Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Jun 2012 08:50 UTC
Microsoft The New York Times further fans the flames of the emerging uneasiness between Microsoft and its hardware partners. As the paper reports, Microsoft decided it needed to get into the hardware game (with Surface) after the utter failure of HP's Slate 500 Windows 7 tablet. "Microsoft worked with other hardware partners to devise products that would be competitive with the iPad, but it ran into disagreements over designs and prices. 'Faith had been lost' at Microsoft in its hardware partners, including by Steven Sinofsky, the powerful president of Microsoft's Windows division, according to [a] former Microsoft executive." The biggest news is not Surface itself. It's the changing industry it represents. Microsoft failed to deliver capable smartphone/tablet software, which pissed off OEMs, who, in turn, turned to Android (and webOS for HP) - which in turn pissed off Microsoft, leading to Surface. Had Microsoft gotten its act together sooner, we'd have had far better OEM products.
Thread beginning with comment 524019
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Microsoft's fault?
by zima on Wed 27th Jun 2012 18:42 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Microsoft's fault?"
Member since:

It is possible to differentiate through hardware quality and software stability though.

Until Nokia got Elop'd and fell into software madness, I used to recommend their phones for their sturdiness and the good stability/feature set equilibrium provided by s40 and Symbian for the price.

S40 seems better than ever, and being developed further, under Elop? Symbian similarly, so far... (and while this one supposedly has writing on the wall, it should still be good at least for one typical mobile phone lifetime)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Microsoft's fault?
by Neolander on Thu 28th Jun 2012 07:36 in reply to "RE[4]: Microsoft's fault?"
Neolander Member since:

Oh, I'm pretty sure that Nokia phones are still good, I just don't want to fund their current practices unless all of the alternatives would really horribly suck.

I want Nokia's financial health to go bad enough that they will have to get themselves some common sense, start firing the people who are actually responsible for the current disaster instead of dumping fine employees from the bottom of the hierarchy, and work on some great new thing instead of rehashing the same old stuff and being Microsoft's bitch. Then they can count me as a potential customer again.

Edited 2012-06-28 07:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Microsoft's fault?
by zima on Thu 28th Jun 2012 13:29 in reply to "RE[5]: Microsoft's fault?"
zima Member since:

But wouldn't buying into their product lines that you do like, S40 or Symbian, be propping up the "preferable" Nokia practices? :p

Again, S40 (or even Symbian...) doesn't appear to be merely "still good" - it seems better than ever under Elop, and dynamically developed ( particularly Asha 305 and the like) - in contrast to its relative stagnation for half a decade or so before Elop, when they were really rehashing the same old stuff (and when you were recommending Nokia phones, I guess); when also phones like Samsung Corby, Star or LG Cookie - not only so called "smartphones" - stole the momentum and spotlight, which Nokia has a hard time recovering.

And yeah, if people will just ignore them even when Nokia is getting its act together here and there... Meanwhile, the board and major shareholders apparently want present Nokia practices (whatever the long-term goal is, particularly with smartphone divisions).

BTW those lowly employees, largely in manufacturing - we decided we don't want them in ~Western fabs, by refusing to pay more for something similar or expecting the same price as for consumer toys manufactured in East Asian factories (hence pushing profit margins, valuations, and so on down).
Also, the lay-offs were announced together with news of some managerial shake-up ( ), but that didn't seem to be reported...

Reply Parent Score: 2