Cutting millions in employee benefits means you spend less on employee benefits and thus have a larger profit margin as a result.
If Microsoft says that their projected earnings are 2.69 billion and they come in at 1.85 billion, the market doesn't look kindly on that and their stock would fall. Microsoft doesn't like it when their stock falls nor do investors.
In fact, Microsoft stock has pretty much flatlines for the last 4 years and has made no significant gain leading many investors to believe that Microsoft's stock has matured and we will not see any significant gains for awhile.
However a loss can hapen and like I said, when companies do not meet projected earnings, stocks take a dive (albeit a small one).
I Bill Gates can prove that Windows is more secure than Linux. Watch as I write it down on this piece of paper. SEE? See what it says? It says 'Windows is more safe'. Don't believe me? Watch me pay someone else to say it. Believe it yet? Well how about if I buy an expensive report and tell them to say Windows is safer. Now do you believe it? NO!!
Damn, who do I have to buy off to make you people believe that Windows is safer?
Yeah forgot about that. They have been nickel and diming employees like nuts. I told my wife that every single time a company starts doing this, you can bet that layoffs are around the corner. This theory has been right so far 10 out of 10 times
Microsoft will be the first company where I haven't seen that happen so far but it's only been a month or two since that happened AND went into effect so we have yet to see how it all pans out.
Exactly. This is what I mean by them effectively countering each other. And since Microsoft has always been a desktop company, they would rather lose their server market share than their desktop share; they'll fight alot harder to avoid inroads being made into the desktop but they can't avoid losing market share of servers and I think they have accepted that and will be circling the wagons around the desktop for the next few years.
Since Microsoft has never TRULY dominated the server market (at least not in the sense that they dominated the desktop), this is the easiest win for Linux and seems to be the way it is heading currently. Once the server market has effectively been tied up and gift wrapped for Linux, it will be up to Microsoft to work with industry standards and if any of Microsofts protocols, tools or other toys like ActiveX start behaving wierdly or becoming a security risk, servers can effectively block them.
Once Linux has tied up the server market, Microsoft will HAVE to get along and be forced to embrace Linux to a certain extent. We are already seeing them soften their stance by no longer saying it is a cancer but their approach behind closed doors is still the same.
As a side effect, once they become second class citizens on the server market and are focused on the desktop, I believe they can justify removal of alot of apps from the desktop that currently make it insecure and problematic; right now, they can't justify it yet because they still feel they can win this one but they are just avoiding the inevitable.
The industry demands open standards and Microsoft demands that they be able to own those standards; the two concepts are incompatible thus forcing the industry to rise against Microsoft as a whole (the Sender-id fiasco is a prime example).
Microsofts best bet is to start focusing on the desktop and stop worrying about the server. But they won't do that yet as they have too much invested. Instead, Microsoft will started attacking the vendors and companies around Linux and Open Source soon claiming patent violation or something like that and attempt to either exhaust their cash flow and effectively choke them to death or try to buy out key developers and bring them into the MS fold. In other words, if you cannot knock the guy down, kick his legs out from under him.
Both of these attempts will fail but for reasons that Microsoft doesn't understand fully. Suing people for patent violation COULD work but the community as a whole will question those patents and as a result, Microsoft could end up LOSING intellectual property as a result. But more importantly, they are still seen as an arrogant bully and this will further damage their appearance to customers. True, it will also damage the people who they are suing but if you try to tell people that you cannot create something yourself and give it away for free, most people will agree that is wrong.
Also, patent law protects people who build things themselves for personal use as long as they do not try to prosper from it and it can be effectively argued that a Linux distro is sold as a compilation and that the person themselves could compile the info themselves as well.
In the long run, they are fighting an inevitable battle in which they will be brought down to a equal level with the other major players on the field.
No, it's close to what I intended to say. But while you use the numbers of copies sold to represent profit, you should also include the fact that most of those copies sold are on new computers sold through hardware vendors like Dell who get HUGE discounts... or through government or business contracts who also get HUGE discounts.
