Microsoft notches record profits, thanks Vista

Don't act surprised: record profits are the expected benefits of selling 20 million copies of a much-delayed operating system, but we must say that increasing one's net income 65-percent year-over-year to a staggering $4.93 billion is worth congratulating. Sure, the newfangled system has suffered (and still is) its share of troubles in the early goings, but with those kind of profits coming in, we're sure all of Redmond will be treated to a 12-pack of their favorite soft drink in celebration. Looking forward, Microsoft also noted that next quarter's performance should be just as impressive, and since it's pulling in all this dough of late, why not extend that $3 software bundle to us low-on-cash Americans, alright?

[John Miller @ Apr 27th 2007 10:01AM]

I bought MSFT stock in March after I installed Vista on my computer and saw how smooth, intuitive and stable it was. Even though I'm a small time investor, it's good to see it paying off!

[Forrest @ Apr 27th 2007 10:08AM]

Holy viral marketing batman!

[PDubNYC @ Apr 27th 2007 10:16AM]

And this ice-cold Coca-Cola(R) is so refreshing and delicious. You can't beat the real thing. Excuse me while I jump in my Chevy. It's the Heartbeat of America you know.


Astroturfers die.

[Chuckles McGee @ Apr 27th 2007 10:28AM]

"Microsoft: We get things right, eventually"

[John Miller @ Apr 27th 2007 10:29AM]

This is so annoying. The second a person posts anything remotely complimentary to Microsoft, they're accused of being a stooge. Go fly a kite, fanboy lewsers.

[Kamokazi @ Apr 27th 2007 10:38AM]

There's a difference between 'remotely complimentary' and 'did he just pull that crap off a Vista marketing brochure?'

I'm all for MS products...working in IT it's nice for everything to work together well with very little fuss. But even if your post was about OSX you'd still get some people (not as many) claimig the same. I honestly thought you were being sarcastic untill I read your reply.

[ark_v2 @ Apr 27th 2007 10:32AM]

It's sad to see how easily people buy this crap...

[John Doe @ Apr 27th 2007 10:33AM]

PT Barnum had it right on the money.

[Kris Burbidge @ Apr 27th 2007 10:38AM]

Could you make it any more obvious, John Miller? Go join the social somewhere else.

[BTS.WRKNG @ Apr 27th 2007 10:43AM]

THEY JUST HAVE NO TASTE.

[mobi fin @ Apr 27th 2007 10:48AM]

Vistalicious baby!

Now lets see a nice Zune 2.0

[John Miller @ Apr 27th 2007 10:52AM]

Alright, I shouldn't have used the word "intuitive". That does sounds like marketing BS. But what's worse: that or the tagline by Apple that their products "just work"?

Just work my ass. My sister's Mac Pro crashes once a week (although she still swears by Apple, for what that's worth). Is that "just working"? How about the iPod I had... I owned it for 2 months and then it stopped syncing. So I wanted to take it in for repairs. Only I couldn't send it in the mail or take it to the Apple store, I had to make an appointment. But guess what? I couldn't even do that because Apple's "Genius Bar" website said they were too busy!

For the record, I don't own a Zune (because it's not PlaysForSure, that's BS), I own a Gigabeat S. And I think Ubuntu is a great OS. My only argument is that when you get past all this stupid anti-Micro$oft stuff and take a look at Vista, it's a great OS! I haven't had one crash, it's caught up with OSX in the graphic department and it's extremely stable. And given the fact that Microsoft releases products before they're 100% ready, SP1 is only going to make it better.

[Forrest @ Apr 27th 2007 11:36AM]

Oh come on John!! I like Microsoft. I have a Zune, which I love. Still haven't found anyone to join the Social with, unfortunately. I'm an MCP. I like their products. Visual Studio is so awesome I actually have some people fooled into thinking I can program :P But I don't go around gently caressing Bill's nether regions on blog comment pages.

Maybe you're not on the payroll, but re-read your first post...it's just DRIPPING with vomit-inducing marketspeak! Shame on you!

[Dave @ Apr 27th 2007 10:52AM]

It's funny to watch fanboys call people fanboys...

[John Miller @ Apr 27th 2007 10:58AM]

If I'm a fanboy, why did I buy an iPod? Temporary insanity was part of it, true, but I did buy one.

Thankfully that mistake has been corrected.

