M$ Verging on Irrelevance

M$ is verging on irrelevance according to a recent survey. Asked early in 2011 what consumers thought of that other OS on a tablet, 45% were interested. Now, the number is 25%. At that rate of decline, interest will be ~10% by the time M$ moves its bowels to deliver “8”.

Chuckle. 😎 M$ cannot even sell vapourware these days.

This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to M$ Verging on Irrelevance

  1. saulgoode says:

    “Interestingly enough it is my understanding I G Farben the creator of zyklon B the gas that killed 6 million people, was given a pass when the war was over.”

    Actually, two people — an owner and a director of an I G Farben subsidiary — were executed for their involvement with the manufacture of Zyklon B, while 13 other directors of either Farben or its subsidiaries were sentenced at Nuremburg to prison terms of two to eight years.

  2. Waldo Frankenhammer III says:

    “So, artillery, bombs, flamethrowers and grenades are OK but 20mm is not?”

    Yes, and since the Atomic Bomb was yet to be invented, it too was legal to drop on people.

  3. oldman says:

    “And you should learn to see. You don’t read these comments very carefully and I suspect you don’t read your own very carefully either.”

    My vision is fine thank you, as is my reading. As to your commenting, whether you do so or not is a matter of indifference to me.

  4. Waldo wrote, ” it was against the Geneva Convention to use 20mm cannons against personnel, only aircraft, vehicles and ships.”

    So, artillery, bombs, flamethrowers and grenades are OK but 20mm is not?

    “The Geneva Conventions comprise rules that apply in times of armed conflict and seek to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part in hostilities, for example:
    wounded or sick fighters
    prisoners of war
    civilians
    medical and religious personnel”

    See Geneva Conventions

  5. Kozmcrae says:

    Although we appear to be on the same side, I can fight my own battles Mr. Frankenhammer. Thanks, but no thanks.

  6. Waldo Frankenhammer III says:

    “I was not talking to you sir but to Kozmcrae, please learn to read.”

    And you should learn to see. You don’t read these comments very carefully and I suspect you don’t read your own very carefully either.

    It really makes me wonder if I should bother at all to comment.

  7. oldman says:

    “What does it mean, @ldman? Where the Hell did that come from. I never used the word “tortured” yet you put it in quotes as if I had.”

    I was not talking to you sir but to Kozmcrae, please learn to read.

    “I can give you an idea where you can put it.”

    I think you need to learn some civility, Mr. W.

  8. Waldo Frankenhammer III says:

    “it was intended for anti-aircraft work ”

    No, not intended, it was against the Geneva Convention to use 20mm cannons against personnel, only aircraft, vehicles and ships. If you see any footage of the Eastern front you will see the Germans firing Quad 20s in flat trajectories. Most likely they were using them against personnel. It was ingrained in them that the Soviets were not human. Many of them would later regret what they had done and suffered later in life because of it.

    ——————————

    Now back to you @ldman. “Remember, Mr. K . not all of us were “tortured” by Microsoft (whatever that means).”

    What does it mean, @ldman? Where the Hell did that come from. I never used the word “tortured” yet you put it in quotes as if I had. That’s a lie. You are straining to put words in my mouth that I never said or even insinuated.

    “But this is not the war, its just business…”

    Why would international companies start fighting one another? That doesn’t make any sense. They would never allow that. Not good for business. Patents are the new battle ground. No one gets killed but the amount of money that gets wasted fighting patents is at least equal to that of a good sized war if not greater.

    “Why do we need to worry about them?”

    Yesterday and all the days before, until the first writing and oral stories, are history. If you are not concerned about your history, you are not concerned about today or tomorrow.

    The way Germany deals with their history is a very good example of not forgetting (You can include Japan too.).

    I was not commenting directly on Microsoft but on history. It was Shelby Foote who first said that, “Each generation’s history is different.” How can that be? You thought history was always the same? It changes with each generation. Think about it for a while. It may take a long while but it’s true. Each generation has its own history.

    Microsoft did some very bad things. They need to be reminded that there are people who still remember that. They need to be reminded that the crap they pulled with Samba was not the first time they tried that stunt. They did it before with Word Perfect. Hey, look at that @ldman, content. Now, what the Hell are you going to do with the content I gave you? I can give you an idea where you can put it.

  9. My late father operated one of those 20mm cannon. It was intended for anti-aircraft work but the Germans were so low on planes they used it as a heavy machine-gun. It was devastating against troops and light vehicles because of the fragmenting shells.

  10. oldman says:

    “Did you know oldman, that the Swiss licensed their Oerlikon 20mm cannon to both the Axis and Allied powers? Same with the Swede’s 40mm Bofors anti-aircraft gun. A lot of money was changing hands while the war was going on. Just like it is now.”

