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

Microsoft Mission Impossible

mondaynote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–59 of 59 posts

Re: Microsoft Mission Impossible

#51

Post by bane »

lokedhs wrote: post #45
mtinkerhess wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Visual Studio is probably the best way to write C++. Windows is probably the best operating system for the enterprise and is ahead of OS X and Linux in bringing a desktop OS to tablets and touch laptops. C# is arguably the best language for writing enterprise applications. Xbox arguably won the console war of the current generation. Kinect is the only consumer product like it. Surface Pro is probably the best desktop…

Yes, I think it's arguable that MS won the console war. Could you tell me what you are measuring to reach that conclusion? Last I looked, the only category where the Xbox was ahead is US sales, and even there, they were only marginally ahead of the PS3.

Xbox 360 total sales: 78.2 million units

PS3 total sales: 75 million units

Wii total sales: 100.04 million units

nintendo ds: 153.93 million units

nintendo 3ds: 32.48 million units

sony psp: 76.3 million units

sony playstation vita: 2.2 million units

sony psp go: not many

Re: Microsoft Mission Impossible

#52

Post by bane »

vetinari wrote: post #50
bane wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it hard to take a comment seriously that says the console video game market is a niche market. I mean, it's only a what, >$70 billion dollar a year industry (bigger than the entire film industry) and the fastest growing segment of the entire media market globally?

Compared to rest of computing? Yes, it is, we are comparing their relative, not absolute sizes.

By your definition then, "niche" is either meaningless, or can apply to any segment of any size in anything so long as it's not the largest arbitrarily defined segment of something.

Re: Microsoft Mission Impossible

#53

Post by e28eta »

bane wrote: post #22
melling wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're really looking at this from so many incorrect ways that I'm not really sure where to start. First of all, "good ideas, theory and philosophy" only go so far when we're talking thousands of more developers and billions of dollars. Excel, is pretty awesome but it's not perfect. I often find myself using Open Office because of some UTF8 issues when importing data into Excel. I own Excel but I use Open Office just…

I didn't downvote you, but I think you deserve a point-for-point >First of all, "good ideas, theory and philosophy" only go so far when we're talking thousands of more developers and billions of dollars. Excel, is pretty awesome but it's not perfect. I often find myself using Open Office because of some UTF8 issues when importing data into Excel. I own Excel but I use Open Office just as often. True, it's not perfect…

> No software is so easy to use that somebody who's never seen it before can walk up to it and start using it and it's a delusion that software can be that's a continuous problem with many tech communities. It's an issue that goes back to the late '70s, and if somebody hasn't learned to use a computer decently in the last 40 years I'd submit that no amount of work in software interfaces will ever overcome that barrier.

I've heard anecdotes that the iPad is that easy to use (children and grandparents).

The iWork apps for iOS aren't, they come bundled with tutorial documents to walk you through the various features and gestures. However, I'm still hopeful we can make progress against that barrier.

Re: Microsoft Mission Impossible

#54

Post by e28eta »

lokedhs wrote: post #45
mtinkerhess wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Visual Studio is probably the best way to write C++. Windows is probably the best operating system for the enterprise and is ahead of OS X and Linux in bringing a desktop OS to tablets and touch laptops. C# is arguably the best language for writing enterprise applications. Xbox arguably won the console war of the current generation. Kinect is the only consumer product like it. Surface Pro is probably the best desktop…

Yes, I think it's arguable that MS won the console war. Could you tell me what you are measuring to reach that conclusion? Last I looked, the only category where the Xbox was ahead is US sales, and even there, they were only marginally ahead of the PS3.

I question why anyone would think winning a generation (or two) would mean the war is over?

There's pretty much always been multiple competing consoles, and I don't think Sony and Nintendo are ready to throw in the towel.

Re: Microsoft Mission Impossible

#55

Post by josephlord »

juhanima wrote: post #47
josephlord wrote: post #44

> In an earlier incarnation I saw Microsoft play legal hardball against anyone who tried to sell PCs with both Windows and another OS installed at the factory…) I know they played commercial hardball with people wanting to offer options other than MS operating systems. Does anyone have any information about them playing legal hardball (lawsuits or threats)?

How about this one? http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm The relevant chapter is III.H.64: "An aspect of Microsoft's pricing behavior that, while not tending to prove monopoly power, is consistent with it is the fact that the firm charges different OEMs different prices for Windows, depending on the degree to which the individual OEMs comply with Microsoft's wishes. " EDIT: Replaced the link to the fin…

Thanks for that although I don't think it backs up the point I was questioning. Your inital quote confirms the commercial hardball that I never doubted and your later links confirm patent licensing demands against Android manufacturers although which isn't really about an "earlier incarnation [of MS]" and they have been making patent licensing deals with a great number of Android manufacturers so I'm not even sure I'd count it as hardball.

