7 ms·

Microsoft is interesting again

71 points by yblu 12y ago

johng 12y ago
If you read that article, what I see is that Microsoft has been forced to do the following: Give away everything for free Produce it's own hardware, and at a loss (Surface may have made $1b now, but it's lost more than that over it's lifetime) Frankly, I don't know how they are making money now a days.
- IanDrake 12y ago
  They are transitioning to SAAS. Windows 10 upgrade will be "free for a year", but I take that to mean after a year you'll be paying $10 per month for Windows 10. Office 365 is doing well already.
  - johng 12y ago
    I may be old school but I am not keen on paying monthly fees for software that I use. That is part of the reason I refuse to upgrade to Adobe's Creative Cloud. Microsoft can't even keep XBOX live up when someone wants to DDOS it, I don't want software that I'm renting that cant run if their servers are down.
    - sejje 12y ago
      What if it can run when the servers are down?
    - freehunter 12y ago
      Shoot, it's been how long since Windows XP and they can't keep their own Windows Update servers running properly. All the time I'm sitting at the update screen waiting, waiting, and waiting, then finally it throws an error. I've never been able to leave feedback on the Windows app store. Downloading from Technet was always hit or miss. My Xbox 360 has lost the ability to update, and there's nothing for the error code it's throwing when I search online. Outlook.com has had several major outages since its launch. Even when it's not being DDoS'd, Xbox Live has given a lot of trouble in matchmaking and download speeds. When it comes to online services, Microsoft has never been reliable in my experience. Not then, not now, not ever. When a Microsoft online service works properly, I'm surprised. When it doesn't work, I expect that and I move on. If you know anything about my comment history, I'm not anti-Microsoft in any way. But man their online services really suck when it comes to reliability.
    - wlesieutre 12y ago
      To clarify the Windows 10 situation, they used some unfortunately vague language when they announced it, but it's not a subscription. The 1-year thing is a limited giveaway period to push Windows 7 users into upgrading quickly rather than waiting.
  - Someone1234 12y ago
    You're mistaken about Windows 10. When I heard that announcement I thought the same thing, Microsoft's language was very ambiguous. However they have since clarified, and Windows 10 won't require a subscription fee as far as they have said. The year thing is similar to the $10 Windows 8 promotion (upgrade from 7 to 8 for $10 for the first year). Except this time it is completely free from 7 or 8/8.1 to 10, but if you don't do it in the first year then you'll have to buy an upgrade kit at whatever the retail price is. The only subscription they've talked about with Windows 10 is Software Assurance, but that isn't remotely new, and has existed for enterprise customers since at least 2000. It doesn't apply to consumers. Office 365 is subscription though, and it remains to be seen if they'll continue to do boxed software indefinitely. They already tried to alter the box software licensing terms so you could never upgrade your computer without re-buying it until there was a massive public outcry.
    - walterbell 12y ago
      The free version of Win 10 requires mandatory updates from Microsoft, not just security updates but app updates. There is also a variety of user data tracking and integration with cloud services, Bing, storage, etc. Businesses that want a predictable operating system that receives only security updates, will need to pay for support. In other words, if consumers want what was free with Win7, they have to use a support pricing structure designed for business.
      - nvivo 12y ago
        > The free version of Win 10 requires mandatory updates from Microsoft, not just security updates but app updates. Are you from the future when the final version is out or can you back this up with some credible source? > There is also a variety of user data tracking Aren't you just saying that because the preview version was built specifically to provide lots of feedback data to microsoft (and they were pretty clear about it)? Because a "preview build" and a "final product that is not even released yet" are different things, you know... Unless you are just being a dick on the internet talking shit about things you don't know and don't even use. I heard that some people do that.
- blumkvist 12y ago
