Microsoft can't accept the fact that what was great back in the day, does not apply now. Microsoft should continue providing the PC's operating system. Microsoft should avoid making themselves look foolish in trying to compete with Apple's approach. Apple's market is different (Think Different).
If you want to say that PC refers to anything that can compute and is personal then I'm all for it. Of course, you should realize that MS has no intention of doing that because their and their OEM standings would look considerably worse even when only adding in the iPad. There goal is the same as its always been and those that call the iPhone and iPad "toys." It just sounds pathetic and desperate.
i think the real way you can cut it would be "all purpose PC's" and "entertainment PC's" This gives you two distinct graphs, "older" versions of PC's and "newer" versions of PC's.
I believe that is the best split. They are all PC's! just they have completely different roles!
MS wins in volume on "traditional PC's" (and maybe even on overall revenue depending on how many of Lenovo's sales are Thinkpads, Some thinkpads can cost more than MBP's for the same specs!!) and "new PC's" which Apple would dominate for at least the next 5 years.
Hope that cleared up my point/idea for how everyone wins (except for makers of shitty low quality copied directly from Apple) which i believe leaves a few Nexus/Lenovo/Palm tablets.
If Apple got serious and produced a real Office Suite comparable to MS Office (iWork doesn't count) but lean, mean and full of features, Microsoft would be screwed.
If I was a Microsoft investor, I would be seriously concerned. Don't let MS turn into RIM.
If Apple got serious and produced a real Office Suite comparable to MS Office (iWork doesn't count) but lean, mean and full of features, Microsoft would be screwed.
If I was a Microsoft investor, I would be seriously concerned. Don't let MS turn into RIM.
And if Apple made it have backwards compatibility with old file types... that is the real problem i think....
and MS office is so entrenched.... imagine if RIM had phones with 10 year contracts..... and no way to terminate early....
aside from that it would be great!!! (aka once if took 5-10+ years to grow)
I do like Microsoft's incorporation of a PC based processor into their Surface which will run PC software and have usable USB ports. In my business, this is a better and more useful direction for a tablet, showing that the iPad is really just for games and internet access and not work. I see a place for both.
i think the real way you can cut it would be "all purpose PC's" and "entertainment PC's" This gives you two distinct graphs, "older" versions of PC's and "newer" versions of PC's.
I believe that is the best split. They are all PC's! just they have completely different roles!
MS wins in volume on "traditional PC's"...
Are traditional PCs not the same all purpose PCs? If so, then why obfuscate your point? if not, what's the difference? Seems to me you are assuming that if it's running Windows it's good and if it's not it's not good. You even solidify that comment by categorizing the iPad as being just for entertainment and falling back into the pejorative "toy" category.
If Apple got serious and produced a real Office Suite comparable to MS Office (iWork doesn't count) but lean, mean and full of features, Microsoft would be screwed.
If I was a Microsoft investor, I would be seriously concerned. Don't let MS turn into RIM.
Very few people need "full of features" office suite. Once in a great while I need Excel because a certain function is not supported in Numbers. Likewise, I very infrequently need Word - only when someone sends me a .doc with funky layout. 99.9% of the time I can use iWork for all my compatibility and collaboration with Windows coworkers and associates. I admit that office productivity is not my main job description but still many office workers use the wrong application in the suite half the time anyway. Even our PhD scientists are known to mistakenly use Powerpoint or Excel when they should be using Word. That is the problem with Office, they need fewer features, not more.
the best thing about this debate is that the answer will be decided in the marektplace over the next year. and we'll actually see who was right/wrong.
Remember when people thought the Zune would kick ass because MS always won? Things didn't work out so well and that was when MS had a dominate mind share in the tech field. Things could be different, but based on my experience with Win8 and their inability to understand what customers want and how to focus on a single product I'm guessing they won't this time around either. Things will get more clear once they actually give us a ship date on and price points on their multiple tablets with incompatible OSes and apps.
In the client consumer space the last 20 years have seen evolution from pc, through phones, mp3 players, smartphones, tablets. All are still in play but sales are splitting across more markets. Whilst their are more devices and consumers, there are certainly more OSes, hardware and app vendors. Those that monopolised earlier markets have lost share to others. Who'd have thought a search engine creator would become the Google of today and see Apple create mp3 players let alone phones and tablets. MS Win, Dell, IBM, Adobe have lost share to all the newcomers or to those that were able to lead or evolve like Apple, Google. TVs are evolving. MS has arrived late to the tablet space. MS and Sony have become game console makers. Desktops are dead. Laptops have gotten large, small, and now thin with makers providing their own OSes, but probably in reducing numbers in an increasing consumer market.
Sadly in the enterprise space, change is a slow struggle. Big players are still enjoying large markets and big margins. User phones are accessing company email but not a whole lot more. Byod might see new technologies but Agreements and leasing arrangements will take time. Device numbers across enterprises not likely to change much.
Consumer+ or Post Monopoly may be a more apt motivator/descriptor.
