Ah but don't you know Microsoft just made Apple's smart cover dumb?
It's amazing how people complain that the Apple appeal is "form over function". Yet nowhere do you see any company that works so hard to get every detail of function right. That's a lot of Apple's appeal.
Microsoft comes out and shows people a cover. "This is what it looks like. No you can't touch it while it's on." And everybody runs around saying how great it is. On the basis of what? Aside from the shallowest form... absolutely nothing.
What they're banking on is that when people actually use it, the mediocre reviews it gets by people who actually used it won't be able to fully supplant the rave reviews of all the people who didn't.
Windows RT isn't particularly appealing to me. I have little interest in running Metro-only apps, especially when an x86/x64 equivalent can also run Metro apps, as well as a full-blown PC.
Windows RT is a weird animal, but Windows 8 (especially on tablets) is a very interesting and forward-looking OS--and if you haven't already, realize that Microsoft is pushing to extend ARM to the desktop (with additional applications) and further (and more importantly), prepare for a world where the mobile phone is also the PC and the tablet.
HP may be the trendsetter here. As a manufacturer, I'd dump Microsoft and let them flounder on their own.
At some point in the near future the idea of following IBM into new markets and ditching PCs and consumer tablets will come to be seen as the right thing to do. I just hope HP haven't left it too late. I'd hate to see them join Kodak on the funeral pyre.
Is it true that Microsoft doesn't know hardware? Not entirely. It has been a dominant maker of mice, webcams and keyboards for decades. It has been making XBoxes for a decade, and its Kinect controller has been sold in millions. If I am not mistaken, it sold faster than the iPad at launch.
The XBox is a complete computer, for all intents and purposes. MS had to master design, integration, supply chain management and marketing to make it succeed. Can we argue it is much harder to design, manufacture and market a tablet? Don't forget, Ballmer's twin brother, Apple's hardware SVP, just retired. Maybe he did it to take over the same job at MS. ;-)
It took MS a while to get the XBox right, but they had the cash and patience to do it. They also have the cash and patience to make Surface succeed, if they really want to.
But I am not yet convinced they want to. The whole Ballmer and Sinofsky show and tell smells uncommitted to me. It could just have been an elaborate demo of a reference model, something akin to Google's Nexus models. At least the Nexus phones and tablet are finished products. The Surface still appears to be pseudo-vaporware. But, I believe MIcrosoft can make this succeed if they are committed.
As for HP, when are they going to try hiring a CEO who is actually techno-savvy?
Wow HP might have few years left. If printers, scanners and pc towers with some laptops can save them for maybe 5 more years that would be amazing. HP really dumped their only hope with WebOS. If they kept WebOS and kept developing their own computers, smartphones, tablets they might have some shot. Unfortunately, the old farts at the top of the management think that people gonna keep buying PC towers, Printers and Scanners forever. Now that they completely placed WebOS in trash they have no hope, just like RIM and Nokia.
I must confess: AppleInsider is doing a better job of clarifying what is rumor from what is fact, and its right in the headline, which is a good thing because RSS feeds tend to show just headlines, and you don't want them to be misleading or untruthful. This I can appreciate. Thanks, and keep up the professionalism.
In terms of OS installations I think iOS and Android each outsell or are on the verge of outselling Windows.
It could happen. Enterprise has adopted Windows 7 fairly well and MS hasn't given enterprise any strong reason to spend a ton of money to upgrade to Windows 8. Furthermore, Windows it butt-ugly and different enough to use to make it a retraining cost to change to it.
It could happen. Enterprise has adopted Windows 7 fairly well and MS hasn't given enterprise any strong reason to spend a ton of money to upgrade to Windows 8. Furthermore, Windows it butt-ugly and different enough to use to make it a retraining cost to change to it.
Just read an Asymco article on that very thing. Looks like Android has topped Windows and iOS will surely do it soon enough. Regardless smartphones are far beyond PCs and I can't see that changing back...ever.
Ah but don't you know Microsoft just made Apple's smart cover dumb?
