Microsoft Employees Love Their iPhones 366
portscan writes "There is an entertaining and telling article in the Wall Street Journal about iPhone use by Microsoft employees. Apparently, despite it being frowned upon by senior management, iPhone use is rampant among the Redmond rank and file. The head of Microsoft's mobile division tried to explain it away as employees wanting 'to better understand the competition,' although few believe this. Nowhere does the article mention attempts by the company to understand why the iPhone is more attractive to much of Microsoft's tech-savvy workforce than the company's own products."
iPhones work beautifully with Exchange. (Score:2, Insightful)
Better in some ways than Windows Mobile phones.
This really shouldn't be surprising.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:2, Insightful)
Lack of tethering is not Apple's fault.
It works here very nicely, without any tricks or hacks.
I don't use a lot of apps (or games) - but the ability to choose e.g. between several different weather-apps is very comforting.
The iPhone is really the ultimate phone IMO - you can make it look and behave exactly as you want (within it's very wide limits).
At least, it's a progress in comparison to exchangeable covers, custom ringtones and background-images.
Victory against monoculture (Score:5, Insightful)
Duh (Score:3, Insightful)
It works with Exchange. Microsoft is not going to run a BES. And Android is the one eating their lunch.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:2, Insightful)
Either way, obviously iPhones would be way better if Apple didn't restrict development and distribution of 3rd party apps.
Well, it's not so obvious IMO.
But that really depends on what "better" means for you.
I'm glad that Apple strictly controls what goes into the App-store, because I have no time at all to do a line-by-line source-code audit of every god-damn silly app I download. I'm glad Apple does this for me, for the 30% of the price that probably the seller would pocket anyway (without the benefits for the end-user)
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course lack of tethering is Apple's fault. The machine is perfectly capable of tethering, and it does so in many markets. But Apple kowtowed to AT&T's request to block it in the U.S. They willingly provided AT&T with the kill-switch, even though I'm the paying customer.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:2, Insightful)
IMO, they items they lock out are just not important to the average Joe. To geeks and some business users, yes some apps are important, like WiFi Scanners, Tethering, Google Voice, Jiggly Tits [chillifresh.com] (ok, granted, that one may have a wider appeal), but for the average user, they get what they need from the app store.
I have a good friend who went with the droid. He loves Apple Mac, but hated the restrictions on the iPhone. All he did after that was complain that it was hard to get it working properly, just the way he wanted it. When I suggested an iPhone so he didn't have to mess with such things, you'd think I suggested taking his porn collection away ;)
The droid is great for Apple customers, as it's forcing Apple to expand into areas where it's weak, and that's always a good thing. The rumored multi-tasking in 4.0 [appleinsider.com] should make some iPhone owners very happy. Personally I don't have much need for it, but the forums are jumping with anticipation over the rumored release.
Do they get the Microsoft products for free? (Score:5, Insightful)
If they do, then there's a real issue there.
If not, it's the employees money to do with what they please. Upper management needs to STFU.
Obsessesion (Score:5, Insightful)
The Apple culture is about obsession. This goes from creation to use. Despite any flaws the iPhone it has, it feels likes someone actually thought how non-engineers would use it. This is an important factor IMHO, because even with the 'wow' factor, a device will only work if people can find it usable. Too many gadgets, IMHO, are designed by engineers and almost feel like the primary user was an engineer. To many people the "it just works" element is as important as any of the features that the device it may include.
There are other companies who have understood the people factor, but all to often it doesn't feel like it is running through the veins of the companies.
Looking at Microsoft, I feel that they are confused about what it means be user friendly. There are elements of the company who seem to get it, while there are other parts that thinks bells and whistles are what user friendly is about. For me being user friendly is something a little complex, it is that right balance of simplicity and richness of functionality. Hiding features or dumbing down an application is not going to magically solve the problem, if the humans factor is forgotten in the process.
The irony in all this is that Apple spends less on R&D than Microsoft, yet whether it is through focused R&D or some other factor I feel they seem to capture the magic combination better. Maybe there is something to be said of having a company run by a guy who is so obsessive that his passion captivates people, rather than alienating them - yes, I am insinuating that Balmer's passion at developer conferences is more an after thought than something that drives the company in a cohesive way.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:4, Insightful)
I suspect a lot of that development has also been fueled by "get rich quick" dreams, which has obviously only come to reality for a small number of developers. Okay if you're a hobbyist, but not a great return on investment for anyone looking for more than that.
Jailbreaking fixes many of the iPhone's limitation (Score:2, Insightful)
This is why I am less and less happy about Apple's desire to end jailbreaking.
Opening up the iPhone allows me to be liberated from some of Apple's control-fetish annoyances.
