Steve Ballmer calls Apple's Mac growth a "rounding error"

1246714

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 272
    thomprthompr Posts: 1,521member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by VinitaBoy View Post


    @phalanx,



    "That is why the they bailed them out financially years ago."



    Sorry, "phal," but Microsoft did no such thing. When little Billy G's company sent $150 million to Apple "years ago," it was to keep himself and his company out of jail! Microsoft (via one of its supposed "subcontractors) was caught red-handed stealing the code from QuickTime to make its own media support system. Yes, STEALING THE CODE. Gotcha!



    The settlement of this matter, accomplished out of court, was the transfer of funds you allude to, above. Believe me, there is no love lost between Microsoft and ANY of its present or former competitors: not Netscape, not Word Perfect, not anybody.



    Do NOT delude your self into believing that Microsoft bailed out Apple. Didn't happen. They bailed THEMSELVES out of just one more in a long list of ethical (not to say CRIMINAL) activities here and around the world.



    I agree with this response and want to embellish a bit.



    People commonly refer to that $150 M investment (they bought shares... they didn't just fork over cash) as something that saved Apple's bacon. Not that it's bad to get that kind of capital, but it wasn't anywhere near the most important aspect of the settlement. The most important thing was that MS agreed to continue updating Office for Mac for at least 5 more years. Prior to the settlement, it looked like Office would be dropped. At that point in time, with Mac OS hanging on by a thread and having little more than MS Office and other third-party publication software to run on it, that would have been the death blow for Apple. Steve knew it in his bones, and he also knew that he just needed a little more time to get the new iMac prepared. So he made the "Deal with the Devil" and then never looked back.





    Thompson
  • Reply 62 of 272
    macromacro Posts: 1member
    GM used to laugh at Toyota, Honda, excetera. They were number one much like Microsft is number one. Who is laughing now?



    he who laughs last will laugh best.
  • Reply 63 of 272
    wigbywigby Posts: 692member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Ballmer was focusing on the hardware but to be honest my Mac Book Pro and even my iPhone don't stand out on quality. Let's face it iPhone is a thin brick and the MBP a fold open box.



    The key to both products is the OS driving each unit. It is brilliant that Apple has taken UNIX so far. In both cases OS and APIs striving for high quality.



    In a way though he is focused on an issue the Mac community needs to take a look at. That is the obsession with market share relative to Microsoft. What Apple needs is healthy and controlled growth in shipments that make the company stronger. What is happening anyone quarter against Microsoft isn't relavant. With sustained growth Microsoft will eventually loose but Apple can't loose sight of quality.



    what other smartphones and laptops are you talking about? if you ask any consumer and even apples' competition to site product examples with great hardware design, they all put apple on top of that list. most other companies just tie for 2nd place. i'm not talking about bells and whistles like abundance of i/o connectors, big hard drives, fastest processors. those things are fine but anyone can slap those in a system at anytime with little thought of hardware design.



    and since when doesn't apple have healthy controlled growth? don't you think that apple could instantly capture 50% of the market if they introduced a $400 netbook and $700 minitower? that's what dell and acer do now but that's not healthy. that's a low margin bubble that will soon burst. it already did for dell. apple's marketshare and sales have only grown since 1999. apple has more cash in the bank than sony. if that's not corporate growth, i'm confused.
  • Reply 64 of 272
    big kcbig kc Posts: 141member
    Here's how Ballmer REALLY feels about Apple. I wonder if he counted this one when he was counting the Apple logos in the crowd??



    http://www.makeuseof.com/tech-fun/wp...esentetion.jpg
  • Reply 65 of 272
    The fact is that most people commenting on this thread from a Fortune 500 office are doing it on a PC because their Fortune 500 company -- along with most Fortune 500 companies -- is locked into MS, and it doesn't look like that will ever change... or does it?



    I would be interested to see how many Fortune 500s are still on XP these days. If a large company is going to have to make a seismic adjustment to get Windows 7 (assuming they never even bothered with Vista), which will involve replacing tens of thousands of PCs, they might as well consider Macs.



    Could Apple market a sensible alternative to Windows 7 for the business environment? Would the long-term cost be lower considering the amount of time/cost/manpower it takes to support MS in the enterprise?
  • Reply 66 of 272
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,609member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post


    He should get fired for saying this. He really should. Because it shows that he just does not understand anything about the markets he's dealing with, the product he himself sells, and how his company is responding to a very real threat.



    Yeah... that's where I lost any faith in Microsoft's opportunities with 7. He is saying (presumably referencing a graph on the screen) that the perception of value improved with the advertising, which is an important point.



