can I get a refund? 

post #91 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post
 

Google has nothing to lose. All they have to do is make sure ad revenue covers their development costs of Chrome OS.  Its the guys that make these Chromebooks that are taking all the risk and bleeding money, like Acer.   We have gone from selling $4000 computers to $200 computers for the past few decades. What has this done for margins and fortunes of the HW OEM and where is all this going? Cheap Netbooks, Chromebooks  and Cheap PCs in general are not a good business move for the HW guys. Many of which realized this and if they have any hint of survival skills are running for the exits.   All the greats of days past, Dell, HP, Sony, Acer, where are they now? What's gonna cause them to reverse the trend? Even cheaper Chromebooks or Windows PCs?   Just who is gonna be left to makes these cheap Chromebooks when most of these guys fold up and leave? Will Chrome OS survive is no one is left to make the HW?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by WS11 View Post
 

There is also the emerging market for set-top style PCs:

 

The ASUS Eee Box EB1037 combines a Bay Trail-M CPU and an NVIDIA GPU into a low cost package:

 

inline.jpg 

 

These types of products represent the "low end" and "low cost" for Microsoft, neither of which lack in performance.  

 

As even more powerful hardware launches later this year, the floor required for running windows will sit even further beneath the performance ceiling of cheap/low end hardware. 

 

Whether or not the consumer takes to Windows 8 in the tablet market is an entirely different story, leading Microsoft into an uphill battle.

 

When I read this story I first thought that Microsux was finally willing to compete by getting off of its high horse. Then I read it was only for the lower priced machines. The lowest priced tablet with Windoz on the Dell site is $299.

 

This must be totally about Chromebooks and Chromeboxes. ASUS is selling a Chromebox this month for $179 with the same internal parts as the $199 Acer Chromebook. HP has some Chromebooks that don't cost much more. Toshiba in March will begin selling a 13.3" screen Chromebook with a much better screen than the Acer. It will sell for $279 using the same chip as the Acer. The reports and reviews of these machines using the latest Celeron Haswell 1.4 GHz chip are very favorable. Web pages load very fast and there is no lag. Maybe these chips could run Windoz 8.

 

Even with these lower prices it makes me wonder who really wants to buy anything with Windoz 8. Everywhere I read customer reviews of different computers there is always a huge percentage of people complaining that they either don't like Windoz 8 or they hate Windoz 8. The word must have gotten around by now to everybody who works with computers that 8 is just not fun to use. It probably will just get worse and worse until Windoz 9 comes around. Who knows what that will bring.

 

Chromebooks are making huge inroads into the mobile computing world because low end chips are fast enough to get work done.

They probably cost manufacturers even less money than Windoz. How much telephone support is really needed for Chrombooks? I bet it is very small compared to Windoz 8. This is probably a big factor in manufacturers deciding to make Chromebooks. Chromebooks have a feature called "power wash". It is essentially a way to quickly reset everything in the OS to its original configuration. That must save a lot of time for telephone tech support which means much less money spent. That means fewer tech support people are needed for Chrome OS. Windoz support takes forever sometimes.

 

That ASUS box costs 270 Euros which translates to $365.00. That is above the Windoz low price threshold for their discount. I would still like to own one because it would do everything I needed at home. It's much cheaper than a Mac Mini and uses very little power just like a laptop.


Edited by Smallwheels - 2/22/14 at 5:23pm
post #92 of 121

Apple is more willing to make a break with the past in order to innovate, that is very true.  They did not "dumb down" iWork, rather they scrapped the old paradigm and began with a clean slate, the new iWork will, in not too much time, surpass the old and will usher in a new era of office productivity software.

 

Microsoft is more fearful of creating a backlash among their users, and do not create disruptive change as Apple does.  There is another difference too.  Apple is famously secretive about their activities, and did not tell users what to expect with the new iWork until they dropped it at our feet.  We were surprised, yes, but if we hold on for just a little bit longer, we will be happy with what we will have.

 

Microsoft is more outspoken about their workings, so what they could do is announce a new era of office productivity software, which will be cloud-based (running on Azure) as well as locally, installed on users' computers.  They could let people continue using their current office suites for the time being, and then roll out the new version on Windows, OS X, and iOS, with feature parity across all platforms, when it is ready.  This would allow current business users to (a) continue using the software they have, and (b) get ready for the new software so that when it arrives, they can begin using it.  I do believe that Office can run very similarly on Windows and OS X, the reason why Microsoft did not realease a full-featured suite for Mac is because they are still trying to steer people toward Windows, their own platform.  But now that operating systems are (or will be) cost-free, MS can transition to offering software and services, rather than trying to make money from Windows.  This is the new paradigm in computing.  Adobe has already gone there with Creative Cloud, and now many others will follow.

post #93 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielsutton View Post
 

Apple is more willing to make a break with the past in order to innovate, that is very true.  They did not "dumb down" iWork, rather they scrapped the old paradigm and began with a clean slate, the new iWork will, in not too much time, surpass the old and will usher in a new era of office productivity software.

