Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Midlife Crisis
pillageplunder writes "This article from Businessweek covers the recent memo sent to all Microsoft employees by Steve Ballmer. Interesting tidbits through-out: how Microsoft will try to cut a Billion dollars in expenses, and its cost per employee is about $300K"
$300k per employee? I wonder how much of that is in weed.... could explain alot of things...
SysWear - Geek T-shirts (UK/Europe)
Includes stock?
Perhaps Gates knew exactly when the right time to leave was :)
With iPod, Linux, Mac, Firefox, etc. kicking ass it's no wonder.
-- Real programmers don't comment their code. It was hard to write, it should be hard to understand.
this article will be a troll fest. this post is a prime example. MICROSOFT SUCKS MICROSOFT SUCKS MICROSOFT SUCKS
Why do they need to cut a billion in expenses? Sure, they spend a lot of money, but they are making a profit, and I'll bet a billion out of their yearly profit is a drop in the bucket.
I know, I know, it's big business and stock price, but still, it's not like they're running out of money.
i think steve ballmer reached his mid-life crisis long ago.
Marge, get me your address book, 4 beers, and my conversation hat.
...or you may just be holding microstock and the one left holding the bag...
My stock and desktop GUI is now in Apple. And who doesn't love a cute penguin?
Microsoft's major problem is that it's been a long time since they've released a totally new line of products that has been sucessful. Aside from Open Source, Microsoft also has to compete with its own prior versions... Why does somebody who has Windows 2000 need Windows XP? Why does somebody who has Office 2000 need Office XP?...
Dear Microsoft,
Welcome to the real world, where your stock does not grow 10,000% in a matter of a few years, and companies have to *gasp* cut costs, or perhaps even *bigger gasp* innovate, to keep their companies from falling flat on their face.
With much love(sorta),
The World
With $300K per employee and buck-saving concerns, they might as well migrate to Linux!
They can keep all thoses perks and crap.
It looks like the beginning of the end for the Redmond Gang.
Yes. If you use a geologic timescale.
immediately discontinue the "one dollar for each reported bug" program.
"Is this just useless, or is it expensive as well?"
Maybe if Ballmer wouldn't charge his dry cleaning to his expense account, they wouldn't be in such dire straights...
DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS!!!!
This space for rent
Linux and open source will never beat Microsoft. Microsoft will crumble from within, and beat itself.
I wonder if Bill Gates and the rest of the guys at the top were considered in that $300,000 figure. Seems likely, since that wage seems ridiculously high.
This is why statistics are often meaningless, or the meaning isn't clear =).
- I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. [strain #2] Thank you
Easy, fire some people.
Any business can benefit from optimizing its processes. Microsoft has been very good at making profits... it will be interesting to see if it will succeed at creating business processes that capture the imagination of its employees and make them feel like part of a well oiled machine.
Amazing magic tricks
If you've costed in the salary of a professional, fringe benefits, vacation, employer's contribution to social security, etc. and then add in a multiplier to account for the infrastructural overhead services (people in accounting, facilities maintenance, management, etc.) in a large corporation or university, this figure is not at all unusual.
That said, however, Microsoft enjoys a surfeit of talent that, like ATT Bell Labs in its day (when it, too, had a monopoly) could afford to do lots of interesting work.
Unfortunately, the need for innovative work to reinforce and expand the existing business model and never ever undermine it is constraining and prevents the company from releasing the full talent of its employees.
So what you see instead are people leaving Microsoft to start entirely new ventures.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
What we're witnessing is the change from a dynamic, idealistic company to one whose primary aim is to stifle innovation and maintain marketshare. Of course, one of the first things to go is the benefits offered to their employees.
With $52 billion in unused cash, I can certainly see the need to save an extra few billion, but instead of cutting management salaries, we'll take it out of the drones. If we don't do this Microsoft will go out of business.
Now..now..play nice.
Everyone look at poor M$ in the corner, dying a slow death for the lack of another Billion in the bank.. Lets not let that happen..shall we..being the good neighbours we are..
So here is what I recommend.. The slashdot community will, painful as it is, will map out the various product lines of Microsoft with their perceived value, which needs to be truncated or snuffed out completely. Once we are all in agreement as to the total worth is a Billion, Cmdrtaco, the chosen representative, will submit said list to the powers that be (read: Balmy Balmer) for review and acceptance.
So get your thinking caps out, check your emotions , pay no heed to the thousands of M$ programmers who will obviously hate you for nixing their much loved products, let reason run rampant..and lets choose what Microsoft needs to put another Billion in the bank!
Rapid Nirvana
Does anyone have a link to the memo itself? I'd love to see what Steve Ballmer actually said to everyone!
Please, no goatse links...
Those whom the Gods would destroy they first give a vision statement to.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
Based on that Microsoftie's blog entry about Money earlier this week, I wonder if the problem isn't innovation per se (especially if they're spending $4B/year), but letting marketing screw around with innovations that might otherwise be left to seed and grow without marketing's black grip around everything they newly develop (i.e., too much control).
;-)
Of course, maybe $4B in cheese puffs doesn't go as far as it used to.
My first thought about Microsoft is that the fact they are Anticompetitive HAS to make their distributers bitter. I mean, think about it. Dell, HP, and other manufactuerers are slowly moving to linux -- they, like many technical users, are tired of being pushed around (owned?) by Microsoft.
I think that when Microsoft got too cocky, and too intrusive, they sealed their own doom. They aren't going to be "destroyed"... but I feel they will be forced to remake themselves in a similar way to IBM.
Jay | http://oldos.org
In other news, Microsoft is nearing the release of their two newest products: Microsoft Combover and Microsoft Penis Car
It would be cool if it didn't suck.
...for backwards compatibility. I think they use a lot of their manpower to maintain backwards compatibility for not only their own software, but other high profile apps that run on Windows. I dont really have a solution for them, just felt like pointing that out :)
Somebody here run their own business and have some insight into this? I'm totally dumbfounded on why it should be that expensive.
Slashdot in 5 Paragraphs
I wonder if this is an example of Microsoft trying to be the "end all, be all" of everything, and it's finally catching up with them.
So far, they have 4 sources of real revenue:
Windows OS/Server
Office
Development Tool Sales
Some hardware (mice, keyboards, etc)
Everything else that MS is involved in has been money losing ventures. Cell phones, PDA, cable TV, "Ultimate TV" - heck, the "raging successful Xbox" has lost over $2 billion for the company (and if that's success, I'd hate to see what failure is).
MS has $56 billion in the bank (some cash, some investments), and so far, revenues are still outstripping costs. But I think Ballmer can look ahead and read the writing on the wall. Other than the MS tax on computers (yes, it exists, deal with it), people aren't rushing out to upgrade with every new OS release. Lots of folks are still on Windows 98/2000 Server and Office 95.
So what will be cut away? WIll they just reduce the number of employees? Shift more developers to India? Or cut on some projects and say "OK, so we're not going to take over the cable market."
The Xbox2, for example, is being retooled not to be "successful" (as in "Beat Sony!"), but "profitable", which should be their focus: making a game system that is cheaper to produce, harder to hack, and even if they aren't #1 in the game industry they can make money at it (wait - that sounds like another console company out there). Why be #1 in the home media player market when sometimes being #2 makes money too?
Odds are, MS is, as the article mentions, just going through a "mid-life crisis". They'll either recoup, tighten down, and keep chugging along - or just proceed with "business as usual" for all their talk, then wonder 5 years from now why all of the business are running Slinux (simple Linux - easy enough for Grandma to figure out how to change the screen resolution) or Apple OS X instead of Windows.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
On growth and costs: "We have as much opportunity to grow as any other company in the world. That's a big statement, but the opportunities we've scoped out are very big. Make no mistake -- we must grow our revenues to grow profits. We cannot just cut costs. At the same time, we must ensure a competitive cost structure, or competitors will offer prices, services or innovations that we cannot afford to match. Other companies have been severe in tightening costs the last few years -- layoffs, major benefit reductions, etc. We have not done those things and want to be prudent now so we avoid severe measures later."
On the need to innovate: "The key to our growth is innovation. Microsoft was built on innovation, has thrived on innovation, and its future depends on innovation. We are filing for over 2,000 patents a year for new technologies, and we see that number increasing. We lead in innovation in most areas where we compete, and where we do lag - like search and online music distribution - rest assured that the race to innovate has just begun and we will pull ahead."
On Microsoft's share price: "Obviously, we all want to increase the value of our stock, and we have the best opportunity to do that since the end of FY98. Our stock was around $25 then, as it is now, and we have more than doubled our operating profits since. Shareholders then were betting we would work hard for all these years to make the company worth that mid-98 stock price. We have done so."
On aiming products at various markets: "Our products must also be better segmented for different users with different needs. And we must evolve marketing to focus more squarely on the value proposition throughout the product lifecycle, not just at launch. So many customers have yet to deploy our most recent advances, so we must not only help them understand why to deploy, but also demonstrate the benefits of deploying before we reach the Longhorn generation."
On perceptions of Microsoft: "We must also work to change a number of customer perceptions, including the views that older versions of Office and Windows are good enough and that Microsoft is not sufficiently focused on security. We must emphasize key positive perceptions of the strong manageability, and developer and information-worker preference, for our platform."
On avoiding the trappings of size: "Nothing solves 'big company' ills quite like a strong focus on accountability for results with customers and shareholders. Innovating, growing share and profits, and serving customers all ensure that we have no time for wasted motion. To do this, we need to prioritize the things that matter the most with our customers and for the company, and then be accountable for executing on those choices."
... Ballmer, the over-excited monkey-boy, is going to steer the company towards its eventual demise. Well, not many companies with 56 billion in cash can actually die, but it can easily fade into obscurity.
... kind of like UPS, actually. And then all the mini-Ballmers can walk around with onions on their belt and reminisce about taking the ferry to Shelbyville.
:)
My theory is that Microsoft needs to behave like Starbucks. They need to open little locations all over the world, which cater to small and medium businesses
Er, where was I? Oh, yes. The memo is bland and boring, just like Ballmer's management style. The only reason the monkeyboy clip exists is because he was trying way too damn hard to conceal his true TQM leanings. Ballmer will not revitalize Microsoft. I could, I think. But he can't.
Steve, can I have your job for about three months? It wouldn't be enough time to effect a proper change, but darn it would be fun to have a slashdot reader in charge.
By switching to Linux and OpenOffice/KOffice on their desktops. Not their development or testing machines, but just their accountants, security team, and call centers.
Dang! Wait a sec...Windows and Office are free to them, so it only saves on the cost of anti-virus + downtime/patch maintenance, so that's probably only $50 per user or so.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
lol micros~1 sux laffo lunix rulez0r
Seems to me that Sun led the way back in the early 1990s when they developed Java. Take 1 really talented software engineer, and give him something to work on. Allow him to pick 5 to 10 other talented people, and sequester them from the rest of the company for 1 year.
At Microsoft's level, they can probably afford to do this with 20 or 30 such groups in parallel working on the same or similar ideas.
After a year, dump the projects that are not going well, and refocus those groups on other ideas. Innovation is rarely done by large commitees.
Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
Companies don't mature until they go through a couple generations of management and product lines. This is one of the criteria used in Built to Last, one of the few biz books I can say were a *good* use of my time (the other IIRC was the ability to deal with failure and bounce back).
Basically, MS has been under the same management (Gates, and even Ballmer has been around since the beginning, pretty much) since its inception. Product lines -- well, in a way it has been through three: command line (DOS-era), early GUI (Win 3.x and Win9x) and modern OSes and platforms (NT, networking products), but it has shown considerable difficulty getting out of the "sell boxes of software" model.
Given all of these, I'd call MS a very immature company even now. Midlife crises will come the day Linux is just as good on the desktop as OSX is, and MS is forced to look in the mirror and ask, "what now?"
Go somewhere random
Most of MS costs are labor - people. How you reduce labor costs is to pay less and pay fewer people.
Expect cuts. All this talk about how MS is no longer going to pay for shiatsu massages for your 'animal companion' is just their way of saying "Hey dickheads the 90's are really fucking over". Next stop - "Microsoft is just like everyone else, move to India or get fired!"
it just means they are laying off a bunch of people...
probably in the USA where labor is more expensive.
Thats 17 Billion dollars right there!
Just cut it down to 282k per employee. There are 57,000 of them so that would apporoximate a 1 billion dollar cut right there.
- what is the definition of simultanagnosia?! I've been meaning to look it up!
Servers them right. You make crappy software, you don't make money. You don't make money, you have to cut expenses.
Well, the last time I checked, that was roughly how much they'd lost over the previous four quarters on the XBox venture... and roughly how much they'd lost onthe XBox venture over the four quarters before that...
In a company where pretty much everything except Windows and Office is the company just tossing money at an unprofitable venture for the privilige of having a product in that area, finding a billion dollars to cut shouldn't be that hard...
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Microsoft could probably save some money is it stopped making so many polo shirts.
Not that I have anything against high fashion, I just though they were a software company.
What if that mime really is trapped in a box?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
My god this is hilarious! Please post this more often. Its a nice change from the stupid GNAA first posts.
I love it! Next time, a french one?
Whenever my mind veers off the beaten path in to its unchartered perverse territories, I have memories of *horror* Ballmer singing and dancing to "Developers..Developers..Developers."
And whenever my mind pulls it off, I am reminded of Eddie Murphy (playing Anna Pearl "Mama" Jensen Klump, Sherman's mother in Nutty Professor II) jumping up and down with fake titties bouncing going "Hercules..Hercules"
Now, Balmer dancing on stage with Fake tits.. and Powell running around in circles in a Construction worker's outfit singing "YMCA..", THAT I will pay to see..
Rapid Nirvana
There are some cool features that warrant the change to XP (i.e., System Restore), but you are right that not much is actually changed.
.NET-based OS that replaces Win32, and so on. You're right that Microsoft hasn't offered much in the past 4 years as far as actual change goes (I consider 2000/XP because it finally got most people off the 9x core), but Longhorn is set to fulfill that. I'm already looking forward to the new era of Windows based entirely on safe and stable .NET code.
.NET technologies. I'm really looking forward to Mono becoming mature. If all goes well I hope it can be ported to OS X.
The big thing is going to be Longhorn--that's why it's taking so long. WinFS, Avalon, whole new interface called Aero Glass, an entire
I admit it, I'm a fan of the
Just do the math... Will cutting down costs per employeee be their goal or will it be cutting down on employees? (or both) Hmm...either way, they're going to have to make a decision: dominate everything (then start underpaying) or dominate one/two things with less resources. This must be a shock to their corporate culture....
I mean, most games didn't work right with Windows 2000, and some don't support Windows 98. Not to mention that most help desks are using Microsoft's Life Cycle in order to cut down on the calls they have to take. Just TRY getting support for a product running on Windows 95... It's fun!
But yeah, I see your point. MS really needs to do something to make itself more money. Maybe they could do an Age of Space or something, and give us the long-desired sequal to StarCraft.
-The Libra
"Please be patient--The future will begin momentarily."
a key focus now for Ballmer is "process excellence," which seems unlikely to inspire Microsoftees to stay up all night creating the Next Big Thing.
The Next Big Thing *is* process excellence and the goodies that come about through that, like secure software with minimal bugs. Ballmer atleast has that right. Now if he can have his developers find their idea of a Next Big Thing, while keeping true to the real Next Big Thing (process excellence) then you might see MS leave the doldrums of midlife crisis.
What's the coporate version of a red sports car and a trophy wife?
To pay for this
Things are coming to a close on this case, and the European theatre is heating up.
Microsoft meets Europe July 27
The bigger they are.........
Self Defense - A Human Right www.a-human-right.com
Subtle changes to most verses. It sounded really gay before.
Good job. Nothing gay in it any more. Clearly removed all traces of gayness. Keep up the good work.
Can I donate something to your G^WPaypal account?
