How many chances can Steve Ballmer have?

[Simon Tupper]

I understand all that, but I truly believe that Steve Ballmer is not the guy that Microsoft needs and if he has to stay... then find someone else to promote the products and put Steve Ballmer in charge of the rest....

I'd be a thousand times happier to see a guy like Ben Rudolf go on stage than Steve Ballmer... Ben Rudolf has manners and he is convincing, while Steve Ballmer is like a raging pitbull (nothing against those dogs), you want to switch to another channel when he's given an interview. (They got rid of Sinofsky which was a smart move IMO)

 

[crystal_planet]

The lawsuit was due to the pre-installation of IE in Windows, which turned out to kill Netscape and hurt competition amongst IE and other browsers.

Microsoft just had to pay the EU again, since its "browser choice" had been forgotten about.Microsoft says it forgot to offer people a browser choice, EU investigating | Marketplace.org

I remember those days with less than fondness. Back then, if I wanted a full featured Netscape package, I would have to go to Futureshop (Best buy) and shell out 70.00 for the privilege. Nowadays, no one can imagine paying for a web browser. I like these days better.

 

[crystal_planet]

I agree. Ballmer is a businessman, not an engineer or a programmer. He probably doesn't even know what a "kernel" does or what's the difference between C++ and C#.

Yes, and?
Neither was Jobs - that's where Woz came in. Can you imagine Wozniak unveiling the new iPad? If you want an engineer to be a front man of a tech organization, he better at least have some personality.

 

[erzhik]

Ballmer is a multimillionaire but he desperately requires some public speaking knowledge. Whenever he talks, I want to cut my ears off.

 

[brmiller1976]

I remember those days with less than fondness. Back then, if I wanted a full featured Netscape package, I would have to go to Futureshop (Best buy) and shell out 70.00 for the privilege. Nowadays, no one can imagine paying for a web browser. I like these days better.

It was incredibly selective, too. Google leverages its search monopoly to distribute a free mobile OS that's approaching monopoly share, and there's not a peep.

Apple leveraged its digital music distribution monopoly to take over the MP3 player market and lock out most competing smart devices from mainstream digital music for YEARS. Not a peep -- in fact, people defended Apple when it caused iTunes to break integration with Palm devices. (Imagine if Microsoft had updated Windows specifically to break iTunes or iPod syncing or to kick Macs off the corporate network... the screams of rage would have been deafening).

Microsoft has been held to different standards than everyone else, holding back its ability to innovate for years (for fear of a successful product that would further marginalize less effective competitors). It took ten years of straightjacketing Microsoft, beating the crap out of it and locking it in the basement to even allow the Apples and Googles of the world to catch up. The question is whether the old, innovative and aggressive Microsoft can compete with all the stumbling blocks thrown in its way by "anti-monopolists" who simultaneously sing the praises of Google and Apple's monopolies.

 

[Simon Tupper]

The question is whether the old, innovative and aggressive Microsoft can compete with all the stumbling blocks thrown in its way by "anti-monopolists" who simultaneously sing the praises of Google and Apple's monopolies.

Well it's not that bad... People will praise Microsoft if Microsoft starts to do things better than the competition... Apple makes high quality products, while Microsoft makes low budget products... of course the surface as a nice build quality, but as for resolution, speakers volume and lag free OS, Apple won again... it sucks, but it's true. How many times have we seen reviews saying that the surface kept crashing when launching apps or that the Keyboard was poor quality.

Microsoft needs to go premium.

 

[jabtano]

Well it's not that bad... People will praise Microsoft if Microsoft starts to do things better than the competition... Apple makes high quality products, while Microsoft makes low budget products... of course the surface as a nice build quality, but as for resolution, speakers volume and lag free OS, Apple won again... it sucks, but it's true. How many times have we seen reviews saying that the surface kept crashing when launching apps or that the Keyboard was poor quality.

Microsoft needs to go premium.