 

Microsoft is more fearful of creating a backlash among their users, and do not create disruptive change as Apple does.  There is another difference too.  Apple is famously secretive about their activities, and did not tell users what to expect with the new iWork until they dropped it at our feet.  We were surprised, yes, but if we hold on for just a little bit longer, we will be happy with what we will have.

 

Microsoft is more outspoken about their workings, so what they could do is announce a new era of office productivity software, which will be cloud-based (running on Azure) as well as locally, installed on users' computers.  They could let people continue using their current office suites for the time being, and then roll out the new version on Windows, OS X, and iOS, with feature parity across all platforms, when it is ready.  This would allow current business users to (a) continue using the software they have, and (b) get ready for the new software so that when it arrives, they can begin using it.  I do believe that Office can run very similarly on Windows and OS X, the reason why Microsoft did not realease a full-featured suite for Mac is because they are still trying to steer people toward Windows, their own platform.  But now that operating systems are (or will be) cost-free, MS can transition to offering software and services, rather than trying to make money from Windows.  This is the new paradigm in computing.  Adobe has already gone there with Creative Cloud, and now many others will follow.

 

What, exactly, is so innovative about iWork? It has nicer templates but a much worse feature set and FAR worse extensibility than Office. Numbers is essentially unusable for anything resembling serious; Keynote is beautiful, but try typesetting an equation (I have been doing it by Skitching pdfs produced with LaTeX, which works, but is not what I would call elegant), Pages is quite nice for letters (I use LaTeX for serious typesetting, so do not know enough to compare it with word). Anyway, just another office suite.

post #94 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
 

Well the lack of IT cooperation is what started all this. We asked for a VPN for one of our team while she was on maternity leave and they said something like "having a non-company issued PC connected to our private network is insecure." or something to that effect. I needed some static IPs... " sorry we can't allow static IPs for workstations"..etc. etc. All totally lame excuses because they just didn't want to do it. So I went over their head with my connections in upper management. Now when any of the global offices wants to get some challenging web programming or shared storage project done, they don't even bother asking IT, they come straight to me. And it gets billed out of IT's budget which is why they love me so much...not.

 

In most large organizations I had worked in, there was a hatred and contempt for the IT department, whose main purpose has always appeared to be to protect their own turf. (Smaller high-tech companies are run differently, and very technically savvy universities [Stanford, MIT] are too. "Normal" universities are not). Interesting, a battle I saw in many places involved the IT department's insistence on windows, and the end users' insistence on other things (Linux, OS X).  Windows is so opaque that running it obviously helps in turf protection. Now, I notice that the pro-IT people here are, in fact, in IT, which seems to indicate that my experience is far from unique.

post #95 of 121

Prescott was at 3.6 Ghz.  Not 2.5, but the point remains.  That was 2003 and now it is 2014.  That was the 90 nm node and we are waiting on the 14nm node and the chips will not be faster, they will simply use less power so they can run at higher frequencies for longer periods of time.  There have been marginal improvements, but the last new chip from intel gave us an average of 10% faster performance by some measures.  Show me a stock Intel chip that ships with the peta hertz frequencies we would have had if things had continued like they did in the 90"s

post #96 of 121

Why has nearly everyone here assumed that this pertains only/primarily to PCs?    

 

I would assume this has far more relevance to tablets.  After the mess caused by Netbooks, I wouldn't think too many manufacturers would be interested in $250 'laptops'.  On the other hand, this could allow companies like Dell, HP, Acer, Lenovo etc. to offer better prices on Windows 8" tablets and should provide for more competitive pricing versus Android tablets.

 

I don't see this affecting Apple much, as they don't and won't be pricing at this level.   I also wouldn't view this as much of a threat to Chromebooks; any laptop at $250 is not going to run Windows 8 very well.

 

On another point, how does this work outside the US, where prices are nearly always higher than US markets and obviously you've got constant currency fluctuations?

post #97 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macnewsjunkie View Post
 

Mobile has been able to catch up to the PC market based on the lower power envelope that allowed the frequency improvements to continue along with the rising transistor counts.  In 2002 ARM was rocking a 13 Mhz chip.  Those inexpensive and very power efficient chips have come a long way in 12 years. 

