...

View Full Version : Microsoft is finished



drhowarddrfine
11-21-2009, 01:31 AM
Microsoft already doesn't matter anymore. Soon it will be dead. I said the first thing a few years ago, if you recall. The second I said would happen if there were a couple of features in ChromeOS, like NeatX and one other.

I haven't had the time to look into whether ChromeOS has the things I thought it needed to dominate the desktop but Scoble has come up with some brilliant reasons why ChromeOS has already won. (http://scobleizer.com/2009/11/20/why-google-chrome-os-has-already-won/)

Google is playing a different game. Google Chrome OS is NOT about killing Microsoft or Apple.

What is it about? Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers.

oracleguy
11-21-2009, 02:02 AM
Nice article. I don't think Google Chrome will replace the OS on many workstations but I could see it on small low end netbook-ish machines. Though I could see it being useful where such specialized netbooks still have 1GB of onboard NVRAM for Chrome and some apps and data. So you can still use the device if your network connection is unavailable. Perhaps they are already planning something like this.

I will agree with that blogger that the InfoWorld author doesn't seem to get it. His points about Linux aren't exactly accurate. Perhaps if he was referring to the 2.6.9 kernel or something but these days the core functionality is pretty solid. There are driver issues still but hell, you still get those on Windows. Regardless of how much success Google has with it, new ideas are always good to have.

brad211987
11-21-2009, 03:39 PM
Microsoft already doesn't matter anymore. Soon it will be dead. I said the first thing a few years ago, if you recall. The second I said would happen if there were a couple of features in ChromeOS, like NeatX and one other.

I haven't had the time to look into whether ChromeOS has the things I thought it needed to dominate the desktop but Scoble has come up with some brilliant reasons why ChromeOS has already won. (http://scobleizer.com/2009/11/20/why-google-chrome-os-has-already-won/)


Just like IBM is dead right? Sure no one pays much attention to them anymore, and Microsoft is certainly heading that direction, as is Google. They are all just at different stages in a Business lifecycle. But dead? Don't matter? Tell that to the wealth of .NET developers out there, I personally prefer Java, but .NET is a solid system, and platform independence doesn't really matter that much when everything is hosted over the web anyway.

Personally, I don't see much coming out of Chrome OS, as anything it can do, you can do on linux and its just as free. It will probably pick up more market share among the netbooks, mostly because of brand recognition, but the first time a super non-technical user wants to save some videos, documents, pictures etc... on their computer and can't its going to be hell.

A plain curiosity question that I haven't yet, but a looking forward to hearing the answer to: If it is all about developers, are they providing a web based IDE as well? The idea of developing for Chrome OS, but being unable to actually develop on Chrome OS has had me stumped since I heard about it. If anyone has heard or seen anything on this, please share, as I've not seen anything that allows a developer to build/test/publish applications using Chrome OS.

Overall my thoughts are that its too early to see what the usefulness of it is really going to be, but it is certainly a different approach and you have to commend Google for that. I absolutely love their apps suite(though docs needs a lot of work), so I'm confident that they will have a lot of answers but its kind of like Google Wave for me right now.........its cool, but why bother?

drhowarddrfine
11-21-2009, 06:54 PM
Personally, I don't see much coming out of Chrome OS, as anything it can do, you can do on linux and its just as free.ChromeOS is Linux, too.

as I've not seen anything that allows a developer to build/test/publish applications using Chrome OS.
I think they're saying it's too early still but here is the ChromeOS source. (http://src.chromium.org/)

seco
11-21-2009, 08:06 PM
MS will never be finished.

Apostropartheid
11-21-2009, 09:43 PM
Nah, I don't think so. I don't think Linux is anywhere near a position to properly challenge Windows--at least till I can get it to work properly on my laptop, have decent games and have the programs I use on Windows without some difficult and incomplete emulation. I want to love Ubuntu, I really do, but it's a lumbering beast on my laptop.

Chrome OS is on a different plane altogether and they're both representing different ideas (but I personally think Chrome OS, despite its claims to the contrary, will fail because not everything I want to do on a netbook is on the Internet.)

oracleguy
11-22-2009, 12:14 AM
Nah, I don't think so. I don't think Linux is anywhere near a position to properly challenge Windows--at least till I can get it to work properly on my laptop, have decent games and have the programs I use on Windows without some difficult and incomplete emulation. I want to love Ubuntu, I really do, but it's a lumbering beast on my laptop.

Well in respect to games, that is a catch 22. A-list titles won't be made for it until enough people use it and to get a lot of people on it requires A-list titles. The same with other Windows programs. It really depends what you do with your computer too. On my laptop I don't play games (apart from some card games) but I use the Internet, develop code, IM, listen to music and watch videos and it does everything I want. But on the other hand, my main desktop is Windows because I play games and I don't want to have to reboot into Windows when I feel like playing.

What doesn't work on your laptop? The only issue I usually run into with Linux on laptops is with wireless cards. That is the biggest weakness right now with Linux in respect to laptops.

drhowarddrfine
11-22-2009, 12:18 AM
Nah, I don't think so. I don't think Linux is anywhere near a position to properly challenge WindowsBut the thread is about ChromeOS, not LInux in general.
--at least till I can get it to work properly on my laptopIt works on both my laptops out of the box
have decent gamesGet a XBox.
and have the programs I use on Windows without some difficult and incomplete emulation.That's why I don't use Windows. I can't get any of my Linux programs to work well on that thing.
I want to love Ubuntu, I really do, but it's a lumbering beast on my laptop.Hmm. Runs blazingly fast on mine. Much faster than Vista and XP do.

(but I personally think Chrome OS, despite its claims to the contrary, will fail because not everything I want to do on a netbook is on the Internet.)
The trend is the mobile web. People look to buying things to keep them mobile. Not desktops; laptops. If not a laptop, a netbook or a smartphone. Desktops are for people who need that but most people don't need a desktop and most people only surf the web and check their messages. Their XBox...er...I mean desktop computer is only there for games.

Apostropartheid
11-22-2009, 01:11 AM
I have a PS3. So what? You aren't the one to tell me what to do with my computer. Besides, there are certain genres that are more suited to PCs.

It's the graphics card, I think. I had Ubuntu 8.04 running well, once upon a time, but my hard disk failed and after I got that replaced I never managed to get it working again. Now it takes an age to open a window, even with with the barest settings. It's really saddening, because it's such a nice OS which I want to play about with but I'm not being given the chance.

I don't see how Chrome OS will function with things such as videos, music and photos. My girlfriend has a netbook and still wants all those around, even though she's not a technical user at all. She loves the thing to hell, even though XP is really the worst OS imaginable on it, because it does what she wants.

funnymoney
11-22-2009, 01:46 AM
both of MS and Google hire developers. Killing either one of them is not good to anybody. There is no need to kill someone in the market but there is a real need to expand the market boundaries. If Google, which I believe isn't, really is trying to "kill" MS with this new OS, then Google is nothing different then what against it stood for in the first place, and that is what their slogan is shouting "Don't be evil".

They both should orient like someone here said, to developers, both open-source communities and payed source software.

There is no need to repeat the stupid 90's mistake which both Netscape and Microsoft did back then. They fought about taking over the market. Efforts they invested in beating each other just slowed www development for a decade. I know people back then know more about it then me.

