| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
MS denies plans for WinXP 'Second Edition' | |
|
||
| Time: 10:25 EST/15:25 GMT | News Source: The Register | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Microsoft Corp's senior vice president of the Windows division, Brian Valentine, has denied suggestions that the company is readying a second release of its Windows XP desktop operating system. Following reports that Windows XP's replacement, codenamed Longhorn, had slipped to a 2005 release date, rumors have been growing that Microsoft is preparing a second edition of Windows XP for release in 2003. The speculation intensified this week with the leak of a new Windows desktop operating system build. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 321 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:53:15 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 9640 (195.92.168.164) at 11/21/2002 11:22:44 AM |
|
#1 Agree that Windows XP probably doesn't have major flaws, but if I was buying a new PC I'd rather have a new version of XP with service pack fixes built-in and latest versions of some of the applications e.g. Internet Explorer. Installing service packs and application updates can be time-consuming. I'm all in favour of a new XP as long as backwards compatibility in maintained.
http://lee.ic24.net/ |
| #2 By 9640 (195.92.168.164) at 11/21/2002 11:43:08 AM |
|
sphbecker - no need to repeat yourself! I heard the first time.
|
| #3 By 2960 (156.80.64.132) at 11/21/2002 1:46:27 PM |
|
As long as there are service packs released to fix problems, and roll up previous one's, I don't care if XP is here for 10 years.
In fact, I'd prefer it. But, given that we now know they enjoy an 85% profilt margin on Windows, I doubt doubt that will happen :) TL |
| #4 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 11/21/2002 2:29:51 PM |
|
and TechLarry, what do you think the profit margin is on an Apple setup?
I hate to tell you, but its just as high (likely higher) as a Windows desktop. |
| #5 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/21/2002 3:01:57 PM |
| A few headlines down, there is an article that says in general software has very high margins. This is true for Oracle, Symantec, etc. 70-80% is not uncommon. |
| #6 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 11/21/2002 4:30:41 PM |
| sphbecker, I brought up Apple because I know that TechLarry is somewhat of a fan. |
| #7 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/21/2002 5:52:25 PM |
| mooresa, I thought you brought them up because you like talking out of your @ss. Apple offers 8 for-fee software titles. Most of these are likely to have substantially lower margins than MS software. What do I base this on? Presume the average is between 70-80%. Then look at the titles Apple offers--most were formally sold by other companies at higher rates--Shake's price was cut in half when it was purchased, WO experienced the most drastic price cut, I think ever, in software history ($50,000+ to $700), smaller but similar cuts to DVD Studio Pro, FCP, Cinema Effects, etc... They have substantially more equitable licensing of client and server OSes than MS... And they provide a relatively full featured suite for 60 bucks... And they actually use a larger percent of their total revenue towards R&D than MS... So what was your point? You were being bitter about the price of a Mac because you want one or something, without realizing you were making a horrendously horrible point? Was that it? |
| #8 By 7390 (63.211.44.114) at 11/21/2002 7:09:03 PM |
|
#11 soda, clearly Apple is trying to increase market share by giving away free usefull stuff. But so is MS, I am sure that someone will give a list of all the pieces that have been added to windows for free.
