OSNews

The open source zealots will come out in force claiming those numbers can't be correct...they're published by Microsoft...so they must be all lies.

While I am sure there will be plenty of people unhappy with this announcement, I think this kind of comment is more appropriate for someplace like slashdot or digg. Don't take the voting down as an anti-Microsoft sentiment, I own a number of shares in Microsoft and this announcement just made me a decent chunk of change on the stock market and I'm one of the few people that really likes Vista. I just like the idea of OSNews being slightly less full of these kind of comments then the rest.

While I am sure there will be plenty of people unhappy with this announcement, I think this kind of comment is more appropriate for someplace like slashdot or digg. Don't take the voting down as an anti-Microsoft sentiment, I own a number of shares in Microsoft and this announcement just made me a decent chunk of change on the stock market and I'm one of the few people that really likes Vista. I just like the idea of OSNews being slightly less full of these kind of comments then the rest.

I agree with your sentiment for the most part.

My comment is a reflection of how sick I am with the anti-MS that has infested this and other sites making it almost impossible to have a sane discussion on anything regarding MS.

The #'s posted by MS in this latest quarter refute most the 'noise' posted on the linux-losing-market-to-windows' thread that made that thread so unreadable.

"The #'s posted by MS in this latest quarter refute most the 'noise' posted on the linux-losing-market-to-windows' thread that made that thread so unreadable."

On the Desktop Microsoft is losing Market share to *everyone* unfortunately in figures that make little difference to Revenue.

When you're at 90+ percent market share...there are 2 ways to go, steady or down.

Welcome to my world, as I feel the same way about this site with regard to the anti-Linux bashing.

Bottom line of this news from further 10k analysis - Microsoft profits are up because of a successful game release (halo 3). Vista and Server 2003 sales remained flat.

"Welcome to my world, as I feel the same way about this site with regard to the anti-Linux bashing.

Bottom line of this news from further 10k analysis - Microsoft profits are up because of a successful game release (halo 3). Vista and Server 2003 sales remained flat."

many companies due to how they pay for the OS can install Vista, but may have not done...and the migration from their product offerings have not been large enough to hurt there bottom line.

The Xbox has made a massive loss overall and Zune too, you have to remember that $300 million is nothing compared to $60Billion although I'm sure it has helped this quarter.

This history of anti-Microsoft, pro-Linux comments around this place shows that this is impossible.

This history of anti-Microsoft, pro-Linux comments around this place shows that this is impossible.

Are you forgetting the history of anti-Linux, pro-Microsoft comments "around this place"? Bias? What bias?

There are issues long term, here are my 'things' I'm thinking about:

1) Microsoft has a monopoly in the desktop OS space, and Office - large numbers of corporations are not only dependent on software but locked in by virtue that any move to an alternative would be prohibitively expensive.

Microsoft right now is basically like a power, telecom or water company. It is expected that they can turn "super normal profits" (economic term) when there are the elements mentioned.

I'm not saying that the profits aren't great, but at the same time, they should be expected as part of their position in the market place. That is why there has been very little movement in the share price vs. Apple who is in a constant upward battle.

2) The importance of the operating system will diminish in the future which brings to light the future profits of the company. Not next year but in 5-10 years time; when the requirement moves from being that of a certain operating system to that of bandwidth will Microsoft be placed in a good position to take advantage of that transition to service based software?

3) I personally don't like Windows Vista, but I won't stop someone from purchasing it - its their choice. The problem I have is when Microsoft tells me the customer that for them to win, I as a Mac customer have to lose. Microsoft need to quickly drop their nepoleonic complex pronto because it rubs me and many users the wrong way. Sure, provide upgrades, entice us with great deals, but don't ram it down our collective throats.

I think this kind of comment is more appropriate for someplace like slashdot or digg. Don't take the voting down as an anti-Microsoft sentiment, I own a number of shares in Microsoft and this announcement just made me a decent chunk of change on the stock market and I'm one of the few people that really likes Vista.

Well, that just about tells us all we need to know, doesn't it?

Microsoft is a joke. Sure they had a good quarter, but their shares are worthless. I did a quick google for General Motors and they have $1.50 to $2.50 on a BAD year when they have to cut staff. The generally pay more DIVIDENDS per share than that! IBM is $1.68 EPS with 30 cents dividend. Microsoft may have MONEY but they are not making INVESTORS money. They're a pump-n-dump if they don't pay dividends after 30 years as they have Billions in the bank that belongs to stockholders.

