Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Is a Dying Consumer Brand

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the i-don't-want-to-go-in-the-cart dept.

Microsoft 585

Taxman415a noted a CNN story on the dying Microsoft brand where they talk about "The less than stellar performance of, and problems in, nearly every consumer division. It cites StatCounter's data showing IE's market share falling below 50%, and is even smart enough to note that's just one statistic with various problems, though the trend is clear. It also seems that MS doesn't want to compete with Android, so it plans to charge royalty fees to handset makers to discourage them from using it in their products. The conclusion is that MS will just be a commercial, not consumer company."

cancel ×

585 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Really??? (3, Insightful)

adeelarshad82 (1482093) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037758)

It is? Doesn't Microsoft dominate the OS marketshare, wasn't Windows 7 a huge hit, isn't xbox 360 kicking ass right now, or are we just judging Windows Phone 7? Cause if we are then i gotta say it's a bit early for that. Come on CNN atleast don't make link baiting so obvious and Slashdot stop putting inaccurate shit on the front page.

Re:Really??? (1)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037804)

Performance != market share

Re:Really??? (1)

adeelarshad82 (1482093) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037880)

right but it's a stretch to say that it's dying

Re:Really??? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038414)

Well, not really. Maybe you're too young, but there was a time when "you couldn't get fired for buying IBM." Then Windows NT and Visual Basic happened. Microsoft is in the same position IBM was in: supporting old platforms because customers don't want to spend the money to change. The general view was that IBM was old, tired and a behemoth. IBM adjusted and became more of a services company. The still make mainframes and mids, but that's now a smaller part of their business.

The question is whether MS can do the same. Their recent failures suggest otherwise. However, a change of management could fix all of that.

Re:Really??? (-1, Troll)

pitdingo (649676) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037850)

No, the xbox 360 is getting its ass kicked right now, as it has been since day one (http://www.vgchartz.com)

Re:Really??? (1)

adeelarshad82 (1482093) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037912)

Those are weekly numbers which means nothing and they don't really declare the source of those numbers so for all we know they could be inaccurate.

Re:Really??? (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037916)

...how could it have been getting its ass kicked since day one if it came out a year before the Wii and PS3? /semantics

Re:Really??? (1)

docrmc (551146) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038114)

Furthermore, are we really willing to put them all in the same category? mobile gaming platforms against consoles? In that case, Nin is competing against itself which makes no sense to me. I'd have been more inclined to be on this chart's bandwagon if they separated the two matters, and, yes, provided stats for the years they overlap.

Re:Really??? (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038176)

It doesn't even matter. We're already starting to see current-gen consoles chug along, with the technology gap between Console and PCs continuing to widen at a faster pace. I hope we're two years or less away from a refresh...the current-gen has gotten quite stale to me [livingwithanerd.com] , something I noticing happening more and more with gamers.

That being said, I'm glad Nintendo is refreshing the DS before the Wii.

Re:Really??? (1)

lymond01 (314120) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037968)

the xbox 360 is getting its ass kicked right now

I don't think you're reading it right. Hint: Big numbers are better.

Re:Really??? (2, Informative)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038000)

I don't understand how people like you are judging these statistics.

So the Wii has sold more units than the 360 or the PS3 - which ultimately makes both of them failures, right? I mean, there's no POSSIBLE way either of them could be a success if they weren't number one, right?

Look at that, almost 44 Million units sold. That can't possibly be any indicator of how well its doing on its own. No, you HAVE to look at Nintendo's statistics to gauge success. You can't be making money if you don't sell more than your competitor! You can't both be making money.

Because NO household has EVER purchased more than ONE console.

And also... looking just a bit further down the page... Second place in the weekly hardware chart... and the #1 top selling game was a 360 game!

But nope: ITS A FAILURE.

Re:Really??? (0)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038320)

*looks at his Wii under the tv*
*looks at his Xbox 360 under the tv*
*looks at his PS2 under the tv*
*considers his PlayStation and SNES in the closet*

Nope, I've only ever had one console. What are you going on about again?

Re:Really??? (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038382)

Thank you for exemplifying my exact point.

360 beats PS3 in North America (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038032)

No, the xbox 360 is getting its ass kicked right now

According to the cumulative sales numbers at VGChartz, Xbox 360 has found its niche. It is still the leader among high-definition-capable video game consoles in alphabetic locales. Xbox 360 is neck-and-neck with PS3 in Europe and significantly in front (60-40) in Americas. I don't call that "getting its ass kicked" unless you're talking about Japan.

Re:Really??? (1)

wjsteele (255130) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038138)

Perhaps you didn't actually read that site. According to it, it shows that the XBox is the #1 selling console in the US... I'd say that it wasn't doing that bad in the world overall either, considering it's #2!

Bill

Re:Really??? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34037870)

I completely agree. Personally, I have a Droid X and I love the phone, but the potential for Windows Phone 7 is enormous. Compatibility with XNA and Xbox Live is going to give WP7 a nice advantage in the gaming segment, and a fairly large, talented developer pool to work with. The Xbox 360 nearly dominates the console gaming market right now, W7 is a good consumer operating system, so I don't think MS is going anywhere anytime soon.

Re:Really??? (2, Insightful)

gblackwo (1087063) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037944)

The Xbox 360 nearly dominates the console gaming market right now in the United States

Re:Really??? (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038512)

Actually the Xbox 360 is also dominating the gaming market in Europe, which means it is lot more "dominating" than for instance the Apple iPhone, which only rules the coastal regions of the US.

Re:Really??? (0, Flamebait)

Nursie (632944) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038006)

"but the potential for Windows Phone 7 is enormous"

What is this meme and where did it come from, or are you a paid shill?

MS has been an also ran in the mobile OS market for as long as it's been in it, and one more release makes little to no difference to that.

Re:Really??? (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038208)

Apparently you have no idea what 'potential' means.

Re:Really??? (3, Interesting)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038510)

I think 'potential' in the poster's context could be infinite. Such are optimists.

And reality, the potential is near zero, and will remain near zero. Microsoft has lots this, and numerous other values. Hence what Ray Ozzie connoted when he left with an exit memo that ought to shake Wall Street into a regime change in Redmond.

Microsoft's oil well, the Windows Franchise, is losing steam, and steadily. That's the crux of CNN's observation. I agree with them, and the inflection point was Windows Vista, and the denial that open source and Steve Jobs could do it better. Maybe the PC isn't dead, it's just one more device. Microsoft doesn't understand this, and the incestuous products they make, coupled with a not-invented-here mentality means their distant and certain future death if they don't wake up.

Re:Really??? (4, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038282)

MS has been an also ran in the mobile OS market for as long as it's been in it

Did you already forget how WinMo owned Palm back in the day? Or do you think that the mobile market only started with iPhone?

As for potential of WP7, it's too early to tell either way. We'll see when the sales figures for the first quarter come in.

Re:Really??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038036)

I have a Droid X and I love the phone, but the potential for Windows Phone 7 is enormous.

Just like the potential for Windows 95 was enormous.
And the potential Windows 98 for was enormous.
And the potential Windows NT for was enormous.
And the potential Windows ME for was enormous.
etc.

Now, what's the difference between those and their phone OS?

Oh yeah, the phone OS will be subject to actual competition.

MS has a long history of using FUD to overpromise "oh, our next OS will be absolutely perfect, so don't waste your time on these alternatives", and then delivering a steaming pile of shit that consumers get locked into. It's worked in the desktop OS market because of lock-in and lack of real competition. The phone market is healthy, and this time "just wait for our next release" will fall flat on its face.

W7 is a good consumer operating system

By MS standards, not by anyone else's.

Re:Really??? (1)

NJRoadfan (1254248) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038384)

Now, what's the difference between those and their phone OS?

Oh yeah, the phone OS will be subject to actual competition.

MS has a long history of using FUD to overpromise "oh, our next OS will be absolutely perfect, so don't waste your time on these alternatives", and then delivering a steaming pile of shit that consumers get locked into. It's worked in the desktop OS market because of lock-in and lack of real competition. The phone market is healthy, and this time "just wait for our next release" will fall flat on its face.

Or actual competition forces them to innovate and improve their software.

Re:Really??? (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038400)

98 wasn't bad for the generation, you had, what, MacOS and Linux of the time to compare it to, for a desktop? MacOS was definitely a competitor then.

There's also examples of 2000 and XP, which were quite good OSes.

Not saying there weren't competitors, in the 2000 and XP era, there was MacOS X, which was a good OS back then, and is still getting better.

Like every company, MS has had ther fuckups, and their successes.

Re:Really??? (4, Insightful)

Sunshinerat (1114191) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037898)

It is the difference between a company that does nothing but milk its market share versus a company that innovates and moves with the market. Sales numbers can be huge and impressive, it says nothing about the long term potential of the company.

Ray Ozzies departure addresses this as well.

Re:Really??? (0, Troll)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038276)

Exactly what part of xbox360 is "milking its market share"? It's been gaining market share hand over fist since release date. Windows 7 has all sorts of enhancements both to the UI, and the programming interfaces.

Anyone that says they aren't innovating either hasn't used their products, or is trolling for slashdot karma.

Re:Really??? (1)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038492)

Exactly what part of xbox360 is "milking its market share"?

Halo 7? /ducks

Re:Really??? (4, Insightful)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037902)

Yes, Microsoft dominate the OS marketshare - on laptops and desktops. When it comes to servers, gaming consoles, smart phones, tablets, or any other internet devices: not so much.

MS is not dead by any stretch, but the market is changing, the paradigms are shifting, and MS is not dominating the new market. If MS were to lose it's strangle-hold on document formats, then MS might become a far less relevant company.