Has Ballmer commented on whether a tablet is a PC or not? If not I can see that coming once they sell a few ... that will be the moment Apple can give in and agree ... then post the Apple sales data for 'PCs' (Macs + iPads).
This really got started because at All Things D, Walt Mossberg asked Steve Ballmer and Ray Ozzie to comment on Apple's "post PC" vision, and Ballmer said (something to the effect) that "tablets are Pee Cees too" and laid out his vision of tablets just being another PC form factor.
And that's EXACTLY how Microsoft has approached tablets since the 1990s. Nothing has changed. Windows 8 isn't some new insight into the future of computing. It's Windows 7 with a new coat of Metro paint and some neon colors.
Ballmer's statement indicates that he doesn't get what makes iPad a success. I would say that calling Apple "wrong" is just posturing. Of course they're going to defend their product.
But the market will be the final arbiter of who is "wrong," and so far, with nearly TWO DECADES of the Windows Tablet PCs behind them, Microsoft's vision of "tablets are pee cees too" have proven not to be the formula for success.
Unified OS for desktop and another smaller form factor. That's brilliant, Microsoft! You should try that on phones, too! That sounds like a winner!
Oh... wait...
Remember the first time they thought their dominance on desktops means they can use the same UI across all systems? I guess it worked out well until something useful came along.
"Let's use a Start Button!"
"Of course we have to include the Windows Start Button."
The slide depicted from Turner's speech actually just cements my view that Apple's view is the right one. I personally would rather that my devices have an OS and hardware which are optimized for the functions of that particular device. My laptop is heavier, but has more horsepower and an OS suited for laptop based tasks. As does the iPhone and iPad. Why would I want to run a desktop OS on a mobile device? Especially when everything in life is about tradeoffs. By running a desktop OS like the one present on the Surface pro, you have to make all of the following tradeoffs. From my view, it is inferior as a supermobile tablet (iPad) and inferior as an ultrabook. It is just like Tim Cook's RefrigaToaster analogy, you have one product that serves neither role well. Then they contradict themselves by offering the Surface RT which again will be inferior to the iPad 3 in terms of battery life and App ecosystem.
My Comparison of Surface Pro to iPad (3rd Generation) (italics are assumptions because it is an unreleased product)
37% Heavier (903g vs 660g for iPad 3)
43% Thicker (13.5mm vs 9.4mm for iPad 3)
No option for built in cellular provider connectivity
Additional ports such as USB and slot for MicroSDXC plus MiniDisplayPort without the use of an additional external adapter
Kickstand and typecover do not allow for laptop operation as they require the product be placed on a hard surface. (harder to use on a plane/train/in bed)
Likely shorter operational time on a charge due to higher power Intel processor coupled with 42 wh battery vs 42.5 wh in iPad 3
Likely to run hotter
Likely to be slower than an actual ultrabook such as the MacBookAir
Comments
Microsoft can't accept the fact that what was great back in the day, does not apply now. Microsoft should continue providing the PC's operating system. Microsoft should avoid making themselves look foolish in trying to compete with Apple's approach. Apple's market is different (Think Different).
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
If you want to say that PC refers to anything that can compute and is personal then I'm all for it. Of course, you should realize that MS has no intention of doing that because their and their OEM standings would look considerably worse even when only adding in the iPad. There goal is the same as its always been and those that call the iPhone and iPad "toys." It just sounds pathetic and desperate.
i think the real way you can cut it would be "all purpose PC's" and "entertainment PC's" This gives you two distinct graphs, "older" versions of PC's and "newer" versions of PC's.
I believe that is the best split. They are all PC's! just they have completely different roles!
MS wins in volume on "traditional PC's" (and maybe even on overall revenue depending on how many of Lenovo's sales are Thinkpads, Some thinkpads can cost more than MBP's for the same specs!!) and "new PC's" which Apple would dominate for at least the next 5 years.
Hope that cleared up my point/idea for how everyone wins (except for makers of shitty low quality copied directly from Apple) which i believe leaves a few Nexus/Lenovo/Palm tablets.
If Apple got serious and produced a real Office Suite comparable to MS Office (iWork doesn't count) but lean, mean and full of features, Microsoft would be screwed.
If I was a Microsoft investor, I would be seriously concerned. Don't let MS turn into RIM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
If Apple got serious and produced a real Office Suite comparable to MS Office (iWork doesn't count) but lean, mean and full of features, Microsoft would be screwed.
If I was a Microsoft investor, I would be seriously concerned. Don't let MS turn into RIM.
And if Apple made it have backwards compatibility with old file types... that is the real problem i think....
and MS office is so entrenched.... imagine if RIM had phones with 10 year contracts..... and no way to terminate early....
aside from that it would be great!!! (aka once if took 5-10+ years to grow)
I do like Microsoft's incorporation of a PC based processor into their Surface which will run PC software and have usable USB ports. In my business, this is a better and more useful direction for a tablet, showing that the iPad is really just for games and internet access and not work. I see a place for both.
I like this one better.
