31–40 of 54 posts
if MS is really going down the cliff why is it that they are still making billions NOW?! nobody's going to use a tablet in the office typing their 10 page report...
Microsoft is far from failed. They might not be doing great with tablets and phones, but they have a few other businesses that happen to make billions upon billions each quarter. The PC is declining, it isn't dead. And it won't be any time soon.
Microsoft is far from failed. They might not be doing great with tablets and phones, but they have a few other businesses that happen to make billions upon billions each quarter. The PC is declining, it isn't dead. And it won't be any time soon.
You are absolutely correct. In the same way, in 2012, half of IBM's profits were from the sales and servicing of mainframes[1]. IBM is not dead, it's just irrelevant. And that's where Microsoft is apparently unstoppably heading. [1] http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2012/09/ibms-mainf...
Irrelevant in what? According to whom? Very important questions.
The only way I'm able to fathom someone being able to claim that IBM is "irrelevant," is if said person has never done any level of enterprise or government IT business anywhere on earth. Must be nice to have an irrelevant $100b sales business with $16b in profit and 434,000 employees.
Well let's see here. By that measure, the following companies are apparently irrelevant too: Oracle, HP, Dell, Cisco, Intel, SAP, Microsoft, EMC - they only tally a cool $450 billion or so in sales. They must not do anything useful at all to earn that.
Irrelevant must mean: not hip or fashionable, and not dominate in consumer smart phones or tablets.
This looks more like an angry letter with childish points made. > i hate this I hate that.
It doesn't help that the writing in the article is pretty bad. I don't think M$ will go under (think: Fortune 500 + gov't), but as a consumer I don't want any of their new stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are absolutely correct. In the same way, in 2012, half of IBM's profits were from the sales and servicing of mainframes[1]. IBM is not dead, it's just irrelevant. And that's where Microsoft is apparently unstoppably heading. [1] http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2012/09/ibms-mainf...
IBM is irrelevant. Extreme exaggeration at its finest. Irrelevant in what? According to whom? Very important questions. The only way I'm able to fathom someone being able to claim that IBM is "irrelevant," is if said person has never done any level of enterprise or government IT business anywhere on earth. Must be nice to have an irrelevant $100b sales business with $16b in profit and 434,000 employees. Well let's se…
They make more off of Android devices than Google does. Maybe their strategy is to build such sucky products that more people pick up Android devices.
You have anything concrete to back this up with?
> Last fall SemiAccurate was one of the few voices criticizing Windows 8 o_0
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Get machine, wipe HD, reinstall Windows, reinstall drivers. Windows Update is an unfortunately necessary evil, it becomes more painful the longer it has been since a major Windows release.
Interestingly, the bricks-and-mortar Microsoft Stores seem to sell laptops with a version of Win 8 that has no crapware/bloatware and is optimized to run well; a lot like doing a fresh install.