So, Mozilla and Google are upset because Firefox and Chrome won’t be able to run on Windows RT. But isn’t that obvious? For all the talk of “no compromises” out of Redmond, that’s exactly what Windows RT is: a compromise.

It’s a less-powerful version of Windows 8 that needs to be more tightly controlled to be able to run on less powerful ARM chips. Again, that means compromises. One of them is apparently browser control.

And Microsoft can probably do this because they’re a total non-player in the tablet space right now. While Mozilla and Google obviously think this should fall under the “browser choice” antitrust stuff from the 90s, this is clearly different. Windows RT is not going to have a monopoly over the market in any way, shape, or form. At least not anytime soon.

John Gruber brings up a good question:

What if Windows 8 for ARM, instead of being called “Windows RT”, were instead called, say, “Metro OS”? Would that make a difference? Is Dotzler arguing that Microsoft should not be permitted to ship a version of Windows that locks out third-party browsers, or that Microsoft should not be permitted to ship any OS that locks out third-party browsers?

In light of what Apple has done with iOS, it’s not clear how you can actually make the second argument. As such, it would be humorous if Microsoft continuing to use the “Windows” brand (even when they probably shouldn’t) came back to bit them in the ass here (but I don’t think it actually will).

I would say “case closed”, but we all know how much Google loves the word “open” — they’re asking for a mistrial. 

Seriously though, this sounds like a mixed bag. A loss for Google, but not a full loss. This is probably going to take several more weeks/months to fully play out.

More interesting is the macro picture. This is yet another headache surrounding Android, the “free” and “open” OS which has now been found to be infringing on someone else’s copyrights and which the majority of the big OEMs pay a licensing fee to Microsoft — not Google — to use. 

Gotta make room for “Windows RT” somehow. Only the strong survive.

Seriously, just look at that chart. Look at it!

For $99 you’ll get an Xbox 360 plus the Kinect and an Xbox Live Gold account provided you pay $15 a month for the next two years, as Tom Warren scoops for The Verge.

This seems like a pretty smart move by Microsoft — even though basic math shows that the current full-price Xbox 360 + Xbox Live subscription is a better deal. People are going to look at this and think: “Oh! $99 Xbox 360 plus Kinect! In!”

It’s the phone carrier subsidy model. 

Too bad it’s only in Microsoft Stores. Or maybe that’s part of the point too?

Continuing on the Apple margin kick, this is arguably the craziest thing: as Horace Dediu points out, Apple’s operating margin was so high last quarter that it surpassed the margin of both Google and Microsoft.

As a reminder, Apple is (mainly) a hardware company while Google is (mainly) an advertising company and Microsoft is (mainly) a software company. That is not supposed to happen.

Overall, a good quarter for Microsoft. Revenue was up 6% year-to-year thanks largely to the Server & Tools Division and the Business Division (read: Office). 

In other words, the quarter was driven by the enterprise side of the company.

Windows growth was up only slightly (4%), but that’s probably to be expected as Windows 8 nears. And Microsoft specifically called out the strong enterprise growth there as well.

On the full-on consumer side of things… the Entertainment & Devices Division (read: Xbox) saw revenue decrease 16% year-to-year. That’s not good. While Xbox was the top-selling console for the 15th straight month, the company cited a “soft gaming console market”.

For the quarter, the division actually swung to a loss — $229 million in the red.

A new Xbox can’t come soon enough for the company. And it’s not gonna happen until next year. 

But hands-down the best part of the release is this:

The Online Services Division reported revenue of $707 million, a 6% increase from the prior year period, and operating loss improvement of approximately $300 million.

“Operating loss improvement”. That’s one way to put it. 

In English, the Online Services Division continues to bleed: it lost $479 million last quarter. An improvement, yes — but mostly thanks to less costs. Revenues were only up $40 million. 

The division has not posted a profit since 2005.

Update: While Microsoft has set up a Windows Phone Division, for financial purposes, the devices are reported under the Entertainment & Devices Division (but the numbers aren’t broken out). It’s certainly possible that high Windows Phone costs contributed greatly to the E&D loss.

Update 2: As Mary Jo Foley points out, it was indeed the greatly depressed Xbox 360 sales that led to the loss.

Apple’s share price has passed Google’s at $632-a-share. Share prices are basically meaningless since the number of shares outstanding differ (Apple has nearly 3x the number of shares out there, and as such, nearly 3x the valuation). But the numbers are interesting in historical context. They show what a ride Apple has been on (while Google has remained relatively static). 

When Google went public in 2004 and their stock immediately popped over $100-a-share, Apple’s stock was trading around $15-a-share. When Google’s stock hit $500-a-share in November 2006, Apple’s stock was around $85-a-share. When Google shares peaked in late 2007 over $700-a-share and people were wondering if the stock was the next Berkshire Hathaway (up, up and away!), Apples stock was around $150-a-share. 

With the price and the number of shares outstanding, Apple’s valuation is now approaching $600 billion. The next closest company in terms of valuation is Exxon. Their market cap is $400 billion. The nearest tech company is Microsoft. Their market cap is $265 billion.

In-sane.