I thought that the more interesting part of the interview was this answer about why Chrome OS and Android both exist:
q: But can’t it be confusing having two operating systems?
a: Users care about applications and services they use, not operating systems. Very few people will ask you, “Hey, how come MacBooks are on Mac OS-X and iPhone and iPad are on iOS? Why is this?” They think of Apple as iTunes, iCloud, iPhoto...The picture may look different a year or two from from now, but in the short term, we have Android and we have Chrome, and we are not changing course.
I could readily argue that Microsoft incurs huge costs for making all their products Windows. Technology is usually a minor cost, and having one, two, or three technologies to address a wide range of use cases and markets will wash out of the costs if the technologies are appropriately used.
Microsoft announced a Windows Everywhere strategy in the 1990s, and Windows has taken its annual turnover from $1bn to $74bn. (That includes doubling under Steve Ballmer.)
Some people would call that "putting all the wood behind one arrow."
Microsoft did try developing a new and different technology for different use cases with Windows CE. That's what it's replacing with Windows 8....
http://www.economist.com/node/107364
Are those numbers due to The Age of PCs, or is that because Windows actually went everywhere and and is a tier 1 competitor in those categories, i.e. servers, tablets, handsets, cars, TVs, media players, etc.?
On servers, Microsoft is on a supposedly even footing with Linux, but I have not seen traffic-weighted statistics. Apart from that, where is Windows?
It looks like Microsoft has created a bottleneck for itself, where all innovation has to get stuffed through the Windows product line.
Microsoft's Servers and Tools division is a $19bn business and sales were up 12% on last year. This compares with Red Hat revenues of $1.13 billion, up 17% year-over-year.
The $19bn compares with initial expectations of zero. Linux fanboys have been telling me for more than a decade that Microsoft was going to be wiped out in the server business, but so far, it hasn't happened. Maybe next year, like the Linux desktop, eh?
Since you're not paying me to do your research, you can google (or even bing) Windows Embedded, Windows Embedded Automotive (aka Ford SYNC) and so on. Of course, it's tough competing with FREE.
> It looks like Microsoft has created a bottleneck for itself, where all
> innovation has to get stuffed through the Windows product line.
Android is 75% of shipping smartphones now. I don't think anyone could argue it isn't the most popular OS now. It's winning in tablets now too, although just barely.
Popularity is more nuanced than a simple number. Android phones cover a much broader price range than iOS or Windows phones so people who might otherwise have chosen an iPhone are forced to choose a cheaper Android phone, which doesn't really count as a "vote" for Android. Choice of phone also depends on a person's cell phone provider. For a long time iPhones weren't available on networks other than AT&T's.
You do understand that this choice that you speak of is simply a strength of the Android platform? You can't just push that aside just to maintain your own world view. Android is the most popular mobile operating system right now - it might or might not be the best or most valuable, but it IS the most popular.
“Android grew to the world’s most popular mobile OS (it’s now on 750 million devices worldwide, with 1.5 million new activations every day)”
Given how it’s phrased, it must be referring to Android installed base. 8 months a go, Eric Schmidt announced[1] that Android has an installed base of 480 million users and that 1.3 million Android devices are activated per day. So it’s entirely possible that Wired’s figures are correct, and that Android is the most ‘popular’ mobile OS, in the literal sense of the word (lots of people use Android devices).
‘Popular’ also has other meanings, like ‘regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general’. For that, it’s more useful to look at surveys measuring user satisfaction and consumer purchase planning. Those surveys tell a different story: consumers are far more satisfied with iPhones than with other smartphones, and more Android users switch to iOS than vice versa.
The predictions I listed are some of the latest, but they don’t differ much from one year a go. And indeed, Apple sells more iOS devices than ever.
In the US, where the iPhone has been available longest, iPhone market share has actually been increasing at all the major telcos – it’s growing faster than any of its competitors.
Satisfaction amongst users of the product is a very poor proxy for popularity amongst the general population. One reason for this is that if someone is unhappy with iOS, there is a good chance that they will switch to Android or another platform, and hence remove themselves from the iOS pool. Another big reason is that making a device that appeals very much to a niche segment will give you a much better score than a product aimed at a broader user base - so the "popular" product will almost always end up with a lower satisfaction score.
I tried to distinguish between the two definitions of ‘popular’, you’re conflating them.
Most people have a mobile device that came with Android preinstalled. In that sense Android is popular. It also has the most malware infections on mobile devices, but would you say Android’s malware is most popular?
iPhones are the most popular cameras used by Flickr members[1], but it’s hard to tell whether that also means these people prefer iOS over Android.
Which I think raises an interesting point/question. We all know that these 'forums' are essentially echo chambers for all sides of the discussion and are hardly representative of typical use patterns. With that in mind, how much of the market is actually using their device? In my little corner of the world I see them (smartphones) used for photos, IM/SMS, the odd game and Facebook. On occasion the more savvy user has email enabled and may use maps for directions. Is there data out there for this? not that it changes the figures, but it could potentially alter what they mean and therefore have an impact on how we design apps etc.
q: But can’t it be confusing having two operating systems?
a: Users care about applications and services they use, not operating systems. Very few people will ask you, “Hey, how come MacBooks are on Mac OS-X and iPhone and iPad are on iOS? Why is this?” They think of Apple as iTunes, iCloud, iPhoto...The picture may look different a year or two from from now, but in the short term, we have Android and we have Chrome, and we are not changing course.