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

Microsoft is Dead (2007)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 195 posts

Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)

#61

Post by weixiyen »

wtallis wrote: post #55
weixiyen wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In terms of UI (flat content based UI) at least, they did not copy Apple, it was the other way around. Apple just did it better.

It seems like you're referring to the visual style, but I think the comment you were replying to was about the structure and behavior more than mere skinning, and about differences that far predate iOS 7. There's a reason the term is "look and feel", not just "look"; that second half is where Apple so often distinguishes itself.

No. I'm not referring to the visual style alone. Microsoft didn't just do flat UI to be cool. There was a purpose behind it to focus on content first, the same thing literally is being preached by Apple. Apple just executed better when it came down to it but they definitely borrowed many ideas from both Android and MS in terms of interaction alone.

Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)

#62

Post by valleyer »

Beltiras wrote: post #42

I predicted Apple's death some months after Steve Jobs died. Why? Two things (both of them decisions of the CEO): Plastic iPhones and the iPad mini (both products Jobs had resisted) and the more damning fact that for the first time a dividend of a serious size was paid ( http://investor.apple.com/dividends.cfm ). Jobs was adamant about growing the warchest. His assumption was that if a stockholder thought his/her inv…

Jobs resisted plastic iPhones? Did they have to drug him to get him to introduce the iPhone 3G and 3GS?

Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)

#63

Post by lutusp »

coralreef wrote: post #54
Beltiras wrote: post #42

I predicted Apple's death some months after Steve Jobs died. Why? Two things (both of them decisions of the CEO): Plastic iPhones and the iPad mini (both products Jobs had resisted) and the more damning fact that for the first time a dividend of a serious size was paid ( http://investor.apple.com/dividends.cfm ). Jobs was adamant about growing the warchest. His assumption was that if a stockholder thought his/her inv…

If you've read Steve Jobs bio and know enough about him, you could surmise that he is "full of shit". He changes his mind, absorbs other people's ideas as his own and doesn't give them credit. The iPad Mini actually sells really well, and Steve was around to ship the hundred iterations of iPod (nano, shuffle, etc.)

> If you've read Steve Jobs bio and know enough about him, you could surmise that he is "full of shit".

I knew Steve, I happen to agree, but de mortuis nil nisi bonum, as they say. :)

Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)

#64

Post by ilaksh »

Its a natural tendency of the system for proprietary efforts to grow in power and centralize. We need a more evolved paradigm because there is a fundamental antagonism between business (in its current form) and technology.

One of the things that is starting to force this evolution is the growing realization that we must move from a server-based internet to a distributed data-based internet.

We need to popularize new or better ways of achieving cohesion while maintaining decoupling, diversity, and freedom to evolve different solutions.

I think there are a lot of ideas but the newest and best ideas for fundamental structural changes are not well known or tested. We need to test some radical changes to societal structures.

Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)

#65

Post by aeturnum »

ddeck wrote: post #21
caiob wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft isn't dead. ------ . They aren't big players on the web, start up space, mobile nor hardware. A bit contradictory, no?

I don't see why. Microsoft had $77bn in revenue last year, with net income of ~$22bn. Revenue has grown every year for the last five years and last year's was their highest ever. Not being large players in the areas mentioned doesn't imply that they are somehow "dead".

No one means 'dead' like RIM, they mean 'dead' like IBM. IBM is doing great - they're making lots of money in the service industry, they have a good research division, etc. They also haven't made an impact in the consumer space for years, and they probably never will again. They're just a different animal now.

When PG wrote this, that's what Microsoft was. They were irrelevant in all the areas where interesting things were happening. Are they more relevant now? They seem like they might be, but it's hard to say. The essay is not about profit, it's about mindshare.

Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)

#66

Post by BlobbyLaMouche »

I tend to think the exact opposite to the "Microsoft is Dead". I'm nobody important (well not a PG anyway), just a consumer and a developer. And if anybody cares, I'm quite excited by Microsoft at the moment.

As both a developer and a consumer, I have a complaint against Google. It's going in every direction. Google has no stable, coherent, ecosystem on which you can build your products. You don't know where they are going between Android and Chrome OS. Or between DART and javascript. Or Java and Go. Microsoft is trying to attack exactly that by trying to create, brick by brick, a coherent software ecosystem. Coherent from a development, design and user experience point of view. This direction makes sense to me. I'm just not buying at the moment as the quality and experience is just not there yet. But I could buy.

Also I just watched Nadella speaking, and he says he wants to address the separation between consumer and business software. I think that's pretty cool. If you couple that with the fact more and more people work from home, or remotely, and the fact we have more and more devices around for both work and private usage, that begins to make sense.

You could argue that we are tired of Microsoft trying. But they are moving all their products together, and it takes more time, obviously. And some skills in the execution. Hence Nadella's new role. Well that's my interpretation anyway.

Now imagine he succeeds to make all these products marginally better. Microsoft doesn't need much, it's almost there. This could become an Apple-like come-back before even being gone.

Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)

#67

Post by nullgeo »

xarien wrote: post #34
blntechie wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't control panel decently organized even in Windows XP SP2? Honestly, I don't see much difference between Mac's System Preferences now and Control Panel of Windows XP era. Searching these settings sucked in XP but Windows 7 resolved that. Windows 8 is one thing I can agree with you. It made using the PC unnecessarily hard for mouse and keyboard users.

For my windows partition, I actually quite enjoy the move from win 7 to win 8. Here's a few things that I've taken a liking to: 1) Boot into desktop mode. This was introduced in 8.1 and definitely better for my uses than having to open a desktop from the metro UI in 8.0. 2) Win-f, I used to use win-r quite a bit to run programs quickly. However, with the changes MS has made with caching, win-f is just as fast and sav…

Windows 7 also ships with Powershell.

Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)

#68

Post by Beltiras »

insaneirish wrote: post #50
Beltiras wrote: post #42

I predicted Apple's death some months after Steve Jobs died. Why? Two things (both of them decisions of the CEO): Plastic iPhones and the iPad mini (both products Jobs had resisted) and the more damning fact that for the first time a dividend of a serious size was paid ( http://investor.apple.com/dividends.cfm ). Jobs was adamant about growing the warchest. His assumption was that if a stockholder thought his/her inv…

The first iPad mini was introduced on 2012-10-23. Steve Jobs died on 2011-10-05. It's certain that Steve both knew about the iPad mini and supported its development. Apple's hardware development takes time and does not shift on a dime. "Apple is no longer hungry, nor foolish" is such a facile statement that means absolutely nothing.

I was actually rephrasing my point, using the quote. Sheding money as dividends means Apple is not hungry. Having no visionary guide to quell the aversion of risk, Apple is no longer foolish. I'm a bit embarrassed having to explain it.

Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)

#69

Post by forgottenpaswrd »

eldavido wrote: post #10

It's really interesting how in 2007, I believed (as did pg, seemingly) that the web would eventually overtake desktop software. Fast forward seven years, and some of the biggest names in software (Instagram, Lyft) have completely abandoned the web for "desktop" (really, native) software. That so much code ships directly to mobile devices says a lot about the power of centralized app stores and truly sandboxed install…

Well, in my opinion web programming and native are blending together.

The web approaches native, with asm.js and webgl. It is not just a document anymore.

Native approaches web, just look at what Apple, or Dropbox are doing(they use native code for giving you network capabilities).

Post reply on HN