4 ms·

Put simply, to win in the long run, Microsoft must be willing to risk losing it all. The one thing I wouldn't accuse MS of right now is playing a conservative

Put simply, to win in the long run, Microsoft must be willing to risk losing it all. The one thing I wouldn't accuse MS of right now is playing a conservative game. If anything I think shoving the "Metro" UI on desktop users is a step too soon, too far.

SoftwareMaven 14y ago
I think the UI is the less radical part of their current gambit. Risking their OEM channel by selling their own hardware and risking their VAR channel by encouraging people to do their Windows 8 purchases directly are both major cards that MS has thrown down. What I'm not clear on is whether this is an intentional effort to circumvent the Innovator's Dilema or just chasing Apple. If it's the former, there should come other, interesting steps. If it's the latter, it will just be sad to watch.
- drivebyacct2 14y ago
  I would suggest a look at production numbers for the Surface and projected sales of OEM Windows 8 licenses. I think "risk" is a bit of a dramatic interpretation, but that's just my opinion.
  - r00fus 14y ago
    How will these translate to actual sales? If Microsoft ships a lot of OEM devices and the manufacturer's channels are stuffed but don't sell - it won't help them at all in the long run. I wish that instead of shoving MetroUI in the user's face by not allowing you to launch directly into desktop shell, they would have done something like Apple's Camera lockscreen slider - it teases you and is there at the bottom, but if you want you can ignore it completely.
    - drivebyacct2 14y ago
      Erm, where did this come from: "Microsoft ships a lot of OEM devices and the manufacturer's channels are stuffed but don't sell".
      - drivebyacct2 14y ago
        Is everyone missing the point? I don't know how else to say it, the percent of overall sales of Windows laptop/tablets from Microsoft is likely to be very small. I think it's simply wrong to act like the OEMs are cowering.
    - simonh 14y ago
      Microsoft should win by letting users completely ignore their ground-up rethink of the user interaction model for computing that they're betting the company on. The one that is their only chance of catching up to iOS and Android. The one that, if it fails, will spell the end of their dominance in computing forever. Sure, why wouldn't they want everyone to just ignore that? No big deal.
- mun2mun 14y ago
  If Microsoft was serious about ditching OEMs on device sales then surface and surface pro would have been priced at $300 and $600 respectively and would have been shipped with touch cover. They have enough cash to subsidize them. It is not about bypassing the OEMs. Surface devices are Microsoft's attempt to set a standard on Windows 8 devices. It is a signal to OEMs that they must think twice before installing a crapware that hampers usability.
  - podperson 14y ago
    I don't think subsidizing the surface to get volume would be a winning move either. Selling heavily discounted surface tablets today would alienate and possibly kill their OEMs and set forward price expectations that would preclude future profitability. Microsoft needs to establish a position for themselves that is profitable, otherwise they're burning their bridges behind them AND in front of them. It's hard to see whether Surface is going to succeed -- the reviews thus far are at best equivocal.
- purplelobster 14y ago
  I think they're doing the right thing. The OEMs are too lazy and slow, VARs are becoming less and less important. Intel for instance had to shove the Ultrabook down the OEMs throats, basically paying them to do it, and still only Lenovo has done a decent job so far. Intel had Ultrabook prototypes ready before the Macbook Air was conceived. With a competitor like Apple, there's no way you can win this game without the vertical integration advantage they have.
glennsl 14y ago
Metro on the desktop isn't about creating a better user experience for desktop users. It's about getting developers to make metro apps that provide a good user experience on tablets. Microsoft's biggest problem when entering the tablet market is the sad state of their ecosystem. And to try to fix that, they decided to sacrifice the desktop user experience. I think that's a pretty bold move. It's also a really really stupid move.
- zmmmmm 14y ago
  > It's also a really really stupid move. Why stupid? I think this demarcates where Android went wrong. Google allowed the tablet OS to ship and run all it's phone apps really badly. That set a terrible precedent and left people wallowing around in a sea of unoptimized apps (the oft repeated claim that Android has no tablet optimized apps is as much that people can't find them as that they don't exist). I think they would have been much better off drawing a line in the sand and promoting explicitly tablet optimized apps and relegating unoptimized ones to a clear secondary status. By contrast, MS is saying, if you want prime real estate for your app in Win8 then it's going to be Metro and hence tablet optimized by default. As a result I am sure that every major software provider is going to ship metro versions of their apps, if only to get themselves onto that metro UI that every user is forced to see by default and into the store in a priority position.
  - glennsl 14y ago
    I agree that it will greatly benefit their tablet ecosystem. No doubt. But at the cost of a lesser desktop user experience. They're throwing away the market domination they already have (to some extent at least), which of course is the backbone of their business, to try to get the money to pay the entrance fee in a market dominated by others, as a late comer with slim chances.

