06-26-2018 07:37 PM
31 12
tools
  1. a5cent's Avatar
    well the way I see it if Microsoft wants to become an integral part of infrastructure they will need front end devices that can show case the best case scenario.
    Using your definition of "infrastructure" I can see where you are coming from. We both know MS sees a large part of their future and growth in their role as an infrastructure provider. However, we don't share a common understanding of what that means.

    I think that has absolutely nothing to do with anything like Google fiber or end user online services. Certainly not hardware.

    IMHO MS is talking about software infrastructure. Azure cloud is the prime example of what infrastructure means to MS. SQLServer or MS' recent acquisition of github also fit the mold. This is all software infrastructure, used to build, host, manage and enable OTHER software.

    Already today these services are ever more OS agnostic. They don't rely on Windows and UWP is largely irrelevant to anything MS terms "infrastructure".

    I think this is the root cause of why we view MS differently

    Software infrastructure is already MS' most profitable endavor by far. This is why MS' stock has skyrocketed, despite consumers largely perceiving only failure and scratching their heads. MS tossing out windows, UWP and all their hardware would hurt them, but I don't think it would be anywhere close to the type of blow you make it out to be.

    For these reasons I disagree that MS' entire story revoles around Windows, UWP and indirectly hardware devices.

    Windows is becoming increasingly difficult to monetize. UWP and devices are important only to MS' personal-computing related efforts, which is already a minority of the company.
    Last edited by a5cent; 06-10-2018 at 09:06 PM.
    06-05-2018 03:13 PM
  2. Drael646464's Avatar
    Nothing.

    A) it's not a consumer product

    B) Folding designs are not going to acheive mass adoption until graphene becomes cheap to manufacture (which isn't going to be for many years)

    C) Andromeda is more like the HoloLens, a niche creative and enterprise product, intended as a platform for improving the OS, ecosystem and manufacturing methods for later, potentially consumer/mass adoption products based on the yet far too expensive graphene screen tech.

    It makes no really difference to MSFT at all, if it makes a loss. All they really care about is if it has some amount of users, and some amount of developers. Like with the HoloLens, all they need is a bit of initial interest to build out their platform, so that they have a lead when it's perfected.


    I totally feel like a stuck record explaining this stuff. Flexible screens are a nanotechnology. It's built at an atomic level.

    What we will have before those are a real market viability, is just two screens put together in such a way to minimise the crease (visual tricks, rounded edges etc). The optimal way to use dual screened devices is with a split UI, or multi-tasking - or perhaps as a viewing experience where UI components and touch don't involve the crease area (because clearly drawing over, or swiping over a dent in your display isn't ideal).

    Thus it's fairly clear, andromeda isn't a mass appeal device. It's for micro-productivity - meetings, journalists, sketch artists, business and the like. And it'll likely be priced for those markets too.The point in andromeda isn't to revolutionize the consumer market - it's to fill a solid niche for professionals, and create the foundation for a much later graphene screen product for general consumers.


    Asking if andromeda needed to be a hit, is like asking if the first mainframes need to be mass adopted hits, or the first cellphones need to be a mass adopted hit. No, they don't, they are a pathway tech. They only need to sell to the exclusive niche they are pitched to.

    No doubt, if you are a business professional, journo or similar, the andromeda device will be a golden product. They are clearly putting extra polish into this having learnt the mistakes of w10m. If not you won't have much use for it, unless you are like a hobbyist power user, who likes to play with new tech. As there will certainly be issues relating the to scaling of apps not designed to scale, or UI's that don't consider the crease.

    If your the sort of person that would purchase the HoloLens because its cool, even though their aren't many apps specifically for it and it's expensive, you might fit into that hobbyist category for andromeda too (which also won't have many apps specifically for it on release, and will also be expensive)
    Last edited by Drael646464; 06-17-2018 at 05:57 AM.
    a5cent likes this.
    06-17-2018 04:46 AM
  3. GeorgeOnArm's Avatar
    Successful Business models for Andromeda were clearly defined at least 5 years ago! Watch Microsoft future vision released 2009. Essential technologies were missing. Microsoft is now a credible Surface, gaming and AR/MR hardware leader. With next generation WinCoreOS, C-Shell, all ingredients needed are finally converged at the right timing. The only weak point that can screw up is lack of creative marketing!!!
    06-18-2018 11:09 AM
  4. TechFreak1's Avatar
    Using your definition of "infrastructure" I can see where you are coming from. We both know MS sees a large part of their future and growth in their role as an infrastructure provider. However, we don't share a common understanding of what that means.

