5 ms·

You're a software company. Get out of the hardware business and start making Android software.

by skrowl 11y ago

revscat 11y ago
The XBox line has been pretty successful.
- tdicola 11y ago
  If success is not defined as making money or being the top selling console then sure I guess it's successful at something.
  - jasonlotito 11y ago
    When has success been defined as just being #1 or making money here at HN? And no, I don't consider raising money from VCs or being sold as making money.
- exelius 11y ago
  Only in the US. It's been pretty much a flop everywhere else.
soapdog 11y ago
Surface 3 and 3 Pro are pretty impressive hardware. They work pretty well and are a joy to use.
- romanovcode 11y ago
  Surface 4 will not be too good though if the rumors that it'll run on M processor are true.
  - soapdog 11y ago
    I have a surface 3, its an atom 7x cpu. I was really worried but for my coffee house workflow of editing html/css/js files, doing lots of email and videoconferencing its great. It all depends on how you approach it. I approach mine as a tablet that can do so much more. These days I mostly leave the macbook air home but then again my load is not cpu heavy. I can see some workloads where the M based processor will be a bad choice...
  - joshuapants 11y ago
    I disagree. There are already issues with heat and power consumption in the Surface Pro 3 especially with the higher end processors. What's the point of a powerful and power-hungry processor if it's just going to throttle hard when you really try to use it? If you need a ton of power, you need a workstation not an ultrabook/tablet hybrid. The rumored changes should allow for better battery life, cooler operation, and probably a minimal (if any) impact on performance on tasks that suit the form factor.
    - PhantomGremlin 11y ago
      What's the point of a powerful and power-hungry processor I strongly agree. The same amounts to laptops, at least for me. I have a Macbook Pro, 13", 2.9 GHz Core i7, non-retina. About 99% of the time my laptop is less than 10% utilized. Even when I run VMware/Windows it barely breaks a sweat. I got the i7 because it was only $100 more once I got the model with 8 GB RAM. Wasted money. Phones, laptops, tablets --> same thing. Mostly used to consume content, probably less than 10% of users need a high end processor. As you say, better battery life and cooler operation are the things that should be optimized for, especially with phones and tablets. I concede that a decent minority of users can make a good argument for owning a powerful laptop.
- Zigurd 11y ago
  Microsoft is capable of making nice hardware. Some of the phone hardware is excellent. BUT making and selling hardware profitably is a puzzle they have not solved. And making it all make sense w.r.t. their OEMs and overall strategy has been even harder.
  - 123jay7 11y ago
    I think you're right, but if the hardware was good, it would sell. The reason they have no profitably is because no body cares. Are you honestly going to tell me the greatest hardware in the world is not selling simply because MS doesn't "know how"? Microsoft is a pig, and you can't put lipstick on a pig.
  - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
    Microsoft keyboards and mice are pretty good. In fact, I have occasionally described Microsoft as a pretty good hardware manufacturer with some unfortunate ventures into software ;-)
mmahemoff 11y ago
68 Android apps by Microsoft, you're welcome: https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Microsoft+Corporation https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Microsoft+Co...
smackfu 11y ago
If you are an OS company, then it makes a lot of sense to be in the hardware business.
- JustSomeNobody 11y ago
  Sure, we can just forget the past 30 years where they've been very successful at partnering with OEMs instead of trying to be one.
  - joshuapants 11y ago
    This assumes that everything that worked in the past will work in the present and future, which is not really a reasonable assumption.
    - JustSomeNobody 11y ago
      True, but you can't assume becoming an OEM will work either.
      - joshuapants 11y ago
        Absolutely. But they have to do something, since standing still will allow their competition to eat them alive, and I think that moving into hardware along with their various services is a good move to at least try. It's probably too early to call it either way; the Xbox division took something like 6-7 years to start posting profit. Surface was (still is?) in the negative, but it's been gaining traction lately and if it isn't already profitable it will be soon. Surface in particular is a good example of what they should do in hardware: make something that nobody else really does and do a damn good job of it. There are other Windows tablets, but nothing comes close to Surface in terms of build quality and form factor. They tried to differentiate the Xbox One with Kinect, which didn't work, but points to that being their strategy. With Windows Phone though, I'm not really seeing it. The main draw is the OS (which isn't much of a draw because of the low marketshare -> no apps feedback cycle).
  - fredkbloggs 11y ago
Delmania 11y ago
https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Microsoft+Corporation&hl=en https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Microsoft+Co... Looks like they got that covered.
realusername 11y ago
Google is also a software company with this reasoning.
- aikah 11y ago
  > Google is also a software company with this reasoning. And very few people own a phone made directly by Google or a company owned by Google. Lumia is a Nokia Phone which is owned by Microsoft.
- draugadrotten 11y ago
  I'd argue that Google is an advertising company. Software, search and phones are just delivery mechanisms for the ads (which brings in the money)
  - sangnoir 11y ago
    > I'd argue that Google is an advertising company. Software, search and phones are just delivery mechanisms for the ads (which brings in the money) That is exactly like saying "The New York Times is an advertising company. Newspaper and website are just delivery mechanisms for the ads (which brings in the money)" Software/AI is a Google core-competency, calling it a "mechanism for ads" seems to be under-selling them, especially when a huge chunk of the software they produce has nothing to do with ad-delivery

You're a software company. Get out of the hardware business and start making Android software.

by skrowl 11y ago

You're a software company. Get out of the hardware business and start making Android software.

revscat 11y ago

The XBox line has been pretty successful.

tdicola 11y ago
If success is not defined as making money or being the top selling console then sure I guess it's successful at something.
- jasonlotito 11y ago
  When has success been defined as just being #1 or making money here at HN? And no, I don't consider raising money from VCs or being sold as making money.
exelius 11y ago
Only in the US. It's been pretty much a flop everywhere else.

soapdog 11y ago

Surface 3 and 3 Pro are pretty impressive hardware. They work pretty well and are a joy to use.

romanovcode 11y ago
Surface 4 will not be too good though if the rumors that it'll run on M processor are true.
- soapdog 11y ago
  I have a surface 3, its an atom 7x cpu. I was really worried but for my coffee house workflow of editing html/css/js files, doing lots of email and videoconferencing its great. It all depends on how you approach it. I approach mine as a tablet that can do so much more. These days I mostly leave the macbook air home but then again my load is not cpu heavy. I can see some workloads where the M based processor will be a bad choice...
- joshuapants 11y ago
  I disagree. There are already issues with heat and power consumption in the Surface Pro 3 especially with the higher end processors. What's the point of a powerful and power-hungry processor if it's just going to throttle hard when you really try to use it? If you need a ton of power, you need a workstation not an ultrabook/tablet hybrid. The rumored changes should allow for better battery life, cooler operation, and probably a minimal (if any) impact on performance on tasks that suit the form factor.
  - PhantomGremlin 11y ago
    What's the point of a powerful and power-hungry processor I strongly agree. The same amounts to laptops, at least for me. I have a Macbook Pro, 13", 2.9 GHz Core i7, non-retina. About 99% of the time my laptop is less than 10% utilized. Even when I run VMware/Windows it barely breaks a sweat. I got the i7 because it was only $100 more once I got the model with 8 GB RAM. Wasted money. Phones, laptops, tablets --> same thing. Mostly used to consume content, probably less than 10% of users need a high end processor. As you say, better battery life and cooler operation are the things that should be optimized for, especially with phones and tablets. I concede that a decent minority of users can make a good argument for owning a powerful laptop.
Zigurd 11y ago
Microsoft is capable of making nice hardware. Some of the phone hardware is excellent. BUT making and selling hardware profitably is a puzzle they have not solved. And making it all make sense w.r.t. their OEMs and overall strategy has been even harder.
- 123jay7 11y ago
  I think you're right, but if the hardware was good, it would sell. The reason they have no profitably is because no body cares. Are you honestly going to tell me the greatest hardware in the world is not selling simply because MS doesn't "know how"? Microsoft is a pig, and you can't put lipstick on a pig.
- AnimalMuppet 11y ago
  Microsoft keyboards and mice are pretty good. In fact, I have occasionally described Microsoft as a pretty good hardware manufacturer with some unfortunate ventures into software ;-)

mmahemoff 11y ago

68 Android apps by Microsoft, you're welcome: https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Microsoft+Corporation https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Microsoft+Co...

smackfu 11y ago

If you are an OS company, then it makes a lot of sense to be in the hardware business.

JustSomeNobody 11y ago
Sure, we can just forget the past 30 years where they've been very successful at partnering with OEMs instead of trying to be one.
- joshuapants 11y ago
  This assumes that everything that worked in the past will work in the present and future, which is not really a reasonable assumption.
  - JustSomeNobody 11y ago
    True, but you can't assume becoming an OEM will work either.
    - joshuapants 11y ago
      Absolutely. But they have to do something, since standing still will allow their competition to eat them alive, and I think that moving into hardware along with their various services is a good move to at least try. It's probably too early to call it either way; the Xbox division took something like 6-7 years to start posting profit. Surface was (still is?) in the negative, but it's been gaining traction lately and if it isn't already profitable it will be soon. Surface in particular is a good example of what they should do in hardware: make something that nobody else really does and do a damn good job of it. There are other Windows tablets, but nothing comes close to Surface in terms of build quality and form factor. They tried to differentiate the Xbox One with Kinect, which didn't work, but points to that being their strategy. With Windows Phone though, I'm not really seeing it. The main draw is the OS (which isn't much of a draw because of the low marketshare -> no apps feedback cycle).
- fredkbloggs 11y ago

Delmania 11y ago

https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Microsoft+Corporation&hl=en https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Microsoft+Co... Looks like they got that covered.

realusername 11y ago

Google is also a software company with this reasoning.

aikah 11y ago
> Google is also a software company with this reasoning. And very few people own a phone made directly by Google or a company owned by Google. Lumia is a Nokia Phone which is owned by Microsoft.
draugadrotten 11y ago
I'd argue that Google is an advertising company. Software, search and phones are just delivery mechanisms for the ads (which brings in the money)
- sangnoir 11y ago
  > I'd argue that Google is an advertising company. Software, search and phones are just delivery mechanisms for the ads (which brings in the money) That is exactly like saying "The New York Times is an advertising company. Newspaper and website are just delivery mechanisms for the ads (which brings in the money)" Software/AI is a Google core-competency, calling it a "mechanism for ads" seems to be under-selling them, especially when a huge chunk of the software they produce has nothing to do with ad-delivery