Microsoft's online gamble could be smart bet

Now, here's something I can agree with wholeheartedly. In fact, I had exactly the same reaction:

As I listened to financial analysts grumble about how Microsoft continues to pour its hard-earned software profits back into its online services effort, I couldn't help but think that maybe Microsoft is on to something.

Wouldn't newspaper industry analysts have had the same grumbles if the Gannetts and Knight Ridders of the world had poured a huge chunk of their profits into online ventures a decade ago at a time when their ad revenues were still enjoying healthy growth? And wouldn't they now say such a move, if well done, would have been brilliant?

If the biggest long-term threat to Windows and Office is free rivals and Web-based services, shouldn't Microsoft be using a significant fraction of its profits to develop its online advertising capacity?

Obviously, Microsoft needs to execute better on the Web. Pouring money into online ventures is only good if it produces returns. To date, Microsoft has not seen the kind of gains it will need to have to make it pay off. Some newspaper companies did, for example, build online job sites and auto sites and just weren't able to grab enough money to replace the ad dollars being lost. It's not enough to see the threat and try. To prove the grumblers wrong, Microsoft will have to do more than throw money online. It will have to win.

Bravo. Exactly.

Discuss this Article 64

DRWAM
on Jul 20, 2008
That's better and I agree. Last year, our IT head employee left to join a few others that contract businesses such as ours. Then the network guy left and joined them as he was unhappy that he also had to deal with hardware since there were very few network issues and one hardware man wasn't enough. We contract the new IT firm and convinced our remaining two people to work for the new IT firm. The result is that the cost increase was negligible [they now pay them benefits, 401K and stuff] and there is no longer gaps in coverage when an employee was on vacation. Also, more people in the firm provide even more knowledge. I really like the guys and hope that the make a boatload of money. They even provide more Mac support and our old IT head bought a MBP and uses VMware for Windows. You are also correct about the nickname as many call me Wambo. During my Fellowship in Nuclear Medicine, the techs bought me a coffee mug and a shirt with WAMBO on it. I kinda sucks to look like Rambo as people naturally think that I dumb, so I started wearing glasses instead of contacts. Even a guy at college. destined to become a partner in my group, admitted to it and was shocked at my CV. Lately, I was voted best in Nuclear Medicine in South Jersey Mag in the top docs issue 2 yrs ago. Mom was thrilled. Thanks again, Doc
DRWAM
on Jul 20, 2008
Oops, I forgot to mention. that although the business IT stuff has better control, our home PC support almost no longer exists. It doesn't require much anyway, but people remain timid about updates because of the IE7 stuff. Three docs were all call, only to find that IE7 was not compatible with the hospital's Centricity software since the hospital did not update it. They were forced to take a night of call at the hospital instead of from home. It's unfortunate that IE 7 worked at the updated offices, but they did not test it for home and the large IT dept at the hspital failed to warn anyone, until the 3 docs compared notes and started an email campaign. I am on the Physicians IT committee and another doc is actually on the IT dept committee, but it was made low priority. Then the IT head and second in command quit, making matters worse. That's when I brought it up at my committees monthly meeting to warn the staff that they may not be able to view their patients imaging studies from their office or home if they used IE 7 with XP or Vista. This got immediate attention but the rollout to the hundreds of computers did not work because of their iron firewall, which they refuse to turn off for even a second [HIPPA regs to the Nth degree]. The PACS adminstrator played with the add ons settings and found a solution. I actually found a better one, but SP1, and or other updates as you have stated looks like MS fixed GE's problem for us. Now I will pass the word that the best thing to do is update or upgrade to Vista SP1. These docs are only now learning the importance of backups and virus/malware protection, and two of us try to keep every one up and running, but 'Damn it Jim, I'm a doctor not a computer specialist'. I got many to switch to OneCare recently, and we have encourage to purchase newer, robust computers, but these people will buy fancy expensive cars, then a cheap PC. Go figure! Also, I converted useless taxable auto allowance to an expense account to buy our needed computer tools and software as well as CME, all with Pretax money. It's like a 40% discount. But you can lead a horse to water.....
Snakedoctor1
