What are you talking about? Did you bother to read the entire article? If you had, at the end, you would have read this;
Other articles have said that MS won't be selling anything in these "stores", that they are just to display and demonstrate products, and that they would have a hard time selecting products to sell because of all the competing interests of so many software and hardware companies they are associated with.
If you now read the post I was responding to, and my reply to it again, you will see, in light of that, why I responded the way I did.
If you wish to talk about being responsible, I suggest you start with yourself.
After you've gone over all of that, I expect an apology. I'm being nice for a moderator. Most other sites would have just kicked you off.
I would apologize if you had put a source reference in your Article.
If you don't post a source or any information where you pulled the information from, you could have pulled the information from anywhere. If it was a reputable site I could have done my own research without pointing out your flaws to the article.
Even if they initially only want their stores to be 'showrooms', customers will eventually demand to be sold something. Who would want to enter a store and only look at things - if you actually intend to buy?
Trust me, it won't be long until they start selling things.
First it will be Microsoft software and hardware like mice and keyboards.
Then it will be favorite software or software Microsoft wants to showcase with Windows 7.
And finally third-party hardware.
Initially they might only sell it online inside the store, shipped to the client. But it won't be long before main configurations are sold in store. At least smaller hardware like phones, music players, netbooks and small laptops.
Otherwise what's the point of opening a retail store?
And I'm sure soon Microsoft will offer 'deal of the month' hardware items, deliberately targeted to counteract newly released Apple hardware where shoppers can play 'Lauren' and see how much they can save in the Microsoft store for 'the same hardware' as compared to the Apple Store next door.
I bet that this will happen.
It'll be interesting to see how Apple will react to that.
They might copy the 'Genius Bar' as well, and One-on-One training.
Benefits for Microsoft are twofold:
- more exposure and better profile
- a way to showcase the hardware products they want the industry to steer towards, either directly by making users buy certain products or indirectly by only showcasing products from hardware vendors who 'please' Microsoft.
Also consider that these new stores might be about selling digital content onto whatever hardware a customer brings in. Perhaps even iPods.
That's where Microsoft could indeed 'innovate'.
Imagine that within a Microsoft store you could try any software you like, be it Zune handheld software or PC software. It'll be downloaded straight from some MS servers on demand for customers to try.
Then if you like it you can order it via disk-on-demand burnt onto disk right there for you in store or you can buy it via download right there and then as well.
This could be the biggest AppStore ever!
And all software would be 'try before you buy'!
As I said, I can see some room for actual innovation.
Although I hope Apple will be there first.
All of the articles are just going by what MS itself has said; they won't be using these locations to sell, but rather to show.
Whether they change their minds over time, or even by the time they open is something we don't know.
The one thing that may prevent them from using these locations as normal stores would be the comparison between theirs and Apple's.
Apple's stores have one of, if not the, highest sell numbers per square foot of stores in any category. If MS sells in these stores, they will be compared directly to Apple's. Being that they want to locate as close to Apple's as they can, that would bring up interesting questions.
First amongst them would be why, in the same location, are Apple's stores doing so much better than MS's, and does that mean that MS's products, and those of the third parties they may also be selling are considered to be so much less valuable than Apple's?
That's a comparison that wouldn't be a good idea.
No matter what MS does, their products, and those of their partners, are sold in more locations than Apple's by a long shot. Therefor, there isn't any real reason to buy from one of MS's stores, unless prices are much better.
I can tell you from having had a company that sold some of its products through dealers, that you NEVER undercut your distributers and dealers. They get mad. Real mad. They even stop carrying your products. I never did that, but I know others who did. Not good. Even MS isn't immune from this.
So if MS can't offer discounts that are better, why would these stores sell at all?
Can you imagine how it would look if the Apple store across from it was packed, and the MS store just had stragglers? If they didn't sell anything, they could say that people were coming in for help, or guidance, and not too many people needed help or guidance as MS's products were so easy to use. Lame, I know, but excuses are always found if required. But if it were a regular store...
