My Photo

Ordering Information

Tomi on Twitter is @tomiahonen

  • Follow Tomi on Twitter as @tomiahonen
    Follow Tomi's Twitterfloods on all matters mobile, tech and media. Tomi has over 8,000 followers and was rated by Forbes as the most influential writer on mobile related topics

Book Tomi T Ahonen to Speak at Your Event

  • Contact Tomi T Ahonen for Speaking and Consulting Events
    Please write email to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com and indicate "Speaking Event" or "Consulting Work" or "Expert Witness" or whatever type of work you would like to offer. Tomi works regularly on all continents

Tomi on Video including his TED Talk

  • Tomi on Video including his TED Talk
    See Tomi on video from several recent keynote presentations and interviews, including his TED Talk in Hong Kong about Augmented Reality as the 8th Mass Media

Subscribe


Blog powered by Typepad

« Ballmer is Gone: Justified. Elop at Nokia Still With His Job: Unjustified | Main | Ballmer Aftermath Part 2 - Impact to Nokia, especially Lumia running Windows Phone »

August 24, 2013

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e0097e337c88330192acbab3e5970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ballmer Aftermath Part 1 - Future of Microsoft, especially in mobile:

Comments

PoiFan

One thing I am always surprised that doesn't get brought up in these discussions on MS failure is how much Intel's inability to develop low power x86 processors that compete with ARM has hurt Microsoft. Windows 8s approach to expand from conventional PCs to mobile/touch devices seems pretty compelling, but only as an expansion of the x86 codebase. WinRT is a horrible and confusing detour that does not leverage much MS incumbent strengths (other than office). Unfortunately current x86 chips cannot provide the same compact size/fanless design/long battery life as ARM. The Surface Pro would be quite compelling if it were iPad price, size, and battery life. Haswell processors may help, but it's already years too late.

winter

@PoiFan
Intel's inability to come up with a real competitor to ARM running the X86 instruction set is compounded by the loss of real cross-platform (CPU) hardware knowledge at MS.

Remember the troubles MS had to get a version of XP booting on the OLPC? That run an X86 compatible AMD CPU. I suspect MS is unable to create a truely cross platform version of the NT kernel anymore.

eduardo

Tomi, you say that MS is going to drop Windows Phone and focus on its big money-makers. But Ben Thomson says that Ballmer's problem was he focused on profits, instead of innovating to delight users like Apple does.

http://stratechery.com/2013/if-steve-ballmer-ran-apple/

zlutor

@winter: " the loss of real cross-platform (CPU) hardware knowledge at MS" - loss of what?!? :-)

The last CPU running MS OS not being x86 one was DEC Alpha/Power PC if I recall correctly. but support was dropped after NT4.0 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT)

So, if they had it at all, they lost that capability loooong-loooong time ago. On the other hand they did not need it lately (before mobile boom), too...

Tester

@eduardo:

I think the article is spot-on.
But it's not a contradiction to what Tomi said.

According to the article Ballmer focussed on profit alone - and it clearly shows today. The customer didn't mean anything at all to him. He had his monopolies and tried to squeeze their users dry to get more profit out of them. He went the unpopular (with customers) route wherever he could if he thought it could increase profits. The result: We got the Evil Empire, the company that never manages to make a product the customer likes. They still got to buy it because they have no choice.
People hate Windows 8, yet everybody who needs a new computer has to buy it. People hate the Ribbon interface, yet Office users have no choice. They need the product. People clearly stated that they want the start button back, yet all we got is an half-assed attempt. These were all the actions of a management team that had a vision of future profits by creating 'synergies' the user didn't need (and they failed misarably for that reason.)

In the end, though, these products will remain profitable because there are no alternatives for most users. And if someone with clearer vision of customer satisfaction gets his say, they can be fixed. Microsoft's current problem in these markets is that customers are fed up with this monopolist attitude and look for alternatives. And if people find alternatives they'll take them. The major thing the next CEO needs to do is stop this - and it can only be stopped by improving the company's reputation (i.e. no Evil Empire anymore.) Otherwise the slow decline will continue.