Ok, ok, enough joking around. I hate to say it, but Microsoft needs to learn how to make a buck off of Linux. They could create their own distro and do their own API and app porting to it. For the same reason people love that OS X is built on *nix, people wouldn't mind a Windows built on it. The best of both worlds. Sign me up for that.
Thanks, you can have the podium back now.
-Patrick
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
Which could only mean that this would add an extra 2,000+ stories to Slashdot every year on stupid, meaningless patents that seem to always get approved.
Hmmm.
Since I do management consulting for a living I can say that Microsoft is in a very enviable position in terms of reducing average employee costs. They are at $300K now, but they also have many billions in the bank. Next year they should just double their staff size by hiring the nations poor for $6/hr. Not only will their per-staff costs plummit, but they won't generate any debt and they'll be providing a great service to the nation.
/. I suppose I should point out that I'm joking, but I really am a management consultant)
(Since this is
Microsoft is dying.
As opposed to truly gay now?
Quick! Someone send Steve Ballmer a TCO study that shows how much money they will save if Microsoft migrates to Linux!!!
It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
If that's an average cost per employee, wouldn't docking the top execs pay a few hundred thousand do more than docking everyone's pay or laying off people?
Unless over the last 13 years you have used your immense cash stockpiles to hire people for the sole purpose of research.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Well, that explains where the name "Longhorn" came from...
Their boat is sinking.
All these diversionary tactics are designed to lull their investors into thinking they are still growing, when if fact they have started shrinking.
There'll be more attempts at "rightsizing" and other shell games before they go belly-up in a whirl of scandal.
Goodbye, Microsoft. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
Funny. Micro$oft fought tooth and nail to avoid being broken up into pieces after being found guilty of anti-trust violations. It would have been the best thing for the value of existing assets and future innovation. Expect to see Micro$oft creating its own spinoffs soon.
an ill wind that blows no good
I wish I had the link to the article, but the fact is 90% (or some other ungodly figure ) of their revenue comes from MSOffice and their Operating System division.
Imagine, Almost 90%..that sure should give the rest of them infinite amounts of inferiority complex.
Rapid Nirvana
Employees can clearly expect no protection from M$'s 56 billion dollars. From the NYT article:
Using some of Microsoft's $56 billion in cash to maintain worker benefits, Mr. Ballmer explained, is not an option. "The cash is the shareholders' money," he wrote, "so we need to either invest in new opportunities or return it to them."
Whack! Who would think that the company that has screwed it's investors, partners and customers would turn around and screw their employees?
Last year's hiring binge is over and the Microsoft game is very close to over. Speculation is that up to $40 billion will be used in a stock buyback to keep the options from tanking. That will leave them with about two or three quarters of operating expenses in the bank. Good riddance, IT will be a much better place without them.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Microsoft's strength has always been embrace and extend. Its weakness comes in the decisions on whether to "exploit" or "extinguish." It has killed a legion of technologies/business/competitors whose contributions to the world of computing have come to nothing or have been FUBARed--just because Microsoft feared the competition.
It has bowdlerized standards when it could for its own gain (e.g. Kerberos, SMB, etc.). Microsoft sees computing as a zero-sum game where it MUST win and everyone else must lose. Rather than compete by making itself look good (innovation, quality, service), it has been always willing to win by making others--including itself--look bad.
Then comes Open Source--a game where they either play fair or they don't play at all. Now, Microsoft is stuck with having to REALLY innovate. Linux and Mac OS X are running rings around Redmond and Ballmer's only answer is to exhort the troops. That won't work.
Microsoft needs to adopt open source, retool its operating system and--for once--put all that money toward excellence rather than bullying the market, ripping off innovators and/or buying ascendancy via restrictive contracts with manufacturers. If Apple announces Mac OS X for x86 or some other innovation comes along, the good ship Microsoft is going to have a BIG hole below its water line and not enough buckets to bail with.
The history of personal computing is comprised of sea changes. Ballmer's memo acknowledges that. He remembers the position he was in ten years ago.
I suppose the best thing would be to see microsoft lose a sizable portion of it's user base and become more dynamic in its products and increase industry inovation over all.
- vphl
The cost per employee at msft is high, partly due to some of the best working conditions in the industry - love 'em or hate em', msft is consistently voted as the best place to work, at least here in the UK, but i'm pretty sure the states is more or less the same. Ballmer (if he would have had hair) is a typical PHB , in that he thinks that cutting costs in some of these "extra's" will make the company "perform better", but usually, the opposite is true. Ballmer and his yes-men probably have not heard about some of the modern management techniques that disprove this single-minded vision of manageing a company. The free Coke's are probably next to go. Along with a fair chunk of employee productivity, no doubt.
People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.
One interesting quote down near the end of that article caught my eye: " One project, called News Junkie, sifts through articles on the Web and presents to you only the ones you haven't seen before." Sounds like a neat idea, though isn't that why we all read slashdot?
I could find anything on that on the MSFT Research Site, nor On Google.
Or at least they did.
That's one of the reason that MicroSoft doesn't pay any corporate tax.
Alternative Fuel
Laugh at my ignorance while I learn Rails - a Real ne
So, when guys enter their midlife crisis they go out and buy a Porsche. Does that mean that Microsoft will go out and buy Porsche?
Quality work, good sir. Wonderful adaptation of a classic Animaniacs song. Do I smell a Grammy?
...when they work nights and weekends patching wormed systems.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
change coming, that's why Gates stepped down and Mikey Dell retired. Both MS and Dell are metaphors for the wrong way to handle the tech industry, mass production without innovation. When Gates came out a few months back and said he envisioned a future where hardware was free (as in beer) and that users paid premiums for software, I think he sent a ripple through the likes of HP, IBM and the other OEMs. Times are changing...
Dear Steve,
If you had really paid attention in your Harvard business classes, you would have learned the story of Standard Oil. A big monopolistic oil company that was finally forced to break up into pieces. Mr. Rockerfeller was sad until he suddenly discovered his stock portfolio went through the roof. Apparently, when Standard Oil became a bunch of smaller companies, they grew the market and their collective market capitlization was far, far greater than they were in one company.
You've had the opportunity several times now, and the last time had the feds suggested it too. But maybe it's not too late. It's time to knife the baby and split Microsoft into two or more companies. Split applications from OS. Create an Internet technology group separate from the others that encompases IE as a pluggible component for Windows or any OTHER Operating System, and provides search, MSN, Instant Messaging, VOIP, etc.. Move the Entertainment group into its own company and let it succede or fail on its own, and more importantly, let them have the freedom to chose the technologies involved. XBox has fans now, and it has a bright future. But only if the XBox division is no longer distracted by trying to save the OS group.
Come on, Steve. You know the time is right, and this is so the right thing to do.
The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com
Microsoft still owes me $87 for forwarding an email to 20 of my friends to help them test their email tracking system. I hope they don't plan on reneging on that. I lost 20 friends to make that $87!
MS should just hire a shitload of animators and take over the movie business with massive render farms. They copy everyone else, they might as well just throw their cash at doing what other people do, just more elaborate ;)
They are probably just spending a lot of money and not "innovating" because there isn't an amazing idea to copy right now. They are in the waiting stage for someone to come a long with a great idea. Once that idea is there, MS will follow (read: will throw their cash at it and integrate into their existing market -- forcing people to use their products).
You create your own reality - Leave mine to me.
Hm- Dividing $1 billion by $300k means that there will be one-third of an employee left over the target mark when they do the layoffs.
I really don't want to be that last employee...
"Uh, Mr. Ballmer? You asked to see me about the employee cuts?"
"Yes! Yes, Mr. Turtle! Please lie down on that table- Don't mind the very large axe hovering over your legs..."
Whew! This water sure is cold!
Small to medium sized businesses typically estimate 2.5 * salary (60:40%) as a comfortably affordable "cost of employment". M$ has 57,000 employees, so that $300K:employee means $17.1B - leaving over $15B in 2003 - about 47%. But much of those per-employee expenses are capital assets, like real estate, equipment and furniture, which have resale value beyond their cost and utility. And who knows how M$ accounts for the vast trove of free M$ software they use, and the value of their various expenses in avoiding taxes (ijn fact, probably receiving net income from federal tax rules). So getting from 47% to 40% with more accurate accounting doesn't take very much auditing.
