Slashdot Mirror


Motley Fool Writes Off Microsoft

The Vista disaster has caught Wall Street's attention before but I've never seen the popular press understand the issues like this argument in the Motley Fool. The opposing argument is a weak statement of faith, essentially "as it was in the beginning is now and forever shall be." "You don't need to watch the 'I'm a Mac, I'm a PC' commercials to see that Microsoft is taking a beating. You see it in the company's financials where its online unit, incredibly, is operating at a loss; overheating Xbox 360 consoles find the company taking a huge warranty hit for a system losing market share to the Wii; and the upgrade wave of its flagship operating system has been more of a ripple than a tsunami. That last point is important. This was supposed to be Microsoft's final feast, the major last hurrah for its Windows Vista operating entry and its Office 2007 suite of applications before the inevitable embrace of cheaper open source operating systems and Web-based apps... In fact, even Microsoft will tell you that its fortunes peaked several months ago."

30 of 404 comments (clear)

  1. In other news by El+Cabri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    MSFT shares are up 3% today after another strong rise yesterday, after announcing their financial results and outlook.

    1. Re:In other news by Otter · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm accustomed to "X writes something in Y arguing that..." being reported as "Y says..." It takes real journalistic skill, though, to turn what's obviously a point-counterpoint piece into "Motley Fool Writes Off Microsoft".

    2. Re:In other news by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      MSFT shares are up 3% today after another strong rise yesterday, after announcing their financial results and outlook. Yeah, I noticed that on MSN Money when I was running at the gym last night. The reason they cited that was strong Vista sales. That's not what I've heard on Slashdot.

      Now I know he's a Microsoft robot but on the otherside of this issue is Ed Bott who cites adoption rates. Of course there are other factors like Vista being forced down people's throats.

      You have to admit, the stories we're hearing just don't add up. People can spin this like Vista's a flop or success. I'm guessing it's par for the course and Microsoft is doing fine. My company will be shoving Vista onto my workstation in a year and it's hear to stay.

      Do I like Vista? Not at all. That still doesn't mean I should live under a rock in denial.
      --
      My work here is dung.
    3. Re:In other news by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Isn't it not uncommon for businesses to skip entire versions of windows? It is not not not uncommon at all! :)

      My company was not in love with '98, so made the jump quickly to 2000, but then stuck 2000 on every machine that came in the door until they had trouble making new hardware work (laptops, for instance, just remained XP). Last time I checked, they were still blocking SP2 - though I've been working remotely for 2 years so that might not still be the case. The loaner PC that I use when I visit is still 2000. I suspect they will be similarly slow to adopt Vista, and may skip it altogether if MS releases another OS quickly enough.

      Then again, my company still runs Exchange 5.5 and just tells everyone to clench during daylight savings :)

      Personally, I won't upgrade my PC to Vista, but if I happen to buy one with it pre-installed I won't remove it, either. I've set up some Vista machines for people and played with it quite a bit now - it's really not so bad. It just has some new irritations, and some things are flat-out impossible to do (or at least not that I could figure out with the help of Google). But on the whole it is stable and not really much different day-to-day than XP.
      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    4. Re:In other news by orclevegam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Really? Has Microsoft really made back 5 years of development effort from Vista sales? I find it hard to believe with most sales coming from bundled (i.e. low profit) type sales. Most of Microsoft's sales come from the OEMs who buy licenses in bulk. Even if they can't offload them onto end consumers MS still made the money because the OEM fronted it. What MS does lose with poor Vista uptake is the leverage a large install base can give them, so rather then using pre-installed apps on Vista to gain a foothold they have to use "requires vista" on apps as a carrot to force Vista onto people. It's all about leverage, and unfortunately MS is holding 90% of the sticks (god, that works on so many levels). Our only real hope at this point is that they hurry up and release Windows 7, and we can go ahead and stick Vista on the same shelf that ME is using to collect dust.
      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    5. Re:In other news by ipxodi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Absolutely common to skip versions.
      My company went from 95/98 directly to XP. Even with Office we still have most of the installs at Office 97 or 2000 with only a few Office 2003 copies.