    I think that has absolutely nothing to do with anything like Google fiber or end user online services. Certainly not hardware.

    IMHO MS is talking about software infrastructure. Azure cloud is the prime example of what infrastructure means to MS. SQLServer or MS' recent acquisition of github also fit the mold. This is all software infrastructure, used to build, host, manage and enable OTHER software.

    Already today these services are ever more OS agnostic. They don't rely on Windows and UWP is largely irrelevant to anything MS terms "infrastructure".

    I think this is the root cause of why we view MS differently

    Software infrastructure is already MS' most profitable endavor by far. This is why MS' stock has skyrocketed, despite consumers largely perceiving only failure and scratching their heads. MS tossing out windows, UWP and all their hardware would hurt them, but I don't think it would be anywhere close to the type of blow you make it out to be.

    For these reasons I disagree that MS' entire story revoles around Windows, UWP and indirectly hardware devices.

    Windows is becoming increasingly difficult to monetize. UWP and devices are important only to MS' personal-computing related efforts, which is already a minority of the company.
    Fair points and I agree that we do view infrastructure differently as in my view is that software cannot work without associated hardware.

    Only time will tell and us speculating about ifs and maybes isn't really going to change much unless decisive action is taken on ramblings from two random people on a forum .
    Laura Knotek and a5cent like this.
    06-26-2018 05:18 AM
  5. a5cent's Avatar
    Fair points and I agree that we do view infrastructure differently as in my view is that software cannot work without associated hardware.

    Only time will tell and us speculating about ifs and maybes isn't really going to change much unless decisive action is taken on ramblings from two random people on a forum .
    Yup, time will tell.

    I didn't really want to add anymore to this, but now need to clarify that absolutely nobody, least of all me, is claiming that software can work without associated hardware. Of course MS will be expanding their data centers and the like, but that's not what they will be selling directly.


    What we're discussing is what MS means when they say "infrastructure". You think MS means "hardware", I think MS means "software". If we google Microsoft + Infrastructure we get a LOT of hits all referring to SOFTWARE infrastructure, which I take as a good indicator of where MS is headed, but of course that doesn't give us a 100% accurate prediction of the future, so we'll see...
    TechFreak1 likes this.
    06-26-2018 06:01 PM
  6. TechFreak1's Avatar
    Yup, time will tell.

    I didn't really want to add anymore to this, but now need to clarify that absolutely nobody, least of all me, is claiming that software can work without associated hardware. Of course MS will be expanding their data centers and the like, but that's not what they will be selling directly.


    What we're discussing is what MS means when they say "infrastructure". You think MS means "hardware", I think MS means "software". If we google Microsoft + Infrastructure we get a LOT of hits all referring to SOFTWARE infrastructure, which I take as a good indicator of where MS is headed, but of course that doesn't give us a 100% accurate prediction of the future, so we'll see...
    Yup, we'll just have to wait and see... (as things can change last minute i.e surface mini) unless you happen to have a crystal ball somewhere that you're not telling us about .
    a5cent likes this.
    06-26-2018 07:37 PM
31 12

Similar Threads

  1. How to trim Xbox One game clips using the guide
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-27-2018, 03:10 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-27-2018, 01:03 PM
  3. Shadow of the Tomb Raider up for preorder on Xbox One, post-launch content revealed
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-27-2018, 11:40 AM
  4. Microsoft says Windows 10 'April 2018 Update' is coming April 30
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-27-2018, 09:10 AM
  5. How to avoid motion sickness caused by VR headsets while gaming
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-27-2018, 08:10 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD