Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SunSpot who wrote (43839)	4/28/2000 7:58:00 PM
From: John F. Dowd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

SS: Thanks for the consoling words. I was really worried there. Here is the real story: MSFT wins at the Appeals Level. JFD

To: SunSpot who wrote (43839)	4/28/2000 8:16:00 PM
From: Valley Girl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

I'll add my two cents: I'm not sure the apps company would be the one true successor. Re. your comment about competing with Apple, that takes too narrow a view of what MSFT has to offer. Windows is already much much better than the Mac OS, at a deep internal level it's grown up while the Mac hasn't. Unlike Apple, MSFT has an OS (W2K) that could run servers. Another thing to consider is that the OS is still the cash cow for this company. There are two very different classes of "apps" that the apps company would end up with. The Office-like stuff there is virtually no market for beyond Windows and maybe Mac, so not much to gain by (for example) doing a Linux version. The server stuff, on the other hand, could benefit a lot from being opened up on other platforms. Right now because of their NT-only strategy they're limited to playing only where NT itself can play, which is only where Intel can play, which has left them out of the high end of the enterprise space. Which of these would get the browser and put out new versions? Hopefully the browser will continue to be free with Windows (or with Office), whichever company gets it in the split. Assuming there is a split, o'course! :) P.S. in the split, which company gets the lawsuits? ;-)

To: SunSpot who wrote (43839)	4/28/2000 8:20:00 PM
From: mozek	Respond to of 74651

By the way, to the list: Do you trust Ballmer, or don't you? I remember both "Microsoft will not be broken up", "PE should be 25". A clarification. No matter how it was spun, Ballmer did not say that Microsoft's or any company's PE should actually be 25. What he said was that companies that make money will have a good stock price and companies that don't won't. He also said that a company should eventually trade at 25 times earnings and that investors should look at earnings growth to determine if many of the hot companies of today will ever get to that level of profitability. As far as your other question, I trust Ballmer a lot more than many other executives or politicians. I have been lied to directly by Sun executives and had my questions evaded by politicians. I have never had either experience with Steve, and I have confronted him with some very difficult questions at times. In my experience he is honest, considerate, and straightforward, sometimes to a fault. Mike

To: SunSpot who wrote (43839)	4/28/2000 10:07:00 PM
From: Don Edgerton	Respond to of 74651

If the Apps side is broken out, they can port products to Linux. CORL will be dead meat (if it isn't already). Can license to ASPs similar to Sun "star" apps deal. In 5 years, there will only be MS office apps 'cause everyone one else burned the last of their cash. Then DOJ can sue the new MS apps company for being a monopoly. However, we need to also request that MS reimbuse the healthcare costs related to carpel tunnel syndrome. Without MS Word, many fewer people would suffer from this dread disease.