[pscates2.0]

Gruber's take on it all. Some good points and observations.

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by Robo But I'm afraid that Metro won't ever get enough really good apps. Developers can just make Windows 8 users boot into the desktop to run their apps, and without Microsoft going all-in with Windows RT with Surface, there might not be enough Metro-only users to worry about. And then users will learn to associate the Metro interface with nothing but "lite" apps, and so they'll avoid it, and it'll start this sort of self-perpetuating cycle. Most troubling is that Microsoft themselves seem to be pushing this cycle. They seem to really believe that the tablet interface is just for media consumption, and for anything creative people should switch to desktop mode. They aren't making a Metro Office, for example. It's like they really believe that tired garbage about how the iPad is just a consumption device, and so they're assuming their tablety UI will be the same. And that's a dangerous foundation to build a platform on, because it's all bullshit. The iPad has a version of Coda now, for heaven's sake.

Right? It's like they're handing Apple the future of computing on a silver platter. Google too. How can they not see this? How is a version of Office for Metro not at the tippy-top of Microsoft's priority list?

Microsoft could conceivably take the iOS 1.0 route with Metro, with no native third party apps and ship with IE and Office and at the right price it could be a smash hit, just with IE and Office! Medium and large companies would eat that up like candy. I know mine would!

Office is so entrenched it's a "get into new markets free" card. Why the fuck aren't they using it? The longer they sideline Office, the less entrenched Office will get, and the more it's influence will diminish—it's not like there's anything special about it as a software suite, but the brand is strong, and they need to keep it strong.

To top it off, the biggest problem for Microsoft with Office is that people tend not to upgrade from older versions. But they would have to if it was on a new platform. Office for Metro solves kills two birds with one stone, and yet here we sit after their umpteenth "here's our new tablet, this one will take off this time, we swear!" event, and no Office in sight. It boggles the mind.

[pscates2.0]

What do you guys honestly think will be the fallout if this thing fails/flops (and let's be honest...it probably will).



Will Ballmer and others skate? Water off a duck's back? Is there any sort of downside or negative to be experienced by the higher-ups (like there seems to be at other companies who constantly drag up short)?

A year from now will there just be another "game-changing" product/service/initiative announced at CES or some media event and it all kicks back up again (the breathless coverage, idiotic punditry, the whole "Apple's in trouble now!" crowing, etc.), and this, along with the other Microsoft less-thans, are somehow forgotten and never mentioned/cited again?

Who breaks this cycle of abuse?

[Kraetos]

Ballmer is Gates' guy, hand picked and been there since the beginning. Ballmer isn't going anywhere.

The ultimate endgame for Microsoft is they become the Office, Exchange and Xbox company as Windows ever-so-slowly slides into irrelevance. In other words, they become IBM with a dash of Sony.

Windows and Office are entrenched enough to keep MS profitable for another decade, even if they release a new tablet flop every year of that decade. And Xbox is doing quite well, not by just by Microsoft standards but by any standard. It's profitable and Kinect is selling like hotcakes.

It's also worth noting that, while Microsoft is no stranger to flops, Windows 8 is a huge risk. If we get another Vista situation and people cling to Windows 7, then that decade time table could be considerably accelerated...

[Jason]

Slightly off topic but I saw today that the new Nokia Lumia 900 (only released in April) won't even run Windows 8 when it ships shortly.

Customers are getting hosed.

What a mess.

[Jason]

Okay, this is obviously a bit fan-boyish but it made me laugh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSj8G...e_gdata_player

Regards

[pscates2.0]

Originally Posted by Kraetos Ballmer is Gates' guy, hand picked and been there since the beginning. Ballmer isn't going anywhere.

Well that's a shame because I think he's got a little to do with things. Not in a malicious, "I hate him because he's a buffoon" way, of course. But I just don't think he's a steerer and leader in a way a company like this should have. He's made so many whackball, out-of-touch - and just plain wrong - pronouncements and predications over the years. "Handpicked" or not, after a while wouldn't you start to feel like "holy hell, this isn't quite how I saw it all going?"

Don't rich, famous people get "do-overs" from time to time? Nobody would begrudge Mr. Gates that chance.

In fact, I bet you there's a shitload of people in Redmond who secretly wish/pray for it every day.

[Kraetos]

The problem is that Microsoft is still profitable. Still making money hand over fist. Windows 7 is the fastest selling Windows ever. Kinect is selling at iPod levels.

You can paint a very different picture of Microsoft, depending on which statistics you cherry-pick. Are you concerned with profit, revenue, and Windows sales? Then Microsoft is doing very well. Microsoft's revenue would have to tank before the board goes "oh, well, maybe this Ballmer guy doesn't know what he's doing." But Microsoft makes so much sheer revenue from licensing Windows that it just isn't gonna happen any time soon.

There are 2 billion PCs worldwide. Billion. With a B. It's an astonishingly large market and Microsoft, for all it's problems, still has it by the balls.

Although as I sit here typing this, the most die-hard Windows guy I know just texted me, saying that he's on the fence between the new Air and the Retina MBP. It's possible Windows is closer to the edge of a market share precipice than it would appear.

[pscates2.0]

Originally Posted by Kraetos The problem is that Microsoft is still profitable. Still making money hand over fist. Windows 7 is the fastest selling Windows ever. Kinect is selling at iPod levels. You can paint a very different picture of Microsoft, depending on which statistics you cherry-pick. Are you concerned with profit, revenue, and Windows sales? Then Microsoft is doing very well. Microsoft's revenue would have to take before the board goes "oh, well, maybe this Ballmer guy doesn't know what he's doing." But Microsoft makes so much sheer revenue from licensing Windows that it just isn't gonna happen any time soon. There are 2 billion PCs worldwide. Billion. With a B. It's an astonishingly large market and Microsoft, for all it's problems, still has it by the balls.

Yeah, I know. That's why that area will sustain them. I just don't think they're going to play in that Apple/Amazon/Google playground in any real way. And that's fine. I've always said play to your strengths and base. The only time I get snarky about them is when they fall flat trying to come across in a way that doesn't seem natural for them. Because it's funny as hell (in a cringe-inducing kind of way ). I've never knocked Office, Exchange, etc. And I only beat up on Windows from a personal standpoint (I don't ever want to be burdened with it, and I'm thankful I don't have to), but I know tons of companies and operations are built on it, and I know that's not going to go away or change anytime soon (if at all).

They've got their place, and their strengths. And they're dug-in well in the places that have signed on to their products and services for years and years.

I think it would be lame or silly for Apple to try and play in that realm. It's not their strength, it's not in their makeup.

Originally Posted by Kraetos Although as I sit here typing this, the most die-hard Windows guy I know just texted me, saying that he's on the fence between the new Air and the Retina MBP. It's possible Windows is closer to the edge of a market share precipice than it would appear.

I'm seeing/hearing this more and more. It's not like it was 5-6 years ago (so many little things all happened, then came together, to make it look like a viable option for many). It's changed a lot, and more and more people are giving them a closer, harder look than ever before. A month doesn't go by that I don't hear from a relative, friend-of-a-friend, former co-worker, casual acquaintance, etc. asking for opinions or advice, or laying out a "what if" scenario (getting a Mac instead of a Dell or HP on their next go-around, "can I used Word if I have a Mac?" and stuff like that). They may have an iPod, or even an iPhone. But all of them are coming from Windows-based PCs. Many of them have switched, others still mulling it over...

[Jason]

This scenario reminds me of Google+ trying to get decent numbers in social networking. It just isn't possible because too many people are already tied into Facebook and see no reason to move.

MS have to convince people to ditch Android before they have even the remote chance of dragging customers away from iOS.

Regardless of how good or bad Surface turns out, it's just too late to the market.

[Jason]

And of course, MS now have to factor in Amazon and their tablet supported by a huge media empire.

[alcimedes]

So, let me get this straight.

No release date.
No hands on for Devs with the hardware or software yet.
ARM and Intel versions will run different software, and the ARM stuff won't run on the Intel machines.
No Office
Few distribution channels.
Pissing off OEM partners with the product.
All of this for a product that's taking on two giants in the industry who have well established and entrenched hardware, software and media stores in direct competition.

I see a lot of cause for concern if I were MS with this product launch.

[Mugge]

Well, let's see if it doesn't go the way of the Courier...

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by alcimedes So, let me get this straight. No release date. No hands on for Devs with the hardware or software yet. ARM and Intel versions will run different software, and the ARM stuff won't run on the Intel machines. No Office Few distribution channels. Pissing off OEM partners with the product. All of this for a product that's taking on two giants in the industry who have well established and entrenched hardware, software and media stores in direct competition. I see a lot of cause for concern if I were MS with this product launch.

Yep. I think it's pretty obvious how this is going to play out. They aren't going to hit the October release. If that was realistic, they would have given us a firmer release date, and they would have let the press play with them on Monday. I think we're probably looking at next spring, which means this thing isn't going up against the current iPad or the current MacBook Air, it's going up against the iPad 4 (which might have some sort of fancy pen input features based on Apple's recent patent filings) and the next MacBook Air, which will likely sport a retina display.

By that point the iPad installed base should hit 100 million, no problem. The platform has already reached critical mass in term of developers, so 100 million units sold is just the icing on the cake. Surface simply won't have the app catalog to compete head to head with iPad, and it's ability to play catch-up is stunted because MS isn't bold enough to go all in on Metro.

Lets say Amazon sticks to their track record and the Fire strategy mirrors the original Kindle strategy, which means that Kindle Fires that don't suck will arrive late summer, possibly with a 10" version. They sell 10 million or so over the holidays, and cement their #2 position in the tablet market. 4 months later, MS releases a tablet with no apps, no integrated content store, and no productivity suite, when the two main competitors have all of those things.

Even after it's out, it will be hard to find since MS itself has a minimal retail presence. They'll be selling a tablet that nobody wants in stores that nobody can find. This has flop written all over it, just like every other tablet that Microsoft has tried to make.

Now, Microsoft are veterans when it comes to product flops. Windows and Office keep chugging along. But the problem is that Windows 8, even on the desktop, has been tabletized. A product flop is one thing, but a product flop which takes their core product with it would be devastating. Usually Microsoft has the good sense to protect Windows and Office from their flops, but apparently they're now so desperate to crack the tablet market that they're betting the farm. This has the potential to end very, very badly for MS.

[pscates2.0]

It's entirely possible my ex-brother-in-law saw this writing on the wall and got the hell out while the getting was good? I've not talked to him about it all yet, but as jaded and crestfallen as he seemed at Christmas, I can only imagine he's been moving in this direction for quite some time. He did not speak of his job (and the things he was doing) in the same way as he had in previous conversations.

[zippy]

Originally Posted by Kraetos Yep. I think it's pretty obvious how this is going to play out. They aren't going to hit the October release. If that was realistic, they would have given us a firmer release date, and they would have let the press play with them on Monday. I think we're probably looking at next spring, which means this thing isn't going up against the current iPad or the current MacBook Air, it's going up against the iPad 4 (which might have some sort of fancy pen input features based on Apple's recent patent filings) and the next MacBook Air, which will likely sport a retina display.

And let's not forget the 7" iPad too.







Sorry. Couldn't resist.

[pscates2.0]

Don't laugh. Apple will put out a 7" iPad before this Surface sees the light of day (or becomes any sort of success).

Even Kraetos can agree with that.

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Even Kraetos can agree with that.

100%



And even if it follows my rather dismal prediction exactly, it would still be more successful than any other tablet Microsoft's tried! Remember slates?

Also, I can see an either larger or smaller iOS something-or-other being released alongside iPad 4, next spring. I just don't think it's happening this year, and I especally don't think it's going to run normal iPad apps, scaled down.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by alcimedes So, let me get this straight. No release date. No hands on for Devs with the hardware or software yet. ARM and Intel versions will run different software, and the ARM stuff won't run on the Intel machines. No Office Few distribution channels. Pissing off OEM partners with the product. All of this for a product that's taking on two giants in the industry who have well established and entrenched hardware, software and media stores in direct competition. I see a lot of cause for concern if I were MS with this product launch.

While I agree with the sentiment, a few points:

• As far as dev hands-on goes, the hardware is largely irrelevant for the devs in this case. It's not like Surface comes with its own proprietary port or something that there's an API for. Software-wise, this is Windows 8; devs have had almost a year now to develop for that. (And thus far, they aren't, much. But that's a different issue.)
• It's more relevant that Intel code won't run on ARM than vice versa. I'm actually not sure if Windows App Store code is necessarily tri-architectural or not, since I don't have an ARM test device for that, but it appears one app I've downloaded is x86-32-bit-only (since it runs as 32-bit on my 64-bit tablet!), which is just bizarre. That Microsoft is even allowing this at all is odd, and the Store does have a "Supported processors" line for each app in Details. Yuck. Why didn't they make WinRT enough of a subset that it'll always, no-compromises, run on all three?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Kraetos Remember slates?

Yup. One's serving as my alarm clock now while my iPhone is getting replaced.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Kraetos The problem is that Microsoft is still profitable.

The problem is that, in many ways, profit is a lagging indicator in business, and especially in technology. You can lose your grip on the future and still be profitable through inertia, but not for long. And it seems like in technology, that friction that stops the inertia is especially strong. Few technology firms, and even fewer technology platforms, seem to slowly and gracefully fade into irrelevance. They reach a certain point and then they fall off a cliff, because people abandoning them becomes a self-accelerating cycle.

It's sort of like RIM. For the longest time, RIM was seemingly confused why the media thought they were troubled. They were still profitable! Now, it seems the media knew RIM far better than RIM's own executives.

Originally Posted by Kraetos Kinect is selling at iPod levels.

Let's not get carried away, here. Xbox isn't even selling at iPod levels. The first Xboxes hit the market almost simultaneously with the first iPods, and Apple's sold like four times as many iPods since.

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 It's entirely possible my ex-brother-in-law saw this writing on the wall and got the hell out while the getting was good? I've not talked to him about it all yet, but as jaded and crestfallen as he seemed at Christmas, I can only imagine he's been moving in this direction for quite some time. He did not speak of his job (and the things he was doing) in the same way as he had in previous conversations.

I have to say, I've noticed an attitude among startup founders that a career with Microsoft is sort of a résumé stain. (And in the PNW techie scene, there are a lot of ex-Microsofties.) The idea is that all the things that Microsoft seems to embody — the sprawling bureaucracy, the in-fighting, the diminished sense of personal responsibility — are the exact opposite of the qualities of a successful startup, and once people get used to One Microsoft Way, they seem to have trouble adjusting to "the real world." That might not be fair, but it's pretty much the perception. And it's not just because Microsoft is a large company — experience at Google is considered almost as impressive as experience at another startup.

Originally Posted by chucker Why didn't they make WinRT enough of a subset that it'll always, no-compromises, run on all three?

For the longest time I assumed that to be the case; I really can't comprehend Microsoft's reason for not doing that.

[Jason]

Here we go, Guys

The product hasn't even been given a shipping date yet but it apparently will be Wifi only, initially.

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-21/microsoft-s-surface-tablet-said-to-be-wi-fi-only-in-first-models.html

It's not shipping for months and yet their already cutting back on mobility.

[chucker]

I don't see how not offering a feature that had never been promised in the first place is "cutting back".

[Jason]

Yeah, phrased that wrong but it's still a surprising omission when you're hoping to go up against everyone else.

[chucker]

Yes, it's an unfortunate omission. (The same could be argued for MBAs and MBPs lacking that option, though.)

[Jason]

I think what I'm really trying to say is that it is a mistake to unveil a product to great fanfare but leave enough vagueness in the details because some of what people might imagine is going to be on offer actually isn't.

I don't think it's coincidence that this omission wasn't announced when they did their presentation.

Of course, we don't know anyway because the browser crashed during the demo.

[Jason]

Yes, the same is true of Apple products but the difference is they announce and ship more or less simultaneously so any disappointment quickly evaporates.
With surface, people with an eye to buying one might now already be disappointed and yet they've still got months to wait before they go and pick one up.
It just seems to invite more negative criticism than it probably deserves.

[Matsu]

They had to do something to stem the tide. Phones and tablets are proving to be huge, and Apple is cleaning up. Do iPad buyers really have a reason to wait for the surface? Not really. If you're looking at an iPad, it does enough of what you want, well enough, and you're comfortable using it as part of either a Mac or PC household. If you're interested in a tablet that's doing something different - not necessarily an iPad, but some custom application or specific use - then we have to see that first.

For example, using real photoshop might be a great thing on this device, but having used photoshop quite a bit over the last few years, I don't think it's going to work all that well on a 10" touch screen. It's, at the very least, going to need a custom UI skin.

I think we'll see iPad specific (interoperable) CS6 apps before we see CS-for-surface...

It'll be more interesting to compare the Surface (and software) with whatever 2013 iPad is out when the surface finally debuts.

[wtd]

So... now you have to be willing to go to a Microsoft store to try one, be won over by it, and not want 3G/4G even as an option?

They're limiting their market quite a bit.

[kscherer]

Microsoft doesn't know when to say "no". So they said "yes" to everything.

Their biggest single problem is legacy.

Nearly their entire user-base is composed of legacy users. We get mad at Apple for forcing us to upgrade to stay cool, but look what it's done: Apple has a very small minority of legacy users. Something like 80% of their install base is on Snow Leopard or later, using Intel-based Macs that are ready for Mtn. Lion!

Compare that to Microsoft, where the majority of their users are running legacy hardware and software. Their largest install base is XP, and I wouldn't be surprised if #2 was Win 95 or earlier (although it might be 7 by now). I'm sure some of you statistical types can shed some shadow on that.

Anyway, the problem with Microsoft's tablet approach is their desire to hold on to that legacy stuff. I guess, in reality, they have no choice, as they have the type of customers who have been trained for 30 years not to upgrade. Too expensive and why bother, since Microsoft is going to support them, anyway.

Thus, their tablet runs Windows, because it has to. The ARM-based thing is there as a side-note, a "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" approach. It's what they're [good] at. The failing will be in their sales approach, which, as usual, will require a nightmarish array of options and "choices" that will serve to confuse the customer and drive them to the iPad.

Here's my prediction: Microsoft will sell 90% of these things to the geeks who have been holding out for "dude, it has USB!", with the remainder going to mom-and-pop types who will toss it aside because it's just too confusing to use. The geek-types will praise it, while the mom-and-pop types will laugh at it. In short, it will find exactly the same user-base that Android tablets are finding: nerds and the gullible Verizon customer. Which means it will sell a million or two units per year in comparison to the iPad at 50+ million.

The user-base is getting smarter, and I think they are sick and tired of being over-sold and under-delivered by Microsoft.

This thing's gonna tank!