Posted on 07/30/2009 11:59:33 PM PDT by Swordmaker
Ballmer expects Windows 7 to grab share from Apple In a bullish presentation to financial analysts today, Steve Ballmer promised Windows 7 PCs that would 'overturn the conventional wisdom that Apple has the coolest hardware'.
He also described Apple's impact on Microsoft sales this year as 'a rounding error', saying that; "Apple's share globally costs us nothing."
"Hopefully we will take share back from Apple," said Ballmer, "But they sell only about 10 million computers globally so it's a limited opportunity."
Taking a bite out of Apple
Ballmer said that research data showed that Microsoft adverts targetting Apple's prices were working, claiming that three times as many 18-24 year olds now think that Microsoft represents better value than Apple - a reverse of the situation before the commercials ran.
"We don't believe in coming to market like Apple - high margin, high quality, high price. We believe in high volume and low price," Ballmer told the Microsoft Financial Analyst Meeting. "Investors are pushing us to spend more money on this marketing."
Ballmer also released the latest data on Windows 7: 8 million copies of the release candidate have been downloaded; half of IT managers plan to upgrade to Windows 7 'as soon as it's available'; and 80 per cent intend to move within 30 months.
The Microsoft boss revealed a change in pricing strategy for Windows 7 in developing countries: "We did a programme to cut the price of Windows in emerging markets. The theory was that lower prices would lead to higher attach rates and higher revenues. That theory was wrong, so for Windows 7 we'll readjust those prices north."
He also had a few words to say about open source rivals, noting that: "It's hard to build ecosystem momentum with a chaotic operating system like Linux," and gloating over expected delays to Android-based netbooks.
“What file compatibility problems?”
Unless the students update Office, the word and Excel files are often not compatible with the PC version. I generally translate their files and show them how to update.
Students often don’t understand the the files with the dot in front of them are not the PC readable file either.
For some reason, thumb drives that have been used on Macs sometimes won’t be readable by PCs either. I’m not sure why, but it happens often enough that I’m convinced there is some sort of issue there.
You have to remember that I am dealing with hundreds of students who are mixing Mac and PC files. I get 40 or 50 problems a semester. Personally, I have never had any of those problems. It may be operator error, but it seems to be one that is easy to make. I have developed habits over the years that avoid many problems.
“Would the Mini be just as good for what you’re using the iMac for?
You could consider getting Windows 7 for the iMac and have a pretty spiffy Windows machine at least. “
Sadly, no. It needs to run Office 2008. My Mini is one of the original ones that only had 512K and the older version of Mac operating system. It’s a fine computer for surfing the web and doing email. It’s good for word processing too. Everyone here needs to run Outlook in Exchange mode to share calendars, and they need to read Office 2007 files. The Mini won’t do it.
I could add Windows, but I already have a quad-core PC running dual 28” monitors. (I’m not giving it away either) I have another one with the minimal setup for testing software on less capable machines. I built it for $135 with some used parts. I use it as a station for students who need help in my office. I use my Ubuntu box to keep myself educated about the open source software available. It costs nothing and makes a great Internet machine for visiting students and faculty.
You are correct that it is a shame to have a computer sitting around unused, but don’t we all have some of those laying around? Mine just happen to be Macs and a 5 year old Walmart.com Fedora box. (I should scrap it, but heck, it works fine)
Our IT team supports XP and only XP. All our new computers come with the Vista stickers on the outside but XP on the inside. They are over worked enough without trying to support Vista’s myriad problems.
XP is getting long in the tooth though. It will be interesting to see how long until we get systems with Windows 7 images. Probably not until after SP1 is released.
It was labeled as such, but the code comes from the XP branch. The genealogy goes NT > 2000 > XP > 2003 > Vista > 2008. From Paul Thurtott (Windows journalist, owner of winsupersite and Vista beta tester):
When Windows Vista development originally started in 2001, however, it was then based on Windows XP. In mid-2004, Microsoft had to restart the core development of Windows Vista because it was too hard to go back and componentize the existing Windows Vista core code. So when it restarted Windows Vista development, Microsoft naturally used the Windows Server 2003 with SP1 code base instead of that of XP.Nope. It wasn't crashing to the ground.
Then I guess you disagree with the Vista project lead Jim Allchin. That was his quote. I think I know who to believe, and it's not you. Try this Wall Street Journal article. Allchin blames the development process of Microsoft at the time and says about Vista development prior to the restart, "The ship was just crashing to the ground."
