Microsoft Blaming PC Firms For WIn 8 Poor Sales.
- Thread starter OLDPHART
- Start date
I have to agree at least partly with Microsoft.
There is plenty of hardware around but much of it lacks touch or other geatures to take advantage of Win8.
The few that are appearing seem to be low powered or over priced.
I am just waiting for thr Surface Pro to appear.
There is plenty of hardware around but much of it lacks touch or other geatures to take advantage of Win8.
The few that are appearing seem to be low powered or over priced.
I am just waiting for thr Surface Pro to appear.
I don't think that is what we're saying.
But after 2+ years to some extent to "the man in the street" iPad had almost become used as a term like Hoover.
I got asked by my neighbour to "get the iPads i've bought for the kids for Xmas set up on the wireless so they can use it out the box".
They were 2 £90 unbranded Android tablets.
Even those who know the difference, like myself, who have a device that works, why would i immediately dump that for a Win 8 one even if there were options out there?
I will consider a Win 8 device next time round, but not now.
And with the desktop market what does Win 8 offer over Win 7? Why would i want to make that switch at additional cost? Does it make a leap in performance like from Vista to 7? Do i feel like spending money on a screen and changing the way my computer desks are set up so i can touch the screen easily, frankly, no.
Win 8 hasn't missed the boat, far from it, but they were naive to believe that people would rush out immediately and buy a new device just because a new OS was out there and probably over egged the take up forecasts.
I'd expect it to become more prevelant as people begin to refresh what they have in the portable device market and people buying a new PC from the "high street" retailers take it up.
The first time round when they brought out a tablet years back wasn't too late but they failed to join the dots then with the cloud / apps. This time around they're way too slow to respond with a competing product, they clearly didn't see ipads as a threat when they should have. HP made the same mistake and look what happened there.
typical Microsoft, late to the party
copying everyone else once they already have a strong hold of the market (apple)
when they tried to innovate they got it wrong, and it didnt take off.
then taking the market they are actually good at (business) and bringing out tiles which most business users dont want ....
have no sympathy for them
copying everyone else once they already have a strong hold of the market (apple)
when they tried to innovate they got it wrong, and it didnt take off.
then taking the market they are actually good at (business) and bringing out tiles which most business users dont want ....
have no sympathy for them
Last edited:
Err , one other point , there is this going around called the recession
Money is tight all round, splashing out for some new hardware that does exactly
what the current hardware you have is not in the fore front of peoples minds
people having their kids clothed and fed is more important
Money is tight all round, splashing out for some new hardware that does exactly
what the current hardware you have is not in the fore front of peoples minds
people having their kids clothed and fed is more important
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
Microsoft should have left Windows 7 alone but built on that instead of a new UI.
No, no they should not.
Go look at any analysis. Tablets are massively growing, desktop market is stagnant. Not even a new os is going to solve desktop market, not even a non metro OS.
What they need is tablets in the market. Wich just aren't there due to oems.
People saying its to late? Is it to late for Windows Phones as well? They've made massive head ways especially in south Europe. Tablets are an even newer market, it's not late at all, there's just nothing out there. Not even surface is a one fit for all machine, seeing as it doesn't have 3G/4g NFC etc.
If you look at total OS market share, MS have been losing out for years and have been heading for a cliff. It'll be a slow slog, but they will get there. They are seeing good growth in certain areas like phones, bing Xbox branded services. They just need a range of tablets from super cheap to super expensive.
They need to continually update and improve w8 like a mobile os with releases ATM yearly and in reality faster than that. They did the hardware in shops and they need a sustained advertising campaign and time.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
Yes, for desktops YES they should. Tablets requires a different OS IMO. Apple have it right.
Why would they do that? It makes no sense at all.
They are doing the right thing by making it all the same, which means things don't have to be programmed 3/4times for different platforms. All though its not there ATM, they will get 100% cross comparability at sometime.
Business actually like w8 tablets. There's already been large orders. BT for a start. It's much easier to integrate and they have far more business needs built into it.
Again look at the statistics, sales charts etc. it makes no sense for them to carry on the way they were.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
MS need Surface in shops
Everywhere
Then rival manufacturers will bother to mae similar and/or better items
Everywhere
Then rival manufacturers will bother to mae similar and/or better items
Associate
- Joined
- 11 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 1,353
- Location
- Here and There (mostly)
Lot's of valid points
The success of android and for all it's fragmentation it has made tablets affordable, and for those who simply do watch media, browse, play simple games it's as much as they need.
Win 7 was too good, I remember using Win ME then moving to XP and it's was like night and day, then I moved to Vista and after three months went back to XP due to it's stability, I cautiously upgraded to Win 7 and have never looked back, barring hardware issues or my own errors Win 7 has never once let me down, I do not want a touch screen pc, I have a smart phone and tablet and yes the touch interface is ideal for what they do it isn't for my pc.
Money is tight, the country is not doing well as a whole and as such a lot of people don't have the disposable income they once had, tie this in with an ever increasing pre owned / second hand market, let's face it most folks could get by on a C2D based system for 99% of their uses, there's a hell of a lot of them around that get sold on and passed down, you can buy a usable home pc for a ton why then bother paying more for a new OS ?
Yes win mobiles and tablets may be making inroads but nowhere near the scale they need to be, MS have missed the boat simple as. IOS/Android are synonymous with mobile / tablet users, Rim had a good run in certain sectors and even they've seen that eroded down to a shadow of it's former self, if someone with an established product and user base is struggling against the big two who the hell at MS thought they could buck the trend ?
