26 ms·

How far has Microsoft fallen?

137 points by dmoney67 14y ago

guilloche 14y ago
Isn't windows RT is for ARM cpu? MSFT just does not bother to port desktop mode to ARM chips. Two possible reasons for not porting desktop mode are: 1.x86 and arm architecture are different and it is not easy to port. 2.No existing desktop application for ARM. Windows RT seems to be windows 8's partial port for ARM chips as I understand.
- dangrossman 14y ago
  Windows RT has the desktop -- with the same task bar as Windows 7, littered with icons as it's always been back to Windows 95 if you so choose, plus the familiar shell apps like Explorer and Task Manager. All the Microsoft Office apps that come bundled with Surface also run in "desktop mode" -- they're not Metro apps at all. The only difference between Windows RT and Windows 8 is that the only sanctioned way to install software on Windows RT is from the Windows Store, where all apps run on both CPU architectures.
  - ghshephard 14y ago
    Re: "...is from the Windows Store, where all apps run on both CPU architectures." From the OP quoted article: "While Windows 8 and Windows RT can both run so-called “Modern” apps (formerly known as “Metro” apps) designed for touch-sensitive screens, even those apps must be converted, or ported, to Windows RT, and not all Modern apps appearing in the Windows app store have been ported over, compounding compatibility issues."
    - DaveMebs 14y ago
      If you write an HTML/JS, it will always run on all architectures. If you write a .NET/XAML app, by default it will be compiled to a CPU neutral IL that runs on all architectures (you can disable this and target a specific CPU architecture). If you write a C++/XAML app, by default Visual Studio will compile different versions of the app for each architecture. For the vast majority of Win8 apps, "converting" to ARM is just a cross-compile. It is only when you are doing very specialized things that you actually need to worry about the CPU architecture your app will be running on.
      - kyllo 14y ago
        Does that mean if there's an open source application you like, all you have to do to get it on your Surface is open the source code in the latest edition of Visual Studio, recompile it, transfer the files to your Surface, and you will be able to install and run it?
        jpatte 14y ago
        Unfortunately no because chances are this open source code is using some parts of the Win32 API that are not supported by WinRT, so you would have to replace the invalid API calls by the new (probably asynchronous) ones... Maybe even completely rewrite the GUI if necessary.
- malkia 14y ago
  I think mips might also be supported, but not sure
- mtgx 14y ago
  Linux for ARM supports legacy x86 apps. And I don't think there's any major performance penalty there. Sure, it's not very fast on pre-Cortex A15 hardware, but that can be said about Windows RT, too. Windows RT is actually a lot slower when processing stuff (up to 3x slower) than Android and iOS (not talking about animations, which are pretty simple and handled by the GPU). Also in the Linux world they are working on improving the performance and battery efficiency with kernels 3.7 and 3.8, and they will keep improving them in future versions, as they are only at very early stages of ARM support. I think the 64 bit ARMv8 chips will get great support for Linux from day one, when they come out in 2014, as support for them it's already being baked into the kernels right now.
  - Nursie 14y ago
    "Linux for ARM supports legacy x86 apps" ?!? I'm a huge linux fan but I've never heard of this outside of some sort of processor-emulation layer and full VM which wouldn't give you the world's best performance. Have I missed something? --edit-- Did you mean support for older apps is (comparatively) easy because they can be rebuilt from source? Also I'm not really sure what you mean by linux support for ARM being in the early stages. I've been running linux on a variety of ARM devices for ~8 years now, since the NSLU2 days. Good support for a huge variety of ARM SoCs has been in place for many years now.
frozenport 14y ago
I spoke with an MS recruiter and they have 4k new job opening. We will see some more violent flailing before they die. Maybe even innovation.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
troymc 14y ago
Heh, there was similar journalistic confusion in a Maclean's magazine article (Maclean's being Canada's main weekly news magazine): "Microsoft also unveiled a tablet this month. The Surface will have a built-in keyboard on the screen cover and run on the Android operating system…" Yep, Android! Source: Maclean's magazine for July 16, 2012, page 47.
- xutopia 14y ago
  That's like O'Leary on the Lang & O'Leary show saying that Pinterest is a productivity search engine.
javajosh 14y ago
Question: how long before Bill Gates steps back in to be CEO of Microsoft?
- lukencode 14y ago
  I hope never, what he is doing at the moment is far more important than running any tech company.
  - fauigerzigerk 14y ago
    No, I think there are a lot more people who can run a charity than people who can make the billions to fund one.
- redthrowaway 14y ago
  Never. Why would he? He's made all the money he'll ever need to make, and by all accounts is happy and fulfilled with his role in his non-profit. Why go back to MS to right a sinking ship, have his public image tarnished (again), and have to deal with the stress of being CEO? What would he gain from it? Gates seems to be happier and more fulfilled (certainly better-liked) than he ever was while he was at MS. I just don't see the value proposition for him in returning.
  - tuananh 14y ago
    a very slim chance. would he stand still and let his child die?
  - javajosh 14y ago
    Don't you think it must be difficult for him to see his baby so badly mismanaged, starting with Vista, and now Windows 8 and Surface? He poured his life blood into that company, I can't imagine that he's unaffected by it's performance.
  - melvinram 14y ago
    Bill still owns a lot of Microsoft stock. He might not care about the money for his personal gain, but he does care about the mission and goals of his foundation. More money for Bill = more money for foundation. I don't see Bill returning to Microsoft being a likely scenario but the value proposition is definitely there if he feels his ability to do things with this foundation in the future threatened.
starik36 14y ago
MS is definitely confusing the market. Their ARM offering should be for tablets only and shouldn't be called Windows RT or Windows anything else. It should have been called Metro OS or some such. It shouldn't have included desktop mode, which serves no other purpose other than to confuse things. No one would have been confused. I don't believe I've used word "confused" enough times.
- nwh 14y ago
  Confused isn't strong enough. I see utter bewilderment as I try to explain to my peers what they difference between RT and the bog standard Windows 8. Usually they get bored and wish they hadn't asked the question. If it runs office and IE in the desktop, why can't I install games? What application store? What's ARM? What does RT stand for? Why would anyone want that?
sonabinu 14y ago
maybe Microsoft needs to revamp their marketing efforts. They have some great things happening in the innovation space (for example http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/technology/microsoft-renews-relevance-with-machine-learning-technology.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/technology/microsoft-renew...)
- Gormo 14y ago
  They ought to revamp their marketing efforts from square one, starting with figuring out who their customers are and what products those customers will want to purchase.
sutro 14y ago
Windows RT (Run Time) - it's the best product name since Windows NT (New Technology). While all those other bad software companies waste your time with OT (Old Technology) and CT (Compile Time), Microsoft gives you the NRTT (New Run Time Technology) you deserve.
- zalew 14y ago
  with Modern ui
  - UntitledNo4 14y ago
    Which should be called modern since Modern (uppercase M) refers, in the world of art, literature and architecture, to Modernism, which is not at all modern. (this was written in jest)
- chris_wot 14y ago
  I really want the startup sequence to say "Built with the Windows RT runtime".
gry 14y ago
Apple kills Microsoft here. My bias: They deprecated every major Mac hardware and software transition into a virtual machine. * Mac OS 9 to Classic Environment * PowerPC to Rosetta Apple brands, changes brands, and moves forward. Microsoft makes Windows proper compatible with the new. They have done an amazing job both from the tech and marketing front. And yet, computing is now the rest of us, not the "enterprise". We have amazing computers in our pockets. The enterprise changed, allowing and adapting to iPhone and Android devices. Our phones do more interesting things than our Windows desktops.
