Quote: "Your issues are completely irrelevant. Posting them in a public forum would be relevant."
Any why would that be candyman? I'm entitled to my opinion no matter who I'm working for. You think somehow I'd get in trouble for not praising every-single move by the parent company of who I work for?
Yeah, maybe you might want to actually want to read the blogs of people actually working for the parent company itself. Not many people agree with how the top-dogs run things. And you know what, they don't particularly care what we think.
This isn't some 'be happy, or else' company. I'm happy working for Microsoft, they pay quite well, they have excellent health, dental, employee care packages. On the whole they produce some awesome software.
Strategy wise, I think the top-dogs are living in the past. And I'm not the only person to say it. This forum is pretty much an unofficial off the record place, but some employees have written in thier Microsoft Blogs how they think the same thing.
We're not going to be fired for our opinions. Hell most employees don't actually use purely Microsoft software.
You know what the most used Browser in Redmond is? FireFox.
That's why the new Explorer 7 looks so bloody similar, they love it. I hate it.
People have a very weird perception of what Microsoft are really like.
Quote: "It isn't. It'd be simple if you knew the exact costs per pint (that includes more than the price your barman pays for it)."
I simplified it so you could follow it. I wasn't going to add the Tax, License Cost, Staff Cost, etc. Because then I'd have to cover far far more topics than the exact one at hand.
The answer was consise and to the point. Rather than being able to say I'm wrong all you've done is said that I'm not taking into consideration all of the factors. Typical really.
If your just here to cause trouble **** off and bother someone else or admit you were wrong.
Quote: "Basically you say they have no economic senses because they keep the price high, but they can do it because the market allows it.
Where's the sense in that?"
Because they're treating the ENTIRE market they server with the same market model.
Everyone pays the same price, for the same software.
No matter the end intentions for it.
Now look at Avid. They treat thier Business and Public markets differently, because they are different. Lowering thier public market prices in order to be reasonable enough for everyone to afford thier software for thier personal commercial needs.
Making software versions free for useage with purchased games so that they have a larger market penatration.
Providing much more complex professional level software and support for a licensable price for sites rather than single units.
Microsoft aren't dividing thier sectors, they treat them the same.
While the market will allow them to charge high because most people no don't purchase thier own operating system. Microsoft haven't realised that they're selling far less units to the actual public sector and changed thier prices accordingly.
Instead they see the major rise in piracy as just people too lazy to pay.
$90 in India, is the better part of 2months wages. For me and you it's less than a week work. Yet Microsoft again treat that market identically to the European and United States Markets.
It makes perfect sense to say that they have no concept of Economics. All they understand is thier profits are still being made at the current price of software. They're relying on the fact that they are a market dominance, not on the economics of the situation they're in.
