backtop


Print 74 comment(s) - last by althaz.. on Oct 27 at 7:35 PM

Microsoft didn't take kindly to Apple's recent digs

In a blog post not-so-subtly titled "Apples and Oranges", Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) VP of Communications Frank Shaw gave comment on rival Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL) recent announcement that iWork (Apple's Office software suite) would be included free with its new iPad/iPad Mini tablets.

I. Flame On

Not surprisingly Mr. Shaw wasn't overly impressed, commenting:

Seems like the RDF (Reality Distortion Field) typically generated by an Apple event has extended beyond Cupertino.

Note: If you are the TL;DR type, let me cut to the chase. Surface and Surface 2 both include Office, the world’s most popular, most powerful productivity software for free and are priced below both the iPad 2 and iPad Air respectively.

Making Apple’s decision to build the price of their less popular and less powerful iWork into their tablets not a very big (or very good) deal.


....Microsoft understands how people work better than anyone else on the planet...We literally wrote the book on getting things done. 

And so it’s not surprising that we see other folks now talking about how much “work” you can get done on their devices. Adding watered down productivity apps. Bolting on aftermarket input devices. All in an effort to convince people that their entertainment devices are really work machines.

In that spirit, Apple announced yesterday that they were dropping their fees on their “iWork” suite of apps. Now, since iWork has never gotten much traction, and was already priced like an afterthought, it’s hardly that surprising or significant a move. And it doesn’t change the fact that it’s much harder to get work done on a device that lacks precision input and a desktop for true side-by-side multitasking.
...

So, when I see Apple drop the price of their struggling, lightweight productivity apps, I don’t see a shot across our bow, I see an attempt to play catch up.

Frank Shaw

Of course his comment overlooks the fact that most Windows 8.1 tablets don't include Office.  And it also is somewhat ironic that he espouses standardization in Office as a selling point, when Microsoft was long accused of fighting or otherwise trying to subvert standards to make Office documents compatible with open source alternatives (although it's recently come around somewhat).

II. ... But he has some points

However, Office as freebie -- particularly with the $449 USD Surface 2 -- is a pretty good deal.
 

Surface 2 (L) and Surface Pro 2 (R)

And Mr. Shaw is correct that Apple's iWork feature-wise is more comparable to the already free Google Docs (by Google Inc. (GOOG)) than Office; in fact Google Docs is arguably more powerful in that it's cross platform compatible (like Office).  Both Google Docs and iWork will meet the needs of most casual users.  But for many enterprise and power users, moving from Office to these free lighter alternatives is not an option and Microsoft knows that.

Google Docs
Google Docs is more compatible than iWork and also free.

Also it's worth noting that Microsoft didn't start this flame war.  Mr. Shaw's comment comes after Apple CEO Tim Cook at the keynote commented:

Our competition is different: They're confused. They chased after netbooks. Now they're trying to make PCs into tablets and tablets into PCs.  Who knows what they'll do next?"

We have a very clear direction and a very ambitious goal. We still believe deeply in this category and we're not slowing down on our innovation.

Tim Cook snickering
Apple CEO Tim Cook [Image Source: Reuters]

Most perceived the comment to a nameless attack on Microsoft, and to a lesser extent Google, whose Android OS now leads the tablet market.

Source: Microsoft [TechNet]



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Not Surprising
By tng on 10/24/2013 2:43:46 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I see Apple drop the price of their struggling, lightweight productivity apps, I don’t see a shot across our bow, I see an attempt to play catch up.
Well, yeah.

At the heart of this is that MS has always been a software company and Apple a hardware company. This does not mean that Apple should not even try, there are plenty of people out there that think that Apple software is fantastic. My opinion is somewhat different though.

Apple could write some great software if they would just get past the Job's legacy of having everything Apple all the time, and write software that works well on other platforms and will play nice with other platforms, instead of working with PCs being almost an afterthought.




RE: Not Surprising
By Argon18 on 10/24/13, Rating: -1
RE: Not Surprising
By tng on 10/24/2013 3:11:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Open formats like HTML breeds brilliant innovation.
But not necessarily income. Come on, both of these companies (no matter who you like) are in it for the bottom line.


