To Ballmer, Grabbing iPad's Market Is 'Job One Urgency' 764
Barence writes "Microsoft's Steve Ballmer has vented his frustration at the success of the iPad and said developing a Windows alternative is 'job one urgency.' 'Apple has done an interesting job of putting together a synthesis and putting a product out, and in which they've... they sold certainly more than I'd like them to sell, let me just be clear about that,' Ballmer told analysts. The Microsoft boss said the company plans to deliver a range of tablet formats in the next year, some based on Intel's next-gen Oak Trail processor. 'It is job one urgency around here. Nobody is sleeping at the switch. And so we are working with those partners, not just to deliver something, but to deliver products that people really want to go buy.'" In Microsoft's vision, slates will run a derivative of Windows 7.
Anger. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Funny)
Shocking news. Microsoft exec upset by the success of a member of the competition that Microsoft cannot buy out
Re:Anger. (Score:4, Interesting)
Can you imagine what it must be like to glance upon a small child delighted with a shiny bauble or piece of candy; and then feel the insane urge to take it? To revel in the misery left in the wake of your theft; jealousy and elation forming an overwhelming melange as you escape the scene?
This is what it feels like to be Steve Ballmer. And it has been a long, long time since he was last able to take a piece of candy from a child.
Re:Anger. (Score:4, Insightful)
Can you imagine what it's like to be a small child, seeing Steve Jobs hold a piece of candy in front of you, to hold it before you and tell you how great its going to be, how it's everything you could possibly want. And then lick his tongue all over it just before giving it to you? This is what it feels like to be someone who reallly wants a nice, tablet form-factor device without a sodding keyboard attached to it, and then find that the only one that is pretty much decent is locked down and made into a device for consuming games and media.
Microsoft are going to make a tablet? About fucking time. I want to take notes on it with a stylus, not wave my fingers over the screen going 'oooo, I can make pictures big'. I want to be able stuff a USB stick in the side of it and put directories of data on it, not sync it to a fucking iTunes program running on an entirely separate computer (because, amongst other things, my Gentoo box really loves running iTunes). The iPad is pricey, pre-licked candy. Until someone else opens a sweetshop and starts selling their own candy, the only way you're getting any is with Steve Job's drool over it. Bring on the rivals, I say.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I would like to be the fourth person to whole-heartedly agree, and the first person to wonder why the hell you aren't modded up higher.
(Seriously, that's the thing that's turned me off from Apple products -- how they'll make it so nice but then leave out so many basic features. Put an mp3 on my music player or a pdf on my smartphone? No, I need their fucking iTunes before I can move a goddamn file. Save a few stills from a video? No, I have to repeatedly navigate through the same lengthy directory sever
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Insightful)
You really do wonders for the research last week that characterised iPad owners as selfish affluent types. :D
Why do you put "essential" in quotes? I determine what I want from a device, not you. If I say I want to be able to manage file transfers and organization on a device before I buy it, then silly comments about why don't I pick up a can of pringles aren't going to make the device something I want.
Your comment about a "cut-rate" device make no logical sense when I'm saying I want the device to have more features. Your comments about business users being a "very small market populated by low-disposable-income types" make even less sense.
And the way you mock people when you suspect they might not have a lot of money doesn't suggest much nice about you.
And for all the relevance it has to a discussion about market requirements for tablet form-factor devices, I'm not eating Pringles, right now. I'm eating a quiche.
Relax a bit. There's room for more than one type of tablet in the world. It's not worth taking these things personally.
Regards,
H.
Re:Anger. (Score:4, Insightful)
Complaining about tone is ad hominem. Address the argument:
Are you willing to pay more money than the cost of an iPad for a device that is bigger, has worse battery life, runs windows and lets you manage your own synchronization?
You can't just whinge that the market isn't serving you.
The truth is, those devices have existed since the ThinkPad and still exist -- and yet you aren't saying you use or still use yours (never mind that the Newton was better by every metric that doesn't include running PhotoShop 3.5).
E.g., I've had one of these for almost 20 years: http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Category:710T [thinkwiki.org]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I've got one of the latest Windows 7 tablet laptops - a Fujitsu T900 with a Wacom digitizer, 4 GB RAM, OneN
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
People have tried most USB keyboards and they work. A mouse doesn't really make sense, but if you wanted to write the driver there shouldn't be anything stopping you. People have also tested a bunch of USB microphones and most work.
I've plugged in a USB stick and it's no problem - gets mounted just like on any other UNIX. Apparently the USB port doesn't put out enough juice to run most hard drives, but they should work just fine if you give them external power.
At the moment MobileTerminal doesn't work on
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Shocking news. Microsoft upset that someone is succeeding by innovating rather than generating bloatware / buying out competition.
Re:Anger. (Score:4, Insightful)
I'll wait as long as I have to to get a proper tablet computer that isn't just a media consumption device. My laptop isn't that heavy.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If inflating an iPod Touch (or iPhone for that matter) to the extent that the device no longer fits in your pocket is innovation, then I guess that's fine.
It is. I can now wear it around my neck, just like Flavor Flav does with his clock.
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Informative)
What are you talking about? Apple is worth more than Microsoft.
Apple: $235.77bn
MSFT: $222.18bn
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Imagine a world in which one of those companies just disappeared tomorrow, tell me which one do you think would have the much more drastic effect on the world...
MSFT. Imagine a world without blue screen of death.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Imagine it? Hell I dream about it every night!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Lol if you honestly think that at the end of the day Apple is worth more than Microsoft
Where does this attitude come from? It's very simple: stock price times shares. If the gp's numbers are from yesterday's closing price, then yes, at the end of the day Apple WAS worth more than Microsoft by simple multiplication. The only 'lol' is that you're trying to make fun of someone who has correctly performed basic math.
Company worth is reflective of their expected near/mid term future income,
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If Windows disappeared, we could still run Win32 programs using WINE. If Office disappeared, we could still use OpenOffice. It wouldn't be as chaotic as you think.
If Apple disappeared, the industry would be a lot more stagnant since they've been at the lead of nearly every trend since the original iMac. But Apple has never been interested in being everywhere. They're interested in being the best in a few areas.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That's largely immaterial to the question "Could Microsoft buy Apple", or "How much are these companies worth". Your point is valid, but the worth of a company (the amount required to "buy it") is its market cap. To "own" either Microsoft or Apple, one must own half or more of the stock (crudely, the type of stock matters, and technically you really only need more than anyone else not half). The value of the outstanding stock is therefore highly relevant to the question "could Microsoft buy Apple" and the
Re:Anger. (Score:4, Informative)
Market caps are almost the same.
They're both around 200 B and change.
http://www.everythingicafe.com/aapl-passes-msft-in-market-cap/2010/05/26/ [everythingicafe.com]
http://247wallst.com/2010/05/27/apple-beats-microsoft-in-market-value-msft-aapl/ [247wallst.com]
http://www.9to5mac.com/AAPL-MSFT-345345332 [9to5mac.com]
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Insightful)
Today AAPL cap is $235 B, MSFT is 221 B, according to Google quotes.
If they only sold a bunch, one can rightfully assume that it's "Apple Fanboys", but they're not selling by the bucket-load, they're selling these things by the millions even if you're scratching your head "why?".
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/06/22/ipad-sales-accelerate/ [cnn.com] iPad sales accelerate, 3 million sold in 80 days or one every 2.3 seconds
When someone is successful, it's useful to think about why they are successful - and sure if they stop doing "whatever they are doing wrong" maybe they will continue or prevent their future failure - or maybe there is something else going on and figuring out the reason can be quite informative. If you just think about the negative, you may never find out the truth. Who is buying it, what are people using it for, what are advantages - and it is a mistake to assume only idiots are buying it. Even if that is the case, remember the adage that you can learn from anyone, even an idiot.
I don't have one. I'm waiting to see what they do with V2.0. I'm thinking "why would I want one?" and I've been surprised that I have found a number of times where it could be useful.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Bullshit (Score:5, Informative)
MS bought a small (150M, I think) as part of a settlement deal, to prevent Apple cleaning their clock in court - MS had been caught ripping off Apple's code and selling it as their own. They later sold all those shares at a profit. From Apple's perspective, by far the larger concession they got from MS was a promise to keep making MS office for 5(?) years as well... They had $2B in the bank when MS bought those shares.
Simon.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"In August 1997, the Company and microsoft Corporation (microsoft) entered into patent cross license and technology agreements. In addition, microsoft purchased 150,000 shares of apple Series A nonvoting convertible preferred stock ("preferred stock") for $150 million. These shares were convertible by microsoft after August 5, 2000, into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price of $8.25 per share. During 2000, 74,250 shares of preferred stock were converted to 9 million shares of the Company's common stock. During 2001, the remaining 75,750 preferred shares were converted into 9.2 million shares of the Company's common stock."
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum9/7140.htm [webmasterworld.com]
Re:Bullshit (Score:4, Interesting)
do you really think that 150 million made a difference to a company that had billions in the bank? That deal was all about cross licencing of pattents and a commitment from MS to make Office for the mac. MS made a lot of money off that stock, which, if I recall correctly, was non-voting stock.
You are off your rocker if you think 150 mil mad the iMac, iPod, iPhone or iPad possible.
Re:Bullshit (Score:4, Informative)
They didn't have "billions" in the bank at the time, and according to the news $150 million kept Apple from going out of business or being bought out.
As I understand it, Apple did have "billions" in the bank at the time. The problem was, though, they were having to spend those billions.
Back in 1997, Apple was going out of business. Everybody knew it. And Nobody wanted to be left holding the bag. Which means that Apple was getting really bad terms on parts. Nobody wanted to ship Apple a million hard drives to make Macintoshes and then have Apple go belly-up and have to stand in line with the other creditors for pennies on the dollar in bankruptcy court. So everyone was demanding lots of money up front for parts.