munger 14y ago
For the PC world, I'm happy with a 13" ultrabook running Windows 7 (Asus Zenbook UX31A). At least I can get work done on it from the recliner and plug it in to an external 24" monitor and keyboard for more serious work. In my opinion the greatest thing about Windows 7 (other than general stability and being less annoying than Vista) is its window key + arrow hot keys to move application windows around super fast on multi-monitor setups. (and to do exact right/left splits on single monitors) There is nothing appealing to me about Windows RT/Surface or Windows 8 for laptop/desktop, they both look like they will just get in the way of creating or working on anything.
- codewright 14y ago
  >In my opinion the greatest thing about Windows 7 (other than general stability and being less annoying than Vista) is its window key + arrow hot keys to move application windows around super fast on multi-monitor setups. (and to do exact right/left splits on single monitors) As an Xmonad user I am simultaneously aghast and amused. Also, this is available on Mac OS X and I use a utility to make available the same behavior.
  - munger 14y ago
    I was actually considering adding "sad but true" to the end of that line... because... it is. =) Also what app do you have to use in Mac OS X for sane window management? One thing that bugged me about giving a 15" MBP a chance was how "maximizing" windows doesn't actually maximize them and that sort of thing. I guess I thought window management was supposed to be built into the OS out of the box.
    - gry 14y ago
      moom [http://manytricks.com/moom/ http://manytricks.com/moom/] or divvy [http://mizage.com/divvy/ http://mizage.com/divvy/]
      - UntitledNo4 14y ago
        I second Moom and there is also Cinch (http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/cinch/ http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/cinch/) which I have used before. They do roughly the same thing, but I prefer Moom since it involves less hand movement, but it's a matter of preference. Moom people also have Witch for window switching management on Mac. Personally it's not what i was looking for, but worth mentioning.
malkia 14y ago
And for more fun: -- C:\Windows\System32 contains 64 bit binaries, while -- C:\Windows\SysWow64 contains the 32 bit ones (that is on a 64 bit version of Windows) Then the naming of $(Platform) $(PlatformShort) in MSVC IDE.. Explore for yourself - it's fun, it's even more fun when the windows sdk, dxsdk, and other ms's sdk's use different naming conventions for the same things. Or the WinDir vs SystemRoot it's something about Microsoft creating too much confusion with their naming
- Gormo 14y ago
  These are hardly problems. Users don't generally encounter system directories or identifiers in IDEs, and these patterns have emerged from MS's traditional dedication to maintaining backward compatibility, which is usually much more important to developers and power users than having directory names be completely descriptive of what's in them. The problem with Windows RT is exactly the opposite: they've broken backward compatibility, severely, and created a product that bears no resemblance to what the vast majority of users recognize as Windows, yet they've decided to call it "Windows" anyway.
  - malkia 14y ago
    most often, it's us developers becoming users of some other software. And real users are puzzled sometimes, there were at least couple of emails to the sqlite mailing list about missing sqlite3.dll from users. In one case it was some tax program installing it in the system32 folder, messing it up with another one (why would they do that is another matter), also as someone posted below, there is Program Files, and Program Files (x86), but there apps that do not follow that convention (internally they have their own bin32, bin64 folders), and it comes to users again - usually plugins for various creative suits - audio, video, etc.
- chris_wot 14y ago
  WoW64 stands for Windows 32-bit on Windows 64-bit. It's a subsystem that allows backward compatibility. Windows on Windows allowed 16-bit software to run on 32-bit Windows. At the time there was no need to call it WoW32. I suppose Microsoft could have called WoW64 W32oW64, but they didn't.
camus 14y ago
Os are becoming less relevant for "most" of uses , with cloud services ,and apps running on the browsers. Os will always be relevant for software requiring intensive computation ( games , complexe CAD programs , etc ... ). So Microsoft might lose some relevance , it is normal. Microsoft has also a branding problem regarding public products.But is doing very well in Enterprise products.
- mtgx 14y ago
  I see the consumer market as a "lower-end" enterprise market, or the enterprise market as a "higher-end consumer market", just like I see the server chips market as a higher-end consumer market. The problem is that when you lose the "lower-end" market, it's only a matter of time before you lose the "higher-end" market, too (5-10 years), according to Innovator's Dilemma. I know it's not a perfect analogy because it's two companies instead of one, but Nokia losing the leadership in the "consumer smartphones" market, made it even more obvious that RIM will lose its leadership in the enterprise market, too, but with a several years of delay, because the enterprise world moves more slowly.
sakopov 14y ago
My god, give them a break. Can we get at least one positive article about Microsoft on HN? It doesn't matter what Microsoft does they always get ridiculed for it. Any effort, no matter how good, gets completely obliterated. Microsoft hasn't been the most innovative company lately but they're slowly adjusting their line of products to at least try to get somewhere. Yes, Surface doesn't stand up to iPad, but it's a very solid product nonetheless. Yes, Windows 8 is a big deviation from norm, but it is an innovative move forward that needs a bit more work. Yes, C# and the entire .NET ecosystem isn't as popular as Rails and gets absolutely no love on HN but it is an incredibly powerful environment. For fuck's sake, stop hating Microsoft just to hate it and embrace their efforts to move forward and compete just like you do Google and Apple.
- Gormo 14y ago
  > Microsoft hasn't been the most innovative company lately but they're slowly adjusting their line of products to at least try to get somewhere. They're slowly adjusting their products in order to jump on someone else's bandwagon, instead of maximizing their own unique competitive advantage. Why the hell is Microsoft making an ARM-based hardware platform in the first place?
  - rbf 14y ago
    > Why the hell is Microsoft making an ARM-based hardware platform in the first place? Same reason as everyone else. People want devices with low power consumption. Until x86 can deliver that I would say it makes great sense to make ARM-based hardware. I keep hearing atom etc will be on par with ARM, however, I have yet to see devices who deliver on that promise.
    - Gormo 14y ago
      > Same reason as everyone else. People want devices with low power consumption. People want cars with good fuel economy and tasty, nutritious lunches, too, so why don't we see Microsoft Motors or The Microsoft Café? I'm not focusing specifically on the ARM architecture, but merely pointing out that using ARM is just another quality of this product that fails to make use of any of Microsoft's existing advantages; the broader question is why MS decided to release any tablet at all in the first place
sigsergv 14y ago
Confusion OS.
elliatab 14y ago
As a developer working with Microsoft products I have a very mixed feeling about what the company is doing right now. The tools and products for developers and professionals are amazing. Visual Studio might be the most visible example but there are really tons of great tools and libraries (and many are actually open sourced). The problem is that I cannot see any of this greatness translated into end-users killer-apps. LOB apps surely benefit from it and other ecosystems (OSX, iOS or Android) will not catch-up for a long time. For me there are two Microsoft: one for the developers and headed by Scott Guthrie and the other for consumers. This last one does not have a clear vision and is just trying to catch up with Google and Apple.
- guilloche 14y ago
  I used to using visual studio and thought it was good. But after using emacs, I donot think it is good any more. and the libraries/APIs seems not well designed too now.
