disposableidentity

Apple, Microsoft, Google: Cash vs. Cash

@jack dee, isn't that funny? Microsoft is basically saying to investors that you are better able to invest the money yourself.

In other words: Despite all of their smart employees, technology patents, infrastructure, monopoly positions in multiple markets, and extensive R&D efforts, Microsoft thinks that you can make a better return on all of that money than they can.

Microsoft to Employ Dual Mobile OS Strategy to Compete with Android and iPhone

Since we're on an investment site, at least in the mobile market, no one would want to trade places with Microsoft. Don't forget, they're only selling the OS.

Look at it this way:

Apple sells 5.4 million PHONES last quarter, they make something like $400-$450 PROFIT per phone including carrier subsidies.

RIM sells 7.8 million BlackBerrys, at maybe half that profit per phone including carrier subsidies.

Microsoft sells 3.8 million Windows Mobile LICENSES last quarter, and they make something like $5-$15 REVENUE per phone.

Even if Microsoft sold 10 times as many as Apple, they wouldn't make anything close to their profit. Microsoft chose it's business model and now has to live with it.

Microsoft to Employ Dual Mobile OS Strategy to Compete with Android and iPhone

@ Josh B, it's about the trend. Microsoft's product have a large amount of momentum, but look where they're going.

Nokia has a huge share of the smartphone market today too, but a few more years of double digit market share losses and that won't be the case anymore.

Microsoft to Employ Dual Mobile OS Strategy to Compete with Android and iPhone

Splitting developers' attention is such a bad move. They already have a hard time justifying development on a mobile platform other than the iPhone / iPod Touch (50 million installed base + more apps purchased per unit than any other mobile platform).

Plus think of the confusion for customers. Which should you buy into? If Apple can be effectively challenged it will be because of one or two strong platforms (RIM is doing well, Android looks like a possibility, but no critical mass yet). A dozen competitive platforms will only help Apple stand out more.

When Apple outdoes itself with a new product, it almost always kills off the old one, instead of leaving a lesser product on the market for others to compete with.

When they brought out their flash-based iPod Nano, Apple killed off it's top selling hard drive-based iPod Mini. At the time analysts said they should have kept the Mini around to fill a gap in the lineup. Turns out Apple was right in the long run. Killing off the Mini left the other manufacturers with nothing comparable to Apple's stuff.

I guess that strategy only works for the leader. The "phone" market is changing rapidly into a "mobile computing platform" market. Apple is fast and ruthless. RIM is smart and focused. Microsoft will have a very hard time competing. Even if it's just for second or third place (or even fourth, if Nokia gets their act together one day).

Microsoft: Whistling in the Dark

"There's nothing to replace Windows and those consumers (the average cheap ones) and businesses (practical ones) won't be buying Macs in any large quantities."

But what if people could buy an Apple to replace your PC laptop for $600 - $800? Would that change things? Apple is now seen as a premium option by most consumers. It's just that the vast majority of mainstream consumers won't pay more than $1000 for any computer, no matter who it comes from. If this rumored Apple tablet provides what most people want in a mobile computer, and is available in that price range, Apple could capture a large slice of the mainstream PC laptop market, without cannibalizing their MacBook Pro line.

Notice how Apple has only had an older "placeholder" product in the MacBook (versus MacBook Pro) product line? They've been planning something big for a long time.

That's a well-run business. Growing out from a strong core, instead of flitting around.

Microsoft: Whistling in the Dark

And when I say "Maybe $850?" that's being very generous. Very.

Microsoft: Whistling in the Dark

Corporate laptops? Sure, they're not cheap. But most cubicle drones have an average mid-range tower under their desks. The software, infrastructure & support are thousands, but I highly doubt that many enterprise desktop boxes break the $1000 mark.

Look at the retail price of your average "enterprise" tower at dell.com, or hp.com. Maybe $850? And that's retail. No doubt you're paying less than that if you buy them by the ten-thousand.

Microsoft: Whistling in the Dark

"My frustrations with MSFT: how about ... concentrating on core competencies instead of trying to expand into competitive markets?"

@ Wisdom vs. Information, exactly.

If Microsoft had innovated and focused their development in the right areas (a usable and stable OS, a competitive mobile OS, truly advancing the Office suite), instead of chasing money-losing ventures with me-too products (search, Xbox, Zune, Silverlight, UMPC, Home Server, Surface / table computing, Bing Maps, MSN, etc, etc, etc.) they wouldn't be in this mess.

Microsoft: Whistling in the Dark

@jack dee, Apple's 90% of all computers sold over $1000 may sound silly, but it's probably about right. It's what the stats say.

Apple's presence in bricks & mortar retail isn't any greater than the other manufacturers, and it's online sales are probably stronger than everyone but Dell. If anything Apple's numbers might look even better if you include online retail. (If you include computers sold to enterprise, no doubt Apple's numbers will look worse -- but how many corporations are paying more than $1000/box these days?).

The End Run Around the Operating System Is Under Way

Open the lid of a sleeping MacBook and you're reading your email 10 seconds later. On my wife's new $2200 HP notebook running Vista and it's well over 1:30. No wonder PC manufacturers are creating these nonboot / thin OS apps. Crazy world.