Microsoft cuts jobs

kevinmcm

http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/0122/microsoft.html

This could have repercussions for Ireland no question!

blast05

Well if you consider 17 out of 1700 employees that are being let go in Ireland as repercussions then fair enough ......

Fat_Fingers

Company i work reduced stuff numbers by 180 in Ireland but you wont find it in the news. Journalists pick and chose what they think is interesting news. There are so many redundancies that reporting on it has to be only on recognized brand names,likes of Dell and Microsoft or the once with strong union. Friend of mine was let go from another American company but their brand is not recognized name so you will not hear about 160 jobs gone.

silverharp

Microsoft as a company is probably past its peak. Why buy Microsoft Office when you can download free products like open office. Its not going out of business anytime soon but they wont be the force they were in 10 or 15 years time.

cat&mouse

silverharp wrote: »

Microsoft as a company is probably past its peak. Why buy Microsoft Office when you can download free products like open office. Its not going out of business anytime soon but they wont be the force they were in 10 or 15 years time.

Interesting......

thebman

cat&mouse wrote: »

Interesting......

You think that is interesting, check out Ubuntu or even more interesting in the long term assuming it isn't shut down:
http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

CaraFawn

The 5000 job cut is actually an immediate action to save 1.5 billion USD in wages.
Microsoft has over 20 billions in cash reserves, but they made the choice not to use it and save 1.5 billion right away.

It is already known Microsoft will cut even more jobs probably after their end of year, July 2009.
A few months back they wanted to reinjecte capital to themselves because they knew it was going to happend and wanted to limit the risk of a serious share drop. It has not really worked out though...

nesf

silverharp wrote: »

Why buy Microsoft Office when you can download free products like open office.

Because if the rest of the world uses Microsoft Office there's a problem if you're using a piece of software that doesn't flawlessly integrate with it. Open Office is getting better every revision, but it's still not there for every use that people have dreamed up for Excel etc. Plus Impress is no substitute for a world using Powerpoint.

Open Office is a genuine alternative for some users but for businesses and/or people who need to be able to flawlessly open certain Microsoft formats for a living, then it might not be a safe bet yet so long as the majority of other users use Microsoft Office and not Open Office.

silverharp

nesf wrote: »

Because if the rest of the world uses Microsoft Office there's a problem if you're using a piece of software that doesn't flawlessly integrate with it. Open Office is getting better every revision, but it's still not there for every use that people have dreamed up for Excel etc. Plus Impress is no substitute for a world using Powerpoint.

Open Office is a genuine alternative for some users but for businesses and/or people who need to be able to flawlessly open certain Microsoft formats for a living, then it might not be a safe bet yet so long as the majority of other users use Microsoft Office and not Open Office.

Your right, I have overstated the case in the short term, inertia is a powerful force here, but give it 10 or 15 years and I wonder where microsoft will be. There are software models developing where up to 98% of the users get them for free and the company makes money on the other 2%. If we get to the place where software becomes essentially free for many users the Microsoft ediface will be vunerable.

Offalycool

I agree. I think Microsoft as a business model is under long-term threat. With the proliferation of software piracy and virus attacks the cost effectiveness of client side software is increasingly unattractive to its customer base. Russia recently announced it is to create its own operating system because of security and financial reasons. China has already proceeded to develop its own system. I think there will always be a place for client side software but it will be increasingly networked with server side data and applications. The secure operating system of the future will be a network that will by accessed by a very thin client like the internet browser, which will probably be free. Sensitive data will have to be stored in walled servers, but more consumer based use will resemble something like face book, with applications built into the server side of the system. If Microsoft is to compete with the likes of Google it will have to drasticly alter its business plan and I can foresee a lot of resistance in its existing customer base; why should people pay for something they get free from Google?

bk

FYI, Russia and China aren't doing anything particularly interesting, they are simply creating their own distributions of Linux with some optimisations for their own market.

The advantage being that Linux being open source, they can examine every line of code and compile it themselves, thus making sure nothing is being sent to the NSA, CIA, etc.

From what I have heard, most of the lay offs at MS have been at under performing areas like Zune development, etc.

So MS are just doing what most big companies do, using the recession as cover to lay off people from under performing areas of their business.

Offalycool

That's true, my post is a little of topic, but I was thinking of the long term implications for the operating system as we know it. I don't think this is going to be a real threat to Microsoft tomorrow, or even in five years, but I think it will happen. For one thing the infrastructure does not exist yet. However I speculate the customer of the future will be attracted by a cheep computer hardware, that offers a stable and broad software base with a price that will be irresistible. Also, the software manufactures can provide their software to the customer with low distribution cost, and curtail piracy by retaining the data on the server side of the system. You buy the PC for the word processor etc, and buy the right to play the video game for a cheep price. You don't have to buy expensive hardware to play the game because the the processing power is mostly done by the server, not the client. Same for moves etc. Monopolization could be a danger, but perhaps we will be able to phone into different systems depending on what appeals to us.

leninbenjamin

Offalycool wrote: »

That's true, my post is a little of topic, but I was thinking of the long term implications for the operating system as we know it. I don't think this is going to be a real threat to Microsoft tomorrow, or even in five years, but I think it will happen. For one thing the infrastructure does not exist yet. However I speculate the customer of the future will be attracted by a cheep computer hardware, that offers a stable and broad software base with a price that will be irresistible. Also, the software manufactures can provide their software to the customer with low distribution cost, and curtail piracy by retaining the data on the server side of the system. You buy the PC for the word processor etc, and buy the right to play the video game for a cheep price. You don't have to buy expensive hardware to play the game because the the processing power is mostly done by the server, not the client. Same for moves etc. Monopolization could be a danger, but perhaps we will be able to phone into different systems depending on what appeals to us.

you're already seeing this to a degree: netbooks.

Offalycool

leninbenjamin wrote: »

you're already seeing this to a degree: netbooks.

I don't entirely agree with this, Microsoft still have a firm -ish grip, but linux is fighting the good fight. I think where we are seeing it now is in mobile phones, they are in almost constant communication with the web. The G-Phone from Google is a strong indicator to the future.

thebman

Offalycool wrote: »

I don't entirely agree with this, Microsoft still have a firm -ish grip, but linux is fighting the good fight. I think where we are seeing it now is in mobile phones, they are in almost constant communication with the web. The G-Phone from Google is a strong indicator to the future.

I think Linux is mostly driving piracy of XP onto netbooks and is being used to keep the selling price low.

I could be wrong though, I have no evidence.

I agree the OS is falling from its important standing but I don't think Ms will disappear.

They will have a net family to rival Google's and Live services is already developing. I think they are behing and it is too image heavy at the moment but we are definitely heading in this direction and there will have to compete with each other which can only be good for business and consumers.

I think the OS will stay play a role in the home market especially for gaming and of course, servers don't run on air (although may will be running Linux).

leninbenjamin

Offalycool wrote: »

I don't entirely agree with this, Microsoft still have a firm -ish grip, but linux is fighting the good fight. I think where we are seeing it now is in mobile phones, they are in almost constant communication with the web. The G-Phone from Google is a strong indicator to the future.

well the thin client revolution you're describing has been on the cards for years now and has never fully come to fruition. netbooks are the most viable compromise, i.e. simply using outdated fat client technology for primarily thin client applications, but still keeping the capacity to operate independently of any master server to overcome areas of privacy and operate in areas of limited bandwidth.

Offalycool

True enough, I can be a sucker for science fiction. Still client side software is vulnerable to piracy and virus manipulation, and probably always will be.

leninbenjamin

Offalycool wrote: »

True enough, I can be a sucker for science fiction. Still client side software is vulnerable to piracy and virus manipulation, and probably always will be.

software is vulnerable to piracy and virus manipulation. but at least fat clients mean you can keep certain information offline at all times.

Tony Broke

CaraFawn wrote: »

The 5000 job cut is actually an immediate action to save 1.5 billion USD in wages.
Microsoft has over 20 billions in cash reserves, but they made the choice not to use it and save 1.5 billion right away.

It is already known Microsoft will cut even more jobs probably after their end of year, July 2009.
A few months back they wanted to reinjecte capital to themselves because they knew it was going to happend and wanted to limit the risk of a serious share drop. It has not really worked out though...

I dont get Bill, he gives billions upon billions to charities and treats his workers like this :rolleyes:

I know he's not around as much as he used to, but I still think its bad form.

thebman

Tony Broke wrote: »

I dont get Bill, he gives billions upon billions to charities and treats his workers like this :rolleyes:

I know he's not around as much as he used to, but I still think its bad form.

Steve Ballmer is in charge now isn't he?

ajc100

bk wrote: »

So MS are just doing what most big companies do, using the recession as cover to lay off people from under performing areas of their business.

This is too true, and in Ireland most people associated with Microsoft are working in an out sourced capacity. Doing jobs that Full Time Microsoft staff used to do before they were let go in the past

The very fact that these people are being let go now, considering Microsoft's past, Would indicate that this work will also be out sourced, maybe here.

One mans fall is another's rise, if you know what i mean...

pwd

Yeah windows azure and silverlight will be the next big thing. Microsoft haven't peaked they have very definite direction and the resources to attain strong market share in emergent areas

thebman

pwd wrote: »

Yeah windows azure and silverlight will be the next big thing. Microsoft haven't peaked they have very definite direction and the resources to attain strong market share in emergent areas

Silverlight hasn't made it onto any mainstream website and I don't really see it taking over from Flash/Shockwave.

I know it has a lot of potential and is very powerful but it is at the end of the day, just another plugin and there are already enough of them out there.

They can't package it with IE because they'll be dragged to court for it.

I could have sworn this was the economics forum....

any chance of some economics being discussed lads? There is a lot of scope for dicussion about Mircrosoft v Opensource.

Somewhat on this topic, does anyone have any figures from iTunes? It would be interesting to see how its music sales service is going.

pwd

thebman wrote: »

Silverlight hasn't made it onto any mainstream website and I don't really see it taking over from Flash/Shockwave.

I know it has a lot of potential and is very powerful but it is at the end of the day, just another plugin and there are already enough of them out there.

They can't package it with IE because they'll be dragged to court for it.

aside from microsoft websites, the following websites either have silverlight content, or are currently developing it:

beijing olympics website
Yahoo! Japan (main Japanese internet portal)
tencent (main Chinese internet portal)
AOL
Toyota
Blockbuster
Madison Square Garden
Hard Rock Cafe
(not a complete list of course)

They don't need to package it with ie. They offer a free streaming service and digital rights management features, which is making it a very popular for video content online, and that alone will get it installed on most computers. Apparently it is already installed on 50%.

Time Magazine

Tony Broke wrote: »

I dont get Bill, he gives billions upon billions to charities and treats his workers like this :rolleyes:

I know he's not around as much as he used to, but I still think its bad form.

Saving billions from Microsoft allows billions to be spent fighting Malaria. Which do you think would have a bigger impact on the world?

Deleted User wrote:

Somewhat on this topic, does anyone have any figures from iTunes? It would be interesting to see how its music sales service is going.

That's not about Microsoft job cuts or software network effects either

bk

pwd wrote: »

aside from microsoft websites, the following websites either have silverlight content, or are currently developing it:

beijing olympics website
Yahoo! Japan (main Japanese internet portal)
tencent (main Chinese internet portal)
AOL
Toyota
Blockbuster
Madison Square Garden
Hard Rock Cafe
(not a complete list of course)

I hope it isn't a complete list as it is a short list of relatively unimportant sites.

Flash is on youtube and literally millions of other sites, it is pretty much on 100% of PC's including Mac's, Linux and Solaris and it is now coming to the iPhone, Palm Pre and most mobile devices and it is now being built into HDTV's this year.

Silverlight is too little, too late IMO.

Deleted User wrote:

Somewhat on this topic, does anyone have any figures from iTunes? It would be interesting to see how its music sales service is going.

Well it is now the number 1 music retailer in the US, and not just digital retailer, but all music including physical (Walmart being number 2).

However Amazon could give them a run for their money with their excellent cheap, DRM free, high quality MP3 store.

bk

bk wrote: »

Well it is now the number 1 music retailer in the US, and not just digital retailer, but all music including physical (Walmart being number 2).

However Amazon could give them a run for their money with their excellent cheap, DRM free, high quality MP3 store.

Apple are DRM free as well now though? I was wondering had there been any immediate impact on their sales.

thebman

Deleted User wrote: »

Apple are DRM free as well now though? I was wondering had there been any immediate impact on their sales.

I doubt it TBH. You need to have iTunes to access their store so most of those people are iPod users and were probably already using the store. It may convert the last few people that sourced music elsewhere but if your source was torrent then DRM free over just free isn't going to be a great incentive despite what these very people will have been saying for a while about their reasons for not purchasing music online.

bk

thebman wrote: »

I doubt it TBH. You need to have iTunes to access their store so most of those people are iPod users and were probably already using the store. It may convert the last few people that sourced music elsewhere but if your source was torrent then DRM free over just free isn't going to be a great incentive despite what these very people will have been saying for a while about their reasons for not purchasing music online.

I look at it from a slightly different angle, since going DRM free, no more piracy is happening, then was happening before and no less tracks are sold then were sold before (and probably more), but must importantly, those people who are doing the morally correct thing of purchasing music are now no longer being punished * for their honest choice.

* As in being restricted in what they can do with their legally purchased items, while those who illegally downloaded music had no restrictions.

pwd

bk wrote: »

I hope it isn't a complete list as it is a short list of relatively unimportant sites.

Flash is on youtube and literally millions of other sites, it is pretty much on 100% of PC's including Mac's, Linux and Solaris and it is now coming to the iPhone, Palm Pre and most mobile devices and it is now being built into HDTV's this year.

Silverlight is too little, too late IMO.



Well it is now the number 1 music retailer in the US, and not just digital retailer, but all music including physical (Walmart being number 2).

However Amazon could give them a run for their money with their excellent cheap, DRM free, high quality MP3 store.

The main internet portals in Japan and China are relatively unimportant sites!?

Silverlight is also being put on phones. Silverlight 3 is in the pipeline already and should have more features to make it a better choice than flash for most contexts. The general consensus of people who have used both Flash and Silverlight is that Silverlight is better for development and Flash is better for design at the moment.

Obviously its penetration at the moment doesn't compare to Flash, but it would be unrealistic to think it would by this stage. Silverlight 1 was nothing special, and Silverlight 2 was only released recently. It remains to be seen if it will become established - but Microsoft have a proven record when it comes to breaking into markets, and are able to put more weight behind new products than other companies can. They play the long game in this regard, they focus on getting students to use their tools by running competitions and offering free software to them, and they are able to push products at a loss in order to gain market share. My opinion is that Silverlight will become established - it certainly won't wipe out flash in the foreseeable future, but I think it will replace it as the tool of choice for some types of projects. They are different tools, and personally I'd like to see them become more different - more specialised and less generic if you know what I mean.

One market I think will open up a lot more soon is selling movies etc over the internet, both via streaming and download. Google spending ten figures to get youtube makes sense if that is correct, since they'll be very well positioned to exploit that market. Silverlight is being developed to be a superior tool to Flash for this.

thebman

bk wrote: »

I look at it from a slightly different angle, since going DRM free, no more piracy is happening, then was happening before and no less tracks are sold then were sold before (and probably more), but must importantly, those people who are doing the morally correct thing of purchasing music are now no longer being punished * for their honest choice.

* As in being restricted in what they can do with their legally purchased items, while those who illegally downloaded music had no restrictions.

That's true I guess. Now if we can only movie discs (be they DVD/Bluray/whatever) to remove the anti-piracy warning at the start, we'd be sorted!

:P

bk

pwd wrote: »

Silverlight is also being put on phones.

Yes, relatively unpopular MS Windows Mobile devices. It definitely won't appear on the iPhone and is unlikely to appear on the Palm Pre or Rim devices, all companies who hate MS.

Given this, you would be very foolish in developing for Silverlight over flash if you want your app to work on mobile devices. This is important as smartphones will likely outnumber PC's in time.

pwd wrote: »

The general consensus of people who have used both Flash and Silverlight is that Silverlight is better for development and Flash is better for design at the moment.

Hardly surprising given their pedigree, MS a developer company, Adobe a designer company. However having said that the developer tools for the latest versions of AIR and Flex are excellent and easy to use for a developer.

Also many developers won't like being locked into a Windows/.net/Silverlight development environment and more importantly deployment environment. IME most developers nowadays prefer Macs or Linux as their development environment of choice.

pwd wrote: »

It remains to be seen if it will become established - but Microsoft have a proven record when it comes to breaking into markets, and are able to put more weight behind new products than other companies can. They play the long game in this regard,

Er, what market would that be, MS has a dismissal record in breaking into new markets.

- Windows Server versus Linux.
- Xbox versus PS2
- Xbox 360 versus Wii
- Zune versus iPod
- Windows mobile versus iPhone, RIM, etc.
- Hotmail versus gmail
- MSN versus google
- Windows Media Player versus itunes
- Windows Play For Sure and Zune store versus itunes store
- WMA versus Mp3 and AAC
- HD-DVD (a very much MS developed and backed format) destroyed by Blu-Ray

Need I go on?

And MS's only success with muscling into a new market in the past 10 years, IE, is now having its market share eaten by Firefox.

Frankly MS's attempts to enter new markets has been embarrassing over the past 10 years, I'll be shocked if Silverlight is any different.

pwd wrote: »

Silverlight is being developed to be a superior tool to Flash for this.

I'm afraid more MS marketing rubbish, both the latest version of Silverlight and Flash support the same MPEG4 H.264/AAC standard *, so no difference in video streaming quality and performance.

* Interestingly, video codecs being yet another market MS failed to break into and dominate, with H.264 becoming the dominate codec over MS's VC-1 codec.