4 ms·
The way it likely competes (which I'm not saying I agree with) is on supportability and productivity. That is to say, I'm sure Microsoft has data that "shows"
by rubyn00bie 10y ago
The way it likely competes (which I'm not saying I agree with) is on supportability and productivity.
That is to say, I'm sure Microsoft has data that "shows" these will be cheaper to administrate and support than Chromebooks. Combine that with all the software you can install, or offline workflows, etc and Microsoft comes out on top (according to Microsoft).
It's how Microsoft has always done things. I'm not here saying it's right or wrong, I'm just trying to answer your question.
- shimon 10y agoActually, this is more like the opposite of how Microsoft has always done things. When they've entered markets, from OS to word processing to RDBMS to web browsers, they've consistently produced simpler, cheaper products. Then they've gradually improved them until they became credible competitors and often dominant choices. With phones, tablets, and now cheap school laptops, their timing didn't allow that. Google has already succeeded with the classic Microsoft strategy, all the way down to commoditizing the hardware vendors. Microsoft is instead coming in as a semi-premium option, combined with inertia/safety as a brand trusted by enterprises. The same play is a bit more successful in cloud computing, but they're still losing to AWS who are nailing the classic Microsoft strategy. Assuming they continue to decline in their ability to rapid-follow in new technology platforms, I expect they'll look more and more like Oracle and IBM.