Microsoft's "New Coke" Moment? 786
theodp writes "Remember New Coke? Twenty-eight years ago, Coca-Cola replaced the secret formula of its flagship brand, only to announce the return of the "classic" formula just 79 days later. Had it launched in 2013, Coke's Jay Moye suspects a social media backlash would have prompted it to reverse itself even sooner. In a timely follow-up, ZDNet's Steven Vaughan-Nichols points out that Microsoft is facing its own New Coke moment with Windows 8. 'Does Ballmer have the guts to admit he made a mistake and give users what they clearly want?' Vaughan-Nichols asks. 'While it's too late for Windows 8, Blue might give us back our Start button and an Aero-like interface. We don't know.'"
It's like deja vu all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
Seems like Microsoft already had their 'New Coke' moment with Vista.
Two failures in three OS launches is going to be a lot more difficult for the shareholders to get over.
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
Many of Microsoft's 'failures' are the result of doing something new. And then when the 'improved' version comes out, it can be quite a hit.
Vista - flop
Vista SE (Win 7) - big success
Office 2007 - somewhat of a flop due to criticism of the Ribbon
Office 2010 - not a whole lot different from 2007, but a lot more popular now that people are familiar with the Ribbon
Windows 8 - Works pretty good, but people bitch about the UI
Windows 8 SE (Blue?) - Hey, Metro apps are cool now. Maybe.
Of course, they have done it backwards...
Windows 98 SE - pretty good
Windows 98 SE 2 (Win Me) - "Hey, people will forget about this once Vista comes out"
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
Office 2010 - not a whole lot different from 2007, but a lot more popular now that people are familiar with the Ribbon
I'm sorry, but no. Just because people are complaining vocally anymore about something originally done five years ago and another screw-up that took place three years ago doesn't mean things are ok now.
I got use to the ribbon, but I still hate it and it is still way less productive than the file menu. I switched to LibreOffice for all my home stuff, and later switched to Ubuntu, because of the ribbon and how badly MS Vista was. I only use MS office when I have to deal with work stuff. One of the small differences between 2007 and 2010 was the replacement of the circular windows button with the green "file" tab, making it closer to the older style file menu and slightly more usable, it still sucks donkey nuts. It takes way too long to load, options are literally hidden in the interface, sometimes not in the main interface at all and are unintuitive when they are there.
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
Office 2010 - not a whole lot different from 2007, but a lot more popular now that people are familiar with the Ribbon
I'm sorry, but no. Just because people are complaining vocally anymore about something originally done five years ago and another screw-up that took place three years ago doesn't mean things are ok now. I got use to the ribbon, but I still hate it and it is still way less productive than the file menu.
Where are mod points when I want them? People lost the choice as it was use 2003 software or use the ribbon. Businesses eventually migrate as support and features in 2003 got dropped.
Productivity wise, 2003 file menus >>>>>> ribbon.
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
I got use to the ribbon, but I still hate it and it is still way less productive than the file menu.
Ditto. Like most other people I'm unsettled by relearning an environment but usually adapt rather well after a short amount of time. However I still hate the ribbon. It is not intuitive or useful and as many have pointed out, it robs you of space in the direction you need it most.
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:4, Insightful)
The ribbon sucks. Having to hunt for things that change depending on "context" sucks. The program is guessing what I need, and getting it mostly wrong. It sucks. It doesn't make any sense to me because when I expect one thing, I see another. And talk abouit UI clutter, much of the ribbon space is useless and doesn't enhance productivity at all. At least, not for me.
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
How much more of a change can you get than going from Windows to Linux or MS office to LibreOffice.
I'm an early adopter and will switch to the latest and greatest with every sip of coffee. I'm quite happy to buy into new tech and things that are better because of changes, but not when the changes are purely because a large organization decided that's just the way it's going to be with no otherwise good reason.
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:4, Insightful)
YES!! I AM AVERSE TO CHANGE! Wanna know why? Because computers and software are not shoes. They're tools. If I wanted my tools to change, then I would be very accepting of not being able to find the handle on my new crescent wrench or how to use my new swingless nail driver (hammer).
I want my hardware and software to work day in and day out in the familiar comfortable way I am used to with improvements to those specific patterns. I want it to be predictable and reliable. Gradual, well-planned and NEEDED change is good. Change for the sake of change is not, and I think that's what we have way too much of today.
Save the change for hairdos and wardrobes.
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows may be salvagable, but not Metro. Microsoft would be wise to gas it now.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
Erh... the search function worked better in XP, actually. That's something I don't get with MS, why do they REMOVE features users enjoy about their system (like,say, search) and ADD features that drive you nuts (like, say, redesigning the friggin' interface to make my desktop look like an oversized tablet PC).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
bullshit... search in windows vista, 7, and 8 are total crap.
You can only find 'microsoft approved' files and types. Quick... go into your windows. find *.log and *.bak within the last 30 days only... yeah. you can't. How about all files that changed in the last 3 days.. not just media files... ALL files.. yeah.. can't do that either.