Admittedly nothing that is "a deal breaker", but it does allow you to fix a few issues that just make the iPhone work "better", based upon your (not Jobs') definition of better.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, you're the product they're selling to AT&T. Or didn't you get the memo?
Re:Victory against monoculture (Score:5, Insightful)
Eating their own dog food.
Apple employees probably use Pages, Keynote and the rest of the iWork suite because they're quite good pieces of software. Microsoft probably doesn't have a raft of people who are using Open Office or Pages because well, even for Mac, Office v.x is pretty slick. Microsoft employees also probably are Xbox fans, by and large.
Mono-culture is one thing, being able to swallow your own dog food is another. Monocultures work when the products you sell are actually good. :) When you have to ENFORCE your monoculture, you're clearly doing something wrong in the market.
That's funny (Score:3, Insightful)
That's funny, you'd expect a lot of them would be using that really popular windows mobile phone, you know, the....err....wait, don't tell me...hmmm
Re:Windows Mobile 7 is not yet out. (Score:4, Insightful)
We'll see how well they do but until people start using it on a day-to-day basis and feedback positively I'm not going to take anyone's opinion on it seriously.
I'm still not entirely sold on the interface. It is much slicker and isn't trying to replicate Windows on a phone but why can't they just make something that fits the screen rather than making it almost certain I'll have to scroll left and right to find everything and what is the point of making a heading to a section, like People, so big that it's guaranteed not to fit on the screen ever? Again, it looks nice but I can see that getting annoying over time and it reeks of being a lazy solution to making things look nice on various screen resolutions.
Re:Victory against monoculture (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:iPhone mania (Score:2, Insightful)
You mean, like they bought Sony or Nintendo instead of coming out with their own game console?
Re:Jailbreaking fixes many of the iPhone's limitat (Score:2, Insightful)
I agree. My iPhone would be much less useful to me without jailbreaking, and would limit its usefulness. Besides the points you made, I can do other things thanks to jailbreaking, like:
* Multitask
* Run WiFi only apps over 3G
* Run any non-approved applications I want
* Use multiple ActiveSync accounts (ie Work Exchange and Gmail)
* Use the iPhone as a storage device
Like you said, they might not be dealbreakers, and I understand the reason Apple doesn't want me to do some of them, but jailbreaking would be sorely missed.
It's too bad Apple can't just make a "no warranties, do at your own risk" official jailbreak for advanced users. I'll gladly take the risk, and I'm sure most users wouldn't even be aware of it.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:3, Insightful)
Not to mention Verizon was (is?) rather famous for locking features down.
Two 'identical' phones on Verizon & AT&T would have Bluetooth turned off on Verizon so you had to send files through their '$1/picture' service.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:5, Insightful)
Correction: the iPod Touch runs the same software with the same restrictions
Microsoft Phone? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft can't succeed (Score:2, Insightful)
No matter how good Windows Mobile 7 itself may be, the fundamental problem with Windows Mobile 7 is that it is still tied to other Microsoft products, and Microsoft's other products often suck. You just know that if you're going to try to use it Google Apps, Mac, Linux, Firefox, or iTunes, there's going to be tons of problems.
They're probably going to use it to try to push Windows Live, Bing, Bing Maps, Xbox, Zune, Office, and all the other crap they are selling. And while you may use and like some of that, I don't know anybody who really likes everything Microsoft makes.
And Microsoft can't escape that trap. The Mobile division would be fired if they tried to give people what they actually wanted: Gmail, iTunes, Google Maps, PS3, etc.
And the things they have optimized for Windows Mobile 7 are not necessarily the ones I care about. "Bright superflat squares that fill the screen"? A good mobile phone interface is not primarily about the best graphic design, it's about a lot of other things.
I don't think it's possible for Microsoft to produce a good mobile phone given the way the company operates.
Of course, in many ways, Apple is just as proprietary and annoying. But unlike Microsoft, Apple is happy with a few percent market share. And Apple doesn't have as much crap to tie into, so despite Jobs's control-freakishness, the iPhone still ends up being more open.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, I should have a right to run any program I want on my hardware.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:5, Insightful)
I have no problem with them offering the iTunes App store, and in fact think that the cut they take doesn't seem too high.
But what if I want a native app for Google Voice? What if I want Google Voice to essentially replace my Voicemail and SMS buttons with a Google version that lets me use SMS for free? What if I want to use Opera on my iPhone? They're developing an application, but it will most likely be rejected. What if I want to alter my home screen? (e.g. Winterboard) Apple won't let me run those applications, even though they've been developed.
And what of all the developers who won't bother to even write an application because they're dreading the possibility of being rejected and having all their work being useless?
I like the iPhone and I like the iTunes store. I just think we'd see even more apps and better apps if Apple didn't keep such an iron fist over distribution.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe I don't follow this well enough to know, but I don't think Apple is doing an audit, much less line-by-line. Seems to me they just react after the fact. From what I understand they recently pulled some apps related to wifi for using undocumented APIs. If they pulled it after they fact they didn't audit the source in the first place, not even using some automated tool on the binary.
I don't have an iphone, just an ipod touch. But I don't get the impression they strictly control the app-store. They certainly impose their own restrictions, but I don't feel like it's for my benefit so I only get quality apps.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:3, Insightful)
So for people like you, there's the app store. That doesn't diminish the value of having fewer restrictions for other people.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:5, Insightful)
Completely agree. Nice and easy. Unless you:
* don't have an extra $100/yr to spend on a membership fee
* don't have a Mac
* want to write apps that do a better job than Apple's built-in apps
* want your apps to be able to run tasks in the background
* want your apps to be able to download, save and play back locally-stored media
* want to write apps that contain a plugin system or language interpreter
* want to write free (as in speech) software
But other than that, yeah, a hobby programmer's dream.
Re:Believe it or not, Microsoft is a pretty tolera (Score:5, Insightful)
I contend that for your average ACPI non-expert (99.999% of the population), it seems to be the other way around. I don't care who's wrong, I just want to my laptop to fucking wake up when I open the lid, like it does in Mac OS X and Windows.
Re:Victory against monoculture (Score:4, Insightful)
Good user experience has nothing to do with UI. In other words, it doesn't matter where you put the buttons... it matters that the user can figure out how to do what they want to do.
Microsoft figured this out, sort of, by creating a completely new UI for Office 2007. Google figured out a long time ago that most users would rather have a box and a button than a page full of stuff. Apple did very well with the iPhone... albeit, the phone part is actually a little harder than most, but the rest of the device is dirt simple to use.
My point... I don't think users care about familiarity as much as software designers think they do.
Re:Victory against monoculture (Score:3, Insightful)
that used to be the case, and was partly responsible for the dominance of Windows. But that was a long time ago, now we have all kinds of UI on Windows - not just the differences between XP, Vista and 7, but the differences between theold menu-bar style apps and the new ribbon, or IE style apps.
Go ahead, look at IE and tell me its got a familiar GUI in keeping with the rest of Windows. The divisions in Microsoft are now in the business of making every GUI look different, possibly to differentiate itself from other MS products, possibly just because they can. Expect this to increase over time.
Re:Victory against monoculture (Score:3, Insightful)
Eating your own dog food is good and valid for the mobile division, but the rest of MS really has nothing to do with the phone wars, so it would be ridiculous to pressure them into using it.
Anyway, I bet the brass are just glad they're using iPhones, not N900s.
Microsoft's Own Products? (Score:4, Insightful)
Nowhere does the article mention attempts by the company to understand why the iPhone is more attractive to much of Microsoft's tech-savvy workforce than the company's own products.
Most likely, that's because Microsoft doesn't make a phone.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:3, Insightful)
AT&T didn't block VoIP over 3G. They told Apple to disallow VoIP apps over the 3G network.
Isn't that in keeping with what I said? "AT&T requires them to disallow you from using it"?
There's nothing inherent about the phone that ever prevented VoIP over 3G, and Apple specifically built the capability to tether another device to your phone, but AT&T has to ok turning the feature on.
The iPod Touch runs the same software with no restrictions.
Well yes, but of course they'd be opening a messy can of worms if they allowed different things on the two different but nearly identical products. For one thing, it might be harder to keep the iPhone locked down if people have access to an identical unlocked version. Second, there'd be a marketing problem of trying to sell iPhones while iPod Touches had superior functionality. Third, you'd have a PR problem because people would get even *more* annoyed at the iPhone being locked down when there's a nearly identical unlocked product.
Of course, it might also be that Jobs is a control freak and won't just let people run their own devices. Hard to know until Apple can sell the iPhone on a truly open data network.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, because they should have gone with the good US cell carrier. Man, that carrier does a great job. They haven't ever tried to hobble the phones that they offer, haven't tried to impede VoIP use on their data network, and haven't tried to keep users from tethering their laptop to their phones. You know, the US carrier that provides great coverage, fast data speeds, and good service at cheap prices without any restrictions on how you use their service...?
Which carrier is that, again?
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:5, Insightful)
I have trouble imagining how that is possible considering that you don't submit your source code to the App Store.
Re:Believe it or not, Microsoft is a pretty tolera (Score:5, Insightful)
Right. In which case you then go speak to the hardware manufacturers and request they write proper Linux drivers for ACPI, or publish their hardware specs properly so the kernel developers can write the drivers.
Countless people went and done that, and what good did it do?
The real solution to his problem - the one that, you know, actually solves his problem, here and now - is the one that he gave himself: use a laptop with OS that can do it with the hardware that exists today. Not chasing unicorns.
By the same logic, it would be perfectly okay for me to call my kid an idiot for not knowing what year the Battle Of Hastings was, even though he's never done anything about it in his history class!
Well, if every single one of his classmates somehow knew that regardless...
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, but you're factually wrong. Both my Motorola RAZR and my Motorola Z6 allowed me to tether over Bluetooth without difficulty. Even my turn-of-the-millennium Sony Ericsson T610 allowed me to tether via IR, as long as I didn't mind about 2400 baud and keeping both the computer and phone out of direct sunlight or flickering neon. AT&T has always wanted to add a surcharge $40/month for tethering, but I never asked them: I just set the data connections up properly and they always worked fine.
AT&T actually sold me both the RAZR and the T610; I bought the Z6 unlocked directly from Motorola.
So that's two different manufacturers who had no problem providing me with three different tether capable phones, and a phone company that was apparently powerless to turn off the feature even when given several chances.
So yes, Apple is sadly completely different. Apple has no problem boning their customers for the benefit of the phone company. But clearly, nothing is going to dissuade a fanboi like you from ignoring reality when it collides with your view of Saint Jobs and his Holy Apple Corp.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:1, Insightful)
Oh, right... T-Mobile. Just not quite "great" coverage ;)
Re:Jailbreaking fixes many of the iPhone's limitat (Score:4, Insightful)
The reason Apple fights jailbreaking is simple: They have realized that their most important asset is their brand, and they will do anything to protect it.
Why does this relate to jailbreaking? Well, remember when all those jailbroken iPhones got rickrolled a few months ago? If you read the media coverage, in most cases the detail got lost that it only concerned jailbroken phones with a badly configured sshd on them. It made Apple look bad because iPhones could be rickrolled. That's the kind of news Apple is fighting, and until you can make certain that those kinds of things do not happen on jailbroken iPhones, Apple will keep fighting it out of fear of bad publicity.
Re:Victory against monoculture (Score:5, Insightful)
Very well said.
There is nothing familiar about the iPhone interface, but it's a raging success.
Why, because it has a good usability design. Especially, it get's rid of the desktop metaphore and uses the appliance metaphore instead, where the device is only one thing at a time, but tries to have the entire user interface be that appliance. When you think about it, it's a very strong and natural interface, and solves a lot of problems people have in current day-to-day use of not just computers, but all kinds of devices.
Most people get lost in devices like VCRs, stereos, TVs and computers because without training it's hard to figure out that a button does different things depending on what other buttons you have pushed before it. The iPhone UI tries to solve this problem by replacing the buttons.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:3, Insightful)
You think T-Mobile would magically be better than AT&T? Really?
I do, actually. I have both a Verizon phone and a T-Mobile phone. While I know that T-Mo has been near-synonymous with "bad service", I can count on my fingers how many calls I have dropped over the past six months since I got my Touch Pro2. While I'll fully admit that they were late to the game with 3G (i.e. might not have been a good launch partner without a solid ultimatum or a longer wait for a 3G handset), the few times I have used 3G on my Touch Pro2 have been faster than either my Blackberry Curve or my VX6800 on VZ. Every WinMo phone I've seen on their lineup comes with Internet Sharing in the Stock ROM, and they don't charge a premium for tethering at all. With one exception, customer service has been stellar every time I've called over the past six years of being their customer. I don't work for this company and I know that there are areas of this country where their service isn't as good as it here in the NY Metro Area, but I do think that T-Mobile would, in fact, "Magically be better".
Re:Believe it or not, Microsoft is a pretty tolera (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it's like calling your kid an idiot if, when asked to research the year of the Battle of Hastings, he writes a letter to the publisher of his favourite history textbook demanding that they email to all customers an errata footnote on the year that the battle of hastings occurred. When there's another free (as in beer -- Microsoft employees can install Windows on their work machines for free, obviously, and this is where the analogy came from) history textbook sitting right beside that has it listed and indexed already. Because he doesn't like the other history textbook.
It's not Linux's fault, per se, but it is Linux's problem. The difference between "Linux doesn't have good ACPI support" and "ACPI hardware doesn't have good Linux support" is pedantic and ultimately irrelevant to anybody not in a position to fix it themselves.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:3, Insightful)
It has nothing to do with being against 'chlorine' in swimming pools. It has to do with being told you have to wear an Apple approved swimsuit or you can't swim there.
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:4, Insightful)
There's definitely an AT&T bias - many overseas mobile networks are quite happy to remove those restrictions as soon as Apple-AT&T agree to do so. For example, in Australia the iPhone was sold unlocked from day 1 (since the 3G came on the market), and 3 out of 4 major networks that carry it allow tethering with no extra charge. The one hold-out charges a nominal fee to enable it. Similar things apply in the UK & Europe, but the primary source of restrictions is still driven by Apple's home market (something I would hope would change with increasing international popularity).
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:4, Insightful)
Without the source code, copyright infringement is probably the most difficult to detect, but they may be specifically talking about copyrighted music or some other audiovisual media clip used in an app without authorization of the author/composer/producer, not copyrighted code. on the other hand, use of non-permitted protocols and APIs could be pretty easily tested for with binaries only (any API calls will need linker/loader info in the executable, and you can run the app in a sandbox to see what it tries to do). As for buffer overflows, while it won't be as efficient as with source, they do have a number of avenues:
a) running through a decompiler before running through a code checker,
b) automated testing apps for testing any/all input widgets
c) see if any input APIs for telecommunications such as bluetooth/IP have load/link references, trace how those are used (ie. what ports are listened to), and then hammer them with automated testing.
A lot of the above could be automated. Sure, it won't be close to foolproof or anywhere as effective as a proper code review but it's better than what NewEgg or any other PC software distributor does for you. If somebody put out a really crappy piece of software full of holes, it will flag it (and probably also let Apple know to scrutinize apps from that developer more closely).
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:3, Insightful)
I like the iPhone and I like the iTunes store. I just think we'd see even more apps and better apps if Apple didn't keep such an iron fist over distribution.
No, you'd see stores all over the place, including developers who decide to serve up their apps on their own web site. There *might* be more apps this way. Overall, there probably wouldn't be better apps, except for a small handful of exceptions (like Google Voice, or 3G Slingbox and Skype (the latter two are now allowed anyway, and Google's Voice web app is really good, and as it is is better than replacing fundamental iPhone functionality)).
But for the end users, it would be a much bigger mess. As it stands now, it's extremely easy to browse, discover, purchase, download, and install iPhone apps. By fracturing the store, this process would no longer be as seamless. Additionally, the potential for true spyware and crapware would rise significantly. iPhone users give up a little bit, but gain a lot in exchange. For those for whom that trade-off isn't so well balanced, there's always Android.
And that's the main problem I have with people wanting Apple to allow apps from any source. There's already a phone OS that allows that (at least, to a greater extent than the iPhone). So use that. But asking Apple to follow suit is to ask Apple to destroy on of the most critical aspects of the iPhone's success. Why break the iPhone when there's already something that meets your requirements?
Re:I loves and hateses my Preciousss (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The google route. (Score:3, Insightful)
What auditing do you think Apple does exactly that Google doesn't?
Apple claims there are 140,000+ apps on the app store, the app store has been around less than 600 days, so that's at least 230 apps per day they have to vet. Do you think they really do anything other than load up the application, see what it's about, have a quick play around with it, then reject or approve it with that kind of volume? Even if they have 100 employees on it, which they wont because that would be unnaffordable for the amount the app store brings them in, then that still only leaves 2 apps a day which will let them maybe do some network monitoring, use the app a fair bit, maybe do a brief look at it, but still nothing more, and even that's assuming all their staff work every day 365 days a year and don't ever take leave or have time off sick.
Really, it is the same type of walled garden. For Apple to be able to do proper vetting of apps they'd need to employ a few hundred people all pretty nifty with a disassembler and able to spot Malware, who all understand Apple's policies on what is and isn't allowed (i.e. use of OSS licenses, acceptable levels of smut, wifi libraries not allowed) and can interpret them as needed. You need extremely skilled people, you couldn't just fob it off to India in bulk, and you'd be needing to pay a decent wage for each member of staff. The sort of staff, that you'd be better off passing over to R&D and letting get on with the next great product and not really caring about quality of apps approved in fact. It's not even the sort of thing you can automate because AI just isn't that good yet.
No, the app store is about control and nothing more, it's not a quality check, it's not a security barrier. Google's marketplace is in contrast about giving people the same easy access to applications but without the control, and that's really only the key difference between them. Google doesn't care who developes for Android, they'll welcome any decent app. In contrast, Apple wants full control of who developers and what sort of app they develop- hence lack of competing browsers, problems getting Google voice and so forth on, blocking of porn apps from small developers whilst allowing major porn coporations to continue publishing etc.