
How far has Microsoft fallen? - dmoney67
http://blogs.computerworld.com/tablets/21504/how-far-has-microsoft-fallen
======
pinaceae
They are indeed confused.

We are working with large enterprise clients (big pharma). Last two years they
practically all adopted iPads for their field forces. Went with single device
policy, which created a lot of pain for IT - no Office, no deployment tools,
no AD, etc.

MS and Intel then start a marketing blitz in those IT departments, hey,
enterprise, we love and understand you. Cool, IT guys fall for it.

Problem?

MS wants enterprise to adopt Win8 Pro on Intel devices. Which practically
_all_ are around 1000$ and have a battery life of 4 hours.

Enterprise IT wants something similar to the iPad, for even cheaper. They want
an iPad with sane deployment tools and MS Office. Cheaper. Because their
people in emerging markets have limited budgets.

Enter Windows RT. It is just like an iPad, cheap, better power efficiency on
its devices. Awesome, right? Except that it does _not_ offer the deployment
and management tools needed. It is practically an iOS device in that regard.
The MS Office on it is Home/Student _Preview_ edition, which seem to be
upgradeable if you have the right CALs. But it runs like shit. Buzz is that
the whole thing was a very late add once they realized that MS' main selling
point was Office. Late, panicky scramble.

And now add the fact that MS seems to be launching MS Office on iOS soon.

And then we have Modern UI. Nice for consumer apps. Facebook looks cool. But
enterprise tools? On iOS we have freedom. On Modern there are guidelines,
horizontal swipe and pagination is key. You're used to high information
density, utilization of screen real estate to show as much as possible on one
screen to avoid a user needing to navigate away? Forget that on Modern UI.
Whitespace rules, it is like the GMail redesign on steroids. No wonder they
need Classic UI to make MS Office available - Modern UI in its current strict
incarnation cannot scale to offer this kind of functionality.

So yeah. Intel is not in a good spot. Microsoft neither. The next 6 months
will be decisive. Lots of pilots going on, Samsung has a good enough Win 8 Pro
device out there, Surface Pro still not here. Surface is not even launched in
Japan, might not be till late next year.

Whoever is in charge of platform strategy at MS should be made to go away.
With access to those resources they should be kicking ass.

~~~
tluyben2
> MS and Intel then start a marketing blitz in those IT departments, hey,
> enterprise, we love and understand you. Cool, IT guys fall for it.

Serious question here; is it that much different in the US? At 'big whatever'
I have been in the EU (besides, strangely enough(?), France), the 'IT guys'
don't like Windows/MS and would not choose it if it was up to them. I see
Ubuntu, BYOD Mac OS X, iOS for management and force-fed Windows (with a lot of
complaining).

People working mostly on Excel (or other Office components) would pick
Windows, but those are not 'the IT guys'?

~~~
pinaceae
Enterprise IT as in systems for end users (you can call it Commercial IT). The
IT guys themselves will not use Win 8 Pro / Surface of course. Just the
business users. But Enterprise IT departments make the purchasing decisions.

It all depends on scale. Once you have 50k employees worldwide, Ubuntu does
not cut it. OS X might, but no one has tried so far. MS Office is the killer
here, if you can't run it, you're dead. That's why MS was caught so surprised
when the iPad took off, against all _logic_.

~~~
flagnog
"Once you have 50k employees worldwide, Ubuntu does not cut it" - yep, it
costs too much. No... wait, it's free. There's no deployment tools... no...
wait, there are... There's no good office softw... nevermind. No one has
ever... wait, there's that town in Germany. I give up. Why isn't Ubuntu
suitable? It even comes with an RDP client so you can use Windows-only
programs remotely...

~~~
bjustin
LibreOffice/OpenOffice doesn't work as well as MS Office. Google Docs doesn't
replicate all of the functionality that MS Office offers, and doesn't work as
well. The productivity difference[1] would easily be worth over
$200/person/month for people who use Office a lot.

