It's dumbfounding (not to say disappointing, to borrow a word) how some folks seem to be incapable (to borrow another word) of understanding that "new" is not necessarily "better." Why should I "adapt" to something that I find worse?
And what's this business about "adapting," anyway -- are we to be viewed as little more than machines (like the Roomba) with no particular preferences, and which mindlessly and unquestioningly "adapt" to whatever new circumstances are framed around us?
If those NeoWin and Verge MicroBorg were even slightly intelligent they would understand that they are acting completely inversely to common sense. The most vital ingredient to technological progress is technological darwinism. Bad or impractical or inefficient or just plain stupid ideas must not only be criticized, but shunned lest progress be artificially detoured down every single rabbit hole on the road to perfection. What they are doing when they say "adapt or die" is reversing the order of who is servicing who. Technology is designed to service humanity not vice versa. Technology must adapt or die to humanity, not vice versa. They actually seem to believe we are supposed to bend and adapt to these products even though they are not vaguely designed to help the customer in any way. Clearly these products like Windows 8
are actually designed to benefit only Microsoft in the most cynical manner yet conceived. Frankly these children couldn't be more dense if they were made of lead. Their entire worldview exactly mirrors the borg, nameless, mindless servants of the MicroHive. "Resistance is Futile". ~barf~
I do understand how estimating sales (or if you prefer forecast them) allows for larger margins of error, but going from an estimated two millions to a "now estimated" one million that another "magician" estimates as 700,000 and that another one "now estimates" as 500,000-600,000 but that "just last month estimated" as 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 is crazy.]
You cannot call them "estimations", "result of throwing a couple of dice and multiplying result by 100,000" seems like a much more accurate description of the procedure they used (and are using).
They are using some huge error bars in their guestimates. As we say over here in the states, 'close enough for government work" Added:
one more thing that I haven't seen yet in these unofficial numbers is that earlier dogfood announcement where Microsoft gave a WP8 phone and a Surface RT to each of their almost 100,000 employees. so if the total number was 1 million in sales then fully 10% of them were bought by Microsoft. If the number is 500,000 total, then 20% were bought internally and that would be incredibly embarrassing.
Everytime these stories come out I worry a little about piling on or kicking them while they're down, and really feel uncomfortable from never being on this side of the argument before. But then I remember that even as we sit here and write these comments, their plan is still underway, feeding their Windows legacy destroying products into the OEM monopoly channel with little chance of correcting course. So then I stop feeling sorry for them and continue. This whole thing is like watching those Russian dashcam car crashes on LiveLeak
in slow motion. P.S.
For some reason when I look at that or any clown picture I immediately see Ballmer superimposed.EDIT:
added one more thing
Edited by CharlotteTheHarlot, 15 January 2013 - 02:13 PM.