Such low EPS means Steve keeps the money for his personal office chair replacement fund. Microsoft investors make their money from other investors wanting to get in ... not from Microsoft PROFITS, there's not enough of those to go around at 45 cents per share. The excuse that they're a tech company really doesn't float anymore.

Where OSS advocates should be pointing is who gets the 85% profit margin and where does it go? Investors are being taken for a ride because they don't get the money. Microsoft is using the cash to expand for it's own sake not for PROFIT to it's investors... that's the point of business. Making investors money thru your stock price going up is silly, it's not like Microsoft will be sold to anybody for a big profit like a small startup, and they're not paying dividends, so it's all monopoly money. OSS advocates should be pointing to investors to take some profit for their wallets. Microsoft's investors could put more money in their pockets if they made Bill and Steve play by normal business rules and get Microsoft making Linux tools... something Microsoft is very good at, with high profits.

Apart from the term zealot being offensive.

Is the massive money making of Microsoft of benefit to the quality of your particular OS or not. Nobody is denying Microsoft's ability to make *massive* amounts of money. I'm glad you think that benefits *you*.

The only real shame here is that *even* after Vista being shunned by *everyone*, due to the artificial inflating of prices through crippling versions of their OS. Forcing customers to by multiple versions of the same product.

Now as a Vista user you should perhaps say an exiting new interface on their office Offerings, new products in home server, and some profits in the money drain that is there gaming division, had done well for Microsoft...and I'm no doubt it has.

The fun thing with the "in your face" comments is my *free* alternatives are looking even better value in terms of Microsoft's inelastic inflation. You are actually celebrating paying more for subsequent offering of the same thing.

It's tough going out there for businesses right now. However, it's not all bad news. The oil companies are doing phenomenal. So are the health insurance companies. And while Microsoft might not be growing exponentially anymore, they consistently make well over 33% profit off revenues in the area of $1B per week, and they did even better this past quarter.

There's no doubt about it, these are all potent money-making machines. What they have in common is a product that everybody uses and couldn't imagine living without, no matter how expensive it gets or how abusive the product becomes. Often it isn't possible to get by without driving 30+ miles to work, taking a large chunk of compensation in the form of health insurance, and using Windows software.

What people don't seem to realize is that when these kinds of companies do well, they do so at the expense of their customers. They aren't bound by supply and demand. They're only bound by their operating expenses and the limit to how much they can exploit their customers before they face Congressional hearings and class-action lawsuits.

They trade on the market, but in practice they are only accountable to governments. Because while the governments, in response to public outrage, investigate the business practices of these corporations, the public can't stop driving their cars, taking their drugs, and being compatible with the Windows ecosystem.

The problem is that in this new era of globalization, big corporations have gone transnational, and most governments can do little to stop them, because the scope of their existence goes beyond the borders of any country.

If the american governament had split up ms into several companies like they were talking about doing, back in the anti-trust litigation days, the intel based pc OS market would have corrected itself years ago. As it stands, I dont see it happening any time soon. No one product of MS really needs to turn a profit, they have so much money that they can give their various offerings the time they need to become competitive. Vista was a flop? I'm sure they care, but I doubt anyone is worried about the future of the company. Their revenue is enough to spend another 5 years fixing it if they need to. The Zune is a joke? Maybe it is now, but after a few years of revisions and building up a client base, I could definitely see it being serious iPod competition. MS office used to just be an office suite, but now it is at the point where it is hard to imagine doing business without it (completely IGNORING outlook and exchange. I know you are a Linux guy, but take a real good look at The Groove or OneNote from 2k7. I have only been using them for a year, but the Groove has quickly become a part of how my small business works, and OneNote has become part of how i think.)

MS has the capital, manpower, and brainshare to turn new ventures into successes through pure brute force, and they are not scared to leverage it.

Vista is not the same as XP. XP is not the same as 2000. 2000 is not the same as 98. 98 is not the same as 3.11.

My IT shop on campus has computer labs. These labs are PCs with XP. We have several las with a line of computers with Vista installed. We have suggestion boxes with forms on them asking what the students think before we even consider campus deployment.

Linux and OS X are gaining acceptance regardless of the profits Microsoft reports. It doesn't take a zealot to figure out that Microsoft is the new IBM of old. It will do anything for attention.

Well it's good that you beat them to starting the seemingly mandatory troll thread. Congrats!

Sometimes I just think those "open source zealots" only exist because of Microsoft zealots like you, who start a conversation with a line like the above.

I've got no particular beef with Microsoft, but you'd think they'd be able to take all this money and give us an operating system *significantly* better than OS X and Ubuntu -- yet, Window's greatest strengths are not in the OS but in the 3rd party ecosystem compatibility. Well, whoop-de-doo, we could have that with Linux, were it simply in the same business position. Vista is not worth the price they're asking if that represents the best roadmap they can derive from our payment. They simply benefit from having gotten in the right place at the right time, and while I give a nod to Bill and company for that, their practice of milking that position for these insanely wide margins and not delivering on giving us a product that reciprocates their profits, well, why do they deserve our loyalty as customers?

Edited 2007-10-26 19:06

Window's greatest strengths are not in the OS but in the 3rd party ecosystem compatibility. Well, whoop-de-doo, we could have that with Linux, were it simply in the same business position

'whoop-de-doo' 'we could have that with Linux'

Yeah, sure you 'could'.

It's so simple to do that it's not worthy of any other enterprise, private or open source, to replicate a feat that rewards with trillions of dollars every quarter LOL

So do you feel that Vista, in comparison to Linux or the *BSDs, is a fair representation of what can be accomplished with billions and billions of dollars, as opposed to the millions that gets pumped into Linux and the pittance that goes towards BSD development?

So do you feel that Vista, in comparison to Linux or the *BSDs, is a fair representation of what can be accomplished with billions and billions of dollars, as opposed to the millions that gets pumped into Linux and the pittance that goes towards BSD development?

More money doesn't equate to a better product. Some of the best stuff ever created came out of a garage with 2 guys hunkered down pulling long nights.

And it's hard to put a dollar value on the effort that went into the Linux of today, considering the volunteer nature of it's development model.

But I will say the Linux effort today does represent something in the billions...not a laughable millions as you think.

So in the end...what's your point?

At the end of the day...hard fast number reported by MS yesterday show people want Vista, MS products, and products that run on MS products.

Edited 2007-10-26 19:22

They have.

.. Who's "they"?

- Gilboa

They = Microsoft, keeping pronoun agreement with the person I quoted.

I've got no particular beef with Microsoft, but you'd think they'd be able to take all this money and give us an operating system *significantly* better than OS X and Ubuntu

[i]They have. [/b]

Please, don't make us laugh.

Why should they?! Microsoft making profit have nothing to do with open source. with the high price of Vista and a new Office suit they have forced their users to empty their wallets big time, so why shouldn't Microsoft be do well. A rich Microsoft with poor customers will work in favor of FOSS.

you said it not me...

they make the most money with their operating systems. They sell their last operating system in 2001 (that's nearly 8 years) - and they are selling a new office at the same time.

So of course they have good results.


Huh? Why does it necessarily follow that new product introduction equates to great results on the street?

Fact is, MS is doing great and the usual contingent can't stand the thought of it...mostly for political reasons.

Those in user space don't have to apologize to the open source geeks cuz they can't rebuild a kernel every time they want to install a new font.

Common sense anyone?

The market for upgrades (installed base) at 90% market saturation far excedes the OEM sales potential. Take into account that the installed base will upgrade when a new releast comes out, while your OEM sales base is still going in full force, and you have no where to go but exponentially UP in sales.

This is exactly why MicroSoft wants to sell you software as a service, to realize revenue from the release of products over time, rather than a lump-sum at the beginning of a product release thanks to the upgrade cycle.

Fact is, this is how economics, human behavior, and the tech market have proven themselves to work for the last 20 years. Did MicroSoft do well this quarter? Yes. But it's a direct correlation to the fact that they released new versions of software that's in high demand.

This is what software companies are supposed to do. The thing that makes this quarter so striking is that MicroSoft failed to deliver concurrent updates to their two main products for nearly 8 years. Delivering a double-whammy so late in the game means that there's huge installed bases looking for upgrades, and there's also the people who've been holding out for new PC's until the new products were released.

Don't expect numbers like this to last, they'll stabilize over the coming quarters, just like it does after every other major software release.

If you've half a brain, you'll take a bit of profit on some of that stock that's surging in the wake of this news of unsustainable revenues, wait a few weeks for the price to settle, and reinvest.

Linux is a kernel, it doesn't report profits and it isn't in the financial market.
Financial market shares relate to how much money a business can make.
Linux doesn't need market share to be useful.

Edited 2007-10-26 17:08

1.) Establish near monopoly on OS & Office productivity applications.
2.) Release new versions.
3.) Profit!

Easier than taking candy from a baby.

"Easier than taking candy from a baby."

If it's so easy why haven't you done
it, or have you?

The guy knows how to grow money!

It's really not that hard when you have complete control of all aspects of your market, and more than $4B in the bank in cash to ride out the rough spots. They can put out mediocre products and still sell, fanboy related zealotry notwithstanding. All they have to do is cash the checks every month.

To all those who make that success possible.
Thank you for paying the Msft tax again and again. I'm sure share holders will make good use of your money.

Everybody, especially shareholders of just about all tech issues on the NASDAQ, is thanking MS today.

By the number of your posts here, I can only assume that either:
A. You work for Microsoft.
or:
B. You are a stock investor that has little (if any) interest in Operating Systems. (beyond MSFT stocks)

Never the less, let me ask you a simple question:
If I'm not a stock investor and I'm just a users - Should I be happy and why? Or, better yet, why should I even care?

- Gilboa
P.S. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are just happy about making a lot of money and not trolling; please treat me with the same curtsy.

Ah good ol' trusty "You must work for Microsoft" argument. Love it!

I offered it as a suggestions given the huge number of gloating (?) posts he made.
Even if you like Vista (and some do) such a behavior (given the original subject) is highly irregular.

One must agree that -normal- people will not post so many different response to the same thread unless they have a vested interest in the subject at hand... I don't see how can a normal OS user can have such an interest.

- Gilboa

Edited 2007-10-27 16:49

Ah good ol' trusty "You must work for Microsoft" argument. Love it!

Actually, most people in this thread supporting Microsoft have done that work for us: they've admitted they either (a) have shares in MS, (b) write apps for MS OSes, (c) are fans of Microsoft or (d) just don't know and/or care about OSes and technology (where members of group (c) who are not also members of (a) or (b) are almost invariably members of group (d) instead. It's not surprising when people with a vested interest in Microsoft are happy when Microsoft claims to do well, even if and when the claims are total bull.

One would hope a company that forces its products and services onto every computer

Forces?! Nobody forced Windows onto my desktops. I'm an Apple OS X, FreeBSD and Vista user. Nobody forced anything onto my notebooks and desktops.

He's referring to when Microsoft lackies force OEMs to purchase their software at gunpoint.

Why, just the other day I saw a Microsoft hit squad take out a poor defenseless point-of-sale terminal and replace its SCO system with Windows Embedded. It was a tragedy.

(EDIT: Pronoun mismatch error.)

Edited 2007-10-26 17:48 UTC

So when you purchased your computer, it didn't have an OS? If it was an Apple, you had OS-X - no choice in the matter. If it was a PC and you bought it from a mainstream channel (like an electronics store or big name vender,) then it probably had Windows Vista or XP - again, you had no choice in the matter. If you chose to wipe the installed OS and install your own choice(s), then I applaud you. I do the same. Wouldn't it be nice, however, if the big PC manufacturers offered OS choices? Dell has taken the first baby step in this direction, but I have yet to see a print add for a Dell computer running Ubuntu (all their ads are adorned with the "Dell recommends Vista..." moniker.) Also, it would be nice if schools and other places of learning were "neutral" and used OpenOffice (and open formats) and open operating systems such as FreeBSD or Linux as opposed to teaching computing skills using proprietary, closed (and expensive) systems like Windows and Microsoft Office. I haven't run Windows in five years, nor any other Microsoft Product and it hasn't hurt my productivity one bit. If anything, it has freed me!

Edited 2007-10-26 18:05

Dell has taken the first baby step in this direction, but I have yet to see a print add for a Dell computer running Ubuntu (all their ads are adorned with the "Dell recommends Vista..." moniker.)

Maybe because Dell doesn't want to recommend Ubuntu...that's *their* choice.

Also, it would be nice if schools and other places of learning were "neutral" and used OpenOffice (and open formats) and open operating systems such as FreeBSD or Linux as opposed to teaching computing skills using proprietary, closed (and expensive) systems like Windows and Microsoft Office.

I don't know of any university that uses Windows as part of their computer science or other curriculums.

The university I attended used unix variants.

Yet, despite having cut my teeth on unix in formal academia, I choose Windows and OS X for my desktops because they run great and help me get things done.

That was true ten years ago. Since the MS monopoly ruling, Microsoft has essentially given big piles of software to schools. Now almost all CS programs teach their students with MS tools - Visual Studio, Office, etc. Point, click, move along...