Fighting brings good to none. So instead of fighting they both should try to find a way to expand software development market, and not to try and destroy each other.

brad211987
11-22-2009, 02:36 AM
What doesn't work on your laptop? The only issue I usually run into with Linux on laptops is with wireless cards. That is the biggest weakness right now with Linux in respect to laptops.

That's been my experience too, but I must say the most recent versions of Ubuntu have been great. I just upgraded to 9.10 today and the last of the issues I've had with my sound card have disappeared. Only problem I have now is it seems to be slow on my keyboard input, I type reasonably fast, but sometimes it just plain doesn't pick up on keystrokes. Anyone else seen anything similar?

Anyway, back on the original topic, I realize that Chrome OS is linux, I simply meant that it offers no advantage over any other distribution, but it takes away some of the choice and flexibility that a lightweight linux installation gives you.


Get a XBox.

I hope you were joking with that one. As a developer, would you really tell a user to change their behavior to adapt to your software? There are exceptions, sometimes a user wants the product to read their mind and do their homework etc... but PC gaming is huge, and to simply disregard it is going to have an army of WoW addicts at your door with pitchforks. On the other hand, if they could get Chrome OS to support WoW, that could be quite an easy market share grab :)

drhowarddrfine
11-22-2009, 02:56 AM
I have a PS3. So what? You aren't the one to tell me what to do with my computer. Besides, there are certain genres that are more suited to PCs.I just find it strange that the number one reason people seem to even own a computer is to play games. Not you specifically but I hear it everywhere. Without games I'd bet half of all Windows users wouldn't even have a computer.


It's the graphics card, I think.Probably. I'm not sure on Linux or Ubuntu but ATI is not BSD friendly and Nvidia isn't all that helpful.
I had Ubuntu 8.04 running well, once upon a time, but my hard disk failed and after I got that replaced I never managed to get it working again.I don't know but I run Ubuntu on a 1.7Ghz P4 with 1Gb ram with no problems.


I don't see how Chrome OS will function with things such as videos, music and photos.Probably the same way everyone does. A lot of people use Picasa over the web.
She loves the thing to hell, even though XP is really the worst OS imaginable on it, because it does what she wants.
My wife runs XP cause she does out books with Quickbooks so she also does everything else on it, too, including watching her online TV shows. I'm impressed it runs well for her and I rarely mess with it. Recently the subject of Windows7 came up and I asked her if she was thinking she would want to upgrade to that and her first question was, "Why should I?". I told her I wasn't saying she needed to if everything worked for her. She said she has no need or interest in upgrading. She also has a laptop with Vista on it so it's not like she isn't aware of other stuff out there.

That said, the restaurants I own all have their cash registers based on XP. Why, I don't know, but we have nothing but problems with them and the franchise constantly struggles with updates for it.

drhowarddrfine
11-22-2009, 03:02 AM
I hope you were joking with that one. As a developer, would you really tell a user to change their behavior to adapt to your software?

I'm repeating what I said above but all too often it seems half of Windows users only have a computer so they can play games. At work, one shouldn't be playing games so, as a non-game player, I view game usage on a computer the same as watching TV and there's a disconnect there for me.

Computers should be for work. If that's true, ChromeOS could fill that with the portable devices the article mentions. Little dedicated devices so players can battle each other over the internet. Just like XBox does now but with a netbook.

Deacon Frost
11-22-2009, 11:36 AM
Though I would love Microsoft to stop dominating the playing field, and allow for more companies to join in the development of operating systems, it's just not going to happen. First time users, and most business owners will use nothing but Microsoft purely because it's what they're used to.

Microsoft will never die, just as Internet Explorer will never die until they just stop working. I'd love to see the company split, and standards introduced for software and hardware developers, but it's not going to happen just because Google released a new OS.

In all reality, the only way to beat Microsoft's dominance with PC is sheer numbers. You simply have to develop enough quality hardware and software that Microsoft can't keep up. That's the only thing that's going to work, IMO.

OGGordon
11-22-2009, 02:58 PM
I remember when a Google stock share was about 80 euro. And look where it is right now. Insane. I think Google is going to kick many companies' *** one day, if not already. The company is expanding crazily and comes up with ergonomic and user friendly programs or software. Soon, I believe, Google will be a monopoly, offering things others can't, in a better way.

Fumigator
11-22-2009, 04:38 PM
To say MS is dead is silly hyperbole and erodes the position of anyone who claims it.

brad211987
11-22-2009, 05:32 PM
I remember when a Google stock share was about 80 euro. And look where it is right now. Insane. I think Google is going to kick many companies' *** one day, if not already. The company is expanding crazily and comes up with ergonomic and user friendly programs or software. Soon, I believe, Google will be a monopoly, offering things others can't, in a better way.

The stock price doesn't really tell you much. If I had a company worth only 1 million, but also divided it up into 100 shares......the price would be a nice looking 10000 per share. Google has quite a few less shares out there than comparable companies that have 20-30 times that, but their consistent earnings, high P/E, and constantly growing cash pool speak pretty strongly.

drhowarddrfine
11-22-2009, 07:28 PM
Microsoft will never die, just as Internet Explorer will never dieIE is dying.
it's not going to happen just because Google released a new OS.Isn't that similar to what IBM said in the 80s?


You simply have to develop enough quality hardware and software that Microsoft can't keep up.
Microsoft's web browser is almost 12 years behind every other browser.
Microsoft's new Azure service, still not turned on yet, is far behind everyone else.

drhowarddrfine
11-22-2009, 07:31 PM
To say MS is dead is silly hyperbole and erodes the position of anyone who claims it.
Yeah. People said that 4 years ago, on this forum, when I said people would/should stop using Internet Explorer and switch over to Firefox. People on this board said it would never happen. I was an idiot among other choice names. Lol! Those were the days.

But, I guess Paul Graham has no status either: Microsoft is dead. (http://www.paulgraham.com/microsoft.html) He said it almost three years before I did.

brad211987
11-22-2009, 07:42 PM
Not being the number one and the complete market dominator is FAR from being dead. There is nothing dead about Microsoft and they won't be for years and years to come. If Google's search market share starts a decline, are you going to declare them dead or is it only Microsoft that dies when one of its many products and focuses starts to decline? I'm far from being a huge fan of Microsoft, I prefer linux over windows, java over .NET, firefox over IE etc.... But declaring them dead simply because they don't control the technology world is a gross overstatement. Also, Paul Graham is always an interesting read but I personally take his article as pointing out the end of the Microsoft Monopoly, not Microsoft. Anyone who is paying attention can see that Microsoft no longer controls the technology world.

oracleguy
11-22-2009, 07:53 PM
Yeah. People said that 4 years ago, on this forum, when I said people would/should stop using Internet Explorer and switch over to Firefox. People on this board said it would never happen. I was an idiot among other choice names. Lol! Those were the days.

Let's see some links to that. I know back in 2003 if not earlier there was a strong support for dethroning IE from its dominate market share position so I have a hard time believing that.

funnymoney
11-23-2009, 12:29 AM
Anyone who is paying attention can see that Microsoft no longer controls the technology world.

but it would also suck if Google starts to control it

brad211987
11-23-2009, 12:32 AM
but it would also suck if Google starts to control it

True, and they certainly could. I don't personally think it is their intention though, as they tend to do everything out in the open, instead of behind closed doors like what has been done in the past few decades. Because of the market following that Google has, I think it would be difficult for them to actually control the market, because they have built it out in the open with the community.