This isn't an exhaustive list by any means but I'd consider each point valid, the only people to blame for the low uptake of Win 8 are MS.
The success of android and for all it's fragmentation it has made tablets affordable, and for those who simply do watch media, browse, play simple games it's as much as they need.
Win 7 was too good, I remember using Win ME then moving to XP and it's was like night and day, then I moved to Vista and after three months went back to XP due to it's stability, I cautiously upgraded to Win 7 and have never looked back, barring hardware issues or my own errors Win 7 has never once let me down, I do not want a touch screen pc, I have a smart phone and tablet and yes the touch interface is ideal for what they do it isn't for my pc.
Money is tight, the country is not doing well as a whole and as such a lot of people don't have the disposable income they once had, tie this in with an ever increasing pre owned / second hand market, let's face it most folks could get by on a C2D based system for 99% of their uses, there's a hell of a lot of them around that get sold on and passed down, you can buy a usable home pc for a ton why then bother paying more for a new OS ?
Yes win mobiles and tablets may be making inroads but nowhere near the scale they need to be, MS have missed the boat simple as. IOS/Android are synonymous with mobile / tablet users, Rim had a good run in certain sectors and even they've seen that eroded down to a shadow of it's former self, if someone with an established product and user base is struggling against the big two who the hell at MS thought they could buck the trend ?
This isn't an exhaustive list by any means but I'd consider each point valid, the only people to blame for the low uptake of Win 8 are MS.
Missed the boat?
Not in the slightest. Italy MS have an 11.6% phone market beating iOS.
Win phone is making huge in roads in several countries.
It takes time to change marketshares.
They aren't making inroads I to tablets though, as there's just non about and far to few options. They are all expensive with very few differences between them, most of those aren't even available anyway.
Brands rise and fall, they are late which makes it harder, but it is by no means missed the boat.
Otherwise Nokia would never of fallen as they controlled the market at one point. MS are in it for the long haul.
Not in the slightest. Italy MS have an 11.6% phone market beating iOS.
Win phone is making huge in roads in several countries.
It takes time to change marketshares.
They aren't making inroads I to tablets though, as there's just non about and far to few options. They are all expensive with very few differences between them, most of those aren't even available anyway.
Brands rise and fall, they are late which makes it harder, but it is by no means missed the boat.
Otherwise Nokia would never of fallen as they controlled the market at one point. MS are in it for the long haul.
I disagree.
Microsoft went down this route with Windows Mobile. They tried to make a PDA/smartphone UI look and feel like a desktop UI. It was a disaster. It made even S60 look good in comparison.
It's good to have the same underlying APIs but user interfaces should be tailored the input and usage of individual categories of device.
Forcing desktop users* with a mouse and a large monitor into using touch-optimised fullscreen interface is a user experience catastrophe.
(* obviously you can pretty much disable Metro but a lot of the built-in apps demand you use it)
From what I read Microsoft angered all of their 'partners' by entering the market with Surface and undercutting them all (MS don't have to pay the extortionate license fee).
From the horses mouth:
Link: http://blogs.computerworld.com/wind...may-anger-manufacturers-endangering-windows-8
So bad management then?
From the horses mouth:
Link: http://blogs.computerworld.com/wind...may-anger-manufacturers-endangering-windows-8
So bad management then?
Last edited:
You're right. I think most people would agree that Apple have captured the majority mindshare when it comes to tablet computers. But a few years ago lots of people were referring to any touch screen phone as an "iPhone", before that a games console was arbitrarily a "Playstation" or a "Nintendo" and even to use your Hoover example it's not really done the success of the Dyson any harm has it?
My point is that entering the market a couple of years after your main competitors will be pretty much inconsequential over the long term.
I think it would be quite unreasonable to expect you to dump a device that's working fine for you right now. Like you say, consider a Windows option when you're next due to update. If there isn't an option out there then you can't buy it - that's Microsoft's problem.
There are compelling reasons, for some, to switch to a Windows based offering but that wouldn't be the case for everybody. There really isn't a solution for anybody looking for a budget option, for example. At least not yet.
Again, you're quite right. Did I throw out my Dell monitor that I use for editing because it wasn't touch based? No chance. I use the same keyboard, same mouse that I have done for years and have not bought a single piece of new interface hardware. The only cost associated with the upgrade so far has been the price of the upgrade itself.
Contrary to popular belief Windows 8 does actually work without touch and gesture-based hardware. And there are many reasons why you might choose to upgrade a desktop to Windows 8, but it's been done to death and I don't really want to repeat the whole thing here.
Which goes back to the original point - that there wasn't a good selection of options out there for people to choose from in the run up to Christmas. Most potential customers would have been mopped up by Apple and Android at the high and low end respectively.
The most compelling "Windows" device was the Surface and that wasn't particularly easy to get hold of and was also expensive, hardly an impulse buy. If you were outside the US you had to pretty much know what you were looking for and where to look for it.
The hardware situation is pretty pathetic at the moment.
most businesses are still use xp so don't try playing that card.
not true
I let my mum use my laptop which as win8 on it, she's in her late 50's and she's no techy and has no idea how to use computers but once she turned on the laptop and metro start screen came up she was navigating it so easily without any help.
on win7 she'd always ask me how to open xxxxx or where this, whats that