Many defenders of Amazon say that they can pull a profit anytime they want by just easing up on the "reinvestment." But I question that. It costs a lot of money to run a data center and continually update its features and functions. You can potentially slow down the pace at which you open data centers or release updates, but you can't really stop, lest the likes of Google, Azure, or even Rackspace will start to pull marketshare from you. So, I question how much profitability is built up the system.
30 posts • joined 23 Apr 2013
Re: It's got similarities to the desktop market, but huge differences too.
I would agree with the developer/consumer paradox and would add the following:
1) Where WP does have an app that achieves the functionality you want, it's often not the popular app. It reminds me of going to dollar stores in the US (I'm sure you have an equivalent across the pond), where brands aren't quite the same- Pume shoes, Tidal laundry detergent, etc. Instead of Run Keeper you have Run Tracker, etc.
2) Lock-in. I would estimate that I have about 50 GBP worth of apps on my phone. So I have to add this amount to my cost when considering a MS phone. Also, I would need to figure out how to play and manage my existing media on a WP. Yes, there are tools to do this, but that's another investment.
3) Media Store. MS doesn't have a good media store like Apple and Android. Again, there are work-arounds.
All of these elements means there's a lot of additional investment (time and money) by the consumer to get the ecosystem where they were when they had an Apple or Android phone. That means that WP needs to offer something compelling to cause people to switch- they haven't done that yet.
Re: To make it even simpler.
Any company with even a small presence in the US, must turn over ALL the data that the government asks for, even if that information is held by an affiliate. The same goes for every other country. So, unless you want to avoid the US market completely, even the most data privacy friendly companies are subject to the whims of government investigations.
I think that's true for many brands that really do just slap a label on Quanta's boxes. But some box makers do offer innovations in their designs (cooling, layout, networking, etc.) where the some of the additional cost is justified (notice I said "some").
The OCP will be a boon for the big cloud providers where the costs and administration to select, customize, and maintain your own hardware (or have someone maintain it) pale in comparison to overall spend. I don't know that the admin costs will work for the small to medium shops.
This is essentially the hardware version of the debate between open source and commercial software. When Open Source first came out, people thought it would decimate the commercial software market, but that ended up not happening. Each has a place in the ecosystem.
Content Remains King
I generally like the Windows UI, but wish they would add proper notifications in addition to their live tiles. Their recent releases get them caught up on the technology front- support larger screens, multiple cores, etc.
But they continue to drag in Apps. The have some of the big names, but then they fall down quickly. Even now, they still don't have a proper youtube app and they label browser pages as apps. Yes, you can use your browser, but the point of the app is that it makes the major functions much easier to use rather than zooming in and out on a browser.
You'd think with all the money they have and all they've spent, they could spend just a bit more to bribe major developers to write proper apps.
Well, there's competing and then there's competing
My guess is that Cisco was using a bit of spin to say that they aren't competing with the core offerings of EMC, etc. as Cisco defines them (i.e. big arrays of drives for long term storage a few layers down). However, all the players are moving towards the emerging market of "fast data." Given the Nicira acquisition, I don't think there's much love lost between the likes of EMC and Cisco.
5c just doesn't have a home...
The problem with the 5c is that it doesn't seem to have a viable demographic.
Many (not all) who buy iPhones are very image conscious and so the prospect of buying a phone that screams, 'candy colored last year's model' just doesn't seem appealing to them. Sure you have a few hipsters that will buy the 80's/90's color scheme, but that's not enough.
Those who are buying for the ecosystem probably are early adopters and have the money to match, natch.
Those who buy purely on price/features will find that they can get a "good enough" android or WP for much less money.
So who is the market for the 5c?
Re: From the X Labs
I'm an iPhone users and am ready to upgrade. If you can convince me why I should get a moto X over a iphone, I'll happily switch. Here's what I want:
1) Good enough hardware with interesting design.
2) Availability of the latest updates to the OS. No, I will not root my phone for this feature, I shouldn't have to.
3) Large music catalog.
4) The ability to buy and manage my content in an easy to use way I don't like technology that causes me to waste time for the benefit of flexibility I wouldn't use and I don't like tinkering- I want my technology to just work.
So, since I'm just a slave to a brand-name, tell me what phone/ecosystem suits this set of needs?
Re: Nail on the head Andrew
Exactly- I think the ecosystem is much of the reason that Apple has been able to maintain market share (though it's slowly eroding). I know its a major reason why I stay with Apple- "good enough" hardware, a huge catalog of music and consistent apps, a consolidated store to buy all my content, and another "good enough" desktop application to manage it all. I like technology, but I'm not much of a tinker-er. I just want my stuff to work and the prospect of needing multiple applications and processes to get and manage content doesn't seem worth it (even if it ultimately offers more flexibility).
