Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Now Makes Money From Surface Line, Q1 Sales Reach Almost $1 Billion
SmartAboutThings writes Microsoft has recently published its Q1 fiscal 2015 earnings report, disclosing that it has made $4.5 billion in net income on $23.20 billion in revenue. According to the report, revenue has increased by $4.67 billion, compared to $18.53 billion from the same period last year. However, net income has decreased 14 percent compared to last year's $5.24 billion mainly because of the $1.14 billion cost associated with the integration and restructuring expenses related to the Nokia acquisition.
But what's finally good news for the company is that the Surface gross margin was positive this quarter, which means the company finally starts making money on Surface sales. Microsoft didn't yet reveal Surface sales, but we know that Surface revenue was $908 million this quarter, up a massive 127 percent from the $400 million this time last year. However, if we assume that the average spent amount on the purchase of this year's Surface Pro 3 was around $1000, then we have less than 1 million units sold, which isn't that impressive, but it's a good start.
But what's finally good news for the company is that the Surface gross margin was positive this quarter, which means the company finally starts making money on Surface sales. Microsoft didn't yet reveal Surface sales, but we know that Surface revenue was $908 million this quarter, up a massive 127 percent from the $400 million this time last year. However, if we assume that the average spent amount on the purchase of this year's Surface Pro 3 was around $1000, then we have less than 1 million units sold, which isn't that impressive, but it's a good start.
If you are totalling the revenue for Surface and subtracting the direct costs for Surface, why would you then include the indirect costs that are by definition not specifically for the Surface? It sounds to me like you are desperately searching for bad news here.
or just didn't make enough to also pay taxes?
At least they didn't taint my device with their software, that should be worth that money.
A tablet running full Windows where you can connect seamlessly to Exchange and AD, run Office and other Windows only apps and their existing .NET devs can easily write apps for them. The org I work for is trialing them now and the initial feedback has been very positive.
I can see the previous company I worked for going for it in a big way too. They have a lot of field staff who have lots of data to capture.
of course, anyone who ever said anything nice about a Microsoft product is a shill...
Mostly yes; There are a number of MS products which kind of work and are useful (e.g. Windows 7) there are a number which don't really work but you have to use (Excel - often you need to use it because it's broken the same way as the software your accountant uses).
How is Excel on your list of "don't really work" apps? Excel is essentially Microsoft's killer app, and it isn't because you can't convert XLS documents to work with other competitors. It is because Excel is one of the best applications ever written (IMHO). My attempt to get used to the Apple operating system (I got a Macbook for work) was mostly successful but I eventually fell back to Windows because their version of Excel was so much better than the Mac version (not Apple's fault, but still important). There were some other minor reasons, such as me liking Notepad++ more than Sublime and my opinion that Windows 7 handles multiple large monitors better, but Excel was the main reason. I also like Visual Studio for most development, but IntelliJ was good enough. The alternatives to Excel were not good enough however.
Once a company starts sponsoring PR agencies to shill on the internet, anyone who is helping them, even without knowing it, becomes unethical and complicit, at least negligently, in lying.
People advocating for products they find useful is not lying. Opinions will always be biased, mostly because it is so hard to become such an expert in multiple product ecosystems that you can objectively compare them, but that doesn't make all opinions completely invalid. Most marketing is underhanded and manipulative, so if outrage over heavy handed marketing makes consumer advocacy unethical then all consumer advocacy would be unethical.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Of course he's looking for bad news. Have you read the comments for any Slashdot article that mentions the Surface or Surface Pro? A brigade of people come out who are basically upset that it even exists. It's like the Surface Pro scared their mothers when they were in the womb.
As a self-confessed Surface hater, I can at least give some insight for the reasons behind it:
1. The hardware is locked to Windows. My understanding is that the newer Pro versions aren't locked, but that's despite MS's efforts otherwise
2. It's an attempt at validating the Windows 8 tablet UI which is almost universally disliked around here
3. MS deliberately tried to confuse users with the x86 and ARM versions in order to strong arm developers into targeting their tablet interface and publishing their apps in the Windows app store
The Surface Pro didn't scare my mother when I was in the womb, but it does represent a threat to open computing, and I for one would be happy to see it fail. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case any more, so I guess we're in this for the long run.
1. The hardware is locked to Windows. My understanding is that the newer Pro versions aren't locked, but that's despite MS's efforts otherwise.
None of the Pro versions have ever been locked. Good luck loading Ubuntu on that iPad too. Hypocrite.