RE: Not Surprising
By Jeffk464 on 10/25/2013 10:31:42 AM , Rating: 2
Yup, apple is pretty famous for playing this sort of game.


RE: Not Surprising
By inighthawki on 10/24/2013 3:13:55 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
No, the heart of this is Microsoft's proprietary file formats, which they purposely obfuscate to make reverse engineering difficult.

You mean like docx (Office Open XML) which is an open format and standardized by ISO? Yes that must be it...


RE: Not Surprising
By OttoResponder on 10/24/2013 3:31:16 PM , Rating: 3
Funny you should mention OOXML... because it's a perfect example.

Richard Stallman: “Microsoft corrupted many members of ISO in order to win approval for its phony ‘open’ document format, OOXML. This was so governments that keep their documents in a Microsoft-only format can pretend that they are using ‘open standards.’ The government of South Africa has filed an appeal against the decision, citing the irregularities in the process.”


RE: Not Surprising
By flatrock on 10/24/2013 3:50:15 PM , Rating: 4
The problem with quoting Richard Stallman is that anyone who might consider him to be providing an unbiased opinion already agrees that Microsoft is the embodiment of evil.

Stallman is brilliant and talented. He's also extremely opinionated.

If you think that standards, or at least large parts of standards being submitted by a single company is something new, then you really haven't had much experience working with standards organizations.

Microsoft and those that work with them and create compatible products represent a huge percentage of the business software market. Why is it surprising that they are able to push their implementation through the standards process without having a lot of changes forced on them? Standardization still provides benefits to consumers and other companies, but complaining that the majority of the standards group sided with Microsoft just makes some other people bad losers.

Microsoft in the past was able to push their products as a defacto standard. People complained about needing to have more open standards, but apparently didn't realize that most companies and even individuals have a vested interest in Microsoft Office as a Standard, and it shouldn't be that surprising that Microsoft was able to get enough support to push though a standard.


RE: Not Surprising
By Mitch101 on 10/24/2013 5:15:39 PM , Rating: 2
The problem when discussing Microsoft Office is people look at it from just Writing a document, sending an e-mail, and doing a simple Excel spreadsheet when Office is a portion of a much larger Eco system.

Where Microsoft Office destroys any competition from remotely coming close is when you add in Exchange Server, SharePoint Server, and Project Server then its like bringing a water balloon to fight the entire US Military. Nothing come remotely close to Office in the corporate world.


RE: Not Surprising
By Varun on 10/25/2013 10:10:05 AM , Rating: 4
This is so true. If you look at the whole package, they are literally years ahead.

It's not just Word, Excel, Powerpoint. OneNote is amazing. Outlook is the benchmark email client. Lync is mindblowing on what you can do with it.

Access. Project. Publisher.

It's no wonder business uses Office.


RE: Not Surprising
By Krioni on 10/25/2013 10:22:05 AM , Rating: 2
This!

Say what you want about MS and their products. MS has PLENTY of flaws. However, It cannot be denied that they have the most fully integrated ecosystem out there when it comes to what a corporate environment needs. From excel to sql server to sharepoint, etc. This stuff really, really plays well together.

Also, I want to see anyone do some REALLY complex stuff in spreadsheets other than Excel. Not just making a list or creating a budget, etc. But something truly complex (think tens of thousands of advanced financial calculations). That's the sort of stuff I do at work, so I NEED excel. Now, for home stuff... I use google docs because it's sufficient for my home needs.


RE: Not Surprising
By TakinYourPoints on 10/24/2013 5:55:06 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Stallman is brilliant and talented. He's also extremely opinionated.


Exactly. He's the last place you go for an unbiased or rational opinion


RE: Not Surprising
By sprockkets on 10/25/2013 12:51:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The problem with quoting Richard Stallman is that anyone who might consider him to be providing an unbiased opinion already agrees that Microsoft is the embodiment of evil.


Logical fallacy - Poisoning the well.

He is biased but his ill will against MS isn't unjustified by any means. You haven't offered any real proof otherwise.

But I will!

