“The word ‘intense’ was invented for Ballmer, who met with us in a green room that had a paper sign with his name taped to the door. While he was at first warm and engaging, a question about security features shifted his mood. His eyes, soft when he smiles, grew dark. The usually boisterous Ballmer became unexpectedly quiet and soon exited the room without saying goodbye. Still, he had a lot to say to SmartMoney senior writer Dyan Machan before he did.”
I love the way Ballmer displays the fact that he obviously only gets his information from lackies and yes men!
Is it just me, or does Ballmer remind anybody else of Jar Jar Binks?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jar_Jar_Binks
Ballmer is strange, and often a bit creepy, but I don’t think you can expect him to respond in any other way. Apple openly insults Microsoft, Windows, Windows Users, and PCs in television ads. In the quote you cite he says 2 controversial things (underpowered, and no presence in the home) and 4 or so less controversial things… I wouldn’t call that wearing rose-colored glasses.
Are you telling us right now that Apple has the lead in any particular market besides music and “Macintosh computers”?
I would be happy with Apple winning some markets (for example, at least 20% of the PC market), but wishing it doesn’t make it so.
You realize there’s an enormous difference between having the lead and having a presence. I would consider 2-3% to be a presence, just not a very big one.
Ballmer is doing exactly what Apple has done in its ads: Exaggerating. Apple plays like Windows Security is as it was in 2002 (which works well because that plays well with human memory, it tends to remember the worst and not the most recent). And Ballmer is playing like it’s 1997 and Apple is close to losing its last few niche markets.
But you should expect Ballmer to get a lot of crap anyway: A lot of people really don’t like him. He’s really not a great consumer personality. Maybe he’s a great business personality, but I think Microsoft’s consumer personality has always been Gates.
I don’t think it’s anything special about Gates either, other than his physical stature and monetary advancement. It’s just that people like the little geeky guy becoming the most wealthy man in the world.
I’d also like to see Apple running 20% of the PC market. I’d even be happy with Microsoft as a majority holder, but less than two thirds.
PC’s are too homogeneous, it’s boring.
I like the centrist/edgy argument. He basically said that consumers want to be average, so that’s what we give them.
He claims that there is a high-end of the music market (that might someday be served by the Zune). Consumers think they pay too much for music as it is.
He says iPod is a hot brand, not Apple. Well, Windows is a hot brand, not Microsoft.
On security: “We’ve done our best.” Did he just say that?
On open source, he says that it’s a new competitor to which they have no response. I guess they’re just waiting for the fad to pass.
I think his last comment says it best:
“There’s no replacing Bill Gates. I gotta go.”
That’s right, Steve, you definitely have to go.
You realize there’s an enormous difference between having the lead and having a presence. I would consider 2-3% to be a presence, just not a very big one.
Yes there certainly is a big difference:
Q4 2006 revenues:
Microsoft: 12,5 billion USD 100%
Apple: 7,1 billion USD 57%
Market shares (according to your post)
Microsoft: 96%
Apple: 2-3%
So, out of 32 times the Apple market share, Microsoft only manage to squeeze 76% more revenue out that share.
If I where at a Banker I would say:
1) surely, Microsoft’s business model is suffering. They will end up pretty much as a “supplier of components for refrigerators”
1.1) they have no influence on how the refrigerator actually look in peoples homes (design)
1.2) they are not the “Main Brand” and they cannot control how the refrigerator is marketed and branded. Lack of influence and leadership effects.
1.3) and they might be forced out of the market since their business model is lacking so much compared with Apple's business model.
Apple is getting 32 times more out of each market share.
As a banker I would say: sell !
.
So, out of 32 times the Apple market share, Microsoft only manage to squeeze 76% more revenue out that share.
I’m not sure this is the best way to see that. Assuming that numbers are true (they look consistent), there are big differences among MS and Apple.
For example, do you know which is second most-used OS? Pirated Windows. And that counts like 20-30% market share (in some regions, even 60-70%) that is pirated Windows has x10 market share than Apple itself has now. If Microsoft manages to recover a tiny fraction of these lost revenues, it will get far more money than Apple do with OS X. Moreover, there wasn’t almost any iPod HALO effect over OS X and Intel transition didn’t help that much: Apple still holds a little fraction of the market and it won’t be easy to get more now that Vista is out.
