You want to know what the problem is here? Apart from wokeness? It's licensing. Microsoft Windows licensing is, to be frank, extortion, offers that can't be refused. That's the problem. > I JUST DON'T HAVE THAT PROBLEM WITH LINUX! I go into computer shops, they sell desktop PC's and are forced to sell them with M$ Windows installed because of licensing. I go into general electrical stores and they sell Windows PC's, yes, because of licensing. When I have to buy new hardware it comes with Windows installed by force onto me. Unless I buy a Chromebook or a Mac but that's the same. Forced on you proprietary operating systems. A fucking MAFIA. Yet I go on the Internet and server after server runs Unix operating systems of some sort or other, Linux or a free BSD derivative, etc. All over the web, these Linux / BSD servers are everywhere. You know why? Because they don't have to worry about high priced licensing that they would have to fret over with a Microsoft Windows OS. And it's not Linux or BSD that's Microsoft's downfall, or going woke, even though woke has certainly taken its toll on Microsoft by now. > It's expensive licensing and people have alternative options that are Microsoft's downfall. Linux, BSD, even Android is open source. They are where it's going. Wokeness is optional with those. And they are preferred now. Not just by me, but the masses. Too bad. It's not a brag, just how it is and how things are going. Maybe Bill Gates should have bought Ubuntu Linux going back to the future. Only joking. Or am I?

>>18972 >Get woke, go broke. I bet you $20k USD that Microsoft will still be in business 10 years from now. That's like $100 today adjusted for inflation

>>18972 > companies that would naturally go broke are propped up by NiggerRock, using OUR tax paying dollars. God, I love being in this gnostic hellhole.

>>18972 IBM fired 3900 people: https://archive.is/h7Iwz If you add these 3900 job cuts to Google's 12000, Microsoft's 10000 and Amazon's 18000, you get a total of 43900 people who learned to code for nothing. Get woke, go broke.

>>18992 There is no such thing as infinite money.

>>18977 It won't. Microshit is going bankrupt.

>>18999 This board is so slow, this thread will still be alive in 10 years. I can't wait to dunk on you when you're proven wrong

>>18998 >There is no such thing as infinite money. Sure there is, if the fed stops caring about hyperinflation.

>>18972 BuzzFeed net loss $27.0 million, est. loss $22.9 million https://archive.ph/4V10b Washington Post is closing its vidya section and firing at least 20 journiggers. https://notabird.site/sarafischer/status/1617960580719194113 https://archive.md/wip/KPjw2 https://www.washingtonpost(Please use archive.today)/media/2023/01/24/washington-post-layoffs/ https://archive.is/INQfS Xbox FY23 Q2 gaming revenue down 13% year-over-year https://www.windowscentral(Please use archive.today)/gaming/xbox/xbox-fy23-q2-gaming-revenue-down-13-year-over-year https://archive.is/Xjucg Get woke, go broke.

>>19009 >Get woke, go broke. All these corpos still have billions or trillions of dollars. When are they going broke exactly?

>>18997 Probably going to outsource. There's the problem, not coders. The problem is that slaves can be used more cheaply abroad and jobs gone across the US mainland. Outsourcing will take more than coding jobs eventually. Management should not get too comfy.

>>19052 Offshoring has been doing just that in a bigger than usual way since Rockefeller asked Bill Clinton (first black president) if he'd make sure NAFTA went through if he became president at the Bilderberg meeting, and of course Bill is politically savvy enough to know to say yes, and so he had the backing of the Rockefeller family and got NAFTA through. Of course, things can always keep getting worse. One imagines that the managerial ranks have more to worry about being bought out and replaced by foreign interests. A bad corporate tax environment just means re-incorporating in a different country, and not necessarily ditching domestic employees in some shell corporation or as part of a trust or whatever else. And there's also the question of how much coolie labor might be imported with borders wide open to criminal invaders to abate exactly how much might be better off physically moved overseas. It's slightly interesting to me to see silicon valley type megacorps trimming the fat. I guess all those overpayed code monkeys weren't really generating good ROI. Do they expect a lot better paying the same 3rd worlders back in their own countries after getting a free education in the US vs. paying them to stay in the US? My guess is that they'll lean toward offshoring the coding labor more, since the wages go further and it fits in with the general concept of infiltrating and controling foreign lands from afar (I think they used to call that things like "colonization" but don't tell the SJWs)

>>19057 The coders do their job but the big problem for them is that once their projects are completed, the coders are surplus. They are expensive ornaments. And management being the ambitious types don't have a problem getting rid of the excess baggage. Outsourcing maintains the projects after that and cheaper. I.T. staff are usually first out the door when that happens, it's standard. Back in time I.T. people were made to feel like gods, especially when something went wrong with machines and only the I.T. nerds could fix it. Now I.T. people are treated like trash once the hard work is done and management take it all for themselves and outsource any odd jobs that need doing. These cost cutting measures feel like an extreme though, this time around. Which means if the rounds of cuts don't stop then even middle management might feel the outsourcing boot on their tushes too.

