Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Could Microsoft show how much they fear the iPad...
13 views
Skip to first unread message
Alan Baker
Jun 14, 2013, 11:40:27 PM6/14/13
to
...any more clearly than this?
'Microsoft's surprise launch of Office Mobile for the iPhone today shows
that the software giant continues to favor Windows' future over Office's
fortune, analysts said today.
And they just don't get that strategy.
"It's puzzling, [Office] on iPhone but not on iPad," said Frank Gillett
of Forrester Research, referring to the Friday launch of Office Mobile
for iOS.
Office Mobile for iOS stores documents on SkyDrive or SkyDrive Pro,
depending on whether the Office 365 subscription is a consumer- or
business-grade plan.
"They're continuing the artificial advantaging of one product over
another to change customer behavior," Gillett said. "We think that's a
major mistake. In their eyes, not providing Office for iPad will
motivate people to buy Windows tablets. That's baloney. People have
already bought iPads. You're going to deny them Office and piss them
off? That makes no sense. And it's not helping sort things out any
faster for Windows 8 [on tablets]."'
<http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9240082/Microsoft_sticks_it_to_th
e_iPad_with_Windows_first_Office_strategy>
Come on trolls: spin this one!
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
'Microsoft's surprise launch of Office Mobile for the iPhone today shows
that the software giant continues to favor Windows' future over Office's
fortune, analysts said today.
And they just don't get that strategy.
"It's puzzling, [Office] on iPhone but not on iPad," said Frank Gillett
of Forrester Research, referring to the Friday launch of Office Mobile
for iOS.
Office Mobile for iOS stores documents on SkyDrive or SkyDrive Pro,
depending on whether the Office 365 subscription is a consumer- or
business-grade plan.
"They're continuing the artificial advantaging of one product over
another to change customer behavior," Gillett said. "We think that's a
major mistake. In their eyes, not providing Office for iPad will
motivate people to buy Windows tablets. That's baloney. People have
already bought iPads. You're going to deny them Office and piss them
off? That makes no sense. And it's not helping sort things out any
faster for Windows 8 [on tablets]."'
<http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9240082/Microsoft_sticks_it_to_th
e_iPad_with_Windows_first_Office_strategy>
Come on trolls: spin this one!
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Flint
Jun 15, 2013, 1:30:35 AM6/15/13
to
On 6/14/2013 11:40 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> ...any more clearly than this?
>
> 'Microsoft's surprise launch of Office Mobile for the iPhone today shows
> that the software giant continues to favor Windows' future over Office's
> fortune, analysts said today.
>
> And they just don't get that strategy.
>
> "It's puzzling, [Office] on iPhone but not on iPad," said Frank Gillett
> of Forrester Research, referring to the Friday launch of Office Mobile
> for iOS.
And just what capability does Office really have on an iPhone? Is it
> ...any more clearly than this?
>
> 'Microsoft's surprise launch of Office Mobile for the iPhone today shows
> that the software giant continues to favor Windows' future over Office's
> fortune, analysts said today.
>
> And they just don't get that strategy.
>
> "It's puzzling, [Office] on iPhone but not on iPad," said Frank Gillett
> of Forrester Research, referring to the Friday launch of Office Mobile
> for iOS.
fully featured in terms of content creation, or more of a suite of
read-only apps more suitable for an iPhone?
> Office Mobile for iOS stores documents on SkyDrive or SkyDrive Pro,
> depending on whether the Office 365 subscription is a consumer- or
> business-grade plan.
>
> "They're continuing the artificial advantaging of one product over
> another to change customer behavior," Gillett said.
> "We think that's a
> major mistake. In their eyes, not providing Office for iPad will
> motivate people to buy Windows tablets.
certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
marketplace? That would be stupid.
> That's baloney.
Agreed. This speculation is baloney.
People have
> already bought iPads. You're going to deny them Office and piss them
> off?
tablet space? Riiiiiiight.
> That makes no sense.
To Apple fangurlz I suppose...
And it's not helping sort things out any
> faster for Windows 8 [on tablets]."'