[1] From features that Google Docs and to a lesser extent, LibreOffice, don't
have or work poorly, and speed especially vs Google Docs.

~~~
flagnog
the only area where I can see this as being a problem is with Excel. For the
others, use a web-authoring tool. Why create a MB document in Word, to attach
to a SharePoint page, then send a link to every pointing out the new document?
Excel has some specialized math functions (and data presentation abilities)
that are beyond LO/OO. But I think it's such a small percentage of people that
need that functionality, you could replace MSO w/ LO/OO and most everyone
would say 'meh' and go back to work.

------
sakopov
My god, give them a break. Can we get at least one positive article about
Microsoft on HN? It doesn't matter what Microsoft does they always get
ridiculed for it. Any effort, no matter how good, gets completely obliterated.
Microsoft hasn't been the most innovative company lately but they're slowly
adjusting their line of products to at least try to get somewhere. Yes,
Surface doesn't stand up to iPad, but it's a very solid product nonetheless.
Yes, Windows 8 is a big deviation from norm, but it is an innovative move
forward that needs a bit more work. Yes, C# and the entire .NET ecosystem
isn't as popular as Rails and gets absolutely no love on HN but it is an
_incredibly_ powerful environment. For fuck's sake, stop hating Microsoft just
to hate it and embrace their efforts to move forward and compete just like you
do Google and Apple.

~~~
jpxxx
No thanks. When you recall their once-titanic power, their vicious business
culture, their decade-long seizure and stagnation of the entire web, the way
they openly eat their own with gusto, and the incalculable amounts of money
and effort thrown into the boundless swamps of their fetid platforms, you
realize that watching them tumble and smash on the rocks below is never, ever,
ever going to get old.

~~~
endgame
I'm looking forward to seeing similar things happen to Apple.

~~~
Jgrubb
Why? Why wouldn't you want a company - any company - to do well, build great
products, make their shareholders happy, and generally succeed?

~~~
endgame
Because I don't think their products are so great, and I believe they're
having a negative effect on the industry.

~~~
theorique
If you find an ubuntu laptop with build quality equal to a MacBook Air or Pro,
I'm all ears.

Same thing with the iPhone or iPad.

~~~
acuozzo
> If you find an ubuntu laptop with build quality equal to a MacBook Air or
> Pro, I'm all ears.

Ummm... what about Ubuntu on the MacBook Air or Pro?

~~~
theorique
That would work, unless you were determined to avoid Apple (I'm not)

------
bobsy
I enjoy using Windows 8. There are problems. Shutting it down isn't obvious.
Selecting "Lock" will bring up a sign in screen. Putting your computer to
sleep won't... its all a bit strange. Like I said though, it is a fairly
enjoyable experience.

I haven't used the Surface. I don't see myself getting one. I have the iPad2.
I only use it to surf the web. I don't need a replacement. Maybe in 2-3 years.

I think Microsoft has got a branding problem. The Surface is obviously running
something different to Windows 8. I only get it because I know what ARM is...
its impossible to explain to my parents. "It runs on a different type of
processor so is different" is met with a blank face or "But its runs Windows
right?"

There is also a fear, especially with my parents about Windows 8. They have
just about mastered Windows 7. A lot of this fear is misplaced. There was a
lot of talk of Desktop UI and Metro UI. It would have been simpler to say "The
start button has been removed and instead has its own screen making programs
easier to find and use."

Instead they banged on about different UI's. Different types of applications.
All very confusing. Then you have the lack of branding. I still call Windows 8
app's "Metro". I think it is a good name. I don't know what they are called
now. When I enter the store in Windows 8 it isn't obvious what the new name is
either..

Microsoft made a big mess of branding and advertising Windows 8. Someone
should be fired because it is harming the take up of what is imperfect but
pretty good software.

------
bambax
> _And, since Windows RT doesn't look or feel like prior versions of Windows
> and doesn't run applications written for them either, why call it Windows at
> all?_

This is called "brand extension". Brand extension is a crime against marketing
and against common sense.

The reasoning goes like this:

\- we have a strong brand

\- we have a new product

\- no one will know this new product exists unless we spend huge amounts of
advertising to inform the public about its existence

\- oh but wait! we have this strong brand! why not attach the new product to
the existing brand, to jump start it?!

\- (and BTW, our strong but old brand can only benefit from this hot new cool
product being attached to it)

At first it seems to work: the new product grows faster with brand extension
than without.

But very fast, people become confused about which is which and what does what,
and prefer two uniquely branded and well-positioned competing products against
the whole "line offering".

The "hot new product" usually ends up polluting, weakening, if not killing the
parent brand, instead of rejuvenating it.

This is exactly what is happening with Windows RT.

Microsoft isn't the only culprit however. "Google Play" is a similar move. It
hasn't started to hurt Google yet, probably because it didn't catch, and
people continue to call the Android app store... well, "the Android App
Store".

