
Microsoft Has Turned The Corner - markbao
http://minimsft.blogspot.com/2009/07/microsoft-has-turned-corner.html
======
_sh
When I read pieces like this, I'm reminded of a Cringely article
(<http://www.cringely.com/2009/02/the-bentonville-mafia/>). To wit, on the
subject of Microsoft stores:

    
    
      Why even do it, then?  Why have these stores? 
    
      Propaganda.
    
      Phil Schiller of Apple made the point back in January
      when he explained that Apple stores had 400,000 visitors
      per day or the equivalent of 20 Macworld shows EVERY DAY.
      Microsoft wants the same thing.  They want to bypass the
      press machine that they feel has tainted users against
      Windows Vista, making sure the same thing doesn’t happen
      to Windows 7.
    
      If Microsoft can achieve that one goal – just that one –
      then the Microsoft stores will have been worth doing even
      if they never have a dollar of retail sales.
    

Vista failed partially because of poor development (and all the other usual
reasons proclaimed a thousandfold), but also because Microsoft lost control of
its perception to bloggers. The pundits were able to set the perception of the
software, and they said it was crap. I'm not arguing that it wasn't crap, I'm
just saying it was _perceived_ as crap from the get-go by people who'd never
tried it.

Not so with Windows 7. After reading Cringely's article I became attuned to
signs that Microsoft might be tweaking the perception of the OS through its
gloved hands. Not by ghosting outright shills (this failed notoriously with
Vista), but through more subtler means.

Like what? Like the perception that the Windows 7 experience on netbooks will
be similar to the desktop experience. Although this has never been proclaimed
outright (Microsoft said Windows 7 'will be designed to work with' netbooks),
the murmur from the great unwashed that I'm getting is that Windows 7 will be
the snappy because they've 'sunk the bloat' and made it work on netbooks.

Well hang on a moment and let's see. The only thing of which I'm convinced is
that Microsoft has done a _far_ better job of managing the perception of
Windows 7 this time around, and I expect to see more of these types of
articles ('Microsoft has finally become insanely OK again!') leading up to the
release of Windows 7. (Please note these are merely my observations and I'm
not implying 'mini-microsoft' is a shill, see your doctor if pain persists).

~~~
DanielBMarkham
_Vista failed_

Vista failed? That's news to me. Care to elaborate on your definition of
success?

I've been using it since it came out and like it just fine.

I can understand saying Vista had _problems_ , or _bugs_ , or that it had a
lot of _PR issues_ , or even that some vendors didn't like or want it. But
fail?

I think maybe you've been listening inside the web echo chamber a little too
long.

~~~
krschultz
As a product it clearly failed. It did not meet its sales numbers at all, they
had to extend XP's life over and over and finally killed the gift horse so
that Vista would be installed on machines by default. Many people would choose
XP over Vista if they could on their machines. I think most people would
reasonably call it a failure from a business perspective.

------
mattmaroon
Anyone who calls the Xbox a failure has no clue. It's the big winner in this
round of console wars. It's the only multimedia device that's networked to
millions of PCs and hooked up to millions of computers.

It maybe hasn't sold as many units as the Wii, but the games per console stat
is a blowout. As are paid downloads of content, third party games, etc.

And yeah, the red ring of death sucks (has happened to me a few times) but
that's how they beat the PS3 to market and won the generation. In the end the
1 year lead is worth whatever they had to eat on that.

~~~
axod
What's the total _profit_ from Xbox? Considering the complete package - total
investment etc from start to finish? Quite a large loss.

There's been one clear winner and that's the wii - unless you're looking for
something other than cold hard cash profit, and I suspect number of units in
peoples living rooms.

In terms of hardware, the xBox absolutely sucks. I use it rarely because the
thing is so loud with its 100 fans. I have a quieter washing machine. If MS
were going after the 'living room multimedia device', they failed
spectacularly. The large HDD is also rendered useless, since you still have to
put game discs in for 'copy protection purposes'.

~~~
encoderer
If you include the 1st generation, you may well be correct. But the 2nd
generation has been profitable.

And that first generation as a loss-leader was essential to produce the
results of this current (and future) generations. So that seems far less like
a _loss_ than it does an _investment_.

Truth is, every company in the hardware space (Apple, Microsoft, Sony, and
lesser companies like Tivo) all understand that when it comes to moving
hardware units, we've got them in the cubicles first, then the home offices,
then the bedrooms. The big untapped markets are the living rooms, pockets and
cars.

And it seems obvious as anything to me that the xBox, PS3, etc, are not about
gaming consoles. They're about getting a multimedia PC attached to your TV.
Gates saw this as the next big thing 15 years ago. That's why they bought
WebTV! Microsoft and a score of other companies have determined that the
living room will be a very profitable market and they've been willing to drop
a few dollars to get there.

~~~
axod
>> "They're about getting a multimedia PC attached to your TV."

The problem is, the xBox is absolutely unusable as a media thing. It's
ridiculously noisy, big, and useless. A mac mini beats it hands down. Or any
small lightweight PC. The xBox still doesn't even have a browser for the love
of god. We live in a time when new calculators probably have web browsers
included.... but not the xBox.