--
make install -not war
The dilemma that Microsoft is in is a natural consequence of relating success to dollar amounts rather than the feeling one gets when one puts out a quality product.
Corporations are really a kind of abomination. They embody only one ideal; greed. They are financial black holes sucking up all available wealth. It's there only purpose of existence. The problem is that once the entire market is consumed what then? Either enter into new markets or start squeezing their own workers of course! Cut benefits, wages and any other expenses.
People, we need to wake up and consider where the world is going. After considering what a corporate world will be like do we really want to allow that? The natural conclusion of a world where corporations own everything is simple. Two classes. The few very rich and the modern day peasants.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
But hey at the end of the day Bill Gates is one of the richest people on the planet and you are a nobody who makes inaccurate comments on Slashdot. C'est la vie.
You should use "ö" instead of "oe".
Since when did handing out cash to shareholders ever add value to a company? Pretty silly idea, and has no basis in reality.
As for the rest, I wouldnt worry about MS. They know what they are doing. They have built their company on doing other people's ideas better than the originators ever could, and in doing things right where their competitors stumble.
If a US employee costs $300K and you need to cut costs by $1 Billion... and an employee based in India costs $30K...
Number of employees to move to India = ($1 Billion)/($300K - $30K) = 3703
MORTAR COMBAT!
Microsoft will try to cut a Billion dollars in expenses, and its cost per employee is about $300K
So that means Microsoft is planning on firing 3333 employees!! Folks, you heard it here first.
& I wish I knew the password to your heart . . . &
DISCLAIMER: I work at Microsoft as a developer. Nothing I say here is official company stance. This is just my personal opinion based on my time both before and after joining Microsoft.
Microsoft's main problem is a refusal to take quick action by trusting in common sense and instinct.
For example, it took upper management over a decade to finally see that users didn't trust Microsoft products. The rest of the world knew it all along, but management had to wait for mountains of hard data to come pouring in before taking any action. The Trustworthy Computing effort is genuine, sincere, and effective, but it's also about fifteen years overdue.
Do you think Bill Gates wrote BASIC for the Altair, or pulled off his buy-an-OS-and-name-it-MS-DOS move, based on mountains of official market research and hard data telling him that it's what people wanted? I'm betting he didn't. I'm betting he did it because he was smart and trusted his own instincts -- just like a professional chess player who doesn't realistically have the time to scientifically evaluate every possible move at every turn.
Microsoft isn't a bad company. People here really do care about satisfying customers and making the best stuff in the world. I really hate the false accusations so many people make about this company. But I also have to say that this company has grown timid and too slow to act, and that is our real challenge.
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
At 300K per employee, let 3,333 and 1/3 employees go.
Heh heh.
Mark
This is pure gold, so if this shows up on store shelves you heard it here first.
Re make Microsoft Bob! Excpet don't give it the same name or tag on an "XP", that would be a give-away.
How about "Microsoft Ballm"
Your interface is a broken-down old house where Ballm (the monkey) helps you find your documents and applications.
You need Ballm's help anyway, because the house was built with non-standard building materials. So there are locks that take keys that only Ballm has that you can't get anywhere else. Also if you want to try and fix the house up, its got screws and other fasteners that take tools with odd-shaped bits that you can't buy anywhere. But luckily Ballm is there to "help" you upgrade you to fasteners that take new tools. Which Ballm will rent(license) to you, he is really strict about not trying to duplicate the tools though.
Will your belongings be safe in your home? You bet! Ballm left all sorts of holes in the walls so you can see anyone who wants to come in. So you don't have to be ever vigilant over your belongings, Ballm offers to help keep the holes safe too. He doesn't really watch every hole though, just waits until someone tries to come/peep in one of them then decides how long he'll wait until he patches up that hole.
The funny fickle Ballm!
hmmm, maybe I will go patent this concept. Surely there is nothing in existance such as this!
"and its cost per employee is about $300K" Well at least we now know they have bought all MS software licenses on a per user basis!
On a long enough timeline, survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
Just out of curiousity, I wonder how much of that 300k can be attributed the TCO of each windows machine they maintain...
Maybe they could save some money if they ditched Windows.
Score: -1 Flamebait
I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
Maybe I'm naive, but something like the huge marketshare microsoft has enjoyed is not meant to last. How can you improve if 95% of people are already using what you sell? Why should you feel like you need to improve any more?
Microsoft's tactic has been to tie everything back to their original innovations- i.e. Windows. But why does this have to be? As was said, microsoft is innovating in other areas fairly well. I'll go out on a limb and say that microsoft DOES innovate, it's just that their stranglehold on the desktop market blinds people to that fact. So why do that? Why religiously hold on to the Desktop OS as being end-all-be-all? Take a tip from apple. Mac marketshare is down, so apple is increasingly branching out into different markets, for example music.
This might sound like crazy talk, but ALLOW windows market share to come down. Seriously. One: it removes the stranglehold on innovation in the tech industry. Two: it re-envigoriates microsoft into competing again, instead of just attempting to maintain the status quo by embrace and extend. Innovate, but don't keep buying up other people to protect your innovations.
This gets back to the whole problem/obsession companies seem to have with IP. Yes, you DO need to protect your cash cows. But if that's ALL you're doing, where's the time to innovate? Where's the time to really make a difference with your products, and change the world?
CREATE NEW PRODUCTS, don't just protect the old ones!
Nothing solves 'big company' ills quite like
actually being a little company.
Had Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson exercised a little more restraint in his emotional venting and the Justice Department actually gone through with a breakup into smaller companies that really compete, those companies, in aggregate, might well be doing much better than the whole of Microsoft is right now.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Microsoft could save a lot in licensing fees if they just switched to Linux and OpenOffice.
Go to Munich and see how they have fallen behind. Advertising won't save them.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
It didn't. Slashdot misreported (surprise). All that got taken out was some arcane network features. They'll likely be added in a Windows Update pack. WinFS is in Longhorn.
The FA cites "$300,000 in annual expenses per employee".
This sounds like they add up all their expenses for the year and divide it by the number of employees. Thus, things like legal bills, lobbying activities, R&D, and the like get heaped in with salary, 401k, costs for office furniture, and so on.
I don't think this is the same metric as the the direct (salary) and indirect (office space, 401k) costs per employee.
Someday a Slashdot ID of 177180 will mean something.
Its probably all the employer purchased Starbucks brand coffee.
Just because you can, does not mean you should.
Maybe it's doing better now because Steve Jobs came back.
When I was at a very small company called Working Software, an Apple employee came to visit, and was very envious of us, precisely because we were a small company. She said we could adapt to changing market conditions in a way Apple was incapable of.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Sorry, that's not a perception issue and it's not one that can be changed internally. It's a quality/cost issue and they are beaten.
On avoiding the trappings of size: "Nothing solves 'big company' ills quite like a strong focus on accountability ....
Notice is issued for the first round of layoffs. If firing someone for posting pictures of Apples on the loading dock is any indication of things to come, the layoffs will have nothing to do with the bottom line.
This whole memo belongs in fucked company.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
cost per employee is about $300K -- come on Microsoft wake up. Realize that if you used Linux your cost/license expenses would decrease and the amount of time having to patch/protect things from bad virsuii and bugs would be less.
A decent Linux setup could probably save you $30K/year/employee..
With over 56,000 employees, and $60 billion in the bank, they could afford to not do anything, and pay each employee $75,000/year for the next 14 years.
Why worry about OSS? They should just take a 10 year sabatical.
That's shocking! How could a company spend that much money on research and development every year and not EVER create a compelling new product?!
DOS was bought from someone else. The original 16-bit Windows was crap when compared to Amiga or Macintosh. Win9x was merely a prettier version of Windows running on DOS. WinME was merely a delay until WinXP was released. Windows NT was based on VMS. Excel was stolen from VisiCalc and Word was stolen from WordPerfect.