And it's fucking slow too. On top of needing indexing running all the time which is itself fucking slow too.
search worked much much MUCH better in 2k and xp.
th
Re:It's like deja vu all over again (Score:5, Interesting)
bullshit... search in windows vista, 7, and 8 are total crap.
You can only find 'microsoft approved' files and types. Quick... go into your windows. find *.log and *.bak within the last 30 days only... yeah. you can't. How about all files that changed in the last 3 days.. not just media files... ALL files.. yeah.. can't do that either.
And it's fucking slow too. On top of needing indexing running all the time which is itself fucking slow too.
search worked much much MUCH better in 2k and xp.
they fucked it up. as a result i simply removed the entire search and indexing system from windows 7. and used a plain ol freeware version for my finding files needs.
Yet another core component of windows... i have replaced with a FREE and much better alterantive... One of these days i'll have nothing left of 'windows' but the core... and thats the time to switch totally to nix or android.
Windows+F .log hit enter (autofills in type:=.log)
click Type filter
type
click Date
drag select April 1 to May 1 (autofills date:=3/1/2013...5/1/2013)
click search
Done.
methinks mr AC has never acutally used search on windows 7.
andindexing runs fine on my 6 year old pc.
maybe its time for you to upgrade there, Anonymous Rex.
"You're holding it wrong" (Score:5, Insightful)
Rarely ever will a CEO admit a mistake. It's the user's fault for not loving it.
Re:"You're holding it wrong" (Score:5, Insightful)
With most large companies, it's up to the Board to admit the CEO made a mistake. Usually with a severance package that your entire family couldn't earn in their collective lifetimes.
Re:"You're holding it wrong" (Score:4, Interesting)
Rarely ever will a CEO admit a mistake. It's the user's fault for not loving it.
And don't forget, they're on record blaming the OEMs for not making enough touchscreen devices. According to MS, it's all their fault. Like 100%.
New Coke was a Flop? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'll debate that while New Coke didn't work out, the aftermath resulted in Coke classic dominating the cola wars with a solid lead for decades now.
If it wasn't for new Coke, Pepsi would have overtaken Coke in the mid 80's and never looked back.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No, New Coke and then the switch to "Classic Coke" concealded the real changes from using sugar to using corn syrup as a sweetener. Classic Coke was *not* identical to the old Coke formula, it was considerably cheaper to make because of that switch to corn syrup.
We might see something similar with the taskbar, where they re-organize the taskbar in Microsoft's classic non-backwards-compatible ways but conceal them behind the restoration of any taskbar whatsoever.
Re:New Coke was a Flop? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, New Coke and then the switch to "Classic Coke" concealded the real changes from using sugar to using corn syrup as a sweetener. Classic Coke was *not* identical to the old Coke formula, it was considerably cheaper to make because of that switch to corn syrup.
We might see something similar with the taskbar, where they re-organize the taskbar in Microsoft's classic non-backwards-compatible ways but conceal them behind the restoration of any taskbar whatsoever.
it's not the metro ui they want. it's the software marketplace that they want. that's the whole business case for windows8 from microsofts view. they had to create a new ui so they could force developers to submit to paying a real ms tax of thirty percent.. well, they didn't have to do that but the backlash is less.
just imagine the execs eyeing getting thirty percent from every CS installation. thirty percent from every autocad installation.
Re:New Coke was a Flop? (Score:5, Informative)
The corn syrup thing is just a myth [snopes.com]. They switched from sugar to corn syrup five years before the introduction of New Coke.
Re:New Coke was a Flop? (Score:4, Informative)
They switched from sugar to corn syrup five years before the introduction of New Coke.
So, that's not what the link says. It says:
The relevant question, which Snopes dodges, is "was all Coca Cola Classic manufactured using 100% HFCS when it was reintroduced"?
An alternate way to disprove the assertion would be to show that all bottlers were using 100% HFCS six months prior to the introduction of New Coke. But Snopes's carefully chosen words suggest that wasn't the case.
Re: (Score:3)
An alternate way to disprove the assertion would be to show that all bottlers were using 100% HFCS six months prior to the introduction of New Coke. But Snopes's carefully chosen words suggest that wasn't the case.
I think it is much more likely that Snopes just does not know how widespread HFCS was and instead of straight out admitting they don't know, the person responsible for that particular article thought it better to "save face" by wording around the important questions. That still doesn't reflect any better on the Snopes editors, but it means you can't really draw any conclusions one way or the other.
Re:New Coke was a Flop? (Score:4, Insightful)
Spoken like a true american that has never tried a non-hfcs beverage outside of their border...
Re: (Score:3)
the taste was no different. Neither are the health consequences
You really need to read up on the rate-limiting effects of sucrase in the small intestine and how that affects the liver's fructose-processing capabilities and what happens when the liver gets fructose faster than it can handle.
people who want to believe that sugar itself isn't deadly
Sugar is very bad, HFCS is worse.