      When we upgrade, I expect it will be directly to "Windows 7". And since I'm the IT Director, my expectations will probably prove accurate. ;)

      Being a small company, the cost of upgrading is prohibitive, so we squeeze the last bit of usage out of our expenditures.

      --
      load "windows7" ,8,1
    6. Re:In other news by SerpentMage · · Score: 4, Informative

      I wish people would understand the market and understand VALUATIONS... Microsoft at these higher levels has a PE of 21. Apple at 200 had PE of around 45 or so. A valuation of 45 requires extreme growth each and every quarter with no errors. Apple said themselves that the next quarter will be slower. Thus the market is going to refactor everything.

      And after all if you had invest in Apple last year you would have had 117% returns. Apple is overvalued... plain and simple...

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    7. Re:In other news by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 4, Insightful

      MSFT is selling Vista for 2-4 times what XP went for.

      Not true at all. My corporate licensing rates on a per-license basis show Vista Business coming in at exactly the same price point as WinXP. I don't know who you're getting your pricing from, but they're taking you for a huge ride if you're paying 400% more for Vista than you did for XP. Heck, even the retail pricing is similar.

      On the other hand, if you've got some sort of ideological axe to grind against MS, you might've tried comparing something silly like XP Home with Vista Ultimate in order to get your ridiculous price differential. I'd like to believe you're not one of the slobbering, frothing, anti-MS zealots Slashdot is so rabidly famous for, so I'm going to assume you're just getting bum pricing from whatever vendor you're using. Given your comments, though, I'm thinking that's not the case with you, is it?

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
    8. Re:In other news by SL+Baur · · Score: 4, Funny

      ... lose's it's ... it's word's ... reader's, it's ... seem's ... becau'se ... pay's ... word's. If I had a nickel for every time a slashdotter misused an apostrophe, I'd be richer than Bill Gates.

      We are watching your every word. Be afraid, be very afraid.

      -Your Friendly Neighborhood Spelling and Grammar Nazi
  2. And yet... by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...despite Vista's problems, Microsoft announced a 79% rise in profits today. I guess they can survive one OS screw-up.

    Here's hoping HD DVD's troubles means that they'll remove all the "secure path" BS from Windows 7. They only did it to placate Hollywood, and it's a major reason why Vista had developmental problems. (Note, they'd have had to do it too if they were supporting Blu-ray instead - the point though is that I'd like to see Microsoft throw a tantrum and remove a "feature" they should never have added in the first place.)

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:And yet... by bizitch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right

      They survived Windows Me and they already announced (leaked) the next OS is on the way sooner than thought

      They also have more money than God - So they will adopt, adapt and improve (and steal, and "innovate" etc etc)

      --
      ---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
    2. Re:And yet... by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They also have more money than God Major point there. No company is permanent or invincible, but Microsoft is the type of behemoth that can bleed off small ammounts of money for DECADES without folding.

      They are still turning a (sizable) profit. They not only need to start taking a loss, but they need to either start taking a MAJOR loss each quarter (doesn't look likely), or, we gotta wait it out. As long as they're managed just well enough that their losses are minor, I doubt we'll see Microsoft go away in the foreseeable future.

      Still, that doesn't mean that they need maintain their current control for that long. I'd love to see Microsoft in 15 years, putting out their OS that only has about 25-30% market share, and shipping Office for Linux (and naturally Mac, but they already do that so no big change there). Xbox would likely be scrapped by then (admittedly though, the 360 is the only current gen system I own, but I bought it pretty much exclusively for Mass Effect).

      If Linux could just get that level of commercial support, I think it would be a major victory. I'll admit that, though not the only things, having WoW and MS Office available are major factors in my preference of MacOS over Linux right now. Linux is ideologically the better way to make software, and I hope to goodness that within the next few years it gets the functionality, polish, and commercial support to be functionally the better of the two as well. Microsoft has already proven that Windows is steering towards crippleware, and Apple is likely not far behind.
      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  3. Who thinks The Fool is a good source? by acvh · · Score: 5, Informative

    AP
    Microsoft Tops Street in 2Q; PC Sales Up
    Friday January 25, 9:45 am ET
    By Jessica Mintz, AP Technology Writer
    Microsoft Beats Street in 2nd Quarter; Vista, Office, Xbox Games Helped

    SEATTLE (AP) -- Microsoft Corp. forecast a rosy 2008 -- despite broader economic worries -- after it blew by Wall Street's expectations for a second consecutive quarter.
    "We will be impacted just like everybody else," if the U.S. falls into a recession, Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell said Thursday. "But overall, we feel very optimistic about our second half."

    Company officials touted rising sales in each of Microsoft's business divisions, a slate of important upcoming business-software launches and the growing contribution from sales in non-U.S. markets.

    Microsoft raised its outlook Thursday for the rest of its fiscal year, which ends in June, matching Wall Street's forecast and sending shares up in after-hours trading.

    The software maker's quarterly earnings jumped 79 percent to $4.71 billion, or 50 cents per share, from $2.63 billion, or 26 cents per share in the second quarter a year earlier. Quarterly revenue climbed 31 percent to $16.37 billion from $12.5 billion.

    1. Re:Who thinks The Fool is a good source? by moderatorrater · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It was a debate. While slashdot wrote off the rebuttal, it's actually a well written and well thought out argument. Also, you'll notice that Microsoft is an inside value pick, meaning it's a safe bet stock because it's undervalued compared to it's debt, earnings and holding.

      The arguments boil down to one guy saying that you're an idiot if you think that Microsoft is going away, the other one says that Microsoft is on the decline, and since it's not the big winner it's a loser. In my opinion, they're both right, although the one saying that Microsoft is a loser takes the longer look and, therefore, more risk of being wrong (what happens if the XBox becomes the PS2 of this generation of systems?). Slashdot got this one wrong, not The Fool.

  4. Uhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    What part of Microsoft's record earnings yesterday did Slashdot seem to overlook? I think the joke is on us.

    http://www.news.com/8301-13860_3-9857633-56.html?tag=newsmap

  5. Need more coffee by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 4, Funny

    'Mötley Crüe Writes Off Microsoft'

    Gonna be a long day...

  6. Vista is the Windows ME of our generation... by halivar · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is especially clear now that Windows 7 is on the horizon. And if MS can survive ME, it can survive anything.

  7. Vista == PS/2 Micro Channel by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 4, Insightful
    IBM came out with the PS/2 and the Micro Channel bus. They fenced it with patents and wanted to charge high fees for people developing hardware and such for Micro Channel. IBM didn't want to get burned like they had before with the PC clones.

    But people failed to beat a path to the PS/2; they waited, and used things like EISA until PCI came along and was roughly as good as Micro Channel. IBM finally learned that they didn't own the PC market anymore.

    IBM's still around but isn't a colossus astride the computing industry. Microsoft has now discovered that the competition is "good enough" and the Microsoft name isn't enough to force people to follow along with whatever they say. Like IBM, MS isn't going away... but they'll be one option among many in a few years, not the single dominant giant.

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    1. Re:Vista == PS/2 Micro Channel by canUbeleiveIT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Like IBM, MS isn't going away... but they'll be one option among many in a few years, not the single dominant giant.

      As much as I'd like to believe this, I see no indication that it will actually happen.

      In my mind, it is software, not hardware, that locks people into Windows. I am a VAR who mostly services businesses too small to have an IT staff, and it seems that every sector has an industry-specific software that only runs on Windows. Examples from my customers include:
      -Collision Repair Estimating Software
      -Accountant Software
      -Manufacturer's Representative Software
      -Dental Practice Software
      -Church Administrative Software

      It's kind of a chicken-or-the-egg dilema; developers would port to other platforms if those OSes's had more marketshare, and platforms would have more marketshare if applications were ported to to the OSes. I just can't see a short-term road out of that conundrum.

  8. What about the Bull Argument? by Red+Pointy+Tail · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is a corresponding Bull Argument that argues the Counterpoint - each with its own rebuttal of the other argument.

    So much for Motley Fool writing off Microsoft. Typically - guess which article gets highlighted in /.!

  9. There's definitely wishful thinking in there by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But it's in the first article, not the second.

    ZOMG, people are specifying XP instead of Vista! Sure, but they're still buying Microsoft. Apple is topping out its niche appeal, and corporations are run by lawyers who hate and fear Google Docs with a cold reptilian passion.

    Wise up, nerds. Major purchasing decisions are not taken by people live with their parents in Wyoming. They are taken by grown ups who have mortgages and orthodentist bills to pay, and those people recommend, and will continue to recommend, Microsoft because nobody ever got sacked for doing so.

    The upcoming recession may see a few smaller outfits switch to freeware in the hope of chiselling a few dollars off the budget, but that's probably a sign that they're doomed, and so wouldn't have been buying M$ one way or the other.

    Still, I'm swimming against the tide of opinion here, if not of history, so feel free to get excited about the prospect of the Evil Empire toppling any day now. Let's compare notes in 5 years and we can spot where you went wrong.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  10. Most interesting part of article... by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I read the bull and bear arguments, whatever, they're both waving their arms. The most interesting part I saw was in the bear rebuttal:

    MS Cash and Short-Term Investments
    6/30/04 $60.6 billion
    6/30/05 $37.8 billion
    6/30/06 $31.1 billion
    6/30/07 $21.1 billion
    Notice a trend? It would seem that MS' me-too policy (Xbox, Zune, live search, etc.) over the last couple of years has been pretty hard on their cash reserves. I think if they can turn a profit on these things it will have been worth it because $60 billion of cash reserves sounds like too much.... but if that trend continues, we'll see MS in debt by the time the coming recession is over.
    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    1. Re:Most interesting part of article... by Serapth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What you are missing is Microsoft started paying out annual dividends starting in........... 2004! Plus some fairly aggressive stock buyback.

      Frankly, their cash reserves have dwindled because simply put, sitting on 60 billion worth of cash is just dumb.

  11. Bill Gate's smartest move by hey · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe Bill Gate's smartest move was knowing when to leave.

  12. He's right, you know. by Simon+Brooke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    OK, I'm old enough to have been in this industry when IBM were as dominant as Microsoft are now. We didn't see them start to slide, either. We were only aware that IBM were falling when their decline was already well advanced and unstoppable. I think we're in that position with Microsoft now. Why?

    We're heading for a recession. The rebuttal to the FA says:

    Sure -- Microsoft's dependence on its Office and Windows products makes it vulnerable to a slowdown in business spending. Then again, GE's power turbine and aircraft engine businesses are vulnerable, too. When the economy turns south, virtually every company is affected in one way or another.

    That's true, of course. But GE's customers can't download an open source aircraft engine for free. Also, and significantly, aircraft engines wear out. If the airlines want to keep flying at all, they have to continue to buy spare parts, sub-assemblies, refurbished engines and, from time to time, new engines. No matter how tight the economy gets, unless all GE's customers go belly up, they will have to continue to buy parts - and GE can at least hope to get some of that business.

    As the economy tightens up, one of the things that happens is people start looking at where they can save some money. Software does not wear out. Software carries on working just as well as it did when it was new, until the hardware platform which supports it wears out. And even then, it can usually be transferred to a new hardware platform. So as the economy tightens up, people simply stop buying new software. Where's the need to upgrade, when the software you have works acceptably well?

    There are fewer reasons to buy software in a recession, anyway. The total number of seats is not increasing - most companies will be laying off staff. And hardware upgrades which had been planned will be put off, so there will be no need to buy software for new hardware...

    And if people have to get new software for one reason or another, for every significant profitable product in Microsoft's inventory, there's a free alternative. Not 'cheap', free. Usually, of as high quality as the Microsoft product or higher. Increasingly, as easy to use as the Microsoft product. The tighter the economy gets, the harder it becomes to justify choosing 'expensive' over 'free'. Furthermore, unlike GE's competitors, Microsoft's free competitors are not subject to the normal rules of the financial market. they can't go bankrupt. The recession will not hurt them much - it is more likely to help them.

    I won't hide the fact that I think it's bad for this industry to have one dominant player, be that IBM, Microsoft or Google. I didn't mourn IBM's fall and I shan't mourn Microsoft's. But I don't think you can any longer pretend it isn't happening.

    --
    I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
    1. Re:He's right, you know. by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nope.

      As long as you have the ability to maintain your software, it will
      never wear out. You can always train someone else to be the
      maintenance monkey. Admittedly, this only works for software where
      you have the source.

      This does NOT necessarily imply "Free Software".

      Saavy companies get the source to important applications so they
      can maintain those systems if necessary. Software like that can
      (and has) last longer than most of us here have been alive.

      Also, the world (or technology) isn't as dynamic as a lot of people would like to think.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  13. Re:Interesting by Aladrin · · Score: 4, Informative

    BTW, the XBox portion of MS (the games division) -has- stopped hemorraging cash.

    http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/26/2052251

    http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/847/847658p1.html

    Yes, 2 quarters in a row now, it has turned a profit.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
  14. Re:dancing by sm62704 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Motley Fool: Bring out your dead!
    Gearoid_Murphy: Here's one.
    Motley Fool: Ninepence.
    Microsoft: I'm not dead!
    Motley Fool: What?
    Gearoid_Murphy: Nothing. Here's your ninepence.
    Microsoft: I'm not dead!
    Motley Fool: 'Ere. He says he's not dead!
    Gearoid_Murphy: Yes, he is.
    Microsoft: I'm not!
    Motley Fool: He isn't?
    Gearoid_Murphy: Well, he will be soon. He's very ill.
    Microsoft: I'm getting better!
    Gearoid_Murphy: No, you're not. You'll be stone dead in a moment.
    Motley Fool: Oh, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
    Microsoft: I don't want to go on the cart!
    Gearoid_Murphy: Oh, don't be such a baby.
    Motley Fool: I can't take him.
    Microsoft: I feel fine!
    Gearoid_Murphy: Well, do us a favour.
    Motley Fool: I can't.
    Gearoid_Murphy: Well, can you hang around a couple of minutes? He won't be long.
    Motley Fool: No, I've got to go to Sony's. They've lost nine today.
    Gearoid_Murphy: Well, when's your next round?
    Motley Fool: Tuesday.
    Microsoft: I think I'll go for a walk.
    Gearoid_Murphy: You're not fooling anyone, you know. Look. Isn't there something you can do?
    Microsoft: [singing] I feel happy! I feel happy!

    Apologies for spamming you with this Monty Pythin troll.

    -mcgrew

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  15. It's neither. by babbling · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I doubt Vista is a huge flop or a tremendous success.

    What's much more interesting is the cash reserves. Dropping by over $10 billion per year? Really?! Are those numbers accurate?

    1. Re:It's neither. by LupusUF · · Score: 4, Informative
      Which kind of goes against the bullish argument that they have no debt and large cash reserves, doesn't it? If they've burned through $40 billion of reserves in 3 years, if they do the same over the next 3 years they be around $20 billion in debt.


      They have been paying out a lot of dividends over the last few years, and have been putting money into new tech. Depleting their cash reserves is not a sign of weakness, it is a purposeful response to shareholder complaints. A few years back they faced a lot of criticism from shareholders because they had to large of a cash reserve. Why is this a problem? Cash reserves are not making the company (or shareholders) any money. If a company can't find anything to do with their cash reserves that they think will meet their required rate of return on investment (ie: invest in R&D, capital, or other ways to improve the future profitability of the company), they should return that money to shareholders via dividends.


      Their current depletion of cash does not suggest that they will be in debt in a few years. Once they have lowered their cash reserves to a level deemed appropriate by their shareholders, they will change their strategy. So to answer your question, yes there is a huge difference in eliminating 40 billion in reserves and taking on 40 billion into debt.