Microsoft sells restrictive new WiMo Marketplace via iPhone ads

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 100
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by talksense101 View Post


    How did Apple compete when Microsoft was running all over them? They became a "premium" provider. They survived because they were able to deliver value. Microsoft is trying this to survive against the iPhone and Android. They have little to lose.



    MS' business model, the corporate culture at MS, their entire attitude when it comes to how the user sould interact with technology, isn't even remotely set up for anything "Premium."
  • Reply 42 of 100
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by talksense101 View Post


    How did Apple compete when Microsoft was running all over them? They became a "premium" provider. They survived because they were able to deliver value. Microsoft is trying this to survive against the iPhone and Android. They have little to lose.



    the iPod saved Apple. OS X for all the hype still has a tiny part of the market and most people don't care what Apple does with it.
  • Reply 43 of 100
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    the iPod saved Apple.



    And the iMac.



    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Bondi_Blue.jpg
  • Reply 44 of 100
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    And the iMac.



    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Bondi_Blue.jpg



    what is the Mac marketshare after all these years? I was looking at Apple's 2000 - 2003 earnings for some research a while ago and 2002 they lost money. 2003 was when the iPod came to Windows
  • Reply 45 of 100
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    what is the Mac marketshare after all these years?



    Which segment of the market are you talking about? Low-end? Mid? Premium?
  • Reply 46 of 100
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    why would anyone want a used computer?



    After their app submission to Apple's App Store has made them a tons of money, they can buy a new Mac. So I wouldn't worry.
  • Reply 47 of 100
    WOW... That just helped me make my decision. I'm getting an Android phone.



    Just kidding. See what I did there?
  • Reply 48 of 100
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    the iPod saved Apple. OS X for all the hype still has a tiny part of the market and most people don't care what Apple does with it.



    Yep got it in one!



    That's why Microsoft is spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to persuade people to stop switching. They just don't care.
  • Reply 49 of 100
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by piot View Post


    Yep got it in one!



    That's why Microsoft is spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to persuade people to stop switching. They just don't care.



    And hundreds of millions of dollars more to give a "Mac Like" user experience with every MS OS release.
  • Reply 50 of 100
    there are a few things that Microsoft is doing right in this game.



    in particular, they have put it right out from the start what will NOT be allowed. In much clearer terms than Apple apparently did. Rather like how the "I'm a PC, I'm a Mac" ad campaign was based on Apple researching the top gripes about Windows and responding how Mac ain't like that, Microsoft has clearly done their homework about the gripes on the App Store, decided from day one how they feel about the various issues and set the rules from day one. And their promise for a full and detailed explanation of rejection is a slam on the complaints of form letter "You have been rejected" replies from Apple.



    as for the cost issue. Well if it means they can hire staff to give those detailed replies and quickly, it really is a win. It sucks but if they give enough details that someone only has to resubmit once to fix bugs that's only $200. and if it keeps all the free farts apps and such out, is that really a great loss.



    as for the not right. well there's being behind the times major. Apple was one year into the game when they were ready to release 3rd party apps (under particular rules but still). I need not repeat how old WinMo is cause the article did it like 10 times. but it's a lot more than a couple of years.



    Also, I think it is a major mistake to treat WinMo and the Zune as two totally different creatures. yes some of that could be cause of all the anti-trust they get tossed at them. but one think that really works with the ipod touch and the iphone is that the touch can be the gateway for those that aren't on ATT and don't want to pay a huge ETF to switch. Some of them, especially ones not yet on a smart phone, get a touch, learn the interface, buy a few apps etc. and then in a few months when the contract is up, they cut ties, buy the phone and give the touch to the kids to keep playing their games.



    even with the focus on the Zune as just a media player and not a game machine, a common interface, syncing software etc would be of valuable. course they would likely base it off the ipod and mac unfriendly Zune software so only PC devotees could have a WinMo phone. but i'm sure someone will make a 'double twist' for the mac if that were to happen.
  • Reply 51 of 100
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by piot View Post


    Yep got it in one!



    That's why Microsoft is spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to persuade people to stop switching. They just don't care.



    and they still couldn't get it right. even Intel was able to make cool commercials.



