Apple vs. Microsoft, By the Numbers

CWmike writes "It's a matter of opinion which company makes the better operating system or is likely to grow its smartphone market share. But numbers don't lie — or exaggerate. A little less than a year ago, Wall Street reached a Microsoft vs. Apple milestone: for the first time, Apple's corporate value surpassed Microsoft's. What has happened since? With Apple due to report its latest quarterly earnings on Wednesday — Microsoft reports its numbers next week — we look at some recent numbers, as well as data over time."

Comments

Well either way..

[Anonymous Coward]

they are doing a helluva lot better then linux on the desktop.

Re:Well either way..

[ron_ivi]

> they are doing a helluva lot better then linux on the desktop.

In sales revenue for desktop software, sure.

But that's like analyzing the breathable-gas market and claiming tobacco smoke is a more valuable breathable gas than fresh air because one has tens of billions of dollars of annual revenue, while the other has ~$0.

Re:Well either way..

[minus9]

This was modded informative?

Has someone given Gartner mod points?

Windows phone to take off?

[symbolset]

Yeah, that's gonna happen.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[sourgum]

The only folks that I know that have Windows phones work for Microsoft. Just sayin'

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[MrEricSir]

Sure, it's gonna take off... in a garbage truck.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[Hultis]

I haven't tried a Win7 phone (heck, I've never even seen one), but I do think MS might be able to push it enough to become a success. Reviews have generally been quite positive, and if they can use their market share from Windows and XBox and create some kind of easy porting method it might become at least a moderate success. It will probably take a couple of years before the platform can actually compete though, if that ever happens.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[theweatherelectric]

Yeah, that's gonna happen.

It might happen. Nokia will be pushing Windows Phone hugely at the start of next year, so much so that I suspect they'll discount their initial models quite heavily. Windows Phone usage will no doubt grow, it will just be a question of by how much.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[davester666]

By 'hugely', you mean they are going to flog the hell out of the SINGLE phone they'll have ready by then?

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[theweatherelectric]

By 'hugely', you mean they are going to flog the hell out of the SINGLE phone they'll have ready by then?

Yes, similarly to how Apple flogged and continues to flog the hell out of their single iOS phone.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[symbolset]

At the current market trend by early next year Nokia will have 10 percent smartphone share, which is where MinMo was at on WP7 launch. They will have gone through a year of selling almost no phones. They will be nearly broke. Their carriers and retail vendors will be trained to expect poor sales from both Nokia and WP7 - both together wil not make the product more appealing. They will have to buy shelf space at premium rates. And the phone featureset wil be competetive with 2007. And that's even if Microsoft manages to get the sw running on their phone, which is by no means certain.

Nokia is too late to help here.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[Anonymous Coward]

The people I know that work for Microsoft have mostly iPhones or Android devices. Except one guy that is actually on the WP team.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[jonbryce]

I don't think they will push through. Why? 5 words. Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers. They are all writing for Android and iOS.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[Anonymous Coward]

wearing a button at best buy doesnt count

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think they will push through. Why? 5 words. Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers. They are all writing for Android and iOS.

Funny, the WP7 marketplace has grown faster than any other marketplace.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[crafty.munchkin]

Reviews have generally been quite positive, and if they can use their market share from Windows and XBox and create some kind of easy porting method it might become at least a moderate success. It will probably take a couple of years before the platform can actually compete though, if that ever happens.

People will say anything for enough money.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[oztiks]

Bottom line: Apple has been by far the superior investment over the past decade. Next: Revenue

Bottom line: Apple's fiscal year 2010 revenue edged Microsoft's, $65.2 billion to $62.5 billion. (Note: Microsoft's fiscal year is July through June, and Apple's is October through September.)

Bottom line: While Microsoft still generates more profits than Apple, the gap has narrowed significantly. If current trends continued -- a big if -- Apple would likely top Microsoft's profits in a couple of years.

My Bottom Line: Microsoft is still more profitable therefore the value of the company is higher but less desirable to buy in to because it has so many shareholders. Apple went through a growth spurt because of its mobile device sales and if you had stocks back then whoopty doo for you. On the flipside the future hold uncertainty since everyone keeps pointing out that Microsoft is expected to beat Apple in marketshare and Android has already started killing it in the market.

So is the TFA

a) trying to rub it in the faces of the people who didn't buy Apple stock in 2000?
OR
b) trying to hint to Apple investors the fun in the sun is over time to sell up?

Personally i think its time to breakout the Tarot cards and see what they have to say ...

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[Karlt1]

My Bottom Line: Microsoft is still more profitable

A company stock price is based on among other things the expected growth of the company. Apple is growing faster than MS.

On the flipside the future hold uncertainty since everyone keeps pointing out that Microsoft is expected to beat Apple in marketshare

Even if you do believe that someone can magically predict the future, MS makes a whopping $12 on each WinMo license sold. Apple makes a $265 profit on each iPhone sold.

and Android has already started killing it in the market.

Not really, Apple sells more iOS devices than all Android devices combined (iPhone,Touch, iPad) and makes close to 50% of all the profit in the mobile phone industry.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[atlasdropperofworlds]

>> Even if you do believe that someone can magically predict the future, MS makes a whopping $12 on each WinMo license sold. Apple makes a $265 profit on each iPhone sold.

It's well known you get less for your money hardware-wise with Apple. It applies to the phones as well.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[atlasdropperofworlds]

> Not really, Apple sells more iOS devices than all Android devices combined (iPhone,Touch, iPad) and makes close to 50% of all the profit in the mobile phone industry.

Ah yes, because Android phones alone are catching up to the iPhone + iPad combined sales, so it makes sense to inject the apple mp3 player in there just to bring the numbers up. Stop comparing Oranges to Apples: Android phones have surpassed iPhone sales, and are taking a stronger lead by the week.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[Karlt1]

How is it comparing Apple to Oranges? When Google talks about "Android Activations", do you think they are excluding the Xoom and the Tab?

When developers are looking at what platform to develop for, they are looking at iOS versus Android devices. They don't care whether it is a phone or not.

And to "catch up" there would have to be more "Android" devices selling than Apple is selling iOS devices -- which they aren't.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[atlasdropperofworlds]

I said Android phone sales alone are overtaking iPhone + iPad sales. I didn't factor in Tab sales at all, because we all know they're a flop.

You, however, decided to add an extra product category, mp3 players, just to make apple look like it's somehow trouncing Android. There is no Android mp3 player, and for good reason: Mp3 players are obsolete, as their function is now provided by our smartphones anyway.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[RobertM1968]

Reviews have generally been quite positive, and if they can use their market share from Windows and XBox and create some kind of easy porting method it might become at least a moderate success. It will probably take a couple of years before the platform can actually compete though, if that ever happens.

People will say anything for enough money.

And that is exactly what's happening. Windows Mobile marketshare is decreasing. While that may largely be due to people defecting from WM6.5 and earlier, they sure as heck arent picking up WP7 - and WP7 sales cant make up for that slip in marketshare (assuming it is actually the case, that WM6.5 defections are the issue). It explains why Microsoft REFUSES to release end user/activation numbers and started with citing oem sales to stores... and when that number turned abysmal, they started citing number of licenses sold to OEMs for phones they may or may not ever actually make.

Add to that, Microsoft has been caught, over the last 2.5 DECADES, buying/paying for favorable reviews (hello to some of you Ziff Davis greedy bastards who went as far as printing Microsoft's marketing materials for Win95 as actual reviews - and still do such things to this day).

No, I am not a troll... all of this stuff has been covered on /. numerous times. And those of you familiar with such things as the Windows vs Linux TCO's Microsoft bought have a tiny inkling of some of the stuff I'm talking about.

I'll make things a little easier for the idiots bought and paid for at Gartner and IDC by Microsoft (ever dig to find out how many such "studies" Microsoft has "commissioned" from them - or read the requirements of them that are in place to skew the results a certain way? If not, go do some digging if you are bored)... ah... I digress... I'll make it easy for them (ie: reality): there are tons of reports online just like this one: http://vista.blorge.com/2011/03/08/microsofts-windows-phone-7-market-share-takes-a-dive/

That recent one cites even WP7 declining. In the end, it's another market Microsoft will fail in, after nice losses in their other such attempts in that same market. Guess they are worth even less than the CW people think.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[SpryGuy]

Windows Phone developer tools are the best of any platform, and are free... it's easily the most developer-friendly platform, and many applications can be easily ported to Windows and XBox 360 Live Arcade.

Developers obviously go where the users are, and right now that isn't the WP7 platform. But then agian, it's only been released for six months. Let's see where things are in two years.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think they will push through. Why? 5 words. Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers. They are all writing for Android and iOS.

Funny, the WP7 marketplace has grown faster than any other marketplace.

Yes .. the WP7 marketplace has grown 100000000% in the last year ... 1000000 x 0 is still 0 ;) Even if a single application was released, it's growing infinitely faster than any other maketplace :)

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[beelsebob]

The thing is – Apple has a good design team, and when they flog the hell out of a single phone, they flog the hell out of a single phone that's doing something no other phone has done before – make a smartphone usable. What nokia will do instead is flog the hell out of a cheap, plasticy, button clad thing running a copycat OS. The latter is likely to be far less successful. Especially considering that the first set of people companies typically try to flog devices to is all the people they've managed to make fans of them. Who have nokia managed to make fans of them? Open source users... Do you really thing they're gonna go scrambling into the phone shops to get a WiMo 7 device?

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[symbolset]

The Tarot cards say that within the month IBM will knock Microsoft out of the top five of the largest pubicly held corporations in America by market cap. They'll trade back and forth for a while, but the outcome is likely eventually permanent.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[oztiks]

> A company stock price is based on among other things the expected growth of the company. Apple is growing faster than MS

That's what I'm trying to say but the article is insinuating (though trying to sound bias at the same time) that if you bought Apple back in 2000 you've done well however they are also saying this wont last forever and that competitors are now in catch up mode and making ground - 2015 is not far away and to claim that Apple will behind that soon is a pretty big call.

I'm not convinced about profitability on iDevices holding much clout it is after all business (cold and calculated). Just because iDevices "had" high margins in the past (and present) if the competition does make enough ground Apple wont get way with it for to long, telcos will simply sell the alternative until margins drop which is what this article is kind of dancing around.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[perryizgr8]

yeah that is my first thought.
my second thought: nokia.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[perryizgr8]

What nokia will do instead is flog the hell out of a cheap, plasticy, button clad thing...

every nokia phone i've ever seen beats iphone in hardware quality. even the old black n white ones were better made.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[Karlt1]

You, however, decided to add an extra product category, mp3 players, just to make apple look like it's somehow trouncing Android. There is no Android mp3 player, and for good reason: Mp3 players are obsolete, as their function is now provided by our smartphones anyway.

The iPod Touch is more than just an "MP3 Player". The Touch is a wireless device running iOS without 3G. Samsung and other manufactureres are releasing devices that are basically phones without 3G.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[tehcyder]

I don't think they will push through. Why? 5 words. Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers. They are all writing for Android and iOS.

Well, yes, and before Android came along they were all writing for iPhones.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[geekoid]

Profit and Value are two different things. If you can't understand that, then you don't understand finance.

Personally, I don't think Apple will handle the transition away from Jobs.

This article is neither a or b. It's just an article based on market share to generate hits.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[tehcyder]

I said Android phone sales alone are overtaking iPhone + iPad sales. I didn't factor in Tab sales at all, because we all know they're a flop.

You might know that, but not everyone would agree. Android makes about a million more times sense on a tablet than a phone, it's too fiddly for most phone screens.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[oztiks]

Absolute bullshit, profit and value goes hand in hand for existing shareholders as it shows stability on their investment as it buffers them. Desirability is a different discussion and that has got more to do with marketcap and what's fashionable based on predictability.

As for not understanding finance I don't want to understand it I prefer to understand the real world. People who live in "bank world" have learned nothing from the GFC - just taught the wannabe Gordon Geko's of the world how break the rules and put more of them in the game.

Having said that maybe your right, hit generating exercise fine no problem.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[Karlt1]

Verizon already tried that with the Droid brand. When the iPhone was exclusively to AT&T, Verizon saw much lower growth rates. Why do you think as soon as they got the iPhone, they completely dropped their Droid Does campaign and now have three categories of phones - the iPhone, smart phones, and feature phones? Android manufacturers can't help but compete on price. There is no brand loyalty.

Even if both Apple and an Android manufacturer sell a phone fir a retail price if $500 before subsidies, Apple will still make a larger profit because it gets better component prices, it can sell them at their own stores and online (capturing the retailers profit), and it still can make a profit off of iTunes sells.

Apple has been able to get larger profit margins than pc manufacturers even after going to intel, larger profit margins on mp3 players for the last decade, and get larger profit margins than other tablet makers AND sell them for less.

No other manufacturer can take advantage of the vertical integration and the retail presence that Apple does. Every other manufacturer gas to depend on the carrier and third party retailers. When you go to an Apple store, they are pushing nothing but Apple products.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[oztiks]

Don't buy it. Apple is backing down on a lot at present, Skype lost its handcuffs (which makes facetime redundant) and they tried going after Samsung on patients only to have the rest of the industry bitch slap them back into reality. Half the telcos, handset manufacturers, etc want their own App Stores. The list goes on and on ...

Just like MacBook pro the profit margins will drop. Apple paved the way for mobile devices, granted, but just like Microsoft who had their massive growth bubble it does have to end somewhere, the when is really the question.

Lets not forget Motorola was the M in A-I-M technologies, IBM being the I. Eric Schmidt was on the board of Directors of Apple for some time. We are talking about intelligent technology partners putting next to no resistance into play. These guys have not worried about Apple as much as you'd expect and to play catch up hasn't been all that strenuous for them, we have yet to see things get nasty.

Apple doesn't have the rep of being like a Microsoft in the industry, that is playing the bad ass, because it needs all its friends to play nice together with them to keep their cosy position ... this as follows

iPhone Primary Contractors - a partial list
Software and design Apple USA
Assembly Foxconn?, Quanta, Unknown Taiwan
TFT-LCD Screen Sanyo Epson, Sharp, TMD Japan
Video processor chip Samsung Korea
Touch screen overlay Balda Germany
Bluetooth chip Cambridge Silicon Radio UK
Chip manufacture TSMC, UMC Taiwan
Baseband IC Infineon Technology Germany
WIFI Chip Marvell USA
Touch screen control chip Broadcom USA
CMOS chip Micron USA
NOR Flash ICs Intel, SST USA
Display Driver chip National Semi, Novatek US, TW
Case, Mechanical parts Catcher, Foxconn Tech Taiwan
Camera lens Largan Precision Taiwan
Camera module Altus-Tech, Primax, Lite On Taiwan
Battery Charger Delta Electronics Taiwan
Timing Crystal TXC Taiwan
Passive components Cyntec Taiwan
Connector and cables Cheng Uei, Entery Taiwan

Yep, Apple profits but so do all these guys ... and more ... even Samsung, sheesh (probably not as much now :))

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[vakuona]

The telcos want their own App Stores, but consumers want iPhones! Guess what, the telcos aren't stupid. At best, they can only hope that the iPhone is clipped in the market by other manufacturers and that the iPhone ceases to be a powerful brand. Then they can start dictating to the phone manufacturers again. But as long as only one of them is willing to deal with Apple, then all of them are.