what is their R&D contribution percentage? show us numbers. |
| #9 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/21/2002 8:09:17 PM |
| Red Hook, what is your point? The critique of MS's margins is that they could provide more... I'm not questioning providing more, I'm questioning the assertion that Apple has high software margins. What the hell does free software have to do with margins? OH, that's right, absolutely bubkiss! |
| #10 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/21/2002 8:24:16 PM |
| So, what are Apple's margins? |
| #11 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/21/2002 8:36:15 PM |
|
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-277407.html?legacy=cnet
I misspoke to say as a percentage of revenue, I meant for it to be % of value, revenue isn't necessarily fair--if there is no profit, obviously it won't be a substantial portion of revenue, but anyway... I didn't realize, based on market value that Apple took in such Revenue and MS took in such little. But still looking at that, it's still quite remarkable... One has to be aware that the actual profits of both companies are substantially different... so let's look at %s of all three numbers, or even better 4 numbers: revenue, market value, profit, and cash reserves. Apple spent 430 million in R&D in 2001 and it went up again this year. Seems like a small number? Well, thats on 5.4 billion revenue... on, let's say approximately, 8 billion market value, 4 billion in cash, and they lost 25 million, which is: just under 8% of Revenue, and is 5.3% of market value, 1720% more than they LOST, and 10.75% of cash reserves. Microsoft had 25.2 billion in Revenue, a market value of approx. 300 billion, 7.3 billion in earnings, and spent 4.8 Billion in R&D, and had 31.6 billion in reserves. That's 19% of Revenue, 1.6% of market value, 65.75% of earnings, and 15.1% of reserves. The most stable number of the 4 will always be market valuation--this is the clearest indicator: people think Apple is worth approx 8 bill and they spend approx .5 bill on R&D, Microsoft is perceived to be worth approx 300 bill and spends approx 5 bill on R&D. A 1/16th versus a 1/60th. So, see, I'm willing to present the truth in the numbers... How come whenever someone is ignorant they have me do the google searching, you lazy asses?) I was in some respects surprised by the numbers, but I forgot last year was a bad rev year for MS and that they are no longer spreading the cash around. The point is very clear however in the products that I mentioned above: almost all of Apple's paid apps were previously distributed by someone else for much higher prices... the margins have decreased. And that was the point. In addition to that original point, I think it's clear that both companies are nearly equal in R&D (last year producing some weird effects on th numbers, but by market value Apple spends nearly 4x more), and this is after much scaling back by Apple, and a recent push by Microsoft. |
| #12 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/21/2002 8:41:17 PM |
| Bob, I have no idea. Their margins on hardware float between 25 and 31%, but that says nothing of software. They don't break out software like this because it's not a huge part of their business. By the way, when you see things like Dell having product margins of 9%, everyone bitches about Apple, but Dell has 20% operating margins... Apple has nearly no operational margins, sometimes negative in fact, because they are a real developer and researcher. |
| #13 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/21/2002 11:37:09 PM |
| jerk, thanks for doing the research. Those are interesting numbers. |
| #14 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/22/2002 12:40:02 PM |
|
littleevil, that's a foolish supposition. Market valuation will generally be more stable than Revenue. Revenue can swing widely from quarter to quarter, and year to year. Last year MS had horrible revenue, but that didn't change the fact that they were a 300 billion dollar company. Just because market value is tied to what buyers will pay for stock doesn't make it an arbitary and fluctuating number--don't you think any flux in value is actually a result in flux in rev, cash flow, and other factors? Don't you know that one of the lessons of the bubble is that it's best and more manageable and more profitable to have a valuation that is actually true so you don't screw with your cash flow when the stock tanks? Boy, I'm the least free market capitalist on this site, but I would never say market value isn't relevent to establishing a business plan and budget? Is that what you are saying? Market valuation is exactly that. What do investors, creditors, banks, analysts, etc. think the company is worth.
This means a company has that equity to make expenditures and borrow money on. As I pointed out, Apple didn't make a profit at all last year--this didn't affect their R&D budget which they planned for at the beginning of the year and continued to make outlays for... Are you saying if a company has a bad quarter of revenue, they suspend R&D based on cash flow? No, you are an idiot if you think so... As far as I can see my numbers are pretty good... Finding this stuff at multiple sources in different forms may produce variation, but if you find an error point it out to me. If you think there is spin, show me where it is. I'll happily adjust for any errors that you may fine, wizard. Play with numbers? I took 4 of the most fundamental numbers necessary for evaluating a company's business fundamentals for two companies and compared them... You don't know much about finance or business, do you? This post was edited by sodajerk on Friday, November 22, 2002 at 13:10. |
| #15 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/22/2002 2:54:31 PM |
|
jerk, your numbers looked rather straight forward to me.
evil, if you take issue with jerk's numbers, what numbers would you prefer. Yes, I mean I'd like to see your equations and conclusions laid out just as jerk laid out his. |
| #16 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 11/22/2002 5:40:47 PM |
| littleevil, you'll never get your point across using logic and facts. These boards are ruled by name calling and spin. |
| #17 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/22/2002 9:02:58 PM |
| This comment has been removed due to a violation of the Active Network Terms of Use. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 321 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:53:15 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
