<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on iPhone and Surface: The moment Apple and Microsoft diverged ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-24T13:53:06-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You are right]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3528214]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[It's the cost of the data plan that buried that device. Who wants to pay that much for a 'tween's phone service?Blame Microsoft for not negotiating well with Verizon and blame Verizon for trying to gouge the consumer.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3528214]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JJFitz]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 08:24:31 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Why can't they get it (WP7) to sell? my 2 cents]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3528150]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Too late. (NOT too little too late) just too late.WP7 is just like the Zune. It looks really nice but it is not easy for the average consumer to move music and video from the iTunes / iPod / iPhone environment to a new one and it is downright impossible to move your iXXX apps to another device.Unless there is a compelling reason and an easy to switch method, WP7 is doomed to fail. Sad but true.On the otherhand, I think XBox is terrific. If Apple wanted to enter the real gaming arena, it would have a huge mountain to climb.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3528150]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JJFitz]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 06:50:50 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Better hardware?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3527566]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[So what you are saying is that when I buy a Mac Mini, the 8gb memory upgrade they charge $300 is somehow better than the $40 8gb kit I can get from Crucial, Corsair, or whomever? Apple only has to make its operating system work on a handfull of hardware configurations, imo that is why they have less driver related problems.Apple hardware is no different than Dell, HP, whatever... they get someone else to make parts then slap their name on it.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3527566]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[lipp74]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2011 04:55:48 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[:-)]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3525725]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[good to see that somebody still gets what I'm trying to say. I'm not an Apple fanboi or MS or whatever but I'm getting sick of all those people tearing down other comments just because they are 'believers' of some brand. I'm just trying to state my OBJECTIVE opinion. @seanferd thanks for the support :-p]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3525725]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[belli_bettens@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2011 06:43:38 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Doomed?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3525107]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Mark Twain said, &quot;The rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated&quot;.  I think the same can be said for Microsoft.I opened my email this morning in Microsoft Outlook, read this post on Microsoft Internet Explorer and did some work in Microsoft Word.  However, the trend is not looking good for Microsoft since in 2008 over 50% of Internet users where using the Internet Explorer browser, today it is under 25%.  Google and Firefox have taken half of Microsoft's market share.  The only saving grace is that Microsoft has bought Skype, which is the largest phone company in the world with well over 500 million users.  AT&amp;T is a very distant second with 62 million subscribers.  This positions Microsoft very nicely to launch mobile devices into the cloud and integrate Skype to combat Android and the iPhone.  Will Microsoft be focused enough and listen closely enough to their customers to take the lead?  Only time will tell - but they still have a very strategic position in the marketplace.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3525107]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[PositiveMojo]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:59:40 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Doomed to Who?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3525043]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I am in agreement with your post- but that's a history lesson in the cut throat world of business- but I can see no software company poised to overtake Microsoft in the medium to long term.What is the market share for Apple desktops/laptops 5-6% ? -I think that would include both business and consumer. There is no viable option for medium to large businesses unfortunately. Even the cloud won't change this and to be fair, Microsoft is too far ahead with:Identity management (FIM)AD Collaboration (sharepoint, Team Foundation, Exchange 2010, Lync) Infrastructure (SCCM, SCOM, Forefront Threat Management)Office 365 Windows 8 - same OS experience on multiple devicesTraining (MSDN, TechNet, MVP, Virtual Labs)Administrative languages like Powershell are much more powerful than Bash shell scripting.Unless you can name the successor I'd say it remains in the eye of the beholder.Apple's in roads over the last 10 years have all been in the consumer market- they're great gadgets - I have an iPhone and iPad but- there toysIBM? - a relicGoogle android/apps will take a share from exchange but office365 is on the upHP-irrelevantRedHat/Fedora - Why?MS would have to slip up big time, I'm talking two or three vista's in a row for any of the contenders to square up.Yes you can point to things like Firefox, but a browser is One thing, complete enterprise infrastructure is entirely another.You won't be deleting your AD account anytime soon ]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3525043]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[rduncan@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 04:29:34 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[wp7 needs more apps and adds]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3525018]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[WP7 being such a good software means that MS cares. However it's the newest competitor on the market, meaning that it has very few apps and not a lot of people know about it. Another thing that doesn't help MS is the general perception of the public as being a big evil company that makes faulty sw (IE, vista which is actually good since sp1). Lastly the fact that they don't make their own device to run wp7 on is a real bummer. They should force nokia to release only wp7 phones and stop making low memory devices. But more advertising would also help. Tell me if any of you has actually seen any adds about wp7 on tv.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3525018]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[ardagii]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 04:17:35 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Drastic but quite realistic]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3525004]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[rberger, a little drastic and perhaps on the MS doomed side but quite realistic on many of your points. Innovation in a productive sense seems to be lacking on MS side. I may disagree they need to disappear but need a drastic change of command.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3525004]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[TheFiebre]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 02:31:15 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Not quite sure...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524989]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[jgedesing, while we can appreciate flexibility on the product's &quot;how to?&quot;, I think a one way to do things right is necessary. MS lacks taking this risk of deciding for users what is best in their platform, or at least assuring a &quot;way to do&quot; while allowing other collateral. Google does not fall in this category, they actually have imprinted their way of doing things in many applications. The difference is that they were willing to take a very calculated and studied risk. They have massive data to study behavior of use that on the right hands, with right professionals it rendered solid and stable products..I like to to use Novell as a comparison. I have been both Novell and MS administrator and I can tell you the difference of doing things is astronomical (UI aside). In Novell you either know or not, in MS, yes you have wizards but not fool proof ones (for way too long), thus opening the door to anyone to dare to execute tasks for which they should have training.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524989]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[TheFiebre]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 02:25:48 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Microsoft is in the early Zombie stage of Tech Giants]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524955]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Microsoft is irrelevant today. They only have impact on legacy environments. No one is planning the future with them as part of it. And they deserve to fade away. People (who were not really involved with tech) think Microsoft ushered in the Golden Age of computers. In reality they created a Dark Ages and set back computing 10 - 20 years. There were much better platforms available when DOS became predominant. Gates was brilliant at identifying when opportunities knocked on his Door and he would pursue them with brilliance and savagery. Like having IBM asking if he had an OS they could use when Digital Research didn't respond rapidly enough, or faking out the author of QDOS which in itself was probably a rip-off of CPM/86, Having a Dad who was the top IP lawyer in the Northeast write the MS/DOS contract with IBM while IBM wasn't concentrating,  Sucker Punching the ISV industry by saying OS/2 was the future while secretly sabotaging OS/2 and creating Windows and Office, Obfuscating all the Windows APIs so it was impossible to make clones, Sucking out the Air from Netscape and so on. Note that the brilliance was in being a super aggressive businessman, not in tech. All MS Software after Basic was hacks, optimizations to maintain monopoly and late copying of other's innovations. So now Microsoft's monopoly is dissipating and they have nothing to offer. They are subject to the Innovator's Dilemma and have very few creative fibers in their corporate DNA.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524955]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[rberger@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 23:40:19 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Microsoft's Future]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524888]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[There are three major issues that need to get resolved for Microsoft to be competitive and innovative again.1. Getting rid of Balmer.2. Getting rid of Balmer.3. Leveraging the popularity of the Xbox and Kinect to drive Windows Phone sales.They can't play &quot;me too&quot; with Windows Phone and they also can't design something that is just different for the sake of being different while ignoring any sense of usability standards. I have seen and used Windows Phone Mango and it is not good.My views regarding Steve Balmer are shared by not only most industry experts but by many, many Microsoft employees. Everything started going down the crapper when Microsoft got too big and the power and decision making flowed through Balmer and his minions of sales people whose only goal was to drive revenue. Bill Gates was a nerd, tech enthusiast and a programmer at heart. Even if he hadn't programmed in 20 years the focus of the company was different when he was at the helm. Balmer is the last person on earth that people should be associating with Microsoft. He represents everything people hate about evil corporations and mean bosses. He is almost the perfect charicature of the worst boss ever -taken right out of a movie script. he should not be giving keynote speeches at technology conferences standing in front of the press with his shiny bald head, red sweater and arrogant grin. The board at Microsoft has some real soul searching to do. They need to find young blood to run the company and demote Balmer to a less public role. He is not, was not and will never be a visionary or a leader. He must go!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524888]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Godlikesme]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 21:01:07 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Every car is proprietary. Most of the stuff it's made of isn't.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524900]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Wires, nuts and bolts, etc. For example, these nuts and bolts are standard...http://www.engineersedge.com/ansi_hardware_menu.shtmland these are proprietary:http://www.nationalbolt.com/custom-bolts-fasteners.htmlSee the difference?Java, for example is proprietary. If competing implementation get to close, Oracle can rock its specification anytime. IBM did that a lot in its &quot;big blue&quot; days, it was pretty infamous for that.With C#, however, it's different story. It's specification is written in stone by ECMA, the same way the specifications for nuts and bolts are written by ISO &amp; ANSI. Microsoft can't change it.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524900]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jkameleon@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:00:57 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Wake up Mr Bill!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524869]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Do you remember when General Motors had that huge market share in the 1960's. It was almost 50% at one point. It (may have) bottomed out at just under 20% in January 2009.That's what is coming for Microsoft if they continue to make all of the mistakes that GM made. The ones like 'good enough' quality and planned obsolescence and my favorite one of all: &quot;We don't compete with Ford (or Dodge...)&quot;.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524869]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jwaustin]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:40:42 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[The comparison was not between OSes.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524875]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[It was a comparison of how both companies innovated in the touch-screen space.I'm not saying that I  think there was any overlap in common from which they diverged, but it would be interesting to see comments on what was actually said in the article.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524875]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[seanferd]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:40:15 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[It's amazing]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524874]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[how no one addresses you actual comments, but something off to the side that they want to think you said.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524874]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[seanferd]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:30:24 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[None of those have anything to do with touch or market comparisons.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524873]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[While they are valid points, they have little to do with MS following Apple in device design or the &quot;divergence&quot; of MS and Apple.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524873]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[seanferd]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:27:09 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Aware of the XBOX....]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524785]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[...Yet not aware of sales figures vs iPhonePadsHowever, the point people seem to missing here is the fact there is one constant, consistent winner in the war of MSFTvsAPPLvsGOOG and that, our friends, is China.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524785]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jgedesign]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:32:17 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[+1 for sharing innovation.....]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524777]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[But the Antitrust regulators would SH*T themselves at that idea.... ]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524777]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jgedesign]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:23:41 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[After translating this inarticulate rubbish into English....]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524776]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I've determined that although the OP may have been half right, you are Completely Mindless.Digital Music wouldn't be where it is without Apple? Christ, it would be in a MUCH better place. Artist's wouldn't be starving the world over etc etc..You may want to look at the original funding logs for the RIAA. They may still be somewhere online....]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524776]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jgedesign]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:22:00 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Is it not also true that mistakes made by MS are easier to rectify?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524794]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[By making everything &quot;exact&quot; and lacking personality, Apple open themselves up to a world of hurt when something goes wrong with the eventual release to a million users? (e.g. iP4 with Retina/Signal/Holding etc.)MS and Google allow people to &quot;play&quot; with their ideas before the mass.market gets a sniff.This is a better method of delivery that will surely sustain marketability better in the long run, yes?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-350876-3524794]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jgedesign]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:18:22 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

