Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Ups Online War, Says Google's 'Failing'

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the shaking-in-their-boots dept.

Businesses 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."

cancel ×

220 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

meh (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34394386)

when your shit stinks, focus attention on someone else.

What passes for dreams at Microsoft: (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34395064)

From the story: "He also said he thinks Google will be shocked to see Microsoft's momentum into the enterprise cloud sector."

Translation: "I wish I worked for a functional company that has a technically knowledgeable CEO."

Re:What passes for dreams at Microsoft: (4, Insightful)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395512)

"From the story: "He also said he thinks Google will be shocked to see Microsoft's momentum into the enterprise cloud sector." "

I think we ALL would be surprised to see Microsoft have momentum into the enterprise cloud sector, or any other server related sector...

Re:What passes for dreams at Microsoft: (1)

abigor (540274) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395574)

They almost certainly have more servers deployed than anybody, thanks to SharePoint, ActiveDirectory, etc.

Re:What passes for dreams at Microsoft: (4, Funny)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395938)

They most certainly have more servers deployed than anybody, thanks to poor scaling and higher need for reboots.

Re:meh (1)

dup_account (469516) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395198)

He disses Google for not counting outages until after 10 minutes. But then claims to have 99.9% (only one 9) up-time (excluding planned outages). That's 8.5 hours outage. I see on App Engine Business they offer the same 99.9% and I didn't see any 10 minute. Maybe on the non-commerical?

Re:meh (2, Informative)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395588)

He disses Google for not counting outages until after 10 minutes. But then claims to have 99.9% (only one 9) up-time (excluding planned outages).

99.9% (0.999) is three nines, not one nine.

Re:meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34395976)

Anybody can see that he meant "one nine after the decimal point". The 99 is a given.

Re:meh (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 3 years ago | (#34396110)

Not really.

Whenever I've heard "five nines" it has (is that it's also?) 99.999%.

Re:meh (1)

dup_account (469516) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395382)

It's interesting, after a quick read (Well how quick can you really go since M$ is determined to hide the relevant information.

Their cloud seems to be an ugly combination of Amazon VM cloud and Google App Engine. It looks like it is designed to charge as much as possible (IE you have to choose a VM size, and I suspect pay for it no matter how much you need it). All of the things that people complain about Google, they are there in M$ offering (Just look at how they want you to store data. #1, use Blob, #2, use their no-SQL implementation).

UGLY!

And if you believe this (5, Informative)

DragonFodder (712772) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394392)

I have a bridge to sell ya!

Re:And if you believe this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34394480)

Is it in Brooklyn?

Re:And if you believe this (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34394552)

I won't sleep until it is.

Re:And if you believe this (3, Funny)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395282)

I'll fight for my right to it... oh wait!

Re:And if you believe this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34395612)

MY GOD! The bridge just collapsed, killing thousands. It must have been... SABOTAGE!!!

Re:And if you believe this (1)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395608)

No, but the fly spot is where we got the champagne

Re:And if you believe this (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#34396092)

I have a bridge to sell ya!

By 'bridge' you really mean another Microsoft middleware product, don't you?

Succesful troll is failing (5, Insightful)

geegel (1587009) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394406)

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.

Re:Succesful troll is failing (-1, Offtopic)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394872)

Google's already learned one Microsoft tactic:

- censorship - both in Google News and Youtube - of the media company called Prison Planet (aka alex jones radio & videos)

Re:Succesful troll is failing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34395626)

Well, it certainly figures that the dumbest person on Slashdot would be a fan of the dumbest person on the planet.

Google News doesn't post Prison Planet stories because they're not news, they're random shit made up by a sociopath. His YouTube channel got pulled for violating TOS. His claims that 'other people violate the TOS and aren't banned' are fucking retarded, by that logic they could never pull anything because it would be impossible to pull everything simultaneously.

Also, citation needed on Microsoft censorship. They're a shitty company that's done a lot of shitty things over the years, but when have they ever even been in a position to censor anything?