And don’t forget Microsoft is starting to provide services, something Apple can’t do easily (if at all).
Ballmer is right to emphasize Microsoft can get more money from other markets where Apple has no presence, for ex. XBox, which is now a bringing losses to MS but might become a plus sign in 1-2 years. There are far more markets where Microsoft can get money from while Apple is mostly struck to 2 main markets (and iPhone wasn’t that impressive to me… I wouldn’t buy it for sure).
Things look very different than you portrait them. If I had Microsoft stocks (which I don’t: I don’t buy stocks at all…), best time to sell was two years ago. I would keep them now, to be honest.
“Apple still holds a little fraction of the market and it won’t be easy to get more now that Vista is out”
1) I have used Vista: Horrible.
2) This year at least 3.2 miljoen people will switch from MS to OSX.
Don’t talk nonsense.
1) I have used Vista: Horrible.
That’s just your (respectable) opinion, of course.
2) This year at least 3.2 miljoen people will switch from MS to OSX.
Oh really? Did you read the previous article? They claim they sold 20millions Vistas in one MONTH. If if that’s 17millions, what should we do with 3.2 millions users using OS X this YEAR? Given that this is to prove yet. About 255millions PC will be sold this year only…
Let’s wait new OS X release and see what happens but I suspect that in 6 months we will still be talking about Apple’s 2.something market share.
“They claim they sold 20 millions Vistas in one MONTH”
Do you think I am that naief that I trust Microsoft twisted statements? (See OSAlert update…)
You were saying that there was no iPod halo effect or Intel effect: Apple is selling almost twice as much computers as 3-4 years ago. This year they will sell 6-8 miljoen units, 50% will be first time users, you may wonder why…
Do you think I am that naief that I trust Microsoft twisted statements? (See OSAlert update…)
Ah, they’re lying C’me on… we’re not talking about our little kid friend telling he got out with that sexy girl…
You were saying that there was no iPod halo effect or Intel effect: Apple is selling almost twice as much computers as 3-4 years ago. This year they will sell 6-8 miljoen units, 50% will be first time users, you may wonder why…
That’s still too few and the best times have gone. Now iPod faces competition and iTunes is not selling as strong as 2 years ago. If you want someone hurt market leader you have to steal significant shares of market in a relatively small period of time. Getting +1% or +1.5% in a year is just nuts.
Let’s just wait and see what happens. I bet in 6 months we will talk about Apple raising 0.4% compared to previous year… and that’s nuts.
We are talking about “Developers, Developers, Developers…”
Anyway keep watching the pc ->HOME<- computermarket in the USA, here MS is loosing the battle, for the coming 18 months, the rest will follow.
Finally, the dark ages are coming to an end, I have passed the tunnel already a few years ago, but..
many will choose to remain in denial…
I’m not sure this is the best way to see that.
Well, do you have at better view to present?
By 2012 Apple will be bigger than Microsoft in revenue, but far behind in traditionally and (how stupidly) measured “market shares”. One can see how utterly foolish it would have been for Apple to go the Microsoft route, licensing Mac OS X to trillion PC producers and Paul, Peter & Joe-garage. Revenue form this model would have been like a drop in the ocean compared with todays Apple growth potential and business model (it’s the Mac that is the product, not Mac OS X)
For example, do you know which is second most-used OS? Pirated Windows. And that counts like 20-30% market share (in some regions, even 60-70%) that is pirated Windows has x10 market share than Apple itself has now. If Microsoft manages to recover a tiny fraction of these lost revenues, it will get far more money than Apple do with OS X.
Well, pirate-market-share does not do much good for Microsoft as a company. However Mac OS X is not a Product! This is the most fundamental difference between these two companies. Microsoft Windows is a Product. Mac OS X is not. It is The Macintosh that is the Apple Product. And here it is Apple that controls everything. Every details, every look, every marketing initiative. If Apple think the Mac should have a face lift in appearance & look, Apple will do just that. The rival, Microsoft, does not have this control. Today the personal computer is moving into peoples expensive fully decorated living rooms, so it better look good! No more PSC’s hidden away in cellars and behind closed doors.
