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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevyn Collins-Thompson who wrote (20697)	2/18/2005 9:03:33 PM
From: erickerickson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78683

re: MSFT Disclaimer: I'm a developer sort who is forced, by the size of our customer base, to program exclusively in the MS world and I've spent many weeks "dealing" with MSFT from a developer's perspective. So maybe I'm a little frustrated <G>. My problem with MSFT at this point is that I can't answer "how can they continue to produce revenues?". I mean, what other bell, light or whistle can they add to MS Office to compel people to pony up more cash for the next version? I don't know about you, but I use, maybe, 10% of the features in Word and that takes care of my needs. I sure can't justify paying for the next version that has features that I'll never use. They've tried alternate revenue models. They were trying to rent Office to all of us and force us to pay an annual renewal fee. That didn't work out. It's not at all clear to me that they can do anything to force me to pay for office again. Some of our customers are still working on windows 98 for crying out loud. So they, at least, see no real reason to upgrade. A while ago, I investigated Linux and Open Office. I can set up all the software on my computer that I need for $100. And that's only if I buy the "supported" version of Linux and do the right thing and contribute to the open office folks and the Mozilla folks. And Longhorn (the next op system they're developing) is already 2 years late. And getting later. I guess the point of this tirade is that I have no faith that MSFT can continue to produce growth the way they have over the last (Dear God) 2 decades or so. Of course, I've said that about MSFT for some years, so you may want to be real cautious about agreeing <G>. A recent development in Brazil is interesting. The government there has decreed that no government computers can run non open-source software. And while they claim that "this policy is not directed at any particular company", I interpret that with a wink and a nod. So I guess that if I were considering MSFT, I'd keep a sharp eye on how that works out since I suspect that the success or failure of the experiment in Brazil may have things to say about the future of MSFT continuing to dominate the PC market outside the US and Europe. Anyway, all of this IMHO, so take it for what it's worth. Best Erick

To: Kevyn Collins-Thompson who wrote (20697)	2/19/2005 2:29:06 PM
From: Spekulatius	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78683

re MSFT kevin and Eric, I appreciate your opinion about MSFT. I am well aware that the high growth for MSFT is over. What i like about MSFT is that they managed the transistion from a growth to a mature company very well. Their cash flow is terrific, as is their balance sheet, stock options are reduced and accounted for, they pay a dividend and venture in new markets (web, video games) where they appear to gain traction over the long term. They have shown growth over the last 5 years in the single digits annually yet the stock hasn't appreciated which attracts me as a value investor. It may be that the elite goes to work at Google but I am just happy with owning a piece of a well run and transparent company.