Ehhh Microsoft still has a lot of talent they are just plagued with entrenched bureaucracy.
Microsoft is Dead (2007)
11–20 of 195 posts
Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)
#12[deleted]
Its a misuse of "because", but a fairly common one -- specifically, the use of "because" to mean "and this is evident because".
Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)
#13[deleted]
Its a misuse of "because", but a fairly common one -- specifically, the use of "because" to mean "and this is evident because".
well the op deleted their post to stop the downvote flood, but the real issue is that it was pg stating that he knows they "seemed" dangerous. That "seemed" means, "my opinion of them."
You could read it as pg saying "I know that my opinion of microsoft in 2001 was they were dangerous because I wrote an essay about it back then."
Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)
#14(sorry if I sound like a phony or worse suckup when I say this, but) PG is one of the smartest, ahead-of-his-times guy of our generation!
Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)
#15It's really interesting how in 2007, I believed (as did pg, seemingly) that the web would eventually overtake desktop software. Fast forward seven years, and some of the biggest names in software (Instagram, Lyft) have completely abandoned the web for "desktop" (really, native) software. That so much code ships directly to mobile devices says a lot about the power of centralized app stores and truly sandboxed install…
Will there be a move towards decentralization of apps again or are we locked in? The inertia that app store and play store have is formidable. If Windows Phone fails, some part of the blame will be on the availibility of apps.
Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)
#16It is an insightful piece but nothing annoys me more than sensationalism. Its click bait and I am annoyed I got sucked into reading it and annoyed that I feel compelled to waste time commenting. Anyway, if it isn't obvious, the article's credibility is killed by the use of the word dead. Microsoft clearly isn't dead it just isn't the biggest player on the internet, and isn't really a player in the start up space.
Microsoft isn't dead. ------ . They aren't big players on the web, start up space, mobile nor hardware. A bit contradictory, no?
Not really. They're still immense players in desktop and corporate IT. That alone accounts for an immense amount of revenue, a sizeable chunk in the whole world of computing.
On top of that, Azure is competitive and is gaining more and more traction, and the person who headed the Azure department is now the new CEO. Their gaming division (Xbox) is profitable, which is mostly a hardware field, and they're slowly getting a foothold in mobile and have purchased a big mobile hardware manufacturer.
Their development tools (Visual Studio and .NET) are immensely popular and they've managed to capitalize on the whole JavaScript thing by making it easy to develop with VS.
They're anything but dead.
Of course things like Bing aren't a success yet but if MSFT figures out what do with that they'll have something other than people just Google stuff on.
Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its a misuse of "because", but a fairly common one -- specifically, the use of "because" to mean "and this is evident because".
well the op deleted their post to stop the downvote flood, but the real issue is that it was pg stating that he knows they "seemed" dangerous. That "seemed" means, "my opinion of them." You could read it as pg saying "I know that my opinion of microsoft in 2001 was they were dangerous because I wrote an essay about it back then."
> but the real issue is that it was pg stating that he knows they "seemed" dangerous. That "seemed" means, "my opinion of them."
That makes no sense at all, since PGs argument wasn't that they seemed dangerous to him, it was that it was his opinion that they were less dangerous that they seemed to other people.
His more recent claim is saying that he was aware of the general perception of Microsoft's danger in 2001, and that this awareness is evident in the post he wrote at the time, which acknowledged that perception and argued that it was exaggerated.
Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)
#18The most common form of Microsoft-hate usually centers around how a company of such gargantuan size makes such gargantuan fuck-ups. But this is to be expected of companies of gargantuan size, and is certainly not limited to Microsoft alone (although recently they've had more than their fair share).
My qualm with Microsoft is all the little things that they let slip through. Little things like having a control panel with 100 different links with nondescript names. Is it really possible that not a single person at Microsoft tried changing a setting on their Windows machine and realized how difficult it was to even find the setting? Were they so entrenched in the Microsoft way of doing things that they were accustomed to a shitty user experience? Or did the aesthetically minded engineer have his voice drowned out by the bureaucracy?
If the higher-ups were yelling down the food chain, "build an Apple-killing UI!", I can see how they would settle on what became the app-centric look of Windows 8. But blatantly idiotic decisions around the little things like control panels, choosing wireless connections, and the sheer difficulty of navigation, make me realize that somewhere at Microsoft something is really fucked up.
Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)
#19Ehhh Microsoft still has a lot of talent they are just plagued with entrenched bureaucracy.
[deleted]
Re: Microsoft is Dead (2007)
#20Microsoft as the concept of an all powerful dominating IT company is dead, and nothing has or will replace it. The company itself is still doing fine- they still make roughly twice the profit google did last financial year.
Is that just net profit, or does it account for growth? Net profit is not always a good metric for a large company's performance, as there are a lot of incentives to keep that number down and invest money back into the business (such as taxes). Amazon, for example, almost always operates near or at a loss from a quarterly or yearly perspective, but makes huge growth as business.