Re:Succesful troll is failing (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34395062)

Clearly, Google isn't failing in advertising, but that's a different business unit. That's unrelated to the sector the Microsoft rep was talking about. I'm inclined to agree with the MS assertion that Google's enterprise services aren't taking hold in the market. In a general sense, Google is doing pretty well. Usually MS reps are just talking BS whenever they talk about a competitor this time their BS might actually line up with the truth for once.

has any fortune 500 company gone Google Apps? (2, Interesting)

alen (225700) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394438)

i know government agencies have but that is mostly because it's a pain in the a$$ dealing with union employees

Re:has any fortune 500 company gone Google Apps? (5, Informative)

jimicus (737525) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394792)

Don't know about Fortune 500 but if you look at:

http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/business/customers.html [google.com]

you can filter by business type - and there are some well-known names there.

I can't say I'm surprised. The value for money versus any Microsoft product is night and day - you get more services for about a third the price. (The balance has started to tilt back; when I first said that the closest alternative was hosted Exchange from a major reseller, that's not the case any more).

Know what? I think Ballmer knows, somewhere in his wizened black little heart, that quite a few of Microsoft's products are not actually particularly good.

That's not been a huge problem in the past, mainly because the competition was frequently just as awful and even if it wasn't, their position in the market meant "nobody got fired for buying Microsoft" became the mantra for many IT directors of the late '90s-early '00s, just as "nobody got fired for buying IBM" was the mantra for their predecessors. Now we're finally starting to see some healthy competition opening up in parts of the industry where previously there was almost none, and my God it's a breath of fresh air.

Re:has any fortune 500 company gone Google Apps? (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395634)

It really makes me wonder how European companies can put their sensitive data in a cloud that might extend into places like Chine or the USofA

In Europe the demands on privacy and data are much different to what the US is offering and forget about China.

I know some US companies will work under the so-called Safe Haven rules but lets be realistic, once it's in the US there are numerous agencies that claim to have access because they protect the homeland.
And what happens when the company that gave the Safe Haven pledge goes belly-up or is sold to the higher bidder, who guarantees the integrity of your data?

I feel there is a market for a cloud service that certifies your data will stay within certain borders or not enter certain countries.

Re:has any fortune 500 company gone Google Apps? (2, Insightful)

jimicus (737525) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395854)

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:has any fortune 500 company gone Google Apps? (1)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395476)

Google?

Enterprise space? (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394458)

"Number one, meet me in ten forward!"

Re:Enterprise space? (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394562)

I got to visit the bridge of the cruise liner on a recent vacation. The bridge was the forward area of deck ten.

Re:Enterprise space? (1)

the_hellspawn (908071) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395288)

Thanks, for screwing that up for me. I have been on a STNG Marathon for weeks now. Two shows a night and on season 5 and now this bs. I am going to think about 10 forward as some sick little joke written by the staff to troll us. OOOOHHHH, I am so mad.

Re:Enterprise space? (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395726)

I was on a cruise liner where the bridge was on the forward area of deck 13.

Seems kind of prophetic in a number of ways really...

Re:Enterprise space? (4, Funny)

thestudio_bob (894258) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395472)

"Fire at will!"

Just once, I wish Worf would have pulled out his phaser and shot at Riker.

Re:Enterprise space? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34395950)

Or Wil Wheaton...

Re:Enterprise space? (2, Funny)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395962)

Everybody knows he'd have fired at Crusher......for the lulz

Re:Enterprise space? (1)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 3 years ago | (#34396102)

"Number one, meet me in ten forward!"

Why did I hear pron music when I read that?

Momentum isn't everything (3, Insightful)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394462)

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.

Re:Momentum isn't everything (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34394866)

ummmm, yes. And unlike Linux, Google has just over 1% of enterprise email market share

Re:Momentum isn't everything (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395174)

You're right. Linux is involved in much closer to 100% of all e-mail delivery.

Huh? (4, Insightful)

mprinkey (1434) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394478)

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?

Re:Huh? (2, Insightful)

Anrego (830717) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394992)

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:Huh? (2, Funny)

Altus (1034) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395558)

And like most buzz words, it will be nowhere shortly after that.