Great point though, a Google monopoly is far scarier than a Microsoft monopoly could have ever dreamed of being.

funnymoney
11-23-2009, 01:12 AM
Only scary thing for me is that I will learn all this programming stuff and one giant like Google or Microsoft will build some system where all of the things I've learned are just going to be useless. That would really suck.

So either Google pushes their stuff or Microsoft pushes theirs, there will always be open-source community that is independent both of Google or Microsoft.

Wow, i just had a serendipity about open-source community. Probably because by now I also associated it with Google. But even if G does become some mean and evil corporation open source shall prevail :D lol

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 01:13 AM
Not being the number one and the complete market dominator is FAR from being dead. There is nothing dead about Microsoft and they won't be for years and years to come.A heavyweight fighter, the reigning champ, is still standing but wavering. Who are you going to put money on?
But declaring them dead simply because they don't control the technology world is a gross overstatement. Also, Paul Graham is always an interesting read but I personally take his article as pointing out the end of the Microsoft Monopoly, not Microsoft. Anyone who is paying attention can see that Microsoft no longer controls the technology world.
Ah! You get the point.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 01:14 AM
Let's see some links to that. I know back in 2003 if not earlier there was a strong support for dethroning IE from its dominate market share position so I have a hard time believing that.
I tried but too many posts to go through. I'll leave it as an exercise for you.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 01:19 AM
but it would also suck if Google starts to control it
Why? Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. Google has never been brought into such things.

In the book "Googled", which I just started reading, the author, from the NY Times, says the difference between Microsoft and Google is that Microsoft is run by cold-blooded businessmen who will do anything to win while Google is run by cold-blooded engineers who only care about the data. What leads Google is far nobler than what leads Microsoft, according to the author, and "don't be evil" really does play a part in what they try to do.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 01:20 AM
Great point though, a Google monopoly is far scarier than a Microsoft monopoly could have ever dreamed of being.
If everything is out in the open, why would it be scary? What specifically scares you that doesn't have you scared with Microsoft?

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 01:24 AM
Wow, i just had a serendipity about open-source community. Probably because by now I also associated it with Google. But even if G does become some mean and evil corporation open source shall prevail :D lol

ChromeOS is open source. You can download the source at the link I provided earlier. Google runs on Linux. ChromeOS does, too. They use the same languages you would. They heavily use javascript, Java and Python. The language they just recently came out with, Go, has a project page, too. The Chrome browser is open source.

Nothing with Microsoft is open source. They recently announced IE9 but didn't give up much information about it at all. Big difference.

funnymoney
11-23-2009, 01:52 AM
I am really puzzled by this. I really am. I lean to Google, but I wouldn't like MS to go away. I don't know why, I just don't.

brad211987
11-23-2009, 04:24 AM
Microsoft wasn't always led by "cold blooded businessmen", and right now, you are right, Google is not. What scares me? Any company that is too strong in any market scares me, and it should scare us all. What is not to fear about a single company hosting millions of work email accounts(just looking at google apps premier) and education accounts. Also having the largest database of personal information and social trend information ever to be created. They are the 4th or 5th largest server manufacturer in the world, and its only for internal server building......thats huge. I've been out to visit their headquarters, the culture and lifestyle are very much like that of Microsoft when they were at a comparable position in their lifecycle. They are extending into new fields all the time: document management, behind-the-firewall enterprise search (google search appliance), building a network of resellers, mobile phone and mobile computer operating systems. Oh yeah, they do search too.....

The list goes on quite a ways. My point is, everything Google does is quite impressive and down-right amazing in many cases, but it is all scary too because of how rapidly they are growing and expanding. I truly don't understand the festering hatred of Microsoft, while absolutely worshipping a company that is following in a trail that was blazed by them.

Love em or Hate em, Microsoft changed computing for the every day user permanently, and they did it in a more widespread manor than IBM or Apple were going to do at the time. Of course I think they have gone down an ugly path in many respects, IE being actually second on my list next to their overall security model, but they are re-joining the game in many respects with file system and security changes in Windows 7, which has been a great release in my experience. IE is lacking, probably will be for qute some time, though IE8 makes many improvements over 7 if you look into ACID tests etc....

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 04:33 AM
Microsoft wasn't always led by "cold blooded businessmen"What does it matter? How does that change anything? You'll find that quickly changed after the first year or so.
What is not to fear about a single company hosting millions of work email accounts(just looking at google apps premier) and education accounts.What is to fear? What are you afraid of? Does Hotmail cause you to tremble also? Does Yahoo's email system make you afraid of something?
Also having the largest database of personal information and social trend information ever to be created.What personal information does Google have that is not already freely available anywhere else? Such as your name, address, phone, etc.?
They are the 4th or 5th largest server manufacturer in the world, and its only for internal server building......thats huge.What is the problem with that?


it is all scary too because of how rapidly they are growing and expanding. I truly don't understand the festering hatred of Microsoft, while absolutely worshipping a company that is following in a trail that was blazed by them. Same question. Please state the problem.

IE is lacking, probably will be for qute some time, though IE8 makes many improvements over 7 if you look into ACID tests etc....
I don't know how that statement applies but, in response, IE9 only scored a 38/100 on Acid3 compared to upper 90s to 100 for all other browsers today. IE9 will continue Microsoft's legacy as being the worst browser on the planet.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

it career
11-23-2009, 05:10 AM
Microsoft already doesn't matter anymore. Soon it will be dead. I said the first thing a few years ago, if you recall. The second I said would happen if there were a couple of features in ChromeOS, like NeatX and one other.

I haven't had the time to look into whether ChromeOS has the things I thought it needed to dominate the desktop but Scoble has come up with some brilliant reasons why ChromeOS has already won. (http://scobleizer.com/2009/11/20/why-google-chrome-os-has-already-won/)

Not even 1% of the people who buys PC are not developer , I do not see how chromeOS is going to beat Microsoft.

oracleguy
11-23-2009, 05:27 AM
What is to fear? What are you afraid of? Does Hotmail cause you to tremble also? Does Yahoo's email system make you afraid of something?


I think the point that Brad was trying to make is that while Google might be "Don't be evil" now, it is far from certain that it will stay that way. Microsoft was instrumental (along with Apple, IBM and Compaq) in creating a world where everyone has a PC and certainly not "evil" at that point. Through IBM clone makers, Microsoft became huge with a massive market share. They then eventually abused that position for their own benefit (EEE and all that).

While Google is different they are also very young and share some parallels with young Microsoft (revolutionizing the world, booming market share, etc) and it would be prudent to pay attention and be careful. Coming back to Brad's post, harping on Microsoft for "evil" things while blindly trusting Google is short sighted.

I'm not anti-Google, I use their products everyday and I think their great, we just have to make sure it stays that way.

brad211987
11-23-2009, 12:52 PM
I think the point that Brad was trying to make is that while Google might be "Don't be evil" now, it is far from certain that it will stay that way. Microsoft was instrumental (along with Apple, IBM and Compaq) in creating a world where everyone has a PC and certainly not "evil" at that point. Through IBM clone makers, Microsoft became huge with a massive market share. They then eventually abused that position for their own benefit (EEE and all that).

While Google is different they are also very young and share some parallels with young Microsoft (revolutionizing the world, booming market share, etc) and it would be prudent to pay attention and be careful. Coming back to Brad's post, harping on Microsoft for "evil" things while blindly trusting Google is short sighted.

I'm not anti-Google, I use their products everyday and I think their great, we just have to make sure it stays that way.

