DirtyP2002 said:
WereKitten said:
The gist of the interview was not about gaining or keeping marketshare, nor about just how financially successful their products are. It was about being creative and spearheading innovation.
(Innovation is not necessarily revolutionary. Sometimes it just means doing less, doing it better, packaging it well. See Google versus previous search engines, or Apple with iPod and iPhone.)
Their browser is still the most used browser in the world. Its usage share keeps declining, though, and every innovation in the browser world (tabs, heavy leverage of extensions, multi-process architecture, fast Javascript VMs enabling complex web apps, adoption of emerging standards) came from the competition.
Their OS is still the most used desktop OS in the world, and yet when I used Vista and Windows 7 I found they have been following where Apple (and Next) opened new paths in UI (composite manager display, dock, etc). As OSs become more and more of a commodity on different devices they'll have to rely on unique benefits if they want to keep asking for a premium price, though.
Do we want to talk about Bing vs Google, .Net vs Java, Azure vs Google Docs, Zune vs iPod/iPad, or WinMobile 7 vs iPhone OS-X/Android?
Strictly from a creative standpoint the sensation is that they are reluctant or unable to push the envelope in a commercially viable way, and too often they just follow suit despite the incredible resources they can muster.
They have great R&D projects - I read about them all the time - but it seems like they're smothered by the bulk of the company. Compare this with, say, Apple where you know they're constantly trying to finalize their research project into viable, attractive products.
|
That is where I disagree. You can't expect MS to push this industry alone. This looks like you blame MS for the innovations others made. This is a huge industry and everybody contributes. Do you expect MS to be the number one in every freaking segment in this industry?
|
I think you are getting a bit too defensive about Microsoft. I think the main argument is that Microsoft isn't fostering an environment where innovative ideas can thrive, not that they should be front runners in everything they do.
Cleartype taking 10 years to get out? Doing a horrible job with making their apps compatible with tablets (and now failing to do the same for capactive touchscreens based on finger inputs)?
Sony get's blasted all the time for being a disconnected company, and I agree with those criticisms. Their divisions have largely in the past been completely ignorant of each other instead of working together. Now we are hearing that different parts of Microsoft are going so far as to sabotage each other. It's ridiculous if true.
