Apparently you can link to an article but not read it. They are filing under the French equivalent of Chapter 11 - Reorg. During the process the company MUST continue to do business because they still have to pay debtors. Otherwise they would have filed the equivalent of Chapter 7 - liquidation.
A private company must report its finances once it has more than 500 common shareholders--or stock-option holders--and $10 million in assets, according to section XII(g) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. That means a private company must file quarterly forms with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that disclose operating expenses, profits, partnerships, shareholders and many other details--a laborious process that can cost as much as $2 million annually.
The Mac version has always had a few extra features but nothing significant. The signficant things - like the file compatability you mentioned - were introduced first on the PC. Also, It makes sense that the later version would have more features because it was released a year later.
Two points - I am making the assumption about mac users just to way off the original poster was. Lower the percentage and my point is even stronger.
Second - You don't have to be an owner to get a prospectus and all the information you need is available in the SEC filings linked in my other post.
I guess there are actually three points. The OS blows away Office in profit. Total OS (client and server) is 2 1/2 billion vs Office (and other productivity software like Visio) at 1 1/2 billion. The rest of the divisions are just penny's compared to those three divisions. Mac group is probably not even 1% of their total revenue.
Hahahah. Now I understand. You really have no clue what you are talking about. I usually don't take on other people's arguments but you are really scary. You say Office is the Mac group's only product and then you tell him to read? You didn't even read the article.
I can't even begin to untangle the mess about OS division vs Office division vs Mac Division.
And you obviously never priced a PC. Office doesn't come with PC's. Dell charges you $129 for the most basic Office and $340 for the full Pro version.
And here is some numbers for you: Market size (hypothetically) - 10,000,000 Mac - 500,000 * $400 = $200,000,000 PC - 9,500,000 * $129 = $1,225,500,000
I already made my point in another post about Mac version coming out first.
and to do so on the Mac first, as has always been the case
The equivalent of Office 97 was Office 98 on the Mac, the equivalent of Office 2000 was Office 2001 on the Mac, Office XP came out before v.X, and Office 2003 came out before Office 2004. Did you have anything of truth in your post?
I apologize for the faulty linking - Here is the correct link to their annual report page. Although if you want to skip the glitz you can go straight to their SEC Filings and take a look at their 10Q. It is in Word, though, so beware.
That sir, is a load of bullshit. From one of my older posts on the same subject:
According to their Annual Report's MD&A they make a profit in Client (Desktop OS), Server, and Information Worker (Office, Visio, etc.). They lost money on Business Solutions (Great Plains Acct Software, etc.), MSN, Mobile and Embedded, Home Entertainment (XBox, etc.), and Other (which had something to do with the sale of Expedia).
It doesn't break out Mac division but I am sure it is profitable but so negligible in total as to be almost a joke.
As for their divisiona losing money. The total loss of all divisions losing money for their Q1 was $335M vs the profit from their profitable divisions of over $5 BILLION.
I can understand your hatred for Microsoft but your spreading false information makes you no better.
For those of you looking for the info it is in Note 11 of the MD&A (which is after the financials for you non-accountants).
That's because there is no trademark for "there's something about mary". That is the difference you are missing. Trademarks change the whole game. You can't go out and buy something about mary dolls but you can buy Finding Nemo Toys. Disney holds their IP very closely and I guarantee you they would go after them if they thought they were misrepresenting their new film as a Disney product.
I am not sure what you are talking about. Toy Story and Finding Nemo are not Pixar's products. They are Disneys. By using them they infer that Disney somehow is affiliated with their new movie. Also saying makers is very deceptive.
Because they didn't infer that McDonalds in anyway is endorsing the Whopper. You can refer to another company's product but you can't use it to sell your product. Not sure why this is so difficult for people to understand.
I can't comment on your second point without specific references. I don't know how Kevin Smith's characters refer to the movie but if they just referring to its existence and not trying to sell a product using its name then they are fine.
The fact of the matter is you cannot use another company's trademarks to sell your product without their permission.
I'm not sure what "competeing for the trademark" means but if I hold a trademark and you try to use it to sell a similar product then you are violating my trademark. Plain and simple.
Try to create a news commentary sight with the heading - from a guy who used to read Slashdot. Maybe Taco wouldn't slap you down but he would be well within his rights. Slashdot is a trademark for "News features and public commentary."
Except that Disney has a trademark on Toy Story as it relates to " prerecorded audio cassettes, compact discs, and laser video discs featuring music, stories, activities and other such educational and entertainment topics for children; prerecorded video cassettes featuring animated entertainment; computer software featuring music, stories, activities and other such educational and entertainment topics for children; motion picture films featuring animated entertainment."
That is only part of the problem. The biggest problem is that netcraft counts sites and not servers in these surveys. All it takes is one big host to switch from RedHat to Debian to swing the whole thing. Every so often they post it by OS but that latest one I can find is from 2001. I think it is because they sell that info now.
Specific to this survey - you have to really look at the total numbers, too. If one distro had gone from 10 to 20 it would have been a 100% increase but I don't think anybody would be reporting it is threatening redhat.
You want to talk testament to Dell's solidity? My girlfriend in a fit of rage through her laptop on the floor and then threw the TV on top of it. She ended up breaking the LCD (easily replaced thanks to Ebay) and dented the internal CD casing (easily fixed thanks to Mr. screwdriver). Everything else works great. I should also point out that this is a latititude bought in 2000.
On the IBM side - I have a T21 from 2001 that has never given me the slightest problem. Moral of the story - it is a crapshoot sometimes.
Besides the fact that parking your retirement savings in any one stick is a bad idea why do you see any problem with Microsoft? The financials don't support your assertion and the fact that the stock is up since the announcement would indicate that the market doesn't agree. Is it some kind of mystical intuition you are using or just blind zealotry.
Income is the money you receive in the course of business. Profit is the income received less the cost of sales. Revenue is your income plus the reduction of liabilities (ie Unearned Revenue). Sales is part of your income.
I don't mention other terms like operating income (which excludes stuff like taxes, interest income, etc.) and Net Income which is the complete bottom line.
I apologize for the misunderstanding. I didn't mean to eliminate them from the financial statements but from the calculation when determining whether Microsoft is buying customers. Stock options aren't a reflection of advertising or customer incentive plans.
That is an interesting study of how a paper can show bias while still presenting just the facts. They don't explain as I did above (and as Microsoft did in their financial statements) why the operating income is down. With all of the accounting adjustments in the last year or so the "bottom line" is hardly a great indicator anymore. What's even more interesting is that they say that MSFT was down 3% in overnight trading when overall they are up 1.9% since the announcement.
Pick and choosing facts is a great way to bias a report without having to make anything up.
I am not saying that it shouldn't be included in their P&L. I am just saying that it doesn't support the idea that "Microsoft is buying sales and hiding the costs" as the parent proposed. A dramatic increase in advertising would have been more of an indicator of that.
Slashdot Mirror
Most filing is quarterly not trimesterly. Their second quarter reports have historically been published in the middle of April.
Apparently you can link to an article but not read it. They are filing under the French equivalent of Chapter 11 - Reorg. During the process the company MUST continue to do business because they still have to pay debtors. Otherwise they would have filed the equivalent of Chapter 7 - liquidation.
Perhaps this will help:
A private company must report its finances once it has more than 500 common shareholders--or stock-option holders--and $10 million in assets, according to section XII(g) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. That means a private company must file quarterly forms with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that disclose operating expenses, profits, partnerships, shareholders and many other details--a laborious process that can cost as much as $2 million annually.
The Mac version has always had a few extra features but nothing significant. The signficant things - like the file compatability you mentioned - were introduced first on the PC. Also, It makes sense that the later version would have more features because it was released a year later.
Two points - I am making the assumption about mac users just to way off the original poster was. Lower the percentage and my point is even stronger.
Second - You don't have to be an owner to get a prospectus and all the information you need is available in the SEC filings linked in my other post.
I guess there are actually three points. The OS blows away Office in profit. Total OS (client and server) is 2 1/2 billion vs Office (and other productivity software like Visio) at 1 1/2 billion. The rest of the divisions are just penny's compared to those three divisions. Mac group is probably not even 1% of their total revenue.
Hahahah. Now I understand. You really have no clue what you are talking about. I usually don't take on other people's arguments but you are really scary. You say Office is the Mac group's only product and then you tell him to read? You didn't even read the article.
I can't even begin to untangle the mess about OS division vs Office division vs Mac Division.
And you obviously never priced a PC. Office doesn't come with PC's. Dell charges you $129 for the most basic Office and $340 for the full Pro version.
And here is some numbers for you:
Market size (hypothetically) - 10,000,000
Mac - 500,000 * $400 = $200,000,000
PC - 9,500,000 * $129 = $1,225,500,000
I already made my point in another post about Mac version coming out first.
and to do so on the Mac first, as has always been the case
The equivalent of Office 97 was Office 98 on the Mac, the equivalent of Office 2000 was Office 2001 on the Mac, Office XP came out before v.X, and Office 2003 came out before Office 2004. Did you have anything of truth in your post?
Why bother making stuff up? I just don't get it.
I apologize for the faulty linking - Here is the correct link to their annual report page. Although if you want to skip the glitz you can go straight to their SEC Filings and take a look at their 10Q. It is in Word, though, so beware.