  - elliatab 14y ago
    When talking about VS and libraries/APIs you really need to be more specific. VS lets you work with very different technologies from native C++ to .NET languages, including web stacks. The user experience may vary but if we are talking about the .NET world I think it is a very strong package. The only equivalent I can think of would be the Eclipse/Java combo.
jacques_chester 14y ago
There is a great deal of ruin in a nation. -- Adam Smith.
pinaceae 14y ago
They are indeed confused. We are working with large enterprise clients (big pharma). Last two years they practically all adopted iPads for their field forces. Went with single device policy, which created a lot of pain for IT - no Office, no deployment tools, no AD, etc. MS and Intel then start a marketing blitz in those IT departments, hey, enterprise, we love and understand you. Cool, IT guys fall for it. Problem? MS wants enterprise to adopt Win8 Pro on Intel devices. Which practically all are around 1000$ and have a battery life of 4 hours. Enterprise IT wants something similar to the iPad, for even cheaper. They want an iPad with sane deployment tools and MS Office. Cheaper. Because their people in emerging markets have limited budgets. Enter Windows RT. It is just like an iPad, cheap, better power efficiency on its devices. Awesome, right? Except that it does not offer the deployment and management tools needed. It is practically an iOS device in that regard. The MS Office on it is Home/Student Preview edition, which seem to be upgradeable if you have the right CALs. But it runs like shit. Buzz is that the whole thing was a very late add once they realized that MS' main selling point was Office. Late, panicky scramble. And now add the fact that MS seems to be launching MS Office on iOS soon. And then we have Modern UI. Nice for consumer apps. Facebook looks cool. But enterprise tools? On iOS we have freedom. On Modern there are guidelines, horizontal swipe and pagination is key. You're used to high information density, utilization of screen real estate to show as much as possible on one screen to avoid a user needing to navigate away? Forget that on Modern UI. Whitespace rules, it is like the GMail redesign on steroids. No wonder they need Classic UI to make MS Office available - Modern UI in its current strict incarnation cannot scale to offer this kind of functionality. So yeah. Intel is not in a good spot. Microsoft neither. The next 6 months will be decisive. Lots of pilots going on, Samsung has a good enough Win 8 Pro device out there, Surface Pro still not here. Surface is not even launched in Japan, might not be till late next year. Whoever is in charge of platform strategy at MS should be made to go away. With access to those resources they should be kicking ass.
- itry 14y ago
  > Enterprise IT wants something similar to the iPad, for even cheaper. Nexus?
  - pinaceae 14y ago
bobsy 14y ago
I enjoy using Windows 8. There are problems. Shutting it down isn't obvious. Selecting "Lock" will bring up a sign in screen. Putting your computer to sleep won't... its all a bit strange. Like I said though, it is a fairly enjoyable experience. I haven't used the Surface. I don't see myself getting one. I have the iPad2. I only use it to surf the web. I don't need a replacement. Maybe in 2-3 years. I think Microsoft has got a branding problem. The Surface is obviously running something different to Windows 8. I only get it because I know what ARM is... its impossible to explain to my parents. "It runs on a different type of processor so is different" is met with a blank face or "But its runs Windows right?" There is also a fear, especially with my parents about Windows 8. They have just about mastered Windows 7. A lot of this fear is misplaced. There was a lot of talk of Desktop UI and Metro UI. It would have been simpler to say "The start button has been removed and instead has its own screen making programs easier to find and use." Instead they banged on about different UI's. Different types of applications. All very confusing. Then you have the lack of branding. I still call Windows 8 app's "Metro". I think it is a good name. I don't know what they are called now. When I enter the store in Windows 8 it isn't obvious what the new name is either.. Microsoft made a big mess of branding and advertising Windows 8. Someone should be fired because it is harming the take up of what is imperfect but pretty good software.
- hfs 14y ago
  I disagree (that it's a branding and advertising problem alone), and here's a very simple reason why. I went into a store and saw a machine running Windows 8. I decided to give it a try despite all the bad things I had heard about it. I opened the calendar app, messed around, said "neat!" to myself, and went to close the program. Wait, there's no close button. Okay, maybe if I hover around the corners there will be a pop-out to click it. No? Okay, maybe if I hover around the edges of the screen in general there will be a pop-out. No? Okay, well I can always hit Alt-F4... that didn't work, they must have it locked down. I have no idea how to close the calendar application. I've been programming for the past 12 years, and I have no idea how to close this application. What has my life become?
mtgx 14y ago
I'm not the biggest fan of Microsoft in the mobile world, but until they launched Windows 8, I actually thought the idea of the "hybrid" device might work, and may be the future of both tablets and PC's. You can use it as a PC when you need it, and as a tablet, when you don't. Best of both worlds, right? Wrong. When I started using Windows 8, I realized it's actually the worst of both worlds. If you want both in the same package, then you have to live with a ton of compromises. Here are some of them: 1) You can't have a large screen, if you want to use it as a tablet, too. Maybe 11" at most, and that includes hybrid devices more like Surface, with light weight tablet parts, and detachable keyboard. The ones like Lenovo Yoga are completely unusable as tablets, unless you intend to use a "tablet" on your desk all the time, at which point, what's the difference compared to just using a touchscreen laptop? 2) Then 10-11" screens are not very usable for real work as a PC, so you have to compromise a lot in that, too. 3) 10-11" is pretty large and heavy for a tablet, and it seems most people are starting to gravitate towards 8" or smaller tablets, which makes it even more likely that people will want the tablet and the PC as 2 different devices in the future. 4) If you want a "hybrid", then you're forced to use x86 chips, and unless you want the performance of a netbook, you need Core chips inside. These have 3 major drawbacks: low battery life, heat/noise, and high price tags. 5) Windows RT devices, while a bit better on the tablet part, because of the ARM advantages (better battery life and more competitive prices), can't seriously be called "hybrids". They only have Office for PC use. 6) 13" or higher "hybrids" are also a joke, as you can't seriously use them as tablets. 7) You're still forced to use or avoid the "touch mode", even when you want to use it as a PC. I consider Windows 8 worse for a PC user than Windows 7. I brings a lot of new stuff that are there to annoy the PC user, not help him. Whatever small benefits it has over Windows 7, they are not worth it for the worse user experience. And this is for the more "techie" of the PC users. For "normal" mom and pop users, they are going to find it even worse, after using XP/Windows 7 for so long, and now having to basically learn and unlearn a ton of new stuff, which is not easy for this type of user. So whichever way you go, either more towards the PC part, or the tablet part, you're going to run into major compromises, if you want to use a single device as both PC and tablet. So I don't think anymore that hybrids are the future, as they seem to do either one part pretty badly, or be mediocre at both. You're better off keeping these two type of devices separated.
- 14y ago
rjd 14y ago
Storm in a teacup. Its no different to Windows CE, or a plethora of other similar named products. Most people who would be confused will no doubt have a sales person to explain the situation. Most other people will have a clue and this won't be an issue. To be perfectly honest this reminds me a lot of the PS3 vs Xbox reporting when they where released. PS3 couldn't catch a break, still sold OK, but nothing but terrible reviews. Eventually it came out of the woodwork was most media agencies where taking money from the gaming industry (and probably MS) to write anti PS3 articles, out right media assassination. My money is on the same tactic being used now.
- laserDinosaur 14y ago
  An entire industry was being paid off to slag the PS3? I've never heard of this before.
  - rjd 14y ago
    No idea if you're being sarcastic or not. If not its quite common, thats what PR companies do, usually they just do positive stuff, but when you have a lot to loose it can go negative. Having worked in big media you learn very quickly that everything is paid for in one way or another. Sometimes quite innocently, free interviews on TV which involve the use of there company name. Other times more sneaky stuff, basically differing levels of bribery. Generally its not to bad, an interview with a pop star releasing a new album, my friend however gets flown all over the world regularly to review movies and games. Everything paid for, thousands and thousands of dollars splashed on him... as long as he continues to write positive review... he'd hate to loose his free holidays in Germany or Las Vegas or London every 6 months or so. So he writes things in a way that keeps his perks. Judging by the lack of negative reviews I'd say the game industry has almost every game reviewer paid off. The ones that annoy me the most are advertorials, paid stories about certain topics or companies. PR companies basically come in with the story finished, all the wording the way they want it and are willing to pay money to get it into the prime time news. I'll admit 90% of the time they get turned down on there first try, but they keep trying, and generally they get there way as smaller agencies and especially bloggers will take the money forcing the larger companies to publish a story as well not to loose market share. Some blogs have bene exposed multiple times for doing it, I believe engadget went on the defensive after being accused of these practices, and there has been a few other examples involving Google and Facebook I can faintly remember within the last year or so. If you weren't aware of that going on I hope I haven't shaken your trust in the media to badly. But its all about money at the end of the day, and with dwindling profits more and more agencies are caving to PR money.
esolyt 14y ago
Yes, sure, it is confusing for the user. But that is the whole point. Microsoft trying to use the Windows brand to get into the mobile market. This is the only advantage they can possibly have over Android and iOS
hmexx 14y ago
I'm in the minority who believes that Microsoft's tablet strategy is reasonable. Their long-term goal is to provide tablets that look more or less like the incumbents (8-10 inch, light, 10 hour battery life, 9mm thin), but can also run any Windows app you want. But that's not possible for another 2 years or so of advancement by Intel and other hardware suppliers. So what do they do until then? Just wait? No, they release two devices: an ipad competitor that's not a hybrid, and an ultrabook competitor. They may both have modest sales, but the Windows store will start getting populated with apps, and Windows 8 will become familiar, so that when they CAN actually build a 'perfect' hybrid, all the other pieces will be in place.
Mordor 14y ago
Perhaps the real truth is that Microsoft always needs a version 1.0, before they get things right with version 2?
- Flenser 14y ago
  The problem is that whereas previously people would just stick with the 2.0 of Microsoft's previous generation; they are now switching to a competitors 1.0 that was better thought out than Microsoft's offering.
netcan 14y ago
There are two dovetailing things going here. # 1 is Windows' part in the disruptive innovation curve which I think touch OSs are clearly following. In the beginning new technology is not directly competing with other players in the category. It is drawing marketing share from non-consupmtion. That's been most of what mobile has gobbled up to now. Then comes low & mid end consumption come next. We're seeing some of that already. People bringing a tablet on business trips when they would have brought a laptop 2 years ago. Windows seem to be trying to "catch" tablets on their way to "high quality use" on the disruption curve. "Primary computers" used by professionals, students & such. Current Android/iOS devices are not really ready for these uses so they have some time. If they can get enterprise on to Windows machines, they may be able to build a moat (or at least some basic battlements). # 2 is Microsoft's lipstick-on-a-pig marketing. Marketing fundamentals like product segmentation, branding, naming, pricing. MS have never been smooth with that kind of stuff. "Windows Home Office for Students (noncommercial use only)" has always felt like a contrived afterthought. I'm sure it's well researched and functional, but it's not elegant. When you don't have the elegance at the more fundamental level of marketing it's harder to communicate. So Windows RT/Metro/Surface/Phone/Touch/8 is not going to be understood by consumers until they start using is. If it was another company, Id say they're doomed. But Microsoft are stubborn and resilient. They may do it.
bambax 14y ago
> And, since Windows RT doesn't look or feel like prior versions of Windows and doesn't run applications written for them either, why call it Windows at all? This is called "brand extension". Brand extension is a crime against marketing and against common sense. The reasoning goes like this: - we have a strong brand - we have a new product - no one will know this new product exists unless we spend huge amounts of advertising to inform the public about its existence - oh but wait! we have this strong brand! why not attach the new product to the existing brand, to jump start it?! - (and BTW, our strong but old brand can only benefit from this hot new cool product being attached to it) At first it seems to work: the new product grows faster with brand extension than without. But very fast, people become confused about which is which and what does what, and prefer two uniquely branded and well-positioned competing products against the whole "line offering". The "hot new product" usually ends up polluting, weakening, if not killing the parent brand, instead of rejuvenating it. This is exactly what is happening with Windows RT. Microsoft isn't the only culprit however. "Google Play" is a similar move. It hasn't started to hurt Google yet, probably because it didn't catch, and people continue to call the Android app store... well, "the Android App Store". But rest assured it will come back to bite them.
- panacea 14y ago
  My amateur marketing analysis follows... "Brand extension is a crime against marketing and against common sense" Agreed and it's an example of something Apple has gotten very right. Apple is the banner brand. What is Apple? It's a hardware device manufacturer with mostly excellent software and services. You buy an Apple X and you're buying (post Mac but still applies): iPod. iPod smaller. iPod much smaller. iPod with a touch screen. iPod with a touch screen and phone. iPod with a touch screen, internet and much bigger. iPod with a touch screen, internet and slightly bigger. Some thinner, some fatter, some with cameras, some without. They've almost never stumbled in extending the brand and creating new sub-brands because the initial umbrella brand isn't 'used in vain' or diluted. What is Google? Google is an ad supported AI interface with occasionally excellent hardware, and genius software services. You buy a Google X and you're buying? It remains to be seen (although I suspect it's coming) what exactly the 'Google Nexus' is. What is Microsoft? Microsoft makes Windows and Office, enterprise software and is a sticker on the side of other people's products. When you buy Microsoft Windows X you get??
kyllo 14y ago
I have to agree about the lack of a compelling use case for the ARM version of Surface. The Surface Pro, which is non-ARM and runs the desktop version of Windows 8, so it can run "legacy" Windows 7 programs, but the drawbacks are that it has worse battery life and costs another $400 more. At that point why not just get a laptop. I actually think Windows 7 is great, it is the most useful, customizable, business-appropriate, and non-broken version of Windows in a while. I was really impressed with Microsoft when I got my corporate box updated to Windows 7 and Office 2010. I thought they were on the right track. But with Windows 8 they tried to fix something that wasn't broken, and abandoned their core market in the process. They really should have forked their OS product line. Windows 8 RT should have been called "Windows Touch" for tablets and phones, and they should have continued to iterate Windows 7 as "Windows Desktop" for business/productivity users. There is no need for Windows 8/Metro/Modern/whatever on a desktop computer, because vertical touch screens do not work ergonomically.

