Just like Google and Apple, I hate 'em, but soooooo glad I bought stock in 'em.....
Microsoft posts first-ever quarterly loss
As was widely expected, Microsoft announced a loss of $0.06 per share for the fourth quarter, ended in June, which marks the first time the software giant has posted a quarterly loss in the 26 years it has been a public company. Most of that drop is attributable to a previously announced $6.2bn charge that resulted from …
-
-
-
-
Friday 20th July 2012 09:26 GMT bdam
Actually Mr Coward you have a point. Why can't Android use ext2/3/4 whatever? Its already using linux so technically this should be a cinch. If all access to it is done via a service layer then it's just the interface which conforms the the FAT32 API - and whoopie dee, didn't Oracle just "clear up" the confusion over whether API's could be copyrighted or not for us all last month?
-
-
-
-
Friday 20th July 2012 01:33 GMT Anonymous Coward
People lose faith
I think that covers it.
Personally I like working with both Win7 & Office 2010. I also think that adding Server 2003 into the mixture gives a pretty solid environment.
But would I have any shares of Microsoft I too would have sold them as soon as possible after the Office previews came about.
And before anyone goes off with: investments... (which by itself is a very reasonable point). Don't forget that a loss means it outweighs any foreseen investments + incoming profits (which is also a variable factor by itself). Unfair context but you could also reason that MS didn't get as much income as they anticipated.
My point being: if this were due to investments it would still indicate very poor leadership because you'd normally anticipate for that.
The more this story develops the more to I start to think we may see very drastic developments in the upcoming future.
Something I'm personally not looking forward to but heck... Their loss.
-
Friday 20th July 2012 06:44 GMT Ole Juul
Bad data
Redmond says . . . that 50 per cent of desktop PCs worldwide now run Windows 7.
Just looking around my neighbourhood, most non-professional users are indeed using some form of MS-Windows. However, some use XP, most are still on Vista, and a couple bought computers recently which are running Win7. Whatever Microsoft does well, gathering realistic information isn't one of them.
-
-
Friday 20th July 2012 08:28 GMT Ole Juul
Re: Bad data
What knowledge? I'm simply basing my comment on what I see regular people using. What you are referring to is no doubt correct in most work environments. Just because you and I use computers all day, doesn't mean that most people do. My point is that many more people have computers at home than at work, and all those computers in people's homes are not updated frequently and from what I can see are quite old by IT standards. A large (probably the largest) proportion of people don't work in an office or otherwise use computers at work. I suggest that MS is only "measuring" office or business computers.
-
-
-
Friday 20th July 2012 07:03 GMT Big_Ted
I may be a bit simpole here but.....
[QUOTE]In addition, Microsoft says it has another $540m in revenue related to the Windows 8 Upgrade program that must be deferred until next quarter, once the company has actually shipped customers the upgrades.[/QUOTE]
How have they got $540m from a product that is yet to be released and is available in consumer release for free ?
Are people so desperate to get it or are they assuming that everyone who is running it now will upgrade for $39.99 a pop ?
-
Friday 20th July 2012 11:08 GMT AceRimmer
Re: I may be a bit simpole here but.....
There will be plenty of hardware vendors who will have already paid for Windows 8 licenses, ready to be able to sell those licenses with brand new PCs and laptops.
Since Microsoft have not yet delivered Windows 8, that income cannot be declared as profit until delivery has actually been made; hence the fact its been deferred
-
Friday 20th July 2012 11:58 GMT sleepy
Re: I may be a bit simpole here but.....
MS does this with every Windows upgrade. It enables them to claim enormous immediate sales of the new release, and in fact engineer more or less whatever initial sales figure they want.
It's based on US accounting regulations that say you can't recognise sales until you have made ALL the deliverables available to the customer. So those Windows 7 licences OEM's are buying in the usual huge quantities (or quite possibly more, because of the threat Windows 7 might not be available at the current price for very long), include a free upgrade to Windows 8. And because Windows 8 is a not yet available deliverable, MS is not recognising the sales until after W8 can be downloaded. So it's not really a Windows 7 OEM sale is it? It's a Windows 8 sale that is not currently deliverable, but has the right to use Windows 7 meantime.
And that's how MS can say to the world "our most successful Windows launch ever". It's a monopoly, and they simply relabel a suitable bunch of sales of the old version to look like the world eagerly CHOOSING the new product.
So when, in due course, MS brags about the incredibly successful launch, you'll know their claims are entirely meaningless, won't you? You didn't think MS could afford to take a RISK with a Windows release did you?
-
Friday 20th July 2012 08:01 GMT Mage
Past the peak
No one needs Win7, it's just a default OS and a Vista Service pack
Upgrades to MS office are increasingly pointless.
You can be as productive on Office 2003 and XP.
Desktop Linux still is not quite right, but MS determined to make Win 8 as rubbish as possible.
Many people just using Internet or could use Open Office.
Most future MS Windows and Office will only be "pre-installed". They are in slow decline. If Apple brings out a 1/2 price Mac Book/Mac Air running iOS on ARM (They'll never call it an iPad + keyboard but that's what it will be) then MS is looking at rapid decline as their own systems have poor legacy compatibility and a minority need it.
-
Friday 20th July 2012 09:23 GMT turnip handler
Re: Past the peak
"You can be as productive on Office 2003 and XP."
I used to think the same until I actually started working with Win7 and Office 2010. Vista and Office 2007 were ok but an annoyance - the ribbon on Office 2007 didn't quite work as promised and I still find now that I struggle to work well on Word 2007.
However - Office 2010 really seems to have got it right the Ribbon has been in improved in little ways, File menu for example, and to me those little changes that make applications easier to use are what it has made a big difference to actual productivity. In terms of nice little basics in Win7 then windows snapping to half the screen and the screen grab tool make everyday tasks much easier than in XP / Vista.
In XP I have to have little applications installed to perform these tasks and in my corporate environment I'm not allowed to install those anyway. Building basic helpful tasks into the OS really helps productivity.
And for any accountant out there, Excel with more rows than the 66k limit definitly helps productivity.
-
Friday 20th July 2012 10:34 GMT durbans
Re: Past the peak
You've managed to completely contradict yourself there...
"You can be as productive on Office 2003 and XP."
"MS is looking at rapid decline as their own systems have poor legacy compatibility and a minority need it."
Office 2003 and XP are legacy systems so these 2 statements are in direct contradiction....and I and most people (except those who cannot deal with change) will tell you that Win 7 and Office 2010 give you a big productivity boost.
Also, have you used Win 8? If not, you can't pass comment on how 'rubbish' they are trying to make it.
-
-
-
Friday 20th July 2012 08:25 GMT Andus McCoatover
Can't see what the fuss is all about...
Given the current economic climate, it's absolutely nothing, except a write-down of a couple of 'misadventures'. Microsoft's still doing fine. Blip on the radar, that's about it.
Even Nokia did (relatively) OK yesterday, and I predicted a total disaster - I was wrong.
-
Friday 20th July 2012 09:24 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Can't see what the fuss is all about...
Sure, it's not total meltdown, but it's a bit worrying nevertheless, given that Microsoft makes such vast amounts of its money from corporate inertia. What it may mean is that a lot of corporates have made an *active* decision not to buy this quarter, and they've got to change their minds next quarter, which is never promising when you're talking about inertia.
As for Nokia, it may or may not be a total disaster, depending on whether Elop decides to make it clear on whether that 4m figure is units sold, or just units shipped.
-
Friday 20th July 2012 11:40 GMT AceRimmer
Re: Can't see what the fuss is all about...
Did you actually read the article?
The loss is due to other factors. Sales and income remain strong
As pointed out, this is their first loss in 26 years. Plenty of companies can make a loss, some even make a loss year after year, get bailed out by their biggest competitor and then come back to become huge.
-
-
Friday 20th July 2012 11:57 GMT Arctic fox
Re: Can't see what the fuss is all about...
Never admit you were mistaken. Just do what several others do and remember that "posting as a AC means never having to say you are sorry" -:P. No, on a more serious note, I agree with you. MS made a poor purchase in 2007 and they have decided for accounting reasons to take the whole hit now. The background figures give a wholly different picture from the headline. Nokia, well the figures are not as poor as the market had been expecting and indeed their share price rose (a bit) on the news. However, the reality is that we will not know one way or the other before we see how the Finns do with WP8 - they screw up then its game over. I hope they do not because whatever certain howlers and haters might opine because of whom Nokia is allied with, Nokia going tits up would be a loss for us all regardless of whose phone/os we prefer.
-
Friday 20th July 2012 18:03 GMT Philip Lewis
Re: Can't see what the fuss is all about...
NOK is already lost, and the engineering staff decimated. Nokia can no longer engineer very much at all, sadly, and those engineers are never going to be re-employed because the "vision" for NOK does not include them being an engineering company.
NOKs "smart phone" strategy is dependent on MS and WP8, and since the customers for smart phones are in fact the carriers, this poses one very serious problem. MS and WP8 are "Typhoid Annie" for the carriers, and they won't touch it. WP8 is not going anywhere except down the tubes, because the channel has rejected it. Elop (and by extension NOK) is about as popular with the carriers as a pork chop in a synagogue, and nothing much he has said or done is likely to alter that.
-
-
-
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
-
-
Friday 20th July 2012 14:25 GMT Anonymous Coward
No, wrong...
Someone at Google managed to engineer the Bing toolbar into making it look like the results from Google was used by Bing. The high level of what happens is:
Bing toolbar looks to see what people search for
Bing toolbar observes what they visit after they have done a search
This info is fed back to MS/Bing
If there are very obscure searches (ie: Bing has no results for them and they've never been searched for before) they get added to bing right up the top of the results list (because there are no existing results.)
All this data are collected from the URL history, not from any specific search engine.
This means that if you have access to the back end of search engine X, you can game Bing toolbar to get results into bing. The results from that search engine haven't been copied, the user's behavior after a search has been observed.
If you think that Google don't do something pretty similar, if not the same, you've got another think coming.
-
-
Saturday 21st July 2012 16:19 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: No, wrong...
No, the Bing results come from the behavior of the person visiting Google. Google is not at any time accessed by Bing, MS or anyone related to them, the results are obtained from observing the URLs that the Bing tool bar sees. Google gamed Bing, in order to make it look like they are copying Google. What they've done is visited results from a Google search (manipulated because they have access to the back end of Google) to show pages which weren't previously picked up by Google or Bing. The Bing toolbar sees that this new page has been visited and then, a week or so later, adds it to the Bing search results.
Google are bang out of order by suggesting that Bing is copying them.
-
-
-