The iPod boom box and the Apple TV. The living room is not Apple's strong point apparently.
Both minor products. The Apple iPod BoomBox thing was stupid and ugly.
AppleTV is like the freakish retarded bastard child that grew up locked in the attic. When it finally is escapes, it may be a monster.
If Apple ever decides what to do with it, AppleTV may develop into more than just a glorified switching box. Maybe they should meld an AppleTV and TimeCapsule with a Mac mini. THAT would be a killer device, but probably too expensive. The building block approach seems to work better.
The iPod boom box and the Apple TV. The living room is not Apple's strong point apparently.
This depends how you define "failure" of course. The Apple TV sells quite well and despite the opinion of some techs and forum pundits could not really be called a "failure." It sells, it makes money, it gets updated, etc...
The Boom Box also was not a failure in that it met the goals of it's design, it worked, and worked quite well actually.
It didn't sell that well, and was ultimately removed from sale but that had more to do with Jobs' comment about it "replacing your stereo" and the resulting "audiophile revolt" against that than it did anything else. It failed only to have top of the line "perfect" sound reproduction as people assumed it *should* have as a "stereo replacement" and that's what made it unpopular. It wasn't cheap, and it had "good" sound but not "the best" sound.
Ironically, now that it's cancelled, it turns out that Jobs' comment about such devices in combination with an iPod "replacing peoples home stereos" was quite correct. There are currently about a dozen other very similar products from other manufacturers, in similar price ranges with similar capabilities that also sell reasonably well.
Both minor products. The Apple iPod BoomBox thing was stupid and ugly.
AppleTV is like the freakish retarded bastard child that grew up locked in the attic. When it finally is escapes, it may be a monster.
If Apple ever decides what to do with it, AppleTV may develop into more than just a glorified switching box. Maybe they should meld an AppleTV and TimeCapsule with a Mac mini. THAT would be a killer device, but probably too expensive. The building block approach seems to work better.
except for the hard drive, the hardware is probably identical on all of them. except of the mac pro and the ipod/iphone everything apple sells is almost identical or very similar hardware with a slightly different version of OS X on it
I agree. I bought this exact Microsoft mouse in 2000 with a PC. I got rid of the PC in 2004 but kept the mouse to use with my Macs and still use it daily. Love it.
agree with your points, but additionally I just can't see MS being an innovator anymore, If they are always reacting to the competition.
Not sure what Ballmar strategy is anymore, since he always having a dig at Apple, but trying to produce products that will be better and draw consumers from Apple. I would concentrate more on the treat from Google. since there are a bigger threat at present.
MS focusing on a tablet will cause Apple to raise the bar and comsumers will win in the end
"Not sure what Ballmar strategy is anymore, since he always having a dig at Apple," Steve Jobs said it best. Never let the salesman run the company. All they want to do is sell what ever crap is in stock. PS. maybe that is why MS is always waiting to see what works then trying to make some second hand version to sell. Advertise, advertise, advertise..... Just a thought.
MS already getting out of the Zune business? That makes the prospects for a vibrant app ecosystem dimmer than ever. Buy a Zune now and know that it's probably going nowhere, or buy an iPod for the same price and know that the zillions of apps (and new OS features) will keep on coming.
"Not sure what Ballmar strategy is anymore, since he always having a dig at Apple," Steve Jobs said it best. Never let the salesman run the company. All they want to do is sell what ever crap is in stock. PS. maybe that is why MS is always waiting to see what works then trying to make some second hand version to sell. Advertise, advertise, advertise..... Just a thought.
en
Good point about Ballmer. I think his strategy, such as it is, is more about salesmanship than delivering the products. But oddly enough, Microsoft has never been particularly good at salesmanship. Just look at their advertising campaigns. Has even one of them been even slightly memorable?
I'd expect it to be mediocre, but cheaper. Microsoft's speciality.
