Google

2011 in High Tech YTD Part 2: Management Shakeups at Google, HP, Microsoft etc.

Revolving Door

In contrast to Apple’s stunning success, the first calendar quarter of 2011 was a revolving door for other Silicon Valley companies and executives. There were management shifts, shakeups and ousters at Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), Google, Hewlett-Packard (HP) and Microsoft. They were variously aimed at jumpstarting product momentum (AMD, Microsoft), polishing a tarnished image and placating stockholders (HP) and providing an orderly transition of power (Google).

You need a scorecard to keep up with all the comings and goings.

AMD’s board ousted chief executive Dirk Meyer in mid-January after only 18 months on the job. It then appointed Senior Vice President and CFO Thomas Seifert, as interim CEO while the search goes on for a permanent chief executive. Siefert continues as chief financial officer and says he does not want to be considered for the permanent CEO position. This is probably a smart move. AMD’s flamboyant co-founder Jerry Sanders spent 33 years as CEO (1969 to 2002), but everyone who’s followed has had a short tenure. …

2011 in High Tech YTD Part 2: Management Shakeups at Google, HP, Microsoft etc. Read More »

2011 YTD in High Tech: Bold Aggressive Actions

It’s hard to believe but the first quarter of 2011 is now a memory and we’re well into spring. The tone for the year in high technology was set in early January: fast, bold, aggressive action and sweeping management changes.

In the first four months of the year high tech vendors moved quickly and decisively to seize opportunities in established sectors (smart phones, virtualization, back-up and disaster recovery) and emerging markets (cloud computing, tablet devices and unified storage management). As 2011 unfolds, it’s apparent that high technology vendors are willing to shift strategies and shed executives in order to stay one step ahead of or keep pace with competitors. The competition is cutthroat and unrelenting. No vendor, no matter how dominant its market share, how pristine its balance sheet or how deep its order backlog and book to bill ratio dares relax or rest on its laurels for even a nanosecond.

Recaps of some of the year’s highlights thus far are very revealing. …

2011 YTD in High Tech: Bold Aggressive Actions Read More »

iPad2 Smashes Sales Records

It’s thinner. It’s faster. It’s here. It’s… Sold Out.

The “It” is the iPad2.

And with about 600,000 iPad2 units sold in the first three days of shipment – roughly twice as fast as the original – the iPad can now officially take its place in the pantheon of celebrated phenomena alongside the hula hoop, the Rubik cube, Elvis, Marilyn, Beatlemania, Bieber Fever et al.

Faster than you can say “I gotta have it” Apple’s iPad2 flew off the shelves on Friday and Saturday, dashing any notion (as well as the hopes of more than a few competitors) that the device and the public’s appetite for it has waned in the past year.

The iPad2 was out of stock at every one of the over three dozen Apple Retail stores that I phoned over the last 72 hours. The phone lines were jammed and I spent about five to 10 minutes typical in the busiest locations. …

iPad2 Smashes Sales Records Read More »

The Patent Game: Everybody’s Playing, You Snooze, You Lose

“Let the future tell the truth, and evaluate each one according to his work and accomplishments. The present is theirs; the future, for which I have really worked, is mine.”

— Nikola Tesla

Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla have a lot in common with Apple, Google, HTC, and Motorola & Research in Motion.

They were/are all warriors in the ongoing war to see who can amass the largest number of the most lucrative technology patents. Edison and Tesla waged their battle from the late 1860s through the 1920s and the stakes were just as high then as they are now.

Nary has a week gone by without mention of the latest contretemps among the high tech industry titans. There’s been no cessation of hostilities during the holiday season. If anything, top tier companies have become even more aggressive about solidifying and extending their dominance in and out of their core competencies as 2010 comes to a close. …

The Patent Game: Everybody’s Playing, You Snooze, You Lose Read More »

Happy 1st Birthday Windows 7; Now Can We Please Cancel Microsoft’s MidLife Crisis?

Windows 7 is now officially a year old. Since it was released October 22, 2009, Microsoft has sold over 240 million copies of the operating system — approximately seven copies per second. That makes it the fastest selling operating system in Microsoft’s history or any vendor’s history. Some industry pundits estimate that Windows 7 sales will top 300 million within the next six-to-eight months.

Microsoft has plenty of other reasons to celebrate Windows 7’s first birthday. Windows 7 has also been one of the most stable, reliable and secure releases in Microsoft’s history.

