Posted on 08/26/2009 10:20:19 AM PDT by Star Traveler
The iPhone & Steve Ballmer: It’s Time For Him To Eat Some Serious Crow
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
There are very few people in the tech world who annoy me quite like Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft. It’s not just that he’s loud, dismissive and arrogant. It’s that he manages to be all these things while usually being spectacularly wrong, especially when it comes to Apple. Take for example his thoughts on the iPhone from a USAToday article in 2007:
“There’s no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance,” said Ballmer. “It’s a $500 subsidized item. They may make a lot of money. But if you actually take a look at the 1.3 billion phones that get sold, I’d prefer to have our software in 60% or 70% or 80% of them, than I would to have 2% or 3%, which is what Apple might get.”
As you might imagine, I experienced a moment of pure schadenfreude last week when Canalysis senior analyst Pete Cunningham announced that not only did the iPhone have 13.7% of the global smartphone market, but that it had surpassed Windows Mobile devices which had slipped to only 9%. Even worse for Microsoft is the fact that in the last 2 years, Apple has sold more iPhones than all the Windows Mobile devices from all its vendors combined.
I can only imagine that somewhere in Redmond, behind a very heavy door…Steve Ballmer is throwing a good old-fashioned hissy fit, cursing Apple, sweating profusely and gnawing on the furniture.
The fact is that Microsoft has never truly understood Apple and that confusion has grown in part out of their unparalleled success with Windows. With Windows, Microsoft found a superior product in the Macintosh OS, produced a cheaper knock-off and then created a large ecosystem of partners for wide distribution and support. The result was global domination. Unfortunately, cheaper and more plentiful doesn’t automatically win in every situation. As computers sink into every facet of daily life and the costs of consumer technology continue to drop, more and more value is being placed on finding products which are easier, more capable or simple more enjoyable to use.
Microsoft was unable to stop the runaway success of the iPod and it’s looking more and more unlikely that they’ll be able to contain the growth of the iPhone either. Why? Because they cannot fathom a formula for success that isn’t a function of feature set divided by price. It’s how they think and it’s also how they ultimately view the products they compete against. No wonder Ballmer spends so much time shouting at the rain. From his perspective, anyone who willingly pays more for the same features is a brainwashed idiot. What he doesn’t understand is that the experience of a product is more than the sum of its component parts. It’s how the device works, how it feels and even more elusively, how it makes you feel. Can you think of a Microsoft product that is truly a joy to use? I don’t mean one that works well, because many of their products work well enough. I mean one that is a joy to use. Neither can I. That’s because Microsoft isn’t in the joy business. They’re in the “nearly as good for less” business and that isn’t an appeal to the heart. It’s an appeal to the wallet.
So Mr. Ballmer, here’s some friendly advice. The next time you feel yourself ready to mouth off about how Apple is doomed to fail because it doesn’t understand the realities of the marketplace, take a moment and think about Windows Vista and the fact that roughly 50% of Apple Store customers are new to the Mac. Think about sales figures for the Zune as compared to the iPod. Think about the millions of people ditching their Windows Mobile devices for an iPhone. Think about the $35 Billion that a zero-debt Apple has sitting in the bank and all the money it continues to make made through this harsh economic downturn. Then if you’re still confident that you’re the smart one and Apple is the delusional one, then by all means have your say.
Just understand that with your miserable track record in predicting Apple’s future, there’s an excellent chance that you’ll end up eating your own words. Better make sure they’re palatable.
You said — As far as Microsoft... Microsoft makes a smart phone???
—
Ummm..., that’s the trouble... Microsoft doesn’t know how to “make” anything... LOL...
From the point of view of a run-of-the-mill user, I have absolutely no idea if the iPhone has more functionality or a better applications ecosystem. All I know is that the thing is beautiful and it is a joy to use. I have all the apps I could ask for, and it doesn’t cost me that much more than using a phone that would torture me every time I fired it up.
My daughter has a Microsoft Mobile phone, and it almost causes me physical pain when I have to use the damn thing.
One may be “better” than the other, but I will stick with the one that gives me joy instead of pain.
Are Macs really positioned to take over the whole market? Being aimed at the high end puts a limit on how much of the market you can take over. They are a legitimate player in the high end though which is really the only area they play in. A company doesn’t have to dominate the market to be meeting its goals.
You said — One may be “better” than the other, but I will stick with the one that gives me joy instead of pain.
—
That’s where Apple understands the consumer better than most any other company around...
You said — At least Microsoft/Gates won’t have to loan them another $100 million.
—
LOL... that was a settlement agreement on Microsoft and Intel stealing code from Apple (had to do with QuickTime code). That’s how they ended up settling the whole thing. I also understand that Microsoft had to pay out a lot of money “behind the scenes” on that one... :-)
Oh... and by the way, that was stock that Microsoft purchased... I understand that when Microsoft sold the stock they made a lot of money because of how successful Apple has been... :-)
I know.
At least Microsoft’s use of Apple code allowed Apple to keep the doors open. Shame Apple couldn’t turn a profit on its own product.
Maybe Apple should countract Microsoft for other revenue projects as well?
Microsoft settlement money (for stealing code from Apple) was gravy on the success... :-) Steve Jobs was the key and always has been. Now it appears that Apple has learned quite a bit from Steve Jobs and will be around for quite a long time.
Actually, Apple has been around, already for quite a long time, considering that even IBM isn’t making their desktops any longer (the one they started out with in 1981). Heck! Apple was doing that before IBM, and they’re still doing it now — long after IBM conceded defeat and got out of this business segment... LOL...
Doesn’t Apple still make most of its money from Mac sales?
I think most people will tell you that so far Steve Jobs has been the key ingredient to success for Apple. Hopefully going forward that won’t be the case, but it has been in the past. His return signaled a definite change in their fortunes.
siiigghhhh
Jeez...give me a break....how long ago was that?
Making excuses as they always do!
Mr. Blonde, you said to SJSAMPLE — “Doesn’t Apple still make most of its money from Mac sales?”
—
I’ve seen Swordmaker post the stats on that. And yes, I believe that’s what I saw in those stats. It’s still the majority of the money made from Macintosh sales, and has been all along.
But, who knows... perhaps in the future there will be a “whole barnload” of products that will be making money for Apple, besides just the Macintosh computers... :-)
Most of their revenue, but not their profit, IIRC.
The iPods kept them afloat and the iPhone has re-energized sales and interest.
I really admire their design staff on these products.
The interfaces are what make them work, and they’re a generation ahead of anybody else.
Silly fanboi article. Wonder if this is at all news.
You said — Making excuses as they always do!
—
One major thing, also, that a lot of people don’t talk too much about today — Microsoft *missed the Internet* completely and had to play a big catchup game there... LOL...
You said — Most of their revenue, but not their profit, IIRC.
The iPods kept them afloat and the iPhone has re-energized sales and interest.
—
No, it was the iMac that was the big deal back then. Perhaps a lot of people forget about that, in light of the current success of the iPods and iPhones. But, back then, it was the — iMac — that did the “heavy lifting”... and did it well. [there was no iPod in 1998...]
Along with that was the Mac OS X that was very important and is a great success story today. It’s Mac OS X that is running the iPhone...
The MSM drooled over the iPhone because it was something worth drooling over.
Microsoft failed with Vista because (like Kodak and Motorola and Smith Corona) the companies lost sight of who their real customers were. Kodak decided their customers were retail stores, who used film-oriented products to bring their customers into the stores several times (buy film, drop off film, buy prints) - forgetting it was the people taking pictures who were the real customers, and who decided they wanted digital photography instead. Motorola decided their customer were cellular services, who use phones to entice customers to switch or stay (cheap/free phone with any 2-year lock-in) - forgetting it was the people making calls who are the real customers, and who are tired of getting “crippled” phones labeled “Motorola”. Smith Corona decided their customers were stockholders, who wanted stock value maintained at all costs (despite the technology’s relative but not complete demise) - forgetting there ARE people who want typewriters and not pathetic computer-wannabes. And ... Microsoft decided their customers are content services, who see the PC & OS as a controllable conduit for movies & music (wanting end-to-end DRM) - forgetting that it is the people actually watching movies and listening to music who are the real customers, and don’t want degraded performance just because of a break in the DRM chain.
Apple KNOWS their customers are the people who actually make phone calls, surf the web on the run, listen to music, watch pocket-sized movies, take pictures, and want a new platform to run their digital lives on - people who DON’T want their digital-life experience degraded by some company’s grubby fingers. And so, Apple created exactly what people want - not what they say they want (a la Ford’s “faster horse” theory), but what they WILL want when they are shown the next generation of the technology, and will adhere to when it works for them.
As such, a new phone/musicplayer/videoplayer/camera/browser/etc. garnered lots of free MSM drooling precisely because it was what the people want, and what they would pick up MSM content to read/see/hear about because they wanted it so badly even if it was experienced by proxy. This in contrast to other similar devices, which merely put those technologies in the same box while trying to sell it to someone (cellular services, music services, movie services, retailers) other than the actual user.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.