Re:New Coke was a Flop? (Score:4, Informative)
And you really need to read up on how sucrose is what we call a disaccharide composed of equal parts glucose and fructose
And how does the glycosidic bond get hydrated? You're talking about component monosaccharides, I'm talking about metabolic processing rates. Rates, rates, rates (just to be clear). The liver does not have the capacity to process an infinite amount of fructose - it's rate limited. Intestinal sucrase production rates balances the liver's processing rate.
One must consider the whole system, not just tally a simple molecular inventory.
Re:New Coke was a Flop? (Score:5, Informative)
"How Stuff Works" isn't the best reference for recent metabolic research. Try Pubmed.
A small amount of sucrose is broken down by stomach acid and absorbed into the bloodstream, so you'll feel that quickly (but glucose is the preferred sugar for diabetics who need a quick shot of sugar, because it does not need to be metabolized first, ignoring the 5-6 fructose conversion).
The majority of sucrose is metabolized by the sucrase produced at the microvilli of the small intestine.
HFCS is like consuming pre-digested sucrose. The fructose and glucose are both absorbed fully and quickly and the liver gets easily overwhelmed by the fructose. There are studies where they do side-by-side comparisons of the two and measure the triglyceride levels in the blood shortly after - it's a stark difference. Check out the research.
Re:New Coke was a Flop? (Score:4, Informative)
.
The above was from memory. This 7-page How Stuff Works article [howstuffworks.com] is from the first hit of a google search of "HFCS vs sugar".
Microsoft doesn't care about PC anymore (Score:5, Interesting)
What these critics all miss is that Microsoft is now betting on the tablet market, and doesn't give a damn what its PC users think.
Re:Microsoft doesn't care about PC anymore (Score:5, Interesting)
If that's really how they're thinking, they're dead and don't realize it yet.
Windows on the PC is known by just about everybody. Microsoft's tablet offerings are not. If people hate what Microsoft is offering them in Windows 8, why would they ever seriously consider buying Microsoft in the tablet market?
People don't have a lot of choice in the PC market, but MIcrosoft is a nobody in tablets. If your experience with the last MIcrosoft thing you used sucked, why would you go with them in a market where they're nobody when you could just get a known commodity in either Apple or Android tablets?
Microsoft needs to leverage their PC users to grow their tablet base, not beat them and hope they come back for more. That is not going to fly.
Original Taste (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
It's not that much of a backtrack (Score:3)
They don't need to backtrack very much. Add a button during initial user setup that lets you enable boot to desktop if you want it. When that's on, boot to desktop and show a start button. At a bare minimum that button could just bring up the Metro Start Screen, which as long as it had a clear way to close it (like an X at the top right when on a PC) would mollify a lot of the complaining.
Bringing back the full start menu would solve more of it, but I'm not convinced that's entirely necessary. In my experience most users actually start programs by clicking icons on the desktop and don't use the start menu much at all anyway. What they really need is just a more familiar way to do what they need to do.
For the more serious people that really want a full start menu back, there's stuff like Start8.
The only version I've ever seen where... (Score:5, Interesting)
This is not hard (Score:3)
To The Cloud city! (Score:5, Funny)
"I am altering the OS, pray I don't alter it any further."
— Darth Ballmer.
Windows 8 User Here (Score:5, Interesting)
I have to admit, it works wonderfully. The system definitely performs better and the interface on Windows 8 is nice.
Here comes the obvious: Metro is pretty shit.
The full screen apps are useless and the main interface has no appeal. You know what my biggest problem is? The thing that bothers me the most? When I search for a program, there is no default "Show All". First it only shows programs installed, and then "Settings". Often I'm using it to find windows components like Device Manager, and it requires additional mouse clicks and movements to get there. Likewise on a tablet, it would require more touches. It's the simplest, most obvious thing, and if they overlook little things like this I don't have much hope for the rest of Metro.
The OS itself it pretty nice though.
Microsoft Never Really Knew What They Were Doing (Score:5, Insightful)
This industry can turn on you in an instant (Well a decade-long instant, you really have to not be paying attention.) Look at Sun, no one ever thought anything would take them down. A decade before Sun went under, I attended a Linux con in Denver and had some SGI rep try to convince me that his company was crapping daisies and unicorns. I asked him point blank why I should buy a storage solution from him when I knew for a fact that IBM would be here two decades from now. He then tried to blow some marking smoke up my ass, but their company sank shortly thereafter. I started seeing the same writing on the wall for Sun later on, and they were gone a couple years later. I really feel like these guys believed their marketing and thought nothing could take them down. Well these days Microsoft's competitors are VERY quick on their feet and can take over emerging markets before Microsoft's lumbering behemoth even realizes there's something to take over. So they're coming in against already-established and VERY popular players. So unless Microsoft loses the complacency and learns how to compete in this new era, the gutted remains of their company will join Sun and all the others in the "Also-Ran" bin of history. This is not an anti-Microsoft rant. This is a warning.
