Coffeehouse Thread

32 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Microsoft in future.

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image

    Microsoft in future.
    In 2030 microsoft ish't globe corp if ...
    we select Linux.
    We don't uderstand new charman
    In Microsoft personal are not to by speck of Bill Gates.
    The world crash! Bum!
    Iraq Win WAR.

  • User profile image
    Gill Bates

    Is that haiku?

  • User profile image
    Jiří Macich ml

    LOL Smiley

  • User profile image

    I think NO

  • User profile image

    Microsoft as we know it won't exist at all. The company would have broken up and dumped its OS division to focus more on the development of Office and its gaming exploits. It will still be producing development tools but for other platforms, they will be competing heavily with open-source versions of the same.
    They will also have multiple lawsuits against others for using their alleged intellectual property, in an attempt to get out of the red zone.

    Bill Gates will be working for Linus Torvald as Mr. Torvald's personal butler...

  • User profile image

    A piece on Slashdot today about an article by Robert Cringely "The Once and Future King: Now the Only Way Microsoft Can Die is By Suicide".

    I know he is trying to say that this is a bad thing.

    Still, I prefer putting my money on the winning horse.

  • User profile image

    My respect for Microsoft has come from the simple fact that they've provided the many with a way to use computers. I like productivity software. It is about getting a job done without over-complicating the whole process so we can turn the box off quicker, and go for a drink Smiley

    Linux, UNIX etc. were created for different reasons. They're fine products for what they do, and if I could do something on Linux in a cleaner, easier way than I could on Windows, then why wouldn't I use it? It seems zealots, like the many I've read comments from on Slashdot and the like only cut themselves off from possible solutions, which helps no-one in the long run.

    Its all just 1s and 0s after all Smiley

  • User profile image

    Though I doubt MSFT will ever completely disappear, it does face serious threats such as Linux. Let's take a lesson from Airbus on how it unseated Boeing as top dog in aircraft sales. It was founded by a European consortium of French, German and later, Spanish and U.K companies. They were hell-bent on creating another viable option other than Boeing, and they did it. Now, an Asian consortium consisting of Japan, South Korea, and China have come together to compete with Microsoft to create what is presently known as Asian Linux. I would NOT underestimate the resources, skill, and will of these countries.

  • User profile image

    Microsoft will rule the future.

    Every livingroom will have a Media Center PC hooked via wi-fi to the LCD tvs. People will use PC wallpaper as art.

    Kids will have portible media center handhelds for video and music.

    Longhorn will start it all, for those who doubt the future try Media Center 2004 on a real Media Center PC hooked to a Big LCD tv for a month... You wont want to go back.

    Take it from me I have been using the 2004 Media Center and the entire family is very happy doesn't want to ever go back.

    The Future is everything Microsoft.

  • User profile image

    Japan_Germany has a point. In Germany Microsoft isn't King just a very strong contender. Just ask Munchen Met Council, they have 10,000 Linux desktops.

    But do you know why? People realising a better product? So yes, most no. It's all about Money my friend.

    Airbus are taking Boeings market because it's cheaper than Boeing.

    Linux has market share because of how much it doesn't cost.

    People will move or stay on a platform for two top reasons.

    1) Easy. ie easy to use (those two big watch words that sell big, 'friendly' and 'familiar') and easy to learn
    2) Cost

    If Linux was easer to use, and easier to convert to and cost next to nothing to migrate, then the whole world would have done it by now. Believe me the world moves fast when something better is around. But it hasn't!

    Why, because Linux isn't as easy to use and it does cost money in the bigger picture.

    Asia may produce a great version of Linux and so may Germany and I'm sure they will be popular. But that doesn't mean it will sell well in UK or the USA.

    So Microsoft ... stay frostie if you wish to continue to enjoy being top of the pile, and people like MiamiJJs and myself will continue to ride the wave just behind.

  • User profile image

    Linux will only have a chance if:

    1. It becoames as easy as windows
    2. Public awareness raises
    3. It will play nice with more hardware (win-modems etc.)

  • User profile image

    Miamijjs, wake up and smell the coffee. Your statement that “The future is everything Microsoft” only goes to show you are naïve. You drank more than your fair share of the MSFT Kool-Aid, my friend. Your optimism is wonderful, but it needs to be tempered with a strong dose of reality, common sense, and lessons from history. To ignore or underestimate viable threats is deadly, or worse, being in denial about them. I can only thank god you are not a military leader for you would get your troops obliterated. Perhaps you might win a battle, but you would not win the war.


    Would you agree that history has shown great nations and businesses can and have failed? Short-term, yes, MSFT will continue to be successful, and pervasive with its technology and not just in the OS realm. However, NO company is exempt from the possibility of failure or losing a leading position in the market.


    I agree, the uptake of Linux will greatly depend on it evolving into a better product. However, you seem to assume it will not. You under estimate the open source community and the recently formed consortium powerful countries that have pooled their massive resources to compete with MSFT. If you believe a $50 billion war chest and Almighty Bill are enough to ensure long-term success, think again. That kind of money is chump change to these countries and they have armies of low-cost, highly skilled technology workers to throw at this. It would be utterly naïve to dismiss this, and the threats from other angles.


    Do I believe MSFT will go the way of Wang or Netscape? Certainly not, but I disagree with the ludicrous notion that “The future is everything Microsoft.” As mentioned previously, even a market leading behemoth like Boeing succumbed to being dethroned.

  • User profile image

    Sabot, I must say, I enjoy reading your balanced posts. Unlike others who swing the pendulum too far in one direction or the other.

    As a sidebar, I just read your profile and wanted to congratulate you on your upcoming wedding. All the best, my friend.

  • User profile image

    History has shown that giants will fall if they do not evolove.
    From a market perspective, the corporate R&D budgets givs you an indication of the current stakeholders. To my recolection, Microsoft uses about 6.8 billon $ in research for 2004 alone. When nearly all companies reduse their r&d investments, Microsoft increases it.
    There is however 2 threats to Microsoft.  
    1.Recently Dave Winer, a Berkman Fellow at the Harvard Law School, had a seminar for the Microsoft Research group called "

    Weblogs and how we can work together"

    He told that ms employees are not used to competition and that could cripple the company.

    2. Politics..Protecting the free market system from anti-competitive legislation championed by companies that want to use Washington to limit the power and effectiveness of their competitors. Both the EU and US government are keeping an eye on microsoft. And especially the .net wave and longhorn technology can be a target.

  • User profile image

    Welll....It depends on how far into the future. Microsoft has a long way to go before it ever figures out Nanotechnology. If anything, this is and will be the Microsoft-killer unless they "evolve" to figure it out.

    The problem with software and politicians is the same as the problem with nuclear power plants and politicians. Politicians can't and won't ever understand how software works or even why it works. Free markets is actually an ideal place for software to be written. No one is actually stopping anyone from creating the next great OS or software application. Plenty of anti-Microsoft people are actually trying (hey, Sun is trying to conquer the Wal-Mart space now). The thing is, people will buy what they like. Sometimes, Governments don't like that and that's when they try to stifle innovation and cram Government-sanctioned software down our throats. It was silly of AOL, IBM, Sun, Netscape and other Microsoft-bashers to even try to ask the Government to go after Microsoft in the first place. By doing so, they opened up a rather gnarly can of worms that I don't think will ever be closed in the forseeable future. Governments do a rather bad job of writing software (see IRS, Department of Interior and almost any agency (except America's Army, hoorah!) for an example).

    By restricting the type of software that can be integrated together, it creates problems for future software innovations that will be required to make Nanosoftware work. Nanosoftware will necessitate an integration of a variety of technologies both biological and virtual in nature. I'd hate to see Nanotechnology, or any other innovation required to make software easier to use, stifled because of some lame regulation introduced by a politician that will never understand software in the first place.

    Software shares so many similarities to art. And the Government definately doesn't understand that, see NEA for examples. Software requires creativity, freedom of expression, innovation and a lot of heart sometimes to create. It will be even more so with Nanosoftware.

    Microsoft definately keeps an eye out for competition and they are very good about recognizing a weakness about themselves and changing that. The only question that remains is whether or not they will continue to do so after Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer retires. They have yet to set into place a long term management team that will successfully continue the proper management company.

    Here's to the future of Microsoft.

  • User profile image

    Microsoft-killer ... Microsoft will been Nanotechnology softwere leader... Mindragon you see a future...

    Here's to the future of Microsoft.

  • User profile image

    V4us wrote:

    Microsoft-killer ... Microsoft will been Nanotechnology softwere leader... Mindragon you see a future...

    Here's to the future of Microsoft.

    Seriously mate, you're beginning to sound like a broken record-Matrix oracle-haiku poet. I know you're having problems expressing yourself, but please try and make your posts a little more understandable.

  • User profile image

    give him a breake will you. This is not an engelish class nore a place for bulliing peole who does not use engelish as their native tounge.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.