Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
theregister.co.uk
Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
1–10 of 63 posts
Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
#2If Microsoft was a B2C company, the article would be spot on. They are not, however, Apple. They are primarily B2B. Windows didn't come to dominate the desktop because consumers loved it. It dominates because it provides a value proposition to businesses. Success with consumers is part of that value proposition, and one of the things which gives it an advantage over Linux.
RT is a long term strategy. It's not a tablet OS. It's the phone too, just not yet, fully.It's not targeted at consumers. It's targeted at enterprise.
As a B2C company, Apple will not offer a roadmap or backward compatibility. Google being an advertising agency, will always seek to read one's data. Microsoft knows what it is.
Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
#3If Microsoft was a B2C company, the article would be spot on. They are not, however, Apple. They are primarily B2B. Windows didn't come to dominate the desktop because consumers loved it. It dominates because it provides a value proposition to businesses. Success with consumers is part of that value proposition, and one of the things which gives it an advantage over Linux. RT is a long term strategy. It's not a table…
"RT is a long term strategy. It's not a tablet OS. It's the phone too, just not yet, fully.It's not targeted at consumers. It's targeted at enterprise."
Comments on the original article point out that Windows RT lacks outlook and active directory integration. Is that the case?
Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
#4If Microsoft was a B2C company, the article would be spot on. They are not, however, Apple. They are primarily B2B. Windows didn't come to dominate the desktop because consumers loved it. It dominates because it provides a value proposition to businesses. Success with consumers is part of that value proposition, and one of the things which gives it an advantage over Linux. RT is a long term strategy. It's not a table…
WinRT/WinPhone are not B2B OSes. B2B lives off the ability of a business to deploy their inhouse software that they (or somebody they contracted like Accenture) deploys on their infrastructure. A lot of these applications did move to the Intraweb. However Microsoft restricts the choice of web browsers that WinRT/WinPhone users can get, so if IE RT/Phone lack the capability you need, you're out of luck.
The WinRT/WinPone strategy is aping 1:1 after the Apple B2C business model. Your "analysis" that this was a B2B solution is spot on wrong.
Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
#5If Microsoft was a B2C company, the article would be spot on. They are not, however, Apple. They are primarily B2B. Windows didn't come to dominate the desktop because consumers loved it. It dominates because it provides a value proposition to businesses. Success with consumers is part of that value proposition, and one of the things which gives it an advantage over Linux. RT is a long term strategy. It's not a table…
" RT is a long term strategy. It's not a tablet OS. It's the phone too, just not yet, fully.It's not targeted at consumers. It's targeted at enterprise. " Comments on the original article point out that Windows RT lacks outlook and active directory integration. Is that the case?
They are shipping an MVP.
The first iPhones didn't have an AppStore, or 3G.
Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
#6If Microsoft was a B2C company, the article would be spot on. They are not, however, Apple. They are primarily B2B. Windows didn't come to dominate the desktop because consumers loved it. It dominates because it provides a value proposition to businesses. Success with consumers is part of that value proposition, and one of the things which gives it an advantage over Linux. RT is a long term strategy. It's not a table…
WinRT/WinPhone are not B2B OSes. B2B lives off the ability of a business to deploy their inhouse software that they (or somebody they contracted like Accenture) deploys on their infrastructure. A lot of these applications did move to the Intraweb. However Microsoft restricts the choice of web browsers that WinRT/WinPhone users can get, so if IE RT/Phone lack the capability you need, you're out of luck. The WinRT/WinP…
[deleted]
Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
#7If Microsoft was a B2C company, the article would be spot on. They are not, however, Apple. They are primarily B2B. Windows didn't come to dominate the desktop because consumers loved it. It dominates because it provides a value proposition to businesses. Success with consumers is part of that value proposition, and one of the things which gives it an advantage over Linux. RT is a long term strategy. It's not a table…
Businesses work on desktops and active directories.
WinRT makes no sense on the desktop, and it offers no AD.
So MS has nothing to offer here, B2B wise.
They made a huge mistake, pretending that desktops and mobile devices are the same beast. And they're gonna pay for it, in sales and market value. At the end of 2013, they should be a even less relevant than today.
Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
#8If Microsoft was a B2C company, the article would be spot on. They are not, however, Apple. They are primarily B2B. Windows didn't come to dominate the desktop because consumers loved it. It dominates because it provides a value proposition to businesses. Success with consumers is part of that value proposition, and one of the things which gives it an advantage over Linux. RT is a long term strategy. It's not a table…
Xbox is "B2C", in a very big way.
The impression I got was that it was intended for consumers. Why else would you only sell it in a Microsoft store? (I did see one in a Best Buy. It was buried in with the other tablets, while there was a shining white table with iPads a few feet away, with actual people around it fondling the merchandise).
It's true that MS did give most of their full-time employees free Surfaces. I assumed this was to promote internal use, and hey, who doesn't like free stuff?
The hardware is great, but the Windows group really, honestly didn't know how to ship a tablet OS -- they're a B2B group trying to do B2C, but not really understanding what it takes. The result is emabarassingly bad in spots. My wife was having to deal with The Scourge That Is the Windows Registry, using the event viewer and task manager to diagnose some bug in WinRT. They really do not get it . . . or if they do, it's not at the level of design and management where it matters.
You don't have to do this kind of mucking around on a Xbox. There are good reasons for this. Yet the Xbox is based on Windows. Interesting.
Windows has been institutionalized inside MS to the extent that you can't ship a platform that doesn't use it. You need to use a /lot/ of it, and it's a procrustean bed, at best. Windows is getting really old and creaky; things that you might be able to justify on a desktop (e.g., a corrupt registry, or a service horking and needing some TLC) are just death on a tablet, and having consumers drop into desktop-level tools to fix stuff is just sad.
(Don't get me started on WinRT).
Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
#9to be honest, what fascinates me is that microsoft seems to have invested a lot of work the past few years to bring forward a pretty decent line up of integrated products. if you want windows and office like you had, that's fine. and much of the windows 8 UI disaster was actually made up by the press to have a great story, even that one video with the guy's dad. i was shocked when i saw that. then i installed windows and while setting up my account, it actually taught me about the new things pretty well. there's room for improvement for sure, but compared to apple, they do not only need to come up with a reasonable set of visible features (yes, this is how the masses work, not us here), but also make these mostly visual features feasible for business and consumers. people tend to forget that talking about 'business' does not mean a brooklyn hipster photography shop, or a startup (although there are just as many employees there) - it means a small shop in india, a global giant like boeing or a government system in germany (munich switched back).
and, in all that chaos, they need to present a clear thread from the mobile sales guy to enterprise software, from consumer home to consumer mobile.
apple is basically focusing on getting the story at home right. now they have the luxury of adding to that, which they become less and less effective at. the iphone was fantastic, and my home is now equipped fully with apple. but it sucks that this is where the story ends, at least for now (i'm sure they've figured this out already).
i'd love to see microsoft getting a bit more love, honestly. all these guys working hard, being the 'bad guy' since the 80's and everyone forgetting that there's a reason they're still in business, were never close to being shut down and very rarely every fire more than a few people. when they do, it's even in the news (last firing spree iirc was 2000 employees, 3 years ago or so, with +100k staff).
very sad that the 'press' still finds it lovely to tell us all how much microsoft really sucks. i love visual studio, i love c#, i love my iphone but man the windows phone 8 is so smooth and great to use, i love the macbook it beats any other notebook, but I also love windows 8 and the freshness of it.
what a drama world.
Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA
#10Excellent slogan: Microsoft: The software stinks
or it is better suited for Java?