60 percent skipping Vista, so Ballmer looks to Apple
A new survey by KACE, a systems management appliance company, suggests that 60 percent of those surveyed have no plans to deploy Microsoft Windows Vista, a 10 percent rise over a similar survey administered by KACE in November 2007. A full 42 percent of these are actively exploring Vista alternatives, with 11 percent having made the leap to alternative platforms like Mac OS X or Linux.
Eighteen months after the release of Windows Vista, enterprise adoption is still in the single digits, and the majority of that seems to have come from upgrades of legacy Windows versions, not XP.
How does Microsoft hope to compete? By copying Apple, the company that is kicking its tail in terms of growth. It worked once before....
In an email sent by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer to Microsoft employees, Ballmer argued that "the success of Windows is our number one job," while acknowledging that to compete with little Apple that it outsells "30-to-1" it will change the way it works with hardware companies to try to catch up.
Indeed, I've been hearing rumors for some time that Microsoft is planning to launch mobile phone interfaces to compete with Apple's iPhone, with a touch-screen UI that will make people "salivate." The problem with this game of catch-up is that it's just that: If you're not leading, you've got to beat the leader on price or some other feature. Witness Microsoft's Zune if you think it's good enough to come out with a good but not better competitor to Apple.
So, while Ubuntu's Mark Shuttleworth talks about being better than Apple, the best Ballmer can do is to aspire to be like Apple. It won't work.
Ballmer ended his missive to Microsoft employees by demanding that people believe that Microsoft is "the best in the world at doing software and nobody should be confused about this."
Unfortunately, they are, Mr. Ballmer. People are very confused on that point. They're doing all sorts of whacky things like using Linux for servers, Apple for mobile and desktops, MySQL for databases, etc. People have become very confused. They no longer think Microsoft writes the best software.
That, Mr. Ballmer, is Microsoft's big problem. Microsoft is no longer the provider of the industry's best software. Not by a long shot.
- Topics:
-
Industry news,
-
Microsoft,
-
Number crunching
- Tags:
-
Microsoft,
-
Windows,
-
Vista,
-
Steve Ballmer,
-
open source,
-
MySQL,
-
Linux
- Bookmark:
- Digg
- Del.icio.us
It's not going to work tho because they'd have to make their own computer and **** off Dell/HP/Toshiba/Acer/ etc... Talk a big game, don't do much. Sounds like a big stock inflation technique so he can sell some of it...
Vista doesn't have the compatibility problems many people think it does, nor the security issues, nor the ease of use issues.....I recently took out an old PCI-input TV tuner from a XP-based machine (it came with it) and put it in my new HP which runs Vista. It worked seamlessly and was up and running in minutes. THis is true for all of my hardware, which is all based in XP oriented technology.
Open source software users, as well as techies who use Linux or Mac such as yourself, commonly have nothing better to do yet to pick on the most popular and controversial OS, Windows Vista.
...and just because the zune is facing a device ruled by a sheep-like monopoly of users doesn't mean its the lesser of the two, "Quality rather than quantity"...just like the new iPhone.
MS will continue its downward spiral until it stop copying and start innovating for once.
I don't see that trend ending now, because it's hardly been a "downward spiral" for them at all.
Vista may go the way of Microsoft Bob or Windows ME, but the company is hardly in trouble.
Like wise often users who defend vista have never used OSX (or linux for that matter) for longer than a day. I was a windows (heck a DOS user before even windows existed) user for a very long time before I made the switch to OSX.
OSX truly is paradise. I get the power of Linux with all the open goodness (libraries, extensions) underneath with a nice UI on top and for most users there isn't any application that they need that doesn't run on OSX these days (MS word etc).
Bottom line is that fanboy/girl'ism aside there is a genuine reason why Apple is gaining market share and apple users are genuinely excited and enthusiastic about a their respective well thought out, well built, easy to use Apple products. Sure Apple has a cult following but any cult following is unsustainable without genuine enthusiasm from its followers and the market share gains apple has been making these days goes a bit beyond a cult phenomenon.
In addition to those issues, consider the cost for migrating all those systems. Many of them don't meet the minimum hardware requirements for Vista and can't be upgraded. So we can't roll out standardized desktop images of Vista until our machines are EOL and replaced. And we just can't afford to replace all of those machines right now.
But the most important issue is the perceived need. There is little perceived value-added for an Enterprise by moving to Vista. It is a testament to the quality of the product Microsoft produced with XP that users feel no need to switch. Microsoft should abandon their current strategy of a rigid life-cycle for XP in favor of a subscription model. In fact, they should have done so long ago. Charge an annual fee for each license, with all of the volume discounts, etc. that they can do for enterprise customers, and entitle customers to use *any* Microsoft desktop O/S with the license - let them upgrade, downgrade, whatever, as they see fit.
Not only would this resolve the issue of the "Microsoft Upgrade Treadmill" that Enterprise Customers *HATE*, but it also would mean a *steady* stream of revenue for Microsoft and less pressure to be rolling out sparkling new operating systems (replete with bugs) every three to five years. Instead, Microsoft could simply go to major releases, minor updates, and collect a steady stream of user fees.
Like wise often users who defend vista have never used OSX (or linux for that matter) for longer than a day. I was a windows (heck a DOS user before even windows existed) user for a very long time before I made the switch to OSX.
OSX truly is paradise. I get the power of Linux with all the open goodness (libraries, extensions) underneath with a nice UI on top and for most users there isn't any application that they need that doesn't run on OSX these days (MS word etc).
Bottom line is that fanboy/girl'ism aside there is a genuine reason why Apple is gaining market share and apple users are genuinely excited and enthusiastic about a their respective well thought out, well built, easy to use Apple products. Sure Apple has a cult following but any cult following is unsustainable without genuine enthusiasm from its followers and the market share gains apple has been making these days goes a bit beyond a cult phenomenon.
