[elehcdn]

Originally Posted by capo

"They've proved to date that no lead, no matter how large, is insurmountable in any market segment that microsoft cares to attack."

I think that pretty much says it. Netscape vs. IE,

Except for the fact that currently, MIE is losing substantial ground to Firefox and Safari. The Gates MS would have a decent shot at pulling this off - the Ballmer MS is just living off the huge monopoly that Bill built.

Besides, wasn't it just a couple of months ago that Urge was sure to kill the itms?

[elehcdn]

Originally Posted by capo

"They've proved to date that no lead, no matter how large, is insurmountable in any market segment that microsoft cares to attack."

I think that pretty much says it. Netscape vs. IE,

Except for the fact that currently, MIE is losing substantial ground to Firefox and Safari. The Gates MS would have a decent shot at pulling this off - the Ballmer MS is just living off the huge monopoly that Bill built.

Besides, wasn't it just a couple of months ago that Urge was sure to kill the itms?

[elehcdn]

Originally Posted by unxmully

Though to be fair, that had less to do with Microsoft's platform being better and more to do with Palm's failure to provide a sensible upgrade path for their users.

Actually, it probably has more to do with people in general abandoning handheld PCs for phones. I think that it was less that MS was increasing units sold than it was that the market for Palm handhelds dried up.

***long quote trimmed by mod JD***

[Ed Hansberry]

Originally Posted by Muntasser

i see this crashing and burning very zune *sic*.

Microsoft have the blinkers on if they think they can "penetrate" the market at this stage.

You mean like how late to the party MS was when they reinvented their PDA in April of 2000 when Palm had been around for several years and was easily over 80% share?

[Darius Wey]

Originally Posted by Charles Pickrell

I think Microsoft's strategy of copying and not inventing is sad. With such a large company full of talented individuals, I can only conclude that most of Microsoft management has had a labotomy. I wish Microsoft would spend more time inventing solutions that meet users' unmet needs today.

I feel that this is an inaccurate assessment. There is plenty that Microsoft has executed well and executed from scratch. For example:

Xbox Live and the Xbox Live Marketplace on the Xbox 360 have done plenty to redefine and set a new standard on the state of online connectivity in gaming. Live Anywhere, which has yet to be seen, may raise that bar even higher.

Media Center could be regarded as the first solid jab at bringing computing and home entertainment together. It's been gaining popularity as of late, and Vista is set to boost Media Center's capabilities even further.

[beq]

I'd read more about it here:
http://news.com.com/Microsofts+Zune+...3-6097196.html


But, I also found this very interesting:
http://news.com.com/2061-11199_3-6097419.html

"Zune could kill Microsoft partners, not iPod"
"With friends like Microsoft..."

[zetsurin]

Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry

You mean like how late to the party MS was when they reinvented their PDA in April of 2000 when Palm had been around for several years and was easily over 80% share?

This has been said before, and it bares little to no relevance to the battle about to take place today. If I recall correctly, Palm still held the majority of the market in 2004, and then proceeded to do NOTHING with the platform for years. They pretty much terminated it all on their own. I'd like to ask you precisely why you expect to see the same thing happening here? Too much Microsoft love, perhaps?

***excess quote trimmed by mod JD***

[Ed Hansberry]

Originally Posted by zetsurin

This has been said before, and it bares little to no relevance to the battle about to take place today. If I recall correctly, Palm still held the majority of the market in 2004, and then proceeded to do NOTHING with the platform for years. They pretty much terminated it all on their own. I'd like to ask you precisely why you expect to see the same thing happening here? Too much Microsoft love, perhaps?

Even by 2004, Palm was losing to WIndows Mobile in Europe and was experiencing significant erosion in the US. I agree that much after 2004, PalmOS just fell into a coma of stagnation and inactivity, but it doesn't change what happened from 2000 to 2004 - significant gains by WM.

[aroma]

Make what excuses you want for Palm / Netscape / Netware / Playstation / et all, but in each of those cases, MS was a very late commer to the party, after the market was well saturated, and they pentetrated very well, were very sucessfull, and in most cases, completely dominated. The point is, even with the market share that Apple currently has, there is no reason to think that MS cannot enter the market this late and be very sucessfull at it. I don't think anyone is trying to predict the downfall of the iPod, rather than just refuting the comment that MS wouldn't be able to penetrate the market this late in the game. History seems to go against that argument.

[Charles Pickrell]

Originally Posted by Darius Wey

I feel that this is an inaccurate assessment. There is plenty that Microsoft has executed well and executed from scratch. For example:

I think my general point stands. For a company that employs over 60,000 people, Microsoft should have tons of innovative new software and hardware. While Microsoft's Live technology for X-Box and soon other devices is indeed successful and cool, they need to be doing more. It has been my experience that Microsoft looks at any successful third party products in new marketspaces as a threat and tries to kill them in the market. Instead it should focus on continued research of new products rather than always looking in the rear view mirror and copying existing technologies. I consider Microsoft's actions of entering a mature market with the intention of eliminating players in that market through sheer financial force a waste of the companies energies and resources. As the market leader Microsoft has a responsibility to move computing forward, and I don't mean releasing larger and larger versions of Windows and Office over and over. I mean look at Vista from the users persppective, slower, more RAM and video requirements, reduced compatibility, not many new user-centric features, etc. What's to like there? Gimme something new and innovative and my wallet is out. Lately my wallet has been out to companies like Apple.

[Darius Wey]

Originally Posted by Charles Pickrell

Instead it should focus on continued research of new products rather than always looking in the rear view mirror and copying existing technologies.

To be fair, the Microsoft Research folks have innovated in the past and present, yet a lot of it goes unnoticed. Have a look at some of the current projects here: http://www.microsoft.com/about/brand...tial/main.html

Originally Posted by Charles Pickrell

I consider Microsoft's actions of entering a mature market with the intention of eliminating players in that market through sheer financial force a waste of the companies energies and resources.

You can't dominate a market through financial force, especially a market as big as the media market. It doesn't matter how many products you create and partnerships you sign, and how many dollars went into all that. At the end of the day, consumers still rule. If your product or service is good enough and gains the appeal of the consumers, you will succeed.

I don't see any of this as a waste of Microsoft's energy and resources. If the company can deliver a better product/service combination, the consumers will benefit. If not, lesson learned, and the company can focus elsewhere. The world can then go back to enjoying what Apple has to offer. You can't blame anyone for trying.