Forget Micro-Hoo or Ya-Soft or how ever that doomed engagement might have been named. Especially where the enterprise is concerned, my money's on something that sounds (or at least behaves) more like Moogle.
Don't misunderstand -- I'm not urging Microsoft to acquire Google (though it would thrill armies of antitrust lawyers if Redmond tried). But at this point in Microsoft's history with Chairman Bill relinquishing the reins, it's well past time the company undertake some drastic reinvention. And if that means becoming more Google-like, so be it.
After some temperature taking in the blogosphere this week, you could conclude that Google's had to install revolving doors to accommodate the alleged exodus, specifically for jobs at Microsoft. Maybe this means Microsoft's really serious about a major overhaul of Windows which, thanks to Vista, transcended its hard-won status as the Jabba the Hut of operating systems: clunky, bloated, unpleasant to approach.
I loved the recent proposal for a Windows OS X to supplant the Vista successor effort known as Windows 7. Between Apple and Google, Microsoft's hold on the desktop has never looked so tenuous, or in such desperate need of a major offensive counterpunch. Apple -- and to a lesser extent, Google -- really seems to get it that good things happen when you make users really want to use your products. My guess is most Windows use the OS because they have to.
I'd love to see Microsoft generate its own version of GoogleApps, and not just mouth some lame software-as-a-service boilerplate. I'd love to see them get really serious about virtualization. What might it do if it untied its business units from the Windows mothership? By creating greater autonomy and even competitive friction, Microsoft might have a real chance at "creating great products," to echo one of Gates's oft-stated axioms.
Change is painful and chaotic, according to either Hillary Clinton or Courtney Love. I suspect Microsoft will endure a couple more years of eroding marketshare before it undertakes any changes that could undermine the Windows franchise. By then, the Moogle model will have morphed to something new. The bigger question is whether most enterprise IT buyers will wait for Redmond to catch up.
This blog is part of Internet Evolution's IT Clan, which addresses the continuing impact of the Internet on enterprise networks, applications, and management. Register here to join the IT Clan's conversation, and you just might win something unspeakably cool.
This question can be solved differently based on the perspective. At one end, I have seen people joining Google and rejecting Microsoft. Why is that, I do know exactly but Google seems to be a more attractive place for innovation and development
From the end users perspective, I like the model of Google in which most of the services are free and Google is depending on alternate sources of revenue i.e. advertisment ( i.e. charging advertisers not the users). In Microsoft realm every new version of a software is a way to earn.
Similarly, there are some questions from the strategy point of view. Should Microsoft focus on its strong hold i.e. desktop applications etc or it should focus on the newer ground like Livelabs. This is the trickiest question I think
And considering the Micro-hoo initiative, Microsoft seems to be having a lot of attraction towards web 2.0 market. Good thing in my opinion but it should not be at the cost of losing the lead in the desktop market
Linux distros focused on desktops are gaining quite some customer base. I may sound optimistic but if Ubuntu goes like it is going then it can give Microsoft a tough competition in next five years ( I am a Ubuntu lover)
Talking about Microsoft becoming more Google-like, perhaps an ad-supported free version of MS Office is not a bad idea for Microsoft to consider. It doesn't have to be web-based like Google Docs but may require users to be online for updates of the ads, and most importantly users can download for free (Microsoft and free?? I know that ain't sound right somehow).
Microsoft has acquisition in their dna. They acquire a product or they kill it by giving theirs away until you go broke.
When Big Blue needed an operating system, they didn't have one. When they went back to MS after Gary Kildall wouldn't give them the time of day on CPM, MS sold them Q-dos a product hastily bought from a hack shop, they didn't even pay until after the resale to Big Blue. Of course this Qdos was bundled with Basic, the first bundled software sale.
So you can see its in the blood.
Along comes Google giving stuff away and now MS has to go back to it's roots to compete.
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) wants enterprise business. And if your shop is like most, it will be up to you as an IT professional whether to take up the vendor's offer.
While many IT professionals were caught up in the emergence of Apple's iPad tablet yesterday (and the ensuing "backlash"), elsewhere in tech a likely more significant trend was taking the spotlight.
If you, as an IT pro, haven't heard the buzz about the Semantic Web and its impact on the enterprise, get with it: The importance of enterprise search as a tool for corporate analytics is forcing the issue of semantics to the forefront of pundit preoccupations.
A lot of observers, myself included, were quick to blame the U.S. government's IT infrastructure a few days back, when information emerged that data on the recent "underwear bomber" had been readily available to government sources who failed to connect the dots.
During a long keynote session at the Computer Electronics Showcase (CES) in Las Vegas today, executives from Ford Motor Company held forth on what's turned out to be a near-term success story driven -- as it were -- by Web-based technology.
Smarter Collaboration: How to Thrive in a Challenging Business Environment Market conditions are changing faster than ever, and organizations need to improve their agility and adaptability in order to provide better service and improve processes. The ability to work with customers, business partners, and employees as effectively as possible - while at the same time holding down costs - is a key to success. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
Cloud computing is being dampened by the lack of local application support for offline use. Google's partnership with open-source should encourage it to build tight integration between Google Docs and OpenOffice, and thus boost the cloud and counter Microsoft at the same time.
In the final episode of this series about the death of Internet anonymity, Saunders describes how the Internet of the future will start to attain a level of intelligence that requires no human intervention. Scary.
What can users today do to protect their online privacy? The simplest and most obvious option is to not use the Internet – at all. However, once all digital information is consolidated over the Internet, trying to protect digital identity by simply unplugging from the Internet becomes impossible – a fact that has manifest implications for civil liberties, Saunders says.
Now that Bing has struck a deal with Twitter, its search service will have to process a tsunami of Tweets, many of which are worthless junk. Stefan Weitz, director with Bing Search, explains to Michael Singer how his service will make sense of the Twitter mayhem to provide relevant results to end users and enterprises.
By 2011 the number of Internet-connected sensors will exceed 1 trillion, making your chances of doing anything or going anywhere unnoticed pretty much zero. Saunders talks about how the 'sensortization' of the Internet is eliminating the traditional divide between online and offline populations.
Bing, Microsoft’s search service, has struck a deal with Twitter. Here Stefan Weitz, director with Bing Search, talks through how the deal will work from a technical perspective, and what’s in it for users.
The 20th Century Internet was characterized by the ability to interact with other people and information on the Internet largely without anyone knowing who you were. The Internet of this century, conversely, will be defined by identity. Saunders explains how Internet users are unwittingly contributing to the demise of the anonymous Internet.
Steve Saunders talks about the risks inherent in uncontrolled, widespread profiling of Internet users, and how one day this practice could form the basis of a new industry, the Outernet, which in economic terms will have outgrown the commercial value of the Internet itself.
Research shows that the youth of today like Facebook – but not blogging or Twitter. Does that mean Facebook has won, or just that it's not yet out of favor? Will all the services we see today fade into Ovaltine-or-Wheaties status in just a few years?
What kinds of companies are doing the most innovation in the data center? Turns out it's midtier enterprises that are taking the "Just Right" approach.
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Email This
TWEET THIS