My guess is the future will be pretty robust competition between an Android-based Google OS and OSX. Though I'm still not sure about Apple without Steve Jobs' vision to keep them rolling. Plus, once they exhaust the world's supply of brushed aluminum, things will get difficult for them, too.
There's already 3rd party fixes (Score:4, Informative)
Re:New Coke? (Score:5, Insightful)
Bob
Me
Vista
Clippy
Zune
Re:New Coke? (Score:5, Funny)
^^ It's more of a company tradition.
Re:New Coke? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: New Coke? (Score:5, Informative)
The problem with Zune wasn't that it was a bad product. When it was released it was probably the best MP3 player if you ignore the ugly brown color.
The Zune was not a success for multiple reasons. First of all was MS execution. MS really botched the marketing and advertising on it. MS thought that being obscure and mysterious would make them seem cool. MS just doesn't know cool. Looking at the commercials for the Zune you had no idea it was a music player from MS. It could have been gum.
Contrast this with the first iPhone commercials. They were 30 second demos and actually very minimalist. Each of them covered the basic information the consumer would want to know: What is it? (A new smartphone). Who makes it? (Apple) Where do I get it (Apple or AT&T stores). How does it work? (A simple hand using fingers is used to operate it).
The other issue with the Zune was that the main feature, squirting was so crippled by DRM that it was not a feature. Without it, Zunes had a very power hungry alternative to syncing with a cable. Later Zunes even omitted squirting as a featire.
Mostly the main issue with the Zune was it was designed to beat Apple's last generation iPod not the next generation. When Apple released the iPod Touch, it was game over for the Zune. Unlike the Zune, the Touch had the interface/design to be a portable computing device. Wireless wasn't a useless feature as users could surf or email with OOTB applications. It also had a strong 3rd party app ecosystem which Zune never had.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Microsoft can survive more than two bombs in a row, and they really do have the cash to do it. However, I don't think there will be another bomb. Windows 7 was a decent recovery from the Vista debacle.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:New Coke? (Score:5, Funny)
I... I don't really know how trains work, but I'm refusing to admit I've made a mistake with this metaphor. Which I feel is probably a better metaphor for the MS situation.
Re:New Coke? (Score:4, Interesting)
Except netbooks. Which, in a way, is another solid example of Microsoft losing their their shit. Having to keep XP "alive" for a few extra years maybe did a bit to hobble Vista growth.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: New Coke? (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:New Coke? (Score:4, Insightful)
They didn't own them, but they sure as hell talked to them before Vista was released. If the drivers weren't ready, the OS shouldn't be considered ready either.
is it Ubunutu's/Red Hat's/Gentoo's/Debian's/etc... fault that nVidia's/AMD's/Creative's/etc... drivers are garbage on Linux?
If they have the market power & control over vendors like Microsoft did, then yes.
Re:New Poke (Score:5, Insightful)
It doesn't suck because of a lack of an Aero like interface
The Metro interface doesn't suck
Windows 8 sucks because it flips between the classic and the metro interface seemingly at random. Yes, we computer folks know that it depends on whether the program has been written as a metro program or a classic one, but from the start screen there is no way to tell what interface you'll end up in when you click on a program. And I'm pretty sure that consistency is one of the central tenets of good UI design.
Re:New Poke (Score:5, Interesting)
The whole point of the Metro interface is to be inconsistent with the old UI.
How else can you charge developers for writing an application they could have just as easily have written using the old interface for free?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:New Poke (Score:5, Interesting)
Windows 8 sucks at every single level. Even the Metro interface, while the design is interesting and unique, ultimately isn't all that use friendly. Very few applications have actually done something useful with live tiles, and the whole pastel colour thing goes to hell when other apps choose to make multi colour logos instead of the style Microsoft uses. Install a few apps and the whole metro screen looks dreadful and unwieldy and unusable. It's like Android widgets, clever idea but I haven't seen anything beyond weather widgets that you would really want on your home screen. And it's now so quick and simple to get to much used apps or Google Now, and sharing is so easy in Android, widgets seem pretty superfluous except as shortcuts to apps.
That is on top of the other issues. The one reason I haven't switched to Macs until now is that the easy familiarity and efficiency with using Windows will take some time to learn on a Mac. Windows 8 kills that argument, a few minutes with it and I realize if I am learning something new I might as well move to Mac. And maybe if Windows 8 followed Vista we would be more open to it. The problem is Windows 7 is so amazingly good at staying out of the way and letting you get things done, it makes Win 8 even more jarring.
Windows 8 is also being pushed out on the same cheap laptops with low res screens and awful touchpads, where a gesture based interface is no fun to use. I got one for my mother, and I regret not just getting a chromebook. As soon as Google get proper offline editing of MSOffice files, chrome will become a better option for so many people.
