Slashdot Log In
How Ray Ozzie is Changing Microsoft
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Oct 05, 2006 12:51 PM
from the change-or-die dept.
from the change-or-die dept.
prostoalex writes "The October issue of Wired magazine takes a look at Ray Ozzie's work with Microsoft. To hear the article describe it, he's rebuilding the company from the ground up. A 70,000-employee company is quietly changing its ways by thinking of software as deliverable services that perhaps could be rented on a monthly subscription basis." From the article: "There are, of course, two major reasons for Ozzie's ascendancy at Microsoft: Gates and Ballmer. Ozzie is one of the few technologists anywhere whom they respect; they'd been trying for years to get him to join the company. Now he's carrying their hopes for the future, and it's a heavy load. Ozzie needs to move Microsoft from selling software in a box to selling lightning-fast, powerful online applications ranging from gaming to spreadsheets. The risks are enormous. The mission is to radically alter the way the company sells its most profitable software and to pursue the great unknown of so-called Web services - trading an old cash cow for an as-yet-to-be-determined cash cow. No, Microsoft doesn't think its customers will stop using PCs with hard drives and work entirely online, but the desktop era is drawing to a close, and that promises to force some painful trade-offs."
Related Stories
[+]
Microsoft Launches Social Network 153 comments
prostoalex writes "Inspired by the fast growth of social networks such as Facebook and MySpace, Microsoft is launching a test version of its own social network. Wallop brands itself as 'the exclusive social experience,' and is technically a separate company, a startup that's based on technologies developed by Microsoft Research. As far as revenues, Wallop 'plans to sell graphics and other features people can use to decorate their personal profile pages,' says MSNBC."
[+]
IT: Father of WebSphere Leaves IBM For Microsoft 143 comments
jg21 writes ".NET Developer's Journal is reporting that Don Ferguson, the 'Father of WebSphere,' has left IBM to join Microsoft CTO Ray Ozzie's office. Ozzie, whose efforts to rebuild Microsoft have been discussed previously on Slashdot, is gaining a man who while at Blue championed Web services, patterns, Web 2.0, and business-driven development — a potent combo for the future that Microsoft is trying to bring into being." Update: 01/16 12:47 GMT by Z : Previous discussion link fixed.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
AAAHHHHH!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Bandwidth
2) Keeping apps under MY control, not somebody elses
3) I don't like being required to have an internet connection to type an f'n paper.
And those are just to name a few.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would the "desktop era" suddenly end? It's not the Ice Age, it doesn't just simply "end" as if it was controlled by the forces of nature. It ends if people want it to end. Does anyone want it to end, besides Microsoft?
Re: (Score:2)
Have you seen Microsoft asking the question?
Do you think they care? It's the Next Big Thing(TM), so the world will have to adjust.
Or not, as it may prove... like MSN replacing Internet.
Re:AAAHHHHH!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
When everything goes online, they will have to fight against google, and in online world, Google is the 500pounds gorilla, no Microsoft.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:AAAHHHHH!!! (Score:4, Funny)
I don't know who said it, but Netcraft confirms it....:)
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I read this:
"but the desktop era is drawing to a close"
And I thought: I doubt it. If anything, increasing security issues on the big intarweb will make people want more local apps and data storage, not less.
I think the build-a-big-shitty-OS era is drawing to a close. That I'll agree with.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But how else is Microsoft going to get you accept paying more money every month for software they already have? It's a big problem in the software industry!
Think about it this way: the pre-release backlash on Vista has indicated that people might not be willing to pay $200 every couple of years for upgrades, no matter how many glass-effects those upgrades might have. Therefore, the only way to get people to pay money for software anymore is to make sure that your old software stops working when you stop
Re:AAAHHHHH!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want apps under YOUR control, I hope you're not running anything from MS as it is....
Parent
Re:AAAHHHHH!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
These people are cash cows for businesses. They get them to buy/rent the software, they are able to convince them that they won't have to care for the applications, and they convince them that this is the best way.
These people don't know what bandwidth is, they are people that don't want to control anything, and they don't think about things like requiring an Internet connection to do their tasks. As long as everything works they're thrilled to fork the money over monthly, just like they do for electric, gas, water, telephone, and their cable TV.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The better way to phrase it would be "the days of desktop being the preeminent focus and source of profit are coming to an end." Similar to the 60's were the heyday of the mainframe. Does IBM still make tons of money on their mainframe business? Hell yes. Are they considered a mainframe company? No - IBM is a "services" company.
The reality is that there are few apps most non-power users care about -
*1996* was a very good year. :-) (Score:3, Interesting)
Over the years I've added some additional SCSI drives, a CD burner, a 12MB Voodoo2 card, and various other things, but the c
"Perhaps"? "Quietly"? (Score:4, Insightful)
MS has been making it increasingly plain, at a very high volume and in no uncertain terms, that this model is precisely what they are aiming toward.
Re:"Perhaps"? "Quietly"? (Score:4, Informative)
I remember Gates talking about subscription servicesvs one-time licensing long before the internet came along. The question has always been how to make this great leap, without orphaning or crippling their existing install base business. Ironically their greatest threat (the internet) will become their greatest enabler.
My company is using MS Project Web and MS Outlook Web to a large extent, and I am very impressed. How come we're all happy to use gmail, google maps, google calendar, etc but not a web version of MS word, MS outlook, or MS Project? There will always be a practical need to local installations and local software, but a centralised produtivity app model has tremendous advantages.
Parent
Service? (Score:5, Insightful)
Software as a service? Perpetual payments? No thanks.
Who -- besides companies looking for more profits and a constant revenue stream -- actually wants this? The cons far, far outweight the pros for the typical customer.
Re: (Score:2)
What services, though? (Score:4, Interesting)
A more far-fetched idea is that they might just do a total end-run around developers and provide complete solutions for businesses and even take on administration duties as well... but is that even realistic? Sounds like a nightmare for MS. Maybe developers on MS platforms will be reduced to middle-men in this situation?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Just as computing can be provided as a service, so can software. It all depends on what is being provided, and what the customer needs.
Do you buy Google Search Engine software, or do you utilize Google as a service?
Re: (Score:2)
The way I see it, *software* isn't a service, but *writing/updating/etc. software* is a service. Just the same as making a tractor is a service, but the tractor itself is not a service.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Author's Note: In reviewing my post before submitting, I see that it's a bit of a brainstorming, but I like the way the thoughts developed. I think it fairly accurately illustrates what web-based "services" really are compared to other products and services. Please bear with the thought-development process.
True - but I would consider your example of hiring someone to plow your field the same as hiring someone to use software - bascially for their services to use the software. That's different than buying
Re: (Score:2)
Service models are already common in technology (power, bandwidth, hardware, projects). Software will be no different, and I'm quite eager to see companies leapfrog over one another to offer the best model.
Re: (Score:2)
Does it matter if no one besides companies looking for more profits and a constant revenue stream actually wants this? They're the ones making the software, and if there's no easy alternative, people will subscribe to it. What do you think people are gonna do? Start using Linux? Continue using their Windows XP machines for the next 10 years, using an outdated, unsupported browser to check their e-mail? It
Re:Service? (Score:4, Insightful)
My company sells software packages where the license alone costs you a million or more. Installation can take from 2-3 hours to a day, and fully configuring it can take anywhere from a couple of hours to weeks. Properly administrating the app, as well as taking advantage of the data it spits out, can take anywhere from a lone admin to 20-30 people (administrators as well as a full fledged NOC). Finally, it's complex enough that learning the ins and outs of it can take upwards of a year. Needless to say, one of the biggest problems we have when people buy it is that they screw up the installation, screw up the configuration, or don't have the manpower or processes in place to properly take advantage of it. So what's the alternative?
Well, the same app is available as a hosted service. People buy a temporary license, tell us what they want the app to do, and it's all set up for them. They don't have to buy hardware for it, don't have to administrate it, don't have to configure it, don't have to maintain it, troubleshoot it, write scripts for it or do any of the other things that are difficult and expensive. All they need to do is log into the web interface, look at the pretty pictures, or look into their email for the pretty pictures that the app sends them. They can be complete users of the app, without ever having to go to the trouble of becoming admins. And that is worth a ton of money to them. Not only that, but it gives them time to learn the app without having to worry about screwing things up. Not only that, but they have someone to yell at when something goes wrong.
The end result is that our customers are much happier with the hosted version than with the stand-alone app. This happyness often translates into hosted services customers buying the stand-alone app, but now they're actually power users, and far less likely to shoot themselves in the foot.
There will be an explosion of hosted services in the near future. Actually, you can already see it now. Just beware of anyone who's trying to tell you that they'll completely replace stand-alone apps. There is a place for hosted services and there is a place for stand-alone apps. Don't confuse them, or you'll end up in a world of hurt.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Large companies who currently pay through the nose for maintaining "enterprise-class" software. You can't imagine the dancing in the street there would be if someone like SAP announced that you wouldn't have to have a couple hundred servers and a legion of support staff to run their software anymore. Just configure your network to enable QoS on the SAN service and point everyone's browser at http://www.s [software-ag.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Unless you've bought the Linux model, or are pirating your O/S, you already are. Or, are you actually still running that ancient copy of Windows 3.1 on your peppy 80286/12?
I didn't think so.
Every few years, you upgrade your O/S. Whether you use the same hardware or buy new hardware is of no consequence. You still do the upgrade, and your $75 every 2-5 years gets sent in to Microsoft. How is that different than spending $19.95/year? That $19.95 gives you u
It's not necessarily one or the other... (Score:2, Insightful)
Look at the Xbox. Microsoft is a big enough of a company that it can afford to branch off into another market and create a whole new division dedicated to new services/products without the other aspects of their business suffering (not any more than usualy, anyway).
Although we may be talking about a change in company culture as wel
Is it just me (Score:2)
Software subscriptions (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It loooks like you are trying to pwn a n00b!
[] he's camping my lewt!
[] ph3ar!
[] Do not show this again
Running to a close? For now, but for how long? (Score:3, Interesting)
The only way we could have applications be truly web-based is if ISP's don't impose quotas, or those quotas are set at such a high level that they are meaningless.
Not about any one company in particular (Score:2)
One word: Chiapaint (Score:2)
Of course, if Chiapaint doesn't convince you, enjoy, you can go to any number of websites that will cause a cute little picture of a steaming coffee cup to appear in your browser window for about a minute and then crash, misbehave, post error messages, display a grey rectangle, or tell you to update your version of Java.
Tales of Desktop's Death Greatly Exaggerated (Score:5, Insightful)
Web applications are not new. I've built my fair share of them. (Maybe even more than my fair share.) In some circumstances, they work very well:
They have downsides, too:
And yet for many applications, particularly specialized applications dealing with customer account access, inventory management, project management, online publishing, or a whole slew of other things, we accept these limitations. We assess the costs of not using a web application and determine that, overall, the web application provides value for the money.
What's interesting here is that while existing web applications have enough benefits to outweigh the risks, it's not clear that replacing standard desktop apps will come out the same in the risk/benefit analysis. The kinds of things we're doing on the web, we're doing because they work better that way; we've had years of experience with the desktop, and we know some things work better with centralized server models, and others work better with all the work done on the client. Microsoft is betting the farm on everyone being happy to push to the server model, but it won't happen; there are too many compelling reasons to keep ordinary desktop apps right where they are, on your desktop.
What they're afraid of is losing the fight for the desktop. This is their long-term strategy to lock everyone into their system. First they tried to lock up the OS. Then they tried to lock up the file formats. While Linux and OpenOffice are not quite credible threats (if you consider market share only) MS can look ahead and see a day when they have enough market share to seriously threaten their dominance on the desktop, and it isn't 50%, or even 25%. Maybe it's 20%, that magic point where people feel like there is an alternative, and then it's the tipping point, people no longer feel locked in. So MS wants to keep people locked in, because it keeps the cash flowing. That means locking up the data itself. And that's what their online apps are all about.
How many times is Microsoft going to announce this (Score:3, Informative)
Frankly, they shouldn't keep running their mouth about these big grand ideas if they're never gonna actually follow through. Sure, they released .NET and have done small parts of what they said they'd do, but so far nothing has come close to completely changing the company the way they keep claiming.
