In his blog post, “How to Turn Microsoft Around,” Thomas Hawk writes, “More than all of this though is the informal anecdotal evidence I’ve been seeing of a shift from the Windows operating system to the Mac. I wrote about my own conversion last year. In the past few months I’ve been completely surprised at some of the names of people that have privately emailed me saying that they were switching as well. And then earlier this week over coffee with one of the top technology journalists in the world (no, not Walt Mossberg, but close up there) what did he pull out of his bag? A brand spanking new sleek black MacBook Pro less than a week old.”
“Now the numbers are not necessarily going to reflect this yet, but when your key influencers, bloggers, journalists, etc. begin abandoning Windows and moving to the Mac it’s like a wave and over time this wave can actually threaten Microsoft’s monopoly on the operating system. Look for Apple’s numbers to continue advancing here in the months ahead,” Hawk writes. “So the question becomes how should Microsoft turn this around?”
Hawk looks at the Windows user experience, “It’s not good. Especially when compared to a Mac… Apple has the luxury of being able to test limited and known configurations on their products. Combine this with an almost manic commitment to user experience and you get a better product… Microsoft of course can’t just reverse course and piss off all of their OEMs and start building their own PC, but what they can do is create a Microsoft certification whereby thoroughly tested systems receive a special Microsoft seal of approval.”
Hawk looks at Microsoft’s Live.com, “Now it is pretty much dead.” Hawk writes about Microsoft’s big pile of dirty cash and how they need to buy “cool” companies, starting up a San Francisco-based “think tank of sorts,” and getting “their evangelism back on track. Scoble was a big loss for Microsoft. Gartenberg would have been an interesting choice to try and fill his shoes but now he’s gone as well.”
Full article here.
All very interesting, but it begs the question: why bother? Why spend all the time, capital, and effort needed to make Microsoft like Apple, when Apple already exists? Microsoft has always been a follower; one can only image what absolute garbage would flow forth from a Microsoft think tank when they have decades now of looking to 1 Infinite Loop for their R&D. Even if you could turn the Titanic around, get it into dry-dock, and attempt to retrofit the thing, it’ll still be the Titanic. All of that effort isn’t worth it when the Queen Mary 2 is already berthed in Cupertino.
And, puleeze, a Microsoft seal of approval? Is Hawk nuts? A seal of approval only works when offered by a respected entity. Microsoft is known for badly-hewn fake Macs, a bloated office suite, a fecal-colored non-selling fake iPod, unexplained and incomprehensible crashes, shoddy security software that doesn’t secure their insecure OS, the worst browser on earth, executives blinded by hubris, layer upon layer upon layer of bureaucracy, being Google’s minor league, a game console they’ve never sold for a profit, failed initiatives like watches and ultra-portable PCs, patches, viruses, overbearing DRMs, monopoly abuse, an idiotic dancing CEO/buffoon, and pure frustration. A Microsoft seal of approval would be a product’s kiss of death. Plus, we don’t think there’s even room left for any more stickers on most ugly-ass PCs. As we’re fond of saying, “The first time Microsoft produces something that doesn’t suck will be when they start making vacuum cleaners.”