~~~
mattmaroon
I've used the Xbox to watch media almost every day since the day it launched.
I download all my files through bittorrent, stream them to the Xbox. I also
use PlayOn to let me watch Hulu there.

It's not too noisy if you have the latest version and aren't running a DVD. A
Mac Mini is not better (though it is smaller and quieter) and it's
significantly more expensive and harder to use for living room applications. I
know because I tried.

The Wii has a browser, and I've used it once and then only to check it out.
Wtf would I want a browser on my TV for? All the Xbox needs is a YouTube app,
and then there'd be no reason for one.

~~~
axod
I have wii, xbox, mac mini hooked up in the living room.

wii: family games (Agreed, the browser is crappy, no keyboard, etc), but games
are best for kids/family.

xbox: guitar hero, good if someone wants to shoot random stuff or do real
racing games.

mac mini: browser, youtube, photos, play backed up dvds, movie trailers,
itunes, etc etc.

IMHO The UI in the xbox isn't good, and their insistance on reimplementing the
web in 'apps' isn't one that I agree with - facebook, twitter integration?
Just use a browser. I just simply can't stand to use the xBox more than is
really necessary. It's painful :/ Whilst everyone else is moving towards the
web as a platform, Microsoft still seems to think the web is irrelevant.

~~~
mattmaroon
Xbox Live Arcade is great. I'm hooked on Settlers of Catan on it.

------
a2tech
I'm not sure you can say Microsoft has turned any corner. I do agree that Bing
is a fair piece of software (even if it is long, long over due). However, Bing
is too little, too late. IE 8 is a solid browser compared to IE 7 and I'm glad
MS is taking steps to produce a browser that can compete with the features of
the other 'name brand' browsers. Those ads MS is running though? I thought the
Apple ads were smug-they have nothing on the price-comparing ads MS is
running.

~~~
old-gregg
This is ridiculous. You're attacking them for not being an effective internet
media company. Are you going to go after GM and Chrysler because they haven't
launched their own search engines too?

To "turn the corner", Microsoft needs to stop its Apple bleeding and make the
Office, Windows Server and .NET stack more competitive in the cloud. That's
their core business.

~~~
profquail
I do most of my development in C#/.NET, and I have to say you're right. I
think their next step should be towards getting all of their desktop
programming into the .NET API; they didn't have time to do it in Windows 7,
but perhaps for Windows "8". I'm talking about things like drivers (which can
be programmed using the now-free .NET Micro Framework) and lower-level APIs
(like writing a screensaver...it should just be a class implementing
IScreensaver or whatever, and not written in C any longer).

Getting everything (or as much as possible) switched over to the .NET
framework in Windows would also help a great deal as far as mitigating
security risks as well.

~~~
kristiandupont
Not saying that you are wrong, but I don't see why this would be important,
besides from the security point that you are making, perhaps?

~~~
profquail
Having the ability to do more system programming on .NET (without having to
P/Invoke all over the place) would (should?) make a lot of it significantly
easier and faster. Also, the security issue is not to be overlooked -- with
managed drivers and lower-level libraries, there'd be a much lower chance of
fatal security bugs (e.g. buffer overflows). Also, writing this code in .NET
allows developers to take advantage of a great number of new testing tools
like Pex and Code Contracts (for fuzzing and static analysis, respectively).

Also, .NET 4.0 includes some additions for doing parallel processing to help
developers take advantage of multi-core processors. I've been playing around
with it for about a month now (I'm writing an open-source managed numerics
library in C#) and the new parallel stuff is really quite good.

~~~
thismat
I would love to see .NET better integrated into the actual operating system. I
agree completely with you.

Also, it's worthwhile to mention that .NET is available and usable freely
(albeit limited features in VS, but not THAT limited), and let's not forget
that start ups can get full access to plenty of the software through
<http://www.microsoftstartupzone.com/BizSpark/Pages/FAQ.aspx>

I like the direction Microsoft is taking the company, I hope it continues.

------
johngunderman
Quite frankly, the only software of Microsoft's that I've ever been impressed
with is their Office Suite, and even that has gone down hill in the last few
years. What they really need to do is stick to the basics. They need to stop
wasting resources in fields they are obviously not good at. They /had/ a
strong Office platform, they should improve on that. (and by improve, I don't
mean "add more features"). If they want to succeed in the OS market, they have
to find a niche. Its hard to compete with free. Apple does it by having
excellent design and customer service. Apple sells the experience. What does
Microsoft sell? Software that companies are too entrenched in. That's no
market at all, at least not for long. Now if Window's could claim to be truly
secure, and truly quick, and truly light on resources, I might actually use
it. In the meantime, free satisfies all my needs.

~~~
mhansen
How has the Office Suite gone downhill in the last few years?

Office 2007 was a major innovation from my point of view. The company threw
out an established, yet underperforming UI, taking a huge risk. But it's payed
off in greater usability and learnability. The Ribbon user interface (imho)
blows away other office suite interfaces.

~~~
thismat
And the ribbon is a relatively new user experience for such a product as well.
This was a huge risk for them considering how widespread office was, but it
goes to show you that Microsoft can indeed produce a quality product.

I use open office on my home computers, but at work I use Office 2007, I
loathe having to spend time in OpenOffice now, because the interface and
usability for Office 2007 is just so pleasant to me.

