13 ms·

Azure seems to be doing well and some people expect it to overtake AWS sooner rather than later in market share. The talk that Microsoft is irrelevant is a bit

by Certhas 10y ago

Azure seems to be doing well and some people expect it to overtake AWS sooner rather than later in market share. The talk that Microsoft is irrelevant is a bit hilarious, given that they beat google on revenue and income last year. They have morphed from a company that is front and center to one that provides the infrastructure for the digital side of non-tech business. Microsoft Office is absolutely pervasive, and it's not going anywhere.

floopidydoopidy 10y ago
Like cancer.
- sctb 10y ago
  Please comment civilly and substantively here or not at all.
  - floopidydoopidy 10y ago
    There's nothing uncivil about similes. It's a valid criticism of a corrupt organization that uses your website like free advertising.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
nathas 10y ago
> Azure seems to be doing well and some people expect it to overtake AWS sooner rather than later in market share. Source? Edit: Sorry, that was lazy of me. Googled: https://mspoweruser.com/cio-surey-finds-microsoft-azure-will-overtake-amazon-aws-infrastructure-service/ https://mspoweruser.com/cio-surey-finds-microsoft-azure-will... A bit of a biased source, "mspoweruser". Read a bit more.. We'll have to see how the offerings change or evolve in the next 5 years. Edit 2: https://rcpmag.com/articles/2016/08/02/microsoft-behind-aws-in-cloud.aspx https://rcpmag.com/articles/2016/08/02/microsoft-behind-aws-... AWS is still > 30% of the overall market, Azure hitting around ~9%.
- tedmiston 10y ago
  I'll second the "citation needed" for Azure overtaking AWS "soon".
- gr3yh47 10y ago
  Azure reliability is near the bottom of the market. I doubt they'll be overtaking aws.
- Spooky23 10y ago
  It's all based on Morgan Stanley’s "2016 CIO Survey". It doesn't appear to be publicly available. I've been the drone filling out surveys like this for CIOs in the past. Sometimes those surveys ask these sorts of things indirectly, especially if it's a paid survey. For example, they might assume that O365 utilization drives Azure adoption. (Behind the scenes O365 auth is an Azure service) Another example would be asking if your org has MSDN or an EA. In both cases, that provides some "free"/NFR Azure services. A few years ago, Gartner pushed a survey like this where 40% of a group of drunken CIO types at some conference claimed that they wouldn't buy PCs or smartphones for employees after 2018. This stuff just isn't that meaningful.
- Certhas 10y ago
  That was where I saw it. It seems the market is balancing, rather than AWS pulling away, with YoY growth better for Google than for Microsoft and both better than Amazon: https://www.srgresearch.com/articles/amazon-leads-microsoft-ibm-google-chase-others-trail https://www.srgresearch.com/articles/amazon-leads-microsoft-...
chocolatebunny 10y ago
Who's saying Azure will over take AWS? Last I heard AWS was an order of magnitude larger than its nearest competitors.
- DamnYuppie 10y ago
  My understanding is that Amazon doesn't break out the AWS revenue separately so it is quite hard to gauge.
  - tedmiston 10y ago
    If you mean separate AWS revenue from Amazon, they definitely do [1]. [1]: http://www.recode.net/platform/amp/2016/4/28/11586526/aws-cloud-revenue-growth http://www.recode.net/platform/amp/2016/4/28/11586526/aws-cl...
- Certhas 10y ago
  Factor 3 according to this with more YoY growth: https://www.srgresearch.com/articles/amazon-leads-microsoft-ibm-google-chase-others-trail https://www.srgresearch.com/articles/amazon-leads-microsoft-...
mtgx 10y ago
That seems very unlikely over the next decade at least.
- zaidf 10y ago
  Azure has 10% marketshare. AWS has 30% marketshare. People who aren't on the frontlines of enterprise wheeling and dealing can't see this but for those who are, it is fairly clear that Azure is out for blood AWS's blood.
alex- 10y ago
The author called out, specifically, how Azure was in his opinion keeping Microsoft relevant "Nadella got Microsoft organized around mobile and the cloud (Azure), freed the Office and Azure teams from Windows, killed the phone business and got a major release of Windows out without the usual trauma. And is moving the company into augmented reality and conversational AI. While they’ll likely never regain the market dominance they had in the 20th century, (their business model continues to be extremely profitable) Nadella likely saved Microsoft from irrelevance."
- Crespyl 10y ago
  > a major release of Windows out without the usual trauma What trauma-less release would this be?
  - alex- 10y ago
    Satya Nadella was appointed as CEO on 4 February 2014. The last 2 windows releases were: Windows 10, released on the 29 July 2015 Windows 8.1, released on the 17 October 2013 So it is safe to assume that the author was referring to the Windows 10 release https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satya_Nadella https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satya_Nadella https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_Windows_versions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_Windows_vers...
- gurkendoktor 10y ago
  > got a major release of Windows out without the usual trauma I haven't been following the Windows world closely when Windows 7 was released - but wasn't that the least traumatic OS release in a long while?
  - unscaled 10y ago
    Windows 7 was a 'tock' release to Vista's 'tick', so I can see why the author would not consider it major. Then again, Windows 10 was also probably a 'tock' release to Windows 8's tick (considering 8.1 was essentially a service pack).
thr0waway1239 10y ago
While all this is true, it is also true that this trajectory looks a lot like IBM's after their heyday. It might just be a somewhat more gradual slide down to irrelevance. For example, I couldn't actually figure out if Tay.AI was an example of supreme idiocy or supreme hubris. Their repeated botching of Windows 10 auto-updates is not getting much attention because the profits have moved towards the cloud, but that it all the more telling considering that MS had quite a monopoly on the personal computing device market not long back. Remember, it wasn't like they were caught by surprise at some of these innovations - they did start something called Windows Live Search way back when, they did have some of the world's first smartphones (except they were put together in a way that no one wanted to use), they also had the advantage of large piles of cash to use to acquire, say, a YouTube. After they finally ran out of options, they decide to jump on the open source bandwagon because otherwise there was a very realistic chance that they would have actually gone into a serious downward spiral, particularly in the currency that matters most for tech companies - the mindshare of software developers who actually wish to push the bleeding edge farther. It might seem ironic that, given the majority of Ballmer's tenure was spent not just bad mouthing open source, but actively harassing the open source community [1], that the first thing that Ballmer's exit brought was a sudden embrace of open source. In reality though, their chameleon like stance towards open source - embracing it when it suits them while kicking it when it doesn't - was effectively the only possibility for MS to regain its reputation. After all, it is not as if they innovated their way out of that hole. The general contempt directed at MSFT is well earned by this point, and while they are supposedly trying very hard to make amends, one also wonders if the world might already have good Linux desktops by this time if not for Microsoft's active nuisance-making for most of the previous decade. Yes, the companies are merely trying to maximize shareholder profits, but there are lots of times when MS did things which were just cringe-worthy. See this gem from Bill Gates [2]: "In the same leaked Microsoft internal 'Challenges and Strategy' memo, Gates outlined a solution to the problem: "patenting as much as we can. A future start-up with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the giants choose to impose. That price might be high: Established companies have an interest in excluding future competitors." By 2004 Microsoft was accumulating 3000 patents a year." And not to mention, the companies which ate away at Microsoft's profits actually came up with genuinely innovative stuff - even today, Bing is no match for Google's search - despite the fact that MS once used to pay people to use Bing (Bing Rewards)? What is MS doing which is similarly innovative? At least with regards to this article, yes, Microsoft is just another software company today which is making a set of the most expedient choices towards profitability. [1] http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/microsofts-ballmer-warns-asia-against-use-of-linux/articleshow/927503.cms http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/microsofts-ballmer-warns... [2] http://www.itpro.co.uk/101743/the-open-source-patent-war http://www.itpro.co.uk/101743/the-open-source-patent-war