You basically will have a hard time trying to purchase a computer without Windows on it. And while these copies through third parties does increase their profit margin, a recent ruling made it so that Microsofts contracts with those vendors were rendered ILLEGAL due to constraints as those vendors not being allowed to sell competing operating systems or else they would lose their discount.
But my main point is that Linux will not affect Windows sales for the desktop, however it WILL affect sales for servers. Dell, HP and others now offer Linux on the server side but not on the desktop. Desktop sales are thus unaffected (even though Windows can be used as a desktop and a server...blech).
My real point was to say that Linux and OOS should focus their attacks and their first area they should worry about is server side technology. Once that is shored up, Microsoft will have to follow industry standards in order to get their product to work across the internet or with server systems.
One of the key errors made in war is trying to attack on two many fronts at once when you have limited resources. Even ATTEMPTING to do a desktop this early in the game is a bit foolish when the server side of things is not shored up yet. Once the server side has been shored up and Microsoft effectively shut out or forced to follow and work with industry standards, then OOS experts and businesses could start to consider a fork of Linux specifically geared for the desktop.
Microsoft is a desktop company and always has been a desktop company first and foremost. Hitting them on the server side would be their weak point as NT and SQL Slammer and several other mistakes have blackened their eye in the IT sector. They are weak on the server and they play a LONG GAME where, if given enough time, they eventually recover.
So yes, Linux is affecting the total number of Windows copies sold... for servers. OOS is affecting the total number of software products sold FOR SERVERS. But as far as the desktop is concerned, they are still strong and will be for a long time to come.
Not even close to true? Let's see, you agree that they cut millions for drug benefits, but they also cut several other benefits as well if you would remember to read your Microsoft employee memos.
And let's not leave out the old classic of free soda that the company cut as well. And why does a company that is doing so well cut benefits like these? Hmmm...? Draw your own conclusion. From past experience, anytime a company has to start nickle and diming things like free soda, they aren't actually doing as well as they are reporting.
As for reports to stockholders, let's not forget that Enron said it was doing great up until the day they went under. Believing a companies financial reporting about itself is like believing a used car salesman trying to sell you a 'slightly used' car; there's always something they aren't telling you.
Truly fascinating when you consider that they had to cut millions from employee benefits in order to declare a profit last quarter. Speaking as a someone who works across the street from them and whose company depends on them directly for 90% of their business, these guys are bleeding all over the floor. Sure they are an 8,000 lb gorilla but even they are not filled with an unlimited blood supply.
But that's not the problem. The problem is that people in the industry have just seen Linux and Open Source strike that blow and are now realizing that if they ever questioned Microsoft's leadership, they have a new ally... and an ally that has the ability to hurt Microsoft. Camp lines are being drawn and the gorilla is hurt. This is when he's the most dangerous of course.
Of course, OOS and Linux have not yet achieved maturity but they have established unbreakable inroads so even if the gorilla wa able to stave them off, they could not truly reduce the size and interest in it at this point.
Open source effectively checkmates Microsoft's 8000 lb gorilla; Because Microsoft is heavily reliant upon maintaining a shrinking monopoly, they must focus all their energies on keeping it from growing.
The patent wars have already begun and they will wage for probably another 10 years and there is only one obvious way to go and that is a better patent process and the negation of existing patents. This will strike a SERIOUS blow to Microsoft and the best that they can hope for is to influence the process because by this point, supporters of OOS and Linux will effectively have a greater combined strength.
Microsoft's best hope is to entrench themselves in the desktop. As programming evolves, people will be spending far less time making products work together and more time building tools using tools (rather than the raw materials of machine language, etc). As a direct result of this, people will be developing for solely for environments. We already see this now with.NET and LAMP in that people are using tools built to interact with each other and to help them build other tools that can effectively communicate unhindered in a specific environment.
