Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Microsoft makes a lot of money, Is Intel exceptionally
 unsuccessful as an architecture designer?
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 09:11:03 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <vcgiq7$fmaa$3@dont-email.me>
References: <memo.20240913205156.19028s@jgd.cix.co.uk>
 <vcd7lo$3op6a$2@dont-email.me> <vcdele$293s$1@gal.iecc.com>
 <vcdstq$3vei1$1@dont-email.me> <vcfdld$525$1@gal.iecc.com>
 <vcfu73$9bc9$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 09:11:04 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c725ff283502bbf48b983059d00c1d0e";
	logging-data="514378"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19nfmHWu6gTtNe2uWMztS2GeNP7FXvMGYc="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rbWdXUh5wdv7yas3RqNgwEM3WQc=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vcfu73$9bc9$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2781

On 19/09/2024 03:19, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 20:37:01 -0000 (UTC), John Levine wrote:
> 
>> It appears that Lawrence D'Oliveiro  <ldo@nz.invalid> said:
>>
>>> On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 02:41:50 -0000 (UTC), John Levine wrote:
>>>
>>>> According to Lawrence D'Oliveiro  <ldo@nz.invalid>:
>>>>>
>>>>> It is true that Microsoft is not (yet) losing money, ...
>>>>
>>>> Windows is shrinking but Azure and both commercial and personal Office
>>>> are hugely profitable.
>>>
>>> That’s not disputing anything I said.
>>
>> Microsoft is stupendously profitable.
> 
> Take a closer look at what they’re profitable *in*. Microsoft 365 (not
> “Office” any more) is a rentware business. Azure is also a service
> business. And look at Windows itself, with attempts to insert adware/
> rentware mechanisms into the OS. So you see this move away from one-off
> products sales towards ongoing payments.
> 
> Which is a classic sign of a company trying to squeeze more and more
> revenue out of a stagnant or declining user base.

No, it is a classic sign of a company that has found a way to get a 
fairly stable revenue stream with a predictable path for the future.

When their main income was selling Windows and Office licenses, they 
were dependent on a continuously increasing market - that model was 
doomed as they approached saturation.  A subscription model does not 
have such limitations, even if the user base is not growing significantly.