If a corporate customer is running their stuff in the cloud they don't care if people are using Chromebooks/MacBooks/Linux to develop the software with. They just care that you are using Azure. Ultimately they want you to do everything through a web browser (just like google), even some dev environments are going that way.
Outside of corporations when interacting with non-tech people, none of them use a laptop. It is phone or tablet. A laptop running Windows is a work machine. I wonder what the stats are for home usage of Windows vs other things and honestly I don't believe a lot people are using a laptop/desktop running Windows.
> It's not like they could not serve ads and shove CoPilot in your face, without making the UI so so sloppy and slow.
I have a stripped down Windows 11 on my second disk (I will be removing it at some point). The OS is reasonably fast. I've removed most of the telemetry and other rubbish like the web search on desktop. So I can only assume it is that. I don't really care though anymore. I am running Debian on pretty much everything except for the work machine which I don't own.
And sadly, the backbone of the majority of quality, paid software... if windows starts losing market share to Linux, things will start becoming interesting when the adobe's of the world start eying the Linux desktop as a platform where everyone already has applications that do what they were selling.
They can probably still sell software there. The problem is that too few people overall are using Linux.
Consider that this "Linus Poettering" turned out to be a Microsoft mole as the conspiracy theorists always maintained that he was. Some say RedHat as a whole was created by Microsoft.
Presumably people who never read the Halloween documents?
And Apple computers are incredibly affordable, rumored to get a budget laptop which will be even cheaper. Computers in general are dirt cheap, including Apple. And paid software is not expensive on Apple either. There are tons of quality pro software for $50 - $100 per license. And affordable subscription models of pro creative software for those who are just getting started.
The vast majority of people that don't work in IT don't ever use a laptop or a desktop computer unless it is for work. They are using a phone and/or tablet.
Ram price has sky rocketed, and probably out of hand of most of the people Same with GPU, HDD price is increasing, so is SSD.
How many people can build a new PC next year? And Amazon CEO just said it out loud about cloud computers.
Even though they'll take my PC out of my cold dead hands. But as it seems they want to get rid of Desktops.
> And Amazon CEO just said it out loud about cloud computers.
And Google said Stadia would have “negative latency”
Who said they cares about consumers? There's also GeForce Now.
Why does it matter, my 15 year old laptop is still working fine. And if it goes down, there is still the hardware produced in the remaining 14 years.
That isn't how you compare things. Server is separate from "Cloud" which is separate from Office 365 which is separate from Windows.
And Windows still makes them ~$28 billion a year, Azure makes then 3x that, but $28 billion is nothing to take for granted. It wouldn't matter if Azure made $150 billion/year, it doesn't make $28 billion look like pocket change.
I compared once segment of the business to others. Several other websites had various estimates on what percentage of the business Windows took up. Most of them said 6-10%, so I took 10%. Other websites group server and cloud, A rough guesstimate for a comment on a discussion thread is good enough. I was't aware I would need to go through the 10Q filings to satisfy you.
The point being communicated (even with your ridiculous nitpicks about the stats) is that Windows isn't a cash cow it once was. Microsoft Strategy is not Windows focused like it was under Ballmer.
> The fact is that Windows isn't the cash cow it used to be for Microsoft
My second to you:
> Windows isn't a cash cow it once was
You really need to learn how to read or all you are doing is arguing about semantics.
In the 1990s Windows brought in $1.2 billion. In the 2010s, it brought in about $14 billion. In 2022 it was $24.8 billion, and in 2024, it was $29.1 billion.
So your assumption that Windows is somehow "not the cash cow it once was" is false. It's bringing in more money than it ever did before.
Windows definitely is still very much a "cash cow" for Microsoft. And they can have more than one "cash cow", they can have as many as they want and it wouldn't make Windows any less of a "cash cow".
No. All you are doing is engaging in semantic wankery.
> So your assumption that Windows is somehow "not the cash cow it once was" is false. It's bringing in more money than it ever did before.
What don't you understand about being a smaller percentage of their business as a whole?
My entire point that it has gone from the basically a 30% (~2010) of the revenue to less than 10%. Therefore they are simply not going to care about it as much, because their strategy is basically to push as much as possible into the cloud.
Saying they make more money with that now, when the growth compared to other parts of the business is low is missing the point.
I'm not the one who first used the term "cash cow" here. It apparently doesn't mean what you think it means.
If you look up the definition, you will find this:
"a business, investment, or product that provides a steady income or profit."
>Therefore they are simply not going to care about it as much, because their strategy is basically to push as much as possible into the cloud.
Microsoft Windows still dominates the OS market. MacOS will never achieve anything close to Windows, never has, never will. Windows is Microsoft's bottom bitch, it's not going to be forgotten as you think it will.
Feel free to quit this conversation at any time.
Yeah it is. I never said it wasn't a cash cow. I said "it wasn't the cash cow it once was". I obviously meant relatively compared to other parts of Microsoft's business.
Considering you keep omitting that from what I said, I can only assume you are continuing to engage in bad faith.
> Next time you want to use a colloquialism, make sure you look it up first.
I understand what it means fine. I did use it correctly.
> Microsoft Windows still dominates the OS market.
On on laptops and desktops. The vast majority of people at home are using phones and tablets (outside of work usage). In that space Android dominates, then iOS and have done so for about a decade now.
> Feel free to quit this conversation at any time.
You are a clown.
And that is wrong. It's even better than the "cash cow" it used to be, I provided some values of what Windows brings in over the years, and it has grown and grown. You ignored that.
>I understand what it means fine. I did use it correctly.
You seriously do not.
>You are a clown.
You are reported.
No and I've never ignored it. As the revenue percentage decreases because it is growing slow. It will become less important.
Relatively it isn't as much of a cash cow, which I explained ad-nauseam to you.
> You seriously do not.
It is correct enough for all intents and purposes. You are quibbling over semantics. It is totally unnecessary and pedantic.
> You are reported.
I don't care. If you make arrogant little statements like that, expect that response.
Okay, Mr 6-day old account. I'm sure you'll just create another one when this one gets banned (again).
Your insistence that you are correct even in the face of evidence to the contrary tells me I'm done with this conversation, completely. Goodbye.
As time goes on Windows is going to be smaller piece of this pie and I suspect Microsoft will move it over to a subscription service or you will just have like 1000 ads shoved in your face. I made the move over to Linux last year and Windows will have to live in a VM.