Monday Note

That’s the question Steve Ballmer, Microsoft’s CEO, is trying to answer every morning when he goes to work. On the server software side, Windows Server is doing well, especially with the Exchange e-mail server and the unheralded but very good collaboration server, SharePoint.  These products have matured, they’re relatively easy to set up and manage by IT organizations.  The Exchange component  is a spectacular success: it manages e-mail, contacts, calendars for hundreds of thousands of organizations all over the world.  Even Apple finally embraced Exchange: the iPhone now syncs well with Microsoft’s server and the next version of OS X promises “native” Exchange support.  In plainer English: Apple’s Mail, Address Book and iCal programs, for example, will sync with Exchange “out-of-the-box” just like the iPhone does.  (This will be a relief to suffering Entourage users.  Entourage is Microsoft’s own Outlook sibling on the Mac, but it is a poor relative and lacks Windows’ Outlook depth and polish.)  Seeing that Windows Server generated more than $20 billion last year, one is tempted to think everything is going swimmingly.
.
Unix is the problem or, rather, the free Open Source implementations of its function set called Linux and FreeBSD, to name the best-known variants. While Windows Server and Exchange still reign for many Enterprise applications, tens of millions of Web sites run on Linux of FreeBSD software.  Further, the Open Source nature of such software encourages sophisticated users to modify the operating system to fit their specific hardware configurations or applications requirements.  For example, Google designs and manufactures (!)  its own servers and customizes the Open Source OS they run.  There’s even a rumor they “roll their own” 10 Gigabits Ethernet switches but I don’t know vouch for that one.  In any event, imagine how much the Google account would be worth to Microsoft if the Mountain View company used Windows Server?  Knowledgeable readers will immediately object: Google running Windows Server isn’t realistic.  Not for price reasons but because Microsoft’s server software isn’t technically suitable for large “server farms” such as Google’s.  True.  It’ll be interesting to look at what Microsoft uses for its own Live cloud.  In the past, Microsoft has had to resort to “other” server software for applications such as Hotmail.  But, “scalability issues” (the ability to grow to serve very large server farms) aside, Microsoft is losing against free server software for the millions of simpler Web servers sprouting all over the world.  And, as Linux and its cousins mature, they will inevitably make inroads in Enterprise applications where Microsoft still leads.  Open Source competitors to Exchange do exist, they’re not yet a strong threat but, if they keep improving, they will erode Microsoft very juicy server business.
.
On the desktop, Linux is trouble again, but much less so than in server farms. For consumers, as opposed to technically versed sysadmins, ease of use is still a strong plus for Windows.  I bought two identical Asus EeePC netbooks, one running Windows, the other a Linux distribution.  Windows is still much easier to use and update, Linux is still a little rough on normal humans.  One example out of many glitches: the version I used didn’t remember WiFi access points and passwords, I had to re-enter everything each time I turned the machine on.  This type of problem has prevented Linux from gaining much ground on the desktop.
.
But this could change: the success of netbooks, their large unit volumes could encourage a manufacturer such as Asus, Acer or Lenovo to invest in the needed polish to make a Linux-based netbook as easy to use as a PC or Mac — or close enough at a much lower price.  And the name, netbook, reminds us it might not need today’s (or is it yesterday’s ?) full suite of robust desktop applications to succeed, it will run applications on/from the Cloud.  Imagine a Google netbook.
.
Last, smartphones. Ballmer tries to change the subject by suggesting Apple ought to license its iPhone OS as opposed to keeping it all to itself.  Let’s skip over Microsoft’s proprietary Xbox and Zune software and, perhaps, the upcoming Danger smartphone, Danger being the company it bought earlier this year, the maker of the Sidekick PDA.  Microsoft has been selling Windows Mobile licenses for close to eight years now.  In the licensing business, the iPhone isn’t the real competition, Android is.  How do you compete with a free smartphone OS, and a good one at that, and supported by Google Cloud applications?
.
My guess is Steve Ballmer is working on a combined answer, one that is sketched before our very eyes already.  Microsoft’s Live services are but a rehearsal for a much bigger act, Microsoft’s Cloud OS, sometimes called Strata. And, based on Microsoft’s own Cloud services, we’ll see a Danger-based smartphone, as proprietary as the Xbox and the iPod competitor Zune.  Put another way, Microsoft’s future business model will borrow from Apple and Google, it will have two components: proprietary devices and “universal” Cloud services.  And like its models, it will attempt to extract extra profits by nicely tying both components together.  For example: iPods are tied to the iTunes service, Android phones might (we don’t know yet) enjoy better Google applications.
.
Interesting times ahead. —JLG

Related columns:

1. Markitecture (take 2) — Google descends from the Cloud Google’s markitecture isn’t so different from Microsoft’s. Just like the old champion, Google tells us we can have the best of both worlds: Everything in the Cloud, applications and data. What? You want to work off-line? No problem, we can do that too. Your data and your applications also on the desktop, re-connect and everything [...]...
2. Caught Between The Desktop And The Cloud How would you like to be the head of Microsoft? Yesterday, you were the emperor of the desktop. Riding Moore’s Law, microprocessors doubling their power every 18 months, microcomputers became personal and made IBM’s mainframes passé. Microsoft Office, Windows on the desktop, Windows servers running Exchange became the industry standards. The resulting dominant position (some [...]...
3. “Cloud Computing is bad for you”… So says Richard Stallman the father of the Free Software Foundation. He makes a simple argument: By using Cloud Computing applications you surrender your life (data) to some big company you can’t trust.  You’re no longer in control.  Conversely, if you keep everything on your (Linux) desktop, you’re the master of your own destiny. . This [...]...
4. That word again: Open The Other Steve, Microsoft’s Ballmer, just treated us to another paean to open systems. This was last week at the Churchill Club, a Silicon Valley schmoozing institution.  There, we meet, gossip, drink, dine and watch a never ending and never boring parade of industry figures submitting themselves to soft-ball interviews by local notables of suitable [...]...
5. Nokia makes Symbian Open Source: Declaring Victory? When a $oftware company experiences a sudden access of generosity and donates its first born to the world of Open Source, what are we to think? They made so much money it was embarrassing? Or, it’s an act of desperation: We can’t sell it, maybe be they’ll use it if we give it away. Uncharitable [...]...