Exactly! I absolutely love most things Google, but Microsoft wasn't "Evil" at this stage of their life, and only grew into that role. Talking as if its the world against Microsoft and they are the root of all problems in computing is just plain shortsighted and ridiculous.

And as for what is wrong with the size and reach of Google, nothing right now. It doesn't take much to abuse power, especially when you already have the power, and if you can't see past your own hatred, then ignorance is bliss I guess. Microsoft turned into the "Evil" company, only after IBM filled that role for a long time, they are just the current bad guys and its very possible that Google is next, while I certainly hope not.


What does it matter?
That is the whole point! If Microsoft, being the hip, upcoming company changing the way people use computers can fall into a trap of being run by "cold blooded businessmen", it would stand to reason that it could happen to Google, or ANY company. Again assuming that its only Microsoft that is capable of evil is just plain wrong.

Again, I absolutely love Google and almost everything they've done, but to blindly follow them as "The good guys" is EXACTLY how Microsoft became the bad guys.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 01:58 PM
Microsoft was instrumental (along with Apple, IBM and Compaq) in creating a world where everyone has a PC and certainly not "evil" at that point. Through IBM clone makers, Microsoft became huge with a massive market share.Not so. Microsoft was forcing manufacturers to install Windows on all their machines and penalized them if they did not or if they installed any other software on them. This was one of the very first instances of anti-trust violations brought against Microsoft.


While Google is different they are also very young and share some parallels with young MicrosoftAt this point, Microsoft was making the deals mentioned above.
Coming back to Brad's post, harping on Microsoft for "evil" things while blindly trusting Google is short sighted.Blindly trusting in what way?


we just have to make sure it stays that way.
What are you doing to do that? What I don't understand is, you have one company, Microsoft, which has for over a decade performed illegal activities and fined billions of dollars on two continents, yet it is Google we should watch out for when no such thing has ever happened with them. I also see the same people who use Microsoft products saying they fear Google yet it is Microsoft that charges them money for products they use (or may never use - the Microsoft Tax), while Google gives them product for free.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 02:05 PM
Exactly! I absolutely love most things Google, but Microsoft wasn't "Evil" at this stage of their life, and only grew into that role. Talking as if its the world against Microsoft and they are the root of all problems in computing is just plain shortsighted and ridiculous.Absolutely false and you need to Google for the emails from the 80s and 90s as I mentioned above.


And as for what is wrong with the size and reach of Google, nothing right now.So you fear something that has not happened and may never happen?
if you can't see past your own hatred, then ignorance is bliss I guess.Typical response from Microsofties when faced with the truth and cannot face up to it.


Again, I absolutely love Google and almost everything they've done, but to blindly follow them as "The good guys" is EXACTLY how Microsoft became the bad guys.
Don't blame the users like Microsoft likes to do. Microsoft did this on their own very early and continue to do so today.

brad211987
11-23-2009, 02:33 PM
You are the absolute first to call a java developer, running Ubuntu as a primary OS, and having nothing to do with Microsoft outside of interacting with work systems a "Microsofty". Very interesting to me. I guess its just a term for anyone who doesn't despise everything Microsoft does? Sorry, I don't work in absolutes, I don't worship Microsoft like some do, but I don't have an unreasonable hatred for every bit of air they breathe either.

I wonder if you will have the same sentiment towards Google if/when they dictate standards that not everyone agrees with, or they start using the information they store and selling it/trading it to advertisers. It's already well documented that the gmail engine can read your emails to better target ads to you. Right now none of this really bothers me, but if you want to put blind faith into a company, which is a money making enterprise at its core, thats a problem for you to deal with. I just simply can't get passed trusting a company to never do anything "evil". I'm not looking for it to happen, but you can't honestly tell me you believe that it can't happen, and that is what anyone with any sense should be keeping an eye out for.

Where did I blame users for anything? This debate is very much for the geeks, at least in my experience, users just plain don't care. The phrase "I just want it to work" comes to mind. Unfortunately, windows "works" for most users, as does IE. It just works in a way that makes web developers miserable, but show me a user that cares about that.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 03:39 PM
Sorry, I don't work in absolutes, I don't worship Microsoft like some do, but I don't have an unreasonable hatred for every bit of air they breathe either.Just counter-pointing. Too often you find people who defend Microsoft but you're not allowed to counter their argument.


I wonder if you will have the same sentiment towards Google if/when they dictate standards that not everyone agrees withI don't live in fear of things that might happen because what happens if they never do? That's a terrible way to live and a terrible way to operate.
It's already well documented that the gmail engine can read your emails to better target ads to you.You think Microsoft and Yahoo don't do that? You say GMail can do that but you don't say they do. I don't recall hearing they do.
Right now none of this really bothers me, but if you want to put blind faith into a company, which is a money making enterprise at its core, thats a problem for you to deal with.Do you blindly trust Microsoft as you use their operating system and products the same way? As I said, Microsoft has shown they ARE evil while Google has not yet you fear Google? Do you fear Microsoft the same way? More so?
I just simply can't get passed trusting a company to never do anything "evil". I'm not looking for it to happen, but you can't honestly tell me you believe that it can't happen, and that is what anyone with any sense should be keeping an eye out for.I never said that. I said Google has not done anything against me yet so why should I fear it? If that time ever comes, then I'll feel differently. I'll feel differently if I were to catch my wife cheating on me, too, yet I don't go around questioning her every move. You have to have trust in someone or something at one point. It is up to Google to lose that trust. They have not given any indication they will. otoh,Microsoft has done plenty of things.


Where did I blame users for anything?You said Microsoft became evil because we blindly followed them. Meh. You could say they go the power to do evil cause we bought their products, I guess, but how they treated vendors is not our responsibility.

This debate is very much for the geeks, at least in my experience, users just plain don't care. The phrase "I just want it to work" comes to mind. Unfortunately, windows "works" for most users, as does IE. It just works in a way that makes web developers miserable, but show me a user that cares about that.

THAT I absolutely agree with but it is up to us developers to teach the public how much better the web can be and show them the path to enlightenment.

funnymoney
11-23-2009, 04:34 PM
I think I realized why would it be bad if Microsoft goes away. Then Google wouldn't have someone to look up to and be completely different from. :)

Oh and yeah, debates like this wouldn't exist anymore, and about 27 000 000 google search results about topic "google vs. microsoft" (83 400 if you use quotes) (http://www.google.com/search?q=google+vs.+microsoft&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rlz=1R1GGGL_en-GB___HR354&client=firefox-a) would just become useless garbage :)

brad211987
11-23-2009, 04:38 PM
The wife example is interesting but there is a clear difference for me. I don't live in fear of what Google can do, but I realize it as a possibility and a common outcome from a company in their position. Any large company that grows to this type of extreme, runs the risk of becoming too fixated on the bottom line instead of their products. It happened to IBM, happened to Microsoft. To me, this gives plenty of reason for suspicion, but not expectation. I'm rooting for them to break that trend but you have to be skeptical given the general history of large companies. That is all I'm trying to say, is there is plenty of reason for suspicion, rather or not it will ever come to pass. There is plenty to learn from Microsoft, and they have had multitudes of positive influences on the lives of computer users, this is why I don't understand the absolute hatred. But I can certainly level with you on many aspects, IE standards support being the obvious choice.



