This comment demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about by back and dividend programs. The fact that Microsoft is starting to pay dividends shows the stability of the company while the buy back program could perhaps signify that Microsoft is preparing to make big changes and would like to hold on to as much of its stock as it can. The point is that one should not confuse stability with a lack of growth. As much as you would like to infer that Microsoft is thinking it is going to loose market share from every piece of news that comes out, this is could not be further from the truth in this case. On the contrary the fact that they are paying dividends (and their 60 billion dollar cash reserve) signify that Microsoft is not going anywhere in the near future.
You are an idiot. This stupid bashing of Microsoft has gone on long enough. Why can't you just freaking grow up. Whether or not you like Microsoft software is not an issue in this forum. Have they made mistakes? Yes they have. However, that does not mean that you have to put in a reference to the blue screen into every topic that has something to do with Microsoft. I am sick of blind immature bashing of Microsoft. How good of an investment has Red Hat been for you? I be hell will freeze over before you see a dividend from them. So unless you have something meaningful to say about the topic, don't post. GROW UP
What desktop market is linux dominating? Are we calling the cultish hobbyist nerds a separate desktop market? Cause last time I checked Microsoft still had control of the actual desktop market.
You have to realize that GTA3 is not going to make your child or anyone else's child cross any line and start shooting people. The problem comes from an emotional/behavioral/mental instability already present in the child. This is where the real need for parenting comes in. Good parenting does not necessarily mean blindly sheilding your child from adult media, it is the ability to correctly understand the emotional/behavioral/mental condition of your child and the things necessary to improve it. I hate to tell you that if the child of the bad parents down the street is emotionally unstable, banning a violent video game will not make your child safer.
While I would agree that MSN or Windows Messenger is a very poor product, one has to be fair in realising that this is not a problem with Messenger. This virus could just as easily be transmitted via AOL or ICQ because it merely sends a link out THAT THE USER HAS TO CLICK before the virus is transmitted onto the users computer. And if you are stupid enough to follow a link sent to you via IM from a person you don't know you deserve to have a virus installed onto your cpu.
The way to deal with Microsoft's monopoly position is to determine the equilibrium of demand that would naturally occur at if Microsoft was in a perfectly competitive market. N ext the government would subsidise Microsoft to attain that level of production and then charge them a flat tax of the subsidy plus their current profit. Therefore they would be maximizing profit at the price and quantity that a competitive market would bring about, and their profit would be the same as if they were in a competitive market, the big 0. (In a perfectly competitive market the long run maximum profit of a firm is 0 which means that it just covers their opurtunity cost).
I am not giving Microsoft G-d like status. But can you point to one tangible result of all the litigation that has gone on against Microsoft? The real problem lies in the way Monopolies (not just Microsoft) are prosecuted. Oh yea, one more time how does including WMP break the law? Or is it that it stifles innovation? How?
No government made Microsoft's monopoly. Microsoft is a monopoly due to the large economy of scale involved in its average cost curve. Microsoft can grow bigger and reduce costs (the definition of an economy of scale) for longer than linux can. Would you blame in elephant for being as large as he is? Just like the elephant can't help being the size that he is, so can't Microsoft. And even if the European governments are blocking the innovation in the Windows market, how does forcing Microsoft to stop including WMP help increase innovation in the Windows market? Shouldn't the European governments look at bettering their practices first?
How long are governments going to pursue this endless litigation of companies who have monopolistic practices? Have we not learned anything from the IBM anti-trust lawsuit which went on for 13 years and ended with a hung jury? If Microsoft is truly producing an inferior product then in time it will get replaced by something better. However, nobody in this forum can really claim that linux is ready to be used by the average home consumer. So in short the US government as well as the EU should stop wasting their money and let the natural forces of competition weather away Microsoft's market position.
PS. If dealing with Microsoft as a monopoly is absolutly necessary there are better ways than breaking it up.
