Did you even bother to read my post or did you just jump at keywords to post this drivel? Feel free to find in my post where I said they have a monopoly in tablets. You're seem to be so interested in defending microsoft for some reason that you can't seem to even understan simple english.
Perhaps you're one of those that believes that, all apps that were and will ever be needed, already exist in the app store?
What makes you think I have any use for an app store, by apple, microsoft (who is now copying this concept as well), or any other company?
Administratively, applications need to be handled too, and, it means, administrators who understand the functionality and purposes for those applications.
Well, we agree on that. The point I was making is that far too many MS-windows "administrators" don't understand the software they are using. If microsoft hasn't provided them with a "wizard" to walk them through the process, they are lost.
Perhaps you need to investigate what the heck is required before being so dismissive about what it takes to administer a server system.
LOL. you have no idea what it is that I do for a living, or what kind of systems I've worked with over the past few decades.
Besides, isn't making things as simple as possible what the Apple fanboys keep telling us that Apple accomplishes so nicely. IOW, people who use Apple computers, do so because, they don't have to think, and things come to the intuitively. So, if Microsoft is doing the same, or attempting to do the same, why would it be such a negative when Microsoft does it? Methinks that, you're just exhibiting your hate for anything Microsoft.
Again, you make assumtions about me that you don't have any rational basis for. I'll put this in small words so you can understand it. I do not use OSX. From what little time I've had to become familiar with it, it does not suit the way I work. Similarly, microsoft does not make a product that suits the way I work either. I'm sorry that it appears to bothers you deeply that some people manage to escape the clutches of microsoft and their continued push to embrace, extend, and extinguish competing products. You also conflate two vastly different environments. Desktop systems are a completely different breed than servers that do actual work. Desktop systems need to be simple and hassle free because in general users don't have a clue how to manage them efficiently. Servers, on the other hand, are supposed to be managed by people who understand the technology being deployed, not jsut monkeys that can click "OK" a couple of dozen times and think they're some kind of genious.
When the total system gets to that point, there won't be a need to worry about incompatibilities, since, the system will have become a lot "smarter", and it will be able to recognize differences between the different components and systems and OSes and hardware attached to the network.
Here, you are making an assumption that is simply not in evidence, that microsoft is interested in interoperating with any product they do not sell, unless they are forced to. They broke Kerberos, for pete's sake.
That is one of the directions for the cloud, where, no matter what hardware and/or software is communicating via the network, the network will handle all of them, including systems and hardware and software from all different vendors/manufacturers.
LOL. Yeah, the "cloud" will solve all our problems. I'm sure every company (and individual for that matter) feels perfectly comfortable shipping their confidential and proprietary data into the "cloud".
Perhaps the times have left you behind, and you are in dire need of upgrading your thinking and technology ideas.
Nope. I've just been involved in rather complex mission-critical data and applications that need security, reduncancy (localized as well as geographic), and availability. These are not generally systems you can build by clicking on a few dialogue boxes, and they take a bit more planning than saying "hey, the default options and file locations will be just fine".
Then, basically, if you don’t really have a dog in the fight, you were just arguing for arguments sake, and to not be left out of the conversation?
My point is still true, that, Microsoft might start out as the underdog, and even an non-player in a tech arena, but, when necessary and important to their survival, they’ll be persistent to the point of taking huge losses in the beginning. Apple and Google are the same, but, to a lesser extent. They’re not as big risk-takers and Microsoft has been in their history.
And, you are the one misunderstanding the total context of my post, especially in regards to my comments about Microsoft’s tablet. I was using the MS tablet as an example of where MS does not have a presence, but, they could become a big player or the biggest in that area; just like they did with OSes and Office software, and the game console business.
Now, I don’t know what you do exactly, and I don’t even care. My comments were just in response to what you were saying, or appeared to be saying.
Myself, I too understand what it means to administer large server systems, especially when I came from platform that basically defined what a server is. Servers vs client or requester, it didn’t matter to me, since, I was involved with all of them, with IBM systems, and with Tandem computers. Those are the original client/server paradigms. And, I know what running them entails. I was not an administrator per se, but, I supervised the people managing those systems, while also being responsible for the systems programming, and the applications development/programming. The point is not to brag; it’s to let you know that, I, very likely, also know what I’m talking about.
What I do, still, is in the development arena, so, for me, I don’t care about the platform wars, or about the fanatical defenses that people put up for their preferred gadgets and preferred companies. I find that to be utterly stupid. What I do, is platform independent, and, the more platforms and OSes and devices out there, the more people that might encounter what I’m developing.