I've become convinced that the purpose of captcha is to punish regular users. I strongly suspect that spambots merely push the re-captcha link until they get a pattern that's easier to parse.
> Wrong product segment. The Samsung note competes with the Surface RT
> Surface pro is... a touchscreen windows laptop with an intel processor. Integrated onboard GPU, a shortage of ports and a sorta kinda nifty cover. And that's about it.
The thing is, a touchscreen windows laptop is pants. Touch is not a paradigm for Windows. It just isn't. It sucked on Windows 7, and it sucks for somewhat different reasons on Windows 8. It's a touch screen on an unusual (for touch screens) architecture and virtually no ecosystem. Yeah, I know, it runs non-touch Microsoft software. But why would you buy a touchscreen to run non-touch software? Why not buy a $300 conventional laptop instead?
Wow, I can't believe it! At $999 the Surface Pro was a great deal on a wonderful device, and now at $100 less, it's even a better deal!!! Buy one before they sell out!! I'm going to sell my car and put all my money in Surface Pros!
I can get a Samsung 10.5 inch Note for literally half the price of the discounted Surface Pro. MS is apparently still going on the assumption that people will buy it because it's Microsoft. I don't see how that works now.
> They watch youtube videos while the boss isn't at his desk, which is often, so the sound is on.
But again, headphones are cheap. Why take the risk of blaring non-work-related sound into the open air when you can enjoy the same experience without the risk?
When I think of Santa Cruz, all I can think of is SCO (Santa Cruz Operation). My mental picture of Santa Cruz is one of suits bringing lawsuits.
Wait wait wait. Santa Cruz Operations was a decent company that actually produced a useful product. The company that called itself "SCO" was a patent troll. The only significant thing in common besides the acronym is the IP. (Or, rather, what SCO thought they had in IP.)
As long as they keep using Facebook it doesn't matter how much they hate the ads or how loudly they complain.
Well, it's a balance. The purpose of ads is to leverage the user base. If obnoxious ads cause the user base to shrink, at some point it becomes a wash, and shortly after that, a net loss.
Video ads (with sound) are the most annoying part of the internet experience, edging out popovers. If they go to that... well, there's always google+. Or email. Remember email? Actually talking to your friends in your own words?
Alternately, is there a plugin that allows one to conveniently turn the browser's ability to play video on and off?
> It's only a matter of time before Microsoft unloads all of these unsold Surface RT tablets for next to nothing, just like HP and Blackberry did with their failed tablet designs.
Don't bet on it. I believe Microsoft will insist they be crushed rather than unloaded cheaply.
...that cause every Windows system to crash and have to be powered-off to resume...I'll consider putting it on my phone!
--CAO
That was my concern also, and was the reason I very reluctantly stopped contributing to SETI when they switched to BOINC. Every once in awhile they plead with me to rejoin, and every time I say "still using BOINC? Then no." Once bitten, etc etc.
On my phone? Freaking kidding me. The phone is unstable enough as it is.
It ran correctly. The "touch" keyboard brought back memories of the ZX 81 I played with 30 years ago. I am not sure if it's much of an improvement over touch screen typing. Maybe slightly.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a nice idea but I also think MS should've made it possible to run android apps on it, and made it somehow possible to install Linux / Android on it.
The shop were I saw it didn't make an effort to sell the Surface either. One step to the left, where the Apple stuff was located and an enthusiastic sales guy asked me if he could help me with anything
The thing is, to allow other operating systems on it breaks the paradigm. While other company's main business is hardware, with the OS being very cheap or free, MS is exactly the opposite -- their primary business is the OS, and selling hardware on which a competing OS could be installed breaks that business model. This is the primary reason MS is having trouble competing in today's environment. And it's an issue that MS can not fix without making major, bordering on catastrophic, changes to their business model. Under their current leadership, they'll collapse rather than make that leap.
Incidentally, the local cellular store pushes all but two of their products. The store is mostly crammed with Android products and low end phones. On one wall is a fairly prominent display featuring Apple phones and tablets, and waaaaay off in a corner is a tiny display with a single Windows phone.