Slashdot Mirror
This comment demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about by back and dividend programs. The fact that Microsoft is starting to pay dividends shows the stability of the company while the buy back program could perhaps signify that Microsoft is preparing to make big changes and would like to hold on to as much of its stock as it can. The point is that one should not confuse stability with a lack of growth. As much as you would like to infer that Microsoft is thinking it is going to loose market share from every piece of news that comes out, this is could not be further from the truth in this case. On the contrary the fact that they are paying dividends (and their 60 billion dollar cash reserve) signify that Microsoft is not going anywhere in the near future.
You are an idiot. This stupid bashing of Microsoft has gone on long enough. Why can't you just freaking grow up. Whether or not you like Microsoft software is not an issue in this forum. Have they made mistakes? Yes they have. However, that does not mean that you have to put in a reference to the blue screen into every topic that has something to do with Microsoft. I am sick of blind immature bashing of Microsoft. How good of an investment has Red Hat been for you? I be hell will freeze over before you see a dividend from them. So unless you have something meaningful to say about the topic, don't post. GROW UP
What desktop market is linux dominating? Are we calling the cultish hobbyist nerds a separate desktop market? Cause last time I checked Microsoft still had control of the actual desktop market.
Yea you're right. How about we go back and try communism again, since that has worked so well in the past?
You have to realize that GTA3 is not going to make your child or anyone else's child cross any line and start shooting people. The problem comes from an emotional/behavioral/mental instability already present in the child. This is where the real need for parenting comes in. Good parenting does not necessarily mean blindly sheilding your child from adult media, it is the ability to correctly understand the emotional/behavioral/mental condition of your child and the things necessary to improve it. I hate to tell you that if the child of the bad parents down the street is emotionally unstable, banning a violent video game will not make your child safer.
I just wonder how many hate crimes have been incited against Haitians since GTA:VC came out?
While I would agree that MSN or Windows Messenger is a very poor product, one has to be fair in realising that this is not a problem with Messenger. This virus could just as easily be transmitted via AOL or ICQ because it merely sends a link out THAT THE USER HAS TO CLICK before the virus is transmitted onto the users computer. And if you are stupid enough to follow a link sent to you via IM from a person you don't know you deserve to have a virus installed onto your cpu.
The way to deal with Microsoft's monopoly position is to determine the equilibrium of demand that would naturally occur at if Microsoft was in a perfectly competitive market. N ext the government would subsidise Microsoft to attain that level of production and then charge them a flat tax of the subsidy plus their current profit. Therefore they would be maximizing profit at the price and quantity that a competitive market would bring about, and their profit would be the same as if they were in a competitive market, the big 0. (In a perfectly competitive market the long run maximum profit of a firm is 0 which means that it just covers their opurtunity cost).
I am not giving Microsoft G-d like status. But can you point to one tangible result of all the litigation that has gone on against Microsoft? The real problem lies in the way Monopolies (not just Microsoft) are prosecuted. Oh yea, one more time how does including WMP break the law? Or is it that it stifles innovation? How?
No government made Microsoft's monopoly. Microsoft is a monopoly due to the large economy of scale involved in its average cost curve. Microsoft can grow bigger and reduce costs (the definition of an economy of scale) for longer than linux can. Would you blame in elephant for being as large as he is? Just like the elephant can't help being the size that he is, so can't Microsoft. And even if the European governments are blocking the innovation in the Windows market, how does forcing Microsoft to stop including WMP help increase innovation in the Windows market? Shouldn't the European governments look at bettering their practices first?
How long are governments going to pursue this endless litigation of companies who have monopolistic practices? Have we not learned anything from the IBM anti-trust lawsuit which went on for 13 years and ended with a hung jury? If Microsoft is truly producing an inferior product then in time it will get replaced by something better. However, nobody in this forum can really claim that linux is ready to be used by the average home consumer. So in short the US government as well as the EU should stop wasting their money and let the natural forces of competition weather away Microsoft's market position.
PS. If dealing with Microsoft as a monopoly is absolutly necessary there are better ways than breaking it up.