4 ms·

MS has been humiliated by Apple for over a decade now. Bill Gates wrote an entire book about the home of the future. And how digital devices would rule it. Who

MS has been humiliated by Apple for over a decade now. Bill Gates wrote an entire book about the home of the future. And how digital devices would rule it. Who came across and actually did that? iPod, iPhone, iPad and the AppleTV are all very successful and the "digital hub" is basically the same thing that MS has been saying. MS has been doing a lot of catch-up "also-ran" devices trying to do what Apple has done. It's unfortunate that they could never leverage their huge lead to make it happen.

DanI-S 15y ago
Microsoft need to do more of what they did with XBox - spin off a smaller, more agile brand that doesn't invoke the image of dusty CRT monitors and lumbering corporate IT. Apple's brand identity works for selling consumer products, but nobody really finds value in the fact that their music player or phone was branded Microsoft. Their brand's strength isn't in consumer tech. Apple didn't manage this by standing still, either. Their brand used to be Apple Computer, and their logo was a cheesy rainbow. That doesn't cut it with 21st century consumers, so they redrew their image.
- jamesaguilar 15y ago
  Branding is a relatively small issue. The bigger problem is that Microsoft's products simply don't "just work" as digital hub solutions. You can make them work if you want to muck around with home groups, addresses prefixed with //, domains, confusing file ACLs, and "shares". But it takes a lot more effort than just putting in your iTunes username and password, which is how you hook up your Apple devices. The downvotes are coming from . . . people who think setting up MS home sharing is easy? (Maybe people who have never done it -- I have.) Or people who genuinely believe branding is more important than the product being branded? I have no use for either of these perspectives but I am curious.
  - DanI-S 15y ago
    I'd argue that, through failure to gain consumer traction, Microsoft just haven't been able to create the network of tightly related devices that Apple has. Thanks to their consumer focus, Apple have an entire platform sharing the same operating system, individual devices developed somewhat in harmony. Microsoft, attempting to corner several markets separately, has competing teams working on entirely unrelated products whose connectedness is incidental. There was a Steve Jobs keynote from the 1990s posted the other day in which he outlined his vision of a networked device ecosystem. It is very significant that they built the line of devices before they tried to market the backbone. Microsoft was thinking about this concept for just as long, but they never really had the platform. Edit: To reply, the key is that product follows from brand and marketing. The reason Apple's products are connected so well is that they're all targeted at one market. Microsoft target several, so their products are developed in bubbles. Edit: To reply again, I think we may be arguing the same thing, but our disagreement is in the reasoning. I believe that Microsoft's lack of a coherent product is due to an attempt to sell their vision to several markets at once; it makes connecting the dots very difficult. Apple's (assumed) success lies in their coherent targeting of a single market, through their strong consumer brand. Both of them are selling a vision; Apple get to amplify this by designing products that fit with their brand. It's a shame we can't continue this conversation further due to the weird commenting system.
    - jamesaguilar 15y ago
      Right. Like I said, the problem is not branding but that Microsoft's products do not play well together like Apple's TV box, speakers, wifi base stations, automatic backup devices, phones, computers, and music players, all of which hook up to each other basically automatically (all you have to do is enter your iTunes account info). To reply to your edit: I think that brand and marketing come from product. You cannot market a feature that does not exist, nor can your brand gain a reputation for an attribute that your products do not have. But underneath, product, brand, and marketing all stem from vision and priorities. Apple and MS shared the same vision, but Apple made this part of that vision a priority. Therefore their products reflect it, their brand gains a reputation for it, and their marketing can highlight the features that support the vision. Microsoft made this part of their vision a talking point, thus their products don't reflect it, their brand lacks the reputation, and any marketing that tries to highlight connectedness of devices rings hollow.
    - jamesaguilar 15y ago
      You can always reply to a comment by clicking "link" above the comment, then replying. (At least, that works for me when I don't see a "reply" link below a comment.)
  - kenjackson 15y ago
    The problem with Windows home sharing isn't that it's hard to do. But that it's not a good idea. I don't want content to rely upon my laptop downstairs not being in hibernate. The cloud or syncing are the way to share content. Not by sharing actual live content on laptops.
    - jamesaguilar 15y ago
      I admit that it's often not a good idea, but I have found that pushing movies on my computer to my Apple TV has some use cases and has been relatively painless.
- ma2rten 15y ago
  Didn't MS also try to do this with Zune? I think the reason why the Apple brand is so strong is mainly because they are making good products.

