vance43211
Banned
- Messages
- 422
I figure it out
You are Bill Gates
You are Bill Gates
Why Is Microsoft So Successfull
- Thread starter Kevz
- Start date
- Status
Vance43211 and ShoobieRat,
first, vance, your response show a lack of either understanding or communication. one thing you should know is not to feed a wild animal... Or is this case, ShoobieRat. IT's not worth the time to post unless you really have something to say.
Shoobie,
You make a lot of very good points, but your very onsided on this issue. there are varing optionins on this topic. Some extreme other only moderate. The point is, you can't change their point of view by cutting them down for what they think.
The whole concpt that the Opensource OS's are not ready to replace Microsoft is a bit of a wash now. You can see how serious MS is by just looking at their homepage. They fear the Open Source world. They have even resorted to opening up some of their code to win back hearts of those that have turned. It's getting to the point that MS and the Open source movement will be running in parallel soon enough. Two issue remain that are keeping both alive. COST and SUPPORT. They run hand in hand but are separte enities.
One thing you have to understand is that the GUI doesnt' matter nor does the SERVER OS to the enduser. You can make it look like what ever you want, so that is not a problem.
The major cost for any company lies in the Server side hardware and software needed to run their enterprise. With Windows, you get the OS in one box, Exchange in another, Office in another, SQL in another and so on... Each costing a pretty penny as well. with the OOS, you pretty much get it all in one package. You can buy the CD/DVD or just download it for free. You can install it on as many systems as you like and not worry about liscensing costs at all.
Now the second most expensive part of IT is support. If you want to have onsite, you pay more. If you want baisc you pay less. Now the only real cost of OOS is support. You ca buy service contracts, or pay highly skilled people to do the support. Microsoft has a support stragity as well, but the cost is very high, and then there are all the cert wavers... (People that do nothing but get paper certificates that say they can do somethings with MS Products. ie MSCE comes to mind.) They come 15 to a dozen and are pretty cheap now.
In the war (because that is what it is) between MS and OpenSource, it comes down to cost in the end. MS will cost more frontend and OS will cost more in the backend. the question becomes how you want to do it.
I understand the idea that MS is evil. I also understand that they are the embodyment of the American way. A way I enjoy and hope to find in my own time. They started as the underdog (IBM) and came through shinning.
my 2 cents...
PS didn't mean to upset anyone, I'm just tired of the argument...
first, vance, your response show a lack of either understanding or communication. one thing you should know is not to feed a wild animal... Or is this case, ShoobieRat. IT's not worth the time to post unless you really have something to say.
Shoobie,
You make a lot of very good points, but your very onsided on this issue. there are varing optionins on this topic. Some extreme other only moderate. The point is, you can't change their point of view by cutting them down for what they think.
The whole concpt that the Opensource OS's are not ready to replace Microsoft is a bit of a wash now. You can see how serious MS is by just looking at their homepage. They fear the Open Source world. They have even resorted to opening up some of their code to win back hearts of those that have turned. It's getting to the point that MS and the Open source movement will be running in parallel soon enough. Two issue remain that are keeping both alive. COST and SUPPORT. They run hand in hand but are separte enities.
One thing you have to understand is that the GUI doesnt' matter nor does the SERVER OS to the enduser. You can make it look like what ever you want, so that is not a problem.
The major cost for any company lies in the Server side hardware and software needed to run their enterprise. With Windows, you get the OS in one box, Exchange in another, Office in another, SQL in another and so on... Each costing a pretty penny as well. with the OOS, you pretty much get it all in one package. You can buy the CD/DVD or just download it for free. You can install it on as many systems as you like and not worry about liscensing costs at all.
Now the second most expensive part of IT is support. If you want to have onsite, you pay more. If you want baisc you pay less. Now the only real cost of OOS is support. You ca buy service contracts, or pay highly skilled people to do the support. Microsoft has a support stragity as well, but the cost is very high, and then there are all the cert wavers... (People that do nothing but get paper certificates that say they can do somethings with MS Products. ie MSCE comes to mind.) They come 15 to a dozen and are pretty cheap now.
In the war (because that is what it is) between MS and OpenSource, it comes down to cost in the end. MS will cost more frontend and OS will cost more in the backend. the question becomes how you want to do it.
I understand the idea that MS is evil. I also understand that they are the embodyment of the American way. A way I enjoy and hope to find in my own time. They started as the underdog (IBM) and came through shinning.
my 2 cents...
PS didn't mean to upset anyone, I'm just tired of the argument...
tajahem
In Runtime
- Messages
- 410
vance43211 said:
I agree with both of those statements. The latter for a different reason than the one you mentioned.
However, this is not "How is Microsoft Bad" it is "Why is Microsoft so Successfull"
In a word: Ignorance
Most people do not know that there are other options. They are blinded by the hugh signs saying MICROSOFT. I just came into this field with only a few computer classes in High School and a love of gaming. Until about 2 months into this job I didn't even know that alternative software existed!
You can laugh at me, but at the very least realize that this is the way things look to fresh eyes. I never knew how much I and everyone around me didn't (and in some cases still don't) know until I started down this path.
ShoobieRat
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,932
Microsoft has this crazy idea that their programmers, engineers, and developers, should get paid for what they slave over and what they create. I tend to agree with that ideal.
I don't want to start an arg about open-source, but if I knew I was spending hours and days and years developing an application, away from all the things I like to do, and someone told me everything I made was just gonna get flung into the public at the end, I'd quit.
I don't want to start an arg about open-source, but if I knew I was spending hours and days and years developing an application, away from all the things I like to do, and someone told me everything I made was just gonna get flung into the public at the end, I'd quit.
That is the way things work ShoobieRat.
besides, unless you work for one of the companies that Distro an OPEN os/program, you aren't working for anyone. You do it cause you want to. That is what makes it so good. People helping people. Kind of like here.
If you want to get paid to do it, then you go work for someone that will pay you. simple as that.
there are those that believe there is something greater then just working for "I" and want to make a wave in the ocean.
That is what really burns so many people about MS though. Their utter greed when it comes to priceing.
Think about it. A copy of XP pro is $400, home is $300, Office Pro is $400 and Office STD is $250. The Upgrades are about $150. Now, if you multiply anyone by one hundred thousand, you have enough for all the programers saleries for a year. BUt we all know that MS sells millions of copies every year. So add that up and you are in the Billions and billions of dollors. not that it's bad to make tons of money, but some people see that much excess as a bad thing. some even see it as a sign that this company is out of line.
besides, unless you work for one of the companies that Distro an OPEN os/program, you aren't working for anyone. You do it cause you want to. That is what makes it so good. People helping people. Kind of like here.
If you want to get paid to do it, then you go work for someone that will pay you. simple as that.
there are those that believe there is something greater then just working for "I" and want to make a wave in the ocean.
That is what really burns so many people about MS though. Their utter greed when it comes to priceing.
Think about it. A copy of XP pro is $400, home is $300, Office Pro is $400 and Office STD is $250. The Upgrades are about $150. Now, if you multiply anyone by one hundred thousand, you have enough for all the programers saleries for a year. BUt we all know that MS sells millions of copies every year. So add that up and you are in the Billions and billions of dollors. not that it's bad to make tons of money, but some people see that much excess as a bad thing. some even see it as a sign that this company is out of line.
ShoobieRat
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,932
XP Home $186 ($96 for the upgrade)
XP Pro $279 ($189 for the upgrade)
That's not bad considering what the software is for, and the amount of stuff you get with it. Plus, your OS comes with the clout, backing, and support, of an industry leading global company...
XP Pro $279 ($189 for the upgrade)
That's not bad considering what the software is for, and the amount of stuff you get with it. Plus, your OS comes with the clout, backing, and support, of an industry leading global company...
vance43211
Banned
- Messages
- 422
Linux $129 for one
Family pack of 5 $199
you have to keep buying window xp over, over, again, and again
you didn't have that problem with win 98
he is going to make money regardless, why be greedy?
Family pack of 5 $199
you have to keep buying window xp over, over, again, and again
you didn't have that problem with win 98
he is going to make money regardless, why be greedy?
ShoobieRat
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,932
Adding numbers here:
Microsoft's employees (those that are actually employed by Microsoft, not those who work for Microsoft by contract which would be a number triple the Microsoft employee count) gather $2.5 billion dollars a year, at low-average, just in salaries. (Actually low-cap $2,475,000,000.00.)
That's just what it costs to pay their corporate permanent staff, for a year.
If that's all they cared about having to pay for, they would have to sell 16.5 million copies of the XP OS upgrade to cut even.
Then you start talking about all the contract employees (who get paid by Microsoft).
$
Then the cost of development.
$
Cost of marketing and design.
$
Cost of user testing, market testing, research.
$
Distribution and sales, licensing, piracy protection, legal support, legal actions, customer support and service...
$$$
Then the cost of building side groups for innovation testing and off-stream analysis and design.
$$
Seems like the costs keep adding up, and up.
Then someone comes along and says: "Hey, we should stop making people pay for our software, packaging, etc...and just run this whole company off of customer-support phone-call profits and...and...
Well lets see. The forums are free. The security patches are free. The user-knowledge-base is free. Wait, there's even a free customer-support phone-number!
Guess we could run this operation off of the hot-dogs we sell in the cafateria."
I suppose they could go back to when the Microsoft OS was able to be repeatedly loaded on multiple home machines with just one copy...I'll just load it on all my machines at work, my neighbors can have it, my relatives, the guy in the lobby, my gf's extended family...all for $199.
Microsoft's employees (those that are actually employed by Microsoft, not those who work for Microsoft by contract which would be a number triple the Microsoft employee count) gather $2.5 billion dollars a year, at low-average, just in salaries. (Actually low-cap $2,475,000,000.00.)
That's just what it costs to pay their corporate permanent staff, for a year.
If that's all they cared about having to pay for, they would have to sell 16.5 million copies of the XP OS upgrade to cut even.
Then you start talking about all the contract employees (who get paid by Microsoft).
$
Then the cost of development.
$
Cost of marketing and design.
$
Cost of user testing, market testing, research.
$
Distribution and sales, licensing, piracy protection, legal support, legal actions, customer support and service...
$$$
Then the cost of building side groups for innovation testing and off-stream analysis and design.
$$
Seems like the costs keep adding up, and up.
Then someone comes along and says: "Hey, we should stop making people pay for our software, packaging, etc...and just run this whole company off of customer-support phone-call profits and...and...
Well lets see. The forums are free. The security patches are free. The user-knowledge-base is free. Wait, there's even a free customer-support phone-number!
Guess we could run this operation off of the hot-dogs we sell in the cafateria."
I suppose they could go back to when the Microsoft OS was able to be repeatedly loaded on multiple home machines with just one copy...I'll just load it on all my machines at work, my neighbors can have it, my relatives, the guy in the lobby, my gf's extended family...all for $199.
vance43211
Banned
- Messages
- 422
how much money do bill gates have in his pocket?
ShoobieRat
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,932
The money he gets from his stocks, which is relational to the value of the stock, not the individual unit price.
And Bill Gates hasn't been receiving a paycheck from Microsoft for over 4 years.
And Bill Gates hasn't been receiving a paycheck from Microsoft for over 4 years.
- Status