A three-quarters majority – 73 percent of the 400+ respondents to the latest joint ITIC/Sunbelt Software poll, gave Windows 7 an “excellent,” “very good” or “good” rating. …

Happy 1st Birthday Windows 7; Now Can We Please Cancel Microsoft’s MidLife Crisis? Read More »

The Dog Days of Summer & High Tech Hijinks

In the mid-to-late 1980s colleagues and friends were surprised when I transitioned from working as an on camera investigative TV reporter to cover the then-fledgling high technology industry for specialized trade magazines.
After all they reasoned, how could I be content covering semiconductors, memory boards, server hardware, software and computer networks after working as a mainstream journalist covering stories such as lurid political and law enforcement corruption scandals ; drug trafficking; prostitution; dumping tainted substances on unsuspecting third world nations and cover-ups by big business when their planes, trains and automobiles malfunctioned? How could I trade in “murder and mayhem” for the staid, sterile world of high technology?
They needn’t have worried.
Admittedly, mastering the technology was a challenge. For the first few weeks every time I did story on PALs and had to spell out the acronym I wrote “Police Athletic League” instead of Programmable Array Logic. And then there was my first work-related trip to Las Vegas to cover the mammoth spectacle that was Comdex circa 1988. In the dark ages before wireless, laptops and decent broadband, it was nearly impossible to file stories from your hotel room because the trunk lines were overwhelmed. A colleague and I were forced to trek down to a bank of pay phones to transmit our news articles at 2:30 a.m. and were mistaken for hookers. The pay was arguably better than a journalist’s salary but we passed. Incidents like this made me feel close to my cops and crimes, murder and mayhem investigative TV roots.
I felt at home covering technology right away. Within a month, I was chronicling tales of high tech companies sending their top executives off to rehab for drug and alcohol addiction; there was a rash of top executives leaving established powerhouses like and taking top engineers and sales executives with them, which in turn precipitated a slew of theft of trade secrets and patent infringement lawsuits. Things really got interesting when Robert Morris, Jr. launched his now infamous Internet Worm; there were myriad other tales of sex scandals, involving corporate executives, board of director fights and coups, price fixing, hostile takeovers, corporate espionage and fiscal chicanery that entailed everything from embezzlement and theft to cooking the books .
Reality TV and the tabloids have nothing on high technology industry hijinks.
Fast forward to what’s making headlines during these “Dog Days” of summer 2010. The ancient Greeks and Romans believed that the dog days of summer (named after the constellation Sirius or Dog Star) lasted from late July to early September and hot weather foreshadowed evil doings. John Brady’s “Clavis Calendarium of 1813 describes it as “an evil time when the seas boiled, wine turned sour, dogs grew mad, and all creatures became languid, causing to man burning fevers, hysterics, and phrensies.” The recent spate of high tech headlines seems to bear that out. Here’s a sampling:
• The Hewlett-Packard board of directors abruptly fired CEO Mark Hurd, after allegations of sexual harassment surfaced.
• Oracle CEO Larry Ellison publicly blasted the HP board for firing Mark Hurd.
• Oracle sued Google for alleged patent and copyright infringement involving the use of Java intellectual property in Google’s mobile Android operating system.
• Google StreetView maps prompts privacy lawsuits and raids in several countries including South Korea
• Google releases version 6 of its Chrome web browser and vows to issue a stable new release every six weeks.
The headlines provide an accurate assessment of both the current state and the direction of the high tech industry. Four words say it all: sex, money, power and posturing. Let’s examine some of the stories in more detail.
The HP board of directors’ decision to fire CEO Mark Hurd after five years of stewardship remains cloaked in mystery. Hurd may or may not have been guilty of fudging expense reports and engaging in conduct not up to HP’s standards with Jodie Fisher, a contract HP “adviser” and sometime actress. In addition to being an adviser, Fisher also received $5,000 to attend HP events acting as a “meet and greet” hostess. Fisher, who retained the services of celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred, may or may not have been a victim of harassment. We don’t know for sure because all of the principals in this tableau are mum. Rumors are rife that the “real reason” the HP’s board may have shown Hurd the door is because: 1) he may have been more involved than was previously thought in the 2006 HP board of directors “pretexting” scandal. At that time, HP board members illegally spied on other board members to learn the source of news leaks and 2) Hurd was exceedingly unpopular with rank and file HP employees.
By all monetary measures, Hurd’s five year stint at HP was a resounding success. And for that, Hurd will walk away with a $40 to $50 million severance package. No one knows how much Fisher received, because Hurd and Fisher settled whatever transpired between them, privately. But it must be a pretty good sum, because Fisher issued a very upbeat and conciliatory statement saying she did not intend for Hurd to lose his job and wishes Hurd, his family and HP all the best. Thankfully, I read this on an empty stomach!
