If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Network World)   Ballmer laughs off the iPhone (5 years ago)   (networkworld.com) divider line 70
    More: Amusing, iPhone, Ballmer  
•       •       •

3668 clicks; posted to Geek » on 27 Jun 2012 at 11:12 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



70 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-27 04:29:46 PM

mccallcl: Abe Vigoda's Ghost:
I don't ever see any smart phone replacing computers.

In ten years, people will wonder why anyone ever put up with desktop computers. If you think about it, they are pretty ridiculous. Like a sewing machine, but for information!


They won't replace PCs, but they will certainly supplant them.

The iPhone was the first handheld device in the mass market that could take the place of a PC for low-impact
routine tasks like checking email, reading prepared documents, playing media or browsing the web. And for a
large number of people, that's all they ever needed a computer for, and when Apple introduced the iPad that
trend only intensified.

People who actually generate content will still need a PC, but most people are content consumers, and the
current crop of smartphones and tablets are optimized for content consumption.
 
2012-06-27 04:52:14 PM

asmodeus224: The world's infrastructure is built in to run on oil...hardware that cannot be easily or cheaply adjusted overnight. Cars, trains, planes etc...oil oil oil. Software (MS products) can be replace overnight with little cost. Your analogy is fail


No, the analogy isn't fail. It was a counterexample, not an analogy. It did what it was supposed to do, which was show that the claim to which it was a response was overly broad.
 
2012-06-27 04:57:25 PM

Great_Milenko: KFBR392: /Sure, in hindsight it looks stupid...at the time it was a valid statement, especially coming from the CEO of competing company.

No, it was still a stupid statement. By the time Apple introduced the iPhone, their fortunes has changed enough to show that price wasn't an obstacle for them.


Do you understand why you're 100% wrong? Price does matter. It always matters...If price didn't matter, they would never have had to cut the price within the first 3 months. They'd still be selling $600 iphones...but they aren't. No one is.

That price cut (and one that quick) signals one of two things:

1) Steve jobs is giant dick-bag that wanted to screw over his most loyal fans but having them pay an extra $200 for the phone...and he was planning to drop the price in 3 months.

or 2) Sales were drying up, and they needed to move some product...
 
2012-06-27 04:58:42 PM
Rev. Skarekroe
Well, that's kind of Ballmer's job.

Steve Ballmer's job is to make Microsoft look like it is being helmed by someone who walks around all day with his head up his ass and has no taste or foresight even for the relatively obvious?
 
2012-06-27 05:41:36 PM
Ballmer is the only reason Apple exists in its present form today. That coont is blight. MSFT would have been better with a cucumber at the helm.
 
2012-06-27 06:42:30 PM

Bullseyed: BullBearMS: Hey now, he just paid 1.2 billion dollars to purchase yet another failing social network.

Previously, he paid 8.6 billion dollars to purchase Skype despite the fact that Microsoft's Windows Live Messenger already offered a voice chat and video chat.

The man's a genius!

Is there a Windows Live Messenger app on both iOS and Android?

Sounds like you don't know anything about business.


Because clearly after you have gone through the process of developing your own protocols and writing your own code for VOIP and video chat and then developing the back end server functions to support those functions within your applications, the best possible way to get phone apps developed is to pay 8.6 Billion dollars for a company who does the same things you have already done.

You couldn't possibly hire programers to write phone apps for one penny less than 8.6 Billion dollars!

Don't ever breed.
 
2012-06-27 08:44:37 PM
You definitely want a fat, sweaty yelling ape in charge of your tech company. How could that possibly go wrong?
 
2012-06-27 11:42:58 PM

markie_farkie: Bullseyed: Typical Apple user reinventing history. The original iPhone was a 2G phone. It wasn't "connected" it wasn't a "desktop replacement" and "apps" weren't a big deal.

You missed the point of my post, too. I pointed out that over time, the iPhone has become more of a desktop replacement for many things.

The original iPhone, yes, was 2G but it was STILL connected in ways that most other competitors of that era weren't. You could surf real websites on it, not those shiatty WAP pages.

The app store only came later on because the platform was completely new, and developers had to get hands-on time to create apps.

Ballmer has completely blown it on the entire vision department. It'll be 10 years before they recover from his short-sightedness, if at all.


wow, Google bought Android Inc. in 2005 ... what a startling contrast to Ballmer's lack of insight. i wonder how far along the iPhone's development was in 05?
 
2012-06-28 12:35:15 AM

American Decency Association: wow, Google bought Android Inc. in 2005 ... what a startling contrast to Ballmer's lack of insight. i wonder how far along the iPhone's development was in 05?


"This is a day I've been looking forward to for two-and-a-half years." said at the first iPhone unveiling on Jan 9 2007, so mid 2004. First iPhone sold in June 2007. First commercially available Android phone was the HTC Dream in October 2008. Google's Nexus One came out in 2010.
 
2012-06-28 03:49:41 AM

Oakenshield:

Nailed it. Publicly dismissing it is one thing. Actually dismissing it is complete lack of Vision. And Purpose.


Which has been repeated time and time again whilst he's been CEO. MP3 players, consumer smartphones and tablets. You can see it happening again with Windows 8 as well, even on Fark I've had people specifically tell me that Windows 8 RT is running their x86 apps. So all hell is about to let loose on that front when consumers start buying the devices.

He is a very bad CEO.
 
2012-06-28 07:10:52 AM

Vaneshi: You can see it happening again with Windows 8 as well, even on Fark I've had people specifically tell me that Windows 8 RT is running their x86 apps.


