Slashdot Mirror
To Ballmer, Grabbing iPad's Market Is 'Job One Urgency'
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.
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.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
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.
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
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.
I know it's become a cliche joke over the years but I find it amusing when a company will casually and regularly throw around the term "innovation" when they rarely are anything approaching innovative. Microsoft has become the poster-child of this movement. When was the last time that Microsoft lead the way into a new market segment? When was the last time that Microsoft truly innovated rather than following someone else's lead? I realize they've watched Apple leap into the tablet market with huge success only to recognize "I want me some of that!" but, seriously, could they have not done it themselves, years ago? They have the money to invest in R they have the brainpower to put together good stuff. But, their corporate culture (which has been discussed, ad naseum, here) absolutely stifles innovation. They have become a corporation that follows rather than leads. They have two markets (desktop OS and office suite software) where they established a lead and are going to be very slow to relinquish their leadership position but, in virtually every other market, they seem intent on watching what others do and follow the successful ones, after the fact.
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.
I wonder if killing Courier will go down in history as one of Microsoft's huge mistakes... I certainly wasn't happy to hear it was cancelled.
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.
But that's what Microsoft doesn't want. The thought process hangs up there.
Have you ever had much interaction with two-year-olds?
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
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.
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 $500 or so. It's a pretty nice piece of technology for that much money. Lots of programmers (including me) love programming and this is a very interesting platform.
Can I develop software using the iPad as a platform? Nope - not easily.
Yes, you can. Maybe not compiled stuff, but writing javascript stuff works, and plenty of nice quick programs I've written through the years were web-based. You can also SSH into your LAMP server or RDP into your IIS server, and use vi/notepad there, but that's sorta like cheating.
Can I play World of Warcraft on an iPad? Nope - not really.
I'll be glad when my friends give up WoW and start Role Playing or playing other computer games again. ^&@$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.
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.
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.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
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.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson