8 ms·

Ballmer Chides Microsoft Over Cloud Revenue Disclosures

45 points by boulos 11y ago

loktarogar 11y ago
Backseat driver Ballmer
- serge2k 11y ago
  Isn't he still a signifigant shareholder?
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - frankacter 11y ago
    from the article: "Ballmer, who is the company’s biggest individual shareholder"
    - nikanj 11y ago
      Backseat driver, limo style?
imron 11y ago
> “That won’t work,” Ballmer commented I seem to recall he said something similar about the iPhone
- rubyfan 11y ago
  I don't disagree with the point "that won't work". I just don't think what he proposes will work either.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- blinkingled 11y ago
  He had a point about the iPhone though - iPhone sales rose quite a bit after it got subsidized pricing which was way lesser than the original price of $500 subsidized that Ballmer was objecting to.
  - imron 11y ago
    Sales were still huge when it was first released though, and it totally changed the mobile phone industry.
    - throwawaykf05 11y ago
      That's not how it happened. It did sell respectably well the first year it was released, but that was only as far as smartphone sales went back then, which was a very small market. It was still had only a small share of the smartphone industry, primarily because the pricing meant very few people could afford it. I had the original iPhone and I was the only person in my entire direct and extended social circle that had one, and that too only because my employer bought it for me. I remember looks of envy from strangers wherever I took it out. The sales numbers from that time bear this out. But then a year later AT&T started subsidizing the iPhone 3G in exchange for a two year contract, and that's when sales really took off. You can clearly see the uptick in July 2008 when that happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system#/media/File:World_Wide_Smartphone_Sales_Share.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system#/media... That is what changed the mobile phone industry. It created a whole new market: the consumer smartphone market. Previously it was only really affordable for two markets: enterprise buyers and rich people. With this new model, everyone could afford a smartphone. Now I don't have any proof of this, but my hunch is Jobs convinced AT&T to go with this business model. If true, his true genius when it came to the iPhone was not really in making a really nice device, but in creating a whole new market for it.
      - bdcravens 11y ago
        http://www.statista.com/statistics/263401/global-apple-iphone-sales-since-3rd-quarter-2007/ http://www.statista.com/statistics/263401/global-apple-iphon... The iPhone sold more in 2008 Q4 than in the previous 5 quarters combined, which I suspect is when the AT&T subsidization started. Also it's worth noting the iPhone didn't initially have an app store or support 3rd party apps, which is what Ballmer was referring to. Had that held, history likely would have proven him right.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
brudgers 11y ago
In fairness, when Ballmer was CEO, he and Gates controlled enough shares that Microsoft could pretty much ignore Wall Street analysts' quarterly noise. Or to put it another way, when someone said "I think Microsoft should do X", Ballmer could say, "Microsoft doesn't care what you think." Nadella doesn't have that luxury.
kayman 11y ago
Satya wants to woo windows developers by letting them write one code base that runs on multiple platforms. Ballmers prefers Windows phones that run Android Apps. I wonder which is a better strategy.
- Joof 11y ago
  I'm assuming that Satya's strategy is targeting Microsoft platforms only. Satya's strategy encourages platform lock-in (which is good for Microsoft), but at this point Microsoft needs to encourage consumers to buy the thing to make it worth developing for; even if it's just a different front-end. Ballmers strategy trades the lock-in for something that solves the chicken and egg problem and removes a huge advantage that android has over windows phone.
  - dewiz 11y ago
    It is kind of the opposite. If MS lost the mobile it's due to Ballers's thinking. Satan's strategy to port the desktop apps to mobile makes more sense to keep developers on VS and other MS products.
    - nacs 11y ago
      > Satan's strategy to port the desktop apps I'm assuming that's some kind of auto-correct fail and you meant "Satya"..
      - dewiz 11y ago
        Absolutely, eh . Sorry about that. Satya's work has been great so far, the continuous flow of news about open source and cross platform support is what many were hoping for.
- dgregd 11y ago
  Both have serious problems. 1. Many Android apps depend on proprietary Google Play Services. So app customization is needed anyway. 2. Do ordinary people really need unified apps for PCs and mobile? Currently an easiest way to develop multi platform apps is to create a native mobile app and UI for power users in web browser. There is no need to build a running tracking app as a desktop native app. Recently notification center was removed from Chrome. To my surprise it turned out that nobody was using it. Well, I also wasn't using it because my (Android|iPhone) is always with me.
DigitalSea 11y ago
I never thought I would see the day when I agree with something that Steve Ballmer said. But he has a point. The problem is no developer has an incentive to write a universal application that runs on all aforementioned platforms. Developers will always write apps for platforms where it makes sense. Windows has a large share of the desktop market so it is a no brainer. But why would a developer care about their app working on a phone platform with limited market share? I think Windows Phone is brilliant. Well-made devices and a great operating system, but the lack of apps makes it very unattractive to the general masses. Support for Android apps without needing to be redeveloped is a no-brainer in my opinion. No developer will see the value in converting an Android app over to Windows. It has to support Android apps out-of-the-box without the developer needing to do anything or no tool, no matter how great or smart it is will make developers change their tune, even if it is easy to do so. At present there is no motivation for developers to develop for Windows Phone and no incentive for customers who adopt the platform. This is very much a chicken and egg problem, one I don't think they will ever solve for as long as they don't support Android apps.
- clumsysmurf 11y ago
  > Support for Android apps without needing to be redeveloped is a no-brainer in my opinion. Have you looked at the Android Play Store lately? Its Facebook, Netflix, Twitter, the McDonalds app (#16 !?!?!) a few other social things, games ... and the rest is total crap. Why take this ocean of garbage onto a new platform (and at the same time, alienate existing developers who now must compete with Android apps)? If app popularity obeys power laws (0.005% of all apps make 60% of all app store revenue)[1], seems a better strategy is just to make sure you have the few essential apps necessary, and then provide great tools and encourage developers to write the rest. > At present there is no motivation for developers to develop for Windows Phone I've been developing for Android quite some time, and the economics of the platform are not appealing. There have been several articles saying the cost of Android app dev is between 20-30% (minimum) more expensive than iOS[2]. As Windows 10 adoption moves along, it will be more enticing to write a univeral app for that platform and mobile. [1] http://arc.applause.com/2015/11/11/app-discovery-strategy-and-monetization/ http://arc.applause.com/2015/11/11/app-discovery-strategy-an... [2] https://adtmag.com/articles/2015/11/02/android-ios-costs.aspx https://adtmag.com/articles/2015/11/02/android-ios-costs.asp...
sandstrom 11y ago
A recent report by Ericsson[1] showed that 20% of current Windows Phone users want to stay within the platform for their next phone. Compared to ~80% on Android and iOS. That plus the small market share (~1-2%) makes it look pretty bleak (which is sad, I would have preferred more competition between mobile operating systems, e.g. with Firefox OS and Windows in the mix too). [1] http://www.ericsson.com/mobility-report http://www.ericsson.com/mobility-report
- pavlov 11y ago
  Staying on the platform is pretty difficult when there are no new phones to buy. Microsoft's new Lumia models are all basically "last year's $120 model, now for $100". Which is fine if you're in the precise market for a $100 phone, but then you also have lots of options from cheapo Android vendors... Windows Phone has long enjoyed a performance advantage on the low end, but that gap is closing. Meanwhile even the low-end market has come to demand a full range of 3rd party software, so Windows is losing there too. For high-end consumers, Microsoft doesn't have anything. The Lumia 950 is barely ok, but won't stop the bleeding. My last Lumia was a 1520 which I bought two years ago. It's nearly equivalent to the brand new 950XL -- and my old phone has a nicer design. (How did Microsoft mess that up? Don't they understand that when their fans have waited two years for a flagship phone, it needs to look attractive?) So I'm probably not getting another Windows phone ever again. The effort of returning to the platform would be too great at this point. (I had three different WP7/8 phones over the years, so I was fairly committed to it.)
  - ableal 11y ago
    Not to mention that "the OneDrive team" has taken the initiative of kicking the WindowsPhone users in the teeth by withdrawing the 30 GB cloud storage offer, without even "grandfathering" existing users. It was one of the nicer aspects, not having to worry about backing up and moving around phone cam photos and videos. Gone, poof, and not a peep from anyone at Microsoft about the protests: https://onedrive.uservoice.com/forums/262982-onedrive/suggestions/10524099-give-us-back-our-storage https://onedrive.uservoice.com/forums/262982-onedrive/sugges... I suppose this does wonders for hardware sales. Just not the right kind.
melted 11y ago
The idea about Android apps is stillborn. I don't know why they pursued it in the first place. There's no way Google will allow Play Store on such a contraption, nor will they allow Google services to be run (which means, for instance, no Maps or Youtube access). As a result you get an OS that can't fully participate in the Android ecosystem. Epic fail.
- fulafel 11y ago
  There are lots of Android devices outside the Play camp (eg Amazon devices, many Chinese ones). Secondly Play won't even start unles you link your Google account to a phone so many people aren't using Play store even on phones that have it. There's a native Youtube WP app I believe, and decent maps apps as well. Youtube works well in browser too.
  - melted 11y ago
    No, there's no native Youtube WP app, and "decent" maps don't come anywhere close to detail available through Google maps. Amazon devices don't support the official Youtube app either, nor do they support Google Maps.
johncolanduoni 11y ago
I think the only hope for Windows universal apps is to backport them to Windows 7 and 8. It seems Microsoft's plan was to use the free switch to Windows 10 from these to get enough market share that developers wouldn't mind moving to universal, but that hasn't happened; unless you want to target only ~10% of Windows desktops you're going to need to choose a different platform.
- tonyedgecombe 11y ago
  Businesses always drag their feet over upgrades, I had a customer ask for Windows 2000 support a couple of weeks ago.
  - nikanj 11y ago
    One of our large customers is in the final stages of upgrading. From XP to 7. Microsoft has traditionally been invincible in the enterprise, but none of their cool new toys work with the Windows versions actually used there.

