John on Tech...

There was a blog post that went up today (yesterday - I'm on Florida time you guys are on UK time of course) by a company that was setting up a Microsoft Surface for a customer. It wasn't very flattering. Actually it was so dreadful that I posted on a Mac site that I visit daily to show just how Microsoft doesn't get it. This is supposed to be Microsoft's answer to the iPod Touch / iPhone - too bad it requires SEVERAL cameras and a projector under the thing to get it do simple interaction.

The problem was that the so-called customer focussed features weren't very customer focussed on opening the box. And Gordon Miller, the author of the blog decided that it wasn't really good enough and blogged about it. He was right based on his assumptions. There were definitely issues.

Now I have just been out for a wonderful Friday evening and checked the computer when I got back in to find my link didn't work. So I clicked on the blog entry and found there was an update. A very PRO Microsoft update had replaced the original posting.

But worse still the original article had been removed.

So Marketing had obviously kicked in and decided the world wasn't ready for the things Gordon Miller had to say about their wonderful toy and got him to rewrite it.

You know what? This is the Internet and this sort of stuff SHOULDN'T happen. So for your edification here is a link to the Google Cache of the original article:

Here

And if that goes down here is a link to a pdf of the original article:

Here

And here is a link to the sanitized version:

Here

But probably isn't worth the effort as it seems to have Microsoft Marketing written all over it. BTW Microsoft Marketing here is an interesting aside. It's nice that you have sold some surfaces. Good. Well done. But you know what? The iPod Touch and the iPhone have just shipped their 37 millionth unit. That is a hell of a lot of multi-touch, gesture based interfaces out there. Good Luck with the Surface but perhaps media manipulation is NOT the way to go. Cleaning up bad press is an approach but this is the Internet shut stuff away in a box and it will come back to haunt you.

It seems a little odd that the BBC should be so anti-Apple. Admittedly Apple isn't a British company but then neither is Microsoft. I was a little stunned but not surprised by the coverage over the last few days. It is also not a particularly blatant bias but usually pretty snidey and generally full of sarcastic asides. For example, yesterday's article headed "Apple to end music restrictions" had this curious box out:

"Apple's imposed DRM proved unpopular with users"

Now let's have a think about that. iTunes is THE leading online digital music provider. That was up until yesterday BEFORE they removed the DRM. So unpopular maybe amongst the digerati but mr and mrs internet user didn't really complain. The truth on this story is that it was the record conglomerates that have gone out of their way to ensure that Apple would be the last to get access to DRM free tracks.

They gave the facility to Amazon in an attempt to bring down the iTunes juggernaut and you know what? It mostly failed. Amazon do have some bargains but still haven't gained the foothold that Apple have in this market.

The greatest irony of course, that all this anti-DRM ranting is coming from the MOST RESTRICTIVE company in terms of rights management there is. Where I, as a TV licence payer, cannot access the iPlayer files if I am outside the UK even though I am actually paying for the programmes to be produced.

Perhaps the BBC can take a leaf out of Apple's book and perhaps, instead of restricting access by IP, giving Licence payers an account which they can log into while abroad.

Well a week after people were calling for his head over at MSFT, Steve Ballmer is back on the street peddling his wares. He has an interview with USA today which is worth a read. Kind of interesting that their tagging system lists the following too: FIND MORE STORIES IN: Microsoft | Google | Windows | Xbox | Steve Ballmer | Microsoft Office | Zune | Chairman Bill Gates | Laughter

Laughter?

The article can be found here:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2007-04-29-ballmer-ceo-forum-usat_N.htm

Anyroad. The general consensus of opinion was that Microsoft's Market Cap has fallen from around 600 billion in 2000 just after he took over to it's current situation of 295ish or thereabouts which is not encouraging.

The whole point is that it seems one of the least able people in the universe has accidentally ended up running the biggest company to influence everyone in IT. I won't dwell on how this happened it's not relevant - but what is relevant is that he continues to prove that as a chairman of such a large company he has no clue.

Here are a couple of the points raised.

Q: When is your next operating system coming out?
A: That I won't share with you. Not because we're not hard at work on that; I want to let the team do their job, figure out what the release looks like. I guarantee you it won't be four or five years.
Q: You mean sooner?
A: Yes, absolutely.

So is this an admittance that Vista doesn't cut the mustard and Microsoft NEEDS something better? Is Vista the ME for the 21st century? I actually think that Vista will "pull an Apple" and build the next OS on top of Linux. They are seeing the advantages that Apple are having making a clean break from the legacy systems and this may give them a better way to provide the security that people in this century demand.

Q: People get passionate when Apple comes out with something new — the iPhone; of course, the iPod. Is that something that you'd want them to feel about Microsoft?
A: It's sort of a funny question. Would I trade 96% of the market for 4% of the market? (Laughter.) I want to have products that appeal to everybody.

So first of all he avoids the question. He's muddling Apple's computer market share with the iPod market share. Notice he didn't say "Would I trade 6% of the market of 30 gig hard drive players with 76% of the worlds MP3 market" OK that was a cheap shot. Oh and btw that's FIVE percent these days. But he continues:

"Now we'll get a chance to go through this again in phones and music players. There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance. It's a $500 subsidized item. They may make a lot of money. But if you actually take a look at the 1.3 billion phones that get sold, I'd prefer to have our software in 60% or 70% or 80% of them, than I would to have 2% or 3%, which is what Apple might get."

OK this is where Steve loses it. If perchance Apple should hit their goals of 10 Million units in 2008 it is probably at THIS point that Steve has proved that he has not got the corporate skills to run a company such as Microsoft and this is probably why they have managed to, for example, lose 6 Billion dollars on a games console.

The point of the game is to actually make money to have a viable company. You cannot leverage your monopoly to just buy markets which is what Microsoft has been doing with both the Xbox and the Zune. Anyone can throw money at a market and, as in Microsoft's case, if you have enough money you will continue trying to buy a market until you own it.

With general celebrations all round at the BBC for the successful roll out of their iPlayer some things appear to have been overlooked.

Yes, after the consultation period they are going to have to support Macs. Except... if you read the small print... it is likely to be 2 years away.

"Earlier this month BBC Future Media boss Ashley Highfield said the corporation was committed to rolling out the iPlayer on Windows PCs first of all, and then cable TV services, Apple Macs, and eventually Freeview boxes.

But the BBC said it could not commit to a two-year deadline to achieve this goal, saying it was up to the third parties concerned."

This is outrageous. Basically it means that Microsoft DRM is ruling the roost and they are relying on Microsoft to deliver the solution.

OR

For Apple to develop time-limited DRM to deliver their material.

Now that the BBC have also stopped their stored radio material being accessed from abroad it means that they are really putting a lock down on all their stuff.

It ain't going to take long for people to break the Microsoft DRM so they will actually achieve NOTHING by using this "solution". Unfortunately it also means that illegal usage of BBC material will be encouraged. So file sharing will continue when they could have got people buying the material they produce. For example - making it available for purchase on iTunes would have been a simple and economic solution - but of course that wouldn't fit in with their plans...

It's pretty obvious that the Beeb does NOT want Apple to get a foothold in the UK in any way, shape or form.

The BBC article can be found here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6607083.stm

A somewhat recalcitrant Beeb Engineer by the name of Ashley Highfield announced at Cannes that due to a sustained voting campaign by Mac users they have relented and are reworking the iPlayer to work with Macs.

We'll skip over the fact that the Beeb appear to have ripped off Apple's naming style by calling it the iPlayer - even though initially they weren't going to support it.

I was more taken with the the fact that he somewhat lost it with the phrase "proprietary and closed framework for DRM" when describing Apple's platform.

I think this actually translates as "Apple machines don't support Microsoft's DRM which were were going to blanket our stuff in" WHICH in itself translates as "Microsoft are refusing to support Apple Macintosh machines with their DRM."

Now listen here Ashley...

Just coz MS make it easy to infect your material with DRM - it doesn't mean that you should lock out other platforms. There should be a choice and Microsoft should NOT be using hard earned English licence payer money on locking viewers and listeners into their way of working.

At some point I would like the full definition from the Beeb of what exactly Apple's "proprietary and closed framework" is and how it differs from Microsoft's "proprietary and close framework."