But rest assured it will come back to bite them.

~~~
panacea
My amateur marketing analysis follows...

"Brand extension is a crime against marketing and against common sense" Agreed
and it's an example of something Apple has gotten very right. Apple is the
banner brand.

What is Apple? It's a hardware device manufacturer with mostly excellent
software and services. You buy an Apple X and you're buying (post Mac but
still applies):

iPod.

iPod smaller.

iPod much smaller.

iPod with a touch screen.

iPod with a touch screen and phone.

iPod with a touch screen, internet and much bigger.

iPod with a touch screen, internet and slightly bigger.

Some thinner, some fatter, some with cameras, some without.

They've almost never stumbled in extending the brand and creating new sub-
brands because the initial umbrella brand isn't 'used in vain' or diluted.

What is Google? Google is an ad supported AI interface with occasionally
excellent hardware, and genius software services. You buy a Google X and
you're buying? It remains to be seen (although I suspect it's coming) what
exactly the 'Google Nexus' is.

What is Microsoft? Microsoft makes Windows and Office, enterprise software and
is a sticker on the side of other people's products. When you buy Microsoft
Windows X you get??

~~~
TillE
I'd say the iPod Nano is the only device Apple has really screwed up in terms
of a consistent message. First it has a clickwheel, then it doesn't. Oh look
there's a camera, and now it's gone. It's small enough to stick in a watch
wristband - but wait, now there's a touchscreen and it sorta looks like it
runs apps except it doesn't.

Totally incoherent. I loved the first few generations with a clickwheel, they
were great to use on the go. I have no idea what the _point_ of the latest
model is.

------
malkia
And for more fun: \-- C:\Windows\System32 contains 64 bit binaries, while \--
C:\Windows\SysWow64 contains the 32 bit ones (that is on a 64 bit version of
Windows)

Then the naming of $(Platform) $(PlatformShort) in MSVC IDE.. Explore for
yourself - it's fun, it's even more fun when the windows sdk, dxsdk, and other
ms's sdk's use different naming conventions for the same things.

Or the WinDir vs SystemRoot

it's something about Microsoft creating too much confusion with their naming

~~~
Gormo
These are hardly problems. Users don't generally encounter system directories
or identifiers in IDEs, and these patterns have emerged from MS's traditional
dedication to maintaining backward compatibility, which is usually much more
important to developers and power users than having directory names be
completely descriptive of what's in them.

The problem with Windows RT is exactly the opposite: they've _broken_ backward
compatibility, severely, and created a product that bears no resemblance to
what the vast majority of users recognize as Windows, yet they've decided to
call it "Windows" anyway.

~~~
malkia
most often, it's us developers becoming users of some other software. And real
users are puzzled sometimes, there were at least couple of emails to the
sqlite mailing list about missing sqlite3.dll from users. In one case it was
some tax program installing it in the system32 folder, messing it up with
another one (why would they do that is another matter), also as someone posted
below, there is Program Files, and Program Files (x86), but there apps that do
not follow that convention (internally they have their own bin32, bin64
folders), and it comes to users again - usually plugins for various creative
suits - audio, video, etc.

------
gry
Apple kills Microsoft here. My bias:

They deprecated every major Mac hardware and software transition into a
virtual machine.

* Mac OS 9 to Classic Environment

* PowerPC to Rosetta

Apple brands, changes brands, and moves forward. Microsoft makes Windows
proper compatible with the new. They have done an amazing job both from the
tech and marketing front.

And yet, computing is now the rest of us, not the "enterprise". We have
amazing computers in our pockets. The enterprise changed, allowing and
adapting to iPhone and Android devices.

Our phones do more interesting things than our Windows desktops.

------
elliatab
As a developer working with Microsoft products I have a very mixed feeling
about what the company is doing right now. The tools and products for
developers and professionals are amazing. Visual Studio might be the most
visible example but there are really tons of great tools and libraries (and
many are actually open sourced). The problem is that I cannot see any of this
greatness translated into end-users killer-apps. LOB apps surely benefit from
it and other ecosystems (OSX, iOS or Android) will not catch-up for a long
time. For me there are two Microsoft: one for the developers and headed by
Scott Guthrie and the other for consumers. This last one does not have a clear
vision and is just trying to catch up with Google and Apple.

~~~
guilloche
I used to using visual studio and thought it was good. But after using emacs,
I donot think it is good any more. and the libraries/APIs seems not well
designed too now.