NT Server has a heck of a lot more features, that are essential for any server operating system, that NT desktops simply don't have.
Read this. Mark Russinovich discovered it and built this tweak into his NTTools utility. You're seriously clueless on the Windows tech front if you don't know who he is. His tools were so good that Microsoft hired him and made him a Technical Fellow.
So you are now saying that in effect, both Vista and Win2003 came from XP code to start off with, no? Meanwhile, let me see you show me the link
Links provided, as was the lineage.
I am still not buying it.
Now buy it. Your history of Windows development has now been thoroughly debunked, with sources. Consider it a learning experience. Don't argue with a tech-head Windows developer who's been using it since version 2.
Hewlett and Packard are gone. Carly Fiorina did her best to destroy what made the company great and heavily clashed with Walter Hewlett (the co-founder's son and board member) over her differing vision.
You know, people who say things like what you said in your reply really make me angry. Thanks for suggesting that I don't know anything and that I look foolish. Do you even grasp how offensive it is to say things like that to another person?
I am very aware that there was a slew of upgrading complaints. I am also aware that some poeple didn't like the look of Vista, or the registration requirements, or that some of the features that they liked in XP were removed. It was actually a very smart move to offer free downgrades. Hey, if someone is so unhappy with Vista, here, will this make you happy? There, all better now? anything else we can do for you?
That said, there is almost a cottage industry of beating up Microsoft. There are many detractors out there, who jump at the opportunity to say negative things about any product that Microsoft delivers. Bill Gates is probably the single most hated man in the history of the computer industry.
Now, let's move on to Apple Computers, There you have a twofer, a corporation that has been running what amounts to a guerrila war against Vista. Their commercials with the young, hip Mac guy and the nerdy PC guy are exclusively geared towards damaging Vista as a platform. They parroted the upgraders complaint over and over, suggested that Vista crashes all the time (mine hasn't crashed once in the two and a half years I've had it). The second part of the Apple twofer is the Apple users themselves, who engage in a proxy war because they like the product they use.
I'm not interested in getting involved in the "computer wars" but I will say this. If Microsoft had been making their software for a computer which they also made, with a known and consistant hardware architecture, they would have had much better results all along. Apple has had that luxury all along. Conversely, if Apple were selling their OS and applications to be run on a multitude of platforms, they would also have had numerous complaints about their product.
It's hard to compare the success' and failures of what Apple and Microsoft do, because they do not do the same thing.
In summation, I stand by my statement. I use Vista on my laptop, I haven't had any problems with Vista. I like Vista (gee... do I have your permission to like it).
MS runs the PC ads because the price advantage is entirely from the hardware. Apple sells OSX for $129 and a family pack of five installations for $199, and the only version that has a software lock to a computer is the version that's sold with a Mac. MS, for a full version retails at $300 for one installation, and there's a lot of key entry, check with MS, etc.
Now, since Macs will run Windows, why does MS run against a company that supports their product? Simple. MS doesn't want Apple to gain market share because on the Mac, they're playing on Apple's court.
Good idea. Heh! ;-)
Correct, but the culture for quality remains
“Carly Fiorina did her best to destroy what made the company great and heavily clashed with Walter Hewlett (the co-founder’s son and board member) over her differing vision”
Carly Fiorina wasn't the best CEO I have seen, nevertheless one CEO can't destroy a culture that has been built over several decades. Not to mention the guy that replaced her, Mark Hurd said, is one of the best CEO’s in America today, and has been doing a great job since he took over.
HP is still a great American company
Bottom line is, you just can't go about claiming that Apple has better quality than HP, especially given the terrible quality problems that the iPods had a few years back, with one of the highest failure rates for any electronics product.
Great thread. Kickin’ the cultists ass...;-)
Microsoft CEO says new PC designs cooler than Apple"Best pizza in town".
We have beta versions running on some old HP laptops at work... all with 512k RAM.. and, they all run GREAT! These puters wouldn't run Vista at all... but, W7 is smokin on them. This is going to be a BIG hit for Microsoft.
Re: the Mac advertising.
The troll is mischacterizing the ads, creating a strawman that the troll can Then claim are “lies.” They are not. The troll, whom I will no longer address personally because repeated personal insults and slurs, started by claiming that Apple started the advertising seven years ago. That is not the case. The ad series he refers to have been aired less than half that time.
He then asserts the ads claim things they have never said and then compounds his falsehoods when he trots out false “factoids”, made up out of whole cloth, to knock down his own mischacterizations. Buying into his arguments and debating him, disproving his assertions and exposing his fictions will gain you nothing because he will ignore your documented rebuttal and just move on with more fabricated strawmen and fictional factoids.