What? How and where does Microsoft makes crap products? have you ever used a MS keyboard or mouse? did you own a Zune player or an Xbox? My surface is built pretty darn well. I have this bad habit of just tossing phones and tablets onto my desk sometimes inflicting damage on said devices. except for my surface it's standing up to my abuse...

 

[Simon Tupper]

What? How and where does Microsoft makes crap products? have you ever used a MS keyboard or mouse? did you own a Zune player or an Xbox? My surface is built pretty darn well. I have this bad habit of just tossing phones and tablets onto my desk sometimes inflicting damage on said devices. except for my surface it's standing up to my abuse...

The first Xbox 360 was a disaster at launch, the RROD was common and the lack of built-in fan made some Xbox overheat, the Surface is quality, but the touchcover breaks easily and as I said the OS is unstable at times and the resolution is far behind the iPad 4. As for Microsoft's Keyboards and mouse, they are solid.

 

[Simon Tupper]

And the sound that the Xbox makes when there is not much noise in the room... damn it's annoying compared to the silence of the PS3

 

[crystal_planet]

Well it's not that bad... People will praise Microsoft if Microsoft starts to do things better than the competition... Apple makes high quality products, while Microsoft makes low budget products... of course the surface as a nice build quality, but as for resolution, speakers volume and lag free OS, Apple won again... it sucks, but it's true. How many times have we seen reviews saying that the surface kept crashing when launching apps or that the Keyboard was poor quality.

Microsoft needs to go premium.

Yeah, it is that bad. The Surface from a pure design angle is better than an iPad.

Those reviews you refer to were written before the first wave of o/s updates were released. Do you mean to say when the very first iPad was released it was in its polished form we see today? Even now some of your beloved Apple products are plagued with bugs - just look at the laundry list of complaints from the iPhone 5. And they've had four generations to get it perfect - and they're the only vendor that makes the bloody product. ****, an entire line of MacBook pro was recalled because of defective retinal displays.

Try to remove your lips from Cook's hiney for a while.

 

[crystal_planet]

The first Xbox 360 was a disaster at launch, the RROD was common and the lack of built-in fan made some Xbox overheat, the Surface is quality, but the touchcover breaks easily and as I said the OS is unstable at times and the resolution is far behind the iPad 4. As for Microsoft's Keyboards and mouse, they are solid.

You know I'm typing this on my non defective touchpad cover and I've never had a problem with the RT os, so I must be the luckiest Surface owner in the world. As far as the vaunted retinal display goes, it's great for reading eBooks, but for watching videos, reviews point to the Surface as the better device.


Keep 'em coming. This is fun.

 

[brmiller1976]

Well it's not that bad... People will praise Microsoft if Microsoft starts to do things better than the competition...

You're kidding, right?

Apple makes high quality products, while Microsoft makes low budget products...

ROFL. Now I know you're kidding.

Have you used one of the "retina" MacBook "Pro" units with the high-res displays powered by the Intel HD4000 integrated graphics?

Who, other than Apple, would dare to release a high-res "pro" machine running with a netbook graphics chipset?

Worst of all, the Apple guys will use the "quality" argument and then convince themselves that they don't need adequate speed/performance for the machine they just dropped $3K for. While the "budget" Dell or Vizio or HP machine that is 1/3 the price has a decent chipset connected to a high-res display and outperforms the Apple machine in, frankly, every way.

for resolution, speakers volume and lag free OS, Apple won again

Boot up one of those awesome $2K to $3K Apple Retina machines from last month with an HD4000 in it. Try running an old game from 2009, like Dragon Age Origins, on it in "maximum" settings. Laugh helplessly as the machine runs at eight FPS and then crashes.

Now, grab any old Dell or HP laptop for $1,000 with an ATI or Nvidia card and run the same title in "maximum settings." It will crank by at 30 FPS or better.

Then we can discuss "lag" and "resolution."

How many times have we seen reviews saying that the surface kept crashing when launching apps or that the Keyboard was poor quality.

From the Apple press, this is a common statement. The same people told us that we didn't need 3G on the original iPhone, didn't need multitasking on iOS, didn't really need Windows at all (until the shift of Mac to Intel), etc. There's significant cognitive dissonance in trying to convince people that all they need is a single, monolithic choice from Cupertino, and that actual choice is "bad."