~~~
elliatab
When talking about VS and libraries/APIs you really need to be more specific.
VS lets you work with very different technologies from native C++ to .NET
languages, including web stacks.

The user experience may vary but if we are talking about the .NET world I
think it is a very strong package.

The only equivalent I can think of would be the Eclipse/Java combo.

------
sutro
Windows RT (Run Time) - it's the best product name since Windows NT (New
Technology). While all those other bad software companies waste your time with
OT (Old Technology) and CT (Compile Time), Microsoft gives you the NRTT (New
Run Time Technology) you deserve.

~~~
zalew
with Modern ui

~~~
UntitledNo4
Which should be called modern since Modern (uppercase M) refers, in the world
of art, literature and architecture, to Modernism, which is not at all modern.

(this was written in jest)

------
troymc
Heh, there was similar journalistic confusion in a Maclean's magazine article
(Maclean's being Canada's main weekly news magazine):

"Microsoft also unveiled a tablet this month. The Surface will have a built-in
keyboard on the screen cover and run on the Android operating system…"

Yep, Android!

Source: Maclean's magazine for July 16, 2012, page 47.

~~~
xutopia
That's like O'Leary on the Lang & O'Leary show saying that Pinterest is a
productivity search engine.

------
hmexx
I'm in the minority who believes that Microsoft's tablet strategy is
reasonable.

Their long-term goal is to provide tablets that look more or less like the
incumbents (8-10 inch, light, 10 hour battery life, 9mm thin), but can also
run any Windows app you want. But that's not possible for another 2 years or
so of advancement by Intel and other hardware suppliers. So what do they do
until then? Just wait? No, they release two devices: an ipad competitor that's
not a hybrid, and an ultrabook competitor.

They may both have modest sales, but the Windows store will start getting
populated with apps, and Windows 8 will become familiar, so that when they CAN
actually build a 'perfect' hybrid, all the other pieces will be in place.

------
mtgx
I'm not the biggest fan of Microsoft in the mobile world, but until they
launched Windows 8, I actually thought the idea of the "hybrid" device might
work, and may be the future of both tablets and PC's. You can use it as a PC
when you need it, and as a tablet, when you don't. Best of both worlds, right?

Wrong. When I started using Windows 8, I realized it's actually the _worst_ of
both worlds. If you want both in the same package, then you have to live with
a ton of compromises. Here are some of them:

1) You can't have a large screen, if you want to use it as a tablet, too.
Maybe 11" at most, and that includes hybrid devices more like Surface, with
light weight tablet parts, and detachable keyboard. The ones like Lenovo Yoga
are completely unusable as tablets, unless you intend to use a "tablet" on
your desk all the time, at which point, what's the difference compared to just
using a touchscreen laptop?

2) Then 10-11" screens are not very usable for real work as a PC, so you have
to compromise a lot in that, too.

3) 10-11" is pretty large and heavy for a tablet, and it seems most people are
starting to gravitate towards 8" or smaller tablets, which makes it even more
likely that people will want the tablet and the PC as 2 different devices in
the future.

4) If you want a "hybrid", then you're forced to use x86 chips, and unless you
want the performance of a netbook, you need Core chips inside. These have 3
major drawbacks: low battery life, heat/noise, and high price tags.

5) Windows RT devices, while a bit better on the tablet part, because of the
ARM advantages (better battery life and more competitive prices), can't
seriously be called "hybrids". They only have Office for PC use.

6) 13" or higher "hybrids" are also a joke, as you can't seriously use them as
tablets.

7) You're still forced to use or avoid the "touch mode", even when you want to
use it as a PC. I consider Windows 8 worse for a PC user than Windows 7. I
brings a lot of new stuff that are there to annoy the PC user, not help him.
Whatever small benefits it has over Windows 7, they are not worth it for the
worse user experience. And this is for the more "techie" of the PC users. For
"normal" mom and pop users, they are going to find it even worse, after using
XP/Windows 7 for so long, and now having to basically learn and unlearn a ton
of new stuff, which is not easy for this type of user.

So whichever way you go, either more towards the PC part, or the tablet part,
you're going to run into major compromises, if you want to use a single device
as both PC and tablet. So I don't think anymore that hybrids are the future,
as they seem to do either one part pretty badly, or be mediocre at both.
You're better off keeping these two type of devices separated.

