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: dybdahl who wrote (61787)	10/21/2001 2:46:34 PM
From: David Howe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

<< the largest danish company I can think of that has Windows 3.11 client PCs in use has 26,000 employees. >> And that company hopes to be competitive? If they aren't falling behind their competition, they will eventually. IMO, Dave

To: dybdahl who wrote (61787)	10/21/2001 6:26:59 PM
From: DiViT	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

"Remember that there are still tons of Windows 3.1 and Windows 95 machines out there being used daily. - dybhahl #reply-16532679 "Windows 3.1? Wrong. Not in any major company today." - DiViT #reply-16533465 "Hmmmm... the largest danish company I can think of that has Windows 3.11 client PCs in use has 26,000 employees." -dybdahl #reply-16534033 Which seemingly implies one company using "tons of Windows 3.1 " Then Dave Howe says: "And that company hopes to be competitive? If they aren't falling behind their competition, they will eventually." #reply-16535750 And in defense: "They surely don't have that many IT expenses. Most of their desktops run NT4, and they use Office 97 the most common Office suite today." - dybhahl #reply-16535750 So which is it Lars. Is it a) Tons of Window 3.11 in use today b) a few PCs that have been replaced by newer ones to support current version of office, but haven't yet been been turned off because the screensaver that had been left running on it was too cute?

To: dybdahl who wrote (61787)	10/21/2001 6:36:55 PM
From: DiViT	Respond to of 74651

"2 years is unnatural because there are few end-users that pay stuff every second year." dybdahl #reply-16534033 So your argument is for the end user? The ones that doesn't sign up for the corporate discounts and software services? The ones who are not required to upgrade XP on a regular basis? "I pay tax and insurances once a year and my phone bill four times a year." You make my point. It's not unnatural to have periods that differ from supplier to supplier. Is it unnatural for a company to sign up for a software services contract that provides upgrades on a regular basis? regular basis could mean every 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 4 years etc...?