The salespeople don't make a huge attempt to steer people either to Apple or Windows. I asked, and the reason, I'm told, is that people who buy i-products already know what they're looking for, and people buying Windows phones... well, there effectively aren't any.
> Turns out people want things that are the size of a laptop to work as well as a laptop.
The size, *and* the expense of a laptop. Early Netbooks caught a break because they were cheap. The Surface RT was the resources of a netbook (without the ecosystem) at *more than* the price of a low end laptop.
A lot of you don't seem like Windows developers, and you're on the outside looking in on this issue. You won't learn anything about WinRT's failure by analyzing Microsoft's marketing.
WinRT became persona non grata in 2011 when Microsoft scared its WPF and Silverlight developers into thinking.NET would be shitcanned to appease the C++ fools, and that everyone would have to use disgusting HTML5 and JavaScript to develop mobile apps in the future. Understandably, they fled in large numbers and Microsoft doubled down on its foolishness, doing nothing until Build 2011 to even rectify the issue. Worse yet, even after the fact, WinRT has no real.NET code compatibility with the desktop, so you have to fork your code base and cannot leverage jack shit. This is the real reason you do not and will never see apps for the platform. They should have had Ballmer's HEAD for this.
I submit that this was intentional. The RT was never intended to be a successful platform. It was intended to (a) demonstrate Microsoft playing in the ARM space, and (b) muddy the non-Wintel waters. I fully expect developers declining to develop for RT to be blamed on the ARM platform, not the software stack.
Was it running correctly? Or did it run 2 1/2 seconds and then popup "windows media player has encountered an error. windows is now searching for a solution to the problem" followed by a "waiting" icon that never goes away?
Exactly. I mean, why bother bringing Steve Jobs back to Apple when they were only 90 days solvent. No use whatsoever!
Bingo. The right person can do it. Sculley was not the right person. Ballmer is not the right person. Jobs had his quirks, but he had vision. Ballmer does not have vision. Or, at very least, what he has is not what we are accustomed to thinking of as "vision".
eh. Microsoft is on it's way out no matter who is in charge. The question is is Balmer any better or worse than the next guy?
Really why bother putting a good competent captain in charge of a sinking ship? You think he is magically going to make it float again?
Um, ok, I don't believe I'm saying this, but under competent leadership, Microsoft could (a) enjoy a roaring comeback, and (b) be a force for good. The company employs some of the most brilliant engineers in the nation. It still has lots of cash. It still has healthy pipelines. It has *components* that other companies would give their left arm for. With competent, truly forward-thinking leadership (not the best fake forward-thinking that money can buy, but the real stuff) and the balls to make a clean break with the festering crap of the past, Microsoft could create some truly engaging, successful products. It's this psychotic insistence to pummel the same deceased equines that's the source of their current issues.
For three examples: Go back to the *real* surface, and lift it from hollywood prop status to a real, dynamic, reliable, affordable product. Dump the Windows core, and build the GUI (and compatibility tools) on top of a modern kernel. Take what has been learned about touch-based GUI so far, and put one together that makes sense for the user, even if you may have to license bits and pieces from companies that did it better, sooner. Take off the "windows everywhere" blinders and make each of these products the absolute most appropriate for these particular environments. Microsoft has the resources to do all of these things. All it lacks is the guts.
Edit: When I say "Windows GUI", I mean the traditional Windows GUI, which is actually useful. I do not at any time mean the Windows 8 GUI.
Isn't Microsoft still buying the xbox market (by selling at a loss)? I guess it's possible that they could do the same with the Surface, to continue playing in that space. Or it could go the way of the Zune.
How big of a fuck up would it take for Ballmer to be forced to resign?
It's the "forced" part that I think is the issue. How much force, and applied by whom. Ballmer wields tremendous power, and his ego will not let him resign voluntarily. I think he'd see the company crash, or at least become a much smaller company, rather than step down.
Slashdot Mirror
This.
I've become convinced that the purpose of captcha is to punish regular users. I strongly suspect that spambots merely push the re-captcha link until they get a pattern that's easier to parse.
