I find it difficult to understand how such a huge corporation can be so badly run. Before they started spending hundreds of millions of dollars on this project there was a fundamental question they had to address. They are a software producer, providing the mobile OS that is licensed by a number of phone manufacturers to make their phones work. So far so good.
Along comes Apple, a hardware company that produces software to make their devices work, who introduce an innovative new phone that takes the market by storm and is a great success. 'Right' say Microsoft, 'we're going to make a phone too'. But hang on, they're a software company! Granted they have bought themselves (at great expense) a foothold in the gaming console market, and produce some decent peripheral devices, but with the phone idea they are proposing to go into direct competition... with their own customers!
What phone manufacturer would want to be held hostage by being dependent on a rival company's software to run their phone? How vigourously would MS develop their mobile OS knowing that it was enhancing a direct competitor's product? Would they look to produce two versions, a good one for their own phone and a less good one for their rivals? It just does not make sense.
If they want to make phones they have to stop providing the OS for other phones. They would have to withdraw from a declining but nonetheless profitable sector to take a punt on this new product, or if not, the market will withdraw from them and Android is sitting there as a ready-to-go alternative.
This is all such a damning indictment of senior management at MS, and an object lesson on why monopolies (or at least de-facto monopolies) are such a bad thing.
This is what differentiates AI from the other Apple sites - in depth, well researched articles. I find it interesting to learn the history of stuff - I've been in the IT industry for over 20 years now and it's always great to hear how technology evolves (or not in the case of Microsoft).
1. The Apple is the fruit of the "Tree of Knowledge". The bite represents the quest for knowledge. Of course this was what got Adam And Eve kicked out of the Garden of Eden.
I believe the apple is also an Isaac Newton reference, concerning the story of him sitting in an apple grove when he had the inspiration for his theory of gravitation.
Can someone summarise this for me? It sounds like a really interesting topic, but as with all of this guys articles, they are so badly written I can never be arsed to finish them!
This is less of an article and more of an interview. so any mistakes in writing are forgiven. Its a great story that paints the full picture of project pink (MS phone to compete with iphone) many many names are given, the story tells us of project 'pink's beginnings and why it ultimately failed.
i can't believe MS decided to make their pink phone compatible with ALL networks (4total designs). i can't believe that as a result of this failure sharp, tmobile, danger, and verizon all end up losing something.
indeed, this story is a great example of what keeps me coming back to AI. keep 'em coming!
1. The Apple is the fruit of the "Tree of Knowledge". The bite represents the quest for knowledge. Of course this was what got Adam And Eve kicked out of the Garden of Eden.
2. The bite is a reference to the computer term "byte".
3. The real reason why the "bite" is there is because the artist that designed it wanted to show size. Otherwise it could easily be mistaken for something the size of a cherry. He had two version drawn up. One with the "bite" and another without it. Steve Jobs chose the one with the bite in it.
I prefer the possibly apocryphal version that it is a tribute to Dr Alan Turing. He could be said to be the father of the modern computer, certainly the first 'software' designer. It was his mathematical genius that produced Colossus, the mechanical/electronic hybrid computer based at Bletchley Park during in World War 2. It broke the German Enigma code, and was one of the single most significant factors in the Allied victory.
He was also homosexual, and in post-war Britain suffered for it. He was never given the recognition of his huge achievements, was arrested on an 'indecency' charge and committed suicide. To do this he painted cyanide on an apple, took a bite and died.
Whether this is the real version we do not know, as with many things at Cupertino it is surrounded in mystery, because that's the way Apple likes it.
I prefer the possibly apocryphal version that it is a tribute to Dr Alan Turing.
That's a sad story about Turing but the original Apple company logo featured Newton getting hit with an apple, and Steve Jobs has also said they chose that name because of the Beatles...
It's pretty amazing to consider that in the time span between minor Windows Mobile updates Apple, Google and Palm were able to build a better product from the ground up largely built on open source projects. I think Microsoft's extreme dislike of open source is really starting to put them at a competitive disadvantage in multiple markets.
Live by Windows, die by Windows. It's understandable, of course, since without DOS/Windows they would never have been anything, but, especially on the desktop, they are somewhat constrained by their own success. They can't really update Windows to a modern OS without breaking compatibility with much of the software that runs on it, and the longer they wait to do it, the more bogged down the OS and their development projects get. They will have to do it eventually or watch themselves become irrelevant, although, with Google stealing their lunch money most days recently, it may already be too late for them.