1. Those so called XML office formats are just xml wrappers around the same old binary formats.
2. Documentation is incomplete to flat out wrong on the format itself.
3. Ignoring all the problems with the format, MS lobbied and shoved the approval of the format on fast track, which it never should have for such a format.


RE: Not Surprising
By chripuck on 10/25/2013 1:23:29 PM , Rating: 4
No, the XML files are not binary files, they are zip files containing full XML. The ridiculously obvious example is the fact that you can save an Excel spreadsheet as xlsm (XML based) or xlsb (binary based) with the binary version significantly smaller and faster to open.


RE: Not Surprising
By sprockkets on 10/25/13, Rating: 0
RE: Not Surprising
By rsmech on 10/25/2013 1:41:27 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
If we had a level playing field


You sound like a sore loser. That's the mentality of a taker not a doer.


RE: Not Surprising
By inighthawki on 10/25/2013 2:35:47 AM , Rating: 2
A lot of people hate on companies that have accomplished a lot and use their extensive portfolio as a means to attack them for not giving away all their work. This applies to more than just Microsoft. If you have a proprietary technology, you're just going to be attacked by the so called "open community" for doing something that doesn't align with their agenda.


RE: Not Surprising
By chripuck on 10/25/2013 1:20:15 PM , Rating: 2
Who got in the time machine and traveled to 2006?

Office has used an open XML based file format since Office 2007 was introduced. You can manipulate the darn thing via a text editor if you want to and there are many development add ins that will take a web report and output it to PowerPoint with no need to have access to COM model because they just write it in XML.


RE: Not Surprising
By djdjohnson on 10/25/2013 2:48:05 PM , Rating: 1
...and that is why, after twenty years, that HTML still has very poor support for graphics, no standard way of letting users markup documents, no support for things like text wrapping around non-rectangular objects, flowing text between frames. Not to mention that it is very difficult to get HTML objects to appear exactly where you want or be rendered exactly the same across browsers.

HTML now isn't really any different than HTML of the 1990s. JavaScript (even the mess that it is) has changed quite a bit, but the underlying HTML isn't really fundamentally different than it was ten years ago. One could easily argue that progress in HTML has been far slower than it has been in proprietary formats like those in Office.

The truth of the matter is that for HTML to progress you've got to get a lot of different parties to agree on what it is and how to use it, and many of those parties don't like each other, and don't want to adopt ideas created by someone else.

You can talk about the progress of browsers, but browsers aren't HTML. They are HTML interpreters.

And none of that addresses the fact that coding HTML and Javascript is a pain in the butt. The web is far harder to develop for than proprietary environments like Win32/WinRT/Cocoa.

Open standards don't equate to fast progress and ease of use. It seems to actually go the other way. Open standards are good in that it means that anyone can use them. But in terms of making improvements, the fact that there isn't just one body in charge means that changes take forever.


RE: Not Surprising
By althaz on 10/27/2013 7:35:28 PM , Rating: 1
All of the current Office formats are open (they use XML and Zip, FYI).

The office products are not open source, but the file formats are completely open (and are also the defacto standard).


RE: Not Surprising
By CharonPDX on 10/24/2013 3:13:13 PM , Rating: 2
For plain text writing, I use a plain text editor.

For "documents", and especially for more layout-driven documents, I greatly prefer Pages to Word.

For spreadsheets, I greatly prefer Excel to Numbers. Numbers is good for "layout-driven" spreadsheets, but I mostly care about the numbers and formulas - and much of my going-back-to-Excel-1.0 formula knowledge doesn't work in Numbers (or Google Docs.)

I don't often need to do presentations, and when I do, it's usually for work, where I have PowerPoint templates that Keynote doesn't like very much, so I have no real opinion on Keynote.


RE: Not Surprising
By tng on 10/24/2013 3:29:02 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, Office is a mixed bag of useful and non-useful programs. I use Thunderbird because Outlook has become such a kludge of a program that does everything while I need only email.

I had a general manager where I work that told me I had to use Outlook, because we all needed to be on the same page, so I bought it and installed it. After setup he told me the features that I would need to have and when I asked him where exactly do you go to do that, he had no idea. If he had to install the software himself he would be lost


RE: Not Surprising
By Flunk on 10/24/2013 4:31:38 PM , Rating: 2
Outlook is really designed as a client for Microsoft Exchange, not an email program. If you're not using Exchange it really doesn't make much sense.