by Certhas 10y ago

floopidydoopidy 10y ago

Like cancer.

sctb 10y ago
Please comment civilly and substantively here or not at all.
- floopidydoopidy 10y ago
  There's nothing uncivil about similes. It's a valid criticism of a corrupt organization that uses your website like free advertising.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

nathas 10y ago

> Azure seems to be doing well and some people expect it to overtake AWS sooner rather than later in market share. Source? Edit: Sorry, that was lazy of me. Googled: https://mspoweruser.com/cio-surey-finds-microsoft-azure-will-overtake-amazon-aws-infrastructure-service/ https://mspoweruser.com/cio-surey-finds-microsoft-azure-will... A bit of a biased source, "mspoweruser". Read a bit more.. We'll have to see how the offerings change or evolve in the next 5 years. Edit 2: https://rcpmag.com/articles/2016/08/02/microsoft-behind-aws-in-cloud.aspx https://rcpmag.com/articles/2016/08/02/microsoft-behind-aws-... AWS is still > 30% of the overall market, Azure hitting around ~9%.

tedmiston 10y ago
I'll second the "citation needed" for Azure overtaking AWS "soon".
gr3yh47 10y ago
Azure reliability is near the bottom of the market. I doubt they'll be overtaking aws.
Spooky23 10y ago
It's all based on Morgan Stanley’s "2016 CIO Survey". It doesn't appear to be publicly available. I've been the drone filling out surveys like this for CIOs in the past. Sometimes those surveys ask these sorts of things indirectly, especially if it's a paid survey. For example, they might assume that O365 utilization drives Azure adoption. (Behind the scenes O365 auth is an Azure service) Another example would be asking if your org has MSDN or an EA. In both cases, that provides some "free"/NFR Azure services. A few years ago, Gartner pushed a survey like this where 40% of a group of drunken CIO types at some conference claimed that they wouldn't buy PCs or smartphones for employees after 2018. This stuff just isn't that meaningful.
Certhas 10y ago
That was where I saw it. It seems the market is balancing, rather than AWS pulling away, with YoY growth better for Google than for Microsoft and both better than Amazon: https://www.srgresearch.com/articles/amazon-leads-microsoft-ibm-google-chase-others-trail https://www.srgresearch.com/articles/amazon-leads-microsoft-...

chocolatebunny 10y ago

Who's saying Azure will over take AWS? Last I heard AWS was an order of magnitude larger than its nearest competitors.