By focusing on the desktop alone (and abandoning the server market), Microsoft can force Linux developers and supporters to focus their attention on the server side and while they fight amongst themselves for dominance, Microsoft can effectively move away from the server market and further entrench themselves in the desktop market/environment and effectively split computer science education into server side development and client side development.
Microsoft DOES need to embrace the inevitable otherwise risk losing it all. But they must also throw out a large enough bone for the open source community to fight over to effectively remove their attention from their combined enemy and allow Microsoft to steal one last toy and make their getaway.
Yeah, SP2 was such a great answer. It only crashes 1 in 4 machines causing the user to have to reinstall. By Microsoft standards, that's a raging success!:)
Well it would be possible should you use something aside from subjective data. Aside from that all I have seen thus far is TROLLING from a child who doesn't like coming in second.
Hey, if I was wrong, I doubt I would have gotten modded up so high. Don't worry though. One day I'm sure you'll be able to admit you're wrong and we will look back on these posts and Laugh and Laugh and Laugh!:)
Oh, we only count ONE SITE?! I'm sorry to tell you this because I'm afraid your tiny little brain will explode. You see Mozilla and Firefox have several. Yes, they do. They are all over the place. Zealot brain or not, I at least have the ability to count. It comes in handy, you should try it sometime.
Counting can be fun.:)
Oh, is the little flamer mad now, did I make him cry?:(
Yay. You have 100K members, take that number by 10 and come on by come on by Firefox/Mozilla some time.
Again, as I said before, the problems you are having are more than likely related to your platform setup or that you are using an older version. But I like how your ineptitude with your OS gets blamed on the software; Bill Gates uses that tactic all the time too.
Geezo you are twitchy and defensive. Did your mom beat you with a rake when you were a child?
Microsoft? LIE? Say it isn't so? No, I don't believe it! Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer are two of the most trust worthy people on the planet. When that security is their number one priority and I continually get attacked on a daily basis, I know it's because all those piles of money blocking the hallways in Bill's House was to blame. If only they coud figure out a way to put all that useless money to work solving their problems. Sigh.
This depends on what system you use it on and how many extensions you have added to it. Also do not confuse Firefox with Mozilla; they have a similar codebase but they are not the same thing.
And Buggier? Yes. Opera is slightly buggy. I've used Mozilla since 0.3 and I have to say that I haven't had a crash since 0.9; I have had discrepancies in how it shows the page but I realized that was due to bad HTML and not the browser.
Less support means less community support. And no matter how you slice it, this is extremely true of any proprietary system vs an open source system. Open source software generally always has a larger community support network.
Yes, having others make choices for you is a very good thing... in a dictatorship. But luckily King George the second is about to get dethroned so I'm allowed to make choices for myself again. Yay pseudo-democracy!
Well I wouldn't call it inferior because it still is a damn fine browser but there are a few things that don't make me use it.
- larger footprint - less CSS support - not free (unless you want an annoying banner ad) - buggier (yes, in comparison to Firefox) - less support - they make the choices for you unlike in Firefox where all the add-ons and extensions are there for YOU to choose.
Al in all, I would still use Opera LONG before I got back to IE but it took a different approach than Firefox and I really have to say I like that I get to choose my own extensions rather than having them bundled.
The consumer wants profit margin?? Um.. I don't think so. The consumer wants security. Microsoft wants profit margin... and Microsoft doesn't give a flying f@ck whether you are secure or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Cutting millions in employee benefits means you spend less on employee benefits and thus have a larger profit margin as a result.
:)
If Microsoft says that their projected earnings are 2.69 billion and they come in at 1.85 billion, the market doesn't look kindly on that and their stock would fall. Microsoft doesn't like it when their stock falls nor do investors.
In fact, Microsoft stock has pretty much flatlines for the last 4 years and has made no significant gain leading many investors to believe that Microsoft's stock has matured and we will not see any significant gains for awhile.
