How Microsoft Makes Profits

[Vince53]

We have deduced that MS can't make a new OS fantastic enough to get office users to upgrade, so they are going after the lucrative mobile market. They hope that people will buy more mobile devices (loaded with Windows 8) and then upgrade their desktops so they can transfer to their desktop more easily.

The next mysterious question: WHY did MS eliminate the Start Button from Windows 8? As free substitutes are appearing n the web, there are reports that MS is working to make it impossible to add these to the final version of 8. Why?

First, MS might be waiting for third parties to develop more Start Buttons (and ways to bypass the Metro Interface) so they can make sure they are impossible to install on the final version. How will this increase MS's profits?

 

[Coke Robot]

By George, Coke, you and I have figured out Microsoft's plan!

There's a good chance that it will work, too.

 

[Coke Robot]

Bu gong after the lucrative mobile computing device market, MS hopes to sell more copies of Windows 8. They can't get too many office users to upgrade to 8, but THEY CAN GET DESKTOP OWNERS TO BUY TABLET COMPUTERS. Vista failed to get people to rush out and buy new computers they didn't need, but 8 might do it.

And since people will become more accustomed to 8, and having 8 on all your devices makes it easier to transfer programs and information, people with desktops will then start buying 8 to replace 7.

And thus. Ladies and Gentlemen, MS will make big profits by selling extra copies of Windows 8.

And not only that, you become more accustom to metro design and you might end up buying a Windows Phone. And if you want better entertainment those two don't offer, you might end up buying an Xbox with its metro design interface. All three devices all work together hand in hand, and Microsoft just made money. And if you don't buy a Windows Phone, you might end up having to pay for an Xbox SmartGlass app on your phone. Clever.

Hi there

A Windows phone --now that's an idea that is going nowhere -- I say this NOT because W8 is horrible for phones --it isn't at all but the AVAILABLE PHONES themselves are horrible.

Who in their right mind would even LOOK at a Nokia phone any more (they will use windows) -- much less actually BUY one.

There are only 3 players in the phone game any more who make desirable products.

Apple with the "infamous" iPhone, Samsung and HTC. We all know that the chance of an Iphone using Windows is even slimmer than Iceland winning the 2014 World Cup in Brazil !!!

Samsung and HTC both use Android --and the latest release of android (ICS / 4.0.x) is quite passable. Future releases will only get better too.

Blackberry's are a declining market as well. I think they've totally pulled out of the consumer retail market as well so we can ignore those areas as ripe for W8.

So it leaves only Poor old Nokia -- no future there I'm afraid.

I think Ms you've missed the boat with this one.

Cheers
jimbo

I hate to be bug, but I have the Nokia Lumia 900 running Windows Phone and I can confidently say, even be non-partisan about this, but it IS the best phone out there. android is inflicted with fragmentation and robot snot while apple has continued to keep ios a non-evolving platform. And, the Nokia Lumia 900's screen looks ABSOLUTELY gorgeous paired with Windows Phone, the colors are very vivid and pop.

And even then, if you don't like it, Microsoft has one of the world's largest phone manufacturers, Nokia, building phones for the Windows Phone platform. They also have att, one of the world's largest cell carriers. They're a trio that don't get much recognition anymore, but together they will push the Windows Phone into recognition of the consumer. Yes, it has had a bad start and hasn't gotten far, but that's because of a few reasons and nothing to do with the software or phones themselves.

 

[Coke Robot]

Probably, but Longhorn had a huge interface change that neither vista or 7 could match. 8 is the only one that has a hugely revamped UI and is pretty animated. The metro part isn't that bad, you just use it, work with it, and knead it to how you use a PC.

I bet there will be backlash for this.....

I was at a presention in Redmond in 2003 where we were shown the target capabilities for Longhorn - Vista didn't come close to them. Win 7 is pretty close. MS dropped the ball for 18 months and then took two more years to produce Vista. and another 3 to produce Win7

Win 8's interface was nowhere in the Longhorn presentation - but tablet PC's running XP were all over the convention center.
Touch screens are nothing new. The easy availability and low price of them is.

I'm not saying metro was part of Longhorn, but I am saying is that if you compare the new, metro Desktop of 8 to the concept of Longhorn's Desktop, they do in fact look a bit similar to each other. Longhorn's interface was to be fully revamped and would look nothing like xp, or 2000 or anything at the time because it was so different and so new.

As is the Windows 8.

 

[Coke Robot]

We have deduced that MS can't make a new OS fantastic enough to get office users to upgrade, so they are gong after the lucrative mobile market. They hope that people will buy more mobile devices (loaded with Windows 8) and then upgrade their desktops so they can transfer to their desktop more easily.

The next mysterious question: WHY did MS eliminate the Start Button from Windows 8? As free substitutes are appearing n the web, there are reports that MS is working to make it impossible to add these to the final version of 8. Why?

First, MS might be waiting for third parties to develop more Start Buttons (and ways to bypass the Metro Interface) so they can make sure they are impossible to install on the final version. How will this increase MS's profits?

Microsoft is going after the tablet market more importantly to stay relevant. A software company that doesn't have an OS on the tablet form factor is troubling in these times. And yes, the more new mobile, touch PCs people buy, the more likely they will upgrade existing form factors to such. And that in turn will make them more likely to get an Xbox or a Windows Phone for the sake of how it looks and some features that come with it.

There is a good reason why the start menu is being axed out in total, a snapped app next to the Desktop makes a start menu/button on the lower left corner, pushed out 1/3 of the screen, awkwardly placed. Technically, the Start button isn't gone for good in 8, it has taken a voyage across screen edges and is on the Charms bar. The Start thumbnail that is in the old button's place is for the sake of users. But honestly, I think the new Start button could had been kept where the old one is regardless of if one is on the Desktop or in a metro app. It would be a Start bar when the user expands out the app taskbar.

 

[Vince53]

How does MS expect to increase profits by eliminating the Start Button?

MS might have figured that since most desktop users won't upgrade to 8, they gain little by keeping it. Their idea might be to present touchscreen devices as the new standard, and Windows 8 as the wave of the future. People who put 8 on a regular computer are out-dated fogies, anyway. By advertising that 8 is a modern touchscreen OS, MS will pressure people to buy mobile devices, get used to the Metro Interface, and then they can buy it for their desktops and still be "modern."

Frankly, I think it's a bad idea, but I can't come up with anything more intelligent than this.

 

[legacy7955]

How does MS expect to increase profits by eliminating the Start Button?

MS might have figured that since most desktop users won't upgrade to 8, they gain little by keeping it. Their idea might be to present touchscreen devices as the new standard, and Windows 8 as the wave of the future. People who put 8 on a regular computer are out-dated fogies, anyway. By advertising that 8 is a modern touchscreen OS, MS will pressure people to buy mobile devices, get used to the Metro Interface, and then they can buy it for their desktops and still be "modern."

Frankly, I think it's a bad idea, but I can't come up with anything more intelligent than this.

While I have NOTHING against capturing a new segment of potential profit (tablets, WinPhones,ect) The philosophy of sticking the middle finger in the faces of long time loyal customers is just plain stupid.

MS can have their cake and eat it too, all the have to do is offer the user the choice of default UI at each and every boot, that way you have ALL your bases covered, and you don't crap on the loyal customers that made your profits and success up till now. This isn't a small slice of the pie either, we're talking about hundreds of millions of users potentially. MS don't be stupid and lose the future business of these people they will also buy tablets and phones with Windows OS "IF" you don't spit in their faces with forcing Metro onto their desktops when they clearly do not want it there.

 

[Coke Robot]

How does MS expect to increase profits by eliminating the Start Button?

MS might have figured that since most desktop users won't upgrade to 8, they gain little by keeping it. Their idea might be to present touchscreen devices as the new standard, and Windows 8 as the wave of the future. People who put 8 on a regular computer are out-dated fogies, anyway. By advertising that 8 is a modern touchscreen OS, MS will pressure people to buy mobile devices, get used to the Metro Interface, and then they can buy it for their desktops and still be "modern."

Frankly, I think it's a bad idea, but I can't come up with anything more intelligent than this.

If by Start button, you mean the menu, I think that's pretty obvious.

 

[SIW2]

Yes, not at all subtle.

 

[Vince53]

Legacy, if your thinking is correct, then MS has forgotten a valuable lesson that Bill Gates learned.

The famous Apple 2E computer was so good that it lasted long after it became obsolete. Apple just kept making better software for it. When Apple finally came out with the Apple 3, they deliberately engineered it so that it couldn't play Apple 2E software. Windows 3 was new on the market at that time, and this is one of the reasons that MS became the dominant OS company: they didn't betray their customers. Bill Gates made it a point that new Windows OSes would have backwards compatibility.

 

[Vince53]

All right, if MS is intelligent and trying to increase profits, why won't they let Windows 8 start with the traditional desktop?

Because if they let you, some of you would. And MS wants you to keep looking at that Metro Interface. And eventually fool around with it. And maybe start to like it. And wonder how much better it would be if you had a touchscreen. And then buy a mobile device with a Metro touchscreen. And thus buy one more copy of Windows 8.

That's why.

 

[legacy7955]

All right, if MS is intelligent and trying to increase profits, why won't they let Windows 8 start with the traditional desktop?

Because if they let you, some of you would. And MS wants you to keep looking at that Metro Interface. And eventually fool around with it. And maybe start to like it. And wonder how much better it would be if you had a touchscreen. And then buy a mobile device with a Metro touchscreen. And thus buy one more copy of Windows 8.

That's why.

A few (very few) power users/ gamers might agree with that philosophy
but I can promise M$ that those overpaid consultants are WRONG about the majority of those that are using their computer in the desktop laptop environment.

I mentioned before I and many others would gladly pay MORE for a version of Windows 8 that simply used the desktop are the default UI everytime (instead of paying for some silly appLICATIONS :huh:. I doubt that others here would have an issue with paying extra either, just give the loyal long time customers what they are asking for and stop with the draconian mashing of Metro in our faces.

I almost find this situation sad and depressing because I always considered M$ the more "benevolent" of the corporate computer software/hardware giants, but now that old feeling is just about gone.

Back when Windows 3.1 was around you could actually call Redmond and speak with technical support that was located right within their main campus if I recall correctly . Back then and up til Win 95 or 98 I felt that M$ was a responsive company to their customers and was actually reachable....not any more.

 

[Vince53]

"...I always considered M$ the more "benevolent" of the corporate computer software/hardware giants..."

Your statement WAS true, Legacy, when Bill Gates was running things.

 

[Vince53]

Well, Gang, the mystery is solved. MS will be producing its own tablet, "The Surface," and it is designed around Windows 8 Pro. So when you buy a new tablet, MS will profit from both the sale of Windows 8 AND the tablet. Look for MS laptops, desktops, and other computing devices in the future, Folks.

 

[Eccles]

Almost solved; don't forget the original owner of the 'Surface' name, now renamed PixelSense and providing a viable transition into the age of the NUI (natural user interface) that touch devices literally only scratch the surface of currently. We don't know when Win8 is going to ship yet, but I'd bet you my computer that by the time it does, PixelSense tech may well have advanced enough for MS to start looking at taking thier currently high-end commercial-marketed baby to the consumer market.

The math runs thus:

Windows 8
+ desk/laptops
+ personal touch devices
+ cloud access
+ private/public access to PixelSense-driven datapods

== Massive profits for a range of companies with MS as the leader
&& Full multi-tasking, multi-media, multi-user, multi-context, multi-interface...

You get the idea. Gotta hand it to Microsoft, the stuff they have in thier R&D departments is truly the stuff of movie dreams, and don't think they don't have a driving plan behind it all. Business-wise, they are bloody brilliant, I'll give them that.

 

[Got2bereal]

Well, Gang, the mystery is solved. MS will be producing its own tablet, "The Surface," and it is designed around Windows 8 Pro. So when you buy a new tablet, MS will profit from both the sale of Windows 8 AND the tablet. Look for MS laptops, desktops, and other computing devices in the future, Folks.

If the Xbox 360 is a good example of their hardware engineering efforts, count me out.. I wouldn't want a Blue Ring of death.

 

[Colonel Travis]

+ private/public access to PixelSense-driven datapods

I follow things, I don't follow everything, and I know what PixelSense is - but what the heck is this?

 

[Eccles]

Ah, yeah, perhaps I should have elaborated on that. My theory is this: Microsoft will use PixelSense technology as the primary interface to cloud-driven servers in-home and/or in public areas such as net cafes and even shopping centres, where people could share data just by swiping it between the server and the portable device (or someone else's portable device) using NUI gestures. Maybe a futuristic pipe-dream, but many a dream has become reality, it seems the technology is under active development and Microsoft may just have the drive and mentality to make it happen one day. Sure, not by Win8's release, but it's possible it could help pave the way depending on thier success with Metro.

I just called them 'datapods' because it was the first thing that popped into my head. I don't expect it to stick - it resembles words associated with a particular fruit a little too closely, methinks.

 

[Colonel Travis]

Gotcha, Eccles. Thanks. I think you're right that if 8 is successful in the device market it will lead to a huge movement in that direction somewhere. Who knows where. As much as I dislike Metro, I like where computers are headed in general, which is everywhere, which is about time.

 

[Eccles]

Well, these days computers are almost everywhere as it stands; I was just a kid when 4-bit microprocessors were the 'norm', and within my own lifetime I've come to accept doing all of my banking, some of my shopping and a large portion of my social networking using the power delivered by a mere 60 extra bits. I can't say I entirely like the way computing has gone and is set to go in future, but I accept it and expect far more 'science fiction' to become 'science fact' in the years to come, at a near- exponential rate. The catch-phase when it comes to computers these days seems to be 'keep up or peek out' - either you embrace the change, or you stare out the peep-hole in your front door wondering where your world disappeared to.