Talk:Microsoft/Archive 10

Internet Explorer obsolete
The introduction says "Its best known software products are the Microsoft Windows line of operating systems, the Microsoft Office suite, and the Internet Explorer and Edge web browsers." Should we remove Internet Explorer since it is obsolete and will not be supported after June 15, 2022? Andrewpmk | Talk 22:31, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

We can add a note that Internet Explorer is going to get discontinued on June 15, 2022 thus making it obsolete after that date. 223.184.77.204 (talk) 12:07, 23 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I think just leave such detail out of Lead and edit it out on June 2022. IE was a top product for 20 years and remains among ‘best known’, which is all the line is about.  If anything, out of the List of Microsoft software,  I would consider adding Bing and Skype.  Cheers Markbassett (talk) 03:30, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Section on tax avoidance? E.g Microsoft Irish subsidiary paid zero corporate tax on £220bn profit last year
Can I suggest that there is a subsection specifically on tax avoidance. E.g


 * https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/03/microsoft-irish-subsidiary-paid-zero-corporate-tax-on-220bn-profit-last-year
 * https://www.seattletimes.com/business/microsoft/how-microsoft-parks-profits-offshore-to-pare-its-tax-bill/

Thanks John Cummings (talk) 10:50, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Additionally Microsoft board recently appointed CEO Satya Nadella as its new chairman, can anyone update the same?

Thanks

Hello admins
Hi. I am Unibeq. Is it necessary to write the official font that is 'Segoe UI' and create one template space for it? Don't misinterpret me... Unibeq (edited) 09:28 AM IST, 28th August 2021
 * There is a page for Segoe, and Segoe UI redirects to the appropriate section on that page; do you perhaps mean that one of these should be linked from the Microsoft page? If so, where might it fit? Klbrain (talk) 12:45, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Question for historical logo
Seattle Times claimed Rick Eiber created logo for Microsoft. We are already collected historical logos of Microsoft, so which one is designed by him? -- Great Brightstar (talk) 04:26, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2021
In this category: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft#2020%E2%80%93present:_Acquisitions,_Xbox_Series_X/S,_Windows_11, It says Windows 11 is set to be released this Fall of 2021 however I request for it to be changed since Windows 11 has already been released on October 5 2021.

This is the line: On June 24, 2021, Microsoft announced Windows 11 during a livestream. The announcement came with confusion after Microsoft announced Windows 10 would be the last version of the operating system. It is set to be released in Fall 2021.Jkleditor (talk) 10:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC) Jkleditor (talk) 10:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Finished. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 13:56, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2021
Please revert the current revision, which replaced the Microsoft logo with one without the wordmark. 93.42.69.104 (talk) 22:57, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done — IVORK Talk 00:43, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

"Text of logo" in this Infobox is redundant
Logo is the place of only logo, note that in the top of Infobox there is the text "Microsoft Corporation" and in the article title there is the text "Microsoft", logoWithText is for when logo is ambiguous, but here there is no ambiguity. I think the attention of reader of article should not be attracted toward some word that is obvious to him and is redundant (there is 3 version of it in that page) because he wants only the logo, also machines that process this Infobox need only main logo, not logoWithText (see semantic web). Additionally PageImage of this article is now File:Building92microsoft.jpg which is an ambiguous building, and there is no meaning conveying from a building to the reader of such article when he/she hover mouser cursor to some Microsoft hyperlink, but a simple logo is clearly more illustrative (the objective of a logo designer is to convey such concept by the simplest way).

By these two reasons, I really think that we should use "text free logo" in the Infobox of this article and all similar articles, also in the template "Template:Infobox company" we should note this comment that "It is better to use a text free logo". Thanks, Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 04:24, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2022
Please describe the hostage crisis in Arcata from the perspectivw of Microsoft, as well as the CIA "crack-rock scheme", the sound system, the .gov-without-a-country-in-the-URL system, and the automobiles-swarming-me-phenomenn. Thank you. Messiahmckee (talk) 02:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. melecie   t  - 02:56, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Wifi password hacking
How to wifi password hacking 157.38.137.101 (talk) 06:10, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:14, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Microsoft logo (2012).svg

bob
bob the builder — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.37.211.80 (talk) 15:11, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Computer
Microsoft 103.159.178.95 (talk) 06:14, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

2021 revenue is incorrect
Looking at the source the revenue should be $168.1 billion instead of $161 billion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sushinred (talk • contribs) 20:31, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 June 2022
There is a spelling error in the first sentence. The current writing says, "....related services headquarted at the...". The incorrect spelling is "headquarted"; I believe it should be, "headquartered".

Thank you, Rmcguine (talk) 07:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Terasail [✉️] 10:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Revenue Is 198 billion dollars in 2022
Please update in revenue session 115.99.39.172 (talk) 17:26, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Request to split template:timeline Windows
That template is getting long. Should a separate template be created as suggested in the template's talk page?197.244.78.225 (talk) 22:52, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Who is 'he'?
This sentence's meaning is unclear. The pronoun 'he' refers to more than one person, I think. As such, one has to guess its meaning. "Allen claimed in Idea Man: A Memoir by the Co-founder of Microsoft that Gates wanted to dilute his share in the company when he was diagnosed with Hodgkin's disease because he did not think that he was working hard enough." 69.120.241.110 (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:53, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Aerial Microsoft West Campus August 2009.jpg

Microsoft divisions
Microsoft soon announced new ceo mr.Hanzala Kathewadi Microsoft is made up of 3 business unit: Microsoft Productivity & Business, Microsoft Cloud, and Microsoft More Personal Computing which Xbox Game Studios is under.

Only established tech company ready for the internet?
The subsection "1995–2007: Foray into the Web, Windows 95, Windows XP, and Xbox" includes the passage: With a few exceptions of new companies, like Netscape, Microsoft was the only major and established company that acted fast enough to be a part of the World Wide Web practically from the start. Other companies like Borland, WordPerfect, Novell, IBM and Lotus, being much slower to adapt to the new situation, would give Microsoft a market dominance.

I'm very confused. IBM WebExplorer, per one of the devs, began development in June 1994 before its Nov 1995 release (according to Wikipedia, though I can't find a source for that, and the article lists a 1.0 version from that Jan). IE similarly began life in summer 1994 before its release in Aug 1995 with Windows 95. Both tools were based on One could argue that the success of Windows 95 in crushing OS/2 gave Microsoft their internet lead by making them both the dominant OS and browser, which was the subject of the US government's antitrust case, but I don't think it's reasonable or fair to suggest that IBM simply didn't act fast enough in putting out a web browser or any internet software.

I'm confused about namechecking Borland and WordPerfect, as well. WordPerfect made, well, a word processor. By summer 1994, when Microsoft was working on IE, they were owned by Novell, which had already been producing all sorts of internet-related software for years including NetWare. They, too, failed in their efforts to take on Microsoft in the OS game, but that's not the same as not acting fast enough. Borland, similarly, made database software, not networking or browsing software. They made databases, spreadsheet software, and software development tools like IDEs. They announced added internet-related features to their software in July 1996, but even then, they bundled third party web server and browser tools. They weren't competing with Microsoft in the OS or web browser business, though they did on office software,

I do understand why this is in the article. I followed the link to the citation and that's what a paragraph in the book read, nearly verbatim. I know that original research isn't a basis for inclusion in an article, but regardless of this citation, as written, this line in the article makes no sense. By way of metaphor, it would read like saying, "Facebook succeeded by entering the social media market before companies like MySpace and Amazon" when, in fact, one company had a contemporaneous product which actually launched first and the other had and has nothing to do with social media. Jbbdude (talk) 19:24, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

"licensing" section removed
There was a section tacked on the end that was fluff about software developers being able to license MS tools and software, I assume that was safe to remove Gnisacc (talk) 18:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

ADD tipico 87.49.44.117 (talk) 03:16, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

"M1cr0s0ft" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=M1cr0s0ft&redirect=no M1cr0s0ft] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:19, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Minecraft question
Does Microsoft own minecraft? 220.215.94.26 (talk) 04:56, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * You can answer that question yourself by searching for  in the article. Peaceray (talk) 05:05, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

computer
Strikethrough this line is strike out 125.209.68.66 (talk) 17:13, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Show picture
Can show picture answer very fast and can answer anything you ask 103.200.34.132 (talk) 11:04, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Computer
How Will you define microsoft? 119.93.206.229 (talk) 11:29, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

New cat
Please could somebody add Category:Companies in the Dow Jones Global Titans 50 ? 78.148.152.27 (talk) 22:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)


 * ✅ Peaceray (talk) 14:22, 13 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.152.27 (talk) 12:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@ 120.29.72.247 (talk) 19:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

MOS:TIES should control on this issue
I just twice reverted an attempt by User:Graham11 to convert this American English article to British English, especially with regard to abbreviations and initialisms.

There is no doubt that Microsoft is a predominantly American subject. It was founded in New Mexico, incorporated in Delaware, and then moved to and still maintains its headquarters in Redmond, Washington.

Under MOS:TIES, "An article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation should use the (formal, not colloquial) English of that nation." In formal written English, many style guides (including Garner's Modern English Usage and the Bluebook), newspapers (including all five newspapers of record), and many professional publishers still prefer the traditional "U.S." over "US". Coolcaesar (talk) 05:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * MOS:US begins: This clearly tells us clearly that "US" is a permissible style in American English (even in an encyclopedic register) and that, per MOS:ENGVAR, we should generally prefer styles like "US" which are common to all varieties of English. (Were "US" not appropriate in American English in an encyclopedic register, MOS:COMMONALITY, which that quotation refers to, would not apply.) Do you read it otherwise, ?
 * Of course, MOS:US does allow "U.S." to be retained in American English articles where "there is [not] a good reason to change it". In the immediately following sentence, it gives an example of such a good reason: harmonizing country initialisms such as "US" and "UK", as "U.K." is never permitted on Wikipedia outside of a quotation and we cannot have two different country abbreviation styles in the same article. In this case, the article also uses "UK", so the only way to bring the article into compliance with the MOS is harmonize the country abbreviation styles. Graham (talk) 05:40, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Just noticed this. I strongly disagree. It sounds like you are interpreting MOS in such a manner in order to find excuses to convert articles on American topics entirely to British English, which is terribly inappropriate. All you will succeed in doing is alienating editors accustomed to writing in American English.
 * Keep in mind that English Wikipedia is already hemorrhaging editors like crazy. I keep running into articles that have been obviously vandalized in their lead sentences, but no one is bothering to fix them for as long as three, four, or five years because the regular editor base is already too small (probably down to less than 20,000). I've also noticed that over the last two years, Google has begun to deprioritize Wikipedia articles in its search results because too many articles have been overrun with misinformation or vandalism and the existing editor base has been unable to contain the damage.
 * The last thing we need to do is alienate the users of the single largest English dialect by number of native speakers. The less offensive and more appropriate approach is to provide country names in this article in full as much as possible, rather than convert the entire article over to British English. I'm planning to make those revisions when I have the time, then I will switch this mess back over to American English.  --Coolcaesar (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Please! Edit this text in the page of the "Microsoft"!
to edit these things in the wikipedia. KielYam1212 (talk) 15:50, 30 March 2024 (UTC)


 * ❌ it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Timur9008 (talk) 15:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC)