On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:00:55 -0700, Chambers wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> I think the combined revenue for their applications probably either is
>> (or could be) their largest source of revenue.
> 
> IIRC, Windows and Office are (respectively) their #1 and #2 earners.
> Everything else pales in comparison.  Their most successful products
> outside of these two make nowhere near as much money for them.
> 
> Of course, that was a few years ago, and things could have changed.

Possibly.  I know MOM is frightfully expensive (at least in large 
implementations) and at least when I was working with AD in a large 
environment, we were told it was absolutely necessary in spite of the 7-
figure price tag.

>>> Think Windows Vista is bad now?  Imagine how bad things would be 10
>>> years from now, if MS's development budget were slashed in half.
>> 
>> Depends on how they structure the business.  If the apps fed into the
>> OS development stream and the apps were successful enough, then it
>> could be self-reinforcing.
> 
> Yeah, but they wouldn't get paid for the OS, only for the Apps, so
> there's the temptation to focus on the apps and not the OS.

Depends on how the revenue was structured and fed back.  The part of my 
company I work for, we are a cost center - we get almost all of our 
funding from the product teams.

Jim

Post a reply to this message