SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Ibexx who wrote (5735)4/9/1998 1:32:00 PM
From: Gerald Walls  Respond to of 74651
 
An interesting musing...

What if Microsoft should begin an extensive investigation of the US government to ensure that all branches are complying fully with all provisions of Windows licensing provisions? They could start with the Justice Department.

I'm quite sure that they would find instances of multiple archival copies (tape backups of networked PCs) in violation of the license. Microsoft would then be completely within their rights to terminate the license agreement. Since these license agreements with the government are most likely site licenses Microsoft could yank Windows from entire departments.

Wouldn't it be interesting if Microsoft changed its Windows license agreement to prohibit use by a governmental agency?

None of this will never happen of course as it would prove monopoly power, but it's the same sort of hardball that the government's playing through the courts.

I do think they should make a point by auditing the Justice Department.



To: Ibexx who wrote (5735)4/10/1998 2:47:00 AM
From: Dennis Gallagher  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74651
 
Does anyone know by what percentages Microsoft's stock grew the last four years on a year by year basis? Or, if not, can someone suggest where I might find these percentages?

I'm going into a compensation negotiation and I want to use these figures to establish a benchmark to negotiate around. Situation is, I've got a solid job offer from Microsoft and another from Company X. Company X is going to offer me stock options in addition to salary and the question is how to decide what's a reasonable amount of stock options to ask them for.

I intend to shoot for at least parity on stock options. And, with these percentage figures I'm looking for, the number of shares of stock options Microsoft is offering and what the estimated price company X's stock should go for at IPO, I believe I can back calculate the number of shares of company X's stock I should get.

This seems reasonable to me becaue with Microsoft's stock, it is a pretty good bet it is going to continue to go up whereas Company X's stock may just be wall paper. Of cource, if it goes strongly the other way and I make way more than I would have if I took the Microsoft offer - well, hey who is going to care then, we'll all be too happy <g>.

I'd love to hear how others may have approached this issue and what bechmarks they used to calculate what a fair value of stock opinions might be.

Dennis
Seattle



To: Ibexx who wrote (5735)4/10/1998 11:23:00 AM
From: Flair  Respond to of 74651
 
Ibexx & all,

Windows terminals about to catch fire
By Joe McGarvey, Inter@ctive Week Online
April 10, 1998 5:58 AM PDT

zdnet.com

The Spring Comdex computer show, which is
to be held in Chicago starting April 20,
will be the unofficial coming-out party
for technology from software giant
Microsoft Corp. that enables underpowered
personal computers to control
Windows-based applications running on a
sever.


In addition to providing a venue for a
demonstration of Microsoft's (MSFT)
forthcoming Windows Terminal Server,
which enables the Windows NT operating
system to distribute server-based
applications to multiple users, some
analysts and industry insiders said the
event will also serve as an occasion to
crown Microsoft's victory over the
Java-based network computer (NC)
movement.
Will cheaper hardware -- Windows
terminals, ncs or low-cost desktops --
really reduce overall costs.

"Our position is that Microsoft will win
this game," said Michael Kantrowitz,
executive vice president of Neoware
Systems Inc., which makes a computing
device, a so-called Windows-based
terminal, designed to run Windows
applications stored on a server.
"Companies don't want to replace their
Windows applications and rewrite them in
Java. They want to use what they already
have."

Microsoft first proposed its
server-centric approach to personal
computing last year, largely as a
defensive move to protect the dominance
of the Windows operating system in
corporate environments. Feeling
threatened by the growing support behind
the network computer, an inexpensive
computing device that runs Java
applications downloaded from powerful
servers, Microsoft announced it would
build a multiuser version of Windows NT
that would distribute Windows
applications to scaled-down PCs.

Microsoft usurped much of the NC's
momentum by providing corporations with
the means to reduce the cost and
complexity of routine maintenance by
placing the bulk of processing power on
centralized servers. The key to the
projected success of Windows terminals,
however, said Eileen O'Brien, an analyst
at International Data Corp., is that it
enables enterprises to reap the rewards
of the network computing model without
giving up access to their Windows
applications.

The sale of hardware designed to run
distributed Windows applications is
expected to start slowly, with only
302,000 terminals sold to corporations in
1998, according to O'Brien. By the middle
of the year, however, when Microsoft is
expected to release the commercial
version of its Windows Terminal Server
product, O'Brien said the sale of Windows
terminals should pick up, reaching more
than 5 million units in the year 2002.

Although O'Brien said she believes the
Windows terminal market will account for
only about 10 percent of personal
computers sold to enterprises, others
think penetration percentages could be
twice that.

Chad Gibbons, product manager at Windows
terminal maker Boundless Technologies
Inc., said that in addition to being a
replacement device for mainframe
terminals, Windows terminals will be
deployed as substitutes for full-blown
personal computers that are primarily
used for productivity applications, such
as a word processor or a spreadsheet
program.

Boundless, much like Neoware, Wyse
Technologies Inc. and other terminal
makers, has diverted plans to build
Java-only devices to concentrate on
Windows terminals, which start at about
$250 and should be unveiled at the Spring
Comdex show.

Despite the apparent momentum around the
Windows terminal market, O'Brien said
several questions have to be answered
before enterprises are likely to adopt
the technology.

John Frederiksen, group product manager
for Windows Terminal Server, said pricing
has yet to be set but that it will not
cost customers more to run Windows
applications from a terminal than it does
from a standard PC.



To: Ibexx who wrote (5735)4/10/1998 11:47:00 AM
From: Flair  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74651
 
Ibexx & all,

The news on Microsoft's buyout of Firefly has been leaked
before April 7. Here is some discussion on what Microsfot
is going to do with Firefly --- a good and positive
appreciation of Firefly's core technology.

Microsoft to buy Firefly
By Maria Seminerio, ZDNN, and Jim Kerstetter, PC
Week Online
April 7, 1998 4:07 PM PDT

www5.zdnet.com

Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) is in the final
stages of negotiations to acquire Internet
personalization specialist Firefly Network
Inc., sources said.

The deal is expected to be announced within
the next week, sources close to the situation
said. Sources did not know the specific terms
of the deal or the fate of Firefly's
approximately 70 employees, should the
acquisition go through.

Firefly officials in Cambridge, Mass., would
say only that they do not comment on
rumors. Microsoft officials in Redmond,
Wash., could not be reached for comment.

Firefly makes a suite of products based on
Passport, a client electronic identification
tag that allows users to specify their interests
and information they would like to receive.
With that data, Firefly's server-side
software can customize Web site data for
that particular user.

Firefly was one of the first companies to
deliver on personalization technologies for
Web sites and has been a key proponent of
Internet privacy standards.

But in recent months, criticism of the Web
pioneer has grown as it became clear that,
outside of a few marquis customers, Firefly
has received more attention than business.

"Firefly came out with a flying head start
over all its rivals," said Peter Krasilovsky, an
analyst with Arlen Communications, in
Bethesda, Md. It quickly gained 1 million
users for its free client software, but then
squandered its lead by failing to provide a
neat integration with existing brands,
Krasilovsky said.

Firefly, he added, fills a Microsoft need.

"Microsoft has always said they've had
hundreds of people working on
personalization tools, but somehow it never
really came together for them," Krasilovsky
said. Taking over Firefly would "gel
beautifully" with the company's strategy, he
added.

Sources indicated that Microsoft is not
interested in Firefly's products as much as
its core technologies, which allow a server to
generate personalized information on the fly,
protect consumer privacy and more readily
share information between Web sites.

The technologies provide two fundamental
features: user profiling, which serves up data
for individual users, and collaborative
filtering, which allows for the sharing of
data.

Should the deal go through, Microsoft would
likely integrate the Passports with Internet
Explorer, while the server-side technology
would likely be integrated with Microsoft's
Site Server and Site Server Commerce
Edition software, sources said. Microsoft can
also use Firefly's profiling tools to promote
its own products on its Web site.

Firefly has played an integral role in two
standards initiatives. The first, the Open
Profiling Standard, is designed to specify and
automate user privacy on a Web site. It is
now under consideration by the World Wide
Web Consortium.

The second, the Information and Content
Exchange specification, defines how
companies can seamlessly tie together
information from their Web sites. It is still
in draft stage.

Firefly has pulled together more than $20
million in venture capital and several
high-profile customers such as
BarnesandNoble.com Inc. After that,
however, the profile of Firefly's stable of two
dozen customers drops.

While Microsoft could certainly develop
Web personalization and privacy tools such
as Firefly's on its own, buying Firefly gives it
instant access to a solution that's already
proved popular, said Tim Sloane, an analyst
at Aberdeen Group, in Boston.

The takeover would make sense, Sloane said,
because "in general, that market needs the
stamp of a large vendor to move forward."

Firefly was founded by alumni of the MIT
Media Lab and originally called Agents Inc.
It was renamed Firefly Network nearly two
years ago.