but it is up to us developers to teach the public how much better the web can be and show them the path to enlightenment.
completely agree, there is nothing more important to a developer than making the lives of users easier/better......regardless of how painful it can be. Without the pain in the neck users, software development is kind of meaningless outside of an intellectual exercise.

brad211987
11-23-2009, 04:42 PM
I think I realized why would it be bad if Microsoft goes away. Then Google wouldn't have someone to look up to and be completely different from. :)

Oh and yeah, debates like this wouldn't exist anymore, and about 27 000 000 google search results about topic "google vs. microsoft" (83 400 if you use quotes) (http://www.google.com/search?q=google+vs.+microsoft&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rlz=1R1GGGL_en-GB___HR354&client=firefox-a) would just become useless garbage :)

That is precisely the point that gets to me. Everyone wants to pitch it as Google vs Microsoft, Apple vs Microsoft, Google vs Apple etc.... For me its about the competition, and that's what Google is doing. If you listen to some of the Google Apps team, they are not trying to compete with Microsoft Office, because on a feature to feature comparison, they get stomped still. They know and admit to that, but its irrelevant. Google is trying to do things different and better, not break into existing markets, but instead change the dynamics of the market.

funnymoney
11-23-2009, 04:49 PM
I don't have much to do so I googled this article

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/07/google-vs-microsoft-what-you-need-to-know/

tried to compare search results so I binged the same phrase, while wired was first on google it was about 6 or 7th on bing, so it's almost the same

so there is new market for developers and SEO experts. the bing world. one guys are gonna be first on g others on b and they'll both do fine in their lives because there is plenty of market for both of them

and if you read that article you can see that google is already starting to act evil.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 05:25 PM
I don't live in fear of what Google can do, but I realize it as a possibility and a common outcome from a company in their position. Any large company that grows to this type of extreme, runs the risk of becoming too fixated on the bottom line instead of their products.That is correct and why there are regulations, anti-trust stuff and so on. That is the reason the author of that book cites it as a significant difference between Microsoft and Google. Brin, Page and Schmidt are computer scientists who's only interest is the data. Ballmer, et al, are businessmen who only care about the bottom line. (Examples were shown where Google passed up many opportunities because they felt doing something solely for the money conflicted with the interests of the consumer in obtaining knowledge.)


To me, this gives plenty of reason for suspicion, but not expectation.I think what you really mean is you always want to watch your back just as you would in any situation. You'd like to purchase some software but, to activate it, you have to register online with the vendor. Why do you need to do that? What info do they want? What will they do with it? Once you feel fine with that, a bond or trust is set that may always be questioned if anything should change. At any moment you might drop them if they did something funny. That is why I always state that if Google really was doing evil things with personal info about you, users would leave in droves yet there's never been any hard evidence showing any such thing is happening, yet people still fear it is.

There is plenty to learn from Microsoft, and they have had multitudes of positive influences on the lives of computer users, this is why I don't understand the absolute hatred.Microsoft has done what you fear Google might do. Microsoft cannot be trusted and that's been proven. If I'm not repeating myself, my disgust with them started when I got involved in web development and had problems coding for IE, then setup a project involving Microsoft products which changed on me and the only solution was to buy more MS product, all of which cost me a year's effort, and the software purchases. I found out that a few years ago I would have been screwed again by changes in the .NET stuff but all that's a long story.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 05:28 PM
and if you read that article you can see that google is already starting to act evil.
How so?

Apostropartheid
11-23-2009, 06:32 PM
I still fail to see why you say it's dying. Chrome OS isn't competing with windows; they're in different leagues. They're simply targeting different audiences. Linux isn't really gaining enough marketshare to make that much of a difference--yet. This is hyperbole.

Fumigator
11-23-2009, 07:08 PM
I still fail to see why you say it's dying. Chrome OS isn't competing with windows; they're in different leagues. They're simply targeting different audiences. Linux isn't really gaining enough marketshare to make that much of a difference--yet. This is hyperbole.

Not only hyperbole, I'd say it's outright propaganda, stating a "big lie" or at best a "half-truth" in an effort to persuade public opinion. The "big lie" being "Microsoft is Dead", the original title of this thread. Of course it's not dead. Windows 7 sales figures are high; pre-order sales on Amazon.UK broke that website's record for pre-sales volume. It's a very polished OS. The OP conveniently changes the thread title to "Microsoft is Finished", but that too is just as big a lie as the original title. Complete lie, told solely to turn the reader's opinion. That is classic propaganda.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 08:10 PM
The "big lie" being "Microsoft is Dead", the original title of this thread.It is not.

Of course it's not dead. Windows 7 sales figures are high; pre-order sales on Amazon.UK broke that website's record for pre-sales volume.Microsoft makes its money on corporate sales, not big box stores. Sales topped Vista but did it top XP? Don't know.
It's a very polished OS.Means nothing if the sales aren't there.
The OP conveniently changes the thread title to "Microsoft is Finished", but that too is just as big a lie as the original title.I didn't even know I could change the thread title. How do you do that? Or are you lying?
Complete lie, told solely to turn the reader's opinion.
So anything one states as an opinion is a lie? What are you 12?

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 08:18 PM
I still fail to see why you say it's dying. Chrome OS isn't competing with windows; they're in different leagues. They're simply targeting different audiences.As I said, people are inclined to buy mobile devices. Notebooks->netbooks->smartphones. Windows competes poorly there except netbooks but that will change. Once established on the mobile web, what's to stop it from going to the desktop? No one said ChromeOS will not eventually work on the desktop and it's already been said it eventually will.
Linux isn't really gaining enough marketshare to make that much of a difference--yet. This is hyperbole.
You are trying to compare Linux as a whole to ChromeOS. No one has ever worked with anything like ChromeOS before so you can't make that comparison.

Fumigator
11-23-2009, 08:53 PM
It is not.
Microsoft makes its money on corporate sales, not big box stores. Sales topped Vista but did it top XP? Don't know.Means nothing if the sales aren't there.I didn't even know I could change the thread title. How do you do that? Or are you lying?
So anything one states as an opinion is a lie? What are you 12?

My apologies, oh great one, I coulda swore the thread title originally had "dead" in it. I retract that part. Too bad that's the only part you really addressed.

An opinion which is obviously false is indeed a "big lie", in the context of propaganda. "Russians eat their own children" is a "big lie". "Microsoft is dead" is a "big lie". Can't wait for your rebuttal. It's sure to be amazing.

Oh, and, I am not 12, but I was once, for a whole year. What was the point of asking that?

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 09:25 PM
Oh, and, I am not 12, but I was once, for a whole year. What was the point of asking that?Re-read your posts for that answer. And, no, you don't know the difference between an opinion and a lie.

TheShaner
11-23-2009, 10:12 PM
It's funny that these arguments still occur. :rolleyes:

DrHowardDrFine has made it perfectly clear that he hates Microsoft with every fiber of his being. If you object to any of his opinions, you are a Microsoft fanboy/fangirl and therefore have no merit of an opinion and are utterly and completely wrong.

DrHowardDrFine is currently the tech world's leading seer. He has prophesied that IE will eventually lose the majority of the market share, and MS will die as a software giant. He withstood great tribulations of geeks laughing and tormenting him when he made these predictions several years ago, which have left visible scars on his character. Although I joined this great forum a month before him and was immediately directed to code to standards and hack for IE, DrHowardDrFine resolutely stands by his affirmation that he was ridiculed on these forums for his objection to IE. Although no proof has yet been found and leads itself to the shortcomings of an aging mind (and greater probability that it may have happened on an MSIE forum he used to frequent), he still grasps to the rationale that claims are valid until otherwise disproved, rather than providing proof with a claim.

