# Microsoft and RIM



## MikeT (Feb 16, 2010)

Apple is winning. The iPhone has been a hit, outshines every other smartphone on the market and has beaten blackberry handily. The iPad has had a great start as well, also dropping the competition like flies. Other manufacturers try, but can only manage to siphon a small share of the market away. Google's android is good, and probably will end up second place when the dust settles.

That's the reailty. 

Microsoft's attempts at competing are not working. RIM had a long head start, but is finally showing it's lack of capacity for competing with the Apple juggernaut. 

Microsoft has the capacity to compete but are being led in a wrong direction by Balmer who is making smart business decisions but bad technology decisions. Teaming up with Nokia is probably the death knell in his leadship reign. Nokia has competed well in the cellphone market, but have no tech leadership when it comes to smartphones.

Which brings me to this. Why on earth does Microsoft not just buy RIM?

These are two companies that desperately need each other. Give up the windows phone platform and just adopt blackberry as your phone platform and build off it. Advance the exchange/blackberry server relationship and focus on the business customer at first. Add in elements of windows to the blackberry platform and open up the development environment to all those millions of windows developers who don't fancy learning a very different platform to build for iPhone and iPad.

That's the right technology decision, I just doubt we will ever see Balmer make it.

(posted from my iPhone)


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

that's a very good idea ...


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

I'm not a techie person, but this article makes some sense to me.

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-microsoft-should-buy-nokia-instead-of-rim-2010-12


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Microsoft tends to survive on brute force cash and clever marketing schemes, but they've fallen way too far behind this time. How long can they keep dumping money just to keep their foot in the door?

They established themselves by practically copying and releasing a crappier version of Mac before Apple did. Then they did the same thing to the Sony PS3 of video games. They continue to copy and regurgitate ideas by spending $$$ on exclusive rights and marketing schemes etc. Not the kind of tech firm I want to use or invest in myself

The problem with their scheme now is the iPhone has been out and established long before Windows 7. Maybe Apple learned Microsoft's craft and safeguarded their innovations this time? Ever heard of Microsoft Zune that tried to establish itself after iPod? I surely don't expect Microsoft to start innovating something themselves anytime soon. RIM hasn't innovated anything lately themselves either, so why buy them? Unfortunately they're just a flash in the innovation pan and even more unfortunate they rely on the Microsoft exchange email network do they not? RIM is just a fly on Microsoft's back if you ask me and if Windows 7 is suited for anything it's to replace BB itself

Then there's Google which is great but when it comes down to it they're an advertisement company. They offer lots of great free services but I can use them on iOS just about as seamlessly as on Android, so why switch? Taking those services away would be contradictory to their advertising/free usage model. Android is for the Apple haters and Linux users basically and I don't see how it can become as refined as iOS. There is still room for many iOS alternatives so maybe there is hope for Microsoft, but I don't think RIM is the answer myself


----------



## MikeT (Feb 16, 2010)

That article is the absolute epitome of the problem. Nokia is the right business decision to make and that's why Steve Balmer made it. He did it because he thinks Microsoft doesn't need tech leadership, but they somehow need cellphone business components. I think he's very wrong.

However, coming from a tech background since I was building circut boards at 8 years old, I know good tech when I see it and Apple is working. Microsoft and Nokia are losing. I just don't believe that bringing them together is going to make a winner. If they bought RIM it would have changed the game. As it stands, I believe they are just wasting time and money.


