Microsoft should have been Apple's challenger in mobile, says Bill Gates

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 44
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,001member
    Steve Ballmer the MSFT CEO shares synergy blame on this missed opportunity!  The MSFT stock was flatlined for a decade while Ballmer did nothing to expand the firms narkets.
    Exactly! Microsoft should have fired Steve Ballmer years ago. I blame him more than anyone. He never took his competition seriously. Just look at Zune, iPhone, the Mac, iPad....all things he laughed at and basically said well Microsoft is on top right now and that's what matters to me. With that attitude, you won't be on top forever and look where they are today. Quite frankly, the guy was an idiot and didn't know how to run a tech company. 

    Microsoft was far too late to the game with Windows Phone. I think it was a nice OS and it proved you COULD make a mobile OS differently from what Apple did with iOS. Its just a shame it was far too late. The app market was already off and running and developers weren't really interested in making apps for 3 completely different platforms with little to no return on 2 of the 3. I really wish Microsoft would have released Windows phone earlier than it did. I think it could have given iOS a run for its money back in the day. 
    edited June 24 watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 44
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,001member

    Arrogance sank MS under Balmer. But they are making a STRONG comeback! Their new support for open standards and open source is something Apple needs to keep a close eye on.

    Apple needs to re-evaluate their Mac mini offering and provide a friendlier price.
    Apple never has and never will be in a race to the bottom with pricing its products. They've always been more expensive than others and always will be. Selling a $300-400 Mac mini isn't going to save Apple (Macs) by any means. 

    If you cannot afford a Mac, then you simply cannot afford it. I want cars I cannot afford but I'm not in automobile forums pissing and moaning about the price of them either. 
    edited June 24 lkrupplostkiwicat52p-dogwatto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 44
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,624member
    Was Windows Mobile (or its predecessor) free from the outset or did MS at first charge handset mfrs for it?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 44
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,001member
    tundraboy said:
    Was Windows Mobile (or its predecessor) free from the outset or did MS at first charge handset mfrs for it?
    I'm sure manufacturers had to pay a license of some sort to use Windows Phone OS. Microsoft wouldn't really make any money at all otherwise unless they were banking on App Store sales which would have been a terrible bet judging on the size of the store and lack of developer support. 
    edited June 24 watto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 44
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,681unconfirmed, member
    "We should have been the iPhone knockoffs!! Waah waah waah!"

    It seems that what he is saying is that Apple creates a product and the market only demands one non-apple copycat alternative. Seemingly aware of the significant amount of IP that Microsoft had copied for Windows. 

    Now I ask (again), what is stopping other companies with coming up with original ideas? Apple does not have a monopoly on ideas. We clearly see this happen in markets which Apple does not operate, so why are tech companies, with their billions, so afraid to make a genuine effort and create a new product. 

    Blows my fu**ing mind. It happens with everything Apple releases. Look at Apple Stores and AirPods now.
    cat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 44
    tundraboy said:
    Was Windows Mobile (or its predecessor) free from the outset or did MS at first charge handset mfrs for it?
    WinCE was pretty much tied to the phone, and there were only minor upgrades (.x) available from the carrier.  There was a site that had builds with different components (Solitaire, telnet, other WinCE apps from Microsoft) built in for the various handsets, but they were technically "illegal".   I was a Microsoft Partner at the time, and I asked one of the Windows Mobile people about that, and he admitted they knew about the site, but the developers there downloaded some of the builds, and pretty much used it as a "see what people like" test bed.

    For the Windows 8 type phones, my wife tried one out, and she liked it.  It wasn't the iPhone, but it wasn't a horrible phone.  It did help explain why Windows 8 was the way it was.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 44
    FatmanFatman Posts: 317member
    Gates makes it sound like it was theirs to take. Nobody wanted Windows 8 or their equivalent Mobile OS with the lousey tile based interface - both have been killed off. They still try to push the sliding tiles in the MS Windows menu - just get rid of it, already. Unless Microsoft has an unfair advantage, or blatantly copies or acquires technology from others, they rarely succeed.
    cat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 44
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,681unconfirmed, member
    Fatman said:
    Gates makes it sound like it was theirs to take. Nobody wanted Windows 8 or their equivalent Mobile OS with the lousey tile based interface - both have been killed off. They still try to push the sliding tiles in the MS Windows menu - just get rid of it, already. Unless Microsoft has an unfair advantage, or blatantly copies or acquires technology from others, they rarely succeed.
    At least the tiles were unique.

    Today it's easy to confuse a fake iPhone with a real one. Zero creativity just copy-paste.
    cat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 29 of 44
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,001member
    Fatman said:
    Gates makes it sound like it was theirs to take. Nobody wanted Windows 8 or their equivalent Mobile OS with the lousey tile based interface - both have been killed off. They still try to push the sliding tiles in the MS Windows menu - just get rid of it, already. Unless Microsoft has an unfair advantage, or blatantly copies or acquires technology from others, they rarely succeed.
    At least the tiles were unique.

    Today it's easy to confuse a fake iPhone with a real one. Zero creativity just copy-paste.
    Yes it proves you CAN make a mobile phone OS with a UI that is completely different from iOS. Everyone else just chooses to make cheap knock-offs of iOS and ripoff its features. 
    AppleExposedcat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 44
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,681unconfirmed, member
    macxpress said:
    Fatman said:
    Gates makes it sound like it was theirs to take. Nobody wanted Windows 8 or their equivalent Mobile OS with the lousey tile based interface - both have been killed off. They still try to push the sliding tiles in the MS Windows menu - just get rid of it, already. Unless Microsoft has an unfair advantage, or blatantly copies or acquires technology from others, they rarely succeed.
    At least the tiles were unique.