The 150 million, while paltry, gave the impression that Microsoft was backing Apple. So Apple wouldn't go bankrupt--they'd get bought out by Microsoft. So you could sell stuff to Apple and not worry about getting paid.
I'm a Mac developer and I'd just quit at a company back in 1997. I went away for two weeks to a foreign country so I was pretty far out of the loop. When I got in the plane to return home, I grabbed a copy of the Asian Wall Street Journal. And right there on the front page was a headline that heavily implied that Microsoft had bought Apple for $150 Million. I almost had a heart attack in my airplane seat. As I read the article, it became a bit more clear what had happened. But I wouldn't necessarily trust the newspapers at the time to get the details right.
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Informative)
In 1997, five years after the lawsuit was decided, all lingering infringement questions against Microsoft regarding the Lisa and Macintosh GUI as well as Apple's "QuickTime piracy" lawsuit against Microsoft were settled in direct negotiations. Apple agreed to make Internet Explorer their default browser, to the detriment of Netscape. Microsoft agreed to continue developing Microsoft Office and other software for the Mac over the next five years. Microsoft also purchased $150 million of non-voting Apple stock, helping Apple in its financial struggles at the time. Both parties entered into a patent cross-licensing agreement.
To resolve the QT code infringement lawsuit, as well as the look-n-feel lawsuit, MSFT agreed to give Apple $150M and continue to make Office for the Mac.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The best part of that was the Apple press event where Jobs pulled a Lando and revealed Apple's savior... Bill Gates (via satellite).
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Interesting)
You're complaining that the iPad/iPhone isn't your computer. Well no shit. If that's what you want, then the iPad isn't for you.
If, on the other hand, you want a web tablet with insane battery life that you can watch movies on, listen to music, read ebooks, or browse (part of) the web, an i device might be worth it for you.
World of Warcraft isn't there, but Plants vs Zombies is a pretty nifty experience on the iPad. If 90% of everything is crap, that still leaves thousands of non-crap applications that these things can run.
Basically, I would say it comes down to the form factor and the applications. Either one could be the killer feature that makes the device worth the money. If it didn't require a computer to set it up, it's the device I would be telling my parents to get when they call me and say they want a computer.
Plus, it's only $500 or so. It's a pretty nice piece of technology for that much money. Lots of programmers (including me) love programming and this is a very interesting platform.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Whose version of the tablet PC are you interested in? I'm also interested to see other takes on the tablet. I think HP could do something interesting with WebOS. Android? Maybe. Windows? I'm skeptical.
Re:Anger. (Score:4, Interesting)
Can I develop software using the iPad as a platform? Nope - not easily.
Yes, you can. Maybe not compiled stuff, but writing javascript stuff works, and plenty of nice quick programs I've written through the years were web-based. You can also SSH into your LAMP server or RDP into your IIS server, and use vi/notepad there, but that's sorta like cheating.
Can I play World of Warcraft on an iPad? Nope - not really.
I'll be glad when my friends give up WoW and start Role Playing or playing other computer games again. ^&@$ing money sink
Can I watch a high quality movie on an iPad? I suspect not really.
I suspect you've never even seen one. You can't watch 1080p high Definition movies, but a friend watched three high Quality movies on his plane flight home and still had 50% battery.
So what's left? Telephone calls and texting.
On an iPad? It's not a phone... Me::Fail I didn't check to see if this is copypasta. I'm sure it is now.
That said, I hate iPad and its "this is the new computing" BS to its very core. I just hate lying and misrepresentation more.
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Funny)
Shocking news: Microsoft working on a project very similar to one developed by Apple.
MS: Always imitating, rarely innovating (Score:5, Interesting)
Ballmer seems incapable of directing his company to do anything innovative. It's like he only sees a product category as valid when it's already been defined by someone else.
Apple defined a new category of tablet device with the iPad. Now Ballmer has MS chasing after it madly. But meanwhile, he's killed innovative new products like Courier. Apparently what he wants is to create something that's essentially a clone of whatever Apple's come up with, rather than a genuinely new kind of product.
This has been the Microsoft curse for decades, going back to the creation of Windows as a Macintosh knockoff. Yes, I know Apple didn't invent the GUI concepts used in Macintosh -- but they were the first to successfully make them into a commercial product. And MS wasn't interested until they saw that Apple was doing it.
Re:MS: Always imitating, rarely innovating (Score:5, Interesting)
While sad, it's been a smart business tactic for Microsoft. Let someone else take the risk first and do the legwork, then if it works out, bomb the market with a copy - albeit usually inferior, but often much cheaper. Nearly, if not actually, everything Microsoft has comes to being that way. Sometimes it bombs, most times it succeeds with Microsoft laughing all the way to the bank, even tho their consumers end up often wishing they spent a little extra and bought Apple. Apple is about creating neat and new stuffs. Microsoft is about copying and leeching off anything that appears to be making money in the market. All IMHO, of course.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Insightful)
And if there's anything that Microsoft as a company should be angry about, that's it. Bill Gates stood there ten years ago and told us that tablet PCs were the future of computing, that a significant portion of PCs sold would be tablets within a few years, and Microsoft failed to make it happen. They failed to make tablet computing sufficiently different from a laptop PC experience, and consumers didn't give tablet PCs a second look.
Now Apple has succeeded in a major way at what Microsoft completely failed at, and boy, that must be embarrassing.
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Insightful)
They seriously don't get it. The very statement that it will be running a derivative of Win7 says that they are doomed from the start. Actually, not that Win7 is bad, on the contrary even as a MacFanBoy I like Win7 but it's not the right OS for a tablet platform. They keep trying to shoehorn the same thing to be a one OS meets all. They have no ability to step back and say what does the market need and what is the solution the users needs. All they seem to be able to do is ask "What is the problem and how can we solve it with Windows?". The concept of thinking outside the box simply does not exist in Redmond. Really sad as I'm sure at the worker level there are a ton of very smart, all be it ,very frustrated software engineers.
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you have any idea how many times Microsoft has already launched a "tablet that is more like a PC"?
I've lost count. Probably five times at least, going back to the days of Windows 95 for Pen Computing.
Each and every time, it has failed miserably.
Then Apple make a tablet that is not "more like a PC". And they succeed wildly.
And then you claim that making a tablet like a PC is supposed to be an advantage.
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Funny)
I've lost count. Probably five times at least
You need to work on your counting skills.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
2) 2000 - Bill Gates unveils the "Tablet PC" concept at Comdex.
3) 2003 - Microsoft unveils "Windows XP - Tablet PC edition"
4) 2005 - Microsoft "Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005" is released
5) 2010 - HP Slate demoed at CES.
There are a slew of other examples, but GP said at least 5, so he is in fact correct. Gates had the vision almost 15 years ago that Tablet PC's were going to feature prominently in the future of computing, but Micro
Re:Anger. (Score:5, Interesting)
Pen Computing's offerings were a threat to Microsoft's core cash cow. Microsoft's philosophy back then was to kill anything that threatened the OS. Microsoft finagled their way into Pen's offices under the guise that they wanted to praise Pen if what they were creating was worthy. Pen, being flattered, allowed them to see the product. A few months later Microsoft announced Pen Windows. Everyone that was adopting Windows (the industry was headed that way en masse) directed their attention to Pen Windows. This told them that they shouldn't want to consider any alternatives when the pen concepts were being added to Windows itself. That began the downfall of Pen. It is the only reason Microsoft entered that market.
Re:Anger. (Score:4)
Re:Anger. (Score:4, Insightful)
It is exactly the same thinking that killed DEC, killed DG, killed "enter name", companies that only see a market from the perspective of what they currently manufacture.
Like them or not, contrast the two companies, Apple and Microsoft and where they have come from and what they currently make. Apples main revenue stream did not exist when Apple was formed. Microsoft is still a 2 product company and gets its revenue from the same 2 product lines they started with. They are a "deer in the headlights". They can't think outside of what brings in their current revenue. The concept of killing your own so you can grow into new markets is a totally foreign concept, and IMHO, will kill them in the end if they don't learn to change.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
2 product lines...
Windows
Office
Every thing else they make is either a looser wrt revenue & profit - Xbox, zune, et. al.
or just noise.
Re:Anger. (Score:4, Interesting)
Don't be surprised that there are so many Slashdotters who don't get the iPad. When you look at a feature matrix, the iPad seems lame. No usb port, no flash, no camera, it doesn't run existing programs, integrated battery and multitasking is a joke.
It's hard to fit the qualities that the iPad gets right into the chart. Instant-on is key is a big deal and multi-touch is pretty sweet but the qualitative features are harder to define. I'm talking about how the device feels in your hands or how it responds when you use the touch screen or rotate it. Very subjective qualities. Android does all this stuff, but it just doesn't feel as refined.
We have an iPad in our house and it's just more fun to use than the netbook, laptop, or desktop. Perhaps the novelty will wear off, but for now it's still novel and gets a lot of use.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Right click under computer, then select properties. Click that. Cycle the tabs and select the hardware tab. Hit the radio button for 'all users'. Click on the box for 'environment variables'. Tab to your account in the accounts pop-up and do a double-click. Now select 'touch screens' from the control panel. Do an alt-F7 for DCP. Next, enter your admin password at the fill form. Now pop back to 'properties'. Hit apply but don't close the form yet....
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's actually kind of surprising, usually company execs aren't quite as blatant as that in expressing things like that. In fact, they almost never are. I find it refreshing.
I don't get it. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft, why don't you just write some QUALITY software for the iPad instead of trying to go head on in competition? That way, the more iPads Apple sells, the more software you sell. It's win-win.
But we, the consumers would lose. Without a healthy competition, there is no pressure to lower prices. And, there is no pressure to innovate on the existing iPad for Apple. So, yes, I would love to see many tablets - some with an Apple OS, some with Windows, and some with Android. What could be better than having the choice?
Re:I don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Without a healthy competition, there is no pressure to lower prices.
