Microsoft under Nadella
I spoke in favour of Satya Nadella when he took over as CEO of Microsoft. I never felt Ballmer was bad, in fact, I think a lot of what Microsoft delivered under Ballmer was truly inspired. It often missed the mark. But usually that was more a timing issue than an execution one. Nevertheless, Microsoft was probably trying to juggle too many things under Ballmer which lead to some losses.
Satya I felt started by making some good moves. He started by killing off some costly projects which were clearly failing. This is what made me excited. But then he kept on cutting. I'm starting to believe that Microsoft will be reduced to a single product or service if Nadella keeps the helm too long. Nothing appears to deliver results fast enough for him.
I can understand cutting the losses with Nokia. I don't like it, and didn't necessarily think it the right move. But, giving up on Lumia and not embracing Android or something similar was an equally offsetting dumb move. Cortana didn't get the investment it needed either.
With the Lumia lineup, I think it is pretty clear that there was a chance. And the death blow was a combination of not seeing what drives smart phone sales and not working to make the devices properly supported by carriers and easily attainable. I owned something silly, like 4 or 5 Windows Phone devices. And every time it was the same; mediocre hardware, limited network availability and no love from the carriers.
Now, I live in Canada and I have at times in the past been able to make the same complaints about others. The difference was, when I felt it about another phone maker, I'd generally NOT see the same complaints from US customers. With Windows Phone, things were just as bad in the US as in Canada. And that is pretty extreme when it comes to smart phones.
What Microsoft needed to do to survive in that industry (in my opinion) was push out a true flagship phone, ensure it was available on all major carriers and give the carriers kick backs (even if it meant jacking up the price) to incentivize them to sell. From early on, it was clear, carriers had been incentivized to either not sell Windows Phone or to sell something specific. This was clear from the sheer number of posts from people who went into a store ASKING to buy a Windows Phone and had something else rammed down their throats.
With Cortana, they were there before Alexa. They had the first digital assistant. They had the longest run way. But, their very first competitor basically debuted with more functionality. Microsoft never answered that challenge. Their failure to build a Cortana speaker in a reasonable timeframe. Their failure to get on board with smart home technologies. Their inability to grow that service. Killed Cortana. It will never meaningfully leave the desktop and even there, users may soon be able to replace it with Alexa.
When Microsoft gave up on smart phones last time the justification was that they were waiting for the next wave to ride instead. I have a feeling Cortana could have been that wave. And Alexa was gauntlet being dropped. But now they may have missed that wave too. HoloLens may be the next wave after that. But it appears equally hobbled. Driving down cost should have been the next step rather than improving the hardware. With Windows MR headsets I really don't get why Microsoft can't justify building a tethered version. Not every application of AR needs to be wireless.
Microsoft seems to have it backwards... you make a gaming product to fund scientific advancements. You don't build scientific prototype to hope it will fund research to build a gaming device. Unless you have astronomical luck you'll never find the money. A $500-1500 tethered headset would draw a lot more sales than a $3000 dev kit.
I don't really understand how they keep missing the mark. I feel like Ballmer would have already had a consumer HoloLens out. I feel like Nadella is days away from axing the current iteration despite having never even giving it the chance to succeed.
Microsoft needs someone a lot more Ballmer like and then maybe have Nadella take the helm for a few weeks each year to prune the roadmap.
Satya I felt started by making some good moves. He started by killing off some costly projects which were clearly failing. This is what made me excited. But then he kept on cutting. I'm starting to believe that Microsoft will be reduced to a single product or service if Nadella keeps the helm too long. Nothing appears to deliver results fast enough for him.
I can understand cutting the losses with Nokia. I don't like it, and didn't necessarily think it the right move. But, giving up on Lumia and not embracing Android or something similar was an equally offsetting dumb move. Cortana didn't get the investment it needed either.
With the Lumia lineup, I think it is pretty clear that there was a chance. And the death blow was a combination of not seeing what drives smart phone sales and not working to make the devices properly supported by carriers and easily attainable. I owned something silly, like 4 or 5 Windows Phone devices. And every time it was the same; mediocre hardware, limited network availability and no love from the carriers.
Now, I live in Canada and I have at times in the past been able to make the same complaints about others. The difference was, when I felt it about another phone maker, I'd generally NOT see the same complaints from US customers. With Windows Phone, things were just as bad in the US as in Canada. And that is pretty extreme when it comes to smart phones.
What Microsoft needed to do to survive in that industry (in my opinion) was push out a true flagship phone, ensure it was available on all major carriers and give the carriers kick backs (even if it meant jacking up the price) to incentivize them to sell. From early on, it was clear, carriers had been incentivized to either not sell Windows Phone or to sell something specific. This was clear from the sheer number of posts from people who went into a store ASKING to buy a Windows Phone and had something else rammed down their throats.
With Cortana, they were there before Alexa. They had the first digital assistant. They had the longest run way. But, their very first competitor basically debuted with more functionality. Microsoft never answered that challenge. Their failure to build a Cortana speaker in a reasonable timeframe. Their failure to get on board with smart home technologies. Their inability to grow that service. Killed Cortana. It will never meaningfully leave the desktop and even there, users may soon be able to replace it with Alexa.
When Microsoft gave up on smart phones last time the justification was that they were waiting for the next wave to ride instead. I have a feeling Cortana could have been that wave. And Alexa was gauntlet being dropped. But now they may have missed that wave too. HoloLens may be the next wave after that. But it appears equally hobbled. Driving down cost should have been the next step rather than improving the hardware. With Windows MR headsets I really don't get why Microsoft can't justify building a tethered version. Not every application of AR needs to be wireless.
Microsoft seems to have it backwards... you make a gaming product to fund scientific advancements. You don't build scientific prototype to hope it will fund research to build a gaming device. Unless you have astronomical luck you'll never find the money. A $500-1500 tethered headset would draw a lot more sales than a $3000 dev kit.
I don't really understand how they keep missing the mark. I feel like Ballmer would have already had a consumer HoloLens out. I feel like Nadella is days away from axing the current iteration despite having never even giving it the chance to succeed.
Microsoft needs someone a lot more Ballmer like and then maybe have Nadella take the helm for a few weeks each year to prune the roadmap.
Comments
Post a Comment