Since it was just revealed that the 12th Russian spy worked at Microsoft, it brings up a concern.
First, 11 spies with valuable information relating to the latest operational, strategic, and tactical methods of the Russians are caught. These 11 spies are traded for 4 westerners, not all U.S. citizens, who have been in prison in Siberia for many years. Any information they had has been extracted by the Russians by now. This is not a trade worth making by any wild imagining.
To the best of my knowledge there has never, ever been a swap of prisoners so quickly. This is very suspicious. What do we have to gain? Or better yet, what does Obama have to gain?
Now we're hearing that some of these Russian spies had ties to Obama Cabinet members. Who will we turn to for the truth? Will Obama tell us about his or members of his Cabinet's connnections to Russian spies? Will the Democrat controlled Senate or Democrat controlled House of Representatives investigate? I don't think so.
Under President Bush, the U.S. had planned a missle defense system with radars based in several European countries, which Russia protested against. We had already made commitments and obtained agreement with Poland and several other countries. Since then, Obama cancelled the missle defense radar system without any concessions from the Russians. Since then the Polish President has been killed in Russia. Since then Obama has given Russia the spies caught by U.S. agencies without so much as interrogating them or trading them for anything of national value. And since then we have heard that Obama administration officials may have ties to Russian spies.
For recreation; "Apps" will have their niche. In the real world we still need robust somewhat "open" systems. OS's come and go and I still need to bang out code occasionally. MS and Linux are so deeply embedded in our technology underpinnings that new OS's have a steep hill to climb now.
The new handset OS's just don't meld with the real work-a-day world like WM6. I can use my handset in the field as an emergency data console for instance, and I already know the "back end" to interface with the real world is all computer.
PC's are fundementally a multipurpose tool, capable of carrying out a variety of useful (and sometimes not so useful) tasks, and even capable of being modified to expand their functionality for more specific tasks. Just because of that flexibility, it will never, ever be completely replaced.
Microsoft's shortcomings in entering into mobile markets (of all kind) is understood, however, it's PC/Server based business still owns a big chunk of the market and who knows when the post-PC era begins.
it's no question that mobile computing/communication era has started and is growing at never-before-seen speed, however that does not necessarily means the end of PC/Server market. Those who know the ever-increasing value of the IT (or IS) services in big to small firms would acknowledge that the mobile industry makes the clients while Intel/Microsoft are making a huge share of the Servers. Which bank do you know that would run its mission critical servers on an iPOD or Android?
I think we are talking about post-PC era for the residential and mobile business users, as I don't see that era is even being a near threat for business servers and clients.
Thanks for your article. I donít think Microsoft needs to be to concern. It amazes me as I travel around the Country of how many people that are using mobile technology; but it also surprises me of how many people that are not using mobile technology. I believe an article needs to be written on this topic because we still live in a digital divide society. For example, there are many local government agencies, public/private schools and small businesses that are far behind in technology from a general point of view, and these groups have a large population. Mobile technology for these groups is not even on the agenda because of the lack of funding. With Microsoft profits, investments, and line of products; the company can do what it has always done: Wait for the right opportunity and purchase a very successful mobile technology company. Microsoft is a very successful company, but they donít have to be the leader in every technology area, just be a team player with a good strategic management plan. Microsoft will survive the post-PC era.
@Feory- yes, by all means, let's retire the term "Wintel." I also agree with what others have said- MS will face massive challenges in the OS area, but the company may be on safer ground in the applications arena. At least for now...
I agree that MS is going to have a tough time in the mobile space. I have struggled with a few Windows Mobile phones and they just don't seem to get it; something unnatural and non-intuitive about it. Apple, Google and the other phone guys are moving in the right direction.
But in the "business" software arena, no one has really made a dent in the huge market share, though there have been many tries. As a developer, I have seen more and more companies (especially small- to mid-sized) make the move to an all-Microsoft stack. This is not insignificant.
It's kind of like they have become the IBM of the new age, which is funny because that's what they were originally fighting against.
Microsoft only thrived when they could use their monopoly power illegally to manipulate the desktop PC market.
The courts found that Microsoft abused its monopoly power and used illegal and unscrupulous tactics to extend that power and eliminate competition. We still suffer from the effects of those illegal practices since competition has not been restored to the desktop marketplace in terms of operating systems, programming languages, development environments and applications.
Microsoft has already tried to extend its tentacles into other businesses such as game consoles and cell phones unsuccessfully, and this will continue. Microsoft has shown bad judgment concerning products not tied to their desktop monopoly, and they have a bad track record especially in mobile products.
Without the ability to manipulate telcos, the FCC, and phone manufacturers, Microsoft cannot parlay its mediocre, me-too, products into a choke hold on the consumer mobile electronics market.
Microsoft has enormous resources of money, and they're not dead yet, but it won't be long, and I wouldn't want to be the last one holding MSF stock.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight Ė as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.