Related articles:
Analyst: Windows Vista UI is step back in Microsoft’s pursuit of Apple’s Mac OS X – February 27, 2007
Gates: ‘Windows Vista’s had incredible reception’ – February 21, 2007
The Register reviews Microsoft’s Windows Vista: ‘Don’t buy it’ – February 20, 2007
Forbes: ‘Windows Vista utterly unimaginative, internally discordant and woefully out of tune’ – February 09, 2007
Digit: Don’t buy Vista; Microsoft may be driving millions to stick with XP or move to Apple Mac – February 05, 2007
TIME Magazine: Microsoft’s Windows Vista ‘an embarassment to the good name of American innovation’ – February 02, 2007
Microsoft’s Windows Vista: Five years for a chrome-plated turd – January 30, 2007
Digit: ‘Microsoft’s Windows Vista may be the best reason yet to buy an Apple Mac’ – January 29, 2007
Pioneer Press: Windows Vista shows ‘Apple is an innovation engine; Microsoft, not so much’ – January 29, 2007
Windows Vista disappoints, so get a Mac – January 29, 2007
CNET Reviews Windows Vista: Is that all? Clunky and not very intuitive vs. Mac OS X; warmed-over XP – January 24, 2007
Mossberg: Microsoft’s Windows Vista offers lesser imitations of Apple’s Mac OS X features – January 18, 2007
Windows Vista disappointment drives longtime ‘Microsoft apologist’ to Apple’s Mac OS X – January 17, 2007
InformationWeek Review: Apple’s Mac OS X shines in comparison with Microsoft’s Windows Vista – January 06, 2007
NY Times’ Pogue reviews Microsoft’s Windows Vista: ‘Looks, Locks, Lacks’ – December 14, 2006
Dave Winer: ‘Microsoft isn’t an innovator, and never was – they are always playing catch-up’ – December 01, 2006
Apple’s Mac OS X Leopard is 64-bit done right, unlike Microsoft’s Windows Vista kludge – August 14, 2006
Microsoft Windows Vista: If you can’t innovate… try to impersonate Apple’s Mac OS X – August 10, 2006
Analyst: Apple’s new Mac OS X Leopard sets new bar, leaves Microsoft’s Vista in the dust – August 08, 2006
Microsoft botches another copy job: Windows Vista Flip3D vs. Apple Mac OS X Exposé – June 26, 2006
Windows Vista rips-off Mac OS X at great hardware cost (and Apple gains in the end) – June 13, 2006
Computerworld: Microsoft Windows Vista a distant second-best to Apple Mac OS X – June 02, 2006
Difficulty rating out of 100 to produce a competitor for Apple’s Mac/OS X/Apple TV/iPod (and it isn’t just the software):
1. Brand new start up, result in 3 years – 60/100
2. Turn around Microsofts’s products, people, culture, history – 99/100
Microsoft have had it and they can thank their lucky star that they kept Office for Mac going.
The key to turning MicroShaft around ???
UNIX is better than DOS !! …
But, Ballmer cant even see his belly button, let alone the writing on the wall !!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”LOL” style=”border:0;” />
> The sad truth is that while Apple is growing market share at an incredible rate, it will be a decade before we could hope that parity with MS could be reached.
Apple is a hardware company. It profits mostly from selling Macs and iPods. Mac OS X is a means of selling more Macs. Apple does not need to reach “parity” with Windows; it just needs to beat the PC box makers (individually). Since they all share the Windows piece of the pie chart, that would be a much more reasonable goal. Getting to 20-25 percent should do it. That might happen in the next three to four years.
Regardless, the “marketshare” issue will become less meaningful as Apple continuues to demonstrate its resurgence; Apple is selling as many Macs as it can make right now. Customers, developers, and the media are taking notice.
@ Mac Arch,
I can’t believe you said that, I work on the BUFF simulators! LOL
Microsoft doesn’t have enough cash to buy off its bad karma. The bishop of Redmond is going
to have to make a trip to the Vatican ….but has the new Pope ever seen anyone soil themselves like this ..
……and does he have that much Heavenly credit of his own that he could launder this ugly load?
My, my, I might need to consult an analyst.
Gee I hope that Machopeless / Unrealist and the other Windoze fanbois are reading this…
“…moving to the Mac it’s like a wave and over time this wave can actually threaten Microsoft’s monopoly on the operating system…” Hawk writes. “So the question becomes how should Microsoft turn this around?”
So… what this guy is saying is he wants to prop up and support a monopoly…and make it even better (bigger).
Hmmm.
“it just needs to beat the PC box makers (individually). Since they all share the Windows piece of the pie chart, that would be a much more reasonable goal”
This is very true, and is why Apple already is more healthy than any of the hardware manufacturers. However it is still useful to compare Apple and Microsoft. Given that any innovation in personal computers is going to come from either MS or Apple, it is useful to compare them.
For developers such as myself it is a much better comparison to compare MS and Apple. For all practical purposes all the other PC manufacturers are Microsoft. The reality they are commodities. If I want to make money with a product, it makes a lot more sense to go after all the Windows systems than Apple. I am faced with the problem all the time – people want me to write something for windows. I have NEVER had anyone say can you write me something for the Mac. Because I love the Mac, I often deliver a cross platform application and I am usually the only person to ever use the Mac version.
This is why the comparison matters – getting developers. I personally would rather work totally on the Mac, but I can’t. Sure as long as Apple remains profitable, I can choose to use a Mac, but I am never going to be able to get away from the Windows crap because OS market share does matter.