MOD PARENT UP (Score:4, Insightful)
"The company said it would retool its product line to shift the very focus of computing away from hardware devices and toward a new generation of Internet-based software allowing people to interact with data and one another whether they are using computers, digital cell phones or interactive televisions. William H. Gates, Microsoft's chairman, portrayed the long-awaited move as 'more ambitious than anything we've done' adding, 'There is no Microsoft product that isn't touched by this activity....'
"Microsoft's new view of computing calls for processing to be done everywhere,
"Mr. Gates said that the bet on
Parent
"The desktop era is drawing to a close"? (Score:2)
*Edit digital video
*Edit digital audio
*Create 3d graphics and animations
*Editing large images
*Develop and compile software
As long as anyone has any interest in doing any of these, the "desktop era" will keep on keepin' on.
However, if Microsoft wants to turn towards a renting-software-over-the-network paradigm, it'll make it that much easier for me to ignore their offerings. Especially if they only run on Windows.
Linux usability. (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not trolling here, I've had SuSE installed as my only OS for 8 months at one time. I've had Ubuntu installed in a dual boot (and it had a lot less pain than SuSE when it came time to install software). But now I'm back to just Win XP as my only OS. The reason is usability. I'm talking about consistency and integration with other Microsoft products. Download Visual Studio Express. Install it (no pain unlike SuSE). Now try out the code completion including automatically looking inside your own classes for documentation tool tips. Look how easy it is to programmatically leverage other Microsoft products (Yes Microsoft is opening their API's). Use the debugger (hover over a variable in your source code to see it's value, etc.). Wizards. Compared to the PythonWin IDE I was using it's heaven.
Gnome has the right idea, usability should be a major focus of software. It does no good to be technically superior if your users can't make it go. I'm not bashing GNU/Linux here, I think it's great but as good as it is Linux still needs to be heavily polished before it's ready for mass consumption. I've drank Microsoft's kool-aid and you should too.
This is just a bit of constructive criticism. Microsoft's strength is the people on a project that they assign exclusively to polish their products. Shiny. And unlike the past current Microsoft products just go.
I believe in Open Source and I also believe that it is a better process on longer timescales. I also believe that Microsoft will switch to open document formats to keep most users on Windows. But in the mean-time Microsoft (especially with Visual Studio) has the advantage with getting people up to speed and generating useful code sooner than someone trying to master the intricacies of EMACS from scratch. This leads into productivity which is Microsoft's major redeeming strength. I think that in twenty years we'll all be using some-unix inspired operating system with amazing software made by a variety of vendors some free, some not, and with-all-their-money definately including Microsoft. Getting to that point however means producing code and that's where Microsoft is putting their development money.
I could go on about a million other things too, like XNA (Microsoft's new environment to standardize game development and yes it's integrated with Visual Studio). But that would be better left to another comment.
Developers! Developers! Developers!
Re:Linux usability. (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree with most of your comments. Usability is a big problem in linux, and open source in general. Most open source software is not created with the end user in mind. However, I don't think that using Windows is the solution. There are other things to consider to. For one thing, linux is free as in freedom (for me that's a big thing). Linux based software tends towards open standards (another big thing, I've been bitten by MS Word too many times). Also, While Linux is complicated, it tends to be fairly consistant, and the things that I learn are easier to remember. Integration is nice, but it has it's ugly parts too.
Parent
Never rent!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Id's under 10k have some cred, for longevity reasons if nothing else. The value of 6 digit ids like yours and mine? Zippo.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:You must be new here. (Score:4, Interesting)
The trolls used to be much worse
General conversation is much better
People have ALWAYS bitched about how much
You are just a troll now because things evolve and you do not.
Parent
Re:Off topic. Bye. (Score:5, Funny)
*10* **k** ?????
Them youngsters??
Parent
Re:Off topic. Bye. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
As far as "growing up" is concerned, I guess I'll "grow up" when the process dispatcher inside Microsoft Windows is as good as the process dispatcher inside the Compatible Time
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
* 45,000 workers in a large services company = $48,600.
Tell me who would buy it with that kind of tax per day.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)