Trending March 2024 # Enterprise Unix Roundup: Eu Vs. Microsoft Vs. Ibm # Suggested April 2024 # Top 5 Popular

You are reading the article Enterprise Unix Roundup: Eu Vs. Microsoft Vs. Ibm updated in March 2024 on the website Hatcungthantuong.com. We hope that the information we have shared is helpful to you. If you find the content interesting and meaningful, please share it with your friends and continue to follow and support us for the latest updates. Suggested April 2024 Enterprise Unix Roundup: Eu Vs. Microsoft Vs. Ibm

Over on IT Jungle, I just read an interesting story about how Microsoft is (by proxy) cleverly using the same law that was just smacked over its head for Windows market dominance against IBM’s mainframe base in Europe.

The story, by Hesh Wiener, is a fascinating look into the world of litigation-as-business-strategy, and details the complaint filed by Platform Solutions (PSI) against IBM for violating Article 82 of the European Commission (EC) Treaty. The complaint was filed, according to a Dec. 18 Reuters story, way back on Oct. 19.

“The complaint alleges that IBM has violated Article 82 of the EC Treaty by refusing to supply interface information relating to mainframe computers and refusing to license third parties,” spokesman Jonathan Todd said in a statement.

As both the Reuters and IT Jungle articles detail, all of this came about after IBM sued PSI in 2006 for violating IBM patents with software PSI used on its mainframes. PSI has since countersued, citing unfair competition. Given that IBM didn’t make any legal moves against PSI until it started getting some of its mainframes into IBM customer sites in 2005, one has to wonder if PSI may have a point. All of that, of course, is still pending a court decision.

According to the PSI Web site, its System64 mainframes are Itanium-based and:

System64 is fully compatible with IBM z/OS, OS/390, z/Linux and associated ISV and customer applications. Major system components of the PSI solution include 2 32-socket dual-core Itanium 2 servers capable of supporting z/OS, OS/390, z/Linux, HP-UX, Red Hat and SUSE Linux, OpenVMS and Windows Server 2003.

The Itanium machines, according to the Wiener article, are actually “a firmware-based mainframe system that runs on Itanium servers from NEC and Hewlett-Packard.” What’s more interesting is that several companies just gave PSI $37 million in Series C funding — including Intel and Microsoft, two companies that would love to see more Itanium machines out on the market.

The ultimate irony of Microsoft throwing in with PSI to crowd out IBM’s alleged over-dominance of the European market is that Article 82 is the basis of the recent EC anti-trust decision to force Microsoft to start coughing up technical information to competitors that want to develop or work with Windows. Microsoft lost its appeal on Sept. 17, 2007, about one month before PSI made its complaint and two months before the latest round of funding for PSI.

Coincidental timing? Maybe. Or maybe even while it was being spanked, Microsoft realized that the EC was serious about enforcing this anti-trust Article, and it saw this ongoing litigation between PSI and IBM as a way of kicking open the door into the European mainframe market. Perhaps it’s one of the reasons why Microsoft seemingly capitulated to the EC demand to start forking over technical documentation to projects like Samba, an open source project that allows communication between Windows and Linux or Unix systems.

When Microsoft actually did hand over that documentation on Dec. 20, you could have knocked a lot of IT observers over with a feather. Many people, myself included, were expecting the company to drag its feet on this issue for a long time.

Whatever the timing, clearly Microsoft and Intel both see this as a way of boosting a company that’s friendly to their products in a market on which Big Blue has a solid lock. Hence, the investment into PSI in November.

It’s a story that may not bode well for IBM’s mainframe business in Europe, and should PSI’s Article 82 complaint succeed, it will certainly alter the face of Unix in Europe.

Brian Proffitt is managing editor of JupiterWeb’s Linux/Open Source channel, which includes Linux Today, LinuxPlanet, and AllLinuxDevices.