Of course, this wasn't even a Windows project, but shows how their entire culture has become completely dysfunctional. Ballmer deserves a lot of the blame, although, I don't think the fault is entirely his since the culture at Microsoft is as much or more Gates' making as Ballmer's.
I think they should focus on what they're good at: the office.
I'm not even sure that is true. They have an unbreakable lock-in with Office, but that doesn't mean that productivity apps couldn't be much further along in terms of usability if there were more true competition. In a parallel universe where MS Office wasn't the accepted 'standard', there might be much better apps available (like Lotus Improv from the early 90's and countless word-processors that were easier to use than Word), but we'll never know.
Given Microsoft's long and consistent history of mediocre product development on pretty much everything they have touched, why would anyone think that their version of office apps are necessarily the best that could have been?
More signs of Ballmer incompetence. That's what happens when the primary qualification for CEO is "Is he the company founder's college buddy?" I have AAPL stock so I'm luvin' it.
Can someone summarise this for me? It sounds like a really interesting topic, but as with all of this guys articles, they are so badly written I can never be arsed to finish them!
its time for microsoft to reaorganize the company again
Live by Windows, die by Windows. It's understandable, of course, since without DOS/Windows they would never have been anything, but, especially on the desktop, they are somewhat constrained by their own success. They can't really update Windows to a modern OS without breaking compatibility with much of the software that runs on it, and the longer they wait to do it, the more bogged down the OS and their development projects get. They will have to do it eventually or watch themselves become irrelevant, although, with Google stealing their lunch money most days recently, it may already be too late for them.
Of course, this wasn't even a Windows project, but shows how their entire culture has become completely dysfunctional. Ballmer deserves a lot of the blame, although, I don't think the fault is entirely his since the culture at Microsoft is as much or more Gates' making as Ballmer's.
starting with Vista SP2, desktop windows is the same as Windows Server
Given Microsoft's long and consistent history of mediocre product development on pretty much everything they have touched, why would anyone think that their version of office apps are necessarily the best that could have been?
I think that's begging the question a little. Are all their products mediocre? Their phones, mp3 players and operating systems are, but (IMHO) their game consoles, office apps, development tools (Visual Studio) and keyboards/mice are quite decent. In comparison to other existing products that is -- I don't think it's fair to any company (even Apple) to compare against alternate histories.
How else can one account for the chunk missing in their logo ?
Opposite. The logo would symbolize the bite that other companies took when they went down on Apple. As in "Bite Me". That's why there's a bite mark in the Apple. Apple can't take a bite out of Apple unless they're insulting themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
I think that's begging the question a little. Are all their products mediocre? Their phones, mp3 players and operating systems are, but (IMHO) their game consoles, office apps, development tools (Visual Studio) and keyboards/mice are quite decent. In comparison to other existing products that is -- I don't think it's fair to any company (even Apple) to compare against alternate histories.
If the "legal" iPhone had as many potential features/options as a jailbroken iPhone there would be no competition. If there is something that the competitions' phones can do that the iPhone can't, a jailbroken iPhone has an app for that.
Can't Microsoft just slap phone hardware and software into the Zune HD and call it a day? Even if it lacked some of the features that the iPhone has it'd still sell. Throw in an app store and grow it, and you're on your way. I don't get the point of all this mess I just read about. If there's 3 companies inside microsoft designing the same product, well, Zune HD won. Merge them all to make a cohesive product. Kill the current WinMo, or make it cheaper (I think they've talked about that). I do not believe Microsoft is as helpless as this report makes them seem.
probably not
you have to rewrite a lot of the software and engineer the product to be a cell phone. little things like where you put the antenna make a big difference
10 years ago MS was run like a tight ship. in the last 10 years they shipped so many new products that all the code from 10 years ago probably has too many forks and incompatibilities with each other. Apple on the other hand sells the same basic code and hardware in all their products with minor differences
If I was Gates, looking to my future contribution to the world through my Foundation's good works, I'd be seriously contemplating taking my money and running. Well, at least, some of it..... (since trying to take all of it will make the stock worthless before he could).
(IMHO) their game consoles . . . are quite decent..
With a failure rate of 54% and billions of dollars flushed down the toilet to offer extended warranties to placate those (justifiably) upset customers, I wouldn't consider the Xbox line as "quite decent". And they've been in the game console business for years now, a competently run company would have already figured out how to avoid high catastrophic failure rates.
If I were a MSFT stockholder, and thankfully I'm not, I would be going to the annual meeting to ask "Why is Mr. Ballmer still running this company?"