Smart Covers don't sell iPads. Apple's perfection of the tablet paradigm sells iPads.
On the other hand, MS seems to be hoping an integrated keyboard-cover will help sell a product that is neither a competitive tablet nor a competitive ultrabook.
So essentially, MS is selling an awesome keyboard-typey cover, with a slab attachment that looks like a tablet. You can even close the awesome keyboard-typey cover by folding that slab attachment over it in order to protect the keys. Great, isn't it?
According to unconfirmed reports, HP has scrapped plans to build Windows RT-based tablets which would have been direct competitors to Microsoft's own upcoming Surface tablet that was announced in June...
...The software giant has placed itself in a curious position with hardware makers that will essentially become competition when Surface is released later this year. Microsoft will have a definite pricing advantage as it won't have to pay the $90 OS licensing fee applied to OEMs planning to use either Windows RT or Windows 8 Pro.
I personally think it is easier for a software/OS company (like MS or Google) to dabble in the hardware market than a hardware company (like HP, Dell, Acer, etc) to dabble in the software/OS market. And THAT is where the hurt feelings from the hardware makers come in. Google or MS can easily pair up with any number of hardware manufactures in the Asian supply chain like FoxConn and produce a generic iTablet. What matters is the OS, and as HP catastrophically proved with WebOS, building an entire ecosystem outside of Android or iOS is hard. All the rumors of Samsung investing in Bada are probably true as they are needing to hedge their bets. What is Dell, Asus, and the countless other commoditized hardware makers to do? It's not as if there is room for 10 OS's.
All the rumors of Samsung investing in Bada are probably true as they are needing to hedge their bets. What is Dell, Asus, and the countless other commoditized hardware makers to do? It's not as if there is room for 10 OS's.
Canonical has Ubuntu. There is Red Hat too. Both are big enough to get the job done. If Dell and HP would take the plunge with all of their computers instead of just netbooks, they could attract developers. Adobe's Creative Suite isn't free on any system. With enough people liking Linux after a couple of years you can bet they would create a version for it. If they did that, Apple would suffer more than Microsoft. I would like to subscribe to the Adobe cloud service for $600 per year but it won't run on Linux.
All of these manufacturers need to offer Ubuntu for free and charge the full price for Windows. Then people would see the cost of Windows and realize it just isn't worth it.
Is it true that Microsoft doesn't know hardware? Not entirely. It has been a dominant maker of mice, webcams and keyboards for decades. It has been making XBoxes for a decade, and its Kinect controller has been sold in millions. If I am not mistaken, it sold faster than the iPad at launch.
I wish people would stop making that comparison. It's like saying a new set of cutlery is better than an iPad because it sold more at launch.
The XBox is a complete computer, for all intents and purposes. MS had to master design, integration, supply chain management and marketing to make it succeed.
Mainly marketing. They also had to replace huge numbers of faulty units and lose billions of dollars on it. Being able to sell something in large numbers doesn't automatically mean that it's a quality product, whether it's Microsoft, HP or Apple.
And Microsoft haven't made a decent mouse since about 1992.
When you cross the Rubicon and diss your hardware patterns you better know what you are doing.
Hard to go back.
P&G decided to directly ship Crush Soda directly to supermarkets and cut their distributers out of the deal. After market share dropped they had to go back, hat in hand, and beg them to distribute their product again. The product was dead shortly after.
It could happen. Enterprise has adopted Windows 7 fairly well and MS hasn't given enterprise any strong reason to spend a ton of money to upgrade to Windows 8. Furthermore, Windows it butt-ugly and different enough to use to make it a retraining cost to change to it.
That is not uncommon in the Windows arena.
It was hard to get people off XP. For years, people continued to use XP.
Vista didn't sell well.
Windows 7 sold very well.
I suspect that Windows 8 will not sell particularly well (except where preloaded on new machines), but in the end, it doesn't matter all that much. Microsoft gets their money whether the user installs Windows 7 or Windows 8.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Ah but don't you know Microsoft just made Apple's smart cover dumb?