I think as long as office works on RT (and the same way it works on x86), it'll all work out as most uneducated consumers expect.

I'm baffled that they don't allow joining RT to a domain - seems they're passing up an opportunity to really appeal to the enterprise. But it would make sense if they just need more time to get that aspect of the operating environment working. I definitely wouldn't significantly delay first shipment for that.
 
2012-06-28 08:58:14 AM

Babwa Wawa:
I'm baffled that they don't allow joining RT to a domain - seems they're passing up an opportunity to really appeal to the enterprise. But it would make sense if they just need more time to get that aspect of the operating environment working. I definitely wouldn't significantly delay first shipment for that.


Yep. It should be just something Microsoft do on their OS platforms, even if it's buried under 5 menu layers: "Join Domain". I mean... didn't they write the server software as well?
 
2012-06-28 09:41:15 AM

Babwa Wawa: I'm baffled that they don't allow joining RT to a domain - seems they're passing up an opportunity to really appeal to the enterprise. But it would make sense if they just need more time to get that aspect of the operating environment working. I definitely wouldn't significantly delay first shipment for that.


Saw a ZDnet article on that. MS is wooing business users with the prospect of end users having RT-based devices, and in corporate environments, if the user needs to run some homegrown X86 app, that would be facilitated by some Citrix-like implementation, where the app is hosted on Server 2012 farms and just the screens pass back.

It's thin client all over again.
 
2012-06-28 09:51:46 AM

Vaneshi: Yep. It should be just something Microsoft do on their OS platforms, even if it's buried under 5 menu layers: "Join Domain". I mean... didn't they write the server software as well?


I'd imagine the domain client code is not trivial, and evidently developing for RT is not just a matter of recompiling on ARM. Not all of Win32 is available. I imagine that they want to do this, they just can't do it in time for a 2012 release.

markie_farkie: Saw a ZDnet article on that. MS is wooing business users with the prospect of end users having RT-based devices, and in corporate environments, if the user needs to run some homegrown X86 app, that would be facilitated by some Citrix-like implementation, where the app is hosted on Server 2012 farms and just the screens pass back.


I have to imagine that that's a band-aid. Hosted desktops are here to stay, for sure, but until you have a domain-enabled tablet, you don't get single sign-on, offline access, etc, etc.
 
2012-06-28 01:13:52 PM

theurge14: American Decency Association: wow, Google bought Android Inc. in 2005 ... what a startling contrast to Ballmer's lack of insight. i wonder how far along the iPhone's development was in 05?

"This is a day I've been looking forward to for two-and-a-half years." said at the first iPhone unveiling on Jan 9 2007, so mid 2004. First iPhone sold in June 2007. First commercially available Android phone was the HTC Dream in October 2008. Google's Nexus One came out in 2010.


well thank you ... 3 years from inspiration to delivery then.

i wonder if/when RIM realised what they need to do?

why do i care any more. our Exchange will finally be upgraded in a few weeks and i can learn to stop throwing inanimate objects at walls
 
2012-06-28 05:29:21 PM

SuburbanCowboy: To be fair, the Zune was a way better mp3 player than the ipod. They just did a horrible job marketing it. Same deal with Windows phone 7.


Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket.
 
2012-06-29 02:16:02 AM

Babwa Wawa:
I'd imagine the domain client code is not trivial, and evidently developing for RT is not just a matter of recompiling on ARM. Not all of Win32 is available. I imagine that they want to do this, they just can't do it in time for a 2012 release.


Which takes us right back to: The reason RT exists is?

It can't join domains, it can't run x86 code and on the consumer side of things the iPad and Android tablets have the market pretty much sewn up. It's Zune all over again; 3 - 4 years too late.
 
2012-06-29 08:22:14 AM

Vaneshi: It can't join domains, it can't run x86 code and on the consumer side of things the iPad and Android tablets have the market pretty much sewn up. It's Zune all over again; 3 - 4 years too late.


See, I disagree there. I have a nice Android tablet. It gets used, but barely. Android tabs are a farking gaming platform. There's no decent productivity software out there for it.

I bought it because I hoped there might be some short trips where I could bring that and leave the laptop home - maybe have something I don't have to take out of my bag for TSA screening. But the sad fact is that it Docs to Go and QuickOffice are junk. Even Touchdown has a terrible UI. So the tab stays home and my kids use it for Cut the Rope, primarily.

Apple realizes this, and iWork is coming along nicely. Rumor has it that MS is developing Office for the iPad. Obviously, WinRT is going to have a version of Office. If it can do complex spreadsheets, I'll pull the trigger. But not for more than $400.

By not taking productivity apps seriously (there's no native ActiveSync client? really?), Google is leaving a serious foothold up for grabs.
 
2012-06-29 08:36:58 AM

Vaneshi: The reason RT exists is?


Intel just isn't power efficient enough yet to make the sorts of extremely thin, light devices with an all day battery life that people have become accustomed to.

For that, you need CPU's as power efficient as ARM. As usual, Intel is saying that next years CPU version will fix everything.
 
2012-06-29 06:43:33 PM

Vaneshi: The reason RT exists is?


If the RT Surface Tab has comparable form factor, battery life, instant on/off, etc, like an iPad, but can also run a full version of Microsoft Office (with Word, PowerPoint, etc), and a version of Internet Explorer that can view any website (even the flash ones) and let you very easily save files to a file system for editing/viewing later, and the keyboard cover works well, then even if it can't run x86 code, it'd still be addressing a number of the key productivity shortcomings of the iPad.
 
Displayed 20 of 70 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report