DanI-S 15y ago

Microsoft need to do more of what they did with XBox - spin off a smaller, more agile brand that doesn't invoke the image of dusty CRT monitors and lumbering corporate IT. Apple's brand identity works for selling consumer products, but nobody really finds value in the fact that their music player or phone was branded Microsoft. Their brand's strength isn't in consumer tech. Apple didn't manage this by standing still, either. Their brand used to be Apple Computer, and their logo was a cheesy rainbow. That doesn't cut it with 21st century consumers, so they redrew their image.

jamesaguilar 15y ago
Branding is a relatively small issue. The bigger problem is that Microsoft's products simply don't "just work" as digital hub solutions. You can make them work if you want to muck around with home groups, addresses prefixed with //, domains, confusing file ACLs, and "shares". But it takes a lot more effort than just putting in your iTunes username and password, which is how you hook up your Apple devices. The downvotes are coming from . . . people who think setting up MS home sharing is easy? (Maybe people who have never done it -- I have.) Or people who genuinely believe branding is more important than the product being branded? I have no use for either of these perspectives but I am curious.
- DanI-S 15y ago
  I'd argue that, through failure to gain consumer traction, Microsoft just haven't been able to create the network of tightly related devices that Apple has. Thanks to their consumer focus, Apple have an entire platform sharing the same operating system, individual devices developed somewhat in harmony. Microsoft, attempting to corner several markets separately, has competing teams working on entirely unrelated products whose connectedness is incidental. There was a Steve Jobs keynote from the 1990s posted the other day in which he outlined his vision of a networked device ecosystem. It is very significant that they built the line of devices before they tried to market the backbone. Microsoft was thinking about this concept for just as long, but they never really had the platform. Edit: To reply, the key is that product follows from brand and marketing. The reason Apple's products are connected so well is that they're all targeted at one market. Microsoft target several, so their products are developed in bubbles. Edit: To reply again, I think we may be arguing the same thing, but our disagreement is in the reasoning. I believe that Microsoft's lack of a coherent product is due to an attempt to sell their vision to several markets at once; it makes connecting the dots very difficult. Apple's (assumed) success lies in their coherent targeting of a single market, through their strong consumer brand. Both of them are selling a vision; Apple get to amplify this by designing products that fit with their brand. It's a shame we can't continue this conversation further due to the weird commenting system.
  - jamesaguilar 15y ago
    Right. Like I said, the problem is not branding but that Microsoft's products do not play well together like Apple's TV box, speakers, wifi base stations, automatic backup devices, phones, computers, and music players, all of which hook up to each other basically automatically (all you have to do is enter your iTunes account info). To reply to your edit: I think that brand and marketing come from product. You cannot market a feature that does not exist, nor can your brand gain a reputation for an attribute that your products do not have. But underneath, product, brand, and marketing all stem from vision and priorities. Apple and MS shared the same vision, but Apple made this part of that vision a priority. Therefore their products reflect it, their brand gains a reputation for it, and their marketing can highlight the features that support the vision. Microsoft made this part of their vision a talking point, thus their products don't reflect it, their brand lacks the reputation, and any marketing that tries to highlight connectedness of devices rings hollow.
  - jamesaguilar 15y ago
    You can always reply to a comment by clicking "link" above the comment, then replying. (At least, that works for me when I don't see a "reply" link below a comment.)
- kenjackson 15y ago
  The problem with Windows home sharing isn't that it's hard to do. But that it's not a good idea. I don't want content to rely upon my laptop downstairs not being in hibernate. The cloud or syncing are the way to share content. Not by sharing actual live content on laptops.
  - jamesaguilar 15y ago
    I admit that it's often not a good idea, but I have found that pushing movies on my computer to my Apple TV has some use cases and has been relatively painless.
ma2rten 15y ago
Didn't MS also try to do this with Zune? I think the reason why the Apple brand is so strong is mainly because they are making good products.