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

Microsoft, Past and Future

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 203 posts

Re: Microsoft, Past and Future

#81

Post by efdee »

gnaffle wrote: post #31
spiderPig wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't sound like a good habit to have in this industry, things change and software evolves. Android's first few versions sucked..a lot for instance. Heck, most the of the early versions of OSS suck. Are you saying there should be a constant rate of change? If you're a programmer, you should really try coding on Visual Studio 2012/.NET/F# and C#. It's a breeze. Very smooth compared to Eclipse.

How is it compared to IntelliJ?

For fans of IntelliJ, there is the Resharper plugin (from the same guys) that brings over much of the refactorings, quickfixes and other features that you know and love from IntelliJ.

Re: Microsoft, Past and Future

#82

Post by grrowl »

I hope Nadella is adjusting strategy closer to a Google-Amazon-Microsoft hybrid; beefing up Hotmail, Office, SharePoint(?) and running them everywhere on Azure, while Windows platform fragments into Phone and Surface/Desktop.

Re: Microsoft, Past and Future

#83

Post by josteink »

sillysaurus2 wrote: post #43
beloch wrote: post #28

What I find surprising is that, in the process of writing a historical review on Microsoft, anyone would ignore the fact that MS has repeatedly identified areas of profit, moved in, failed spectacularly, iterated aggressively, and ultimately become dominant, at least for a time. e.g. What killed Netscape? Microsoft's surface tablets are signs of big things to come. They're currently too expensive for what they are, b…

Which problems do Surface tablets solve? For example, iPhone completely changed my life overnight, mostly due to its navigation features and ability to look up phone numbers. I think Surface will only be dominant if it solves a problem for people. So, which problem does it solve, and why is it useful for people?

iPhone completely changed my life overnight, mostly due to its navigation features and ability to look up phone numbers.

I'm not disputing that the iPhone changed smartphones forever, but looking up numbers was something existing smartphones had apps for, long before the iPhone.

Re: Microsoft, Past and Future

#84

Post by ZeroGravitas »

klipt wrote: post #50
sillysaurus2 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which problems do Surface tablets solve? For example, iPhone completely changed my life overnight, mostly due to its navigation features and ability to look up phone numbers. I think Surface will only be dominant if it solves a problem for people. So, which problem does it solve, and why is it useful for people?

> What problem do Surface tablets solve? Art problems, apparently. Gabe of Penny Arcade seemed pretty positive about the Surface Pro: http://www.penny-arcade.com/2013/02/22/the-ms-surface-pro

He gave up on Windows phone after a year though:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/2014/01/22/so-many-games1

"I made the switch back to an iphone recently after having a Windows phone for about a year. I really liked the OS but I had nothing but trouble with the hardware. I went through three different handsets and all of them ended up failing on me. Eventually I gave up and just bought an iPhone 5c. I have to say that after a year on the Windows phone I had forgotten what the Apple app store looks like. I think I had managed to convince myself that the Windows app store was pretty solid. Jesus Christ was I wrong."

Re: Microsoft, Past and Future

#85

Post by DrJokepu »

beloch wrote: post #28

What I find surprising is that, in the process of writing a historical review on Microsoft, anyone would ignore the fact that MS has repeatedly identified areas of profit, moved in, failed spectacularly, iterated aggressively, and ultimately become dominant, at least for a time. e.g. What killed Netscape? Microsoft's surface tablets are signs of big things to come. They're currently too expensive for what they are, b…

> What I find surprising is that, in the process of writing a historical review on Microsoft, anyone would ignore the fact that MS has repeatedly identified areas of profit, moved in, failed spectacularly, iterated aggressively, and ultimately become dominant ...

When was the last time they have actually managed to pull this off? Maybe the Xbox? It was never dominant or an area of profit. .NET? Never dominant or a direct source of profit.

The days you are referring to are long gone. It's not the same company anymore and it's not the same world anymore.

Re: Microsoft, Past and Future

#86

Post by ZeroGravitas »

codeulike wrote: post #67

I think the Windows 8 gamble could still pay off. We're starting to see 8" tablets that run full Windows. Give it 12 months and the 8" form factor will be powerful enough to cover a lot of enterprise needs. 8" tablet + docking station is a very compelling way to get work done.

Only if your data and apps are on that device you carry about, and not in the cloud so you can access them from both at once. And they just made the cloud guy CEO so he might be thought to favour that way.

Re: Microsoft, Past and Future

#87

Post by jrs99 »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #48
beloch wrote: post #28

What I find surprising is that, in the process of writing a historical review on Microsoft, anyone would ignore the fact that MS has repeatedly identified areas of profit, moved in, failed spectacularly, iterated aggressively, and ultimately become dominant, at least for a time. e.g. What killed Netscape? Microsoft's surface tablets are signs of big things to come. They're currently too expensive for what they are, b…

>> "Yeah, so MS might dominate the content-creation/student/artist tablet niche" I doubt it. A keyboard alone isn't enough to win that market, great software is. Look at the content creation apps available on iOS - iMovie, Garageband, iWork, Paper, Brushes, DM1, Amplitube, Notion. It's going to be hard to catch up with that. They are built for touch. The people using them don't need a keyboard. A keyboard isn't reall…

It's already kind of happening.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3gG8TlUVyU

many designers look at the surface pro and find that it has very appealing features, and it's only going to get better.

Re: Microsoft, Past and Future

#88

Post by jrs99 »

DrJokepu wrote: post #85
beloch wrote: post #28

What I find surprising is that, in the process of writing a historical review on Microsoft, anyone would ignore the fact that MS has repeatedly identified areas of profit, moved in, failed spectacularly, iterated aggressively, and ultimately become dominant, at least for a time. e.g. What killed Netscape? Microsoft's surface tablets are signs of big things to come. They're currently too expensive for what they are, b…

> What I find surprising is that, in the process of writing a historical review on Microsoft, anyone would ignore the fact that MS has repeatedly identified areas of profit, moved in, failed spectacularly, iterated aggressively, and ultimately become dominant ... When was the last time they have actually managed to pull this off? Maybe the Xbox? It was never dominant or an area of profit. .NET? Never dominant or a di…

Microsoft isn't even close to where apple was in terms of hitting a low.

Re: Microsoft, Past and Future

#89

Post by dasil003 »

timje1 wrote: post #64
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did Microsoft profit from browsers? Or was it a threat to existing platform profits that it temporarily pushed back via antitrust-inducing bundling tactics in order to scorch the earth for others trying to make inroads? And looking back, how did that go for them, they may have stalled human progress for a while, but what did they do with the time it bought them?

Internet Exploder, stalling human progress since '95.

Actually it was the most innovative browser from '95 to '99.

Re: Microsoft, Past and Future

#90

Post by stormbrew »

72deluxe wrote: post #51
stormbrew wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there some particular reason to exclude that? Because most of those people who 'just' use their search use their search a lot.

But there isn't brand loyalty with free web products. Users are fickle. I happily used AltaVista, Yahoo! and Lycos before moving to this weirdly named Google thing. I happen to use it because it is the default but change the default (without asking) and eventually people won't mind. Having said that, I do find Bing awkward, so perhaps I do use Google out of necessity, but not loyalty.

If Lycos was the last thing you used before switching to google that means that it's been probably about 13-15 years since you switched. On the web that's an eternity. If that's fickle then Google must be pretty happy to have its users be so fickle.
Post reply on HN