What's behind Microsoft's fall from dominance?

[psxphill]

Also the Win 8 experience is just too jarring for pussies

Fixed that for you.
 
It's different, if you can't cope with different then the Windows 8 UI change is not your biggest obstacle in life.

[psxphill]

In which case there's probably no compelling reason for it to be a Win 8 phone or tablet.

The compelling reason is that it's by Microsoft and they are a software company. You can run Windows 8 on hardware that shipped with Windows XP. They are less likely to leave you out in the cold.
 
Apple stop offering OS updates after a few years, so you're forced to upgrade your phone.
 
With Android you're lucky if you get one update by your manufacturer and its likely to make your phone unusable. I have an android phone and I'm fed up with substandard software.

[psxphill]

That has to do with your carrier and the particular model phone. Google keeps releasing updates, it's up to Verizon/Sprint/T-Mobil/etc. to push them out

I don't like the nexus hardware, no sdcard slot and worse cameras than my 2 year old phone. But each android version they push out is basically hard coded for their phones, which is why it's so hard for manufacturers to port them to last years hardware. Google change the os enough each time that you can't just use the old drivers etc.
 
The other manufacturers don't help as they use binary blobs for drivers that they don't update, plus they can also make changes to the os to get their drivers working. It's a major problem for someone trying to clean up the mess.
 
So with Android you get a choice you can either:
 
1. be forced to buy a nexus, which might be supported for three years (they have stopped supporting the first two already).
 
2. live with being stuck on the version of android the phone comes with.
 
3. upgrade to a cyanogenmod build for your phone that has been ported by a school kid and has drivers that crash or don't work.
 
 
I don't have the money to buy apple stuff & I don't have the money to buy a new phone when my old phone could actually run the latest software if google could get their act together.
 
Android has really left a bad taste in my mouth, something I've never experienced with Microsoft. Microsoft force the operators to accept updates (I think apple do too).
 
Androids Linux origins really show through and it's not something that works commercially.

[psxphill]

Yeah, that's why Android is on 75% of new smart phones.

Current market share is irrelevant. The majority of people are sheep and will buy whatever you manipulate them into buying.
 
Android's USP is it's open, but that hasn't really delivered any benefits. It's lack of a controlling overlord has created a mess.

[psxphill]

My Galaxy S2 is currently running Android 4.3 quite nicely.

Is that official or are you just lucky that someone has managed to botch something together? Anything that has been upgraded to 4.3 without massive battery issues or crashes is very very lucky. I wonder what android phone will win the next lottery for reasonable upgrades.
 
We'll see how Microsoft handle upgrades moving forward, especially now they'll be controlling their own hardware as on pc's they've been very good. Having the latest OS isn't necessarily the important thing, it's that security updates will still be made. There are a huge number of android phones out there that will never get an update but have lots of security holes.

[psxphill]

I compiled it myself.

I guess you didn't port it yourself. You're lucky someone did the work unpaid, most phones don't get anything resembling a stable port.
 
I currently have the choice of 4.3 with no camera light, touch screen bugs & random battery drain because google keep trying to keep devices on all the time or 4.2.2 with random reboots due to a buggy wifi driver.
 
For both of those google maps doesn't work well for some reason the screen just jumps around. Neither one of them supports the FM radio either. There are other bugs and missing functionality, but those are the ones that really affect me.
 
I could compile it myself, but it wouldn't make it any better. If you're not changing it then building it yourself is pointless.
 
Or I could go with the official 4.0 build, which is slow and doesn't work with BBC iPlayer. I couldn't install it officially though as sony didn't release it for unlocked phones in the UK because O2 wouldn't give them the go ahead. I assumed when I bought an unlocked phone I'd not have to worry about the operators.

[psxphill]

IMHO if you're having that many problems you need to hard reset the device and start over again from scratch with a fresh install of only the core apps you use. That or buy an iPhone, because Android clearly isn't the operating system for you.

