audzk, on 05 February 2013 - 03:25 AM, said:
Those figures are for Win 8 and are not all purchases by the public yet. Most are to OEMs. But the most important thing for a company is revenue. How do you get it? Sales of your product. So far MS has sold around 900,000 Surface RTs in the 4th quarter 2012. Apple, in the same quarter, sold 22.9 million iPads. see: http://news.techworl...demand/?olo=rss
So if MS does not sell Office for iOS they lose out on a large share of the tablet market( Apple's 100 mil. iPads plus Andriod). If MS would sell 1 mil. copies at $30, let's say, and Apple takes 30% that is still a $20 mil. revenue stream and that ain't chump change.
i think you are part right and part wrong.
yes , you are right that company all needs is revenue. but microsoft is a software company, their main revenue is not from surface sales. those 60 million copies are sold to oems, oems paid microsoft whether oem's able to sold it to consumers or not. so those 60 millions copies are already revenues of microsoft. microsoft doesnt need apple, well i think apple doesnt need microsoft either.
Respectfully beg to disagree. They both need each other. Here's the bigger picture: MS didn't cater to schools like Apple did. So all the 20-somethings entering the workforce now, were weaned on Apple/Mac/iPod, so of course they are Apple fanboys.
I was weaned on DOS, so I'm a DOS junkie. You go with what you know. So now these folks enter the workforce, having little familiarity with MS. That spells future revenue trouble
for MS unless it can hook these young ones early on, with their software. MS knew that back when it started bundling PCs with its software, and the same strategy holds today. So it desperately needs to offer its flagship software on Apple devices.
If Linux had started like MS did, we'd all be using Linux instead of either
MS or Apple. For the 20-somethings overseas, Linux is what they're being weaned on. So both Apple and MS have a lot to lose, over the next 10-20 years.
They need each other's customers, to survive, especially since both companies have practices which offend and alienate many of their current customers, like suing competitors at the drop of a hat. So they had better well get the next generation, if they hope to survive.
MS seems to know that vaguely, that's why it invented Win8 as a tablet hybrid OS. Trouble is, it did a very bad job in the design, and especially the LOOK of the thing. It's not 'cool'. Flat, too big and garish, a real turnoff to anyone who has half a brain. Apple had and still retains a 'cool' interface. MS didn't pick up on that, despite the fact it had made great strides (if it hadn't totally screwed up icon usage and file management) in Windows 7. It basically junked what it should have learned from Windows 7, and now goes back to what no one wants, Windows 3.1 style 'look'. Bad move, if you want the 20-somethings, who are used to more sophistication, now.
80% of the user reviews of Win8 report major installation and usage problems, with the interface only an irritation, but enough of one to garner complaints. You cannot afford to alienate customers by making their lives harder. Businesses can't use Win8 because its touch-centric interface doesn't lend itself to corporate needs for standardization. So MS has alienated its personal buyers and its business buyers, in one fell swoop. So now the potential future revenue pool has shrunk a lot, and Linux is just now maturing for the desktop and tablet, having already won millions of hearts via smartphones. So it's not surprising that among the 1-star reviews I've read of Win8, most of them end with the exclamation that they will port over to Linux or Mac. So if MS wants to keep these disgruntled folks at ALL, they better wake up and start making their overpriced software available on other platforms.
But they won't. They are arrogant beyond description, thinking like all religions do, that if they just plant their feet and draw a line in the sand
, they will win in the end. Well, honey, that didn't work when Antiochus IV bucked Rome (origin of 'line in the sand' quote from his old roommate, Popilius Linus
, how ironic) -- and it won't work now.
MS and Apple have seriously underestimated the amount of goodwill left them, and have even more underestimated the competition. The game is not like it was, 30 years ago. Users don't like big garish pictures, like PC World now spews on all its webpages and articles; like Google is doing in Youtube. So, less time is spent at those places. So, advertising revenue will go down. Users don't like interface changes which actually make it two-four times harder or longer to get to the same place as they used to get. Above all, they don't like the changes being FORCED on them. Again, the alternative of Linux (as much as I still dislike it) offers a freedom increasingly lost from MS and Apple. Since the 20-somethings overseas are being weaned on Linux, since it's all they can afford; since smartphones are on Linux already, in the final analysis MS and Apple need to be nice to each other so they aren't defeated by an OS both disparage.
It's equivalent to The Reformation, but for operating systems. That's what the recent 'fad' of tablets and Chromebooks, really signifies. 'We're sick of the complexity of the big boys, GIVE US SOMETHING SIMPLER.' Whoever caters to that goal, will win. If you have to GUESS at how to use a device, sooner or later you'll tire of using it.
This post has been edited by brainout: 05 February 2013 - 04:19 AM