The sad thing is, even if MS does nothing but windows and office they will still be huge and profitable for the forseeable future. Sure they will not be on mobile, but enterprise desktops and home PC will be with us for at least 5 more years. And I don't see office going away ever. So maybe they will down size and become a productivity software company.
obvious conclusion if the Windows Phone 7 OS does not unseat iOS and Andriod as the new hip thing.
There is no need to "unseat" anybody. And BTW, among those who care about such things, the iphone is hardly the "new hip thing". It is yesterday's news, and the hipsters are unimpressed. They gather around the cool new Android phones, oohing and ahing, while the old-fashioned iPhones are ignored.
There is no need to "unseat" anybody. And BTW, among those who care about such things, the iphone is hardly the "new hip thing". It is yesterday's news, and the hipsters are unimpressed. They gather around the cool new Android phones, oohing and ahing, while the old-fashioned iPhones are ignored.
Maybe Microsoft needs Bill Gates back in the office.
Gates is the one who caused half these problems. he was good for the desktop side but he is the reason why MS sucks in mobile. MS released mobile OS's back in the late 1990's and no one bought them because Bill Gates decreed a consistent user experience which meant the same GUI on mobile as on the desktop which was too clunky.
You think maybe Bill is insufficiently challenged and stimulated by philanthropy? Visualize him returning to Microsoft to save it like Steve did for Apple. iCEO.
Ray Ozzie sure didn't make much of a dent in the tech world at Microsoft. However this news seems to deflect blame where the blame really should be. Ballmer is responsible for Microsoft's failings and the board will have to make that obvious conclusion if the Windows Phone 7 OS does not unseat iOS and Andriod as the new hip thing. Gaining or losing marketshare in the coming quarters will be telling of whether Ballmer stays or goes as there's no one else to blame but himself.
Realistically, I don't think anyone at MS sees a scenario where W7 Phone unseats iPhone and Android as the two big dogs. Their strategy is just to keep a marker in the game. MS is moribund because the Board is happy that the company continues to cash its legacy checks. Until desktop computing market share dominance is replaced by portable and handheld computing they will not make any huge changes in the way they do business. By then it may be too late. Microsoft is a bit like IBM in that regard.
I'm in two minds about this one. On one hand it's beneficial to have input from someone with different ideas, on the other hand Ozzie's computing world view simply didn't mesh with Ballmers (and hence Microsoft's).
Ozzie pushed software as a service to the nth degree where everything existed in the cloud (applications and data). His ideas were much more in sync with Google and ChromeOS than with Microsoft.
It doesn't take a genius to see that if Ozzie had his way Microsoft would essentially become another Google and whilst they would create new markets, those new markets would cannibalize and endanger Microsoft's Windows Server\\Windows\\Office cash cow.
I find that I'm subscribing to Ballmer's computing world view more and more (tech fortune tellers be damned ) where branded client devices control the UX and data is synced to the cloud in a somewhat accessible and manageable form.
Perhaps in a future of ubiquitous high-speed wireless and fibre I'll change my mind, but I really think that with Microsoft pushing their Windows+Cloud strategy and the likes of Apple showing the benefits to be had with a unified branded client UX, that we will be sticking with the current computing paradigm for the next 5 or 10 years.
Then, after all of that, I come back to thinking it wouldn't have been such a bad idea to keep Ozzie around for a different point of view.
It is a little bit embarrassing that such a big smart company is going thru so much negative.
They seem to have plenty of money to work this out. Of course they need someone with a better vision of where they want to go. They have to accept their place on the totem pole and not be afraid to get into things.
Stop trying to be Steve Jobs. They could use someone like a Richard Branson as a better role model.
He made his company name Virgin something that could carry on to do other things bigger but yet more adventurous. Even though it would had seemed that there was no way they could succeed on becoming an Airliner. Branson decided on buying one Jet at a time until voila.
Now. Can you believe it. The guy will actually be the first person (with the help of others of course)
to do something that even NASA could not do. Make money out of putting people in space. Even if it is for just a few minutes. The vision is different.
Even Apple, when they seemed to be dead in the water. A humbled S. Jobs accepted that the sim-
ple iPod, (not a computer) might be able to provide a check for the employees.
So. I would say. Bill Gates will probably have to come back for a few days. But he will have to bring somebody else with him. Somebody that can have a better or perhaps different vision. Someone that has not been bred in the Microsoft way. Someone that could see things a little different from outside the Box.
Microsoft has plenty of money coming in, that they could try something like that. Of course, it will take guts. It will also take Bill Gates saying that this 'visionary' can have Carte Blanche.
How can they say Microsoft has lost its way since Bill left? Didn't the Zune come under Bill's watch? And, wasn't their mobile platform losing market share to smarter phones?
One more question...doesn't Ballmer look every bit the bully? Is he? It seems he is only there because he and Gates were buddies in high school. What does he bring to the table?
Well one thing I would think I would jump in would be to quickly develop that White Space spectrum. At least here in the U.S.
You can see where Apple wants to get to with FaceTime for example. They for sure want to outdo
Skype and even the Carriers in connecting people. Even maybe trying to corral FaceBook a little bit.
Maybe Microsoft could start placing a service in Florida. Supposedly placing something on an existing tower should cover 50 miles. With water on both sides, they should be able to cover the state with minimal time and money. What could come out of that? Ask for ideas. Give me a week, I could think of a few things. Would they work? Who knows. Do you think Apple thought that the iPod was gonna do what it did? The thing would be to do a few things a little different then follow Apple and Google's footsteps. Look for someplace to get ahead of them.
I'll think of a few more ways. Nobody says it would be easy.
Realistically, I don't think anyone at MS sees a scenario where W7 Phone unseats iPhone and Android as the two big dogs. Their strategy is just to keep a marker in the game. MS is moribund because the Board is happy that the company continues to cash its legacy checks. Until desktop computing market share dominance is replaced by portable and handheld computing they will not make any huge changes in the way they do business. By then it may be too late. Microsoft is a bit like IBM in that regard.
...Microsoft's extensive licensing strategy. Apple licenses Exchange from Redmond, among a host of others. HTC licenses touch interface from Microsoft in order to run Android "freely" on their hardware. Redmond is suing Motorola and probably the rest in turn until they either win the suits or gain the licensing fees they desire frm the mobile handset makers that abandoned Windows for Android. Microsoft will ensure that Android doesn't remain "free" for them as pay-back for dropping Windows Mobile. So there is more than legacy Windows/Office feeding the behemoth. Desktop computing is currently entrenched in corporate business, because there is a massive infrastructure supporting it, involving all kinds of Microsoft products from Exchange, Sharepoint, server/AD OS via .Net, to Communicator and SQL. But as Linux and other open source variants demonstrate cost savings and ease of support, that will erode. As more and more "paper" gets virtualized via email and chat, the landscape changes and ultraportable devices begin to replace the tradition desktop in the enterprise. As long as Redmond can leverage that they will remain, if not robust at least viable.
Comments
As long as Ballmer is at the helm nothing will change.
As an unapologetic Apple fanboy I hope he stays. Do we really want Microsoft to get a clue?
I think Ballmer and the Boys took Huey Lewis and the news "Hip To Be Square" hit a little too much to heart.
Sort of like your grandfather running around with a Faux Hawk, tattoos and a muscle t-shirt.
Hilarious!
obvious conclusion if the Windows Phone 7 OS does not unseat iOS and Andriod as the new hip thing.
There is no need to "unseat" anybody. And BTW, among those who care about such things, the iphone is hardly the "new hip thing". It is yesterday's news, and the hipsters are unimpressed. They gather around the cool new Android phones, oohing and ahing, while the old-fashioned iPhones are ignored.
... a big fish, mind you,... but a fish out of water nonetheless...
There is no need to "unseat" anybody. And BTW, among those who care about such things, the iphone is hardly the "new hip thing". It is yesterday's news, and the hipsters are unimpressed. They gather around the cool new Android phones, oohing and ahing, while the old-fashioned iPhones are ignored.
Please ignore. It's A TRAP!
Maybe Microsoft needs Bill Gates back in the office.
Gates is the one who caused half these problems. he was good for the desktop side but he is the reason why MS sucks in mobile. MS released mobile OS's back in the late 1990's and no one bought them because Bill Gates decreed a consistent user experience which meant the same GUI on mobile as on the desktop which was too clunky.
Maybe Microsoft needs Bill Gates back in the office.
Micrsoft Bob 2010 FTW!
Ray Ozzie sure didn't make much of a dent in the tech world at Microsoft. However this news seems to deflect blame where the blame really should be. Ballmer is responsible for Microsoft's failings and the board will have to make that obvious conclusion if the Windows Phone 7 OS does not unseat iOS and Andriod as the new hip thing. Gaining or losing marketshare in the coming quarters will be telling of whether Ballmer stays or goes as there's no one else to blame but himself.
Realistically, I don't think anyone at MS sees a scenario where W7 Phone unseats iPhone and Android as the two big dogs. Their strategy is just to keep a marker in the game. MS is moribund because the Board is happy that the company continues to cash its legacy checks. Until desktop computing market share dominance is replaced by portable and handheld computing they will not make any huge changes in the way they do business. By then it may be too late. Microsoft is a bit like IBM in that regard.
