Vista sales in China booming (no, not really)

Newlaunches.com reports [Via Slashdot. ]:

Microsoft spent millions of dollars advertising its next generation OS ‘Windows Vista’ in China, in fact the IT juggernaut threw up the biggest Vista Ad on the 421 meter high Jin Mao tower in Shanghai China. However after 2 weeks (Jan 19 to Feb 2) from launch Microsoft managed to sell a mere 244 copies of Windows Vista. Software piracy is rampant in the middle kingdom and a pirated version of Vista sells for a mere $1 on the streets. The following numbers are quoted by Windows Vista chief distributor in Bejing.

This is astonishing! OS X probably sold more.

iPod and enterprise security. Same as it ever was.

DF and Macalope accurately identify NetworkWorld editors as jackassess for promoting the iPod as security threat within enterprises. Of course, these are probably the same jackasses who, in an earlier era, predicted that PDAs were security disasters were waiting to happen:

Corporate information technology users are increasingly relying on personal data assistants (PDAs) to check e-mail, surf the Web, and a variety of other tasks. When you use PDAs for online tasks they become just as vulnerable as desktop systems to viruses, mobile code exploits, and a variety of other threats. What should organizations do to make keep their PDA users safe from the threats of the Internet?

And lets not forget the threat from mobile phones:

With the recent proliferation of mobile devices, IT managers are faced with a host of new security worries. Microsoft estimates that every user carries 2.3 devices-a laptop, two handheld devices and a mobile phone-all carrying some amount of corporate data and frequently connecting back to the corporate network. IDC estimates that more than 35 percent of an organization is made up of mobile workers. Organizations with this situation are at risk of several security threats, including interception, infection, and theft and loss.

Get ready for more of the same now with the impending the release of the iPhone: the threat posed by mobile phone, internet device, and, GASP, an iPod. RUN FOR THE HILLS!

I’ll tell you what’s the biggest security risk within enterprises: Windows. And that’s been the same as it ever was.

AppleMatters list of pundits to shun

James Stoup lists well known characters who keep popping up and won’t shut the f* up. Everyone knows that they’re just trolling for $$ and have zero insight. It is high time that people ignore them and stop linking to their bat-shit crazy punditry.

John C. Dvorak—Don’t mistake commentary for journalism
Rob Enderle—Mr. “I-will-say-anything-for-a-quote”
George Ou—He lost his mind during the wireless-MacBook-hack scandal and never recovered
Paul Thurrott—Facts are sooooo optional

PC Mag’s Tim Gideon takes hammer to nail

Gideon responds to iTunes/iPod competitors who continue to whine about Apple’s dominance and pricing strategy:

There, there, competitors. Let’s take a step back and think.

Apple created the very business space you’re trying to compete in by making the iPod ubiquitous. The company had no unfair advantages: Apple just came up with a better product and an affordable way to load it. Whining about pricing is like creating an expansion team, then bitching about the game’s rules once the season starts. Nobody’s forcing you to compete! You invited yourself!

When music is 99 cents per song, it’s the hardware that’s pricey. But people are willing to pay, as iPod sales obviously attest. Why not recognize Apple’s successful strategy and mimic it? That’s how just about every other industry works: The best business model wins, and everyone adapts. If it’s a larger share of the public’s spending money you seek, here’s a surefire way not to get it: Mess with a pricing standard that finally has people listening to music again.

Well said, Mr. Gideon.

Irony: Microsoft & AT&T complain about Google-DoubleClick

Is there any richer irony than this? Two companies that were convicted of abusing monopoly power complaining about Google gaining too much market power! From tomorrow’s WSJ:

“Google’s purchase of DoubleClick combines the two largest providers of online advertising delivery and is going to reduce substantially the market competition on which Web sites rely on to provide advertising,” said Brad Smith, Microsoft’s general counsel. He said that, taken together, Google and DoubleClick would handle more than 80% of the advertisements served up to third-party Web sites when a user pulls up a page.

Comeuppance is a bitter pill to swallow, ain’t it, bitch?

AT&T said it had concerns about antitrust issues with the Google-DoubleClick deal. “We think it’s real important that the antitrust authorities take a real hard look at whether or not this gives Google not only market power but enhances market power they already have,” said Jim Cicconi, AT&T’s senior executive vice president of external and legislative affairs. Google, he said, “seems to be positioning itself very intentionally in the dominant or controlling position in being the single broker of advertising on the Internet.”

Gee, I am sure the one thing that the telcos love more than anything is unfettered competition.

MS bid up DoubleClick on purpose (but didn’t really want it?)