>>19059 Back when I was working at a university, I found this old book from decades ago in the stairwell, the sort of random find one should in an old fashioned univerity full of old fashioned people. And as I leafed through it, it explained that staudies show that managers should plan that at least 25% of an employee's time should be expected to be spent on maintenance of legacy systems. And it had some other categories of time necessarily spent toward maintaining an ongoing operation rather than a throw-away project. And in the end it was I maybe less than 25% of an employee's time should be expected to go toward developing new ideas or actual productive work as one might expect that workers do all day. I don't think they teach from such books at MBA courses, but that was a well-thought-through book with citations and studies and everything. It's just one more reason why I dislike how most schools work in terms of generating a class project over maybe a week or a few weeks, and maybe there's a final project but even that probably doesn't even last the whole semester. That's not how the real world works, even if the real world moves at such a pace that you do wind up having to throw away a lot along the way in order to keep up. Tiny isolated temporary class projects that get automatically thrown out whether they ever worked or not is a bad model of thinking and experience for the workforce of the future.

>>19060 Graduates are lied to. They are bullshitted to. buffed up, made to feel that as soon as they get that piece of paper with their name on it, the streets will be paved with gold, they will be snapped up and start at a big corp with a salary so high it will insta-payoff their student debt. Most of the grads, IT grads included, were soon on welfare after graduation or flipping burgers for minimum wage stuck in a part time job they got while studying. With these layoffs, if I could just tell them to get the hell out of this big myth they are fed at university about how things will take off for them once graduated and tell them to head to a pro-Tech country that pays big and don't look back once employed, i wish I could get that through to them.Go somewhere like Singapore or Taiwan, somewhere tech savvy and pays well and won't lay you off over a cheap buck-saving. I just wish I could emphasize that enough so it gets through to them in time. Of course, the universities will be the only ones brainwashing these fresh meat to the grinder undergrads with their liberal programming and that's all they will live with until they are shoveled into the ovens like all the rest of the US cannon fodder by their own employers, the only thing they did wrong was trust those in charge. That's usually found out the hard way and that's what's happened with these recent layoffs, while the bosses get the cheaper outsourced labor in without a shred of conscience or care.

>>19062 >Graduates are lied to. When I was in school for a business degree, some HR lady came into our class to shill LinkedIn. She told us it would be literally impossible to get any job without a LinkedIn account. I have never had a LinkedIn account and have worked for ~10 companies. This lady also told us to wear a suit to every job interview no matter what. I brought this up to my manager when I worked in a tire shop. He told me he would never hire a mechanic who wore a suit to the interview, because he assumed they would be too prissy to get their hands dirty. He also looked down on people with college degrees for the same reason. Moral of the story is don't listen to HR roasties' advice about getting blue collar jobs.

>>19062 Yeah worked with one post doc who even had privs for being a black lady from uh either some island or maybe even Africa. So after she leap frogged off the nice university name and having worked with some known names in the field, she got a position in google research. Before she left, she was telling us how insane it was that after making a quarter million starting sallary in san fran she was going to have to shack up in a communal closet because everything is so ridiculously expensive there. I mean I can't deny that's some fuckin success compared to where she came from, and not necessarily with the best brains in the basket, but I can't imagine wanting that lifestyle. Give me my pleasant little apartment with a back yard and a garden and a driveway in a quiet neighborhood where I variously leave my door unlocked or open, and where I can walk through the woods for half my commute to work, showing up and leaving more or less whenever I want within reason. But I guess the joy of freedom is also the freedom to pick your own personal priorities. >>19064 I hate HR so much. One of my favorite life accomplishments was getting two people fired from HR for being incompetent and counterproductive power mongers. What a great feeling.

>>19065 *three quarters of a million starting salary I mean holy shitballs. Not that I want anything to do with living around silcicon valley or working for google reasearch anyway, but holy shitballs. And live in a communal shed?