    But what really got me is that he misses that if Google can carve out another 5-10 point share then MSFT really is in for trouble, not financially but in terms of mindshare. When you are the dominant player, going from 95% share to 75% share over a decade is a real problem. This is made much worse to the company given the reliance of Office to drive profits.



    OpenOffice is no where near close today. (Load time is especially annoying.) However, I can switch our office over to it rather than upgrade our old licenses with minimal productivity impact, and I hope that in a couple years some of the big problems are solved. If Apple put their weight behind OOo, Microsoft would have a real problem.
  • Reply 67 of 272
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,778member
    mmmm... I wonder if these 'new PC designs' we will see arriving with 7 will have any design resemblance to Apple designs?
  • Reply 68 of 272
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by crisss1205 View Post


    Lets go back to that line,



    What? Not to expensive? WTF Windows is the most expensive OS!

    At $299 for a basic retail version and $399 for a premium, thats not expensive?



    FYI: Apple has sold 10 million "PC's" and how many did Microsoft sell? Um, 0! All they do is sell software for PC, not hardware!





    that's retail



    OEM copies that you get with a new PC are $30 - $150 for ultimate. plus or minus a few $$$ depending on the OEM. most copies of Windows and OS X get sold at OEM. and with Apple's margins it makes OS X a lot more expensive
  • Reply 69 of 272
    chronsterchronster Posts: 1,894member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Big KC View Post


    Here's how Ballmer REALLY feels about Apple. I wonder if he counted this one when he was counting the Apple logos in the crowd??



    http://www.makeuseof.com/tech-fun/wp...esentetion.jpg



    that was left on stage from a previous presenter. Believe me, I would love for that to be true, but it's old news
  • Reply 70 of 272
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,609member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lazy-i.com View Post


    Could Apple market a sensible alternative to Windows 7 for the business environment? Would the long-term cost be lower considering the amount of time/cost/manpower it takes to support MS in the enterprise?



    The best opportunity for Apple is having 25% share of a Fortune 500 account. Defeat monoculture first, and let the IT people select the best platform for the application. One-size-fits-all is not as much of a slam-dunk as it used to be.



    But, Fortune500 share for Apple has more to do with on-site hardware support levels than cost or operating system. The other players simply do a better job.
  • Reply 71 of 272
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by thompr View Post


    People commonly refer to that $150 M investment (they bought shares... they didn't just fork over cash) as something that saved Apple's bacon. Not that it's bad to get that kind of capital, but it wasn't anywhere near the most important aspect of the settlement. The most important thing was that MS agreed to continue updating Office for Mac for at least 5 more years. Prior to the settlement, it looked like Office would be dropped. At that point in time, with Mac OS hanging on by a thread and having little more than MS Office and other third-party publication software to run on it, that would have been the death blow for Apple. Steve knew it in his bones, and he also knew that he just needed a little more time to get the new iMac prepared. So he made the "Deal with the Devil" and then never looked back.



    Not entirely. The continued development of Office for the Mac was part of the deal Apple made with Microsoft to avoid a long court battle, which involved that, the "investment," a technology sharing arrangement, the MSIE install agreement, and many thought at the time, probably some cash behind the scenes. We don't know if Microsoft would have continued Office development for the Mac had all the rest not occurred. It was all packaged up in one big announcement.
  • Reply 72 of 272
    ozboneozbone Posts: 5member
    As usual for Ballmer, drivel ... pure drivel.

    Consider the audience. He doesn't want to - he cannot - acknowledge weakness to these guys.

    Of course, the reality is completely different. Otherwise, why would they bother to copy Apple .... iPods, Stores, etc..
  • Reply 73 of 272
    desarcdesarc Posts: 642member
    of course there will be resemblance. Apple is the Win/PC design lab.



    sadly, Microsoft will turn a huge profit this fall because everyone who's been holding onto XP will upgrade to win7, assuming that - since it's not called vista - it's going to work.



    i can't wait for the Apple ad where "Mac" hands people thirty bucks and sends them into best buy [and a microsoft store] to fine an OS upgrade. then they go to the apple store and get snow leopard for 29 bucks.
  • Reply 74 of 272
    Steve Ballmer looks like a buffoon, but he's not. His pronouncements often have a purpose beyond their surface meaning. In this case, as others have noted, he mischaracterizes Apple's primary marketing message as being about having "the coolest hardware," thus damning Apple's hardware with faint praise and diverting attention away from systems software - the area where Apple and Microsoft actually compete.



    His assertion that market share gains or losses happen in a range lower than the rounding error of measurements may actually be true. Microsoft sells a lot of software, far more than Apple does. This statement makes that point, but implies another: that Microsoft is not concerned with Apple as a competitor. This is obviously false given the company's recent actions and investments in counter-propaganda. Microsoft may not feel threatened by loss of market share, but it absolutely is terrified about the relative strengths of the Apple and Microsoft brands.



