Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 27th May 2010 11:32 UTC
Apple It's rumour time! Analyst Trip Chowdhry, with Global Equities Research, is claiming that Microsoft has been allotted seven minutes during Steve Jobs' WWDC keynote speech. Supposedly, the Redmond giant will unveil that developers will be able to write native iPhone, iPad, and Mac applications using Visual Studio 2010 on Windows. As crazy as this sounds, this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who can move beyond the outdated Apple vs. Microsoft attitude.
Thread beginning with comment 426880
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Pardon?
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 27th May 2010 16:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Pardon?"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

"Not being religious means they have no qualms about supporting competing products, as long as there's something in it for Microsoft. Microsoft have shown time and time again that as long as it it makes sense money-wise, they'll do pretty much whatever.

For instance, that's why they're putting so much effort into making it easy to run an open source server stack on Windows (as opposed to using all-Microsoft tools). Microsoft knows that people want those open source tools, so they'll help getting them to run optimally on Windows - even when they have their own, competing products.

That's what I mean by not being religious. I thought that was pretty obvious.

While I agreed with your original article and found x comments to be bordering on trolling, I do not agree with your reply:
-> Microsoft run plenty of their platforms at a loss (XBox, online portals, etc) to drive people away from competing products that are both popular and profitable.
-> They undercut Linux (a "free" OS) on netbooks to drive people towards Windows.

Microsoft are like the Tesco / Wallmart of IT - they'll constantly undercut the competition and happily run entire departments at a loss until they own the local market and then they'll hike the prices right up.

So all this "non-religious" cross-development is nothing more than selling Kellogs Cornflakes in store knowing that most consumers will inevitably end up buying the supermarkets own brand. Thus it's not offering customers choice or "what they want" - it's just a baited hook to lure more customers in before trapping them/us into Microsofts own platforms.
"

...and thus, making money. Which is the bloody point.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Pardon?
by flynn on Thu 27th May 2010 17:23 in reply to "RE[3]: Pardon?"
flynn Member since:
2009-03-19

...and thus, making money. Which is the bloody point.

I feel your pain Thom. It seem some people are not capable of understanding the simple concept of a 'loss leader'. I'm not sure what part of a short term loss to facilitate long term gain is so difficult for people to comprehend.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Pardon?
by Laurence on Thu 27th May 2010 18:20 in reply to "RE[4]: Pardon?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


I feel your pain Thom. It seem some people are not capable of understanding the simple concept of a 'loss leader'. I'm not sure what part of a short term loss to facilitate long term gain is so difficult for people to comprehend.

I get that point.

However Thom was also arguing that Microsoft aren't religious about their platform.

So if you're talking long term, then they are religious about their platform as they run services at a loss to promote their platforms (thus his point about MS not being religious is false).

However if you're talking short term, then Thom's point about them not being religious is true, however his point about them going where the money is, is false.

Thus his two points can't coexist.


That said, personally I think the problem here isn't that we disagree with each others points, but rather we're explaining exactly the same points but so badly that they sound contradictory (case in point, yourself stating that some people can't understand "loss leader" when I explained exactly that principle in my post which you and Thom were replying to).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Pardon?
by Laurence on Thu 27th May 2010 18:25 in reply to "RE[3]: Pardon?"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

...and thus, making money. Which is the bloody point.

"and thus making money for their own platform" - which shows they're religious about their own platform.


As I said before - I don't disagree with your original article. However you seem to switch between long term strategy and short term observation when making your points but if you look at Microsoft in either just the short term game or just the long term game, your points about MSs adoption of other platforms and making money don't coexist.

I explain this better here though:
http://www.osnews.com/permalink?426895

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Pardon?
by segedunum on Fri 28th May 2010 00:50 in reply to "RE[3]: Pardon?"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

...and thus, making money. Which is the bloody point.

As long as it comes from Windows or one of their other new fangled platforms it's OK, otherwise they're not interested. That's why Windows Mobile and the Xbox and other business units have made such huge losses over the years. It's complete stubborness, but fortunately for them they can afford it right now.

You were trying to argue that Microsoft are not religious about their own platforms and products if it means they can make some money. Not so. They've incurred huge losses for their 'evangelism' because they want to make money on only their own terms.

Reply Parent Score: 2