All his posts against MS are worded to pronounce his hatred of MS and to purposely get a rise out of anyone who disagrees with his opinion. He's supposedly a 50+ year old individual with retirement on his mind, and nothing much better to do than attempt to feel as if he is in some way a part of the dismantling of IE and the rest of Microsoft.

So let the man attempt to persuade the technical masses here of the evilness of the MS empire. Let him stand on his mount and prophesy to all who would listen. Don't throw stones. Nay; let him speak and in turn, give us an example of how a religion does not have to center around a supernatural being, but of a hatred of a software giant. Amen.

-Shane

Apostropartheid
11-23-2009, 10:22 PM
The thing is, drdr, you seem to think Chrome OS is a direct competitor to Windows, which it simply isn't. The Internet isn't fast enough. Web apps aren't good enough. People are inclined to buy low cost, cheap things, but they're also inclined to buy things which what they need done. Even word processing is still a bit awkward on the web, but it is getting there--I use Buzzword to write the novel I'm...writing, for example, but I use Word for serious work. It's not in the position yet. You say Microsoft is dead, but...it's not. Even fully-fledged competitors to Windows haven't come anywhere near giving it a serious challenge.

Fumigator
11-23-2009, 10:44 PM
Re-read your posts for that answer. And, no, you don't know the difference between an opinion and a lie.

Gah ok I didn't think I'd have to spell this out but apparently I do. When I refer to your opinion as a "big lie", I am using the term "big lie" (notice the quotes, it should clue you in) in the context of propaganda, wherein a falsehood or exaggeration (or hyperbole) is stated as fact to intentionally persuade, convince, or deceive. Hense, I don't think you're lying, in the plain and pure sense of the word, I think you're using a ridiculous exaggeration to attempt to persuade us, the ignert public, into agreeing that the demise of Microsoft is at our doorstep and that any moment we'll hear a mighty rumble as ol' Bill crashes to the mat.

The reason this is a ridiculous exaggeration is obvious. A successful release of Windows just occured. Deny it if you want, it's a successful release. It's a good OS. The masses are embracing and will continue to embrace it. M$ remains strong in other areas of business. To lose market share is not an indicator of imminent collapse, unless the amount of market share lost is huge. Google's OS isn't on the brink of a wholesale takeover of the PC OS industry. That's as silly as saying man-made global warming is going to destroy us all within 100 years!

You really love to argue just for the sake of arguing, don't you? :rolleyes:

funnymoney
11-23-2009, 11:00 PM
How so?

They are engaging in competition with Microsoft to try and take some part of Microsoft market. That is something that usually evil companies do. I agree it is normal for such companies and in a business world, but when you look at Google slogan and what Google really does, it just doesn't fit their portfolio.

Maybe those articles are engineered by authors to look even more offensive than they really are but who knows, maybe Google did fell into the same pit like other companies have so far Intel vs. AMD, ATI vs NVidia, Apple vs IBM etc.

So Google first stated "Don't be evil", which was intended for those companies and now they are doing absolutely the same what made those companies evil.

I never thought that MS or others were evil, I understand that work has to be paid, that profit has to be made in this world today. But if Google called them Evil because of what they were doing, and now does the same, than it's also evil.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 11:16 PM
If you object to any of his opinions, you are a Microsoft fanboy/fangirl and therefore have no merit of an opinion and are utterly and completely wrong.

Microsofties respond that awy. Anything said against Microsoft makes you a Microsoft hater, troll, etc. The facts do not matter and the added response is equivalent to "Oh, yeah? Sez you!".

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 11:29 PM
The thing is, drdr, you seem to think Chrome OS is a direct competitor to Windows, which it simply isn't..... You say Microsoft is dead, but...it's not. Even fully-fledged competitors to Windows haven't come anywhere near giving it a serious challenge.

Why so serious? As a writer I would have thought you wouldn't take the phrase so literally. At the same time, I already pointed out, elsewhere on this board, how Microsoft sales have slumped while Google and Apples have soared. Microsoft trails in the phone market where ChromeOS may combine with Android and Microsoft is on the majority of netbooks. If netbooks are the current target of ChromeOS, that puts them in direct competition. ChromeOS can work with any platform and blends well with the web and all its applications. Windows does not.

Let's not look at how things are today but look at how things will be. Spdr, if you've heard of it, promises a large increase in internet speed. Broadband is getting more widespread as the wireless market is trying to improve itself and what if the speed issue no longer is one? When someone accesses the web from their phone, are they using Windows even though such a phone exists? Not likely. If you can open your netbook and access GoogleDocs in 7 seconds including booting it up, then save that doc on your home computer, would that interest you?

Now, say, you wanted to use your home computer's horsepower for a graphical application while using your netbook while out of town. Does that interest you?

This is a whole new ball game.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 11:43 PM
The reason this is a ridiculous exaggeration is obvious. A successful release of Windows just occured.You look at what is front of you without seeing anything else. You read the headlines but don't figure how it affects others. Think of the "butterfly effect" or, at least, nothing happens in a void.
Deny it if you wantI didn't.
it's a successful release. It's a good OS. The masses are embracing and will continue to embrace it. M$ remains strong in other areas of business.We won't know the real success for 3 more months when the next quarterly results come out. This we do know. Microsoft has had declining revenue for the last 4 or 5 quarters while its competitors, Apple and Google, have had record increases. As we say in the stock market, the trend is your friend, except when it goes against you.
To lose market share is not an indicator of imminent collapse, unless the amount of market share lost is huge.MS year-over-year revenue has declined 14%.
Google's OS isn't on the brink of a wholesale takeover of the PC OS industry.What do you base that on, or is that only your opinion?


You really love to argue just for the sake of arguing, don't you? :rolleyes:
At least I think for myself and don't have to ask Microsoft what I should think or do.

Guarantee: All of you will have used ChromeOS or its applications to some extent two years from now.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 11:46 PM
They are engaging in competition with Microsoft to try and take some part of Microsoft market. That is something that usually evil companies do. I agree it is normal for such companies and in a business world, but when you look at Google slogan and what Google really does, it just doesn't fit their portfolio.Uh....um....er....I just don't know how to reply to that.


I never thought that MS or others were evil, I understand that work has to be paid, that profit has to be made in this world today. But if Google called them Evil because of what they were doing, and now does the same, than it's also evil.
Apparently you are unaware of the dirty tricks Microsoft applied against Netscape and others years ago. See the Wikipedia article "United States vs Microsoft" to come up to speed.

drhowarddrfine
11-23-2009, 11:51 PM
btw, you guys are aware the original article of this post was written by Scoble, aren't you? The Microsoft evangelist?

funnymoney
11-23-2009, 11:57 PM
Which operating system of today comes without an Internet Browser? So now I will sue Linux community because they implement Firefox in every instalation, while I have less chance of selling my browser? WTF, oh, but yes now internet is faster? They(MS) created OS and sold it with browser so that everyone can have one installed on a computer ASAP, which is perfectly normal programmers logic.

It basicly means that in everday life if you let's say buy a car with a certain brand of tires already installed on the car, that other company that sells tires can sue that car manufacturer because they chose competition.

