What Will It Take to Save Microsoft?

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 5:44 PM, tdstauffer wrote:

  Ballmer's record is 100% perfect: Everything he has done since becoming CEO has turned to s**t. Why would anyone think MSFT will improve as long as he is at the helm?

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 6:11 PM, RichWee wrote:

  MSFT is no longer the leading techno company that develops leading technological solutions quickly to all. Under the current era and leadership, it losts

  "it". It being - the right solutions developed correctly, at the right time in anticipation of needs and with the marketing muscle to create demand. That's what Apple did. MSFT has proven it's not a leader in new product development, marketing prowess, or operational efficient. Under Ballmer's leadership, MSFT achieved all these - all in one decade. A company stinks at the top - its CEO. Remove Ballmer and you will may a chance to turnaround MSFT.

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 6:23 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Microsoft is hanging on as Apple is capturing user computing. But Rim blackberries is already a lost battle. Rim should be out of business no later than year 2013 because even if Rim can catch up with Apple somehow, there are currently 23 other manufacturers chasing Apple also. These 23 Android manufacturers may never catch up to Apple, but they definitely have the power to trample all over Rim capturing all Rim's businesses since Apple appears to be too high to stoop to Rim's low level.

  Microsoft can save itself by abandoning user computing to Apple, and work on Service computing. An excellent Service Computing platform from Microsoft can fill the voids now sorely needed, SOA with legacy systems Is not cutting it. Google is a nomad. A new mandate is dawning upon us to forge a a fellowship between Apple, Microsoft, and perhaps Google to establish a platform for reengineering the entire world. It wouldn't do Microsoft and Google to dwell upon user computing, that's only one layer which is now Apple's. Microsoft really has only 1 app which is the Office.

  Apple - User Computing

  Microsoft - Services

  Google - Integration Computing

  Each will grow complementarily in symbiotic ways.

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 6:28 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  I remember when Microsoft used to spend 10% of its budget in collecting user requirements in developing Windows 95. That was when Bill G was still at the helm. What happened? Perhaps it's time to put a geek on top of Microsoft again, having a number cruncher as CEO has its disadvantages.

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 6:54 PM, JeffreyYang wrote:

  Microsoft board of directors were split between management styles. One camp argue for more executive power, the other said developers should be more independent, management is there just to help, not to direct. Microsoft lost permanent temp law suite in 2000, and this gave the "hands off" camp upper hand. Microsoft top management was restricted in what they can do. Unfortunately Microsoft employees were not as self motivated as those directors thought. The result was stagnation for aboout 8 years. The board of directors has changed nearly half of its members since 2007, and Microsoft show clear sign of improvement since 2008. As an example why Steve Ballmer was not the cause I want to use Jim Allchim and Jeff Raike as examples. These two executives were responsible for the great success of Windows and Office. Their records until early 2000 would put them in hall of fame, yet they both performed pooly since then. The "lost decade" of Microsoft was caused by the policy of Microsoft board.

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 7:40 PM, lawman508 wrote:

  You guys said the same thing about Apple 10 years ago!

  While Apple is easily taking over the consumer space (for now), Microsoft has spent the last 10 years (under Balmer) taking the Enterprise from IBM.

  Check your numbers - Enterprise revenue DWARFS consumer revenue - this is where Microsoft has been focusing their efforts.

  Windows 7 mobile will catch up with Apple in the next 5 years.

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 7:47 PM, estebansalsa wrote:

  Wow. The article ignores Windows 7 the fastest selling operating system in history!

  Also ignores the fact that since 2000 revenues have gone up almost 3 fold. In addition, they have become fully entrenched in enterprise computing which is a much more sustainable business than have the coolest gadget of the day.

  Sooner or later Apple's phone won't be the coolest kid in town and the company will come crashing down. Meanwhile, MSFT will continue to grow steadily.

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 9:42 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Apple has easily gained a 2 year lead over Microsoft in User computing. If Microsoft spends 10% of its revenue to collect new user requirements and incorporate them into Windows 8, Microsoft may be able to roll it out by year 2012, but this effort comes with a high cost impacting Windows Server 201x, affecting competitiveness in the Microsoft corporate clientele. It's still worthwhile for Microsoft to streamline and enrich the Wondows Servives platform and collaborate with Apple's User Computing. It's my personal opinion for this kind of arrangement because I believe Microsoft and Apple could benefit each other greatly instead of fighting each other.

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 9:47 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Revenue from retailing dwarfs corporate sales by 20 times. Retail revenue is the main driving force in Apple's surpassing Microsoft in market cap. My observations reveal a dangerous level of customer inclination towards Apple and away from Microsoft.

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 10:02 PM, MaBellIsDead wrote:

  As long as a solid company with solid products is on-hand to pick up what Microsoft loses, I don't have anything but casual sympathy for MS. And most of that sympathy is for the employees.

  Microsoft's vindictiveness in not permitting computers using Vista to have XP installed was a good example of their lack of concern for their customers.

  Their salvation will undoubtedly require ousting Balmer for the greater good.

• Report this Comment On May 28, 2010, at 10:44 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Microsoft's biggest mistake was its neglect of user computing which is organic, not systemic. Look at the Windows UI, this is a 25 year old artifact. Blindly calling upon developers to stick by a 25 year old artifact is like squeezing water out of a dry wall. From a juvenile perspective, people had been poking fun at Apple's 33 years of effort in user computing calling this key area of computing 'toys', it is only recently that people have finally come to realize the real importance and benefits in user computing, and the long overdue fruits Apple is reaping now from its dedication. Frankly, Steve Jobs has graduated with honors joining the rank of prophets if for lack of a better concept. Let's hope that Steve can remain healthy and help bring wisdom to his fellow Americans.

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 12:01 AM, Philyogy wrote:

  Microsoft is doing more than just OS. And they are doing so with a vengeance... One example, the "Natal project".. This is the next level of interaction with another dimension.. Sure.. Nintendo has a Wii with controllers that use motion, and Sony has a motion controller as well coming soon, but Microsoft has developed a software that can do more than just movement sense.. Microsoft have come up with a software that can read your facial expressions, and actually ask you, " What's wrong" Or just say "Hi" if it sees you... Microsoft is by far no slouch in the R&D department.. With or without Gates at the helm, Microsoft will continue to roar.. Also.. I have 4 computers at the house.. Two have Vista and XP, and two have Win7 and XP... So I don't follow the statement of Microsoft not allowing more than one OS on a specific machine..

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 12:11 AM, MaBellIsDead wrote:

  "So I don't follow the statement of Microsoft not allowing more than one OS on a specific machine.."

  I didn't express it well. What I meant was that a new computer that came with Vista, could nor have Vista replaced by XP. It could not be done! I have an extra, unused copy of XP as proof. The computer would not run it.

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 1:57 AM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Replace the pre-installed Vista with XP as follows:

  1. Insert XP installation disk in DVD or CD drive.

  2. Cold boot the PC.

  3. Press PF12 once you see anything on screen.

  4. PC pops up a screen for you to select boot device. Select the DVD or CD drive with XP disk.

  5. Boot up XP and do a fresh install over Vista.

  One caveat, your XP must be 2008 SP2 or newer which comes with a working boot manager.

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 2:03 AM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Windows 7 Pro & Ultimate allows a virtual XP or Vista install under Windows 7, but there are a few bugs for certain XP software such as the SAP Netweaver program which installs fine under virtual XP but fails to start using either the Start option or the Windows Console.

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 6:52 AM, hahahacreek wrote:

  In Sept 2008, Microsoft tried to kill XP and force everyone to use Windows Vista. Big Mistake! When XP Laptops were no longer available, Linux Netbooks took 1/3 of the Laptop market share. Vista also helped Apple Macbooks become one of the best selling Laptops on Amazon.com. Vista won first place in the 2009 Fiasco Awards hands down. Vista is the most hated OS since Windows ME. In fact, Microsoft lost 4% market share to Mac and Linux since Vista was released in Jan 2007. Now Vista barely has 13% market share while XP still has over 56%. Microsoft should have paid attention to what it's customers really wanted, instead of trying to force Vista on the world.

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 10:51 AM, mrfreezy wrote:

  Microsoft is like the Michael Jackson of business in the sense that the same extreme internal forces that drove them to do whatever it took to get to the top of their industry are now destroying them. And yes they are enjoying huge royalties from those extreme earlier efforts but royalties are known, calculable and expected and as we know the only thing that moves the market is the is variance from expectations. In Microsoft's case they have not delivered anything more than what is expected of them for a long time now. Some could argue they've delivered less and were it not for their aggresive stock buy back programs and relatively large percent of insider holdings for a company their size their stock would have depreciated more than it has. And so shareholder value stagnates, year after year after year.

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 11:03 AM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  3 disjoints need to be addressed and removed in saving Microsoft:

  * customers needs are disjoint with Microsoft's vision. Realignment is necessary. Most of the new customers are missing from Microsoft's OS blueprint

  * hardware. Although Windows's success came mostly from the Control Panel, hardware innovations have far outstripped the sophistication of the Control Panel which is very weak in handling device drivers and in identifying new hardware devices. The problem lies in poorly written hooks and a serious need to clean out the control panel is in order

  * documentation. Windows is one of the worst documented system in the world. Average users find the Windows Help very wordy and hard to follow. The diagnostics are useless, Microsoft is better off outsourcing this area to the manufacturers who can provide the best cures. Customers who are forced to becomes hacks themselves do not make satified customers, and precious times are wasted

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 2:32 PM, blogzack wrote:

  There is a good series of articles at an Open Source site [yes despite their allegiance] that covers 3 important points:

  1)Yes indeed, Microsoft has ruined its brand with Vista and other misplays:

  http://www.theopensourcery.com/keepopen/?p=1034

  2)Steve Ballmer is the defensive specialist - Bill Gates is still the offensive master at MSFT:

  http://www.theopensourcery.com/keepopen/?p=1845

  3)Redmond is loosing its Windows monopoly position as it cedes consumer mobile lite to Google Android[2nd now] and Apple [3rd in smartphones] : http://www.theopensourcery.com/keepopen/?p=2280

  Conclusion: Anders is right - there are lots of problems, and some internecine , in Redmond.

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 3:00 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Microsoft can best save itself by sending Balmer and his lieutenants to solicit the user requirements for years 2010-2014. Instead of Windows, Microsoft should develop an OS that's named Objects which is based on the new user requirements.

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 8:22 PM, blogzack wrote:

  The Windows as OS is the main technical problem. Look what both Apple and Google have been able to do. Create very lite, very fast OS that consider 1GB more than enough memory to work with. Further, Google Android is just Linux with some server functionality/utilities stripped out. I can run 1GB Linux 2-3 times faster on the same Intel box then Windows 7 or Windows XP. Even worse, WinXP runs 20-40% faster than Windows 7. Now I know that there are at least 3-5 "Object" lost in the bowels of Microsoft Research and other divisions - but the warfare between divisions is such that a Goldman Sachs trading room looks the epitome of civility in comparison. NIH and Internecine Rivalry still carry the day. The only thing worse is the 16 government agencies[I kid you not] "regulating" Wall Street each in its own incomplete and apparently incompetent way.

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 10:27 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Transparency is a lost hope at Microsoft. .Net has become a pie in the sky. Microsoft is being pulled in many directions at the same time. Problem is a lack of integration between

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 10:30 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Transparency is a lost hope at Microsoft. .Net has become a pie in the sky. Microsoft is being pulled in many directions at the same time. Problem is a lack of integration between .Net components and the underlying classes. Perhaps .Net is too ambitious? Microsoft has taken a house of cards into an art form, it takes weeks of meetings just to discuss a few changes uncovering

• Report this Comment On May 29, 2010, at 10:55 PM, Philyogy wrote:

  check out the natal project.

  http://xbox360movies.ign.com/xbox360/video/article/989/98915...

  this type of innovation, is what will make all the difference.. Out in time for Christmas 2010.. :)

• Report this Comment On May 30, 2010, at 4:24 PM, WaltFrench wrote:

  There's no law that says any one company needs to change with the times. Lots of Foolish investors own shares of their local electric utilities, with business models that are relatively little-changed in decades.

  Change is hard. As a manager who's tried to introduce radically different approaches in his business (first, as a startup, now, as an insider), you see this instantly. <i>Taking Charge of Change</i> and <i>The Innovator's Dilemma</i> pretty well cover the territory. Microsoft may be hostage both to its blue chip board and to its customers' expectations of backward compatibility forever. Too bad the shareholders get stuck with a grossly inefficient R&D budget wasted on projects that get aborted, or jump-the-shark efforts like Natal, which merely provide bragging rights for an important niche, rather than really new products or (heaven forfend!!!) new <b>markets.</b>

• Report this Comment On May 30, 2010, at 6:23 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Changes come in two forms: new, or changes in place. If the infrastructure is worth keeping, then perform changes in place, otherwise scrap the old and begin anew. There has never been alternatives. Microsoft had already dodged a bullet scrapping DOS and began anew with Windows 95. Now Microsoft is much bigger but the scenario remains the same. Windows is based the 35 year old paradigm based on GUI, it's time to replace this with the 25 year old Object Oriented paradigm and leapfrog the whole world which is still all tangled up in GUI.

• Report this Comment On May 30, 2010, at 6:42 PM, plange01 wrote:

  replace the idiot balmer thats what it would take to get microsoft back on track this company has everything going for it.a 5 year old could run it!!!i sold out at $31 after years of owning this stock and will never go back this stock split to $25 a share 10 years ago and its still there!!!!!

• Report this Comment On May 30, 2010, at 9:04 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Problem with MS MFC library is that it is a GUI based abstraction instead of real world object based, otherwise the MFC would have been a good basis for Windows. GUI has very high inheritance trees because GUI abstractions are symbolic representations, not attribute based. The world had been barking up the wrong tree all these years. I would advice Apple to abandon the symbol based abstraction, and I would advice Microsoft to do the same. Symbols are great for analysis and design, but the real problem we had ignored is the basic definition for what things are, not how to represent them. Because until we actually know the what's, ten thousands years of analysis and designs using symbols are not going to net the world any real tangible benefits.

  I hope I have enlightened the people who understand, rather than just see and observe.

• Report this Comment On May 30, 2010, at 9:58 PM, aleax wrote:

  @waltfrench, the reason one might not mind too much owning utilities, e.g. via IDU, is that while they are flat over the last 10 years they do at least dependably yield 4% yearly dividends. MSFT is down 20% or so over 10 years and only yields dividends of 2% -- not a nice combination.

  Plus, if you're willing to pick and choose which utilities are worth owning, rather than going for the stability of an ETF like IDU, it's not hard to find ones that have been much better than IDU -- e.g., EXC, up 50% in 10 years and yielding 5.5% dividends, or PCG, up 60% and yielding 4.5% (I won't get into the pros and cons of stock picking, but the Fool communities are generally very friendly to it when done in the proper long-term way;-).

• Report this Comment On May 30, 2010, at 10:26 PM, crawlfish wrote:

  I have been using Linux for the last six years at home. At work we use Windows. Frankly Windows seems primitive to me and not as easy to use.

  Apple uses a form of Unix called BSD for it's under lining operating system and it's GUI is proprietary.Microsoft could do the same thing.

  Apple is betting on media and DRM (digital rights management) for its future profits.That is to lock up the formats. Other wise the authors could use any vendor as an outlet for their creativity. Like the server wars that Microsoft lost to Linux I think Apple will lose its war. The new method of profit will be offering the software for free but selling service for it. I think that the Red Hat model will ultimately be the one that survives.

• Report this Comment On May 30, 2010, at 11:33 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  I wouldn't say Apple's future depends on anything else but software architecture and logistics. Apple has the most disciplined software practices in the business with a fierce focus not not allowing the releases of any software that would 1) crash, 2) hogs the resources, 3) hard to use. As a result the Apple user experience sells the Apple hardware. Linux is for programmers. Windows is for word processing and spreadsheet users, surfing and at work. Rim is obsolete. Wii, PS3, Xbox, are for gamers with excellent games which earn their makers a lot of money. Unix and Linux are lousy for games but Apple Unix is an exception. Windows has some excellent PC games but the graphics card alone costs $700.

  You can specialize but you cannot generalize on computer operating systems.

  In summary Windows is not as idiot friendly as Apple, and Windiws had too many system crashes, usage complexities, and too few enjoyable but useful apps in comparison to Apple, just like Rim which can only do email / messaging which Apple does with more power and ease.

• Report this Comment On May 30, 2010, at 11:49 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Just look at how Adobe is screaming threatening antitrust actions against for Flash not running on iPhone but at the meantime Flash Builder 4 is not even available for Linux and Solaris. Reason why workplaces still use Windows over Linux is for the exact same reason, the software heavyweights just don't go to Linux first, ask anyone. iPhone / iPad are seriously dethroning Windows in both personal and workplace computing including the important smartphone / mobile processes. When you talk about user computing it's all about apps apps apps, and Apple is all about apps apps apps. Without Apple's software logistics and practices no one in the world can stand in Apple's steady march in becoming the world's first Trillion Dollars company, not one, not even Microsoft. Rim will be the first major casualty in Apple's ascendancy. If Microsoft does not do something effective real soon, its fall to Apple can be witnessed within 10 years.

• Report this Comment On June 01, 2010, at 3:48 PM, polenium wrote:

  Save Microsoft? Has anyone who claims to be a business journalist or expert looked at earnings vs. stock price? Microsoft earns the entire net worth of Google anually. Apple has 8% of the market of share.

  Why the stock price doesn't reflect Microsoft's success is a mystery. Could it have anything to do with fallacious reporting and whipping up public sentiment against Microsoft?

  Why did our own government go after Microsoft who were providing better products for less money and turn a blind eye to oil giants who collude and price gouge? Go figure.

• Report this Comment On June 01, 2010, at 5:22 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  Intel Macs co-executing OSX & XP had pulled in $billions for Steve Jobs and now iPhones & iPad had provided a solid app market to embark on Apple's own Ax microprocessor CPU family. CPU architectures drive machine instruction sets which are the basis for operating systems that control hardware. This is the real future. MS Windows control memory, keyboard, screen, drives, printers, modems, etc. but the real world is a whole lot more, wouldn't you agree? MS had dwelt upon this set of apparatus too long. MS is stuck in the office while Apple has the intention to move beyond the office, to build CPUs with instruction sets that control much more hardware using the mighty OSX operating system. Microsoft is confined in the office as Apple is exploring the entire universe. Now can people see why Microsoft needs saving?

  The Apple A4 is like the engine of the embryonic sic-fi USS Enterprise starship, the first major step in human endeavor to reach beyond the confines of a office metaphor driven role of a computer, into a computer that can take us boldly to places we have never been before, in our search to rediscover the lost Garden of Eden, back into the presence of God, some day.

• Report this Comment On June 01, 2010, at 5:32 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  My own observations reveal a 50% inclination to switch from Windows to Mac in the general user computing community. The major driving force is the much superior user Apple experience which often translates into enhanced productivity, efficiency, time savings, and reduced employee head counts due to greatly automated processes through workflow. Windows application paradigm is outdated.

• Report this Comment On June 01, 2010, at 5:51 PM, InfoThatHelp wrote:

  In short, the iPad iWorks programs are on the verge of overtaking the MS Office as the primary purpose for using a small computer. MS Windows do not have many apps at all, and all of these apps are on the verge of being replaced by iPad apps that are far easier to use, and getting a lot more things done quickly and immediately gratifying. This is very serious in undermining the value to MS Windows to its customers, whether individuals or workplace. In technology, sea changes often occur as 5-minute tsunamis. Often, entire conglomerates are brought down within 2 heartbeats long before the bankrupt conglomerate headed out the last paychecks to the distraught employees.

• Report this Comment On June 02, 2010, at 8:49 AM, EvilPhD wrote:

  Apple is over-valued in my book. the products they make are faddish, short on versatility, and short lived. Besides there are only so many i-nouns left in the vocabulary.

  MSFT needs to take a lesson from Google and go and an R&D spree. Unleash the creative intellect of it's employees and see what comes out of it. Give the people what they want.

  Windows 7 actually did a lot of good, and project Natal I think is going to lead into other innovations. Innovations that can be built into other devices.

• Report this Comment On June 04, 2010, at 2:18 PM, canary08 wrote:

  Well now, none of this is news. These calls have been made and remade for a long time coming now. It will get real dark before it gets better. The public has not even gotten wind of the lack of business ethics component that burns not far beneath the lid with a culture that behave like teenagers addicted to crack, defending their position, not listening or learning, and where knowing right from wrong is clear as mud. This will at some point overshadow all of the other ills and will come to pass in time.

• Report this Comment On June 04, 2010, at 7:54 PM, tuffdeal wrote:

  Problem is that Microsoft has never been a hardware innovator or a hw/sw innovator. A software innovator, yes, but the only truly innovative software that they've issued in the past few years is 7 and Silverlight. Ballmer does not have foresight and his minions are there to feed his ego. He really does have to step down so that the company can be reorganized totally and reinvigorated.

• Report this Comment On June 04, 2010, at 10:41 PM, birder1500 wrote:

  Microsoft's idea of innovation is to come out with new versions of the same old crap. What a piece of crap. I stopped down loading their system updates after one I down loaded crashed the system and I had to reinstall the operating system.

  I hate their crap, but I do use it.

• Report this Comment On June 07, 2010, at 10:55 PM, webjawns wrote:

  "In short, the iPad iWorks programs are on the verge of overtaking the MS Office as the primary purpose for using a small computer."

  I can't stress how wrong this person is. Microsoft Office is the de facto standard in the business world, and iWorks will likely never replace nor put a dent in this product. It is evident that you do not understand the IT world.

  In order to utilize Apple products, you must have a compatible operating system. Apple doesn't really make software that works on Microsoft-based systems (outside of iTunes). Most business networks use some combination of Linux and Microsoft Windows Server. There is nothing that compares to what Microsoft offers in terms of IT administration and management. I say this not as an investor, but as an IT professional.

  "MS Windows do not have many apps at all, and all of these apps are on the verge of being replaced by iPad apps that are far easier to use, and getting a lot more things done quickly and immediately gratifying."

  This is so funny. There are more applications for Windows than there are for all operating systems combined. Microsoft Windows applications are also more powerful and feature-rich, while most also provide a minimalist approach as an option to cater to the crowd you speak of.

  "My own observations reveal a 50% inclination to switch from Windows to Mac in the general user computing community."

  This was definitely a made-up statistic.

  It is disingenuous for people to claim that Apple's products are somehow easier to use, and it is a flat-out misstatement to say that they are better. Apple is good at one thing - taking a piece of crap and slapping it in a pretty package. I do not believe they are the innovators many make them out to be, as almost every product they've every released has been done by someone else before. Don't mistake innovative marketing for innovative products.

• Report this Comment On June 07, 2010, at 11:03 PM, webjawns wrote:

  "In short, the iPad iWorks programs are on the verge of overtaking the MS Office as the primary purpose for using a small computer."

  I can't stress how wrong this person is. Microsoft Office is the de facto standard in the business world, and iWorks will likely never replace nor put a dent in this product. It is evident that you do not understand the IT world.

  In order to utilize Apple products, you must have a compatible operating system. Apple doesn't really make software that works on Microsoft-based systems (outside of iTunes). Most business networks use some combination of Linux and Microsoft Windows Server. There is nothing that compares to what Microsoft offers in terms of IT administration and management. I say this not as an investor, but as an IT professional.

  "MS Windows do not have many apps at all, and all of these apps are on the verge of being replaced by iPad apps that are far easier to use, and getting a lot more things done quickly and immediately gratifying."

  This is so funny. There are more applications for Windows than there are for all operating systems combined. Microsoft Windows applications are also more powerful and feature-rich, while most also provide a minimalist approach as an option to cater to the crowd you speak of.

  "My own observations reveal a 50% inclination to switch from Windows to Mac in the general user computing community."

  This was definitely a made-up statistic.

  It is disingenuous for people to claim that Apple's products are somehow easier to use, and it is a flat-out misstatement to say that they are better. Apple is good at one thing - taking a piece of crap and slapping it in a pretty package. I do not believe they are the innovators many make them out to be, as almost every product they've every released has been done by someone else before. Don't mistake innovative marketing for innovative products.

Add your comment.