5 ms·

Windows has fallen behind Apple iOS and Google Android

13 points by CrankyBear 14y ago

Encosia 14y ago
So, if "computing operating systems" is what we're measuring now, no one should complain about Microsoft's monopoly advantage anymore, right? The most frustrating thing about reading pop-journalism about Microsoft these days is watching people complain that Microsoft is abusing their monopoly to promote services like SkyDrive/Bing or not allowing Store apps to implement dynamic code generation, while still claiming that Microsoft is no longer relevant because we're in a post PC world now. Which is it?
- sounds 14y ago
  Both. (I'll play devil's advocate, if that's ok.) What matters most? "Computing operating systems" or "desktop market share"? I believe both are vital to the long-term success of any competitor, Microsoft, Google, Apple, or "other." If Google or Apple did not deliver a good UX on Windows Desktops, the resulting lost opportunities would severely curb their success in "computing operating systems." Meanwhile, Microsoft owns the platform they deliver on. Can Microsoft use that to their advantage? Logically they can, but the ethics of their actions may result in US DOJ antitrust action. If Microsoft does not deliver a good UX in mobile, tablet, and ultrabook markets, their future relevance on the desktop is threatened. This is where I think you and I disconnect: I believe Microsoft is now waging a two-front war and is being squeezed by the resulting pincer attack. Microsoft has to simultaneously innovate in new, fast-moving markets like mobile and tablet, while acting like a benevolent 800-lb gorilla in the desktop OS market. It's not impossible to do, but it requires a combination of finesse and balls that Microsoft seems to be lacking, based solely on the stock price history for the 2002-2012 timespan.
mappu 14y ago
I'm not sure i follow that graph. What happened in 2004-2005 that caused 29% of "Other"? And what's responsible for the simultaneous large jump with apple? The iPhone wasn't released until mid-2007.
- kapnobatairza 14y ago
  Can't be Symbian, can't be Linux/Ubuntu, as those never picked up a large chunk of market share.... Possibly Blackberry? Large jump with Apple might be Tiger? The data does seem highly dubious though....
- wutbrodo 14y ago
  I believe the report includes music devices...might it be the iPod (released '05)? I'm not sure if the report would include the first-gen iPod, but it seems to.

13 points by CrankyBear 14y ago

So, if "computing operating systems" is what we're measuring now, no one should complain about Microsoft's monopoly advantage anymore, right? The most frustrating thing about reading pop-journalism about Microsoft these days is watching people complain that Microsoft is abusing their monopoly to promote services like SkyDrive/Bing or not allowing Store apps to implement dynamic code generation, while still claiming that Microsoft is no longer relevant because we're in a post PC world now. Which is it?

sounds 14y ago
Both. (I'll play devil's advocate, if that's ok.) What matters most? "Computing operating systems" or "desktop market share"? I believe both are vital to the long-term success of any competitor, Microsoft, Google, Apple, or "other." If Google or Apple did not deliver a good UX on Windows Desktops, the resulting lost opportunities would severely curb their success in "computing operating systems." Meanwhile, Microsoft owns the platform they deliver on. Can Microsoft use that to their advantage? Logically they can, but the ethics of their actions may result in US DOJ antitrust action. If Microsoft does not deliver a good UX in mobile, tablet, and ultrabook markets, their future relevance on the desktop is threatened. This is where I think you and I disconnect: I believe Microsoft is now waging a two-front war and is being squeezed by the resulting pincer attack. Microsoft has to simultaneously innovate in new, fast-moving markets like mobile and tablet, while acting like a benevolent 800-lb gorilla in the desktop OS market. It's not impossible to do, but it requires a combination of finesse and balls that Microsoft seems to be lacking, based solely on the stock price history for the 2002-2012 timespan.

mappu 14y ago

I'm not sure i follow that graph. What happened in 2004-2005 that caused 29% of "Other"? And what's responsible for the simultaneous large jump with apple? The iPhone wasn't released until mid-2007.

kapnobatairza 14y ago
Can't be Symbian, can't be Linux/Ubuntu, as those never picked up a large chunk of market share.... Possibly Blackberry? Large jump with Apple might be Tiger? The data does seem highly dubious though....
wutbrodo 14y ago
I believe the report includes music devices...might it be the iPod (released '05)? I'm not sure if the report would include the first-gen iPod, but it seems to.