I came across a story posted in Digg.com, courtesy of Martin Stein’s Publishing Weblog and Die Welt (original article in German) of an interview with Steve Ballmer, the CEO of Microsoft.
A more demure interview, which is somewhat a little different to how we usually see Ballmer in public. However, true to Ballmer’s style, there are a few gems.
After asking Steve if he has a “Apple Computer”, he says that he does not have a Mac nor a iPod. ” Of course, I have to know the devices. We have to know what the competitors do”.
Naturally. Microsoft needs to know what the person next to them is doing. It would be in the best interest of that person, naturally, to cover their exam sheet when writing down their answers — Microsoft has a nasty habit of darting its eyes about, seeing what answers they can put on all their blank spaces.
Die WELT: Was it a satisfaction that Apple had to give in? [in regards to Apple running Windows]
Ballmer: Honestly, I don’t think that it is that important. Actually, it is relatively expensive if a user gets a separate Windows OS for his Mac. Not a lot of people will do this.
Actually Steve, and I’m pretty sure you’re well aware of this, that the cost of a Windows XP licence on every new machine is absorbed in the total price of the machine itself. Naturally, the cost of licence + CD is the same for those who already have a PC and wish to upgrade to Windows XP. Funnily enough though with some OEM machines, you just get the licence. That’s it. The “install disc” is a hidden partition on the hard drive, so when your hard drive dies prematurely, screwing up all partitions, you’re stuffed.
The cost of Windows XP is unimportant, since either way Microsoft is still extracting the AU$479 a pop. What baffles me more is that the introduction of BootCamp by Apple has done nothing but increase (a little one, but increase nonetheless) sales for Microsoft — why go ahead and say that your product is expensive?
Die WELT: Is Apple unbeatable?
Ballmer: Which company would be able to compete with Apple at these days? It can only be Microsoft or Apple stays without any serious competitor. I think, everybody deserves some competition.
Yes, we wouldn’t want lack of any competitors, would we Microsoft? There’s no real reason to explain this point or the double entendre introduced by Mr. Ballmer here. This quote smacks too much of irony for me to bother writing anything here about it.
This one’s gold:
Die WELT: But couldn’t you just buy a Mac without hesitation since Apple opened up their machines for Windows?
Ballmer: No, we prefer real PCs.
Ahem, “real PCs”? Oh I see, those beige boxes that are churned out of the same factory in China, albeit with different logos emblazoned on the front and side. As opposed to Apple hardware, which is churned out of a factory in China that has an Apple logo emblazoned on the front and side.
Hey hold on a tic, there’s a pattern here! Upon further investigation… holy moly they even use the same CPU! And RAM! And hard drives! Hmm, what makes a “real PC” then? Is a PC made “real”, depending on the logo that’s emblazoned on the side? If that’s the case, then custom made PCs — that have bleeding edge technology and outstrip OEM machine performance by at least 6 months — are not, by definition “real PCs”.
Then again, when you look at Apple’s hardware offerings, you may notice that much of it is provided by Intel. The same Intel that provides much of the hardware in Dells, HPs, Acers and Lenovos. Add the fact that all Intel-based Macs can run Windows XP just fine, and it seems that Steve Ballmer’s comments nail in the fact that he wouldn’t know his ass from his elbow if either one of them hit him in the face.
But that’s hardly surprising, is it?
