I think John Dvorak is very much right when he says Microsoft should never have tried to have a browser. What do you think?
Edited by bwelford, 01 May 2006 - 05:06 PM.
Jump to content
Posted 25 April 2006 - 04:51 PM
Edited by EGOL, 25 April 2006 - 04:52 PM.
Posted 25 April 2006 - 06:03 PM
Posted 26 April 2006 - 01:29 AM
Posted 26 April 2006 - 03:16 AM
Edited by Juliette, 26 April 2006 - 03:18 AM.
Posted 26 April 2006 - 07:47 AM
Posted 26 April 2006 - 08:11 AM
Microsoft has never done that. Google has roughly done
Posted 26 April 2006 - 08:35 AM
Posted 26 April 2006 - 06:15 PM
He was saying that looking at the whole company the IE related business activities have been a sinkhole rather than a profit generator.
Certainly in terms of what all these skilled Microsoft people and resources might have been doing with their time, it's not clear that IE related activities have been incredible winners.
A much more praise-worthy goal is to be better in some sense. Ideally if you deliver the best value to your customers while delivering long-term shareholder value and being good corporate citizens, then that's something to be honored. I believe that requires some focusing of efforts. Microsoft has never done that. Google has roughly done that and will likely be the ultimate winner in the Internet world.
Posted 26 April 2006 - 07:06 PM
Posted 27 April 2006 - 12:39 AM
Posted 27 April 2006 - 08:41 AM
Posted 27 April 2006 - 09:21 AM
For whatever reasons, I think Microsoft is scrambling to catch up with Google and not doing as well as might be expected.
Posted 27 April 2006 - 09:58 AM
Posted 29 April 2006 - 11:16 AM
I rest my case.
The announcement yesterday that sent Microsoft shares sliding by 11% is an indication that the company no longer has confidence in its current business model. ..
Posted 29 April 2006 - 11:36 PM
I rest my case.
Posted 30 April 2006 - 08:50 AM
Whether Microsoft has strategic focus is not displayed on a twelve month time horizon but is measured on a 5 to 10 year time frame. We should revisit this thread 5 years out and see what it all looks like.
But Morgan Stanley analyst Mary Meeker downgraded the shares to "equal-weight" from "overweight."
"We are shaking our heads and asking the question, ‘if Microsoft can’t get operating leverage when it’s in its biggest product cycle ever (and customer interest is high), when can the company show leverage?'"
Posted 01 May 2006 - 10:20 AM
Edited by bwelford, 01 May 2006 - 10:24 AM.
Posted 09 May 2006 - 03:50 PM
Edited by bwelford, 13 May 2006 - 05:24 AM.
Posted 15 May 2006 - 01:41 PM
Posted 22 May 2006 - 06:53 PM
Posted 24 May 2006 - 12:00 AM
Posted 30 May 2006 - 12:54 PM
Posted 01 June 2006 - 07:42 AM
Posted 01 November 2006 - 09:26 AM
Posted 01 November 2006 - 10:25 AM
But they have both had a nice increase in stock price since May: 21-26%! You don't see many companies like that ... that increase is scary! Have they both really gained that much in value?
... they're both floundering a bit ...
Posted 30 April 2007 - 11:37 AM
Posted 30 April 2007 - 02:53 PM
Posted 03 May 2007 - 09:49 AM
I think you Googlephiles are being a little hard on yourselves.
So the majority was right and some of us Googlephiles were completely wrong.
Posted 03 May 2007 - 01:22 PM
Posted 03 May 2007 - 03:42 PM
What, you're not using Google Calendar? And I am! My, talk about role reversals!
Aw shucks, Frank. It was nothing. I just use a very useful program from Microsoft called Outlook.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users