Ballmer admits Vista not selling as expected

[NIGHTMARE]

New Windows OS to arrive within five years

Microsoft's Steve Ballmer has pledged that the next version of Windows won't take as long to develop as Vista, which he concedes is not selling according to expectations.

Speaking in a conference call as reported by ARN News, Ballmer said, "We won't go five years again, I promise, between big Windows releases."

He admitted that sales forecasts for Vista were "overly optimistic", but said that Microsoft plans to boost revenues by introducing stronger anti-piracy measures.

"Piracy reduction can be a source of Windows revenue growth, and I think we'll make some piracy improvements this year," Ballmer observed.

"We have new technologies built into Windows Vista, something we call Windows Genuine Advantage [that] we've really dialled up in capabilities with the Vista release.

"I do think that will bring some revenue growth. We will have strong growth in the Windows business in emerging markets: China, India, Brazil, Russia and many others. Those markets [have] very high piracy."

Some critics have claimed the anti-piracy features of Vista are excessive and can cause serious problems for users, but Ballmer said they could be extended even further if necessary.

"We [will] really ferret through how far we can dial it up, and what that means for customer experience and customer satisfaction," he stated.

link



I think the market is at such a saturation point that it'd be very hard to push Vista let alone a "new" OS within 5 years, although I'm one of those people that sees no point of a new OS except being force fed when you buy a new computer.

[aryayush]

This is pretty old news.

[freebird]

anyways a happy news for OSS fans like Me!

[Josan]

vista is the best os dat i hav used nd am planing to buy it right now!!

[tarey_g]

When XP came out p2p sharing was not so common, thats why they sold XP very well . Now every single computer user knows where to get stuff from. So only thing they can do is to lower down the price of the OS in the emerging markets where ppl cant buy a 10-16k OS. Perks of having a leagal copy are nice , let more users experience it.

[jack// ani]

nice to hear that they admitted the truth, no matter was the reason behind it was.

[hailgautam]

Earlier versions of Windows and DOS were brought to market where the environment was conducive for the MS Windows.

1. alternative OSs did not enjoy wide-spread support by applications, and developers - as like Mac which was considered a multimedia OS, and also it required different hardware.
2. alternative OSs were not really usable by newbies - as in the case of linux et al.
3. Windows OSs were not as expensive as they are now
4. previously win 95 was a revolution in a sense that brought a new graphical user interface then win 98 grew on the BSODs of win 95 and all they guys who had win 95 had to upgrade.
5. XP was way to smart and coming of age.
6. now linux provides a comfortable alternative not only for experienced users but also for the newbies.
7. It was way to easy to pirate, so many more people were using so more acceptance of the OS.

[freebird]

I cant understand the 7th point,may be i am *BAD* in Angrezi

[phreak0ut]

^^Yeah, what do you mean by the 7th point??

[koolbluez]

Y ask ballmer for that... I myself told that long back...
Vista'll not sell that quick. XP ka raaj hai... aur XP ka raaj chalega in India.. @least for another year or so. No doubt.

[Pathik]

wait till vista and vga is properly cracked...only then we can see its real popularity...

[koolbluez]

^^^ LOL... very true......

[aryayush]

Originally Posted by Josan

vista is the best os dat i hav used nd am planing to buy it right now!!

That's primarily because you haven't used Mac OS X yet.

[freebird]

!!!

[aryayush]

Originally Posted by hailgautam

Earlier versions of Windows and DOS were brought to market where the environment was conducive for the MS Windows.

1. alternative OSs did not enjoy wide-spread support by applications, and developers - as like Mac which was considered a multimedia OS, and also it required different hardware.
2. alternative OSs were not really usable by newbies - as in the case of linux et al.
3. Windows OSs were not as expensive as they are now
4. previously win 95 was a revolution in a sense that brought a new graphical user interface then win 98 grew on the BSODs of win 95 and all they guys who had win 95 had to upgrade.
5. XP was way to smart and coming of age.
6. now linux provides a comfortable alternative not only for experienced users but also for the newbies.
7. It was way to easy to pirate, so many more people were using so more acceptance of the OS.

The fifth point is wrong. Windows 95 was not the first operating system to bring a graphical user interface. The first operating system with a GUI was the Mac OS in 1984. Microsoft could not copy the Mac OS for all those years because they did not have the rights to do so. They ultimately made Apple's CEO, Gil Amelio sign an agreement that allowed them to copy the Mac OS and then they came out with Windows 95 in, well, 1995. The Mac OS has always been more advanced than Windows and it continues to be today.

The seventh point is that Windows XP was very easy to pirate and therefore, a lot of people were able to use the operating system and realise that it was good and easy to use.
However, even I don't understand how this would help sales. One out of probably a thousand people would have been righteous enough to actually buy the OS after using and liking the pirated version.

[jack// ani]

Originally Posted by aryayush

That's primarily because you haven't used Mac OS X yet.

exactly, very well said!!

[Vyasram]

http://www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49621

^^^ this sells more

[hailgautam]

Originally Posted by aryayush

The fifth point is wrong. Windows 95 was not the first operating system to bring a graphical user interface. The first operating system with a GUI was the Mac OS in 1984. Microsoft could not copy the Mac OS for all those years because they did not have the rights to do so. They ultimately made Apple's CEO, Gil Amelio sign an agreement that allowed them to copy the Mac OS and then they came out with Windows 95 in, well, 1995. The Mac OS has always been more advanced than Windows and it continues to be today.

The seventh point is that Windows XP was very easy to pirate and therefore, a lot of people were able to use the operating system and realise that it was good and easy to use.
However, even I don't understand how this would help sales. One out of probably a thousand people would have been righteous enough to actually buy the OS after using and liking the pirated version.

I did not mean Win 95 was the first to bring GUI, I meant fist to bring a proper GUI to win platform. I understand that Win 3.x had GUI, but it was more like a shell and it ran from the DOS base.

In fact if I am not wrong, Apple had this legendary Olympics Ad campaign in the 84 LA Olympics where a guy throws an hammer and breaks the large IBM logo kind of thing.....

point 7 - I was referring to the fact that earlier versions of windows were easier to pirate, which had led to wider acceptance among the users and hence more sales.....How it helps? well......if you see more people using an os you will have more support for that platform....and agin more support for an platform will result in the more use of an OS...a cyclic affair...
__________
the main reason why apple failed though being the easiest and probably best OS ever to be used from the beginning is that it used a closed format hardware - which meant less piracy for the software.... and in effect smaller user group. In a way the open architecture of PC has enabled PC and then consequently MS to have such large share of the market.

[freebird]

tend to agree with u r points @hailgotham:
esp :

Originally Posted by hail

the main reason why apple failed though being the easiest and probably best OS ever to be used from the beginning is that it used a closed format hardware - which meant less piracy for the software.... and in effect smaller user group. In a way the open architecture of PC has enabled PC and then consequently MS to have such large share of the market.

[aryayush]

Everyone knows that the closed platform approach and the high prices in the past has been the reason for Apple's low market share.
However, Apple has not "failed". Mac sales are consistently on the rise, and even if they fall, it is not the sales that determine how good a product is, but the user satisfaction. And by the number of fans of the Mac platorm out there, you can easily conclude how good the machines are. As long as Apple keeps making fabulous product and we, the users, are happy, it will not have failed.
Apple is the only company in the computer field that has "got it right".

Originally Posted by hailgautam

In fact if I am not wrong, Apple had this legendary Olympics Ad campaign in the 84 LA Olympics where a guy throws an hammer and breaks the large IBM logo kind of thing.....

Uh, it wasn't related to the Olympics. It was the "legendary" Super Bowl commercial.

[hailgautam]

Originally Posted by aryayush

Everyone knows that the closed platform approach and the high prices in the past has been the reason for Apple's low market share.
However, Apple has not "failed". Mac sales are consistently on the rise, and even if they fall, it is not the sales that determine how good a product is, but the user satisfaction. And by the number of fans of the Mac platorm out there, you can easily conclude how good the machines are. As long as Apple keeps making fabulous product and we, the users, are happy, it will not have failed.
Apple is the only company in the computer field that has "got it right".