And yes, Apple's suppliers profit when Apple sells, but Apple's customers are not clamouring for Samsung displays, or Marvell radios. Those guys are supplying commodities. The brand and the access to the customers is the reason Apple profits handsomely. Have you seen Apple's margins. Put it this way, Samsung has perhaps 3 times Apple's revenue, but only manages a third or so of Apple's profit.

Re:Windows phone to take off?

[oztiks]

Lets break this down a little. Say your a Grocer and you sell 10 Oranges and 20 Limes per day. Oranges sell for $100 each but Limes only sell for $50, as soon as the Oranges start selling at 9 per day and people start buying 21 Limes so on and so fourth the damage the Limes are making to the Oranges is a lot harsher. Its far better for the Oranges to be in a position where both are sold at $75 each and then you sell 15 Oranges and 15 Limes per day.

I'm guessing you also saw the article stating 50% of Apples revenue is just iPhones so that's a fairly scary notion if the TFA is right. A little bit more FUD in the media is enough to scare investors.

No

[theweatherelectric]

But numbers don't lie — or exaggerate.

That's a lie — and an exaggeration.

Re:No

[bennomatic]

The main thing that numbers (or at least the people trumpeting them) exaggerate is their own importance. That is to say, for example, "X OS outsells Y OS on Z type of platform, so X wins!" To which the retort is, "Well, Y OS earns ten times the revenue, so Y OS wins!"

People like to use car analogies (Yugo vs. BMW), but I've recently decided that, at least in the mobile market (I know, off topic, but related), a better parallel would be a comparison with restaurants. These days, anyone but the most ironic hipster would probably be hesitant to drive a Yugo, but every day, people choose to eat at MacDonald's, or PF Changs, or Chez Panisse. If you look at the profits, the unit sales, the societal impact, the "objective" quality of the product, the status associated with each, you could make a case for each and every one of them "winning". However, doing so really just exposes your own bias.

Back to the main topic, Microsoft and Apple each have their own strengths and weaknesses. In general, I prefer Apple products to MS's, but while I've never considered buying "Numbers", I have purchased multiple versions of Excel over the years. While I like my iPhone, I might give WP7 a try when my current contract is up if it looks like developers have taken to it and there's a good app market. And so on.

The point is that no level of quality on the menu at Chez Panisse will ever make MacDonald's go away, and no level of cost cutting at MacDonald's will ever make PF Chang's go away, and so on. Similarly, Apple and Microsoft (and a few of the other giants) are all big enough and diversified enough that it doesn't matter if they lead a particular market. They're not going away.

The biggest question, of course, is whether a particular product is sustainable for them. Google is notorious for dropping products that don't have enough of a following (Wave?); Microsoft has done the same thing (Kin?). I can't think of any big recent ones from Apple--after Steve's return, they've pretty much pared down their offerings and remained close-lipped about them so the projects they kill die before release. But that's the only thing that would really matter to me when choosing a device or OS or other product platform: will it be orphaned.

Re:No

[ArundelCastle]

But numbers don't lie — or exaggerate.

That's a lie — and an exaggeration.

Lies. Damned lies. And statistics.

Re:No

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree apple is defiantly McDonalds. All hype and color no substance or special ingredients.

Re:No

[Dr Max]

Microsoft is a 4wd/suv (lot of excess bloat that is rarely used, but quite powerful adaptable system)

Apple is a sedan (easy to drive auto; cut down system runs fast but only on apple approved highways)

Linux is a sports car (a fair bit of manual tinkering to get the best ride, then you have to run it on fairly flat but mostly curvy open source tracks)

Re:No

[Anonymous Coward]

I was trying to find a chart to comapre market caps over the years and I could not find one. Apple Computer (as was) had the largest Initial Public Offering (12/12/80 (Apologies for writing that European style)) since Ford Motor Company in 1956. Microsoft went public in 1986. Anyone with access to the charts of that time could see whether Apple did have a larger market cap. I am guessing given the Ford fact it would have taken quite a big hit to get Apple below Microsoft because I do not think that Microsoft took Apple's record for the largest IPO. For example we assign Apple the number 100 for its IPO and Microsoft 75. In those six years Apple would have needed to lose 25%+ to have to have a lower market cap than Microsoft when it went public.

In short I could not find the charts after looking for them did the original author even bother?

Re:No

[Anonymous Coward]

"Numbers don't lie" because they don't say anything. They're numbers.

The person or entity presenting said numbers - now there's where the lies can come from.

Re:No

[geekoid]

Microsoft in an OS based on user input in the design.
Apple is a study of human behavior implemented in software.
Linux is what specialist in a field feel it should be.

Re:No

[geekoid]

statistics don't lie. People are able to deceive with them because other people don't understand them enough to even ask the basic questions.

Re:No

[bennomatic]

This is a very, very astute set of observations.

Meh

[geek]

Apple stock is way over priced and has been for a while. Microsoft on the other hand is on the decline in almost every way. Not sure I really care about either company.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

Do a little research or maybe learn a bit about simple Wall Street evaluation before you spout off nonsense like AAPL being over priced. The price off the stock does not have anything to do with that.

Re:Meh

[getNewNickName]

Overpriced compared to what? Compared to Microsoft? Apple has year-over-year EPS growth numbers that are over twice as high as Microsoft's. Stock valuation is based on expected future earnings growth. If you said that Google or Amazon are way over-priced compared to Microsoft you would have a legitimate argument since their earnings growth thus far has only matched Microsoft yet their P/E ratio paints a different picture. Let's focus on facts instead of vague hand-waving.

Re:Meh

[rolfwind]

It's P/E is not extravagant or that high.

MSFT has plateaued since the early 00s because people have seen it really can't innovate beyond OS/Office line. The whole Xbox division has lost money to gain it's prominent position this generation of consoles. The Zune was mostly meh. It came out early in tablets/smartphones but despite that couldn't make anything people needed to have.

The day Steve Ballmer steps down is the day that stock will start gaining again. Even better if they get a CEO with an iota of division and the power/desire to kill the bureacracy that is stifling that company. I wonder how much of their workforce are just leeches who have a cushy job that produces little/no value to the company.

Re:Meh

[ElBeano]

You were modded up as insightful, but for many straight quarters, Apple has been performing very well. Their stock price reflects real world, historical performance. If you happen to know that they are headed for an earnings drop, please tell us how you know.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

Stock value is SUPPOSED to be based on future earnings growth. In the case of stocks like AAPL, stock price is based more on the fact that the shares keep increasing in value (not unlike tech stocks in the late 90s). When I hear my friends/coworkers who know nothing about the stock market saying that they want to buy AAPL because they hear it keeps going higher, I know that it's a bubble waiting to burst.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple would have to quadruple their revenue to make their revenue meet their market capitalization. Does that not sound overvalued to you?

Re:Meh

[dougmc]

Do a little research or maybe learn a bit about simple Wall Street evaluation before you spout off nonsense like AAPL being over priced. The price off the stock does not have anything to do with that.

*blink*

You don't think a company's stock price has anything to do with a company's stock being overpriced?

(I'm not saying I agree with any claims that the stock is overpriced, but your statement is ludicrous.)

Re:Meh

[joocemann]

The lead people at MS are killing the company. I have no doubt about it.

Have you ever read the e-mails from Bill Gates to his top guys at MS? The e-mails where he describes his intent to use windows movie maker and ended up in an hours-long fiasco of installing all kinds of crap and encountering dysfunction along the entire path? If not it is worth googling.

I had this EXACT same experience, except I wasn't a former owner writing e-mails... I was just a guy laughing at how ridiculous it was.

I attempted to get windows messenger for windows xp. Normally to update messenger, it offers an update. But this was not working at all (lol). So I decided to go to www.microsoft.com and dig up the software. Even though their website detected my OS, it gave me the download to Windows Live Messenger that was *NOT* for XP. I downloaded and attempted to install twice, only to be faced with a 'corrupted file' error.... funny.. because it wasn't corrupted.. it just didn't run on XP.

So after bumbling around a bit and curiously wondering why the regular update didn't work and their site's download didn't work... I stumble upon the fact that there is a separate messenger for XP. When I get to that page, which is on microsofts site, it doesn't render well. The page, viewed in MS internet explorer, was dilapidated and you couldn't actually hit the SELECT LANGUAGE box!

Funnily, I just checked, and its STILL screwed up! http://explore.live.com/windows-live-Messenger-XP This was months ago I saw this and it is STILL screwed up! Notice how the "Download Windows Media Player Plugin" text overlaps the "Choose Language" box and you can't actually click the box!

I had to dork around with this page for a good 15 minutes before I somehow got to select a language.... from there I finally got my download and got windows messenger for XP installed.

THE TOTAL PROCESS TOOK ABOUT 55 MINS. And I've been a nerd since 1992 if that gives you any reference to how fast I can usually solve problems.
--------------------

I was laughing the whole time, yet outrageously irritated. I was laughing because it is clear to me that the people running microsoft are clearly and without any question trying to kill the company. They are by neglect or deliberate act, ignoring every important thing that matters in software. Bill Gates complained a lot, and in his fervor, you can sense he wanted his software to operate like Apple's does.

Re:Meh

[joocemann]

I had the latest Internet explorer that was available through windows update. I'm pretty sure it was newer than IE6.

That's weird how you assumed it was IE6 even though I never said it was. I just checked the site in Firefox 3.5.7 and it is still screwed up looking as I had described.

What was your point again? To make an ass of yourself with assumption?

Re:Meh

[symbolset]

Price is only one component. Berkshire Hathaway shares have a high price, but there is a strong case for them being a good value. Apple PER less cash is ridiculously low for a company that's growing profits this fast and has so much more market share to gain in markets that are themselves growing quickly.

Re:Meh

[Daniel Phillips]

At P/E of 18.9 I would have to disagree with you. Unless Apple's earnings were to collapse dramatically in the short term, 18.9 is a fairly modest multiple for a tech company showing strong growth and ownership of multiple market segments. Yes, Android is coming on strong but that negative is already priced in, otherwise Apple's P/E would be somewhere in the mid 20's. Note: I am in no way an Apple groupie. I detest Apple's corporate culture and getting anywhere near an Apple product makes me ill. But a fair analysis is a fair analysis all the same.

By the way, having exceeded Microsoft in market cap, Apple would now seem to aspire to exceed Microsoft in moral bankruptcy. Just a thought.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

They can start by killing the HR policy's and CSPs that are driving employee's away by large numbers, it is also driving graduates away from full time work. Nobody wants to be "forced" on a career path, velocity, that is what they do.

They leave for a company they can do real work in and less bullshit clown dancing in manager's offices for a promotion by forced HR policy, Promotional Driven Development is MSFT's HR policy. I know, ive been there for a decade.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

Turn in your nerd card, please.
I navigated to that page and I couldn't use the mouse to select to a language. Hit tab until the drop down box is selected and use cursor keys to choose language.
Total time: 5 seconds.

Re:Meh

[snowraver1]

I was able to open it in Firefox 3.6.16 just fine. I also was able to open it using IE8.

Re:Meh

[Vectronic]

Opera 11.1, Chrome 10, Safari 5, and IE8 all work fine... Firefox 4, and Aurora, both screw up... but in the case of a layout malfunction, they all have an "Inspect Element" (for Opera or Chrome, for IE it's Developer Tools, or View Source for Firefox/Safari) where you would be able to get the link from. Just a suggestion for the future.

Re:Meh

[jonbryce]

The stock price reflects future growth potential. The price of a utility stock such as AT&T reflects real work historical performance. It has a P/E of 9.06, Apple's is 18.85, meaning the market expects Apple to more than double its earnings in the future.

Re:Meh

[jo_ham]

Considering that they released the iPad 9 months ago, in one of the most successful product launches in history, and were able to continue to grow their profits in a global economic downturn, and continue to grow their smartphone user base, and continue to increase their computer market share, I think that's not too far away.

Despite many claims that they'd be a flash in the pan, every year they have continued to grow.

Re:Meh

[ceoyoyo]

According to the article Apple has septupled their profits since 2006, so a mere doubling doesn't seem particularly farfetched.

Re:Meh

[symbolset]

So we're disassembling web pages now just to follow a hyperlink? Somehow I doubt this was what Tim Berners-Lee envisioned.

Re:Meh

[brunes69]

P/E is not everything. Compared to GOOG or MSFT, AAPL's margins are horrid.

AAPL's gross margin is currently at 38%. GOOG is 64% and MSFT is 79%.

That is just one example.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't hear you over me sucking Job's cock.

Re:Meh

[catmistake]

I wonder how much of their workforce are just leeches who have a cushy job that produces little/no value to the company.

In my experience, at any company with more than 300 employees, roughly a third of the workers that have been employed there for more than 2 years are leeches. Why is it every place I work, the people that have been there the longest act like they own the company and feel justified in bullshitting most of the day? What is so special about a long time employee that has no work ethic?

Re:Meh

[atlasdropperofworlds]

That site renders fine in IE 9, FF 4, and Chrome 10.

What problem are you having?

Also, XP is 10 (yes TEN) years old now. Think about that: You're using an OS from the last decade, and complaining about how much you have to install to use modern software.

FFS, if you must use Microsoft, at least try to keep up to date before you go on criticizing them. They've supported your OS for a full decade, and they're still patching it. Hell, they even release MSE for it, so you have free antivirus. For all the things they're doing wrong, which many seem so apt to point out, they are actually doing several things very well: Legacy support, free lightweight AV, free cloud/sync. Not even Linux gives you free cloud storage. Do their products work perfectly in every way? No. Do they work well enough? Yes, absolutely. They're also improving, and not too slowly.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

They've quadrupled since Jan of 2008. So no, it doesn't.

Re:Meh

[Goboxer]

From the numbers I saw they've quadrupled since 2006. However, its easier to go from 10 billion to 40 billion than to go from 40 billion to 160 billion.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

You take MSFT's margins, I'll take AAPL's profits and product stream. Deal?

Re:Meh

[prockcore]

Not even Linux gives you free cloud storage.

I agree with the rest of your post, except this. Ubuntu One gives me 2gigs free cloud storage.

Re:Meh

[phantomfive]

No, not at all. If you can make an investment, then make your money back within four years, that is a very good investment.

In reality, of course, you have to look at profit, not revenue. After taxes, Apple made $14 billion last year. Their market cap is $311 billion. That means, without any future growth, if you bought Apple, you'd be making a 4.5% return. Which is not bad, but if you consider that the company has been also growing 30% year over year for a while now, the price is very good. By next year, your $311 billion would have become ~$415 billion. That's a good deal.

