Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 237 posts

Re: Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

#171

Post by shaftway »

DanielHB wrote: post #120
nunez wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

very big companies use Workspace and the full suite of Google Docs products within.

Examples? I right now work in one, but I wouldn't call my company big ( From my (limited) experience google workspace doesn't really offer the level of control over employee computers that microsoft solutions do (like limiting what you can install or tuning settings). So it is a non-starter for any big company.

Of the recent places I've worked, both use it. Block was at ~14,000 employees, but I think they're currently at ~12,500. My current company uses it, and we're ~2,000.

Re: Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

#172

Post by johnea »

ghc wrote: post #66

It's interesting to read comments about this today, written through the lens of the present. I suspect many commenters were too young to really understand the level of dominance Microsoft had in the market circa from 1995-2005. Just look at this chart: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/143277-microsofts-shar... In 2004, outside of education and desktop publishing it was extremely rare to see an Apple computer at…

Your comments that MS is a completely differnt company are absolutely correct.

MS owns github, linkedin, and it's cloud services in azure, etc, are outside the initial desktop OS business model. Not to mention it being one of the biggest contributors to the linux kernel (to my chagrin). All of this is because of the slide in significance and dominance of it's windows OS business.

This OS business is still quite present though, such as in the h/w upgrades being pushed on users now in migrating to win11. The big h/w OEMs pay windows OS royalties for all those new computers.

Also, WRT your mention of the h/w driver dominance of MS, it's ironic to note that in the modern world h/w peripherals still often come with a custom windows driver, when their use on linux is almost always supported by standard USB class device drivers. A notable failure to evolve.

Re: Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

#173

Post by shaftway »

anothercoup wrote: post #147

> Nearly all the people we fund at Y Combinator use Apple laptops I find this absolutely shocking. Was this a west coast thing? I graduated and got my first job around that time and never met a single developer who used an apple laptop. My CS department was entirely unix/linux/bsd and windows. All my internships and jobs post graduation was windows or linux. My experience was that the hacker community, cs community,…

I haven't been issued a company laptop that wasn't OSX since 2009. Nowadays everyone makes a big deal about having the latest Apple M7.2 silicon.

Re: Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

#174

Post by carlosjobim »

caspper69 wrote: post #165
carlosjobim wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are just doing yourself a disfavor by dismissing anybody who doesn't think exactly like you as non-human (a troll, a bot, a Russian, a heretic!). On that route, you'll end up living your life much less than to the fullest. I think your example speaks for this. Yes, I think that a graphical user interface would be excellent for a server. And I'm probably not the only one who would like that idea: Apple invested a…

> People who can choose what kind of computer they have will choose Apple over PC. I have worked for an awful lot of people over the years, and given they could afford my services, I would guess they fall into the "people who can choose what kind of computer they will choose" category. Some could choose what kind of Ferrari they wanted, lol. Your intuition is anecdotal. Plenty of people either don't care, or gasp pre…

> Your intuition is anecdotal. Plenty of people either don't care, or gasp prefer Windows. They are not stupid (I'm one of them, which I'd be happy to discuss with anyone, up to and including Mr. Torvalds).

You're one of who?

Re: Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

#175

Post by hawaiianbrah »

shaftway wrote: post #171
DanielHB wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Examples? I right now work in one, but I wouldn't call my company big ( From my (limited) experience google workspace doesn't really offer the level of control over employee computers that microsoft solutions do (like limiting what you can install or tuning settings). So it is a non-starter for any big company.

Of the recent places I've worked, both use it. Block was at ~14,000 employees, but I think they're currently at ~12,500. My current company uses it, and we're ~2,000.

My ~3000 person company (a subsidiary of Microsoft!) even uses Google workspace

Re: Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

#176

Post by insane_dreamer »

breadwinner wrote: post #156
insane_dreamer wrote: post #154

The OS-based Windows 98/2000 Microsoft is dead. The Enterprise Microsoft is very much alive and well.

Sure they are alive, but they are not the 800 pound gorilla they used to be, who could freeze investments in an area just by announcing they are entering that area.

I think they're still an 800 lb gorilla. It's just that now they're not the _only_ 800 lb gorilla.

Re: Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

#177

Post by fogpudding »

buran77 wrote: post #151
fogpudding wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first time this essay made the rounds, a bunch of people misunderstood his point the same way you're doing: https://www.paulgraham.com/cliffsnotes.html He was talking about cultural dominance among people developing new tech, not revenue. There was a time when being a programmer essentially meant writing C++ on Windows. I still remember getting a Mac as late as ~2013 and having my normie (non-engineer) friends ch…

> a bunch of people misunderstood his point the same way you're doing Nobody implied he meant "dead dead" so that's a straw man, just that he completely missed the mark with his observation. Everything else is a backsplanation. PG even acknowledges he may look like a fool in retrospective. > He was talking about cultural dominance among people developing new tech [...] Everyone's using Macs So... a cultural thing you…

They implied that he meant Microsoft's financials were in trouble, when he was more saying that Microsoft had become the new IBM.

I don't think Macs are popular in tech merely due to frivolous or circular fashion. Basically no one used Windows to do 2009-2016 era web dev. Not because founders were pushing employees to use Macs so investors would see when they came to visit; Microsoft genuinely lost a lot of reputation among programmers prior to the WSL stuff due to how bad their stuff was. Am I the only one who remembers this? People complaining and giving each other a look if they had to use "Winblows" and so on? (I still see this today.)

> Was it really necessary to come to his defense? ...

I mean, no, but why does every PG essay posted on here spawn a bunch of comments about basically how rich and pretentious he is? Why does this matter? If he's wrong, why not just say why?

Re: Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

#178

Post by caspper69 »

carlosjobim wrote: post #174
caspper69 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People who can choose what kind of computer they have will choose Apple over PC. I have worked for an awful lot of people over the years, and given they could afford my services, I would guess they fall into the "people who can choose what kind of computer they will choose" category. Some could choose what kind of Ferrari they wanted, lol. Your intuition is anecdotal. Plenty of people either don't care, or gasp pre…

> Your intuition is anecdotal. Plenty of people either don't care, or gasp prefer Windows. They are not stupid (I'm one of them, which I'd be happy to discuss with anyone, up to and including Mr. Torvalds). You're one of who?

> Plenty of people either don't care, or gasp prefer Windows.

Re: Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

#179

Post by breadwinner »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #176
breadwinner wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure they are alive, but they are not the 800 pound gorilla they used to be, who could freeze investments in an area just by announcing they are entering that area.

I think they're still an 800 lb gorilla. It's just that now they're not the _only_ 800 lb gorilla.

Nope. Were you alive in the 1990's? It was completely different. Microsoft froze innovation in the industry. Nobody does that today.

Re: Microsoft Is Dead (2007)

#180

Post by ianburrell »

behnamoh wrote: post #135
dist-epoch wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't wear a watch, because NOW is important That doesn't imply that Jensen thinks he's successful because he doesn't wear a watch. He's not that delusional.

oh he knows... you're telling me the CEO and co-founder of the most valuable company in history doesn't think he's successful?

NVIDIA was the most valuable stock for short period, before Apple took the record. It is now less valuable than Apple and Microsoft.
Post reply on HN