Everyone says that Microsoft only hires the best and the brightest. I've never seen any proof of that.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
CEO at 500M/yr and about 1668 outsourced programmers at $1/day
It goes to show that working conditions alone will not yield the desired results. It's the culture that will make the final determination where innovation is conerned. Quite frankly, I don't think Microsoft has that kind of culture- hell, the company's entire history is based on copying the work of others.
Ballman and Gates have quite a challenge ahead of them, as changing the culture of a company that size will not be an easy task. It may be that they even have to replace some key people who are so entrenched in the "copy and extend" mentality.
I have a mean and nasty religious zealot of an online stalker that won't leave me alone. He hails from the IP 24.16.129.60. Please help.
That's only true in a free market. Ask Steve Ballmer how motivating bullshit like this is. That pales in comparison to memos about "accountability", which are big dumb company speak for, "we're going to fire people, work harder." When you are using government IP laws to squash your competition and purchases to prop up your bottom line, you might get big headed. The market, however, is much freer than M$ suspects.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
MS needs to make up for a $1B loss they will take over the next year. I forget the exact reason for it, but it's nothing special, they made some acquisitions and some such that gave them higher profits previously and those are now going away, it's natural and to be expected.
The problem is stock holders will see $1B less and think the company is going under and freak and sell, despite any amount of education MS tries. Companies that have had similar things happen and tried the education route found it didn't work out.
So MS is choosing to reduce the $1B as it showson paper, part of this is to not spend as much money, hence some of the cut backs.
And while there might be cut backs the benefits offered by Microsoft are pretty damn amazing. It's like saying a rich kid is going into poverty because there dad took back on of there 4 mansions from the kid. The employees are still pretty nice off.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
It looks like the memo also had another section blaming the users for Windows' security problems! He has a point, but that's a little like Ken Lay blaming Enron's problems on Arthur Anderson.
We are 1/2 way past the age of MS?!?!? SWEET! only another 25 years.
I wonder how Bill is gonna waste all that money in 25 years... anyone smell venture capital?
$300k per employee? I wonder how much of that is software costs - they could save a bundle by migrating to open source. Oh, wait ...
Well.... They're probably not gonna save a billion on free coke (although coke shares are dropping already. But the whole story suggests that much the savings will be made in the 'employee benefits' area.
Which is ofcourse default behaviour for dumb companies. Smart would be not spending money on stupid projects, like windows ME, or ms BOB or you name them. But for some reason, when savings need to be made, management starts looking at the employees. And that reason usually has to do with the power of management, protection of careers and the lack of power of the common employee. Which is very demotivating. And demotivation lead to lack of caring. And lack of caring increases the chance of more 'stupid projects' happening.
I'ts official. ms is now a stupid company.
Blimey, time to send those jobs to India!
MSFT has assets beyond cash. If they had a fire sale tomorrow, there would be buildings and pencils and all that that could be converted into money. They also have a tremendous amount of IP - software, patents, trademarks - all of it worth a substantial amount.
While your approach to valuating stock is refreshingly tied to reality, you're not really being fair by evaluating only cash assets. MSFT is worth much more than $60 billion.
Let's not stir that bag of worms...
It's OK though because "640K ought to be enough for anybody".
They are trying to save $1 billion while they are sitting on $75 billion in the bank ($56 cash and $20 equities in other companies).
We are already seeing the "backlash" in our company. Most of the tech companies in our region nickeled-and-dimed their benefits down, We are seeing some significant turnover this year after three years of minor attrition.
With their R&D campus in India I wonder if part of the cost cutting will result from a transfer of jobs to there. There's a lot of very smart people there that can afford to live well on 1/3 of an US programmer's salary. From the business point of view it makes sense to make the move. Moral viewpoint: well that depends were you live I guess (good for India, bad for US workers).
Personally I don't mind that some other country gets US jobs so long as those people are treated fairly. The past has shown us that more times than not these workers aren't treated fairly at all.
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
its cost per employee is about $300K"
maybe they could reduce those costs by...say...hiring the temp workers!
"Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
I do not agree. Microsoft has tried to destroy every competitor, many successfully. In my opinion, Microsoft's business model is miserably inadequate with respect to its customers (real) needs, such as not being subject to every worm that comes along. Their approach to "partners" is miserably dishonest. Their manipulation of the market is legendary. I believe they are among the most harshly competitive, no-holds-barred, bare-knuckle, knockdown-dragout, meanest competitor the computer business has seen.
But they take their "fiduciary responsiblity" to stockholders very very seriously, and until recently (last year, this year) were among the most consistent growth stocks in business history.
I remember when we thought IBM were "evil"... They never came close! Microsoft executives are the gold standard of "growth at *all* costs" mentality.
I want Bill Gates to have my baby
Oooh... didn't think men could do that, but if it were possible, biologically, I guess that would mean, realistically, the only hole it could be born through would be Gates'... urethra.
Yeah, if they could fix it that way, I'd like Gates to have your baby too.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
The problem of course is - how will we tell the difference from the status quo?
Bill: We must cut back the costs, Steve. Let's fire all the IE and IIS security experts.
Steve: But Bill, we need both of them.
quit spending millions on advertising the fact that they are so much more secure than Linux!
Anyone else think that cutting cokes is going to have any remotely significant effect on the Balmer-billion-dollar-cost-cuttage plan? Puhleeze! This kind of fix certainly mimics their approach to fixing their cruft-quality malware .... big talk, miscellaneous tweaks, nothing of substance. But instead of pissing off customers, this time they're poking their own. Yikes! The beginning of the end?
- The Kessel run is for nerf herders. I can circumnavigate the entire Central Finite Curve in a lot less than 12 parse
Anyone remember a few years ago when Oracle did the same thing? They cut about 1 billion per year in expenses by switching a lot of their backoffice stuff over to Linux. Think that's in Microsoft's plans?
The Matrix is real... but I'm only visiting!
Microsoft isn't going anywhere. Their fortunes may ebb and flow; but their going to be a major player for the forseeable future.
If knocking them off the monopoly pole is enough to declare victory, then it might be believable; but they're not going to "collapse" from either inside or outside pressures.
I wish they would; but realistically, it isn't going to happen.
Hot Damn! It's the Soggy Bottom Boys!
There is a Microsoft tax on every PC clone.
There could be OS2.
There used to be Netscape.
There used to be DrDOS (fuck SCO b.t.w.)
I can go on and on.
It is a bad company.
You can't handle the truth.
>>In the past 6 years I've worked on 2 projects that were halted, because the product we were creating was added in to Windows. It's hard to sell a product that duplicates what comes in the OS itself.
You write bugs for a living? How cool is that?
Everyone copies from everyone else. The only way we move forward is by building on the past. Apple does it. Linux/Open Source does it. MS does it. Innovation is simply synthesizing old concepts into new ones in different contexts. For example, Windows NT built on the ideas of useability and automatic hardware detection to make IT administration much easier than before. As another example, .NET != Java. There are fundamental differences and cool things that .NET does that you simple can't do as easily or with as good of results in other evironments (For example, ExxonMobil is ditching Java because of how crappy it is with interop, among other things). One more example is the cool work that MS research has done on natural language processing and handwriting recognition. Finally, check out their developer tools they are creating to statically check code for security-related bugs.
Looking over the page, I notice things thta look like Smart Folders and a sketch of a 3D desktop that looks a bit like something Sun just open-sourced.
I don't see much there that other companies are not already working on - or have released! The few things that are somewhat interesting are very niche, and I'm not really sure how much they will ever come into use. Comic Chat looked cool - but was released in 2001! Who has ever even heard of it today?
This to me is criminal, to have so many talented people and seemingly generate nothing from it. I can't think of any features in Longhord that don't look like copies of things already done.
A suspicious person would say that Microsoft bought up all the smart people they could find just to keep them on ice, and to prevent them from coming up with ideas for other companies! Perhaps the stagnation in the computer industry is a result of locking away so many talented people in their own "Microsoft Holodeck" where they can play forever and not affect the outside world.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
Why is this "Overrated?"
Is it because Overrated mods don't get meta-modded? Coward.
...After all, their shit don't stink!
The problem with this company is that you have to make a lot of random people feel good about themselves before you get a go ahead on anything. You want a permission to fart in your office? Ask a dozen other teams what their policy is, schedule two dozen meetings, negotiate, negotiate, negotiate and only then will you get a go-ahead.
You know why this is? This is because of lousy management. A lot of people have become managers at MS simply because they wanted to become managers, not because they have necessary skills or are particularly fit for the job. A repercussion from this is that there's certain lack of leadership and vision from the very bottom to the very top.
This is unfortunate, because as a company Microsoft can kick everybody else's ass. We have SIXTY BILLION bucks and the best talent in the world, yet we still sit on our butts and wait until somebody else invents something to buy the company outright.
Indian programmers make about $10/hr. Not nearly as bad as so many people seem to think. EEs and other engineers make less, about $5/hr, which is the reverse of the US where Engineers make more then coders.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
And it's already done!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
We don't really work 60 hours per week anymore. Some chose to do so, and they do quite well for it. But many work 40 hours and do perfectly fine as well. I personally have done quite well in my first few years here, and I only work 40 hours a week. Like any software job, I have worked a couple of 50 or 60 hour weeks at deadlines, but by no means is this common.
Microsoft open source developers would think about start accepting donations.
Where does that $300k average come from?
Sure there is salary, benefits, office space, workstations, etc. But stock grants are a big part of it.
Last year my boss was one of the top 200 guys that each got $2M worth of stock grant. The average for the rest of the company was $20k. A 100x difference. These $2M guys really shove up the average.
And he worked 10-2 four days a week. Total jerk. Already has tens of millions from being at Microsoft for 13years. Ahole never heard an idea from outside of Microsoft that he didn't hate. Quick to blame his employees and credit himself. The project is never going to be a product, just a waste of money.
So yeah. Chop our salaries, cut our stock discount, reduce our options, and keep paying the good 'ol boy network a ton for cruising their boats around all afternoon.
That is what will kill this company in the end.
Dude, They have $6/7 per share in cash right now. That's not "the amount of money they've made in 30 years". That's just the money they've saved most companies save far, far less money then that, because they can invest it and earn a much better return, usually in themselves (i.e. hireing new people, expanding product lines, etc). Having so much liquid cash is actually counterproductive from stockholders point of view. Lots of companies are in for most of their existence.
Microsoft's Price to earning's ratio is 31.77, meaning (approximately) it'll take 30 years to make your investment in Microsoft, assuming that they never expand again at all. That's a bit much, but nothing freakishly out of the ordinary.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
That $27 stake in MSFT, purchased in 1980 would have only cost a few cents, if that. $27 invested in Microsoft in 1980 would be worth a shitload today.
Why? Because most of the money that was made was reinvested in the company. That money isn't lost to stockholders. It's reflected in the share price.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Until last year, they never paid a dividend. The only people who ever made money off M$'s greed were stock market speculators. Now that the "growth" is over, they pay a pathetic little dinkle to all those who had faith. At the same time, they rewarded their executives handsomely, though their treatment of "perma-temps" is infamous. You call that responsible? That's rape all around.
When the stock crashes down to it's worth, about $6 for their assets, "investors" will be left with nothing. Don't you worry, the lawyers will get the cash. I predict that long term investors, such as pension funds and "partner companies", would have been better off with government bonds.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Having a cafepress store that sells copyright expired works and mouse pads is hardly "owning your own business". Please.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
The price is moment-to-moment unpredictable, simply because people buy and sell all the time. That can't be gamed. But long-term stock prices can be predicted pretty well, if you know what you're doing :P
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
You seem to be claming that over the past 30 years, ms has only made $6 for each $27 dollar share (which, if the grandparent's calculations are correct, was worth 27/288 or about 11 cents).
But you're missing the point that most of the money that they made was reinvested in the company. So while some of the money is that $60g, some of it is reflected in their $300g market cap. Microsoft gets tons of income every year from sales, which are a reflection of the money they invested in those products long ago.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
but I didn't lose any stock either.. :P
ms contractor
You'd probably like it.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
I'd sure like to screw him the way he's done it to everybody else.
Oh yeah: The RIAA/MPAA have a right to stop stealing by pirates (ARRR, Matey!). Software patents are essential to the survival of the IT industry. The third Matrix movie RAWKED. AOL is a good ISP. Code is not speech. The Easter Bunny ate your candy. {Insert the opposite of your viewpoint on abortion or gun rights here.}
I would continue, but you slashbots could never keep up with my super el33tness.
Microsoft Windows is, fittingly, the official Desktop OS of Olig
I'm not entirely clear about the point of buying stock that doesn't pay dividends. Seems like an expensive trading card to me. Where a dividend-paying stock has a value equal to the present worth of all the dividends it will eventually pay out, a non-paying stock has no real worth whatsoever. The only thing that gives it value is the hope that some day someone else will buy it from you for more than you spent on it.
Here I am feeding a troll...
My local 7-11 is ways better, so your "grander scale" description is also BS.
I've never seen a 7-11 that had more than 2/3 of what I saw in the fridges in the Redmond campus. Your mileage may vary.
The food was okay, but to say that it "blew away any cafeteria" is simply ridiculous -- that is, unless you live on snails out in the woods or something.
You'll notice I didn't say it blows away every restaurant, because it doesn't. Every college/corporate cafeteria or similar eatery I've seen? Absolutely.
I mean, come off it. Get out of your bedroom more often and see the real world out there. Or maybe save up some money and take a trip to the city some day...
I've lived and worked in three major cities. I've certainly visited others. I'm not a world traveller, but certainly beyond your asinine accusations.
And it looks like you missed it: the point of all their free drinks and the food court theme is to keep you THERE and WORKING, as much as possible. No need to go out for lunch (even if a brief change of scenery would be refreshing), nor even a stroll to the corner 7-11 for a soda or Starbucks for a coffee.
No, I quite got that. Point is, it's something Microsoft does right that the vast majority of companies that employ programmers do wrong. Yes, it absolutely is in a company's best economic interest if I just grab a handy soda and go back to work without losing my train of thought, rather than walk or drive to get one. They make up the $0.50 for the soda in my greater than $0.50 value of productivity. I wouldn't be disallowed the choice to go out for a drink or for lunch if I wanted -- but I have that choice, I don't have to if I don't want to.
All things being equal, why would you not rather work for a company that makes smart, rather than dumb, choices in managing you and your work environment?
It's better to make money by selling the stock for more than you bought it for than it is to get it in dividends. This is because you pay tax on dividends immediately while you can delay capital gains taxes for years.
I'm not big on dividends for this reason, but healthier non-tech companies tend to pay them.
My open letter to Steve Ballmer:
Dear Mr. Ballmer,
As a scientist and developer developer developer developer, I believe I can answer some of your concerns:
I can sincerely assure you that I, for one, have never considered older (or newer, for that matter) versions of Microsoft Office and Windows good enough. Not even once. You can stop worrying about that.
Now, no matter how much you believe your developers developers developers developers to innovate innovate innovate innovate, saying the above as a company which, in fact, has never contributed a single notable innovation to any computer-related field... Well... What can I say? You are not only doomed. You are already dead.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
Unfortunately, I firmly believe that M$ will be here ever after. Just because their products are crap doesn't mean they can't live longer.
M$, at current state is vulnerable. Not in future, though. M$ will be soon moving into high end consulting business to kill Peoplesoft, SAP etc.,.
Wait, more is coming. M$ will be moving to AV products also. Seems mid life crisis will be blown away.
PS: My name is not Bill gates & I don't own M$ stock.
Microsoft is addicted to money.
The lack of growth is saturation and that's not temporary. M$ has been saying that free software is "temporary" and won't catch of forever. But it's not, the fact is that M$'s core products are being replaced.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
If they cut that 52 billion 57,000 ways, everyone would get $912,280.70. If you invest that and get 5% return annual, they would all get $45,614 a year FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES. And because it's pure interest income, and US tax laws favour those who don't work fora living over those who do, they would only pay something like 20 - 25% income tax on it.
Why doesn't MS do something like this? Because they are beholden to their shareholders who speculate on their profits, and not to the workers who MAKE their profits.
Every employee of MS should RISE UP and revolt against their masters. RISE UP!!! YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT YOUR CHAINS AND YOU CAN GAIN A GUARANTEED COMFORTABLE LIFE!!!
THROW OFF the consciousness that holds you down - TAKE WHAT IS YOURS - your LIFE, your LIBERTY, and your RIGHTFUL WAGE!!!
Insert (smash the state) statements here.
Insert (facts) here.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
I'll bite anyway, just in case you are genuine.
To follow through with your auto-mechanic analogy, their tools are probably not speech, but descriptions of their methods most certainly are speech. Don't you think it would be a violation of mechanics' right to express themselves if they were prevented from publishing their methods as manuals? In much the same way, a programmer's computer is not really speech, but the code compiled and run on it is.
What you say about comments is true, although I would have said this shows that code is the same as speech, as any natural language text can be thrown into a comment in code, and the code is still valid.
One useful way of looking at actual program code though, is as a description for how to do something. For people well-versed in the language used, it is often a more precise and concise way of expressing that description than using a natural language. You could instead choose to describe the exact same process in English or Swahili, although it would most likely be a lot less efficient. This does not change the fact that the content would be identical.
It is possible to take the text of code, and express it in a way that shows it is undeniably speech - putting it on a t-shirt for example. You can't run it directly any more, although the text is unchanged. You can hardly argue that text on a t-shirt is not speech. Particularly in the case of the OpenDVD t-shirt, worn to make a political statement.
Even more to the point, any code expressed in a Turing-complete language can be expressed in natural languages as pseudocode. The best example is the De-CSS haiku - while it is code of a sort, it is also poetry!
Code expresses ideas. Ideas are speech. Not that complicated.
They've been too busy trying to put DRM in to screw their "customers" they lost site of why they were popular... pleasing their customers.
Honestly, they are a picture example of how a monopoly gets stupid and lazy and kills itself.
I defy you to provide an example of MS exhibiting this behavior.
MS does have an impressive IP portfolio. But they have historically used this portfolio for defensive purposes only. For example, Sun sues MS over patent-infringement issues relating to the JVM. MS counter-sues with several other patent infringement issues, perhaps including for example the "Long filenames in Fat16" patent which MS holds. The resulting fray ends with a cross-licensing agreement between the two companies. Lawsuit over.
Also, as far as that stupid firing of the contractor episode is concerned, Microsoft has an unequivocal policy regarding ANY photographs on corporate grounds. Only FTE's (Full-Time Employees) are allowed to take such photographs, and there are a whole slew of restrictions on what can be done with the resulting photographs. Photographs on corporate grounds used for non-business purposes are explicitly forbidden. In this case, a "leak" of "inside information" insinuating that MS is "secretly using Apple computers" is clearly a violation of corporate policy. The guy was asking to be sacked.
"Publicly traded corporations are all about the share price, nothing else matters except dividends and with so many shares in circulation they simply don't have enough revenue now to pay meaningful dividends and revenue isn't going to growing much anymore, and will probably be declining 5 years out. So their future is one of pain."
Well some companies are minimizing their pain by doing stock buybacks.
Now we have a comparatively stagnant economy, where companies are postponing the computer and software upgrades. The ROI on computer systems must be demonstrated; these days bean counters don't automatically approve any purchase request with "computer" written on it.
Microsoft has had a longer winning streak than any other PC business. But once you take the top spot in the market, it's difficult to find enough new market opportunity to maintain that momentum. Passive, defensive business practices (cost cutting) gain favor over active, productive ones ("betting the company" on an all-new product). Microsoft probably won't go away, but they're already not the company we once knew. People grow old; companies do too. The hard part is doing so gracefully.
Micro$oft has announced that they will be
moving their OS operations to China, and
their Office Apps operations to India.
In a quote from Steve Ballmer "With the
current economic Outlook, we have a
responsibility to our shareholders to
reduce costs and improve share value.
Our goal is to reduce our HR overhead by
60 percent. Certain employees will be
given the opportunity to move with the job,
but relocation costs will not be reimbursed."
This is a completely misleading statement. The fact that Microsoft expenses options is a *Good Thing* and is something that all corporations should be doing in the wake of recent accounting scandals.
And by saying "MS doesn't pay any corporate tax" you are insinuating that it somehow is hiding revenue, which is ludicrous. Recently, MS stock options have been "underwater" so they have not been popular to exercise. But any money that *is* spent on exercised option discounts is written off as additional employee salary expenses, which it is (the number of options purchased times the difference between the option strike price and the cost basis is added to the employee's W-2 taxable income total). MS should certainly not have to pay taxes on employee salaries: the employees already pay taxes on their salaries! Making the company pay taxes on the same money would amount to double-taxation. This is how all companies handle their options plans, assuming they are expensed on their books. If not, then investors beware...
Now, whether this deduction alone can wipe out the total taxable corporate net income of Microsoft is a different story entirely. There would have to be a LOT of options exercised to amount to that kind of money, and in recent years it just hasn't happened. Back in the late 90's, it's possible. MS net profit was much smaller back then. Today, with MS stock price stagnant for 5 years and profits stronger than ever, there is no way that options deductions could come close to offsetting their tax burden.
So, has MS built houses and hotels already? Or can it still do it? ;)
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places
Their assets are far, far more then 60 billion. they have 60 billion in cash like, in bank acounts and such. They are worth far more then that. In terms of intelectual property, physical property (buildings, etc)
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
2003 accounts total operating expenses $18,970 million, total employees (per the article) 57,000. Therefore average cost per employee $332,808.
Total operating costs include Research & Development and sales and marketing.
Sorry to spoil the speculation/guesswork folks.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Who knows. They probably wouldn't get the deserved credit anyway. They might be working on algorithms, or other such stuff that you just don't see. WMV? Although it is proprietary, it is a pretty good format. I'd bet that if you look in MS's patent portfolio, you'd see some of the things they have done. I have always said that MS is not a technology company, they are a software business. They probably saw the power that companies like IBM have with their patent portfolio, and simply bought people who could beef theirs up.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
By John Dodge
October 16, 1998
PC Week Online
After doing 20 TV and radio interviews related to the Microsoft-DOJ case in the last week, I offer a solution that should make everyone happy.
Since the Department of Justice has not clued us into any specific remedies and enforcement measures, I'm taking the task upon myself.
Microsoft should voluntarily break itself into separate companies.
Voluntarily? People at Microsoft will call me a lunatic -- or even worse: A columnist having a slow news day. But there's method to my seeming madness.
Method to this madness
If Microsoft proposed such a plan and it contained provisions to truly level the competitive playing field, many of the current distractions would go away. The company should not wait until it's forced to do so on someone else's terms.
Here's my reasoning:
Too much power is concentrated in one company. From all we've seen over the years, there has been enough monopoly abuse to warrant the trial. Gates & crew come off as power-hungry and obsessed with bending the world to their computing will. There is no room for anyone else.
Brilliant and rich they are. Noble and REALLY far-sighted, they're not.
But the more they whine about being persecuted for doing too well, and the more they declare government prosecutors don't know their elbow from their pelvis, the less credible they sound. Even if it were true.
Microsoft's claims of complete innocence and Gates getting steamed by the mere mention of the "M" word work against the company. They think they are so right, there's no way they can be!
Granted, Microsoft's rivals are just as whiny, and for certain, they are exaggerating many of the claims. I can't feel real bad for them. Still, Microsoft can neutralize its rivals by coming up with its own safeguards to blunt all the charges and claims.
Microsoft, or rather Gates, should take the initiative, reverse course and reconfigure the company at the first opportunity. And I'll leave it to him to figure out how the OS company would still not behave like a monopoly.