    Nothing would surprise me Mr. K.

    But this is not the war, its just business…

    Though come to think of it, I’m sure that those “neutral” Swedes and swiss thought of it as “just business” as well.

    “Clarence was attempting to revise Microsoft’s history as something we need not worry about anymore.”

    Why do we need to worry about them?

    Remember, Mr. K . not all of us were “tortured” by Microsoft (whatever that means). And the attitude expressed by Mr. Moon is a very prevalent one.

    You can scoff at it, but the more you bleat “microsoft iz ebil”, and demand their destruction, the more you get classed fairly or unfairly as one of the tinfoil hat brigade.

    not that you care, I suspect.

  11. Kozmcrae says:

    “And you are all worked up over Microsoft…”

    I’m not comparing Microsoft to anyone in my statement. There seems to be an epidemic of poor reading comprehension around here. My statement was about history and why it is important for each generation to interpret their history for themselves. Which is not the same as revising it. Clarence was attempting to revise Microsoft’s history as something we need not worry about anymore.

    Clarence, you are referring to Godwin’s Law. And no I did not invoke Godwin’s Law. That would be like saying, Microsoft are nothing but a bunch of Nazi’. I didn’t say that. I used the German Government question because Germany is extremely careful about anything pertaining to the Nazi’. It is outlawed as a political party and you should have known that if you know anything about history. Either way you would have gotten an ear full. oldman certainly knows something.

    Did you know oldman, that the Swiss licensed their Oerlikon 20mm cannon to both the Axis and Allied powers? Same with the Swede’s 40mm Bofors anti-aircraft gun. A lot of money was changing hands while the war was going on. Just like it is now.

  12. oldman says:

    “Why don’t you ask the German Government how many votes the Nazi party got in the last election. The answer will give you a lesson in why history needs to be preserved and understood by each generation in their own way.”

    Interestingly enough it is my understanding I G Farben the creator of zyklon B the gas that killed 6 million people, was given a pass when the war was over.

    And you are all worked up over Microsoft…

    Pathetic.

  13. Clarence Moon says:

    I remember seeing somewhere or another on usenet that the person who first invokes some reference to Hitler or the Nazi Party in a discussion is immediately declared the loser. I think the buzzer just sounded for you, Koz.

    On reflection, though, I would have to modify my statement to say that the appeals court reversed or remanded most significant elements of the case due to a “reinterpretation” of the facts in the light of the law. The claim that a meeting was held or an email was sent is not refuted, but the significance or meaning of the act was corrected.

  14. Kozmcrae says:

    “Many of the “facts” here were apparently found to be in error by the higher courts and in the end there wasn’t much done about it.”

    You are attempting to revise history Clarence. That is a very nasty thing to do. Why don’t you ask the German Government how many votes the Nazi party got in the last election. The answer will give you a lesson in why history needs to be preserved and understood by each generation in their own way.

  15. Clarence Moon says:

    You have to keep an open mind, I think. Many of the “facts” here were apparently found to be in error by the higher courts and in the end there wasn’t much done about it. It seems to me that Microsoft leaned on OEMs who wanted to get in on selling what Microsoft had built up over the years, but Microsoft didn’t do anything illegal there. An OEM was free to go it alone, picking Linux or OS/2 or writing their own OS. Of course that would have been very hard to do, but that is what Apple did and they made a success out of it in the end.

    Originally IBM wanted Microsoft to stop development of Windows since they were also doing OS/2 for IBM. That is what led to the breakup between them and the sourness over Symphony and OS/2. If Microsoft hadn’t gone their own way and created a monopoly, IBM would have done the same thing with OS/2 as far as I can see.

    Microsoft watches out for itself, I agree, but so does IBM, Apple, and Google, too. All big companies do that, I believe, and everyone knows that to be the case.

  16. The facts are the facts. What lawyers do with them is irrelevant to a discussion of tech. M$ is an evil company.

  17. Clarence Moon says:

    That is a pretty compelling litany of sins by Microsoft, but then you have to come to the rest of the story. The main issue that you find is that the decisions of that judge were largely overturned on appeal and nothing much was ever done to change what was left and the judge even lost his job over not appearing to be truly objective. Also, the case was 12 years or so in the past and the PC landscape has changed almost totally since then. IBM is not even in the PC business anymore, Apple uses Intel x86 processors, Compaq is no more, etc..

    If the charges were filed again, I doubt that the feds or the states would bother with the case.

  18. Conzo wrote, “I don’t believe MS ever had a monopoly.”

    Are you a Holocaust denier too? Bad things happened. At one point, M$ insisted that OEMs sell only M$’s stuff on PCs, otherwise they would not be able to sell any of M$’s stuff. M$ could only do that because they had a monopoly. That’s in court records.

    “35. Microsoft possesses a dominant, persistent, and increasing share of the world- wide market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems. Every year for the last decade, Microsoft’s share of the market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems has stood above ninety percent. For the last couple of years the figure has been at least ninety-five percent, and analysts project that the share will climb even higher over the next few years. Even if Apple’s Mac OS were included in the relevant market, Microsoft’s share would still stand well above eighty percent.”

    “on July 20, 1995, just three days after IBM announced its intention to pre-install SmartSuite on its PCs, a Microsoft executive informed his counterpart at the IBM PC Company that Microsoft was terminating further negotiations with IBM for a license to Windows 95. Microsoft also refused to release to the PC Company the Windows 95 “golden master” code. The PC Company needed the code for its product planning and development, and IBM executives knew that Microsoft had released it to IBM’s OEM competitors on July 17.

    132. In sum, from 1994 to 1997 Microsoft consistently pressured IBM to reduce its support for software products that competed with Microsoft’s offerings, and it used its monopoly power in the market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems to punish IBM for its refusal to cooperate. Whereas, in the case of Netscape, Microsoft tried to induce a company to move its business away from offering software that could weaken the applications barrier to entry, Microsoft’s primary concern with IBM was to reduce the firm’s support for software products that competed directly with Microsoft’s most profitable products, namely Windows and Office. That being said, it must be noted that one of the IBM products to which Microsoft objected, Notes, was like Navigator in that it exposed middleware APIs. In any event, Microsoft’s interactions with Netscape, IBM, Intel, Apple, and RealNetworks all reveal Microsoft’s business strategy of directing its monopoly power toward inducing other companies to abandon projects that threaten Microsoft and toward punishing those companies that resist.”

    See Findings of Fact in US DOJ v M$

    The bottom line is M$ had a monopoly which is not illegal but did illegal things with its monopoly power:
    “412. Most harmful of all is the message that Microsoft’s actions have conveyed to every enterprise with the potential to innovate in the computer industry. Through its conduct toward Netscape, IBM, Compaq, Intel, and others, Microsoft has demonstrated that it will use its prodigious market power and immense profits to harm any firm that insists on pursuing initiatives that could intensify competition against one of Microsoft’s core products. Microsoft’s past success in hurting such companies and stifling innovation deters investment in technologies and businesses that exhibit the potential to threaten Microsoft. The ultimate result is that some innovations that would truly benefit consumers never occur for the sole reason that they do not coincide with Microsoft’s self-interest.”

  19. Conzo says:

    “BestBuy, Sears, Walmart (in stores), etc. do not offer GNU/Linux in North America.”

    Back then, they sold Linux (and earlier on, OS/2) in retail. No-one bought it. Granted, the argument is a bit academic, but I doubt Linux would be picked up in retail, even if they just had it lying around at no cost.

    Don’t know about the Americas, but they tried selling SuSE, and a couple of other distros here, where you basically pay for an extensive user manual with free DVD with the distro. It didn’t sell …

    “Vista was a flop when it first emerged. It was released before it was ready because large customers had paid for the rights to an upgrade and M$ was forced to give it to them.”

    I’ll give you that.

    ” “7″ is Vista debugged. Vista now is Vista debugged. ”

    No, I don’t agree. Vista SP1 was Vista debugged. 7 may be ‘Vista matured’, but there’s too much different between the 2008 and 2008 R2 codebase.

    “I never met a real person who like Vista/”7″. ”

    As long as we don’t discuss OS’s, you’re welcome to come and grab one of our wonderful Saxon beers some day 🙂

    “I have moved people from XP to GNU/Linux and they prefer it to “7″ simply because it’s faster/more reliable than XP but similar to XP in user interface.”

    Might be, I do enough admin stuff in my day job, so I try to steer clear of helping other people. Most people I know either stayed on XP, or are quite happy with 7 and many others (mostly the University crows) flirted with Linux for a couple of years, when it was hip to install Linux over Windows, until they upgraded to their next laptop/PC and stayed with Windows. But ok, a war-of-the-anecdotal-evidence is not really productive.

    “Conzo, explain why M$ is selling only 50 million licences for 90 million computers if the monopoly is not on its last legs.”

    I can imagine many other reasons … tech has developed so much over the last couple of years, with the whole smartphone and tablet boom. Markets that move and develop so fast are too complex for me to feel qualified to make a one-dimensional statement about.