If Apple were to exceed 25% or even better approach parity, my life would get better as would many others.
Alternatively, If MS could change cultures and provide a much better user experience, then I could enjoy working on Windows stuff.
Hmmmm, while businesses are always slow to turn around and try new things, could Apple produce enough computers to produce 80 percent of the worlds needs??
Actually yes, but it would need the help of HP – Dell, etc. Apple could sublet the production of its computers to them. The computers would have to meet Apples standards in design and quality but the companies that build PCs could — I say COULD produce Apple machines within say 6 months.
Will they? NO. Cause egos run HP and Dell etc. And you will still be selling machines to replace those currently running PC software to people who like to be able to play with their machines.
So, JMHO.
N.
“it would need the help of HP – Dell, etc.”
Apple would not need their help – Apple would just have to expand. The truth is Apple (like everyone else) uses fabricators – it can hire more.
RUMOR: New version of Vista being released this week:
Vista OMFG
@Bobby
I am sure you are right. Do Dell actually own factories?
Spark: – “As hot as the MB Pro gets, I could use it to cook on.”
You are perpetuating a myth. My MacBook Pro never gets hotter than mildly warm.
How to fix Microsoft….hummm…
1. Well, the proper fix would be for Microsoft to be broken up into smaller companies, and Gates and Ballmer banned from the industry for life.
Personally, I think some jail time would have been appropriate to send a message, but I don’t believe the legislation supports that, altho it should.
2. Since the regulatory process failed, let the normal corporate process happen: let Microsoft grow into a mindless corpporate cancer moving imperceptibly in all directions.
This happens to all rotten companies that are based on theft/piracy/reverse engineering, and especially monopolies, however formed.
3. I’m particularly pleased with the leadership of Ballmer: Microsoft only has two cash cows – Office and Windows. He seems to have done a good number on both of them…. Vista,in particular, seems to be just a wonderful upgrade, with particularly positive reviews…<end sarcasm>
Seriously: don’t change a thing, everything is going according to a bigger plan. Unfortunately, due to a regulatory failure, we (the citizens and the industry) have had to put up with this for about 10 years longer than we should have, but that is another matter.
4. Microsoft, in spite of revenue growth, has a flat share price. They’re now doing the classic rotten big company trick: squeeze your existing customers (lower quality, raise prices), since all of their new ventures are failing.
How far are we away from declining revenues similar to Dell? If Apple’s market share continues to grow, not that far. (Hello Linux – are you there? You’re part of the solution – care to get with the program on the desktop?)
Remember that Apple’s market share doubled in the last 6 months, which is almost unbelievable. Will it be double yet again in another 6 months? 4x in a year? Hard to say, but this will start to bite the Microsoft Felon’s revenue fairly soon.
Personally, I can’t see 100% growth every 6 months continuing – this is too much, and it might be hard for Apple to manage. Plus, Apple has to be very careful to continue to listen to its customers, and not be arrogant…
I would not be surprised to see Apple in the #3 PC mfr spot in a year, at around 10% market share.
But I digress.
MDN Magic Word: down, as in “Microsoft is going down”.
(who comes up with these uncannily relevant words, anyway?)
i just love the seeing the picture of both of these twats in V-necks.
the whole jeans and black turtleneck thing of jobs is pretty lame, but the v-necks do certainly take the cake.
Sounds like Microsoft should,
1) buy Dell
2) make a more streamlined version of Vista optimized for the Dell machines
3) sidestep antitrust problems by including a non-iLife version of OS-X preinstalled as a boot option.
How to turn MS around. Quite simple: Split it in two. Windows and Office. The two should not be allowed under one roof. Until Office no longer has the monoply position to leverage off of Windows, but instead has to compete on the open market, and visa-versa.
Windows is being challenged = Good.
Office needs to be challenged. To do this MS cannot be allowed to dictate standards of document formats. I would go one further, and state, that at least for the time being, MS not even be allowed participation, in establishing these standards.
Splitting the company would be a step in the right direction, but that one additional step need also be taken, until such time as Office software publishers get a step up in market share.
I hate MS just as much as the next person, I truly feel it is an evil enterprise, however, it would be bad for it to cease to exist.