What’s wrong with this picture? Plenty.
The real victims here are HP’s rank and file employees, the American worker and sexual harassment victims – both men and women – who lack the clout to hire a Gloria Allred to rattle her saber for another 15 minutes of fame and a quick, inglorious settlement.
The average Joe and Jane worker have seen their ranks decimated with each new acquisition and round of layoffs. HP currently ranks number 9 on Fortune 500 list. In the past several years it has acquired Compaq, EDS, 3Com and Palm. Those mergers and acquisitions helped HP become the first high tech company to have annual revenues that exceed the $100 billion threshold. HP is also first in another category – albeit an unwelcome one: despite its stellar financial performance, over the last decade HP has cut more jobs (most of them here in the U.S.) than any other high tech firm. The head count stands at approximately 85,000.
So Mark Hurd gets $40 to $50 million and tens of thousands of HP’s American employees get shown the door.
Then there’s Ms. Fisher. I know nothing about the woman. One must presume if Hurd was willing to settle with her that her claim had some merit. However, as soon as I heard she was represented by Allred, I cringed. Allred has turned into a modern day Carrie Nation for the tabloid TV generation. In an age of instant and continual information via the Tabloids and the Web, publicity is the chief currency – the more salacious and lurid, the bigger the settlement. I phoned Allred’s office to inquire how many pro bono and non-celebrity sexual harassment cases she handles. I haven’t heard back yet and I’m not too hopeful.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) received 12,696 complaints of sexual harassment in the workplace – 16% of them by men. The EEOC says it recovered $51.5 million in monetary benefits for those nearly 13,000 workers. That’s probably just about what Mark Hurd, Jodie Fisher and Gloria Allred pocketed among the three of them. Nice work if you can get it.
That brings me to another prominent headline of the past couple of weeks: Oracle chief Larry Ellison, in an interview with the New York Times blasted the HP board for firing his longtime friend Mark Hurd. Ellison’s comments have all the credence of a professional athlete convicted of using steroids writing an editorial extolling the virtues of doping. Oracle, which completed its acquisition of Sun Microsystems earlier this year, is gearing up to axe up to one-third to one-half of Sun’s workforce of over 25,000. No one is sure exactly how many Oracle employees will be pink slipped but estimates range from 5,000 to as high as 10,000. Oracle disclosed in a recent government finding that it will take write off $825,000 in restructuring charges.
The question is will Larry Ellison make room for Mark Hurd at Oracle? He might. Hurd has a proven record of cutting costs, cutting people and thus delivering value to shareholders.
The real measure of a company’s success should not be measured by how many jobs it cuts by how many jobs it creates for the American worker.
Oracle also made headlines and flexed its muscles last week with the announcement that it is suing Internet search engine giant Google for allegedly infringing on the Java patents Oracle now owns as part of the Sun acquisition, that are used in Google’s mobile Android operating system. This is all about Oracle making a preemptive strike to try and contain Google in what’s shaping up to be a battle of high tech titans. Google’s Android OS runs on many of the major mobile phone platforms including Motorola and HTC Corp. The implications are enormous. Don’t expect this one will ever get to court. Neither firm wants to spend millions or expend precious corporate resources in a protracted legal battle, which would be detrimental to both sides. Expect them to settle. But we can also expect the acrimony between these two rivals to rise commensurately along with the stakes in the mobile market.
Google meanwhile engaged in some posturing of its own. The company released beta version 6 of its Google Chrome web browser. Google also says it will issue a stable new release of the browser every six weeks. This move is clearly designed as a challenge to Microsoft Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox and Apple Safari. While I applaud Google’s initiative and desire to retain its competitive edge, releasing a new version of its browser every six weeks is overkill. No matter how fast Google or any vendor makes its browser, the actual speeds are still determined by the user’s broadband. And frankly, the constant application upgrades to everyday packages like Adobe, WordPress and the various browsers are a nuisance. One can barely log on to an application without being hounded to upgrade to the latest version. It’s a major nuisance.
But these days, companies feel compelled to make an announcement just to keep their names in the headlines at all costs. There’s never a dull moment in the high tech industry, especially during the dog days of summer. I can’t wait to see what fall brings. If you have any ideas, Email me at: ldidio@itic-corp.com.

The Dog Days of Summer & High Tech Hijinks Read More »

Apple, Google Grapple for Top Spot in Mobile Web

Since January, the high technology industry has witnessed a dizzying spate of dueling, vendor product announcements.
So what else is new? It’s standard operating procedure for vendors to regularly issue hyperbolic proclamations about their latest/greatest offering, even (or especially) when the announcements are as devoid of content as cotton candy is of nutritional value. Maybe it’s just an outgrowth of the digital information age. We live and breathe instant information that circumnavigates the globe faster than you can say Magellan; the copy monster must be fed constantly. Or maybe it’s the protracted economic downturn which is making vendors hungrier than ever for consumer and corporate dollars.
Whatever the reason, there’s no doubt that high technology vendors – led by Google and Apple – are engaged in a near constant game of one-upmanship.
Apple indirectly started this trend in early January, when word began leaking out that Apple would finally announce the long-rumored iPad tablet in late January. The race was on among other tablet vendors to announce their products at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas in mid-January to beat Apple to the punch. A half-dozen vendors including, ASUSTeK Computer (ASUS), Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Lenovo, Taiwanese manufacturer Micro Star International (MSI) and Toshiba all raced to showcase their forthcoming wares in advance of Apple. It made good marketing sense: all of these vendors knew that once Apple released the iPad, that their chances of getting PR would be sorely diminished.
I have no problem with smaller vendors or even large vendors like Dell and HP, who rightfully reckon that they have to make their announcements in advance of a powerhouse like Apple to ensure that their products don’t get overlooked.
Apple vs. Google Battle of the Mobile Web Titans
But when the current industry giants and media darlings like Apple and Google start slugging it out online, in print and at various conferences, it’s overwhelming.
Apple and Google are just the latest in a long line of high technology rivalries. In the 1970s it was IBM vs. HP; in the 1980s, the rise of networking created several notable rivalries: IBM vs. Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC); IBM vs. Microsoft; Oracle vs. IBM; Novell vs. 3Com; Novell vs. Microsoft; Cabletron vs. Synoptics and Cisco vs. all the internetworking vendors. By the 1990s it was Microsoft vs. Netscape and Microsoft vs. pretty much everyone else.
The Apple vs. Google rivalry differs from earlier technology contests in that the relationship between the two firms began as a friendly one and to date, there has been no malice. Until August, 2009 Google CEO Eric Schmidt was on Apple’s board of directors. And while the competition between these two industry giants is noticeably devoid of the rancor that characterized past high tech rivalries, it’s safe to say that the two are respectfully wary of each other. Apple and Google are both determined not to let the other one get the upper hand, something they fear will happen if there is even the slightest pause in the endless stream of headlines.
Google and Apple started out in different markets – Google in the online search engine and advertising arena and Apple as a manufacturer of consumer hardware devices and software applications. Their respective successes – Apple’s with its Mac hardware and Google’s with its search engine of the same name have led them to this point: a head to head rivalry in the battle for supremacy of the mobile Web arena.
On paper, they appear to be two equally matched gladiators. Both companies have huge amounts of cash. Apple has $23 billion in the bank and now boasts the highest valuation of any high technology company, with a current market cap of $236.3 billion, surpassing Microsoft for the top spot. Google has $26.5 billion in cash and a valuation of $158.6 billion. Both firms have two of the strongest management and engineering teams in Silicon Valley. Apple has the iconic Steve Jobs who since his return has re-vitalized the company. Google is helmed by co-founders and creative geniuses Larry Page and Sergey Brin and since 2006 and Eric Schmidt, the CEO who knows how to build computers and make the trains run on time.
Fueling this rivalry is Apple’s and Google’s stake in mobile devices and operating systems. In Apple’s case this means the wildly successful iPhone, iPod Touch and most recently the iPad and the Mac Mini. Google’s lineup consists of its Chrome OS and Android OS which will power tablet devices like Dell’s newly announced Streak, Lenovo’s forthcoming U1 hybrid tablet/notebook due out later this year. The rivalry between the two is quite literally getting down to the chip level. Intel, which has for so long been identified with Microsoft’Windows-based PC platform is now expanding its support for Android – a move company executives have described as its “port of choice” gambit. Apple is no slouch in this area, either: its Macs – from the Mac Minis’ to the MacBook Pros, ship with Intel inside. Last week Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang weighed in on the Apple/Google rivalry on Google’s side, predicting that the tablet designs will converge around Google’s operating system.
But a stroll through any airport, mall, consumer home or office would give a person cause to dispute Huang’s claim: iPads and iPhones are everywhere. Apple recently announced that it has sold over two million iPads since the device first shipped in April. During a business trip from Boston to New Orleans last week I found that Apple iPads were as much in evidence as hot dogs at a ballpark.
Ironically, Microsoft, a longer term traditional rival of both Apple and Google is not mentioned nearly so often in the smart phone and tablet arenas. That’s because Microsoft’s Windows OS is still searching for a tablet to call its own. Longtime Microsoft partner HP, abruptly switched course: after Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer got on stage and demonstrated Windows 7 running on HP’s slate, HP bought Palm and earlier this week acquired the assets of Phoenix Technologies which makes an operating system for tablets. That leaves Microsoft to promote its business centric Windows 7 phone which will run Xbox LIVE games, Zune music and the company’s Bing search engine. All is not lost for Microsoft: longtime “frenemy” Apple CEO Steve Jobs said recently that the new iPhone 4G will run Microsoft’s Bing fueling speculation that Apple will drop support for Google’s search engine. Both Google and Apple are still competing with Microsoft in other markets like operating systems, games and application software to name a few, but that’s another story.
There are other competitors in the smart phone and tablet markets but you’d hardly know it from the headlines. Research In Motion’s (RIM) Blackberry is still a market leader. But Apple and Google continue to dominate the coverage. I guess high technology just like sports revels in a classic rivalry. And this one promises to be a hard fought struggle.

Apple, Google Grapple for Top Spot in Mobile Web Read More »

Microsoft Azure Platform, BPOS Cloud Vision Must Address Licensing

Microsoft did a very credible job at its TechEd conference in New Orleans last week, laying out the technology roadmap and strategy for a smooth transition from premises-based networks/services to its emerging Azure cloud infrastructure and software + services model.

One of the biggest challenges facing Microsoft and its customers as it stands on the cusp of what Bob Muglia, president of Microsoft’s Server & Tools Business (STB) unit characterized as a “major transformation in the industry called cloud computing,” is how the Redmond, Wash. software giant will license its cloud offerings.

Licensing programs and plans—even those that involve seemingly straightforward and mature software, PC- and server-based product offerings—are challenging and complex in the best of circumstances. This is something Microsoft knows only too well from experience. Constructing an equitable, easy-to-understand licensing model for cloud-based services could prove to be one of the most daunting tasks on Microsoft’s Azure roadmap.

It is imperative that Microsoft proactively address the cloud licensing issues now, and Microsoft executives are well aware of this. During the Q&A portion of one cloud-related TechEd session, Robert Wahbe, corporate vice president, STB Marketing was asked, “What about licensing?” He took a sip from his water bottle and replied, “That’s a big question.”