SoftwareMaven 14y ago

I think the UI is the less radical part of their current gambit. Risking their OEM channel by selling their own hardware and risking their VAR channel by encouraging people to do their Windows 8 purchases directly are both major cards that MS has thrown down. What I'm not clear on is whether this is an intentional effort to circumvent the Innovator's Dilema or just chasing Apple. If it's the former, there should come other, interesting steps. If it's the latter, it will just be sad to watch.

drivebyacct2 14y ago
I would suggest a look at production numbers for the Surface and projected sales of OEM Windows 8 licenses. I think "risk" is a bit of a dramatic interpretation, but that's just my opinion.
- r00fus 14y ago
  How will these translate to actual sales? If Microsoft ships a lot of OEM devices and the manufacturer's channels are stuffed but don't sell - it won't help them at all in the long run. I wish that instead of shoving MetroUI in the user's face by not allowing you to launch directly into desktop shell, they would have done something like Apple's Camera lockscreen slider - it teases you and is there at the bottom, but if you want you can ignore it completely.
  - drivebyacct2 14y ago
    Erm, where did this come from: "Microsoft ships a lot of OEM devices and the manufacturer's channels are stuffed but don't sell".
    - drivebyacct2 14y ago
      Is everyone missing the point? I don't know how else to say it, the percent of overall sales of Windows laptop/tablets from Microsoft is likely to be very small. I think it's simply wrong to act like the OEMs are cowering.
  - simonh 14y ago
    Microsoft should win by letting users completely ignore their ground-up rethink of the user interaction model for computing that they're betting the company on. The one that is their only chance of catching up to iOS and Android. The one that, if it fails, will spell the end of their dominance in computing forever. Sure, why wouldn't they want everyone to just ignore that? No big deal.
mun2mun 14y ago
If Microsoft was serious about ditching OEMs on device sales then surface and surface pro would have been priced at $300 and $600 respectively and would have been shipped with touch cover. They have enough cash to subsidize them. It is not about bypassing the OEMs. Surface devices are Microsoft's attempt to set a standard on Windows 8 devices. It is a signal to OEMs that they must think twice before installing a crapware that hampers usability.
- podperson 14y ago
  I don't think subsidizing the surface to get volume would be a winning move either. Selling heavily discounted surface tablets today would alienate and possibly kill their OEMs and set forward price expectations that would preclude future profitability. Microsoft needs to establish a position for themselves that is profitable, otherwise they're burning their bridges behind them AND in front of them. It's hard to see whether Surface is going to succeed -- the reviews thus far are at best equivocal.
purplelobster 14y ago
I think they're doing the right thing. The OEMs are too lazy and slow, VARs are becoming less and less important. Intel for instance had to shove the Ultrabook down the OEMs throats, basically paying them to do it, and still only Lenovo has done a decent job so far. Intel had Ultrabook prototypes ready before the Macbook Air was conceived. With a competitor like Apple, there's no way you can win this game without the vertical integration advantage they have.

glennsl 14y ago

Metro on the desktop isn't about creating a better user experience for desktop users. It's about getting developers to make metro apps that provide a good user experience on tablets. Microsoft's biggest problem when entering the tablet market is the sad state of their ecosystem. And to try to fix that, they decided to sacrifice the desktop user experience. I think that's a pretty bold move. It's also a really really stupid move.

zmmmmm 14y ago
> It's also a really really stupid move. Why stupid? I think this demarcates where Android went wrong. Google allowed the tablet OS to ship and run all it's phone apps really badly. That set a terrible precedent and left people wallowing around in a sea of unoptimized apps (the oft repeated claim that Android has no tablet optimized apps is as much that people can't find them as that they don't exist). I think they would have been much better off drawing a line in the sand and promoting explicitly tablet optimized apps and relegating unoptimized ones to a clear secondary status. By contrast, MS is saying, if you want prime real estate for your app in Win8 then it's going to be Metro and hence tablet optimized by default. As a result I am sure that every major software provider is going to ship metro versions of their apps, if only to get themselves onto that metro UI that every user is forced to see by default and into the store in a priority position.
- glennsl 14y ago
  I agree that it will greatly benefit their tablet ecosystem. No doubt. But at the cost of a lesser desktop user experience. They're throwing away the market domination they already have (to some extent at least), which of course is the backbone of their business, to try to get the money to pay the entrance fee in a market dominated by others, as a late comer with slim chances.