Live data from Hacker News

For Google, iCloud Is Annoying; For Microsoft, It's A Humiliation

sfgate.com

31–40 of 176 posts

Re: For Google, iCloud Is Annoying; For Microsoft, It's A Humiliation

#31

Microsoft has a marketing problem, they have a lot of cloud services like Skydrive, Live Mesh etc. but are not able to grab the attention of consumers or media like Jobs is able to, on stage. However, Windows 8 seems to be coming with a ton of integrated cloud features so I don't know about the humiliation part.I just don't see that their marketshare is affected more than 1% specifically due to the cloud services in…

I don't think it's a marketing problem, I think the problem is that the products suck.

Re: For Google, iCloud Is Annoying; For Microsoft, It's A Humiliation

#32

You know, the funny thing is that as nerds we tend to look at iCloud and say, "well I can already do that with Dropbox and Amazon Cloud Player". It's not revolutionary to us. Yet, can you imagine how many sales Apple will be able to take from Microsoft just by saying, "all your files are backed up and synced automatically between your iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch and Mac devices." No more worrying about backups, losing y…

Actually, they were very careful to never use the word 'sync'. You don't "sync" anything, the files are just there, on all your devices, always up to date.

I think that is an important point.

Re: For Google, iCloud Is Annoying; For Microsoft, It's A Humiliation

#33
Good god! Isn't it too early to prejudge iCloud? It will likely get a lot of users (it's mostly free and automatically integrated into their products after all), and it will likely succeed given mobility trends. But it is also too early to judge the future success or failure of Microsoft's cloud offering (though from what I'm seeing now, I guess it is likely to succeed as well).

At this point in time, Apple's success in the "software+cloud" model is the same as that of Microsoft (in that neither have seen mass wide adoption).

The use of "humiliation" in the title is an obvious exaggeration. But I guess without such title, that article wouldn't end up on the front page of HN.

Re: For Google, iCloud Is Annoying; For Microsoft, It's A Humiliation

#34
Google is providing facsimiles of applications in the web browser, along with remote storage.

Apple is providing smart remote storage that works with local applications.

Browser apps are clunkier than web apps, at least for now and the immediate future, so Apple has the apparent edge.

Re: For Google, iCloud Is Annoying; For Microsoft, It's A Humiliation

#36
post #28

I think iCloud will be great for Microsoft, they are including vista and windows 7 in icloud. I know lots of people with PCs and iphones/ipads.

Then if it takes off, Microsoft will be locked into a competitor's platform. If someone's using Windows + iCloud, what's to keep them from switching to the (presumably better, more integrated) Mac + iCloud?

Re: For Google, iCloud Is Annoying; For Microsoft, It's A Humiliation

#37

I don't know that anything Apple is doing is that revolutionary, the difference is that Apple and Jobs are phenomenal at presenting the idea so that people actually get it. I'm sure there are a lot of Microsoft execs right now that are saying "we already do that with product X" and pretty pissed off that they were never able to sell product X over 5 years the way Apple did in an hour. The bottom line is that Apple kn…

I don't agree that this is about "getting" marketing. You may not mean it this way, but when people describe Apple as being a marketing company, the implication is that given the exact same product, Apple would succeed where Microsoft would fail. The truth is, Apple doesn't build the exact same products as Microsoft. What Apple does is what Dropbox did: They take a product and build what people actually want. People…

I agree that Microsoft execs probably think they already do product X or Y or Z that Apple is doing, but I don't think they do X or Y or Z the way Apple does them: I think Apple does them right much more often than Microsoft does.

Actually I don't think most MS execs think they build the same cloud product. I think they believe they have the feature set, but they realize, probably better than most, that they're not as well integrated. This is largely due to antitrust concerns.

MS has been hamstrung on doing deep integration for a lot of features. Live Mesh is a killer feature if built into Win7. As an optional download, no one ever even knows it exists.

With the rise of tablets and mobile phones as computers, they may finally begin to be able to start adding functionality typically seen in standalone apps to the OS (as they can argue they no longer have a monopoly in the personal computing space). Until they feel comfortable doing that they're going to continue to just have silo'ed apps that never get traction. And I think their execs know it.

