I don't think you have provided a persuasive argument (or any argument actually) for the contention that Microsoft's performance has a relation to the performance of a pharmaceutical company.
Drug development is hit-or-miss like software development. But that's about it.
Unlike drug development, software development often involves creating and maintaining a platform that will give you profits for years to come - or failing miserably and spectacularly. Microsoft's recent performance has been beyond abysmal and they've only only survived on the profits from their previous successes at building a platform - many people are still forced to use Windows. But everyone is looking around and the prospects look, uh, dim.
Sure, Microsoft doesn't live quarter to quarter. Which is why it's death is not yet finished but that's about it.
They made more money in the last 3 months than any tech company on earth save for Apple and you're writing as though they are an almost dead, twitching patient in a hospice.
For a group of smart people who at least consider themselves open-minded and objective, an astonishing amount of stupidly closed-minded things are said about Microsoft.
completely agree. My question to everybody who's out there with their knives and fork is this, so microsoft's surface tablets lost a lot of money and did not sell , you think companies like microsoft and google should quit trying to compete with apple for gaining tablet market share ? I believe the next iteration would fare much better and win 8.1 or maybe even win 9 could be when we begin to see microsoft gaining market share in mobile device sales.
No other platform is even remotely ready for corporate environment. Not by a long shot. The billions invested in Windows software by every company on the planet means incredible vendor lock and the momentum required to move past that is so immense that is just not possible.
Any possibility of their "death" is ridiculous. This is just a slight bump in the road for them, they'll shift strategy and lather, rinse, repeat.
MS is in fine shape for a decade or two to come, if not more. But an MS that's still based on Office in 2030 will be irrelevant, no matter how profitable. And they can't milk that forever.
17 years is such a distant time in the future as to be meaningless for short-term tech prognostication.
17 years is indeed a distant time. But Microsoft's business 17 years ago was basically the same as it was today. Microsoft in 1996 was built around Office just like it is now. Meanwhile Apple's core business has changed two or three times in that same period.
MS has been stuck with the same major product for decades, and they show no signs of that changing.
The Kin's desktop software was widely praised by reviewers as a great way to organize things. But when the pricing put it in iPhone range instead of feature phone range, it had no chance.
Surface RT I don't consider competitive. But the Pro is the reference device for Windows 8 and nobody was doing it as well when I looked. They should have a market position there at least.
I think Windows 8 is a bit misguided in design - it's a step backwards not being able to resize apps on a laptop resolution screen, but using it as traditional windows works fine.
Merck had nearly $7 billion in operating losses last year on $48 billion in revenue. Microsoft had $22 billion in net revenue on $78 billion in income. The write down affected profits by less than 5%.
Surface is a research project - like Kin before it. Microsoft put several million Windows RT devices in the field in less than nine months. They will probably put another several million in the field in the next few.
That's a lot of stinking data, a lot cheaper than clinical development of a new new drug, and almost certain to be repaid over the long term because they've got Windows running on ARM and while there's the normal calls for Ballmer - Microsoft's second largest stockholder after his college buddy Gates - to fire himself, there are not widespread reports of technical failure from the field. On top of all that, every device they sell recoups part of their sunk cost in R&D.
Microsoft built a reference device for a new operating system. They have collected data to help their hardware partners develop more devices. They have collected data upon which to build a roadmap for Windows on ARM. Microsoft does not live and die quarter to quarter with Wall Street because the founder and first Business Manager still hold enough stock to call the shots.
They also realized well over a billion dollars of wealth apiece last year from Microsoft's operations. Both the numbers and the standard journalistic refrain that Microsoft is failing are pretty much the same as last year and the year before etc. It's just another news cycle.