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.
Shocking news. Microsoft exec upset by the success of a member of the competition.
This is not the penguin you're looking for.
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.
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.
Check out my world simulator thingy.
The iPad is old news. Wired reported on the existence of the iPad 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?
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.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
I don't want a "range", developed with "partners". MS has repeated that mistake so often now, expecting different results every time. isn't there a witty saying that defines insanity this way?
Fleur de Sel
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?
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.
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.
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!
Bill was into tablets for years
http://www.google.com/images?q=Bill+Gates+tablet
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?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
http://pixelatedgeek.com/2009/09/steve-ballmer-as-dk/
I really want someone to make a Donkey Kong rom hack with chairs instead of barrels and Ballmer instead of DK.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
>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.
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.
MS has not recently issued an new product. It's always me too.
Replace "recently" with "ever" and your sentence is fixed.
You can't take the sky from me...
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,
KANT -
Kinda like Apple's New Technology
That sounds like a TUNA
noT
qUite
aN
Acronym
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.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
"In Microsoft's vision, slates will run a derivative of Windows 7."
and therein lies the problem.
SURELY NOT!!!!!
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!"
I really doubt you can find them because that's all complete bullshit.
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.
Physicists get Hadrons!