If I was Gates, looking to my future contribution to the world through my Foundation's good works, I'd be seriously contemplating taking my money and running. Well, at least, some of it..... (since trying to take all of it will make the stock worthless before he could).
No, he should stay there and put his money where his mouth is since it's pretty evident that the only reason this walking, squawking management disaster named Steve Ballmer remains CEO is because Gates lets him.
Comments
Along comes Apple, a hardware company that produces software to make their devices work, who introduce an innovative new phone that takes the market by storm and is a great success. 'Right' say Microsoft, 'we're going to make a phone too'. But hang on, they're a software company! Granted they have bought themselves (at great expense) a foothold in the gaming console market, and produce some decent peripheral devices, but with the phone idea they are proposing to go into direct competition... with their own customers!
What phone manufacturer would want to be held hostage by being dependent on a rival company's software to run their phone? How vigourously would MS develop their mobile OS knowing that it was enhancing a direct competitor's product? Would they look to produce two versions, a good one for their own phone and a less good one for their rivals? It just does not make sense.
If they want to make phones they have to stop providing the OS for other phones. They would have to withdraw from a declining but nonetheless profitable sector to take a punt on this new product, or if not, the market will withdraw from them and Android is sitting there as a ready-to-go alternative.
This is all such a damning indictment of senior management at MS, and an object lesson on why monopolies (or at least de-facto monopolies) are such a bad thing.
1. The Apple is the fruit of the "Tree of Knowledge". The bite represents the quest for knowledge. Of course this was what got Adam And Eve kicked out of the Garden of Eden.
I believe the apple is also an Isaac Newton reference, concerning the story of him sitting in an apple grove when he had the inspiration for his theory of gravitation.
Can someone summarise this for me? It sounds like a really interesting topic, but as with all of this guys articles, they are so badly written I can never be arsed to finish them!
This is less of an article and more of an interview. so any mistakes in writing are forgiven. Its a great story that paints the full picture of project pink (MS phone to compete with iphone) many many names are given, the story tells us of project 'pink's beginnings and why it ultimately failed.
i can't believe MS decided to make their pink phone compatible with ALL networks (4total designs). i can't believe that as a result of this failure sharp, tmobile, danger, and verizon all end up losing something.
indeed, this story is a great example of what keeps me coming back to AI. keep 'em coming!
1. The Apple is the fruit of the "Tree of Knowledge". The bite represents the quest for knowledge. Of course this was what got Adam And Eve kicked out of the Garden of Eden.
2. The bite is a reference to the computer term "byte".
3. The real reason why the "bite" is there is because the artist that designed it wanted to show size. Otherwise it could easily be mistaken for something the size of a cherry. He had two version drawn up. One with the "bite" and another without it. Steve Jobs chose the one with the bite in it.
I prefer the possibly apocryphal version that it is a tribute to Dr Alan Turing. He could be said to be the father of the modern computer, certainly the first 'software' designer. It was his mathematical genius that produced Colossus, the mechanical/electronic hybrid computer based at Bletchley Park during in World War 2. It broke the German Enigma code, and was one of the single most significant factors in the Allied victory.
He was also homosexual, and in post-war Britain suffered for it. He was never given the recognition of his huge achievements, was arrested on an 'indecency' charge and committed suicide. To do this he painted cyanide on an apple, took a bite and died.
Whether this is the real version we do not know, as with many things at Cupertino it is surrounded in mystery, because that's the way Apple likes it.
I prefer the possibly apocryphal version that it is a tribute to Dr Alan Turing.
That's a sad story about Turing but the original Apple company logo featured Newton getting hit with an apple, and Steve Jobs has also said they chose that name because of the Beatles...
I find it difficult to understand how such a huge corporation can be so badly run.
Well, they certainly have a precedent.
It's pretty amazing to consider that in the time span between minor Windows Mobile updates Apple, Google and Palm were able to build a better product from the ground up largely built on open source projects. I think Microsoft's extreme dislike of open source is really starting to put them at a competitive disadvantage in multiple markets.
Live by Windows, die by Windows. It's understandable, of course, since without DOS/Windows they would never have been anything, but, especially on the desktop, they are somewhat constrained by their own success. They can't really update Windows to a modern OS without breaking compatibility with much of the software that runs on it, and the longer they wait to do it, the more bogged down the OS and their development projects get. They will have to do it eventually or watch themselves become irrelevant, although, with Google stealing their lunch money most days recently, it may already be too late for them.