137 points by dmoney67 14y ago

Isn't windows RT is for ARM cpu? MSFT just does not bother to port desktop mode to ARM chips. Two possible reasons for not porting desktop mode are: 1.x86 and arm architecture are different and it is not easy to port. 2.No existing desktop application for ARM. Windows RT seems to be windows 8's partial port for ARM chips as I understand.

dangrossman 14y ago
Windows RT has the desktop -- with the same task bar as Windows 7, littered with icons as it's always been back to Windows 95 if you so choose, plus the familiar shell apps like Explorer and Task Manager. All the Microsoft Office apps that come bundled with Surface also run in "desktop mode" -- they're not Metro apps at all. The only difference between Windows RT and Windows 8 is that the only sanctioned way to install software on Windows RT is from the Windows Store, where all apps run on both CPU architectures.
- ghshephard 14y ago
  Re: "...is from the Windows Store, where all apps run on both CPU architectures." From the OP quoted article: "While Windows 8 and Windows RT can both run so-called “Modern” apps (formerly known as “Metro” apps) designed for touch-sensitive screens, even those apps must be converted, or ported, to Windows RT, and not all Modern apps appearing in the Windows app store have been ported over, compounding compatibility issues."
  - DaveMebs 14y ago
    If you write an HTML/JS, it will always run on all architectures. If you write a .NET/XAML app, by default it will be compiled to a CPU neutral IL that runs on all architectures (you can disable this and target a specific CPU architecture). If you write a C++/XAML app, by default Visual Studio will compile different versions of the app for each architecture. For the vast majority of Win8 apps, "converting" to ARM is just a cross-compile. It is only when you are doing very specialized things that you actually need to worry about the CPU architecture your app will be running on.
    - kyllo 14y ago
      Does that mean if there's an open source application you like, all you have to do to get it on your Surface is open the source code in the latest edition of Visual Studio, recompile it, transfer the files to your Surface, and you will be able to install and run it?
      - jpatte 14y ago
        Unfortunately no because chances are this open source code is using some parts of the Win32 API that are not supported by WinRT, so you would have to replace the invalid API calls by the new (probably asynchronous) ones... Maybe even completely rewrite the GUI if necessary.
malkia 14y ago
I think mips might also be supported, but not sure
mtgx 14y ago
Linux for ARM supports legacy x86 apps. And I don't think there's any major performance penalty there. Sure, it's not very fast on pre-Cortex A15 hardware, but that can be said about Windows RT, too. Windows RT is actually a lot slower when processing stuff (up to 3x slower) than Android and iOS (not talking about animations, which are pretty simple and handled by the GPU). Also in the Linux world they are working on improving the performance and battery efficiency with kernels 3.7 and 3.8, and they will keep improving them in future versions, as they are only at very early stages of ARM support. I think the 64 bit ARMv8 chips will get great support for Linux from day one, when they come out in 2014, as support for them it's already being baked into the kernels right now.
- Nursie 14y ago
  "Linux for ARM supports legacy x86 apps" ?!? I'm a huge linux fan but I've never heard of this outside of some sort of processor-emulation layer and full VM which wouldn't give you the world's best performance. Have I missed something? --edit-- Did you mean support for older apps is (comparatively) easy because they can be rebuilt from source? Also I'm not really sure what you mean by linux support for ARM being in the early stages. I've been running linux on a variety of ARM devices for ~8 years now, since the NSLU2 days. Good support for a huge variety of ARM SoCs has been in place for many years now.

frozenport 14y ago

I spoke with an MS recruiter and they have 4k new job opening. We will see some more violent flailing before they die. Maybe even innovation.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

troymc 14y ago

Heh, there was similar journalistic confusion in a Maclean's magazine article (Maclean's being Canada's main weekly news magazine): "Microsoft also unveiled a tablet this month. The Surface will have a built-in keyboard on the screen cover and run on the Android operating system…" Yep, Android! Source: Maclean's magazine for July 16, 2012, page 47.

xutopia 14y ago
That's like O'Leary on the Lang & O'Leary show saying that Pinterest is a productivity search engine.

javajosh 14y ago

Question: how long before Bill Gates steps back in to be CEO of Microsoft?

lukencode 14y ago
I hope never, what he is doing at the moment is far more important than running any tech company.
- fauigerzigerk 14y ago
  No, I think there are a lot more people who can run a charity than people who can make the billions to fund one.
redthrowaway 14y ago
Never. Why would he? He's made all the money he'll ever need to make, and by all accounts is happy and fulfilled with his role in his non-profit. Why go back to MS to right a sinking ship, have his public image tarnished (again), and have to deal with the stress of being CEO? What would he gain from it? Gates seems to be happier and more fulfilled (certainly better-liked) than he ever was while he was at MS. I just don't see the value proposition for him in returning.
- tuananh 14y ago
  a very slim chance. would he stand still and let his child die?
- javajosh 14y ago
  Don't you think it must be difficult for him to see his baby so badly mismanaged, starting with Vista, and now Windows 8 and Surface? He poured his life blood into that company, I can't imagine that he's unaffected by it's performance.
- melvinram 14y ago
  Bill still owns a lot of Microsoft stock. He might not care about the money for his personal gain, but he does care about the mission and goals of his foundation. More money for Bill = more money for foundation. I don't see Bill returning to Microsoft being a likely scenario but the value proposition is definitely there if he feels his ability to do things with this foundation in the future threatened.

starik36 14y ago

MS is definitely confusing the market. Their ARM offering should be for tablets only and shouldn't be called Windows RT or Windows anything else. It should have been called Metro OS or some such. It shouldn't have included desktop mode, which serves no other purpose other than to confuse things. No one would have been confused. I don't believe I've used word "confused" enough times.

nwh 14y ago
Confused isn't strong enough. I see utter bewilderment as I try to explain to my peers what they difference between RT and the bog standard Windows 8. Usually they get bored and wish they hadn't asked the question. If it runs office and IE in the desktop, why can't I install games? What application store? What's ARM? What does RT stand for? Why would anyone want that?

sonabinu 14y ago

maybe Microsoft needs to revamp their marketing efforts. They have some great things happening in the innovation space (for example http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/technology/microsoft-renews-relevance-with-machine-learning-technology.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/technology/microsoft-renew...)

