

Steve Ballmer: We won't be out-innovated by Apple anymore - anderzole
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/steve-ballmer-says-microsoft-will-not-be-out-innovated-apple

======
tomkarlo
This is the kind of thing a CEO can say internally, but probably shouldn't be
saying to press. If they are successful, there won't be any benefit; if they
fail, he'll look silly. I realize part of the motivation here is to keep some
partners on board, but a similar credibility issue will apply there as well.

~~~
TomAnthony
You make a very good point, but on the flipside I like that he publicly
recognises their position and that they need to get back on track. It
reassures me that they aren't just hiding from the situation.

~~~
tomkarlo
True, but it would be a lot better if he was saying this before everyone else
in the universe realized they were lagging on innovation. Also, I feel like
they're making a mistake by specifically pointing to Apple - they're lagging
behind multiple companies in multiple markets.

When you spend all your time talking about one competitor, you're admitting
they're beating you. Market leaders don't call our their competitors by name.
(See: Coke, Pepsi.)

------
FreshCode
Why even mention the competition? We all know who the tablet incumbent is.
I've always been bullish on Microsoft, but Ballmer... A truly great CEO could
say something more subtle like, "We have our best people working on Surface
and we think producers - executives, artists, developers and managers - will
love our tablet offering, which we pioneered with Surface Table in 2007 and
can now finally bring to the public in the beautiful, compact Surface. <sends
MS Word document via email, smiling like a sir>."

~~~
pedalpete
My thoughts exactly. He's too focused on the competition when he needs to be
focused on the customer.

You won't win the race if you're focused on what your competitors are doing.
Focus on the finish line and just get there first.

------
zeruch
Yes they will, most likely. Or rather they will collide in various areas
struggling for consumer mindshare (with MS in a very disadvantaged position
right now).

I still argue that Apple is far less "innovative" than it takes obsessive
interest in the packaging of already done things and has the greatest
marketing arm of any corporation out there.

"but you can't deny that the man [Ballmer] has passion" Maybe, but I don't
think its for interesting product as much as a belligerently competitive
business streak. That isn't a value judgement as much as an observation of
character. Jobs was a bastard but one driven on what was produced. Ballmer is
also a bastard but about as in the box a thinker as one gets for the industry.

If MS can even put up a viabe fight it will be some time in, and will be more
to grab the

~~~
maxharris
_obsessive interest in the packaging of already done things_

Already done for whom? If you buy a new product, and it has a feature you've
never had before, it's new _to you_. Like anything else, this isn't
subjective: you can _count_ the number of people that have a given feature in
their phones.

There is a world of difference between someone doing something new in a lab
somewhere vs. someone building something that I can actually use to improve my
life. The earlier is only a mere promise of things to come, while the latter
is something I can actually count on.

In the context of a _computer company_ , _innovation_ means delivering
excellent (and therefore original & novel) design, making the most of the
latest technology available. Before the other companies do (if they ever do).

Tl;dr: let's dispense with the fiction that innovation stops in a research
lab. It doesn't! (I should know because I work in a research lab. What we
produce is only barely tangible, and it's up to others to actually take it
somewhere.)

~~~
zeruch
Yes, then let's also dispense with the fiction that great product & packaging
is as novel and actually innovative as creating new technology (whether that
be a protocol, or languages or manufacturing processes, or complete past the
horizon breakthroughs, et al...sorry, but I dislike the use of "innovation" to
be anything even mildly market "novel" instead of actually groundbreaking
tech. Timing the market entry right is not the same as actually innovating
something into it).

~~~
maxharris
I don't agree, and I think you completely missed the point of my original
post.

Is technology somehow good for its own sake, or is it good because it makes
individual people better off? My view is the latter. Therefore, the answer to
the question of who should get moral credit for bringing a technology to life
is: everyone that had a consciously played part in making it so that person X
could have thing Y in their lives.

~~~
zeruch
I didn't miss the point; I disagree with it. Yes, it "takes a village" to
bring that technology to a marketable life, but ultimately the large part of
that chain isn't doing the "innovative" part (the actual out the box
conceptualizing to fruition of a truly novel concept) but taking said
innovation and making it consumable by a perceived (or primed) audience.

I am making a distinction between participants. What you are saying implies
that its those because it makes something "better off" but I could say that
about a lot of things that are not novel either (i.e. vaccination of poor
populations that can't otherwise afford it), so innovation doesn't necessarily
mean (or in my mind have to be) marketable to large numbers (i.e. novel new
treatment for a niche disease).

Innovation != "bring a technology to life" (take it to market), its
proving/crafting something truly novel.

Whether it makes it to wider usage doesn't make it any less novel, nor does
successfully selling non-novel ideas at scale make that success any less
valuable. I simply refuse to conflate the two.

------
gdsf34dfsg
This is a crazy thing to be saying at a time when everyone is questioning the
price and performance of Surface.

Don't get me wrong. Surface looks good. But what is the impression after a
week of use? Does the cheaper model compete effectively with the $400 iPad2?
Does the more expensive model compete with an Ultrabook?

Really. Innovation is about competitiveness as much as ideas. And if the
Surface is over priced without being as useful, then Ballmer's comments are
embarrassing.

------
pohl
Microsoft has a sordid history with the word 'innovate'. Reading this gave me
flashbacks to the days where they were trying to control the narrative
regarding to their conflict with the DoJ. If only the verb form 'innovate' had
some synonyms. Then they could say "Apple won't out-Garde the Avant on our
watch" instead. Or something.

------
DannyBee
So i guess this means they are going to move out of computers and start making
hamburgers or something?

Since, of course, there is a near 0% chance of them not being out-innovated by
apple in every field in which they compete.

------
MaysonL
Horace Dediu has a perfect takedown, showing the timeline:
[http://www.asymco.com/2012/07/10/the-poetry-of-steve-
ballmer...](http://www.asymco.com/2012/07/10/the-poetry-of-steve-ballmer/)

------
yen223
Ballmer could be right. If iOS 6 or the most recent MacBook lineup is any
indication, Apple seemed to have pulled the brakes on innovation.

------
teeja
Oh yes they will.

------
moron
That's weird, I thought the standard line on Apple was that they _don't_
innovate, they just take existing product ideas and make them "pretty". And
then sheeple like me buy them because we're gullible and stupid.

~~~
subsection1h

        I thought the standard line on Apple was that they
        don't innovate, they just take existing product
        ideas and make them "pretty".
    

Please show us when and where Ballmer stated this "standard line"?

If he never stated it, then how does this "standard line" relate to this
article? Do people who state this "standard line" generally hold a high
opinion of Ballmer's conclusions and must now reconcile their opinion of
Ballmer's conclusions with their "standard line"?

Or do you simply want to use any opportunity to attack strawmen who believe
that everyone who buys Apple's products are stupid and gullible sheeple?

------
phene
Like he has a choice or control in the matter...