Of course, this wasn't even a Windows project, but shows how their entire culture has become completely dysfunctional. Ballmer deserves a lot of the blame, although, I don't think the fault is entirely his since the culture at Microsoft is as much or more Gates' making as Ballmer's.
I think they should focus on what they're good at: the office.
I'm not even sure that is true. They have an unbreakable lock-in with Office, but that doesn't mean that productivity apps couldn't be much further along in terms of usability if there were more true competition. In a parallel universe where MS Office wasn't the accepted 'standard', there might be much better apps available (like Lotus Improv from the early 90's and countless word-processors that were easier to use than Word), but we'll never know.
Given Microsoft's long and consistent history of mediocre product development on pretty much everything they have touched, why would anyone think that their version of office apps are necessarily the best that could have been?
Can someone summarise this for me? It sounds like a really interesting topic, but as with all of this guys articles, they are so badly written I can never be arsed to finish them!
its time for microsoft to reaorganize the company again
Live by Windows, die by Windows. It's understandable, of course, since without DOS/Windows they would never have been anything, but, especially on the desktop, they are somewhat constrained by their own success. They can't really update Windows to a modern OS without breaking compatibility with much of the software that runs on it, and the longer they wait to do it, the more bogged down the OS and their development projects get. They will have to do it eventually or watch themselves become irrelevant, although, with Google stealing their lunch money most days recently, it may already be too late for them.
Of course, this wasn't even a Windows project, but shows how their entire culture has become completely dysfunctional. Ballmer deserves a lot of the blame, although, I don't think the fault is entirely his since the culture at Microsoft is as much or more Gates' making as Ballmer's.
starting with Vista SP2, desktop windows is the same as Windows Server
Given Microsoft's long and consistent history of mediocre product development on pretty much everything they have touched, why would anyone think that their version of office apps are necessarily the best that could have been?
I think that's begging the question a little. Are all their products mediocre? Their phones, mp3 players and operating systems are, but (IMHO) their game consoles, office apps, development tools (Visual Studio) and keyboards/mice are quite decent. In comparison to other existing products that is -- I don't think it's fair to any company (even Apple) to compare against alternate histories.
And For Some... APPLE Bites!
How else can one account for the chunk missing in their logo ?
Opposite. The logo would symbolize the bite that other companies took when they went down on Apple. As in "Bite Me". That's why there's a bite mark in the Apple. Apple can't take a bite out of Apple unless they're insulting themselves.
I think that's begging the question a little. Are all their products mediocre? Their phones, mp3 players and operating systems are, but (IMHO) their game consoles, office apps, development tools (Visual Studio) and keyboards/mice are quite decent. In comparison to other existing products that is -- I don't think it's fair to any company (even Apple) to compare against alternate histories.
If the "legal" iPhone had as many potential features/options as a jailbroken iPhone there would be no competition. If there is something that the competitions' phones can do that the iPhone can't, a jailbroken iPhone has an app for that.
.
Can't Microsoft just slap phone hardware and software into the Zune HD and call it a day? Even if it lacked some of the features that the iPhone has it'd still sell. Throw in an app store and grow it, and you're on your way. I don't get the point of all this mess I just read about. If there's 3 companies inside microsoft designing the same product, well, Zune HD won. Merge them all to make a cohesive product. Kill the current WinMo, or make it cheaper (I think they've talked about that). I do not believe Microsoft is as helpless as this report makes them seem.
probably not
you have to rewrite a lot of the software and engineer the product to be a cell phone. little things like where you put the antenna make a big difference
10 years ago MS was run like a tight ship. in the last 10 years they shipped so many new products that all the code from 10 years ago probably has too many forks and incompatibilities with each other. Apple on the other hand sells the same basic code and hardware in all their products with minor differences
(IMHO) their game consoles . . . are quite decent..
With a failure rate of 54% and billions of dollars flushed down the toilet to offer extended warranties to placate those (justifiably) upset customers, I wouldn't consider the Xbox line as "quite decent". And they've been in the game console business for years now, a competently run company would have already figured out how to avoid high catastrophic failure rates.
If I were a MSFT stockholder, and thankfully I'm not, I would be going to the annual meeting to ask "Why is Mr. Ballmer still running this company?"
Microsoft. . . a GM for the 21st century.
If I was Gates, looking to my future contribution to the world through my Foundation's good works, I'd be seriously contemplating taking my money and running. Well, at least, some of it..... (since trying to take all of it will make the stock worthless before he could).
No, he should stay there and put his money where his mouth is since it's pretty evident that the only reason this walking, squawking management disaster named Steve Ballmer remains CEO is because Gates lets him.