That is an understatement.

Microsoft has continually grappled with simplifying and refining its licensing strategy since it made a major misstep with Licensing 6.0 in May, 2001, where the initial offering was complex, convoluted and potentially very expensive. It immediately met with a huge vocal outcry and backlash. The company was compelled to postpone the Licensing 6.0 launch while it re-tooled the program to make it more user-friendly from both a technical and cost perspective.

Over the last nine years, Microsoft’s licensing program and strategy has become one of the best in the high-technology industry. It offers simplified terms and conditions (T&Cs); greater discounts for even the smallest micro SMBs and a variety of add-on tools (e.g. licensing compliance and assessment utilities), as well as access to freebies, such as online and onsite technical service and training for customers who purchase the company’s Software Assurance (SA) maintenance and upgrade agreement along with their Volume Licensing deals.

Licensing from Premises to the Cloud
Microsoft’s cloud strategy is a multi-pronged approach that incorporates a wide array of offerings, including Windows Azure, SQL Azure and Microsoft Online Services (MOS). MOS consists of hosted versions of Microsoft’s most popular and widely deployed server applications, such as Exchange Server, PowerPoint and SharePoint. Microsoft’s cloud strategy also encompasses consumer products like Windows Live, Xbox Live and MSN.

Microsoft is also delivering a hybrid cloud infrastructure that will enable organizations to combine premises-based with hosted cloud solutions. This will indisputably provide Microsoft customers with flexibility and choice as they transition from a fixed-premises computing model to a hosted cloud model. In addition, it will allow them to migrate to the cloud at their own pace as their budgets and business needs dictate. However, the very flexibility, breadth and depth of offerings that make Microsoft products so appealing to customers, ironically, are the very issues that increase the complexity and challenges of creating an easily accessible, straightforward licensing model.

Dueling Microsoft Clouds: Azure vs. BPOS
Complicating matters is that Microsoft has dueling cloud offerings; the Business Productivity Online Suite (BPOS) and the Windows Azure Platform. As a result, Microsoft must also develop, delineate and differentiate its strategy, pricing and provisions for Azure and BPOS. It’s unclear (at least to this analyst) as to when and how a customer will choose one or mix and match BPOS and Azure offerings. Both are currently works in progress.

BPOS is a licensing suite and a set of collaborative end-user services that run on Windows Server, Exchange Server, and SQL Server. Microsoft offers the BPOS Standard Suite, which incorporates Exchange Online, SharePoint Online, Office Live Meeting, and Office Communications (OCS) Online. The availability of the latter two offerings is a key differentiator that distinguishes Microsoft’s BPOS and rival offerings from Google. Microsoft also sells the BPOS Business Productivity Online Deskless Worker Suite. It consists of Exchange Online Deskless Worker, SharePoint Online Deskless Worker and Outlook Web Access Light. This BPOS package is targeted at SMBs, small branch offices or companies that want basic, entry-level messaging and document collaboration functions.

By contrast, Azure is a cloud platform offering that contains all the elements of a traditional application stack from the operating system up to the applications and the development framework. It includes the Windows Azure Platform AppFabric (formerly .NET Services for Azure), as well as the SQL Azure Database service.

While BPOS is aimed squarely at end users and IT managers, Azure targets third-party ISVs and internal corporate developers. Customers that build applications for Azure will host it in the cloud. However, it is not a multi-tenant architecture meant to host your entire infrastructure. With Azure, businesses will rent resources that will reside in Microsoft datacenters. The costs are based on a per-usage model. This gives customers the flexibility to rent fewer or more resources, depending on their business needs.

Cloud Licensing Questions
Any cloud licensing or hybrid cloud licensing program that Microsoft develops must include all of the elements of its current fixed premises and virtualization models. This includes:

1. Volume Licensing: As the technology advances from fixed premises software and hardware offerings to private and public clouds, Microsoft must find ways to translate the elements of its current Open, Select and Enterprise agreements to address the broad spectrum of users from small and midsized (SMBs) companies to the largest enterprises with the associated discounts for volume purchases.
2. Term Length: The majority of volume license agreements are based on a three-year product lifecycle. During the protracted economic downturn, however, many companies could not afford to upgrade. A hosted cloud model, though, will be based on usage and consumption, so the terms should and most likely will vary.
3. Software Assurance: Organizations will still need upgrade and maintenance plans regardless of where their data resides and whether or not they have traditional subscription licensing or the newer consumption/usage model.
4. Service and Support: Provisions for after-market technical services, support and maintenance will be crucial for Microsoft, its users, resellers and OEM channel partners. ITIC survey data indicates that the breadth and depth of after-market technical service and support is among the top four items that make or break a purchasing deal.
5. Defined areas of responsibility and indemnification: This will require careful planning on Microsoft’s part. Existing premises-based licensing models differ according to whether or not the customer purchases their products directly from Microsoft, a reseller or an OEM hardware manufacturer. Organizations that adopt a hybrid premises/cloud offering and those that opt for an entirely hosted cloud offering will be looking more than ever before to Microsoft for guidance. Microsoft must be explicit as to what it will cover and what will be covered by OEM partners and/or host providers.