Re:Meh

[atlasdropperofworlds]

Cool, I didn't realize they have that. I don't remember seeing it in the past. 2 GB is good. MS Live gives you 5 GB you can sync between your devices, and 25 GB online.

Re:Meh

[LynnwoodRooster]

I'll do that - considering Microsoft makes more profit in absolute dollars as well...

Re:Meh

[graymocker]

From TFA we learn that Apple has tripled revenue over the past 4 years. Future growth prospects is baked into market cap, and based on past performance exceptional revenue growth is a reasonable expectation for Apple.

Now I personally don't believe Apple's current growth rate is sustainable. But there are many investors who do, and they have a reasonable basis for that belief.

Heck, they might be right. In 2006 Apple was selling lots of iPods and skeptics said yeah, its a hit, but the MP3 player market is maturing so where is the growth potential? Apple stock was "overvalued" based on existing product and product sales numbers. As it turns out the growth potential was in iPhones and iPads. Today the Apple skeptics (and I count myself one) believe that there won't be any new hit market-defining products from Apple that can give them the same levels of stratospheric growth. But hey, maybe we're wrong. We were wrong in 2006 after all.

Re:Meh

[graymocker]

Apple's margins are bad for a software company. Apple's margins are exceptional for a hardware company. (HP, HTC, and RIM's margins are all in the 10-20% range. They would kill for a 38% margin.)

Judging purely from the financials, it's almost as if Apple were a hybrid software/hardware company or something.

Re:Meh

[bloodhawk]

hell yeah, I will take that deal in a second. MS make more profit by a significant margin at this point with steady continual growth. Apple have skyrocketted by still are a long way below MS profits and will require continual skyrocketting just to equal MS's current profits.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

Getting near a MacBookPro makes you ill? Have you seriously used one? What's the piece of crap PC laptop that you're using right now?

I'm a die-hard Linux workstation dude.

But my laptop is a MacBooPro running OS X.

If such a laptop makes you ill I suggest a visit to the nearest psychiatric hospital and... Have fun catching your feet in your laptop's power cord!

Re:Meh

[beelsebob]

No, AAPL stock's value rising is based on the fact that AAPL's revenue and profits are consistantly rising, and that their profit per employee is pretty enormous.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

And I've been a nerd since 1992 if that gives you any reference to how fast I can usually solve problems.

If you were a nerd, you'd get yourself a real OS rather than fiddling with Windows and their messengers.

Re:Meh

[Cant use a slash wtf]

It doesn't matter what their motives are for charging too much. They are still charging too much. I honestly don't see how their expected growth in any way affects how over-priced they are deemed to be when they still cost more than they're worth.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice try, but Google and MS are mostly software, Apple is at least 50% hardware. Apples and oranges when it comes to margin.

Re:Meh

[Thing 1]

So we're disassembling web pages now just to follow a hyperlink? Somehow I doubt this was what Tim Berners-Lee envisioned.

Ahem. We route around damage. I think it's pretty spot-on.

Re:Meh

[geekoid]

"Apple would have to quadruple their revenue to make their revenue meet their market capitalization."

Please stop talking about finance, you are looking pretty damn stupid.

Re:Meh

[tehcyder]

Overpriced compared to what? Compared to Microsoft?

No, compared with non-tech shares.

Re:Meh

[geekoid]

XP is out of support, so suck it.

This is what happens when you make OS's that get old, as opposed to OS's the mature.

Re:Meh

[tehcyder]

No, AAPL stock's value rising is based on the fact that AAPL's revenue and profits are consistantly rising, and that their profit per employee is pretty enormous.

Who cares what profits they make if they don't distribute them? Sorry, it's all looking like another bubble waiting to burst.

Re:Meh

[geekoid]

"Also, XP is 10 (yes TEN) years old now. Think about that: You're using an OS from the last decade, and complaining about how much you have to install to use modern software."

And it some respects it's a valid complaint. This is rarely an issue with a properly designing OS that matures.
Early in me career, you would be laughed at if a system was designed to only last 10 years.

Re:Meh

[tehcyder]

In reality, of course, you have to look at profit, not revenue. After taxes, Apple made $14 billion last year. Their market cap is $311 billion. That means, without any future growth, if you bought Apple, you'd be making a 4.5% return.

Well, you would if Apple paid dividends. As it is, you make no return at all until you sell your shares. No company's shares keep rising in value by 30% a year indefinitely. It's just a case of when the bubble bursts.

Re:Meh

[Compaqt]

Well, that's what sometimes happens.

Other times what happens is:

The oldest employees are the ones who actually created the product.

Say, in the case of Google, the actual algorithms and the hardware setup that run the company.

The people who come in afterward are the marketers, the Vice-Presidents of "Strategy", the PR people, the lawyers getting $400 for photocopying stuff out of law books.

Re:Meh

[phantomfive]

Generally if the company earnings justify the cost, it is not a bubble. The reason people are willing to buy it now without dividends is because of the promise of future dividends (or because they are crazy). Eventually the growth will level off, and it is expected at that time they will begin to pay dividends. If they don't, at that time, indeed their stock will drop.

Try taking off the apple tax!

[Anonymous Coward]

Remove like 15-20% due to apple tax inflating costs.

Then another 5% for hipster smugness.

Yep...

[E IS mC(Square)]

And Linux has already beaten them both in server,mobile devices and embedded systems market. What's your point again?

Re:Yep...

[the linux geek]

Windows ships more servers by both revenue and volume than Linux. Mobile devices, if you mean consumer electronics, are largely Linux, but embedded systems (especially lower-end ones) are not.

Re:Yep...

[h4rr4r]

And how many servers are shipped bare?
I bet most of those end up as linux boxes.

Re:Yep...

[the linux geek]

Very few. Most servers from major OEM's (HP, IBM, Fujitsu) which make up a large majority of server sales will include an OS, whether its Windows, Linux, or a proprietary system.

Re:Yep...

[h4rr4r]

I buy from HP and DELL, we alway buy bare boxes so that surprises the heck out of me.

Re:Yep...

[the linux geek]

I didn't say that you couldn't buy them bare, just that it was fairly unusual. I doubt it makes up the difference between Windows and Linux ($6.3bn vs $2.5bn, 1.5mn units vs 450k units, according to IDC in Q4 2010.)

Re:Yep...

[h4rr4r]

Revenue is pointless to look at, MS charges way more and Centos is on many servers. Units is more interesting, and I now am wondering where they get their units figures. Not saying anything is wrong with them, just 3 times the units does not match what I see on a day to day basis in server rooms. Maybe other parts of the earth are not like my little area.

Re:Yep...

[blair1q]

That there's money in desktop, and nerds in those other things.

Re:Yep...

[theBully]

just that it was fairly unusual

That may be the case for very small shops. For big shops, their gonna' buy bare even if planning to install Windows onto them simply because big shops tend to avoid OEM installs and just drop their self made images on. Also, big shops typically buy the licenses through various volume license programs because they get savings that way. It's really impossible to say what get's Linux and what gets Windows in the end. Many machines in my server rooms have jumped over from Windows to Linux after a while.

With certainty I see more and more Linux boxes in data centers. Particularly since the recession hit and FOSS has gained a whole lot of interest ranging from small to big businesses. At some point I thought this recession was going to be a boost for FOSS but I guess the communities missed the opportunity.

Still, that does not tell anything. My server room has shifted from predominantly Windows to predominantly Linux in the last 2 years. But that's obviously not a measure. Nothing really is because Linux doesn't sell much so in many cases you cannot speak of a market share to measure. On the desktops, you can get a very off count by looking at browsers hitting a certain site but that's limited to the users of the site and to those users that do not configure their browser not to report such data. Servers, and particularly Linux servers have very little to do with web browsing (as it should normally happen in a secure environment).

All these market share analysis are nothing but waste of time. They're never accurate and can never be verified. Each company will have someone create a favorable report for them. If you really want to know how well a company is doing at the moment look at their stock, earnings and financial reports. This is exactly what the story is about. Apple seems to have surpassed Microsoft in value. That's still not much of an indicator as to which company provides better quality products. It may indicate which company has a better marketing strategy at the moment.

Re:Yep...

[StuartHankins]

HP Blades ship with no OS as default. It's only their lower-end DL- and ML- servers and SOHO stuff that ships with an OS preinstalled.

Re:Yep...

[westlake]

And Linux has already beaten them both in server,mobile devices and embedded systems market. What's your point again?

It depends on how you define "Linux."

The community-oriented Linux client distribution is all but dead.

The smartphone and tablet markets are being defined by Apple and the iOS, Google and Android, Microsoft and Windows.

The Internet Suite for your HDTV , video game console or set top box may run under an embedded Linux OS.

But the content - music, video, and games - will be purchased from your Vizio or Samsung app store, distributed and protected using the latest and greatest in licensed codecs.

The geek will have "won" the victory for "openess" in the browser and lost the war.

Re:Yep...

[QuantumRiff]

How many real players buy Dell or HP? Seriously? Facebook, Google, Rackspace? they all have custom OEM ones, (and I think Amazon does as well). So those shipments don't count in the numbers your quoting.. Seriously, with VM's, windows is going out quickly.. When you can turn up a new server in 5 minutes, you can seriously start isolating services. ie, separate print server, file server, calendar server, etc. Except with Windows, your paying out the nose in licensing and CAL's.. (why do people always forget the CAL's?)

Re:Yep...

[Requiem18th]

The parent lives in an alternate reality where windows dominates the server, Linux is a Hipster toy OS and Apple sells a general purpose OS that ships in 90% of desktop machines.

Re:Yep...

[smash]

Bet again. I'll bet that most of them end up as ESX/ESXi or Windows.

Re:Yep...

[robbrit]

This statistic doesn't include what I do: buy a server that happens to come with Windows installed, wipe it, and put Linux on it. Does anybody else do that?

Re:Yep...

[arief.utama]

The parent lives in an alternate reality where windows dominates the server, Linux is a Hipster toy OS and Apple sells a general purpose OS that ships in 90% of desktop machines.

Sounds like my world, like 15 years ago...

Re:Yep...

[Anonymous Coward]

Volume I very much doubt it... I'm renting several dedicated servers. These comes bare bone and then get a free, unaccounted for, Debian Linux. And that's in server rooms containing thousands of server like these. And there are several buildings containing these server rooms. In several countries. On several continents.

The biggest datacenters from Amazon, eBay, Google, FaceBook, etc. are not running Windows either.

If Linux servers makes only $2.5bn billions in sale it's because most people, like Google and FaceBook, realize it's not mandatory to pay the Red Hat tax.

Re:Yep...

[e70838]

At my work, in the simulation room, there are around 60 PC running linux (redhat) and that have never run windows. All of them have the microsoft XP pro sticker with a license key.

Re:Yep...

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows ships more servers by both revenue and volume than Linux.

Naturally. Linux doesn't have license fees ;-) Volume, well, if you count just this "hey I paid for a license"- volume, then sure. But when it comes to actual install base and bare metal installations, Windows is very very far behind Linux.

Re:Yep...

[rtb61]

Android is a Linux based client distribution "Android's mobile operating system is based on a modified version of the Linux kernel" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system).

I think you really and I mean really fail to grasp them principle of open source software "The Android Open Source Project". At any time, 'The Geek' can take it and change it to behave more like "The Geek' wants it to behave, in the mean time closed source propriety software dominance outside of games is 'DEAD', 'The Geek" wins.

At no time has anyone (a part from insiders whose jobs are at stake) demanded that any particular distribution, graphical user interface, browser, office suit et al must win, just that free open source software must win. What shape, form or pattern that takes, when it takes or for how long each variant exist, dominates and the wanes is arbitrary as long as you can 'Chose To Change' what ever it is you want to change.

Re:Yep...

[Baki]

And even many systems sold with windows (the windows tax) end up as linux boxes.

Re:Yep...

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention that linux absolutely dominates the modern supercomputer market.

Re:Yep...

[tehcyder]

Revenue is pointless to look at,

As an accountant, I find that highly offensive.

Re:Yep...

[tehcyder]

This statistic doesn't include what I do: buy a server that happens to come with Windows installed, wipe it, and put Linux on it. Does anybody else do that?

No, I think you're pretty much unique. Most people on slashdot have barely heard of Linux, never mind actually installed it on a server. We're pretty big on Windows 95 for production environments, although some of the hardcore gamers use Mac OS9.

Re:Yep...

[speculatrix]

if you go through retail channel to buy servers then you will often get the choice of a microsoft OS, or a commercial linux os, and you'll pay at least 30% more than asking an HP or Dell account manager for a price, at which point you can tell said acct mgr you don't want an OS or any media.

Re:Yep...

[h4rr4r]

Good.

Re:Yep...

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

And Linux has already beaten them both in server,mobile devices and embedded systems market. What's your point again?

Citation for "mobile devices" needed.

Re:Yep...

[westlake]

Android is a Linux based client distribution

But the Android smartphone - as a mass market consumer product - is defined by Google and the cell phone carriers.

At any time, 'The Geek' can take it and change it to behave more like "The Geek' wants it to behave, in the mean time closed source propriety software dominance outside of games is 'DEAD', 'The Geek" wins/

20% of prime time Internet traffic in the states was a Netflix stream before Netflix offered a streaming only service.

The Internet "app" can be installed on your HDTV set, PS3 video game console, Roku set top box, home theater receiver, etc.

It doesn't need a browser.

The app store is owned by Sony or Mitsubishi Electric.

The hardware can ship as a big ticket home appliance.

The $5 to $15,000 home theater system install your wife isn't going to let you hack into this side of Divorce Court.

The geek loses.

Re:Yep...

[rtb61]

https://guardianproject.info/ nuff said ;).

The Old New Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

This is Apple versus IBM all over again. Look how that worked out. When is Steve Jobs going to realise that his obsessions are screwing over the ordinary guy? Let's face it. The guy hasn't changed that much and he dropped the ball and nearly crashed the company last time around. He's as out of touch and greedy as he ever was only this time instead of storming out in a blaze of publicity he's signed up to getting an authorised biography done. Only this time around it's not going to be a computer company like NeXT but a grave and the hereafter.

From the other side he'll be madly laughing to himself as the seeds of his own arrogance caused Apple to miss the boat on getting an affordable OS X out to the masses and someone carries the blame again. The last time I checked nobody has returned from the grave unless you count unprovable fairy stories so there isn't going to be a Steve Jobs returning on a cloud to save the day. That's a challenge for Apple management to butch up and meet peoples needs and market demand while they can. There will be no NeXT 2.0 to save the day.

Re:The Old New Thing

[scotts13]

I'd try to calm down before posting next time - and check a few facts. Take a look at what happened to Apple without Steve Jobs... and what happened last time Apple let other companies use their OS.