~~~
batiudrami
I assumed that (not now, but in 5 years time), you'll bring your 7" or 10"
tablet home, plug it into its dock (a-la laptop docks now), which will hook it
up to your full size mouse and keyboard, and your 27" high resolution monitor.

It'll have enough processing power to do what most people need from a machine,
and when you need to go out, you grab it out of its dock, and all your
programs, files and settings are with you, running on their tablet-optimised
version.

This is the end game as I see it and I'm pretty convinced this is what
Microsoft is planning for. If that's the way it goes, they have a huge head
start over Apple who are insisting on keeping OSX and iOS separate.

~~~
josteink
_when you need to go out, you grab it out of its dock, and all your programs,
files and settings are with you, running on their tablet-optimised version._

This was what the future looked like 10 years ago until cloud-provided
software and storage became an option. This was the videos Microsoft showed us
and it all looked _fantastic_.

Now I'm wondering why on earth would I lob files manually around? It's as old-
fashioned as synching your phone via USB and iTunes. You did that 5 years ago.
Not now. It's a stone-age solution created by stone-age approach to computing.
We demand better now.

Now I have one Google doc document, which is a live document. It's always the
latest version, with all the latest collaborations, and I don't need to bring
it with me. That's _great_. I don't know which documents I'll need. And you
can't be realistically expected to bring them _all_ with you always, just to
be covered.

The "future" you are painting sounds old fashioned and I don't want it. That
is Microsoft's main problem now: Their future insist we should keep things
which are obsolete (like local files) at all cost, and they are doing it to
attempt to keep the relevance of their OS as it used to be.

In services like Office 365 they are very explicit about not creating a
"document", you are creating a ".docx-file". This is 100% orthogonal to the
way they tried to do things on the desktop (hide the extensions at all cost,
because they were "confusing").

Now they are back-pedalling hard. Now people _must know_ that they are
creating a MS Word file. In the cloud. As if that makes sense.

They are either confused, conflicted, panicking, a mix of those, or just
appearing to be entirely uncoordinated right now.

Even as a .NET developer I am seriously starting to doubt Microsoft's future,
at least as far as client-platforms go.

~~~
zanny
"Now I'm wondering why on earth would I lob files manually around? It's as
old-fashioned as synching your phone via USB and iTunes. You did that 5 years
ago. Not now. It's a stone-age solution created by stone-age approach to
computing. We demand better now."

AT&T and Verizon's monopoly on wireless spectrum called, they want their $50 a
gigabyte.

~~~
josteink
That's a US problem which the rest of the world is not constrained by. It's
not going to stop technological progress.

Especially not when wifi and wired internet is completely and utterly
untouched by it. That's how 99.99% of the business market is deployed.

And you have governments to regulate monopolies. Demand action from your
government instead of complaining about it online. That has worked out pretty
well for Europe.

~~~
zanny
> It's not going to stop technological progress.

Are you kidding? I don't want to sound ethnocentric but what technology has
taken off on a global scale that _didn't_ at least work in the US? It isn't
even about GDP, it is that the US accounts for between a third and half of
major 1st world consumers.

A great example of the inverse is how most major streaming services only serve
US customers. The rest of the world can take it in stride and just pirate all
the media, though, so progress on that front doesn't really slow. However, if
you tried using truly cloud based computing with everything remote, it would
never work in America because the internet coverage is way too bad (it is also
really bad in a lot of other first world monopoly telecom nations like the UK,
Canada, and Australia though).

------
frozenport
I spoke with an MS recruiter and they have 4k new job opening. We will see
some more violent flailing before they die. Maybe even innovation.

------
netcan
There are two dovetailing things going here.

# 1 is Windows' part in the disruptive innovation curve which I think touch
OSs are clearly following. In the beginning new technology is not directly
competing with other players in the category. It is drawing marketing share
from non-consupmtion. That's been most of what mobile has gobbled up to now.
Then comes low & mid end consumption come next. We're seeing some of that
already. People bringing a tablet on business trips when they would have
brought a laptop 2 years ago.

Windows seem to be trying to "catch" tablets on their way to "high quality
use" on the disruption curve. "Primary computers" used by professionals,
students & such. Current Android/iOS devices are not really ready for these
uses so they have some time. If they can get enterprise on to Windows
machines, they may be able to build a moat (or at least some basic
battlements).

# 2 is Microsoft's lipstick-on-a-pig marketing. Marketing fundamentals like
product segmentation, branding, naming, pricing. MS have never been smooth
with that kind of stuff. "Windows Home Office for Students (noncommercial use
only)" has always felt like a contrived afterthought. I'm sure it's well
researched and functional, but it's not elegant. When you don't have the
elegance at the more fundamental level of marketing it's harder to
communicate. So Windows RT/Metro/Surface/Phone/Touch/8 is not going to be
understood by consumers until they start using is.

If it was another company, Id say they're doomed. But Microsoft are stubborn
and resilient. They may do it.

------
starik36
MS is definitely confusing the market. Their ARM offering should be for
tablets only and shouldn't be called Windows RT or Windows anything else. It
should have been called Metro OS or some such. It shouldn't have included
desktop mode, which serves no other purpose other than to confuse things.

No one would have been confused.

I don't believe I've used word "confused" enough times.

~~~
nwh
Confused isn't strong enough. I see utter bewilderment as I try to explain to
my peers what they difference between RT and the bog standard Windows 8.
Usually they get bored and wish they hadn't asked the question.

If it runs office and IE in the desktop, why can't I install games? What
application store? What's ARM? What does RT stand for? Why would anyone want
that?

------
rjd
Storm in a teacup. Its no different to Windows CE, or a plethora of other
similar named products. Most people who would be confused will no doubt have a
sales person to explain the situation. Most other people will have a clue and
this won't be an issue.

To be perfectly honest this reminds me a lot of the PS3 vs Xbox reporting when
they where released. PS3 couldn't catch a break, still sold OK, but nothing
but terrible reviews. Eventually it came out of the woodwork was most media
agencies where taking money from the gaming industry (and probably MS) to
write anti PS3 articles, out right media assassination. My money is on the
same tactic being used now.

~~~
laserDinosaur
An entire industry was being paid off to slag the PS3? I've never heard of
this before.

~~~
rjd
No idea if you're being sarcastic or not.

If not its quite common, thats what PR companies do, usually they just do
positive stuff, but when you have a lot to loose it can go negative.

Having worked in big media you learn very quickly that everything is paid for
in one way or another. Sometimes quite innocently, free interviews on TV which
involve the use of there company name. Other times more sneaky stuff,
basically differing levels of bribery.

Generally its not to bad, an interview with a pop star releasing a new album,
my friend however gets flown all over the world regularly to review movies and
games. Everything paid for, thousands and thousands of dollars splashed on
him... as long as he continues to write positive review... he'd hate to loose
his free holidays in Germany or Las Vegas or London every 6 months or so. So
he writes things in a way that keeps his perks. Judging by the lack of
negative reviews I'd say the game industry has almost every game reviewer paid
off.

The ones that annoy me the most are advertorials, paid stories about certain
topics or companies. PR companies basically come in with the story finished,
all the wording the way they want it and are willing to pay money to get it
into the prime time news.

I'll admit 90% of the time they get turned down on there first try, but they
keep trying, and generally they get there way as smaller agencies and
especially bloggers will take the money forcing the larger companies to
publish a story as well not to loose market share.

Some blogs have bene exposed multiple times for doing it, I believe engadget
went on the defensive after being accused of these practices, and there has
been a few other examples involving Google and Facebook I can faintly remember
within the last year or so.

If you weren't aware of that going on I hope I haven't shaken your trust in
the media to badly. But its all about money at the end of the day, and with
dwindling profits more and more agencies are caving to PR money.

------
kyllo
I have to agree about the lack of a compelling use case for the ARM version of
Surface. The Surface Pro, which is non-ARM and runs the desktop version of
Windows 8, so it can run "legacy" Windows 7 programs, but the drawbacks are
that it has worse battery life and costs another $400 more. At that point why
not just get a laptop.

I actually think Windows 7 is great, it is the most useful, customizable,
business-appropriate, and non-broken version of Windows in a while. I was
really impressed with Microsoft when I got my corporate box updated to Windows
7 and Office 2010. I thought they were on the right track. But with Windows 8
they tried to fix something that wasn't broken, and abandoned their core
market in the process.

They really should have forked their OS product line. Windows 8 RT should have
been called "Windows Touch" for tablets and phones, and they should have
continued to iterate Windows 7 as "Windows Desktop" for business/productivity
users. There is no need for Windows 8/Metro/Modern/whatever on a desktop
computer, because vertical touch screens do not work ergonomically.

------
javajosh
Question: how long before Bill Gates steps back in to be CEO of Microsoft?

