I don't get the big deal with free OS X updates. Apple sells hardware at a premium and you get the software with it. You can't buy Apple software, so why should you be able to buy software upgrades? It should have always been free, just like iOS upgrades are free.
The comparison isn't germane anyway. Apple charges $20-30 for something Microsoft calls a "service pack", which they've always given away for free. I just downloaded Windows 8.1 -- no cost. Amazing how these guys spin stuff and people just eat it up.
Yup - making it sound like paying for software is bad. Considering how long Windows 7 is lasting me, it was worth every penny since I can transfer it between devices!
When you put it that way it doesn't sound nearly as impressive:
Real World:
A) Upgrading the software on our hardware costs money.
B) Upgrading the software on our hardware does not cost money.
Reality Distortion Field:
A) Our software upgrades cost money.
B) Our software upgrades are free! (Look how nice we are now!)
In a way, it reminds me of enterprise updates and services...
My NAS is about 4 years old now, yet I'm still getting brand new software for it, because making that available to me as a brand-loyal customer comes at no extra cost to the manufacturer, because the value is in the upcoming hardware.
(Additionally, I'm less inclined to upgrade my old software when I'm forced to purchase hardware to get access to the same software later anyway)
In my environment less and less people use Office and more and more people use Google Docs. Not because Google Docs are better than Office (they’re worse) but because for a lot of people it just feels like a lot less hassle to create and share documents using Google Docs. If I was Microsoft I would be worried, thing like this tend to get amplified over time.
Not really sure it's a completely fair comparison.
I've seen a huge trend recently in people using Keynote over PowerPoint. Everything out the box simply looks and "feels" better. Last time I checked, Google Docs didn't let people start making up the presentation on their laptop and then finish it off on the train on their tablet, with no internet connection [1]. In fact I don't think I've ever seen anyone give a presentation to a room from Google Docs, but maybe that's just me?
It also doesn't easily allow people to present to a room with the help of iPhones & iPads to cue/preview the next slide.
Google Docs is amazing, but I think Apple went after them today as well - let's not forget the big bullet hurled in their direction [2].
I'll still be amazed to see any immediate, large scale shift away from Excel anytime soon though.
In a lot of places it has. I can't even remember the last time I opened anything in Office. At work people share links to google docs instead of sending docs.
I am always fascinated by people sharing corporate documents on Google Docs... It blows my mind to put that in the cloud, than allow people to share if among themselves, so if any of them gets his/her account hacked, the hacker will have access to company's corporate secrets... And that's without assuming that Google has access to those as well.
From experience, the global Oil & Gas industry is completely reliant on Excel, and that will not change any time soon. They use it for nearly everything... It's the common UI to bigger, complex systems, and it's the data storage/manipulation tool for more specialized, or "simpler" needs.
Many of the non-Excel applications in this space started out and grew from a monster Excel workbook.
IMHO, people still send the docs or portable files especially when they have to share final and binding contracts. There is quite a bit of lifecycle of a document after it has been created on Google Docs!
Apple will say that tablet/laptop hybrids are dumb right up until they announce their own.
In fact, I would bet money that the Macbook/iPad convergence is already in the works.
But then, as it occasionally happens, they might also deliver something overwhelmingly superior to anything around.
As Gruber recently commented on the Galaxy Gear: "About the best you could expect from Samsung without having anything to copy from Apple: overpriced, ugly, laggy UI, terrible battery life, dubious utility." (Come to think of it, that seems to fit the Surface quite well.)
Tim Cook describing the Surface as a “sorta-tablet, sorta-PC” thing, reminds my Steve Ballmer mocking the iPhone few yrs ago. In both cases I find it immature and short-sighted.
From a hardware perspective being half and half is fine, I think the criticism of the surface is that the interface and software is optimised for neither paradigm and the device suffers as a result. Apple may well release a Mac Air with a touchscreen, but I doubt it will run in IOS mode and in OSX mode, it will more likely pick one and stick with it.
> other companies aren't quite ready to completely embrace the post-PC world, where people are typing on virtual screens rather than physical keyboards
I don't see Apple completely dropping all their various Mac lines. So technically, they have not completely embraced it either. Why do they keep claiming they have?
I can't be the only that cannot efficiently do their job (programming) without a keyboard. Maybe "people as consumers" are typing only on virtual screens but I think there is way too many "people as producers" that need an actual keyboard. Yes, I'm sure there are some people that can make it work for some types of jobs. But I don't think that is a very large segment. So I don't want... we don't need... companies to completely embrace a non-keyboard world. We need companies that can make a good product that can live in both worlds. While what has been offered so far keeps missing the mark a bit... in a way they are closer to this than what Apple has (that we know of).
It's good marketing and I don't blame them for hitting MS where it hurts, but on the other hand this is the same company that wants customers to pay $3000 for a desktop model.
EDIT well a tower model, but you get the point. The Mac Tube reminds me of the G4 Cube.
Should we encourage that as users, this quote war between Apple, Google, Microsoft and co? They just play the game of Apple fanboys in this particular case, and I find that immature and totally useless.
Apple is after consumers with their new set of never ending, shiny, made in china toys.
That's all cool.
With Ballmer and his me-too copycatting and being always late to the party strategy gone soon, Microsoft better (and likely) will stop playing gadget and widget games and refocus on enterprise software and services department as well as cloud strategy.
Remember when "cool new government technology" was a thing (in movies)? I do.
There's a huge debate going on in Redmond right now (ex-MS employee here) on whether to focus on big, rich, slower-moving enterprises, or faster-moving consumer tech.
Microsoft has rightly realized that consumer tech (not big companies/government) is setting the agenda for the path of technology, and they're going to fight tooth and nail to remain relevant to consumers. I think they have the right idea commercially.
As far am I'm concerned, there isn't even a contest. The industry should have learned from the iPhone's success and the subsequent BYOD movement: enterprises are composed of people who go home and buy consumer products. The consumer space drives the market and picks the winners.
There are way more profits to be made in selling enterprise services to mid-size company vs. selling to their employees razor-thin margin gadgets.
And competing in consumer market business (with millions of way faster moving, smaller companies) takes too much resources and focusing.
Apple won because they're all-in into that. Ballmer tried to play too many games at once and proved that his "compete everywhere!" stupid ego was wrong.
Google will be biting pieces from Apple, not Microsoft.
Microsoft's salvation is in cloud and enterprise software and services.
Once Ballmer announced his departure MSFT stock suddenly became way more attractive first time in decade.
the segmentation of consumers makes the whole debate boil down to who will you make the most cash. I think apple has a solid hold and doesn't really need to worry in regards to the consumer market. but developers are going linux meaning more sales for PC vendors (plus Microsoft since they have default license sales on that hardware). Both camps have a solid consumer base and at this point I wouldn't bet against either.
Do we expect Apple execs to praise its competition? Google Docs competes both with Office and iWork, its also free! PR quotes for the perfect linkbait articles.