----------



## PMREdmonton (Apr 6, 2009)

Android OS is already outselling iOS.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple eventually gets squeezed out into a niche player (at least on the global scale) with Android being the dominant platform. It could be like the PC story all over again and for exactly the same reasons.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Apple will always have their horde of die-hard fans. But iOS and their products inevitably become irrelevant. They may create new segments, but they have no ambition to control them. All they want to do is make a few expensive devices rather than hang on to market share. It's not a terrible strategy, as they have astronomical profit margins (read: overpriced devices sold to hipsters who buy their marketing as much as their products), but it also means that they can't stay a $300 billion business unless they create a new killer app every 18 months. It just isn't going to happen.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

You could be correct but that's because people would often rather pay slightly less for lesser value

Apple devices cost the same or slightly more than their cheap plastic counterparts. The rubber Playbook costs about the same as the iPad, the plastic Nexus S costs about the same as the gorilla-glassed iPhone etc. You can easily resell an iPhone/iPad looking like new while the playbook/nexus are practically junk a year later

I'm really routing for Android, but an open system inherently cannot be as smooth as a closed one. This time you're asking people to switch from a OS that does what they need seamlessly, to one that additionally does what any nerd wants at the cost of refinement. I think iOS has the advantage Windows had as the first mainstream OS

Android has done very well though probably fueled by the anti-Apple sentiments. I buy regardless of brand and find the anti-Apples are even less open-minded while accusing "Apple fans" of the same. I would say iOS is more mainstream and Andoid is now for people who consider themselves the "hipsters"


----------



## slacker (Mar 8, 2010)

Amongst people in my cohort of professionals in their 30's, iPhone seem to dominate. About 7 out of 10 use iPhone.

But I see young people (the less than 25's) seem to use the Blackberry a lot more. Is it because iPhone is so expensive? or is BBM really that much of a draw?

Android doesn't seem to have much penetration in my circle of friends...

PS: you can count me in the anti-apple hipster crowd.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

mikeT, i agree with you that microsoft buying rim would be a good business move for microsoft but i don't agree that the current market share will always continue

it only takes 1 or 2 new pieces of ground-shaking technology and it could all change

i remember when apple was on the ropes, microsoft could do no wrong and nokia was the king of the world in cellphones

apple is looking very good (and i am an old apple user from 1987, i drink the kool aid) at the moment, primarily because steve jobs has always understood the needs of end users and we are just transitioning into the period where technology is gaining total penetration, everyone under the age of about 70 is using technology and jobs makes it simple for grandma to own an iphone


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I don't see anything changing. MS will gain some Nokia and HTC platforms but will remain a distant fourth behind Apple, Android and RIM in the smart handheld space.


----------



## financialnoob (Feb 26, 2011)

fatcat said:


> mikeT, i agree with you that microsoft buying rim would be a good business move for microsoft but i don't agree that the current market share will always continue
> 
> it only takes 1 or 2 new pieces of ground-shaking technology and it could all change
> 
> i remember when apple was on the ropes, microsoft could do no wrong and nokia was the king of the world in cellphones


Seems like so long ago, but it really wasn't that long ago. Times change pretty rapidly in the tech world. Android had less than 3% market share in early 2009, but climbed over 30% within a year and a half.

How this all relates to MS and RIM vs. Apple, I don't know. But I don't think it's likely that the status quo will always remain, especially with technology. 

And non-investment-related (or maybe it is), but RIM's Playbook is atrocious. Their position in the smart phone market is dwindling, and the Playbook was supposed to be a way to bolster that position and expand their market, but it looks like a train wreck so far. They better follow Apple and pull another improved version out real quickly.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

IMHO, Micro$oft buying RIM won't be a good match.
RIM is clearly losing market share and is clearly behind the curve on both technology as well as consumer preferences/sentiment.
Micro$oft is no longer a "tech" company any more in the way Google, APPL, etc, are.
They are essentially operating as a products/manufacturing company on the basis of their strength in the operating system, office, and server products.
They've clearly missed the boat on the whole mobile technology and productivity fad.
I personally think Micro$oft should continue focusing on their core strengths....acquiring RIM will be an expensive proposition and will not bring long term value and growth to MSFT.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

HaroldCrump said:


> They are essentially operating as a products/manufacturing company on the basis of their strength in the operating system, office, and server products.
> They've clearly missed the boat on the whole mobile technology and productivity fad.