~~~
redthrowaway
Never. Why would he? He's made all the money he'll ever need to make, and by
all accounts is happy and fulfilled with his role in his non-profit. Why go
back to MS to right a sinking ship, have his public image tarnished (again),
and have to deal with the stress of being CEO? What would he gain from it?

Gates seems to be happier and more fulfilled (certainly better-liked) than he
ever was while he was at MS. I just don't see the value proposition for him in
returning.

~~~
melvinram
Bill still owns a lot of Microsoft stock. He might not care about the money
for his personal gain, but he does care about the mission and goals of his
foundation. More money for Bill = more money for foundation.

I don't see Bill returning to Microsoft being a likely scenario but the value
proposition is definitely there if he feels his ability to do things with this
foundation in the future threatened.

~~~
jrogers65
Speaking of the Gates Foundation, it appears to be involved in myraid shady
dealings -
[http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Gates_Foundation_Critiq...](http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Gates_Foundation_Critique)

~~~
bcoates
That website is one dense concentration of crazy. Each of those links is to
yet another article by the same guy where he does some ranting, then mostly
misrepresents some aside in an article at another source, then "just asks some
questions", then closes with some more ranting.

~~~
jrogers65
Plenty of those articles link to mainstream sources.

First one I looked at linked to this, for example:
[http://www.npr.org/2011/06/03/136920664/gates-foundation-
sho...](http://www.npr.org/2011/06/03/136920664/gates-foundation-shows-off-
new-headquarters)

Which contains the same kind of information they are talking about:

> They're influencing governments in lots of different ways — and
> corporations, and really everybody else in society, and it's not just about
> writing checks

So clearly this isn't just a philanthropic effort - it's a political machine
with real influence.

More:

[http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2012751169_gatesmonsa...](http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2012751169_gatesmonsanto29m.html)

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leonie-
haimson/post_1315_b_788...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leonie-
haimson/post_1315_b_788994.html)

------
sonabinu
maybe Microsoft needs to revamp their marketing efforts. They have some great
things happening in the innovation space (for example
[http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/technology/microsoft-
renew...](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/technology/microsoft-renews-
relevance-with-machine-learning-technology.html?_r=0))

~~~
Gormo
They ought to revamp their marketing efforts from square one, starting with
figuring out who their customers are and what products those customers will
want to purchase.

------
munger
For the PC world, I'm happy with a 13" ultrabook running Windows 7 (Asus
Zenbook UX31A).

At least I can get work done on it from the recliner and plug it in to an
external 24" monitor and keyboard for more serious work.

In my opinion the greatest thing about Windows 7 (other than general stability
and being less annoying than Vista) is its window key + arrow hot keys to move
application windows around super fast on multi-monitor setups. (and to do
exact right/left splits on single monitors)

There is nothing appealing to me about Windows RT/Surface or Windows 8 for
laptop/desktop, they both look like they will just get in the way of creating
or working on anything.

~~~
codewright
>In my opinion the greatest thing about Windows 7 (other than general
stability and being less annoying than Vista) is its window key + arrow hot
keys to move application windows around super fast on multi-monitor setups.
(and to do exact right/left splits on single monitors)

As an Xmonad user I am simultaneously aghast and amused.

Also, this is available on Mac OS X and I use a utility to make available the
same behavior.

~~~
munger
I was actually considering adding "sad but true" to the end of that line...
because... it is.

=)

Also what app do you have to use in Mac OS X for sane window management? One
thing that bugged me about giving a 15" MBP a chance was how "maximizing"
windows doesn't actually maximize them and that sort of thing. I guess I
thought window management was supposed to be built into the OS out of the box.

~~~
sbuk
Apple UI paradigm is different to that of Windows. The windows of Windows are
application based, while the windows of the Macintosh system are document
based, hence the seeming "lack" a screen maximisation.

~~~
kitsune_
I don't get the "document based" label - in my opinion it's misnomer. It's
anything BUT "document based" when you are working on a photoshop document and
behind its window you see your finder, your desktop icons, your desktop
background, your browser and so on. How is it that a "document based" UI
philosophy?