RE: Not Surprising
By Mitch101 on 10/24/2013 5:07:19 PM , Rating: 2
Outlook Works perfectly fine for e-mail where thunderbirds only advantages are free and usenet.

I tried adopting thunderbird but had to go back to Outlook because thunderbird was very buggy and doesnt recover well.

I will ding Microsoft because I don't particularly care for the Office 2013 monochromatic look and feel its kind of slid a little downward since Outlook 2007.


RE: Not Surprising
By chripuck on 10/25/2013 1:25:02 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, I love me some Outlook 2010 much better than 2007. Agreed on the monochromatic 2013. Don't like it.


RE: Not Surprising
By daboom06 on 10/24/2013 4:14:45 PM , Rating: 4
i dont always make crappy looking manuscripts, but when i do, i like to use word.

latex is and has always been far superior to any other typesetting method.

i wrote a script in matlab that automatically closes word every time i open it thinking i should give it another chance.


Irony
By Samus on 10/24/2013 4:17:07 PM , Rating: 2
What I find amusing is how Office:Mac is version-after-version "better" than its PC equal.




RE: Irony
By tng on 10/24/2013 5:01:05 PM , Rating: 3
Well that is because MS actually cares about how it's software runs on a Mac, the same can't always be said for how Apple software runs on a Windows machine.


RE: Irony
By Reclaimer77 on 10/24/2013 5:37:42 PM , Rating: 3
iTunes and Quicktime.

The two worst running Windows programs, consistently, of ALL TIME.

Brought to you by Apple.


RE: Irony
By Lord 666 on 10/24/2013 6:27:34 PM , Rating: 2
Java by far takes that title.


RE: Irony
By FaaR on 10/24/2013 7:04:04 PM , Rating: 2
Worst software ever? Realplayer. Nuff fking said. :P Arguably, adobe reader and flash also belongs in this competition.

But yeah, itunes and quicktime are (hugely) the suck and have always been. Even on mac they blow, although somewhat less than on windows.


RE: Irony
By BillyBatson on 10/25/2013 1:43:54 AM , Rating: 2
Hehe I commented about RealPlayer before I saw you saying the same thing. Completelyyyyyy agree!!!!!!


RE: Irony
By BillyBatson on 10/25/2013 1:41:27 AM , Rating: 2
What do you mean by "worst running"?
I absolutely hate itunes I find it utterly useless and bloated, however I've never known it to be anything but rock solid when it comes to actually running, crashes, errors, etc.
I will agree with you about QuickTime but will counter and say that RealPlayer has always been much much MUCH worse in every possible way.


RE: Irony
By djdjohnson on 10/25/2013 2:59:52 PM , Rating: 2
My experience is a little different. Besides it taking well over a minute for iTunes to launch on my 4C i7 w/ SSDs & 24GB of RAM, it is constantly throwing useless and erroneous error messages. ("Can't communicate with this iPhone" ? I don't even have an iPhone.) And I hardly have anything in its library.

It is the biggest piece of junk that I have on my machine. And that includes Java, Flash, etc.


RE: Irony
By Reclaimer77 on 10/25/2013 3:26:12 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly!

iTunes on a Windows machine is some of the worst software I've ever seen.


RE: Irony
By BillyBatson on 10/25/2013 8:49:55 PM , Rating: 2
Wait what??? Over a minute to load?! It takes about 15 seconds to load on my Athlon X2 system with 4gb ram and a 5400rpm hdd, system is from 2006 I think, running win7. 8 seconds on a HP laptop with AMD turion cpu 4gb ram and 7200rpm hdd from 2007 with win7. I can let you know how fast it loads on my new haswell 8gb ram and ssd once I install win8.1 but I'm guess won't be slower than the 2 above numbers.
I've never seen the error you stated with or without an apple device plugged in. I've never seen an error message by any iTunes ever.
Every system I've had it on it's been rock solid ever since 2003 when I got my very first ipod.
Again, I'm not saying it isn't junk!!! As I personally hate the software. But stability is not one of the points I can knock it on. RealPlayer on the other hand beats it in every possible category even with your itunes experience, it just doesn't happen to be installed on your PC like iTunes is?


