Which company is more evil? Sony or Microsoft?

[Asher]

Yes yes, I see that now.

Still, revenues don't mean size, it means volume of sales.

Company size is determined by market capital. In which MS is most certainly way ahead of Sony.

What do you know of economics?

[Saint Marcus]

clearly more than you

I don't go looking for Sony in the Fortune500 rankings.

[Asher]

I was looking at a chart that said "2002" while yours said "1999-2000" and that's all I saw.

Revenues mean little to nothing because the costs to maintain those revenues are so much higher for most companies (Sony, Walmart).

Market capital (market cap) is the way a company's size is usually measured.

[Saint Marcus]

here on the business news we usually get profit, turnover and the increase/decrease in them. Market capital is usually mentioned among other things, but it doesn't has the focus. Also not surprising that Fortune bases it's lists on revenue, and not on market cap, when listing the biggest companies.

and yes I know that says nothing about it's performance, but it is the measure for it's size.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Choosing between the evil satan of software and Sony, I would still choose Evil Satan of Software (...MSFT)

[Asher]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
here on the business news we usually get profit, turnover and the increase/decrease in them. Market capital is usually mentioned among other things, but it doesn't has the focus. Also not surprising that Fortune bases it's lists on revenue, and not on market cap, when listing the biggest companies.

and yes I know that says nothing about it's performance, but it is the measure for it's size.

It's a measure of size of volume of sales, not size of the company or the company's clout in the marketplace.

And what do you mean turnover? Here in North America turnover tends to mean employee turnover, which means higher turnover rates are bad since people are fleeing the company on a regular basis.

And profits, you say?
Since Sony nearly posted a loss last year, and MS posted record profits....I wonder....

[Saint Marcus]

and you know why people vote on MS?

posters usually have Sony stuff at home, as well as MS stuff. For some reason, the Sony stuff is usually working rather well, and the MS stuff, well, isn't. Add to that the monopoly MS has, and is abusing, and you got yourself a winner. Sure Sony does some ugly crap too, but the word most closely asociated with "anti-trust" is Microsoft.

[Saint Marcus]

turnover = revenue

in dutch "omzet"

and MS posted record profits....I wonder....

Duh. they have no competition in the market.

[Asher]

Just some fun figures for profits from the year 2000:
Sony: $2.40B (on revenue of $66B)
Microsoft: $20B (on revenue of $23B)

[Saint Marcus]

I wouldn't expect anything else. getting profit is so much easier when you have a monopoly.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
posters usually have Sony stuff at home, as well as MS stuff. For some reason, the Sony stuff is usually working rather well, and the MS stuff, well, isn't. Add to that the monopoly MS has, and is abusing, and you got yourself a winner. Sure Sony does some ugly crap too, but the word most closely asociated with "anti-trust" is Microsoft.

Yeah, and it's a shame since the anti-trust trial in the US has been laughable. It's all based upon hearsay and people whining, and when it came to produce facts and proof to the judge they were all empty handed.

And I quite enjoy the Xbox, Windows XP, and Office XP. No complaints from me.

Although I also quite like my Sony WEGA XBR TV.

But my PS2 pissed me off. They overcharged for it and created artificial supply shortages to increase publicity on launch, and it's got some of the worst design ideas ever conceived. 4MB video RAM?! No easy way to anti-alias?! No easy way to reduce flicker?! Power button on the BACK?! 16 graphics pipes with the memory bandwidth to feed four of them?! No multi-texturing support?!

Not to mention the high CD prices Sony helps maintain, as well as high DVD prices and boxoffice prices.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
I wouldn't expect anything else. getting profit is so much easier when you have a monopoly.

If you'd look at the actual balance sheet, you'd see that it's not the monopoly factor that keeps their profits up.

Software has incredibly high margins. It's phenomenal. While Sony is stuck in physical, tangible objects they've got HUGE costs to revenues accordingly, whereas MS has the cost to develop upgrades to software, press a CD, and box it. Tada.

Most software companies have incredibly high margins like MS. It's a far better business model.

[Saint Marcus]

loads of software companies now don't have any profit at all, due to the collapse of the market.

MS is of course a notable exception. why? monopoly.

[Saint Marcus]

BTw, you haven't mentioned the sheer size of the XBox. It's way to big and bulky for me. I simply don't have any room for it

[Asher]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
BTw, you haven't mentioned the sheer size of the XBox. It's way to big and bulky for me. I simply don't have any room for it

It's the size of a VCR. What kind of shanty do you live in?

It works great, it fits on a home theatre rack right above my VCR and below my DVD player. And it works like the other devices too. Power button on the FRONT, tray slides out the FRONT.

The reason why the Xbox is so big is because you get more with it, such as the built in hard drive, ethernet, dolby digital encoder, and a big reprogrammable GPU chip.

I can't wait until you start *****ing about the sheer size of your PS2 with the external HDD and Ethernet addons. Not to mention that it'll cost you nearly the price of an Xbox alone just to get those addons and still have the inferior graphics and sound.