    As I wrote before, I don’t believe MS ever had a monopoly. But again, MS is a behemoth of a company, and until the day I see them losing massive money on every single source of income and/or see big layoffs in HR, I insist that they’re doing fine … they might have to change attitude/policies/whatever, but they’ve been surviving imminent death for, what, about 15 years at least now?

    I suggest we hold this discussion again next year this time, and see what the numbers say then …

  20. Conzo wrote, “As long as that’s the case, it can’t be a monopoly.”

    Well, there is no monopoly for geeks who install OS but consumers largely don’t do that so there is a retail monopoly. BestBuy, Sears, Walmart (in stores), etc. do not offer GNU/Linux in North America. Dell does in China so the existence of monopoly seems to be regional. It was global not long ago. The monopoly is dying.

    Vista was a flop when it first emerged. It was released before it was ready because large customers had paid for the rights to an upgrade and M$ was forced to give it to them. “7” is Vista debugged. Vista now is Vista debugged. I never met a real person who like Vista/”7″. They were comfortable with XP, bugs, malware and all but Vista was a PITA. I have moved people from XP to GNU/Linux and they prefer it to “7” simply because it’s faster/more reliable than XP but similar to XP in user interface.

    Conzo, explain why M$ is selling only 50 million licences for 90 million computers if the monopoly is not on its last legs.

  21. Conzo says:

    Aw, that’s an ancient do not/do too/do not/do too argument that’s grown a beard years ago.

    OSX and some Linuxen were available in retail too, and – as Neal Stephenson pointed out ages ago – Linux is being given away for free. As long as that’s the case, it can’t be a monopoly.

    I had the chance to check out Vista on my home PC after SP1 was released. I was actually preparing with glee to hate the heebiejeebies out of it, but I was quite astonished to have to conclude that it was the first MS OS I was almost completely happy with (until I switched to 7, that is).

    Unless you’re out to provoke, any statement or prediction that MS will be or become irrelevant is humbug, and will be for quite some time. Be thankful that they’ve got some healthy competition, as it can only help make the products of any developer better. Whatever happens in the mobile market (where, keep in mind, people buy the _hardware_ and not the software, so in a way it’s similar that if you want a certain tablet or phone, you’re going to have to use the OS that comes with it), MS is doing fine. That they’re not anymore completely dominant in any sector is something positive, isn’t it? But why on earth should that automatically lead to their downfall …

  22. Conzo wrote, “Vista still did better than Linux ever did.”

    With the help of a retail monopoly…

  23. Conzo says:

    I have to disagree with you there. For a relative flop, Vista still did better than Linux ever did.

    But, more importantly, 7 _is_ a success, as well as a very good OS.

    More importantly, they got a lot of goodwill from tech pros, because they did so many things right, which they previously got painfully wrong.

    Leaving the whole mobile biz aside for a minute (we’ll have to see how the dust settles, when we’re a year or two further along the road), credit to Linux for giving both Apple and MS a much-needed kick in the butt, and get them to re-think not only their OSes from a user’s POV, but also finally put in the kinds of features and functionality techies (myself included) had been complaining about not being available.

    Personally, at work we have very limited resources (Hyper-V on 2 physical servers), and I’m still very happy to have Linux running on our webserver, mailserver and on my hobby-box (Server 2008 would be overkill for such basic stuff), but it’s a relief to have the rest on 2008 R2.

    I think I don’t need to mention that uptime and performance are excellent, despite habitually torturing both physical servers till they bleed, but just stay alive …

  24. Look what happened when Vista flopped. The natives got restless and cranked out netbooks with GNU/Linux, smart thingies with Android/Linux and M$ was shut out. M$’s next flop will be it’s last as a monopolist. From some points of view they have already lost monopoly but in the x86 world they are still hanging on. They have to put up a vigorous offence to defend the castle. They pretend that “7” is a brilliant success but they only sell 50 million licences per quarter when the world is shipping 90million PCs and 100 million smart thingies.

    The only thing guaranteeing M$’s survival is the world’s willingness to throw money at M$. Now the world sees alternatives on retail shelves and on the Internet. M$ is coming down from a high place but they can fall very far very fast.

  25. M$ does that all the time. They sold businesses “upgrade rights” and had to deliver Vista, warts and all, because the customers were going to get nothing for their money and might rethink doing business with M$ otherwise. In retrospect the price paid was too high.

  26. Conzo says:

    Also, even if W8 crashes and burns on the tablet, it’s not exactly critical to MS’s survival.

  27. Ray says:

    I don’t think anyone can sell something that hasn’t been released yet…

Leave a Reply