Uh, yeah. An earnings report is going to steal the thunder of a product launch.
"It doesn’t matter if Microsoft creates the greatest operating system in the world if it then allows others to junk it up. And, ultimately, it means that Microsoft isn’t in control of its brand."
No one can succeed if they give up absolute control of their platforms to OEMs ... oh wait that's exactly what android does. And OEMs put (non-uninstallable!) crapware on android phones, and they still sell. Only Apple is pushing the complete control angle, and while it works for them, it's hardly the only model that could work.
I love android phones, and while I won't be getting a windows phone, I think this article's arguments are pretty weak and don't have enough substance to back up that link bait title.
In comparison, Amazon sold 5 million Kindle Fires from last year to end of August.
This is true, but nobody should give a crap.
What's important is that Windows 8, the surface, etc. are actually good.
Until Apple came along and turned computers into fashion accessories, brand image didn't matter so much. Now it clearly does. What the author ignores is that brand image is a product of many things, with press releases being only a small part for most companies (They are a somewhat larger part of Apple's brand). A long track record of high quality and innovative products coupled with clever advertising is what makes or breaks a brand like Apple's more than anything else.
Microsoft's brand is currently rather mediocre. Missteps over the last decade have really hurt it, but Windows 7 did go a long way to help it recover. Vista, as maligned as it was, was actually a really good OS saddled with some bad default settings (e.g. The overly obtrusive UAC). Windows 7 brought some minor innovations to the interface, greatly improved the default settings, and added a little bit of "cool" with details as subtle as just adding some unusually funky and artistic default backgrounds. Windows 7's default backgrounds made OSX look like the bland, boring corporate OS that Apple has long tried to brand Windows to be!
Movie studios often keep stinkers under strict wraps until opening weekend. If they advertise enough and prevent the film from being savaged by critics until the day of release they can still get a good opening weekend out of a poor film. Good films are frequently shown to critics or at film festivals well in advance of general release. This "festival route" builds word of mouth.
If MS had kept Windows 8 under wraps until a big press event this month and then hyped it as the most awesome thing ever, just like Apple does with their products, few people would likely believe them. By broadly distributing a release candidate for Windows 8 and showing the Surface publicly prior to release, MS took the "festival route" and built a big word-of-mouth effect. MS's brand isn't what Apple is, and they were smart enough to realize they have to do things differently, and did.
Microsoft has a real chance of claiming a big chunk of the market, not from Apple, but from the messy Android ecosystem, with a clear brand and a simple product lineup.
It took forever just to explain metro (not metro) and windows RT (not metro but metro) and windows pro (with metro but not metro, i mean RT or ARM, or modern UI). ARM but not intel, desktop but including ARM/RT/metro but not metro. Just build apps for windows phone (but not mobile), but metro no wait not metro on mobile (i mean phone).
Honestly really crazy stuff, round and round.
Just call it what it is already, damnit. If you so happen to invent something new -- then by all means, call it what you want -- but please quit taking old ideas and applying the old web 2.0 naming convention everywhere.
I'm sure that people are buying the new BMW 5 series because they like the name of the design language (Flame Surfacing) and because it was launched in Hong Kong. The actual quality of the product doesn't matter.
"Even when Microsoft has a great product on its hands, even when its product, engineering and design teams manage to hit one out of the park, it won’t matter once the business team comes in and ruins it for everyone."
The whole history of all screw ups from Microsoft just confirms that.
MS won't be able to change their software or their business model fast enough to compete with ubiquitous $200 computers.
Windows 8 runs as Windows 8 and as Windows 8 RT. However, there's also WinRT which is something else:
WinRT == Windows Runtime
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Runtime
"Not to be confused with Windows RT"
Now
"Windows RT (formerly known as Windows on ARM) is an upcoming version of the Windows 8 operating system for ARM devices such as tablets. The RT acronym does not officially stand for anything.[1] It will officially only run software available through the Windows Store or included in Windows RT."
Homework: try to explain that in less words. :)
Windows 8 Pro is a desktop/laptop/tablet OS aimed at businesses/power users
Windows 8 Enterprise is a desktop/laptop/tablet OS aimed at large businesses (only available via volume license)
Windows RT is a tablet only OS aimed at the iPad/Android market (and can only be delivered via an OEM on a device) Like the iPad and Android it can only run apps available via the Microsoft App Store.
Surface RT is a tablet running Windows RT (so aimed at iPad/Android tablet owners).
Surface Pro (available early 2013) is a tablet running Windows 8 Pro and is more or less like an ultrabook with higher specs than the Surface RT. As it runs Windows 8 Pro it can run all apps that any other Windows 8 Pro computer can it is not limited to the App Store like the Surface RT is.
WinRT is the new Windows Run Time. Read more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WinRT as it explains it better than I can in one sentence.
If I'm confused, I have to wonder how the average Joe is going to keep up.
If they keep this up, I agree Windows just can't win.
The simplest way to think about it is probably to think that WindowsRT is to Windows 8 as iOS 9 (iPad) should be to OSX 11 should the current trends of the latter pair keep going
See http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/17/3514556/windows-8-vs-wind... for more info (and a hint as to how confusing it is)
What you meant to say that existing Windows apps cannot be installed or run on Windows RT. Technically they can be compiled to ARM, but there is no way you can install them. And Windows RT cannot emulate x86.
Windows 8 is the real deal - you can still use apps from outside the app store.
Not only that, but you are likely much more tech sophisticated than the average consumer which makes this even more damning.
[0] - http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/17/3514556/windows-8-vs-wind...
Port access and IRQs without writing an actual device driver.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_AG
It has 66 billion Euro revenue and 250000 employees. It's the fifth largest retailer in the world.
Kind of unlikely that they give up their trademark name or sell it to Microsoft. It's not worth fighting for. Especially since Metro sells Microsoft products.
With Windows 8, I think we'll probably see more mild annoyance as folks buy new PCs for their homes. After two weeks, they'll likely get used to it, then we'll never hear another word about Windows 8 failing. I just don't see the change being so enormous that users will really care long enough to affect anything.
It'll probably be like Vista: a lot of people dislike it without using it, some dislike it for a specific reason (like drivers), and most get along with it just fine and don't really have any problems. The UI changes are enough to probably increase the size of the group complaining, especially the group that hasn't used it, but I don't think it's enough to stop Windows 8 from succeeding in the long run.
But he does have a point with bloatware and control over the brand. I commonly associate the Windows brand with garbage software that comes pre-installed on every PC.