[Jeff Foster @ Apr 27th 2007 11:11AM]

that's just it - I'm sure you didn't.

but i'm also sure you've used the lie enough times to actually start believing it yourself by now.

[Jeff Foster @ Apr 27th 2007 11:12AM]

"If i weren't jamacian, why would i be wearin dis hat?"

[Jeff Foster @ Apr 27th 2007 11:09AM]

i wonder how many copies of vista were either OEM or IT purchases.

I'm not sure if MS really needs congratulations for profiting from their vendor lock-in. (the piles of money should be enough of a congrats for 'em.)

It's not as if they actually made a product that SOLD for that much profit, so much as just flex their lock-in muscles on people who don't understand that there are better alternatives. congrats!

to John Miller: it's easy to pretend you had an iPod. And if your sister's mac pro is crashing regularly, you're probably running windows in parallels or something. I have a handful of old g4 towers at home with uptimes of a few months regularly, only really restarting for software updates. At work, my iMac and Mac pro have never crashed. All of this doesn't really matter, of course, because your story is so obviously made up to support your silly conclusion.

"Smooth, intuitive and stable" are the bare minimum requirements for an OS. it's nothing to be proud of that Vista finally caught up to what OS X was doing years ago. If you're trying to pimp MS, you'll need to come up with some BENEFITS, not just what SHOULD be the most basic aspects of any operating system.

[ph @ Apr 27th 2007 11:32AM]

"to John Miller: it's easy to pretend you had an iPod. And if your sister's mac pro is crashing regularly, you're probably running windows in parallels or something. I have a handful of old g4 towers at home with uptimes of a few months regularly, only really restarting for software updates. At work, my iMac and Mac pro have never crashed. All of this doesn't really matter, of course, because your story is so obviously made up to support your silly conclusion."

And it is just as easy for you to pretend that your mac pro never has crashed.

For the record, I HAVE seen macs crash. ITs a computer, and sometimes computers crash. That said, a well running machine, whether xp, vista, or mac osx should be very stable. (It has been 5 years since I have seen xp crash)

[Jeff Foster @ Apr 27th 2007 12:10PM]

fair enough... and you're right, i've seen macs crash, but my newer macs at work have had zero problems.
though only run major programs at work, which may have something to do with it... and i don't have to use MS office! in fact, the most recent semi-crash i can remember at home was MSWord dying. :)

anyway, you're right, a well running machine (regardless of OS) should be very stable. I'm my experience, keeping XP "well" is significantly more work.

[Dave @ Apr 27th 2007 11:27AM]

I am now with Vista and i like it. Its the best OS i have seen (although i havent seen Ubuntu in F2F though...).

[John Miller @ Apr 27th 2007 11:28AM]

If I didn't own an iPod and sell it and if my sister didn't tell me her Mac Pro crashed about once a week, may my soul go to hell for an eternity. There. Is there anyway I can convey my truthfulness any better on the internet?

Vista is selling well because people want it, not because they're forced to own it or because it's OEM. The increase in sales was above all Wall St forecasts (that what drives the price of the stock higher) and whether it's copies off the shelf or people buying new computers with Vista pre-installed, it's all due to the (perceived) quality of the product. I think consumers' perceptions are right.

Now, if y'all want to continue paying $750-$1000 more for an Apple with the same exact specs as a PC, go ahead. But you're not getting any additional value for it, except your perception that the Apple is better.

[Chicksta @ Apr 27th 2007 1:13PM]

If someone's system is crashing frequently, then they need to remember the 'definition' of an idiot; someone who does the same thing over and over and expects a different result. People can do stupid things to computers and cause them to crash. And of course no OS is perfect no matter what. Why would someone not get it checked out, and why do you try to blame her stupidity on the system? I have to wonder why you brought Apple into the discussion at all. One comment used OSX as an analogy to prove a point of you talking like a plant. Then all of a sudden you go off about a Mac Pro and an iPod; WTF does an iPod have to do w/Vista? I think it speaks poorly of Vista if every conversation about it inevitably brings up (unfavorable) comparisons to OSX, or linux, or anything else. I guess I could say that Vista must suck because all of these xbox 360s had such major manufacturing issues; that makes just as much sense.
You're wrong if you think that people are buying Vista because they want it. I deal with people every day who return systems or put other OSs on it because they hate it, but were forced to get it because they needed a new system. They also buy Macs instead because they DON'T want Vista. When Vista was released, a whopping FIVE people bought it within the first 12 hours at the local computer retailer. When the last Mac OS was released, cops had to control the lines of hundreds of people waiting to get it. Now, that doesn't make the Mac any better or worse; it's a question of needs and what suits each person best. But it's stupid and wrong to say that an Apple system is $750+ more comparably equipped. You can find a billion online comparisons that will show the exact opposite. So don't try and equate your Apple bias for anything positive about Vista; they're two separate issues. And surely don't try and think that you should be happy that the MS stock went up a wee amount; just think of how much better off you'd have been if you'd gotten Apple stock instead!

[nikster @ Apr 27th 2007 6:11PM]

ph, I guess it depends on your definition of crash. I haven't seen a BSOD in a while, yet I need to restart XP on average every 2 days or so because it screws up with suspend mode/bluetooth/wireless/explorer/something else - all kinds of reasons.

OS X is more stable when it comes to surviving sleep mode. I have actually never seen it crash - but I have had more than a few incidents where it needed to be restarted because something didn't work anymore.

So no it's not crashing. It just stops working.

[John Miller @ Apr 27th 2007 11:37AM]

Oh, and she's not running Windows in parrallel or anything like that. Crash... once a week.

[PDubNYC @ Apr 27th 2007 12:04PM]

then it's a bad installation. Just reinstall, which is a hell of a lot easier on a Mac than a PC, and move on with your life. No computer should crash that much, and if you live with it without investigating further, and go around saying "Apple sucks, my sister's baby cousin's best friend etc..." rather than taking the pretty f'n easy steps to remedy the situation, than you are just a douchebag, MS shill or not.

Personally, I was a fan of Win2K over XP. It generally worked pretty well for me, without all that extra b.s. on top. All I can say about Vista so far is, of the 4 or so friends I know that have it, they are not pleased at all. I have only spent a little time using it myself, but it seems like some people love it, a lot of people hate it. Just my opinion and observations.

[Jeff Foster @ Apr 27th 2007 12:12PM]

did you pour coffee in it or something?

i don't buy it.

if you're really having problems, fix it or get it replaced. it's idiotic for you to assume "that's just how it is."

[Kris Burbidge @ Apr 27th 2007 11:49AM]

i dont know, i still have a 4g black and white 20gb ipod. the only time i had a problem was out of the box syncing w/ my friend's itunes, because it was an old clearance model off amazon. i took it to the apple store down the street, and one of the clerks updated it for me in about 2 minutes. trouble free ever since. i won't be buying an iphone, though, since i have a non-cingular phone that work pays for. i also don't own any apple computers, because all i do is surf the web with my several years old dell laptop (even though i've had to format it twice because if spyware). i'll probably get one when it clunks out. i do enjoy apple products, i'm just a cheap bastard

[TIMMAH! @ Apr 27th 2007 12:31PM]

Wow, they should come out with a new OS every year.

[Jessica @ Apr 27th 2007 12:41PM]

Yay for fuzzy math?

I can count the number of people I know who "upgraded" to Vista on one hand. The majority put XP back on their cpus... :/

[whiskey @ Apr 27th 2007 12:56PM]

Let's all use here our thinking hats, right kids?
See last year MS sales were bummer because ... nobody cared. Nobody has Vista (or Longhorn at the time) and they had XP. Nobody was buying new XP copies because of the hype certain OS was making.

So now comes the new OS and all sales break loose. Well this was bound to happen... People deferred their consumption of an OS (or a PC with one of those installed).

Oh, and by the way, ask your retailers (if not DELL) and they will tell you that thanks to the glorious strategic alliance, Microsoft has imposed that every new PC that comes with Windows should use Vista, not XP.

That's it... Not even Intel wants it (yet) and MS is claiming victory. I say let's stay watching them, just to laugh when they flop.

By the way, if you do not already know, Vista Sucks Big Time... Ask the Home version users if they can restore their backed up files? Or how secure everyone feels with the "allow/deny" question.

[Andir3.0 @ Apr 27th 2007 1:03PM]

It's easy to say your revenue/profits (not sales) are up if you write off all your "coupon orders" last year so your revenue is lower than it is this year. Man, I love the numbers games...

