"As a private company, we have concentrated on the long term, and this has served us well. As a public company, we will do the same," the letter states.
"In our opinion, outside pressures too often tempt companies to sacrifice long-term opportunities to meet quarterly market expectations. Sometimes this pressure has caused companies to manipulate financial results in order to 'make their quarter.' In Warren Buffett's words, 'We won't smooth quarterly or annual results: If earnings figures are lumpy when they reach headquarters, they will be lumpy when they reach you."
SCO spokesman Blake Stowell declined to say how much EV1Servers.net paid but said the arrangement covered the "vast majority" of about 20,000 servers, and therefore got a high-volume discount on the $699 per single-CPU server that SCO asks.
As much publicity as ev1servers.net is going to receive (negative, positive, regardless) having their servers not respond to a rush of traffic is not saying much for product...
Again, this is all about oppurtunities. Just because they don't make money off of Internet Explorer, doesn't mean that it won't or can't lead to something down the road that they could.
Why not respond to my main argument and not just my example that you shouldn't sit on a cash cow product, such as windows and office, while ignoring other areas where oppurtunities exist just because they are not profitable instantly?
It is a fallacy to say that Microsoft is good at making money in new markets. They are actually very good at wasting huge sums trying to dominate new markets, and failing.
Anybody with a business background knows you don't sit on your cash cow and not look for oppurtunities in new areas. The cash cow products are there as capital to drive new product development. Not always are you going to be successful in these areas, but you must take chances where oppurtunities exist. Internet Explorer is one example you left off that list of products that Microsoft attempted to enter where they were the underdog. I'm no Microsoft fan, but this is Business 101.
I'm no conspiracy theorist, but if you think about it logically for Microsoft, it's good anytime one of these memos is put together or "leaked". Microsoft continues to trumpet the so called "threat" of Linux and Apple and thus govt and other interested parties are less likely to scream that Microsoft is dominating the software industry. I believe for the same underlying reason they loaned Apple $200 million when they needed it (it hurts Microsoft in the end to be the only one left standing (govt doens't like this)).
This is why every time I read one of these "leaked" emails I just shrug picturing somebody at Microsoft's HQ smiling that everybody here and on various other sites all go into hoots over "leaked" email.
I'm using spamcop.net and it's cut down on my spam by about 85%. Cost is $30/year for having your email filtered. Some spam (15%) still gets through but you can submit that to them to ensure others don't get the same spam as well.
(I have no affiliation with spamcop.net except as a satisfied customer.)
I attend Northeastern Univeristy, where Shawn Fanning created Napster originally. Although Shawn dropped out to pursue Napster full time, during Napster's peak, our Northeastern continued to allow access to Napster, as to not bring too much attention if they denied access (avoiding headlines of "Home of Napster Blocks Napster" etc). However over the last fall, with all the students returning, file sharing programs put so much strain on the network, access to many gnutella and KaZaa etc exchanges were blocked. They are attempting to fix the problem now by installing a larger bandwith pipe, but the trouble over the fall was severe. I'm a little suprised it wasn't mentioned in the NY Times article.
Slashdot Mirror
working link for the Google Webmaster's FAQ you'll have to scroll to bottom of the page on your own.
The ad served by osdn for this article was this sun grid. Actually the ads appears all over slashdot and other sites now.
Anyways, here's the official sun page for the grid and a datasheet in pdf.
Not to worry, as the filing states:
"As a private company, we have concentrated on the long term, and this has served us well. As a public company, we will do the same," the letter states.
"In our opinion, outside pressures too often tempt companies to sacrifice long-term opportunities to meet quarterly market expectations. Sometimes this pressure has caused companies to manipulate financial results in order to 'make their quarter.' In Warren Buffett's words, 'We won't smooth quarterly or annual results: If earnings figures are lumpy when they reach headquarters, they will be lumpy when they reach you."
As much publicity as ev1servers.net is going to receive (negative, positive, regardless) having their servers not respond to a rush of traffic is not saying much for product...
Actually the article says Sprint PCS, not Verizon's push to talk service is expected to go live soon.
Cost of tuition for one semester: $2,000 /. attack on top of everything else: Priceless
Fees and settlement from lawsuit: $15,000
Having to deal with a
Again, this is all about oppurtunities. Just because they don't make money off of Internet Explorer, doesn't mean that it won't or can't lead to something down the road that they could.
Why not respond to my main argument and not just my example that you shouldn't sit on a cash cow product, such as windows and office, while ignoring other areas where oppurtunities exist just because they are not profitable instantly?
It is a fallacy to say that Microsoft is good at making money in new markets. They are actually very good at wasting huge sums trying to dominate new markets, and failing.
Anybody with a business background knows you don't sit on your cash cow and not look for oppurtunities in new areas. The cash cow products are there as capital to drive new product development. Not always are you going to be successful in these areas, but you must take chances where oppurtunities exist. Internet Explorer is one example you left off that list of products that Microsoft attempted to enter where they were the underdog. I'm no Microsoft fan, but this is Business 101.
I'm no conspiracy theorist, but if you think about it logically for Microsoft, it's good anytime one of these memos is put together or "leaked". Microsoft continues to trumpet the so called "threat" of Linux and Apple and thus govt and other interested parties are less likely to scream that Microsoft is dominating the software industry. I believe for the same underlying reason they loaned Apple $200 million when they needed it (it hurts Microsoft in the end to be the only one left standing (govt doens't like this)).
This is why every time I read one of these "leaked" emails I just shrug picturing somebody at Microsoft's HQ smiling that everybody here and on various other sites all go into hoots over "leaked" email.
I'm using spamcop.net and it's cut down on my spam by about 85%. Cost is $30/year for having your email filtered. Some spam (15%) still gets through but you can submit that to them to ensure others don't get the same spam as well.
(I have no affiliation with spamcop.net except as a satisfied customer.)
I attend Northeastern Univeristy, where Shawn Fanning created Napster originally. Although Shawn dropped out to pursue Napster full time, during Napster's peak, our Northeastern continued to allow access to Napster, as to not bring too much attention if they denied access (avoiding headlines of "Home of Napster Blocks Napster" etc). However over the last fall, with all the students returning, file sharing programs put so much strain on the network, access to many gnutella and KaZaa etc exchanges were blocked. They are attempting to fix the problem now by installing a larger bandwith pipe, but the trouble over the fall was severe. I'm a little suprised it wasn't mentioned in the NY Times article.