Todays security- and OS-maintainance problems are just baby food compared with security problems of the future. Microsoft does not compete here, because they are not in control of the products which they are set to control = the consumers personal computer. They just deliver a component, the PC OS.
Microsoft has now exploited it’s market to a 95% extent on todays market size. But Apple ? Apple is just warming up! Which company has a greater growth potential ? You can guess!
The problem for “Microsoft of the future” is that Microsoft's business model has painted the company into a corner. Microsoft can’t go into hardware. They can’t go the Apple route. At least not without a declaration of war from zillion so called “pc-partners” and 100% of the market legislation body. First Microsoft would have to loose some hefty weight, i.e. market shares, before that could happen.
Your are absolutely right about this market share measuring method being plain stupid. It really only measure how many Microsoft-Business-Model-Copies of Microsoft main product are being sold.
Moreover, there wasn’t almost any iPod HALO effect over OS X and Intel transition didn’t help that much: Apple still holds a little fraction of the market and it won’t be easy to get more now that Vista is out.
This is not true.
By 2012 Apple will be bigger than Microsoft in revenue, but far behind in traditionally and (how stupidly) measured “market shares”.
Well, let me say this is wild speculation.
Revenue form this model would have been like a drop in the ocean compared with todays Apple growth potential and business model (it’s the Mac that is the product, not Mac OS X)
Why are you people all so sure that there’s just one winning business model and it’s that one ALL companies must pursue? There are MANY good business models and it depends on products you sell which is the best for you. Google, Microsoft and Apple are very different companies and they have different business models. That doesn’t mean one is successfull per se nor others are trash. Apple and Microsoft MUST have different business models because they sell DIFFERENT products. Saying that Microsoft business models is bad and Apple one is good is just a nonsense. In the days when Apple stocks were toilet paper, a company with the same business model (Sun) was skyrocketing (or kinda). So stop thinking it’s the business model…
The rival, Microsoft, does not have this control. Today the personal computer is moving into peoples expensive fully decorated living rooms, so it better look good! No more PSC’s hidden away in cellars and behind closed doors.
What does this mean? One could say that Microsoft can sell its product to millions people more than Apple can and make more profits. It’s not the business model, again. Plus, I don’t know if you noticed that but Apple has NO kind of product your describe (living room appliance)…! While Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo and others have. So what are we talking about?
Microsoft has now exploited it’s market to a 95% extent on todays market size. But Apple ? Apple is just warming up! Which company has a greater growth potential ? You can guess!
I have yet to see that. To me, Apple is slowing down, expecially in iPod / iTunes market.
The problem for “Microsoft of the future” is that Microsoft's business model has painted the company into a corner. Microsoft can’t go into hardware. They can’t go the Apple route. At least not without a declaration of war from zillion so called “pc-partners” and 100% of the market legislation body. First Microsoft would have to loose some hefty weight, i.e. market shares, before that could happen.
What are you talking about? Microsoft just entered that market! They decided to enter the console market (which is hardware) and they did. They decided to enter the MP3/sound players market and they did. They simply have no interest in entering the PC hardware market for the same reason IBM quitted. Microsoft makes almost the same profit hardware makers get by selling the software only! (Well, exaggerated but not that much if you check how much h/w makers get from a single PC sell).
You know, to me the best proof that Apple will have some problems exploiting new markets can be the fact that Jobs decided to enter Disney. Pay attention: AFAIK he entered Disney as Steve Jobs, not Apple itself, sign that Jobs was looking for investments and new chance to exploit. If he was so confident Apple could do that, he could have just brought Apple there (and save tons of money). We’ll see what happens but I wouldn’t be suprised when I will hear that “next year will be OS X desktop year!”
Q4 2006 revenues:
Microsoft: 12,5 billion USD 100%
Apple: 7,1 billion USD 57%
http://db.tidbits.com/article/8713
4.84 billion USD for apple
I am not talking about financial quarters:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2412
Apple on Wednesday released results for its fiscal 2007 first quarter ended December 30, 2006, which included record revenue of $7.1 billion and record net quarterly profit of $1.0 billion, or $1.14 per diluted share.
Hey… that looks like an argument based on rationality and reality! This is the OSAlert comments on a Microsoft-relates story – where’s the popular mythology and subjective personal opinions asserted as objective reality?