Microsoft needs to go premium.

Microsoft IS premium.

I have a MacBook Pro... a "premium Apple laptop." It's crap. Overpriced crap. It's pretty when running the few apps that OS X supports, but once you start to do anything even remotely demanding -- like light gaming or video editing -- the fan kicks in and the OS slows down. It's got a slow graphics chipset, a slow hard drive, and cost way, way too much. I don't see how that's a "premium" product (other than the Apple people constantly insisting that it is, and that I "don't need" to edit video or play games).

 

[Simon Tupper]

You're kidding, right?



ROFL. Now I know you're kidding.

Have you used one of the "retina" MacBook "Pro" units with the high-res displays powered by the Intel HD4000 integrated graphics?

Who, other than Apple, would dare to release a high-res "pro" machine running with a netbook graphics chipset?

Worst of all, the Apple guys will use the "quality" argument and then convince themselves that they don't need adequate speed/performance for the machine they just dropped $3K for. While the "budget" Dell or Vizio or HP machine that is 1/3 the price has a decent chipset connected to a high-res display and outperforms the Apple machine in, frankly, every way.



Boot up one of those awesome $2K to $3K Apple Retina machines from last month with an HD4000 in it. Try running an old game from 2009, like Dragon Age Origins, on it in "maximum" settings. Laugh helplessly as the machine runs at eight FPS and then crashes.

Now, grab any old Dell or HP laptop for $1,000 with an ATI or Nvidia card and run the same title in "maximum settings." It will crank by at 30 FPS or better.

Then we can discuss "lag" and "resolution."



From the Apple press, this is a common statement. The same people told us that we didn't need 3G on the original iPhone, didn't need multitasking on iOS, didn't really need Windows at all (until the shift of Mac to Intel), etc. There's significant cognitive dissonance in trying to convince people that all they need is a single, monolithic choice from Cupertino, and that actual choice is "bad."



Microsoft IS premium.

I have a MacBook Pro... a "premium Apple laptop." It's crap. Overpriced crap. It's pretty when running the few apps that OS X supports, but once you start to do anything even remotely demanding -- like light gaming or video editing -- the fan kicks in and the OS slows down. It's got a slow graphics chipset, a slow hard drive, and cost way, way too much. I don't see how that's a "premium" product (other than the Apple people constantly insisting that it is, and that I "don't need" to edit video or play games).

You are talking about laptops... I'm talking about tablets...
Microsoft does not make its own laptops...

Also, the Retina does not have a HD4000 in it.... it has a NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M which can run StarCraft 2, Max Payne 3, Dragon Age II, Darkside, F.E.A.R 3 and many more games...

 

[spyderzWPC]

good thing windows 7 and xbox were such horrible products nobody bought....

 

[Simon Tupper]

You know I'm typing this on my non defective touchpad cover and I've never had a problem with the RT os, so I must be the luckiest Surface owner in the world. As far as the vaunted retinal display goes, it's great for reading eBooks, but for watching videos, reviews point to the Surface as the better device.


Keep 'em coming. This is fun.

Microsoft admitted that they had a lot of returns for the touchcover, yeah... you must be lucky then...

 

[Simon Tupper]

good thing windows 7 and xbox were such horrible products nobody bought....

Don't put words inside my mouth....

 

[brmiller1976]

You are talking about laptops... I'm talking about tablets...
Microsoft does not make its own laptops...

I'm talking about everything. You're talking about nothing in particular.

 

[brmiller1976]

Microsoft admitted that they had a lot of returns for the touchcover, yeah... you must be lucky then...

Fortunately, they simply said "a lot" instead of "a ton" or "as many returns as lines of BS in the 'Steve Ballmer' thread on WPC Forums."

 

[Simon Tupper]

I'm talking about everything. You're talking about nothing in particular.

I edited my previous post go back and look

 

[brmiller1976]

You edited your previous post because I demolished the original.