    Apple's successful attempts to define their brand as standing for higher quality and ease of use have the potential to erode Microsoft's market position over the medium to long term. This is partly due to the fact that Apple's software really is better, meaning that the assertions they make have legs to stand on independent of any marketing effort. But it's also due to the farcical attempts by Microsoft to define a brand for the company and/or for Windows, over the years.



    Microsoft seems to be acutely aware of this deficiency. They've found an effective marketing message recently, asserting that Windows based PCs provide better values than Macintosh does. This is a good message to trumpet in a recession like the current one, that squeezes consumers hard. But over the long term, It has the disadvantage of conceding Apple's main point: that Macintosh is higher quality. If the quality and usability of Windows+non-Microsoft hardware doesn't improve significantly, meaning that the actual quality gap between Wintel and Mac will persist, then the twin barreled weapons of truth and marketing smarts could do significant damage to Microsoft's brand. This is the outcome Ballmer is trying to deflect. It's not dumb, though it's a bit pathetic.
  • Reply 75 of 272
    cmf2cmf2 Posts: 1,427member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by phalanx View Post


    I think the success of the latest Microsoft ads proves me right. Apple's Mac has been wallowing in the sub 10% market share for 20 years, and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Microsoft is coming off of one of its worst years and still made more profits than Apple. It is hard for Microsoft to grow its market share when it has it all. I'm sure you believe that Apple will have 90% market share soon and Microsoft will will go bankrupt. When you don't have a grip on reality anything seems possible.





    Mac sales were up during the quarter with those ads, did you miss that memo? Most people know that mac will never have 90% market share, but unlike you they actually know why. Apple gaining 90% market share would not just hurt Microsofts bottom line, but drive the companies that Apple directly competes with out of business as well. That would be PC manufacturers like HP, Dell, Acer, Lenovo, Toshiba, etc. Microsoft having higher market share doesn't make Windows the better OS. The business models of Apple and Microsoft have a lot more influence on market share.



    Apple is a computer manufacturer that uses a custom OS to promote their products. They are not in the business of selling OSX, they are in the business of selling Macs. Apple isn't wallowing in the sub 10% market, they are thriving in it. Yes Microsofts profits are still higher than Apples, but I fail to see the relevance. Using the Microsoft standard for profits makes a lot of companies look bad, but Apple is doing fine in its own right. To be honest, Microsoft should be paying more attention to Google (which is becoming more of a direct competetor than Apple is), or they will be seeing losses, not profits in the future.
  • Reply 76 of 272
    chronsterchronster Posts: 1,894member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by desarc View Post


    i can't wait for the Apple ad where "Mac" hands people thirty bucks and sends them into best buy [and a microsoft store] to fine an OS upgrade. then they go to the apple store and get snow leopard for 29 bucks.



    aww yeah man good one! I can't wait either!



  • Reply 77 of 272
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post




    OpenOffice is no where near close today. (Load time is especially annoying.) However, I can switch our office over to it rather than upgrade our old licenses with minimal productivity impact, and I hope that in a couple years some of the big problems are solved. If Apple put their weight behind OOo, Microsoft would have a real problem.



    I remember once upon a time when Apple was #1 when it came to word processing and DTP. iWork recaptures a bit of this, and I love where it is going, but I'd like to see a bit more development put into it. Of course, many design/publishing houses are Mac-only, but they run Adobe or Quark.
  • Reply 78 of 272
    leonardleonard Posts: 528member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    I bet when Apple meets with analysis they are told they are not welcome if they walk in with a competitor phone, laptop or MP3 player, and you can bet that Jobs will not sit down with anyone using a competitors product.



    Actually, ideally, I would think the opposite. Steve Jobs would rather meet with people who don't use his product as if you can convince them to use your product, you gain new users. But frankly, I don't think Jobs cares what you use. He may try to use his RDF to get you to use his own products, and you probably would be, by the end of the meeting.
  • Reply 79 of 272
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by phalanx View Post


    Sure. Whatever you want to believe. btw, Santa Claus isn't real.







    I think the success of the latest Microsoft ads proves me right.



    What success? The Laptop Hunter ads were a total failure. MS should pull them and bin them along with their Seinfeld and "I'm a PC" abortions. MS pulling the Wal Mart approach simply cheapens their image. It looks they're going right for the bottom of the barrel, and they know it. I think that might be what Ballmer actually wants, strangely enough. In any case, it might already be too late for them to claw back any Premium image they might have once had.



    MS simply does not know how to market anything. And their products NEED all the marketing gloss they can get.
  • Reply 80 of 272
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member
    The fact this dimwit is CEO of Microsoft proves you can make a deal with the devil.
Sign In or Register to comment.