on Jul 20, 2008
Want some more speed Doc? http://www.thehotfix.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1059&... It is pretty nice to be honest.
DRWAM
on Jul 20, 2008
Actually, the images load rapidly, faster than I can interpret them. This Vista is install is on my 3GHz quad Mac Pro Tower, and using VMware! I never authenticated the install on my home made PC. It has a 3.4 GHz P4 overclocked to 3.51 Ghz. I installed Vista on a second HD, but could no longer boot the XP Pro volume. It tried a few utililities to fix the MBR, but they did not help. Finally I just reinstalled XP. The P4 is a Prescott and runs very hot. I needed to buy a good heatsink [Silent Tower] as the stock from Intel would overheat in my desk cubby, yielding the BSD. The temp was over 63 celsius. Anyway, I installed Vista with Bootcamp and then used VMware. Funny thing is that Bootcamp will not show the 4GBs of RAM, although it's a 32 bit install which I guess tops at 3GB. Bootcamp [Vista] sees only 2GB on a Pro Tower, but will see the entire 3GB in a MBP on a 32 bit install. What's up with that?
Snakedoctor1
on Jul 20, 2008
Presshot! Think green doc and dump that furnace. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121323 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115032 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148111 Common problem with Vista 32 bit. Most of the time its a issue with the chipset not being able to address, but it happens with new chipsets as well. Go 64bit Vista, and feel the pain of compatibility. http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=2434989&SiteID=17
johnpapola
on Jul 20, 2008
@RaaJ, "You could have chosen a better ally in your rage against the [Windows] machine than the most irreverant and blatant troll on this site." Hmmm.... I believe my post was the precise opposite of chosing Ocean as an "ally". I believe I was actually distancing myself from his tactics and inviting him to do less trolling. Not really sure how you came to the conclusion you made above. Again, I don't think this topic has anything to do with Apple and as such, see little reason for platform warfare in this thread. "In regards to your accusation quoted above, you yourself have mentioned that your business unit makes extensive of Macs for design and that you use Macs to be more productive. Isn't that the same basis for bias towards Mac as you accuse Mike of being biased because he earns his living from MS products?" Yep. That's dead on. The difference is I'm not the one in attack mode against all things Microsoft the way Mike or Waethorn are about Apple. My posture in these posts has always been one of defense against what I feel are wrong-headed attacks on my platform and fellow mac users by Paul and others here. Mike and Waethorn on the other hand go on what amounts to "Apple Sucks" tirades pretty regularly. I think Mike's new to the site, but he's already laced the Apple-related posts with amazingly blind platform zealotry and provably false mac-bashing. This is the quality of thinking and debate that Paul's hyperbole and link-baiting is drawing in. A pity.
Waethorn
on Jul 20, 2008
"Want some more speed Doc? www.thehotfix.net/index.php" I guess there's a reason why you're called "snakedoctor". Do you sell your own brand of medicinal oils? http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=2263 "Most of the time its a issue with the chipset not being able to address, but it happens with new chipsets as well." The 4GB cap has nothing to do with that actually - it is a limitation of 32-bit operating systems. PAE is also not used by default for compatibility issues with a lot of software. The 3.xGB limit is because PCI Express resources have to be addressed within the 4GB address space, so the top 7/8's (usually) of the top GB are used for that. The 2GB limit that you see on Mac's is due to a restriction imposed by the Mac's EFI running in BIOS mode. This is something that only affects certain Mac's but Apple hasn't released an EFI firmware update to address the issue (which it could - but won't bother to). "Go 64bit Vista, and feel the pain of compatibility." Pain? What pain? Funny you should point to a motherboard that carries the logo that identifies it as being fully Certified for Windows Vista. Without even knowing it, you've pointed to a motherboard that is fully 100% compatible with 64-bit flavours of Windows Vista (and runs at least as well as the 32-bit version). See, now that wasn't that hard now was it? (BTW: The DG33TL is the best G33 Intel board, but there are new G45 chipset boards now) "I'm not the one in attack mode against all things Microsoft the way Mike or Waethorn are about Apple. My posture in these posts has always been one of defense against what I feel are wrong-headed attacks on my platform and fellow mac users by Paul and others here." ....and to point out how much you hate Windows (on a pro-Windows site nonetheless) You sir, are a self-confessed Windows hater and a troll. Quit trying to pretend otherwise - we're all too smart for that. @DRWAM "I installed Vista on a second HD, but could no longer boot the XP Pro volume. It tried a few utililities to fix the MBR, but they did not help. Finally I just reinstalled XP." It's not the MBR that you need to fix. BCDEdit is the tool to use, and you use it from a Windows Vista Recovery Console (is included in the repair options when you boot off a Vista Setup DVD).
