3 ms·

So what? Had gsuite/office been made by a 3rd party company, you would have counted them in, right? And had Google/MS not have a cloud presence so these product

by yyyk 7y ago

So what? Had gsuite/office been made by a 3rd party company, you would have counted them in, right? And had Google/MS not have a cloud presence so these products would have been hosted in a different cloud, they would have been counted in your estimation as well, right? This case is technically no different than the others. It is a fact Office/GSuite are rather reliable and fast. It's a credit to their respective clouds, and obviously propels them forwards in their competition with AWS. The respective companies are right to include these in total revenue/marketshare, and it is good to see that they eat their own dogfood. We could have flipped that around and ask why Amazon doesn't trust AWS, but I recall that Amazon does have a few things there too...

leereeves 7y ago
Is the cost of GCP/Azure also deducted from GSuite/Office profits?
- yyyk 7y ago
  I suspect it is, though I haven't delved in their financials to prove it. Giving a different internal pricing to their own product could be constructed as an anti-competitive action, and someone would have sued them for that. If they merely didn't report it [that is, didn't count it in Office/GSuite costs], it would sound like hosting for free which again could be considered anti-competitive, so that sounds unlikely to me. My original comment was just saying that there's no good reason not to count GSuite/Office in respective GCP/Azure marketshare. Obviously these cloud-products could have been hosted in different clouds, but they aren't.
simonebrunozzi 7y ago
I disagree with you. If you want to tell me how big your public cloud is, in terms of revenues, you are not going to count revenues that come from software than runs on top of it. By that account, AWS could say: 30B, plus 200B more, taking into account the revenues of Salesforce, Elastic, etc. It makes no sense to conflate these two very different categories.
- yyyk 7y ago
  *"revenues that come from software than runs on top of it" I am not sure I understand you here. Do you mean "what the software is paying to run on the cloud" (even if the payment is 'merely' internal accounting) or "what customers are paying for the software that runs on the cloud"? I meant the former, and that's the way I read your original comment. But your latest comment seems to refer to the latter? I agree these would be different categories (IaaS/PasS vs SaaS). I was saying that MS/Google should be able to count Office/GSuite hosting expense on their cloud - it would be no different if it were some 3rd party product - not that they could count what customers are paying for these products.
  - simonebrunozzi 7y ago
    I meant the latter.

by yyyk 7y ago

leereeves 7y ago

Is the cost of GCP/Azure also deducted from GSuite/Office profits?

yyyk 7y ago
I suspect it is, though I haven't delved in their financials to prove it. Giving a different internal pricing to their own product could be constructed as an anti-competitive action, and someone would have sued them for that. If they merely didn't report it [that is, didn't count it in Office/GSuite costs], it would sound like hosting for free which again could be considered anti-competitive, so that sounds unlikely to me. My original comment was just saying that there's no good reason not to count GSuite/Office in respective GCP/Azure marketshare. Obviously these cloud-products could have been hosted in different clouds, but they aren't.

simonebrunozzi 7y ago

I disagree with you. If you want to tell me how big your public cloud is, in terms of revenues, you are not going to count revenues that come from software than runs on top of it. By that account, AWS could say: 30B, plus 200B more, taking into account the revenues of Salesforce, Elastic, etc. It makes no sense to conflate these two very different categories.

yyyk 7y ago
*"revenues that come from software than runs on top of it" I am not sure I understand you here. Do you mean "what the software is paying to run on the cloud" (even if the payment is 'merely' internal accounting) or "what customers are paying for the software that runs on the cloud"? I meant the former, and that's the way I read your original comment. But your latest comment seems to refer to the latter? I agree these would be different categories (IaaS/PasS vs SaaS). I was saying that MS/Google should be able to count Office/GSuite hosting expense on their cloud - it would be no different if it were some 3rd party product - not that they could count what customers are paying for these products.
- simonebrunozzi 7y ago
  I meant the latter.