I don't see any point to this. It would be a lot better to have a couple of MS trained people in MS's dealers to help people. I think they said they were going to do that too.
By putting a store next to Apple, MS has more to lose than to gain. Let me explain why :
When you put premium product next to a regular product and the price difference is within comfortable range, there is tendency of the regular product shopper to move to premium product, but not the vice versa. The price difference is the key element here. If the price difference is too high, reverse movement is possible. This is the strategy many sales guys use. They would show a regular product and then say "but for few dollars more you can have the a better..."
MS has agreed that apple is premium. That is the reason why they never talk about the quality aspect in their ads and just focus on price. They also make statements like "I am not cool enough to be a mac person" in their ads.
With the current reduction in price, the price difference between MS and Apple has come to a comfortable range (about $200, which %age wise should be in 20-30% range). When a person shops in MS store and sees Dells and HPs and then peeks into an Apple store, they are likely to settle for Apple. (If they bring their teens or college going children, they will almost be forced to buy at Apple)
If you sell cheap products, the best strategy would be to talk about price, but don't let people see the premium products. MS can't control people from looking at Apple products, but the least they can do is to distance themselves from Apple
Any of you have a virtual desktop so you can play REAL computer games?
Any of you need to have IE run corporate Software at home?
Any of you NEED MICROSOFT OFFICE TO DO YOUR JOB?
Need an ATM? They all run Windows OS.
Need a Hospital? They all run Windows OS.
Need to check out at Best Buy, Lowes, the Grocery Store. They all run Windows.
Apples computer sales are now 35% of their total revenue. Apple now makes Phones and Music Players for 65% of their revenue.
We're going to have to move their category to gaming business by 2011.
No XBOX, Wii is great
I have VMWare, but everytime I boot Windows on it, it takes forever to do its thing, slows XP and the OS X side. I got so tired of it, I invested 700-1000 in replacement software for the Mac.
I need IE for one thing only. It runs well on Citrix and WINE
Do I NEED MICROSOFT OFFICE? ABSOLUTELY NOT! Piece of bloated stale crap compared to iWork. Try iWork, it will make your life much easier.
In 2-3 years all those things you mention, ATMS etc... will be running chrome OS. There was no serious challenger to Win CE for a long time. Microsoft beware, Apple and RIM rule the smartphone and Google Chrome will rule the "small Appliance PC".
Quote: If Apple that much better than Microsoft than why after 30 years do they have 8% of the computer desktop arena (in the USA ONLY). World Wide Apple isn't even on the chart.
I have often shaken my head with disbelief at this one. Here is why IMHO.
Could it be that Windows users found the whole process of learning and using the PC so daunting that they don't want to go through it again with any other computer? Couple that with the myths that Apple Macs can't do this or that and the misperceptions about price and you have people hesitant to switch.
These are the reasons people I know don't want to switch. I wasn't crazy about it myself, but I was so blown away the first time I walked into the Apple store in SOHO I knew it was right for me. OSX Tiger and iLife were so far ahead of what was available in the Windoze world. And of course the iMac was so beautiful compared to a HP Pavilion!
A major reason was because for several years, Pc's were IBM Pc's, and companies had IBM mainframes and mini's. IBM had, and has a very large sales force. Companies bought these IBM Pc's ( "Nobody gets fired for buying IBM" was the phrase back then.), and people bought for themselves what they used at work, because that was what they were trained in. Businesses also gave Employees discounts on hardware and software, and often gave them software for free, all to better their use of the equipment at work.
As a result, most people used Pc's. This continued after IBM lost control, because at that time, a Pc was a Pc.
Mac's were not Pc's and so were out of the loop for most, especially after 1996, when companies that had Macs in large numbers began divesting themselves of them. But that's another story.
I would apologize if you had put a source reference in your Article.
If you don't post a source or any information where you pulled the information from, you could have pulled the information from anywhere. If it was a reputable site I could have done my own research without pointing out your flaws to the article.
