No, the statement was that profits are strongly tied to Office and Windows
Here is the quote I responded to (my emphasis):
Microsoft still makes 100% of its vast windfall profits from leveraging its monopoly
When I said that this statement was erroneous, you corrected me, with:
So how then are the profits not strongly tied to their monopolies in Windows (Desktop) and Office (Desktop Productivity)?
Now, if you were not intending to answer in the appropriate context, why did you answer in this context? You are absolutely correct that Microsoft profits are tied to Office and Windows, but again, context matters.
Breasts are most definitely not intrinsically sexual!
To quote good old Oscar: "Everything in the world is about sex, except sex. Sex is about power.". So, in that Wilde sense you are wrong. On the other hand, that would make falling leaves about sex too, and I am not sure there are a lot of people who thinks so. Other than in the bible-belt of the US of course. In that area everything is indeed about sex, even sex. Perhaps we should nuke the whole damned thing, from New Mexico to Florida in a wide belt. We could leave Austin of course, Austin is just weirdly normal.
Microsoft announces the end of life of a lot of stuff all the time. Various Windows versions, for example. This doesn't mean the end of life of the technology, though SL5 hasn't seen a lot of talk lately. If (and that is a big if) there is a SL6, it will also have and EOL, some time in the decade after SL5.
In the latest report, Microsoft revenue in the non-office, non-windows categories, was about 8% commercial other, 8% consumer other and 14% consumer hardware. None of these are tied to the Microsoft stranglehold on the desktop. They include Azure, XBox, services, enterprise software (for example the Dynamics product line) etc. 30% of revenue is unrelated.
For your statement to be correct, together these sectors together must either break even or operate at a loss. I'd love to see your argument for that. 70% is not 100%.
The same as always? They get people hooked on their platform and then extort them
That doesn't really answer anything. It's only a "because they can". Could you explain a theoretical way they could do it? Please be specific.
They will hook them with fake-ass open source
If that's all you have then my original description of your intelligence was not a personal attack but an accurate description of reality. Again, please explain to those of us who actually think every now and then, what is fake about the Apache or MIT software licenses. Please be specific. No ranting or moronic statements like the one above. Facts please.
Platform specific issues are covered in.Net, someone mentioned Path.Combine( one, two, three... ninetynine) as an example. Things like temporary directory locations, home directory locations etc also. Now, you never know if the actual developer uses these, but if they don't, and they test on their target platform, they'll find out quickly.
The same problem pertains to Java, and most Java developers still develop on Windows.
they need to write a back-end and port the runtime components
Given that they have had ARM in Windows Phones for a few years already, I think we can assume they already did. Also, if you read the info provided, VS 2015 can be used for writing C++ apps for Android devices. so I think they are well covered already.
From what I can tell "cross platform" to MS seems to be x86 only
Your name is fitting. Your statement is based on an ignorance that is not only deep, but stems from a retarded mind. Most people know that Microsoft has a mobile platform (that isn't doing too well, to put it mildly) and there isn't really an x86 platform for mobile phones as of now (not really, it's even less successful than Microsoft's mobile OS). So, assuming MS does only x86 requires you turn off your brains first.
Also, instead of just opining nonsense, why not just check out the information provided. You can use Visual Studio 2015 to build native C++ apps for Android. In fact, even the preview of VS 2015 blows the doors, roof and walls off any other development environment for Android out there. For C++ or Cordova apps (not for Java apps to my knowledge).
We are used to Microsoft fucking things up, and we are afraid of things being the same
As he said, you need to peek out of the basement of your moms once a decade or so to see what is going on. Seriously. Sitting in the dark masturbating to Penguin images destroys your brain.
Please explain the theoretical way Microsoft could EEE in any of what they are doing now. When 2015 is released (you can try it your self right now) and given away for free (not a crippled version, the same that is the Pro version now) it will be, by a rather significant margin, the best tool for developing native (in C++) or Cordova based apps for Android. How can that, even theoretically, destroy Android?
Oh, and if you don't believe me, download VS 2015 preview and try. It is heads, shoulders, torso and thighs above the horrible bloat available today, and it's only a preview.
Well, the reality shows it is not. Microsoft wants to compete, but it doesn't, and at its current path - can't, use the old ideas of the Microsoft of the '90s.
Anyone who thinks that MS of 2010 and on is the same as the MS of th 1990s, have been sitting in their mothers basement masturbating to Penguin images for the past decade or so.