Gormo 14y ago
They ought to revamp their marketing efforts from square one, starting with figuring out who their customers are and what products those customers will want to purchase.

sutro 14y ago

Windows RT (Run Time) - it's the best product name since Windows NT (New Technology). While all those other bad software companies waste your time with OT (Old Technology) and CT (Compile Time), Microsoft gives you the NRTT (New Run Time Technology) you deserve.

zalew 14y ago
with Modern ui
- UntitledNo4 14y ago
  Which should be called modern since Modern (uppercase M) refers, in the world of art, literature and architecture, to Modernism, which is not at all modern. (this was written in jest)
chris_wot 14y ago
I really want the startup sequence to say "Built with the Windows RT runtime".

gry 14y ago

Apple kills Microsoft here. My bias: They deprecated every major Mac hardware and software transition into a virtual machine. * Mac OS 9 to Classic Environment * PowerPC to Rosetta Apple brands, changes brands, and moves forward. Microsoft makes Windows proper compatible with the new. They have done an amazing job both from the tech and marketing front. And yet, computing is now the rest of us, not the "enterprise". We have amazing computers in our pockets. The enterprise changed, allowing and adapting to iPhone and Android devices. Our phones do more interesting things than our Windows desktops.

munger 14y ago

For the PC world, I'm happy with a 13" ultrabook running Windows 7 (Asus Zenbook UX31A). At least I can get work done on it from the recliner and plug it in to an external 24" monitor and keyboard for more serious work. In my opinion the greatest thing about Windows 7 (other than general stability and being less annoying than Vista) is its window key + arrow hot keys to move application windows around super fast on multi-monitor setups. (and to do exact right/left splits on single monitors) There is nothing appealing to me about Windows RT/Surface or Windows 8 for laptop/desktop, they both look like they will just get in the way of creating or working on anything.

codewright 14y ago
>In my opinion the greatest thing about Windows 7 (other than general stability and being less annoying than Vista) is its window key + arrow hot keys to move application windows around super fast on multi-monitor setups. (and to do exact right/left splits on single monitors) As an Xmonad user I am simultaneously aghast and amused. Also, this is available on Mac OS X and I use a utility to make available the same behavior.
- munger 14y ago
  I was actually considering adding "sad but true" to the end of that line... because... it is. =) Also what app do you have to use in Mac OS X for sane window management? One thing that bugged me about giving a 15" MBP a chance was how "maximizing" windows doesn't actually maximize them and that sort of thing. I guess I thought window management was supposed to be built into the OS out of the box.
  - gry 14y ago
    moom [http://manytricks.com/moom/ http://manytricks.com/moom/] or divvy [http://mizage.com/divvy/ http://mizage.com/divvy/]
    - UntitledNo4 14y ago
      I second Moom and there is also Cinch (http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/cinch/ http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/cinch/) which I have used before. They do roughly the same thing, but I prefer Moom since it involves less hand movement, but it's a matter of preference. Moom people also have Witch for window switching management on Mac. Personally it's not what i was looking for, but worth mentioning.

malkia 14y ago

And for more fun: -- C:\Windows\System32 contains 64 bit binaries, while -- C:\Windows\SysWow64 contains the 32 bit ones (that is on a 64 bit version of Windows) Then the naming of $(Platform) $(PlatformShort) in MSVC IDE.. Explore for yourself - it's fun, it's even more fun when the windows sdk, dxsdk, and other ms's sdk's use different naming conventions for the same things. Or the WinDir vs SystemRoot it's something about Microsoft creating too much confusion with their naming

Gormo 14y ago
These are hardly problems. Users don't generally encounter system directories or identifiers in IDEs, and these patterns have emerged from MS's traditional dedication to maintaining backward compatibility, which is usually much more important to developers and power users than having directory names be completely descriptive of what's in them. The problem with Windows RT is exactly the opposite: they've broken backward compatibility, severely, and created a product that bears no resemblance to what the vast majority of users recognize as Windows, yet they've decided to call it "Windows" anyway.
- malkia 14y ago
  most often, it's us developers becoming users of some other software. And real users are puzzled sometimes, there were at least couple of emails to the sqlite mailing list about missing sqlite3.dll from users. In one case it was some tax program installing it in the system32 folder, messing it up with another one (why would they do that is another matter), also as someone posted below, there is Program Files, and Program Files (x86), but there apps that do not follow that convention (internally they have their own bin32, bin64 folders), and it comes to users again - usually plugins for various creative suits - audio, video, etc.
chris_wot 14y ago
WoW64 stands for Windows 32-bit on Windows 64-bit. It's a subsystem that allows backward compatibility. Windows on Windows allowed 16-bit software to run on 32-bit Windows. At the time there was no need to call it WoW32. I suppose Microsoft could have called WoW64 W32oW64, but they didn't.

camus 14y ago

Os are becoming less relevant for "most" of uses , with cloud services ,and apps running on the browsers. Os will always be relevant for software requiring intensive computation ( games , complexe CAD programs , etc ... ). So Microsoft might lose some relevance , it is normal. Microsoft has also a branding problem regarding public products.But is doing very well in Enterprise products.

mtgx 14y ago
I see the consumer market as a "lower-end" enterprise market, or the enterprise market as a "higher-end consumer market", just like I see the server chips market as a higher-end consumer market. The problem is that when you lose the "lower-end" market, it's only a matter of time before you lose the "higher-end" market, too (5-10 years), according to Innovator's Dilemma. I know it's not a perfect analogy because it's two companies instead of one, but Nokia losing the leadership in the "consumer smartphones" market, made it even more obvious that RIM will lose its leadership in the enterprise market, too, but with a several years of delay, because the enterprise world moves more slowly.

sakopov 14y ago

My god, give them a break. Can we get at least one positive article about Microsoft on HN? It doesn't matter what Microsoft does they always get ridiculed for it. Any effort, no matter how good, gets completely obliterated. Microsoft hasn't been the most innovative company lately but they're slowly adjusting their line of products to at least try to get somewhere. Yes, Surface doesn't stand up to iPad, but it's a very solid product nonetheless. Yes, Windows 8 is a big deviation from norm, but it is an innovative move forward that needs a bit more work. Yes, C# and the entire .NET ecosystem isn't as popular as Rails and gets absolutely no love on HN but it is an incredibly powerful environment. For fuck's sake, stop hating Microsoft just to hate it and embrace their efforts to move forward and compete just like you do Google and Apple.

Gormo 14y ago
> Microsoft hasn't been the most innovative company lately but they're slowly adjusting their line of products to at least try to get somewhere. They're slowly adjusting their products in order to jump on someone else's bandwagon, instead of maximizing their own unique competitive advantage. Why the hell is Microsoft making an ARM-based hardware platform in the first place?
- rbf 14y ago
  > Why the hell is Microsoft making an ARM-based hardware platform in the first place? Same reason as everyone else. People want devices with low power consumption. Until x86 can deliver that I would say it makes great sense to make ARM-based hardware. I keep hearing atom etc will be on par with ARM, however, I have yet to see devices who deliver on that promise.
  - Gormo 14y ago
    > Same reason as everyone else. People want devices with low power consumption. People want cars with good fuel economy and tasty, nutritious lunches, too, so why don't we see Microsoft Motors or The Microsoft Café? I'm not focusing specifically on the ARM architecture, but merely pointing out that using ARM is just another quality of this product that fails to make use of any of Microsoft's existing advantages; the broader question is why MS decided to release any tablet at all in the first place

sigsergv 14y ago

Confusion OS.

elliatab 14y ago

As a developer working with Microsoft products I have a very mixed feeling about what the company is doing right now. The tools and products for developers and professionals are amazing. Visual Studio might be the most visible example but there are really tons of great tools and libraries (and many are actually open sourced). The problem is that I cannot see any of this greatness translated into end-users killer-apps. LOB apps surely benefit from it and other ecosystems (OSX, iOS or Android) will not catch-up for a long time. For me there are two Microsoft: one for the developers and headed by Scott Guthrie and the other for consumers. This last one does not have a clear vision and is just trying to catch up with Google and Apple.

