Ballmer admits Vista not selling as expected

Status
Not open for further replies.
NIGHTMARE

NIGHTMARE

ANGEL OF DEATH
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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
tarey_g

tarey_g

Hanging, since 2004..
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.
 
hailgautam

hailgautam

Youngling
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 :D 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.
 
koolbluez

koolbluez

Šupər♂ - 超人
Y ask ballmer for that... I myself told that long back... :D
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.
 
aryayush

aryayush

Aspiring Novelist
hailgautam said:
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 :D 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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
hailgautam

hailgautam

Youngling
aryayush said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
freebird

freebird

Debian Rocks!
tend to agree with u r points @hailgotham:
esp :
hail said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
aryayush

aryayush

Aspiring Novelist
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".

hailgautam said:
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.....
Click to expand...
Uh, it wasn't related to the Olympics. It was the "legendary" Super Bowl commercial.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom