is Microsoft "dressing like" apple?

[Jaredallister]

Well of course Microsoft's ultimate goal is to get the Apple users aboard since they represent population that can afford and wants premium devices like the Surface line and of course Apple devices. Apple users (as it was already mentioned in this thread) care more or less mainly about design and portability. I'd say they a lot of them didn't accept the "innovative" Mac touch bar very well and I also think many of them disliked Apple ditching the headphone jack on the iPhone. MS got the right timing, got the design right, pretty much got everything right except (in opinion of some) ports and RAM configuration.


I think we are going to see quite some people ditching their MacBook Airs and purchasing the Surface Laptop. If MS had only took the chance with Apple's removal of headphone jack and making a right phone device with great design at that time, maybe we would see some iPhone users come over too.

It's a slight mischaracterization to say a lot of Apple users didn't accept the changes in Apples newest products as Apple reported record sales of both Mac and iPhone led by both the iPhone 7 Plus and the new Macbook Pros sales. It is true that a vocal few in the tech media and youtube had some issues with them, but in general, the majority of Apple's users were happy and bought them in droves. So while Microsoft will see some switchers, Apple customer are incredibly loyal and are extremely unlikely to switch in any meaningful numbers.

 

[kaktus1389]

It's a slight mischaracterization to say a lot of Apple users didn't accept the changes in Apples newest products as Apple reported record sales of both Mac and iPhone led by both the iPhone 7 Plus and the new Macbook Pros sales. It is true that a vocal few in the tech media and youtube had some issues with them, but in general, the majority of Apple's users were happy and bought them in droves. So while Microsoft will see some switchers, Apple customer are incredibly loyal and are extremely unlikely to switch in any meaningful numbers.

It's true that the majority of Apple consumers are loyal, but I know Apple users who were pissed off because the headphone jack from real life and I know people who went to wait in the line the very first day iPhone 7 was available.

 

[formalcomparison]

A quick correction, in the US the Macbook Air with an i5, 8GB RAM, and 256GB is $1199. Now the Surface does have a better screen and newer processor, but the Macbook Air is $100 cheaper. Now if you're talking about the Macbook? For an M3 Processor, 8GB of RAM, and 256GB is $1299. But the Surface has a slightly larger screen and an I5 instead of a Core M. Now the MacBook Pro starts at $1299 and the 2016 Models start at $1499.

Thanks for the correction!

However , I think Microsoft shouldn't put the future of such a good alternative like Windows 10 S entirely on the surface laptop

 

[SpaciousZebra]

I think Microsoft has enough money to give this a shot. If it doesn't work, it stings, but they learn and adapt in the future.

 

[Drael646464]

It's a slight mischaracterization to say a lot of Apple users didn't accept the changes in Apples newest products as Apple reported record sales of both Mac and iPhone led by both the iPhone 7 Plus and the new Macbook Pros sales. It is true that a vocal few in the tech media and youtube had some issues with them, but in general, the majority of Apple's users were happy and bought them in droves. So while Microsoft will see some switchers, Apple customer are incredibly loyal and are extremely unlikely to switch in any meaningful numbers.

It's a mistake to catergorize sales figures or market share as being identical to total or past userbase. People do this often. Both notebooks and smartphones have experienced growth - we don't know what proportion of existing users were happy with those changes, and what proportion of new users brought the devices. We don't know if those that did buy it, were happy with their purchase either.

In general though you are right, it didn't effect sales.

I often hear about people who buy Samsung, apple, Microsoft, and mix them all together, and I would love to see some studies on apple brand loyalty, because I have the feeling that brand loyalty might not be as cut and dry as it often appears due to apple missionaries.

 

[k1s23]

Of course you're right , but so it shouldn't run on the top laptop. The surface pro starts from over $1000 so not many students could afford it at that price.

hello. microsoft is trying to "lead by example" by pushing windows 10 s to its consumers and what better way to do it than on their product. the surface pro is under $1000, the surface laptop "technically" starts at under $1000 ($999) but also for people in the education background it drops to $899 after education discount for the base model so it is cheaper than the macbook air. its hard to go on campus and not see macbooks which are more expensive than the surface laptops, so its hard to believe these students or their families cant afford something cheaper....

 

[formalcomparison]

hello. microsoft is trying to "lead by example" by pushing windows 10 s to its consumers and what better way to do it than on their product. the surface pro is under $1000, the surface laptop "technically" starts at under $1000 ($999) but also for people in the education background it drops to $899 after education discount for the base model so it is cheaper than the macbook air. its hard to go on campus and not see macbooks which are more expensive than the surface laptops, so its hard to believe these students or their families cant afford something cheaper....

That's true , there are some students that have expensive computer but many other that don't obviously. Daniel Rubino in a podcast sad the same thing about campus students with MacBooks but it always depends on the family. In Italy is easy to find students with MacBook but manly thanks to his popularity and because people know it is very expensive and ,before buying it , they have already this idea in mind. When we talk about less popular laptop , like UNFORTUNATELY the surface , people are not always ready to spend such amount of money especially students that maybe have to leave home to study. In addiction , there are many other computers that are better than the less powerful of the surface laptop options and cost the same or less. Microsoft has already done a great job in developing a better laptop than the apple's one but now the company has to work on surface popularity to make people ready to spend such amount of money.

 

[Jaredallister]

It's true that the majority of Apple consumers are loyal, but I know Apple users who were pissed off because the headphone jack from real life and I know people who went to wait in the line the very first day iPhone 7 was available.

Like I said, based on sales date, a majority of Apple Fan/customers/users were happy and/or receptive to the changes and voted with their wallets. Of course, there were people who were upset. It's impossible for Apple or any company to please everyone. But those few do not represent the majority as the 7 and 7 Plus sold more than its presedators and current are the two best selling smartphones.

 

[Jaredallister]

It's a mistake to catergorize sales figures or market share as being identical to total or past userbase. People do this often. Both notebooks and smartphones have experienced growth - we don't know what proportion of existing users were happy with those changes, and what proportion of new users brought the devices. We don't know if those that did buy it, were happy with their purchase either.

In general though you are right, it didn't effect sales.

I often hear about people who buy Samsung, apple, Microsoft, and mix them all together, and I would love to see some studies on apple brand loyalty, because I have the feeling that brand loyalty might not be as cut and dry as it often appears due to apple missionaries.

No it did affect sales, Apple sold more. You are right, we cant know what proportion of the current userbase where happy with the changes, but we do know what proportion of iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus users feel about the changes

 

[chinkwanhow]

Microsoft used to be "dressing like" apple few years ago when the initial Surface launched.
In term of market position, video ads, sales strategy etc...

But today, this is not true. Because Microsoft is far better than Apple.
Apple should learn from Microsoft today.

 

[k1s23]

Microsoft used to be "dressing like" apple few years ago when the initial Surface launched.
In term of market position, video ads, sales strategy etc...

But today, this is not true. Because Microsoft is far better than Apple.
Apple should learn from Microsoft today.

hey there. the way that microsoft reveals products is incredible. the blending of music (not just the sound but the song lyrics too) to the video clips match amazingly, and i can feel strong emotions when im watching product ads. i dont recall many videos from apple now that i dont like them like i used to years ago, but i do remember jony ive voicing over some of the videos talking about the manufacturing of the iphone etc. and it felt like they were trying too hard to sell the product to me, or the music which wasnt that pleasing to listen to. microsoft is better at advertising to me now because they got me interested in their products.

 

[jmork]

Its a great idea, creating a more closed system like this - in terms of safety. But it removes what makes windows 10 tablets competitive to the ipad, which is that it can run all apps. No big companies will want to sell through the app store since they lose almost 1/3 of the money. A program that can sell for 700$ on its own website has no incentive to move to the windows store - they'll lose a couple hundred per purchase.
This is also what I think keeps developers from making big programs for the ipad - you cant sell things for too much money and then apple takes a huge chunk....

 

[jmork]

I also feel like its silly comparing the price of a macbook to a surface. the resale value of a mac is so much higher than a PC. as soon as you buy a PC it loses so much value - its not the same for a mac. Macs also generally tend to last longer than PCs. In my opinion, a swank PC should still always sell for cheaper than a macbook - theres no comparison.