[John Miller @ Apr 27th 2007 1:13PM]

You people obviously know nothing about the market. Everyone knows that their sales were going to be up. Any new OS will sell more copies. But for the last time, Microsoft not only beat Wall St's expectations as a whole, there wasn't a single analyst predicting for this big of an increase. That means Vista is doing much better than expectations and the expectations already take into account the fact that Vista is a new OS. Read that twice if you're still confused.

So what's the reason? If anybody would like to come up with something other than the fact that consumers might *shock* like Vista, I'd like to hear it.

Now please excuse me... I'm going to take $140 of the money I made on this stock and upgrade to a dual core AMD. Sure is nice to be able to nearly double the speed of your computer for $140 instead of buy a whole new $1400 iMac.

[Chicksta @ Apr 27th 2007 2:52PM]

I do hope you're kidding - if I had bought MS stock instead of Apple stock, I would have lost... hmmm... about 120 bucks per share, because the stock split. Now, that's just using quick math and not factoring the this-and-thats, but you hardly become a market expert because you made over $140 with it; you would have made over $120 more PER SHARE if you'd bought back when, oh, those same analysts were predicting Apple would fold. Read that once or twice or whatever. And who said MS is only Vista? Maybe one of their other products did well... Office.. xbox... whatever. So there's your amazing 'other reason' - they make other products and provide other services.
Why the constant obsession with Apple? If you like Vista or XP or whatever, yippee.

[rip @ Apr 27th 2007 3:35PM]

It's you that obviously knows nothing about the market. The stock market. I'm not even going to touch the other ridiculous statements you've made regarding Microsoft and Apple products. Let's just look at the stocks.

You could have bought Apple stock Jan 1 2003 $7.40/share. As of right now, Apple stock is at 99.62. $10,000 invested would be worth $134,584.

You could have bought Microsoft stock in Jan 2003 for 23.12 and it is now at 30.19. It would now be worth $13,122. WOW.

Microsoft beat expectations, big deal. There are many reasons the analysts got it wrong. Microsoft could have given conservative guidance. Or the analysts are just lazy. Or stupid.

And in case your wondering Apple DESTROYED analyst estimates last quarter. They were expecting 64 cents. Apple came in at 87 cents. The analysts weren't even close.

hmm, a Microsoft investor profits enough to buy a cpu. An Apple investor profits enough to buy a house...

Enjoy that cpu.

[tyecies @ Apr 27th 2007 2:06PM]

Now lets not get too crazy on either side here. Im writing this on a macbook pro, and find osx very stable and easy to use. But i also like windows. The reason i have a mac, is because with the education discount, i got a macbook pro (core duo when that was the standard) for $1600. This was a much better deal than comparative windows laptops (and no i don't cound iLife as value). What i think is, when Macs update their product line and prices (not often enough), they tend to be very competetively priced (except for things like the mini), and a great deal. However, as the product cycle drags on, pc prices drop and the mac prices don't, so pcs become a much better deal. I'd say go with whatever the best deal is at the time, regardless of OS because realistically, they're both pretty stable these days

[Don @ Apr 27th 2007 2:45PM]

A bit off-topic, but for those Bill-Bashers out there, here's something to think about:

Tuberculosis was a #1 killer at the turn of the century. Through the efforts of scientists, the disease was MOSTLY eradicated. unfortunately, it wasn't COMPLETELY eradicated, and so now it is making a comeback in poorer nations around the world. TB is an airborne disease that is highly contagious and frequently fatal. We have now seen "XDR" (extremely drug resistant) TB cases, where standard drug treatments are less effective - and have now seen strains of "TDR" (Totally Drug Resistant) TB.

Unfortunately, there is no money to be made on new TB vaccines, so drug companies are not working on new treatments. So guess who is funding the research? That's right - Bad Boy Bill and his evil, moneymaking empire - The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

So next time you piss on a dude for making money, ask yourself the last time you gave tens of millions towards fighting a disease that no one else is willing to since there's "no money in it".