I don't think Moore's law has flatlined just yet. Speed may have hit a wall, but other aspects of processor design have gone around it. Look at Geekbench marks since 2002. My current iMac scores 6x higher than my first Intel iMac, seven years later. That's 2x every three years instead of every 18 months. That's not much worse than the benchmark improvement rate in the middle of the 90s. Transistor count growth is actually accelerating. And I designed a 200MHz StrongARM processor into a product way back in 1996, bringing it to market in 1997. The MessagePad 2000 ran a 162MHz StrongARM back in 1997.

 

You're right about the future not appearing as bright as the past. But we've been here before too. Moore's law was expected to expire in the 70s.

 

Here's an interesting worry about the future...

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/116561-the-death-of-cpu-scaling-from-one-core-to-many-and-why-were-still-stuck

post #98 of 121

"Blah blah blah Bay Trail-T blah blah blah"

 

The average iPad customer just wants a great user experience. Once you start slinging the Intel code names, you've already lost the competition for the consumer. They don't speak specs.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #99 of 121
Seems like a real visionary leader would be able to recognize that MS needs to create an entirely new OS from scratch that has no relationship to Windows. Create a team isolated from any and all Windows groups and give them the money and carte blanche to get the task done. Build an integrated phone/tablet OS while your at it since PCs are becoming secondary to those devices. As it stands now MS has the cash to do a Manhattan Project like this. In a few years that might not be true.
post #100 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

Seems like a real visionary leader would be able to recognize that MS needs to create an entirely new OS from scratch that has no relationship to Windows. Create a team isolated from any and all Windows groups and give them the money and carte blanche to get the task done.

 



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midori_%28operating_system%29
post #101 of 121

Try and open up Notepad. That's everything that is wrong with Windows 8.

post #102 of 121

Actually, the Chromebook angle does make sense come to think of it. The Chromebook as a very cheap terminal device to access the corporate applications remotely is very tempting only Citrix still isn't providing a very good experience here and the long term vendor support from Google is questionable. Ie, will I be able to use my Chromebook thin clients 2-3 years down the road or not. Having Windows on the same hardware solves a whole host of issues like CAL licensing, configuration, lifecycle management yadayada. Windows and Microsoft are known entities. 

 

So as a way to avoid Chromebooks eating into corporate IT client deployments. Yes. Not a bad move.

post #103 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
 

I doubt MS can afford to dumb down Office enough to be compatible across all platforms. Look how much Apple had to cripple iWork apps just for equality across iOS, OS X and the iCloud version.  Not that risky for Apple to do something like that because they don't have so many business users, but if MS did that it would be suicide.

I think you misunderstand the bigger picture of what Apple is doing with iWorks.

 

Granted, that Apple has rewritten iWorks from the ground up with an architecture that scales better on iCloud, desktops and mobiles,. 

If you followed what Apple did with the Final Cut Pro X rewrite, you would notice that iWorks features are quickly coming back and iWorks will be in an architectural position to beat office in the long run just like Final Cut Pro X rules in movie making.  iWorks is not watered down in anyway, not in iCloud and not in iOS.  Moreover, Apple is not trying to compete against MS Office with iWorks.  iWorks is free and will be used to help sell Apple's ecosystem (iCloud, Mobile, Portable, Wearables and Desktops) and Apple will not be totally dependent on MS Office.  

 

Microsoft needs to do the same with MS Office but it will be much more difficult for Microsoft for several reasons:

 

  1.  Office is huge and I believe it has what's called a "Fragile Base Class" issue that makes it difficult to fix for mobiles without a rewrite.  It is similar to when Microsoft rewrote Windows '98 as Windows NT.  It is a huge under taking that took years but had to be done.

  2.  The Mobile paradigm is radically different than the desktop and the Cloud because of limited available resources on mobile devices and everyone knows that Office is a resource hog.  Office will need to be rewritten for Mobile devices.  It will be much easier on iOS because Apple already has a very advanced text engine for mobile iOS and well defined UI and APIs.

  3.  Office is part of MS' enterprise money maker on the desktop.  MS does not want to break the desktop and venture into Mobile just yet.  Their Mobile efforts are not that successful yet.  MS is entrenched on the desktop with the old software, they have sort of integrated office into the Cloud but have yet to take the full leap on Mobile.  If they don't rewrite Office, I think it will be a mediocre experience on mobiles and inconsistent with the desktop and the cloud.  MS is going to start with Office for iOS just like they started with Office for Mac OS on desktops and then go from there.

 

Time will tell if MS can pull this off and still maintain Office as an enterprise money maker on the desktop.