I would apologize if you had put a source reference in your Article.
If you don't post a source or any information where you pulled the information from, you could have pulled the information from anywhere. If it was a reputable site I could have done my own research without pointing out your flaws to the article.
What are you talking about? Did you bother to read the entire article? If you had, at the end, you would have read this;
Other articles have said that MS won't be selling anything in these "stores", that they are just to display and demonstrate products, and that they would have a hard time selecting products to sell because of all the competing interests of so many software and hardware companies they are associated with.
If you now read the post I was responding to, and my reply to it again, you will see, in light of that, why I responded the way I did.
If you wish to talk about being responsible, I suggest you start with yourself.
After you've gone over all of that, I expect an apology. I'm being nice for a moderator. Most other sites would have just kicked you off.
Edit.
It doesn't matter if it was your article. You backed it up with nothing from a credible source and kept quoting the Apple Sheep.
How about a Wired Magazine article from July 15th with the quote.
"It’s unclear whether the Microsoft stores will be selling strictly Microsoft hardware (e.g., the Zune or Xbox 360) and software, or whether it will also be selling products from third-party companies. In the past, Microsoft has said the purpose of the stores was to build the company’s brand name by connecting with customers."
Melgross Quote
Quote:
Quote:
All of the articles are just going by what MS itself has said; they won't be using these locations to sell, but rather to show.
The other obvious "CLUE" was the woman had a shopping cart. What the heck is she going to put in the shopping cart?
In other words YOU READ APPLE SITES AND MADE YOUR OWN CONCLUSION.
I've had the pleasure of visiting five different Apple Stores here in the States and one Apple Center in Prague, and in all of them most of the Macs on display had the latest Microsoft Office for Mac loaded onto it. I wonder if Microsoft's retail "stores" will show the same professional courtesy by featuring even a single Mac loaded with their own Office for Mac product. Somehow, I doubt it.
I've had the pleasure of visiting five different Apple Stores here in the States and one Apple Center in Prague, and in all of them most of the Macs on display had the latest Microsoft Office for Mac loaded onto it. I wonder if Microsoft's retail "stores" will show the same professional courtesy by featuring even a single Mac loaded with their own Office for Mac product. Somehow, I doubt it.
Apple "needs Microsoft" for Microsoft Office. That is the only reason it was there.
Apple needs Microsoft for business users. Microsoft doesn't need Apple for anything.
Can you imagine how it would look if the Apple store across from it was packed, and the MS store just had stragglers?
But isn't that exactly what would happen if they don't sell anything? Why would people then go to the MS 'store'?
But I hear what you're saying. You can only report what MS says.
Yet MS isn't stupid. They're not burning money for nothing.
So they must have a plan.
And I can see 2 elements:
- selling support
- selling software on-demand
One of the biggest magnets in Apple Stores is the Genius bar, as well as the new One-on-One training.
People know they can go to the Apple Store and get help and support in a reasonable turnaround time. That's really reassuring to retail customers.
With Windows support it's currently not as easy. Corporations have their own support systems, but Joe Shmo has no one. Getting help in a Microsoft Store might seem more trustworthy than picking a random number from the yellow pages...
And the stores could be about selling software, movies and songs.
A massive 'try before you buy' setup could actually be tempting. Especially with the huge amount of PC software available.
Providing a 'real' AppStore Microsoft can always claim that they're not selling these things, that they're merely offering people a chance to try/see/listen before they buy.
Whether customers buy via CD/DVD burn-on-demand in the store, or via electronic download or someplace else altogether, Microsoft might not care.
At least they got people lured into the store and can now show them their brand new Zune and XBox hardware.
"Microsoft will be paying for expensive leases but won't necessarily recoup its investment through actual sales."
How can Microsoft possibly afford to do that? Oh, I forgot, their products are way overpriced.
i thought that was the hate on Apple. Overpriced while Windows based computers are the proof
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnp1
ITS TIME FOR APPLE TO HAVE EMPLOYEES SIGN A TEN YEAR NON COMPETE!