Complicating the cloud licensing models even further is the nature of the cloud itself. There is no singular cloud model. There may be multiple clouds, and they may be a mixture of public and private clouds that also link to fixed premises and mobile networks.

Among the cloud licensing questions that Microsoft must address and specifically answer in the coming months are:

• What specific pricing models and tiers for SMBs, midsize and enterprises will be based on a hybrid and full cloud infrastructures?
• What specific guarantees if any, will it provide for securing sensitive data?
• What level of guaranteed response time will it provide for service and support?
• What is the minimum acceptable latency/response time for its cloud services?
• Will it provide multiple access points to and from the cloud infrastructure?
• What specific provisions will apply to Service Level Agreements (SLAs)?
• How will financial remuneration for SLA violations be determined?
• What are the capacity ceilings for the service infrastructure?
• What provisions will there be for service failures and disruptions?
• How are upgrade and maintenance provisions defined?

From the keynote speeches and throughout the STB Summit and TechEd conference, Microsoft’s Muglia and Wahbe both emphasized and promoted the idea that there is no singular cloud. Instead, Microsoft’s vision is a world of multiple private, public and hybrid clouds that are built to individual organizations’ specific needs.

That’s all well and good. But in order for this strategy to succeed, Microsoft will have to take the lead on both the technology and the licensing fronts. The BPOS and Azure product managers and marketers should actively engage with the Worldwide Licensing Program (WWLP) managers and construct a simplified, straightforward licensing model. We recognize that this is much easier said than done. But customers need and will demand transparency in licensing pricing, models and T&Cs before committing to the Microsoft cloud.

Microsoft Azure Platform, BPOS Cloud Vision Must Address Licensing Read More »

Ready, aim, fire! Google Chrome Gets Ready to Battle Windows for Desktop Dominance

Everyone loves a good battle. And no market segment has experienced more bellicosity than the operating system arena.

For the last two decades, Microsoft Windows was the undisputed, dominant player with 90% of the desktop OS market share. Today, Microsoft Windows is still the most widely deployed operating system. But its dominance is no longer undisputed.

Microsoft faces an array of formidable challengers including Apple, Google and Ubuntu. Google’s initiatives over the last two years have obviously attracted a good deal of attention – just as they are meant to do.

The recent media coverage and talk of the looming battle between Google’s Chrome OS and Microsoft Windows 7 and Office 2010 conveniently ignores two important facts: 1) the Chrome operating system doesn’t ship until sometime in 2010, and 2) when it does debut it will initially run only on low-cost Netbooks, a miniscule if rapidly growing part of the market.

Other considerations are not as easily answered: What tangible, material impact will this rivalry have on customer deployments? Will Google’s entrance into the Netbook OS market really force Microsoft to slash prices and cut into its Windows profits, the heart and soul of its business? And who besides the press, Google and Microsoft really cares?

It is abundantly clear that Google and Microsoft — each of whom dominates in their core markets – are desperately attempting to encroach on one another’s turf. Google is a convincing leader in the search engine and online advertising market. And Microsoft continues to be the market leader in operating systems and office productivity applications. The sparring has been exacerbated and honed by the ongoing economic downturn. Hence, the series of recent one-upmanship maneuvers. Microsoft announces it’s moving up the release date for Windows 7 and Google responds with headlines of its own about directly competing with Windows. Google said it will partner with top OEM manufacturers like Acer, HP and Lenovo to port Chrome OS onto their Netbook platforms by the second half of 2010. Microsoft counter-punched by releasing details about some of upcoming Office 2010 applications becoming untethered.

Microsoft is aiming straight for Google with its new Office Web Applications. Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, Excel and OneNote are heading to the cloud in scaled down versions of the immensely popular software that will be browser based and completely free. And although details have been sketchy at best, sources within Microsoft indicate company intends to meld the Office platform across traditional PCs and servers, the Internet and smart phones.Microsoft did release new details about Office at its Worldwide Partners Conference (WPC) in New Orleans last week.Among the disclosures: Office 2010 – due out in the first half of next year – will include a free Web edition and it will finally offer interoperability with the Mozilla Firefox and Apple Safari browsers. The Office 2010 Web edition will also incorporate “lite” versions of Word, PowerPoint, Excel and OneNote. Microsoft will likely release more details at its Worldwide Partners Conference (WPC) in New Orleans, this week.

Microsoft and Google continue to circle each other like the battle scarred veterans they are –looking for the weak spot and the right moment to attack, hoping to score a direct hit and encroach on the other’s turf in a meaningful way – e.g. stealing sales and market share.

In truth, neither company has drawn first blood, although not for lack of trying.

 

Google vs. Microsoft: A Historical Perspective

The rivalry between Google and Microsoft dates back several years. Both covet what the other has and both have met with limited success in their attempts to extend their empires beyond their core competencies and revenue streams. While Microsoft has for the last few years been unceasing in its efforts to penetrate the online search engine and advertising market, it still derives 50% of its revenue from the Windows and Office platforms.
Microsoft’s Bing search engine debuted earlier this year to generally positive results. In fact, Bing is Microsoft’s best effort to date but it remains to be seen how much impact it will have on Google.

