Skip to main content

Microsoft: Pay me $250 instead

If this article is accurate, Microsoft is paying Nokia almost $250 for every Windows phone that Nokia ships.  The payback, ostensibly, is twofold:
  1. Wide enough adoption that Microsoft becomes a player in mobile
  2. People, through usage, will stick to Microsoft services, and become long term customers.
I wonder if Microsoft could achieve both aims through a software-only play?  I imagine buying my new Android phone, and then installing "Windows Phone 8", the App, for which Microsoft will pay me $20/month for every month that I am an active user.  They can do that for 12 months for the same amount that they are paying to Nokia, so they have a full year to make me a believer in Microsoft solutions.

Of course, Google may react and try to shut down, or limit, such a practice.....but operators might endorse it.  More Microsoft services, more data usage.

The marketing tradeoff is straightforward: is it easier to get someone to download the Windows 8 App, or to purchase a Nokia phone?  With most of the planet sitting in front of a Windows OS, and using a Microsoft browser, they would seem to have a lot of leverage for promoting a software download.

Why won't Microsoft do this?  Because it implies that the OS is no longer important (the App would run on Android!).

Popular posts from this blog

Timed math tests

You have 3.2 seconds to figure out the problem below. Alan knows 90% of the concepts behind the math test, and can do those 90% very quickly.  He always gets 90% on timed math tests. Bob knows 100% of the concepts, but is a slow worker.  In the timed math test, he gets 75%, but, if given an extra 10 minutes, would get 100%. Alan graduates with an A; Bob with a C. You are building a bridge. Who would you hire? Seems like everyone from Gates to Zuckerberg has problems with how education is carried out today.  I wish I had some of their clout and could help to change the system.
Post a Comment
Read more

FTC should look at the Republicrats

It strikes me that the Republicrats (the Democrats and the Republicans) form an unfair monopoly.  While antitrust law is typically associated with corporations, it could, conceivably also be applied to government (the FTC is an independent government body). Triggering the antitrust laws typically means that you have a monopoly (hard to argue against that for the Republicrats) and that you abuse that position.  It has become abundantly clear over the last year that both parties are abusing their positions by focusing all of their energies on "win at any cost" as opposed to "do something for the country."  This is also why they can be considered a single entity (for the purposes of a monopoly)...they are not really two parties; just one inward facing machine. Unfortunately, it appears that there will not be any real third party, yet again, in the next election....so there is no motivation for either party to change their behavior.   It also appears that you ...
Post a Comment
Read more