Healthy competition? What healthy competition? It certainly won't be in the form of Micro-Soft's rush-job tablets.
Re:I don't get it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, god.
I had hopes for the Zune.
See, I thought the response to the iPod was obvious. The Zune would be compatible with the Microsoft-created DRMed music format used by the wide network of then-extant "PlaysForSure" download services. The Zune would come with the ability to play pretty much any non-DRM audio format in existence at the time. The Zune would have a user-replaceable battery and a user-replaceable hard drive. The Zune would have a standardized, fully-documented (both hardware and software), royalty-free accessory interface, to actively encourage third-party add-ons. Zune would be launched in a huge co-marketing deal with Walmart (which ran one of the PlaysForSure download stores). Initial pricing would be 20% off the iPod of equivalent storage, just to drive initial adoption. And, to top it off, Walmart and Microsoft would pay Apple Corps (then in a lawsuit with Apple Computer) a fortune to bring the Beatles to the Walmart music store at the launch.
In short, I thought Microsoft would actually try to beat the iPod by attacking the iPod simultaneously at every point of potential vulnerability. Not just put up a near-clone and hope it sold.
Since then, I've been pretty certain that Microsoft can't do anything but flail in consumer electronics. They're dead in the water. The future is either Apple or Android.
Re:I don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft, why don't you just write some QUALITY software
Because that goes against everything they stand for.
That way, the more iPads Apple sells, the more software you sell. It's win-win.
NO! There is no win-win: the other guy has to lose! They MUST lose! You're not a winner unless someone else is hurting.
Re:I don't get it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Brother, I must say that yes, you dont get it at all.
IT competition is all about control and platform. Microsoft is worried of anything that gets enough market to constitute a viable investment for development firms because if those firms make more money of the ipad/iphone then investing in microsoft develpment platform is less atractive and, given enough time, can even kill or seriously hinder the windows platform income which is way, way, way, way much more than anybody is ever going to get out of any ipad/iphone app.
And thats because, really, nobody can claim any kind of "moral" authority in that world (we foss guys are somehow different): if you ever make an app that makes that kind of money you can bet your ass Apple will kill it by copying it, extending it and including it in their base app set for the ipad.
It has been this way since there has been any kind of competition in personal computing.
Re: (Score:3)
IT competition is all about control and platform. Microsoft is worried of anything that gets enough market to constitute a viable investment for development firms because if those firms make more money of the ipad/iphone then investing in microsoft develpment platform is less atractive and, given enough time, can even kill or seriously hinder the windows platform income which is way, way, way, way much more than anybody is ever going to get out of any ipad/iphone app.
It's all about control. Ultimately, it all leads to money. But I believe it's short-sighted to put money as the immediate motivator.
Control is about being the master of your own fate. There are few surprises when you control the platform. You know the long-term plan because it is your plan. You know when something crops up that may interfere with those plans. You know the alternative plans and the changes in direction before anyone else. You get to choose that change in a way that best benefits you a
Re:I don't get it. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's really something to see how times have changed. 10 years ago the Mac user's lament was that the software options for their computers were too limited and now Microsoft is trying to launch hardware or OSs for new hardware into markets where Apple and Google have the mindshare nearly cornered between iTunes and the Android Marketplace.
This is why Microsoft is becoming the stuff you use at work and Apple is slowly becoming the stuff you use everywhere else.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, Apple would never just invents pretenses on which to reject applications from vendors which are major competitors with Apple in other markets from the App Store. Which is why you can buy the native Google Voice app that Google built for the iPhone in the App Store.
"Forbidden Fruit" Of Vertical Integration (Score:3)
The reason why is that Microsoft has had a taste of vertical integration and they like it. This is what Apple is doing and has perfected so it is no surprise Microsoft thinks they can as well. If Microsoft creates and controls a device, creates and controls a new hardware production, creates and controls the software platform, creates and controls technology specs, and creates and controls the only store users can buy apps then they can make so much more money than just selling software. Using simplified
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because that's going to make far less money in the long run. And the reality is that if Apple wants to see Microsoft (one of their largest competitors) dead, they'd probably just not approve their apps anyways.
With garbage tablet PC's they're going to lose money, not make far less. And the reality is that Microsoft already has some free software out for the iPhone/iPod Touch (Windows Live Messenger, Bing, Tag Reader, Seadragon Mobile). Apple's not going to kill their apps. Having more apps available for the iPad increases it's perceived value to the consumer.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
garbage tablet PC? you mean the ipad? that isn't a tablet pc at all. go on, try to install an arm binary on it and get it to run? how about sync it on a platform without iTunes? play videos, you knowns ones not out of quicktime(again not available on all platforms).. so yes, the iPad is a nice device, but a tablet PC it is not.
*Go ahead mods, i have some karma to burn...
Re:I don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
'Because that's going to make far less money in the long run.'
