Twister:
It is always a great pleasure to have discussions with you.
You state:
> It it nothing but a misstatement to say that msft "only"
> participates in the desktp sector.
Well, then I ask you can you show me one single technology they have introduced that can be used in any other sector of the computing besides the PC desktop? The confusion that you may experience is your continued assumption that the PC and PC specific related objects are the computing market! This is no longer the case and I have come to believe that you only read that which you would like to hear or understand! Computing is now defined to be anything that has a chip inside and that can work with either an electricity and/or battery! And I do realize this maybe new to you, but it is true! So based on this definition of computing can you tell me of one single technology that Microsoft has introduced that can expand the boundires of personal computing (via PCs based on Intel processors)?!
You state:
> It is altogethere laughable to say that a company that is
> growing at 20% rates, sunw, is starting in the next quarter or so
> going to be growing at 100% rates.
Again I see that my statements are being twisted a little here! In my post to you I was specifically careful not to use any company names when pointing out the natural laws of investment when taking into account growth rate! The 100% was a figurative number I used in my example of describing Company A versus Company B (please go back and read my comments to you techstocks.com. However, since you want specific company names (namely Microsoft VS Sun), I can say with comfort that the growth rate of Sun (based on their size, balance sheet, and the not so established newer technology) has been far far better (and will continue to be) than that of MSFT in term of percentage revenue generation and earnings since the new definition of computing has come into play (After all Wall Street's big boys dont simply put higher bids - percentage wise - on SUNW shares than MSFT shares just because one has a nicer name than the other! And if you do not believe it, I suggest you go to the SI CHART page and enter MSFT SUNW in the textField on that page and hit the Submit button and view the chart for the past year for the 2 companies as was suggested to you a while back)!
You state:
> And further, that the compaines like cpq and dell who have been
> growing at far far far higher rates than sunw, will suddenly "trade
> places" with sunw where sunw assumes the role of higher growth and
> cpq and dell and msft and intc take on sunws role of moderate
> growth.
First of all you keep bringing up CPQ and DELL and somehow you imply that I have said something with regard to their growth. Companies such as CPQ and DELL will continue to enjoy a healthy growth as long as they continue to provide cheap machines at around $1000 or so, and also as long as they in one form or another provide machines that can run server OS (whether Solaris, or NT). These machines are perfect to be used at corporate level as middle tiers in conjunction with a cluster of high powerful UNIX servers in a thin client computing architecture. So I hope this clears things with this subject for you as what I mean! As for SUNW, yes its growth rate will dramatically be increasing (as compare to companies such as MSFT that has not yet done a successful transformation to get away from their specific closed area of computing). The dramatic growth of Sun will be because of its powerful servers, and the very broad computing market that it participates (from providing the chips, to software, to servers to the thin client machines, to consulting and services, and you name it).
You state:
> Again you provide not one lick of factual evidence...
hmmmm.... interesting. All you have to do is go to yahoo, and enter the name Sun Microsystems, and then click on the search button. I am sure you will get plenty of articles and documents. But perhaps the simplest form of evidence would be if you can not wait till tomorrow at around 1:30PM PST to read Sun's earnings report, go back to last quarter's earnings or the one prior to that or the one prior to that, and perhaps then you can get a flavor and taste of such evidence as you require!
Best Regards,
Addi Jamshidi |
