Microsoft Ups Online War, Says Google's 'Failing' 220
CWmike writes "Raising the stakes in its war of words, Microsoft said on Tuesday that Google simply doesn't understand what businesses need, and is failing at pushing its way into the enterprise. In this edited version of his interview with Computerworld, Microsoft's senior director of Online Services, Tom Rizzo, talks about Google's privacy issues, scanning user data, the difference between consumer and corporate needs, and his doubts about Google surviving in the enterprise space. He also said he thinks Google will be shocked to see Microsoft's momentum into the enterprise cloud sector."
meh (Score:5, Insightful)
when your shit stinks, focus attention on someone else.
Succesful troll is failing (Score:5, Insightful)
Given the market share that Google has in contextual advertising, I tend to disagree with Microsoft's conclusion. Of course I could be wrong, but I highly doubt it.
Momentum isn't everything (Score:3, Insightful)
He also said he thinks Google will be shocked to see Microsoft's momentum into the enterprise cloud sector.
Maybe, but that's ignoring the already massive size of Google in "the cloud." The only thing better than being about to unleash a can of whoop-ass is to be currently whooping ass.
Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
What enterprise momentum in the cloud sector? What CIO is seriously going to shunt critical infrastructure into some cloud environment? Seriously? Who? Backups...maybe? Personal photos and email? Of course. But, trade secrets? Human Resources info? Salaries and performance evaluations? To the cloud? Really?
Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (Score:5, Insightful)
Really?
Google wants all my data. They make no effort at hiding that intent. But I do trust they aren't handing my data over. Microsoft has a specific patent on how to sell my private data, and has handed my private data over the government.
The trusted voice (Score:5, Insightful)
When I want to know what the future trends of online services are, I know I can always count on Microsoft being the one to turn to when I want to know EXACTLY what will be next years abysmal laughingstock of failure will be.
I love how Bing maps only allows streetview to work in IE... how web2.0 of them
Microsoft is trolling, but is also right (Score:2, Insightful)
Google hasn't gotten too far with offering corporate services, and I suspect they aren't that interested. It's one thing to provide a free email service that is based on ad revenue and data mining. But selling that and providing an SLA offering 99.999% up-time is a different market. You have to provide real support and respond to issues - Google has forums for reporting bugs but I can't call them and say "Hey, my gmail isn't working" and get an answer. I can't call them and report that an RSS feed isn't working or that a gadget is screwing up my iGoogle page. And rightfully so -- those services are free perks. If you don't like 'em, don't use 'em - but they are the best of the free options.
Another interesting example is Google's "desktop" search tools. Google Desktop has been around for a decade and I've seen 1 or 2 small businesses use it, but no one large and not seriously. It is more like something that some techie guy installs on his machine and that's it, which is too bad because it is something businesses really need.
There are a couple things... (Score:5, Insightful)
I do know that Microsoft has Azure, but that is all I know about it outside of knowing it exists. I honestly know more about Amazon's could space than Microsoft's. I am no expert and probably not the best and most reliable source of information. I am just a straight up web developer. If a normal web developer like myself has not heard of the Microsoft solutions outside of the name itself but has heard alot about the competition, then I would see that as them being behind the rest of the market since us normal web developers have not heard much about it.
No Surprises Here (Score:5, Insightful)
Who is failing again? (Score:5, Insightful)
Google does not care about its Office products. It does not want any revenue from its cloud based office offerings. Google understood that as long as Microsoft is having a cash cow in the form of Microsoft Office, it will be able to out last any competitor. It can take losses in the billions, quarter after quarter and simply wait for the competitors to run out of money. Putting a crimp on the income stream of Ms-Office is the primary goal of Google. That it has achieved. No matter what, people are not going to pay the old norm prices for MS-Office.
Wow .... (Score:5, Insightful)
And, maybe Microsoft doesn't understand what consumers need.
Hearing Microsoft actually say this is reminiscent of the whole "I'm a PC/I'm a Mac" commercials where the PC wants to do "fun stuff" like spreadsheets and pie charts.
This blind focus on what corporations need basically missed out on the existence of the consumer market. In a lot of ways, I think Apple has shown that going after the consumer market can be quite lucrative, since apparently nobody else is really focusing on that very well.
And, I've come to decide that anybody who cites a Gartner report is, by definition, talking out of their backside. Gartner says what companies pay them to say.
Re:Who is failing again? (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, the "playing ball" is handled via Microsoft's obscure proprietary protocol, ActiveSync. Apple and Google have licensed it so that their devices can connect to Exchange. They're playing ball with the MS way of doing things, not the other way around.
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
To the cloud? Really?
Yes.
And it sucks! I hate the whole cloud concept.. but it has achieved buzzword status so expect it to be everywhere fairly shortly..
Re:Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (Score:5, Insightful)
There are two precedents.
1 - The government in Brazil wanted information on a group in Brazil circulating kiddie porn via Orkut. Google fought serveral court orders before handing over data. To my knowledge, this is the only time they've ever handed over data.
2 - George W. Bush asked the major search engines to hand over search data with corresponding IP addresses. Google flatly said no while AOL, Yahoo and Microsoft handed over data. If that wasn't enough, Google started anonymizing IP addresses earlier, and started building an off-shore mobile data center than can go into international waters to keep your private data away from the government.
Again, between the two, does Microsoft have a leg to stand on when it comes to critcizing Google here?
Re:What passes for dreams at Microsoft: (Score:5, Insightful)
I think we ALL would be surprised to see Microsoft have momentum into the enterprise cloud sector, or any other server related sector...
Re:has any fortune 500 company gone Google Apps? (Score:3, Insightful)
Very easily.
The real world is a lot more pragmatic than a lot of people on /. would like to admit. You're not expected to physically go and meet everyone you buy services from and analyse how their product is delivered with a fine-toothed comb, and you're certainly not expected to run everything yourself. It's quite adequate for them to offer a contract which says "we'll keep your data confidential".
You can't stop someone suing you if they want to but you can show that contract to a judge and demonstrate that you did everything you reasonably could - with emphasis on the word "reasonably".
Re:Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (Score:5, Insightful)
Want to bet? It may take a court order but they will hand it over all the same.
The big ballyhoo last year about Privacy and Google's CEO missed the point. It wasn't that that Eric Schmidt was telling us we shouldn't feel the need for privacy. He was warning us that Google gets served with PATRIOT Act requests.
Re:Enterprise space? (Score:1, Insightful)
Or Wil Wheaton...
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, sure. But notice: just because the CIO *wouldn't* doesn't mean he *shouldn't*.
Let's consider a hypothetical situation where you as new CIO walk into a company with a really dysfunctional IT environment. They paid peanuts, they got monkeys, and over the years the monkeys proliferated. Now you're competent and when you look into things you discover that the organization is a sitting duck; it's got security holes all over the place and nothing but monkeys to plug them with.
Why not call in Google? You put your security concerns in the RFP, and they come back with a proposal that addresses them. If you're not satisfied they can meet your needs, at least you've got an outsider's perspective on your problems for free. If you like the proposal, you look at the price tag. If it's too much, you go to management saying, "This is what it would cost to pay an outside group to fix our problems. Note how much cheaper hiring that in house team of human engineers would be." If the price is good, you take it to management and say, "Look at how much cheaper hiring Google would be than continuing to pay all these monkeys."
Alternatively, you can start down the long and lonely road of reforming corporate culture without even considering whether your firm might be better off trusting Google's engineers to secure its data, at least for part of the way. What have you gained from this?
Of course if you have a world class in-house IT team and it's doing great, that's a different kettle of fish. The bottom line is there are no panaceas.
Re:has any fortune 500 company gone Google Apps? (Score:1, Insightful)
Alex Jones has a financial interest in making sure it looks like there's a conspiracy against him, no matter what form it takes.