DRWAM
on Jul 20, 2008
That's where I went wrong. I did not use it from the Windows Vista Recovery Console, and it tusly, I guess did not work. Then I deleted Vista, then just had to reinstall XP. It needed aclean install anyway as I added a lot of promising looking apps in an attempt to see if any would create a CD of PET/CT and image fusion with multiplanar reconstruction, because I did not want to spend $20,000 [yep, twenty thousand] on MIMvista, which has nothing to do with Windows Vista at all, just a coincidence, pardon the pun. [PET works by 511 keV "coincidence"' gamma photons from an annihilation reaction of a 1.022 MeV positron with an electron. Which is an example of renormalization in quantum field theory— the field theory being necessary because the number of particles changes from one to two and back again] Here's a good link if your bored: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron_emission_tomography
Waethorn
on Jul 20, 2008
@DOC You can also sometimes use it from within Windows, but depending on the installation, it may lock those options while Windows is loaded. If your OEM installed WinRE (the Windows Recovery Environment - which is a bootable version of the Recovery Console), it's likely on a hidden partition, but pushing F8 during boot (which usually brings up Safe Mode options and the like) will give you an option to launch WinRE. It's the same as clicking "Repair your computer" from a Setup disc. BTW: BCDedit isn't exactly the easiest thing to use. Windows XP had a program called BootCfg, but Vista's is much more complicated. TechNet has full documentation on BCDedit though.
Snakedoctor1
on Jul 21, 2008
Yeah Wae...I pointed out that mobo because I knew it would run 64bit fine. There was a cheaper Intel board based on the 945chip set on newegg, but it cant fully address 4gig. Pain for 64bit. Not admitting that some applications did not work with Vista 64bit is crazy. Vista 64bit also requires signed drivers, it wont allow a non-signed driver like Vista 32bit. Doc works in a medical field, so I imagine there might be a piece of software and or hardware that is not yet Vista 64bit compatible. The 2008 thing was a joke kind of. I think its faster, but for one reason all the eye candy of Vista is off. If you turn that eye candy off in Vista it gets faster, or if you turn it on in 2008 it gets slower.
DRWAM
on Jul 21, 2008
Thanks, guys. Those volumes are no longer with us as they are in cyber heaven. I'm thinking about building again in the fall. Wae has me intersted in 64 bit this time. It makes sense as I love speed and have few peripherals and apps to load, so even if there was a compatibilty issue with some stuff, it wouldn't effect me.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jul 21, 2008
@Snakedoctor1 (And really for DrWam) Vista 64 bit does NOT require signed drivers anymore (SP1 change) although it is a VERY good idea not to turn that off unless you have a compelling reason. When WS2008 and Vista SP1 are configured with the same features they should perform identically since they're the same OS. As for things getting faster with the eye candy off, don't take that as a given. Since Aero used a GPU and Classic doesn't, in some cases Aero is actually faster. (The point being don't make assumptions - test instead)
johnpapola
on Jul 21, 2008
@Mike Honest question here, since I gather that you're a developer. Why does window resizing still cause horrible image tearing and have generally poor performance in Vista? I thought the WPF was supposed to be a ground-up new display engine. Whether it's Internet Explorer or Windows Media Player, the slick UI instantly breaks when resizing. In OSX, you generally don't see any tearing and now get excellent application resize performance. I believe this is a matter of double-buffering to prevent the tearing, but I'm not a coder. Given, Quartz is many many iterations more mature than Aero and at the beginning had serious performance trouble the machine of the time (2001)... but still, even OSX 10.0 didn't exhibit this tearing. Any thoughts?
mikegalos@msn.com
on Jul 21, 2008
@johnpapola Honest answer here. I've never had that problem in any of my computers. I'd suspect a problem with the video driver or bought some seriously crappy video hardware that's broken. Now, considering the supposed intent of an "honest question" I'll ignore the Mac Roolz d00d second paragraph as you just not being able to hold an entire post together.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use