Just like PC's were a fad? Mobile tech has the potential to do everything + 10 times more than a PC, in your hand. They already have enough processor power and storage, but then you add a cloud of servers to do the processing and backup storage.

Micro$oft and RIM clearly missed the boat but not of a fad, of the next generation of computing. To be fair RIM invented it, but just failed to keep up. The playbook is a joke


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

It seems like people are being a little hard on the PlayBook. It's selling better than expected and will serve its niche reasonably well. RIM could have done better, but I don't think they're out of the game yet. 

I'm not totally sold on tablets. They don't seem very ergonomic to me. Touch displays are okay for light interaction and short periods, but is a recipe for serious fatigue over longer periods. Staring down at a display while manipulating it or typing is pretty bad for the neck, as well.

Tablets are a niche--an important one--but they are not killing off desktops or laptops just yet for serious work.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

mode3sour said:


> Just like PC's were a fad? Mobile tech has the potential to do everything + 10 times more than a PC, in your hand. They already have enough processor power and storage, but then you add a cloud of servers to do the processing and backup storage.
> 
> Micro$oft and RIM clearly missed the boat but not of a fad, of the next generation of computing. To be fair RIM invented it, but just failed to keep up. The playbook is a joke


Right, fair enough, fad was the wrong choice of words.
Maybe wave or revolution would have been better 

Anyhow, my point was that both companies are struggling to innovate right now and have missed the boat on several key developments in their own industries.
If I were a Micro$oft shareholder, I would not endorse a buy out of RIM, unless it were at a huge, huge discount to book value (which is unlikely).
If I were a RIM shareholder, I would welcome a buy-out by MSFT, as long as the offer price was more than my buy price.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

andrewf said:


> It seems like people are being a little hard on the PlayBook. It's selling better than expected and will serve its niche reasonably well. RIM could have done better, but I don't think they're out of the game yet.
> 
> I'm not totally sold on tablets. They don't seem very ergonomic to me. Touch displays are okay for light interaction and short periods, but is a recipe for serious fatigue over longer periods. Staring down at a display while manipulating it or typing is pretty bad for the neck, as well.
> 
> Tablets are a niche--an important one--but they are not killing off desktops or laptops just yet for serious work.


People laughed at the mouse and keyboard too. We are at the stage of mobile computing where people were using Windows 3.1 and MS Paint was cool on PCs

I can sit however I want and hold/use the iPhone with 1 hand. The BB however I had to slouch over and type with 2 hands. The tabs I'm not so sure, but the fact is you have all the computing power while walking around a warehouse etc. I think they will end up everywhere, replacing car radios and the many computers you use daily. The need to be tied to a desk/computer are dwindling quickly. They are not killing them yet but I think the majority of PC users can easily be replaced by mobile computers

Playbook is nothing but a half assed last rushed copy of the iPad so that BB users can have their own brand. They view Apple buyers and brand loyal snobs, yet they'll pay the same for a much worse product?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

hey ya'll can see what a great tech portf team can be put together here out of awesome present talent.

mode in charge of ferreting out emerging voip & mobile devicers.

harold & andrew providing ballast with timed positions in & out of solid well-known brand names for chips, laps & desktops.

brad & t.gal in support positions (analysis of global tech trends, marketing respectively.) Royal mail equipped w a bull-horn to nag the troops when necessary.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

i have to address those that have dissed the playbook

i just sold my ipad and am ready to buy a new tablet (i would like something with flash) and so i am looking around

i spent about 30 minutes in a future shop one morning playing with a playbook (and i have also owned an android tablet as well)

my impression is that from a technical point of view, it's an extraordinary piece of work
it is fast, video and graphics are stunning (better than the ipad) it has an amazing built in camera which takes beautiful 1080P video, the interface is intuitive and well designed, and it's small and reasonably light

on the down side, it has almost no apps at present and it's a 7 inch tablet which has a limited appeal

i think rim has aimed it straight at 2 groups, businesspeople for whom their blackberry screen is too small to do web browsing and hard-core blackberry lovers

most other people will probably take a pass, unless rim drops the price which i think they will have to do to stay competitive

it's also worth noting that they sold more units on their first day than both the motorola xoom and samsung galaxy tab


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

mode,

I think it's far from clear that PlayBook is inferior in every way. It has a better (though smaller) display and camera. It supports flash. People who dismiss flash support are nuts. Until HTML5 is fully deployed, it is a must-have for many buyers.

I'd be surprised if RIM didn't have a 10 inch version within the year. The app situation will be largely fixed with Android app emulation. I agree with being harsh on them for being slow out of the gate, but they are not out of the race. Piggybacking on Android for apps was pretty brilliant. Most apps that people care about will run natively on the device, and a few specialized apps can be obtained through Android (and Android support is going to be more ubiquitous than Apple, driven simply by penetration of Android devices).


----------



## MikeT (Feb 16, 2010)

I'd hazard a guess that I'm likely the only one here that runs resource monitors constantly while using my pc. If you'd see how many resources flash takes to do its basic functions you'd know why it was a non-starter for Apple. Its a choice between reasonable battery life and flash. 

The direction they wanted apps to go was a flash-less one, and that was the right 'tech' decision even though it caused some flack and lost a few customers. Obviously not enough people cared about it since they've still sold so many units. Developers are switching gears as well. On a pc web browser, no problem since you have a ton of available power. Battery tech, although much better today than 5-10 years ago, isn't advancing that quickly. 

Again I'm telling you straight up that Apple is making the right tech decisions now. I can't say they'll continue if Jobs stops running the show, but for now they have my money.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

MikeT said:


> I'd hazard a guess that I'm likely the only one here that runs resource monitors constantly while using my pc. If you'd see how many resources flash takes to do its basic functions you'd know why it was a non-starter for Apple.


I agree with flash being a resources hog.
IMO, it is a scourge on the face of the planet 

I think Silverlight can do everything that flash can, and much more.
Unfortunately, because of MSFT's lameness in this industry, Silverlight will never get widely adopted in this space.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

It looks like Anroid is taking the lead over iOS and RIM:
Android overtakes iOS in buying intentions
This could mean that Google wins the OS wars with both MS, AAPL and RIM!


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I'm not a fan of flash either, but some people demand it. 

iPads aren't mobile anyway--I don't see why you need 12 hours of battery life sitting on your couch. The thing is too big to stick in a pocket, and who wants to haul around a carrying case? Honestly.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Adobe is a horrible resource hog, I'm not sure what they're doing with Flash and Reader but it sucks. I often take Adobe Reader off friend's comps and they ask how I made it so fast? I tell them as a bonus they won't have to update Adobe Reader every day anymore

As I sat on the plane yesterday with the ancient touch screens that everyone pokes 5 times to get one click, driving the person in front of them insane, I wondered what OS is best suited for airplanes, cars etc. It just doesn't seem acceptable somehow to have iOS, I guess all the Apple-haters would have to quit flying and driving! There is huge potential there for somebody, maybe Android if they keep improving? Certainly not RIM or Micro$oft!

I agree Tabs may not be on everyone's wishlist, but they do have huge potential that a lot of people haven't accepted. They will probably replace cashier computers and anything that doesn't use a keyboard imo. Who wants a box with a noisy dusty fan? Honestly


----------



## rookie (Mar 19, 2010)

MSFT is not buying RIM cos it has decided to enter the fray with nokia's partnership. msft already has a working OS, it needs the h/w. and nokia had gr8 hw and a pretty good network with a wide range of product lines. so the partnership.

i am not too optimistic on their success, but i have a friend who works at nokia. he was saying the new msft OS was mind blowingly intuitive and is ages ahead of apple. but then the disclaimer is that he works for nokia...


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

andrewf said:


> I'm not a fan of flash either, but some people demand it.
> 
> iPads aren't mobile anyway--I don't see why you need 12 hours of battery life sitting on your couch. The thing is too big to stick in a pocket, and who wants to haul around a carrying case? Honestly.


So far the only thing I haven't been able to see with my iPad is those nice Jackie Lawson greeting cards that all my relatives send me.  Flash is on the way out, it's buggy and a security risk, and I'm seeing it less and less often on the Web these days.

As far as the iPad not being mobile, I disagree -- for me it's a perfect laptop replacement and I've gone traveling with it a couple of times now; it worked admirably. I don't have a carrying case for it, just Apple's cover that was designed for the iPad2. I used it to read books while waiting in the airport and on the plane, and it's an awful lot easier to read websites on an iPad than on a phone or iPod. I think the iPad is the iPod for baby boomers -- it's much kinder on aging eyes. And baby boomers are a pretty huge market.

But it also has amazing professional applications in healthcare, construction, science, education, etc. -- it's carving out niches for itself all over the place.

I do agree that iOS and the Apple products that run it will ultimately be niche products, which is always where Apple has operated, it's just that (as I've said here before), a niche in a huge and growing market can give you a very viable and growing business. I don't think Apple has ever aimed for market domination; they just want to create a niche.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I think they might have a hard time justifying their current valuation going forward. It's one of the largest companies in the world by market cap. They can only maintain that by inventing new product categories and dominating them for the first few years. Can they keep that up? I'll admit that they've been on a roll, but we've reached the point where they need to continue to do that just to maintain their valuation.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

andrewf said:


> It seems like people are being a little hard on the PlayBook. It's selling better than expected and will serve its niche reasonably well. RIM could have done better, but I don't think they're out of the game yet.


Agree again!

Lol, some of you speak like such experts and maybe you are, idk, but I have read many reviews & comparisons [not just one or two] & not everyone is as negative.

I would agree with Maclean's article that said: *"The PlayBook may never come close to matching the iPad in sales. But it’s probably also too soon to close the book on it either."*

In this [global] digital revolution, surely there is room for more than one player.


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

andrewf said:


> I think they might have a hard time justifying their current valuation going forward.


I do think they will continue to have plenty of tricks up their sleeve, but I have no doubt their stock will drop in the months/years ahead and they may be at a peak. I wouldn't buy Apple stock myself right now, but unlike RIM and many other companies I'm willing to bet that Apple will still be around--and still successful--in 20 years' time.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

20 years is a long time in tech! They're going to reinvent themselves twice in that time.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

andrewf said:


> 20 years is a long time in tech! They're going to reinvent themselves twice in that time.


With a PEG of .7, they are going to be OK for a while yet. 20 years ago, they did not even have an iPod!

(BTW RIM had a tablet 20 years ago! And MS had Windows...)


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Toronto.gal said:


> Agree again!
> 
> Lol, some of you speak like such experts and maybe you are, idk, but I have read many reviews & comparisons [not just one or two] & not everyone is as negative.
> 
> I would agree with Maclean's article that said: *"The PlayBook may never come close to matching the iPad in sales. But it’s probably also too soon to close the book on it either."*


That's an understatement if there ever was one. PlayBook requires a BB so obviously will never come close in sales. Bill Gates was the first to realize how important software is to the user experience. Playbook has all the hardware anyone needs but is just way behind in OS refinement. The question is if MS can fix that but I don't see why MS needs RIM for anything if they have the OS. The hardware suppliers will pretty much flock to whoever can develop a decent iOS alternative


----------



## MikeT (Feb 16, 2010)

MS needs the tech leadership and innovation in the mobile device space. They don't think they do, because Balmer has a superiority complex and think's windows phone is awesome.

Blackberry needs the tech development capacity and resources of MS. 

It's a marriage made in heaven.

Look at how well they did with xbox by buying bungee before they shipped a single xbox. And look how crappy zune turned out when they tried to do it themselves.

MS has no shortage of talent and resources. They are short on creativity and real product innovators in unfamiliar product spaces. RIM is simply overmatched on capacity. I'll buy the champagne, you get the rings and rice.


----------