I already hard reset it when upgrading to 4.2.2 and then when downgrading from 4.3 to 4.2.2. If you're suggesting that I'm doing something wrong then I can point you to the bug list.
 
Android clearly isn't the operating system for someone that expects updates and for the updates to work. Apple seem quite good at it, but there stuff is expensive for what it is.
 
So I've got Microsoft and FirefoxOS to choose from. But as FirefoxOS is aiming at low end devices with rubbish cameras, it will probably be a Microsoft phone.
 

On the other hand, MS are quite thoroughly alienating themselves from their existing customer base in pursuit of a market that they have consistently failed to get a foothold in for well over a decade now.

They aren't alienating many people. There are some type A personalities that complain about the start screen, but most windows 8 users ignore them. The sheep might not upgrade because someone told them that they should be outraged about the start screen. Most of their existing customer base isn't about to buy a new computer or operating system anyway.
 
Just because they haven't managed to get a foot hold in the tablet market doesn't mean they shouldn't try. They were too expensive with their first tablets & didn't have the right UI, they do appear to have then given up at that point. That was their mistake, not trying to get into the market now.

[psxphill]

I like how your argument boils down to "nobody dislikes Windows 8 except for all the people who dislike Windows 8, and they're all either haters or sheep so they don't count." Very sensible.

No my argument is that they can't be alienating the majority of their customer base because the majority of them aren't looking to buy a new OS.
 
The sheep hated Windows 95 because of the Start Menu when it was added. They'll hate Windows 8 because it's removed. They all come round in the end after they get over themselves. There were people who insisted that they preferred using Program Manager http://toastytech.com/guis/win95progman.png, it didn't last long though as eventually their fake outrage wasn't funny enough to justify the pain.
 
google has even preserved some of their indignation with Microsoft for adding the start menu for you https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.win95.shellui/MEBAy63Qlbc/dp23ffmNQ0gJ
 
People being upset about windows 8 is a non event, if you can't see that then you're ignoring history.

[psxphill]

Okay, so we've gone from "nobody hates Windows 8 except for all the people who hate Windows 8, and they don't count" to "they don't count because of what different people thought eighteen years ago."
 
Convincing.

How people reacted is very relevant. Where are the huge number of people who hate the Start Menu and demanding Program Manager? The same place the people who hate the Start Screen and want the Start Menu back will end up, they'll just get over it.
 
You can't make progress if you worry about a few angry people.

[psxphill]

I've heard Classic Shell on Sourceforge.net makes Windows 8 almost tolerable.

I'll make sure not to install it, almost tolerable would be a step down for me.
 

Jerky DVD playback with third-party applications, because Windows 8 no longer includes DVD playback capabilities as standard. I *hate* DVD's, and even I facepalmed when I saw this decision by Microsoft. :p

DVD playback was only ever included in windows 7 home premium/ultimate/enterprise, it wasn't included in earlier versions of windows or the other windows 7 versions. IIRC Microsoft had to pay license fees which was a percentage of the cost of Windows. Lots of machines don't even have optical drives anymore & it wasn't that good either, cyberlink was always better.
 
It makes sense for Microsoft to drop DVD support because it isn't cost effective.
 
I don't miss windows media centre either, early adopters could get it for free but even that wasn't worth it for me.

[psxphill]

So it seems like Microsoft was the only major player to remove DVD playback capability from their OS and force users to have to hunt down 3rd party applications.

Ok, yeah I missed that it was in professional. It's not in home basic or starter.
 
Microsoft always have problems when they bundle software, because of the whole monopoly thing. Apple get away with bundling a lot more because they aren't the incumbent OS. If Apple ever get the majority desktop market share then expect them to have similar issues. Compare Microsoft being sued for bundling Internet Exporer to Apple bundling safari (http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/how-can-the-eu-come-after-microsoft-for-anticompetiveness-but-apple-gets-a-pass/)
 
So Microsoft get pressure to drop it from Cyberlink/WinDVD, who made better products. It allowed Microsoft to reduce the price of Windows 8, which is much cheaper than Windows 7. I'd expect OEM's to bundle a player if they sell a windows 8 machine with a DVD/bluray drive (and I believe most of them do). But it makes perfect sense to me.
 
I think the Linux distros should also be subject to the same controls as Microsoft, if you get five free media players bundled with Linux then how is anyone ever going to compete with those. You could argue that they should get bundled too, but that misses the point of allowing competition.

[psxphill]

So you want to screw over people using a free OS by applying commercial restrictions to a non-commercial product simply for the sake of making Microsoft look less cheap for dropping something that cost them a small fraction of their sale price.
 
Yeah, that's totally a reasonable stance.

It is totally reasonable to expect Apple and the Linux distros to have to adhere to the same rules as Microsoft.
 
It's much more reasonable than expecting them to eat the cost.
 
Windows 8 Pro with media centre includes DVD playback, if you're not too cheap to pay for it.

[psxphill]

Microsoft deliberately dropped DVD playback to avoid having to pay those fees

That was definitely one of the reasons and it's a really justifiable one.
 
FWIW the free Linux DVD players aren't paying for a license (because they are cheap too)
 
Let us be clear, you can't possibly know whether Microsoft were threatened to drop DVD playback. I was merely showing that Apple bundling everything with the OS while Microsoft getting hassle was a real thing & therefore comparing Windows & MacOS like that is like breaking someones leg and then punishing them for not being able to run a marathon.
 
Your ability to troll is wasted here.
 

John, your statements about Linux are simply not correct. Install Ubuntu and you'd also find out it's missing it as well. Linux distros cannot simply chuck in proprietary software that otherwise needs to be licensed because they aren't charging for a distro. It's not a charity mission when it comes to intellectual property.

Ubuntu might not bundle it, but there is unlicensed DVD player software out there. Linux users tend to think that everything is owed to them, IMO they are worse than people who pirate windows.
 
 

Simple: non-commercial projects are exempt from a lot of restrictions like patents, and Linux is largely non-commercial. (I'm not sure what enterprise vendors like Red Hat do - do they not ship DVD players? Pay licensing fees? I dunno.)

They aren't exempt, it's just with non-commercial projects there isn't anyone worth suing.
 
 

Yes, folks, they're paying people to buy a Surface. Oy gevalt. Seriously, Microsoft, just take a mulligan on this tablet thing already.

Do you realise your righteous indignation makes you sound like a git?

[psxphill]

I can't possibly know? Since when was I the one claiming that? You openly claimed that Microsoft dropped DVD playback in response to pressure by other vendors - I'm asking if you have a source for that.

No, I didn't openly claim that. I said that comparing Windows with MacOS on bundled software was flawed because Apple don't get sued while Microsoft do.
 
You obviously are exhausted as you can't even troll effectively anymore.
 

My only point in bringing this up was, that if someone buys a new computer out of the box, someone who doesn't know a whole lot about computers (unlike everyone on this forum obviously, yadda yadda), and see the label for DVD on the drive, pop in a disc... they should be able to play it with no hassle. This is just such a basic feature these days that everyone expects to be able to do it without having to think about it, ya know?

Everytime I go to an ATM and insert my card there is money available, it's such a basic feature that I expect the money to be available without having to think about it. I opened a new bank account and the ATM won't give me any money, why doesn't it give me yours?
 
Or in other words why should everyone subsidise a feature in Windows that the majority of people don't use? Just because some users are too dumb? If they buy the version of Windows without the DVD player then it's their own fault.

[psxphill]

This pretty much throws the whole argument out the window... not only is Windows 8 less capable, it costs more, too. Way to go, Microsoft! *facepalm*

It's not less capable, you can buy a copy of Windows that includes DVD playback. It appears that Microsoft increased the price of Windows 8 in February, you should have bought it sooner.