Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 137491	2014-07-14 10:08:00	Microsoft Is The Very Antithesis Of Strategy	zqwerty (97)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1379233	2014-07-15 02:37:00	it becomes very hard to restrict rubbish hard ware from running on it if you have very loose hardware requirements and very little way of monitoring those standards. Its actually VERY easy You state what the minimum hardware is. You make that hardware spec such that the OS will run at a speed that users will be happy with . (eg NOT 512M RAM for vista) You tell OEM's you cannot put the Win sticker on PC/laptops if it doesnt meet specs You can stop the software from installing if it doesnt meet specs You can also have a "Designed for Win" spec/sticker . To get that spec you have a std button to get into bios, a std button for system recovery, a std button for boot options. You tell manufacturers that "Designed for Win" cannot use F8 for hardware functions/options . As for rubbish build quality, well what can I say. Some people simply refuse to spend the $ , my mother was one of them & she did end up with a new $500 laptop that was almost unusable (512M RAM).	1101 (13337)
1379234	2014-07-15 02:46:00	Its actually VERY easy You state what the minimum hardware is. You make that hardware spec such that the OS will run at a speed that users will be happy with . (eg NOT 512M RAM for vista) You tell OEM's you cannot put the Win sticker on PC/laptops if it doesnt meet specs You can stop the software from installing if it doesnt meet specs You can also have a "Designed for Win" spec/sticker . To get that spec you have a std button to get into bios, a std button for system recovery, a std button for boot options. You tell manufacturers that "Designed for Win" cannot use F8 for hardware functions/options . As for rubbish build quality, well what can I say. Some people simply refuse to spend the $ , my mother was one of them & she did end up with a new $500 laptop that was almost unusable (512M RAM). They have only started doing that in the last few years, prior to that their standards were pretty loose. Having said that, their strategy under Steve Ballmer was a good one which resulted in their share price barely moving for more than 10 years as they completely missed or squandered numerous emerging product opportunities. It was a great strategy and I liked it a lot :thumbs:	Webdevguy (17166)
1379235	2014-07-15 05:12:00	If MS built PCs that their OS runs on that would be a valid statement. While Bill Gates came up with a fantastic idea of creating a software only business - it becomes very hard to restrict rubbish hard ware from running on it if you have very loose hardware requirements and very little way of monitoring those standards. Of course now that there is a very level playing field that is open to ALL competitors we get to see what happens when the real players stand up (Apple, Google etc). MS's issues have very little to do with its size and a lot to do with the way the company is run and the path it has been taking over the last 14 years as a result. Yes, I know that MS may have difficulty with that last point - but I still say they could do it, a couple of different ways. 1) Run a program similar to the Nexus series of phones - ie work with a company to create a design. Say, as Asus Surface 15, or maybe an HP Surface 13. Make it quality, and decently priced, like the Nexus series, and see what happens. 2) Run a 'Windows Premium' certification or something. Spec standards, design standards, no software crud, and give makers some sort of a bonus for doing it. Maybe something like any pcs that meet those requirements get a discount on Windows. Doesn't trod on manufacturers toes too much, they all face the same requirements, and they have an incentive to make better machines.	Nick G (16709)
1379236	2014-07-15 08:41:00	Yes, I know that MS may have difficulty with that last point - but I still say they could do it, a couple of different ways. 1) Run a program similar to the Nexus series of phones - ie work with a company to create a design. Say, as Asus Surface 15, or maybe an HP Surface 13. Make it quality, and decently priced, like the Nexus series, and see what happens. 2) Run a 'Windows Premium' certification or something. Spec standards, design standards, no software crud, and give makers some sort of a bonus for doing it. Maybe something like any pcs that meet those requirements get a discount on Windows. Doesn't trod on manufacturers toes too much, they all face the same requirements, and they have an incentive to make better machines. Microsoft planning on producing ultra cheap laptops (www.talkandroid.com) to compete against Chromebooks and expanding (www.maximumpc.com program_boost_hardware_sales_2014) it's free window licencing program to boost cheaper tablet sales. Good enough incentive I guess for MS current hardware partners, and possible attract others.	kahawai chaser (3545)
1379237	2014-07-15 11:09:00	Microsoft planning on producing ultra cheap laptops (www.talkandroid.com) to compete against Chromebooks and expanding (www.maximumpc.com program_boost_hardware_sales_2014) it's free window licencing program to boost cheaper tablet sales. Good enough incentive I guess for MS current hardware partners, and possible attract others. I know, and I personally think it's totally the wrong strategy. MS needs to encourage quality hardware, not cheap plastic crap at the lowest possible price point.	Nick G (16709)
1379238	2014-07-15 11:22:00	Microsoft planning on producing ultra cheap laptops (www.talkandroid.com) to compete against Chromebooks and expanding (www.maximumpc.com program_boost_hardware_sales_2014) it's free window licencing program to boost cheaper tablet sales. Good enough incentive I guess for MS current hardware partners, and possible attract others. Agreed. It's a brilliant strategy. A race to the bottom as far as profit margin goes.	Webdevguy (17166)
1379239	2014-07-15 20:55:00	www.stuff.co.nz They bought Nokia??!!! Why? Lets' buy a dead brand.....	pctek (84)
1379240	2014-07-15 21:40:00	www.stuff.co.nz They bought Nokia??!!! Why? Lets' buy a dead brand..... Stupid people making stupid decisions. I like that strategy, I like it a lot :thumbs:	Webdevguy (17166)
1379241	2014-07-15 21:47:00	I know, and I personally think it's totally the wrong strategy. MS needs to encourage quality hardware, not cheap plastic crap at the lowest possible price point. The problem with building quality hardware is that it costs more to produce so you have to put more margin on it to get a return which puts you directly in competition with Apple. On the other downside you will be undercut by your Windows selling brethren selling cheaper Windows PCs - baring in mind that you are just selling Windows on expensive hardware. All the customer sees is the price differential because that is what Windows PC buyers tend to look for when shopping.	Webdevguy (17166)
1379242	2014-07-16 08:57:00	The problem with building quality hardware is that it costs more to produce so you have to put more margin on it to get a return which puts you directly in competition with Apple. On the other downside you will be undercut by your Windows selling brethren selling cheaper Windows PCs - baring in mind that you are just selling Windows on expensive hardware. All the customer sees is the price differential because that is what Windows PC buyers tend to look for when shopping. Nothing wrong with competing directly with Apple in this area, they certainly don't have a right to be left alone in quality hardware niche. And I think saying Windows users only care about price is wrong - sure, some maybe, but I'm sure there'd certainly be a market for premium Windows devices. And hey....if I could pay the same $$ for a Macbook Pro or a Windows PC of the same build quality....well....I sure wouldn't pick the Macbook ;)	Nick G (16709)
1 2 3 4 5