Ballmer: You have to be a computer scientist to use Android

[runawayprisoner]

I think the guy is simply trying to use hyperboles... which you'll see CEOs do a lot. It's a CEO thing, I think.

Strictly speaking, from a serious point of view, most people here have at least some basic understanding of a computer, and may only need to score some A's on a test to become a certified computer scientist, so I don't think his remark is completely... off the mark.

Unless we're saying someone here doesn't know how to use Android... 🙂

Honestly, I have seen my fair share of people in real life who don't know what the heck Android is or how to operate an Android phone, so I think there is some truth to that statement.

 

[theeedude]

 

[Bman123]

I see more android phones then anything else. I mean young old black white tall short fat skinny people using android. I mean I know I'm a computer scientist and all but Sheesh there's a lot of us out here LOL

 

[QueBert]

I see more android phones then anything else. I mean young old black white tall short fat skinny people using android. I mean I know I'm a computer scientist and all but Sheesh there's a lot of us out here LOL

And how many of those people actually know how to use the phone outside of making a call, or clicking on an icon that's on the screen to open something? I can't tell you how many people I've encountered that had no idea they could add/remove things from their screen. "ZOMG! I can click and hold and add more of these thingies? cool!" 98% of people I come across with an Android phone it's 100% stock outside of maybe a wallpaper. As a phone, no Android isn't hard to use, but for anything beyond that? hummm. Try explaining widgets to one of them, lol.

 

[Red Storm]

making a call, or clicking on an icon that's on the screen to open something?

Funny, that right there is all the iPhone can do. Android can do it too, and then some. Seems the majority of people out there like having the option to do more. 🙂

 

[Zaap]

And how many of those people actually know how to use the phone outside of making a call, or clicking on an icon that's on the screen to open something?

So we've gotten to the point where using a phone for its intended purpose, and also clicking icons to use it for something else, is "not knowing how to use a phone."

What icons would they be clicking to open something? email? text messaging? The app store? Web browser? That's pretty much all most people do with their phones, regardless of platform. If someone couldn't do any of the above on an Android phone, they couldn't do it on *any* phone.

I can't tell you how many people I've encountered that had no idea they could add/remove things from their screen. "ZOMG! I can click and hold and add more of these thingies? cool!"

What does this prove? There's pretty much NO WAY to make the process any simpler than click and hold on the screen and a dialogue that pops up saying "Add to screen" and a list of things you can add to screen. I guess there could be a hovering text message that never goes away saying "Hey kiddies, didja know you can add things to the screen? Well by golly you can! Press here!" That might make it 'easier' than it is now, but frankly, I don't think even the biggest dummies want that 'feature' on their phones.

98% of people I come across with an Android phone it's 100% stock outside of maybe a wallpaper. As a phone, no Android isn't hard to use, but for anything beyond that? hummm. Try explaining widgets to one of them, lol.

I can't tell what my made-up percentage of iPhone users I've come across were 100% stock- all their phones look alike. One thing was common though: no widgets at all, so no explanation needed. 😉

And anyway, what exactly is 100% stock for Android? A user would actually have to be rooted and running stock to actually achieve that. Since you must mean all these people were running 'stock' from the carrier, you must be hyper-aware of what each make/model phone looks like stock.

Let's say it's true, that most Android users don't really know how to add widgets or modify their phone in any way (first off, I don't buy this for one second.) If they are happy with the phone, and know how to use it for what they want to use it for, so what? What would the 'solution' be anyway? Take out all of the function for those that know its there and know how to use it, to accommodate those that are clueless? Create a walled garden? To me that kind of sounds like Apple's approach. ( I dunno about Windows Phone, I've literally, no joke, never seen anyone with one in the wild).

 

[Red Storm]

Let's say it's true, that most Android users don't really know how to add widgets or modify their phone in any way (first off, I don't buy this for one second.) If they are happy with the phone, and know how to use it for what they want to use it for, so what? What would the 'solution' be anyway? Take out all of the function for those that know its there and know how to use it, to accommodate those that are clueless? Create a walled garden? To me that kind of sounds like Apple's approach. ( I dunno about Windows Phone, I've literally, no joke, never seen anyone with one in the wild).

Exactly. That's the beauty of Android, you can use it like you would an iPhone (simple interface, no widgets), or you could do more. The choice - something Apple doesn't offer - is yours.

 

[BladeVenom]

He's an idiot lol.

QFT! The average child can figure out how to use an Andriod phone, but Ballmer can't.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

He isn't completely off-base, honestly.

Android has proven to be popular, yes. The truth, however, is that most people who own Android devices have no idea what kind of power the OS has. Android is not as user friendly as iOS or Windows Phone, and the user experience is inferior the average user.

The power Android offers is great if you're a power user. The phrase "computer scientist" was obviously a bit extreme, but Android's appeal to the masses is all from well-executed marketing.

Well exicuted marketing? You mean the carriers showing the features and abilities of the phones they offer?

Android is very user friendly. Please explain how it is not? My youngest daughter has been able to pick it up and use it since she was 7. She figured out how to install Angry Birds and Fruit Ninja and set up an email account without any help.

That's all 95% of phone users need. Don't try to bring up Android people loading ROMS and such because the Jailbreaking scene is much larger.

Can't really comment on WP7 because no one is buying it.

 

[WelshBloke]

And how many of those people actually know how to use the phone outside of making a call, or clicking on an icon that's on the screen to open something? I can't tell you how many people I've encountered that had no idea they could add/remove things from their screen. "ZOMG! I can click and hold and add more of these thingies? cool!" 98% of people I come across with an Android phone it's 100% stock outside of maybe a wallpaper. As a phone, no Android isn't hard to use, but for anything beyond that? hummm. Try explaining widgets to one of them, lol.

Anyone with a stock HTC phone will be using widgets as standard.

 

[AstroManLuca]

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

marketshare is explained by the fact that the iPhone was held hostage by AT&T and there was no other choice... I'm pretty sure if you gave people unlimited money and which phone to pick from, the iOS marketshare would grow even more...

I'm so sure ATT really had them by the balls and it wasn't some mutually beneficial arrangement

 

[wirednuts]

seriously, microsoft absolutely gave the mobile market away by sitting on wm6 for as long as they did. people were crying for years for ms to just put out a new, streamlined os for phones that is easy to develop apps for. thats it. it was EXTREMELY simple. people would have poured countless hours into developing for it.

but they just sat on their hands while google said "fine, we will do it". nobody cares who actually owns the software. people just wanted something easy to work with. android is as far as development goes.

 

[Deeko]

seriously, microsoft absolutely gave the mobile market away by sitting on wm6 for as long as they did. people were crying for years for ms to just put out a new, streamlined os for phones that is easy to develop apps for. thats it. it was EXTREMELY simple. people would have poured countless hours into developing for it.

but they just sat on their hands while google said "fine, we will do it". nobody cares who actually owns the software. people just wanted something easy to work with. android is as far as development goes.

Its not that simple, though. As the Ballmer video above alludes to, Microsoft already had an established OS at the time. It was easier for Google to make massive changes because they didn't have a released product yet. Plus, in 2007, no one really knew what would happen - hindsight is always 20/20, its easier to look back now and laugh than to remember what it was like back then.

Ultimately, when the market changed, Microsoft did scrap their 6x platform for Windows Phone 7. It takes time to rebuild your OS from scratch, and now we have WP7, which is a modern, polished OS.

Regarding your last comment about development - I have to say, I disagree wholeheartedly. I've developed apps for all four of the major platforms, and I hate the Android SDK/environment. Its cheap, which lowers the barrier of entry, and with their marketshare of course devs will target them, but all other things equal, based just on the actual development process/environment/sdk, I'd develop for either Windows Phone or iOS over Android every time.

 

[RedRooster]

MS desperately needs a "Droid" type campaign of some sort. I've yet to see any commercials on TV for WP7, with the exception of the odd cameo in TV shows like CSI.
If they could just get the word out, I think WP7 could take off. If they keep doing what they're doing, it's going to be dead in three years.

 

[DirkGently1]

Has there been some sort of Brain Drain from Microsoft recently? Is this why everything they are producing is becoming Fisher Price while to them it seems that everyone else's products are rocket science?

Perhaps they need to start looking at their recruitment policy?

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I'm so sure ATT really had them by the balls and it wasn't some mutually beneficial arrangement

Last I checked people swap SIMs into iPhones all the time. And why are the US iPhones still locked to carrier? Oh. Right. Apple has to spend extra resources to software lock a fucking iPhone? You think they really like spending resources on that?

 

[William Gaatjes]

He isn't completely off-base, honestly.

Android has proven to be popular, yes. The truth, however, is that most people who own Android devices have no idea what kind of power the OS has. Android is not as user friendly as iOS or Windows Phone, and the user experience is inferior the average user.

The power Android offers is great if you're a power user. The phrase "computer scientist" was obviously a bit extreme, but Android's appeal to the masses is all from well-executed marketing.

Of course he is not, i agree with you.

What made Apple and Microsoft so great is that they enforced a certain type of standard. That means that almost all applications have a similar look and feel. With android because it is free this is definitely not always the case(especially with apps). There is a lot of fragmentation and this can make customers doubt. That is why Microsoft and Apple came as far as they did. They introduced standards. May not always be the best standards but it was more easier for other people (developers and customers) because they had some foundation to work with, enforced or not. Liking it or not.

 

[mosco]

as a "computer scientist" and iphone to android user(for now), I somewhat agree with what he saying.

Unfortunately for Apple and MS, google seems to be making an effort to clean things up in ICS. Thank god they finally added a good looking font.

 

[HeXen]

as a "computer scientist" and iphone to android user(for now), I somewhat agree with what he saying.

could you clarify specifically whats difficult? or what your agreeing with Balmer about? cause i use Android 2.2 and Ios the exact same ways. The settings screen is different, but its all pretty much obvious if you can read your own language.

like i said before. click power, click market, click download, click on pretty icon, move your finger around...how can it be harder to use?

 

[Pretty Cool]

I would never touch Apple stuff and have never tried WP7, so I cannot say anything about them. Prepay does not give you too many options, so my choice was just the entry-level Optimus One. Granted the device is on the low end. However, Android is just not that easy. If it were, there would be no need for me to read the manual. It is still not that intuitive to me. There is not even any applications I even find interesting. I do have Juice Defender because battery life is so bad, and I guess I have install some task killer eventually. Then I will have to root it to get rid of the bundled apps that load for no reason. Honestly if there was a WP7 device at the price I paid for the Optimus, I would have gone that route instead.

 

[wirednuts]

Its not that simple, though. As the Ballmer video above alludes to, Microsoft already had an established OS at the time. It was easier for Google to make massive changes because they didn't have a released product yet. Plus, in 2007, no one really knew what would happen - hindsight is always 20/20, its easier to look back now and laugh than to remember what it was like back then.

Ultimately, when the market changed, Microsoft did scrap their 6x platform for Windows Phone 7. It takes time to rebuild your OS from scratch, and now we have WP7, which is a modern, polished OS.

Regarding your last comment about development - I have to say, I disagree wholeheartedly. I've developed apps for all four of the major platforms, and I hate the Android SDK/environment. Its cheap, which lowers the barrier of entry, and with their marketshare of course devs will target them, but all other things equal, based just on the actual development process/environment/sdk, I'd develop for either Windows Phone or iOS over Android every time.

well im not a programmer so your opinion there is better then mine. cost i suppose would be the largest factor

but in 07 i think we all knew where things were headed. korea was already there... and thats when the iphone first came out. everyone and their mom knew that wm6 wasnt going to cut it... and 4 years later microsoft finally responds with an entirely new os- one that has nothing to do with their past achievements that supposedly held them down?

gimme a break. microsoft knew the mobile market needed a new os, they just had no idea what to do. google and apple had to show them.

 

[TheStu]

well im not a programmer so your opinion there is better then mine. cost i suppose would be the largest factor

but in 07 i think we all knew where things were headed. korea was already there... and thats when the iphone first came out. everyone and their mom knew that wm6 wasnt going to cut it... and 4 years later microsoft finally responds with an entirely new os- one that has nothing to do with their past achievements that supposedly held them down?

gimme a break. microsoft knew the mobile market needed a new os, they just had no idea what to do. google and apple had to show them.

If you actually look at Windows Phone 7 you will see that its similarities to Android and iOS end at 'modern, capable smartphone OS'. The UI and interactions are different wherever they can be (there are only so many ways to press a button you know?) and the overall look and feel of the devices are significantly different from iOS and Android. They took good features from all sources, their multitasking is WebOS inspired it seems, the C/P is iOS inspired, the multiple hardware options, straight out of the Android playbook.

I think that it would be more accurate to say that Google and Apple showed them that a whole new approach was required, not optional, and if all they did was riff off of either of them, they would have had WinMo 7 (NOT Windows Phone 7) out much sooner, because they could have kept the core OS the same and layered on top, that would have been all they needed to catch up to Android at the time.

 

[vshah]

his statement is proven invalid by the 2 female friends i have who love their android based phones (think apple levels of love) who are honestly 2 of the stupidest people i know tech wise. as in a TV remote control is hard to understand stupid.

if they can figure it out and fall in love with it anyone can

it really does help that the mascot is a fucking cute little green robot. i have converted people for this reason alone :awe:

 

[Nebor]

Microsoft sat on their hands after they (kind of) released WM6.5. The rest of the world moved on, and now MS is trying to recapture the market. If they would have released WP7 2 years earlier, they'd probably still have a good market share.