3 ms·

I think folks are too quick to point to the iPad (& misc. tablets) as the cause of Win8's apparent downfall. PC vendors bungled this one on their own. It's a s

by jpxxx 14y ago

I think folks are too quick to point to the iPad (& misc. tablets) as the cause of Win8's apparent downfall. PC vendors bungled this one on their own. It's a shitty economy and Microsoft & Friends are offering tired form factors, severe usability regressions, bad word of mouth, a bifurcation of Windows into two conceptually incompatible product lines, a meaningless brand, useless marketing, and poor developer incentives to migrate to the App Store model. Then consider how 'Microsoft Surface' is muddying every message with mixed reviews, poor availability, atrocious marketing, OEM alienation, and incoherent product segmentation. Windows 8 was a flop on its own terms, and Microsoft doesn't have the luxury of working in a vacuum anymore.

mgkimsal 14y ago
Do you mean "Surface" the touch table, or "Surface Windows RT", or "Surface Pro"?
- xorgar831 14y ago
  Along those lines, what compelling innovations are there? I've even used a Surface before, and still have no idea what I should get excited about.
- jpxxx 14y ago
  Whichever one comes with the touch cover... er, I mean the type cover. I mean the colorful one that is a keyboard but isn't a keyboard but I can type on it fast but just not as fast as a real keyboard but it's a real keyboard which makes this a laptop but it's not. It comes included, right?
- CamperBob2 14y ago
  Exactly.
- threepointone 14y ago
  Yes.
dmethvin 14y ago
You've left out things like bundled crapware, impossible-to-remove stickers that advertise Intel on the palm rest, horrible tech support, the need for antivirus, the sleazy way the software autorenews at much higher rates, and retail stores that bully you into protection plans that are a bad value. I'm puzzled how PC vendors can be so oblivious to the reasons why people are unimpressed by their products. Most of them just ooze mediocrity. Microsoft is powerless to fix the problem because the OEM owns the customer and Windows is just a component.
- seanmcdirmid 14y ago
  Surface has none of that, but then it doesn't go through OEMs.
redler 14y ago
Windows seems like it's heading toward being an indistinct blur. There's Windows Phone 7, which was an innovative break from its WinCE-looking predecessors. Now we have Windows Phone 8, an evolution. Looks good. We also have Windows 8, with that same new formerly-known-as-Metro UI, which looks like the phone UI, all of which grow from the UI ground tilled with WP7. But Windows 8 also lets you get the old, familiar Windows Desktop -- although not on the cheaper Surface. Oh, right, Surface: a highly unscientific survey of the three people within shouting range reveals they have learned that the Surface is "Microsoft's cool-looking colorful iPad thing with the click-on keyboard". A high quality, very interesting, promising product, except, well, there's the laptop-priced one, the RT, which has the "old" Windows available, sort of, and the iPad-priced one, which is the pure touch one, although it has Office, albeit not fully re-imagined for touch. Is it only Microsoft that makes Surfaces? What about Dell and Acer? And what about the beautiful, fluid-looking Windows we see on the commercials, with a little girl swiping through tiles on a giant touch screen, using a painting app -- which one is that, exactly? How and where would one go about buying that computer with that OS? And how does that relate to the colorful clicky tablets? Yes, I know how to get the answers to those questions, but it's a confusing mishmash from the consumer perspective. You don't have a strategy if you never say "no", and at some point Microsoft should have said "no" to calling both its touch and non-touch products "Windows". They're creating genuine interest in these new things, but there's great uncertainty among the kind of people who don't read YC -- which is to say, 100 percent of the people they seek as customers, to a close approximation. They have some good new forward-looking products, and they're suffocating them in a scattered go-to-market strategy, and a miasma of confused branding, marketing, and advertising.

by jpxxx 14y ago

mgkimsal 14y ago

Do you mean "Surface" the touch table, or "Surface Windows RT", or "Surface Pro"?

xorgar831 14y ago
Along those lines, what compelling innovations are there? I've even used a Surface before, and still have no idea what I should get excited about.
jpxxx 14y ago
Whichever one comes with the touch cover... er, I mean the type cover. I mean the colorful one that is a keyboard but isn't a keyboard but I can type on it fast but just not as fast as a real keyboard but it's a real keyboard which makes this a laptop but it's not. It comes included, right?
CamperBob2 14y ago
Exactly.
threepointone 14y ago
Yes.

dmethvin 14y ago

You've left out things like bundled crapware, impossible-to-remove stickers that advertise Intel on the palm rest, horrible tech support, the need for antivirus, the sleazy way the software autorenews at much higher rates, and retail stores that bully you into protection plans that are a bad value. I'm puzzled how PC vendors can be so oblivious to the reasons why people are unimpressed by their products. Most of them just ooze mediocrity. Microsoft is powerless to fix the problem because the OEM owns the customer and Windows is just a component.

seanmcdirmid 14y ago
Surface has none of that, but then it doesn't go through OEMs.

redler 14y ago

Windows seems like it's heading toward being an indistinct blur. There's Windows Phone 7, which was an innovative break from its WinCE-looking predecessors. Now we have Windows Phone 8, an evolution. Looks good. We also have Windows 8, with that same new formerly-known-as-Metro UI, which looks like the phone UI, all of which grow from the UI ground tilled with WP7. But Windows 8 also lets you get the old, familiar Windows Desktop -- although not on the cheaper Surface. Oh, right, Surface: a highly unscientific survey of the three people within shouting range reveals they have learned that the Surface is "Microsoft's cool-looking colorful iPad thing with the click-on keyboard". A high quality, very interesting, promising product, except, well, there's the laptop-priced one, the RT, which has the "old" Windows available, sort of, and the iPad-priced one, which is the pure touch one, although it has Office, albeit not fully re-imagined for touch. Is it only Microsoft that makes Surfaces? What about Dell and Acer? And what about the beautiful, fluid-looking Windows we see on the commercials, with a little girl swiping through tiles on a giant touch screen, using a painting app -- which one is that, exactly? How and where would one go about buying that computer with that OS? And how does that relate to the colorful clicky tablets? Yes, I know how to get the answers to those questions, but it's a confusing mishmash from the consumer perspective. You don't have a strategy if you never say "no", and at some point Microsoft should have said "no" to calling both its touch and non-touch products "Windows". They're creating genuine interest in these new things, but there's great uncertainty among the kind of people who don't read YC -- which is to say, 100 percent of the people they seek as customers, to a close approximation. They have some good new forward-looking products, and they're suffocating them in a scattered go-to-market strategy, and a miasma of confused branding, marketing, and advertising.