Microsoft just released a preview of the very best tools for developing native (as in C++) or Cordova based apps for Android. Seriously. None of the bloatware from Google comes close. The emulator alone is fantastic, and amazingly, you can replace the monstrosity that Google has created with the fast and excellent Microsoft version while still (for masochists) using the Google tools. What is their embrace, extend, extinguish path? Are they going to destroy Android in some way?
Wrongo, Microsoft still makes 100% of its vast windfall profits from leveraging its monopoly
This is probably one of the dumbest things written on the entire set of connected tubes that is the Internet of 2014. Your ignorance is only topped by your arrogance, but then again, arrogance and ignorance typically go hand in hand.
Example: The Apple iCloud foundation is built to a high degree on Azure. Do you think MS makes zero $$$ on Azure? How is Azure in any way tied to the Microsoft monopoly on the desktop? According to the latest earnings call, the Cloud (Microsoft doesn't break out Azure alone) contributed about $4.4B to Microsoft revenue. Please explain how that relates to a desktop monopoly. Azure revenue grew by close to 150% from 2013 to 2014, and at its current speed, Microsoft revenue on Azure will surpass Amazon some time late this year or early next.
Remember, it is always better to sit quietly in the corner having everybody think you're an idiot than posting some retarded nonsense online and removing any residual doubt.
Seriously, as the saying goes - it's better to sit quietly in the corner having everybody think you are a moron or post some retarded nonsense on the net and remove all doubt. No wonder you have to stay anonymous.
autoboxing makes it easy to miss potential NullPointerExceptions
Also, autoboxing in Java was a horrible idea from the start. For a start, a Java boolean and a Java Boolean are "interchangeable" in code, but not in real life. Some frameworks (for example) can get you into serious trouble here when trying to assign a null to a boolean primitive type.
You move in different circles from me. I have never known anyone personally who used Excel
You will, probably by the time you start high school, definitely by the time you start college. Once you join the work force you'll barely know a single person who do not use Excel.
Here is a general advice: Get your knowledge from real science, not from bullshit religious hysteria. Point by point.
"Aspartame accounts for over 75 percent of the adverse reactions to food additives reported to the FDA": This is simply unsubstantiated BS. The most common culprit is food color, aspartame doesn't make the list.
"Too much aspartate or glutamate in the brain kills certain neurons by allowing the influx of too much calcium into the cells": This is pure rubbish. If this was true you would have to stay away from apples, meat, oranges, lemons, mothers milk etc, all of which contain one or all of the substances aspartame is metabolized into, and all in much higher quantities than in a diet soda.
"methanol... formaldehyde: A can of tomato juice contains significantly more methanol than a can of diet soda. So does most other fruits (tomato is a fruit) and many other vegetables. If the amounts of methanol/formaldehyde (after metabolism) in a diet soda was dangerous, almost all healthy food would kill you since the concentration of methanol/formaldehyde is significantly higher in these than in a diet soda.
"DKP is a byproduct of aspartame metabolism": This is not true, DKP is a result of improperly stored aspartame and aspartame breakdown, not metabolism. If you drank a diet soda where the aspartame was degraded and DKP produced you'd spit it out immediately since the aspartame would no longer be a sweetener. Aspartame broken down doesn't taste sweet, so there would be no sweetness in your diet soda. Also, DKP exists in almost everything you eat. From cereal through processed meat to cheese, milk and coffee. Mostly in higher concentrations than in diet sodas. The average consumption of DKT from all sources is about half a microgram per kilo of bodyweight from all DKP sources. 7 micrograms are considered safe. If you wanted to drink enough (non-sweet tasting) diet soda to consume enough DKP for it to be dangerous to you, you would have drunk so much diet soda that you'd be dead of kidney failure first.
Sigh. The Aspartame is dangerous conspiracy theory. Surely you must have read some science on the topic by now? Don't let the religious nuts fool you. There is nothing in Aspartame that is dangerous to your body. Nothing at all.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the statement was that profits are strongly tied to Office and Windows
Here is the quote I responded to (my emphasis):
Microsoft still makes 100% of its vast windfall profits from leveraging its monopoly
When I said that this statement was erroneous, you corrected me, with:
So how then are the profits not strongly tied to their monopolies in Windows (Desktop) and Office (Desktop Productivity)?