However a loss can hapen and like I said, when companies do not meet projected earnings, stocks take a dive (albeit a small one).
Consider that your lesson in economics.
I Bill Gates can prove that Windows is more secure than Linux. Watch as I write it down on this piece of paper. SEE? See what it says? It says 'Windows is more safe'. Don't believe me? Watch me pay someone else to say it. Believe it yet? Well how about if I buy an expensive report and tell them to say Windows is safer. Now do you believe it? NO!!
Damn, who do I have to buy off to make you people believe that Windows is safer?
Yeah forgot about that. They have been nickel and diming employees like nuts. I told my wife that every single time a company starts doing this, you can bet that layoffs are around the corner. This theory has been right so far 10 out of 10 times
Microsoft will be the first company where I haven't seen that happen so far but it's only been a month or two since that happened AND went into effect so we have yet to see how it all pans out.
Exactly. This is what I mean by them effectively countering each other. And since Microsoft has always been a desktop company, they would rather lose their server market share than their desktop share; they'll fight alot harder to avoid inroads being made into the desktop but they can't avoid losing market share of servers and I think they have accepted that and will be circling the wagons around the desktop for the next few years.
Since Microsoft has never TRULY dominated the server market (at least not in the sense that they dominated the desktop), this is the easiest win for Linux and seems to be the way it is heading currently. Once the server market has effectively been tied up and gift wrapped for Linux, it will be up to Microsoft to work with industry standards and if any of Microsofts protocols, tools or other toys like ActiveX start behaving wierdly or becoming a security risk, servers can effectively block them.
Once Linux has tied up the server market, Microsoft will HAVE to get along and be forced to embrace Linux to a certain extent. We are already seeing them soften their stance by no longer saying it is a cancer but their approach behind closed doors is still the same.
As a side effect, once they become second class citizens on the server market and are focused on the desktop, I believe they can justify removal of alot of apps from the desktop that currently make it insecure and problematic; right now, they can't justify it yet because they still feel they can win this one but they are just avoiding the inevitable.
The industry demands open standards and Microsoft demands that they be able to own those standards; the two concepts are incompatible thus forcing the industry to rise against Microsoft as a whole (the Sender-id fiasco is a prime example).
Microsofts best bet is to start focusing on the desktop and stop worrying about the server. But they won't do that yet as they have too much invested. Instead, Microsoft will started attacking the vendors and companies around Linux and Open Source soon claiming patent violation or something like that and attempt to either exhaust their cash flow and effectively choke them to death or try to buy out key developers and bring them into the MS fold. In other words, if you cannot knock the guy down, kick his legs out from under him.
Both of these attempts will fail but for reasons that Microsoft doesn't understand fully. Suing people for patent violation COULD work but the community as a whole will question those patents and as a result, Microsoft could end up LOSING intellectual property as a result. But more importantly, they are still seen as an arrogant bully and this will further damage their appearance to customers. True, it will also damage the people who they are suing but if you try to tell people that you cannot create something yourself and give it away for free, most people will agree that is wrong.
Also, patent law protects people who build things themselves for personal use as long as they do not try to prosper from it and it can be effectively argued that a Linux distro is sold as a compilation and that the person themselves could compile the info themselves as well.
In the long run, they are fighting an inevitable battle in which they will be brought down to a equal level with the other major players on the field.
And had I a shared your occupation, I might be worried.
No, it's close to what I intended to say. But while you use the numbers of copies sold to represent profit, you should also include the fact that most of those copies sold are on new computers sold through hardware vendors like Dell who get HUGE discounts... or through government or business contracts who also get HUGE discounts.
You basically will have a hard time trying to purchase a computer without Windows on it. And while these copies through third parties does increase their profit margin, a recent ruling made it so that Microsofts contracts with those vendors were rendered ILLEGAL due to constraints as those vendors not being allowed to sell competing operating systems or else they would lose their discount.