Are traditional PCs not the same all purpose PCs? If so, then why obfuscate your point? if not, what's the difference? Seems to me you are assuming that if it's running Windows it's good and if it's not it's not good. You even solidify that comment by categorizing the iPad as being just for entertainment and falling back into the pejorative "toy" category.
first phase: denial
the best thing about this debate is that the answer will be decided in the marektplace over the next year. and we'll actually see who was right/wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
If Apple got serious and produced a real Office Suite comparable to MS Office (iWork doesn't count) but lean, mean and full of features, Microsoft would be screwed.
If I was a Microsoft investor, I would be seriously concerned. Don't let MS turn into RIM.
Very few people need "full of features" office suite. Once in a great while I need Excel because a certain function is not supported in Numbers. Likewise, I very infrequently need Word - only when someone sends me a .doc with funky layout. 99.9% of the time I can use iWork for all my compatibility and collaboration with Windows coworkers and associates. I admit that office productivity is not my main job description but still many office workers use the wrong application in the suite half the time anyway. Even our PhD scientists are known to mistakenly use Powerpoint or Excel when they should be using Word. That is the problem with Office, they need fewer features, not more.
Remember when people thought the Zune would kick ass because MS always won? Things didn't work out so well and that was when MS had a dominate mind share in the tech field. Things could be different, but based on my experience with Win8 and their inability to understand what customers want and how to focus on a single product I'm guessing they won't this time around either. Things will get more clear once they actually give us a ship date on and price points on their multiple tablets with incompatible OSes and apps.
[VIDEO]
It's not a burger...it's a Cow+
It's not cheating...it's Monogamy+
They're not shoes...they're Feet+
It's not sex...it's Masturbation+
Thank you Microsoft!
[URL=http://forums.appleinsider.com/image/id/171753/width/400/height/300][IMG]http://forums.appleinsider.com/image/id/171753/width/400/height/300[/IMG][/URL]
MS is the industry step child that no one wants to talk about.
Sadly in the enterprise space, change is a slow struggle. Big players are still enjoying large markets and big margins. User phones are accessing company email but not a whole lot more. Byod might see new technologies but Agreements and leasing arrangements will take time. Device numbers across enterprises not likely to change much.
Consumer+ or Post Monopoly may be a more apt motivator/descriptor.
This really got started because at All Things D, Walt Mossberg asked Steve Ballmer and Ray Ozzie to comment on Apple's "post PC" vision, and Ballmer said (something to the effect) that "tablets are Pee Cees too" and laid out his vision of tablets just being another PC form factor.
And that's EXACTLY how Microsoft has approached tablets since the 1990s. Nothing has changed. Windows 8 isn't some new insight into the future of computing. It's Windows 7 with a new coat of Metro paint and some neon colors.
Ballmer's statement indicates that he doesn't get what makes iPad a success. I would say that calling Apple "wrong" is just posturing. Of course they're going to defend their product.
But the market will be the final arbiter of who is "wrong," and so far, with nearly TWO DECADES of the Windows Tablet PCs behind them, Microsoft's vision of "tablets are pee cees too" have proven not to be the formula for success.
Unified OS for desktop and another smaller form factor. That's brilliant, Microsoft! You should try that on phones, too! That sounds like a winner!
Oh... wait...
Remember the first time they thought their dominance on desktops means they can use the same UI across all systems? I guess it worked out well until something useful came along.
"Let's use a Start Button!"
"Of course we have to include the Windows Start Button."
The slide depicted from Turner's speech actually just cements my view that Apple's view is the right one. I personally would rather that my devices have an OS and hardware which are optimized for the functions of that particular device. My laptop is heavier, but has more horsepower and an OS suited for laptop based tasks. As does the iPhone and iPad. Why would I want to run a desktop OS on a mobile device? Especially when everything in life is about tradeoffs. By running a desktop OS like the one present on the Surface pro, you have to make all of the following tradeoffs. From my view, it is inferior as a supermobile tablet (iPad) and inferior as an ultrabook. It is just like Tim Cook's RefrigaToaster analogy, you have one product that serves neither role well. Then they contradict themselves by offering the Surface RT which again will be inferior to the iPad 3 in terms of battery life and App ecosystem.
My Comparison of Surface Pro to iPad (3rd Generation) (italics are assumptions because it is an unreleased product)
37% Heavier (903g vs 660g for iPad 3)
43% Thicker (13.5mm vs 9.4mm for iPad 3)
No option for built in cellular provider connectivity
Additional ports such as USB and slot for MicroSDXC plus MiniDisplayPort without the use of an additional external adapter
Kickstand and typecover do not allow for laptop operation as they require the product be placed on a hard surface. (harder to use on a plane/train/in bed)
Likely shorter operational time on a charge due to higher power Intel processor coupled with 42 wh battery vs 42.5 wh in iPad 3
Likely to run hotter
Likely to be slower than an actual ultrabook such as the MacBookAir
Yes, Microsoft will take fail to a whole new level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcallows
once again microsoft is reactive, not proactive
And as always, ineffectively so.