This article was first published on chúng tôi

You're reading Enterprise Unix Roundup: Eu Vs. Microsoft Vs. Ibm

Enterprise Value Vs Equity Value

Enterprise Value vs Equity Value

Differences between enterprise value (firm value) and equity value

Written by

CFI Team

Published February 26, 2023

Updated July 7, 2023

Overview of Enterprise Value vs. Equity Value

In this guide, we outline the difference between the enterprise value of a business and the equity value of a business. Simply put, the enterprise value is the entire value of the business, without giving consideration to its capital structure, and equity value is the total value of a business that is attributable to the shareholders. Learn all about Enterprise Value vs Equity Value.

To learn more, watch our video explanation below:



Enterprise value

The enterprise value (which can also be called firm value or asset value) is the total value of the assets of the business (excluding cash).

When you value a business using unlevered free cash flow in a DCF model, you are calculating the firm’s enterprise value.

If you already know the firm’s equity value, as well as its total debt and cash balances, you can use them to calculate enterprise value.

Enterprise value formula

If equity, debt, and cash are known, then you can calculate enterprise value as follows:

EV = (share price x # of shares) + total debt – cash

Where EV equals Enterprise Value. Note: If a business has a minority interest, that must be added to the EV as well. Learn more about minority interest in enterprise value calculations.

or

Calculate the Net Present Value of all Free Cash Flow to the Firm (FCFF) in a DCF Model to arrive at Enterprise Value.

Equity value

The equity value (or net asset value) is the value that remains for the shareholders after any debts have been paid off.  When you value a company using levered free cash flow in a DCF model, you are determining the company’s equity value. If you know the enterprise value and have the total amount of debt and cash at the firm, you can calculate the equity value as shown below.

Equity value formula

If enterprise value, debt, and cash are all known, then you can calculate equity value as follows:

Equity value = Enterprise Value – total debt + cash

Or

Equity value = # of shares x share price

Use in valuation

Enterprise value is more commonly used in valuation techniques as it makes companies more comparable by removing their capital structure from the equation.

Example comparison

In the illustration below, you will see an example of enterprise value vs equity value.  We take two companies that have the same asset value and show what happens to their equity value as we change their capital structures.

As shown above, if two companies have the same enterprise value (asset value, net of cash), they do not necessarily have the same equity value. Firm #2 financed its assets mostly with debt and, therefore, has a much smaller equity value.

Download the Free Template

Enter your name and email in the form below and download the free template now!

Enterprise Value vs Equity Value Calculator Template

First Name

*

Email

*

Δ

Financial modeling applications

When building financial models, it’s important to know the differences between levered and unlevered free cash flow (or Free Cash Flow to the Firm vs. Free Cash Flow to Equity), and whether you are deriving the equity value of a firm or the enterprise value of a firm.

Learn more:

House analogy

One of the easiest ways to explain enterprise value versus equity value is with the analogy of a house.  The value of the property plus the house is the enterprise value.  The value after deducting your mortgage is the equity value.

Imagine the following example:

Value of house (building): $500,000

Value of property (land): $1,000,000

Box of cash in the basement: $50,000

Mortgage: $750,000

What is the enterprise value?

$1,500,0000. (Value of house plus value of property equals the enterprise value)

What is the equity value?

$800,000. (Value of the house, plus value of the property, plus value of the cash, less the value of the mortgage)

Here is an illustration of the house example with some different numbers. Each of the three houses below has a different financing structure, yet the value of the assets (the enterprise) remains the same.

The above example and screenshot are taken from CFI’s Free Intro to Corporate Finance Course.

More about enterprise value vs equity value

We hope this article has been a helpful guide on enterprise value versus equity value. To learn more, please check out our free introduction to corporate finance course for a video-based explanation of enterprise value versus equity value.

Linux Vs. Unix Values Evident In Red Hat, Sun Market Valuations

Let’s take a look at Sun Microsystems, the once mighty Unix vendor and maker of servers that powered the Internet, circa 1982. And Red Hat, a company that’s been purveying Linux software since 1995. Sun sells more than $13 billion of goods and services per year, while Red Hat sells a little over $600 million. So which is worth more?

Ask the market (and remember the market is not stupid, at least not in the long term), and the answer is that they’re both worth about the same: Both companies are currently valued by the market at about $2.7 billion. (Actually Red Hat is worth more than Sun today — which is a story in itself.) Sun’s value has been dropping like a stone over the past few months, while Red Hat’s has been soaring — almost doubling since mid-November. Today it’s up almost 2.5 percent.

There are a number of reasons for Sun’s declining share price that have been widely discussed. It’s not clear where Sun is going to make money in the future, in particular how or whether it will monetize its open source software and whether open source developers will drive sales for its systems and services. There’s probably also a feeling on the part of the market that Unix is not “where it’s happening.” Since Sun has cash reserves of roughly the same as its market valuation, the market is essentially valuing the entire Sun business at nothing.

But more interesting by far is the fact that the market values Red Hat — a Linux company with revenues of $600 million — at almost $3 billion in the current economic and market conditions. Why it is valuing Red Hat at this figure is also interesting.

Sun’s cash reserves give its shares an underlying value, which explains why the company might be worth what it is even if you value the business itself at nothing. But Red Hat has far less cash: about $1 billion at the last count. Adding in other assets doesn’t come close to $2.7 billion — the company is not being valued on an asset basis. And Red Hat pays no dividend (and isn’t a mature business like an oil company anyway), so it can’t be valued as a yield stock.

That leaves valuation on an earnings basis. The company’s earnings per share (EPS) on a historic (ttm) basis is about 41 cents. With the share price standing at $14.98, that puts the Red Hat on a price/earnings (P/E) ratio of 35.84. Which is very high indeed in the current market climate.

An uncommonly high P/E ratio might mean that the market has very high hopes for Linux in general, and Red Hat in particular. And that might make sense in the current economic climate. With tough trading conditions and sales plummeting for many businesses, open-source software sounds mighty attractive (without going in to the features and benefits and the whole cost of ownership thing). When markets get an idea in their head, money tends to flock to the obvious stocks — and Red Hat is arguably the brand in enterprise Linux. A P/E of 35 would then imply that the market expects some serious earnings growth from Red Hat — and perhaps Linux more generally — in the foreseeable future.

There’s another possibility of course. In contrast to Sun, the market might be expecting someone to come in and make a bid for Red Hat. After all, it’s Linux, not Unix, that the market seems to fancy at the moment.

Who might buy Red Hat is a game that can be played endlessly, and just about everyone who is anyone has been mentioned in the past — Microsoft, Dell, Google, Oracle, you name it. So what about another name that’s been mentioned less frequently in the past: Sun? Much of Red Hat’s business is selling support services for open source software, which is an activity Sun would like to be doing more of. Sun’s pretty much got the cash, and such a move might get its share price moving north again.

OK, so it’s not really that simple, and historically the two companies haven’t been the best of friends, but then who’d have thunk Microsoft would invest in Apple (to the tune of $150 million) back in 1997?

Ah, yes, Apple. Now there’s a company with the best part of $25 billion in the bank. I wonder if it is planning to spend any of that cash while Steve Jobs isn’t around? It could buy Sun and Red Hat if it wanted to, and establish itself in the enterprise marketplace without even breaking its stride. Now there’s a thought that puts the relative value of some well known names into perspective.

DEC PDP-11 in 1979.

Whatsapp Vs Instagram Vs Facebook Messenger Vs Snapchat

We compare the best of the current crop. It’s WhatsApp v Instagram v Facebook Messenger v Snapchat.

What devices can I use them on and how much do they cost?

It will probably come as no surprise that these apps are available on nearly all mobile platforms. WhatsApp has versions for iOS, Android, Windows Phone, Blackberry, and even some Nokia phones! You can also use its clever desktop app for Mac and PC which connects to your phone to display chats and messages. To see exactly how this works you can read our How to use WhatsApp on any Windows PC guide.

Facebook Messenger covers a lot of the same ground, with iOS, Android, and Windows Phone apps available, but as its web version is baked into the main Facebook site, it offers a bit more of a streamlined experience in this regard. There’s also a new ‘ Messenger Lite‘ which is good for older Android phones or those with limited monthly data.

Instagram is available for iOS or Android, and there’s a very basic web version for PCs. Snapchat is the most selective of the bunch, limiting itself to just iOS and Android.

How easy it to navigate around the apps?

They’ve had time to mature, so each of them is fairly straightforward, albeit with some quirks. WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger default to your Chat list when they launch, giving you instant access to previous conversations, all of which are shown chronologically.

Both have simple navigation buttons at the bottom of the screen (well, the top if you’re using WhatsApp on Android) which allow you to move between Chat, Calls, the Camera, and either Settings or Games depending on which app you’re in.

This similarity of design could well be down to the fact that Facebook acquired WhatsApp a while back, and has quietly set about standardising the layout. Whatever the reasons, Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp feel primarily about messaging, rather than the visual emphasis used by the other two apps.

Instagram, which coincidentally is also owned by Facebook, opens to the photostream of your friends and contacts. Unlike the former pair, Instagram doesn’t have an actual chat option that you can see, but swiping left opens up the Instagram Direct page where you can send private videos, photos, or messages to individuals or groups of friends.

Of all the apps in this roundup, Instagram is the one that acts essentially as its own social media platform, with the messaging capabilities something of an add-on.

Compared to the other apps here Snapchat is the one that has the least intuitive interface. That’s not to say that it’s complicated, but it just takes a little more getting used to.

When you launch the app the camera opens automatically, giving you a clue of how Snapchat wants to be used. Swiping right will open up the chat window, while swiping left will bring you to Stories, which are collections of short videos and images.

Snapchat recently added that ability for groups to add content to a Story, making it a great way to celebrate a trip or event.

Swiping left a second time unveils the Discover section, where there’s various content available from news outlets and online creators. This is usually in the form of video articles, celebrity news, or new product releases, all of which can be loud and colourful.

Content that you or your friends create is designed to be automatically deleted within 24 hours unless you specifically choose to save it, so Snapchat does have a more temporary feel than its rivals.

What features do they have? Chat

As we’ve alluded to above, all of the apps have some kind of chat feature. You can either exchange messages with individuals or groups, using mobile data or Wi-Fi. All also allow images, video, and emoji to be included in the conversations.

Calling

If you want to make free phone calls over Wi-Fi then Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp offer this very handy ability. So, when the call minutes allowance on your tariff is running low, or you can’t get a signal, this is an excellent way to stay in touch. Video calls are also available on both apps.

Image sharing and editing

Instagram is often cited as the app that started the whole filters craze, and it still remains a firm favourite for those who want to add a bit of style to their snaps. After capturing an image you’re free to apply one of the many filters that can transform a simple picture into a noire masterpiece or lend a fuzzy 70s feel.

There are options to crop the shot, alter the colour or temperature balance, and even add multiple images into a collage via the free Layout app.   

You won’t find many crazy animations, such as you will on Snapchat and Facebook Messenger, but it does boast Boomerang, which allows short videos to run forward then backwards, creating amusing, moving pictures.  

Snapchat takes a more youthful approach, offering facial animations that can add hats, animal features, or even turn you into a hot dog. Filters are based more on artistic styles which dramatically alter the colour and texture of an image, sometimes in quite spectacular fashion.

You can also add messages, draw on the images, or include geo-tagged titles letting people know where the photo was taken. Overall, it’s a lot more fun than Instagram, but might be a bit much for some.

Facebook Messenger takes its lead most definitely from Snapchat, offering plenty of amusing overlays, special effects, and ways to annotate an image. From floating disco balls, to Game of Thrones-style dragon fire, there’s plenty to keep you occupied. You can also employ some artsy filters, and various titles on your snaps.