I’m typing this from my 17″ MacBook Pro; at home. He’s wrong on that point.
I have a new IBM Thinkpad T series laptop at work, and the specs on my MacBook Pro are better. He’s wrong on the “underpowered” point.
If you spec out a Dell or HP with the same specs as a MacBook Pro, you end up paying about the same amount of money, so they aren’t overpriced either (Apple just doesn’t offer crap-end machines like Dell and HP do).
I was an avid user of Windows for about 10 years. I even worked as a developer at Microsoft. During this time, I always kept a Linux machine handy as well. In about 2002, I completely abandoned Windows and went with Linux and OpenBSD. About a month ago, I bought this Apple laptop. It is by far the most enjoyable computer I have ever owned. With Linux and OS X available as options, I see no reason whatsoever to run Windows again.
I’ve tried them all (even Vista for a while) and Microsoft has nothing on the competition anymore. As far as I’m concerned, that is a fact.
So, in my opinion, the difference between Apple’s ads and what Balmer is saying here is that Apple has a valid point and Balmer is just blowing smoke.
If you spec out a Dell or HP with the same specs as a MacBook Pro, you end up paying about the same amount of money,
Not in my country of Australia.
A similarly speced Dell laptop is half the price to the Apple Macbook I’m sorry to say (with Dell coupons discounts) and I can’t get Apple student discount.
Your right the Apple/Asus built machine are better built, but at twice the cost.?! Please I have to eat too!
If an Apple laptop was only 1/4 as dearer than the Dell as in the U.S. the Apple notebook would be the better purchase.
Apple Australia get your S**T together.
What did you expect him to say? That MS sucks? That Apple has them beat?
Of course it’s all bullshit but it’s no more bullshit than most other CEO’s spew on regular basis.
He’s right about the Zune being a high end device. Granted I have a lot of money invested in my main audio system, and by far the Zune is the best sounding mp3 player I have bought. I had everything from the Rio Karma (w/ FLAC) to the iPod, to the Cowon iAudio X5. I picked up a Zune a week or so ago and was instantly blown away by the audio quality.
And no I am not a Microsoft fanboy by any means, I can ramble on and on about the benefits of Solaris any day
That’s weird. I tried a Zune and an 80GB video iPod at the store side by side and bought the iPod because I thought it sounded better and had better features.
To each their own.
I have to agree. I think the Zune is a fantastic device in many respects, and in some ways designed even better than the iPod. I did not think it sounded better than the iPod, though, and certainly not better than the cowon players. Unfortunately, cowon america has done some serious damage to that brand name by under-marketing it, and providing less than satisfactory customer service in many cases. Unfortunately for the Zune, it doesn’t appear to have gained much at all in the way of traction so far.
Edited 2007-03-27 13:55
Steve Jobs’s iPhone announcement stole the thunder from Bill Gates’s keynote address at the Consumer Electronics Show. Do you wish you had the iPhone?
No. Apple has put its brand into a new category. That doesn’t mean it’s a good product. I wouldn’t be surprised if one of our partners came out with a device that looks exactly the same at a lower price in six or seven months “
Priceless quote
As said before, Ballmer is not good for Microsoft’s consumer image. He may be a good businessman, but an expert in PR he’s definitely not. Having said that, the questions posed in the article definitely seem to have the purpose of aggravating Ballmer, and act on a rather amateurish level.
For example, the “Do you wish you had the iPhone”. You already know the answer to that before asking, and you can tell by his blatant response he was starting to get annoyed.
I’m not defending Ballmer, Lord knows he’s by far one of my least favorite guys in the industry, but after reading the interview, I realized I didn’t learn anything new, and I couldn’t come to the point of the article. I’m not really all that surprised Ballmer decided to leave. When you hold an interview, it’s important to ask the interviewee (is that a word?) questions that will get not only their interest, but the *readers* interest as well. Dont be scared to strike a nerve, but when the questions seem silly with little purpose than it’s simply a waste of time, and I think that was why Ballmer left. In all honesty, if I was the editor I would have pulled this article. But please remember, that is only my personal view.
There were some questions I were looking for in particular of points that I would have liked to know.