Re:Really??? (5, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037962)

Even Ray Ozzie has admitted that a fundamental shift in today's computing environment is underway. Microsoft has traditionally used its Windows operating system as a means of controlling other markets, and he basically admits that this business model is done [ozzie.net] . The future is all about embedded devices and cloud computing.

Re:Really??? (1)

moeluv (1785142) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037964)

Well put and moreover while M$ is charging manufacturers a a licensing fee to use W7 mobile, they are integrating options like xbox integration that are decidedly consumer focused. MOre likely the licensing fee is because M$ wants to get paid and believes their product will be worth it. Whether that is true remains to be seen.

Re:Really??? (5, Insightful)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038024)

Microsoft dominates DESKTOP OS market share. I doubt if it dominates OS market share, considering Android, Symbian, iOS, OSX, Palm, Linux .....

I've said this before, but it fits here. Microsoft is a WINDOWS company (with exceptions), it is NOT a technology company. Almost everything they do is for WINDOWS, and WINDOWS is their primary focus. Apple and Google have let Microsoft have the WINDOWS market. They are after other markets, and why they are killing Microsoft in the process.

I'm reminded of an old story, from the late 1800s. The story is about a Railroad Magnate who saw his business as being "railroading". That was his focus. The problem was, that view was myopic and very short sighted. IF he had a broader viewpoint, saying instead he was in the "transportation" business, he would have able to incorporate automobiles/trucks and aircraft when those came onto the scene.

What business is Microsoft in? It is in the WINDOWS business. THAT is their product, that is their service, that is what they do. That is their Achilles Heel, and why they are dying (Netcraft Confirms it)

Re:Really??? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038184)

What business is Microsoft in? It is in the WINDOWS business. THAT is their product, that is their service, that is what they do. That is their Achilles Heel, and why they are dying (Netcraft Confirms it)

Actually, they're selling DirectX in hardware these days as well (Xbox etc) but that's grossly unprofitable so far. They are, however, learning how to sell devices to consumers. You don't need a Windows machine to make use of any of Xbox 360's functionality, although they won't help you use anything else.

Re:Really??? (2, Interesting)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038058)

Doesn't Microsoft dominate the OS marketshare, wasn't Windows 7 a huge hit

Take a poll on people about who is more [insert positive phrase] , Apple, Google, Microsoft and some others and Apple and Google will show up more highly ranked than MS. It is their brand that is tarnished - their desktop OS monopoly is not threatened. Windows version xxx will dominate, no matter how crappy. They got away with XP for 6 years with only fairly minor updates, and it still captured almost all of the market.

Come on CNN atleast don't make link baiting so obvious

Hey, they have to eat! :) To be fair to CNN, Wall Street is eating MSFT alive.

Re:Really??? (4, Interesting)

iMadeGhostzilla (1851560) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038298)

I was thinking the same, but look at the video of the interview on the TFA page and look closely at their faces. Balmer seems defeated. His posture is slumped, he mostly says Win Phone is "different," and you can see contempt in the bitchy reporter's face -- when she talks about her experience with Win Phone, when she mentions Bing, when she barks at him telling him "Explain this" and so on. And all the while he only tries to be attentive, smiling, and upbeat. Even the article ridicules him as struggling with the "vision thing."

That's not a sign of a company doing well. But I think it's just a phase, and that they will eventually reposition themselves not as a consumer brand, but as a company that enables you to get things done.

good (5, Insightful)

SoupGuru (723634) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037780)

That's what you get for resting on your laurels.

When I think hip, happening, cutting edge, pushing the envelope, fun.... I don't think Microsoft.

Re:good (1)

p0p0 (1841106) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037940)

No, apparently you're alone with a marketing book from the 90's.

Royalty fee (5, Insightful)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037790)

It's not a royalty fee in the traditional sense. They are essentially patent trolling.

AND, the summary leaves out that Microsoft is trying to leverage this to prevent companies like Acer from choosing Android for their netbooks or tablet PCs, not phones.

Re:Royalty fee (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038072)

It's not a royalty fee in the traditional sense. They are essentially patent trolling.

Exactly and these are software patents that are unenforcable in many parts of the world. Note to Acer -- I like my hardware to ship "naked" and especially so if it deprives MS of the extortio^w royalty fee!

Maybe Microsoft is different? (2, Insightful)

js3 (319268) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037818)

Think about it. Microsoft has no tablet because they don't make the hardware. They make the software which allows other smaller companies like Asus, HP, Acer etc to use in their hardware. IE never made them any money instead it brought on tons of headaches and a bad reputation, we should be happy that it is dying.. not sad. Their money makers are windows, xbox, office etc.. none of which are mentioned in the article.

It's like saying Intel is dying.. oh wait I saw that the other day too!

Re:Maybe Microsoft is different? (5, Insightful)

samkass (174571) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038062)

Their money makers are windows, xbox, office etc.