Note that I am not a supporter of Microsoft and avoid their products largely because of the commercial hardball they played when they had monopoly power but the original article suggested that they played "legal hardball" with OEMs who wanted to ship devices (I interpreted as PC's) with additional operating systems rather than just MS ones. I had no recollection of this and was looking for a reference before I add it to the list of offences I believe MS to have committed. It is not implausible but it was a new claim and I wanted to understand it.

I'm interested in understanding why you think the B&N case is so sad and telling. I haven't investigated the patents claimed but in principle the idea that MS requests fees for using it's patents isn't actually a problem for me.

Re: Microsoft Mission Impossible

#56

Post by bane »

e28eta wrote: post #53
bane wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't downvote you, but I think you deserve a point-for-point >First of all, "good ideas, theory and philosophy" only go so far when we're talking thousands of more developers and billions of dollars. Excel, is pretty awesome but it's not perfect. I often find myself using Open Office because of some UTF8 issues when importing data into Excel. I own Excel but I use Open Office just as often. True, it's not perfect…

> No software is so easy to use that somebody who's never seen it before can walk up to it and start using it and it's a delusion that software can be that's a continuous problem with many tech communities. It's an issue that goes back to the late '70s, and if somebody hasn't learned to use a computer decently in the last 40 years I'd submit that no amount of work in software interfaces will ever overcome that barrie…

> I've heard anecdotes that the iPad is that easy to use (children and grandparents).

You are right of course, except that the iPad is an unusual in being a hardware/software solution. Use the same interface and give somebody a mouse instead of a touch screen and they'll have the same old problems as before.

Re: Microsoft Mission Impossible

#57

Post by bane »

e28eta wrote: post #54
lokedhs wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I think it's arguable that MS won the console war. Could you tell me what you are measuring to reach that conclusion? Last I looked, the only category where the Xbox was ahead is US sales, and even there, they were only marginally ahead of the PS3.

I question why anyone would think winning a generation (or two) would mean the war is over? There's pretty much always been multiple competing consoles, and I don't think Sony and Nintendo are ready to throw in the towel.

I would not be surprised at all if we see other competitors enter the market in the next 2 or 3 generations. For example, Samsung or even an unknown. As the hardware is now basically topping out, it will eventually commoditize to the point that even smaller companies can have a go at the market.

Re: Microsoft Mission Impossible

#58

Post by clarky07 »

programminggeek wrote: post #19
clarky07 wrote: post #8

I think the people who say Microsoft has been a huge failure for the last decade should take a better look at the numbers that matter. The stock price doesn't matter. In 2000, we were at the top of the tech bubble. Bubble means valuations were stupid. The story talks about 2000 report with 19.3 billion from windows and 23 billion total revenue. On the other hand, Microsoft made 19.9 billion in revenue just last quart…

Microsoft has done quite well financially, but where they look bad is when you see how much Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, etc. have grown in the same period. One thing I learned in business school is the measure of a CEO is not whether or not they did a good job, but rather if they did a better job than someone else in the same position. It's hard to look at Microsoft in the last 10 years and think that they have…

That's silly. Google, Facebook, and Amazon barely existed at the beginning of this timeframe, and Apple was near death. Microsoft on the other hand was a several hundred billion dollar company. To expect similar growth rates is absurd, and only one of these companies is actually a direct competitor.

Re: Microsoft Mission Impossible

#59

Post by wvenable »

throwawaykf wrote: post #34
wvenable wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ask a teenager if they'd rather give up their iPhone or their laptop; I guarantee they'll say laptop. The real problem for Microsoft and PC makers is that everyone has a PC and they don't need a new one. Whatever PC almost anyone has is now good enough. People are spending their money on the latest phones and tablets.

True, a teenager would say that, but that's because teenagers are pretty shortsighted. Just wait until they get home and have to type up a school report. A few attempts on the touchscreen and even the most headstrong teenager will be ready to swap it for a laptop. And while it's true that the PC market is sort of saturated, the tablet market too will suffer the same fate. In the end the only thing that will continue…

> Just wait until they get home and have to type up a school report.

I speak from experience, they will just use whatever PC is laying around or stuffed in a corner.

Post reply on HN