Quote:
Originally Posted by robintosh
Traitor!
BTW... MS is just telling everyone, once again, that Apple is the leader and that MS is just following on something they don't even understand.
lets drop the hate. I"m sure this guy had a non compete at some point and if it was an issue
Apple would have jumped on it. Since they haven't they are likely aren't too worried about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8CoreWhore
It seems to me the only thing novel about what they are doing is the location: directly adjacent to Apple stores
they never said directly adjacent. they just said near. and you can't blame them. getting their little 'stores' in or near the same areas makes it easier, they will believe, for folks to comparison shop. and they felt certain folks will go Windows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac
Quote: If Apple that much better than Microsoft than why after 30 years do they have 8% of the computer desktop arena
you assume they want to go higher. Have you been reading all the talk about the Psystar sitch. Part of why the anti-trust case was tossed is because Apple has only about 10% of the market. if they gain too much strength, they will be legally forced to stop tying hardware and software and they don't want that.
Quote:
Could it be that Windows users found the whole process of learning and using the PC so daunting that they don't want to go through it again with any other computer? Couple that with the myths that Apple Macs can't do this or that
which is why over the last 3-4 years Apple stores have added
1. file transfers from pc to mac
2. one to one training
3. workshops
4. online videos
and so on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPhone1982
Apple "needs Microsoft" for Microsoft Office. That is the only reason it was there.
i am not going to be shocked if we stop seeing Office on the demo computers and see much more pushing of iwork. i've been using keynote and it is brilliant. i find it much easier than powerpoint. Pages is quickly proving better than Word. Numbers is the only thing I am not totally fond of, but it is growing on me as I learn it
Microsoft indeed needs Apple to be alive and relatively well. Otherwise any monopoly inquiry by the US or Europe would have a field day!
The mere fact that people have a choice in Apple keeps Microsoft independent and unregulated.
(I do not think Linux qualifies (yet) as a consumer product alternative for Joe Average.)
That is the one thing that Microsoft needs Apple for.
That is not true if they have no competition.
Apple has dominated the personal media player for years.
It can only be seen as unfair if there is no competition. Take Intel for example.
How many notebooks or desktops run anything other than Intel.
Intel is a monopoly only for the reason that no other competitor has given the EU, US Gov or anyone else to go after them. In other words Intel can't be considered a monopoly without competition.
What caught my eye was the shopping cart. Can you picture that in an Apple Store?
So they expect me to go to their store not necessarily to buy something but to experience their advertising. Why would I do that when I'm constantly muting their TV ads?
Yeah, what is the deal with the cart? If you can't buy anything what are you gonna put in the cart? Looks like Microsoft has their top geniuses on this one.
Once one of the cornerstones of Apple's early retail efforts, real estate expert George Blankenship has switched sides and is now providing advice to Microsoft on plans for its own stores.
Georgie, porgie, pudding and pie has forgotten that for a store to be successful, the products have to be desired.
In other words Intel can't be considered a monopoly without competition.
No, not really.
Competition laws don't necessarily even forbid monopolies.
Only once the monopolist abuses his market position things become illegal.
Consumers still can purchase a computer with AMD chips inside.
Only if Intel would purchase AMD could they be considered a monopoly. Which is why this will never happen. Apart from the fact that officials would never agree to such a merger.
It's the same with Apple and Microsoft.
The exact figure of what is considered 'sufficient control' changes on circumstances. Neither in Microsoft's nor Intel's case it was considered big enough - yet.
Comments
What are you talking about? Did you bother to read the entire article? If you had, at the end, you would have read this;
Other articles have said that MS won't be selling anything in these "stores", that they are just to display and demonstrate products, and that they would have a hard time selecting products to sell because of all the competing interests of so many software and hardware companies they are associated with.
If you now read the post I was responding to, and my reply to it again, you will see, in light of that, why I responded the way I did.
If you wish to talk about being responsible, I suggest you start with yourself.