Re:New Poke (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:New Poke (Score:5, Insightful)
It took me 15 minutes to figure out how to shut down my computer in Window 8. Windows 7, you press the windows button and there's a shut down option.
Re:New Poke (Score:5, Interesting)
It took me 15 minutes to figure out how to shut down my computer in Window 8. Windows 7, you press the windows button and there's a shut down option.
And, as I've posted previously, there's a good chance you didn't really shut down the computer - instead you just logged out and hibernated. (Which is what "shutdown" does now.)
Actually shutting down the computer all the way involves a hidden setting somewhere in the power options - you have to "change what the power buttons do" and then uncheck "fast startup." Only then will shutting down the computer allow you to do a clean boot at a later point in time.
As an additional exercise, figure out how to log out. Remember how it always used to be an option in the shutdown menu? It's not any more.
The answer: turns out your account name on the start screen can be clicked on. I never noticed it was even there until it was pointed out to me, because my use of the Windows 8 start menu was almost exclusively "press start key, type search terms" - which makes the username vanish.
Mod Parent up (Score:3)
Quote: "Windows 8 sucks because it flips between the classic and the metro interface seemingly at random"
Exactly. Metro on a phone is not bad at all. I KNOW I don't know, so I'm OK with exploring the interface. But Win 8 gives me a lot of "WTF - when did $X go?" Is it in the metro interface, or in a new location in Control Panel, or was it dropped, or...."
Re:New Poke (Score:5, Interesting)
Metro would be ok as a concept at least if it was a Windows component you could choose to install.
Look at Windows Media Centre for example - outside of a media PC there will be many Vista and 7 owners who never use it, and aren't affected by it even being installed. There are others, such as myself, who use WMC daily in the lounge, on a PC that is sat inside a AV cabinet operated by a remote control.
This is critical to understanding why Metro is such a failure. People with desktop computers will likely be sitting some distance from their monitor, and it would be uncomfortable in most cases for them to operate its touchscreen when it sits vertical on the desk. Notwithstanding that usability issue I would assume that it is still the case today that the vast majority of Vista/7 users do not have touchscreens, and in my experience Metro is pretty underwhelming without one. The use of a touchscreen is antithetical to using a desktop computer for the most part, yet MS seemed to think that the transition would be fluid and that the marketplace was just crying out for someone to fill this void.
This would all be just a misstep if it were possible to get to the main Windows desktop and stay there and retain all of the functionality you had in Windows 7 (Start button, etc). Instead Metro apps and utilities drop you to the old desktop seemingly on a whim and without warning, which is quite jarring, and you can't even really choose to stay there if you wanted to with ease (at least not without third party utilities to help you recreate the old UX). It is quite a shock to drop from Metro to the old desktop, the UX is completely different - which is fine for a seasoned user but is it really the experience MS wanted people to have?
That W8 drops you to desktop with a totally different UI smacks of MS really not having a clear direction or dedication to Metro, which is something you can't really say of Apple for example. Apple are notorious for having a walled garden approach to their software, and the OSX UX is very much "they'll take what we give them", but Apples customer base is used to that UX, they are familiar with it, and it is not change for changes sake.
Metro would've imo made a great Windows component in the same vein as Windows Media Centre - something you can choose to install or even boot to IF you want to, as it is it's an affront.
Re:New Poke (Score:5, Informative)
Re:New Poke (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is the trend of being cool because you can complain has left . Can't find the start button? Yes it's damn annoying I agree, but New Coke sucked all around. Windows 8 isn't all about a single button. A keyboard you aren't used to will ruin your life much more miserably, but do you call Dell and tell them the computer should go in the garbage? It's time people got used to this mess. Yes as a hardcore 24 hours a day user it is definitely a mess and why we can't get to the shutdown or log off screen with a click is frustrating. You are not going to sell businesses on this model the way it is right now. But it is not going to make anyone go out and change their life. Let the insane and moaners do whatever makes them feel better. I will donate a leper to your cause.
You don't seem to get it. Microsoft is a business that is attempting to sell a rather expensive (~$100 and up) product to consumers. If you want to sell your product, you have to listen to what your customers want. You can't just brush off their complaints by saying that they will eventually get used to it. Well, you can, but you'll lose a ton of business that way, and shareholders will start to get unhappy.
It may be an exaggeration to say that "the customer is always right" – sometimes individual customers really are unreasonable – but if thousands of customers are telling you the same thing, then you should damn well listen.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Funny)
Here's your cheque.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
I switched to OSX about a year ago, and while it has its shiny moments, it also has lots of blunders and I wouldn't really say that it's a better desktop than Windows 7. Besides, calling "standard desktop OS" something that has ~10% market share is ... funny.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem with the "LOW MARKET SHARE!!1!!" comments is that you're talking about a company having a 10% of a market worth billions of dollars. I will take 10% of a billion dollars any day of the week.