Re: For Google, iCloud Is Annoying; For Microsoft, It's A Humiliation

#38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference might be that on a new OS X install in the near future, pressing Save on a document open in even a simple text editor will automatically sync that document to "the cloud" and all my devices. No desktop app that I'm aware of from Microsoft does that today out of the box, as the default action. Sure you can easily sync stuff with Dropbox or whatever Microsoft's product is, or you can do word processing i…

> pressing Save on a document open You will not need to even do that. It's autosaved. Coming to Lion next month.

Auto-save coming to office, docs etc. since.. years ago.

Re: For Google, iCloud Is Annoying; For Microsoft, It's A Humiliation

#39

I don't know that anything Apple is doing is that revolutionary, the difference is that Apple and Jobs are phenomenal at presenting the idea so that people actually get it. I'm sure there are a lot of Microsoft execs right now that are saying "we already do that with product X" and pretty pissed off that they were never able to sell product X over 5 years the way Apple did in an hour. The bottom line is that Apple kn…

I don't agree that this is about "getting" marketing. You may not mean it this way, but when people describe Apple as being a marketing company, the implication is that given the exact same product, Apple would succeed where Microsoft would fail. The truth is, Apple doesn't build the exact same products as Microsoft. What Apple does is what Dropbox did: They take a product and build what people actually want. People…

I think the point was about non-obvious features. Lets take the Aero snap feature in Windows 7. How many would know that it is possible to drag a window to the sides and the top etc. and have it snap into place for split screen view or to maximize? Most of the people who know would be either geeks, or someone who saw someone else do it or discovered it by accident.

Contrast that to Apple's features, which are demoed in keynotes by Jobs and watched by a BIG percentage of Apple users. This is the reason that Apple is an ultra secret company with very high penalties for leaking things out. The hype that precedes every conference, with all the guessing etc. keeps Apple in the headlines and in people's minds. That's what people mean when they say Apple is a marketing company. Contrast that to Microsoft, how many people would watch them tout new features? They do make good stuff, but without their marketing, sales would be a lot slower.

Re: For Google, iCloud Is Annoying; For Microsoft, It's A Humiliation

#40

I don't know that anything Apple is doing is that revolutionary, the difference is that Apple and Jobs are phenomenal at presenting the idea so that people actually get it. I'm sure there are a lot of Microsoft execs right now that are saying "we already do that with product X" and pretty pissed off that they were never able to sell product X over 5 years the way Apple did in an hour. The bottom line is that Apple kn…

The bottom line is that Apple knows how to sell products to consumers, and Microsoft doesn't

I disagree. Apple isn't selling a product to consumers, they're telling consumers, "Hey guys, by the way, Apple stuff just got a lot better. You're going to like the new way it works. Come check it out." iCloud is "the new way to store and access your content."

Apple knows they're in the business of selling Apple stuff, and iCloud is an improvement to that stuff rather than something separate. The fact that iCloud is a "product" is incidental and only matters to people who are used to thinking in those terms: stock analysts, MBA school marketers, shareholders, etc. To consumers, needing another "product" to do exactly the same things they've always been doing is a nuisance. Another complication? Fuck that. I like what I've got. I don't need them ramming another product down my throat. Apple's on their wavelength: they just want people to keep using Apple products and they want more people to switch. This is all about making existing products work better. Honestly, it would be more attractive to consumers if the this new non-product had no name at all, but Apple had to cater a little bit to all the journalists and analysts and bloggers who need a product name so they can talk about it. So Apple gave it a name that isn't catchy and only means something to people who follow technology trends.

I don't think Microsoft's slowness is just incompetence, though. There's also an issue of trust. Microsoft can't just roll out a cloud service and a whole bunch of cloud-enabled software to desktop users and expect them to use it. Who would trust Microsoft? Apple is just a company and shouldn't be considered trustworthy from a consumer's point of view, but it is regarded with trust and affection by a large number of users. Besides, if jack-booted thugs arrived on my doorstep as a result of something I stored in Apple's iCloud, it would probably be the Fashion Police coming to take me to a gulag for frumpy people (which I'm convinced is Apple's intended endgame.) Not only is Microsoft trusted less by its users, Microsoft wants enterprise customers as much as or more than individual consumers, and the number of businesses who won't trust Microsoft because they see themselves in competition with Microsoft or its business partners (or in violation of Microsoft software licensing terms) is pretty big. Microsoft needs a more complicated solution with better security and probably a productized cloud storage platform so users can manage their own cloud servers if they don't trust Microsoft. Apple is concentrating on consumers and has a loyal customer base that is willing to trust them with storage, so it's no wonder they've found it easier to make the jump.

Post reply on HN