For its part, Google launched its first serious offensive strike at Microsoft’s dominance in the operating system and applications arena in early 2006 with Google Apps, a set of web-based and desktop applications. Google Apps consists of Gmail, Google Maps, Google Docs & Spreadsheets and Google Calendar. The company continues to bolster the functionality of the platform, and in 2007-2008 added Standard and Premier offerings that incorporate remote and mobile access capabilities, email migration tools and stronger online technical support. The Standard version of Google Apps is free and the Premier version lists for $50 per seat.

Microsoft & Google by the Numbers

From a financial standpoint, both Google and Microsoft remain healthy, although like every other ITfirm, both have felt the effects of the continuing economic crunch. So far this year, Microsoft has laid off 5,000 employees; this is the first substantial layoff in the company’s history. More worrisome for the Redmond, Washington giant is that its Quarterly Revenue and Quarterly Earnings Growth fell into negative categories (See chart below) from the 2008 to the 2009 third quarter ended March 31. The company hopes that Windows 7 (due out on October 22) and Office 2010 will spur sales and revenue and reverse the decline. At the same time, Microsoft knows it must diversify and so it looks to the Web and the emerging cloud computing market, where companies like Amazon and Google dominate.

Google, for its part has yet to loosen Microsoft’s hold in the rich operating systems and office productivity suite. Google Chrome is free and as such does not generate any revenue for the company but that may change because Netbook sales are poised to explode over the next 12 months and could provide Google with the needed momentum to establish itself as an applications provider.In the meantime, Google hopes that the good news from its latest financial earnings (see chart below) and its aggressive high profile marketing strategy will generate a buzz and create pent-up demand for Chrome in the run-up to its 2010 debut.

 

Performance Criteria – Q3 2009

  Google Microsoft
Market Cap: $135 billion $206.7 billion
Profit margin: 20.6% 25.9%
Operating margin: 32.6% 37.1%
Total Cash: $19.3 billion $24 billion
Debt: $0 $2 billion
Return on Assets: 14.2% 20.3%
Return on Equity: 16.% 42.5%
Annual Revenue: $22.7 billion $60.4 billion
Annual Net Income: $4.6 billion $22.5 billion
Quarterly Revenue Growth: 2.9% -5.6%
Quarterly Earnings Growth: 19% -32.2%

***Editor’s Note: Google’s fiscal year coincides with the calendar year, while Microsoft’s fiscal year begins on July 1. The above figures represent Google’s most recent second quarter ended June 30.

 

Future Prospects

What does this posturing and verbal sparring mean for corporate and consumer customers? In the near term, Google and Microsoft’s dueling headlines and pronouncements will have very little impact on customers in terms of platform commitment and purchasing decisions. The ongoing rivalry does mean that neither company can relax or relent for a Pico-second. Each must continue to deliver first-rate, full featured, bug-free products that deliver ease-of-use and integration and interoperability with existing applications and platforms. And both companies must stick to their announced timetables and deliver on their promises, lest one or the other exploit the opportunity.

Microsoft can’t afford a repeat of the lack of backwards application compatibility that plagued its much-maligned Vista desktop. At the same time, Google’s hopes for penetrating the applications and OS market rest on the functionality of its offerings beyond the simple basics that are adequate for Netbook sales.

Ultimately, corporate and consumer customers will demand and receive high performance products at a reasonable price – or they’ll simply sit on their wallets.

The biggest winners in this ongoing war may be the end users. And isn’t that a refreshing change?

Ready, aim, fire! Google Chrome Gets Ready to Battle Windows for Desktop Dominance Read More »

Windows 7 is a make or break release for Microsoft

The long awaited successor to Windows XP and Windows Vista, will ship several months earlier than planned. Expectations are high industry-wide.

Windows 7 is crucial to Microsoft’s over-arching software business and technology strategy for the next two years. Although it is an incremental upgrade and not a major overhaul of the underlying Vista kernel, Windows 7 represents a crucial upgrade for both consumer and corporate customers.

Practically speaking, Windows 7 must do what Vista didn’t: deliver near seamless, plug and play integration and interoperability with the overwhelming majority of Microsoft and third party applications, device drivers, utilities and hardware peripherals. As a standalone operating system (OS) Vista was fine. Unfortunately, there’s no such thing as a standalone OS. The lack of backwards compatibility between Vista and third party software and even incompatibilities in the file formats between Vista and Office 2007 and other Microsoft products was a nightmare for corporations and consumers alike.

As a result, there is no margin for error. Windows 7 must fulfill users’ expectations, business and technology needs from the first day it ships. Microsoft will not get a second chance to make a good first impression. Failure to do so could send customers running to rival desktop platforms like Apple’s Mac OS X 10.x and Linux distributions, or even online options such as those being pitched by Google. . And if Windows 7 does not deliver the features, integration, interoperability and reliability Microsoft is promising, it may well create a domino effect that adversely impacts the upcoming releases of related solutions like Exchange Server and the Office platform.

Integration and interoperability are the most important criteria, besting even cost, when it comes to choosing a new technology. The results of ITIC’s May 2009 Application Availability survey of 300 businesses worldwide found that 60% of business said integration and interoperability with existing and legacy applications tops the list of “must have” items in new software application and operating system purchases. Cost came in a close second with 56% of the respondents followed by ease of use and installation (55%).

The stakes for Windows 7 are also high because of intensified competition. Rumors abound that Microsoft pushed up the release date by at least three months so that Windows 7 hits the streets in advance of the low cost netbook version of Google’s Android. Microsoft also faces increased competition in its decades-old rival Apple. During the past two years Apple’s Mac OS X 10.x running on Apple’s Intel-based proprietary hardware has been making a comeback in corporate enterprises. Apple products do not represent a significant threat to Microsoft’s corporate desktop dominance, but they can nibble at the fringes, potentially dilute momentum [for Windows 7] and take some market share. In this ongoing global economic downturn, no vendor wants to concede any revenue or even a percentage point of market share.

Microsoft of course is acutely aware of these issues. In recent months, company CEO Steve Ballmer and Senior Vice President Bill Veghte have publicly stated that users were stymied by the incompatibility issues they encountered with Vista. They intend to avoid those problems with Windows 7.

Fortuitously, for Microsoft, there are many factors in Windows 7’s favor. They include:

  • Pent-up Demand. To date, only 10% of the 700 survey respondents in ITIC’s 2009 Global IT and Technology Trends Global Deployment Survey have deployed Vista as their company’s primary desktop operating system. The results indicated that Windows XP remains the primary desktop OS for 89% of the respondents. Nearly half—45%—of the survey respondents indicated they would skip Vista and migrate from XP to Windows 7. The main reasons for this were cost constraints associated with the bearish economy, and reluctance to undertake a complex OS upgrade with manpower constraints.The prevailing sentiment among businesses is that they can afford to wait because Windows XP adequate met their business and technology needs over the last two years. ITIC believes this bodes well for Windows 7 deployments in the short and intermediate term. If 20% of the installed base of legacy Windows XP users migrate or indicate their intention to upgrade to Windows 7 within the first three or four months of shipment, Microsoft will be well-positioned. There is a reasonable likelihood of this, providing Windows 7 delivers the goods. And the advance word from customers interviewed by ITIC is generally positive.
  • New feature set. Windows 7 will have six different versions, but to minimize the confusion that accompanied the Vista launch, only the Home Premium and Professional editions will be widely sold in retail outlets. Specific versions that are designed for enterprise use or developing nations will be aggressively marketed to those specific accounts and geographic regions, thus taking the guesswork out of purchasing. Most importantly: Microsoft says that every one of the versions will include all of the capabilities and features of the edition below it which will help to minimize upgrade woes. Corporations and consumers that want to move to a more feature rich version of Windows 7 can use Windows Anytime Upgrade to purchase the upgrade online and unlock the features of those editions from their desktops.ITIC interviewed several dozen Windows 7 beta users over the last several months and an overwhelming 9 out of 10 respondents expressed their satisfaction with improvements in many Windows 7’s core capabilities when compared to both Windows XP and Vista. This includes faster boot sequence, better reliability, improved security, a much faster and more comprehensive search engine, and more flexible configuration options. Additionally, Microsoft bolstered the inherent security of Windows 7 with DirectAccess and BitLocker To Go features. The DirectAccess capability is designed to provide remote, traveling and telecommuting workers with the same secure connectivity as though they were local by establishing a VPN “tunnel” to their corporate networks. BitLocker To Go extends the data encryption features introduced in Vista to include removable storage devices such as USB thumb drives support in Windows 7. Users can employ a password or a smart card with a digital certificate to unlock and access their data. And the devices can be used on any other Windows 7-based machine with the correct password. Users can also read, but not modify data on older Windows XP and Vista systems.
  • Economical and feature rich Licensing contracts. Finally, the terms and conditions of Windows 7 licensing contracts promise to make upgrades easier on corporate IT budgets. In February, Microsoft said it would provide a license that will allow customers to directly upgrade from Windows XP to Windows 7. There is a caveat, though: users will have to wipe their hard drives and perform a clean install – so technically, it’s not an upgrade. Microsoft has not yet released pricing details for Windows 7 but ITIC believes the upgrade license will most likely cost 20% to 40% less than a new license.Additionally, corporations that purchased Microsoft’s Software Assurance Maintenance and upgrade plan as a standalone product or received it as part of their Enterprise Agreement (EA) licenses, are entitled to free upgrades to Windows 7 since it is an incremental release. Additionally, in order to make life easier for users (and to engender goodwill) Microsoft is letting the Release Candidate (RC) free trial license for Windows 7 last a full year until June 2010! And users looking for a discounted version of Windows 7 to run on low cost, minis or netbooks take note: Microsoft and Intel have agreed that in order for a device to be considered a netbook, the screen must not exceed 10.2” Prior to this, Microsoft allowed customers to get the Windows XP or Vista discount for or devices as large as a 12.1” screen.

In summary, all indications are that Microsoft has learned from its Vista mistakes. As a result, businesses and consumers stand ready to reap significant benefits in compatibility, features, pricing and licensing with Windows 7.

Windows 7 is a make or break release for Microsoft Read More »

Scroll to Top