Apple *is* getting converts in key sectors and if Microsoft continues to blunder and do whatever the fuck they want they will get more. Microsoft won't go anywhere - there are too many Microsoft zombies in upper management - but to roll out the "low market share" argument is absurd here when Apple has more cash on hand than the federal government.
Apple priced itself out of the market (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple *is* getting converts in key sectors
No its not...and it won't Apple will never be a serious contender for the Desktop, it simply costs too much. Sales dropped 22% last quarter...and shrunk a more manageable 2% this, but any pretence of world domination, or mass exodus to Apple simply aren't happening.
The reality is Apple could buy Dell (about 22 times), or they could License their OS, but if anything they have got used to relying on Microsoft being so awful..they get to roll around on wads of cash...and even though the salesman is dead, Cooky seems indent on second guessing what a dead man will do.
I love the idea of Apple going for Microsofts throat, but they Love the incredibly profitable Duopoly. It looks like companies are putting bets on Android...and Linux is sneaking market share.
Re:Apple priced itself out of the market (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:2013 the year of the Apple Desktop (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I see a lot of people talking about how much cash Apple has on hand these days. You know what? Microsoft had that much in their "war chest" about 10 years ago. Now where are they? Apple better USE that money to DO something game changing, or they're going to become a shell of their former selves, just like Microsoft has. Licensing their OS might be exactly what they need to do to take over the world. Let the market proliferate with cheap Apple knockoffs driven by 3rd-party peripherals. It's what allowed Win
Re:Apple priced itself out of the market (Score:4, Insightful)
uh, what?
desktop and tablet/smartphone are not the same market, at all. one can have a desktop for a variety of reasons, and a tablet as well. There's nothing that says one is exclusive of the other. What also shares the market of the tablet/smartphone is the netbook, which is basically going away aside from the ultrabooks which are trying to separate from the netbook market but coming up against the desktop market to some degree.
Re: (Score:3)
Or it could just be that the people who wanted smartphones and tablets now have them, so those one-time boosts that created the new markets will not happen again. New smartphones and tablets will come out, of course, and they will sell, but not at a dramatically faster rate than last generation's models.
Going forward, it seems we may be in for more products that supplement smartphones and tablets, rather than replacing them. Google Glass is the most obvious recent example. I guess we'll see how that works o
Re: Apple priced itself out of the market (Score:5, Funny)
Two things I notice:
1) nobody I work with has a desktop. 2) Apple portables outnumber windows and Linux combined
Where I work Apple has taken over the desktop.
So where you work, there are zero desktops and they are all Apple?
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple has more cash on hand than the federal government.
That is a fairly low bar, I have more cash on hand than the federal government as I don't run a deficit.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple has more cash on hand than the federal government.
That is a fairly low bar, I have more cash on hand than the federal government as I don't run a deficit.
No... In reality you don't have more cash than the government, because you are the government. People forget that anything that is done by the government is done in their names, whether they like it or not. So that deficit... yeah, it's your deficit too... Maybe if more people understood this we would have better government.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Funny)
FTFY.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
Still doesn't make OS X the standard. And Microsoft is in the enterprise not because of "Windows Zombies" but because they offer the enterprise tools. OS X server is a joke, especially since the further dumbing down in 10.8.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
I switched to OSX about a year ago, and while it has its shiny moments, it also has lots of blunders and I wouldn't really say that it's a better desktop than Windows 7. Besides, calling "standard desktop OS" something that has ~10% market share is ... funny.
I don't think he meant it like that, i.e. in terms of market share. You are too stuck in the MS fanboy idea of Windows, Excel, Word etc. and their market share making them 'Industry Standards'. He probably meant more like that OS X is becoming more of a benchmark/reference point to measure your own Desktop OSes usability against than Windows is, i.e. that people are more likely to steal ideas from OS X than Windows 8. Of course you may disagree on whether OS X is the best UI ever made. Having used both I'd say it's better than Windows if only because OS X has a lower UI friction factor, although Windows 7 made major strides in that department so it's less of a factor than it was in the time of XP and Vista. I don't think anybody will be using Windows 8 as a usability reference UI any time soon. If OS X was discontinued tomorrow my next choice would probably be Gnome 3, bugs and all rather than either Windows 7 or 8.
Re: (Score:3)
You are too stuck in the MS fanboy idea of Windows, Excel, Word etc. and their market share making them 'Industry Standards'.
I run into this problem frequently. Windows is a zombie where I work because no one knows that there are alternatives. There is no official policy, yet the whole place has turned into a Microsoft shop for no reason. Apple seems completely uninterested in competing in the business world and so it goes, Microsoft claiming huge "market share" simply because it is familiar and fairly well supported/integrated at many places of employment. I chose to use OS X and Linux at work because I do a lot of work with com
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Informative)
If you have web software that requires IE on Windows to work, the problem is on your end.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:4, Informative)
I checked when our bosses wanted to get a mac for media editing (which is comical by itself).