It's amazing how people complain that the Apple appeal is "form over function". Yet nowhere do you see any company that works so hard to get every detail of function right. That's a lot of Apple's appeal.
Microsoft comes out and shows people a cover. "This is what it looks like. No you can't touch it while it's on." And everybody runs around saying how great it is. On the basis of what? Aside from the shallowest form... absolutely nothing.
What they're banking on is that when people actually use it, the mediocre reviews it gets by people who actually used it won't be able to fully supplant the rave reviews of all the people who didn't.
Windows RT isn't particularly appealing to me. I have little interest in running Metro-only apps, especially when an x86/x64 equivalent can also run Metro apps, as well as a full-blown PC.
Windows RT is a weird animal, but Windows 8 (especially on tablets) is a very interesting and forward-looking OS--and if you haven't already, realize that Microsoft is pushing to extend ARM to the desktop (with additional applications) and further (and more importantly), prepare for a world where the mobile phone is also the PC and the tablet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
If I had a violin, I might play a sad song for HP.
HP virtually screws everything up they touch, I can't even remember their last successful product.
HP 12C. The best financial calculator ever made. Still the best. The only one I have consistently used for over 20 years.
Sadly, I think HP is going the way of Kodak.
At some point in the near future the idea of following IBM into new markets and ditching PCs and consumer tablets will come to be seen as the right thing to do. I just hope HP haven't left it too late. I'd hate to see them join Kodak on the funeral pyre.
Is it true that Microsoft doesn't know hardware? Not entirely. It has been a dominant maker of mice, webcams and keyboards for decades. It has been making XBoxes for a decade, and its Kinect controller has been sold in millions. If I am not mistaken, it sold faster than the iPad at launch.
The XBox is a complete computer, for all intents and purposes. MS had to master design, integration, supply chain management and marketing to make it succeed. Can we argue it is much harder to design, manufacture and market a tablet? Don't forget, Ballmer's twin brother, Apple's hardware SVP, just retired. Maybe he did it to take over the same job at MS. ;-)
It took MS a while to get the XBox right, but they had the cash and patience to do it. They also have the cash and patience to make Surface succeed, if they really want to.
But I am not yet convinced they want to. The whole Ballmer and Sinofsky show and tell smells uncommitted to me. It could just have been an elaborate demo of a reference model, something akin to Google's Nexus models. At least the Nexus phones and tablet are finished products. The Surface still appears to be pseudo-vaporware. But, I believe MIcrosoft can make this succeed if they are committed.
As for HP, when are they going to try hiring a CEO who is actually techno-savvy?
HP WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH PALM?
They're probably still sat there with their fingers in their... ears.
Given their software is complete and utter ballshitfuckbuggery, you'd think...
Ah, nevermind.
Wow HP might have few years left. If printers, scanners and pc towers with some laptops can save them for maybe 5 more years that would be amazing. HP really dumped their only hope with WebOS. If they kept WebOS and kept developing their own computers, smartphones, tablets they might have some shot. Unfortunately, the old farts at the top of the management think that people gonna keep buying PC towers, Printers and Scanners forever. Now that they completely placed WebOS in trash they have no hope, just like RIM and Nokia.
I must confess: AppleInsider is doing a better job of clarifying what is rumor from what is fact, and its right in the headline, which is a good thing because RSS feeds tend to show just headlines, and you don't want them to be misleading or untruthful. This I can appreciate. Thanks, and keep up the professionalism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Ah but don't you know Microsoft just made Apple's smart cover dumb?
Stop kidding yourself. If you wanted an ultrabook, the MacBook Air runs Windows too. And it doesn't need a goddamned kickstand to stay open.
Oooo... a cover that doubles as a keyboard, where have I seen that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
In terms of OS installations I think iOS and Android each outsell or are on the verge of outselling Windows.