Now, if you were not intending to answer in the appropriate context, why did you answer in this context? You are absolutely correct that Microsoft profits are tied to Office and Windows, but again, context matters.
Breasts are most definitely not intrinsically sexual!
To quote good old Oscar: "Everything in the world is about sex, except sex. Sex is about power.". So, in that Wilde sense you are wrong. On the other hand, that would make falling leaves about sex too, and I am not sure there are a lot of people who thinks so. Other than in the bible-belt of the US of course. In that area everything is indeed about sex, even sex. Perhaps we should nuke the whole damned thing, from New Mexico to Florida in a wide belt. We could leave Austin of course, Austin is just weirdly normal.
Microsoft announces the end of life of a lot of stuff all the time. Various Windows versions, for example. This doesn't mean the end of life of the technology, though SL5 hasn't seen a lot of talk lately. If (and that is a big if) there is a SL6, it will also have and EOL, some time in the decade after SL5.
In the latest report, Microsoft revenue in the non-office, non-windows categories, was about 8% commercial other, 8% consumer other and 14% consumer hardware. None of these are tied to the Microsoft stranglehold on the desktop. They include Azure, XBox, services, enterprise software (for example the Dynamics product line) etc. 30% of revenue is unrelated.
For your statement to be correct, together these sectors together must either break even or operate at a loss. I'd love to see your argument for that. 70% is not 100%.
The same as always? They get people hooked on their platform and then extort them
That doesn't really answer anything. It's only a "because they can". Could you explain a theoretical way they could do it? Please be specific.
They will hook them with fake-ass open source
If that's all you have then my original description of your intelligence was not a personal attack but an accurate description of reality. Again, please explain to those of us who actually think every now and then, what is fake about the Apache or MIT software licenses. Please be specific. No ranting or moronic statements like the one above. Facts please.
Platform specific issues are covered in .Net, someone mentioned Path.Combine( one, two, three... ninetynine) as an example. Things like temporary directory locations, home directory locations etc also. Now, you never know if the actual developer uses these, but if they don't, and they test on their target platform, they'll find out quickly.
The same problem pertains to Java, and most Java developers still develop on Windows.
they need to write a back-end and port the runtime components
Given that they have had ARM in Windows Phones for a few years already, I think we can assume they already did. Also, if you read the info provided, VS 2015 can be used for writing C++ apps for Android devices. so I think they are well covered already.
From what I can tell "cross platform" to MS seems to be x86 only
Your name is fitting. Your statement is based on an ignorance that is not only deep, but stems from a retarded mind. Most people know that Microsoft has a mobile platform (that isn't doing too well, to put it mildly) and there isn't really an x86 platform for mobile phones as of now (not really, it's even less successful than Microsoft's mobile OS). So, assuming MS does only x86 requires you turn off your brains first.
Also, instead of just opining nonsense, why not just check out the information provided. You can use Visual Studio 2015 to build native C++ apps for Android. In fact, even the preview of VS 2015 blows the doors, roof and walls off any other development environment for Android out there. For C++ or Cordova apps (not for Java apps to my knowledge).
We are used to Microsoft fucking things up, and we are afraid of things being the same
As he said, you need to peek out of the basement of your moms once a decade or so to see what is going on. Seriously. Sitting in the dark masturbating to Penguin images destroys your brain.
Please explain the theoretical way Microsoft could EEE in any of what they are doing now. When 2015 is released (you can try it your self right now) and given away for free (not a crippled version, the same that is the Pro version now) it will be, by a rather significant margin, the best tool for developing native (in C++) or Cordova based apps for Android. How can that, even theoretically, destroy Android?
Oh, and if you don't believe me, download VS 2015 preview and try. It is heads, shoulders, torso and thighs above the horrible bloat available today, and it's only a preview.
Chances are that it is
Well, the reality shows it is not. Microsoft wants to compete, but it doesn't, and at its current path - can't, use the old ideas of the Microsoft of the '90s.
Anyone who thinks that MS of 2010 and on is the same as the MS of th 1990s, have been sitting in their mothers basement masturbating to Penguin images for the past decade or so.
Microsoft just released a preview of the very best tools for developing native (as in C++) or Cordova based apps for Android. Seriously. None of the bloatware from Google comes close. The emulator alone is fantastic, and amazingly, you can replace the monstrosity that Google has created with the fast and excellent Microsoft version while still (for masochists) using the Google tools. What is their embrace, extend, extinguish path? Are they going to destroy Android in some way?