That sir, is a load of bullshit. From one of my older posts on the same subject:
According to their Annual Report's MD&A they make a profit in Client (Desktop OS), Server, and Information Worker (Office, Visio, etc.). They lost money on Business Solutions (Great Plains Acct Software, etc.), MSN, Mobile and Embedded, Home Entertainment (XBox, etc.), and Other (which had something to do with the sale of Expedia).
It doesn't break out Mac division but I am sure it is profitable but so negligible in total as to be almost a joke.
As for their divisiona losing money. The total loss of all divisions losing money for their Q1 was $335M vs the profit from their profitable divisions of over $5 BILLION.
I can understand your hatred for Microsoft but your spreading false information makes you no better.
For those of you looking for the info it is in Note 11 of the MD&A (which is after the financials for you non-accountants).
That's because there is no trademark for "there's something about mary". That is the difference you are missing. Trademarks change the whole game. You can't go out and buy something about mary dolls but you can buy Finding Nemo Toys. Disney holds their IP very closely and I guarantee you they would go after them if they thought they were misrepresenting their new film as a Disney product.
And who do you think paid to make the film?
I am not sure what you are talking about. Toy Story and Finding Nemo are not Pixar's products. They are Disneys. By using them they infer that Disney somehow is affiliated with their new movie. Also saying makers is very deceptive.
Because they didn't infer that McDonalds in anyway is endorsing the Whopper. You can refer to another company's product but you can't use it to sell your product. Not sure why this is so difficult for people to understand.
I can't comment on your second point without specific references. I don't know how Kevin Smith's characters refer to the movie but if they just referring to its existence and not trying to sell a product using its name then they are fine.
The fact of the matter is you cannot use another company's trademarks to sell your product without their permission.
I'm not sure what "competeing for the trademark" means but if I hold a trademark and you try to use it to sell a similar product then you are violating my trademark. Plain and simple.
Try to create a news commentary sight with the heading - from a guy who used to read Slashdot. Maybe Taco wouldn't slap you down but he would be well within his rights. Slashdot is a trademark for "News features and public commentary."
Except that Disney has a trademark on Toy Story as it relates to " prerecorded audio cassettes, compact discs, and laser video discs featuring music, stories, activities and other such educational and entertainment topics for children; prerecorded video cassettes featuring animated entertainment; computer software featuring music, stories, activities and other such educational and entertainment topics for children; motion picture films featuring animated entertainment."
They also hold it for lunch boxes, toys, etc.
They have around 20 trademarks for Finding Nemo.
That is only part of the problem. The biggest problem is that netcraft counts sites and not servers in these surveys. All it takes is one big host to switch from RedHat to Debian to swing the whole thing. Every so often they post it by OS but that latest one I can find is from 2001. I think it is because they sell that info now.
Specific to this survey - you have to really look at the total numbers, too. If one distro had gone from 10 to 20 it would have been a 100% increase but I don't think anybody would be reporting it is threatening redhat.
No argument here but I know very few sane women. It is also a testament to the effects of adrenaline. Normally she couldn't lift that TV.
It had nothing to do with the laptop. It was just an unfortunate victim.
You want to talk testament to Dell's solidity? My girlfriend in a fit of rage through her laptop on the floor and then threw the TV on top of it. She ended up breaking the LCD (easily replaced thanks to Ebay) and dented the internal CD casing (easily fixed thanks to Mr. screwdriver). Everything else works great. I should also point out that this is a latititude bought in 2000.
On the IBM side - I have a T21 from 2001 that has never given me the slightest problem. Moral of the story - it is a crapshoot sometimes.
Besides the fact that parking your retirement savings in any one stick is a bad idea why do you see any problem with Microsoft? The financials don't support your assertion and the fact that the stock is up since the announcement would indicate that the market doesn't agree. Is it some kind of mystical intuition you are using or just blind zealotry.
Income is the money you receive in the course of business. Profit is the income received less the cost of sales. Revenue is your income plus the reduction of liabilities (ie Unearned Revenue). Sales is part of your income.
Full definitions are available here.
I don't mention other terms like operating income (which excludes stuff like taxes, interest income, etc.) and Net Income which is the complete bottom line.
I apologize for the misunderstanding. I didn't mean to eliminate them from the financial statements but from the calculation when determining whether Microsoft is buying customers. Stock options aren't a reflection of advertising or customer incentive plans.
That is an interesting study of how a paper can show bias while still presenting just the facts. They don't explain as I did above (and as Microsoft did in their financial statements) why the operating income is down. With all of the accounting adjustments in the last year or so the "bottom line" is hardly a great indicator anymore. What's even more interesting is that they say that MSFT was down 3% in overnight trading when overall they are up 1.9% since the announcement.
Pick and choosing facts is a great way to bias a report without having to make anything up.
I am not saying that it shouldn't be included in their P&L. I am just saying that it doesn't support the idea that "Microsoft is buying sales and hiding the costs" as the parent proposed. A dramatic increase in advertising would have been more of an indicator of that.