But my main point is that Linux will not affect Windows sales for the desktop, however it WILL affect sales for servers. Dell, HP and others now offer Linux on the server side but not on the desktop. Desktop sales are thus unaffected (even though Windows can be used as a desktop and a server...blech).
My real point was to say that Linux and OOS should focus their attacks and their first area they should worry about is server side technology. Once that is shored up, Microsoft will have to follow industry standards in order to get their product to work across the internet or with server systems.
One of the key errors made in war is trying to attack on two many fronts at once when you have limited resources. Even ATTEMPTING to do a desktop this early in the game is a bit foolish when the server side of things is not shored up yet. Once the server side has been shored up and Microsoft effectively shut out or forced to follow and work with industry standards, then OOS experts and businesses could start to consider a fork of Linux specifically geared for the desktop.
Microsoft is a desktop company and always has been a desktop company first and foremost. Hitting them on the server side would be their weak point as NT and SQL Slammer and several other mistakes have blackened their eye in the IT sector. They are weak on the server and they play a LONG GAME where, if given enough time, they eventually recover.
So yes, Linux is affecting the total number of Windows copies sold... for servers. OOS is affecting the total number of software products sold FOR SERVERS. But as far as the desktop is concerned, they are still strong and will be for a long time to come.
Not even close to true? Let's see, you agree that they cut millions for drug benefits, but they also cut several other benefits as well if you would remember to read your Microsoft employee memos.
And let's not leave out the old classic of free soda that the company cut as well. And why does a company that is doing so well cut benefits like these? Hmmm...? Draw your own conclusion. From past experience, anytime a company has to start nickle and diming things like free soda, they aren't actually doing as well as they are reporting.
As for reports to stockholders, let's not forget that Enron said it was doing great up until the day they went under. Believing a companies financial reporting about itself is like believing a used car salesman trying to sell you a 'slightly used' car; there's always something they aren't telling you.
Truly fascinating when you consider that they had to cut millions from employee benefits in order to declare a profit last quarter. Speaking as a someone who works across the street from them and whose company depends on them directly for 90% of their business, these guys are bleeding all over the floor. Sure they are an 8,000 lb gorilla but even they are not filled with an unlimited blood supply.
.NET and LAMP in that people are using tools built to interact with each other and to help them build other tools that can effectively communicate unhindered in a specific environment.
But that's not the problem. The problem is that people in the industry have just seen Linux and Open Source strike that blow and are now realizing that if they ever questioned Microsoft's leadership, they have a new ally... and an ally that has the ability to hurt Microsoft. Camp lines are being drawn and the gorilla is hurt. This is when he's the most dangerous of course.
Of course, OOS and Linux have not yet achieved maturity but they have established unbreakable inroads so even if the gorilla wa able to stave them off, they could not truly reduce the size and interest in it at this point.
Open source effectively checkmates Microsoft's 8000 lb gorilla; Because Microsoft is heavily reliant upon maintaining a shrinking monopoly, they must focus all their energies on keeping it from growing.
The patent wars have already begun and they will wage for probably another 10 years and there is only one obvious way to go and that is a better patent process and the negation of existing patents. This will strike a SERIOUS blow to Microsoft and the best that they can hope for is to influence the process because by this point, supporters of OOS and Linux will effectively have a greater combined strength.
Microsoft's best hope is to entrench themselves in the desktop. As programming evolves, people will be spending far less time making products work together and more time building tools using tools (rather than the raw materials of machine language, etc). As a direct result of this, people will be developing for solely for environments. We already see this now with
By focusing on the desktop alone (and abandoning the server market), Microsoft can force Linux developers and supporters to focus their attention on the server side and while they fight amongst themselves for dominance, Microsoft can effectively move away from the server market and further entrench themselves in the desktop market/environment and effectively split computer science education into server side development and client side development.
Microsoft DOES need to embrace the inevitable otherwise risk losing it all. But they must also throw out a large enough bone for the open source community to fight over to effectively remove their attention from their combined enemy and allow Microsoft to steal one last toy and make their getaway.
All the more morons for Gord to devour and debase :)
Untrue. I'm helping myself by venting; every first year Psych student knows this :)
When the first guy IS that neo-nazi, baby fucker then YES... most definitely.
You are either voting against Bush or for Bush. Unless the other candidate is a child molesting, neo-nazi, it really doesn't matter much.
Sure if you say so. You're a legend in your own mind. :)
For a presumably pro-Windows post, I wonder why you choose to be an Anonymous Coward especialy when your product is so loved by everyone. :)
Yeah, SP2 was such a great answer. It only crashes 1 in 4 machines causing the user to have to reinstall. By Microsoft standards, that's a raging success! :)
It's nice to know that they have made security such a high priority. Hopefully their next high priority will be 'doing something about it'.
There you go, jumping to conclusions. Next time try basing your argument on facts... it makes you seem smarter. :)
Boo hoo... Opera still isn't popular and better no matter how much you whine or troll. Boo hoo.
Well it would be possible should you use something aside from subjective data. Aside from that all I have seen thus far is TROLLING from a child who doesn't like coming in second.
:)
Hey, if I was wrong, I doubt I would have gotten modded up so high. Don't worry though. One day I'm sure you'll be able to admit you're wrong and we will look back on these posts and Laugh and Laugh and Laugh!
Now run back under your bridge... shoo.
Oh, we only count ONE SITE?! I'm sorry to tell you this because I'm afraid your tiny little brain will explode. You see Mozilla and Firefox have several. Yes, they do. They are all over the place. Zealot brain or not, I at least have the ability to count. It comes in handy, you should try it sometime.
:)
:(
Counting can be fun.
Oh, is the little flamer mad now, did I make him cry?
Yay. You have 100K members, take that number by 10 and come on by come on by Firefox/Mozilla some time.
Again, as I said before, the problems you are having are more than likely related to your platform setup or that you are using an older version. But I like how your ineptitude with your OS gets blamed on the software; Bill Gates uses that tactic all the time too.
Geezo you are twitchy and defensive. Did your mom beat you with a rake when you were a child?
Microsoft? LIE? Say it isn't so? No, I don't believe it! Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer are two of the most trust worthy people on the planet. When that security is their number one priority and I continually get attacked on a daily basis, I know it's because all those piles of money blocking the hallways in Bill's House was to blame. If only they coud figure out a way to put all that useless money to work solving their problems. Sigh.
This depends on what system you use it on and how many extensions you have added to it. Also do not confuse Firefox with Mozilla; they have a similar codebase but they are not the same thing.
And Buggier? Yes. Opera is slightly buggy. I've used Mozilla since 0.3 and I have to say that I haven't had a crash since 0.9; I have had discrepancies in how it shows the page but I realized that was due to bad HTML and not the browser.
Less support means less community support. And no matter how you slice it, this is extremely true of any proprietary system vs an open source system. Open source software generally always has a larger community support network.
Yes, having others make choices for you is a very good thing... in a dictatorship. But luckily King George the second is about to get dethroned so I'm allowed to make choices for myself again. Yay pseudo-democracy!
Well I wouldn't call it inferior because it still is a damn fine browser but there are a few things that don't make me use it.
- larger footprint
- less CSS support
- not free (unless you want an annoying banner ad)
- buggier (yes, in comparison to Firefox)
- less support
- they make the choices for you unlike in Firefox where all the add-ons and extensions are there for YOU to choose.
Al in all, I would still use Opera LONG before I got back to IE but it took a different approach than Firefox and I really have to say I like that I get to choose my own extensions rather than having them bundled.
The consumer wants profit margin?? Um.. I don't think so. The consumer wants security. Microsoft wants profit margin... and Microsoft doesn't give a flying f@ck whether you are secure or not.