5 ms·

Keep in mind that Windows as a platform is fading away. The Web with SaaS and is taking a lot of that. Even if they keep 90% of the desktop market, revenues are

Keep in mind that Windows as a platform is fading away. The Web with SaaS and is taking a lot of that. Even if they keep 90% of the desktop market, revenues are migrating to cloud and apps. MS doesn't want to end up with just an OS running a browser to access other things.

heavenlyblue 8y ago
Does MS not actually want it or is it your thinking?
- simonh 8y ago
  Oh, they really don't want that because it makes the OS valueless. If the only desktop app you're running is a browser, you might as well be using ChromeOS.
  - heavenlyblue 8y ago
    But it doesn't suddenly make Windows any less valuable than ChromeOS. Which means that under the assumption of 50% of the market still using Windows, they will continue using Windows. You may be drinking the kool-aid, but 90% of the market doesn't care. Windows costs $20 per device; ChromeOS has a non-zero cost either.
    - simonh 8y ago
      The profit margin on most consumer PCs is less than $20. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jan/09/pc-value-trap-windows-chrome-hp-dell-lenovo-asus-acer https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jan/09/pc-value-... Look at the 4th chart down. That's a bit out of date, but current figures aren't going to be dramatically better, and look at the trend line.
      - heavenlyblue 8y ago
        Yeah, but Chrome OS is also developed by Google - a revenue-seeking company. So you're either missing the point where the margins on the laptops are already including the cost of the OEM OS priced at an even lower price than a personal OEM license, or you're missing the point where the OS being free also includes your annual usage of Google services.
        simonh 8y ago
        I’m not sure I’m following you. Bottom line is, if a consumer purchasing a laptop doesn’t care about Windows apps, two very similar laptops one running Windows and the other $20 cheaper running ChromeOS is not a good situation for Microsoft. No matter what Googoe’s revenue model is.
        heavenlyblue 8y ago
        Well, I don't see any features of Windows that make it inherently not-free. So what's the catch here? I think people who are selling Windows believe they can milk that cow for some time, still. During that time they can push on the software development tools/environment; and frankly they have always been better at that. Business logic is better done by business people and no matter how hard an average software developer is going to push against that - that's the truth. Who do you think is going to acquire AirTable or alike? I could see Microsoft being incredibly interested in that opportunity.
- Eridrus 8y ago
  MS definitely doesn't want it. ChromeOS has already won in terms of device administration, because simpler devices are easier to administer, less prone to malware, etc. If native apps, e.g. Office, really get replaced by web apps, it's going to be all over for Windows as a profit center, and Windows will be hamstrung by it's legacy customers from embracing simpler ideas.
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    ChromeOS is no where to be seen in Europe, that doesn't sound like a victory to me.

heavenlyblue 8y ago

Does MS not actually want it or is it your thinking?

simonh 8y ago
Oh, they really don't want that because it makes the OS valueless. If the only desktop app you're running is a browser, you might as well be using ChromeOS.
- heavenlyblue 8y ago
  But it doesn't suddenly make Windows any less valuable than ChromeOS. Which means that under the assumption of 50% of the market still using Windows, they will continue using Windows. You may be drinking the kool-aid, but 90% of the market doesn't care. Windows costs $20 per device; ChromeOS has a non-zero cost either.
  - simonh 8y ago
    The profit margin on most consumer PCs is less than $20. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jan/09/pc-value-trap-windows-chrome-hp-dell-lenovo-asus-acer https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jan/09/pc-value-... Look at the 4th chart down. That's a bit out of date, but current figures aren't going to be dramatically better, and look at the trend line.
    - heavenlyblue 8y ago
      Yeah, but Chrome OS is also developed by Google - a revenue-seeking company. So you're either missing the point where the margins on the laptops are already including the cost of the OEM OS priced at an even lower price than a personal OEM license, or you're missing the point where the OS being free also includes your annual usage of Google services.
      - simonh 8y ago
        I’m not sure I’m following you. Bottom line is, if a consumer purchasing a laptop doesn’t care about Windows apps, two very similar laptops one running Windows and the other $20 cheaper running ChromeOS is not a good situation for Microsoft. No matter what Googoe’s revenue model is.
        heavenlyblue 8y ago
        Well, I don't see any features of Windows that make it inherently not-free. So what's the catch here? I think people who are selling Windows believe they can milk that cow for some time, still. During that time they can push on the software development tools/environment; and frankly they have always been better at that. Business logic is better done by business people and no matter how hard an average software developer is going to push against that - that's the truth. Who do you think is going to acquire AirTable or alike? I could see Microsoft being incredibly interested in that opportunity.
Eridrus 8y ago
MS definitely doesn't want it. ChromeOS has already won in terms of device administration, because simpler devices are easier to administer, less prone to malware, etc. If native apps, e.g. Office, really get replaced by web apps, it's going to be all over for Windows as a profit center, and Windows will be hamstrung by it's legacy customers from embracing simpler ideas.
- pjmlp 8y ago
  ChromeOS is no where to be seen in Europe, that doesn't sound like a victory to me.