Posts Tagged ‘steve ballmer’

Microsoft: Hardware Vendors Be Ready for 7

This week is Microsoft’s WinHEC conference. The conference is aimed at hardware manufacturers to help them develop the best hardware and drivers for the Windows platform. According to APC Magazine, Microsoft is urging hardware makers to be more prepared for Windows 7 than they were for Vista. Microsoft appears to have learned their lesson that poor cooperation from hardware makers can really mess things up for them. Microsoft doesn’t want the assault it took when Vista was launched for the release of Windows 7.

This type of attitude from Microsoft towards hardware vendors has been showing ever since they started talking publicly about the next release of their Windows operating system. A beta of Windows 7 is promised in early 2009 with a release promised the same year as well. Microsoft stated that there will not be another WinHEC before the release. Since WinHEC is an annual event, that pretty well locks them into sometime before the latter half of Q4.

Microsoft is finally getting a taste for what Linux users have been experiencing for years: bad hardware support. Having to rely upon outside entities for your flagship product to be a success is a dangerous road to walk down. Luckily for Microsoft, they can push their weight around quite a bit with vendors to ensure things are in place and Windows 7 has a nice platform to launch from, but if hardware makers are as prepared for 7 as they were for Vista, they could be in for a lot of trouble. In its early days, Windows really took off because Microsoft made an OS that didn’t have to be prepared with a certain model or brand of computer. Remember that video for just over a month ago on Ballmer laughing at how the Apple didn’t have separate its OS from its device? Now, it seems that Microsoft is not wanting to sleep in the bed it made for itself.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under News, Tech Trends : Comments (0) : Nov 6th, 2008

Ballmer On the Separation of Software and Hardware

In another part of the recent the Churchill Club event I talked about a few days ago, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer talked for a bit on mobile phones and hinted at Microsoft’s strategy on competing with Google.

Well, okay, it’s more than a hint. Microsoft is depending upon being able to license its mobile OS to cell phone manufacturers to be able to beat out competitors Nokia, RIM, and Apple (and Palm if their new Linux-based OS ever arrives) just like it did to beat out IBM, Apple, and others. Using this strategy it was able to accomplish over 90% even now, many years later. I would agree to a certain degree that allowing its OS to mobile phone makers, Microsoft could create a potentially larger market for itself, however I’m not sure that the potential gains are worth the risk.

What makes the desktop market different than the mobile phone market? It’s quite simple: standards. If you give me two different phones from two different manufacturers, chances are the key layout is different, the power cord is different, the screens have different resolutions, and so on. Give me two different PCs from different manufacturers and I don’t necessarily have the same screen resolutions, but I have standards-based peripherals (keyboards, mice), internal components, and even network connection types. Often, on top of the differences in cell phone makers we have phones that have been customized to each provider.

So what benefits do keeping the software locked into a hardware and locked into a provider give us? This too is pretty simple, support and ease of use. The iPhone has been met with a significant amount of criticism since its only available for AT&T and only on the Apple hardware (unless unlocked, of course). But, at the end of the day when I call support because my phone doesn’t work the only questions I have to answer are whether it’s a first or second generation and what size. The developers, support personnel, and end users are never met with surprises. RIM’s Blackberry devices are close, though they have a much wider variety of devices for different types of users.

Why then should Microsoft take this stance and not lock its software to a piece of hardware? For the same reasons it was successful in the PC market. It doesn’t matter if I buy an HP, Dell, Lenovo, or whatever, more than likely it has Windows on it. Sure, nowadays we can buy PCs with Linux (a good move, I think) and occasionally (questionably) OS X, but that’s more of a recent trend in the mainstream market. Having a ton of phones with Windows Mobile on them makes it much easier for Microsoft to get its product in front of end-users. As we learned from the success of Internet Explorer, it doesn’t matter what’s a better product, it’s what comes on the device “out of the box” that most users will use. This also gives them the opportunity to push more users to its search engine and advertising market which really is what it’s all about.

Any company that takes the plunge and licenses its OS on any hardware also takes a risk in compatibility issues. Both Linux vendors and Microsoft have found this out the hard way on the desktop side. Linux has been plagued for years with driver issues since very few manufacturers make drivers for Linux for their hardware. Vista was hit hard with this especially in its first year. Most of the driver issues seem to be disappearing, but Microsoft had a lot of trouble dealing with hardware vendors right away and took a beating from Apple. They apparently have learned their lesson and are hoping to not make the same mistake again on Windows 7.

From either perspective, licensing a mobile OS to a non-standardized marketplace can be a risk. Microsoft has seen some success in the past, of course, but will it eventually win out using the same tactics of its day of old like Ballmer says? It’ll be interesting to see. Microsoft has had recent failures in keeping quality drivers and hardware support in consumers hands and Apple was right on their heels with its hardware-OS bundle and benefited from Vista’s shortcomings.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Filed under Tech Trends : Comments (1) : Sep 29th, 2008

The Real iPhone Killer: Apple?

Ever since the release of the iPhone, other cell phone companies have been trying to catch up. There have been dozens of phones deemed as iPhone killers, but they’ve all been just a regular cell phone with a fancy interface and a touch-screen. There are also smart phones that try to compete, but let’s face it, no other phone has the SDK, sleek interface, and easy one-stop-shop for applications for the phone. Of course, most non-smart phones don’t have the advantage of the open platform. Google has of course released its new phone OS which so far, reports have been somewhat negative towards the phone. It’s very similar and obviously meant to directly compete with the phone.

So, with this head start and momentum in the market, what could possibly stand in the iPhone’s way? The answer is simple: Apple itself. Apple controls what applications can be placed in the App Store on iTunes. While the platform is mostly open, the App Store is the only supported way to install applications. You can of course jail-break the device, but that’s not something I want to get into. Having Apple as the gateway to the App Store is a great way for Apple to achieve some sort of quality of service for the device, thus enhancing the user experience. However, just like every other solution, this has a downside.

Apple reserves the right and has used this right to reject applications submitted to the App Store. Apple has strict guidelines for what applications can be added and as of late, it seems like there’s also a secret check-list. Several well-known applications got rejected recently which caused quite a commotion and some backlash. Recently, rejected developers have revealed that Apple has placed all rejection notices under an NDA so no one can disclose why the application was developed. Even if the applications that are rejected are done so for valid reasons, how are other developers going to avoid the pitfalls that others have fallen in? Just like the famous saying, history is bound to repeat itself, especially if that history is forbidden to be shared. Without clear and concise criticism of applications that get rejected, what serious developer is going to put any time into an application that may or may not be accepted? Heck, even Steve Ballmer knew the secret years ago to extending a platform: developers.

I would imagine that a good majority of developers will follow, but at least one iPhone developer has made a stand already and it’s all over the blogosphere. How long will Apple continue down this path? I’m an Apple fan, but let’s be real here. I’m not sure that even its arch-nemesis Microsoft would get away with this. This closed doors policy is definitely a classic Apple move, but the smart phone industry could be at stake here. What possible future could an “open platform” device have if no one develops for it? When Apple unveiled the new iPhone they claimed that the only thing that could beat the iPhone was the iPhone.. I’m not sure that they meant it quite like this.

Tags: , ,
Filed under Tech Trends : Comments (4) : Sep 24th, 2008