45 points by boulos 11y ago

loktarogar 11y ago

Backseat driver Ballmer

serge2k 11y ago
Isn't he still a signifigant shareholder?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- frankacter 11y ago
  from the article: "Ballmer, who is the company’s biggest individual shareholder"
  - nikanj 11y ago
    Backseat driver, limo style?

imron 11y ago

> “That won’t work,” Ballmer commented I seem to recall he said something similar about the iPhone

rubyfan 11y ago
I don't disagree with the point "that won't work". I just don't think what he proposes will work either.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
blinkingled 11y ago
He had a point about the iPhone though - iPhone sales rose quite a bit after it got subsidized pricing which was way lesser than the original price of $500 subsidized that Ballmer was objecting to.
- imron 11y ago
  Sales were still huge when it was first released though, and it totally changed the mobile phone industry.
  - throwawaykf05 11y ago
    That's not how it happened. It did sell respectably well the first year it was released, but that was only as far as smartphone sales went back then, which was a very small market. It was still had only a small share of the smartphone industry, primarily because the pricing meant very few people could afford it. I had the original iPhone and I was the only person in my entire direct and extended social circle that had one, and that too only because my employer bought it for me. I remember looks of envy from strangers wherever I took it out. The sales numbers from that time bear this out. But then a year later AT&T started subsidizing the iPhone 3G in exchange for a two year contract, and that's when sales really took off. You can clearly see the uptick in July 2008 when that happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system#/media/File:World_Wide_Smartphone_Sales_Share.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system#/media... That is what changed the mobile phone industry. It created a whole new market: the consumer smartphone market. Previously it was only really affordable for two markets: enterprise buyers and rich people. With this new model, everyone could afford a smartphone. Now I don't have any proof of this, but my hunch is Jobs convinced AT&T to go with this business model. If true, his true genius when it came to the iPhone was not really in making a really nice device, but in creating a whole new market for it.
    - bdcravens 11y ago
      http://www.statista.com/statistics/263401/global-apple-iphone-sales-since-3rd-quarter-2007/ http://www.statista.com/statistics/263401/global-apple-iphon... The iPhone sold more in 2008 Q4 than in the previous 5 quarters combined, which I suspect is when the AT&T subsidization started. Also it's worth noting the iPhone didn't initially have an app store or support 3rd party apps, which is what Ballmer was referring to. Had that held, history likely would have proven him right.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