After you've gone over all of that, I expect an apology. I'm being nice for a moderator. Most other sites would have just kicked you off.
I would apologize if you had put a source reference in your Article.
If you don't post a source or any information where you pulled the information from, you could have pulled the information from anywhere. If it was a reputable site I could have done my own research without pointing out your flaws to the article.
Apology is now in order.
I don't believe that for a second!
Even if they initially only want their stores to be 'showrooms', customers will eventually demand to be sold something. Who would want to enter a store and only look at things - if you actually intend to buy?
Trust me, it won't be long until they start selling things.
First it will be Microsoft software and hardware like mice and keyboards.
Then it will be favorite software or software Microsoft wants to showcase with Windows 7.
And finally third-party hardware.
Initially they might only sell it online inside the store, shipped to the client. But it won't be long before main configurations are sold in store. At least smaller hardware like phones, music players, netbooks and small laptops.
Otherwise what's the point of opening a retail store?
And I'm sure soon Microsoft will offer 'deal of the month' hardware items, deliberately targeted to counteract newly released Apple hardware where shoppers can play 'Lauren' and see how much they can save in the Microsoft store for 'the same hardware' as compared to the Apple Store next door.
I bet that this will happen.
It'll be interesting to see how Apple will react to that.
They might copy the 'Genius Bar' as well, and One-on-One training.
Benefits for Microsoft are twofold:
- more exposure and better profile
- a way to showcase the hardware products they want the industry to steer towards, either directly by making users buy certain products or indirectly by only showcasing products from hardware vendors who 'please' Microsoft.
Also consider that these new stores might be about selling digital content onto whatever hardware a customer brings in. Perhaps even iPods.
That's where Microsoft could indeed 'innovate'.
Imagine that within a Microsoft store you could try any software you like, be it Zune handheld software or PC software. It'll be downloaded straight from some MS servers on demand for customers to try.
Then if you like it you can order it via disk-on-demand burnt onto disk right there for you in store or you can buy it via download right there and then as well.
This could be the biggest AppStore ever!
And all software would be 'try before you buy'!
As I said, I can see some room for actual innovation.
Although I hope Apple will be there first.
All of the articles are just going by what MS itself has said; they won't be using these locations to sell, but rather to show.
Whether they change their minds over time, or even by the time they open is something we don't know.
The one thing that may prevent them from using these locations as normal stores would be the comparison between theirs and Apple's.
Apple's stores have one of, if not the, highest sell numbers per square foot of stores in any category. If MS sells in these stores, they will be compared directly to Apple's. Being that they want to locate as close to Apple's as they can, that would bring up interesting questions.
First amongst them would be why, in the same location, are Apple's stores doing so much better than MS's, and does that mean that MS's products, and those of the third parties they may also be selling are considered to be so much less valuable than Apple's?
That's a comparison that wouldn't be a good idea.
No matter what MS does, their products, and those of their partners, are sold in more locations than Apple's by a long shot. Therefor, there isn't any real reason to buy from one of MS's stores, unless prices are much better.
I can tell you from having had a company that sold some of its products through dealers, that you NEVER undercut your distributers and dealers. They get mad. Real mad. They even stop carrying your products. I never did that, but I know others who did. Not good. Even MS isn't immune from this.
So if MS can't offer discounts that are better, why would these stores sell at all?
Can you imagine how it would look if the Apple store across from it was packed, and the MS store just had stragglers? If they didn't sell anything, they could say that people were coming in for help, or guidance, and not too many people needed help or guidance as MS's products were so easy to use. Lame, I know, but excuses are always found if required. But if it were a regular store...
I don't see any point to this. It would be a lot better to have a couple of MS trained people in MS's dealers to help people. I think they said they were going to do that too.
When you put premium product next to a regular product and the price difference is within comfortable range, there is tendency of the regular product shopper to move to premium product, but not the vice versa. The price difference is the key element here. If the price difference is too high, reverse movement is possible. This is the strategy many sales guys use. They would show a regular product and then say "but for few dollars more you can have the a better..."
MS has agreed that apple is premium. That is the reason why they never talk about the quality aspect in their ads and just focus on price. They also make statements like "I am not cool enough to be a mac person" in their ads.
With the current reduction in price, the price difference between MS and Apple has come to a comfortable range (about $200, which %age wise should be in 20-30% range). When a person shops in MS store and sees Dells and HPs and then peeks into an Apple store, they are likely to settle for Apple. (If they bring their teens or college going children, they will almost be forced to buy at Apple)
If you sell cheap products, the best strategy would be to talk about price, but don't let people see the premium products. MS can't control people from looking at Apple products, but the least they can do is to distance themselves from Apple
Any Apple Sheep in here own an XBOX?
Any of you have a virtual desktop so you can play REAL computer games?
Any of you need to have IE run corporate Software at home?
Any of you NEED MICROSOFT OFFICE TO DO YOUR JOB?
Need an ATM? They all run Windows OS.
Need a Hospital? They all run Windows OS.
Need to check out at Best Buy, Lowes, the Grocery Store. They all run Windows.
Apples computer sales are now 35% of their total revenue. Apple now makes Phones and Music Players for 65% of their revenue.
We're going to have to move their category to gaming business by 2011.
No XBOX, Wii is great
I have VMWare, but everytime I boot Windows on it, it takes forever to do its thing, slows XP and the OS X side. I got so tired of it, I invested 700-1000 in replacement software for the Mac.
I need IE for one thing only. It runs well on Citrix and WINE
Do I NEED MICROSOFT OFFICE? ABSOLUTELY NOT! Piece of bloated stale crap compared to iWork. Try iWork, it will make your life much easier.
In 2-3 years all those things you mention, ATMS etc... will be running chrome OS. There was no serious challenger to Win CE for a long time. Microsoft beware, Apple and RIM rule the smartphone and Google Chrome will rule the "small Appliance PC".
Quote: If Apple that much better than Microsoft than why after 30 years do they have 8% of the computer desktop arena (in the USA ONLY). World Wide Apple isn't even on the chart.
I have often shaken my head with disbelief at this one. Here is why IMHO.
Could it be that Windows users found the whole process of learning and using the PC so daunting that they don't want to go through it again with any other computer? Couple that with the myths that Apple Macs can't do this or that and the misperceptions about price and you have people hesitant to switch.
These are the reasons people I know don't want to switch. I wasn't crazy about it myself, but I was so blown away the first time I walked into the Apple store in SOHO I knew it was right for me. OSX Tiger and iLife were so far ahead of what was available in the Windoze world. And of course the iMac was so beautiful compared to a HP Pavilion!
A major reason was because for several years, Pc's were IBM Pc's, and companies had IBM mainframes and mini's. IBM had, and has a very large sales force. Companies bought these IBM Pc's ( "Nobody gets fired for buying IBM" was the phrase back then.), and people bought for themselves what they used at work, because that was what they were trained in. Businesses also gave Employees discounts on hardware and software, and often gave them software for free, all to better their use of the equipment at work.
As a result, most people used Pc's. This continued after IBM lost control, because at that time, a Pc was a Pc.
Mac's were not Pc's and so were out of the loop for most, especially after 1996, when companies that had Macs in large numbers began divesting themselves of them. But that's another story.
I would apologize if you had put a source reference in your Article.
If you don't post a source or any information where you pulled the information from, you could have pulled the information from anywhere. If it was a reputable site I could have done my own research without pointing out your flaws to the article.
Apology is now in order.
Please get rid of this delusional guy.
I would apologize if you had put a source reference in your Article.
If you don't post a source or any information where you pulled the information from, you could have pulled the information from anywhere. If it was a reputable site I could have done my own research without pointing out your flaws to the article.
Apology is now in order.
It's not MY article. I didn't write it.
Apology accepted.
What are you talking about? Did you bother to read the entire article? If you had, at the end, you would have read this;
Other articles have said that MS won't be selling anything in these "stores", that they are just to display and demonstrate products, and that they would have a hard time selecting products to sell because of all the competing interests of so many software and hardware companies they are associated with.
If you now read the post I was responding to, and my reply to it again, you will see, in light of that, why I responded the way I did.
If you wish to talk about being responsible, I suggest you start with yourself.
After you've gone over all of that, I expect an apology. I'm being nice for a moderator. Most other sites would have just kicked you off.
Edit.
It doesn't matter if it was your article. You backed it up with nothing from a credible source and kept quoting the Apple Sheep.
How about a Wired Magazine article from July 15th with the quote.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/...ext-to-apples/
"It’s unclear whether the Microsoft stores will be selling strictly Microsoft hardware (e.g., the Zune or Xbox 360) and software, or whether it will also be selling products from third-party companies. In the past, Microsoft has said the purpose of the stores was to build the company’s brand name by connecting with customers."
Melgross Quote
All of the articles are just going by what MS itself has said; they won't be using these locations to sell, but rather to show.
The other obvious "CLUE" was the woman had a shopping cart. What the heck is she going to put in the shopping cart?
In other words YOU READ APPLE SITES AND MADE YOUR OWN CONCLUSION.
awaiting an apology...
It's not MY article. I didn't write it.
Apology accepted.
That was not an apology. I was waiting for yours for the poor article that gave no relevent information to the source of the article.
I've had the pleasure of visiting five different Apple Stores here in the States and one Apple Center in Prague, and in all of them most of the Macs on display had the latest Microsoft Office for Mac loaded onto it. I wonder if Microsoft's retail "stores" will show the same professional courtesy by featuring even a single Mac loaded with their own Office for Mac product. Somehow, I doubt it.
Apple "needs Microsoft" for Microsoft Office. That is the only reason it was there.
Apple needs Microsoft for business users. Microsoft doesn't need Apple for anything.
Edit.
http://www.macworld.com/article/1380...se_office.html
As of January 09 77% of Mac users run office.
Can you imagine how it would look if the Apple store across from it was packed, and the MS store just had stragglers?
But isn't that exactly what would happen if they don't sell anything? Why would people then go to the MS 'store'?
But I hear what you're saying. You can only report what MS says.
Yet MS isn't stupid. They're not burning money for nothing.
So they must have a plan.
And I can see 2 elements:
- selling support
- selling software on-demand
One of the biggest magnets in Apple Stores is the Genius bar, as well as the new One-on-One training.
People know they can go to the Apple Store and get help and support in a reasonable turnaround time. That's really reassuring to retail customers.
With Windows support it's currently not as easy. Corporations have their own support systems, but Joe Shmo has no one. Getting help in a Microsoft Store might seem more trustworthy than picking a random number from the yellow pages...
And the stores could be about selling software, movies and songs.
A massive 'try before you buy' setup could actually be tempting. Especially with the huge amount of PC software available.
Providing a 'real' AppStore Microsoft can always claim that they're not selling these things, that they're merely offering people a chance to try/see/listen before they buy.
Whether customers buy via CD/DVD burn-on-demand in the store, or via electronic download or someplace else altogether, Microsoft might not care.
At least they got people lured into the store and can now show them their brand new Zune and XBox hardware.
Microsoft doesn't need Apple for anything.
Technically that's not true.
Microsoft indeed needs Apple to be alive and relatively well. Otherwise any monopoly inquiry by the US or Europe would have a field day!
The mere fact that people have a choice in Apple keeps Microsoft independent and unregulated.
(I do not think Linux qualifies (yet) as a consumer product alternative for Joe Average.)
This is the one thing Microsoft needs Apple for.
Apple shouldn't be too big (obviously) but cannot be insignificantly small either.
My estimate would be around 3%-5% market share. That's where Microsoft would like Apple to be. 10% max.
"Microsoft will be paying for expensive leases but won't necessarily recoup its investment through actual sales."
How can Microsoft possibly afford to do that? Oh, I forgot, their products are way overpriced.
i thought that was the hate on Apple. Overpriced while Windows based computers are the proof
ITS TIME FOR APPLE TO HAVE EMPLOYEES SIGN A TEN YEAR NON COMPETE!
Traitor!
BTW... MS is just telling everyone, once again, that Apple is the leader and that MS is just following on something they don't even understand.
lets drop the hate. I"m sure this guy had a non compete at some point and if it was an issue
Apple would have jumped on it. Since they haven't they are likely aren't too worried about it.
It seems to me the only thing novel about what they are doing is the location: directly adjacent to Apple stores
they never said directly adjacent. they just said near. and you can't blame them. getting their little 'stores' in or near the same areas makes it easier, they will believe, for folks to comparison shop. and they felt certain folks will go Windows.
Quote: If Apple that much better than Microsoft than why after 30 years do they have 8% of the computer desktop arena
you assume they want to go higher. Have you been reading all the talk about the Psystar sitch. Part of why the anti-trust case was tossed is because Apple has only about 10% of the market. if they gain too much strength, they will be legally forced to stop tying hardware and software and they don't want that.
Could it be that Windows users found the whole process of learning and using the PC so daunting that they don't want to go through it again with any other computer? Couple that with the myths that Apple Macs can't do this or that
which is why over the last 3-4 years Apple stores have added
1. file transfers from pc to mac
2. one to one training
3. workshops
4. online videos
and so on.
Apple "needs Microsoft" for Microsoft Office. That is the only reason it was there.
i am not going to be shocked if we stop seeing Office on the demo computers and see much more pushing of iwork. i've been using keynote and it is brilliant. i find it much easier than powerpoint. Pages is quickly proving better than Word. Numbers is the only thing I am not totally fond of, but it is growing on me as I learn it
Technically that's not true.
Microsoft indeed needs Apple to be alive and relatively well. Otherwise any monopoly inquiry by the US or Europe would have a field day!
The mere fact that people have a choice in Apple keeps Microsoft independent and unregulated.
(I do not think Linux qualifies (yet) as a consumer product alternative for Joe Average.)
That is the one thing that Microsoft needs Apple for.
That is not true if they have no competition.
Apple has dominated the personal media player for years.
It can only be seen as unfair if there is no competition. Take Intel for example.
How many notebooks or desktops run anything other than Intel.
Intel is a monopoly only for the reason that no other competitor has given the EU, US Gov or anyone else to go after them. In other words Intel can't be considered a monopoly without competition.
What caught my eye was the shopping cart. Can you picture that in an Apple Store?
So they expect me to go to their store not necessarily to buy something but to experience their advertising. Why would I do that when I'm constantly muting their TV ads?
Yeah, what is the deal with the cart? If you can't buy anything what are you gonna put in the cart? Looks like Microsoft has their top geniuses on this one.
Once one of the cornerstones of Apple's early retail efforts, real estate expert George Blankenship has switched sides and is now providing advice to Microsoft on plans for its own stores.
Georgie, porgie, pudding and pie has forgotten that for a store to be successful, the products have to be desired.
In other words Intel can't be considered a monopoly without competition.
No, not really.
Competition laws don't necessarily even forbid monopolies.
Only once the monopolist abuses his market position things become illegal.
Consumers still can purchase a computer with AMD chips inside.
Only if Intel would purchase AMD could they be considered a monopoly. Which is why this will never happen. Apart from the fact that officials would never agree to such a merger.
It's the same with Apple and Microsoft.
The exact figure of what is considered 'sufficient control' changes on circumstances. Neither in Microsoft's nor Intel's case it was considered big enough - yet.
You guys are nuts!
It's ok for Apple to get executives from other companies, but not for them to get Apple's?
Where do you think companies get executives from? No one hires out of school for top people.
I was wondering about that from the first post; but then I remembered this is Apple fan-boy site (with all the respect for those reasonable members).