 

[Drael646464]

No it did affect sales, Apple sold more. You are right, we cant know what proportion of the current userbase where happy with the changes, but we do know what proportion of iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus users feel about the changes

More than what? More than the general yoy growth of the smartphone industry? More than previous models?

Apples growth has slowed significantly due to market saturation, in smartphones and especially in tablets. Its generally expected they sell "more", the issue commercially is what percentage that growth is - how much more, compared to how much more last time.

Right now, in smartphones the biggest growth is coming from Huawei, Lenovo and oppo, and the biggest growth in tablets, from Huawei, Lenovo and some other budget android and also windows tablet manufacturers. There isn't one area where apple is growing like it used to.

Its a bit like snapchat - its failure to grow beyond its US teenager base, is eventually threatening a shrink - shareholders will be asking questions. Those types of questions will be being asked at apple - and they will be considering budget phones, and emerging markets (they've already done a budget tablet, and a hybrid because the ipad markets been shrinking for years while other players grow)

Apple might continue to sell more phones - until it doesn't, and starts selling less. And that won't be down to people hating their products. It'll be down to market saturation, mature market consumer attitudes - replace the device when it needs replacing, not "for fun", buy reasonable price-quality propositions, shop around, be more aware of the options. Basically more product experience and knowledge.

Ultimately apples success in adoption phase smartphone and tablet markets has little to do with people sense of proportionate satisfaction next to all the other brands the consumers have tried - but the opposite, with branding and marketing being primary in adoption phase markets - a lack of comparative knowledge and experience.

Remember Hoover? IBM? Blackberry?

Same deal. Brand awareness increases slowly in adoption phase. I bet most people still barely know more than a few smartphone brands to actually compare. In five years, that will be very different.

Apple won't be currently doing a little dance, happy with their smartphone performance. They'll be looking at their dwindling growth and wondering how to get it back via new investments, new products and market strategies. Companies are not content to stay where they are, or exist with present mindsets - they have to look to the future.

Although in all of this saturation phase coming about, I worry more about Samsung. They have other products sure, but I am not as convinced they will be able to some up with next gen, new products like apple will, to replace their smartphone sales. Although they have folding screen patents shared with MS, that may be awhile. What do they do in the intervening years? At least you can guarantee apple will have some new AI, AR and other innovations soon to step in....

 

[tgp]

More than what? More than the general yoy growth of the smartphone industry? More than previous models?

Apples growth has slowed significantly due to market saturation, in smartphones and especially in tablets. Its generally expected they sell "more", the issue commercially is what percentage that growth is - how much more, compared to how much more last time.

Right now, in smartphones the biggest growth is coming from Huawei, Lenovo and oppo, and the biggest growth in tablets, from Huawei, Lenovo and some other budget android and also windows tablet manufacturers. There isn't one area where apple is growing like it used to.

And that's only going to get worse now we've meet saturation.

Apple might continue to sell more - until it doesn't, and starts selling less. And that won't be down to people hating their products. It'll be down to market saturation, mature market consumer attitudes - replace the device when it needs replacing, not "for fun", buy reasonable price-quality propositions, shop around, be more aware of the options.

Apple is growing where it counts: profit. And there is no sign of that slowing. Any of the OEMs you mentioned, plus Microsoft I bet, would give their proverbial right arm to have the "problems" Apple is having.

All for-profit businesses care about one thing, and one thing only: the bottom line. If they seem to care about you as a customer, it is because they believe it will cause you to spend more money. The moves they make are ultimately driven by profit. In fact, the reason Microsoft provides software for all platforms is exactly the same reason as why Apple doesn't; they each are doing what they believe will provide the most profit. And they are both correct.

 

[Drael646464]

Apple is growing where it counts: profit. And there is no sign of that slowing. Any of the OEMs you mentioned, plus Microsoft I bet, would give their proverbial right arm to have the "problems" Apple is having.

All for-profit businesses care about one thing, and one thing only: the bottom line. If they seem to care about you as a customer, it is because they believe it will cause you to spend more money. The moves they make are ultimately driven by profit. In fact, the reason Microsoft provides software for all platforms is exactly the same reason as why Apple doesn't; they each are doing what they believe will provide the most profit. And they are both correct.

Growth is falling for apple. YoY for the iPhone has slowed, and YoY for the ipad has slowed. Yes, I am sure those companies would like apples profits. Shareholders however don't just want profits, they want long term ROI, which depends not merely on present profits, but on growth and the future.

if someone for example buys shares today, they want apple to be substaintially bigger in the future. Not just making a bit more money, or worse, a bit less.

The prospect of future profits is something they care about IMO. Hence why they are using their substantial smartphone profits to invest heavily in other areas, like AR and AI, rather than merely re-investing it in smartphones. Pretty much no one is doing the later, because market trends like adoption versus saturation are obvious to them. It's only a matter of time before all the growth is in budget smartphones and currently all of it in tablets IS in windows and budget devices.

Eventually that means shrinkage - loss of profits. No one likes that, even the biggest tech company in the world

I'm glad they aren't coasting on iPhone, and are aware of the future, because competition is good for consumers. Google by comparison seems a little slack these days. I like their AI moves, but because they profit from search, they are sort of 'cozy', and not acting like actually someone could take that from them (and someone like apple actually could, AI could easily rob google of its primary profit model)

Look at for example snapchat for an example of the growth thing. By everyones account they are a successful company. But unable to make headway outside of the US, and unable to crack older users, their user growth has almost completely stalled. Because of this shareholders will demand changes in the platform eventually, and the market strategy. And like twitter without that momentum they may shrink, especially with all their major features now on larger Instagram. Just that stalling alone, while they are still profitable, will be taken as a signal that maybe the company will fail.

Not that apple will fail, but the same principle applies. Like animals store food for the winter, companies must have plans for future profits, not merely present day ones. They must appear strong, like the leader of a group of apes, vital. Not slowly getting old, stagnant - no matter how dominant they presently are. And apple does, but not because of its iPhone cashcow. But because a) it actually stores a lot of that as pure cashflow and b) it invests heavily in new tech. It has passion, vitality.

Same thing happened with MSFTs nokia disaster. Sometimes even, there is a coup, CEO's are ousted even when profits are stable. Like mfst. Large global companies are like sharks, they pretty much always need to move forward or at the very least protect their marketshare/profits like guards at a castle wall. Any kind of downward trend, is concerning, even if they still make money hand over fist - because of future prospects, and opportunity.

Apple does have that, but believe me, discussions will be ongoing in their huge offices, over expensive drinks and food, how to maintain the former growth of the juggernaut in new ways.

(Although really this was not intended so much as a discussion about market strategies or apple but rather reflection that adoption markets are not typified by high consumer critical analysis, product comparison, or brand awareness, but rather by monolithic brand loyalty to small numbers of premium brands, and a general low level of product knowledge - as such consumers are comparatively niave in emerging markets compared to mature ones, and that in such conditions marketing rules over pure pragmatic comparisons of every day value for dollar - mature markets is where to pick market trends and more experiences and sceptical consumer choices, and as those saturation points grow that level of brand awareness and product knowledge will only increase - then you'll be able to draw satisfaction conclusions from sales figures, until then you should be drawing primarily marketing conclusions)

 

[tgp]

@Drael646464 I didn't want to take a lot of space quoting the above post, but you are mostly correct. Your post is typical jargon, similar to what you would find on any business publication.

You are basing your assumptions to the future on what might happen, or what could happen, or probably more accurately, what you hope happens.

However, I don't see much reality there. Ever since WP7 was released 6 1/2 years ago, we've been saying pretty much what you're implying. Microsoft is making all the right moves. They are doing it right. Users will embrace what they offer, and flock to them. Microsoft is looking down the road, preparing for the next paradigm.

In real life, it hasn't happened. Sure, by all things logical, what few consumers are using Chromebooks will drop them like a hot potato and buy a Surface Laptop running Windows 10 S. Once we get the Surface Phone with Windows 10 on Arm, consumers won't be able to get rid of their iPhones and Androids soon enough. Once the 2017 Surface Pro releases, it's good-bye iPad. Developers are flocking to Xamarin because with a click of a checkbox, they can have their apps published on all platforms.

A lot of Microsoft's problem is that while they have some good ideas, it's too often "Soon" or "Fall 2017" or "Redstone <insert the next number here>". Or, we get some rose colored ideas, mostly fabricated due to speculation, and the real product disappoints when it is unveiled. As an example, look at the Cerulean Moment. While it was quite run-of-the-mill and not bad, it sure wasn't what we expected based on Mr. Murphy's promises!

To be fair, this happens to a certain degree with other companies as well. But we here are (or were) focused on Windows Phone, and with its descent into near obscurity over the last couple years, we have been desperate for something, anything!

We all know about stock prices and shareholders and growth and hedging for the future. That stuff has been around since the advent of business. What we want to see are real world results. And that is also what shareholders want to see.

If I were to decide between two different areas of tech on which to bet, and the choices were 1. iPhone and 2. HoloLens, and the result was real money, I'd bet on iPhone. You would too, at least if it was based on the foreseeable future.

Yes, the future is important, but so is the present. I once heard a statistic that I don't have the source for or even remember the exact numbers, but it said that a very high percentage of businesses fail within the first five years or something like that. The general consensus I read on Microsoft fan forums is that even if they released the holy grail of smartphones tomorrow, plenty of fans have already left and are turned off. If Microsoft alienates their fans today, who will be their customers tomorrow?

Down the road, who knows? Microsoft isn't the only one working on AR, and given their history, when the industry has matured, there is not guarantee they'll be in front. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple, Google, or even Samsung will beat Microsoft at their own game.

Reading back over my post, I realize it is every bit as much jargon as yours. I'm just looking at it from a different point of view.

 

[Photonsym]

I feel like design is a major selling point to the average consumer which is why microsoft went down this path with the surface laptop. The current mobile processors provide more than sufficent power for the average consumer.

 

[Drael646464]

@Drael646464 I didn't want to take a lot of space quoting the above post, but you are mostly correct. Your post is typical jargon, similar to what you would find on any business publication.

You are basing your assumptions to the future on what might happen, or what could happen, or probably more accurately, what you hope happens.

However, I don't see much reality there. Ever since WP7 was released 6 1/2 years ago, we've been saying pretty much what you're implying. Microsoft is making all the right moves. They are doing it right. Users will embrace what they offer, and flock to them. Microsoft is looking down the road, preparing for the next paradigm.

In real life, it hasn't happened. Sure, by all things logical, what few consumers are using Chromebooks will drop them like a hot potato and buy a Surface Laptop running Windows 10 S. Once we get the Surface Phone with Windows 10 on Arm, consumers won't be able to get rid of their iPhones and Androids soon enough. Once the 2017 Surface Pro releases, it's good-bye iPad. Developers are flocking to Xamarin because with a click of a checkbox, they can have their apps published on all platforms.

A lot of Microsoft's problem is that while they have some good ideas, it's too often "Soon" or "Fall 2017" or "Redstone <insert the next number here>". Or, we get some rose colored ideas, mostly fabricated due to speculation, and the real product disappoints when it is unveiled. As an example, look at the Cerulean Moment. While it was quite run-of-the-mill and not bad, it sure wasn't what we expected based on Mr. Murphy's promises!

To be fair, this happens to a certain degree with other companies as well. But we here are (or were) focused on Windows Phone, and with its descent into near obscurity over the last couple years, we have been desperate for something, anything!

We all know about stock prices and shareholders and growth and hedging for the future. That stuff has been around since the advent of business. What we want to see are real world results. And that is also what shareholders want to see.

If I were to decide between two different areas of tech on which to bet, and the choices were 1. iPhone and 2. HoloLens, and the result was real money, I'd bet on iPhone. You would too, at least if it was based on the foreseeable future.

Yes, the future is important, but so is the present. I once heard a statistic that I don't have the source for or even remember the exact numbers, but it said that a very high percentage of businesses fail within the first five years or something like that. The general consensus I read on Microsoft fan forums is that even if they released the holy grail of smartphones tomorrow, plenty of fans have already left and are turned off. If Microsoft alienates their fans today, who will be their customers tomorrow?

Down the road, who knows? Microsoft isn't the only one working on AR, and given their history, when the industry has matured, there is not guarantee they'll be in front. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple, Google, or even Samsung will beat Microsoft at their own game.

Reading back over my post, I realize it is every bit as much jargon as yours. I'm just looking at it from a different point of view.

Well I hadn't actually really mentioned MS. I probably sound business jargon-y, because I am in the tech retail business. In a specifically related area (mobile devices). I don't really come at the topic of things like growth and market saturation as a MS fan, but rather as someone who wants to stay ahead of the curve personally. As an observer I've been aware of the impending saturation conditions for about five years.

As such an observer, I don't know if MS's plans will work out swimmingly, or in a luke warm success. I expect they will deliver some kind of result, and that their focus on static machines will pay off in emerging VR markets.

I have more faith in apple as a innovator right now, than Samsung or google. Google seems to have an AI focused direction that I think could pay off big in the smarthome business. But I know apple has some neat tricks up its sleeve in AI, and it has its secret AR project.

I do suspect that mobile markets will become even more complimentary as performance of gpu capabilities becomes more central. I'm pegging that VR will be large entertainment markets, and that consumers will have more spending preference for capability than mobility - as with gaming, tvs and movies. AR however may be more mobility focused, and replace the smartphone to some degree (users however will not always want to wear headsets/glasses, nor will flat entertainment be replaced, more diversified). A true glasses like AR, small FF device might almost entirely replace slabs however eventually, for on the go computing (as opposed to casual media/information use around the home or office)

It's a little like the 3d movie paradigm. Or mobility/static PCs. Instead of focused markets, what we see is more specialization, niches, more diversity. The trouble, or benefit, depending on ones perspective, is that the early growth boom is over for tablets and smartphones. That means premium is going to be increasingly less premium- and premium products in other markets, like VR, AR, AI, smarthome devices may deliver the profits that will fall from phones.

It also means midrange devices and brands will start to really shine and have their limelight.

I guess from this perspective, I think nothing like a consumer, and more like the businesses themselves.

 

[Drael646464]

I'm keen to see MSFTs success for two quite different reasons. One, as a consumer I believe in their vision technology wise. Two its very long play-ish, and quite clever from a business perspective, leveraging ones strengths against ones weaknesses.

It does lack marketing punch though, they need to spend more, for sure.

Although I am impressed that they are reaching out to global markets, something they have neglected - apple and google products are more dominant in the US in many ways. US companies often neglect the globe (I won't say this is really true of apple - their ad spend for the iPhone is emerging markets right now is large, and reflects the flailing growth in mature markets - as is samsungs)

On one hand their early announcements do tend to generate some buzz, on the other hand, they diminish impact. But with the insiders program, outside of hardware they actually have little choice. The word is always on the street well before release.

Even their form factor defying new mobile device, codenamed Andromeda, I think has be quasi cracked by trails in the code. Its miles from a slab, but I suspect everyone in tech will know roughly what it is, well before release, even though consumers will be clueless.

This connects to how MS now produces software. Which has its advantages in being rich in user feedback, but disadvantages the element of surprise. They need to work on that as much as they can.

BTW, if this were a long term bet, I'd bet on AR not phones. Indeed long term, were I to bet on phones I'd probably bet on Lenovo or Huawei, not apple. Although I am not convinced that MS yet has the best consumer AR product (they don't have one yet), or the best marketing for it. When they get it out of development, they ought to make it cheaper, improve the FoV, and market the living bejesus out of it. There will be competitors from apple and from magic leap. Possibly from hardware partners too, like HP. Being a software company, the main thing for MSFT, is that its a windows product. VR is a surer bet for a company with such a strong dominance in gaming, and in desktop PCs. And that's something they should leverage as much as possible - someone also very much needs to fix that nasea thing there, use a different display tech. Early days....