Your points are completely moot.
Even if Microsoft did not make a dime, they could afford to pay that fine for the next 34 years. Do you really think they care? Sure they might, but maybe they'll pull an Apple and just withdraw the product from the market. The chances of the enterprise customer in Europe letting that happen is next to nill.
Is the Xbox making money, or gaining marketshare proportional to MS's investment?
Is MSN making money, or gaining marketshare proportional to MS's investment?
How about Windows Defender? Or Microsoft Passport? How about the variety of MS Home Entertainment (Media Center, Media Keyboard, MS Remote control, WinCE for DVD players, etc . ..) offerings?
Console hardware has ALWAYS been a loss leader for any manufacturer. Sony is just barely beginning to turn a profit on the PlayStation 2 hardware. The bread and butter has always been the software. They are first-to-market with their next-gen hardware and their aggressive time lines are forcing the rest of the players like Nintendo and to Sony get off their hands and do something about it. A company like Microsoft doesn't look at its profitability on a per-product line. They look at it overall, so pointing out the under-performing products that only represent a fraction of their overall revenue is ridiculous. When Windows starts losing the company, then there will be something to worry about.
If Microsoft didn't have billions in the bank its new product offerings would not even blip on the radar.
That is such an asinine statement I don't even know where to begin. Make sure you re-read that and really let it sink in, because you made my point for me. Too bad a five-year share price history doesn't mean anything for the vitality of the company in the overall scheme of things (Yahoo! Star Analysts). If it were really that much of a problem, they'd be carrying much less than 4 stars from EVERYONE. Look at the 5-year history of half the companies on the market, most of them exhibit a similar trend.
Make no mistake; Microsoft is doing something wrong, and me, the GP poster, and the stock market know this. Why do you still have your head stuck up your ass?
I don't know where you took me to be some Microsoft fanboi, maybe you didn't read my post. I just said assuming Microsoft is ignorant of their competition and market conditions is ridiculous. Go ahead and keep bashing them and whining about their monopoly, it's par for the course here at good ol' Slashdot. Cheese with your whine?
It's funny how people like to sit behind their computers and criticize the business tactics of the most powerful corporation on the planet. I am not implying that I agree with their methods, but to assume a "lack of understanding" from a company that generates more than $40 billion (billion with a "b") in annual sales, and whose executives are among the richest men and women in the world...that shows a lack of understanding. Arrogant...sure, ignorant, FAR from it. You can afford some arrogance when you can buy and sell half the world's countries with your annual sales.
On the development side, there is nothing like outsourcing the development of your applications to thousands of developers for free. of course OSS is a viable market strategy, your code gets tightened up for at practically no cost.
From the adoption standpoint, you don't really have to worry about software going stagnate and if it does, you always have the source to fall back on. OSS works great as long as you have the talent within your organization to support it.
Aside from that, look at the Xbox line. Microsoft makes very little if any at all on the hardware. The revenue stream comes from licensing and the software. They might try and do the same with hardware. Provide a player at very low cost and engineer it to only play DRM protected content; thus, helping to fuel their DRM initiative. No matter what most might say, Gates is a smart guy and I am sure the thought has already crossed his mind. You don't get to be a billionaire without knowing how to step on your competition.
Some may argue blogs give the average citizen a voice that can be read around the world. What it really does for the most part is give people with retarded opinions a voice to be read around the world.
Blogs are stupid and since we all know they are not going away, the Post is stupid for censoring the comments of their readers.
...and she doesn't own a computer, let alone have the faintest idea of how to use one. Google is this millennium's Ford Motor Company. Ford started the assembly line and all the other automakers followed suit. Google values what they consider their most valuable assets and reward them well for their efforts.
Another example; I was explaining Picasa to someone who was looking for a way to easily email photos who wasn't the most computer savvy of all people. She was leery about trying a new piece of software until she found out it's a Google product. She was all for it after that. In a lot of people's minds, Google == Quality. I am not saying it's right, but perception rules the world.
From an administrative side of things, my users are not allowed to do any of that. They are policied and locked down. All of the operations you describe are controlled through our systems management software. The server has a System level account that it logs in to the machine with to perform these operations. Otherwise, the user has just enough rights to do their job.
As for my home PC, of course I run as an admin.
Slashdot Mirror
Your points are completely moot.
.) offerings?
Even if Microsoft did not make a dime, they could afford to pay that fine for the next 34 years. Do you really think they care? Sure they might, but maybe they'll pull an Apple and just withdraw the product from the market. The chances of the enterprise customer in Europe letting that happen is next to nill.
Is the Xbox making money, or gaining marketshare proportional to MS's investment?
Is MSN making money, or gaining marketshare proportional to MS's investment?
How about Windows Defender? Or Microsoft Passport? How about the variety of MS Home Entertainment (Media Center, Media Keyboard, MS Remote control, WinCE for DVD players, etc . .
Console hardware has ALWAYS been a loss leader for any manufacturer. Sony is just barely beginning to turn a profit on the PlayStation 2 hardware. The bread and butter has always been the software. They are first-to-market with their next-gen hardware and their aggressive time lines are forcing the rest of the players like Nintendo and to Sony get off their hands and do something about it. A company like Microsoft doesn't look at its profitability on a per-product line. They look at it overall, so pointing out the under-performing products that only represent a fraction of their overall revenue is ridiculous. When Windows starts losing the company, then there will be something to worry about.
If Microsoft didn't have billions in the bank its new product offerings would not even blip on the radar.
That is such an asinine statement I don't even know where to begin. Make sure you re-read that and really let it sink in, because you made my point for me. Too bad a five-year share price history doesn't mean anything for the vitality of the company in the overall scheme of things (Yahoo! Star Analysts). If it were really that much of a problem, they'd be carrying much less than 4 stars from EVERYONE. Look at the 5-year history of half the companies on the market, most of them exhibit a similar trend.
Make no mistake; Microsoft is doing something wrong, and me, the GP poster, and the stock market know this. Why do you still have your head stuck up your ass?
I don't know where you took me to be some Microsoft fanboi, maybe you didn't read my post. I just said assuming Microsoft is ignorant of their competition and market conditions is ridiculous. Go ahead and keep bashing them and whining about their monopoly, it's par for the course here at good ol' Slashdot. Cheese with your whine?
It's funny how people like to sit behind their computers and criticize the business tactics of the most powerful corporation on the planet. I am not implying that I agree with their methods, but to assume a "lack of understanding" from a company that generates more than $40 billion (billion with a "b") in annual sales, and whose executives are among the richest men and women in the world...that shows a lack of understanding. Arrogant...sure, ignorant, FAR from it. You can afford some arrogance when you can buy and sell half the world's countries with your annual sales.
On the development side, there is nothing like outsourcing the development of your applications to thousands of developers for free. of course OSS is a viable market strategy, your code gets tightened up for at practically no cost. From the adoption standpoint, you don't really have to worry about software going stagnate and if it does, you always have the source to fall back on. OSS works great as long as you have the talent within your organization to support it.
Aside from that, look at the Xbox line. Microsoft makes very little if any at all on the hardware. The revenue stream comes from licensing and the software. They might try and do the same with hardware. Provide a player at very low cost and engineer it to only play DRM protected content; thus, helping to fuel their DRM initiative. No matter what most might say, Gates is a smart guy and I am sure the thought has already crossed his mind. You don't get to be a billionaire without knowing how to step on your competition.
Some may argue blogs give the average citizen a voice that can be read around the world. What it really does for the most part is give people with retarded opinions a voice to be read around the world.
Blogs are stupid and since we all know they are not going away, the Post is stupid for censoring the comments of their readers.
I'll only be 1,000,027 years old when it all goes down. Prime surfing age...
...and she doesn't own a computer, let alone have the faintest idea of how to use one. Google is this millennium's Ford Motor Company. Ford started the assembly line and all the other automakers followed suit. Google values what they consider their most valuable assets and reward them well for their efforts.
Another example; I was explaining Picasa to someone who was looking for a way to easily email photos who wasn't the most computer savvy of all people. She was leery about trying a new piece of software until she found out it's a Google product. She was all for it after that. In a lot of people's minds, Google == Quality. I am not saying it's right, but perception rules the world.
From an administrative side of things, my users are not allowed to do any of that. They are policied and locked down. All of the operations you describe are controlled through our systems management software. The server has a System level account that it logs in to the machine with to perform these operations. Otherwise, the user has just enough rights to do their job. As for my home PC, of course I run as an admin.