4.3M views · Sep 18, 2007 · 2:23 · 0 HN recommenders · 20 mentions · discussed 2012–2024
A two-minute clip of Steve Ballmer laughing at the $500 price of the newly announced iPhone and dismissing its lack of a keyboard. It captures a famously wrong early reaction from an industry executive.
Why Hacker News points people here: Cited again and again as the classic example of incumbents dismissing a disruptive product.
“It's easy to look at what the iPhone is today and laugh at Ballmer”HN comment, 2024
Great article! Looking at a lot of successful companies (apple, tesla, spacex, amazon, etc.), it seems like the founders believed that such a thing should exist so strongly that they made the rest of the world follow them. When iPhone launched ( this video )
“In an interview a decade later after this one he acknowledged to an interviewer that it might have been a mistake.”
Ballmer later acknowledging the mistake in an interview.
That wasn't Gates, it was Steve Ballmer. In an interview a decade later after this one he acknowledged to an interviewer that it might have been a mistake. this video One error Gates later admitted making was not buying Allaire Corp because he thought the price was too high. His own staff members argued with him on that one. But after Allaire was sold to Macromedia J.J. Allaire started the company Onfolio with some friends from Allaire. Gates insisted after launch that Ballmer purchase it, primarily to acquire the services of J.J. Allaire. During his time at Microsoft he created Windows LiveWriter and I've been told also worked on the creation of Azure. He left Microsoft and founded RStudio.
“That's why people thought phones with just a screen would never become popular”
Ballmer dismissing the iPhone's screen-only design
The same could be said for mobile phones. Some things can be done quicker with physical buttons. That's why people thought phones with just a screen would never become popular: this video But with a screen you can do many more things.
“Interesting just how similar his reaction is to what Ballmer's was when asked about the iPhone.”
Ballmer's dismissive reaction to iPhone, compared to Zuckerberg on Vision Pro
Interesting just how similar his reaction is to what Ballmer's was when asked about the iPhone. "We like our strategy," comments about how it's so expensive (in fact giving almost precisely the same comparison; $99 vs. $500 back then is quite close to the $500 vs. $3500 with VR!), and mentioning that they're selling "millions of phones per year" while Apple is selling zero. this video
“the iPhone wasn’t taken all that seriously² on launch”
Example of early dismissal of the iPhone at launch
> When the iPad was introduced, everyone was shocked by the very low price and the sleek form factor compared to previous Windows tablet devices. What I remember is everyone making fun of it, including the name¹, for being “just a big iPod Touch”. Similarly, the iPhone wasn’t taken all that seriously² on launch. The App Store wasn’t even an idea yet, let alone a reality. That is to say this always happens: people discount a new thing and use as contrast something else which was also discounted at the time but framed as if it had always been perceived by the current lens. I have no idea if the Vision Pro will “succeed” (however we define that), but we can be reasonably sure that the current version is the worse it will ever be. In other words, it will get better and it’s too soon to judge its impact. ¹ link ² this video
“It's easy to look at what the iPhone is today and laugh at Ballmer”
Ballmer's iPhone comments, defended as reasonable at the time
>what Steve Balmer said about the iPhone The first iPhone, running iOS v1, was kinda shit. It's easy to look at what the iPhone is today and laugh at Ballmer, but I don't think what he said was wrong at the time he said it. this video
“they laughed[1] while allowing that position to get completely eroded by less experienced competitors”
> It is losing money, sure, but short term losses are not important when you're talking about entering a market as large as the mobile phone market after the existing players are firmly entrenched. I think the point on mobile is that Microsoft itself was a well-entrenched player in mobile, and they laughed[1] while allowing that position to get completely eroded by less experienced competitors. It's true that after that happened, they've seemed to build a pretty good project in Windows Phone 7. But I don't think it's really accurate to start the scorekeeping so recently. [1]: this video edit: formatting
“he started laughing explaining it's too expensive, doesn't have a physical keyboard.”
This immediatly reminded of about Ballmer's reaction to the first iPhone [1] : he started laughing explaining it's too expensive, doesn't have a physical keyboard. [1] this video
“the same way we look back at Ballmer laughing at the iPhone”
I'm loving this Bitcoin ramp up over the past few weeks. Namecheap should be applauded for their general endorsement of "what's good for the internet". Of course it's in their best interest, but you don't see GoDaddy doing the same. I think back to the "So, that's the end of Bitcoin"[1] article by Forbes and chuckle to myself. Hopefully one day we can look back at that article in the same way we look back at Ballmer laughing at the iPhone [2] [1] link [2] this video
“Kind of reminded me of Steve Ballmer laughing at the iPhone when it first came out.”
Kind of reminded me of Steve Ballmer laughing at the iPhone when it first came out. this video Millions and Millions and Millions...
“I can think of a fair number of execs who did not understand the implications.”
I can think of a fair number of execs who did not understand the implications. One of the classics: this video
“Even those whose job it is to get these things right routinely don't.”
Even those whose job it is to get these things right routinely don't. Example A: this video I always wonder at what point it was that Balmer realized their strategy was a failure.
“Ballmer's reaction to the iPhone launch laughing at the perspective of such a device to gain any market”
This strikes me the same as Ballmer's reaction to the iPhone launch laughing at the perspective of such a device to gain any market: this video
“Remember Ballmer laughing at the iPhone?”
How is that reaction different than those that dismissed the iPhone in 2007 because it was sold for $500? Remember Ballmer laughing at the iPhone? this video
“And any argument over a strong current situation reminds me of this”
>I think we give too much credit to an application that plays videos on a phone And what Youtube or Instagram does? Doing laundry on a phone? If it was a simple UX tweak situation the USA wouldn't be using it's muscles to force a take over by an US company. Unless of course there are no designers left in SV due to high rents. How much was that to take over TikTok USA operations? 50 billion? I am sure that you can hire designers for that money. And any argument over a strong current situation reminds me of this: this video
“At the time Windows phone was a failure and they missed that entire platform because of Ballmer”
I'm open to being wrong here and I'd agree that my initial comment was stated in a provocative way, but let me clarify a bit. Revenue growth isn't the whole story. If you're extracting rents from legacy locked-in products or enterprise deals that doesn't necessarily mean you're a competitor on the new paradigms (phone, cloud, web). At the time Windows phone was a failure and they missed that entire platform because of Ballmer (there's hints of your argument in this video, "we're making money with windows mobile"): this video MSFT cloud wasn't doing well and was overly focused on .NET They were too focused on Windows rather than recognizing the strategic value they could provide outside of it: link Today I'd make a similar argument for Intel. Intel doubled down on old style fabs and is not competitive with TSMC. They failed to compete on mobile. They're ignoring the end of x86 and mocking Apple: link Increasing revenue is a good sign, but it matters how. If you're making short-term decisions to extract money from legacy stuff at the expense of new products - that's bad for your long-term future. It can take a while to catch up to you, but it eventually will. Then you'll just limp a long as a dinosaur that makes enough money to survive but nobody really wants to work there and you're done doing interesting projects. That's basically what I mean by irrelevant.
“It doesn't have a keyboard which makes it not a very good email machine”
Strong Steve Ballmer vibes about this comment. "It doesn't have a keyboard which makes it not a very good email machine" this video Sure the iPhone was such an evolutionary product - practically indistinguishable from my old Nokia.
"Overthrown" does not mean "disappear", it means "no longer king." IBM was once the king of computing. It was overthrown by Microsoft. Microsoft was then king, but it is no longer, though those living in the past will point to its continue dominance of the PC, a dominance that is both declining and becoming more irrelevant. Google was crowned the king of the web, with users spending most of their time on google.com, but now they spend far more time on Facebook. > The Roman and British empires lasted hundreds of years. We're talking technology, not geopolitical power. The former operates on a vastly accelerated time scale, aka "Internet time". I recommend you read the Innovator's Dilemma, or at least the cliff notes on Wikipedia: link . There's a nice list of things many of which weren't expected to be overthrown so quickly. I'm wondering if you might actually be a celeb: this video .
Chromebook is like the flipside of that Ballmer quote[1]: "that is the cheapest computer in the world and it appeals to everyone because it even has a keyboard" [1] this video
“FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS FOR A PHONE?”
> Imagine if Microsoft went around rattling the cage every time Apple released some product You mean like this? this video FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS FOR A PHONE? In all seriousness, you made a few blaming statements early on in this thread which is the most likely reason got the reaction you did from Solomon. I'm not opposed to people making observations, but speaking for others really has no place here! Specifically talking about the "PR machine" comment. Say what you mean!