Uh, it wasn't related to the Olympics. It was the "legendary" Super Bowl commercial.

Apple Failed or not is subjective.....and any discussion on it will sure to cause flams. But cosnidering the fact that Apple came out with a GUI at the first place way back in 1984, it is just ironical that MS has gained more out of GUI instead. There was a time when Jobs was removed from the Apple Board, the product porfile was dwndling and Apple was loosing customers.

If I am not wrong it was the 2nd term of Steve Jobs that has seen the inovative product development starting with the iMac, then came the iPod.....but there was time when the picture was not so rosy.....

[NIGHTMARE]

well of course its not selling well as expected.
first off its way 2 much money.
and people don't want to give MS any more money if they install
vista over 3 times. people are happy with xp and MS should have waited
another year to launch vista

Problem is in big hardware requirements, but soon as new pc come then Vista will go with them, for now WinXP is enough for 80% of users.

Vista isn't expensive when you consider that 10,000 peoples working 5years on it, and 10 billion $ project coast.

But Microsoft expect to bring back $11.5 billion operating profits from Windows Vista before end 2007.


The best thing about Vista is that it's not on my computer at home.

Complete waste of money that doesn't offer much of anything for the price they are asking.

[mehulved]

Originally Posted by aryayush

The fifth point is wrong. Windows 95 was not the first operating system to bring a graphical user interface. The first operating system with a GUI was the Mac OS in 1984.

http://imrl.usu.edu/OSLO/technology_writing/004_003.htm
Now I wonder who is right - gautam, you or that article? Someone help me decide.

[aryayush]

I was talking about the first graphical user interface on a commercially available operating system. I know Apple got the inspiration from Xerox PARC. And then Microsoft from Apple.

[hailgautam]

And I was solely referring to Windows. If i am not wrong, Xerox PARC was wronged many times like the invention of the Mouse, though was invented at Xerox initially Apple and then MS made merry on the invention...

We both were right at the our stand points ....however narrow (according to some) may it be

[gxsaurav]

Vista will be pirated soon, all it needs is time. It's made by coders which are humans which means bugs & flaws will be there

The Paradox crack is working fine here. Once Vista is cracked & people understand that Aero Glass isn't everyhting & Vista runs fine on even older hardware, the market of Vista will raise a lot

One thing is good though, at my friends computer shop most of the people coming to buy a new branded or assambled PC/Laptop are asking weather it can run Vista fine or not. Trust me this has raised his sales of GFX Cards, Geforce 7300 & 6600LE are in demand again cos they are cheapest. He is also advertising it nicely using banner & posters all over his shop....with a laptop giving live demo

[Manshahia]

Originally Posted by tarey_g

When XP came out p2p sharing was not so common, thats why they sold XP very well . Now every single computer user knows where to get stuff from. So only thing they can do is to lower down the price of the OS in the emerging markets where ppl cant buy a 10-16k OS. Perks of having a leagal copy are nice , let more users experience it.

i think the price of Windows Vista Home edition is $200(approx. ra 9000)...

[EagerBeaver]

The problemo is the hardware upgrading costs..................

[Manshahia]

yeah thats rite..

[NIGHTMARE]

Not surprising. It's a couple of years late and is a big resource hog. It has some neat features and DX10 will force gamers to move over.

But that's it. If you don't game I suggest you checking out Linux Ubuntu. It has drivers for most hardware and works as good as Windows for Office-work(Open-office among others), instant messaging(AMSN and GAIM), web surfing(firefox).
It demands a bit tinkering if you want to run Windows applications through emulation but IMO it's worth it.
The biggest "selling" point is that it's free.
Just download the ISO and burn it to a CD. You can always try booting from it and try it out (it's fully functional) before installing the OS.
Download


If you are ready to try something different it's for you.