Is it? Microsoft has already basically conceded that Apple has won this round. As Apple very well knows from the early desktop days, once a competitor has a solid lead in the market share it is very, very difficult to get the market back. It seems like whatever Microsoft's offering for this market is, it's probably never going to be as popular as the iPad.
Software is supposed to be Microsoft's main business, not hardware. Producing quality apps for the iPad as well as for various other portable devices that hopefully *other* people make, but which run Windows, would be their best bet, money wise. I haven't been able to see why, for some time now, Microsoft won't just focus on producing good products in one area (software) rather than producing shitty products in lots of areas.
Re:I don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
As Apple very well knows from the early desktop days, once a competitor has a solid lead in the market share it is very, very difficult to get the market back.
Really? Ask Wordstar, Wordperfect, Lotus 1-2-3, dBaseIII, Netscape, and countless other companies what fat lot of good the early lead did for them?
Re:I don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Excellent list. I'd offer one even more profound example. Apple. The Apple II (combined with VisiCalc) redefined the personal computer from hobbyist novelty to must-have business tool. If anyone has had a front-row seat to how the industry works, it's Apple.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Then why didn't businesses tend to buy Apple IIs?
They did. The Apple II was selling very well as the first business microcomputer. Essentially, it was sold as a VisiCalc machine (one account I read from an early computer shop owner was that people came in to the store wanting to buy that exact setup without knowing what it was they needed to buy). Apple and VisiCalc created a new market and lead that market. But that success also attracted IBM's attention.
Keep in mind the timing here. The Apple II had been in production since 1977. VisiCalc comes ou
Re:I don't get it. (Score:4, Insightful)
To be honest, they're better off buying HTC, or releasing their own version of an Android tablet. They're far less likely to fuck it up if they do that,
I disagree - in my opinion, they'd "Buy HTC" - move all the hardware to Windows mobile, and HTC will just be a memory.
D'oh. (Score:5, Insightful)
Once again, Microsoft is late to the party and Ballmer's pissed. Hey, Steve, your company has never been a trendsetter! Deal with it.
I'm no Apple fan, but a company that can create markets out of thin air for products everyone else assumed would fail has to be doing something right.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is job one urgency around here. Nobody is sleeping at the switch.
Nobody is sleeping at the switch... We just woke up in a panic... !
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Once again, Microsoft is late to the party and Ballmer's pissed.
Except that Microsoft has been developing software for the Tablet PC market since 2001. They incorporated this into the main build of Windows with Service Pack for of Windows XP. Rather than being late, they were too early so that the tablets were too big and heavy.
Also, they assumed that people wanted the full Windows interface, which doesn't lend itself to the less precise controls of pen and finger input. They made that same mistake with Windows Mobile too. Back in the early PDA days, that was the reason
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ballmer is pissed not because Microsoft was late, but that they were never able to capture the user's imagination with their tablet technology. Apple got it right because they were able to see the mistakes that Microsoft made compared to their opposition at the time.
Then he's going to be pissed for a long time to come unless he can do some serious turning of the Microsoft ship.
As a company, Microsoft have had a lot of trouble dropping or substantially re-thinking a concept once they've got it. As soon as you say "general-purpose computer", the concept automatically becomes "with 17" screen, keyboard, mouse, being operated by someone who is competent to deal with more-or-less anything that they system can throw at them, running fairly independently of anyone else". Fr
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
but a company that can convince people they need a product that does the same thing as other gadgets they already own has to be doing something right.
FTFY.
And yes, Slashdot, this is just my opinion. Sorry if it angers you.
If you get modded down for that remark it's because you've stated the obvious, but failed to understand it. "Creating a Market" == "Convincing people they need something" regardless of if they have a different gadget that does the same thing or not, Creating a new market always means you have to convince the customer that they need your new thing, because it's better, different, and uniquely qualified to make the customer happier than if they didn't buy the new thing. What sets Apple apart seems to be that
Quit playing catch up, innovate! (Score:5, Insightful)
The iPad is old news. Wired reported on the existence of the iPad [boingboing.net] way back in 1999. Why wasn't Microsoft working on their iPad-competior way back then? More importantly, why are they trying to play catch up now? Should they not be working on the next big thing?
Re:Quit playing catch up, innovate! (Score:5, Insightful)
More importantly, why are they trying to play catch up now?
They see Apple making monies, they want THOSE monies.
Microsoft is a three year old child.
Good luck with that. (Score:5, Informative)
Did you see their crappy looking Windows tablet mock-up? That's pretty much everything right there. Microsoft has no idea how to make a stable, secure, easy-to-use, attractive product. If it runs standard Windows apps it's just a tiny hard to use PC. If it doesn't then you may as well go with the better made iPad with it's huge lead in apps or even an Android based device. Their only hope is to offer a cheap device for people to dumb to know the difference - it works on the PC.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft will be successful with it just like they were successful with netbooks. They came into the game late with an inferior product, but used their position to push the hardware manufacturers and retailers to sell XP netbooks instead of Linux netbooks.
Re:Good luck with that. (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that a netbook interface is pretty much identical to a normal PCs interface, so Windows works "good enough" and is more familiar to most users. The traditional Windows paradigm does NOT work well in a touch-only, tablet interface. If they insist on using it, they will fail. It doesn't matter how much money they throw at it... look at the Zune.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
KANT -
Kinda like Apple's New Technology
That sounds like a TUNA
noT
qUite
aN
Acronym
I don't want... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft's penis envy is lame, old, and disingenuous to its share holders. Grabbing the iPad's market share is job one... pheh. Here's Apple buzz "I wonder what Jobs will do next?" Here's Microsoft's: "I wonder what Ballmer's excuse will be this time?" Rather than chasing after Apple, RIM, Adobe, ..
Message to Ballmer: Try some of that. Do. Execute. Create. I N N O V A T E. Stop being lame. Ya big tard.
And yet (Score:5, Insightful)
They killed the genuinely interesting-looking Courier before it ever got anywhere near production.
Can't think why the vultures are circling over Ballmer, can you?
Re:And yet (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:And yet (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing about Courier is that nobody ever saw it actually working: they just saw tech demos. In the tech demos, the stylus handwriting recognition was always perfect. Considering that we never once saw an on-screen keyboard in the demos, it appears that the handwriting recognition portion of the formula was crucial to the concept. What do you want to bet that it wasn't nearly as good as it was supposed to be? Can you say Newton? "Eat up Martha?"
There was one other thing that made me think that perhaps it was less realistic than it first appeared: Battery life vs. weight. With both of those screens going all the time, that's two separate backlights sucking power. Either the weight would have to be a lot heavier than the iPad's (which is already heavier than I would like), or the battery life would be much worse.
Remember: Lies, Damn lies, Statistics, and Tech Demos.
Playing catchup (Score:5, Insightful)
This seems to be another "Johny come lately" attempt by Microsoft to catch up to Apple and Google. "Innovation" may be a big catchword these days by the large companies, but by making a competing project "job one urgency", it just underscore the fact that Microsoft is just trying to play a me-too game.
I don't mind if Microsoft does well or not, but why do they actively choose not to actually innovate? Do they not understand that the success of search engines, phones, tablets, and everything else that they've been late to the market on is because...well, because they're late to the market.
I simply don't understand why Microsoft doesn't get it. Innovating requires *new* ideas. Otherwise, they might as well be another Chinese second rate copy.
Re:Playing catchup (Score:5, Insightful)
From an iPad owner (Score:5, Insightful)
I own an iPad. It's nice for what it is, a media consumption device.
What amazes me though is the time it's taking for viable alternatives. It wasn't in any way a surprise that Apple launched this. It wasn't a surprise that this would be a new market segment - netbooks had already shown demand for lower cost highly portable computing devices.
I purchased the iPad for a specific function and it does its job well. However, I can see plenty of areas it could be improved. We're still waiting on multi-tasking. It has no camera a gaping hole in what would otherwise be a great device for grandparents to use for web/email and skype). No flash does limit some sites, and Safari is just okay, certainly not a great browser - you have to pay to get a browser that supports tabs!
The email client seems cumbersome, and from a business user perspective, Microsoft could really make a killing from a similar form factor but with outlook. Outlook is, after all, still king in the corporate world.
The competition needs to get in gear before the iPad becomes as entrenched as the iPod.
Asleep at the Switch (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft has been asleep at the switch for a long long time.
They chase every new product Apple comes out with, instead of actually innovating and putting a product out there that customers want. Sure, they do quite well in the operating system and Microsoft Office world, but outside that they do very little of any worth. The Xbox is only now profitable, and will probably never recoup the original costs.
Ballmer wants to chase the sexy gadgets that Apple is putting out, but Microsoft's operating system is not sexy.
Granted, there is a serious threat here, Microsoft has almost completely missed he mobile market both with phones and tablets. The irony being that Microsoft has already come out with a tablet operating system that has barely seen adoption, and the mobile OS market will only continue to grow.
So, will Microsoft come out with a tablet that "people will really want to go and buy"? Maybe - if they licence the iPad 2.0
Microsoft has become too bulky for meaningful development. Infighting between departments is crippling the ability for Microsoft to actually innovate. They will be relevant in the OS and Office Space for some time to come, but so far, Ballmer has not carved out that "third" tier of highly profitable business that he promised he would when he took the position.
Bill Gates (Score:5, Informative)
Bill was into tablets for years
http://www.google.com/images?q=Bill+Gates+tablet [google.com]
Just do the opposite. (Score:5, Funny)
In Microsoft's vision, slates will run a derivative of Windows 7.
Apple just put out something that is so well integrated and Microsoft decides to start with a derivative? OMG! Calculus MS101 fighting Calculus MS102! Is it normal or am I talking at a tangent here?
Ballmer Kong (Score:4, Funny)
http://pixelatedgeek.com/2009/09/steve-ballmer-as-dk/ [pixelatedgeek.com]
I really want someone to make a Donkey Kong rom hack with chairs instead of barrels and Ballmer instead of DK.
