5 ms·

The best thing Microsoft could do at this point is put together a Metro style touch-centric UI that is the default for Windows tablets. Give developers a quick

by jsz0 16y ago

The best thing Microsoft could do at this point is put together a Metro style touch-centric UI that is the default for Windows tablets. Give developers a quick & dirty way to port their existing applications to a touch-centric UI. It wouldn't be the most elegant solution but it would be closer to what people seem to want in a tablet.

glhaynes 16y ago
Put an app store on and require it. Don't approve apps that don't roughly fit touch guidelines and "feel good": be strict, perhaps capriciously, making examples of some — or, rather, letting them make examples of themselves through their public complaining. This will scare developers into making their apps seem as non-desktop-Windowsish as possible in hopes of being approved. Out Apple Apple.
j053003 16y ago
Personally, I hope it looks like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIPjJElVx0U http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIPjJElVx0U One can dream, right?
- rbanffy 16y ago
  I'd be happy with something like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPDT21oEhW0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPDT21oEhW0
rbritton 16y ago
The best thing Microsoft could do is to innovate and do something no one's done. Everything they've done of late is in markets where someone has already done very well in, and they've done such a half-assed job of it that it's a guaranteed fail. Think what you want of Apple, but their products have been things largely not done before. Microsoft is copying the wrong half -- the product ideas themselves -- they should be copying the act of innovating.
- berntb 16y ago
  >>The best thing Microsoft could do is to innovate and do something no one's done. Everything they've done of late is in markets where someone has already done very well in But that is what Microsoft has done historically. The old solution was to use profits from already owned market segments to invest much more in other market segments, until they own those too. I don't know either why it stopped working. Could the problem be a lack of a monopoly leverage? They can't threaten hardware/software makers anymore? Or maybe the problem is just leadership, as others wrote? Or maybe they have just screwed over too many people (to paraphrase an old Netscape executive, too many people has woken up with a bloody computer monitors in bed)?
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    > I don't know either why it stopped working. They no longer can use one monopoly to create another. That's what landed them in trouble in the US and in the EU. Their historical model of growth is no longer possible. I would suspect they rely too much on focus groups to drive product development. There is only so much consumers can tell you about what they need. You can't just round up a bunch of consumers and ask them what will be the Next Big Thing. Well... You can, but you will end up with a Kin or a Zune in your hand.
    - berntb 16y ago
      >>They no longer can use one monopoly to create another. I tried to write that in the paragraph starting with: "Could the problem be a lack of a monopoly leverage?". :-) >>That's what landed them in trouble in the US and in the EU. I wonder if that is the reason. They kept ignoring the monopoly laws and paid fines ten years later, when they courts had managed to get to the (then ancient) transgression. >>I would suspect they rely too much on focus groups to drive product development. Hmm.. a point which seems to fit well.
      - rbanffy 16y ago
        Yes. You pretty much nailed it. I believe top management really wants to completely ignore the law and employ every subcriminal tactic available in the books and, perhaps, write a couple new ones in the process. I also believe they don't have the guts this would take, as they believe that their past transgressions brought attention enough for someone to end in jail. That and the lack of balls to design products no focus group wants, but build them because you know people will want them once they see them.

by jsz0 16y ago

glhaynes 16y ago

Put an app store on and require it. Don't approve apps that don't roughly fit touch guidelines and "feel good": be strict, perhaps capriciously, making examples of some — or, rather, letting them make examples of themselves through their public complaining. This will scare developers into making their apps seem as non-desktop-Windowsish as possible in hopes of being approved. Out Apple Apple.

j053003 16y ago

Personally, I hope it looks like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIPjJElVx0U http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIPjJElVx0U One can dream, right?

rbanffy 16y ago
I'd be happy with something like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPDT21oEhW0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPDT21oEhW0

rbritton 16y ago

The best thing Microsoft could do is to innovate and do something no one's done. Everything they've done of late is in markets where someone has already done very well in, and they've done such a half-assed job of it that it's a guaranteed fail. Think what you want of Apple, but their products have been things largely not done before. Microsoft is copying the wrong half -- the product ideas themselves -- they should be copying the act of innovating.

berntb 16y ago
>>The best thing Microsoft could do is to innovate and do something no one's done. Everything they've done of late is in markets where someone has already done very well in But that is what Microsoft has done historically. The old solution was to use profits from already owned market segments to invest much more in other market segments, until they own those too. I don't know either why it stopped working. Could the problem be a lack of a monopoly leverage? They can't threaten hardware/software makers anymore? Or maybe the problem is just leadership, as others wrote? Or maybe they have just screwed over too many people (to paraphrase an old Netscape executive, too many people has woken up with a bloody computer monitors in bed)?
- rbanffy 16y ago
  > I don't know either why it stopped working. They no longer can use one monopoly to create another. That's what landed them in trouble in the US and in the EU. Their historical model of growth is no longer possible. I would suspect they rely too much on focus groups to drive product development. There is only so much consumers can tell you about what they need. You can't just round up a bunch of consumers and ask them what will be the Next Big Thing. Well... You can, but you will end up with a Kin or a Zune in your hand.
  - berntb 16y ago
    >>They no longer can use one monopoly to create another. I tried to write that in the paragraph starting with: "Could the problem be a lack of a monopoly leverage?". :-) >>That's what landed them in trouble in the US and in the EU. I wonder if that is the reason. They kept ignoring the monopoly laws and paid fines ten years later, when they courts had managed to get to the (then ancient) transgression. >>I would suspect they rely too much on focus groups to drive product development. Hmm.. a point which seems to fit well.
    - rbanffy 16y ago
      Yes. You pretty much nailed it. I believe top management really wants to completely ignore the law and employ every subcriminal tactic available in the books and, perhaps, write a couple new ones in the process. I also believe they don't have the guts this would take, as they believe that their past transgressions brought attention enough for someone to end in jail. That and the lack of balls to design products no focus group wants, but build them because you know people will want them once they see them.