Media editing is actually one of the areas where Macs excel. There is a wide variety of software available, and they have been favored by creative professionals for quite some time.
It works with exactly zero of our software suites. ZERO. No CRM, no office, no database apps, nothing. In fact, Firefox and Safari don't work with our ASP software either.
Firefox and Safari for OSX are standard web browsers. If they don't work with your "ASP software" then that means the software is crap (probably designed to be IE-specific) and needs to be fixed. It's not a problem with the OS or the browsers. Why a media editing system would need CRM or database apps isn't clear to me, but you certainly can get MS Office for OSX if you need it.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. I'm head IT manager so let's use my company as an example. I checked when our bosses wanted to get a mac for media editing (which is comical by itself). It works with exactly zero of our software suites. ZERO. No CRM, no office, no database apps, nothing. In fact, Firefox and Safari don't work with our ASP software either. Macs are toys for clueless rich people and have no place whatsoever in a professional environment. Forget compatibility, just go with cost. It's an idiotic choice.
Dude, you need to calm down. Every single one of your complaints is about cross platform issues If you designed your infrastructure with only Windows in mind and didn't factor in portability needs you have only yourself to blame. You might as well be complaining that pickup trucks are crappy pieces of equipment because they have zero parts commonality with your companies bulldozers.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Informative)
OP is not at all wrong, and it's bullish of you to suggest that a business should simply change its entire operating strategy to account for the limitations of the install base of the operating system. I worked as a CTO for a niche retail business (wine) which had certain custom measures to track in order to maintain basic levels of inventory management (e.g. multiple vintages and sizes use the same SKU). The stores had already deployed Macs for their POS due to the business decisions of my predecessor. I spent months trying to find a POS system that could handle anything beyond the "my first retail system" level. I found three retail POS systems at all. One of them we were already using -- and it didn't work, one of them was similarly barebones and locked down all of the database material so I couldn't export to something like Quickbooks, and then there's Lightspeed, which is big, costly, and spends more time and energy on advertising "It Works on Mac!" than it does providing any utilitarian function whatsoever. I gave up and installed Windows 7 on the systems through BootCamp, opening up at least 30 wine-retail specific POS systems for my pleasure.
Nearly all cross-platform software suites don't talk to one another. Quickbooks won't talk between Mac and PC. More specialized office applications and database applications won't talk to one another. There might be a FEW that will provide interoperability, though it's often buggy beyond belief, and most don't provide critical features necessary to certain businesses. Try and find an actually usable service-based POS (QSRs and restaurants). There are none. I'm sure that's because the Mac hardware is not touchscreen, which makes the OSX unusable to an entire industry.
If the general topic is about replacing your fleet of bulldozers with pickup trucks, parts commonality between the trucks and bulldozers is a pretty important metric.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:4, Insightful)
I spent plenty of years in corporate IT, sorry. Interoperability was always a big thing - even bigger now with smart phones and tablets and all kinds of other ways to get at apps and data.
You remind me of a guy at a local company I used to do work with here. He ran the company on an AS/400 and couldn't understand why people weren't happy getting their reports as TIFFs. I was able to get his data out of the AS/400 and into an actual database that folks could connect to using odbc from their desktops, allowing them to not only run the same reports themselves but also pull the data into Excel and manipulate it further.
It doesn't take infinite money - hell, the server I set up to run it was pulled from the trash bin (literally) and reconfigured with FreeBSD in about an hour. It went down one time in 3 years when someone tripped over the power cord in the server room.
I know how to run IT, and I also know how to explain patiently to "upper management" why it might make sense to spend an extra $10 now for longer term benefits. These are skills you should learn.
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:4, Insightful)
You setup a server in such a way that someone could trip over the power cord, and we're supposed to take your IT background serious? Really? For your sake, I hope there is much more to the story, because that's some seriously bad stuff.
I did the software setup as an outside consultant. Someone else placed the server in its room. I would have never done that.
And, if you think that's bad - I had another client one time that had their Sun e450 plugged in to the same power strip as their laptop. They nearly lost their web site when they accidentally pulled the plug on the 450 instead of the laptop one Friday evening. Oh, and no backups.
I do what I can...
Re:OSX is better anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
OS X may be "much better than both Windows and Linux desktops" but it will never be the "standard desktop OS". Apple's business model presents itself as the premium option, not the standard one, and Apple would just as soon see OS X die in favor of iOS.
A desktop line consisting of gimmicky miniature, an all-in-one, and and overpriced, functionally obsolete deskside doesn't make for standard even if it makes for the standard for you.
Re: (Score:3)
"better than both Windows and Linux desktops"
Hey - that sounds like something good. But, please, tell us: better than WHICH Linux desktops, precisely? And, tell us what metrics you are using to measure these desktops.
I'll be fair here - I've never owned an OS X computer. I don't have the background to make real comparisons.
