Microsoft said plotting 'major restructuring' with reorganization to happen as soon as July 1



  • Reply 61 of 76
    icoco3icoco3 Posts: 1,459member


    Originally Posted by Juil View Post


    You must be meaning to say "out of all the Windows OS".


    I use both Mountain Lion and Win7 at the moment, and I can’t really come to the same conclusion as you... But maybe you are sensitive to things that I am not (and vice-versa).


    And reading the comments in context, that is what was implied.  I saw the context and understood the meaning.

  • Reply 62 of 76


    Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

    Translation: Windows 8 and the tablets have been a failure.


    I think a better explanation can be had here:



    No, seriously... there's been a lot of failures, even outside of Windows 8 and the whole tablet thing. The entire mobile thing, the XBox One egg->face incident, you-name-it. I think the only parts of MSFT that didn't shoot their feet this year are the folks who do Exchange and SQL Server.

  • Reply 63 of 76
    jcraigjcraig Posts: 30member
    My wife works for a major insurance company here in Chicago. Working from home yesterday, she fired up her laptop, still running WinXP. I asked if the entire company was still running XP. "Yes, but not for long. We're 'updating' to Win7.' Clearly, Enterprise is not happy with the recent direction (i.e. last decade or more) of Microsoft's OS evolution. Why not be the innovator they once were, cut their losses, and completely re-imagine the OS on a new *nix-based kernel, one that's scalable to present mobile devices (and other devices that may not even exist yet)? Their present strategy clearly isn't working, Business ain't buying what they're selling, and they can't support legacy code forever and progress. If current leadership can't see this (especially in a business environment that seems to change almost daily), then it's time for a change in leadership.
  • Reply 64 of 76
    macbook promacbook pro Posts: 1,605member
    Microsoft and partners are in serious jeopardy.

    No more can Apple be said to be overpriced. With the inclusion of iWork for iCloud, Apple products and services are the more cost effective solutions.

    Microsoft Office 365 = $99.99/yr or more
    Google Apps = $50/yr
    Apple iWork for iCloud = free iCloud account with hardware
  • Reply 65 of 76
    Balmer is the problem here, so any restructuring led by him is going to be a miserable failure because it does not deal with the root cause of Microsoft's troubles. It has no real leadership, no innovation engine, nothing. It is a behemoth of middle managers cobbling together products that nobody asked for.
  • Reply 66 of 76
    droidftwdroidftw Posts: 1,009member


    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

    Let me put it this way: it doesn't lack features except VBA, which is a scripting language, and otherwise it's no more "garbage" than Windows Office. Since they stagger the release of Windows and Mac versions in different years, I think there are some minor feature differences, but I couldn't name any because they're not obvious. Unlike Office clones, Mac Office opens Windows office files and formats them correctly. It even has a ribbon. Edits made by one match in the other platform, so it's real Microsoft Office.


    Thanks for the info.  The mention of being able to read and write Office docs with correct formatting is surprising to hear.  As you correctly point out, most can't do that.  I'll have to adjust my opinion on Microsoft's anti-competitive nature (but maybe just a little image ).

  • Reply 67 of 76
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member
    Can AAPL be far behind? It feel off a cliff the day Tim Cook took over. Balmer and Cook have a lot in common. They were handed the reigns by the geniuses behind Microsoft and Apple and the new ceos crippled both companies.
  • Reply 68 of 76
    The change may include hiring executives with the same names as those in Apple, to further copying the success of that Cupertino company.
  • Reply 69 of 76
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    mj web wrote: »
    Can AAPL be far behind? It feel off a cliff the day Tim Cook took over. Balmer and Cook have a lot in common. They were handed the reigns by the geniuses behind Microsoft and Apple and the new ceos crippled both companies.

    Sure he did.
  • Reply 70 of 76


    Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post

    I have been suggesting for years that Microsoft needs to dump their platform and take the risk that Apple did by moving to a Unix-based operating system.

    I was escorted out of M$ HQ for that very remark... heh

  • Reply 71 of 76
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,694member
    mj web wrote: »
    Can AAPL be far behind? It feel off a cliff the day Tim Cook took over. Balmer and Cook have a lot in common. They were handed the reigns by the geniuses behind Microsoft and Apple and the new ceos crippled both companies.

    Go away already. AAPL was at 375 ish when Cook took over.
  • Reply 72 of 76
    lilgto64lilgto64 Posts: 1,147member


    Originally Posted by iaeen View Post

    Actually the VBA editor was added to the Mac version a couple of years ago (2010?), so there is currently no functional difference between the Mac and Windows versions.


    I do development in VBA on a Mac for users on both Mac and Windows versions of Office - and while support for VBA is quite good, especially compared to sorry can't do that at all, there are still places where there are differences between the two versions. Active X is a big one - works on Windows and not available on Mac (which is likely a good thing, but it does mean that some folks write code that will only work on Windows). Some differences are the way the OS works in terms of the filesystem so to write cross platform you have to write separate code to handle each platform differently. The biggest gripe I have is the way colors and fonts are rendered - I can layout a beautiful custom dialog box linked of a carefully placed button on a spreadsheet and then open in on the Windows side and my graphics elements do not line up properly and the foreground and background colors no longer match. 