True in this case, Microsoft didn't have competition, but that is not their fault, it is other OS and software developers fault. If programmers who did Netscape back then had some marketing and business skills, I'm sure they would have made some agreement with MS, and I really don't want to read the whole article about that topic, but if i'm not mistaken settlement was made, and court orders were followed. MS also payed in EU i belive 500 000 € which is not little. Yeah sure, they did make 100 times more money, but again it's not their fault their software was ahead of time, like most of Google software is now.

oracleguy
11-24-2009, 12:33 AM
True in this case, Microsoft didn't have competition, but that is not their fault, it is other OS and software developers fault. If programmers who did Netscape back then had some marketing and business skills, I'm sure they would have made some agreement with MS, and I really don't want to read the whole article about that topic, but if i'm not mistaken settlement was made, and court orders were followed. MS also payed in EU i belive 500 000 € which is not little. Yeah sure, they did make 100 times more money, but again it's not their fault their software was ahead of time, like most of Google software is now.

Your account of history is a little lacking. Microsoft for all intents and purposes was late to the party which is the world wide web. It was years before they started making their own browser. Supplemental reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars#Background

For a while after IE came out it was very much behind the dominate browser of the time, Netscape Navigator. By 1996-97 is when things started to change.



Which operating system of today comes without an Internet Browser? So now I will sue Linux community because they implement Firefox in every instalation, while I have less chance of selling my browser? WTF, oh, but yes now internet is faster? They(MS) created OS and sold it with browser so that everyone can have one installed on a computer ASAP, which is perfectly normal programmers logic.

And the difference between a Linux distro including a browser and Microsoft (or Apple) doing so is that the Linux distro doesn't make the browser. So they just pick the one they like, similar to your car analogy. But in the case of the first browser wars, by including IE with Windows 95 and later, it strongly discouraged people from downloading something else. Especially since at that point people were on dial up. I forget what the modem speeds were in 1997 but I'm guessing around 33.6Kbps.

funnymoney
11-24-2009, 01:17 AM
So even better then I told. Netscape was already there. It says that it even wasn't free until MS gave IE free bundled with windows.

You must admit that it took MS 7 years to beat Netscape, and when they finally did it not much changed. True, us HTML/CSS designers are left with IE browser quirks and strange behavior, but now Netscape is back again in form of Firefox, which is due to Internet connection being faster and people knowing about internet security much more then they did before, plus maybe a small hate for corporation.

But you can't say Firefox is perfect to. I personally hate how it handles float divs, and clear: both; hack i need to use in firefox when sometimes i use two floating divs inside third one, IE behaves logically and even if two divs are floating their parent stretches normally without clear: both hack. But FF has better Javascript experience.

Rivalry is not always bad, and not always evil. It is good because it pushes peoples limits, and that means better products. Everyone is talking how Windows 7 is finally a decent MS Operating System. So, that means even old dog like Microsoft learned new tricks, and started listening to customers and developer ideas also. That is a good change, and let's hope they will do the same with the rest of the software.

As for Google, it is number one search engine, and probably if they don't do something stupid, or if someone doesn't do something revolutionary it's gonna be first for a very long time. That is great, because it means then they can generate enough revenue from ads so they can comfortably work on their projects, whatever they might be.

If we ignore the fact that Google OS isn't really a Win true "killer", and if Google really does make OS better then windows are now, then MS really deserves to die. And I don't think really that Google programmers are that much better then Microsoft ones, and that they can build operating system in let's say year or 3 years, that would beat windows that are developed for more then 20 years. But we will see. A free OS (but not a 'nix) would be a great thing. Lol

drhowarddrfine
11-24-2009, 02:29 AM
But you can't say Firefox is perfect to. I personally hate how it handles float divs, and clear: both; hack i need to use in firefox when sometimes i use two floating divs inside third one, IE behaves logically and even if two divs are floating their parent stretches normally without clear: both hack.Of course, what you describe is a bug in IE and not the standard nor how every other browser behaves. You may not like it but IEs implementation is wrong and it doesn't perform like any other browser.


Rivalry is not always bad, and not always evil.When done right and legally, it's never evil.

A free OS (but not a 'nix) would be a great thing. Lol
There are lots of free OSes around.

brad211987
11-24-2009, 04:06 AM
MS year-over-year revenue has declined 14%.

Unless you look at the actual financials: http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:MSFT&fstype=ii

It's a little over 3%, and its 1 year of decline, that followed a near 15% annual increase. Not to mention the decline happened in the year they released the piece of crap that is Vista, and we sunk into this wonderful recession. This is also while their total assets have continued a steady increase, while total liabilities have decreased. They sure look as if they are whimpering along to me.

drhowarddrfine
11-24-2009, 04:34 AM
Unless you look at the actual financials: http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:MSFT&fstype=ii
Unless you know how to read such statements. You look at the last reported quarter and compare it to the previous year's quarter. You do not compare sequential quarters except to show a linear increase or decrease, and you cannot show any increase beyond the one quarter. Year over year quarters compares similar time frames so things such as Christmas sales do not unduly show an upward trend but comparing Christmas quarters to Christmases past would.


Not to mention the decline happened in the year they released the piece of crap that is Vista, and we sunk into this wonderful recession.Compare that to Apple and Google which had record growth and now tell me about the difficulties of the recession. Using Vista as an excuse for poor sales is of no matter since a decline is a decline no matter the reason.

Net income was $12.9 billion this past quarter compared to $15 billion the same quarter last year.

drhowarddrfine
11-24-2009, 04:40 AM
And Apple went from $7.9 billion to 9.9 billion; about a 25% increase in the same recession. Apple now has more cash than Microsoft. Googles's also went up.

brad211987
11-24-2009, 01:10 PM
Not arguing that their current performance isn't up to par with the others, but nothing in their financial statements suggests a dying company, quite the opposite. Are you really suggesting that 3 quarters plagued by bad product releases and recession is enough to kill Microsoft? Google and Apple have had just the opposite, they have had great product releases in 2009 and it has kept them solid through the first year of the recession. Microsoft has turned around with a great product release and it will show on the upcoming quarterly report. There is nothing abnormal going on, you would see increasing debt, longer turnover in AR, stacking up AP and severe decreases in cash flow if you were looking at a dying company.

Plain and simple, the performance of Microsoft this year has been lackluster, but again you've failed to show me anything that suggests Microsoft is dying.

drhowarddrfine
11-24-2009, 01:55 PM
Not arguing that their current performance isn't up to par with the others, but nothing in their financial statements suggests a dying company, quite the opposite. Are you really suggesting that 3 quarters plagued by bad product releases and recession is enough to kill Microsoft?I'm saying the trend is there but also ChromeOS is a killer app.
Google and Apple have had just the opposite, they have had great product releases in 2009 and it has kept them solid through the first year of the recession.Doesn't really matter. The proof is in the numbers.[quite] Microsoft has turned around with a great product release and it will show on the upcoming quarterly report.[/quote]Fumigator would call your statement a "big lie".

There is nothing abnormal going on, you would see increasing debt, longer turnover in AR, stacking up AP and severe decreases in cash flow if you were looking at a dying company.Like the others, you're taking the headline too literally, but none of your observations matter in the sight of decreasing revenue.