> Wrong product segment. The Samsung note competes with the Surface RT
> Surface pro is... a touchscreen windows laptop with an intel processor. Integrated onboard GPU, a shortage of ports and a sorta kinda nifty cover. And that's about it.
The thing is, a touchscreen windows laptop is pants. Touch is not a paradigm for Windows. It just isn't. It sucked on Windows 7, and it sucks for somewhat different reasons on Windows 8. It's a touch screen on an unusual (for touch screens) architecture and virtually no ecosystem. Yeah, I know, it runs non-touch Microsoft software. But why would you buy a touchscreen to run non-touch software? Why not buy a $300 conventional laptop instead?
Wow, I can't believe it! At $999 the Surface Pro was a great deal on a wonderful device, and now at $100 less, it's even a better deal!!! Buy one before they sell out!! I'm going to sell my car and put all my money in Surface Pros!
(Well, you know someone was going to say it.)
I can get a Samsung 10.5 inch Note for literally half the price of the discounted Surface Pro. MS is apparently still going on the assumption that people will buy it because it's Microsoft. I don't see how that works now.
On the bright side, you'll improve your forensic skills.
> They watch youtube videos while the boss isn't at his desk, which is often, so the sound is on.
But again, headphones are cheap. Why take the risk of blaring non-work-related sound into the open air when you can enjoy the same experience without the risk?
When I think of Santa Cruz, all I can think of is SCO (Santa Cruz Operation). My mental picture of Santa Cruz is one of suits bringing lawsuits.
Wait wait wait. Santa Cruz Operations was a decent company that actually produced a useful product. The company that called itself "SCO" was a patent troll. The only significant thing in common besides the acronym is the IP. (Or, rather, what SCO thought they had in IP.)
Did anyone else read that in Eric Bana's voice?
As long as they keep using Facebook it doesn't matter how much they hate the ads or how loudly they complain.
Well, it's a balance. The purpose of ads is to leverage the user base. If obnoxious ads cause the user base to shrink, at some point it becomes a wash, and shortly after that, a net loss.
Remember those losers on myspace with the flash autoplay music?
Dimly. I think that was the reason I stopped using it.
If you're surfing the net without the sound turned off or headphones plugged in, you should turn in your slacker card.
Video ads (with sound) are the most annoying part of the internet experience, edging out popovers. If they go to that... well, there's always google+. Or email. Remember email? Actually talking to your friends in your own words?
Alternately, is there a plugin that allows one to conveniently turn the browser's ability to play video on and off?
> I want Metro!
So YOU'RE the one. Can I have your autograph?
> It's only a matter of time before Microsoft unloads all of these unsold Surface RT tablets for next to nothing, just like HP and Blackberry did with their failed tablet designs.
Don't bet on it. I believe Microsoft will insist they be crushed rather than unloaded cheaply.
...that cause every Windows system to crash and have to be powered-off to resume...I'll consider putting it on my phone!
--CAO
That was my concern also, and was the reason I very reluctantly stopped contributing to SETI when they switched to BOINC. Every once in awhile they plead with me to rejoin, and every time I say "still using BOINC? Then no." Once bitten, etc etc.
On my phone? Freaking kidding me. The phone is unstable enough as it is.
It ran correctly. The "touch" keyboard brought back memories of the ZX 81 I played with 30 years ago. I am not sure if it's much of an improvement over touch screen typing. Maybe slightly.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a nice idea but I also think MS should've made it possible to run android apps on it, and made it somehow possible to install Linux / Android on it.
The shop were I saw it didn't make an effort to sell the Surface either. One step to the left, where the Apple stuff was located and an enthusiastic sales guy asked me if he could help me with anything
The thing is, to allow other operating systems on it breaks the paradigm. While other company's main business is hardware, with the OS being very cheap or free, MS is exactly the opposite -- their primary business is the OS, and selling hardware on which a competing OS could be installed breaks that business model. This is the primary reason MS is having trouble competing in today's environment. And it's an issue that MS can not fix without making major, bordering on catastrophic, changes to their business model. Under their current leadership, they'll collapse rather than make that leap.
Incidentally, the local cellular store pushes all but two of their products. The store is mostly crammed with Android products and low end phones. On one wall is a fairly prominent display featuring Apple phones and tablets, and waaaaay off in a corner is a tiny display with a single Windows phone.
The salespeople don't make a huge attempt to steer people either to Apple or Windows. I asked, and the reason, I'm told, is that people who buy i-products already know what they're looking for, and people buying Windows phones... well, there effectively aren't any.
> Turns out people want things that are the size of a laptop to work as well as a laptop.
The size, *and* the expense of a laptop. Early Netbooks caught a break because they were cheap. The Surface RT was the resources of a netbook (without the ecosystem) at *more than* the price of a low end laptop.
A lot of you don't seem like Windows developers, and you're on the outside looking in on this issue. You won't learn anything about WinRT's failure by analyzing Microsoft's marketing.
WinRT became persona non grata in 2011 when Microsoft scared its WPF and Silverlight developers into thinking .NET would be shitcanned to appease the C++ fools, and that everyone would have to use disgusting HTML5 and JavaScript to develop mobile apps in the future. Understandably, they fled in large numbers and Microsoft doubled down on its foolishness, doing nothing until Build 2011 to even rectify the issue. Worse yet, even after the fact, WinRT has no real .NET code compatibility with the desktop, so you have to fork your code base and cannot leverage jack shit. This is the real reason you do not and will never see apps for the platform. They should have had Ballmer's HEAD for this.
I submit that this was intentional. The RT was never intended to be a successful platform. It was intended to (a) demonstrate Microsoft playing in the ARM space, and (b) muddy the non-Wintel waters. I fully expect developers declining to develop for RT to be blamed on the ARM platform, not the software stack.
on it was a video running promoting the iPad :-)
Was it running correctly? Or did it run 2 1/2 seconds and then popup "windows media player has encountered an error. windows is now searching for a solution to the problem" followed by a "waiting" icon that never goes away?
Man, there really needs to be.
Exactly. I mean, why bother bringing Steve Jobs back to Apple when they were only 90 days solvent. No use whatsoever!
Bingo. The right person can do it. Sculley was not the right person. Ballmer is not the right person. Jobs had his quirks, but he had vision. Ballmer does not have vision. Or, at very least, what he has is not what we are accustomed to thinking of as "vision".
eh. Microsoft is on it's way out no matter who is in charge. The question is is Balmer any better or worse than the next guy?
Really why bother putting a good competent captain in charge of a sinking ship? You think he is magically going to make it float again?
Um, ok, I don't believe I'm saying this, but under competent leadership, Microsoft could (a) enjoy a roaring comeback, and (b) be a force for good. The company employs some of the most brilliant engineers in the nation. It still has lots of cash. It still has healthy pipelines. It has *components* that other companies would give their left arm for. With competent, truly forward-thinking leadership (not the best fake forward-thinking that money can buy, but the real stuff) and the balls to make a clean break with the festering crap of the past, Microsoft could create some truly engaging, successful products. It's this psychotic insistence to pummel the same deceased equines that's the source of their current issues.
For three examples: Go back to the *real* surface, and lift it from hollywood prop status to a real, dynamic, reliable, affordable product. Dump the Windows core, and build the GUI (and compatibility tools) on top of a modern kernel. Take what has been learned about touch-based GUI so far, and put one together that makes sense for the user, even if you may have to license bits and pieces from companies that did it better, sooner. Take off the "windows everywhere" blinders and make each of these products the absolute most appropriate for these particular environments. Microsoft has the resources to do all of these things. All it lacks is the guts.
Edit: When I say "Windows GUI", I mean the traditional Windows GUI, which is actually useful. I do not at any time mean the Windows 8 GUI.
Isn't Microsoft still buying the xbox market (by selling at a loss)? I guess it's possible that they could do the same with the Surface, to continue playing in that space. Or it could go the way of the Zune.
How big of a fuck up would it take for Ballmer to be forced to resign?
It's the "forced" part that I think is the issue. How much force, and applied by whom. Ballmer wields tremendous power, and his ego will not let him resign voluntarily. I think he'd see the company crash, or at least become a much smaller company, rather than step down.