[Don @ Apr 27th 2007 3:29PM]

BTW, for the stats, I should have said "Hundreds of Millions":

* $104 million, five-year grant to the Global Alliance for TB Drug Development to build a portfolio of drug candidates with the potential to shorten and simplify TB treatment, fight MDR-TB, and improve the treatment of latent TB infection.(2006)

* $1 million grant to Treatment Action Group to educate HIV advocates about TB and to support TB/HIV advocacy in general. (2004)

* $83 million to the Aeras Global TB Vaccine Foundation to develop and license an improved vaccine against TB (January 2004)

* $45 million to the Harvard Medical School to establish Partners for TB Control, and to develop and demonstrate an effective model for treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (July 2000)

* $23 million to the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics to develop diagnostic tests for infectious diseases including tuberculosis (December 2003)

* $47.7 million to the Consortium to Respond Effectively to the AIDS-TB Epidemic to develop and promote new uses of existing tools to control TB in areas heavily burdened by HIV (September 2002 and June 2004)

[Miguel @ Apr 27th 2007 3:34PM]

When a stock splits, the individual cost of a share goes down, but the number of shares held by each shareholder goes up.

So, let's say you own 100 shares of a company at $50 per share. Then the stock splits and the price per share drops to $40 per share. 50-40=10*100 shares=$1000 lost. Ouch! But wait! The stock split, which means you now own 200 shares at the new price of $40 per share. 50*100 shares=$5000...40*200 shares=$8000-$5000=$3000 return! Amazing!

[AJ @ Apr 27th 2007 3:03PM]

Chicksta, imagine how horrible the $120 "drop" would be if they doubled your shares too!!!...hmm...yeah

[Don @ Apr 27th 2007 3:36PM]

Yeah, I guess someone (chicksta) doesn't own any stock. When stock SPLITS, it means that the value of your individual shares are halved, but you now have 2x as many - you lose absolutely NOTHING. Splitting the stock reduces the price of buy-in for more investors, and is a GOOD thing generally.

[Andir3.0 @ Apr 27th 2007 3:50PM]

@Don: Would you buy drugs from a drug dealer if he also contributed money to a charity? It would be the same thing in my eyes. Microsoft is killing the growth of the industry/economy by controlling the OS market and your sucking on the candy they give you to keep quiet.

[Don @ Apr 27th 2007 4:03PM]

Dude, you are an idiot. Drug dealers sell an illegal and dangerous product (in most cases). Nice strawman. That you equate selling software at a *gasp* profit with drug dealing shows just how warped your views are of its importance.

Yes, since Mico$0ft ( or however your kind spells it) has started up in the early 80's, the PC and software industries have STAGNATED :rolleyes:

What a tool. BTW, I run Ubuntu.

[Chicksta @ Apr 27th 2007 5:03PM]

I suppose if you don't read it the way I intended it, that I was unclear. I *did* say it was a good thing. I said that, not only did my stock go up, but it went up AND doubled in shares owned, which the MS would not have. That equation of 134K versus 13K doesn't seem to account for the split. So, if I HAD bought MS shares, I would NOT even have as many shares, because they split, let alone the value of each. The REASON the amount PER SHARE is so drastic (over $120 more GAINED in the same timeframe, each) is because there are more shares, and I had to factor that in too. Sorry about the caps, just trying to make that clear.

[Don @ Apr 27th 2007 5:09PM]

Ah, OK then. Sorry for the miscommunication!

[Andir3.0 @ Apr 27th 2007 7:51PM]

I equate selling a product that places you in a state of dependence the same as drugs. Just because you took it to mean making money isn't my fault. The industry didn't stagnate when Microsoft was up and coming, but now that they own 95% of the market, they have wormed their way into owning their users. DirectX, .NET, *.DOC...etc.

It's a good thing I'm a tool, since by your post you seem to have a few screws loose that need tightening.

[Don @ Apr 27th 2007 9:29PM]

"I equate selling a product that places you in a state of dependence the same as drugs."

ALL products put you in one state of dependence or another. Sorry, dude - in logic what you've committed is called a "false equivocation". Go ahead and believe that 'open source will set you free'. It, like all software, is just one way of attacking a problem. In Gate's case, he made money off his (or IBM and Xerox's) grand ideas, boo hoo. Don't cry because he capitalized on them while you are left saying crap like "dependence on Office/XP/Whatever is equivalent to being on crack. It isn't, and you are an ignorant idealistic, unrealistic fool for thinking so.

[mike @ Apr 27th 2007 6:18PM]

I'm all for MS products...working in IT it's nice for everything to work together well with very little fuss
--

Dont make me laugh, if there was no fuss, you'd be out of work. We all know why you love MS products. ;)