  SQL Server, Windows Server, Sharepoint Server, Exchange Server, Dyanamics NAV, Dyanmics AX, Dynamics GP, Dynamics CRM, Dynamics Marketing, Lync Server, Biztalk Server, System Center Server. Windows Desktop, MS Office, Visual Studio, Xbox (platform AND games), Skype. All of these are profitable. Then you have Azure, which I'm not sure if it is profitable, but will most certainly be. Very profitable. Geesh, how are these guys alive even? They should give Dynamics AX for free, otherwise they are toast!
  - serve_yay 12y ago
    I agree with the point you're making. However if you look at that list... it's not all the fresh-faced glitzy stuff people are so excited about. So really, what has changed about MS as a company if they make money in the same ways they did 5 years ago. (Skype as one of the examples, though?! Skype is likely never going to be profitable for MS, right?)
    - blumkvist 12y ago
      Who are these people excited about glitzy stuff? SaaS startups? Do you know what a small part of the world those people are?
  - hassaderpdole 12y ago
    Yes,yes, nope,yes,nope,nope,nope,nope,nope,yes,nope,maybe,yes,yes,nope,kids,spies.
- bryanlarsen 12y ago
  That's basically the point of the article. In Ballmer's Microsoft, they spent cash on dividends. In Nadel's Microsoft, they're spending cash on market share.
CmonDev 12y ago
"If Android & Cyanogen both run Android Apps perfectly, and Cyanogen doesn’t have to come bundled with Google’s suite of services….well….hmmmm…do the math." Android: hate the new GUI and every game prompting me to sign in to stupid G+ or whatever it's called. Anyone tried Cyanogen on Nexus 2013 tablet?
- soylentcola 12y ago
  Depending on what you dislike about the UI, you can probably make it more to your liking by using a different launcher (Nova is the one I use). It lets me make one or two minor changes to bring things more in line with my preferences but otherwise is just as fluid as the stock Google launcher. Cyanogen is fine and has some nice features if they apply to your personal usage but the thing about games wanting to log into your Google account would likely be the same. It's the equivalent of Apple's game center or whatever it's called. It's basically a universal login for games so you can keep progress/settings saved across devices. I haven't found any yet that require it but typically it's an opt-in thing if you care about that functionality. I've only ever been asked to sign in on first run of a newly installed game so it's not nearly as obnoxious as the ones that constantly pester you to connect with Facebook or some other thing that's completely unrelated. On a Google phone I can understand using Google's games framework for your game profile but it's annoying to assume I want to use an unrelated service (Facebook) or even have an account with them.
33mhz 12y ago
Microsoft did miss the boats on open source, search, mobile, social, and cloud, but they continued to #win what they previously cared about: enterprise. No one has meaningfully entered their arena. Now they want to play ball, which is wise... since business is unfortunately likely to pursue social, mobile, and cloud for enterprise.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
crystaln 12y ago
It's true, Microsoft is suddenly a palatable company without the greedy, vengeful, angry attitude of Steve Ballmer. With the anachronistic culture of the founders now entirely purged, I see no reason why they would not become a credible competitor in many markets. They are hungry to prove they are relevant again, giving them the incentive of a startup, while they have essentially unlimited cash. As much as some part of me squirms when I say it, Microsoft really is a player again.
- drzaiusapelord 12y ago
  Player in what? The Surface looks interesting but its very, very expensive compared to either a laptop or a tablet. Their phones are underwhelming regardless of their massive 'mobile/cloud' first initiatives and are now the bottom-basement phone for the ultra cheap buyer. Office365 is interesting but predates Nadella's leadership. Azure never panned out to be the Windows EC2. OSX keeps eating up laptop marketshare (go to any college campus, no one has windows). Surface RT was a complete disaster. Win8 was underwhelming at best. On the enterprise side of things, a lot of sysadmins are shocked at the low quality of security updates and the massive delay in getting them out. How many were recalled in 2014? Nadella's personal mission at MS was redoing QA and as far as I can tell, he's somehow made it worse. Tabletizing