"Oh, and can you guess when Apple — now the world’s biggest company — announces its first earnings post-iPhone 5? Oct. 24. "

Uh, yeah. An earnings report is going to steal the thunder of a product launch.

"It doesn’t matter if Microsoft creates the greatest operating system in the world if it then allows others to junk it up. And, ultimately, it means that Microsoft isn’t in control of its brand."

No one can succeed if they give up absolute control of their platforms to OEMs ... oh wait that's exactly what android does. And OEMs put (non-uninstallable!) crapware on android phones, and they still sell. Only Apple is pushing the complete control angle, and while it works for them, it's hardly the only model that could work.

I love android phones, and while I won't be getting a windows phone, I think this article's arguments are pretty weak and don't have enough substance to back up that link bait title.

This article critiques the theatricality of MS's release process quite thoroughly and concludes that it is not the same as Apple's.

This is true, but nobody should give a crap.

What's important is that Windows 8, the surface, etc. are actually good.

Until Apple came along and turned computers into fashion accessories, brand image didn't matter so much. Now it clearly does. What the author ignores is that brand image is a product of many things, with press releases being only a small part for most companies (They are a somewhat larger part of Apple's brand). A long track record of high quality and innovative products coupled with clever advertising is what makes or breaks a brand like Apple's more than anything else.

Microsoft's brand is currently rather mediocre. Missteps over the last decade have really hurt it, but Windows 7 did go a long way to help it recover. Vista, as maligned as it was, was actually a really good OS saddled with some bad default settings (e.g. The overly obtrusive UAC). Windows 7 brought some minor innovations to the interface, greatly improved the default settings, and added a little bit of "cool" with details as subtle as just adding some unusually funky and artistic default backgrounds. Windows 7's default backgrounds made OSX look like the bland, boring corporate OS that Apple has long tried to brand Windows to be!

Movie studios often keep stinkers under strict wraps until opening weekend. If they advertise enough and prevent the film from being savaged by critics until the day of release they can still get a good opening weekend out of a poor film. Good films are frequently shown to critics or at film festivals well in advance of general release. This "festival route" builds word of mouth.

If MS had kept Windows 8 under wraps until a big press event this month and then hyped it as the most awesome thing ever, just like Apple does with their products, few people would likely believe them. By broadly distributing a release candidate for Windows 8 and showing the Surface publicly prior to release, MS took the "festival route" and built a big word-of-mouth effect. MS's brand isn't what Apple is, and they were smart enough to realize they have to do things differently, and did.

So much hate for Microsoft. I'm at awe. Like one commenter on the article's page said, If Apple would do that kind of launch experiment, everybody would praise them for how revolutionay they are.

Microsoft has a real chance of claiming a big chunk of the market, not from Apple, but from the messy Android ecosystem, with a clear brand and a simple product lineup.

I sat in on a MS presentation the other day, and it was a disaster. The terminology is off the chart confusing, the presenter constantly dropping terms then backing off with "oh but we aren't supposed to call it that" and then "oh but if marketing isn't listening i'll just call it that" ... back and forth.

It took forever just to explain metro (not metro) and windows RT (not metro but metro) and windows pro (with metro but not metro, i mean RT or ARM, or modern UI). ARM but not intel, desktop but including ARM/RT/metro but not metro. Just build apps for windows phone (but not mobile), but metro no wait not metro on mobile (i mean phone).

Honestly really crazy stuff, round and round.

So Windows can't succeed because they've announced their products and aren't spacing the announcement and the codename used for the design language is actually a trademark owned by someone else?

I'm sure that people are buying the new BMW 5 series because they like the name of the design language (Flame Surfacing) and because it was launched in Hong Kong. The actual quality of the product doesn't matter.

I completely agree with the following from the article:

"Even when Microsoft has a great product on its hands, even when its product, engineering and design teams manage to hit one out of the park, it won’t matter once the business team comes in and ruins it for everyone."

The whole history of all screw ups from Microsoft just confirms that.

My bet is that small, cheap and really good 7" tablets will all but kill MS in the consumer sphere next year. Fair or not (the Nexus 7 looks great), Apple's going to popularize the form factor, and it's going to change people's expectations. A lot more people can afford a $200 - 300 tablet as a Christmas present than a $500 one. Women will find them more purse-friendly and way more parents can afford them for their kids, which is going to tilt developers even further from Windows.

MS won't be able to change their software or their business model fast enough to compete with ubiquitous $200 computers.

Wait, Windows 8 and Windows RT are different things?

The German company 'Metro' is not exactly small.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_AG

It has 66 billion Euro revenue and 250000 employees. It's the fifth largest retailer in the world.

Kind of unlikely that they give up their trademark name or sell it to Microsoft. It's not worth fighting for. Especially since Metro sells Microsoft products.

As Lt. Commander Worf would say, "We shall see".

This article demonstrates the increasing gap between tech reporters and consumers. Announcements and marketing aren't the metrics for the quality of a product. Design, user experience and features will ultimately decide whether the latest line of Microsoft products succeeds.

But he does have a point with bloatware and control over the brand. I commonly associate the Windows brand with garbage software that comes pre-installed on every PC.

Definitely.

Windows 8 runs as Windows 8 and as Windows 8 RT. However, there's also WinRT which is something else:

WinRT == Windows Runtime

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Runtime

"Not to be confused with Windows RT"

Now

"Windows RT (formerly known as Windows on ARM) is an upcoming version of the Windows 8 operating system for ARM devices such as tablets. The RT acronym does not officially stand for anything.[1] It will officially only run software available through the Windows Store or included in Windows RT."

Homework: try to explain that in less words. :)

Kinda. It's confusing. Windows RT is supposedly "Windows 8 on ARM", a restricted version of Windows 8 where Win32 is not available to non-in-house developers (applications must be developed using WinRT a replacement API not to be confused with Windows RT as WinRT is also available to Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8); all applications must be distributed via the Windows Store; the fate of the Windows 8 desktop is unclear (though it won't be very useful if there); a bunch of software or capabilities are unavailable in RT (Windows Media Player, Media Center, Remote Desktop, Homegroup, ...).

The simplest way to think about it is probably to think that WindowsRT is to Windows 8 as iOS 9 (iPad) should be to OSX 11 should the current trends of the latter pair keep going

See http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/17/3514556/windows-8-vs-wind... for more info (and a hint as to how confusing it is)

Windows RT is a version of Windows 8 built to run on ARM processors. "Metro" style apps can be compiled to run on Windows RT and downloaded from the Windows App Store. However traditional desktop software cannot be compiled for or installed on Windows RT.

Easy - Windows RT = Windows Restricted Tablet; you can only use apps from Microsoft's app store.

Windows 8 is the real deal - you can still use apps from outside the app store.

"With Surfce looming, Microsoft fails to explain Windows 8 vs. Windows RT to consumers"[0]

Not only that, but you are likely much more tech sophisticated than the average consumer which makes this even more damning.

[0] - http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/17/3514556/windows-8-vs-wind...

And not to be confused with the _original_ WinRT that many of us grew to love: http://www.pds-site.com/Bsquare/WinRT/default.htm

Port access and IRQs without writing an actual device driver.

That's a good one.