In 1911, the Standard Oil Trust was dissolved and broken into several separate companies, per order of the Supreme Court. Within a few years, these companies (among them Exxon, Amoco, Conoco and Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell today) were bigger than the original company, most of them giving stockholders a greater return than the Trust ever did.
On Jan. 1, 1984, the Bell System was split up into regional companies and AT&T. Those companies have largely thrived, learning how to survive in an unregulated environment. The breakup of the Bell System was a mandatory first step to telecommunications deregulation.
Conversely, the slap on the wrist IBM received following antitrust litigation from 1969-82 sowed the seeds of the company's darkest days a decade later.
To come to pass, all these actions required years of government intervention. But Microsoft has the unique opportunity to make it all happen -- much faster and on its own terms. Seize it, Bill.
A half-dozen competing "Microlets" would rouse a relatively sleepy software industry. "Office & Desktop Apps," potentially the biggest of the breakouts, would be a ferocious competitor. It wouldn't need the rest of Microsoft, anyway. The research arm could go to the "OS Company."
Each new Microlet would have to create its own systems, accounting and HR infrastructure. Each would have a separate stock, board of directors, logo and real estate.
Gates: What will be his legacy?
Surely, Gates must want to go down in history as something more than an angry, self-righteous and super-successful businessman. Windows is not a gift to mankind (The Mac OS might be).
Gates has rewarded employees and stockholders for years. I am convinced he can continue doing that and developing better technology, while still taking a Ginsu knife to Microsoft.
The Microsoft CEO has a chance at greatness that Rockefeller never took.
Bill, you've built the most successful company in history. But it's time to do something different now. You can't take it with you, but crafting a better legacy than you have now if it all ended tomorrow is within your grasp.
Yes, but Microsoft tends to copy more and add less. In "embrace and extend", "embrace" means "copy" and "extend" means "break compatibility".
And sometimes the copies are simply theft. Check out this strategy for innovating in Web search!
-especially growth companies.
If the company management is competent, re-investing the profits back into the company to improve growth or profitability is a better use of the money, as it will increase shareholder value more than the simple payment of dividends => you'll make more money in the long run. If they're not competent, then payment of dividends just takes more money out of the company when it needs it to survive.
Read Warren Buffett's letters (1977-2003)
in the Berkshire Hathaway Annual Reports, or at least "Buffettology", by his son's ex-wife, Mary Buffett. Also read his BH Owner's Manual. This material constitutes an excellent education in long term investing.
Buffett generally disagrees with dividend payouts. According to Buffettology he believes that by paying dividends, the company is telling investors that there are better places to invest their money than in this company. If the management does not believe in their own competence, then neither should investors.
ALL stockholders are speculators. It's just a matter of time. Buffett is one of the pre-eminent buy-and-hold advocates. Much of his fortune was made by keeping stocks in Coca-Cola, Disney and others bought low in the 1960's. His strategy has, of course, made him the second richest man in America (not sure about this year), and the only billionaire in the US who made his money entirely in the stock market (as of several years ago - still true?) Buffettology has a summary of his success, starting out with $5000 of his own money and $5000 each from several other friends (20 of them?) in the late 1950's IIRC. That's like $100,000 each now, I suppose.
Shares in BH are now $89,900 each. The five year chart shows a dip to $40,000/share in 2000. (BH never splits.)
According to Buffettology, his strategy is to identify companies that will 'own' the market 10 or 15 years in the future - they have a 'franchise' (like Coca-Cola - the brand is forever, regardless of economic downturns), or are a tollbridge (he doesn't do high tech, but Cisco is certainly a candidate, as nearly every packet on the internet goes over a Cisco router at some point). Good, long term management is a requirement as well. He figures out the probable value of the company based on projected revenues 10+ years hence. Then, using bond interest rates over the 10 years, he backs back out the net present value of the company today. He buys the stock (actually nowadays he just buys the company) when the actual price is below the NPV price.
Up till now anyway, he hasn't bought tech stocks because he "doesn't understand tech" - a wise position, even if one is deep in the tech business. Berkshire Hathaway had a big drop (see chart, linked above) during the dotcom boom, as the great unwashed nattered on about the "new economy" and laughed at his "obsolete methods". Had I any cash then, I would have bought BH. His approach has been vindicated, needless to say.
The difficulty is figuring out MS' (or any tech stock's) value in 10 years, which seems just about impossible. Certainly they are a tollbridge - anyone who makes software or hardware for
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
That was kind of my point. There was a page on "new things from MS research", and we have a bunch of half-baked ideas or rehashes of things people have done before - 3D desktops have been under consideration for a long time now!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Here's a thought. It is possible that Microsoft is hiring smart people because they need them to solve some serious problems. Like backwards compatibility back to 95, like compatibility with existing windows software, all the while trying to introduce some new technologies (you have to give them some credit for .Net).
.Net - what do I have to give them credit for? For the part that looks like Java, or the other part that looks like Java? For screwing up name capitalization in such a way that different elements can look the same now?
.Net that is not in some other language already (years ago usually). What innovation is to be found there vs. copying from other sources?
.Net is that it is the most massive standards fork (of Java) ever seen in our industry, and is creating a tremendious amount of duplication of effort. Is that really the way to move things forward? Microsoft by releasing .Net in one fell swoop has done more to retard inovation in software over the next few years than all the clueless bosses of the world put together.
.Net even? I'm not sure they did.
I'm sorry, but the giant task of keeping backwards compatibility is more sheer grunt work and persistance than intelligence. You don't need a mastermind to pile on layer after layer of API's and keep things working. I'm not saying it's not an accomplishment in it's own right, but it's not the kind of work you hire the kind of guys at MS Research for (and indeed they are not working on any such thing). It's more like building a pyramid than creating a new invention.
As for
Show me one feature of
What I would say about
And, more importantly - did MS Research have anything to do with
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The lawsuit is judicial extortion, given the insane set of laws and practices of the patent office. Microsoft has consistently used the cost of these kinds of suits to intimidate competitors. It's part of the deal you can't refuse when they decide to get into your market.
An excellent example is their buyout of archival software under their platform. I was a fan of Fast-back, which was one of the best and located in my home state.
Bogus patents on long filenames are a good example of how M$ plans to block free software from interacting with their file systems. Their kludges to their inadequate file systems hardly merit the name "invention" and don't rate a patent. Their submarining the issue for a decade is another clue to their ill intent. If I have to "license" the ability to read M$ junk, then I can't share it with my friends and free software won't be able to do this in the future. The DMCA can come to their rescue on this one and make sure that free software is no longer a competitive threat.
If those things are not M$ using copyright and patent powers that they have worked to build for themselves, I don't know what is.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
You need to be more precise. The ballpark estimate is a clear loser for Microsoft investors.
A tenfold advance in "value" over twenty years is not very good if the actual valuation is about 25% of current market value. Any investment should more than double in ten years given average inflation. Over twenty years, that's a four fold increase. If M$'s current "value" is $27 and that represents a tenfold advance, but the worth is $6 investors have lost their shirts on M$ and would have at least $12 from government bonds. These losses would have been offset, had Microsoft done the honest thing and payed divedens. The assets on hand do not cover the investment people have made. The only people who did well are those who speculated early and sold high.
Precise numbers might prove me wrong but "Best Investment Ever!" rings about as true as "Best Software Ever!" and "Best Place to Work Ever!". It's a bitch how one or two little lies can discount everything you say, isn't it?
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Just out of curiousity, how do they respond to moving your hours to the early side? If you've come in late, and are staying late, then you're there when the boss leaves, and look good.
OTOH, during the Summer I like to get in by 7:00+/-, and out correspondingly early. So odds are good I see others heading to a meeting somewhere, and I'm heading out the door. Actually, I'm getting no flack at all for it, so any very slight unease I may feel isn't enough to stop me.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
* Finally think I have goat sex written correctly in German. I think. Arschficken?
Arschficken mit Ziegen really means assf*cking with goats. If you want goat sex, I'd got with Ziegegeschlecht (to coin a new compound word - why not, it's German afterall). Geschlecht seems to be the preferred equivalent to the english noun sex.