Ozzie pushed software as a service to the nth degree where everything existed in the cloud (applications and data). His ideas were much more in sync with Google and ChromeOS than with Microsoft.
It doesn't take a genius to see that if Ozzie had his way Microsoft would essentially become another Google and whilst they would create new markets, those new markets would cannibalize and endanger Microsoft's Windows Server\\Windows\\Office cash cow.
I find that I'm subscribing to Ballmer's computing world view more and more (tech fortune tellers be damned
Perhaps in a future of ubiquitous high-speed wireless and fibre I'll change my mind, but I really think that with Microsoft pushing their Windows+Cloud strategy and the likes of Apple showing the benefits to be had with a unified branded client UX, that we will be sticking with the current computing paradigm for the next 5 or 10 years.
Then, after all of that, I come back to thinking it wouldn't have been such a bad idea to keep Ozzie around for a different point of view.
They seem to have plenty of money to work this out. Of course they need someone with a better vision of where they want to go. They have to accept their place on the totem pole and not be afraid to get into things.
Stop trying to be Steve Jobs. They could use someone like a Richard Branson as a better role model.
He made his company name Virgin something that could carry on to do other things bigger but yet more adventurous. Even though it would had seemed that there was no way they could succeed on becoming an Airliner. Branson decided on buying one Jet at a time until voila.
Now. Can you believe it. The guy will actually be the first person (with the help of others of course)
to do something that even NASA could not do. Make money out of putting people in space. Even if it is for just a few minutes. The vision is different.
Even Apple, when they seemed to be dead in the water. A humbled S. Jobs accepted that the sim-
ple iPod, (not a computer) might be able to provide a check for the employees.
So. I would say. Bill Gates will probably have to come back for a few days. But he will have to bring somebody else with him. Somebody that can have a better or perhaps different vision. Someone that has not been bred in the Microsoft way. Someone that could see things a little different from outside the Box.
Microsoft has plenty of money coming in, that they could try something like that. Of course, it will take guts. It will also take Bill Gates saying that this 'visionary' can have Carte Blanche.
Of course they need someone with a better vision of where they want to go.
Which direction do you think they should go? (not being an asshat, it's a genuine question
One more question...doesn't Ballmer look every bit the bully? Is he? It seems he is only there because he and Gates were buddies in high school. What does he bring to the table?
You can see where Apple wants to get to with FaceTime for example. They for sure want to outdo
Skype and even the Carriers in connecting people. Even maybe trying to corral FaceBook a little bit.
Maybe Microsoft could start placing a service in Florida. Supposedly placing something on an existing tower should cover 50 miles. With water on both sides, they should be able to cover the state with minimal time and money. What could come out of that? Ask for ideas. Give me a week, I could think of a few things. Would they work? Who knows. Do you think Apple thought that the iPod was gonna do what it did? The thing would be to do a few things a little different then follow Apple and Google's footsteps. Look for someplace to get ahead of them.
I'll think of a few more ways. Nobody says it would be easy.
Realistically, I don't think anyone at MS sees a scenario where W7 Phone unseats iPhone and Android as the two big dogs. Their strategy is just to keep a marker in the game. MS is moribund because the Board is happy that the company continues to cash its legacy checks. Until desktop computing market share dominance is replaced by portable and handheld computing they will not make any huge changes in the way they do business. By then it may be too late. Microsoft is a bit like IBM in that regard.
...Microsoft's extensive licensing strategy. Apple licenses Exchange from Redmond, among a host of others. HTC licenses touch interface from Microsoft in order to run Android "freely" on their hardware. Redmond is suing Motorola and probably the rest in turn until they either win the suits or gain the licensing fees they desire frm the mobile handset makers that abandoned Windows for Android. Microsoft will ensure that Android doesn't remain "free" for them as pay-back for dropping Windows Mobile. So there is more than legacy Windows/Office feeding the behemoth. Desktop computing is currently entrenched in corporate business, because there is a massive infrastructure supporting it, involving all kinds of Microsoft products from Exchange, Sharepoint, server/AD OS via .Net, to Communicator and SQL. But as Linux and other open source variants demonstrate cost savings and ease of support, that will erode. As more and more "paper" gets virtualized via email and chat, the landscape changes and ultraportable devices begin to replace the tradition desktop in the enterprise. As long as Redmond can leverage that they will remain, if not robust at least viable.
In couple years?
You took the emoticons right out of my track pad.