Hahahaha, totally priceless. People that choose ipods are mindless sheep, so that must mean that people that choose windows are ..... What? I can't hear you.
It's not like anyone has to choose an ipod, or anything.
OSX vs Windows Vista -- like you said, quality, not quantity.
"Ballmer ended his missive to Microsoft employees by demanding that people believe that Microsoft is 'the best in the world at doing software and nobody should be confused about this.'"
Way back when, Gordon Letwin's Basic was superior to that of Microsoft and yet Microsoft won the contract. Bill Gates told Gordon that if you want your software to sell, then come work for Microsoft.
Microsoft was the best in the world at SELLING software, not DOING software. Unless Ballmer views "doing software" in the same manner as "Debbie does Dallas".
It's also fun to watch all the Microsoft supporters come out and rail against anyone and anything that besmirches their precious Microsoft. Apparently, a lot of sheep have careers and futures riding on the continued explosive growth of Microsoft, but that rides over and done with. Microsoft won't go away soon, but at nearly 100% of the desktop market they cannot grow their core much more (unless they find other planets to sell to). Ballmer wants to ride the wave like Gates did, but that wave is over and no amount of shoreline ranting and raving will create another monster wave.
He says Microsoft stands for choice. Well then, let there be some choice. It's not like Apple or Linux vendors are a real threat to Microsoft. Looks more like Ballmer can't stand it when there is choice.
Do we see GM's or Toyota's CEO go ballistic if BMW has a good quarter? No, because they know that no matter how popular BMW can be as a brand, it is no threat to their business.
Do we see McDonald's CEO scream when some Mexican or Italian restaurant chain becomes popular with business lunchers? No, because he knows that they are no threat to his business.
Ballmer seems like a spoiled child which has too many toys already but screams every time some other kid gets a new toy. He is only making a fool of himself.
This all means that today's desktop computer market, mainly controlled by Microsoft, has reached the performance and usability point that desktop workstations had reached in 1985. Planned post '85 developments have been set aside while Bill Gates used marketing expertise for 25 years to sell the uninformed masses incremental pieces of that technology.
The original plan was to replace desktops with a P2P grid of ever increasing bit size nodes, so that by 2000 we could expect 512bit PU registers, and use the power of the grid and its PU registers to enable interactive voice, 3D and writing recognition on wireless connected user interface devices. In fact many such devices human interfaces could be linked to one node, minimising the need for each individual to have or even be close to their own unit.
Microsoft are desperately trying to hang on to their lateral market by promoting other obsolete technologies like touch screens as the next best thing.
Yet development of the original plan has been taking place in laboratories around the world creating other technologies that cannot be suppressed. Take for example the Toshiba/Sony/IBM Cell architecture that powers the Sony PS3, the Toshiba laptop and IBM's petaflop supercomputer. Here is an architecture that really fits the plan. Or take Intel's Atom chip powering portable hand held Internet interfaces, many of which are being built by innovative Asian companies creating their own functionality with Open Source tools. Or take the rise of the notebook as a fixed desktop replacement.
All these changes are a harbinger of a shift from Microsoft's desktop to devices that fit within the original robust computing plan. Even the Apple iPod and iPhone fit this plan, but desktop PCs definitely do not.
No wonder Ballmer can't see his way to any future that include Microsoft's major cash cows.
As to whether users who decline the offer of an "upgrade" to Vista, in favor of sticking with the XP they know, are "confused"; perhaps there's something for Mr. Ballmer to learn there as well...
You do realize that OSX is the most proprietary OS ever created, correct? Are you going to argue it isn't? Don't say Mac is ANYTHING like Linux. Linux is undeniably closer to Windows XP in functionality, compatibility, and even appearance. That fanboy-ism which you mention that comes from Apple fans is actually a proven mental issue:
You spend the money on a machine which is mediocre for the price you paid for it, only to realize its not exactly a "paradise" as you call it. People with Macs then defend the product to death because they paid for an "elite" machine which is actually quite overpriced, and are too filled with pride to admit it.
My school has been using Macs since the mid-90's. We have about 60 but they allow use to bring our own laptops to school for computer and arts classes. I was one of a few using Vista, but it worked just as well and I was able to do everything my counterparts were doing in class.
Also, its a personal preference. The cult culture emerging for Apple is largely due to the iPod, not the performance of the Macs, and because you have a very inspiration man at the helm, Mr. Steve Jobs.
@gregk8:
Yes, you can apply that logic to the WIndows v. Mac situation, but comparing mp3 players and operating systems is completely different. When someone uses a computer, the vast majority of people 40+ that I know don't really care if it's Mac or Windows (but most prefer Windows, including my 78 year-old grandmother BECAUSE OF ITS EASE OF USE!). When someone buys an mp3 player, the vast majority of people want what everyone else has, which is the iPod. Ive owned two iPods, and two Zunes. People were far more impressed with the Zune functionality and other aspects about it
"It's not like anyone has to choose an ipod, or anything."
-exactly..because they dont know what else is out there.
-
by pjonesCET
July 25, 2008 11:11 AM PDT
- The fact is, Microsoft has never written any true original piece of software in their life.
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
See all 32 Comments >>They have always acquired it by any means they could get away with.
Windows started out as copying somewhat Apple's Idea of the GUI. in OS 6 on up.
Naturally they changed it around enough so the courts couldn't say they ripped it off.
Excel , Word, and Powerpoint were purchases from other software companies.
Even MSWorks was a direct rip-off off of the original Appleworks. Appleworks started out on Apple I and Apple II machines.