brudgers 11y ago

In fairness, when Ballmer was CEO, he and Gates controlled enough shares that Microsoft could pretty much ignore Wall Street analysts' quarterly noise. Or to put it another way, when someone said "I think Microsoft should do X", Ballmer could say, "Microsoft doesn't care what you think." Nadella doesn't have that luxury.

kayman 11y ago

Satya wants to woo windows developers by letting them write one code base that runs on multiple platforms. Ballmers prefers Windows phones that run Android Apps. I wonder which is a better strategy.

Joof 11y ago
I'm assuming that Satya's strategy is targeting Microsoft platforms only. Satya's strategy encourages platform lock-in (which is good for Microsoft), but at this point Microsoft needs to encourage consumers to buy the thing to make it worth developing for; even if it's just a different front-end. Ballmers strategy trades the lock-in for something that solves the chicken and egg problem and removes a huge advantage that android has over windows phone.
- dewiz 11y ago
  It is kind of the opposite. If MS lost the mobile it's due to Ballers's thinking. Satan's strategy to port the desktop apps to mobile makes more sense to keep developers on VS and other MS products.
  - nacs 11y ago
    > Satan's strategy to port the desktop apps I'm assuming that's some kind of auto-correct fail and you meant "Satya"..
    - dewiz 11y ago
      Absolutely, eh . Sorry about that. Satya's work has been great so far, the continuous flow of news about open source and cross platform support is what many were hoping for.
dgregd 11y ago
Both have serious problems. 1. Many Android apps depend on proprietary Google Play Services. So app customization is needed anyway. 2. Do ordinary people really need unified apps for PCs and mobile? Currently an easiest way to develop multi platform apps is to create a native mobile app and UI for power users in web browser. There is no need to build a running tracking app as a desktop native app. Recently notification center was removed from Chrome. To my surprise it turned out that nobody was using it. Well, I also wasn't using it because my (Android|iPhone) is always with me.

DigitalSea 11y ago

I never thought I would see the day when I agree with something that Steve Ballmer said. But he has a point. The problem is no developer has an incentive to write a universal application that runs on all aforementioned platforms. Developers will always write apps for platforms where it makes sense. Windows has a large share of the desktop market so it is a no brainer. But why would a developer care about their app working on a phone platform with limited market share? I think Windows Phone is brilliant. Well-made devices and a great operating system, but the lack of apps makes it very unattractive to the general masses. Support for Android apps without needing to be redeveloped is a no-brainer in my opinion. No developer will see the value in converting an Android app over to Windows. It has to support Android apps out-of-the-box without the developer needing to do anything or no tool, no matter how great or smart it is will make developers change their tune, even if it is easy to do so. At present there is no motivation for developers to develop for Windows Phone and no incentive for customers who adopt the platform. This is very much a chicken and egg problem, one I don't think they will ever solve for as long as they don't support Android apps.

clumsysmurf 11y ago
> Support for Android apps without needing to be redeveloped is a no-brainer in my opinion. Have you looked at the Android Play Store lately? Its Facebook, Netflix, Twitter, the McDonalds app (#16 !?!?!) a few other social things, games ... and the rest is total crap. Why take this ocean of garbage onto a new platform (and at the same time, alienate existing developers who now must compete with Android apps)? If app popularity obeys power laws (0.005% of all apps make 60% of all app store revenue)[1], seems a better strategy is just to make sure you have the few essential apps necessary, and then provide great tools and encourage developers to write the rest. > At present there is no motivation for developers to develop for Windows Phone I've been developing for Android quite some time, and the economics of the platform are not appealing. There have been several articles saying the cost of Android app dev is between 20-30% (minimum) more expensive than iOS[2]. As Windows 10 adoption moves along, it will be more enticing to write a univeral app for that platform and mobile. [1] http://arc.applause.com/2015/11/11/app-discovery-strategy-and-monetization/ http://arc.applause.com/2015/11/11/app-discovery-strategy-an... [2] https://adtmag.com/articles/2015/11/02/android-ios-costs.aspx https://adtmag.com/articles/2015/11/02/android-ios-costs.asp...

sandstrom 11y ago

A recent report by Ericsson[1] showed that 20% of current Windows Phone users want to stay within the platform for their next phone. Compared to ~80% on Android and iOS. That plus the small market share (~1-2%) makes it look pretty bleak (which is sad, I would have preferred more competition between mobile operating systems, e.g. with Firefox OS and Windows in the mix too). [1] http://www.ericsson.com/mobility-report http://www.ericsson.com/mobility-report

pavlov 11y ago
Staying on the platform is pretty difficult when there are no new phones to buy. Microsoft's new Lumia models are all basically "last year's $120 model, now for $100". Which is fine if you're in the precise market for a $100 phone, but then you also have lots of options from cheapo Android vendors... Windows Phone has long enjoyed a performance advantage on the low end, but that gap is closing. Meanwhile even the low-end market has come to demand a full range of 3rd party software, so Windows is losing there too. For high-end consumers, Microsoft doesn't have anything. The Lumia 950 is barely ok, but won't stop the bleeding. My last Lumia was a 1520 which I bought two years ago. It's nearly equivalent to the brand new 950XL -- and my old phone has a nicer design. (How did Microsoft mess that up? Don't they understand that when their fans have waited two years for a flagship phone, it needs to look attractive?) So I'm probably not getting another Windows phone ever again. The effort of returning to the platform would be too great at this point. (I had three different WP7/8 phones over the years, so I was fairly committed to it.)
- ableal 11y ago
  Not to mention that "the OneDrive team" has taken the initiative of kicking the WindowsPhone users in the teeth by withdrawing the 30 GB cloud storage offer, without even "grandfathering" existing users. It was one of the nicer aspects, not having to worry about backing up and moving around phone cam photos and videos. Gone, poof, and not a peep from anyone at Microsoft about the protests: https://onedrive.uservoice.com/forums/262982-onedrive/suggestions/10524099-give-us-back-our-storage https://onedrive.uservoice.com/forums/262982-onedrive/sugges... I suppose this does wonders for hardware sales. Just not the right kind.

melted 11y ago

The idea about Android apps is stillborn. I don't know why they pursued it in the first place. There's no way Google will allow Play Store on such a contraption, nor will they allow Google services to be run (which means, for instance, no Maps or Youtube access). As a result you get an OS that can't fully participate in the Android ecosystem. Epic fail.

fulafel 11y ago
There are lots of Android devices outside the Play camp (eg Amazon devices, many Chinese ones). Secondly Play won't even start unles you link your Google account to a phone so many people aren't using Play store even on phones that have it. There's a native Youtube WP app I believe, and decent maps apps as well. Youtube works well in browser too.
- melted 11y ago
  No, there's no native Youtube WP app, and "decent" maps don't come anywhere close to detail available through Google maps. Amazon devices don't support the official Youtube app either, nor do they support Google Maps.

johncolanduoni 11y ago

I think the only hope for Windows universal apps is to backport them to Windows 7 and 8. It seems Microsoft's plan was to use the free switch to Windows 10 from these to get enough market share that developers wouldn't mind moving to universal, but that hasn't happened; unless you want to target only ~10% of Windows desktops you're going to need to choose a different platform.

tonyedgecombe 11y ago
Businesses always drag their feet over upgrades, I had a customer ask for Windows 2000 support a couple of weeks ago.
- nikanj 11y ago
  One of our large customers is in the final stages of upgrading. From XP to 7. Microsoft has traditionally been invincible in the enterprise, but none of their cool new toys work with the Windows versions actually used there.