7 ms·
Personally, I think Microsoft needs to make the strategic "pivot" to selling experiences - not necessarily operating systems. They've done a great job of this
by unexpected 16y ago
Personally, I think Microsoft needs to make the strategic "pivot" to selling experiences - not necessarily operating systems.
They've done a great job of this with Xbox and Windows 7. I was incredibly sad when the Courier got cancelled. This was a big head pound moment for me. At it's core, MS sells software, but increasingly, it seems apparent that consumers are going to spend their dollars on hardware/software combos (this is primarily a nod to Apple, but look at the care that Google invested with Android - the G1, the close relationship to Droid, and Nexus One, and RIM making all their devices). It's no longer enough to say "here's an operating system, do what you want with it." This was the previous mobile strategy, and now it's gotten them into the position their in.
Mobile seems to be figured out already - MS will be fighting for 3rd place (at least for the next 5-7 years). Tablets is still a potential area for innovation - the iPad leaves a lot to be desired, ChromeOS seems to be dead, Android Tablets have yet to really take off.
Overall - there seems to be an inherent political culture at MS. It's intriguing that Apple has a higher market value with 10% of the employees. I know so many brilliant, smart people that work at Microsoft, but I haven't heard from them in the past 5 years - they seem to all be cogs in a big machine.
Encourage employees to start their own companies. Maybe have a blanket policy of providing seed money to any employee that wants to - YC style. Take a lot of smaller risks instead of few big ones. Zuckerberg would have taken $10,000 for 10% when he first started - now 1.6% cost you $240,000,000! You could have invested in 200,000 ideas for that price. Let your people run with their own ideas, without having to sit through 80 million meetings and having their ideas suffer death by 1000 PM's.
- buro9 16y ago+1 for that last paragraph. Just thinking that you need a billion dollar product or it's not worth it, will mean that no potentially game-changing ideas that start as a seed and will grow can come through the system. You're left with only the options to buy (but now the other companies will not sell as they have wisened up to their value) or partner (and you'll not get the real benefit or possibilities from it, and your competitors might).
- rsbrown 16y agoTotally agree. Many have criticized Google's culture of "try lots of things", but it has clearly worked well for them. Microsoft should be encouraging their young, hungry tech talent to be creating tomorrow's killer apps today. Bureaucracy and top-down direction will kill this type of innovation every time.
- encoderer 16y agoGoogle's product development looks strikingly similar to Microsoft's from my POV. They buy small companies and assimilate their products. Microsoft has done this many times, making many small but "successful" products. So has Google. And they both have just a handful of home-grown products that support their reputation. Personally, I find no fault with the strategy. But I do find fault with the way people use Google to bash Microsoft when they're so similar in this respect. Everybody knows about Microsoft's acquire / "embrace extend extinguish" so how about a brief one for Google, to reinforce my point. 1. Search - Home Grown, Obv. 2. AdWords - Embrace/Extend/Extinguish - Copied from IdeaLab, Sued, Settled out of Court 3. AdSense - Acquisition 4. Maps - Acquisition 5. GMail - Home Grown. 6. Android - Acquisition 7. Chrome - Not sure entirely, but def based on WebKit, Seems fair to say it's not an E/E/E strategy tho. 8. Display Advertising - Acquisition 9. Docs - Several Acquisitions 10. Voice - Acquisition
- ollerac 16y agore: Chrome several former GreenBorder employees were named in a description of [Chrome's] sandboxing ability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GreenBorder http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GreenBorder via: http://www.digitalbuzzblog.com/infographic-googles-acquisition-map/ http://www.digitalbuzzblog.com/infographic-googles-acquisiti...
- listic 16y agoCare to explain how come Chrome OS is dead?
- siglesias 16y agoBecause netbooks are not the future of ultraportable computing; tablets are, and Chrome OS is primarily part of a mouse and keyboard driven paradigm. Also it is making increasingly little sense for Google to support two divergent operating systems.
- points 16y agoThat's just ridiculous. Is this theonion.com ? Step outside the bubble for a second. Most people don't have tablets, and don't want tablets.
- com 16y agoI was extrememly surprised at the number of people at Singapore's Changi airport who were using their (Apple) tablets in the departure lounges. Still a small percentage of total laptop users, but very noticeable. And the number of kids showing their parents how easy it was to be online with iPads in the various shops that were selling them. Step outside the bubble yourself - "most people" don't understand the complicated "Start" menu - they just want to get on with using the web so they can do their internet banking, buy cheap airfares or look at gossip sites. Preferably not at desk. Or with a keyboard.
- rakkhi 16y agoI think he is probably drawing on sources like this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1698213 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1698213 That has best buy saying tablets are cannibalizing their netbook revenue. This does not mean that netbooks or laptops are dead - personally for the current price I find something like an ACER1215N a lot better value for my usecases than an ipad. This is primarily due to the the HDMI out, USB input for storage, rich client gaming and the fact that I can run any VM for any OS I want. For running MS office / Openoffice also the tactile keyboard is handy without paying for additional accessories. If there are others like my netbooks/laptops may decline but not die completely, I would suggest a 60/40 split in 3 years tablets/laptops respectively.
- kennedywm 16y agoThe Courier was precisely the device I wanted. I don't know if they had it working as well, or could make it work as well, as it did in the videos. I remember describing a device like the Courier the day before I saw it. HUGE disappointment.
- bonzoesc 16y agoThey had a plastic mockup to film with and added the screens in post. It never existed beyond a video and some photos.
- jcl 16y agoI love that a couple of the top suggestions are "Microsoft should reduce its number of products" and "Microsoft should start hundreds of little companies". :)
- aaronbrethorst 16y agoRegarding your last paragraph: I could not agree more. I've described something similar to this to a handful of people at relatively high levels in MS before, and the answer I heard repeatedly was "not a snowball's chance in hell." If you consider how much money Microsoft has wasted on seemingly failed or useless acquisitions, like $6B for aQuantive or $500MM for Danger, spinning off novel ideas from internal teams would likely have a greater impact at a far lower cost.