Microsoft is way more diversified than Google in it's revenue stream https://visualign.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/side-by-side-apple-microsoft-google-amazon/ With a push against tracking and Ad's...
Microsoft is way more diversified than Google in it's revenue stream
Yea Microsoft is much more 'established' as a company. Not to mention they were packed full of cash in the 90s when they were the only game in town, and were able to diversify themselves...
Yea Microsoft is much more 'established' as a company. Not to mention they were packed full of cash in the 90s when they were the only game in town, and were able to diversify themselves considerably more than Google has, and buy up tons of companies. It will be interesting to see where they are in 20 years.
That was a good article! I was surprised to see how minuscule Google's non-advertising profit is. I wonder, is that including the rest of Alphabet or just Google?
That was a good article! I was surprised to see how minuscule Google's non-advertising profit is. I wonder, is that including the rest of Alphabet or just Google?
GOOG ( the stock ) is the valuation of the umbrella company Alphabet that post was from 2012 so before Alphabet became a thing if we look at Alphabet's financial report for Q1 2018, they reported...
GOOG ( the stock ) is the valuation of the umbrella company Alphabet
that post was from 2012 so before Alphabet became a thing
if we look at Alphabet's financial report for Q1 2018, they reported $26.6B from Ads for a total of $31.1B ... so it's still minuscule :D ( and if I'm reading it right, the rest of the properties under Alphabet but not under Google are at a mere $150 millions )
thanks for doing that research, I grabbed that info while I was on mobile and missed the date, I'm glad the information is still relatively accurate. It is crazy to think the amount of money that...
thanks for doing that research, I grabbed that info while I was on mobile and missed the date, I'm glad the information is still relatively accurate.
It is crazy to think the amount of money that Alphabet/Google poured into things like Android how little revenue it brings them outside of Ads.
I would Also be interested in seeing how Facebook revenue stream is broken up, I would assume it is similar to $GOOG.
FB is actually much worse in terms of diversification: in Q1 2018 they reported $12B in revenue for $11.8B in Ads ( strangely after saying "we don't sell your data", they never mention they make...
FB is actually much worse in terms of diversification: in Q1 2018 they reported $12B in revenue for $11.8B in Ads ( strangely after saying "we don't sell your data", they never mention they make >98% of their revenue selling some kind of access to it )
I don't have lots of time today ( but I have to travel a lot next week so I might end up pursuing this a bit further ) but it's also interesting to note that it's not the first time MSFT goes above GOOG, the 2 have been "flapping" for a long time.
See my reply elsewhere in the thread, but O365 gives you a much different experience. The mobile stuff is tightly integrated with the desktop stuff and so you can work from wherever you are, using...
See my reply elsewhere in the thread, but O365 gives you a much different experience. The mobile stuff is tightly integrated with the desktop stuff and so you can work from wherever you are, using whatever device you prefer at that time. So I'll start a document on my desktop, then head out to meetings and whatnot where I can do light editing from my iPad. I'm sure this is possible to set up using the on prem stuff, but it Just Works on O365 without a lot of hassle.
Mainly just to stay on the latest version of office. However I think some plans can be cost effective if you have many computers (like a family or business). Usually offline license (one time buy)...
Mainly just to stay on the latest version of office. However I think some plans can be cost effective if you have many computers (like a family or business). Usually offline license (one time buy) are for 1-3 PCs, where I believe the office subscription model allows up to 5 (and you can remove/add PCs). But I could be wrong, we have the "E3" plan at work, which includes office.
From an article:
A subscription to Office 365 Personal -- which includes Office 2016 (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, Outlook, Publisher and Access -- for installation on one PC or Mac (plus one phone) is $70 per year. A subscription to Office 365 Home, which includes Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, Outlook, Publisher and Access, for installation on up to five PCs/Macs and five phones -- is $100 per year.
It's amazing for enterprise and business use. We're champing at the bit to transition over from Office 2013 right now to get all the cloud and collaboration features since the old version (and...
It's amazing for enterprise and business use. We're champing at the bit to transition over from Office 2013 right now to get all the cloud and collaboration features since the old version (and Exchange infrastructure) just can't support a lot of modern workflows or methods.
I'm sure these slightly older versions can be configured to but a lot of large orgs (like govs) just can't transition so much so quickly without a single sweeping change point like an MS Office upgrade.
It's shouldnt really surprise anyone that a company whose core business is actual products rather than nebulous ad-driven websites is more valuable. I feel we've hit peak website-companies, and...
It's shouldnt really surprise anyone that a company whose core business is actual products rather than nebulous ad-driven websites is more valuable. I feel we've hit peak website-companies, and the future will bring more news like this.
Microsoft is (relatively quietly) killing it with Office 365. A huge chunk of the Fortune 1000 are either already on O365, migrating to it or at least seriously considering it. And, as a...
Microsoft is (relatively quietly) killing it with Office 365. A huge chunk of the Fortune 1000 are either already on O365, migrating to it or at least seriously considering it. And, as a newly-converted O365 user, it's actually a great experience. They've integrated mobile and desktop very well, so you can use either or both interchangeably. It's an honestly better user experience than the old, on prem model that I've used for years.
Microsoft is way more diversified than Google in it's revenue stream
https://visualign.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/side-by-side-apple-microsoft-google-amazon/
With a push against tracking and Ad's Google's guaranteed cash cow is no longer certain.
And the best thing about Microsoft, is that it is no longer dependant on Windows for a revenue stream
Yea Microsoft is much more 'established' as a company. Not to mention they were packed full of cash in the 90s when they were the only game in town, and were able to diversify themselves considerably more than Google has, and buy up tons of companies. It will be interesting to see where they are in 20 years.
That was a good article! I was surprised to see how minuscule Google's non-advertising profit is. I wonder, is that including the rest of Alphabet or just Google?
thanks for doing that research, I grabbed that info while I was on mobile and missed the date, I'm glad the information is still relatively accurate.
It is crazy to think the amount of money that Alphabet/Google poured into things like Android how little revenue it brings them outside of Ads.
I would Also be interested in seeing how Facebook revenue stream is broken up, I would assume it is similar to $GOOG.
FB is actually much worse in terms of diversification: in Q1 2018 they reported $12B in revenue for $11.8B in Ads ( strangely after saying "we don't sell your data", they never mention they make >98% of their revenue selling some kind of access to it )
I don't have lots of time today ( but I have to travel a lot next week so I might end up pursuing this a bit further ) but it's also interesting to note that it's not the first time MSFT goes above GOOG, the 2 have been "flapping" for a long time.
Office365 and making office a subscription model probably helped a lot
I am still using 3026 and see no reason to upgrade. What is the point of the subscription model?
See my reply elsewhere in the thread, but O365 gives you a much different experience. The mobile stuff is tightly integrated with the desktop stuff and so you can work from wherever you are, using whatever device you prefer at that time. So I'll start a document on my desktop, then head out to meetings and whatnot where I can do light editing from my iPad. I'm sure this is possible to set up using the on prem stuff, but it Just Works on O365 without a lot of hassle.
To make more money. Why let someone buy something once when you can force them to keep buying it?
Mainly just to stay on the latest version of office. However I think some plans can be cost effective if you have many computers (like a family or business). Usually offline license (one time buy) are for 1-3 PCs, where I believe the office subscription model allows up to 5 (and you can remove/add PCs). But I could be wrong, we have the "E3" plan at work, which includes office.
From an article:
A subscription to Office 365 Personal -- which includes Office 2016 (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, Outlook, Publisher and Access -- for installation on one PC or Mac (plus one phone) is $70 per year. A subscription to Office 365 Home, which includes Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, Outlook, Publisher and Access, for installation on up to five PCs/Macs and five phones -- is $100 per year.
It's amazing for enterprise and business use. We're champing at the bit to transition over from Office 2013 right now to get all the cloud and collaboration features since the old version (and Exchange infrastructure) just can't support a lot of modern workflows or methods.
I'm sure these slightly older versions can be configured to but a lot of large orgs (like govs) just can't transition so much so quickly without a single sweeping change point like an MS Office upgrade.
It's shouldnt really surprise anyone that a company whose core business is actual products rather than nebulous ad-driven websites is more valuable. I feel we've hit peak website-companies, and the future will bring more news like this.
When you're worth the better half of a trillion dollars what does it really matter?
Microsoft is (relatively quietly) killing it with Office 365. A huge chunk of the Fortune 1000 are either already on O365, migrating to it or at least seriously considering it. And, as a newly-converted O365 user, it's actually a great experience. They've integrated mobile and desktop very well, so you can use either or both interchangeably. It's an honestly better user experience than the old, on prem model that I've used for years.