>>18973 >I go into computer shops, they sell desktop PC's and are forced to sell them with M$ Windows installed because of licensing What are you talking about? Big OEMs like HP and Dell negotiate contracts with Microsoft. Boutique PC shops are not legally required to pursue such contracts. There is no industry safety regulation that says you lose your PC building license when you preinstall Linux

>>19078 Every shop i go to has MS Windows installed on most of their PCs for sale. The only other alternatives mainstream are Apple Macs or Google Chromebooks but the Windows laptops and desktops dominate the shop. It's obvious who won the licensing war.

>>19086 I can't speak for them all, but at least at the enterprise level you can often order them without a windows license since a lot of times they wind up with linux, either free or via a site license. Desktops at the enterprise level often get some kind of site bulk discount after negotiating a standard configuration or two, so that depends on who's doing the negotiating as to whether or not you get stuck paying for software licenses. I'd rather just whitebox most of the time anyway, although that's not always practical at scale, especially with all the stupid hoops you have to jump through on a lot of contracts, especially government ones. Laptops they pretty much have you by the nuts unless you really want to go out of your way. That sucks, but the US doesn't have the best track record in the world with antitrust even though it tried. Exxon-Mobile is a majority of what Standard Oil used to be, and now in the age of transnational conglomerates and cartels, nobody even bothers to try figuring out how much of Ma Bell is operating basically in lockstep, or if Stelanis might be a bigger too big to fail than the "big three" US automakers used to be. Oh well. I also didn't ask for this shitty touchpad instead of the superior nipple mouse, so you can't really expect to have it all if most things are aimed somwehere toward the mass market.

>>19086 >Every shop i go to has MS Windows installed on most of their PCs for sale. I understand that. My disagreement was with: >>18973 >they sell desktop PC's and are forced to sell them with M$ Windows installed because of licensing. There is no law preventing these PC shops from selling PCs with Linux/BSD/MacOS/Nothing installed. They choose to sell out to MS, because there is a monetary incentive. There is no "force" involved. Microsoft doesn't send thugs to break the store owner's kneecaps if he doesn't shill Windows. No cops will arrest the store owner for selling Linux PCs.

>>19088 >They choose to sell out to MS, because there is a monetary incentive. I want to expand on this to make it a bit more accurate. There are probably many PC store owners/managers who are ignorant about alternative operating systems. Then there are other owners/managers who are aware of the alternatives, but stick with Windows for convenience. It's not worth the time and effort to train their staff, and additionally to sell the value of non-Windows to their customers.

>>19088 Sure, but unless they're trying to carve out more of a whitebox or specialty niche, the average consumer is going to want windows or apple or some off-the-shelf ecosystem. I agree it sucks fo those of us who would rather not, but from the retailer's pserspective, is there really enough volume of non-licensed buyers to justify the overhead of a non-licensed line? That's why I suspect it remains more for the niche retailer. Especially if you're buying big name like HP or Dell, are you really going to walk because you can't buy it license-free? How many customers do they really lose that way? By comparison, last time I was in walmart (I needed a laptop ASAP on the road after breaking my old one fite me) what I noticed in the phone section was a lot of advertisement and placement for cracked or unlocked phones. What that tells me is that there's enough of a market out there for people who want and use such devices to dedicate floor space and product lines to it. Apparently not so much with people who don't want windows or whatever.. I don't know if I could argue that it's really anti-competitive to do that vs. tacking on promotional options. Do I need or want a laptop with THX sound (especially when THX stands for "this sucks"?) Well if I need it ASAP I'm limited to whatever they have in stock, rather than ordering exactly what I want and waiting for it to show up at uh, the truck stop on state road 230 eastbound in Fuckerville.

>>19088 I understood what you said, but there's very little boutique shops, if any at all, that have specialized computers with alternative operating systems installed after the lockdowns. Most of them shut down after going bust. All that's left are the big corporate stores only and their computers for sale have always been, and from the looks of it always will be, licensed Microsoft Windows on the desktops and laptops. And that feels forced on me, let alone any "optional" "between friends" contract that Microsoft has with hardware retailers. How does that affect the future? I don't actually know. Has even Microsoft reached a retail impasse with these layoffs? Hrmmmm.

>>19091 >>19093 >I understood what you said Apparently not, because you keep arguing for things that I already agreed to. My only issue with >>18973 was the misuse of the word forced. If a whore agrees to have sex for money, then it isn't rape.

>>19094 If the only alternative operating systems aren't feasible or realistically aren't going to replace Windows due to lack of popularity then of course Microsoft Windows is forced on the PC retailers and the masses. Sure go for the personal insults saying I don't understand, please do, it shows how weak your argument is. Please keep playing on the one little thing instead of moving on,which I am doing. You got your Don bosses in Redmond to keep happy.