Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why Microsoft Shouldn't Worry About Cannibalizing Their Userbases

Posted by Soulskill on from the gotta-get-your-protein-somewhere dept.

New submitter coyote_oww writes "A ComputerWorld analysis article suggests that Microsoft should stop worrying about one product cutting into another product's sales, and concentrate on putting their best foot foward regardless of the impact on product lines. The big impact would be the price of Windows: '... Microsoft must, at least in the main, sell devices based on lower prices. And the only significant component of a Windows-powered device that can be cut further — hardware margins are at or very near the bone, and have been for years — is the Windows license.' It's still possible they could sell Windows versions at different rates for different devices, but that could get hard to justify to consumers over the long haul."

8 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. Different versions of Windows by ArcadeMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know what I want? A lower-cost Windows targeted at gamers. I don't need drivers for scanners, printers, fax and other unnecessary crap if all I do is play games on it.

    A Windows with less processes running would also mean a faster computer able to dedicate more resources to the games instead of crap I don't need.

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    1. Re:Different versions of Windows by Your.Master · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's basically what an xbox is.

      I guess the implication is that you want something that compromises between Windows PCs and XBox on some points. Which raises the question of what is the right compromise position?

    2. Re:Different versions of Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You don't work in IT, do you?

    3. Re:Different versions of Windows by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The sad part? The pirates have had it for a fricking decade now and it kicks MAJOR ass, in fact it makes Linux look like a beached whale in August by comparison.

      I'm of course talking about the "Tiny" Windows builds that have been going on since Tiny2K, came out around 2001. The TinyXP used just 48Mb of memory on the desktop, Tiny 2K3 Workstation just 63Mb, and Tiny 7 uses as little as 256Mb for a full desktop but of course with superfetch any extra RAM will be used to speed up the system. The one exception would be Tiny Vista which took 512Mb for the desktop but hey, they're gamers not miracle workers.

      So anybody that wants to give them a try I'm sure can find a copy easily enough, but why MSFT don't hire these guys I'll never know as frankly their builds kick the shit out of WinFLP and Embedded as far as footprint and CPU usage goes while letting you run all your Windows software, its truly crazy how little those builds use while giving you everything you need to make a kick ass gaming PC OS that uses less than the consoles do to run the OS.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. Suspicious article by schneidafunk · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article is on ComputerWorld, which is owned by IDG. They are quoting a research analyst from IDC, which is also owned by IDG. What's the motivation for writing this article?

    --
    Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
  3. Re:"You have to kill your own babies" by macromorgan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The important thing to remember is in a competitive economy, someone is going to disrupt your business. It might as well be you. Fighting against it only postpones the inevitable.

  4. Microsoft's decline is directly correlated with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    the introduction of Windows Genuine Advantage.

    Before WGA was introduced, most people thought windows came free when they purchased a new computer. The rather high price for the OS was completely obfuscated. The cost was hidden because there was no impediment to installing a copy onto any machine so they thought it was free. All you needed was a copy. Well, MS decided they wanted to get paid for all of those installs. So, they introduced WGA. So, what happened... Well, people still bought new machines... But, when they went to use the new OS version on their old machines it didn't work because it could only be validated on one machine... Now, people still wanted the new OS so they went to see how much it cost and they were horrified by how much a copy of windows cost.

    This left people with four choices:
    1. Don't upgrade... (Look at how long it has taken to get people to stop using Win XP.)
    2. Pay the high price. (Probably not)
    3. Bootleg a copy. (Bit-torrent has lots of copies)
    4. Look someplace else. (Have you noticed how well Apple has been doing lately)

    Notice, in all but one unlikely scenario, MS doesn't make anymore money than they did before the introduction of WGA. But what they have done is enlighten people to the true cost of MS windows. Additionally, when someone doesn't upgrade or goes with an alternative to Windows, then third party applications suffer because the installed base of the current windows is diminished...

    MS quite simply destroyed their own monopoly by trying to get people to pay for something they would never pay for.

    Every time MS releases a new OS I keep thinking they would figure this out and drop WGA but they keep on striving for a smaller and smaller market share.

    Simply put, having a solid monopoly is MUCH more valuable than the few sales they have made as a result of WGA...
    Oh and lets not forget, WGA just pisses people off so as a paying customer... You get punished... Great business model if you want to shrink your market share.

  5. Re:New license model: Free! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I routinely use both Linux and Win7, depending on the client I'm dealing with.

    A well set up Linux is easily the more responsive environment, and has less annoyances and inconsistent behaviors than the Windows equivalent. Simple stuff like using USB drives or wireless networking just works better. Switching back to W7 feels like wading through glue after a day or two on Linux.

    If both OSs were priced the same, had identical OEM and software vendor support, I have no doubt people would largely choose Linux.