He’s been kicking them from one side of my monitor to the other for about a week. It’s like watching someone own all the bots in Crysis on the hardest setting.
What the heck has that got to do with Windos NT Server and Windows NT desktop having different feartures?
Now why don't you READ my post that you were supposed to be replying to eh. This is what I posted:
"NT Server has a heck of a lot more features, that are essential for any server operating system, that NT desktops simply don't have."
Your link has nothing to do with what I posted. This has though:
Differences between NT workstation and NT server:
NT 4 Workstation: Memory Minimum 12 MB RAM Recommended 16+ MB RAM
NT 4 Server: Minimum 16 MB RAM Recommended 32+ MB RAM
NT 4 Workstation: Number of Processors Supported: 2
NT 4 Server: 32
NT 4 workstation: Fault Tolerance: None
NT 4 Server: Mirroring, Duplexing, RAID 5
NT 4 Workstation: Number of Inbound Dial-in Connections: 1
NT 4 Server : 256
NT 4 Workstation :File & Print Serving Peer (limited - see license)
NT 4 Server: Yes - requires Client Access Licenses
NT 4 Worskation: HTTP, Gopher, FTP Serving Peer: (limited - see license)
NT 4 Server: Yes - Internet Information Server
DNS
NT 4 Workstation : NO
NT 4 Server Yes
DHCP Server
NT 4 Workstation: No
NT 4 Server : Yes
WINS Server
NT 4 Workstation: No
NT 4 Server : Yes
Etc etc.
The two operatiing systems have different feature sets, which is exactly the point I have been making, which you continue to ignore and post links which have nothing to do with anything.
NT Server has DHCP Server, WINS Server, DNS Server which are all NOT in NT workstation. Thats why its a SERVER operating system. Get it?
And you call me clueless?
What does that make you?
Heh - yeah...gonna have to bookmark this one...
No, he has only been insulting to fellow freepers, calling names and making false attributions, lying, misrepresenting opponents' statements, refusing to answer direct questions, and ignoring documented evidence that rebut his assertions and proves them false. He is a troll who uses the same debate techniques that the leftists use: strawmen, ad hominem, and lies. He owns nothing except disdain.
If Vista came from XP, through Win2003, it still came from XP, and it's still the next desktop operating system after XP. If you are going to Huntsville, Alabama from New York, and your plane stops over at Philadelphia, and you spend the night there, then travel to Huntsville the next day, your journey is till from New York to Huntsville, albeit through Philly.
“Then I guess you disagree with the Vista project lead Jim Allchin. That was his quote. I think I know who to believe, and it's not you”
I wouldn't worry take quotes like that too seriously if I were you.
As it happens, I read a book about 10 years ago, by by G. Pascal Zachary, called “Show-stopper!The Breakneck Race to Create Windows NT and the Next Generation at Microsoft”. The chief architect, a guy called David Cutler, who Microsoft had poached from DEC, said much worse things than Jim Allchin ever did, screamed about things falling apart, and getting out of control and what not. Only difference is, he used more colorful language, threatened on occasion to use the lawn mower on some of his people's butt(after turning their butt into grass of course) and was a pretty rude, aggressive fellow. They still get the job done in the end, after all the ups and downs. These kinds of projects by their nature are stressful on everyone, and inevitably develop myriad problems, lost tempers, hurt feeling, heck even mental breakdowns. Nothing new about any of that.
Nice backpedaling. This after your incredulity that a desktop OS could be built off of a server OS and vice-versa. The problem here is that you reached into an area you don't know about, code lineage, while your knowledge is about how Windows versions were marketed. Still, it was not "re-written" from XP to Vista. A few portions of it were rewritten, like the networking, printing and audio subsystems, but the rest is new features and modifications to the 2003 code.
I wouldn't worry take quotes like that too seriously if I were you.
Did you even read the article? Vista development was going down in flames. It probably wouldn't have even hit the market had they not done a complete reset and changed the development model so much that Bill Gates was worried at the magnitude of the change.
Productive Vista development really started in 2004. They were able scavenge some bits of features from before that, but the productive development time was no more than three years.
Back to the point, Vista development didn't take six years because it was such a big job, it took six years because Microsoft wasted three years using a development model that couldn't handle a project like Vista.
You should be happy. The main reason Windows 7 came out so well was because of the lessons learned from the disaster that was Vista development.
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.