The comment about Microsoft choosing hardware partners is potentially the most interesting development. This is something they've never tried before, AFAIK. They've always taken on all comers. If it happens, this would be an admission that (1) they are unable to successfully reproduce their Windows selling strategy and, (2) they really don't understand hardware. Two major statements, if it comes to pass.
actually, "choosing" partners is an attempt to spin the fact that WinMobile is rapidly being abandoned by the majority of the "any OS" phone industry in favor of Symbian and Android. so MS will "choose" from what's left over. plus it opens the door to cutting "exclusive" deals direct with the telcos who then job out the manufacturing to some anonymous asian company and sell phones under their own "house brand" name.
actually, "choosing" partners is an attempt to spin the fact that WinMobile is rapidly being abandoned by the majority of the "any OS" phone industry in favor of Symbian and Android. so MS will "choose" from what's left over. plus it opens the door to cutting "exclusive" deals direct with the telcos who then job out the manufacturing to some anonymous asian company and sell phones under their own "house brand" name.
Could be that too, but I still think it would be Microsoft's first admission that their success selling Windows to any/all comers can't be reproduced. They have simply failed at every effort to create similarly profitable OEM markets for anything else, over a period of decades now. Add to that the suggestion that they might be giving up on hardware, and it looks like Microsoft is flopping around like a fish on a dock. I wouldn't mistake motion for progress.
Who in their right mind would want another product that runs MS software. After Vista & various Windows Mobile versions I can't trust that they can get it right. Seems like they pick bad hardware & then stress the heck out of it with software that can't seem to obtain sufficient resources so it works itself to death, which doesn't serve anyone well.
Who in their right mind would want another product that runs MS software. After Vista & various Windows Mobile versions I can't trust that they can get it right. Seems like they pick bad hardware & then stress the heck out of it with software that can't seem to obtain sufficient resources so it works itself to death, which doesn't serve anyone well.
Macs can run ms software... I guess what you meant was, who in their right mind would want a Windows based tablet? I can answer that for you: Anyone who wants a tablet. See, because of this little reason... What is it? Oh right, Apple doesn't have a tablet nor do they let you load OSX onto any machine they don't build.
Comments
So they can copy form and functionality, of course.
MeTooSoft hard at work once again.
The iPod boom box and the Apple TV. The living room is not Apple's strong point apparently.
Both minor products. The Apple iPod BoomBox thing was stupid and ugly.
AppleTV is like the freakish retarded bastard child that grew up locked in the attic. When it finally is escapes, it may be a monster.
If Apple ever decides what to do with it, AppleTV may develop into more than just a glorified switching box. Maybe they should meld an AppleTV and TimeCapsule with a Mac mini. THAT would be a killer device, but probably too expensive. The building block approach seems to work better.
"Chief Experience Officer"? Weird.
Ballmer's dominatrix, naturally.
http://www.wrongsideoftheart.com/wp-..._poster_01.jpg
http://spidouz.wordpress.com/2008/09...ooks-and-games
The iPod boom box and the Apple TV. The living room is not Apple's strong point apparently.
This depends how you define "failure" of course. The Apple TV sells quite well and despite the opinion of some techs and forum pundits could not really be called a "failure." It sells, it makes money, it gets updated, etc...
The Boom Box also was not a failure in that it met the goals of it's design, it worked, and worked quite well actually.
It didn't sell that well, and was ultimately removed from sale but that had more to do with Jobs' comment about it "replacing your stereo" and the resulting "audiophile revolt" against that than it did anything else. It failed only to have top of the line "perfect" sound reproduction as people assumed it *should* have as a "stereo replacement" and that's what made it unpopular. It wasn't cheap, and it had "good" sound but not "the best" sound.
Ironically, now that it's cancelled, it turns out that Jobs' comment about such devices in combination with an iPod "replacing peoples home stereos" was quite correct. There are currently about a dozen other very similar products from other manufacturers, in similar price ranges with similar capabilities that also sell reasonably well.
Both minor products. The Apple iPod BoomBox thing was stupid and ugly.
AppleTV is like the freakish retarded bastard child that grew up locked in the attic. When it finally is escapes, it may be a monster.
If Apple ever decides what to do with it, AppleTV may develop into more than just a glorified switching box. Maybe they should meld an AppleTV and TimeCapsule with a Mac mini. THAT would be a killer device, but probably too expensive. The building block approach seems to work better.
except for the hard drive, the hardware is probably identical on all of them. except of the mac pro and the ipod/iphone everything apple sells is almost identical or very similar hardware with a slightly different version of OS X on it
I agree. I bought this exact Microsoft mouse in 2000 with a PC. I got rid of the PC in 2004 but kept the mouse to use with my Macs and still use it daily. Love it.
Using a MS BT mouse here too. Best ever.
agree with your points, but additionally I just can't see MS being an innovator anymore, If they are always reacting to the competition.
Not sure what Ballmar strategy is anymore, since he always having a dig at Apple, but trying to produce products that will be better and draw consumers from Apple. I would concentrate more on the treat from Google. since there are a bigger threat at present.
MS focusing on a tablet will cause Apple to raise the bar and comsumers will win in the end
"Not sure what Ballmar strategy is anymore, since he always having a dig at Apple," Steve Jobs said it best. Never let the salesman run the company. All they want to do is sell what ever crap is in stock. PS. maybe that is why MS is always waiting to see what works then trying to make some second hand version to sell. Advertise, advertise, advertise..... Just a thought.
en
Clippy:
I see you want to creat a new document. Touch me to create one.
Touch me again.
That was great. Now touch me again.
Touch me again.
Touch me again.
I see you're having trouble. Just keep touching me.
Win
"Not sure what Ballmar strategy is anymore, since he always having a dig at Apple," Steve Jobs said it best. Never let the salesman run the company. All they want to do is sell what ever crap is in stock. PS. maybe that is why MS is always waiting to see what works then trying to make some second hand version to sell. Advertise, advertise, advertise..... Just a thought.
en
Good point about Ballmer. I think his strategy, such as it is, is more about salesmanship than delivering the products. But oddly enough, Microsoft has never been particularly good at salesmanship. Just look at their advertising campaigns. Has even one of them been even slightly memorable?
I'd expect it to be mediocre, but cheaper. Microsoft's speciality.
The comment about Microsoft choosing hardware partners is potentially the most interesting development. This is something they've never tried before, AFAIK. They've always taken on all comers. If it happens, this would be an admission that (1) they are unable to successfully reproduce their Windows selling strategy and, (2) they really don't understand hardware. Two major statements, if it comes to pass.
actually, "choosing" partners is an attempt to spin the fact that WinMobile is rapidly being abandoned by the majority of the "any OS" phone industry in favor of Symbian and Android. so MS will "choose" from what's left over. plus it opens the door to cutting "exclusive" deals direct with the telcos who then job out the manufacturing to some anonymous asian company and sell phones under their own "house brand" name.
She speculated that Microsoft would likely wait to show off the hardware until after Apple unveils its own long-rumored tablet device.
MS is waiting in part to know what to do and in part to know what design and functions are going to be a success?!
C'mon MS bring out YOUR product first for a change!
actually, "choosing" partners is an attempt to spin the fact that WinMobile is rapidly being abandoned by the majority of the "any OS" phone industry in favor of Symbian and Android. so MS will "choose" from what's left over. plus it opens the door to cutting "exclusive" deals direct with the telcos who then job out the manufacturing to some anonymous asian company and sell phones under their own "house brand" name.
Could be that too, but I still think it would be Microsoft's first admission that their success selling Windows to any/all comers can't be reproduced. They have simply failed at every effort to create similarly profitable OEM markets for anything else, over a period of decades now. Add to that the suggestion that they might be giving up on hardware, and it looks like Microsoft is flopping around like a fish on a dock. I wouldn't mistake motion for progress.
C'mon MS bring out YOUR product first for a change!
As has been pointed out here numerous times, they already have:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablet_PC
What? You don't see one in the backpack of every student? I wonder why it wasn't a raging success?
As has been pointed out here numerous times, they already have:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablet_PC
What? You don't see one in the backpack of every student? I wonder why it wasn't a raging success?
And lest we forget, Origami, another raging success.
Who in their right mind would want another product that runs MS software. After Vista & various Windows Mobile versions I can't trust that they can get it right. Seems like they pick bad hardware & then stress the heck out of it with software that can't seem to obtain sufficient resources so it works itself to death, which doesn't serve anyone well.
Macs can run ms software... I guess what you meant was, who in their right mind would want a Windows based tablet? I can answer that for you: Anyone who wants a tablet. See, because of this little reason... What is it? Oh right, Apple doesn't have a tablet nor do they let you load OSX onto any machine they don't build.