I've run every version of Windows from Windows version 1. Every one of them. Some were pretty cool for their time. Two have positively sucked. Windows 8 is shaping up to be even s
Re:They've done this before (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with Microsoft is after they got to a certain size they started taking on characteristics of IBM. It does seem that the attitude is "they'll take what we give them." Their decisions about their products always seem to be based on what is good for THEM and what they want reality to be rather than what is good for users and what actual reality is.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Depends on what the companies who pay a lot of money for licensing are saying. MS dont give a real shit about the consumer but the Enterprise - who by far are the ones MS depends on - are saying no, they dont want W8 or Metro.
Ya think MS are going to stand there and stick to their guns when Enterprise says fuck it and refuses to upgrade?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And if you think they will, look at when Microsoft originally wanted to EOL WinXP, and when they actually did.
Re: (Score:3)
And if you think they will, look at when Microsoft originally wanted to EOL WinXP, and when they actually did.
Hell, I'm not convinced that MS is even going to EoL XP on the scheduled date in 2014. There are still a lot of big companies (and not a few governments!) stuck on XP, and I think many of them are asking MS how big a dump truck of money they have to drive up to their door to get the expiration date pushed back indefinitely.
Re:Wishful thinking. (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't care for Windows 8 as much as the next guy, but they're not going to reverse field; Microsoft is all in on this.
I'm sure if you had asked Coke executives in May-June 1985, all of them would have said they were "all in" on New Coke. People generally don't attain high-level executive positions by being indecisive or publicly showing doubt. But when customers don't want to buy the product you're selling now, and they want to buy the product you used to sell but don't any more, then it doesn't take a marketing genius to figure out what you should do. And if you don't make that decision on your own, then eventually someone higher up will do it for you. If not the leader of the Windows team, then Ballmer. If not Ballmer, then the Board of Directors. And if not the Board, then ultimately Wall Street.
Re:Windows 8 Is the Innovation MS needs (Score:5, Interesting)
You can't be serious. Windows 8 makes it damn near impossible to run a multi-windowed environment - which is what the OS was named for. It is pretty clear that Microsoft panicked with the tablet boom and forced a tablet onto a desktop. Yes, tablets are probably going to be used for a single app at a time, but I still need a desktop that let's me access multiple windows at once since I normally run about 13 applications at once.
Re:Windows 8 Is the Innovation MS needs (Score:4, Insightful)
I hope not. I hope they stick to their guns. Look, I am not the biggest MS fan, but Windows 8 is probably the most innovative and certainly the boldest thing MS has done in years. Maybe, ever.
the start button is an afterthought, it was something to get rid of how we used Windows 3.11 (which was permanantly opened folders). It was neat, it worked, but that is the past. The part people don't seem to grasp is that window with all those boxy icons IS the start menu. it is just visulazed now.
they will cave, because that is what MS does, but they shouldn't. Windows 8 is fantatic, and MS should grab their users and drag them out of 1995.
Have you tried using w8/2012 over a low bandwidth link? The suckiness is terrible to behold. Visual prettiness may belong on a tablet where big icons are needed to accommodate big fat sausage fingers, but how useful is a touch screen going to be on a server where you need to create a new account or something useful?
The way I get around w8/2012 is much like w7 - hit the windows key and start typing what I want. w8 is _so_ much slower to give me the answer so i'm less productive.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yep, nothing says "innovation" like confusing the hell out of your users and removing the ability to have multiple programs on screen at once.
Because nobody who uses Windows multitasks, right?
Re:When will this bullshit ever stop? (Score:4, Informative)
Vista did suck when it came out for quite a lot of people, but the core problem wasn't Vista. The problem was that the driver model changed and there was a lot of immature drivers out there. But for your average home user, all they understand is that the computer has Vista and isn't working as well as their older XP one did.
Windows 7 didn't share that problem because by time it came out the drivers had matured.
Windows 8's problem is that it's two UIs that don't play nice together in the same place, and people who know how to use Windows 7 (or XP) don't want to learn the new one and figure out when they're going to switch back and forth. It's a blunder on Microsoft's part that the two don't play together more nicely.
That, and what moron thought moving the "shut down" button into such an obscure location was a good idea? Yes, people do in fact turn PCs off fairly regularly.
Re: (Score:3)
what the hell takes 5X more clicks? you put the things you use on the start screen, and it's always 2 clicks no matter what you need, and it's big enough to put everything normal users need on there. And on the desktop you can still pin your most used applications on the taskbar and open them in a single click, so unless you used to be able to open 5 applications in a single click, and now no longer can, i wonder where the hell your 5X number comes from -_-.
And yes, with everything that is new there will be
Re: (Score:3)
Why would anyone want a "start" button that completely changes their context and covers up what they were doing?
Windows is barely functional enough as it is for getting real work done, with its insane raise-on-focus making it almost impossible to look at two applications simultaneously (try reading from one large window while typing into another one, without two screens) - but Metro makes it fucking unusable. Nobody asked for it, and clearly, from the sales, nobody wants it.