> <http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9240082/Microsoft_sticks_it_to_th
> e_iPad_with_Windows_first_Office_strategy>
>
> Come on trolls: spin this one!
Microsoft's part not to actively undermine their own mobile computing
efforts. Maybe Apple fangurlz should petition Apple to do its own
Office compatible product if they feel they really need one that bad
instead of whining.
Sandman
Jun 15, 2013, 3:44:02 AM6/15/13
to
In article <kpgts6$qd5$1...@dont-email.me>,
money from Office than from Windows?
I understand how they're thinking, but I kind of get the feeling that
the VP for Office is sitting there "Hey guys, please let us sell our
product to ALL users and make a shitload of money!" :)
--
Sandman[.net]
Flint <agen...@section-31.net> wrote:
> > "We think that's a
> > major mistake. In their eyes, not providing Office for iPad will
> > motivate people to buy Windows tablets.
>
> A presumption for which no evidence exists. Even if true, it's
> certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
> tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
> iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
> marketplace? That would be stupid.
Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Microsoft making tons more
> > "We think that's a
> > major mistake. In their eyes, not providing Office for iPad will
> > motivate people to buy Windows tablets.
>
> A presumption for which no evidence exists. Even if true, it's
> certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
> tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
> iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
> marketplace? That would be stupid.
money from Office than from Windows?
I understand how they're thinking, but I kind of get the feeling that
the VP for Office is sitting there "Hey guys, please let us sell our
product to ALL users and make a shitload of money!" :)
--
Sandman[.net]
Jon
Jun 15, 2013, 6:24:34 AM6/15/13
to
Apps/Drive, just take a look into Zara's crystal ball...
ZnU
Jun 15, 2013, 10:14:10 AM6/15/13
to
In article <mr-6D1F95.09...@News.Individual.NET>,
Yes, this really doesn't seem like it makes a ton of sense for
Microsoft. Office 365 Home Premium is $99/year -- a traditional desktop
Windows license is ~$40. You'd think they wouldn't hold back the
$99/year product to help push the $40-every-few-years product.
I suppose the thinking is that Windows gives Microsoft strategic
leverage -- that controlling it is part of what allows them to sell as
many copies of Office as they ultimately do, for instance, because it's
hard to challenge them on their own platform.
I think Microsoft *did* gain some measure of security historically from
controlling the world's 'default' OS, but that ship has long since
sailed with the rise of the web as a platform and with the number of
non-Windows computing devices now in use. Microsoft would be better
served at this point by simply creating the best Office it can for every
major platform.
Microsoft. Office 365 Home Premium is $99/year -- a traditional desktop
Windows license is ~$40. You'd think they wouldn't hold back the
$99/year product to help push the $40-every-few-years product.
I suppose the thinking is that Windows gives Microsoft strategic
leverage -- that controlling it is part of what allows them to sell as
many copies of Office as they ultimately do, for instance, because it's
hard to challenge them on their own platform.
I think Microsoft *did* gain some measure of security historically from
controlling the world's 'default' OS, but that ship has long since
sailed with the rise of the web as a platform and with the number of
non-Windows computing devices now in use. Microsoft would be better
served at this point by simply creating the best Office it can for every
major platform.
KDT
Jun 15, 2013, 10:36:25 AM6/15/13
to
On Saturday, June 15, 2013 1:30:35 AM UTC-4, Flint wrote:
> On 6/14/2013 11:40 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>
> A presumption for which no evidence exists. Even if true, it's
>
> certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
>
> tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
>
> iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
>
> marketplace? That would be stupid.
Microsoft is a software company. They make more per sale on Office than Windows (assuming OEM cost for Windows). Why would they not sale Office to a demographic who was the money to spend and willingness to spend it?
> On 6/14/2013 11:40 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>
> A presumption for which no evidence exists. Even if true, it's
>
> certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
>
> tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
>
> iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
>
> marketplace? That would be stupid.
> So let's see... Microsoft is supposed to undermine its own efforts in
>
> tablet space? Riiiiiiight.
>
>
>
> > That makes no sense.
>
>
>
> To Apple fangurlz I suppose...
