Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 104 posts

Re: Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

#41

Post by teyc »

Maarten88 wrote: post #9

But they did build a lot of that video. A few things even succesfully, like Lync/Skype (video conferencing) and SharePoint (document sharing) However, they failed at most things: - they were too early and the market and technology was not ready for it (Pocket PC) - they were too late (Zune, Windows Phone) - plans were blocked by companies who's support they needed but who were scared of them (music/movies/mobile phon…

They also have very little marketing budget, and then when used was spent ineffectively. Apple reportedly lavished 700m on advertising the iPhones teaching people how to use it. Not only that, Apple figured out how to get free press for their product releases. Microsoft on the other hand, gets free press on product bungles.

Re: Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

#42

Post by Steko »

Steko wrote: post #19

What's become more and more clear is that while Ballmer is resigning now, he actually largely abdicated the powers of CEO to the heads of the office/windows/mobile fiefdoms over a decade ago.

Here's the article I was reminded of, and I've read variations on the same theme many times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/opinion/04brass.html?pagew...

early in my tenure, our group of very clever graphics experts invented a way to display text on screen called ClearType...

Engineers in the Windows group falsely claimed it made the display go haywire when certain colors were used. The head of Office products said it was fuzzy and gave him headaches. The vice president for pocket devices was blunter: he’d support ClearType and use it, but only if I transferred the program and the programmers to his control. As a result, even though it received much public praise, internal promotion and patents, a decade passed before a fully operational version of ClearType finally made it into Windows.

When we were building the tablet PC in 2001, the vice president in charge of Office at the time decided he didn’t like the concept. The tablet required a stylus, and he much preferred keyboards to pens and thought our efforts doomed. To guarantee they were, he refused to modify the popular Office applications to work properly with the tablet. So if you wanted to enter a number into a spreadsheet or correct a word in an e-mail message, you had to write it in a special pop-up box, which then transferred the information to Office. Annoying, clumsy and slow.

So once again, even though our tablet had the enthusiastic support of top management and had cost hundreds of millions to develop, it was essentially allowed to be sabotaged. To this day, you still can’t use Office directly on a Tablet PC. And despite the certainty that an Apple tablet was coming this year, the tablet group at Microsoft was eliminated.

Re: Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

#43

Post by riggins »

corresation wrote: post #31
acchow wrote: post #7

Ideas are worth nothing. A 15 minute conversation with any expert in HCI 15 years ago would cover 95% of these ideas. Execution is everything. Microsoft tried to execute on some of these ideas, but the result was always too cumbersome/confusing.

"Ideas are worth nothing." While it is seen here regularly -- and is always strangely given a pass -- this remains the most profoundly meaningless, if not outright stupid, thing that anyone in this industry can mutter.

this remains the most profoundly meaningless, if not outright stupid, thing that anyone in this industry can mutter.

do you really not understand what this means?

here's an awesome idea. A sensor and software that can read your brain waves so you don't need mouse or keyboard. Awesome idea, right? Worthless without the implementation.

Re: Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

#44

Post by debt »

corresation wrote: post #31
acchow wrote: post #7

Ideas are worth nothing. A 15 minute conversation with any expert in HCI 15 years ago would cover 95% of these ideas. Execution is everything. Microsoft tried to execute on some of these ideas, but the result was always too cumbersome/confusing.

"Ideas are worth nothing." While it is seen here regularly -- and is always strangely given a pass -- this remains the most profoundly meaningless, if not outright stupid, thing that anyone in this industry can mutter.

Ideas are worth nothing. Ideas have a mental effect, but execution still has tangible results.

I could just do something, literally anything, and me, having done a thing, would be worth way more than me, having an idea.

Many people have great ideas, few people have the balls or resources to actually execute them and make them worth something.

Just a thought.

Re: Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

#45

Post by xal »

dreamfactory wrote: post #27
saurik wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, Windows Journal was epic , and nothing on the iPad even comes close (nor really can it, due to the inaccuracy of the input compared to an active pen digitizer). I provided some more details on this a long time ago on Quora (which kind of sucks, but it at least saves having to go into a long description ;P). http://www.quora.com/Tablet-Devices-and-Tablet-Market/Why-do...

OneNote is incredible, couldn't find anything close on iPad - but feels like zero effective marketing there. If Apple made anything like that it would be all over their keynotes and ads as a USP.

OneNote exists on the iPad: https://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/microsoft-onenote-for-iphone...

Right, it's not quite the same.

Re: Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

#46

Post by MAGZine »

riggins wrote: post #43
corresation wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Ideas are worth nothing." While it is seen here regularly -- and is always strangely given a pass -- this remains the most profoundly meaningless, if not outright stupid, thing that anyone in this industry can mutter.

this remains the most profoundly meaningless, if not outright stupid, thing that anyone in this industry can mutter. do you really not understand what this means? here's an awesome idea. A sensor and software that can read your brain waves so you don't need mouse or keyboard. Awesome idea, right? Worthless without the implementation.

Here are 500 of the industry's most talented engineers, artists, HCI experts, etc, entirely yours, for 10 years.

Worthless without a money-making proposition, which is, in many cases, the idea.

if you've got money (and thus, talent), the idea is the most valuable part.

good ideas might be valueless (though you could make a case to say this is also untrue), but they're definitely not worthless.

Re: Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

#47

Post by hobb0001 »

car wrote: post #40
corresation wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Ideas are worth nothing." While it is seen here regularly -- and is always strangely given a pass -- this remains the most profoundly meaningless, if not outright stupid, thing that anyone in this industry can mutter.

I wholeheartedly agree. If this were true, we wouldn't need a patent system.

Arguably, the patent system is about execution, not ideas. Science fiction authors have been providing cool ideas for free for some time now.

Re: Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

#48

Post by gnaritas »

car wrote: post #40
corresation wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Ideas are worth nothing." While it is seen here regularly -- and is always strangely given a pass -- this remains the most profoundly meaningless, if not outright stupid, thing that anyone in this industry can mutter.

I wholeheartedly agree. If this were true, we wouldn't need a patent system.

Patents don't cover ideas, they cover implementations of those ideas.

Re: Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

#49

Post by shubb »

Maarten88 wrote: post #9

But they did build a lot of that video. A few things even succesfully, like Lync/Skype (video conferencing) and SharePoint (document sharing) However, they failed at most things: - they were too early and the market and technology was not ready for it (Pocket PC) - they were too late (Zune, Windows Phone) - plans were blocked by companies who's support they needed but who were scared of them (music/movies/mobile phon…

I loved my pocket PC. The stylus and palm style glyth input gave data entry a practicality Android tablets can't match today.

What the IPad had was style, a lot of style. The UI was beautiful. In terms of functionality didn't carry redundant desktop features like menus with it. But it was the style, the cool factor, that made it consumer in a way that nerdy Pocket PCs never were.

I feel, (like ValueAct), that Microsoft is losing consumer outside of games, and would do better to concentrate on enterprise.

Re: Microsoft's Concept Videos From 2000: Why Didn't Ballmer Build Any of It?

#50

Post by nhebb »

corresation wrote: post #31
acchow wrote: post #7

Ideas are worth nothing. A 15 minute conversation with any expert in HCI 15 years ago would cover 95% of these ideas. Execution is everything. Microsoft tried to execute on some of these ideas, but the result was always too cumbersome/confusing.

"Ideas are worth nothing." While it is seen here regularly -- and is always strangely given a pass -- this remains the most profoundly meaningless, if not outright stupid, thing that anyone in this industry can mutter.

I've heard John Doerr echo "Ideas are worth nothing", and I think the phrase is born out of the VC mindset. From their perspective ideas are actually worth nothing. They need to see execution and traction. But from the perspective of an entrepreneur or an established business, ideas are valuable.
Post reply on HN