  • Reply 73 of 76
    nikon133nikon133 Posts: 2,600member
    poksi wrote: »
    Microsoft should above all re-think its vision and focus before any strategical decision. Fact is, anything mobile they have touched up to now turned into shit. Another fact is that they cannot loose in the field where they are the best: business computing at almost all sizes, except perhaps large server farms. There are also too many hardware companies totally depending on them. No one can license them better OS than Windows. And there is absolutely no commercial replacement to Windows in SME, not only because of software, but because of unbelievable net of partners worldwide.

    MS should above all ask themselves following questions:

    - do we really want to race the mobile race?

    Of course they do. PC market is already oversaturated, while smartphone and tablet markets are still (reasonably) young. In addition, maturity of desktop market is killing upgrade reasons for majority of customers - 5 years old Core 2 Duo PC/laptop will do fine for majority of users, and with not more than 4GB of RAM (really minor investment today) will run Win 7 and 8 fine. On the other hand, dynamics of mobile market are still in favour of 2 years refresh cycle, and level of maturity where next hardware upgrade simply does not matter for majority wasn't reached yet (thought it is getting there) - so that's El Dorado of IT industry right now.
    - should we spin-off divisions that do not belong to our core business?

    Being software company predominantly, making of OSes and applications is their core business. And in turn to keep them well connected and integrated, you'd probably want to keep them close together. They could spin off Entertainment and Hardware, IMHO.
  • Reply 74 of 76
    nikon133nikon133 Posts: 2,600member
    sockrolid wrote: »
    Oh.  Now they're thinking about interoperability and the whole ecosystem thing.
    Finally getting serious, are we Ballmer?

    Maybe the "capabilities and interoperability" would have been easier if Windows desktop and 
    Windows Phone shared the same kernel and low-level OS code.  But then again, maybe the Windows
    kernel and low-level code (and, horror of single-point-of-failure horrors, The Registry), were too
    bloated, fragile, and too dependent on Intel's power-hog CPUs to port to mobile.

    Good luck with that legacy deal, Ballmer.
    And may the computing gods be more favorable to your successor.

    Um... you don't know that "On October 29, 2012, Microsoft released Windows Phone 8, a new generation of the operating system. Windows Phone 8 replaces its previously Windows CE-based architecture with one based on the Windows NT kernel with many components shared with Windows 8, allowing applications to be easily ported between the two platforms"..?
  • Reply 75 of 76
    nikon133nikon133 Posts: 2,600member
    lilgto64 wrote: »
    Riiiiight, because clearly that is how Apple has been successful with the iOS platform - by cramming every desktop feature into there creating a full desktop experience smooshed into a 4" screen - NOT!

    The single most genius thing that Apple did with the original iPhone was NOT dragging every bit of legacy baggage along for the ride. While I think it is great that the underlying kernel has a similar base - and that many parts of the user interface and user experience are converging - if Apple had tried to deliver a Mac OS X Phone back in 2007 it may not have done nearly as well. 

    On the other hand - from the limited screen shots I have seen of iOS7 - not sure if my sweet tooth is strong enough for the cotton candy UI - and I have one heck of a sweet tooth. Seriously though, a number of pics I have seen of the developer release show very thin light elements with little contrast between the elements and the background - could be a serious issue if there isn't a way to change it. I do understand to a degree Steve Jobs' obsession with keeping the user experience from getting fragmented - I do not understand the pathological aversion to allowing the end user to customize the appears of their own device. Simple things like audio feedback from UI elements can make a huge difference - or not having monotone gray icons in iTunes can actually be helpful to the user. 

    This is not true. Current problem (majority?) of users have with Windows is not that desktop features are forced into phones, but that phone features are forced onto desktop.

    As a phone and tablet platforms, Windows Modern GUI works fine. Based on my experience, it is my opinion that WP8 is comparable efficiency-wise to iOS, both being much more efficient and less resources-demanding than Android. Even Win 8 Pro works remarkably smooth on underpowered Atom tablets, and GUI comes naturally on hand-held, touch-screen devices.

    But on desktops? While I'm using Win 8 at work and home and am fine with it (as in not even considering to fall back to 7), I can understand why it's bipolar nature doesn't go well with so many users. I like preview features of tiles (new emails, calendar, ToDos, weather etc.) but, beside using Modern Skype more often than desktop version, I am almost exclusively on desktop anyway. I'd be happy to see an option to open Modern apps windowed on desktop, and to be able to put tiles on desktop rather than having to switch between desktop and Modern, quick and easy as it is. That being said, none of my computers has touch screen yet; can't say if having one would change my opinion.
  • Reply 76 of 76


    Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

     based on the Windows NT kernel with many components shared with Windows 8, allowing applications to be easily ported between the two platforms"..?


    ...and that explains why MSFT is bleeding developer mindshare like a sieve since Windows 8 came out

Sign In or Register to comment.