Ballmer's phrasing is telling (Score:5, Insightful)
>they sold certainly more than I'd like them to sell
Not "we'd like to sell more", not "we'd like to supply their software and participate in their success like we did with AppleSoft Basic and Mac Office".
This is competitiveness in its pathological form, where the point isn't to win but instead to make sure others lose.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That's because "$DEVICE running a modified version of Windows" is the only thing Microsoft understands - even when it makes no sense whatsoever.
Steve Ballmer - Life and Death (Score:5, Interesting)
This is pretty much it for Steve Ballmer. They are playing a catch-up game with Apple (and others). They have had so many things just fizzle while he's been at the helm. Vista, Zune, Mobile, "Slates". It's obvious he's a business guy and not the forward thinking visionary the company needs. There's been a lot of Wallstreet chatter that Steve Ballmer's time to turn things around is very short.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Innovation (Score:5, Interesting)
It really is a shame because I'm sure, if their braintrust was let loose to create without the petty corporate politics getting in the way, they could probably make some really cool shit but, until their corporate culture is slaughtered and replaced with a new one (in other words, Ballmer is replaced...), they seem intent on remaining a me-too company.
Re:Innovation (Score:5, Interesting)
seriously, could they have not done it themselves, years ago?
Seriously: No. Microsoft can't make something like an iPad because it goes against their way of life. They are trying to make products that will deliver what their corporate allies want, not what consumers want, and that's why they can make a Zune to squirt things at you but they can't make an iPhone.
Apple fights its corporate partners to give its users the DRM-less files they want, Mircrosoft fights its users to give its corporate partners the "this file will autodestruct" DRM they want. It's an antithetic mindset.
Re:Innovation (Score:4, Interesting)
That's interesting, because I've been talking this idea up forever. Taking over full support of the Mono platform would ingrain .NET development into so many platforms that MS would have a massive link between developer culture, operational congruency, good will, and several other perceptions that I cannot imagine a good reason for keeping .NET a MS-only platform. Just bad reasons, like manager stubbornness, ROI-only-based accounting, and hubris.
Ironically, I remember when .NET was first released, competing with Java for a run-on-everything multi-language framework. It's now a painful reminder that MS cannot seem to shed their chains of pride and interact with the rest of the larger computing market.
For example, even their web proposal (IE/Silverlight) cannot compete with the likes of Chrome, where Google doesn't care what platform it runs on, just that they're a presence in the space. IE on anything but Windows? I doubt it, and this means it'll simply be a corporate layer or noob-home-user default, like today.
Instead of integrating and offering ideas to available platforms, MS buys/builds their own space and competes in it, then wonders why it's so damn expensive to start such ideas (Xbox, for example).
Way way too late Ballmer (Score:3, Interesting)
Way way too late Ballmer... Hint: for Microsoft to succeed in the new iPad space the wow factor needs to be so much higher to make an impact on the already infatuated crowd. Any investor and board member should just kick him out. Ballmer is not on top of things and will NEVER... I repeat NEVER be on top of things. Even Gates wasn't fully on top of things BUT he was at least in the same ballpark.
Re:Way way too late Ballmer (Score:4, Insightful)
Even Gates wasn't fully on top of things BUT he was at least in the same ballpark.
Note that MS under Gates' watch had successful (and ruthless) business practices to make sure that MS made heaping tons of money, even without being a major market innovator. It was often easier to let others innovate, then use a combination of financial might, second-mover advantage, and sometimes a bit 'o market leverage to move in and take over.
I'm frankly a bit shocked at how much this news item echoes Ballmer's earlier pathetic whinging about iPod and then iPhone. It's unacceptable that a major corporate CEO should sound like such a broken record when the message being repeated is "failure!"
Urgency is not the answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Urgency is not going to produce a quality product. According to Jobs the iPad was in development before the iPhone, they have been waiting for technology to catch up the the design. They have spent serious time and money on both hardware and software design.
You don't turn around and make a high quality product in 6 months, sure you might already have the core of the OS ready to go, but to develop the UI and the applications and come up with a consistent user experience takes time and effort, lots of it. If MS rushes to release a tablet in 6 months it will not be good. It will not likely even be good enough. Sure the people who want to be different might buy it, much like they bought the zune, but making a quality, easy to use product does not happen overnight.
My professional career has been spent creating high end, end user software with a specialization in user interface design and development. Most developers consider this to be something that gets tacked on at the end but it is not and the iPad (and any competitor to the iPad) is more about the UI than anything else and trust me, the UI matters more to most users than just about anything else.
staring him in the face (Score:5, Insightful)
"In Microsoft's vision, slates will run a derivative of Windows 7."
and therein lies the problem.
Re:I hate unoriginal people like Ballmer (Score:5, Insightful)
MS has not recently issued an new product. It's always me too.
Replace "recently" with "ever" and your sentence is fixed.
Well, there is that. (Score:4, Interesting)
But that's what Microsoft doesn't want. The thought process hangs up there.
Have you ever had much interaction with two-year-olds?