Linked by David Adams on Sat 31st Jul 2010 06:05 UTC, submitted by fran
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Microsoft had its annual financial analyst meeting on Thursday, and Steve Ballmer answered questions about what the company's answer to the iPad was going to be, and whether Windows Phone 7 was going to be a part of that product strategy. He said, "We're coming . . . We're coming full guns. The operating system is called Windows." Ballmer and Microsoft so don't get it. I can't believe Steve Ballmer is making me feel sorry for Microsoft.
Thread beginning with comment 434939
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: The touch revolution
by jtfolden on Sat 31st Jul 2010 19:30 UTC in reply to "RE: The touch revolution"
jtfolden
Member since:
2005-08-12

The original iphone with out cut/paste, multi tasking, or third party development was half baked. Apple's history of product releases always starts off with a half baked version. OSx 10.0 was maybe even quarter baked. Ipod was half baked (firewire, macs only). Itunes was half baked ( no music store).


It's a bit silly to look back in hindsight and see "missing pieces" only due to their importance today.

When iTunes was initially released there were NO online mainstream music stores, nor were record companies pushing for such.

The iPod was originally intended for Mac users only, the fact it didn't work out of the box on Windows was irrelevant.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: The touch revolution
by David on Sun 1st Aug 2010 00:11 in reply to "RE[2]: The touch revolution"
David Member since:
1997-10-01

You have a point, but I think it was pretty clear to users of both OSX 10.0 and iPhoneOS 1.0 that the products were "half baked," that is to say, they were missing key features or functionality, or those features were rough, and we all expected them to be improved in future versions.

The users of these products generally appreciated them for what they were, while waiting expectantly for the future revisions that we knew would come. The fact that every subsequent version of OSX and iOS have been better and faster is one of the reasons why Apple fanboys get so excited about new releases and upgrades. During the Jobs 2.0 era, Apple has a great track record of taking a promising OS and making it better with each revision.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: The touch revolution
by jtfolden on Sun 1st Aug 2010 00:26 in reply to "RE[3]: The touch revolution"
jtfolden Member since:
2005-08-12

You have a point, but I think it was pretty clear to users of both OSX 10.0 and iPhoneOS 1.0 that the products were "half baked," that is to say, they were missing key features or functionality, or those features were rough, and we all expected them to be improved in future versions.


I actually had very little exposure to the original iPhone release so can't comment on that.

Certainly OS X 10.0 had issues, I think just about everyone could agree. Of course, Apple was pretty upfront about this in the case of OS X. They didn't even bundle it as the default OS on their systems until a later version was released. However, I think it was important to have that release out at the time.

Although, from 10.1 onwards it did what I needed it to do. It's improved since then, but this is the natural course of software development (except when it's done wrong, obviously (see Vista).

Reply Parent Score: 1

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

It's a bit silly to look back in hindsight and see "missing pieces" only due to their importance today.


I'm not, those were my complaints when they were released. I was looking to buy a mp3 player. Ipod was mac only, so I could not consider buying it.

ITunes was also mac only, and was not as good as music match (IMHO). I was at the time screaming for a legal way to buy digital audio on the net. I did forsee the future of the integration and decried its non-existence. Early versions of Music Match were loosely integrated with mp3.com's free music content.

Os X just sucked. True story: Microsoft audited the api for osx and reported back to Apple that they would be unable to write an office version for it, without substantial improvements. Yes, MS was critical to OSX's succes. 10.0 was as user friendly as the Linux Desktops of the day, while considerably less stable. ( It did rapidly improve at an astonishing rate, but the point stil stands)

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: The touch revolution
by jtfolden on Sun 1st Aug 2010 03:04 in reply to "RE[3]: The touch revolution"
jtfolden Member since:
2005-08-12

I'm not, those were my complaints when they were released. I was looking to buy a mp3 player. Ipod was mac only, so I could not consider buying it.


That's not an example of something being half-baked, though. Apple wasn't in the habit, at that point, of making hardware or software for Windows users. Just because something doesn't fit your personal needs, that doesn't mean it doesn't work as intended.

ITunes was also mac only, and was not as good as music match (IMHO). I was at the time screaming for a legal way to buy digital audio on the net. I did forsee the future of the integration and decried its non-existence. Early versions of Music Match were loosely integrated with mp3.com's free music content.


Yeah, I remember MM. Hated it. lol Though, I seem to recall early iPods working with MM on Windows.

Os X just sucked. True story: Microsoft audited the api for osx and reported back to Apple that they would be unable to write an office version for it, without substantial improvements. Yes, MS was critical to OSX's succes.


I'm not aware of the story, though Office X was released fairly soon after OS X was released, around 6 months, IIRC.

10.0 was as user friendly as the Linux Desktops of the day, while considerably less stable. ( It did rapidly improve at an astonishing rate, but the point stil stands)


Probably some truth on the latter statement, although the first one sounds like hyperbole to me. The UI and ease of use of OS X 10.0 was perfectly sound, if cosmetically questionable.

Edited 2010-08-01 03:06 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1