Now on to Windows Phone. Windows Phone does not have a monopoly. It doesn't even have a significant market position. People have a choice and the vast majority votes against it. In fact, Microsoft wouldn't be able to sell anything at all, wasn't it for ultra-low price points and the Nokia brand name. These are issues that can NOT be fixed. The mobile market is already dominated by the competition. No matter how much money Microsoft throws at it, it won't matter. They have tried for over two years now with utterly pathetic results. If the cash flow stopped now the product would be dead within a year.
And even if they tried to fix the problems on the design side to 'delight users' it'd be too late. We see with Blackberry how tough it is to position a new operating system in this market, even if it is well designed.
3, even 2.5 years ago, with a well designed system Microsoft might have had a good chance. But what did they focus on: System lockdown, user restrictions, a rigid user interface that was prohibited to be changed, a system 100% incompatible to its predecessor - and the infamous '101(?) design flaws'. Ballmer tried the monopolist's view on a market he didn't own and he failed. And then one year later he pulled WP8 out of the head, and repeated one of the biggest mistakes: It was again incompatible to its predecessor. He again took the accountant's view, trying to maximize profit with the least amount of work and totally forgot that he'd lose a lot of people he would have needed: effectively he also killed the developer community that would have slowly formed.

And once the honest projections are in the open, if they tell that WP will never generate any profit, it will get the axe, mobile be damned. No sane CEO would pursue such an undertaking unless there were contracts requiring him to continue.

winter

@zlutor
MS cannot even write drivers anymore as the PLPC debacle showed.

@Tester
Even the "succesful" Xbox has burned so much money that there is no way MS will ever see a positive ROI. The same for Bing if it ever is a succes.

It has been said before: Outside Windows and Office/sharepoint, every endeavor of MS has had a negative ROI, ie, a failure

Birne

Ballmer's actions remind me of this little article I found some time ago:

http://www.inc.com/karl-and-bill/maximizing-shareholder-value-is-not-a-dumb-idea.html

Look in particular for a section starting with 'But there’s a right way and a wrong way to do so. The right way:'

Hands up who thinks that Ballmer did not ignore any of the points that were said there. No wonder he's in trouble. Ballmer was the typical CEO for whom the bottom line was all that mattered, regardless of how he got there. The one thing he completely failed at was 'treating his customers well'.

Even before he became CEO he was already regarded as the cause of Microsoft's bullyish behaviour and once he took over the really bad things started to happen right away - beginning with the product activation in Windows XP. Strange that this only became an issue for them after he took control. ('Yes we assume you may be a thief and in order to protect us we take preemptive measures to limit your use of the product...') Truly great impression.

winter

People who hire a bully and robber are as bad as the person they hire. Ballmer was in office this long because those who hired him were pleased by his actions. He is now fired not because the powers that rule the evil empire want to mend their immoral ways, but because Balmer's bullying did not bring in enough money.

Tester

'People who hired him' would be Bill Gates - and he hired him long, long before he became CEO. He had been there almost since the very beginnings of Microsoft's existence. Even when Gates was still CEO, Ballmer had a significant amount of influence in the company and to a great deal was responsible for how Microsoft was perceived.

And I don't think he had to go because his bullying didn't bring in enough money but because his bullying started to harm the company. This type of CEO works to a degree with a monopolist but he's utterly incapable of defending market positions in a competetive market, and also to explore new markets well.
'Scroogled', for example was a typical Ballmer-brainchild. Instead of delivering something good, just badmouth the competition. Too bad, if that competition is too strong to get harmed by such antics, especially if your own competing product is as piss-poor as Bing.

But in the end he was the CEO, he decided how to make business - and he was Bill Gates's 'best pal'. Don't count on the shareholders, if someone went up before them telling them they'd get rich they'd say 'yes' and 'amen' to everything that's being suggested.

你好

@tester @tomi

i agree with tester opinion that most of the wp problem started with balmer (i.e restriction, locked user interface/launcher, etc).
therefore the solution might not to throw away the product but to change/lighten up the restriction.

and not doing scrogle, not fighting over youtube but follow google guideline, bring product (office, internet explorer, game) to android.

chithanh

@zlutor
Windows NT 4.0 ran on X86 and Alpha in the end (it launched with more platforms)
Xbox 360 (PowerPC) operating system is also based on Windows.
Windows XP ran on X86 and Itanium.
Windows CE runs on ARM, MIPS and SH.
Windows Phone and Windows RT run on ARM.
Windows 8 runs on X86 and X64.

Microsoft supports fewer hardware platforms than many Linux distributions, but I don't think there is a total lack of cross-platform knowledge.

darwinphish

To put all of this in perspective, if Ballmer had been running Apple for the past 5 years, there would be many more versions of the iPhone (including one with a keyboard) and the iPhone would be available on far more carriers. In other words, he would have done just about everything Tomi has suggested Apple should do!

eduardo

Tomi, I have an idea for a post that would make good use of your expertise and be of interest to many of your readers.

You say Nokia was so successful at least in part because it had such good relations with the telecoms. Why don't you write about what Nokia specifically did to get such good relations, and how that changed under Elop?

R

Well, if Ballmer had been running Apple, then the iPhone would never have been released. It would have been developed, prototypes shown to the press, and then killed at the last minute because it wasn't compatible with the existing MacOS business.

Then the developers would stretch their interpretations of what could be reported in expense reports, and ultimately resign.

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_ariely_what_makes_us_feel_good_about_our_work.html

Well, Ariely's account is somewhat anonymized, so I can't be sure that he was talking about Microsoft Courier. But there can't be that many companies matching that description.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-20128013-75/the-inside-story-of-how-microsoft-killed-its-courier-tablet/

R

Microsoft will not abandon the mobile market. Bill Gates said that what they were doing with Windows Phone was obviously a mistake, because it did not dominate. But he himself led Microsoft into mobile devices several times until Windows Mobile stuck and achieved 12% market share.

Mobile is crucially important to Microsoft. Microsoft makes loads of money from server licenses, office products, and Windows, and mobile devices are important to all of those businesses.

Server sales depend on stuff being served. A bunch of servers are sold running Exchange, so when email was the most important application, mobile devices had to hook into Exchange. Now a lot of mobile applications depend on "the cloud," and the cloud is reified in Linux servers run by Amazon, Google, Rackspace, Facebook, etc. This is a major threat to Microsoft, which is why they were so happy to have the Azure cloud grow into a $1 billion business so quickly.

Office depends on documents being locked into the Office formats. The Office division prefers to develop for Windows. (The MacOS port is done by a separate Macintosh Business Unit organizationally within the Office division.) With mobile devices becoming more powerful, people are trying to do more work on them, which currently means they're weaning themselves off of Office. No more commentary needed.

Windows is an obvious thing. Fall of PCs, rise of mobiles. One problem is that Apple has trained their developers to be used to the idea of disruptive change every couple years. Microsoft has cultivated an image of being nice and solid, so improvement-averse companies could build on Microsoft systems. Now that Microsoft is adopting Apple-style disruptive change but not achieving Apple-level market shares, they are making the whole Microsoft Windows lock-in model less attractive.

leebase

We should also realize that PC's are falling in "market share"...doesn't mean exactly what folks might think. When Nokia smart phone share started dropping like a rock, it represented folks replacing their need for a Nokia with an iPhone or Android. Smartphones and tablets to a large extent are filling in spaces that PC's didn't fill for areas of the world that couldn't afford a PC to begin with.

This would be a different story if Linux on the desktop was what caused the drop of marketshare of windows. That would be a direct replacement.

Tablets are more of direct replacements but only for use cases where PC's have been "over serving" the market. You don't need a full PC to surf the web, watch youtube, facebook, read books, play casual games your friends and other consumer/content consuming activities. That's the whole car/truck thing that Jobs spoke of.

The remaining "truck class" use of PC's isn't in jeopardy. After all these years, the free Linux alternative still has a paltry 1-2% of the desktop market.

Windows is still doing very well on the server. Not as well as Linux, but Linux has largely eaten up the traditional Unix market.

The net result is that Msft will be raking in it's Windows profits for the forseeable future and using those profits to fund it's assault on the tablet and smartphone market. Msft is no longer the monopoly it once was...but it's hardly become a paper tiger. Msft may well be improved by having to compete from a "non monopolist" position.

R

@leebase

Actually, the rise of mobiles not running Windows is hugely threatening to Microsoft. Microsoft was founded back when "PC" meant a box with no user interaction except for a panel of switches and a couple rows of lights. Microsoft has adapted as PCs have changed into their current forms. Everybody in the operating system industry agrees that smartphones are basically PCs that can make phone calls.

If everything people do can be done in a web browser that is not Internet Explorer, then why go with Microsoft for the "truck class"? Macs are nice but safely expensive. But Chromebooks and Chrometops promise the web browser with no maintenance hassle. If Android is your primary platform, then why not use that on your "truck"? Several companies now sell micro-PCs that plug into HDMI ports and run Android. A few companies, including HP, are selling experimental All-in-One PCs running Android instead of Windows.

While Microsoft is still profitable, they're looking at trends and taking the long-term view. And the trend is that traditional PC sales are going down, not just market share. If you include smartphones and tablets, Microsoft's market share is already a minority. Printers are being built with Airprint and Cloud Print, so you could actually do office work entirely on your iOS or Android device. It's a sign of the waning influence of Microsoft, because printer manufacturers are not known for producing printer drivers that they don't have to.

Desktop is the present of Microsoft, but they need Mobile to be the future. They will do whatever they have to for a chance of Bill Gates-level success in it. I hate Microsoft, and Ballmer is a big, 6'5" part of that hate, so they have their work cut out for them.

Tester

@R:

>> They will do whatever they have to for a chance of Bill Gates-level success in it.

Hint: They will never achieve that. The owned the PC because there was no competitor. The only one who might have been able to own this space was Apple and they priced themselves out of business with their early Macs and their refusal to open up the system.

To rule Mobile it's too late, plain and simple. And they won't stand any chance with an Apple copycat (locked down and restricted) when the original is more popular tham Macs have ever been in the PC world and an open competitor with huge market share already exists.

Microsoft can try what they want, this battle is lost forever. Also, please read the fine print: Nobody predicts that Microsoft may abandon mobile, but it can easily be that they abandon Windows Phone because it'll get them nowhere. The system had it chance and everything that happened so far tells us that the only way to sell it is by selling below cost.

leebase

There is no "Android PC" for Android mobile phone users to use. It's no more threatening than Symbian phones or BB phones. Chromebooks are just noise as is Linux on the desktop. People will have Android phones and Windows PC'S...just as folks have iPads and iPhones working with their windows pc's. A Chromebook is also no "truck". It's the same cut down user experience that a tablet is...worse actually.

And yes...it can look REALLY bad for Msft if you count phones and tablets. That's my point...those devices are not PC's. I can't do my programming on a smart phone. I can't run Sql Server on a tablet.

I love my iPad and it has certainly reduced my usage of PC's. But unless I stop having a need to program, a need to use spreadsheets at a business level...have business class word processing, and all the things that keep me needing a real PC....then I will still need a real PC. It just won't be used for web surfing as much as it used too.

I bought my elderly mother an iPad 2 when it was released. I'd never give her a computer. But she can skype with the grandkids, google search about medications, read books...facebook. It's perfect for her. Msft windows didn't lose out to the iPad with my mom. She was a non-PC user.

My oldest started college this week. She has an iPhone and an iPad...but I still bought her a laptop. You still just can't do everything you need to do with a tablet.

This will change over time. But it's going to change from both directions. Tablets are going to get more powerful, and their apps more sophisticated. The Surface shows that PC's are coming down from the high end. They are getting touch interfaces, and encroaching in the tablet space.

Msft is playing in both the "up from the bottom" with WinRT and the down from the top with Surface Pro. Ignoring Msft in this space is like writing off the original iPhone because it didn't come with a keyboard, removable memory, or support flash.

Tester

@leebase:

>> This will change over time. But it's going to change from both directions. Tablets are going to get more powerful, and their apps more sophisticated. The Surface shows that PC's are coming down from the high end. They are getting touch interfaces, and encroaching in the tablet space.


Fully agreed and yet it shows Microsoft's big error in thinking: If both of these converge (and yes, that would be my prediction for the future), why did they produce a Frankensteinian monster of two mutually incompatible user interfaces into one system instead of providing a standard API extension to create touch apps? This is not one coherent OS but essentially two, hastily stitched together.