So says Mary Jo Foley:

But what if Microsoft bluffed? What if the Microsoft didn’t really want DoubleClick and simply wanted to bid up the price that Google had to pay to make its latest acquisition?

So what would have happened if Microsoft ended up with a company that it did not want, did not need, or did not know how to integrate? That would imply Microsoft shirked from its fiduciary responsbilities – sufficient reason for shareholder revolt.

Helping Troy Wolverton to write about Microsoft’s new slip

I am sure Troy is thinking about how Microsoft delaying their new virtualization product “may signal deeper problems“. I thought I would help him out by using some of his own writing:

Apple’s Microsoft’s ambition may be starting to get ahead of the company’s ability to achieve it. Renowned in recent years for its operational excellence, Apple Microsoft in the last two years has delayed two high-profile products, the Apple TV set-top box Vista and now, it said Thursday Saturday, Leopard, the upcoming update to its OS X operating system virtualization technology. The company pushed back the release date of Leopard the virtualization technology so it wouldn’t have to delay an even more highly anticipated product, the iPhone Vista.

The problem Apple Microsoft is running into is that it’s a relatively small large company compared to tech giants such as Hewlett-Packard or IBM Apple, said Van Baker, an analyst with research firm Gartner. As of last fall, Apple had about 18,000 full-time employees, compared to 156,000100,000? for H-P Microsoft, according to the companies’ annual reports.

“Clearly there’s evidence that they’re not executing to the same level they have in the past,” said Baker.

While Apple Microsoft hasn’t has been known for such delays, they’re not surprising, Baker said, noting that Apple Microsoft is “broadening their product offering, and they have only so many engineering resources to go around.”

The delay – and the reason behind it – are “a risk and a sign of how Apple Microsoft is changing and diversifying,” said Shim. “It’s also a sign that they’ll have to be more careful with spreading themselves too thin.”

Now Apple Microsoft will have to wait several months for those sales, which will now come after the end of its fiscal year in September. That could lead analysts to lower their sales and earnings estimates for the company this year – and potentially lead to a lower stock price.

Perhaps more importantly, the delay gives archrival Microsoft EMC extra time to convince computer shoppers debating between the two that its new Windows Vista operating systemvirtualization technology is every bit as good as OS X VMWare’s.

“This might give Microsoft VMWare a one-up to get that consumer enterprises that doesn’t don’t want to wait for Leopard Microsoft,” said Baker.

Troy, you are welcome.

MS pinhead disses iPod without a competitive product in sight

Microsoft seriously has to get out of the trash-talking business. Instead of devoting every waking hour to thinking about Apple, Google, and others, Microsoft and its executives need to hunker down and seriously ponder their own initiatives. Brad Smith takes the baton from Ballmer:

I’m not a big believer in just blaming the music industry for Apple’s inability to sell every conceivable iPod,” said Brad Smith, senior vice president and general counsel at the US software giant.

I know this type of language satisfies the acolytes, but it does them no good in the market when all they have to offer are unwanted products (search, music, Vista, xbox).

Giddiup Microsoft, stop with the bad-mouthing and start competing. The clock is ticking and violent language and assorted insults will not help you get products out the door (if that indeed is your intention).

Google gets DoubleClick, but Microsoft gaining?

According to this Marketwatch report:

Microsoft has recently gained ground on Google in online services, and has said it will spend heavily to do so.

Where has Microsoft gained ground? It’s definitely not in search:

Some 64% of U.S. searches went through Google in March, according to data released on Wednesday by Internet metrics firm Hitwise, up from 58% in March 2006.

Yahoo, Microsoft, and Ask.com saw 22%, 9%, and 3% of U.S. searches and each of the three posted a decline in search traffic from a year ago. The remaining 5% of searches went through 48 separate smaller search engines.

I am not sure what what “gains” the reporter is referring to.

Parent org WSJ offers a more sober view:

Doubleclick would have given Microsoft instant entry into the market for running ads on other companies’ Web sites. Now Microsoft may have to build its own service if it decides to compete. That approach has proved difficult to Microsoft, which has poured money into its own search engine and online ad system to little success.

Is Leopard delay related to earnings smoothings?

How much of it is related to development issues related and how much is related to earnings smoothing (irrespective of development issues)? Presuming that iPhone gives the crucial revenue jump in June, maybe Leopard blitz is timed to reinvigorate Mac and iPhone sales during the fall?

This is funny:

Think Secret, two months ago:

Development of Mac OS X 10.5 is wrapping up faster than many at Apple even anticipated, and at present, a release can be expected as early as late March, sources say