    Today it's easy to confuse a fake iPhone with a real one. Zero creativity just copy-paste.
    Yes it proves you CAN make a mobile phone OS with a UI that is completely different from iOS. Everyone else just chooses to make cheap knock-offs of iOS and ripoff its features. 

    Which blows my mind.

    What blows my mind more is iKnockoff users in denial. As if Android was an original invention independent of Apple.

    Either way glad to see Apple haters in a fragmented mess. Android phone, Fire tablet, Bose headphones, Windows machine, Fitbit Watch, Roku box, Soundmates Airpods knockoffs.
    edited June 24 cat52p-dogwatto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 44
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,499member
    It seems that what he is saying is that Apple creates a product and the market only demands one non-apple copycat alternative. Seemingly aware of the significant amount of IP that Microsoft had copied for Windows. 

    Now I ask (again), what is stopping other companies with coming up with original ideas? Apple does not have a monopoly on ideas. We clearly see this happen in markets which Apple does not operate, so why are tech companies, with their billions, so afraid to make a genuine effort and create a new product. 
    It should be noted that Microsoft and Apple have a longstanding patent sharing agreement in place. They don’t share everything obviously, but they manage to avoid a lot of costly legal conflicts due to this arrangement.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 44
    Fatman said:
    Gates makes it sound like it was theirs to take. Nobody wanted Windows 8 or their equivalent Mobile OS with the lousey tile based interface - both have been killed off. They still try to push the sliding tiles in the MS Windows menu - just get rid of it, already. Unless Microsoft has an unfair advantage, or blatantly copies or acquires technology from others, they rarely succeed.
    It WAS theirs to take. The Windows foothold in the enterprise world was (and still is) MASSIVE. Had they managed to convince their enterprise customers to adopt Windows Phone (by, you know, actually building a compelling product instead of focussing on "Windows Everywhere") then Gates is right and they would have been in Android's position right now.

    The touchscreen technology wasn't available in the late 90s when WinCE was developed, but MS made the mistake of thinking the hardware was good enough to run a kludge of Windows and that transferring a desktop UI to such tiny screens was the right move. They could have just copied Simple Finder from the Mac and gotten a better result, but no. They thought they had enough time to iterate on their initial design and wait for the hardware to improve (the way it did in desktop PCs and laptops) so that they could keep using the Windows codebase.

    Could'a, should'a, would'a, Bill.
    cat52SpamSandwichwatto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 44
    I think Ballmer deserves a little more credit than he's being given here. Despite the strategic mistakes he made, he still kept the money rolling in for MS and did his best to increase market share.

    Remember, he was a sales guy more than an engineer - and Steve's quote about letting the sales guys take charge is apropos.
    cat52
  • Reply 34 of 44
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,681unconfirmed, member
    Embarassing....

    cat52docno42watto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 44
    geekmeegeekmee Posts: 336member
    I think the reality is, this was bigger than Bill Gates; Microsoft missed the importance of data becoming mobile. Expecting Microsoft to be serious about the trend away from stationery devices, is like expecting IBM to serious about developing PCs when the trend was data moving from mainframes.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 36 of 44
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,337member
    Microsoft, like most companies, wasn't willing to "knife the baby" - they couldn't let go of Windows desktop as the center of the universe and paid the price.

    Apple has embraced their products being eclipsed by the natural follow on - and ensured they were eclipsed by another Apple product.  Witness iPod to iPhone.  Microsoft just couldn't get their head wrapped around that and they paid the price for it with Windows, Windows, Windows!

    That's why Satya Nadella was a much needed change.  He got Microsoft back into being a software company and not a Windows company. 

    Microsoft as a software company is not a company I'd bet against.  Back in the day, much of the best Mac software came from Microsoft. 
    Carnagep-dogwatto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 44
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,337member

    so why are tech companies, with their billions, so afraid to make a genuine effort and create a new product. 
    They are afraid of "Osborneing" their existing products.  

    Gutless wonders.
    edited June 25 watto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 44
    Embarassing....


    Seriously, what the fuck was that?? Gates seemed so embarrassed. Ballmer was having a ball.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 44
    correctionscorrections Posts: 1,410member
    gatorguy said:

    Fun Fact: Samsung could have had Android for all to themselves in mid-Dec 2004, but they pretty much laughed Rubin and Danger out of the room when they visited Korea to pitch it. No interest, waste of time. By the first week of January 2005 tho it was Google who approached Danger and ultimately purchasing them in February 2005. ...And there went Windows Mobile.

    What makes you think Samsung could have done anything more with Danger's JavaVM OS than it did with Bada or Tizen?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 40 of 44
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,283member
    gatorguy said:

    Fun Fact: Samsung could have had Android for all to themselves in mid-Dec 2004, but they pretty much laughed Rubin and Danger out of the room when they visited Korea to pitch it. No interest, waste of time. By the first week of January 2005 tho it was Google who approached Danger and ultimately purchasing them in February 2005. ...And there went Windows Mobile.

    What makes you think Samsung could have done anything more with Danger's JavaVM OS than it did with Bada or Tizen?
    Ummm... I didn't. In fact I'm implying that had Samsung bought them instead of Google then WinMo would have had a longer life. 
Sign In or Register to comment.