Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 26th Mar 2007 22:11 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Microsoft "The word 'intense' was invented for Ballmer, who met with us in a green room that had a paper sign with his name taped to the door. While he was at first warm and engaging, a question about security features shifted his mood. His eyes, soft when he smiles, grew dark. The usually boisterous Ballmer became unexpectedly quiet and soon exited the room without saying goodbye. Still, he had a lot to say to SmartMoney senior writer Dyan Machan before he did."
Permalink for comment 224975
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: What a dweeb!
by Umbra on Tue 27th Mar 2007 12:17 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: What a dweeb!"
Umbra
Member since:
2006-03-06

I'm not sure this is the best way to see that.

Well, do you have at better view to present?

By 2012 Apple will be bigger than Microsoft in revenue, but far behind in traditionally and (how stupidly) measured "market shares". One can see how utterly foolish it would have been for Apple to go the Microsoft route, licensing Mac OS X to trillion PC producers and Paul, Peter & Joe-garage. Revenue form this model would have been like a drop in the ocean compared with todays Apple growth potential and business model (it's the Mac that is the product, not Mac OS X)


For example, do you know which is second most-used OS? Pirated Windows. And that counts like 20-30% market share (in some regions, even 60-70%) that is pirated Windows has x10 market share than Apple itself has now. If Microsoft manages to recover a tiny fraction of these lost revenues, it will get far more money than Apple do with OS X.

Well, pirate-market-share does not do much good for Microsoft as a company. However Mac OS X is not a Product! This is the most fundamental difference between these two companies. Microsoft Windows is a Product. Mac OS X is not. It is The Macintosh that is the Apple Product. And here it is Apple that controls everything. Every details, every look, every marketing initiative. If Apple think the Mac should have a face lift in appearance & look, Apple will do just that. The rival, Microsoft, does not have this control. Today the personal computer is moving into peoples expensive fully decorated living rooms, so it better look good! No more PSC's hidden away in cellars and behind closed doors.

Todays security- and OS-maintainance problems are just baby food compared with security problems of the future. Microsoft does not compete here, because they are not in control of the products which they are set to control = the consumers personal computer. They just deliver a component, the PC OS.

Microsoft has now exploited it's market to a 95% extent on todays market size. But Apple ? Apple is just warming up! Which company has a greater growth potential ? You can guess!

The problem for "Microsoft of the future" is that Microsoft´s business model has painted the company into a corner. Microsoft can't go into hardware. They can't go the Apple route. At least not without a declaration of war from zillion so called "pc-partners" and 100% of the market legislation body. First Microsoft would have to loose some hefty weight, i.e. market shares, before that could happen.



Your are absolutely right about this market share measuring method being plain stupid. It really only measure how many Microsoft-Business-Model-Copies of Microsoft main product are being sold.



Moreover, there wasn't almost any iPod HALO effect over OS X and Intel transition didn't help that much: Apple still holds a little fraction of the market and it won't be easy to get more now that Vista is out.

This is not true.

Reply Parent Score: 1