>
>
> No spin required. It looks like a pretty clear decision on
>
> Microsoft's part not to actively undermine their own mobile computing
>
> efforts. Maybe Apple fangurlz should petition Apple to do its own
>
> Office compatible product if they feel they really need one that bad
>
> instead of whining.
Gary
Jun 15, 2013, 1:26:46 PM6/15/13
to
cloud microsoft start blabbing about office 365 for IOS.
Apple are hard at work making major changes to Iwork and this probably
put microsoft in a tight spot cause if Apple really get serious with
Iwork then nobody will care about office on IOS.
Sandman
Jun 15, 2013, 4:44:04 PM6/15/13
to
In article <znu-6E6323.1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
enough, but still - by now they would have realized that the Surface is
no money maker, and they even said from the start that it was a way to
kickstart the market.
> I suppose the thinking is that Windows gives Microsoft strategic
> leverage -- that controlling it is part of what allows them to sell as
> many copies of Office as they ultimately do, for instance, because it's
> hard to challenge them on their own platform.
>
> I think Microsoft *did* gain some measure of security historically from
> controlling the world's 'default' OS, but that ship has long since
> sailed with the rise of the web as a platform and with the number of
> non-Windows computing devices now in use. Microsoft would be better
> served at this point by simply creating the best Office it can for every
> major platform.
Agreed. While they'r enot (yet) in the same position as Sega in relation
to the rest of the industry, sooner or later they will have to just
separate Windows and Office and let each division to their best job and
work independantly (marketing wise).
--
Sandman[.net]
ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> > > > "We think that's a
> > > > major mistake. In their eyes, not providing Office for iPad will
> > > > motivate people to buy Windows tablets.
> > >
> > > A presumption for which no evidence exists. Even if true, it's
> > > certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
> > > tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
> > > iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
> > > marketplace? That would be stupid.
> >
> > Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Microsoft making tons more
> > money from Office than from Windows?
> >
> > I understand how they're thinking, but I kind of get the feeling that
> > the VP for Office is sitting there "Hey guys, please let us sell our
> > product to ALL users and make a shitload of money!" :)
>
> Yes, this really doesn't seem like it makes a ton of sense for
> Microsoft. Office 365 Home Premium is $99/year -- a traditional desktop
> Windows license is ~$40. You'd think they wouldn't hold back the
> $99/year product to help push the $40-every-few-years product.
I suppose throwing in the Surface in the mix might give them incentive
> > > > "We think that's a
> > > > major mistake. In their eyes, not providing Office for iPad will
> > > > motivate people to buy Windows tablets.
> > >
> > > A presumption for which no evidence exists. Even if true, it's
> > > certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
> > > tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
> > > iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
> > > marketplace? That would be stupid.
> >
> > Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Microsoft making tons more
> > money from Office than from Windows?
> >
> > I understand how they're thinking, but I kind of get the feeling that
> > the VP for Office is sitting there "Hey guys, please let us sell our
> > product to ALL users and make a shitload of money!" :)
>
> Yes, this really doesn't seem like it makes a ton of sense for
> Microsoft. Office 365 Home Premium is $99/year -- a traditional desktop
> Windows license is ~$40. You'd think they wouldn't hold back the
> $99/year product to help push the $40-every-few-years product.
enough, but still - by now they would have realized that the Surface is
no money maker, and they even said from the start that it was a way to
kickstart the market.
> I suppose the thinking is that Windows gives Microsoft strategic
> leverage -- that controlling it is part of what allows them to sell as
> many copies of Office as they ultimately do, for instance, because it's
> hard to challenge them on their own platform.
>
> I think Microsoft *did* gain some measure of security historically from
> controlling the world's 'default' OS, but that ship has long since
> sailed with the rise of the web as a platform and with the number of
> non-Windows computing devices now in use. Microsoft would be better
> served at this point by simply creating the best Office it can for every
> major platform.
to the rest of the industry, sooner or later they will have to just
separate Windows and Office and let each division to their best job and
work independantly (marketing wise).
--
Sandman[.net]
Flint
Jun 15, 2013, 6:16:23 PM6/15/13
to
On 6/15/2013 10:36 AM, KDT wrote:
> On Saturday, June 15, 2013 1:30:35 AM UTC-4, Flint wrote:
>> On 6/14/2013 11:40 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>
>
>> A presumption for which no evidence exists. Even if true, it's
>>
>> certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
>>
>> tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
>>
>> iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
>>
>> marketplace? That would be stupid.
>
> Microsoft is a software company. They make more per sale on Office than Windows (assuming OEM cost for Windows). Why would they not sale Office to a demographic who was the money to spend and willingness to spend it?
A simplistic view of bottom line sales during a narrow time slice
> On Saturday, June 15, 2013 1:30:35 AM UTC-4, Flint wrote:
>> On 6/14/2013 11:40 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>
>
>> A presumption for which no evidence exists. Even if true, it's
>>
>> certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
>>
>> tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
>>
>> iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
>>
>> marketplace? That would be stupid.
>
> Microsoft is a software company. They make more per sale on Office than Windows (assuming OEM cost for Windows). Why would they not sale Office to a demographic who was the money to spend and willingness to spend it?
period is a rather quick nickel grab rather than going for the long
dime. This is especially true considering the competition between
Office's supporting cloud service and its competitors.
It's simply going to take a bit more time for the marketplace to sort
out the clear
dominant positions, and for Microsoft to fully support iOS at this
juncture would
be a risky move, especially since no one can provide any evidence that
iPad users
would rush en mass for the product anyway.
>> So let's see... Microsoft is supposed to undermine its own efforts in
>>
>> tablet space? Riiiiiiight.
>
> So why does Microsoft sale Office for Mac?
Just sayin...
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>> That makes no sense.
>>
>>
>>
>> To Apple fangurlz I suppose...
>>
>
> I guess it didn't make sense to you when Sega got out of the hardware business and start selling software for other platforms? Microsoft advertises the Azure platform to iOS developers a lot,
must have missed that bit of news...
>
>>
>> No spin required. It looks like a pretty clear decision on
>>
>> Microsoft's part not to actively undermine their own mobile computing
>>
>> efforts. Maybe Apple fangurlz should petition Apple to do its own
>>
>> Office compatible product if they feel they really need one that bad
>>
>> instead of whining.
>
>
> It's called iWork.
>
it, one would think there is no equivalent available whatsoever.
--
MFB
Alan Baker
Jun 15, 2013, 10:39:02 PM6/15/13
to
In article <kpiopu$1of$1...@dont-email.me>,
It shows how much they fear the iPad.
Just sayin...
Flint <agen...@section-31.net> wrote:
> On 6/15/2013 10:36 AM, KDT wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 15, 2013 1:30:35 AM UTC-4, Flint wrote:
> >> On 6/14/2013 11:40 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> >>
> >
> >> A presumption for which no evidence exists. Even if true, it's
> >>
> >> certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
> >>
> >> tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
> >>
> >> iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
> >>
> >> marketplace? That would be stupid.
> >
> > Microsoft is a software company. They make more per sale on Office than
> > Windows (assuming OEM cost for Windows). Why would they not sale Office to
> > a demographic who was the money to spend and willingness to spend it?
>
> A simplistic view of bottom line sales during a narrow time slice
> period is a rather quick nickel grab rather than going for the long
> dime. This is especially true considering the competition between
> Office's supporting cloud service and its competitors.
>
> It's simply going to take a bit more time for the marketplace to sort
> out the clear
> dominant positions, and for Microsoft to fully support iOS at this
> juncture would
> be a risky move, especially since no one can provide any evidence that
> iPad users
> would rush en mass for the product anyway.
Right.
> On 6/15/2013 10:36 AM, KDT wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 15, 2013 1:30:35 AM UTC-4, Flint wrote:
> >> On 6/14/2013 11:40 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> >>
> >
> >> A presumption for which no evidence exists. Even if true, it's
> >>
> >> certainly their right to protect their ow interest and investment into
> >>
> >> tablets. Why should they cut their own throat by releasing it for
> >>
> >> iPads before their own tablets are successfully established in the
> >>
> >> marketplace? That would be stupid.
> >
> > Microsoft is a software company. They make more per sale on Office than
> > Windows (assuming OEM cost for Windows). Why would they not sale Office to
> > a demographic who was the money to spend and willingness to spend it?
>
> A simplistic view of bottom line sales during a narrow time slice
> period is a rather quick nickel grab rather than going for the long
> dime. This is especially true considering the competition between
> Office's supporting cloud service and its competitors.
>
> It's simply going to take a bit more time for the marketplace to sort
> out the clear
> dominant positions, and for Microsoft to fully support iOS at this
> juncture would
> be a risky move, especially since no one can provide any evidence that
> iPad users
> would rush en mass for the product anyway.
It shows how much they fear the iPad.
Just sayin...
Flint
Jun 16, 2013, 3:03:47 AM6/16/13
to
and throw in the towel and be what Apple fangurlz think they should be
- Apple's software lackey.
--
MFB
Alan Baker
Jun 16, 2013, 3:36:10 AM6/16/13
to
In article <kpjnnb$ou2$1...@dont-email.me>,
Nope.
I'm saying what I said:
That Microsoft...
...quite rationally...
...fears the iPad.
I'm saying what I said:
That Microsoft...
...quite rationally...
...fears the iPad.
KDT
Jun 16, 2013, 8:50:02 AM6/16/13
to
So which was a better decision for Apple back in 2003? To support iPod on Windows or should have just stuck with making it Mac only?
Nashton
Jun 16, 2013, 9:58:50 AM6/16/13
to
of a community college graduate-no-future iOs developer.
>
> So which was a better decision for Apple back in 2003? To support iPod
> on Windows or should have just stuck with making it Mac only?
>
die-hard cultist.
Gary
Jun 16, 2013, 10:13:30 AM6/16/13
to
He's comparing how Apple decided to allow for instance Itunes to be
available on Windows instead of just Mac.
Fast forward and microsoft have a choice here….
Release a proper mobile version for ipad/iphone users or keep it on
surface for instance with the hope of selling loads of tablets because
of it.
Issue is surface sales will not improve substantially because office is
on there but release it on the ipad/iphone and sales of office will
increase substantially.
I do think however Apple will go to town on the next update of Iwork
for 2014 so they will make sure they have something on the back burner
should microsoft not play ball.
KDT
Jun 16, 2013, 8:15:29 PM6/16/13
to
Alan Baker
Jun 16, 2013, 8:20:04 PM6/16/13
to
In article <1f0cd9d7-1939-458d...@googlegroups.com>,
Is extensive education (at LEAST a bachelor's degree)...
...in physiotherapy!
...in physiotherapy!
Nashton
Jun 16, 2013, 10:20:54 PM6/16/13
to
On 6/16/2013 9:15 PM, KDT wrote:
> On Sunday, June 16, 2013 9:58:50 AM UTC-4, Nashton wrote:
>> On 6/16/2013 9:50 AM, KDT wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, June 16, 2013 3:03:47 AM UTC-4, Flint wrote:
>>
>>>> On 6/15/2013 10:39 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>
>>>>
=
> On Sunday, June 16, 2013 9:58:50 AM UTC-4, Nashton wrote:
>> On 6/16/2013 9:50 AM, KDT wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, June 16, 2013 3:03:47 AM UTC-4, Flint wrote:
>>
>>>> On 6/15/2013 10:39 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> So which was a better decision for Apple back in 2003? To support iPod
>>
>>
>>
>>> on Windows or should have just stuck with making it Mac only?
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> What an idiotic statement. Another flawed syllogism from another
>>
>> die-hard cultist.
>
> Grown technical people are talking, Why are you part of this conversation again?
They were before you entered the fray.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> So which was a better decision for Apple back in 2003? To support iPod
>>
>>
>>
>>> on Windows or should have just stuck with making it Mac only?
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> What an idiotic statement. Another flawed syllogism from another
>>
>> die-hard cultist.
>
> Grown technical people are talking, Why are you part of this conversation again?
How's your iOS developing coming along? Are you in the midst of creating
another fart app for iOS 7?
>
0 new messages