Apple is making the right steps with multi-boot macs. However, there will reach a point where Apple is the dominant player, and competition is always good.
PCs (beit Macs or Dells or HPs) should be platform agnostic. Truly they should a commodity. It is the software that counts, and really even the OS should not matter, as it is merely the platform on which you use software. The Software should matter, and you should be allowed to use whatever app floats your boat, however, with the apps using standarized formats.
I will get off my rambling soapbox
zac
@Sure Am Relieved
I was not wanting to justify Microsoft’s past actions. As much I would like to se MS in little pieces, that was never going to happen. Their “crimes” should have brought about huge fines and Civil awards to companies like Netscape and Digital Research. Let’s face the facts, the bulk of the problem we have today was the fault of John Sculley who chose to artificially inflate the prices of Macs (and force NeXT’s prices higher by settlement agreement) that kept Apple from winning. He created a market waiting for Microsoft to offer a cheap substitute.
Microsoft stepped over the line in building their market share advantage, but not that terribly far until it came to netscape. If a company had risen to the occasion and created a product that was well designed and enjoyable to use, we would be barely angry.
The reality is other than the thing with Netscape it is hard to find a huge violation of anti-trust laws at Microsoft. However if you look at all the little things they did, it adds up.
Though I can strain to see evil in Microsoft, but it is much more likely that they simply played hard and were able to convince people that the crap they were selling was good enough. Chances are they had no intent to violate the law, they were just playing hard ball and got a little too rough.
A reformed Microsoft would be a good thing. Eliminate the market domination, and they could expand their revenues and create good will by becoming a coopering member of the community and eliminate the monopoly issue.
It will not happen, because the people that chose to walk the monopolistic line are still making those decisions and will try to continually push closer to the line where-ever we draw it. I think the vast resources of the company, if run by the right person(s) could be put to good use and be even more profitable.
I’m with MDN on this one – Why? Why? Why?
If we’re gauging things at all correctly here, it looks like more and more peopel are asking why, and are not simply buying the anti-Mac myths that they have been so willing to swallow in the past.
Bobby Skinner:
“VM slowdown of java without the hope of cross-platform operation.”
Please do not propogate this long ago debunked “Java is slow” myth.
Java is NOT slow, it is in the same ballpark as C++, and has been so for years (roughly in the 1.3/1.4 timeframe), with each version getting faster.
If fact, Java with its dynamic compilation can apply optimizations to code that statically compiled languages like C/C++ cannot do, based on ACTUAL runtime usage, and change them when usage changes. In fairness, this hasn’t made Java faster than C/C++, as one would have expected, but I digress.
see
http://kano.net/javabench/
caveats: #1 phone java excepted generally (still slow) #2 java, particularly on first load (when not in cache) has a slow startup time of a few seconds (better than it was but still noticeable particularly for applets; the Big Fix is coming, but slowly) #3 java has a larger memory footprint (in the interest of full disclosure) due to the compiler being around at run time – don’t starve Java for memory – this WILL make it crawl. #4 the GUI has only recently become decent, performance wise, out of the box (say, 1.5/1.6) #5 a inefficient Java program will be slow, just like an inefficient “C” or assembler program will be slow – this is the big reason for slow Java programs today, using modern Java runtimes.
@Sure Am Relieved
I perpetuate no myth, as you see from your own caveats.
I will confess that JIC (Just In time Compilation) of the VM Code has vastly improved the performance Java (an entire order of magnitude) and bringing it much closer to C/C++.
I like Java, it is a great language and with a good JIC and fast modern computers I highly recommend it’s use. However, to claim that it is as efficient as C/C++ would be a flat out lie.
Not all the inefficiencies lie in the VM, for instance the String manipulation library is horribly inefficient when compared to C++ strings and even more when compared with C’s char arrays.
However my point is this:
Java is a great language that offers you cross platform operation in exchange for a degradation in performance (we could argue the amount), but this is a good tradeoff. .Net on the other hand offers the same kind (more or less) of performance degradation, but without the positive cross-platform operation.
I am sorry if I offended any Java proponents out there, I did not mean to. As I said I like Java. All languages have tradeoffs. Java is not as fast as C and it never will be, but it is much easier to shoot yourself in the foot with C/C++ because part of what makes them faster is lower constructs that can be dangerous. I did not mean to say that Java was so slow as to be un-usable – it is VERY USABLE.
turn microsoft around?
how about just getting it to a complete stop?