    Dell had cool TV ads with the Dell dude years ago. Apple had good ones but they need a refresh. the iphone ads were cool. when my wife called to cancel her VZ wireless they tried to tell her they had good phones as well. she said she wanted to shake her phone and get a restaraunt recommendation and there was nothing the VZW CSR could say to top that
  • Reply 52 of 100
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    the biggest barrier to writing iphone apps is that you need a Mac. that's at least $1000.



    $99 might sound like a lot but Visual Studio will run on any cheapo PC you can find from the last 5 years. you can even get Visual Studio Express for free from MSDN





    Judging by the amount of apps submitted, it can't be a very big barrier, and don't forget the "mac mini" at $699.00.
  • Reply 53 of 100
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post


    And hundreds of millions of dollars more to give a "Mac Like" user experience with every MS OS release.



    Correct.



    In fact, the biggest x-factor in the industry today as far as operating systems go is OS X.



    Apple provides the example. Everyone and their dog is trying to make their experience more "Mac-like."



    It definitely matters what Apple does with it. The fact that it's confined to the Premium end of the market has no effect on its desirability. In fact, it has only increased its desirability over the years.
  • Reply 54 of 100
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Psych_guy View Post


    I wonder of the same 'softie trolls will come out for this article too. You know, the ones who had less than 5 posts and were probably paid by Microsoft to spew their talking points here?



    Where would it be profitable for MS to spend money on having people post Pro-MS here? Those who visit this site are pretty determined in their convictions of computers, regardless of OS they use.



    As for the article... I think MS will shoot themselves in the foot by following Apple's "Big Brother" method. I don't want their hands in everyone's code more than it has to be. I'm seriously loving all the closed computing arenas that are popping up.



    Aside from the Ads in iPhone softwares, this is NOT Apple news!
  • Reply 55 of 100
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post


    It's an one time fee, submitting updates is free.



    That's not what the articles have said.
  • Reply 56 of 100
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RichL View Post


    There's one big difference that Prince fails to point out - the traditional method of installing apps on WinMo will still be open to application developers. Don't like the $99 fee or the restrictions? Distribute your app through your website.



    The real problem for Microsoft is that carriers like Verizon want to replace Microsoft's app store with their own. That's only going to confuse consumers.







    Actually, it's coming to 6.1 (and possible 6.0) phones too.



    Can you point to where MS has said this, because I can't find anywhere where they did.
  • Reply 57 of 100
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RichL View Post


    The current Windows Mobile SDKs do. They offer more access than Android or iPhone and slightly less than Symbian.







    It's wrong. Once again, don't believe Prince McLean's FUD.



    Good, so they changed it from what they had announced. Apparently their original intention to charge was so lame that it was successfully fought. I'll give them credit for wising up.
  • Reply 58 of 100
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by talksense101 View Post


    I wonder if Apple will eventually charge some money for reviews. But the money Apple makes from downloads of paid applications hopefully will make it easier to offset the review cost. Apple is driving to get volume, M$ is playing the quality trump card.



    MS is playing the "We know we won't get many apps for the phones, so we'll just pretend it's all about the quality" card.
  • Reply 59 of 100
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post


    "Q: Do I need to pay the $99 fee again to submit an application update?

    A: No. If your application has been previously certified and published in the catalog, you can submit subsequent updates without incurring any additional fees. The application update will be made available through Windows Marketplace for Mobile to all customers that have downloaded your application."



    Gee, thanks for quoting from a link that was already posted.



    But MS DID require them to pay again after 7 days. It's just that they've been convinced to wave that from what was no doubt, a barrage of protests.



    It's bad enough that they will get very few apps submitted because of all the other reasons, with that in place, they wouldn't have gotten any.
  • Reply 60 of 100
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Owl View Post


    Guess what the $99 submission screams out. Little to no free apps! Why would a developer spend time developing a free app, only to have to pay upwards of $99 to submit just once? If it gets rejected, even more money goes down the drain and the developer then sees it's not financially viable to give out the app for free.



    But, so far at least, they are all going to be free apps.



    What an incentive!
Sign In or Register to comment.