Analyst Says Windows 8 should be free to existing Windows users


Recommended Posts

Microsoft has many shortcomings. Apps have always been one of them. They finally have Instagram and I understand even it lacks functionality. They're taking too, long. So they finally have Instagram and native Facebook, if they shore up the app situation, how do they get people to give the phone a try after passing it over?

 

Right now, to consumers, WP isn't the best at anything. They don't relate to it in a personal way ... love my 925. It's not too late, but MS doesn't have the creativity at this time to reach humans. They're the new IBM. Technically they should be buying our stuff, does not compute.

 

The only real risk MS took was alienating too many happy Windows 7 users since the whole Windows 8 push. They haven't taken enough risks or the right kind IMO.

 

Microsoft hasn't lost anything (other than maybe user trust and confidence in them.) They've only failed, as they really always have, with their mobile initiatives, with consumers. Nothing else was ever at risk, there is no alternative for desktop OS' nor in the enterprise.

Again, most consumers see Microsoft as the work/cubicle OS, and this is especially true of older consumers.  While younger consumers may be aware of the Xbox, how many connect it to Windows?

It's like the long-time perception of no less than General Electric - Pratt and Whitney (itself a subsidiary of conglomerate United Technologies) had dismissed GE as a "lightbulb company" - all the while GE's aircraft engine business was winning contracts and taking marketshare - to the point where GE - not P&W - is the leading aircraft-engine manufacturer on the planet;  in that business, P&W has gone from Goliath to David

 

This very thread is an example of the non-perception MIcrosoft has among consumers.  Despite Apple having a history of being used in business, Macs aren't seen as a business/enterprise (or even corporate) computer; it's seen as a tool for creators and designers - not bean-counters or even secretaries.  Apple's whole advertising strategem has played that up - Macs (and later, iPads) are not buttoned-down, serious, work machines.  They are about fun, play, - basically, anything that doesn't remind them of work.  Microsoft (and Windows) is basically seen as a reminder of the office - how many folks truly like what they do?

 

Google?  Please - Google is a completely new company - it had no reputation in anything (other than advertising) - it's become the non-Apple of devices.  However, like Apple, it has no enterprise reputation (also, while it is trying to build one, how much success has it really had doing so, even with Google Apps/Docs).  Google is the mirror of Microsoft - a "fun" company trying to break into the serious world of enterprise computing.  Like Microsoft in the consumer area, Google is NOT having it easy breaking into enterprise computing.

 

Perception is a two-edged sword - in everything.  It can be an advantage in some areas, and a liability in others.  Microsoft has the reputation - even perception - as the work/enterprise Goliath - basically, IBM of today - even though the only place they have penetrated as thoroughly as IBM ever had is in the computer (in terms of the software), as opposed to the brand OF the computer.  Further, Microsoft, like IBM, gets little respect - if anything, it has taken over from IBM as the Rodney Dangerfield of computing.

 

Lastly, look at the exterior (not interior) perception of all three companies merely since XP.  Google and Apple have played up devices (in fact, Google acquired the mobility/device side of Motorola) - consumer-focus; their corporate and business use is incidental, not the be-all and end-all.  (If anything , that is new for Motorola Mobility - that side of the company was originally aimed pretty much entirely at businesses - they were the biggest handset supplier to PTT cell-phone Goliath Nextel - now part of Sprint.)  Only Google has tried to cross the "divide" into corporate/enterprise computing (with Google Docs/Apps), and with extremely limited success - sounds familiar, doesn't it?  Meanwhile, Microsoft has had mis-step after mis-step - almost all on trying to move into the consumer side of things.  And what is Microsoft being told?  Stick to the enterprise - consumer is not for the likes of you.

 

How honestly, really, are we evaluating Microsoft's consumer efforts?  Or are we still basically trying to keep Microsoft in that cage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While, i don't think it should be given away for free, I think the $40 upgrade price was and still is an amazing idea! I did more XP upgrades in that short time than I had done in the previous 9 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microsoft has many shortcomings. Apps have always been one of them. They finally have Instagram and I understand even it lacks functionality. They're taking too, long. So they finally have Instagram and native Facebook, if they shore up the app situation, how do they get people to give the phone a try after passing it over?

 

Right now, to consumers, WP isn't the best at anything. They don't relate to it in a personal way ... love my 925. It's not too late, but MS doesn't have the creativity at this time to reach humans. They're the new IBM. Technically they should be buying our stuff, does not compute.

 

The only real risk MS took was alienating too many happy Windows 7 users since the whole Windows 8 push. They haven't taken enough risks or the right kind IMO.

 

Microsoft hasn't lost anything (other than maybe user trust and confidence in them.) They've only failed, as they really always have, with their mobile initiatives, with consumers. Nothing else was ever at risk, there is no alternative for desktop OS' nor in the enterprise.

well said. I'm a happy as can be W7 user, and up until w8 then w8.1, i've had hope of something a little bit more refined. I was proven wrong. Metro isn't bad per se, its the difference of theoretical to practical implementation which buzzes different users. Metro is hard to be productive on, period. Metro apps are for the most part done badly, like 'gadget-esque' badly; and no developers are really interested to mass development for metro. The only apps I think are decent: weather, finance, and hopefully betters metro settings.

So I hope, MS makes some big changes for W8.2. If things look good, i'll switch. 

 

On topic : and no, windows can't or shouldn't be free. Maybe, for the next version, do more cheap software bundles, i'd like to buy premium windows and office at a better price. Maybe $30 less?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>snip<<

 

I think I agree with all of that. Except MS does get respect.

 

And why did Google Apps fail? Because they tried to force feed a consumer grade productivity app and infrastructure down the enterprise's throat. And it was "NOT" free. So, why bother? Kind of the opposite of where MS is in a few areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like change on PC and ever since open beta, I've been on Windows 8 and now 8.1. People say that the start screen is for tablets only but that's not true. While some may be better suited to a touch display, a standard monitor is just fine. Windows 8 compelled me to buy a touch monitor and the experience is wonderful. Though, even on my non touch monitor at work I love it. I definitely don't see why anyone thinks it should be free. Microsoft is a business and I don't think they are a charity to just give away Windows. People should okay for Windows 8 and the fact that point releases will be free is the icing on the cake for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microsoft has many shortcomings. Apps have always been one of them. They finally have Instagram and I understand even it lacks functionality. They're taking too, long. So they finally have Instagram and native Facebook, if they shore up the app situation, how do they get people to give the phone a try after passing it over?

 

Right now, to consumers, WP isn't the best at anything. They don't relate to it in a personal way ... love my 925. It's not too late, but MS doesn't have the creativity at this time to reach humans. They're the new IBM. Technically they should be buying our stuff, does not compute.

 

The only real risk MS took was alienating too many happy Windows 7 users since the whole Windows 8 push. They haven't taken enough risks or the right kind IMO.

 

Microsoft hasn't lost anything (other than maybe user trust and confidence in them.) They've only failed, as they really always have, with their mobile initiatives, with consumers. Nothing else was ever at risk, there is no alternative for desktop OS' nor in the enterprise.

The app situation is why I'm so shocked that Microsoft did things they way they did with Windows 8. They completely missed the boat on bringing value to users where it mattered most...

 

They need to fix a handful of problems in the app arena before they can start to make important traction. They have to start offering the same apps users have on other platforms, this seems to be getting addressed well, and they also have to counteract the investments people have made into competitive ecosystems. Addressing the first one without addressing the second one will leave them where they are now. People will be happy to see them getting more apps, but no one will be switching. They are asking people to buy a new phone and repurchase all their apps*.

 

To go back to my original point, I expected MS to do an App Store in Windows 8. After all, the money Apple was making on this front made it a no brainier. What I didn't expect was for Microsoft to improperly isolate it. Microsoft should have ensured that the store was the same on Phone, Tablet, and PC to offer a strong ecosystem pull for consumers. They could have had the "buy it on your phone and also run it on your PC in Metro" ads or something... It is all about real value for the users.

 

I understand the APIs for Windows Phone and WinRT and all that are slightly different, but that still doesn't cut it IMHO. Microsoft could have virtualized the apps or something similar to unify that marketplace. They already have the code written anyway since an emulator using HyperV is used by developers to create the apps!

 

Really, MS should have been persuading the Phone users they do have to come to their tablets and offered an actual incentive for PC users to pull down to their phones. They bet far too hard on people being superficial. They bet that as long as they make the UIs the same people will buy into it as if it is all one beautifully connected ecosystem. They are now, hopefully, learning that this isn't true, people want real features. As you said, they need to get out there and take real risks.

 

*This says nothing about their inability to push for accessories for their devices. So users would also be asked to repurchase loads of accessories that don't exist on the MS platform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*This says nothing about their inability to push for accessories for their devices. So users would also be asked to repurchase loads of accessories that don't exist on the MS platform.

 

What accessories? lol. Micro-USB on the side somewhere didn't encourage many, neither did lack of full BT support. This is still a glaring weakness. One dev told me they would never make their accessory for Windows phone. It was easier for them to program to the iPhone interface than USB. I don't know if that's true or not, but without some mass success, accessory makers aren't getting on board. Hopefully with "some" Windows Phones getting full BT 4.0 support that will change where applicable.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so.  Perhaps it will help with Windows adoption rates, but it will no doubt hurt MS bottom line.

 

There are a lot of computer makers out there beside Apple that need to put an Operating System or else all that hardware is basically unsellable.  OEMs could start migrating to Linux, but I don't think that is what the market is asking for.  Consumers need Windows (even if they don't necessarily want it specifically), and MS will continue to do well with Windows so long as that stays true.

 

I find the price to be upgrade prohibitive but if I didn't currently have Windows 7 on my machines, then I would be fine with Windows 8.  If I could find an upgrade for <$40 then I'd bite for an 8.1 upgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On top of all else:

 

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/172468-the-start-menu-will-return-in-new-desktop-optimized-version-of-windows-8-2

 

 

With Windows 8.1 out of the way, Microsoft has now begun work on Windows 8.2. According to sources close to the development Windows 8.2, dubbed Threshold, Microsoft will bring Windows, Windows Phone and Xbox One closer together ? to the threshold, if you will, of being a fully unified OS. Furthermore, again according to insider sources, Windows 8.2 will introduce a ?traditional desktop? SKU that is optimized for mouse-and-keyboard Desktop users and resurrects the original Start menu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that story gets it all wrong, firstly there is no desktop SKU, that's the same normal home pro SKU we have today, secondly they're not resurrecting the start menu. IF and that's a big if, they do bring back the start menu, the actual rumor is that it's not the classic start menu but a mini start screen.

What they mean by the desktop and non desktop SKU is that they are adding a non desktop SKU, essentially, they're making RT it's own SKU and using the same SKU for bot intel and arm tablets and removing the desktop altogether from them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm good with unification, maybe it will result in the Xbox One's Guide and Media Center being ported to Modern UI?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.