Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 4th Feb 2011 23:33 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Is it really going to happen? Will we see one of the more momentous announcements in the tech world next week? The web's been abuzz about Nokia possibly adopting Windows Phone 7 for a number of handsets, and now even The New York Times has chimed in - at which point it might be time to start taking the rumours seriously.
Thread beginning with comment 461308
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
wirespot
Member since:
2006-06-21

Because no other company ever done this ever at all. There was never online maps before Googlemaps, There was never web mail until gmail, and Myspace never existed ... facebook was totally original.


I did not say that Microsoft is the only company that ever copied or aquired something. I said they can't seem to be able to focus on something else.

Except Macintosh was actually out before Windows 1.0 and the first versions of office were actually for the macintosh ... Lets forget that.


Office for the Mac was a completely separate thing from the Windows version. There's no use comparing the two.

1) The first versions of Office for Mac were part of agreements with Apple. When those agreements fell through the Mac versions were abandoned.
2) The Mac Office team was completely separate from the Windows team. The Mac Office suite was a completely different codebase from the Windows version.
3) MS had issues with Office for Mac being different from the general Mac look and feel, especially in the later versions. It did not go well with Mac users.

9 out of 10 jobs in my Area of the U.K. are either VB/C# with ASP.NET, IIS and SQL Server 2005/2008. Microsoft are doing very well with ASP.NET.


Have you ever heard the saying "a sample of one is poor statistics"? You may live in a peculiar area. From my experience over various areas, you're likely to see at least as many requests for Java, C++, Python, PHP, Perl, Ruby etc. Actual proportions may vary wildly from place to place.

What do you base this one then? Supporting Windows XP for 13 years ... apparently they don't care about their customers at all.


They care about the software makers. It has to do with keeping the mass of software available for Windows working. It has to do with maintaining the monopoly strong.

Software makers are not Microsoft customers, they are developers for the Windows platform. The customers are the ones that buy copies of Windows. Making sure someone buys your product is not the same as taking the extra step of making sure they're satisfied with it. I don't believe Microsoft ever cared for that extra step. "Make them buy it" was always enough for them.

Heard of the Kinect then?


Yes. The latest development in human interfaces for gaming consoles. A market invented and established by the Nintendo Wii.

There's a difference between taking something already invented and making it better, and inventing something ground breaking. It takes genius to take those playing cubes that everyone is polishing but basically stacking in the same old way and make something completely new out of them. It's not in Microsoft's core philosophy to go for that spark of genius. It doesn't cultivate that sort of talent, it never has.

It can be argued that Bill Gates had it when he made the initial moves that established Microsoft for what it is today, but he never cultivated it. Microsoft is not about "make something new", it's about "see, want, get, polish" applied to stuff that's already there.

The strategy is quite obvious ... Get devs working with .NET, get companies using .NET and it will ensure the survival of their platforms.


Not exactly visionary, is it. Living is not just about surviving.

Like with the Xbox ??? Oh wait it tops the sales charts in the U.K. in 2010 ...


Yes, after a decade of selling the Xbox as loss leader... to a point that stretches the definition of the term. May I point out that Nintendo makes a profit on every Wii sold?

Like I said, Microsoft will hang in there, somehow, even if they have to throw money at it to make it stick. But it's not their market in any sense. They entered it by force, they are staying in it for as long as they're willing to lose money, they haven't managed to eliminate any of the major competitors.

Even assuming your definition of "fail" is cutting them some slack, there's no way you can call this success.

Stop talking utter freetard bollox.


You're the only one looking like the retard/fanboy, when resorting to name calling. Stick to making your points and we'll all be better off.

And in case you forgot what this discussion is about, I'm not attacking Microsoft. I'm trying to explain why Nokia would have little reason to get involved with them.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

A market invented and established by the Nintendo Wii.


Uh, not exactly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_Toy

Reply Parent Score: 1

wirespot Member since:
2006-06-21



And Dreameye etc. I'm sure there were plenty of previous attempts. There were MP3 players before the iPod, natural interfaces before the Wii etc. Why did they stand out? That's the question. IMHO, they brought much more than just a cool gadget to the table.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I did not say that Microsoft is the only company that ever copied or aquired something. I said they can't seem to be able to focus on something else.


MySpace was well out before Facebook, but Facebook did the social networking thing better, remember those unreadable profiles.




Have you ever heard the saying "a sample of one is poor statistics"? You may live in a peculiar area. From my experience over various areas, you're likely to see at least as many requests for Java, C++, Python, PHP, Perl, Ruby etc. Actual proportions may vary wildly from place to place.


Exactly so you can't just say that they have totally failed when it is doing well in England, just look at reed.co.uk. It shifts every few years ... suddenly loads of PHP, MySQL jobs then Loads of .NET jobs.

You are making assumptions with no basis ... yes most of the worlds servers run a LAMP stack or similar ... but how many of those are very small scale websites with a shopping cart and a few other bits and pieces I wonder. Statistics are meaningless without any context ... as we have both so well pointed out.

If there were jobs at the time using a LAMP stack when I left uni I would probably be doing that now. Thank God I am now because I am currently working on a website in PHP in my spare time and it sucks compared to .NET.

They care about the software makers. It has to do with keeping the mass of software available for Windows working. It has to do with maintaining the monopoly strong.


Oh so software makers are not customers now?

Software makers are not Microsoft customers, they are developers for the Windows platform. The customers are the ones that buy copies of Windows. Making sure someone buys your product is not the same as taking the extra step of making sure they're satisfied with it. I don't believe Microsoft ever cared for that extra step. "Make them buy it" was always enough for them.


You obviously have not used Windows 7, Basically makes everything else look crap (says the man with a iMac on his desk). I am extremely satisfied with Windows 7, growth rate of Windows 7 installs is staggering, obviously at some point they must have pleased quite a few people after the relatively poor sales of Windows Vista, It can't just all be OEMs.

Yes. The latest development in human interfaces for gaming consoles. A market invented and established by the Nintendo Wii.

There's a difference between taking something already invented and making it better, and inventing something ground breaking. It takes genius to take those playing cubes that everyone is polishing but basically stacking in the same old way and make something completely new out of them. It's not in Microsoft's core philosophy to go for that spark of genius. It doesn't cultivate that sort of talent, it never has.

It can be argued that Bill Gates had it when he made the initial moves that established Microsoft for what it is today, but he never cultivated it. Microsoft is not about "make something new", it's about "see, want, get, polish" applied to stuff that's already there.


You making a hell of a lots of assumptions based on nothing, other businesses that have showed if you take a poorly implemented "good idea" and make it better you can make a lot of cash money ... things like facebook, iPod, google maps are a few I can just think off the of my head. Innovation isn't about inventing something new, it is about taking something that is could be awesome and is currently broken in some way and fixing it.

Not exactly visionary, is it. Living is not just about surviving


You knew exactly what I meant. That Microsoft are cultivating a rich developer environment where skills can be transferred easily.

Yes, after a decade of selling the Xbox as loss leader... to a point that stretches the definition of the term. May I point out that Nintendo makes a profit on every Wii sold?


Everyone except Nintendo has sold at a loss, they make the money back in selling Games ... Sega did this since the days of the master system, it is nothing new.
Sony has been doing it with the playstation for 15 years and I they made a tidy profit with the Playstation and Playstation 2.

Like I said, Microsoft will hang in there, somehow, even if they have to throw money at it to make it stick. But it's not their market in any sense. They entered it by force, they are staying in it for as long as they're willing to lose money, they haven't managed to eliminate any of the major competitors.


I am sure that Microsoft are probably raking the cash back in with the Arcade game, Xbox Live and all the large games that comes out like Halo Reach, Call of Duty Black Ops, Peripherals like the Kinect and the Controllers .... it called a business plan.

Even assuming your definition of "fail" is cutting them some slack, there's no way you can call this success.


Selling more than the competition is apparently failing, right.....

Lets not forget that people buy games, Xbox live accounts, Xbox Arcade Games, Controllers and other peripherals ... which I am sure Microsoft make quite a bit of cash on (the controller itself is £50 here while a new console is £215 ... they are losing on the console and making money on peripherals).

You're the only one looking like the retard/fanboy, when resorting to name calling. Stick to making your points and we'll all be better off.


You used the classic "extend, embrace, extinguish" crap I hear from Linux fanboys soooooo many times, maybe you should keep to the facts instead of rattling off well known phrases that are used by what some of use know as "freetards"

have a look here http://tmrepository.com/trademarks/

What else I am supposed to think when I see warning signs just like these?

And in case you forgot what this discussion is about, I'm not attacking Microsoft. I'm trying to explain why Nokia would have little reason to get involved with them.


Certainly sounded like attacking Microsoft, which is what happens on OSNews pretty much all the time ... Which pretty much what you were doing. Had it occured to you that Nokia are developing not only Meego, but also Qt, this is probably expensive. Windows Phone 7 is already built ... buying licenses for this may well be a hell of a lot cheaper than running two large software development projects?

Reply Parent Score: 2

wirespot Member since:
2006-06-21

Exactly so you can't just say that they have totally failed when it is doing well in England[...]


I didn't. I'm saying they play a game of "me too" and that it's not a recipe for overwhelming success.

Oh so software makers are not customers now?


No, not in this context. They are developers.

You obviously have not used Windows 7, Basically makes everything else look crap (says the man with a iMac on his desk). I am extremely satisfied with Windows 7, growth rate of Windows 7 installs is staggering, obviously at some point they must have pleased quite a few people after the relatively poor sales of Windows Vista, It can't just all be OEMs.


You would still use Windows 7 no matter how it looked. It's nice that you happen to like it, but irrelevant.

That's not exactly customer satisfaction at its finest.

[...]things like facebook, iPod, google maps are a few I can just think off the of my head. Innovation isn't about inventing something new, it is about taking something that is could be awesome and is currently broken in some way and fixing it.


Careful, you're talking about the leaders of their respective fields.

But OK, so you're saying that absolute game-changers aren't relevant, that fixing things is good enough. Give me an example involving Microsoft, then. A market where Microsoft took something broken, fixed it, and absolutely owned as a direct result. It cannot be about Windows or Office, and it cannot be a "market" within one of these monopolies (eg. .NET). And I'm afraid I will not accept the gaming console market as proof either.

That Microsoft are cultivating a rich developer environment where skills can be transferred easily.


There's nothing innovative about keeping your developers happy, it's common sense.

Everyone except Nintendo has sold at a loss, they make the money back in selling Games ...


Then why can't Microsoft do that too? Have the others needed a decade as well?

Anybody can enter and stay in a market by throwing money at it. The trick is to make useful products at a profit. To do that you need some amount of empathy for your customers. And to absolutely own the market you need to make something outstanding.

Selling more than the competition is apparently failing, right.....


When you sell at a loss each item you sell is actually bad for you. You want to offset the loss in some other manner. They haven't been able to.

they are losing on the console and making money on peripherals


No, they're not. The losses are for the entire Xbox division, they're overall figures.

I admit I don't have information more recent than summer 2010. If you do please share.

You used the classic "extend, embrace, extinguish" crap I hear from Linux fanboys soooooo many times, maybe you should keep to the facts instead of rattling off well known phrases that are used by what some of use know as "freetards"


«"Embrace, extend and extinguish," also known as "Embrace, extend and exterminate," is a phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice found was used internally by Microsoft to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to disadvantage its competitors.»

From here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

Had it occured to you that Nokia are developing not only Meego, but also Qt, this is probably expensive. Windows Phone 7 is already built ... buying licenses for this may well be a hell of a lot cheaper than running two large software development projects?


Qt for mobile and MeeGo were already well on their way and in their finishing stages when WP7 came out. I don't see how suddenly doing a fundamental switch late in a project can be good for it. Not unless it's absolute crap and you decide to cut your losses. How crap is MeeGo remains to be seen.

It's true that adopting an existing OS saves you from investing into your own R&D. But it puts you at the mercy of the OS maker. All OEMs have learned that the hard way in Windows' glory days. That's the angle that Google is exploiting by making Android free and open. That's why Apple and Samsung and Nokia and RIM etc. are making their own OS.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Nth_Man Member since:
2010-05-16

> I am sure that Microsoft are probably raking the cash back
How can somebody say that he's sure... when he makes clear that he really doesn't know?

> freetard
Next time you insult you might get your insult back.

Reply Parent Score: 1