Literally...
By jimmymmm on 10/24/2013 2:59:38 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
....Microsoft understands how people work better than anyone else on the planet...We literally wrote the book on getting things done.


Literally... I have yet to see this book.




RE: Literally...
By spamreader1 on 10/24/2013 3:15:59 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.amazon.com/Getting-Things-Done-Stress-F...

But Microsoft didn't write it so...lol on them?


RE: Literally...
By Mitch101 on 10/24/2013 5:03:05 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.amazon.com/Readings-Microsoft-Windows-W...

They did for Operating Systems too but people wanted change.


RE: Literally...
By retrospooty on 10/24/2013 6:07:57 PM , Rating: 3
"Literally... I have yet to see this book."

See pretty much every company on Earth. Almost all of it runs on MS software. Windows OS and Office productivity dominates almost everything business related.


RE: Literally...
By Motoman on 10/24/2013 10:03:38 PM , Rating: 2
This is true. For better or worse, the amount of non-MS operating systems and/or office suites in the corporate world -> 0.

What's sad is how much these things have become bloatware. The percentage of word processing users who need a word processor to do anything more than WordStar did in the 80s is single digits at best.

And if you think that's an exaggeration in any way, you're kidding yourself.


RE: Literally...
By puter_geek_01 on 10/25/2013 1:26:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The percentage of word processing users who need a word processor to do anything more than WordStar did in the 80s is single digits at best.


But, the people that DO use it, the ones who are productive users in the business world, use the crap out of it, and make up for the rest that don't. The productivity the Office Suite makes is pretty much invaluable to a business. As an IT person for 10+ years, the business has changed so dramatically. And for the most part, everything is related to MS in one way or another. And yes, we have tried other Suites, but with close to disastrous results. The longest any user lasted was about three weeks.


um... work?
By domboy on 10/24/2013 3:42:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And so it’s not surprising that we see other folks now talking about how much “work” you can get done on their devices. Adding watered down productivity apps. Bolting on aftermarket input devices. All in an effort to convince people that their entertainment devices are really work machines


... Says the company that has repeatedly stated that the Surface RT is a consumer only device and not intended for business use (to me that is what "work" means). And the follow-up for that statement is the "get the Pro" which is a whole bunch more expensive (and doesn't actually come with office, which probably isn't a problem for business, but still).




RE: um... work?
By Digimonkey on 10/24/2013 4:20:27 PM , Rating: 2
They said the Surface RT was geared more towards individual consumers and students. That's a far cry from saying it's consumer only and not intended for business.

The fact that it runs IE, can be domained and managed through group policy already makes it more superior than an iPad in a business environment.


RE: um... work?
By sprockkets on 10/26/2013 3:38:23 PM , Rating: 2
IE isn't thankfully needed anymore for businesses, and even if it were due to IE6, this version won't help you here.

Oh, and ipads can be managed via domain as well. And they can be natively managed much better via apple's setup, without any central server either.


Open Office
By Shig on 10/24/2013 5:30:32 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.openoffice.org/

(You can save your files into all popular extensions)




RE: Open Office
By kmmatney on 10/24/2013 6:03:15 PM , Rating: 2
There is also LibreOffice:

http://www.libreoffice.org/

The problem with open office is they took so long to finally support Microsoft's OOXML. I think it does now, but only after LibreOffice started supporting it, and OpenOffice started losing users.


RE: Open Office
By chripuck on 10/25/2013 1:25:47 PM , Rating: 2
Decent option for basic home use, but you're not using that in a work environment.


Microsoft is right!
By FaaR on 10/24/2013 7:13:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Microsoft: Apple iWork is Less Popular and Less Powerful Than Office

Yeah. And iwork is also freer (well, as long as you were gonna buy an iThing anyway...), and it runs on ipads, which office doesn't (yet.) So it's a tradeoff.

...Not that it really matters, as both software packages are equally soul crushing and boring. Until there's a decent deathmatch mode built into them I won't play either!

Also, who the frig cares about what PR spinheads say? I mean...seriously. What would we expect this guy to say anyway, "oh no, iwork is going to bury us, run for your lives!", what? People like him always play down the competition, it's how they work, mentally. *shrug*




RE: Microsoft is right!
By purerice on 10/24/2013 8:21:52 PM , Rating: 2
Actually there is Smart Office 2 out. I have never tried it but it says you can create and edit MS Office files.

Good point on PR though. You'll never hear an Apple PR guy say he prefers MS Office to iWork and vice versa.


might be Apple worst nightmare
By jmerk on 10/24/2013 8:15:10 PM , Rating: 2
My hope is that it is enough to push m$ to release office for the iPad, which might become apple's worse nightmare for ios. I have iworks for the iPad and personally i have found it to have a high learning curve. I am used to office and would like it to cross over to the iPad now. People used to compare Apple and Android talk about what a joke Android was. They don't do that anymore. If Apple doesn't get their act together, M$ might come along with a product that is not a joke. i have been hearing that surface 2 is actually somewhat usable.




RE: might be Apple worst nightmare
By troysavary on 10/25/2013 5:24:56 AM , Rating: 2
MS crushed Apple before. Apple is only around now because MS kept them on a lifeline long enough for them to recover. They had a nice run with iOS, but they are about to be crushed again. The battle for mobile will soon be between Google and MS with Apple being a niche player again.


Windows Box
By DarelRex on 10/24/2013 2:59:26 PM , Rating: 2
The attack on Microsoft actually wasn't so "nameless" -- when they were talking about how OS X Mavericks is going to be a totally free upgrade, they showed an image of a cardboard-box Windows package.




Well...
By ATrigo on 10/24/2013 4:56:03 PM , Rating: 2
Why use words (no pun intended) when a video will do:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZp7BvQJnU8




For most - all will work fine
By DrApop on 10/25/2013 8:18:24 AM , Rating: 2
Whether for business or casual work, any of the office products out there will work fine for probably 95-99% of all users. Be it Google doc, zoho, iWorks, Openoffice/Libreoffice, or MS Office. All of these will do memo's, reports, letters, the vast majority of spreadsheet work, and presentations perfectly fine as long as you know how to use the product.

Unless you are doing high powered accounting or something, most spreadsheet software will work. For database there is MS Office and libre/OpenOffice.

Heck, for 99% of what most of us do in a text document, wordpad would work just fine.




Getting things done
By MikeMike11 on 10/26/2013 3:37:13 AM , Rating: 2
"....Microsoft understands how people work better than anyone else on the planet...We literally wrote the book on getting things done. "

Did he forget about Windows 8 interface flop?




Office vs iWork
By lawrance on 10/24/13, Rating: 0
Marketing needs to try harder
By aliasfox on 10/24/13, Rating: -1
RE: Marketing needs to try harder
By Digimonkey on 10/24/2013 3:11:44 PM , Rating: 3
You are aware that the Surface can connect to the Internet?


By ClownPuncher on 10/24/2013 3:27:27 PM , Rating: 2
I think awareness has escaped that one.


RE: Marketing needs to try harder
By aliasfox on 10/25/2013 9:36:35 AM , Rating: 2
Oh, I fully recognize that Surface, in many ways, can do more things than iPad. I was calling out that a lot of the problem is with their marketing and messaging, not necessarily with the product.

Up until this fall, the only ads for Surface on TV were ads showing people clipping it into a keyboard. In comparison to iPad ads that showed people doing lots of leisure activities on the iPad. The thought was that maybe MS should look at marketing to the crowd of people that want a tablet, not the crowd of people that need MS Word/Excel.


RE: Marketing needs to try harder
By Digimonkey on 10/25/2013 11:23:13 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry, I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

I totally agree that the first Surface commercials were dumb. Microsoft should give up the pretending to be cool and hip and just concentrate in showing the functionality of their products. The new commercial for the surface brings a bit of hope.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OqzxB-cSW8


RE: Marketing needs to try harder
By Belegost on 10/25/2013 12:23:00 AM , Rating: 2
I see you're trying to write a troll comment. I can help! Let's correct a few things:

"It's a matter of marketing and semantics,but here goes - what value proposition is each company pushing?

MS Surface: It's a tablet for getting on the web, communicating, and consuming content with a keyboard that also can do Microsoft Office for easy access to all your work documents.

Apple iPad: It's a tablet for getting on the web, communicating, and consuming content. Oh yeah, we have a few Office-type apps too, if you need them, but they're not the ones you need for work anyways.

Considering most people already have access to a computer with Office (either at home or at the... office), which pitch sounds more appealing? "

</clippy>


RE: Marketing needs to try harder
By aliasfox on 10/25/2013 2:30:47 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, but where in the colorful dancing commercials that MS played for a year does it show me that I can do that? The marketing message was "I'm a tablet, with a keyboard, that has Office." Compare that to iPad ads last year, that showed this app, then this app, then that app, then Facetime, etc. You may not like the product, but it shows you why someone might want to pick one up and try it out. Surface on the other hand, with its keyboard and MS Office... well, who hasn't seen a computer with a keyboard and MS Office already?

When the target audience is zoned out watching Big Bang Theory, the advertisers/marketers need to spoon feed simple messages to get them across. MS very much failed to do that in any convincing way. Sure, everyone knows that a tablet can get on the web - in fact, that's pretty much all they can do. As a marketer though, do you want your customer to have to pause and think before they recognize that fact? Obviously not - if people stopped to think about things, far fewer things would get purchased.


Beta Test
By BuckEagle on 10/24/13, Rating: -1
RE: Beta Test
By ClownPuncher on 10/24/2013 3:26:10 PM , Rating: 3
Inferior to what? Office is the best office suite out there.


RE: Beta Test
By retrospooty on 10/24/2013 4:19:24 PM , Rating: 5
"I have every disrespect for a company that for years has used it's customers to beta test it's office products costing billions in lost productivity."

Clearly you don't actually have a job in any company. If you do you have no idea how it works. MS office is the office standard and has been for at least 15 years. It has not only not cost billions in lost productivity it has gained 10's if not 100's of billions in gained productivity, quite possibly more even. Practically the whole business world runs off of MS office. It's like you saying automobiles are costing our transportation industry in lost productivity. Beyond ridiculous.


RE: Beta Test
By BrgMx5 on 10/25/2013 11:39:31 AM , Rating: 2
I agree, basically everyone who uses advanced spreadsheets has years of experience with Excel.

Apple can give Numbers away, and it could even be superior (It´s not), and no one would trade Excel for Numbers.

The loss of productivity to migrate from one to the other is just not worth it.


The pertinent metric
By Tony Swash on 10/24/13, Rating: -1
RE: The pertinent metric
By rsmech on 10/25/2013 2:02:49 AM , Rating: 3
That post sounded desperate. Just remember history has a way of repeating itself. You use to argue Apples growing market share. Percentage wise how does Apple look today? Are tablet or phone growth increasing like they use to or are others chipping away at their % of market share? From past posts I you would have thought Apple would be 95% of any market they touched and $1000.00 a share.


RE: The pertinent metric
By Tony Swash on 10/25/2013 5:14:27 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
That post sounded desperate. Just remember history has a way of repeating itself. You use to argue Apples growing market share. Percentage wise how does Apple look today? Are tablet or phone growth increasing like they use to or are others chipping away at their % of market share? From past posts I you would have thought Apple would be 95% of any market they touched and $1000.00 a share.


My post was about Microsoft. Try replying to a point I was actually making.


RE: The pertinent metric
By retrospooty on 10/25/2013 12:54:23 PM , Rating: 3
"My post was about Microsoft. Try replying to a point I was actually making."

Sorry Tony, nothing you post is about anything other than skewing things to make Apple look better and making its competitors look worse.


RE: The pertinent metric
By troysavary on 10/25/2013 5:20:49 AM , Rating: 2
You are delusional if you think the tablet software market is larger than the PC software market. Hell, there was probably more money made selling console software than tablet software.


RE: The pertinent metric
By Tony Swash on 10/25/13, Rating: 0
"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki