hbharadwaj

True. Nonetheless, I find myself a bit disappointed. At this point, the only thing iPad has is a first mover's advantage aka the App Store. There are very compelling alternatives available in both 7 inch and 10 inch range with interesting experimentation - Surface Blades for example. Nexus 7, Lumia 2520, Surface can match the build quality.

Of course they are afraid. 97% of their revenues were/are from search and nothing else. So, from their perspective, increasing the medium through which their search function is accessed is pretty damn high. You can see it in their target models.

Project Loon - way to push their services Google Fiber - way to push their services Self driving cars - way to push their services Glass - way to push their services

Apple didn't care about search/mapping services for a while when they started out. So Google has no issues building out trying to poach Apple users.

From a MS perspective, not only do they not have competing services, they have a different cost model for their products and services and a different architecture as a result. Every user Bing picks up or MS picks up, that's one less user for Google. So, of course, they are panicking.

Why on earth would anyone combine PwC with Infosys and Wipro? Infosys and Wipro represent the lesser expensive labor band while PwC is a true accounting and consulting firm.

Consulting in this context is so muddled up.

True Consulting: McKinsey, Deloitte, PwC, KPMG, EY, etc.,

Off-shoring/Lesser expensive labor: Infosys, Wipro, Cognizant etc.,

Granted Infosys and Wipro may have some true consulting guys, but to put them in the same bucket as McKinsey or EY is a little ridiculous.

It is quite an irony. If an engineer were to come across a "Jobs" like character, he/she would ignore him/her for the most part. This makes it harder for a "Jobs" like character to make a breakthrough to big stages. To me, he was a brilliant Product Manager. I have seen really good Product Managers who could not write a "select *" query. They have a sense of technology like no others in the sense that they can apply technological solutions to real life problems and envision product futures. They don't care as much about the intrinsic details.

Every time I see a post on HN stating "Here are the things I look for in a Product Manager", I begin envisioning Jobs trying to take on such tests and it is quite funny.

I wonder what the impact would be across the different types of startups. I see this as a boon for foreign entrepreneurs but there are associated downsides as well. For one as an example, if you are planning to start a service based start-up, you may have to manually grab users until your start-up picks up steam.

Based on the numbers from International Telecommunications Union, US has 10 times more online users. I am pretty sure online services and in general start-up success is also tied to your market size. Heck, the first thing they taught me in Management Consulting is to size up the market. I am sure you can get a Temporary Business Visitor visa to the US but as always, this complicates the story.

All in all, as someone from India, looking to start something, I am thrilled by the news but I am not going to apply until I run out of all options in the US. Just my $0.02.

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_...

If all the decisions were based on users, the company will never be able to define the future. I think we clearly see that in product failures/criticisms - even the new Xbox backlash for MSFT. Consumers are fickle. They never like drastic changes. And consumers always choose near term interests than long term benefits.

I don't understand why HN Users need to single out MSFT/Steve Ballmer as making mistakes all the time. They have made mistakes but my point is - RT wasn't one of them. It's cool to analyze strategies without associated fanboyisms/ individual hatred.

Well, I used it in a casual way for making it seem like an obvious decision - the perception having been part of my opinion.

Please allow me to correct myself - Most people wouldn't have taken the bet nor have the insight to do so. Steve Ballmer or maybe Steve Sinofsky or someone did. And they are not most people.

It's a billion dollar strategy. Not easy to make.

Opinion: RT was an interesting strategy and most people in Steve Ballmer's shoes would have taken the same bet. It came at a time when Microsoft didn't have a tablet to compete with iPad. So, what did they do? They converted their existing Start interface to occupy the entire desktop into Metro Mode. If you think about it, the desktop was always a huge waste of space. After they converted, Microsoft had couple of major issues - if they allowed for tablets running legacy apps or forced x86 on tablets, people would ignore the new interface and continue building legacy apps. The new metro was going to be used by their phones and game consoles in a one screen, 3 devices policy and in case they didn't have metro apps, their phones and consoles would suffer. Windows was always the driver - it had to be. So, they decoupled desktop from their new interface and put it in a new set of devices supporting low powered ARMs.

And as such, current Office is never really meant for Touch. So, I am guessing they were forced to bundle a pseudo-desktop along with RT to support Office which is also a cash cow. Would they have loved to remove Desktop completely? I would bet so.

Maybe Microsoft foresaw that x86 prices would fall, power would increase and battery life would increase etc., but they had to continue down this road and take a hit because they needed metro apps. My bet is that they were willing to take the hit. I don't think anyone in Microsoft had the impression that RT would come save the day. It is a necessity because of their new direction. If RT designs in app interest being generated, I would say that it did it's job to some extent. Of course, I don't know how this will play out but according to me, these are some very daring decisions being played out at MSFT and I would say better than Google.

Without sounding like a fan boy, I would actually recommend you to go give WP a try. I am not going to say it's better than iOS for lacking quality apps but it's way better than my Nexus 4. Android to me is the poorest OS amidst the 3.

Oversampling of images - super pixels. You are not taking 41 MP images.

True - I doubt that any of the hardware manufacturers for Android have the technology to top what Nokia did with Lumia 1020. Nokia is completely invested in camera unlike HTC, Samsung, Motorola etc.,

Teamviewer is present as well.

My views on Indian sector maybe a little outdated and mostly Bangalore centric, but here they are:

a. The IT and Outsourcing boom happened in the 2000s and the Indian IT sector started outpacing all other industries and non-IT companies began to suffer. For example, during the 80s and 90s, there was demand for electrical and electronic engineers in state owned corps like BEL and there were other players such as Onida, Dyanora and Kirloskar. Then globalization happened - suddenly in came Infosys and Wipro with unheard of pay scales and they started sucking in the talent. Foreign players came into the electronic appliances space and non-IT companies began to lose talent heavily. They never were in a position to compete with Samsung etc., and got completely wiped out. As a result, in the 2000s, most engineers irrespective of their specialization (Computer Science, Electrical, Civil) would go towards an IT space looking for a job.

b. Indian IT is mostly service based. As a result, they are looking to maximize value at all times. They don't care if you can't think on your own or need supervision. As such, the idea is that if you are good enough to graduate with an engineering degree, you are good enough to succeed in an Indian IT job. There are no true technical interviews, there are no true behavioral interviews. They are looking for molds. The same guys go on to become supervisors and they in turn look for similar traits when they recruit.

c. I seem to be the only one always complaining about this but Indians in general are not risk taking. They seem more content working for a Wipro or an Infosys than taking the plunge to start their own companies. The problems here are multi-prong. Parents are more focused on ensuring their kids success relative to others. The whole thing is based on a giant mediocrity scale. As long as I earn more than my friends or their friends daughters and sons, parents are happy. Inheritance, wealth, prestige are far more important and play a huge role in related incidents such as marriage, political influences, etc., Part time jobs will get you treated like you are below the poverty line. As a result, failure is not an option. Start-up mentality is non-existent in most engineering colleges. In fact the whole setup is against startups. Opportunities are extremely hard to create. The political hoops, the societal hoops turn most people off. No start-up companies in turn leads to lesser product based companies and more IT service based. And as globalization progresses further, the cost differentials and the drops in quality cause a progressive decrease in number of jobs outsourced etc., So, of course the job market is going to suffer.

d. The last part is around the Indian Education system. I came from a pretty good Univ and again, the whole thing was set on mediocrity. Labs were strictly controlled. You couldn't use equipment when lab supervisors were not around and they were in general never around unless they had a class going on. Most programming courses I took hardly had any practical implications. I thought I was terrible at programming only to later realize that it was taught to me in a ridiculously stupid way by professors whose only knowledge of programming came from Indian authored text books which in turn acted as guidebooks for technical interviews to Indian IT Service Companies. So, it was a giant vicious cycle. My final coding test was to swap a set of numbers using pointers and I could never understand the practical implications of any of it. My Professors used employment statistics for comparisons with other educational institutions and between students and constantly emphasized how hard work would get you through an Infosys. At the same time education hardly costs anything compared to what is spent in the US. The Govt authorization of educational institutions is a giant political scam in itself and requirements are fairly minimal. So institutions are mostly ill equipped and are focused on quantity than quality. You will never know your relative worth in an Indian educational system because there is already a pre-existing mediocrity scale for that.

Depends on the situation.

In a pool environment, always look for objects to throw. These include tubes, life hooks if available. In case you can't reach the victim, swim towards the victim (but don't reach the victim) with these objects and thrust them out. Else, approach the victim from behind and place your arms under the victims armpits. Place the safety apparatus between you and the victim and drag the victim backwards.

In an open environment with no safety apparatus, first panic and worship all the gods you know (No - don't). Then try to alert if possible. Approach the victim from behind (first para approach) and grab under victim armpits. Remember - this is extremely difficult to attempt. The victim could be heavier than you.

2 things that were repeated again and again during my lifeguard training sessions - reassure the victim as much as possible once you are in control. If you can't control the victim during the approach, pull the victim suddenly under the water. That will give the victim a pause and allow you to get free. ( There was a technique taught for that as well - lot of lifeguard manuals available online. I wish lifeguard and CPR was made mandatory at some levels.)

Microsoft actually ended up learning from Google and Apple by coming in late. I think they went for an intermediary between Apple's cohesive ecosystem and Google's open ecosystem. Agreed, they had their own Windows PC OS distribution as a model as well.

If Windows Phone ever takes off, it would ideally offer the best of both worlds. Differentiation in terms of hardware and apps while core functionality remains the same.

Isn't that Microsoft is attempting with Windows Phone? The differentiation is based on applications while the base functionality remains the same.

You are certainly serving as my inspiration. I am a IT-Business Strategy guy learning Scala and Play. I realized I don't enjoy functional programming - but like you, I have a product in mind and want to see it shipped :)

I am not sure what happened to Google but I am strongly disliking their new decisions. The Yelp debacle, the new cards, Google Instant previews, Google+...I can go on.

Windows 8 allows you to merge contacts. Once you clean up your contacts on Windows, it's pretty good. Well, at least, has been for me.

I agree with your branding conclusion. That maybe primarily one of the reasons why Nokia is going big on the Lumia branding that a WP8 branding.

Android does not have support on a lot of phones beyond the original version which comes with the phone. The only problem for MS is the fact they spell out the fact that old phones can't be upgraded due to a kernel change which end consumers don't understand. Upgrade options are available on Android only because of the hacker community.

The rest of your post is just your opinion on Android v/s WP8. So, no comments.

I don't think that's necessarily the conversation telcos are having regarding Skype, Facetime, etc. Skype probably is hated because of bandwidth issues but that is not the reason for the hate.

Look, Telco love for Android is around the fact that Android handsets are virtually under their control. They can do with it as they please - bloatware, ads, etc., Android also filled the lower end market with cheaper phones retaining the same functionality while Apple only caters to certain segments.

Telcos don't love iOS. iOS is popular with customers and iOS sells. Hence, Telcos are left with no choice but to support Apple and show their love for Apple.

Microsoft on the other hand is treated like a step child essentially because they want to go with the Apple way in not letting Telcos control their handsets while not having the customer love as of now. The only single reason why MS is still in the game is because Nokia stepped in to save their butts with beautiful hardware. Yes, it's a chicken and egg issue for MS as of now but I think if they hang in there, they will eventually start getting respectable number of apps and succeed as a platform. Not to mention, Nokia releasing cheap phones as well.

Haha - see the comments on the page. I have no idea where their weird twisted logic is derived from. I would much rather see the redistributive efforts occur through the Foundation than let it run through a public choice theory test.

Essentially, Nokia improves webpage load performances by utilizing data compression algos on their servers through Xpress - similar to Opera and Amazon Silk. In between, Nokia decrypts HTTPS traffic - Opera and Amazon apparently don't.

So, effective use of Xpress could be limited to articles (The Verge), magazines and mailbox use could be done through IE or through the mail app. The problem is limited on the Lumia phones but it is a bigger deal just on their S40 phones.

You do realize Nokia Lumia phones have IE as well as Xpress? This issue affects Xpress alone. You could use IE without any of this affecting you.

That's the current problem. If it gets into litigation, whose fault is it?

Currently, the person who is operating the vehicle is responsible for what the car does.

MS just combined 2 different form factors into one. They are so unique at this point in time. People just have to realize the productivity differences and shell out the dough for an increase in computing quality.

I keep thinking that they should not allow companies to sue on patents unless the patent has been implemented in one of the company's products, currently in market. Exception of course being algorithmic patents - compression techniques etc., - These could be made FRAND. My comment is vaguely generic and there may be lots of exceptions but the first part would eliminate a lot of the patent trolls I keep hearing about.