WhatsApp is probably the most conservative of the bunch when it comes to image editing. You can apply a few different filters, add emojis, text, or draw on the image, but animations and wild styling are left to the other apps.

Stories So, which is the best app for you?

As with any software, this all comes down to what you intend to do. If keeping in touch with friends and family, while possibly arranging a holiday or event, then the simplicity and focus on group messaging that WhatsApp provides is a solid choice.

Instagram is the one for sharing photos and seeing what other people are creating, while Snapchat is perfect for quick videos and images that you can personalise and have fun with.

Facebook Messenger does a good job of mixing these various elements into one easy to use portal, and as such if you were only going to have one messaging app on your phone this would be the one we recommend. 

Of course, they’re all free, so there’s nothing stopping you from having them all!

You’ll also like:  10 ways to get more Instagram Likes that actually work

Microsoft Vs. Google Spurs Ballmer To Surpass Previous Performances

Microsoft vs. Google Spurs Ballmer to Surpass Previous Performances

Interesting doesn’t even begin to describe the titanic battle that is being quietly waged between Microsoft and its archrival Google. Ever since Bill Gates had the blinding realization Google was about to eat his lunch for breakfast , Microsoft has been living on the bleeding edge of search. It seems things might be getting out of control.

Gates was right to be worried about Google, which is growing internationally at an unprecedented rate. Google has lured away a number of Microsoft employees over the past year, the most famous of which was former VP at Microsoft, Kai-Fu Lee. It also recently hired former Microsoft .Net guru Mark Lucovsky, fuelling speculation it is developing an alternative operating system.

John Battelle published an account of Marc Luconvsky’s declaration to his blog on September 2nd . To quote the juicy part

“Prior to joining Google, I set up a meeting on or about November 11, 2004 with Microsoft’s CEO Steve Ballmer to discuss my planned departure….At some point in the conversation Mr. Ballmer said: “Just tell me it’s not Google.” I told him it was Google.

At that point, Mr. Ballmer picked up a chair and threw it across the room hitting a table in his office. Mr. Ballmer then said: “#%$**&@ Eric Schmidt is a@*%#@(* (@^&%^#^ I’m going to #%$**&@ bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I’m going to #%$**&@ kill Google.” ….

Thereafter, Mr. Ballmer resumed trying to persuade me to stay….Among other things, Mr. Ballmer told me that “Google’s not a real company. It’s a house of cards.”

Apparently things are much better on the other side of the fence, at least according to this blog posting by former Microsoft employee Joe Beda, celebrating his first year after defecting to Google.

Gates is right to be worried about Google. Maybe he should also be watching Ballmer, especially as it is reported that Ballmer will be attending Google’s seventh birthday celebrations later this week.

Uml Association Vs. Aggregation Vs. Composition

Relationships in UML diagram are used to represent a connection between various things. A relationship is a connection amongst things such as structural, behavioral, or grouping things in the unified modeling language.

Following are the different types of standard relationships in UML,

Association

Dependency

Generalization

Realization

Other than these, UML allows the use of aggregation and a composition relationship.

In this UML tutorial, you will learn:

UML Association

It is a structural relationship that represents objects can be connected or associated with another object inside the system. Following constraints can be applied to the UML Association relationship.

{implicit} – Implicit constraints specify that the relationship is not manifest; it is based upon a concept.

{ordered} – Ordered constraints specify that the set of objects at one end of an association are in a specific way.

{changeable} – Changeable constraint specifies that the connection between various objects in the system can be added, removed, and modified as per the requirement.

{addOnly} – It specifies that the new connections can be added from an object which is situated at the other end an association.

{frozen} – It specifies that when a link is inserted between two objects, then it cannot be modified while the frozen constraint is active on the given link or a connection.

We can also create a class that has UML Association properties; it is called as an association class.

Reflexive Association

The reflexive association is a subtype of association relationship in UML. In a reflexive association, the instances of the same class can be related to each other. An instance of a class is also said to be an object.

Reflexive association states that a link or a connection can be present within the objects of the same class.

Example:

Let us consider an example of a class fruit.

The fruit class has two instances, such as mango and apple. Reflexive association states that a link between mango and apple can be present as they are instances of the same class, such as fruit.

Reflexive Association

Directed Association

As the name suggests, the directed association is related to the direction of flow within association classes.

In a directed association, the flow is directed. The association from one class to another class flows in a single direction only.

It is denoted using a solid line with an arrowhead.

UML Association Example:

You can say that there is a directed association relationship between a server and a client.

A server can process the requests of a client. This flow is unidirectional, that flows from server to client only. Hence a directed association relationship can be present within servers and clients of a system.

Directed Association

UML Composition

It is not a standard UML Relationship, but it is still used in various applications.

Composite aggregation is a subtype of aggregation relation with characteristics as:

It is a two-way association between the objects.

It is a whole/part relationship.

If a composite is deleted, all other parts associated with it are deleted.

Composite aggregation is described as a binary association decorated with a filled black diamond at the aggregate (whole) end.

The folder could contain many files, while each File has exactly one Folder parent. If a folder is deleted, all contained files are removed as well.

In a composite aggregation, an object may be a part of only one composite at a time.

UML Composition Example:

For example, in a windowing system, a Frame belongs to precisely one Window. In a composite aggregation, the whole system is responsible for the disposition of its parts, which means that the composite must manage the creation and destruction of its parts.

Composition

UML Aggregation

An aggregation is a subtype of an association relationship in UML. Aggregation and composition are both the types of association relationship in UML. An aggregation relationship can be described in simple words as “an object of one class can own or access the objects of another class.”

In an aggregation relationship, the dependent object remains in the scope of a relationship even when the source object is destroyed.

UML Aggregation Example:

Let us consider an example of a car and a wheel.

A car needs a wheel to function correctly, but a wheel doesn’t always need a car. It can also be used with the bike, bicycle, or any other vehicles but not a particular car. Here, the wheel object is meaningful even without the car object. Such type of relationship is called UML Aggregation relation.

Aggregation

Association Vs. Aggregation Vs. Composition

Association Aggregation Composition

Association relationship is denoted using an arrow. Aggregation relationship is denoted using a straight line with an empty arrowhead at one end. Composition relationship is denoted using a straight line with a filled arrowhead at any one of the ends.

Association can exist between two or more classes in UML. Aggregation is a part of an association relationship. The composition is a part of an association relationship.

There can be one-one, one-many, many-one, and many-many association present between the association classes. Aggregation is considered as a weak type of association. The composition is considered as a strong type of association.

In an association relationship, one or more objects can be associated with each other. In an aggregation relationship, objects that are associated with each other can remain in the scope of a system without each other. In a composition relationship, objects that are associated with each other cannot remain in the scope without each other.

Objects are linked with each other. Linked objects are not dependent upon the other object. Objects are highly dependent upon each other.

In UML Association, deleting one element may or may not affect another associated element. In UML Aggregation, deleting one element does not affect another associated element. In UML Composition, deleting one element affects another associated element.

a teacher provides instructions to the students. A car needs a wheel, but it doesn’t always require the same wheel. A car can function adequately with another wheel as well. A file is placed inside the folder. If one deletes the folder, then the file associated with that given folder is also deleted.

Summary

A relationship is a connection between things.

Association, dependency, generalization, and realization are various relationships provided by UML.

Apart from standard relationships, composition and aggregation are used inside the UML.

Aggregation and composition are both the types of association relationship in UML.

The UML Composition is a two-way relationship which is also called as a binary relationship.

Update the detailed information about Enterprise Unix Roundup: Eu Vs. Microsoft Vs. Ibm on the Hatcungthantuong.com website. We hope the article's content will meet your needs, and we will regularly update the information to provide you with the fastest and most accurate information. Have a great day!