DamnYuppie 10y ago
My understanding is that Amazon doesn't break out the AWS revenue separately so it is quite hard to gauge.
- tedmiston 10y ago
  If you mean separate AWS revenue from Amazon, they definitely do [1]. [1]: http://www.recode.net/platform/amp/2016/4/28/11586526/aws-cloud-revenue-growth http://www.recode.net/platform/amp/2016/4/28/11586526/aws-cl...
Certhas 10y ago
Factor 3 according to this with more YoY growth: https://www.srgresearch.com/articles/amazon-leads-microsoft-ibm-google-chase-others-trail https://www.srgresearch.com/articles/amazon-leads-microsoft-...

mtgx 10y ago

That seems very unlikely over the next decade at least.

zaidf 10y ago
Azure has 10% marketshare. AWS has 30% marketshare. People who aren't on the frontlines of enterprise wheeling and dealing can't see this but for those who are, it is fairly clear that Azure is out for blood AWS's blood.

alex- 10y ago

The author called out, specifically, how Azure was in his opinion keeping Microsoft relevant "Nadella got Microsoft organized around mobile and the cloud (Azure), freed the Office and Azure teams from Windows, killed the phone business and got a major release of Windows out without the usual trauma. And is moving the company into augmented reality and conversational AI. While they’ll likely never regain the market dominance they had in the 20th century, (their business model continues to be extremely profitable) Nadella likely saved Microsoft from irrelevance."

Crespyl 10y ago
> a major release of Windows out without the usual trauma What trauma-less release would this be?
- alex- 10y ago
  Satya Nadella was appointed as CEO on 4 February 2014. The last 2 windows releases were: Windows 10, released on the 29 July 2015 Windows 8.1, released on the 17 October 2013 So it is safe to assume that the author was referring to the Windows 10 release https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satya_Nadella https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satya_Nadella https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_Windows_versions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_Windows_vers...
gurkendoktor 10y ago
> got a major release of Windows out without the usual trauma I haven't been following the Windows world closely when Windows 7 was released - but wasn't that the least traumatic OS release in a long while?
- unscaled 10y ago
  Windows 7 was a 'tock' release to Vista's 'tick', so I can see why the author would not consider it major. Then again, Windows 10 was also probably a 'tock' release to Windows 8's tick (considering 8.1 was essentially a service pack).

thr0waway1239 10y ago

While all this is true, it is also true that this trajectory looks a lot like IBM's after their heyday. It might just be a somewhat more gradual slide down to irrelevance. For example, I couldn't actually figure out if Tay.AI was an example of supreme idiocy or supreme hubris. Their repeated botching of Windows 10 auto-updates is not getting much attention because the profits have moved towards the cloud, but that it all the more telling considering that MS had quite a monopoly on the personal computing device market not long back. Remember, it wasn't like they were caught by surprise at some of these innovations - they did start something called Windows Live Search way back when, they did have some of the world's first smartphones (except they were put together in a way that no one wanted to use), they also had the advantage of large piles of cash to use to acquire, say, a YouTube. After they finally ran out of options, they decide to jump on the open source bandwagon because otherwise there was a very realistic chance that they would have actually gone into a serious downward spiral, particularly in the currency that matters most for tech companies - the mindshare of software developers who actually wish to push the bleeding edge farther. It might seem ironic that, given the majority of Ballmer's tenure was spent not just bad mouthing open source, but actively harassing the open source community [1], that the first thing that Ballmer's exit brought was a sudden embrace of open source. In reality though, their chameleon like stance towards open source - embracing it when it suits them while kicking it when it doesn't - was effectively the only possibility for MS to regain its reputation. After all, it is not as if they innovated their way out of that hole. The general contempt directed at MSFT is well earned by this point, and while they are supposedly trying very hard to make amends, one also wonders if the world might already have good Linux desktops by this time if not for Microsoft's active nuisance-making for most of the previous decade. Yes, the companies are merely trying to maximize shareholder profits, but there are lots of times when MS did things which were just cringe-worthy. See this gem from Bill Gates [2]: "In the same leaked Microsoft internal 'Challenges and Strategy' memo, Gates outlined a solution to the problem: "patenting as much as we can. A future start-up with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the giants choose to impose. That price might be high: Established companies have an interest in excluding future competitors." By 2004 Microsoft was accumulating 3000 patents a year." And not to mention, the companies which ate away at Microsoft's profits actually came up with genuinely innovative stuff - even today, Bing is no match for Google's search - despite the fact that MS once used to pay people to use Bing (Bing Rewards)? What is MS doing which is similarly innovative? At least with regards to this article, yes, Microsoft is just another software company today which is making a set of the most expedient choices towards profitability. [1] http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/microsofts-ballmer-warns-asia-against-use-of-linux/articleshow/927503.cms http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/microsofts-ballmer-warns... [2] http://www.itpro.co.uk/101743/the-open-source-patent-war http://www.itpro.co.uk/101743/the-open-source-patent-war