Not xbox-- that division has lost billions since inception. And not "etc.", either. Just Window and Office [osnews.com] . Really, Microsoft never WAS a consumer company; it's always been a business company. So saying it's "no longer" a consumer brand is like saying that Apple no longer dominates the enterprise market.

Re:Maybe Microsoft is different? (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038106)

Their money makers are windows, xbox, office etc.. none of which are mentioned in the article.

It's like saying Intel is dying.. oh wait I saw that the other day too!

Well, they mentioned Windows and the Xbox in the article, but there is always a positive notion but the writer tried to spin everything in a negative way. It mentions that Windows 7 has been the fastest selling OS to date... but thats because companies didn't want to upgrade to vista, so they held out... It says that the Xbox was an innovative idea, but because it was outsold by the Wii it ultimately means Microsoft is no longer a consumer brand. There's so much false logic in that I don't even know where they started.

Seriously, this article is such a fail at trolling. I'm disappointed it made it onto CNN.

Re:Maybe Microsoft is different? (1)

InsaneProcessor (869563) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038212)

I'm disappointed it made it onto CNN.

I had no doubts that this came from CNN. They, themselves, have lost so much market share that they are desperate to put out any garbage that they can find. Maybe they should start giving all views of the news so that people will watch again.

If only they have bought Apple (1)

martyw (1911748) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038150)

They could have assimilated them that around 1998 without much of a problem, but they let them slip, now that might have been a fatal undoing for the Borg.

Re:If only they have bought Apple (1)

Captain Spam (66120) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038226)

They could have assimilated them that around 1998 without much of a problem, but they let them slip, now that might have been a fatal undoing for the Borg.

Highly doubtful. At that time, the FTC would've unloaded a heaping helping of antitrust lawsuits to block the merger with extreme prejudice if need be. Doesn't matter how irrelevant Apple was at the time; one whiff of "the only company most people think of with regards to computers buying the only other company most of the remaining people think of with regards to computers" would've stopped that idea cold.

Re:If only they have bought Apple (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038316)

They could have assimilated them that around 1998 without much of a problem

I don't believe MS could have bought apple around 1998 even if they wanted to.

As I recall, they were giving Apple money to keep them afloat so that Microsoft could say "see, we have competition, we're not a monopoly".

Had they bought Apple, then as far as commercially available desktop operating systems, Microsoft would have truly been a monopoly, and might have risked being broken into different divisions.

Microsoft is now losing market share on a lot of fronts, and people are discovering that there are now several viable alternatives. I question how long before the losses become something they can't really recover from. I'm not saying they're going to go away any time soon, but some of the competing products are leaving Microsoft standing in the cold.

Perhaps a Zune tablet (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038174)

Microsoft has no tablet because they don't make the hardware.

Microsoft makes Zune HD. I see no reason why it couldn't extend the brand to a Zune tablet.

Re:Maybe Microsoft is different? (5, Interesting)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038192)

Their money makers are windows, xbox, office etc.. none of which are mentioned in the article.

Microsoft has an incredibly great balance sheet and is making shitloads of money, and that's good news.

The bad news is that Redmond has developed a nasty habit of releasing incremental improvements and lackluster copies of what the competition is doing.

It's not that what they sell is bad, Windows Seven is actually a very good operating system (and this is said by someone who switched to Ubuntu, but I still see enough Windows Seven to like what I see). The xbox obviously gets great reviews (I'm not a game machine owner, so I can't judge for myself). Windows phones have always had a good reputation as decent phones. Hell, you can have my Microsoft Natural Keyboard when you pry it from my cold, dead, grateful-not-to-have-needed-carpal-tunnel-surgery hands. Microsoft makes some really good stuff.

The problem with Microsoft is that they aren't trying to make brand new stuff any more, and their copies of others' work has become really lackluster. Windows Seven is great, but set Windows 2000 next to Windows Seven and tell me there's 10 years of significant innovation there. Tell me how many revolutions that product has gone through since they dumped the 95/98/ME kernel. No, I'll tell you. Zero. Nada. Zip. It doesn't make Seven BAD, it just makes it BORING.

Where are they in social networking? Where are they on mobile stuff? Search? Bing? Really? Where's my Microsoft Flying Car? Why am I carrying a cell phone at all? Where's my glasses with a heads-up display, eye tracking, and an earpiece built into the wing? What is Microsoft Labs working on? Oh, right, a ribbon interface for Office, a poor clone of Google, and an update to Windows CE. Yawn. Snore.

That's how the market works, if you don't come out with something that makes people go "WOW!" every now and then, you're dying. That doesn't mean bankruptcy is imminent or your shareholders should be concerned about not making a dividend 3 years from now. It just means that you aren't a leader any more, and you need to get off those laurels before they leave a permanent mark on your ass. Because once people start looking to others for new stuff, they'll start drifting away from you on your cash cow products.

Re:Maybe Microsoft is different? (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038386)

Microsoft has no tablet because they don't make the hardware.

Really? www.xbox.com

Netcraft confirms it (4, Funny)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037820)

Windows is dying!