It could happen. Enterprise has adopted Windows 7 fairly well and MS hasn't given enterprise any strong reason to spend a ton of money to upgrade to Windows 8. Furthermore, Windows it butt-ugly and different enough to use to make it a retraining cost to change to it.
Just read an Asymco article on that very thing. Looks like Android has topped Windows and iOS will surely do it soon enough. Regardless smartphones are far beyond PCs and I can't see that changing back...ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Ah but don't you know Microsoft just made Apple's smart cover dumb?
Smart Covers don't sell iPads. Apple's perfection of the tablet paradigm sells iPads.
On the other hand, MS seems to be hoping an integrated keyboard-cover will help sell a product that is neither a competitive tablet nor a competitive ultrabook.
So essentially, MS is selling an awesome keyboard-typey cover, with a slab attachment that looks like a tablet. You can even close the awesome keyboard-typey cover by folding that slab attachment over it in order to protect the keys. Great, isn't it?
That's quite an expensive keyboard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
According to unconfirmed reports, HP has scrapped plans to build Windows RT-based tablets which would have been direct competitors to Microsoft's own upcoming Surface tablet that was announced in June...
...The software giant has placed itself in a curious position with hardware makers that will essentially become competition when Surface is released later this year. Microsoft will have a definite pricing advantage as it won't have to pay the $90 OS licensing fee applied to OEMs planning to use either Windows RT or Windows 8 Pro.
So maybe Léo Apotheker was right after all?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
4x Expandable floppy bays?
What lunatic would need access to that much data at once?
I personally think it is easier for a software/OS company (like MS or Google) to dabble in the hardware market than a hardware company (like HP, Dell, Acer, etc) to dabble in the software/OS market. And THAT is where the hurt feelings from the hardware makers come in. Google or MS can easily pair up with any number of hardware manufactures in the Asian supply chain like FoxConn and produce a generic iTablet. What matters is the OS, and as HP catastrophically proved with WebOS, building an entire ecosystem outside of Android or iOS is hard. All the rumors of Samsung investing in Bada are probably true as they are needing to hedge their bets. What is Dell, Asus, and the countless other commoditized hardware makers to do? It's not as if there is room for 10 OS's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedyTomato
All the rumors of Samsung investing in Bada are probably true as they are needing to hedge their bets. What is Dell, Asus, and the countless other commoditized hardware makers to do? It's not as if there is room for 10 OS's.
Canonical has Ubuntu. There is Red Hat too. Both are big enough to get the job done. If Dell and HP would take the plunge with all of their computers instead of just netbooks, they could attract developers. Adobe's Creative Suite isn't free on any system. With enough people liking Linux after a couple of years you can bet they would create a version for it. If they did that, Apple would suffer more than Microsoft. I would like to subscribe to the Adobe cloud service for $600 per year but it won't run on Linux.
All of these manufacturers need to offer Ubuntu for free and charge the full price for Windows. Then people would see the cost of Windows and realize it just isn't worth it.
I wish people would stop making that comparison. It's like saying a new set of cutlery is better than an iPad because it sold more at launch.
Mainly marketing. They also had to replace huge numbers of faulty units and lose billions of dollars on it. Being able to sell something in large numbers doesn't automatically mean that it's a quality product, whether it's Microsoft, HP or Apple.
And Microsoft haven't made a decent mouse since about 1992.
When you cross the Rubicon and diss your hardware patterns you better know what you are doing.
Hard to go back.
P&G decided to directly ship Crush Soda directly to supermarkets and cut their distributers out of the deal. After market share dropped they had to go back, hat in hand, and beg them to distribute their product again. The product was dead shortly after.
That is not uncommon in the Windows arena.
It was hard to get people off XP. For years, people continued to use XP.
Vista didn't sell well.
Windows 7 sold very well.
I suspect that Windows 8 will not sell particularly well (except where preloaded on new machines), but in the end, it doesn't matter all that much. Microsoft gets their money whether the user installs Windows 7 or Windows 8.
Gotta use them drive letters for something!
Plus, if you remember how little storage those floppies had, you'd probably get as many drives as possible.