If PC and tablet/mobile phones really converge, what is needed is an operating system that serves both ends equally well - and by that I mean that an app can offer both user interfaces all at once. But no, they have to be programmed separately and worse, the distribution channels are totally separated. That part makes no sense at all.

As for Android not working well on PCs, yes, that's obviously correct. But due to its Linux base and openness it may even be in a better position than Windows is to fill that gap.

Yes, Microsoft can still get there, but not with the products they currently have. They first need to fix them and that's not going to be easy.

R

@Tester:

Smartphones have taken over only about half of the mobile phone market. With the really short product cycles, I think there's still room for something exciting to happen, though I genuinely hope it's Jolla or Firefox or Ubuntu that becomes a major third ecosystem. But I like Linux and hate Microsoft, so there's an obvious bias.

@leebase: I think you're wrong, but I don't have time for you.
http://xkcd.com/386/

leebase

@Tester - I agree that Msft is not going to get it done with today's products. I just don't think they are going to sit on them. Just as Android 3 years ago was not nearly as competitive...but they kept working on it. Windows 1.0 equally wasn't what was needed to take on the Mac. By Win 3.1 they had a viable competitor and by Win95 they were at parity.

Msft, Google, Apple -- three formidable competitors with deep pockets. They each have their strengths and weaknesses. I don't foresee any of the other entrants to be nearly as successful as these three.

Hardware you have Samsung and Apple. Samsung being the far and away top dog manufacturer. Apple the innovation leader. But will Sony, Motorola, HTC and Nokia forever struggle? On that, I have less hope for any but the top two. Android giveth and taketh away at the same time. It gives everybody an OS and ecosystem able to compete toe to toe with Apple...but it gives EVERYBODY that same advantage. It's going to be hard to compete with the scale of Samsung or the cheapness of the Chineese (Huwaie, ZTE, etc).

Sigunas

Surprise surprise :)
http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_blog/archive/2013/09/02/the-next-chapter-an-open-letter-from-steve-ballmer-and-stephen-elop.aspx

Bruno

Now it would be pretty interesting, but not likely, for Nokia to buy Jolla and start over again with mobile department. Maybe they won't have Devices and services anymore, but know-how and people fired from Nokia are still in Finland and, as I can read, patent portfolio isn't sold, only non exclusively licensed to M$ for next 10 years.
Anyway, this is a sad day for mobile industry...

Alan

Spelling "brower" should be "browser". Also would be interested to learn what ways OpenOffice does not fit your needs.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Available for Consulting and Speakerships

  • Available for Consulting & Speaking
    Tomi Ahonen is a bestselling author whose twelve books on mobile have already been referenced in over 100 books by his peers. Rated the most influential expert in mobile by Forbes in December 2011, Tomi speaks regularly at conferences doing about 20 public speakerships annually. With over 250 public speaking engagements, Tomi been seen by a cumulative audience of over 100,000 people on all six inhabited continents. The former Nokia executive has run a consulting practise on digital convergence, interactive media, engagement marketing, high tech and next generation mobile. Tomi is currently based out of Hong Kong but supports Fortune 500 sized companies across the globe. His reference client list includes Axiata, Bank of America, BBC, BNP Paribas, China Mobile, Emap, Ericsson, Google, Hewlett-Packard, HSBC, IBM, Intel, LG, MTS, Nokia, NTT DoCoMo, Ogilvy, Orange, RIM, Sanomamedia, Telenor, TeliaSonera, Three, Tigo, Vodafone, etc. To see his full bio and his books, visit www.tomiahonen.com Tomi Ahonen lectures at Oxford University's short courses on next generation mobile and digital convergence. Follow him on Twitter as @tomiahonen. Tomi also has a Facebook and Linked In page under his own name. He is available for consulting, speaking engagements and as expert witness, please write to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com

Recent Comments

Tomi's eBooks on Mobile Pearls

  • Pearls Vol 1: Mobile Advertising
    Tomi's first eBook is 171 pages with 50 case studies of real cases of mobile advertising and marketing in 19 countries on four continents. See this link for the only place where you can order the eBook for download

Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009

  • Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009
    A comprehensive statistical review of the total mobile industry, in 171 pages, has 70 tables and charts, and fits on your smartphone to carry in your pocket every day.

Alan's Third Book: No Straight Lines

Tomi's Fave Twitterati