I wish that Google would step up and create a better systems to manage content on Android phones and I'd seriously consider switching.
Rounding the curve
Cisco is approaching a curve with the comoditization of hardware through lower cost competitors, SDN, OpenCompute, etc. I think their high end stuff can still do well, but that can't make up for weakness in other areas. And the data center space can only support them for so long. They're are starting to dabble in "X"aaS and orchestration and other software, but it remains to be seen if they can execute on that vision, or if they'll default to their hardware-centric ways. So, they can round the curve like IBM, they can scrape along the curve like an HP, Fujitsu, or Oracle (who aren't doing great, but are getting by and will emerge battered), or they can crash into the curve. I hope its one of the first two as I think they still have a lot to offer.
Re: My thoughts...
I find it to be very clumsy and confusing. It takes more clicks to do simple things and still don't fully understand the distinction between the "apps" and programs. If your monitor calibration is off at all, its to try to mouse over certain areas to bring up windows or menus.
Re: Baby/bathwater (@ ARP2)
But I think the trolls could easily pay to create a mockup or demo of whatever patents they've bought. it would be a few hundred thousand extra. If we're talking "original" inventors, that's often the case, except with business method patents, which are the most difficult since there's no easy way to create a prototype (which may be your point).
I think this is the heart of the issue and the most difficult to parse. For example, what if IBM gets a patent on some form of SDN, but never creates a product the exploits that patent. Instead, they do something with OpenFlow. Is IBM a troll? Certainly not, but how do you differentiate? You could say that the have to actively participate in the industry in which they hold patents. Actively participate would mean producing products and services in that industry.
Hopefully they see the writing on the wall..
With switches and routers becoming increasingly commoditized (even servers to a certain extent), they need to focus on network management, configuration, fabrics, SDN, services...things that manage networks rather than run them. I think they'll be in switching and routing for the foreseeable future, but they can no longer rely on it as their primary revenue generator. Likely, they'll move to the high end and leave the rest of the market to the commodity players.
True, but it's an extra step and I've notice that MS uses the Start menu to buy some time while the rest of the OS loads. So, it wastes time to have it load into the start menu.
This is in addition to the extra steps needed to shut down, close programs (or are they apps? I can't always tell), etc.
Re: It does go to show
I think its an issue of sensitive v. non-sensitive data. If you're hosting a website or other non-sensitive uses, you're going to use a commodity player like Amazon. If you have sensitive data, it's going to be DIY or a more expensive private cloud provider. I think many companies have already "clouded" everything they feel comfortable clouding. In reality, some of these cloud providers provide better security than DIY, but there's an element of control over your own destiny. I also think that many cloud providers agree to security, but may not back that up with big payouts (indemnities, etc.) if there is a breach. Without that "skin in the game" many are reluctant to push their data out to the cloud.
Appearance greater than actual risk.
I think if China weren't such a famous hacker of systems, there would be less concern. Realistically, their kit is low risk. However, when you combine China's penchant for hacking, ZTE and Huawei's close ties to the Chinese government, with their expanding market share, you create the appearance of a issue, whether its true or not.
No more worrying about Graphic card memory
If I understand correctly, if they were use this architecture on a "traditional" PC, do we need to worry about memory on a graphics card anymore? Or would the CPU/GPU simply split the use of my RAM as they need it? Could that also mean that more RAM= much better graphics performance?
Apple becoming the MS of phones?
Apple's phones a very good, but they are becoming boring and ubiquitous.
The wow factor of someone having an iPhone just isn't there nearly everyone has one. In addition, the brand association (Apple= creative, artsy, hipster type) is fading quickly. I think that's why you're seeing the slump. What's keeping Apple dominant are a few things:
1) While boring, apple phones are stable and generally work well.
2) People are locked into their ecosystem- it's the devil they know. Strange since, Apple has been trying to break that spell re: Microsoft.
3) Their app selection is second to none- most major businesses (and lots of minor ones) have an iOS app. Fewer have a Android app, but they're still very respectable. WP8 is lagging in this area.
However, the HTC One and some of the Lumia phones are closing in. If the app ecosystem improves, it could be enough to peel off iphone users.
Yes, but if another company is willing to sell out its short term future for a slightly higher share price, the investors will go to them. It's more a problem with the investor class, not the tech companies. The problem is that companies buy into the hype (the CEO's job depends on it) and does all sorts of dumb things to keep double digit growth.