Microsoft finally realizes that Steve Jobs was right all along

“For the majority of Microsoft’s existence, they have been an OS company that provides key software that ran on PCs. Then, in the mid-1980s, they became a software applications company and dabbled in things like mice and keyboards as well. While they got into hardware with the XBox, this product was a vertical play for gamers and had no impact on their core businesses and PC partners,” Tim Bajarin writes for Tech.pinions. “During that, period I was very close to Microsoft. In fact, often Steve Ballmer and I would meet or have lunch when he came down to Silicon Valley to discuss Microsoft’s visions and strategies and he would try and convince me Microsoft was on track to dominate the PC world well into the future.”

“But on at least two occasions, I suggested to him ultimately Apple had the better business model in that they controlled the hardware and software and also oversaw its user interface so the hardware could be tweaked to the UI. I suggested this type of oversight would help Apple in the long run and give them greater control of their destiny,” Bajarin writes. “At the time, Ballmer could not see this as a plus for Apple and banished the idea they would ever want to own or control the entire ecosystem in order to guarantee Microsoft’s future.”

“But if you look at Microsoft’s new strategy, one can’t help but see this is an acknowledgment Apple’s business model of owning the hardware, software and services is ultimately the best one that assures Microsoft’s control of their destiny,” Bajarin writes. “It looks like “the Apple Way” is now the Microsoft Way too.”

Much more in the full article – recommended, as usualhere.

MacDailyNews Take: What good is making the whole widget when it’s inferior, frustrating, poorly-conceived crap?

The Apple wannabes and those who settle for knockoffs are coming to a sad realization. There’s only one master of vertical integration in technology: Apple. And they have a nearly 40-year head start.MacDailyNews Take, June 7, 2014

SEE ALSO:
Why Google and Microsoft couldn’t emulate the Apple mobile device model – July 9, 2015
Frictionless fruit: Apple offers users unmatched convenience – June 7, 2014
Apple’s vertically integrated Mac could make interim Wintel model look like a detour – April 25, 2008
Apple has proven that vertical integration works better – October 24, 2006
Apple was right all along: vertical market quality trumps horizontal market woes – April 30, 2006

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Readers “Fred Mertz” and “Edward W.” for the heads up.]

31 Comments

    1. Have to say, just came from BestBuy and spent a good 20 minutes with the Surface Book. It is stunning. Gorgeous. Incredible. Better than a MacBook. The fit and finish and quality is the best in the business. Better than Apple. The base of the Surface Book is unreal. It’s so thin and the sides sort of slope down to give a softer, rounder feel compared to the sharp blunt edges of the MacBook.

      The screen is also fantastic. And the keyboard is amazing, better than my MacBook’s. Also, the detachable tablet screen is pretty incredible. It’s such a big screen for a tablet yet it’s so light and easy to handle.

      Here’s what I didn’t like:

      1. Doesn’t seem like anyone is talking about this, but the screen doesn’t seem to tilt back far enough. It’s degree of axis appears slightly less than a MacBook Pro’s;
      2. I wish the unit was flat when the lid is closed. There’s a gap between the screen and the base due to the design of the hinge;
      3. The screen wobbles a bit when using it as a laptop since the unit is a bit top heavy; and
      4. Lifting it up when in laptop mode… the top heaviness makes it hard to handle: it wants to tip backwards.

      If Microsoft can improve the hinge so there’s no gap when the unit’s closed; if the screen can tilt back farther; and, if they can make it less top heavy, this thing is a runaway winner.

      What they have right now as a Version 1 is impressive. It’s an absolutely beautiful piece of technology. If any of you have a chance, you should check it out.

      1. Soooo, ummm…. the hardware is wonderfully made, except it’s not wonderfully made?

        (Not that I actually believe your gushing declarations of it being so astoundingly better than the MacBook.)

        But even if they got a physically perfect piece of hardware designed and built for them, it still runs Microscum Winblows.

      2. “Gorgeous. Incredible. Better than a MacBook.” Except for your significant points 1-4, and the “if” Microsoft can improve comments. So IF Microsoft had done this of that, then it would great, or like a MacBook. But “ifs” are imaginary or at best in the future, if they happen at all. And I notice you didn’t say that you came home with one of these wonderfully unreal machines. So your review comes down to nothing but 20 minutes of playing with a piece of poor imitation junk that you wouldn’t waste your money on.

    1. Not only late, but also NOT the same as Apple. Licensing Windows is still Microsoft’s cash cow, by far. If Microsoft designs Windows to serve third parties, then by definition, Microsoft does not “control its destiny.” By selling Microsoft-branded laptops and tablets running Windows, Microsoft is trying to be the Apple that almost went bankrupt – the one that tried licensing Mac OS to third parties while selling Mac hardware.

      1. Spot on. Microsoft is on a downward trajectory brought on by Apple producing excellent hardware and software together and making the software FREE. Microsoft is dipping in to the hardware game, does not have the required supply chain / production expertise, and is likely making piddling margins on this new business. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me if Microsoft’s consumer business is a massive loss leader across its Surface, Surface Book and Windows Phone lines.

        Apple is slowly destroying Microsoft, and karma is a bitch!

  1. If you look at Microsoft’s history, copying Apple then trying to cut Apple out of the business is their real business strategy.

    Every time Microsoft copies something that Apple does, I say watch your back Apple. Same goes for Google.

  2. The world is full of examples where and ‘almost as good’ device that was less expensive has won over around 80% of the market. If your margins are 10% and you have 80% of the market vs 20% of the market at 35% margins, which makes more money? The Microsoft model does not value the virtue of excellence but is ‘good enough’ for the majority.

    I prefer excellence in my life, do you?

    1. Except that the MS Surface Book is not less expensive as equivalent Apple counterparts. It’s about the same payment up front.

      Given that, it won’t attract people who already have Macs. It might only attract people that are firmly entrenched in the MS ecosystem. But the reason for many of those MS enthusiasts is their belief to get a PC with SIGNIFICANT LESS upfront payment than getting a Mac.

      Given that, do you really believe the Surface Book can achieve a significant market share?

  3. SJ told us what MS’ problem before he returned to Apple, and it’s still true today: they have no taste. It doesn’t matter if you control the hardware and software both, if you don’t have the management that can recognize and distinguish the great from the mediocre.

    -jcr

  4. My prediction, if Microsoft goes vertical, PCs will start to get a whole lot more expensive, and could get better. Current examples not considered.

    If the Surface laptop is any indication though, then all bets are off.

    Dell better start shipping their own OS.

    1. If M$ does both OS & hardware, and refuses to license Windoze to Dell, HP, Lenovo, et al, that would leave Linux as the OS of choice.

      Would be interesting to see which OS ecosystem consumers would choose once Wondoze became incompatible with previous versions. 🖖😀⌚️

    1. Nope. The MacBook Air was what DESTROYED the whole netbook “industry”. (While the self-proclaimed “Apple should” crowd declared that Apple was doomed if they didn’t bring out a cheap netbook immediately.)

      1. I’m not disagreeing with you about the death of the netbook industry, simply that the naming may have been a riff off the word ‘netbook’ in response to it.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.