Slashdot Mirror
Ballmer Sends Wakeup Call to Staff
Puneet writes "An MSNBC article outlines details of how the world's biggest software company seems to be facing a technology gap. Steve Ballmer, chief executive officer of Microsoft, sent a memo across the company basically saying that with no immediate breakthroughs in technology coming, and with the Linux computer operating system and a batch of other open-source programs biting at its heels, Microsoft will have to do a better job of persuading customers it has something they need.
. Microsoft must "improve business consistency" so that customers are not hit with unexpected - and unwanted - changes. Also covered by Forbes but in lesser detail."
To back up this new push to promote a more customer-friendly Microsoft, Ballmer promised that the company would âoeincrease our advertising budget significantly for all our audiences.â
This pretty much sums it up.
An equal headline and probably more accurate one would be "MS launches new media campaign to portray company as customer-friendly".
All marketing, no real changes.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
More than anything, Microsoft has really hurt itself through it's new licensing plan -- and this with a competitor who offers an initial software cost of zero. That defies market logic -- to raise your prices when faced by a seemingly lower cost competitor. It almost forces the hands of IT engineers (who already face much tighter budgets) to consider open source solutions instead of Microsoft when they need an implementation of, say, an extra file and print server to hold all of the new graphics files generated by the marketing department.
At the end of the day, it is money that makes the corporation go 'round. And, if I can offer my management and users a better solution that costs less money, it is in my absolute best interests to do so.
First he identifies a problem - Microsoft has no new and innovative ideas for improving their products.
Then he comes up with the perfect solution - "improve business consistency!" The best way we can serve our customers is by not introducing any new and innovative ideas to improve our products!
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Knowing the "mess" they're in and fixing it has always been one of their strong suits. When they released Windows 3.x and found lukewarm support by WordPerfect and Lotus, they admitted it and took a course of action to correct it. When they realized they were too late in jumping on the Internet bandwagon, they admitted it and started development on a browser to compete with Netscape. Now, they realize that they are falling behind in the security and "features people need" area and will most certainly strive to correct the situation. So, don't just sit back, point your finger, and laugh; take a good look within the open source world and see what needs fixing.
The article says that Ballmer plans to "increase our advertising budget significantly for all our audiences". Does anyone else see that as treating the symptom rather than the disease? The point of the article was that Microsoft doesn't seem to have anything to persuade people to buy its products, so instead of INNOVATING, they're going to "persuade" people that they need Microsoft. The problem isn't that people don't need Microsoft, the problem is that Microsoft isn't creating anything new and exciting in the computer world... and increasing the advertising budget by all the money in Fort Knox isn't going to change that.
"It's better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it." ~ Christian Slater, True Romance
No, that wouldn't work. Microsoft depends on high growth for stockholder returns, and partly to pay its salary bill. Operating systems and productivity software are a saturated market - they own it, and with flat PC sales, it's not expanding. Worse, they're about to have their lunch eaten by Linux.
They have to spread out, and hope that todays money-loser turns into tomorrows next big thing.
Second, drop product activation. No one likes being treated like a criminal.
Unfortunately enough people are that it makes sense to try and maximise profits by clamping down on it.
The real purpose of product activation is to stop friends and family from sharing copies. If Microsoft's software was lower in price, (see my first point) people would simply buy their own copy.
What price should it be?
Fourth, stop with those outrageous deals to stop Linux
Yeah, this one would be nice :) But I can understand why they do it, it's like a snowslide, all it takes is a few blasts and the right place and the whole thing starts sliding. They know this.
They also know timing is critical. Windows only has so long, eventually it will be a liability rather than an asset. Eventually it will be cut off from them as a revenue source and by that day, if they haven't diversified enough, it's game over. No more Redmond.
They have time to do that, but it's hard. Stuff like MSN, the Xbox etc shows they in this for the long haul, as well they might be. So they need to buy time, because they don't know how fast things will move once Linux becomnes truly viable.
Sixth, I could go on and on and on. But since my boss expects me to work for money, Iâ(TM)ll quit here and let others post some suggestions.
Heh, my boss too, so one last one - unfortunately being nice to their customers isn't going to turn Microsoft around, it's far too late for that. They have to leave Windows before it drags them down with it, and until they manage that it's a race against time.
Apple may be marginalized, but they're the ones on the consumer end who keep building the bridges Microsoft has to walk across. No new technology coming forward? Apple built their own with the iPod. They were late to the game with iTunes, granted, but iPhoto, iMovie and iDVD are still leaps and bounds ahead of any competition in terms of ease-of-use.
The "digital hub" strategy they're embracing is working very well for Apple. The only problem, natch, is that digital camcorders (and camcorders and DVD burners) are still too expensive to be casually embraced by most consumers. But then, prices are getting lower all the time -- simple digital cameras under $100 are easy to come by, and used iPods can be found on eBay for as low as $100-$150. Apple knows that people are doing less and less with their personal computers but more and more with the other "computers" around them, and constantly works on ways to tie those peripherals to Apple's hardware and software.
What Microsoft ought to be throwing it's money towards, then, is building easy-to-use consumer software that consumers actually *want* to use, not because they're gimmicky but because they're easy to understand. Media Player is a good start. Their video editor needs much work, and integrating it with the ever-cheaper DVD burners and VideoCD writers could only help them.
Then let's try some new ideas, just to see if they take off. Skip the Tablet PC thing; build a cheap (like $50-$60) e-book reader that people can actually afford and will want to own, then get the magazine and newspaper publishers to sign on. Try to really integrate webcams and IM. A Flash-format animation creator for under $50 so people can make their own cartoons. They don't have to give this stuff away with the OS, if they make it cheap enough to buy separately. (I'm keen on that $50 price point, which is the most your average consumer will spend on non-profit-making software.)
Microsoft is, IMO, so bent on keeping the business markets that they've all but neglected their consumer market. Aside from some pretty colors, self-customizing menus and Apple-chasing software hacks, they've not done anything new for the home market since Windows 95 was released. It's good for them to spend time building tools that developers and managers want to have, but it helps their image immensely to add the stuff home users would want to have -- even if they don't make as much profit from it.
i think joe sixpack isn't the problem
all they do is using their computer for surfing web and writing letters
the problem is the user between geek and sixpack
he wants to do things himself say install a printer, software, install new graphic card drivers maybe even replace his graphic card
but he has no deeper knowledge of the system
for this user linux is to complex to do such tasks (in sufficient time)
it is the point where windows has the biggest advantage to linux
stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
Here's the thing. With their "Trusted Computing" Platform, all the bugs have to be ironed out before shipping, otherwise the chain of trust is broken. After the first bug, it is no longer Trusted Computing, but Fairly Trustable Computing.
Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
"...companies have turned to Linux and other open-source software programs, seeing them as cheap but adequate alternatives."
I'd amend this to say companies find that Linux and Friends aren't just "cheap but adequate." Instead, we find on the server side that they are cheap, rock solid, effective, and simple. In my opinion, Microsoft does do many things well. But MS continues to believe that "featurization" is what companies want, and that corporate types will see additional features as being worth additional time, trouble, and money. What MS might finally be seeing is that more feature-laden, more trouble-prone, and more expensive is NOT what we're looking for. Open Source code should serve as a model for Microsoft, at least in the back office, because it's written by geeks, for geeks. And, obviously, it works.
It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then, it's hilarious.
you have to wonder whether he thinks some of the changes are too extreme and possibly of little value to the user."
Or it could mean Microsoft's waiting for Apple to release its next version of OS X, so they can, um, compare features and come up with new "innovative" products. Yeah...
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
You seem to have a couple things confused. I could be mistaken, but it looks that way.
;)
Taking forever to choose a platform for graphics and sound isn't a product of compatibility, it's a product of choice. I know that's a foreign concept to a lot of computer users, so I'll explain. You see, in an efficient marketplace, there are generally several competitors, all who have their respective strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes, it will take a customer more than half a second(!!) to decide, based on these strengths and weaknesses, which is fine, because in that way, mulitple products(now, this is the important part now) can co-exist because not every customer has the same requirements. To put this in a less abstract way, look at your grocers juice aisle, at the orange juice. Odds are, there might be Sun Rype, Dole, Minute Maid and Sunkist, all in the same aisle. They don't stock them all because it's the idealistic thing to do, they do it because some people have different goals and different desires.(My personal favourite is Sun Rype, because the rest taste like orange peels).
As for the installer, last time I checked, Linux was not Red Hat. Mandrake, for instance, has an installation from scratch that puts the Windows 2k or XP installations to shame in terms of allowing the beginner to install the product without knowing a thing, yet allowing experts to delve into details.
I wouldn't really argue that Linux is technically superior in every way to Windows, as there are a few features which I think windows does better than the Linux platforms I've seen(and I doubt that will change until the 2.6 kernel is released and bundled into new distributions), but you haven't given an example otherwise. The lack of choice on the Windows platform and the fact that you don't think the installer is simple enough are not technical reasons Windows would be superior to Linux. They're pet peeves at best, and massive misinterpetations of what exactly "Linux" is at worst.
Great idea using the old "I'll probably get modded down for saying this" bluff. Gets 'em every time. Weakminded fools. Though I'll probably be modded to hell for saying that.
It's been a long time.
Well if they keep redesigning the GUI for each release of Windows, adding in more annoyances like Messenger (which they make hard to remove for the less IT literate people) then their future isn't looking too rosy.
:)
With Linux you can upgrade to the latest kernel and stick with KDE2 if you want. You're getting the latest drivers, security and performance enhancements but you're maintaining a familiar front end.
Um... What? On one hand you're saying that the "less IT literate people" find it too hard to remove things like messenger and then you're suggesting that these same people should move to Linux because they can use the same GUI even after a kernel upgrade?!
If these users can't figure out how to disable messenger (a check box), I doubt they're going to be able to figure out how to upgrade the kernel.