Wrongo, Microsoft still makes 100% of its vast windfall profits from leveraging its monopoly
This is probably one of the dumbest things written on the entire set of connected tubes that is the Internet of 2014. Your ignorance is only topped by your arrogance, but then again, arrogance and ignorance typically go hand in hand.
Example: The Apple iCloud foundation is built to a high degree on Azure. Do you think MS makes zero $$$ on Azure? How is Azure in any way tied to the Microsoft monopoly on the desktop? According to the latest earnings call, the Cloud (Microsoft doesn't break out Azure alone) contributed about $4.4B to Microsoft revenue. Please explain how that relates to a desktop monopoly. Azure revenue grew by close to 150% from 2013 to 2014, and at its current speed, Microsoft revenue on Azure will surpass Amazon some time late this year or early next.
Remember, it is always better to sit quietly in the corner having everybody think you're an idiot than posting some retarded nonsense online and removing any residual doubt.
Yes, for now the community edition (2013) and when this is released what amounts to today's Professional edition will be free.
Seriously, as the saying goes - it's better to sit quietly in the corner having everybody think you are a moron or post some retarded nonsense on the net and remove all doubt. No wonder you have to stay anonymous.
So, you are just guessing and then posting retarded nonsense?
MS already has compilers for other platforms. ARM for one.
autoboxing makes it easy to miss potential NullPointerExceptions
Also, autoboxing in Java was a horrible idea from the start. For a start, a Java boolean and a Java Boolean are "interchangeable" in code, but not in real life. Some frameworks (for example) can get you into serious trouble here when trying to assign a null to a boolean primitive type.
Clueless nonsense.
Oh, you're talking about the worthless lite version they give away for free
Does it hurt to be this ignorant?
You move in different circles from me. I have never known anyone personally who used Excel
You will, probably by the time you start high school, definitely by the time you start college. Once you join the work force you'll barely know a single person who do not use Excel.
Here is a general advice: Get your knowledge from real science, not from bullshit religious hysteria. Point by point.
"Aspartame accounts for over 75 percent of the adverse reactions to food additives reported to the FDA": This is simply unsubstantiated BS. The most common culprit is food color, aspartame doesn't make the list.
"Too much aspartate or glutamate in the brain kills certain neurons by allowing the influx of too much calcium into the cells": This is pure rubbish. If this was true you would have to stay away from apples, meat, oranges, lemons, mothers milk etc, all of which contain one or all of the substances aspartame is metabolized into, and all in much higher quantities than in a diet soda.
"methanol ... formaldehyde: A can of tomato juice contains significantly more methanol than a can of diet soda. So does most other fruits (tomato is a fruit) and many other vegetables. If the amounts of methanol/formaldehyde (after metabolism) in a diet soda was dangerous, almost all healthy food would kill you since the concentration of methanol/formaldehyde is significantly higher in these than in a diet soda.
"DKP is a byproduct of aspartame metabolism": This is not true, DKP is a result of improperly stored aspartame and aspartame breakdown, not metabolism. If you drank a diet soda where the aspartame was degraded and DKP produced you'd spit it out immediately since the aspartame would no longer be a sweetener. Aspartame broken down doesn't taste sweet, so there would be no sweetness in your diet soda. Also, DKP exists in almost everything you eat. From cereal through processed meat to cheese, milk and coffee. Mostly in higher concentrations than in diet sodas. The average consumption of DKT from all sources is about half a microgram per kilo of bodyweight from all DKP sources. 7 micrograms are considered safe. If you wanted to drink enough (non-sweet tasting) diet soda to consume enough DKP for it to be dangerous to you, you would have drunk so much diet soda that you'd be dead of kidney failure first.
Sigh. The Aspartame is dangerous conspiracy theory. Surely you must have read some science on the topic by now? Don't let the religious nuts fool you. There is nothing in Aspartame that is dangerous to your body. Nothing at all.
Sorry, the site you refer is total and utter bullshit. Seriously. It is. There is more methanol in an apple than there is in a diet soda. For example.
I have no problem believing a fictional character would utter such words :-)
And Lamarckism is still thought impossible
Maybe not according to the recent work done in epigenetics. Of course, everything is open to both corroboration and interpretation.
It is rumored to be Lord Kelvin. If he said it, he was retarded at the time of utterance.