~~~
robotresearcher
There is no application window. Instead, each application shows one window for
each document, plus tool palettes, etc in their own window. The application
would take over the global menu bar when active.

This is in contrast to Windows 3, which had the "multiple document interface",
in which each application had its own single window, with the application's
main menu under the title bar, and containing a sub-window for each open
document and tool palette.

There are pros and cons for each design. The Mac's document-based style is
aimed at making it easier to work with several apps at once. This sort of
drifted away with the modern one-window Apple apps. Now they even go
fullscreen, which has been a decent way to use Microsoft MDI apps since the
16-bit days.

------
guilloche
Isn't windows RT is for ARM cpu? MSFT just does not bother to port desktop
mode to ARM chips. Two possible reasons for not porting desktop mode are:

1.x86 and arm architecture are different and it is not easy to port. 2.No
existing desktop application for ARM.

Windows RT seems to be windows 8's partial port for ARM chips as I understand.

~~~
dangrossman
Windows RT has the desktop -- with the same task bar as Windows 7, littered
with icons as it's always been back to Windows 95 if you so choose, plus the
familiar shell apps like Explorer and Task Manager. All the Microsoft Office
apps that come bundled with Surface also run in "desktop mode" -- they're not
Metro apps at all.

The only difference between Windows RT and Windows 8 is that the only
sanctioned way to install software on Windows RT is from the Windows Store,
where all apps run on both CPU architectures.

~~~
ghshephard
Re: "...is from the Windows Store, where all apps run on both CPU
architectures."

From the OP quoted article:

"While Windows 8 and Windows RT can both run so-called “Modern” apps (formerly
known as “Metro” apps) designed for touch-sensitive screens, even those apps
must be converted, or ported, to Windows RT, and not all Modern apps appearing
in the Windows app store have been ported over, compounding compatibility
issues."

~~~
DaveMebs
If you write an HTML/JS, it will always run on all architectures.

If you write a .NET/XAML app, by default it will be compiled to a CPU neutral
IL that runs on all architectures (you can disable this and target a specific
CPU architecture).

If you write a C++/XAML app, by default Visual Studio will compile different
versions of the app for each architecture.

For the vast majority of Win8 apps, "converting" to ARM is just a cross-
compile. It is only when you are doing very specialized things that you
actually need to worry about the CPU architecture your app will be running on.

~~~
kyllo
Does that mean if there's an open source application you like, all you have to
do to get it on your Surface is open the source code in the latest edition of
Visual Studio, recompile it, transfer the files to your Surface, and you will
be able to install and run it?

~~~
jpatte
Unfortunately no because chances are this open source code is using some parts
of the Win32 API that are not supported by WinRT, so you would have to replace
the invalid API calls by the new (probably asynchronous) ones... Maybe even
completely rewrite the GUI if necessary.

------
esolyt
Yes, sure, it is confusing for the user. But that is the whole point.
Microsoft trying to use the Windows brand to get into the mobile market. This
is the only advantage they can possibly have over Android and iOS

------
Mordor
Perhaps the real truth is that Microsoft always needs a version 1.0, before
they get things right with version 2?

~~~
Flenser
The problem is that whereas previously people would just stick with the 2.0 of
Microsoft's previous generation; they are now switching to a competitors 1.0
that was better thought out than Microsoft's offering.

------
jacques_chester
_There is a great deal of ruin in a nation_. -- Adam Smith.

------
sigsergv
Confusion OS.

------
camus
Os are becoming less relevant for "most" of uses , with cloud services ,and
apps running on the browsers. Os will always be relevant for software
requiring intensive computation ( games , complexe CAD programs , etc ... ).
So Microsoft might lose some relevance , it is normal. Microsoft has also a
branding problem regarding public products.But is doing very well in
Enterprise products.

~~~
mtgx
I see the consumer market as a "lower-end" enterprise market, or the
enterprise market as a "higher-end consumer market", just like I see the
server chips market as a higher-end consumer market.

The problem is that when you lose the "lower-end" market, it's only a matter
of time before you lose the "higher-end" market, too (5-10 years), according
to Innovator's Dilemma.

I know it's not a perfect analogy because it's two companies instead of one,
but Nokia losing the leadership in the "consumer smartphones" market, made it
even more obvious that RIM will lose its leadership in the enterprise market,
too, but with a several years of delay, because the enterprise world moves
more slowly.