Plain and simple, the performance of Microsoft this year has been lackluster, but again you've failed to show me anything that suggests Microsoft is dying.
A year of decreasing revenue while the competition is increasing is never a healthy sign.

brad211987
11-24-2009, 02:02 PM
Math and logic don't strike me as a big lie. Windows 7 has already been a far more successful release than Vista, its gaining popularity, people switching from both Vista and XP are happy with it and businesses are even implementing it without much difficulty. To think that this won't have a very positive effect on their bottom line for the current quarter is just plain wrong. No lying about it, just simple math and logic, sell more stuff => make more money.

TheShaner
11-24-2009, 02:19 PM
Guarantee: All of you will have used ChromeOS or its applications to some extent two years from now.
Hear ye, hear ye! The great tech seer, DrHowardDrFine, has pronounced his next prophecy! Prepare ye the way of ChromeOS and its applications... to some extent!

-Shane

nick1988
11-24-2009, 03:02 PM
Guarantee: All of you will have used ChromeOS or its applications to some extent two years from now.

This has been noted and I shall return in 2 years (or less perhaps?!)! Farewell chaps.

drhowarddrfine
11-24-2009, 04:19 PM
Math and logic don't strike me as a big lie.Fumigator considers opinions he considers false a lie but that was the joke.
Windows 7 has already been a far more successful release than Vista, its gaining popularity, people switching from both Vista and XP are happy with itThe trade rags are saying that's only true of sales from the big box stores which matters less than....
and businesses are even implementing it without much difficulty.And that's where they say Microsoft is in trouble.

drhowarddrfine
11-24-2009, 04:22 PM
Hear ye, hear ye! The great tech seer, DrHowardDrFine, has pronounced his next prophecy! Prepare ye the way of ChromeOS and its applications... to some extent!

-Shane
Some people choose whether they want to be hanging from the cross or banging the nails. Some people think ahead, notice trends, are visionary. Some take what's given to them and follow the herd. Some cut themselves on the bleeding edge or trail behind on the dull back end.

drhowarddrfine
11-24-2009, 04:23 PM
This has been noted and I shall return in 2 years (or less perhaps?!)! Farewell chaps.

Make it 3 years. I didn't notice ChromeOS won't be released till the end of 2010. Not that that will stop any of us from using it this week (I am).

Apostropartheid
11-25-2009, 12:14 AM
Why so serious? As a writer I would have thought you wouldn't take the phrase so literally. At the same time, I already pointed out, elsewhere on this board, how Microsoft sales have slumped while Google and Apples have soared. Microsoft trails in the phone market where ChromeOS may combine with Android and Microsoft is on the majority of netbooks. If netbooks are the current target of ChromeOS, that puts them in direct competition. ChromeOS can work with any platform and blends well with the web and all its applications. Windows does not.

Let's not look at how things are today but look at how things will be. Spdr, if you've heard of it, promises a large increase in internet speed. Broadband is getting more widespread as the wireless market is trying to improve itself and what if the speed issue no longer is one? When someone accesses the web from their phone, are they using Windows even though such a phone exists? Not likely. If you can open your netbook and access GoogleDocs in 7 seconds including booting it up, then save that doc on your home computer, would that interest you?

Now, say, you wanted to use your home computer's horsepower for a graphical application while using your netbook while out of town. Does that interest you?

This is a whole new ball game.

Lol, forgive me, drdr, but your previous attitude has given me reason to take this literally. I know what you're talking about. Believe me, I'm as excited as you are about it. But we live in the here and now, and at the moment Chrome OS isn't nearly as exciting as it could be. I hadn't heard of Spdr, but I live in a nation where all telephone lines are still operated and owned by one company. By and large, broadband is mostly capped at 24Mbps, but even in the suburbs one will get significantly less (I receive 6Mbps). BT have no reason to upgrade the telephone lines; it serves their best interests not to undergo a multimillion pound undertaking for no benefit (remember quite how densely populated the UK actually is.) For now, it's a dream, drdr. A tangible dream, but still a dream. Chrome OS isn't the killer app. Not yet. And, as we're dealing with hypotheticals, remember: anything can happen.

brad211987
11-25-2009, 12:30 AM
Lol, forgive me, drdr, but your previous attitude has given me reason to take this literally. I know what you're talking about. Believe me, I'm as excited as you are about it. But we live in the here and now, and at the moment Chrome OS isn't nearly as exciting as it could be. I hadn't heard of Spdr, but I live in a nation where all telephone lines are still operated and owned by one company. By and large, broadband is mostly capped at 24Mbps, but even in the suburbs one will get significantly less (I receive 6Mbps). BT have no reason to upgrade the telephone lines; it serves their best interests not to undergo a multimillion pound undertaking for no benefit (remember quite how densely populated the UK actually is.) For now, it's a dream, drdr. A tangible dream, but still a dream. Chrome OS isn't the killer app. Not yet. And, as we're dealing with hypotheticals, remember: anything can happen.

Consider yourself lucky to get that type of speed. Where I live, you can pay a fortune to get 20 mbps, most of the time 5 mbps is what they advertise as "blazingly fast".

drhowarddrfine
11-25-2009, 01:34 AM
In my area they just bumped us up to 10M/1Mb down/up at no extra charge. It's cable but I live in a large city. Actually, I'm on the rural edge so I'm surprised we get such speeds but just 3 years ago wasn't I only getting 2Mb down? Not sure but I don't think it was over 3Mb.

Apostropartheid
11-25-2009, 04:25 PM
Lucky you. I live in London, where, as one of the developed capitals of the world, one might expect slightly better speeds. I used to be on 2Mbps about two years ago, but it just goes to show: the time it takes new technology to reach the mainstream can sometimes be more appropriately measured in years.

drhowarddrfine
12-10-2009, 04:25 PM
Helping to continue my thought:
What the Google web will look like in 10 years (http://royal.pingdom.com/2009/12/09/what-the-google-web-will-look-like-in-10-years/)

oracleguy
12-10-2009, 07:10 PM
I found this interesting and somewhat chilling at the same time: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/07/schmidt_on_privacy/

drhowarddrfine
12-10-2009, 07:27 PM
Start your own thread, oracle. You're OT but that's a popular article for the tin-hat society.

Apostropartheid
12-10-2009, 07:38 PM
I was reading about that in Le Monde the other day. I find it...twisted.

Fumigator
12-10-2009, 11:58 PM
If you are critical of Google I guess that means you wear a tin hat.

HuH???

drhowarddrfine
12-11-2009, 12:30 AM
If you are critical of Google I guess that means you wear a tin hat.

HuH???

EDIT: Arrrggghhh. Fumigator, this thread is NOT about Google. If you and Oracle want to go off and start your own thread, do so.

Fumigator
12-11-2009, 03:55 PM
C'mon Oracleguy, let's go start another thread... we've been kicked off the playground :( Just let me find my hat...

TheShaner
12-11-2009, 04:48 PM
Yeah OG and Fumigator, no OT posts unless you're talking about Ireland (http://codingforums.com/showthread.php?p=895350). :p

-Shane

drhowarddrfine
12-11-2009, 06:31 PM
The difference is he's trying to justify his point with a straw man argument.

drhowarddrfine
12-17-2009, 04:08 PM
I never heard of this company (http://www.tapsns.com/blog/index.php/2009/12/sns-predictions-for-2010-released-from-new-york/) but this was making the rounds today:

SNS Predictions for 2010:

Microsoft loses in its Consumer play: except for gaming, it is Game Over for MS in Consumer.

tspek
12-18-2009, 04:53 AM
MS will never be finished.

Correct.
Not in any meaningful sense in any time soon.



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum