My goodness, take a walk down a cereal aisle. 

When did the term “Niche Market” become an industry swear word?

Solipsistic comment is solipsistic.

When you say ‘solipsistic’, do you mean a phenomenological ‘solipsistic’ or an epistemological ‘solipsistic’?

After reading the CNET article, it seems to me there are two things at play here:

1. Microsoft was being short-sighted in resisting a modified version of Windows that was more streamlined for a slicker, less “work-horse” device. This is often their problem, offering software that relies on its wealth of features rather than what it is supposed to do for the end user.

2. Alldard and his team were at fault for not finding a way for Courier to have mass market appeal. Making a device targeted to “creators” is niche and they should have found a way to pitch it as a device the niche market would like, but that the mass market would be attracted to, as well. For every 10 iPad owners, I’ll bet two are using it to “create” and the others are using it to consume content. That’s at the heart of the iPad. 

I also think they got it wrong with the design. Two screens?? I can’t even imagine the list price. Cost does matter and this would have been too much for the mass market. Say what you will about Apple or the iPad, but a lot of credit has to be given to their industrial design teams, perhaps more than their software teams. They have more often than not “got” what consumers will like and find easy to use.

I can’t speak to Excel or Windows Server, but do you think either could be described as “innovative” or “revolutionary” to the markets they served? By that I mean “did they fundamentally how people use this technology,” not “did they eventually get a major market share.”

This innovation meme is interesting to me. What is innovation? Is it being the first with the idea? If so, which ideas were Apple first with?

I’d say it has a lot to do with recognizing good ideas and bringing them together in a new and useful way. Apple didn’t invent the mouse, but unlike Xerox PARC they recognized its potential and used it to create the first personal computer with a graphic user interface. They didn’t invent the portable digital music player, but they created the design and software platform which made them so appealing. They weren’t the first to create a smartphone, but they were the first to create one that wasn’t a clunky limited-use business device.

Microsoft has been a hugely successful company by most measures but with few exceptions their products haven’t been especially innovative. Apart from the Kinect I can’t think of a single thing they’ve sent to market that wasn’t basically a Microsoft-branded clone of a successful product that was already out there:

Windows = Mac OS
Word = WordPerfect / Wordstar / Etc.
Zune = iPod
Xbox = PlayStation / Dreamcast / Nintendo
Windows Phone = (Wait, Microsoft sells smart phones?)

I’m less worried about the crap Microsoft will make and more about the future of Apple, which was already making innovative products.

Microsoft is just too big and inefficient now to really innovate and change the world anymore. It’s a textbook case of what was described in the book “The Innovator Dilemma”. They won’t sell cool new products because either they’d be too niche at first to be worth it for such a big corporation, or they’d be popular enough to threaten their established cash cow (Windows and Office). So instead they keep doing boring, safe products and they react to the market instead of leading it.

On the other hand, Apple is so good at creating a community of fans that people still line up to buy incremental upgrades to their products.

It’s quite obvious when you take the adjective into account.

As for the overpricing… That legendary overpricing must be why it took two years for rival tablets to come down to the iPad’s price, or why Intel had to set up a fund to help other companies make ultrabooks at a price competitive with the MacBook Air, no? Seriously, that meme is as old and relevant as bringing up the BSOD whenever someone mentions Microsoft.

Allard’s thinking that people don’t want an email program on a tablet is pretty foolish; email is the primary way that people communicate with each other and share things like pictures, appointment invitations, presentations, etc that would be used on a device like the Courier.

Thats weird. Didn’t they know about the blackberry?

Their own? They seem to do fine, apart from being able to produce as fast as they can during i-Launches.

Others growth? Makes no sense to claim that, as overpricing on Apple’s part would enable others to undercut their price and still make a a profit. 

Internet Explorer was not the first or best browser. It wasn’t until IE 3 that Microsoft began leveraging the product (offering it for free)! Netscape couldn’t compete with free (though it certainly tried).

As for innovation, perhaps Microsoft Bob, and we all know where that went.

Seriously, Microsoft has always been about making a slightly better product than whatever exists and leveraging it. As much as I hate to admit it, Apple does innovate, but then stifle the growth by overpricing and draconian control.