“Java is NOT slow, it is in the same ballpark as C++, and has been so for years (roughly in the 1.3/1.4 timeframe), with each version getting faster.”
Note this means nearly 50% slower – that is a huge difference. That is not yet the same ballpark.
Is a Jet flying at 400 knots (turbo-prop) in the same ballpark as one at 600 Knots (fast jet).
Perhaps it would be better to not perpetuate the Myth that Java is now as fast as C/C++.
Again, It is often a good tradeoff for type and pointer safety and a cross platform GUI library.
If you need cross-platform use Java, if you need speed use C. If you need a compromise use REALBasic http://www.realsoftware.com/ (You have to use BASIC, but it is a good OO-BASIC … but sadly not C++).
Bobby Skinner:
You really need to do more digging on Microsoft:
1. Microsoft is a reverse engineering shop (which, while distasteful to me, is legal, and it keeps innovative companies from getting arrogant and charging too much). So I’ll let this one slide, but it doesn’t earn any respect points from me.
2. Unfortunately, Microsoft chronically supplements their reverse engineering with piracy and intellectual property theft. Check out the Stacker conviction, for example (long before Netscape).
Resolution: after the conviction, they bought the company.
And you forgot about the Java case, where Microsoft deliberately (according to the court) made a non compatible version of Java to break Java’s cross platform promise (this resulted in their biggest single settlement, as I recall, 1.9 billion).
3. In fairness, they buy a lot of companies (not a problem; Apple does this too), however, when coupled with a chronic lack of innovation is a severe long term problem for Microsoft – is unsustainable.
4. Name just one significant technological innovation that Microsoft has made (and buying/stealing/reverse engineering innovation doesn’t count). And Microsoft Bob doesn’t count (a flop is not considered an innovation). And innovative abuse of the legal system/the press/politicans doesn’t count – is only, at best, peripherally technological.
5. They also have a flagrant disregard for the law (“to heck with Janet Reno”, at the time, the Attorney General of the U.S.) and are chronic liars. In other words, they are not an appropriate company to do business with – are disreputable in the extreme, if anybody cares to check.
6. Unfortunately, they have so terrorized the press (especially the technical press) that, until recently (the Vista launch), the press went along. But watch out, now that the press has suddenly got a bit of spine and is sensing weakness – Microsoft is due for some serious comeuppance.
And spending ill-gotten gains (that is, a big chunk of Microsoft’s cash; some to be fair, was obtained fairly – Wordperfect/Lotus made some really boneheaded moves and generally lost mostly fairly, ignoring those secret APIs) on charity is not what I am talking about as regards comeuppance.
7. They grossly disrespect their customers and are focused on killing the competition, instead of making the customer happy. The business model in a nutshell is: get 90% market share by any and all means, legal or otherwise, then let the products rot, while they go after another company/market segment.
This is not the way capitalism is supposed to work – a company is supposed to provide good products at a good price, and monopolies are always bad for customers and the industry (and the monopolist’s long term survival). In fairness, certain temporary situations like creating the first telephone network may make sense if done as a monopoly, but even that is debatable, and market subsidies are a much better idea, generally (with proper oversight, of course).
8. ATT was broken up, so was Standard Oil – there are prededents; Microsoft should have been.
Regardless, the time is past for that, and now a worse punishment is coming, courtesy of the market, in my opinion.
9. To everybody who is worried about Microsoft stock: don’t be – this will take a few years. But remember that big companies tend to die or become very inefficient, which only starts the cycle again for small companies.
Look at the changes at IBM. IBM was the Microsoft of the 60’s and 70’s. But they’re still around, and have a new business model: ditching hardware, consulting and strip mining open source with offshore talent (not really sustainable, but that’s another story).
I also think that Microsoft will survive, just smaller, and with current management turfed (particularly Ballmer).
IT will survive; they will change, just like they changed from IBM mainframes and 3270 terminal to PC’s.
I think there should be a major accounting for IT being an accessory to Microsoft’s Crimes, but that won’t happen either.
As much as Microsoft sucks, I’d rather they were still around than totally crumble. A monopoly for Apple would not be a good thing. It’s the competition with Microsoft that gets Jobs all riled up, and to make everything Apple produces better and better.