Note that Google only has office software in the Cloud and a different software that it sells on Mobiles.  (No desktop software)


Edited by AppleSauce007 - 2/23/14 at 3:02am
post #104 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post
 

"Fragile Base Class" issue ....

 

 

Equivalent for POS, crappy, poorly designed/written ... ?

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.

Frank Zappa

Reply

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.

Frank Zappa

Reply
post #105 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hydrogen View Post
 

 

 

Equivalent for POS, crappy, poorly designed/written ... ?

No, not necessarily.  It is a problem that is inherent in the programming language that they use to write it.  In the case of Office:  C++

 

Apple uses Objective C for OS X and iOS APIs.  It is much less susceptible to the "Fragile Base Class" issue and it is much more flexible to re-architect software written in Objective C without breaking all other softwares that depend on the base libraries.  I think the Objective C language gives Apple a huge advantage.  Apple is now the only company that really uses it since it was adopted it at NeXT in 1988, Apple now changes it at will for the better without really having to answer to any consortium.

post #106 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post
 

No, not necessarily.  It is a problem that is inherent in the programming language that they use to write it.  In the case of Office:  C++

 

Apple uses Objective C for OS X and iOS APIs.  It is much less susceptible to the "Fragile Base Class" issue and it is much more flexible to re-architect software written in Objective C without breaking all other softwares that depend on the base libraries.  I think the Objective C language gives Apple a huge advantage.  Apple is now the only company that really uses it since it was adopted it at NeXT in 1988, Apple now changes it at will for the better without really having to answer to any consortium.

 

 

You are probably right, I won't argue since , after an ADA self training (on a PC..) somewhere  in 1990, I swore to myself I would never program anything in another langage ! (I have been faithful to this promise , at least in my professional life ...(but simply because I stopped programming in my professional life ...)).


Edited by Hydrogen - 2/23/14 at 4:08am

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.

Frank Zappa

Reply

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.

Frank Zappa

Reply
post #107 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by WS11 View Post

 

Whether or not the consumer takes to Windows 8 in the tablet market is an entirely different story, leading Microsoft into an uphill battle.

 

Everybody I know has already bought an iPad  I don't think that anybody wants Windows anymore.

post #108 of 121
@macnewsjunkie I agree, but it isn't Moores Law that is failing it is the perceived benefit on PCs that is failing. Moores Law just deals with the number of transistors you can chuck at the problem for a given cost point. Frequency is a different metric.

Smartphones have benefited greatly, but soon they will also gain less and less.

Gradually it will be smaller and smaller devices that gain the benefit.
post #109 of 121

It's not the price, but it's the quality that windows need to fix.

post #110 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by WS11 View Post
 

I don't think I've ever seen a single advert that makes reference to Bay Trail, at most it might include "intel inside".

 

I'm referring to posts in this thread that brag about "Bay Trail-T".

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #111 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post
 

Try and open up Notepad. That's everything that is wrong with Windows 8.


*opens up Notepad*

 

I don't get it

post #112 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

Seems like a real visionary leader would be able to recognize that MS needs to create an entirely new OS from scratch that has no relationship to Windows. Create a team isolated from any and all Windows groups and give them the money and carte blanche to get the task done. Build an integrated phone/tablet OS while your at it since PCs are becoming secondary to those devices. As it stands now MS has the cash to do a Manhattan Project like this. In a few years that might not be true.

 

What works for one company isn't the best choice for another. In the mid 1990s, every pundit was telling Apple that the way to fix their declining sales and profits was to splinter the Mac OS and Mac hardware, or even sell off the Mac hardware business and "become like Microsoft" and license Mac OS to Mac clone makers, who would then drive hardware prices down through a competition (which we now realize was an unsustainable race to the bottom). The common, unimaginative remedy for Apple's business model was to adopt Microsoft's. And why not? Windows 95 was on top of the world back then. It took a Steve Jobs to recognize that this advice wasn't going to work, and that "Apple needed to remember how to be Apple."

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #113 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by WS11 View Post
 

In your previous post you made reference to the "average iPad consumer", a group that wouldn't even know this website exists.

 
The market is bigger than this website. That's something techies never understand: tech doesn't revolve around them.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #114 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post
 

That ASUS box costs 270 Euros which translates to $365.00. That is above the Windoz low price threshold for their discount. I would still like to own one because it would do everything I needed at home.

When I typed "I would still like to own one..." I meant that I would like to own the computer and run GNU/Linux. I would not ever run Windoz.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by WS11 View Post
 

The Microsoft Store has the 32GB model of the Dell tablet listed for $229 USD.  

 

The ASUS could likely seem some price variations depending on the model and specs.  Not to mention the European price doesn't always translate into the US pricing. 

If this is so then Microsux really doesn't care about profit at their stores. The $229 price is what Dell charges for the Android version on their site.

 

This would also give manufacturers another reason to dislike Microsux because they are undercutting them.

 

What is the real cost of buying brand recognition and market share? Google gave away Android hoping it would earn money from mobile device users clicking ads on Google's search engine. Some ads do cost a lot and could make up for the price of the work that went into Android. When mortgage rate ads cost $25 per click or more that could add up fast.

 

They sell Chrome OS and support it for probably the same reasons. It is easy to see how they recoup their investment over time. What I wonder is how long it takes. It must be worth it because Android came long before Chrome OS and Google decided to use the same strategy for an operating system for computers. They must have known ahead of time what they would get in return.

 

When Microsux discounts their OS, builds their own hardware, and sells other manufacturers hardware at a big discount, they are counting on people to buy their properties in the future. Is the Microsux ecosystem really so good that people will want to buy their next machine using Windoz?

 

Apple's iOS is getting better all of the time. There are hundreds of thousands of apps for it that do great things. Android, though plagued with malware, is also getting better with tens of thousands of apps that are great too. Chrome OS has fewer apps but the machines running it are capable office work devices. As internet speeds increase and apps improve, cloud computing will become a big industry. Why would most people and even businesses choose Microsux if they don't do specialized computing beyond paper pushing? It is only a matter of time before Adobe's programs are run in the cloud and available via a browser. Quicken and other huge specialized software firms will in time do the same thing. They will sell subscriptions and offer data storage on-line for easy sharing.

 

All Google needs to do is make a better office suite than Microsux and Windoz will be dead soon afterwards.

 

Now that Google is contracting with a company to make a virtual machine interface so that Microsux Office can run in Chrome OS it is only a matter of months before Windoz takes another big hit. If Google does some heavy advertising once this product is functional Microsux could experience a huge drop in sales. Then HP, Dell, Lenovo, Acer, ASUS, and the rest will have one less reason to continue putting Windoz on their machines. They will want to sell Chromebooks.

 

Maybe some of you believe this is a race to the bottom. Such comments are made here often. It is just a shift in the way people use computers. This happens in all industries. As things evolve competition comes into play. Manufacturers can either innovate to get more sales at prices that make them happy or they can compete in the price arena.

 

Innovation brings prices up. Competition brings prices down. The balance is always shifting like a pendulum.

post #115 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by WS11 View Post
 

A laptop using the weakest Intel hardware from late 2013 ~ early 2014 should handle Windows 8 just fine. 

 

Of course the potential problem for Microsoft is whether or not the consumer wants Windows 8, although this problem might be more persistent in the tablet/touch market, not as much the laptop market. 

That may be true, however, I just took a look at Best Buy for NEW Windows 8 laptops.  The cheapest device is $280.  If the OEMs save $35 with this program, it would still put the price above $250 and that is the absolute cheapest Windows 8 laptop sold at Best Buy.

 

The more I look at this, the more I'm convinced that this program is being done mainly for tablets, where Microsoft believes it can ride the huge growth being seen in Android tablets.

post #116 of 121
Hooray! More "race to the bottom" policies.

Still don't see how it's possible for manufacturers to make any money at those levels...
post #117 of 121
They need to encourage more people to purchase Windows licenses. OEMs, people with existing hardware, even mac users wanting to run bootcamp. The only way they can do that is to greatly reduce the cost, and get rid of the confusing home/pro/enterprise/ultimate nonsense. No more regular or upgrade versions either. Stop throwing up roadblocks for the user.

Windows 9 (get a new name while you're at it) should ship as a single, unified product with a retail price of no more than $50. All features short of Windows Server included. OEMs will get wholesale pricing, and they can price accordingly for academic site licenses.
post #118 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by HealthNut View Post
 

Geez these sub-$250 computers will be built so horribly, I mean more so than usual.

I always thought Steve Jobs' statement about not being able to make a $500 computer that wasn't junk was hyperbole, but a $250 machine can't be anything BUT junk.  I shudder to think about the $249.95 laptops being flushed through Wal-Mart next Black Friday.  

post #119 of 121
They should simply give it away for free until the whole OS makes cohesive sense.
post #120 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

 

Innovation brings prices up. Competition brings prices down. The balance is always shifting like a pendulum.

 

I think this is pretty good. Maybe would be stronger concept if you replace the word "prices" with "margin".  I don't think most companies care as much about ESP as they do margin. I guess there are some that might, if it's strategic to them, but thats a different thread. 
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Microsoft to reportedly cut Windows pricing by 70% as Apple, Google eat PC marketshare