Microsoft revenue down 6%, earnings down 30% for third quarter(thestandard.com)
thestandard.com
Microsoft revenue down 6%, earnings down 30% for third quarter
http://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/04/23/microsoft-earnings-down-over-last-year
4 comments
My ThinkPad running Vista has all the advantages you list for Mac OS X--I don't have "gestures" but I get to use the TrackPoint + 3 buttons instead, which I greatly prefer. Plus, I have "page up" and "page down" keys.
Can anybody give an example of something that makes Mac OS X better than Vista? I am not worried about driver issues because my hardware vendor gives me good drivers. I'm not worried about malware because I use UAC and because the network clients I use (e.g. IE8 and Chrome) all use more layers of malware mitigation than are even available on Mac OS X.
Also, why do you count your company's preference for Microsoft's 8-year-old version of Windows over modern Mac OS X against Microsoft? Doesn't it show instead that Windows was better 8 years ago than Mac OS X is today?
Can anybody give an example of something that makes Mac OS X better than Vista? I am not worried about driver issues because my hardware vendor gives me good drivers. I'm not worried about malware because I use UAC and because the network clients I use (e.g. IE8 and Chrome) all use more layers of malware mitigation than are even available on Mac OS X.
Also, why do you count your company's preference for Microsoft's 8-year-old version of Windows over modern Mac OS X against Microsoft? Doesn't it show instead that Windows was better 8 years ago than Mac OS X is today?
Can anybody give an example of something that makes Mac OS X better than Vista?
It's Unix. That's the big one. Unix isn't necessarily the Platonic ideal of an operating system, but it is the standard. Learn it, and you know an OS that runs on almost all the hardware in the world and that powers the majority of the web.
No more Cygwin. No struggling with bizarrely different Windows semantics. No falling behind the open-source development curve -- git works better, ruby works better. Any software which is developed on Mac or Linux works better on Macs or Linux boxes -- that's where the bugs get fixed first.
Obvious other reasons to love the Mac include really not worrying about malware, and the Mac software community and its well-designed Mac-only apps. I'm not a heavy user of such things, yet even I have a few that I would be loath to give up: 1Password, Quicksilver, Textmate [1], Pixelmator, xScope, iWork, HandBrake, VisualHub.
A final obvious reason: Mac users have Windows around if we want it. [2] I've got two Windows VMs on this machine right now, which I use for the dreaded Quickbooks (argh), the occasional game, and (of course) cross-browser testing of web page rendering.
---
[1] Though I use emacs most of the time.
[2] Windows users can apparently also have the Mac around... but it's not supported, and they have to solve a lot of those pesky driver issues.
It's Unix. That's the big one. Unix isn't necessarily the Platonic ideal of an operating system, but it is the standard. Learn it, and you know an OS that runs on almost all the hardware in the world and that powers the majority of the web.
No more Cygwin. No struggling with bizarrely different Windows semantics. No falling behind the open-source development curve -- git works better, ruby works better. Any software which is developed on Mac or Linux works better on Macs or Linux boxes -- that's where the bugs get fixed first.
Obvious other reasons to love the Mac include really not worrying about malware, and the Mac software community and its well-designed Mac-only apps. I'm not a heavy user of such things, yet even I have a few that I would be loath to give up: 1Password, Quicksilver, Textmate [1], Pixelmator, xScope, iWork, HandBrake, VisualHub.
A final obvious reason: Mac users have Windows around if we want it. [2] I've got two Windows VMs on this machine right now, which I use for the dreaded Quickbooks (argh), the occasional game, and (of course) cross-browser testing of web page rendering.
---
[1] Though I use emacs most of the time.
[2] Windows users can apparently also have the Mac around... but it's not supported, and they have to solve a lot of those pesky driver issues.
There are lots of reasons to love OSX, but I don't think the malware argument is standing up very well these days.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2941
"It’s really simple. Safari on the Mac is easier to exploit. The things that Windows do to make it harder (for an exploit to work), Macs don’t do. Hacking into Macs is so much easier. You don’t have to jump through hoops and deal with all the anti-exploit mitigations you’d find in Windows."
http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2941
"It’s really simple. Safari on the Mac is easier to exploit. The things that Windows do to make it harder (for an exploit to work), Macs don’t do. Hacking into Macs is so much easier. You don’t have to jump through hoops and deal with all the anti-exploit mitigations you’d find in Windows."
All of these sound like suggestions that you just "like" OS X better than any MS OS.
"No falling behind the open-source development curve"
I agree with this one somewhat.
All others are simply not convincing enough. Malware argument is just bogus.
"No falling behind the open-source development curve"
I agree with this one somewhat.
All others are simply not convincing enough. Malware argument is just bogus.
I know handbrake was originally for os x but it does work on windows now as well.