Re:Huh? (1)

mprinkey (1434) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395622)

Grid computing achieved buzzword status too...among suits. People dumped money into it and it fizzled. Who is still doing grid computing...except for SETI or Folding? Eventually, this will go the same way.

I suspect that it will take one thorough breach of just one of these cloud platforms to make everyone realize that this is bad bad idea. Even just one employee accessing "the cloud" from their home PC that happens to be rooted with a keylogger installed is enough. Then that delicious "access from anywhere" feature becomes a wicked liability.

Re:Huh? (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 3 years ago | (#34396012)

The problem is, it's already everywhere. Every time you use virtual machines, san's, offsite backups, whatever, you're working in magic cloud land as far as the phbs are concerned.

Since that's all it takes, just take the amorphous buzzwordy shit and turn it around on them, and sell them on the "local cloud" a wholly incoherent idea if you really understand the point, but one that the absurdly vague nature of the buzzword makes completely plausible.

I did that earlier this year, and got myself a nice new blade server, and the bosses all got to congratulate themselves on how cutting edge they are. It's a great scam...Even better, other business units are getting in on it, and we're setting up redundancies across the WAN, so it actually is "The Cloud"

Re:Huh? (1)

haeger (85819) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395184)

Sure, I talked to the person who handles MS at my company. There are many clients asking for Office365 with hosted files and BPOS are having trouble keeping up with demand I'm told.
It could all be bull, but I don't think so. Especially BPOS. I have som experience there and it seems to me like they're stalling, probably to get everything up and running.

Re:Huh? (1)

abigor (540274) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395488)

Yes, and it's been that way for years. Taleo, for instance, does HR (they call it "talent management", but whatever), and they handle everything you mentioned, including compensation.

Re:Huh? (2, Informative)

jimicus (737525) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395586)

Two issues at stake here:

1. Outsourcing is not new. Outsourcing of something which includes confidential information isn't that new either. If it wasn't, there would be no such thing as external companies providing HR advice, payroll services, there wouldn't be patent lawyers, independent accountants....

2. The great majority of businesses aren't Fortune 500 megacorps. They're small businesses - under 100 staff. They almost certainly outsource a number of services anyway - and they certainly don't have a CIO. This is the sort of business that Google Apps is absolutely made for - by the time you've bought a half-decent server, licensed something like Exchange and paid someone to come in and set it up for you, you could have bought Google Apps for your entire staff for four years. And you still won't have reliable webmail for anyone who's on the road, unless you want to buy a leased line or hosting in a data centre - which for the small company is an expense they can ill afford.

Re:Huh? (1)

zach_the_lizard (1317619) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395788)

Most businesses may be small, but what is their slice of the economic pie? I don't know, but just because there are more of them it doesn't necessarily mean they are as lucrative a market.

Re:Huh? (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395764)

The same CIOs that will gladly ship stuff off to some cut rate outsourcing service half way across the planet.

You have a rediculously rosey view of how corporations work and why they do things.

Re:Huh? (1)

mprinkey (1434) | more than 3 years ago | (#34396176)

Not rosy. But I do expect CIOs to project a bit more foresight than this. But with all of the Chinese hacking and Wikileaks in the news, maybe it will fan the paranoia and knock some sense into them. I'd love to see "the cloud" go poof in a new Red cyber-scare.

Re:Huh? (1)

mlts (1038732) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395804)

You would actually be surprised. A lot of cloud providers will say, "trust us, we use passwords and encryption and even electronic locks for physical security", and clients will happily hand over their data. They even pitch SOX and HIPAA compliance without even citing the relevant parts of the law.

So, people trust cloud providers without looking at the SLA. Then when the cloud provider goes bankrupt, all their private HR info, their customer sales rolls and such now is public info, and there is not a single thing the former cloud customer can do about it.

Clouds have their uses -- backups after an encryption API, or getting capacity up. However, people need to realize if unencrypted data leaves a facility, it should be considered public record.

Don't forget that access to the cloud resources may need a heavy beefing up of the edge network, where simple core LAN infrastructure would have done the job.

No different than any other data center. (2)

ron_ivi (607351) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395890)

"shunt critical infrastructure into some cloud environment? Seriously?" It's really no different than sticking your servers (especially if you lease or finance them) in any other third-party-managed data center. In either case, the company can tap network connections; steal the hard drives with our data; etc. The biggest difference between clouds and traditional data centers is really just that clouds tend to charge you hourly or daily or at longest monthly; while data centers like yearly, or at shortest daily contracts.

Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (4, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394482)

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.

Re:Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394648)

Really? You trust Google to not hand your data over?
Want to bet? It may take a court order but they will hand it over all the same.

Re:Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394820)

So you're saying Microsoft isn't going to hand over your data on a court order? Or.. any other company in the US? Really?

Re:Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395872)

Nope I expect any company to hand over data with a court order. It is foolish to think otherwise.

Re:Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (1)

Triv (181010) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394918)

It may take a court order but they will hand it over all the same.

As opposed to other telecom companies that hand over data on their customers because the DoJ asked them to?

I don't have a problem with Google for handing over logs when presented with a court order. I may have a problem with the government asking in the first place, and I may take issue with judges effectively signing warrants without looking at them critically because a federal agent cited some nebulous and ill-proven terrorist threat to wiretap Grandma to get her chocolate chip cookie recipe, but I don't have a problem with Google for following the law.

It's when they start handing over information without being served with a warrant that I'll start having problems.

Re:Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (5, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395092)

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:Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (4, Insightful)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395862)

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:Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34394852)

You may have heard of some little company called salesforce.com that provides exactly that.

The trusted voice (4, Insightful)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394500)

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 should talk! (0, Offtopic)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394580)

Right... because Bing has been so wildly successful?

Okay, that might have been uncalled for, but it felt really good.

Microsoft is trolling, but is also right (2, Insightful)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394600)

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.

Re:Microsoft is trolling, but is also right (2)

vbraga (228124) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394912)

You do get phone support if you use the paid Google Apps.

And, for search, Google does offer Google Search Appliance for enterprises.

Re:Microsoft is trolling, but is also right (1)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395800)

You do get phone support if you use the paid Google Apps.

Good to know. Also: I didn't mean to imply that Google doesn't offer paid services.

Google does offer Google Search Appliance for enterprises.

Yeah, it has been out for a while too. Do you know any businesses that use it? In another thread, someone asked how many Fortune 500 companies use Google's business solutions. I would love to know.

There are a couple things... (4, Insightful)

Stregano (1285764) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394652)

The guy goes in and talks about how it is bad that Google dumped offline support. So... ...an internet company that was founded and ran off of the net makes you use the net for support. Who uses anything by Google and is not online? Who uses Google's enterprise solutions and is not online? Yes, Google takes my data. I am well aware of that. I have small websites that I have built that will take your data if you on onto them. Like Google, I do not sell my information that I have gathered.

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.

Synopsis: Q: Are you a total failure at your job? (4, Funny)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394658)

A: No, I'm super mega awesome and totally deserve more money!

See also the answer to "Hey, hooker, are you a really bad lay?"

No Surprises Here (4, Insightful)

rakuen (1230808) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394700)

We get these stories a lot on /. What's the surprise here? One competitor is talking smack about another. This is what they do. They do it on a regular basis. Wake me up when, I don't know, when Apple admits that the Android might be a good product. Or when hell freezes over. You know, whichever you want to use for your timepiece.

Re:No Surprises Here (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34395072)

Or when the Pope condones condoms.

O wait...

Translation (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394730)

Not everybody is dropping office for Google Docs.
Has anyone tried Office 365? Is it any good?

Re:Translation (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394848)

Where I work, we have both. Shrug.

Re:Translation (0, Troll)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395254)

When I read that (Office 365 [microsoft.com] ) I thought you were joking. The name must come from the number of days you can expect it to work properly each century.

Re:Translation (1)

CoolCat (594452) | more than 3 years ago | (#34396004)

Works actually pretty good and more goodies next year.

Who is failing again? (5, Insightful)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394744)

So Microsoft took its vaunted Ms-Office to the cloud, and decided to give it away at throw away prices instead of its usual highway robbery prices. Its Exchange server is forced to play ball with mobile devices running Android and iOS, instead of pulling a fast one with obscure proprietary protocols. And now it is claiming Google does not "get" corporations? Shows how sorely Microsoft does not "get" google.

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.

Re:Who is failing again? (2, Insightful)

Dynedain (141758) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394920)

Its Exchange server is forced to play ball with mobile devices running Android and iOS, instead of pulling a fast one with obscure proprietary protocols.

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.

Pot calling the kettle black? (1)

Entens (983281) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394766)

If Microsoft understands the business better, then why has the Online Services division been in the red since 2006? Isn't this the same division that lost Microsoft another $33M in the last quarter alone?

Trollface badge for Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34394806)

I usually don't care about Microsoft either way, but listening to them spew this shit really makes me mad. Aside from an undeserved majority share with IE, how is Microsoft even relevant on the internet? This really reeks of desperation.

Well paid executive admonishes competition (1)

Saishuuheiki (1657565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394810)

This is news? Really?

Enterprise, come in, over! (3, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394826)

Enterprise, we need to increase momentum, we are entering the cloud sector now!

Re:Enterprise, come in, over! (1)

Farmer Tim (530755) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395168)

Apparently nobody at Microsoft has seen Wrath of Kahn, otherwise they'd know what a bad idea it is taking Enterprise to the cloud.

Wow .... (4, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394860)

Microsoft said on Tuesday that Google simply doesn't understand what businesses need

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:Wow .... (1)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395086)

More importantly Microsoft completely missed the mobile market. They can't touch the iPhone or the iPad, that ship has sailed. So unless they want to tie their cloud offerings to their own mobile devices, thereby creating a captive market, they are screwed!

Re:Wow .... (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#34396148)

Microsoft didn't "miss" the mobile market. They fully made an attempt at it. There have been MS products in the mobile market for almost as long as there has been a mobile market. What has happened is that Microsoft completely failed in the mobile market. They focused to heavily on gaining as big a piece of the mobile pie as they could, and completely missed out on the idea of making the mobile market bigger, and in fact even shrank the market. So, their numbers stayed largely stagnant. Now that the mobile market is 10,000 times larger, their near 100% market share becomes 1%. They only now realize that they failed, and are floundering to try and reinvent themselves.

If he's right, so what? (1)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395240)

The consumer market is plenty big enough for Google to thrive and prosper.

What's really interesting is to note how consumer technology has been inviting itself into the enterprise space since the first personal computers. Are there any examples of technology moving in the opposite direction?

Re:If he's right, so what? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395540)

What's really interesting is to note how consumer technology has been inviting itself into the enterprise space since the first personal computers. Are there any examples of technology moving in the opposite direction?

Hmmmm ... photocopiers, fax machines, laser printers, networks and firewalls, gigabytes and terabytes. Heck, I think even my Roomba would count.

They're all stuff that's now pretty commonplace, but I'm sure there's loads of examples.

I would say most computer things started out as something only corporations could afford to have.

Re:If he's right, so what? (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395834)

I think he's thinking of stuff more like MS-DOS and msoffice.

Hopefully the recent success of Apple and Google will break people of the idea that they need to use some proprietary MS thing even when it's really unecessary.

Re:If he's right, so what? (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395982)

Besides the list that the other poster made, how about the the Wintel ecosystem. The PC was a corporate computer. Commodore and Apple dominated the consumer market when personal computers hit the scene. It was the fact that people were running IBM PCs with MS OS at work, that people rationalized bringing them into the home.

Google FAIL (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 3 years ago | (#34394900)

...and, in other news, North Korea broadcasts apology for shelling S. Koreans to death, say it was all a Korean April Fools Joke, and come on in! Check what's doin' in our Nuke research program! Gift baskets for all UN inspectors.

Chrome OS (1)

Randwulf (997659) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395008)

I don't much care what Microsoft has to say about anything. What I am curious about is how much Chrome OS will cut into Windows market share once it is finally launched. I don't want speculation -- wake me up when there are some solid numbers.

Pretentious (1)

ieatcookies (1490517) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395028)

The tone of that ms dude in the interview annoyed me. I wonder if ms is going to shoot themselves in the foot by pushing cloud based services. They have ms office engrained in business because everyone uses it, and it works well enough to continue. But if they push people to use cloud office and it sucks some other company like google may swoop those customers away. The article talks about how people are used to having these softwares on their machine and I think that's a major reason for offices success, change that and you may uproot your own cusomters.

Electrolytes? (1)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395122)

ITS WHAT BUSINESS NEEDS!

Hhhmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34395224)

That's a bit odd because we just switched our enterprise over to Google...

Same old Microsoft, not getting it. (1)

crovira (10242) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395320)

Microsoft has yet to learn that most of the planet doesn't deal with enterprises.

That's Microsoft's bailiwick and their undoing as well.

Microsoft will do as well with the desktops they helped enterprises change but they've been pinned there as effectively as Erie/Bucyrus was with their large earth movers, and unable to even see the threat from Case backhoes. Case is bigger than ever and Erie/Bucyrus is a company that operates in an extremely rarefied "project atmosphere."

Not every project needs huge expenditures, complex change control and multi-phase deployment.

Google is doing fine dealing with people and enterprises in other relationships and charging per connection.

Microsoft simply charges too much for equivalent (actually lesser,) service.

Intended audience (1)

magus_melchior (262681) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395414)

This definitely isn't for Google, because Google couldn't possibly care less about what Microsoft has to say about any of Google's plans for the enterprise.

This is more for the IT execs and managers of big corporations who couldn't tell a server from a doorstop: "Don't buy Google! They're unreliable! They're unsafe! They're full of FAIL!"

It's called Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt, and they're masters at using it on stupid executives.

Nuts (1)

Isochrome (16108) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395482)

And after they just gave me a pay raise. I was hoping to stick around to see if we get another phone this year. Is anyone from Microsoft accepting resumes?

Just to be clear... (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395556)

Microsoft said ... that Google simply doesn't understand what businesses need, and is failing at pushing its way into the enterprise.

Or, perhaps companies don't like having "solutions" forced on them.

He also said he thinks Google will be shocked to see Microsoft's momentum into the enterprise cloud sector.

Perhaps a bit off-topic, but if any of my employees ever says, "To the cloud!" I will fire them on the spot. Fucking stupid commercials. Yes, the OS is so powerful, one has to offload processing elsewhere.

google is failing or the failing of google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34395738)

Please be clear, and when it comes to titles be not so lazy as to save yourself typing one character. Japanese amateur animators do that when they produce in English, let's not follow their lead.

Corporation trash-talking competitor (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395792)

Film at eleven.

No substance (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395884)

Just read the article...

Basically the Microsoft guy is saying "don't use Google's cloud services, use Microsoft's cloud services" and attempting to justify that by saying "they don't know security but we do". However he fails to provide any evidence for his statements - his single example mentions Google's Street View, which a) is about privacy rather than security; and b) isn't related to their cloud services at all.

I believe Microsoft is doing a significantly better job with security overall than they did a few years ago. But, given their track record, I would think they'd be hesitant to play the security card - it could easily backfire.

"What businesses need?" Talk, walk... (1)

dpbsmith (263124) | more than 3 years ago | (#34395932)

If Microsoft understands what businesses need they don't need to talk about it, they just need to do it.

_Talk_ by companies about how they understand what businesses need and their competition doesn't is a handy smokescreen to explain away problems with their product or their product line. "Yes, it looks to _you_ like a steaming pile, but you, you understand nothing. _You_ are not part of our target market. You understand nothing about what businesses want. We do, and I can assure you real businesses don't want sugar, they want steaming piles."

If Google is failing, Google is failing. Microsoft doesn't need to talk about it. All they need to do is let Google fail. I care whether Google fails or not, but why should I care what Tom Rizzo thinks? And why should anyone at Microsoft lift a finger to influence perception, if "Google is failing" is the reality?

MS is winning online war? Please... (1)

Skuld-Chan (302449) | more than 3 years ago | (#34396022)

I can't even sync my hotmail contact list, calendar or email with my phone... Google lets me do this ;).

Coming from an expert on 'Fail' (1)

bl8n8r (649187) | more than 3 years ago | (#34396080)

pot kettle black
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>