“What are your future strategies in increasing Microsoft’s competitiveness in the entertainment devices field?”
“What is your reaction to Dell’s IdeaStorm responses asking for Linux? Will pressure from demand for Linux influence Microsoft’s strategy in the long run for Windows?”
Anyways, my 2 (and a half) cents.
Edited 2007-03-27 00:19
I totally agree with you on this one. The interviewer seemed to be taking meaningless shots at Ballmer. I don’t think the interviewer’s aim was to catch Ballmer’s attention or to engage in any form of intelligent discussion. From the article’s brief synopsis I thought, “Maybe Ballmer really was being a jerk.”. But after reading the article it seems like Ballmer was simply fed up with being baited by one.
I agree completely. If I was Ballmer I would have left (or punched the interviewer. Thats why I’m not in PR…) too.
There are so many interesting questions that could have been asked but we’re left with “nuggets” like:
“You mean the Zune? Please.”
“Google has a ridiculous lead in paid search, and Linux, your open-source competitor, continues to nip at your heels.”
(Way to go guy, that’s not even a question)
“What’s doing in paid search?”
(Nice grammar)
“What part of Bill Gates’s job stretches you the most?”
(Huh?)
I’m surprised Ballmer didn’t tell him to go f–k himself.
I guess the “smart” in smartmoney does not refer to their staff.
Heh, yep, it seems like he took the Jim Cramer quote as a challenge and spent most of the interview doing his darnedest to disprove it.
Of course, it was pretty funny to read Cramer’s description of Ballmer:
“Tenacity, loyalty, rigor and honesty all rolled into one great guy.”
That sort of reminds me of the gibberish hyperbole bits from the Firesign Theatre.
“In these days of modern times, you can trust Steve Ballmer because he will help us come together as one – like a twin! With Steve Ballmer’s help, we can make life whole again – it’s as easy as a bridge!”
You already are.
That’s evening more amusing if you are British.
A number two indeed!
Just wondering …
Unfortunately Ballmer is not going to cut it in the 21st Cenury as the Spokeshole for MS. No believability outside of shills & hacks. They need someone 30-40 who is hip, attuned, personable & visionary, and that represents a danger to those at the top right now.
I use both PCs and Macs depending on what I have to do and would use Solaris or Sun if I needed to do so to do work. Ballmer doesn’t present an upbeat and “real” answer for me as to why I will commit money to his OS or Office. Sometimes I have no choice, sometimes I do.
The early 21st Century is going to be rough on companies that can not keep growth up, and so far Microsoft under CEO Ballmer since 2000 is not looking “robust”. I give him 2 years before the Board puts in someone else.
MS is at the point of a mature company in its field and can’t expect to maintain its 85%+ market share forever. Apple did a long range bet on Unix starting 10 years ago, and it is paying off in efficient software & hardware design. Microsoft didn’t see it, is late to hardware, and now competes with its own software partners, and went the with Cairo & then Longhorn and kept trimming down to VISTA, but 3-5+ years is dog slow, depending on how you count is a LONG time.
Pure Guess: MS holds its market share for a few more years before the % inexorably starts a decline. It will take one heck of a visionary to resucue it, just because it is so massively large, and Ballmer will not give up without throwing a whole boardroom full of chairs.
hey…. it wasn’t so bad after all. Nobody got hit by a flying chair passing by!
I think that since taking the helm of Microsoft in 2000 Steve has held up his end of the bargain by maintaining the dark oppressive stance that has long been Microsofts signature trademark. He has goaded, ridiculed and thru devious means, think SCO, done battle with the Linux movement. Linux couldn’t have asked for a better arch villian. Steve’s perfect! We just love to hate this guy.
So now it’s time for the Linux community to set aside a day of tribute to Steve in graditude for his being one of the prime motivations to make open source model succeed.
Edited 2007-03-27 05:23
Why is it that every time the name “Steve Ballmer” is in print, the adjective “tool” comes to mind?
Very strange.
Antagonistic questions followed by shallow sound-bite answers. [yawn] A rare opportunity lost…
-Bob
> > […] Security is a selling point for Vista.
> > Have you held back security improvements […]
>
> Quite the contrary. Our strategy is to get rid of it.
I don’t quite see the point of such a strategy, but it seems to be working.