Re:The Old New Thing

[vijayiyer]

The whole point of the article is that it's not like Apple vs IBM all over again. You forgot to take your blinders off some 10 years ago.

Re:The Old New Thing

[SilverJets]

He's as out of touch and greedy as he ever was only this time instead of storming out in a blaze of publicity he's signed up to getting an authorised biography done.

Lol, wut? Out of touch? Really? Did you happen to notice the iPod? Apple cornered the marked on portable, digital music players and everyone else had to play catch up. Which none of them ever managed to do.

Have you seen the iPad? Again, Apple has cornered the market and yet again the competitors are racing to catch up with Apple having already launched its 2nd gen iPad.

From the other side he'll be madly laughing to himself as the seeds of his own arrogance caused Apple to miss the boat on getting an affordable OS X out to the masses and someone carries the blame again.

Affordable OS X? Go to any computer store that sells Apple products. The disk for OS X costs about $30. 30 DOLLARS. How farking much does cheapest hobbled version of Windows 7 cost?

Re:The Old New Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Gotta laugh at all you guys replying to my "The New Old Thing" post. You're attacking the cliché like a cliché. If that doesn't make you stop to think behind the manufactured headlines and hype I don't know what will.

One of the things that said about a genius is they don't think they're especially clever but wonder why everyone else is so stupid. If you think that's a wake up call aimed at you it is.

Re:The Old New Thing

[BlackSnake112]

But according to Apple, you also have to own/buy apple hardware to install that $30 OS on.

Considering Apple went out of their way to stop people from installing OSX on netbooks, the AC has a point. If Apple had to support OSX on every type of Intel and AMD platform I am not so sure their "smooth OS experience" would be there across the board.

Re:The Old New Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

When is Steve Jobs going to realise that his obsessions are screwing over the ordinary guy?

When it no longer pays.

Re:The Old New Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup. Apple surprised everyone with IS X and the switch to Intel. It built up a lot of interest. Apple then blew it. Ballmer may be as dumb as a brick but is now making Apple look evil. This isn't because Microsoft are putting out good products or are even a particularly nice company. It's the fact that Jobs is so arrogant and autistic. He just doesn't get real peoples practical needs nor the fact they have to eat.

There's a chance Microsoft will keep Ballmer on and Microsoft will crash on its own leaving Apple to ride the surf. The problem is that won't happen with a dictator like Jobs at the helm. The very thing that gives him his arguable genius is the very thing that's getting in the way. Apple won't change unless Jobs changes. He can't or won't do that so has to die or leave before Apple collapses and exists the OS market.

Anyone who knows anything about history and culture can pick out countless examples of this. If the obsessive emos on Slashdot stepped out of their nerd cubes for one moment, and the investors took their eyes of the wads of illusory stock profits they're building they'd know this. But they don't want to because it's not the story they've hitched their wagon to. Apple won't be the first of its type to go down hard and, believe it or not, cease to exist. The more wedded they are to Jobs the sooner that will happen.

Re:The Old New Thing

[jo_ham]

"Out of their way" being a non-encrypted install DVD with no serial numbers and no activation system with a single text file that says "please don't steal OSX" that you have to remove before burning a bootable copy on a non-apple machine.

That's so far out of their way, I agree.

Re:The Old New Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Affordable OS X? Go to any computer store that sells Apple products. The disk for OS X costs about $30. 30 DOLLARS. How farking much does cheapest hobbled version of Windows 7 cost?

And it's just an expensive coaster unless you also buy apple's hardware - which is pretty much identical to everything else but of course they put an artificial limitation in to force you to buy from them.

Re:The Old New Thing

[UnknowingFool]

But according to Apple, you also have to own/buy apple hardware to install that $30 OS on.

According to MS you have to buy/own PC hardware to install Windows 7. And it has to be hardware made in the last several years or Aero won't work. The nerve of Microsoft.

Re:The Old New Thing

[SilverJets]

Ok, so you don't have to buy a PC to run Windows 7 on?

Also, are you claiming that the Windows experience is smooth across the board? Seriously?

Re:The Old New Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Affordable OS X? Go to any computer store that sells Apple products. The disk for OS X costs about $30. 30 DOLLARS. How farking much does cheapest hobbled version of Windows 7 cost?

That's only an upgrade, which requires you purchase at least a $999 plus tax computer, before you upgrade. It even says this on the website. Dollar for dollar Windows will be cheaper for the same set up, but require more work on your part, Mac is a finished product OOTB. Macs desktops are overpriced, but the laptops tend to be slightly more reasonable when you consider that they come with iLife, which isn't a bad package. I think if Windows could offer a package to compete with iLife, they'd do a lot better on market share. Windows has a wider variety of systems to support. Apple still hasn't hit the bumps of anti-trust lawsuits yet, but give it time and it will in which case you'll see it having to choose other browsers to ship, and to allow 3rd parties to sell it, same as Microsoft.

Re:The Old New Thing

[stewbacca]

Ooh look! Another "Apple is going to go out of business" sighting...I've been hearing this since 1988 and it's still not even remotely close to happening.

Re:The Old New Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd try to calm down before posting next time - and check a few facts. Take a look at what happened to Apple without Steve Jobs... and what happened last time Apple let other companies use their OS.

Jobs sold his 11.3% stake for $70.5 million. He could have got $135 million if he held on while proper managers were running the company better. Eventually the awfulness of the OS caught up with them and to save themselves they tried licensing only to dicover other companies made better Macs than Apple did.

Jobs came back because Next had the OS that would eventually allow Apple to have a decent OS.

Uncomfortable as these facts are for fanbois they are facts.

Agreed.

[mosb1000]

I'm going to have to agree. I don't know anyone who is planning to get (or is excited about the possibility of getting) a windows phone. Add the fact that many (most) companies are now supporting iOS and Android on their corporate networks, and what you come up with is a market already filled with devices superior to anything Microsoft could offer. No one is going to willingly downgrade to a windows phone.

Re:Agreed.

[tepples]

No one is going to willingly downgrade to a windows phone.

Unless, say, the mobile side-game for one's favorite Xbox 360 game is Windows Phone exclusive.

Re:Agreed.

[UnknowingFool]

That's the problem I see with WP7 getting more marketshare. MS is trying to appeal only to consumers who are their current customers. It's not trying to get more general consumers. Is Xbox Live integration a good feature? Yes, if you already have it. If you're talking about my grandmother who has doesn't care for a "YBox" or "PlaySituation" or a "Whey", it's no good for her.

Re:Agreed.

[theweatherelectric]

Is Xbox Live integration a good feature? Yes, if you already have it. If you're talking about my grandmother who has doesn't care for a "YBox" or "PlaySituation" or a "Whey", it's no good for her.

I imagine the intention is to use XBox Live as the backend for games on Windows Phone. So if your grandmother cares about Angry Birds she will perhaps end up caring about XBox Live as well.

Re:Agreed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hold the fuck up! You mean to tell me you can play games on your CELLPHONE??? Sign me up!! Oh, wait...

Re:Agreed.

[scot4875]

Your grandmother also doesn't care about an "eye phone" or a "robot" either, so that's probably not much of a concern to Microsoft.

--Jeremy

Re:Agreed.

[UnknowingFool]

But if she cares about Angry Birds she can already get it without getting Xbox Live.

Re:Agreed.

[Cronock]

I think MS would have to strong-arm their way back into the market, but with them working hand-in-hand with Apple for exchange capabilities in the iPhone I don't think they'll take that approach. Possibly by offering phones dirt cheap in quantity to businesses, in exchange for contracts that will commit them to infrastructure that may not be non WP7+ friendly. I would like to think that IT management has wised up in the large corp. environments to not be tricked into lock-ins like that anymore, but I would probably just be dumb to think that.

Re:Agreed.

[terjeber]

No one is going to willingly downgrade to a windows phone.

Just for the record, I upgraded from iPhone to WP7 this year. A little by accident. Developing for mobile I have to keep tabs on what goes on, so I have an iPhone 3GS, a Galaxy Tab and I got a WP7 phone just before Christmas. I was not expecting it to be my main phone, which at the time was the iPhone, so I just got the cheapest they had, the LG.

I was immediately impressed with the development environment which is at least a generation ahead of Android and even more ahead of Apple (gawd I hate Objective-C). I doodled some apps. Worked on it for a while. I found my self grabbing the WP7 phone more and more and suddenly I found I preferred it over the other two.

Does the phone have shortcomings? Fewer now that the first update is out, but sure, it does. It is still a significantly improved user experience over iOS though. Given what we saw at Mix, the Microsoft lead over Apple in phone usability will take another significant leap forward. Honestly, nobody innovates on the phone like Microsoft at the moment. It took a while to get started, but as some of the other Microsoft teams, the WP7 team is world class with a great product.

Sadly I think a number of developers, particularly of the ilk that reads /. are making judgements mostly on their own superstition. Microsoft of 2011 is not Microsoft of 1999. There is a significant improvement, and many Microsoft products, like C# - which has jumped far, far ahead of Java now, .NET MVC and others, are really quite good. In my current job I integrate JBoss and Microsoft solutions. Working in Eclipse on Linux is a huge step backwards compared to VS2010 on Windows.

Before concluding I am a MS fanboi, I have been working almost exclusively in Java since early 1997 and was part of one of the very early companies to make serious money on a commercial Java product. In the beginning we had to carefully wrap our Java stuff in C front-ends to make sure our customers didn't notice it was Java. If they had, at the time they would have rejected it, since everybody "knew" at the time that Java was too slow to use for anything real.

Re:Agreed.

[UnknowingFool]

That's the point. She doesn't care about the iPhone at all. She wants a phone that can do things. Xbox Live integration is not among that list. Her list includes "How do I talk to my grandkids?" "How do I see my grandkids?" "Where am I in the city?" "Can I do crosswords?" With more apps on the iPhone and Android, they are her best option.

Re:Agreed.

[geekoid]

What the hell Dev environment are you suing for the Android? Mine is as good as my MS dev environment.

" (gawd I hate Objective-C)"
SO you evaluate the phones usefulness based on your opinion of the dev language?
And frankly, I have no idea how you can hate objective C.

"like C# - which has jumped far, far ahead of Java now"
In what way?

I thin k you need to take a look at your eclipse environment. Seriously sound like your missing something.
Java is slower then C, always has been and always will be. That's not even a question. The question is development speed and cost. If you can't understand that, then I would be suspicious of your understanding of the platforms you develop for.

I use and Android phones because of ti's integration with Google. I need to be able to easily access Gmail, Google calendars, etc...
The iPhone is a pain to set up, and as near as I can tell, that's the same with WP7 phones; which is a shame, I would love to have Google integration well as integration with one of my consoles.

Re:Agreed.

[terjeber]

What the hell Dev environment are you suing for the Android?

Eclipse, and it can't hold a candle to VS2010 in my opinion. That might be because I use Eclipse on Linux though.

SO you evaluate the phones usefulness based on your opinion of the dev language?

Did I say that? Of course not. I just said I didn't like Objective-C. It makes me feel like it is 1989 again, and it isn't.

[C# ahead of Java] In what way?

LINQ is a good starting point. Concurrency is another. Dynamic - you have to try it. Oh, and nothing like the botched Java compile-time auto-boxing. If there ever was a bad idea implemented in Java, the current auto-boxing mechanism is a great example.

Some examples (please ignore any and all errors) - get some data from a list, ordered (LINQ):
List<Person> myFriends = allPeople.Where( p => p.Status == Friend ).OrderBy( p => p.LastName ).ToList();

Parse some XML, assume you have an XML stream where each Person is defined as something like

<person>
<firstname>Tom</firstname>
<lastname>Jones</lastname>
</person>

You want to parse this into a List type thing. How to do this?

XDocument doc = XDocument.Parse( theXML );
List<Person> people = (from p in doc.Descendants("person")
select new Person {
firstname = p.Element("firstname"),
lastname = p.Element("lastname")
}).ToList();

Too easy. Compare this to, for example, Smooks, which fails in weird and impossible to understand ways. It is heaven.

I thin k you need to take a look at your eclipse environment

I have been doing Java dev for quite a while. I know my Eclipse quite well. Compared to VS2010 it falls short. Not badly so, but still.

Java is slower then C, always has been and always will be ... The question is development speed and cost

For one, Java is not necessarily slower than C, but in most cases it will be. With a JIT you can at least theoretically achieve optimizations that are not possible in a compiled language, such as code-removal, pre-calculations of values that are determined will not change etc. But yes, Java will generally be slower than C. I don't know why that is a point to make though, since I have never raised any issues with the speed of Java in this discussion. In fact, I have claimed that I prefer C#, which is very similar to Java in most ways, for example it is run in a VM with a JIT Compiler. Some minor differences in the way execution happens, but that is as relevant as bringing up the speed of Java in this discussion.

As to the speed and cost of development, that is precisely why I use C# over Java. I am significantly more productive in C# than I can be in Java, and that is quite amazing given that I have developed in Java since 1997 and in C# since 2009.

I need to be able to easily access Gmail, Google calendars, etc... The iPhone is a pain to set up, and as near as I can tell, that's the same with WP7 phones

You are just guessing now, are you not? You have in fact never seen an iPhone and never heard of WP7. Setting the iPhone up to use Gmail is a snap. If someone was having problems with that they need to go back to their day-job as a bus driver and stop pretending they know how to use computers. I have actually not set up Google Calendar on my iPhone so I can not say anything about that. For Windows Phone 7 you have to provide your Gmail credentials, and if that is painful for you then I can of course understand why you do not like WP7, but I am also surprised that you are at the same time actually able to post on /. since posting on /. requires significantly more skills and work than setting up Gmail and Google Calendars on WP7.

I'm sure I'm speaking for a lot of people here

[future assassin]

"Please hook us up with your dealer!!" what ever you're popping/snorting we want some too.

Does that mean

[Anonymous Coward]

I must start hating apple and loving Microsoft ?

Re:the only number that matters

[WrongSizeGlass]

#2. That's your butt. And my post number.

In the Navy we call it our "6", you insensitive clod!

Analyst's expectations are far fetched

[arivera71]

Analyst's are assuming that just because Microsoft partnered with Nokia their smartphone businesses will come back from the dead by gravity!!! Guess what... I don't think that's ever going to happen. Both Microsoft and Nokia have demonstrated that they are dinosaurs and they don't understand new technologies. Even worst, they don't understand consumers!!!

Re:Analyst's expectations are far fetched

[UnknowingFool]

Yeah, the so-called experts just moved Nokia's current market share over to Windows Phone without really explaining why and declared the Windows Phone the winner. It is not guaranteed that the MS/Nokia partnership will generate a lot of sales. The first phone will be years away and I don't expect Apple or Android to sit and wait for Windows Phone to catch up. MS and Nokia both have a lot of work ahead. Execution has not been a strong point of MS since Ballmer took charge.

Re:Analyst's expectations are far fetched

[symbolset]

Analysts sell out. That's their business model. - James Plamondon, Microsoft chief evangelist.