Checklists of features tell you nothing about how well they are implemented.
OS X features are implemented with attention to all of the details that make them a joy to use. I rarely get frustrated anymore because my computer isn't doing want I want it to.
Check that. I still get seriously frustrated whenever I make a new feature for our site, verify that it works in every browser other than IE, and then test it in IE to see that I need to perform some javascript, css & dom acrobatics to get it working.
OS X features are implemented with attention to all of the details that make them a joy to use. I rarely get frustrated anymore because my computer isn't doing want I want it to.
Check that. I still get seriously frustrated whenever I make a new feature for our site, verify that it works in every browser other than IE, and then test it in IE to see that I need to perform some javascript, css & dom acrobatics to get it working.
I don't count my company's use of XP against Microsoft. I am suggesting that's one of the challenges they face: installed base.
We didn't upgrade to Vista because there was no compelling reason. The hardware requirements were stiff and none of our business software was actually going to run better on Vista than it already did on XP.
We still pay Microsoft plenty through our Enterprise Agreement, and they're a good company to deal with if you're running a corporation.
I hope I didn't imply that I dislike Microsoft or their software. I tried not to. I honestly want them to get BETTER at what they're doing because competition is healthy in any market.
I think Microsoft has an innovation problem, and an innovation problem is death in the technology game. If you're not innovating, someone will innovate for you. The lock-in that Windows and Office provided over the years is decreasing as things move to the cloud, so personal preference can now be a bigger factor in the choice of OS you use to reach the cloud.
Regarding your question about something that makes OS X better than Vista, for your purposes the answer may be "nothing." I too use Chrome on the PC and love it. I wish it was available on the Mac.
I do believe Apple is innovating faster than Microsoft, especially on the OS front. When one considers OS X drives the iPhone as well as the Mac, there's no question who is driving the industry at this point. The iPhone was launched publicly over two years ago and still no one has released anything close. Two years is an eternity in technology, and until someone releases a viable competitor we don't yet know how truly far behind second place is.
Spend some time with a Mac. Borrow a friend's. You'll like it. It may not be for you, but you'll appreciate seeing things through a slightly different lens.
We didn't upgrade to Vista because there was no compelling reason. The hardware requirements were stiff and none of our business software was actually going to run better on Vista than it already did on XP.
We still pay Microsoft plenty through our Enterprise Agreement, and they're a good company to deal with if you're running a corporation.
I hope I didn't imply that I dislike Microsoft or their software. I tried not to. I honestly want them to get BETTER at what they're doing because competition is healthy in any market.
I think Microsoft has an innovation problem, and an innovation problem is death in the technology game. If you're not innovating, someone will innovate for you. The lock-in that Windows and Office provided over the years is decreasing as things move to the cloud, so personal preference can now be a bigger factor in the choice of OS you use to reach the cloud.
Regarding your question about something that makes OS X better than Vista, for your purposes the answer may be "nothing." I too use Chrome on the PC and love it. I wish it was available on the Mac.
I do believe Apple is innovating faster than Microsoft, especially on the OS front. When one considers OS X drives the iPhone as well as the Mac, there's no question who is driving the industry at this point. The iPhone was launched publicly over two years ago and still no one has released anything close. Two years is an eternity in technology, and until someone releases a viable competitor we don't yet know how truly far behind second place is.
Spend some time with a Mac. Borrow a friend's. You'll like it. It may not be for you, but you'll appreciate seeing things through a slightly different lens.
>Can anybody give an example of something that makes Mac OS X better than Vista?
Sleep mode that works (quickly).
Sleep mode that works (quickly).
The suspend to ram mode worked since windows xp on thinkpads.
Suspend-to-RAM resumes almost instantly for me and even suspend-to-disk only takes about 10 seconds to resume on my ThinkPad.
AAPL reported better results anyway.
I can't compare Mac & Vista but I know that the 8 year pld XP is better than Vista. I'm happy with Ubuntu GNU/Linux though.
I can't compare Mac & Vista but I know that the 8 year pld XP is better than Vista. I'm happy with Ubuntu GNU/Linux though.
I think a lot of people would say Microsoft had the better quarter, considering Microsoft earned a $13.7 billion profit and Apple earned a $1.21 billion profit.
By the way, your use of the Apple ticker symbol made me curious, so I checked AAPL vs MSFT on Google Finance. I am amazed that APPL has 2/3 the market cap of MSFT but only 1/10th the profit.
By the way, your use of the Apple ticker symbol made me curious, so I checked AAPL vs MSFT on Google Finance. I am amazed that APPL has 2/3 the market cap of MSFT but only 1/10th the profit.
I have a Thinkpad running XP and it is fine except every time I resume from sleep I have to repair my wifi connection. In addition for being the "premium windows laptop" it sure comes bundled with a lot of annoying software (password manager that invades every browser installed, another wifi icon for the task bar that is always lit green to confuse the issue, etc)
> Can anybody give an example of something that makes Mac OS X better than Vista?
Mouse over a word, Ctrl + Cmd + d. Love it.
Mouse over a word, Ctrl + Cmd + d. Love it.
...that, or they're simply a diverse company whose fortunes are well-correlated with the economy, whereas Apple makes several fashionable consumer items.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=1y&s=%5EGSPC&l=on...
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=1y&s=%5EGSPC&l=on...
Oh my, only 13+ billion dollars in revenue and 3 billion in net income during one of the worst economic downturns in decades. These numbers are more than Apple and Google combined. Total cash up from 23 billion to 25 billion. The horror.
Interesting, Apple reports "almost" 29 billion in cash and best non-holidays quarter results in company's history.
During the worst economic downturns in decades. The horror.
True. But you pay a lot for the 3b as an investor. 1% earnings & negligible dividend for a 'monopoly' is not great, even in this low-interest environment. It indicates that the market (and I would guess most HN readers) do not believe MS's 'monopoly' is secure.
you pay a lot for the 3b as an investor....It indicates that the market do not believe MS's 'monopoly' is secure.
Your argument makes zero sense. You may believe MS's monopoly is insecure, but if the markets believed that as well, then you wouldn't have to pay so much to own MS. The short term dividend returns would be greater because investors would be expecting capital loss.
Your argument makes zero sense. You may believe MS's monopoly is insecure, but if the markets believed that as well, then you wouldn't have to pay so much to own MS. The short term dividend returns would be greater because investors would be expecting capital loss.
I agree, you're right about the low dividend. But the argument against paying a high price for MS's future earnings stands. I conflated two ideas, but although I actually believe MS's conservative cash position is perhaps their best strength - I still believe they had a valuable monopoly & lost their way.
Microsoft has paid "special dividennds", some quite large ones (it paid 3 dollars per share , or 32 billion dollars juste a couple of years ago), so it's historical dividends aren't that bad.
It seems that IT sector is quite unaffected by current recession. Of course it suffers as whole economy slows down, but still perform much better then the other industries.
1 year of indexes
S&P 500: -38.26%
Dow Jones Industrial Average: -37.66%
Nasdaq Composite: -33.56%
1 year of indexes
S&P 500: -38.26%
Dow Jones Industrial Average: -37.66%
Nasdaq Composite: -33.56%
Oh no! I'm not a big fan of internet explorer - but I hope the company does well!
They are delivering very little in the way of innovation and have no real focus as a business.
From my angle their products are less impressive than their peers in each market segment, with the possible exception of the Office franchise.
I have an Xbox 360, which I like, and I manage a SharePoint platform as my job. SharePoint has its moments, but overall it's solid and it works. It's good. It's a standard Microsoft product. Mlah.
But when it comes to computing resources that I own and manage, there's no value on the Microsoft platform any more. We have 3 Mac laptops at home and a Mini for the TV. I have an iPhone despite already having a work-issued BlackBerry (RIM is another story).
The value I get out of OS X may be things the consumer can't see or doesn't see soon enough before purchasing a PC or a Windows Mobile device. Things like antivirus and malware. Things like integration between hardware and software, to which anyone who has used gestures on modern MacBook can testify. Things like instant-on when waking from sleep. Things like simple backups and restores, and transferring user data and configurations from an old Mac to a new one.
I'm sure a lot of those things that differentiate Apple's offering from Microsoft's will not last for a long time. Windows 7 will close the gap. But I'm enjoying these features now and have been enjoying some of them for years. Why wait?
Microsoft will not stand still, and neither will Apple. But unless something happens at the DNA level in those two organizations, I expect Apple's offering to actually increase the gap, because that's been the trend since OS X was introduced in 2001. Windows XP was introduced later the same year . . . and I'm using it here at work to post this.
The fact that I'm using an 8 year old OS at work fully underscores the challenges faced by Microsoft. We have no plans to upgrade. None.
So Apple is the platform of innovation. They're innovating at the OS level and people who innovate are drawn to the capabilities to afford. The next generation of software is being brought about on platforms other than Windows.
Machiavelli nailed it in 1505 and in 2009 Microsoft is suffering the effects. A long but poignant quotation:
"It ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from the fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them." (http://gojomo.blogspot.com/2002/06/machiavellis-innovators-d...)
The guys who got rich at Microsoft are still there, strangling the place because they only know one way to get rich and damned if they're going to throw that away. The smart guys take off, unwilling to be stifled, so you're left with worker bees who nod when told to nod.
The best thing that could happen for Microsoft would be a new senior management team. The second best thing would be to force them all to use any products other than their own.