guilloche 14y ago
I used to using visual studio and thought it was good. But after using emacs, I donot think it is good any more. and the libraries/APIs seems not well designed too now.
- elliatab 14y ago
  When talking about VS and libraries/APIs you really need to be more specific. VS lets you work with very different technologies from native C++ to .NET languages, including web stacks. The user experience may vary but if we are talking about the .NET world I think it is a very strong package. The only equivalent I can think of would be the Eclipse/Java combo.

jacques_chester 14y ago

There is a great deal of ruin in a nation. -- Adam Smith.

pinaceae 14y ago

They are indeed confused. We are working with large enterprise clients (big pharma). Last two years they practically all adopted iPads for their field forces. Went with single device policy, which created a lot of pain for IT - no Office, no deployment tools, no AD, etc. MS and Intel then start a marketing blitz in those IT departments, hey, enterprise, we love and understand you. Cool, IT guys fall for it. Problem? MS wants enterprise to adopt Win8 Pro on Intel devices. Which practically all are around 1000$ and have a battery life of 4 hours. Enterprise IT wants something similar to the iPad, for even cheaper. They want an iPad with sane deployment tools and MS Office. Cheaper. Because their people in emerging markets have limited budgets. Enter Windows RT. It is just like an iPad, cheap, better power efficiency on its devices. Awesome, right? Except that it does not offer the deployment and management tools needed. It is practically an iOS device in that regard. The MS Office on it is Home/Student Preview edition, which seem to be upgradeable if you have the right CALs. But it runs like shit. Buzz is that the whole thing was a very late add once they realized that MS' main selling point was Office. Late, panicky scramble. And now add the fact that MS seems to be launching MS Office on iOS soon. And then we have Modern UI. Nice for consumer apps. Facebook looks cool. But enterprise tools? On iOS we have freedom. On Modern there are guidelines, horizontal swipe and pagination is key. You're used to high information density, utilization of screen real estate to show as much as possible on one screen to avoid a user needing to navigate away? Forget that on Modern UI. Whitespace rules, it is like the GMail redesign on steroids. No wonder they need Classic UI to make MS Office available - Modern UI in its current strict incarnation cannot scale to offer this kind of functionality. So yeah. Intel is not in a good spot. Microsoft neither. The next 6 months will be decisive. Lots of pilots going on, Samsung has a good enough Win 8 Pro device out there, Surface Pro still not here. Surface is not even launched in Japan, might not be till late next year. Whoever is in charge of platform strategy at MS should be made to go away. With access to those resources they should be kicking ass.

itry 14y ago
> Enterprise IT wants something similar to the iPad, for even cheaper. Nexus?
- pinaceae 14y ago

bobsy 14y ago

I enjoy using Windows 8. There are problems. Shutting it down isn't obvious. Selecting "Lock" will bring up a sign in screen. Putting your computer to sleep won't... its all a bit strange. Like I said though, it is a fairly enjoyable experience. I haven't used the Surface. I don't see myself getting one. I have the iPad2. I only use it to surf the web. I don't need a replacement. Maybe in 2-3 years. I think Microsoft has got a branding problem. The Surface is obviously running something different to Windows 8. I only get it because I know what ARM is... its impossible to explain to my parents. "It runs on a different type of processor so is different" is met with a blank face or "But its runs Windows right?" There is also a fear, especially with my parents about Windows 8. They have just about mastered Windows 7. A lot of this fear is misplaced. There was a lot of talk of Desktop UI and Metro UI. It would have been simpler to say "The start button has been removed and instead has its own screen making programs easier to find and use." Instead they banged on about different UI's. Different types of applications. All very confusing. Then you have the lack of branding. I still call Windows 8 app's "Metro". I think it is a good name. I don't know what they are called now. When I enter the store in Windows 8 it isn't obvious what the new name is either.. Microsoft made a big mess of branding and advertising Windows 8. Someone should be fired because it is harming the take up of what is imperfect but pretty good software.

hfs 14y ago
I disagree (that it's a branding and advertising problem alone), and here's a very simple reason why. I went into a store and saw a machine running Windows 8. I decided to give it a try despite all the bad things I had heard about it. I opened the calendar app, messed around, said "neat!" to myself, and went to close the program. Wait, there's no close button. Okay, maybe if I hover around the corners there will be a pop-out to click it. No? Okay, maybe if I hover around the edges of the screen in general there will be a pop-out. No? Okay, well I can always hit Alt-F4... that didn't work, they must have it locked down. I have no idea how to close the calendar application. I've been programming for the past 12 years, and I have no idea how to close this application. What has my life become?

mtgx 14y ago

I'm not the biggest fan of Microsoft in the mobile world, but until they launched Windows 8, I actually thought the idea of the "hybrid" device might work, and may be the future of both tablets and PC's. You can use it as a PC when you need it, and as a tablet, when you don't. Best of both worlds, right? Wrong. When I started using Windows 8, I realized it's actually the worst of both worlds. If you want both in the same package, then you have to live with a ton of compromises. Here are some of them: 1) You can't have a large screen, if you want to use it as a tablet, too. Maybe 11" at most, and that includes hybrid devices more like Surface, with light weight tablet parts, and detachable keyboard. The ones like Lenovo Yoga are completely unusable as tablets, unless you intend to use a "tablet" on your desk all the time, at which point, what's the difference compared to just using a touchscreen laptop? 2) Then 10-11" screens are not very usable for real work as a PC, so you have to compromise a lot in that, too. 3) 10-11" is pretty large and heavy for a tablet, and it seems most people are starting to gravitate towards 8" or smaller tablets, which makes it even more likely that people will want the tablet and the PC as 2 different devices in the future. 4) If you want a "hybrid", then you're forced to use x86 chips, and unless you want the performance of a netbook, you need Core chips inside. These have 3 major drawbacks: low battery life, heat/noise, and high price tags. 5) Windows RT devices, while a bit better on the tablet part, because of the ARM advantages (better battery life and more competitive prices), can't seriously be called "hybrids". They only have Office for PC use. 6) 13" or higher "hybrids" are also a joke, as you can't seriously use them as tablets. 7) You're still forced to use or avoid the "touch mode", even when you want to use it as a PC. I consider Windows 8 worse for a PC user than Windows 7. I brings a lot of new stuff that are there to annoy the PC user, not help him. Whatever small benefits it has over Windows 7, they are not worth it for the worse user experience. And this is for the more "techie" of the PC users. For "normal" mom and pop users, they are going to find it even worse, after using XP/Windows 7 for so long, and now having to basically learn and unlearn a ton of new stuff, which is not easy for this type of user. So whichever way you go, either more towards the PC part, or the tablet part, you're going to run into major compromises, if you want to use a single device as both PC and tablet. So I don't think anymore that hybrids are the future, as they seem to do either one part pretty badly, or be mediocre at both. You're better off keeping these two type of devices separated.

14y ago

rjd 14y ago

Storm in a teacup. Its no different to Windows CE, or a plethora of other similar named products. Most people who would be confused will no doubt have a sales person to explain the situation. Most other people will have a clue and this won't be an issue. To be perfectly honest this reminds me a lot of the PS3 vs Xbox reporting when they where released. PS3 couldn't catch a break, still sold OK, but nothing but terrible reviews. Eventually it came out of the woodwork was most media agencies where taking money from the gaming industry (and probably MS) to write anti PS3 articles, out right media assassination. My money is on the same tactic being used now.

laserDinosaur 14y ago
An entire industry was being paid off to slag the PS3? I've never heard of this before.
- rjd 14y ago
  No idea if you're being sarcastic or not. If not its quite common, thats what PR companies do, usually they just do positive stuff, but when you have a lot to loose it can go negative. Having worked in big media you learn very quickly that everything is paid for in one way or another. Sometimes quite innocently, free interviews on TV which involve the use of there company name. Other times more sneaky stuff, basically differing levels of bribery. Generally its not to bad, an interview with a pop star releasing a new album, my friend however gets flown all over the world regularly to review movies and games. Everything paid for, thousands and thousands of dollars splashed on him... as long as he continues to write positive review... he'd hate to loose his free holidays in Germany or Las Vegas or London every 6 months or so. So he writes things in a way that keeps his perks. Judging by the lack of negative reviews I'd say the game industry has almost every game reviewer paid off. The ones that annoy me the most are advertorials, paid stories about certain topics or companies. PR companies basically come in with the story finished, all the wording the way they want it and are willing to pay money to get it into the prime time news. I'll admit 90% of the time they get turned down on there first try, but they keep trying, and generally they get there way as smaller agencies and especially bloggers will take the money forcing the larger companies to publish a story as well not to loose market share. Some blogs have bene exposed multiple times for doing it, I believe engadget went on the defensive after being accused of these practices, and there has been a few other examples involving Google and Facebook I can faintly remember within the last year or so. If you weren't aware of that going on I hope I haven't shaken your trust in the media to badly. But its all about money at the end of the day, and with dwindling profits more and more agencies are caving to PR money.

esolyt 14y ago

Yes, sure, it is confusing for the user. But that is the whole point. Microsoft trying to use the Windows brand to get into the mobile market. This is the only advantage they can possibly have over Android and iOS

hmexx 14y ago

I'm in the minority who believes that Microsoft's tablet strategy is reasonable. Their long-term goal is to provide tablets that look more or less like the incumbents (8-10 inch, light, 10 hour battery life, 9mm thin), but can also run any Windows app you want. But that's not possible for another 2 years or so of advancement by Intel and other hardware suppliers. So what do they do until then? Just wait? No, they release two devices: an ipad competitor that's not a hybrid, and an ultrabook competitor. They may both have modest sales, but the Windows store will start getting populated with apps, and Windows 8 will become familiar, so that when they CAN actually build a 'perfect' hybrid, all the other pieces will be in place.

Mordor 14y ago

Perhaps the real truth is that Microsoft always needs a version 1.0, before they get things right with version 2?

Flenser 14y ago
The problem is that whereas previously people would just stick with the 2.0 of Microsoft's previous generation; they are now switching to a competitors 1.0 that was better thought out than Microsoft's offering.

netcan 14y ago

There are two dovetailing things going here. # 1 is Windows' part in the disruptive innovation curve which I think touch OSs are clearly following. In the beginning new technology is not directly competing with other players in the category. It is drawing marketing share from non-consupmtion. That's been most of what mobile has gobbled up to now. Then comes low & mid end consumption come next. We're seeing some of that already. People bringing a tablet on business trips when they would have brought a laptop 2 years ago. Windows seem to be trying to "catch" tablets on their way to "high quality use" on the disruption curve. "Primary computers" used by professionals, students & such. Current Android/iOS devices are not really ready for these uses so they have some time. If they can get enterprise on to Windows machines, they may be able to build a moat (or at least some basic battlements). # 2 is Microsoft's lipstick-on-a-pig marketing. Marketing fundamentals like product segmentation, branding, naming, pricing. MS have never been smooth with that kind of stuff. "Windows Home Office for Students (noncommercial use only)" has always felt like a contrived afterthought. I'm sure it's well researched and functional, but it's not elegant. When you don't have the elegance at the more fundamental level of marketing it's harder to communicate. So Windows RT/Metro/Surface/Phone/Touch/8 is not going to be understood by consumers until they start using is. If it was another company, Id say they're doomed. But Microsoft are stubborn and resilient. They may do it.

bambax 14y ago

> And, since Windows RT doesn't look or feel like prior versions of Windows and doesn't run applications written for them either, why call it Windows at all? This is called "brand extension". Brand extension is a crime against marketing and against common sense. The reasoning goes like this: - we have a strong brand - we have a new product - no one will know this new product exists unless we spend huge amounts of advertising to inform the public about its existence - oh but wait! we have this strong brand! why not attach the new product to the existing brand, to jump start it?! - (and BTW, our strong but old brand can only benefit from this hot new cool product being attached to it) At first it seems to work: the new product grows faster with brand extension than without. But very fast, people become confused about which is which and what does what, and prefer two uniquely branded and well-positioned competing products against the whole "line offering". The "hot new product" usually ends up polluting, weakening, if not killing the parent brand, instead of rejuvenating it. This is exactly what is happening with Windows RT. Microsoft isn't the only culprit however. "Google Play" is a similar move. It hasn't started to hurt Google yet, probably because it didn't catch, and people continue to call the Android app store... well, "the Android App Store". But rest assured it will come back to bite them.

panacea 14y ago
My amateur marketing analysis follows... "Brand extension is a crime against marketing and against common sense" Agreed and it's an example of something Apple has gotten very right. Apple is the banner brand. What is Apple? It's a hardware device manufacturer with mostly excellent software and services. You buy an Apple X and you're buying (post Mac but still applies): iPod. iPod smaller. iPod much smaller. iPod with a touch screen. iPod with a touch screen and phone. iPod with a touch screen, internet and much bigger. iPod with a touch screen, internet and slightly bigger. Some thinner, some fatter, some with cameras, some without. They've almost never stumbled in extending the brand and creating new sub-brands because the initial umbrella brand isn't 'used in vain' or diluted. What is Google? Google is an ad supported AI interface with occasionally excellent hardware, and genius software services. You buy a Google X and you're buying? It remains to be seen (although I suspect it's coming) what exactly the 'Google Nexus' is. What is Microsoft? Microsoft makes Windows and Office, enterprise software and is a sticker on the side of other people's products. When you buy Microsoft Windows X you get??

kyllo 14y ago

I have to agree about the lack of a compelling use case for the ARM version of Surface. The Surface Pro, which is non-ARM and runs the desktop version of Windows 8, so it can run "legacy" Windows 7 programs, but the drawbacks are that it has worse battery life and costs another $400 more. At that point why not just get a laptop. I actually think Windows 7 is great, it is the most useful, customizable, business-appropriate, and non-broken version of Windows in a while. I was really impressed with Microsoft when I got my corporate box updated to Windows 7 and Office 2010. I thought they were on the right track. But with Windows 8 they tried to fix something that wasn't broken, and abandoned their core market in the process. They really should have forked their OS product line. Windows 8 RT should have been called "Windows Touch" for tablets and phones, and they should have continued to iterate Windows 7 as "Windows Desktop" for business/productivity users. There is no need for Windows 8/Metro/Modern/whatever on a desktop computer, because vertical touch screens do not work ergonomically.