Re:Analyst's expectations are far fetched

[geekoid]

And the employees don't like the fact they are working on a MS phone. So I imagine that will impact delivery and quality.

People won't be buying Windows Mobile...

[joocemann]

... because they *like* or *prefer* it.

They will (mostly) be buying it because they don't know any better, or that it is "The OS" that is present on the phone they were sold.

Windows Mobile has been and always will be a trash OS. Glitchy, crashy, unreliable, clunky, odd..... I have multiple years of experience and wished for something akin to iOS or Android the whole time.

---I fear the only way they can predict WM will outrun iOS is because of some form of anti-trust action in business producing exclusivity and limitation of OS choices. This is par for the course for microsoft and its business model; when the consumer doesn't like it, buy up, control, and limit their choices. In the end, they know the consumer pays for MS crap rather than not have technology.

Re:People won't be buying Windows Mobile...

[Idbar]

Hey, perhaps WM never worked for you, as you expectations were different. I switched from mi HTC wizard to an iPhone, and I gained lots of applications, but I started losing calls. As a phone WM worked well and with a fairly powerful browser it gave me what I needed, and its processor speed was less than 200Mhz. I never recovered from that. And eventually has to switch to a 1Ghz android. Now... As time passes I realize that for the actual processing power, WM5 worked quite well.

Re:People won't be buying Windows Mobile...

[the-matt-mobile]

I own an iPhone, but frankly I'm rooting for WP7 all the way. While there's a lot of excitement about developing for iOS *devices*, I don't see much excitement about iOS as a *development platform*. Closed app store, OS X development only, clunky programming language - no reason to rehash the whole list - you read slashdot. This is the one thing MS brings to the show - they know how to make software that appeals to developers, and that's what I expect out of WP7. Some excitement around it as a development platform. If they do that, which is what they're traditionally good at, they'll dominate. Sadly, I worry that they've not yet found their "developers, developers, developers" monkey dance mantra when it comes to mobile devices, but if history is an indicator they'll figure it out.

Re:People won't be buying Windows Mobile...

[DrgnDancer]

Except that nearly that whole list describes how Microsoft plans to handle developers for WM7. Closed App Store, Windows only development (granted, given Windows ubiquity, not a huge issue, but conceptually the same), probably VS only development... Only the clunky language is missing and there are ways around that. Not to mention that while ObjectiveC may be somewhat clunky, most people admit that Cocoa is pretty spiffy overall once they play with it a bit. It abstracts away most, if certainly not all, of ObjC's warts. In my mind, Microsoft is taking the worst features of Android and iOS and making an all new all "better" OS.

Re:People won't be buying Windows Mobile...

[Anonymous Coward]

So, have you actually tried Windows Phone 7? Or are you talking about the old WM 6 stuff?

Re:People won't be buying Windows Mobile...

[Anonymous Coward]

So windows mobile today is the same as WM 2 years ago? Seriously, MS has tried and failed in this market for 10+ years. The current iteration is not the same OS, and it will stand or fail on its own merits. iOS will wind up on the wrong end of an anti-trust suit because of its app store not because of its OS dominance. (Duh, look at market share.)

Re:People won't be buying Windows Mobile...

[dunkelfalke]

I liked Windows Mobile. Used it for years. Would still use it if it weren't dead and if there were decent hardware for it available (I like resistive touchscreens and styluses dammit)

Re:People won't be buying Windows Mobile...

[gbjbaanb]

No, people won't be buying WinPho7 because they *do* know better - they know Windows, they know Microsoft. They use it every day at work. They know how slow, buggy and unstable it is.. and given the choice of smartphone, they're already showing what they think of the brand.

Re:People won't be buying Windows Mobile...

[Anonymous Coward]

So XXX today is the same as XXX 2 years ago?

That same argument is used against most non-Microsoft things as well.

Re:People won't be buying Windows Mobile...

[stewbacca]

I've wanted to, but they are extremely rare in the wild.

numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[CannonballHead]

the interpretation can.

For example: $1k invested in 2000, AAPL vs. MSFT. What about 1985? 1990? 1995? Hindsight is 20/20, as the saying goes. Apple has had success with some of it's more recent Jobs products. But nobody KNEW that would happen before-hand. Apple has gone up and down; has Microsoft done the same? Was MSFT less of a gamble with a smaller potential benefit, whereas Apple was a gamble with large potential benefit? (I don't know, I'm only asking questions that could color the interpretation of these "infallible numbers" ....)

Or, how about this one: revenue vs. profits. MSFT is still beating Apple in profit. So ... which is more important? Total stock price? Profit? Total revenue? ...

Or how about diversity of revenue? If suddenly iPhones and iPads went out of style, where would Apple be? If Windows phones went out of style, where would Windows be?

Interpretation of numbers is a big deal in comparing two companies... and there's a lot more to a company vs. company debate than revenue, profit, stock price/market cap, and phone sales... especially when products come and go as trends, and when one company has already shown that it falls apart without a certain CEO.

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[ceoyoyo]

Potential profits for the next few years determine stock price. Apple's profits are multiplying (x7 since 2006 apparently). Microsoft's are going up, so far, a little bit.

As for diversity, Microsoft makes most of their money from two closely linked software products - Office and Windows. Both of which are losing market share. Apple makes most of their money from phones, tablets, music players, computers, apps and music, all but one of which is growing, fast. Which of those is more diverse?

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, MS didn't even go public until 1986 so there's no point in comparing 1985.

If you had purchased $1000 of MSFT & AAPL on 3/13/1986 when MS went public, your Apple stock would be worth around $110K, and your MS stock would be worth around $280K today.

By 1990 (1/2/1990), the numbers are a lot closer. AAPL: approx $39K; MSFT: approx $42K
1995 (1/3/1995) - AAPL: approx $36K; MSFT: approx $7K

Apple purchased on historical low and sold on historical high (not as sure about these numbers, but they should be close): AAPL $243K; MSFT: $280K

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[CannonballHead]

Doh. I just had a post and accidentally clicked a link in the preview. Sigh.

Here are some charts. Most of Apple's profit comes from the iPhone of late. Without it, it looks like its profits would have been much lower.

Here's a slightly dated Windows one. Office and Windows, you're right. On the whole, I'd say iOS products are more of a luxury item (and have more competition?) than Windows and Office.

Of course, if either one stagnates, then either company is in trouble :) Not sure how Windows 7 has improved or deteriorated MS's profits from the Windows line. It doesn't look like the iPad has made a *huge* impact on Apple, at least not to the same extent the iPhone did. There's rising competition for iOS products from Android products, now, I think... but I'm not sure any major significant OS competition is there yet (aside from OS X, which has not been growing very quickly...)

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[Rockoon]

Microsoft makes most of their money from two closely linked software products - Office and Windows. Both of which are losing market share.

You are making one of the mistakes the poster was talking about.

iOS is losing market share to Android, yet Apple is still printing money hand-over-fist at an ever-increasing rate in those very markets its "losing share" in.

The same is true for Microsoft. Even though Office and Windows are "losing share", they are still setting profit and revenue records nearly every year.

Apples problem is that the revenue streams are too tightly integrated with each other. If Apple doesnt sell any iPhones or iPads, then the App Store also loses all of its value. The same just isnt true for Microsoft which is at its core a software company that enters and leaves markets as they grow and shrink. If the desktop market collapses, Microsoft will be putting out Office for Tablets (in a sense, they already are with Office 365.)

When Microsoft dies, it will be after a very long slow death with slowly shrinking profits. When Apple dies again, it will begin with a very rapid collapse of the tower.

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[ceoyoyo]

Yes, Microsoft has certainly demonstrated their ability to move from one market to another successfully.

Are you serious? Microsoft has tried over and over to get Windows and Office on non-PCs. Office for Tablets? Is that one going to go over like Windows Tablet Edition?

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[tlhIngan]

iOS is losing market share to Android, yet Apple is still printing money hand-over-fist at an ever-increasing rate in those very markets its "losing share" in.

Incorrect.

The iPhone is losing marketshare to Android. iOS is pretty strong because there's two other iOS platforms that are not counted in phone marketshare. Yes, the iPod Touch sells hand-over-fist and is selling way more than the iPhone. The iPad is doing somewhat worse than the iPhone, but that really is more supply limited than anything.

There are tons of reasons to buy an iPod Touch over an iPhone - notably, lack of contracts, cheaper, and until recently, avoiding AT&T.

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[LynnwoodRooster]

There are tons of reasons to buy an iPod Touch over an iPhone - notably, lack of contracts, cheaper, and until recently, avoiding AT&T.

And both function about the same when it comes to making phone calls, too!

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[gbjbaanb]

who cares about ancient history. Now if you can tell me what $1000 invested today will be in 10 years time, I'll be listening....

of course you can;t, the best you can do is show the last few years and say "well, we reckon it'll be sortof along these lines". Going back to 1985 really is meaningless to what the company, and therefore the price will do tomorrow.

You're still probably better off buying ARM shares though - as with Win8 running on Arm chips, it won't matter so much whether MSFT or AAPL does better :)

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[geekoid]

Copper.

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[CannonballHead]

Er.... well I don't know about number of sales, but iPhone revenue is higher than iPod revenue. iPad revenue is pretty small, relatively speaking.

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[CannonballHead]

Thanks for the stock-price/history educated response.. :) I was pulling dates out of my hat, obviously... to make a point that an artificial stock price timeline analysis thingy isn't necessarily a good analysis.

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[CannonballHead]

the best you can do is show the last few years and say "well, we reckon it'll be sortof along these lines"

But see, my point is that arbitrarily taking the last decade and using that is somewhat silly... for all I know, there were major company changes (was Jobs at Apple in 2000? Will he be at Apple in 2020? Did anything significant change when Ballmer became CEO?)... or any number of other things. For example: Apple's major revenue increase has been relatively recently, and a large portion of that comes from the iPhone. Will the iPhone be a one-hit-wonder? Is it going to suddenly go out of style? If so, Apple's revenues just died. Will a "last 10 years trend" really show anything like that?

My point is this: blindly taking a couple general financial facts over 10 years makes a tidy statistic, but I don't know if it's a very useful one.

For that matter, a good analysis would even have to take into account things like ... which company does well during recessions? during good economic times? during economic booms? which company has products that are more "luxury" products? because all that will significantly affect the next 10 years, depending on what the next 10 years has in store... and, along those lines, during the last 10 years, were we in more economically good times then 1990-2000? There are so many variables...

To me, if I am going to attempt to predict anything, I'd rather either take the last few years and only attempt to guess at the next few years ... or I'd rather take a large chunk of company history and attempt to take it from, say, two rather stable positions; e.g., I don't want to pick a really bad time as my starting point and extremely profitable time as my end point...

Meh. I guess it comes down to this: I thought it was a remarkably general and over-simplified article that just compared a couple financial statistics that didn't really prove much without further clarification and then topped it off with a meaningless "if you bought this in 2000, you would have this much now!" comparison.

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[gbjbaanb]

sure, taking the last 10 years of numbers isn't particularly useful, but its mroe useful than taking the 10 yeras previous to that and tryign to infer something about today's market.

the last year's numbers might tell you something, but again, not much.

i'm sure the last bit was just 'feel good' fluff - if you'd done this, you'd have loads of money now, so read more of my articles and feel richer!

Re:numbers don't lie/exaggerate, but...

[CannonballHead]

I can agree to that, pretty much. "read more of my articles" was pretty much my take of that too hehe.

Gartner wishful thinking...

[alexhs]

FTFA:

However, both Gartner and IDC predict Microsoft's Windows Phone will beat out Apple's iOS for mobile market share by 2015

Yeah, that's what everyone predicts from the market share trends :

• USA (3rd graphic)
• France

Or maybe MS will continue its slow descent into hell...

AAPL overpriced? Are you on crack?

[jamrock]

Apple's P/E is only about 18.5, and the case has been repeatedly made that the stock is ridiculously underpriced. Case in point. I can't believe your neck fart was modded insightful.

Re:AAPL overpriced? Are you on crack?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you missed the point of the article (which I admit is deliberately misleading). The current P/E ratio is low for Apple, it is not low compared to other companies. So when you say Apple's P/E is only about 18.5 what I head is that Ferari is only 18.5 million dollars WAY underpriced.

"But numbers don't lie or exaggerate"??

[thisisauniqueid]

How Numbers Lie: A Consumer's Guide to the Fine Art of Numerical Deception

Kinect.

[w0mprat]

Everyone forgets about Kinect. Which outsold iPhones, iPads, iPod touchs, combined. It went on to break the Guiness World Record for the fastest selling consumer gadget of all time. Mod me down as a troll or whatever but: Thats Pretty Fucking Impressive. Frankly Apple's wonderously profitable, despite having nothing like the market share of other players, that is all.

We're all still so besotted with shiny iThings and Microsoft bashing groupthink that we've kind of ignored this revolutionary human computer interface. Things being done with Kinect by hackers are seriously cool and ultimately this is the technology that is going to be the technology that the forthcoming consumer robot revolution will see the world with.

Microsoft is hardly old news, it just isn't a news media and Wall Street darling like Apple. Microsofts been sinking billions into user interface R&D over the last little while, too much criticism, yet they now have something pretty revolutionary and record breaking to show for it.

As soon as they stick Kinect in a smartphone they'll have a hit on their hands.

""It's a matter of opinion which company makes the better operating system or is likely to grow its smartphone market share. But numbers don't lie â" or exaggerate."

Yeah numbers don't lie - Apple still has a niche desktop install base, and a smaller market share of mobiles than Android, and growth has plateaued in each area. Tablets are where Apple will inevitably dethroned, but I'd bet they hold out longer since their lead in this area is bigger. Historically Apple having any kind of lead has been a temporary thing.

Re:Kinect.

[h4rr4r]

It sure did, but did it pay for the debt the xbox project has?
That debt goes back all the way to the first one.

Re:Kinect.

[avatar139]

Historically Apple having any kind of lead has been a temporary thing.

I'm curious to know what your definition of temporary is given the fact that since 2004 the iPod has had over 90% of the market for hard drive-based players and over 72% of the market for all types of portable music players?

Re:Kinect.

[geek]

This is perhaps anecdotal but truthfully, the mp3 market is changing rapidly thanks to smart phones. I gave my iPod away a long time ago and haven't looked back as my Android phone(s) have been capable of doing a lot more. With the rise of smartphones the decline of mp3 devices will increase until it goes the way of the sony walkman. That I think leads into the "temporary" part of the Apple dominance thing.

The iPod was and remains a great device but it's usefulness is going to be short lived if current market trends continue.

Re:Kinect.

[Anonymous Coward]

Work for microsoft?

Re:Kinect.

[rhook]

The XBox has been making a profit since before the start of 2008. They even had $165 million in profit for Q3 of last year.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/148982/xbox_delivers_a_profit.html

http://www.pcworld.com/article/148982/xbox_delivers_a_profit.html

And lets not forget that while Microsofts profits are falling that the XBox and Kinect profits are growing.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/jan/28/microsoft-profits-xbox-kinect

You were saying?

Re:Kinect.

[SplashMyBandit]

Kinect has competitors. One done with (Open Source) software and an IPhone also produces impressive results:
http://www.i-programmer.info/news/105-artificial-intelligence/2310-predator-better-than-kinect.html

Neither the Kinect nor XBox will cause investors to love Microsoft. Just as well there are still loyal fanbois who have blinkers on to what is going on outside of Redmond. The rest of us see Microsoft in a similar way to IBM; big, bloated, and not going away anytime soon, but not exciting either - it's just not in their corporate DNA to make a radical change (the 'addiction' to the Windows/Office cash-cow ensures this).

Re:Kinect.

[rhook]

Oops, posted the same link twice.

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/04/23/xbox-division-posts-165-million-profit-in-fiscal-q3/

Re:Kinect.

[rhook]

You numbers are wrong, just look at all the non-Apple smartphones that are on the market. Those also happen to double as portable media players.

Re:Kinect.

[Okonomiyaki]

Here, let me fix that for you.

Historically, having any kind of lead has been a temporary thing.

There. Isn't that better?

Re:Kinect.

[avatar139]

The iPod was and remains a great device but it's usefulness is going to be short lived if current market trends continue.

For hard-drive "classic" iPods I agree and I think Apple has already nearly finished working to phase those out completely at this point for that reason.

I suspect the reason recent iPod sales are fluctuating so much for iPods is that while I think the iPod touch is going to eventually succeed in replacing the "Classic" iPod in terms of functionality, I think the Flash Storage capacity still isn't at the point where it needs to be in order to support both heavy media player use AND iOS applications for people who don't want to be burdened by the cost of the data plan of the iPhone!

But as time goes on, and the cost of Flash memory goes down, while the efficiency of storage increases, I fully expect that will change!

Re:Kinect.

[jo_ham]

Right, which is where the iPod Touch comes in, as well as the iPhone.

From my own experience I know of 6 or 7 people who now have iPhones whereas before they had simple candybar phones and are enjoying the new experience, and crucially they don;t need anything more than the Apple experience offers because Apple are extremely good at catering to the "average user". An Android phone doesn't offer these people any more than an iPhone does because the extra benefits of the Android platform just don't fit into that demographic.

So while I'm sure Android will be there for those who absolutely need root access on their phone, the market will continue to expand with people who just want a phone that works well for them - both Android and iPhone fulfil that market, but there is no doubt that iPhone makes it absurdly easy and offers a consistently good user experience.

If you think that "current market trends" spell the end of iOS then I'm not sure what sort of Reality Distortion Field (tm) you are looking through - both iPhones, iPod Touches and iPads are continuing to grow in install base, alongside the growth of Android.

Re:Kinect.

[Anonymous Coward]

The Xbox 360 Kinect? It sold about 10 million units as of March. WTF are you talking about?

Re:Kinect.

[Your.Master]

That's not relevant to anybody who cannot travel back in time.

Re:Kinect.

[ceoyoyo]

Um, do you have any references to back any of that up?

The Kinect is the best selling consumer gadget of all time, but it's closely followed by the original iPad, the previous record holder. And after it's initial burst the Kinect slowed off. It looks like the Microsoft shipped 10 million Kinects to retailers in it's first four months, selling at $150 apiece. Note that those are shipped to retailers, not necessary sold.

In the last three months of 2010 Apple sold 7.33 million iPads, 16.24 million iPhones and 19.45 million iPods. So no, the Kinect didn't outsell iPads, iPhones and iPods combined, unless you were looking at a very short period of time right around launch. Besides which, the Kinect is a $150 device while the iPad averages about $600 and iPhones are around $800.

The Kinect is a neat gadget, and a decent innovation, but it's not particularly revolutionary and a $150 peripheral isn't going to turn Microsoft around.

Re:Kinect.

[theBully]

The iPod was and remains a great device but it's usefulness is going to be short lived

I have to correct you here. iPod's have never been useful and never ever sold for that reason. At any point in the iPod history I could buy devices that were half the price, had expandable storage, had voice recording directly to mp3 and always an FM radio. In addition, they functioned on a common AAA battery that brought the advantage of not having to replace the product when the battery ran out. (which happened after 1 year on the single iPod I ever owned.)

iPod's (as well as all other Apple products) always sold because they were and still are marketed as cool. That also explains why Apple products had and still have so little traction in the business markets. Don't bring the iPhone as an argument. I don't know of too many businesses that equip their employees with iPhones. Maybe the executives, but those are a small group. Most employees whom get a company phone still get something waaaay cheaper than an iPhone.

Don't mean to bash Apple, but no, their products are not any better or more useful than others simply because Steve Jobs says so in a keynote (bye bye reality distortion field). Take the iPad. Deemed the revolutionary device between the laptop and the phone it's exactly that. Simply, because in terms of usefulness the only use left in between a smart phone and a laptop is an overpriced toy and news reader. Cool nonetheless. So yes, the question is out there. What happens when the "cool" factor gives in? Microsoft has by now a very solid and pretty constant consumer base for many of their products. Apple has a consumer base made of people inclined to always use whatever's cool and fashionable for the season and there's very little loyalty in there. Just like w0mprat said, I'm not sure what relevance is to be found in those numbers.

Re:Kinect.

[avatar139]

You numbers are wrong, just look at all the non-Apple smartphones that are on the market. Those also happen to double as portable media players.

No, as I said in my post, I was talking about portable media player sales which are categorized differently than smartphones because while a smartphone can make phone calls without a wi-fi connection AND play music whereas portable media players can play people's music without requiring them to sign a contract with a wireless carrier (or using wi-fi dependent equivalent service)!

It's an Apple to Oranges comparison because it's called a Smartphone, not a SmartMusicPlayer, as most people buy a Smartphone primarily for the purpose of some sort of communication, not to play media on it!

Re:Kinect.

[getNewNickName]

The number of Kinect's sold by MS is definitely an impressive feat, but how profitable will it be for MS on the whole? When Apple sells an iDevice they also get software and media sales via iTunes. There is the so-called "halo-effect" of iDevice owners buying Macs (evidence by Macs growing sales while PCs are shrinking). Owners of iDevices tend to be repeat customers buying replacement iDevices each time. Are people going to repeatedly buy the Kinect? Arguably Kinect is driving some additional software sales for MS, but I have yet to hear of many Kinect games that are big hits. What I do hear is that hobbyists are buying up units to experiment with for entirely non-gaming purposes which won't add any additional revenue beyond the initial hardware sale to MS. And we haven't even mentioned that the Kinect is a device that is 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of an iDevice. Go ahead invest in MSFT, at least the Nasdaq rebalancing is on your side...

Re:Kinect.

[DrgnDancer]

The question of how we define "temporary" is still very germane though. Arguably iPod will have dominated the MP3 player market from the introduction of the device until the effective death of the market. That's not really temporary by any reasonable definition. Especially when you consider that Apple themselves introduced the device which will eventually "kill" the iPod, the iPhone. Foreseeing the likely death of their own market (something like iPhone was bound to come along sooner or later), they hastened the demise by introducing a new product which would usher in the replacement market. Of course they're not dominating the new market like they did the old, they could never have hoped to. It's a much lager market though, so they're making more money selling 18% or whatever of the smartphone market than they made selling 90% of the MPS3 market.

Re:Kinect.

[sootman]

> As soon as they stick Kinect in a smartphone they'll have a hit on their hands.

WTF? This is totally wrong for at least two reasons:
1) What in the world would you use Kinect for on a phone?
2) MS stuck another dominant product (Office) onto a phone and it didn't do them much good.

Besides, the Kinect came out of the gate strong--6 million in the first two months--but it has only sold 2 million more in the next two months. Apple, on the other hand, has sold about 18 million iPhones, 4.5 million iPod touches, and 4 million iPads in the first quarter of 2011.

Re:Kinect.

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone forgets about Kinect. Which outsold iPhones, iPads, iPod touchs, combined.

??? Kinect just reached 10 million devices, and iOS devices is well over 100 million. iPhone itself might be over 100 million devices by now.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/06/analyst-iphone-sales-to-surpass-100-million-by-2011/

Re:Kinect.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but the Kinect only had the record for a consumer device sales within a 60 day period, not cumulative sales (but it's still a big accomplishment). It has sold about 10 million units as of last month (the most recent numbers I could find -- http://www.tgdaily.com/games-and-entertainment-features/54566-kinect-sales-figures-net-microsoft-a-guinness-world-record), while iOS devices currently number over 150 million (see http://iphonehelp.in/2011/04/20/apple-lawsuit-on-samsung-reveals-ipad-2-ipod-touch-sales-figures/). This is 15x the number of Kinect. Even just the iPad has sold almost double that of Kinect, while iOS devices have 3x the global install base of the Xbox 360 (53 million per vgchartz.com).

While Kinect has some potential and there have been some cool hacks, comparing it to iOS devices is not a fair fight. As you said, "numbers don't lie".

Re:Kinect.

[je ne sais quoi]

I have some references to refute it, how about that?

Look at the hardware and software sales for 2011. Yes, xbox 360 and Kinect are doing well, a kinect game is #3 for top selling game for 2011 so far. However, it's flanked by numbers 2,3 and 4 which are all Wii games. Wii Sports has been out for what, over four years and it's STILL beating the top kinect game? Come on folks, the kinect is a nice device and MS struck a home run with it. But the top selling device in history? NO. What you're seeing is that everyone who already had an xbox 360 bought one, but its not driving xbox 360 sales the way the wii appeals to casual-gamers. It's just not happening.

Re:Kinect.

[je ne sais quoi]

Oh, and another thing I noticed on that chart. Look at the percentage sales for the xbox360 vs. other consoles for this year. The xbox360 is at precisely the average change in sales over the past year over all consoles. That means the kinect is not actually helping sell the xbox360, it offers precisely zero competitive advantage against other consoles. As I said in the above message, people who already owned an xbox 360 bought a kinect, and people who already were planning to buy an xbox 360 are buying a kinect, but no one is buying an xbox 360 in order to obtain a kinect, at least, no one who was thinking of buying another console.

Re:Kinect.

[Anonymous Coward]

Good fact-finding there but the record-making thing about the Kinect was "Having sold 8 million units in its first 60 days on the market." I agree that it would plateau a lot sooner than mobiles or tablets. However...

Consider this...using just the customer base for xbox 360, they managed to have that massive figure. Add to that people who would have already considered the technological implications of such a device but that didn't come to fruition until late 2010. Compare that first 8 mil sale with the potential customers for a mobile or tablet. It's awesome that they managed it. 500 mil on marketing, 500 mil on R&D (i suspect much less) and a complete ROI in 60 days. It's just going to be more profit after this and with each iteration, add-on, games (SDK, etc.).

It may plateau sooner but technologically it was a first that exceeded any of apple's firsts (ipod, iphone, ipad).

PS: not an ms or apple fan - i hate them both in different ways. But give credit where credit is due.

PPS: "It's a matter of opinion which company makes the better operating system" - maybe a matter of opinion but it's also a fact that Apple's OSwhatever is far better than windows. It just happens to be expensive (when you consider the only-Apple hardware factor) and historically less supported for software and in corporate usage.

Re:Kinect.

[Anonymous Coward]

Lies will get you nowhere fast.

Kinect sold 10 million. Iphone? 100 Million.
Should be marked as troll-spam-pants-on-fire

Re:Kinect.

[Bongo]

"Cool" as a word doesn't explain much. If coolness was something trivial then most other manufacturers could just add cool to their product.

I could call Dyson vacuums "cool" and claim they only sell because of being marketed as "cool" with the "cool" funky coloured plastic designs.

If you can't explain why any other manufacturer can't just add coolness, or why they don't understand that coolness sells, then maybe neither you or them understand what this stuff actually is that you're simply labelling as "cool."

Sorta like if I pointed to a Boeing 747 and said, "nothing special about that, it is just the spirits that favour it and the spirits lift it and make it fly."

Re:Kinect.

[ashmeister]

It's hard to see what MS can gain from the Kinect long term. All it looks to have done is give their xbox sales a bit of a boost. The hardware itself is not theirs - it's built by another company, Primesense (http://www.primesense.com/)...which is not in MS' pockets. PrimeSense is building other similar units already. One in particular with Asus. See http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/03/primesense-and-asus-team-bring-kinect-like-wavi-xtion-to-your-h/. Other companies are also already close to bringing their similar products to market - our company is engaged with one at the moment.

What is Microsoft's is some of the software bundle that is used in kinect games. But with the excitement around the product, and some software from primesense itself, that void is and will rapidly be filled. When it does it won't leave Microsoft anything for the long term. Already we're using it in all sorts of ways on our robots, running linux, using the openni and ros software. Its rather easy to forget that its an actual Microsoft product.

Re:Kinect.

[h4rr4r]

They have been profitable on the quarter and year level, not on the project as a whole.

Re:Kinect.

[theBully]

Did I anywhere suggest that "cool" was trivial to achieve? No. I was merely pointing out that the Apple products sell more on the "coolness" than on the "usefulness". There are other products that sell on "cool". For example Nike products do have (or at least had at some point) that label attached to them. No, it's not trivial to achieve. It requires aesthetics and moreover, a well put together and expensive marketing campaign. There are examples of failures in the world of marketing. Subaru had a marketing campaign ran by the same advertiser that made Nike big with this exact principle: coolness. But the approach failed miserably for Subaru. The management team there, was not ready for it simply because it presented a lot of risk.

Not all manufacturers target the same market segments and not all of them have the same strategies. Mind you, I never suggested Apple is not one of the best examples of successful marketing. That still does not imply their products are useful, or, more useful than others. Yes, there are manufacturers that try to stay away from the "cool" driven marketing because it's a risky one. Apple's success with it is an impressively long one. Others simply don't realize it's potential, and that shows Apple does have marketing vision.

Finally no. I was not simply labeling Apple products as "cool". Apple did, with intensive marketing campaigns. I was merely noticing that label.
Your Boeing 747 example is out of place here.

Re:Kinect.

[Double Drop]

Shame it cost them an estimated $6 billion to develop the XBox and it's successor. At the current rate of progress they will pay down this debt in a mere 35 years.

Re:Kinect.

[RobbieCrash]

Neither Windows nor OSX is better than the other in any realm aside from personal preference. They're both stable, they're both riddled with security holes, they both only run some stuff and not others.

Bought my first Mac

[the-matt-mobile]

I've been a lifelong Windows user (happy about it too), and up until recently never thought that would change. But, as I was researching my options for a new laptop, I found I couldn't get what I wanted (256GB SSD, 13", ultra light, long battery) for any cheaper buying Dell/HP/whatever so I bought a refurb Macbook. I'm a .NET developer though, and I never never never never never would have even thought of buying one without Parallels so that I could run Windows. I'm not sure that my anecdote is representative of the recent Mac surge at large, but I sure am one who can be counted in both camps. This is one of those statistics that I'm not sure represents the whole story. I wonder how many Mac owners run just OSX, because I suspect that most PC owners run Windows exclusively by a wide margin.

Re:Bought my first Mac

[cinnamon colbert]

"lifelong [happy] windows user" I mean, really !!
Couldn't get the laptop I wanted (256 gb SSD), I mean really - you represent 0.01% of the market ?

Re:Bought my first Mac

[mortonda]

I've been a lifelong Windows user (happy about it too)

Sounds like Stockholm Syndrome to me.... ;)

Re:Bought my first Mac

[the-matt-mobile]

0.1% of the Slashdot crowd, maybe. But you delude yourself if you believe that plenty of folks aren't happy with Windows. Now, yes - the specs I wanted for my laptop aren't super-typical for someone in the market for a Dell, but so what? My point still stands - I highly doubt that Apple is killing Microsoft in any way right now in the markets where they actually compete. People aren't choosing Apple over some Microsoft alternative - that was the battle from 2 decades ago. The more interesting comparison is how Apple is doing against Dell, HP, Samsung, and Sony as Apple is a maker of devices... the software part of their business is ancillary.

Re:Bought my first Mac

[the-matt-mobile]

I know you're trying to be cute, but I think that's part of the problem. I run a Linux server at work for secure file transfers and we have a legacy Apache box serving PHP pages for an old website. We run Cygwin on many of our Windows servers. But the truth is - and I recognize I'm not in great company here at Slashdot - that Windows is plenty fine for most in the consumer space. Windows 7 is the best OS MS has ever released, and the adoption rate blew away OSX's total market share in a matter of months. I like OSX okay I guess (typing from it now), but I certainly wouldn't pay a premium for it. I paid the premium for superior hardware. That's what Apple does really, really well.

Re:Bought my first Mac

[Anonymous Coward]

The real problem is that you - and the other people in this thread - are comparing windows to Apple OS, or Linux, instead of asking, what do I expect from an OS ?

For instance, I am typing this on a pretty run of hte mill dell laptop, with windows 7; the machine has a problem recognizing usb thumbdrives. Now recognizing a periphreal is a basic part of hte OS; yet in my case, and I'm sure many others, windows is a big PITA. Of course it is not as bad as office 2007 (cant group text box and picture; error bars in excel charts screwed up; etc ad infinitium) but still.

yesterday, I tried to install a powerline adaptor on my old XP box; a cat5 connects the computer to the adaptor, which plugs into a std 110 wall socket; down in the basement, you plug another adaptor into a socket and cat5 to the router, and voila, no more problems with weak signal from the wireless router.

after an hour of frustration, I found, by accident, that the Cat5/powerline adaptor worked ONLY when a USB wireless adaptor was plugged into 1 of the 4 identical USB ports.....you can blame 2nd party vendors all you want, but this sort of hair tearing crap is so common with windows

backup....need I say more ?

Re:Bought my first Mac

[SplashMyBandit]

Actually you are missing the point. Microsoft dominates the desktop and will continue to do so. However, people aren't buying desktops as they used to. They use their smartphone and iPads for tasks they formerly bought desktops for. With console use on the rise as well you can expected to see the number of consumer desktops stabilize or grow very slowly (accounting for growth in use in the developing world). This is not a situation investors will want to be in. (also written from OS X; I agree with your point that the the software is ok, but the hardware integration is excellent).

Re:Bought my first Mac

[shutdown -p now]

tl;dr edition: +1

You've described my background and thought process for a recent purchase almost exactly - except that I've bought a new Macbook Air. I still think it's overpriced for what it does, but then no-one else offers all the features and benefits in one package, so I guess they have a reason to charge as much as they do. And I've grown to like it a lot - more so than a tablet (another recent purchase), in fact. It has completely replaced my Win7 netbook, and I don't notice any loss of functionality. I guess it's mostly because there wasn't really anything Windows-specific about usual activities on the netbook.

One sole exception is an oldish Windows game that I like and play regularly - Age of Wonders - but that runs decently using Crossover. I've installed Parallels on it as well (with Bootcamp), but so far I haven't actually used it apart from trying out if it works. MSOffice is available as a native app (now also with Outlook), and browser is 99% of the rest. Do yourself a favor, though, ditch Safari and install Chrome.

Re:Bought my first Mac

[the-matt-mobile]

I have an iPad as well. The first thing you do when you open the box is plug it into your computer and wait. We're not in a post-PC world yet by a long shot, but I'll agree with you that MS got caught with their pants down when it comes to tablets and phones. But if history is any indication, they'll catch up, and I expect they'll do it quickly.

Re:Bought my first Mac

[bwayne314]

I am in the exact same situation as you - I own 3 windows machines: a 1997ish gateway which is lost somewhere in the garage, a 2001(ish... I cant recall the exact year) Dell tower which after one vid card replacement still works because back then Dell shipped quality product and a 2 year old Acer laptop which I bought to replace the Dell tower but don't bring anywhere due to it's 1-hour battery life and hefty 19inch screen.

The status of the acer laptop leaves something to be desired, nothing major but little things here and there that have ceased to function over time: one of the USB ports is glitchy and with the slightest jiggle will lose connection, the light-up media control touchpad (exact one pictured here: http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/acerblue1.jpg) goes unresponsive every once in a while, there is a way to reset it but requires full powering down and taking out the battery. Because the surface of this touch-pad is literally glued on top of the housing, a corner of it has recently come unglued (this happened long before the freezing) and sometimes can catch onto things because it juts out a little.

So when the sandy bridge processors were released in the new macbook pro iteration (and nowhere else) along with the thunderbolt port (which, yes, at the moment is pure hype) and I realized that the minecraft server I play on is hosted by a ten-year old macbook and that my second-gen ipod touch (my first ever apple product) still works as well as the second day I bought it despite multiple falls and lack of protective case, I decided to take the plunge.

The OS is taking some getting used to, but not as painful as I expected: the thing I miss the most is the 'end' and true 'delete" buttons on the keyboard... not the 'windows' one.

Re:Bought my first Mac

[theBully]

Yeah, Linux runs great on my MacBook Pro hardware as well. So I guess, here I am in the third category crippling the market share counts. Bought a Mac, wiped out the OS - because I don't like someone else deciding for me that I should use a dock - and installed Linux. After that, I bought a desktop computer, wiped out Windows - because I don't like someone else telling me what OS and what bloated applications I should get on my computer (I have my own favorite stock of bloat-ware) - and installed Linux. Finally, somewhere in the house there's a laptop with Windows 7 on it, along with yet another Linux next to it. So yeah, out of 2 windows boxes and a mac (all of them PC's by the way) count me in for 0 Mac OS X installs and 0.5 Windows installs.

Re:Bought my first Mac

[Slur]

I wonder how many Mac owners run just OSX

Most. But a lot more are starting to dual or triple boot Windows and Linux. At the moment on my 2007 white MacBook I've got Mac OS X 10.6 on one partition, Mac OS X 10.7 Lion (developer preview) on another, and Ubuntu on a third. (It's a 250GB drive so there's plenty of room!) I am running Windows apps in a variety of different ways as I experiment with the available options on the Mac. So I have VMWare, Virtual Box, and I found a nice WINE installer for OSX. And of course I run WINE in Linux as well.

Mac OS X is my main platform as a web developer/designer and Mac/iPhone developer, because of course XCode is needed for Mac and iPhone development, and because web-wise it's just perfect to have a real Unix running Apache / MySQL / PHP natively, and to be able to download and install GNU stuff in a native environment. And of course in Mac OS X I also have the full Adobe Creative Suite suite including Flash, which I also do a bunch.

Right now my Ubuntu install is more of a curiosity thing, but I have also been trying out cross-platform game development in C++ with SDL - having the very same code compile within XCode, Eclipse, and Virtual Studio is a hoot! I've been liking Ubuntu a lot as a working environment. I am pleasantly surprised at how much more mature the desktop and GUI apps have become since my last foray into Linux half a decade ago. It's not nearly as rich, robust, or as solid as Windows 7, let alone Snow Leopard, but it makes up for it with configurability that Mac and Windows can't touch, and some genuinely cool workspace options.

I'm glad to hear you went for the Mac hardware, because regardless of which OS you run on it, it's just the best laptop hands-down, and it makes a big difference in the whole workflow when your laptop (the one you bought already) isn't advertising itself to you with lights and buttons all around the screen, like so many commodity laptops now have. Getting the refurb was also a great idea. It's the only way I buy Apple stuff anymore. And, oops, when I received my laptop Apple had put in an extra gig of RAM by mistake. :-)

why does anyone take Wall Str numbers seriously ?

[cinnamon colbert]

I mean, these are the guys selling toxic mortgage backed securities as "AAA" while simultaneously shorting the securities as junk
Wall Str is where one number can come out, and suddenly a company is worth 10, or even 20% less then yesterday
I could go on, but this blind faith in the "market" - which is really a relatively small # of conservative white guys who all live suburbs that are the same across the country - this faith is silly.

The stock market, the bond market, the commodit...

[Colin Smith]

All correlate with the Federal Reserve Quantitative Easing programme.

EVERYTHING is way overpriced.

[Citation Needed]

[Anonymous Coward]

Very few. Most servers from major OEM's (HP, IBM, Fujitsu) which make up a large majority of server sales will include an OS, whether its Windows, Linux, or a proprietary system.

[Citation Needed]

Re:[Citation Needed]

[Anonymous Coward]

Very few. Most servers from major OEM's (HP, IBM, Fujitsu) which make up a large majority of server sales will include an OS, whether its Windows, Linux, or a proprietary system.

[Citation Needed]

[Common Sense and/or Ability to Google Needed]

Re:[Citation Needed]

[Anonymous Coward]

So OP doesn't have either, since he couldn't conjure a reference to go with his claims?

Re:In The Ghetto's Journal: In the Ghetto Part XI

[sdguero]

Ummm. Mod parent totally fucked up please.

Computerworld confirms it: Microsoft is dying

[Anonymous Coward]

It is official; Computerworld now confirms: Microsoft is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Microsoft community when IDC confirmed that Microsoft market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all mobile phones and pads. Coming close on the heels of a recent Computerworld survey which plainly states that Microsoft has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Microsoft is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Engadget comprehensive apps store test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict Microsoft's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Microsoft faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Microsoft because Microsoft is dying. Things are looking very bad for Microsoft. As many of us are already aware, Microsoft continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

Microsoft Windows 7 Mobile is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time Windows 7 Mobile developers Matt Miszewski only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: Microsoft is dying.

Fact: Microsoft is dying

Re:Computerworld confirms it: Microsoft is dying

[blair1q]

Lister: Where is everybody, Hol?
Holly: They're dead, Dave.
Lister: Who is?
Holly: Everybody, Dave.
Lister: What, Captain Hollister?
Holly: Everybody's dead, Dave.
Lister: What, Todhunter?
Holly: Everybody's dead, Dave.
Lister: What, Selby?
Holly: They're all dead. Everybody's dead, Dave.
Lister: Petersen isn't, is he?
Holly: Everybody is dead, Dave.
Lister: Not Chen?
Holly: Gordon Bennett! Yes! Chen, everybody. Everybody's dead, Dave.
Lister: Rimmer?
Holly: He's dead, Dave. Everybody's dead. Everybody is dead, Dave!
Lister: Wait. Are you trying to tell me everybody's dead?

Re:don't know anyone planning to get excited

[TaoPhoenix]

I dunno, in an oligarchy like we have now, you have this twisty spread of Rock Scissors Paper.

We know all of what evil MS was capable of in their prime, so now their humility looks like "we can't pull our tricks, so we'll smile a little."

So then you dance to the "Rebel Company" aka Apple. You spend a while debating "dominant vs rebel". Then you consider the Android Clones.

I know what MS is, I feel like Tech needs a little bit of a jolt.

Where is the Ferengi Steve Jobs icon!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Bill Gates doesn't work at Microsoft any longer. Put up the Microsoft logo, like Slashdot puts up the apple logo, or put up a Ferengi Steve Jobs for all the apple stories.

AAPL over MSFT if "diversity of revenue" matters

[Anonymous Coward]

MSFT has ONE revenue source: their Windows monopoly.

If anything even chips away at that, MSFT's business model is DOOMED.

Which is why Apple, Linux, and Google combined SCARE THE LIVING SHIT out of MSFT execs.

Which is why MSFT poops its collective pants whenever any government anywhere makes a purchasing decision of any kind that chips away at what Judge Jackson rightfully called the "barriers to entry" that MSFT maintains.

two point data extrapolation....

[DrYak]

I fear the only way they can predict WM will outrun iOS [...]

This is the most ridiculous claim of TFA.
They only provide 2 data point : 2010 and 2011, where Microsoft has clearly a fraction of Apple marketshare, but is showing some slight improvement. And out of this, the analyst predict the value of 2012 and 2015 and think that by then Microsoft will dominate the market ?!?

It mostly reminds me of that.

Re:two point data extrapolation....

[ceoyoyo]

The prediction is based on Nokia choosing to go with Windows 7. For some reason the analysts think that a) Nokia is going to put Windows 7 on all their phones and b) people will actually buy those phones in the same numbers that they buy current Nokia phones. If those two miracles were to happen then Windows 7 would top Apple's phone market share.

Re:Kinect not from Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Kinect, the device that most people bought to hack around is a 3D range camera developed by the Israeli company primesense. Microsoft research was mostly in the software that runs on the xbox. If you get your facts straight you will notice that most people bought kinect not to use it with xbox but rather to connect to the pc. It is also rather funny thar most kinect hacks I saw, feature a computer running OSX or Linux.

-
Sent from my iPhone

Steve Ballmer is doing an excellent job

[symbolset]

I am quite happy with Steve Ballmer's level of achievement over this past decade. Fighting the law of large numbers, a mature market for their established products he has held the company level year after year. Yes, the company has been caled stagnant, dead money, a dinosaur. But he keeps struggling, investing the company's profits in acqsitions that strategically fail, share buybacks that mysteriously don't increase the stock price, and Bing - which consolidates non-Google search and ads into one bundle whose competitive strengths are legendary.

We should all praise Steve's achievements if we want him to continue to do such great work.

Re:Steve Ballmer is doing an excellent job

[Goboxer]

Say what you will, but considering that Bing got 10% market is rather impressive.

Re:Steve Ballmer is doing an excellent job

[symbolset]

Oh, I agree completely. I'm surprised he hit that high mark with such a minor investment. I think that's an outstanding use of Microsoft's wealth and power. One can only hope they redouble their efforts.

Re:Steve Ballmer is doing an excellent job

[stewbacca]

Say what you will, but considering that Bing got 10% market is rather impressive.

Bing is the default search engine of the default browser on 90% of computers. I would say 10% is pretty lame.

Dubious numbers

[wen1454]

Was Microsoft really worth more than Apple in 1980s? According to Google finance, since pi day 1986 (Microsoft's IPO) Microsoft stock has increased 24850% and Apple stock has increased 10820% (adjusted for splits). Obviously there is not a perfect connection between stock increase and market value (because of stock buybacks, acquisitions, etc.). But if the Google finance numbers are correct, it seems implausible that Microsoft was worth more than Apple in 1986. And since Apple stock did not increase between Apple's IPO (1980-12-12) and Microsoft's IPO, Apple was almost certainly worth more than Microsoft in the early 80s.

Re:Dubious numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

And since Apple stock did not (increase? decrease) between Apple's IPO (1980-12-12) and Microsoft's IPO, Apple was almost certainly worth more than Microsoft in the early(late?) 80s.

This fact was alluded to above somewhere. I do not have the numbers off hand but I do know that Apple had the biggest IPO since Ford Motor Company and since Microsoft did not take that record Apple was worth more than Microsoft pre Microsoft IPO so now the next question is did Apple lose market cap between the two companies IPOs that made it worth less than Microsoft when Microsoft had their IPO. My guess is that they did not.

You can compare Apple and Oranges

[countertrolling]

See for yourself:
Apple
Oranges

Which would you choose?

My Mom:

[Anonymous Coward]

"I've told you a million times: don't exaggerate!"

Re:AAPL over MSFT if "diversity of revenue" matter

[cavreader]

Windows monopoly? Is that something like Ford motor company having a monopoly on Fords? Last time I checked I didn't see any companies trying to compete with MS in selling Windows. MS has always done what any for profit company is supposed to do and that is succeed. The reason they were able to succeed enough to saturate the industry was due to the lack of any competition when they first started and a hell of alot of luck. MS took the software on commodity hardware approach where Apple chose the software and controlled hardware approach. This resulted in Macs always being more expensive than Windows and that resulted in a lot of companies choosing MS over Apple because the cost factor. Now that the IT landscape has turned towards phones and pads Apple can embrace their original business model and keep a tight rein on the hardware which runs their software offerings. Now MS needs to re-tool and come up with new set of priorities and plans. The IT business world is probably the most volatile industry on the planet. Every time you turn around there are new cpu's and improved network technology being developed. What was the best 2 years ago is totally obsolete today. Both hardware and software have a very short shelf life. I wouldn't count MS out just yet because as much as people complain about MS they do have some very smart people working for them and they certainly have enough money to take a hit in revenue while they work on changing their priorities. Judging and stereotyping all of their staff using Ballmer as the example is incredibly short sighted.

I have head of these disorders

[codepunk]

Windows, I have heard of these self harm disorders before, I hope for your speedy recovery.

Re:In The Ghetto's Journal: In the Ghetto Part XI

[sulphurlad]

OMG !!!!!! Mod!!! Mod!!!!!
Fucking funny!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:AAPL over MSFT if "diversity of revenue" matter

[HerculesMO]

That's the stupidest thing I've ever read.

Windows. Office. Sharepoint. BizTalk. Exchange. System Center Suite. SQL Server. Dynamics. Forefront, and probably more.

They *all* make money. Microsoft is one of the most diverse companies out there, and despite you not liking their products doesn't make them any less profitable. The thing is, MS doesn't have to improve a lot in these arenas because its products are superior to most competitors. Sure, there's choice but MS integration is what companies strangely like, as it keeps the TCO low.

Granted, it's not to say that they couldn't do a better job on a lot of their products, and Windows Phone has a great OS (now, anyway) with a mediocre product launch and marketing, and long term strategy.

However if Apple loses out on the phone arena, and their tablets aren't doing so well either... the company is going to take a dump FAST. Similarly for Google, if Microsoft gains 5% in Bing traffic and Google loses 5%, Google loses a *huge* chunk of revenue because 90%+ of it is derived from search. The same is not true for Microsoft. They have the luxury to be able to make mistakes, but it doesn't mean that every little thing that other people do better in phones, in tablets, in search, or on the desktop (yet to be seen) will chip away at MS quickly.

Usage share numbers don't lie either.

[trouser]

Apple's market cap exceeds Microsoft's but OS X still represents less than 10% of the desktop market and Android has comfortably eclipsed iOS on smart phones.

Re:Usage share numbers don't lie either.

[aristotle-dude]

Apple's market cap exceeds Microsoft's but OS X still represents less than 10% of the desktop market and Android has comfortably eclipsed iOS on smart phones.

Sorry but are you comparing mobile OSes or phones running the mobile OSes? Because if you are comparing Android to iOS, it is iOS that comfortably eclipses Android when you count iPhones, iPod Touch and iPad. They all run iOS and all can run most of the same apps.

Re:Usage share numbers don't lie either.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple's market cap exceeds Microsoft's but OS X still represents less than 10% of the desktop market and Android has comfortably eclipsed iOS on smart phones.

Sorry but are you comparing mobile OSes or phones running the mobile OSes? Because if you are comparing Android to iOS, it is iOS that comfortably eclipses Android when you count iPhones, iPod Touch and iPad. They all run iOS and all can run most of the same apps.

I would Chickasaw a guess that he means smart phones because he only mentions smartphones. RTFPF.

Re:AAPL over MSFT if "diversity of revenue" matter

[Waffle Iron]

Windows monopoly? Is that something like Ford motor company having a monopoly on Fords?

No, but it might be if there were technical issues that forced each brand of car to use different and incompatible kinds of gasoline, and all the gas stations in the country only sold Ford-compatible fuel.

Apple flops since Steve's return

[grouchomarxist]

Apple has been doing very well since Steve's return, especially in the last ten years or so, but there has been a handful of flops to various degrees:

Mac G4 Cube
hockeypuck mouse
magic mouse
Dalmatian & flower power iMacs
Motorola ROKR
iPod socks
iPod Hi-Fi
Ping .Mac/mobile me

Re:Apple flops since Steve's return

[IrrepressibleMonkey]

Magic mouse, a flop? I'm not sure I understand that conclusion. Actually I think it's the best mouse I've ever used. Although it does require a third-party plugin to enable the two finger vertical swipe gestures that I use to navigate my open windows, which is a little bit stupid.

Re:Apple flops since Steve's return

[grouchomarxist]

Ah, actually I meant the Mighty Mouse.

Re:Apple flops since Steve's return

[geekoid]

" flower power iMacs"

Those were a success. Not sure why you think they where a failure.
In fact, they where the first step to move Apple from a stagnating company, to a leader.

Re:Apple flops since Steve's return

[grouchomarxist]

It is the original iMac and the subsequent colored iMacs that were important for Apple's comeback. However, the flower power and dalmatian iMacs were not as well received. Perhaps you're confusing them?

http://www.apple.com/pr/photos/imac2001/imac_tokyo.html
http://www.applegazette.com/imac/flower-power-imac-named-one-of-the-ugliest-tech-products-ever/

Re:Apple flops since Steve's return

[bennomatic]

Good list. I'd suggest two things, though:

Most of these are individual products, not platforms which need ongoing support to have value. That is to say, if you're going to replace your computer every two or three years, then the design (cube, dalmation, etc) is not a huge factor. But regardless of which Mac you're running, at least for most of the last 10 years, you could run OS X on it. Apple hasn't had a Vista or Kin-level abandonment in that time.

Some of these things were just proofs-of-concept to encourage the third party market. I don't really think that Apple wanted to get into the hifi market, but they needed something to show the opportunity. Similarly, with the hockeypuck mouse, my first thought when I got one with my B/W G3 was, "Man, they really want to help third-party USB mouse makers." And I went out and bought a Logitech mouse that I used for five years until I replaced it with a Microsoft laser mouse which I'm still using today.

I think that the biggest flop so far is Ping, from that list. I know a lot of people who swear by .Mac/Mobile Me; I have yet to see the value. Rumor has it that big changes are coming... if they release it as a free service for Mac/iOS users, then I might find myself transitioning away from a lot of Google-hosted cloud services. My understanding is that MobileMe is a good service; it's just that it might not be good enough to warrant a $99/yr charge for many.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Windows 92%? OSX 4%?

[PineGreen]

I don't know where they get these numbers out! In my field, I don't know a single guy that is still on Windows. Last time I was on a workshop and there were 80 participants and exactly two PCs (me and a toothless french guy). In fact, all my friends are purely apple as well. I hear all these claims that windows still oversells apple, but it just doesn't click. I'd guess it is 95% OSX 5% apple and if I correct for selection effect, maybe 50%-50%, but this article claims just 4% OSX?!?! I haven't seen anybody using windows for a long time. In fact, I use bing just out of support for the underdog...

Re:Windows 92%? OSX 4%?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe you should try leaving 1 Infinite Loop.

Re:Windows 92%? OSX 4%?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with your observations. At best I see a 50/50 split between OS X and Windows among consumers, and if anything I'd give Apple the edge. the only way the 95/5 numbers make any sense if if you consider the billions of cubicles around the world all outfitted with a Windows XP box.

Literrally the only people I know that use Windows do so because their company forces them to. Even the people I know that don't have disposable income spend the $1000+ on a Mac.

Re:Windows 92%? OSX 4%?

[Anonymous Coward]

I do not know anyone with an Iphone so how can Apple be making 50% of their profits from it?

Anecdote != Data

HP sells a good bit of those.

[symbolset]

The cookie sheet and blade servers are a bit different that the 1-5 RU units most people think of when they say "HP server" but HP sells a lot of them and seeing huge growth. Then there's HPC, hosting and "cloud." HP sells more servers than anybody, and OS is always optional.

Re:In The Ghetto's Journal: In the Ghetto Part XI

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoever wrote that is a sick puppy, but I must admit I laughed my fucking ass off. Wow. Randomness.

Re:AAPL over MSFT if "diversity of revenue" matter

[dskzero]

Mod parent up! This is something MS bashers don't stop to think. Windows and Office might be their most visible products, but there is a big line out there from MS that makes a lot of money and is in high demand. Apple has a really short stick on that one: ipods, ipads, iphones. This isn't me saying MS has a huge advantage over Apple: This is me saying that, no matter how much you want it to happen, MS' death isn't that close. Apple is a lot more vulnerable to wild market whims.

Re:why does anyone take Wall Str numbers seriously

[warrigal]

You've only been saying this since MS lost the top slot.
A year or so ago it was all "MS is teh biggerz!!!"
Now it's "Meh?".
Nobody is fooled.

Women Lingerie

[krishna12]

Awesome post! This is really cool site and it has a lot of useful information posted here

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

mod up plz bn/t

[Mateo_LeFou]

fghfnh

Well, I guess Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft=loads of pirated copies of XP.

Apple=Hardware devices

Re:AAPL over MSFT if "diversity of revenue" matter

[cavreader]

Not sure I follow your reasoning but using the word "if" doesn't help your argument. The words "If " and "maybe" change the context in which the topic is being debated. The fact is Ford doesn't have any fuel requirements that are different then any other manufacturing and MS is the only company selling Windows and therefore doesn't meet the definition of a monopoly.

Window Phone? Srsly?

[stewbacca]

Windows Phones will surpass iPhones by 2015? Yeah, right. Windows phones will surpass iPhones at approximately the same time Zunes surpass iPods.

Re:AAPL over MSFT if "diversity of revenue" matter

[Waffle Iron]

The word "if" means that your analogy doesn't work unless this this contrived fuel situation is added to account for software compatibility network effects. IOW, your original claim that there was no monopoly in the desktop OS market (based on arbitrarily narrowing the definition of a monopoly to suit your argument) was incorrect. HTH.

How about some depth to that analysis?

[jonaskoelker]

[why does anyone take Wall Str numbers seriously?] I mean, these are the guys selling toxic mortgage backed securities as "AAA" while simultaneously shorting the securities as junk.

Let's think about this. I think government policy was that everybody should own a home, whether they could afford the loan or not. That, and the observation of broke banks being bailed out in the past, lead to incentives for banks to give out bad loans to people who couldn't afford it. The government 'encouragement' of AAA stocks was an incentive to overstate the un-risk of stocks so that the people who wanted to buy them, could. The trading of derivatives washed out what was an already obscured risk in the "base cases".

Yeah, people sold crap. Probably some sold crap knowingly. So the Wall-Streeters are not innocent. But let's not pretend the government is innocent either. What I think ought to happen is propagation of risk to the people who own the bank (the stockholders, and the stockholders of stockholders, and to infinity): if the bank goes south and can't pay the people who have lent it money, the people who own the bank should pay. Then banks can crash all they want and not hurt Joe Schmoe by not paying out his life savings. An unstable or failing banking system still hurts people by limiting the access to financial services (savings, loans, investment), but I think it's better for society to put up with that than giving money to people who can't run a successful business.

Wall Str is where one number can come out, and suddenly a company is worth 10, or even 20% less then yesterday

Right, because numbers never say anything about the world, right? The demand for long-lasting food and emergency shelters might very reasonably depend on whether the asteroid is 1 or 0.001 light-years away from the earth. This high or low demand will very reasonably influence the value of the producers of long-lasting food and emergency shelters, because if we're about to get hit, why is it bad to want that or bad to supply the people who want it?

People at Wall Street might make bank on hurting society, but that's to some extent a consequence of the government setting up the playing field badly, and also actively giving money to nincompoops. It's my understanding that what you need is not better people, but better incentives: if people get rewarded for doing things that are good rather than bad for society, they often will. The more they want the reward, the greater the incentive effect of it.

For instance, if there's a cause-effect between getting campaign financing and holding political power, the people who want to hold political power have an incentive to seek out campaign financing. The result is a "free" market favoring rich industrialists rather than consumers and public schools favoring teacher unions rather than students. If the banking incentives are such that you'll make a big wad of cash even if you take on too much risk, the people who run banks will... well, I'll let you work on that :-)

Think also about evolution: if the "incentive" (working through survivorship bias) is to procreate, what will organisms do?

Back to being innovative, underdogs

[Anonymous Coward]

As a company, Microsoft is much more innovative when they are the underdog. Just take a look at Bing, the first search engine to incorporate images into search results (copied by Google) or 3/4 view visual maps. And so on. This isn't the same Microsoft from the mid-90s, they have TONS of liquid cash they can spend on R&D, and I believe the days of MS gobbling up small, innovative companies are over, they want all new patents to be in-house

I'm not ashamed to admit that I was a Microsoft fanboys when 3.1 was released. They pushed GUI when the command line interface was king. Here's hoping they can be retake the innovator crown we all knew (and used to love).

Fundamental shift

[Anonymous Coward]

Now you're going to see tech forums shifting from a vocal Apple lovers population, to a vocal Microsoft lovers population.

Friggin minorities. . .

I should care because?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do I care which closed source OS is better? I don't. This is like asking if it is better to bash your left or your right hand with a hammer. If both were to evaporate tomorrow, I would not be affected or care.