Re:Netcraft confirms it (4, Funny)

ickleberry (864871) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037874)

Never thought i'd see the day this would be posted on /.

Re:Netcraft confirms it (0, Redundant)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038264)

Windows is dying!

You really trust this source?

I believe it when Netcraft says it!

Re:Netcraft confirms it (3, Interesting)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038494)

Windows is like the sick old man of Europe.

It may be a zombie but it will probably outlive all of it's contemporary commercial competitors.

those who don't remember the past... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34037828)

The company I work for is currently positioning itself for the post-PC era, when mobile devices take over the jobs that used to require a big-box PC, or at least a laptop. Very soon these devices will wirelessly talk to keyboard, monitors, each other, the public internet... but they'll fit in your shirt pocket. And they *won't* be running Windows. That's what scares the shit out of Microsoft. The world is changing out from under them, and they are not positioned to be a player in the upcoming mobile and cloud computing world.

Remember the past. This isn't the first time such market forces have killed dominant players in the industry. Remember minicomputer, back in the 60's and 70's? Gone. Remember technical workstations? Killed by the PC. Well, mobile computing is about to do this to the PC, and by extension, to Microsoft.

Re:those who don't remember the past... (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038248)

Remember technical workstations? Killed by the PC.

Remember arcade-style games on PCs? Killed by the consoles. And Microsoft makes one. So Microsoft is positioned to be a player in at least this market.

Re:those who don't remember the past... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038250)

Good - it's about time.

Now we just need to make sure we maintain 3 or 4 equally sized players in the mobile device market so that a new Microsoft is less likely to develop.

Re:those who don't remember the past... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038420)

The minicomputer isn't dead -- the use for it morphed into either a PC for workstation tasks, or a rack mounted machine (discrete or blade) for server duties. Same with the mainframe. Mainframe computing is still with us because even though it is boring, it does the job and provides uptimes that no other solution can provide, especially with parallel sysplexes.

Technical workstations are still around, even though PC desktops have eroded their market share greatly. However, the Mac Pro is still a good seller by Apple, and both Dell and HP have decent offerings for the workstation class of stuff.

Desktops are not going away. Take iOS devices. They need a machine to sync to for backups and to activate. Perhaps in the future the devices will back themselves up to the cloud, but as of now, they don't work unless you fire up iTunes. Android devices are more standalone, although they do need backed up periodically, either by a backup program, or image based with Nandroid (if you have root and a custom recovery image.) I'm sure WP7 devices will require synced to the Zune software. All these mobile devices need a mother ship, and until secure cloud syncing becomes commonplace, the desktop will be a must for that.

As for replacing the desktop with the cloud, it won't happen because of the intrinsic insecurity of cloud computing. How do we know that the addressbook and other personal info (E-mails, photos) are not being just copied off and handed en masse to anyone who buys that info? PII isn't classified information; there are no criminal penalties in going through a celebrity's data store and slurping all their addressbook entries for a tabloid (think Paris Hilton and the Sidekick fiasco a few years back.) Desktops have their problems, but with physical control of the hardware, most issues can be prevented, unlike the cloud. Worst case, I can airgap my desktop and not worry about anything but physical intrusion.

Cloud computing is inherently insecure, and there is yet a provider who can provide more than vague promises ("Yes, we are secure, we use 'passwords' and 'encryption' and have a lock on the server room door") of security.

Ford did drop Microsoft plugs from their ads (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34037832)

They used to emphasize that their computer gizmos in their cars were Microsoft powered. It seems now they don't do that. This might be an indication that they weren't getting any traction saying that Microsoft developed their computer gizmos in their cars, so it wasn't worth mentioning in their ads. Of course they could just have another vendor now.

Re:Ford did drop Microsoft plugs from their ads (3, Informative)

wjsteele (255130) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037992)

It seems now they don't do that.

I just watched a commercial for the 2011 Ford Fiesta... and lo and behold it talked about Sync, Powered By Microsoft.

I guess that kind of debunks that myth.

By the way, you can also see it on their website here. [fordvehicles.com]

Bill

Re:Ford did drop Microsoft plugs from their ads (2, Informative)

oracleguy01 (1381327) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038038)

No, it is still Microsoft. My 2011 Ford has sync and there is a small little thing in the car next to the USB port that says "SYNC Powered By Microsoft.". And sync works pretty damn well so far for me, I only wish you could customize the voice.

Re:Ford did drop Microsoft plugs from their ads (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038328)

GPs point wasn't that SYNC is not Microsoft software. It's that Ford doesn't make an emphasis on that in their advertising the way they used to do.

Lack of innovation ain't much of a problem (1)

arshadk (1928690) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037836)

when your products (winsdows, office) are well entrenched in most companies and schools.

Re:Lack of innovation ain't much of a problem (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037990)

Don't be too sure. Other products have been well entrenched. Remember dBase, WordPerfect, Wordstar, Lotus 1-2-3?

Nobody will be able to compete with MS-Office, or Windows, directly. But, with changing technologies, other companies will not have to compete directly. The world is going to SaaS, and to mobile internet devices, and MS is not keeping up.

Microsoft's problem summed up: (2, Insightful)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037858)

Lenovo's technology director recently told PC Mag that his company won't be building around the platform: "The challenge with Windows 7 is that it's based on the same paradigm as 1985 -- it's really an interface that's optimized for a mouse and keyboard."

MS wants to build everything off of Windows. That's where Apple was smart, they created different OS for the hand held devices.

Re:Microsoft's problem summed up: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34037922)

Microsoft created a new OS for their new windows 7 phones. iOS from Apple is based off OSX, you know...

Re:Microsoft's problem summed up: (2, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038016)

Windows 7 Mobile isn't a new OS. It's Windows CE.

Re:Microsoft's problem summed up: (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038326)

But of course Windows CE is not based on Windows NT, but iOS is based on OSX. So it is entirely possible that what an OS is "based on" is a lot less important than what the user experience looks like.

Re:Microsoft's problem summed up: (3, Informative)

wjsteele (255130) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037936)

Really? I thought that iOS was based on OS X!!! Hmmm... checking my facts... IT IS!

Bill

Re:Microsoft's problem summed up: (3, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038356)

MS wants to build everything off of Windows. That's where Apple was smart, they created different OS for the hand held devices.

You realize that Windows 7 and Windows Phone have absolutely nothing in common, right? Not even the kernel, much less UI. In fact, OS X and iOS share significantly more components.

The branding is confusing, though. Maybe the phone version should've been called "Tiles" instead. ~

The article has some serious errors in it! (3, Informative)

wjsteele (255130) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037900)

The article clearly has errors in it. First of all, it makes it seem that the $10-15 royalty fee goes all to Microsoft. That is simply not the case... Google charges the largest Royalty Fee for their applications. Microsoft also charges for their stuff, but it's not the entire $10-15... it's more like $1.

Also, it states that Microsoft wants the vendors to use Windows Mobile on their Netbooks and Tablets, which is also not true. Currently, Microsoft is using Windows 7 for those devices, not Windows Mobile, which is for their older handsets. There is no Windows Phone OS 7 based software for Tablets or Netbooks either.

Bill

Late to the game? (5, Interesting)

norminator (784674) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037904)

Microsoft has been late to the game in crucial modern technologies like mobile, search, media, gaming and tablets.

Microsoft was doing tablets (since 2002!) and mobile long before Apple kicked out the iPhone and the iPad (yes, I'm aware of the Newton, but it wasn't directly involved in the successes of the recent mobile efforts).

Just because they haven't been doing it right doesn't mean they haven't been doing it.

Re:Late to the game? (1)

norminator (784674) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037950)

Also, they explain Windows Media Center as being "Content in the cloud"... I realize WMC does NetFlix, and a few other internet-based sources, but my understanding is that it has always been primarily focused on local media, particularly DVR-ing TV.
Does the writer know anything about Microsoft?

Re:Late to the game? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038228)

> I'm aware of the Newton, but it wasn't directly involved in the successes of the recent mobile efforts.

Well, clearly Microsoft's decade long attempts haven't been directly involved in the successes of the recent mobile efforts either. Apple's iPhone is what got everyone crazed about Mobile stuff.

Re:Late to the game? (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038488)

Microsoft has been late to the game in crucial modern technologies like mobile, search, media, gaming and tablets.

Microsoft was doing tablets (since 2002!) and mobile long before Apple kicked out the iPhone and the iPad (yes, I'm aware of the Newton, but it wasn't directly involved in the successes of the recent mobile efforts).

Just because they haven't been doing it right doesn't mean they haven't been doing it.

In the markets Microsoft was targeting with tablets, they were dominating. Consumer tablets seem to have taken them by surprise, but Microsoft powers tablets in dozens of industries where they've been doing so for a decade.

Microsoft a Dying Brand? On which planet are you? (2, Insightful)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037948)

I wonder whether the author of this piece knows what he's talking about. I will agree with such a statement if I see just 10% of alternative desktops on my University Campus.

Over here, Microsoft and its products represent almost 100% of IT desktop infrastructure. It would not be far fetched to say "Microsoft all the way." This is despite the fact that general student computers we use take at least 8 minutes to boot! This is a major pain every morning. Ee just have MS Office on them and they still run Windows XP.

Re:Microsoft a Dying Brand? On which planet are yo (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038142)

They aren't saying that they're dying as in going under, they specifically say its no longer a "consumer brand" - meaning that only your University Campuses, Corporations, and other services are going to be using Microsoft products, not your "at home consumers" so to speak.

Re:Microsoft a Dying Brand? On which planet are yo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038180)

I wonder whether the author of this piece knows what he's talking about. I will agree with such a statement if I see just 10% of alternative desktops on my University Campus.

While the author is probably up in the night, your counterpoint is irrelevant. University computing system choices have little to do with consumer impressions of a brand. Universities are enterprises -- businesses -- and the author's claim is that Microsoft is failing as a consumer brand, while being successful in the commercial space. The author could be 100% right, and yet you might still see pure Microsoft in universities.

Re:Microsoft a Dying Brand? On which planet are yo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038200)

A dying consumer brand. There's a difference.

Re:Microsoft a Dying Brand? On which planet are yo (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038246)

That doesn't say something of the BRAND Microsoft. People are using Microsoft because the market dictates the use of Microsoft products, not because they have warm fuzzy feelings about Microsoft. As a brand Microsoft has a piss poor image by a lot of consumers imho.

prepare for DDOS (1)

dhungan (1253846) | more than 3 years ago | (#34037954)

slashdot should prepare for an unintended non-coordinated distributed DOS attack now. there will be cheers from almost every nook and corner of the earth on this post.

Re:prepare for DDOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038030)

Or perhaps a not-so-unintended attack? Microsoft fanboys, unite!

Guys, come on!

You can play halo later! ...Seriously!

>.>

No innovation here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34037974)

We already have a dead OS. Typical.

Poor Microsoft (5, Insightful)

RaymondKurzweil (1506023) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038046)

If their consumer brand continues to erode like this, they might end up with the likes of IBM, which as we all know is not a very successful company.

Re:Poor Microsoft (2, Insightful)

wjsteele (255130) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038224)

Man, I wish I could mod you up!

I agree... if I was only half as unsuccessful as Microsoft has been... I'm pretty sure I'd still be happy about it.

Bill

Royalties (4, Interesting)

LBArrettAnderson (655246) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038140)

I'm sure many phone makers are very happy with the fact that MS charges royalties for Windows Phone 7. This is because MS will be the one defending any IP/patent lawsuits, etc. Why do you think people are suing HTC and other Android phone makers instead of Google? Google probably isn't legally responsible. MS will be, so they are charging a small amount for it.

Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038242)

Is it just me or does TFS not make any fucking sense? The first sentence is incomplete. The summary seems to tie IE to mobile platforms for some unknown reason. It doesn't even make sense as to how charging royalties is going to encourage the use of their platforms over others (TFA doesn't even seem to make sense on this).

This is just a troll story trying to bash Microsoft (Oh no! I didn't say Micro$oft or whatever!), and really fails to do so.

Website Churn (2, Insightful)

userw014 (707413) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038254)

The CNN article is just trolling, designed to create churn for their website and show advertisers that CNN is still relevant.

Sure, a move to tablet IT and personal/handheld IT presents a risk to Microsoft - and Dell, HP and Lenovo - and even Apple to some extent. It also presents a risk to software developers due to the always-on nature of the devices. Windows users have gotten used to frequent (daily or more) reboots, and this has more to do with the erratic quality of various third party software. Because MS doesn't control the hardware as tightly as Apple does, it isn't able to integrate device drivers as well. Third party software will need to cope better with applications that run for weeks or months, rather than just hours.

Do we still hate Microsoft here on Slashdot? (5, Interesting)

dmomo (256005) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038260)

Get off my la.. bah. Nap time.

Microsoft just doesn't make my blood boil the way they used to. Sure, I still hate them out of habit, but I'm old and tired now. I feel like a bed-ridden, old and gray, Elmer Fudd who still mumbles that he "could have had that wascilly wabbit', but in reality doesn't really care and just wants you to leave him alone so he can watch Diagnosis Murder.

That fact alone is a bad sign for Microsoft. They just don't matter in the same way they used to and they certainly don't drive Technology the way they did in the past few decades. Their tactics are less of a threat than they used to be. Sure, they'd do evil if they could, but they are just fruit flies at my picnic, and I've got my eyes peeled for bears.

No no no. I plan on stepping aside and enjoying my Golden Years while the next generation shakes their fists at their Apples and Googles and Facebooks.

As time goes on the situation grows dire (1)

codepunk (167897) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038274)

As time goes on here the situation will grow more dire for them. Think about how many startups today are going to use their platform? I am sure there are some but
the vast majority choose not to have to pay for the software stacks they are running because they don't need to. You have this whole ecosystem that is springing up
cutting them off at the legs. Even in corporate america there is a big push to sandbox the windows os by placing it in virtual machines, sure you might be running
windows but it is being moved to a secondary position.

Windows logo (1)

Melted_Igloo (1482045) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038280)

Until the day I dont see the windows logo every time I boot my PC, then I will consider Microsoft dead I dont see that happening in many years

Re:Windows logo (1)

techwrench (586424) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038458)

Until the day I dont see the windows logo every time I boot my PC, then I will consider Microsoft dead I dont see that happening in many years

Switch to Linux.

not really consumer brand (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038340)

MS pretty much did very little consumer computing. It works with commercial enterprises to use MS branded components to create complete products. Some of these products are consumer oriented. Sometimes MS will brand a consumer product as it's own, and sometimes they have even done a significant amount of the design work. The only significant example of a succesful consumer product that is both designed and branded by MS is Xbox.

The reason IE market dominance was important was because is fostered the market fragmentation that encouraged computer manufacturers to use MS products. IE, for all intents and purposes, was really only fully useful on MS Windows, so if the web was built for IE, then it was built for MS Windows computers. As IE became less used, firms were not willing to dismiss 10% of their customers, often the higher income customers, just because these customers did not wan to use IE. Advances in technology meant that there were other was to implement the IE functionality, so people started creating web sites that were not IE specific. In particular, Google was not likely to make money throwing huge amounts of money to MS, so they had to come up with techniques implemented with open standards.

The question, IMHO, that the article is addressing is if the success in the desktop market can be reproduced in the mobile market in which a larger number of buying decisions in made at the consumer level and where compatibility with office equipment is not such an overriding issue. In this case, the consumer is more likley to buy something with a perceived brand value as opposed to vendor lock in. An iPhone, an Android phone, a Blackberry, can probably interface with the Outlook server and office documents as well or better as a MS Mobile phone. Such phones can also interface with social services better than a MS phone, which is limited in this respect.

The hope is that MS can subsidize the phone as they did with Xbox. If MS can get a buch of phones placed that cost $0 with a two year contract, then MS Mobile is probably a good enough product to start building brand loyalty. MS is certainly spending enough on ads and it look like they are giving ATT huge bags of money to push the phone, but if the consumer has to shell out cash to get one, there has to be some brand incentive.

Where's the patent-busting effort? (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038342)

Are the software patents Microsoft is asserting listed or named anywhere? I think it's time we look into busting those patents. If someone is already doing that, I'd like to know where.

Wrigley Gum (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038358)

The story goes that reporters were flying with Mr. Wrigley on a business trip, and he gave an interview. One of them asked 'Since you are by far the most popular gum around, why do you keep advertising so much, those "Doublemint" commercials are everywhere." He replied - "This plane is flying along pretty nicely, don't you think? Why does the pilot keep the engines on?"

What NEW stuff has MS done lately?

Well. they sort of did this to themselves... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038360)

I was a Windows guy all throughout the '90s. Windows 95 and 98 were my favorite systems at the time (don't laugh!). In the past ten years though, I feel that Windows has gone downhill. Win2k was the tipping point and the best OS Microsoft ever made.

I personally refuse to rely on any software that must be "activated" for use. Thus, after XP took over I began experimenting with Linux. Let's just imagine what could happen to users who rely on software that has to be activated. We live in a litigious society, where everyone preys on everyone else for money. What would happen if some company sued MS for some imaginary property violation in the OS, and a judge ordered MS to stop selling it AND activating it for people. Don't think that could never happen. Remember the 1984 incident?

If you want my respect, you should sell your product at competitive prices and not include any unwanted features. That's right, I'm willing to pay. Also, drop the "OEM license" BS.

It is like buying a Nirvana CD and a new stereo together and being told I am only allowed to listen to it on that stereo. If that stereo ever breaks, I have to buy another CD. That is a load of crap.

Yes, but... (1)

MaufTarkie (6625) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038402)

I won't believe it until Netcraft confirms it.

Microsoft has been late to the game (-1, Troll)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038428)

Microsoft has been late to the game in crucial modern technologies like mobile, search, media, gaming and tablets.

Mobile - False. It's just that their previous entries in the mobile market sucked.

Search - True.

Media - Er... what exactly is this supposed to mean? Are we referring to things like mp3 players or desktop software? Yes, they were late to market for portable media devices. No, they were not late to the market with desktop media playing software... except for playing DVDs. And I mean old, original DVDs, not Blu-Ray.

Gaming - Now you're just making shit up. Not only has MS been keeping DirectX ahead of OpenGL, but the Xbox 360 is the top selling console in North America and (as I recall) Europe. The area they're failing nearly completely in is Japan... who are very Xenophobic.

Tablet - False. It's just that their previous entries in the table market never caught on.

Microsoft's biggest problem is that they aren't an advertising company, which is something Apple excels at... and face it, this article is clearly comparing them to Apple and Google only.

MS has always been a "commercial" brand (3, Insightful)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038442)

Microsoft has always been a commercial brand and not a consumer one. I've never purchased (or used freely) a Microsoft product because I wanted to. (Xbox being an outlier, even though I have a PS3 now).

I think most people feel this way. It's weird to find somebody who actually chooses an MS product willingly.

With that, Windows 7 is really nice. Too bad it's about 15 years too late.

Pssst ... (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 3 years ago | (#34038496)

Google charges, too.

People seem to keep forgetting that.

Android's core OS is free, but the Google apps on it all cost money and everyone pays for them.

REVERSE THE EOL ON XP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34038502)

Not much more to say here.. I'd pay for updates.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?