interfaces in Win8 and Server 2013 was a questionable move. Office 2013 is a pig with lipstick and is known for its horror stories. Licensing has somehow gotten more bureaucratic and expensive. I'm not fan of Ballmer, but I think the Ballmer/Gates magic was a real thing for a time, and its obvious this magic needed Gates to work. Nadella's Steve Jobs impersonation is becoming tiresome imo. The cloud/mobile first initiative ate from MS's core competencies- rock solid and featureful enterprise software. The only thing I can say about Nadella is that he's recognizing how important a classic start menu is for enterprise users and its coming back in Win10. Out of all of MS's products, Win10 is the only thing of interest. "Me toos" like its budget tablets/phones or the buying of skype or minecraft, just seem like desperate moves from a company that has lost its way. Frankly, I'd like to see enterprise broken off from loss leaders like surface (which is sold at a loss) and all the things its giving away for free as a sort of catch up to FOSS dominated and Apple dominated areas. One just seems to be eating the other, and the one being eaten is the moneymaker. MS is just too big and is chasing so many tails. Nadella fought to keep the xbox division when investors were pissed about it last year. How much political capital did it cost for him to keep that pig? I certainly don't think MS is going to fail anytime soon, but I don't think its somehow changed its ways. Its still too many chefs chasing too many targets, many of which are probably unhittable for such a bureaucratic giant. Windows phone goes for 50 bucks nowadays and the sales are still unimpressive. Getting this late to the mobile game is a killer. There may be no way to recover lost marketshare that mobile has taken. How many billions will Nadella burn through trying? We're almost three years into the Surface line. When does it finally pay off? When do I actually see one in public?
serve_yay 12y ago
Not to downplay the change taking place, but what portion of the work that MS as a company does is represented by the flashy stuff that has everyone calling it a "new Microsoft"? Did all that middle-management and infighting and bureaucratic stasis just... disappear? In other words, nerds often heap disdain on marketing but they are as susceptible to it as anyone else. The marketing to which they are susceptible is just less recognizable as such.
- 33mhz 12y ago
  They fired tens of thousands of employees, including shifting upper management thoroughly. So yes, they killed a lot of bureaucracy.
  - Grazester 12y ago
    and how many of those people were from Nokia that was acquired by them?
    - Gurkenmaster 12y ago
      They acquired Nokia with 30,000 employees then fired about one third of those.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
sparaker 12y ago
Microsoft has always failed when they have tried to enforce their own standards in the industry. Moving away from this mistake and recognizing that promoting something that is relevant and makes sense is the only way to go forward is a huge step. Funding new interesting ideas will always help them also secure a better seat in the open source community as most startups rely on open source technologies.
dbg31415 12y ago
I didn't think this was horribly written until I saw the "move to SF" line about 8 times. Sorry, SF location isn't going to do anything for MSFT. So sick of all the fanboy shit about life in SF.
- hacknat 12y ago
  I know, what the hell is moving Bing or Xbox to SF going to do? I don't think he realizes how big these teams are, but even if that wasn't issue this sounds a lot like underpants gnomes to me.

71 points by yblu 12y ago

johng 12y ago

If you read that article, what I see is that Microsoft has been forced to do the following: Give away everything for free Produce it's own hardware, and at a loss (Surface may have made $1b now, but it's lost more than that over it's lifetime) Frankly, I don't know how they are making money now a days.

IanDrake 12y ago
They are transitioning to SAAS. Windows 10 upgrade will be "free for a year", but I take that to mean after a year you'll be paying $10 per month for Windows 10. Office 365 is doing well already.
- johng 12y ago
  I may be old school but I am not keen on paying monthly fees for software that I use. That is part of the reason I refuse to upgrade to Adobe's Creative Cloud. Microsoft can't even keep XBOX live up when someone wants to DDOS it, I don't want software that I'm renting that cant run if their servers are down.
  - sejje 12y ago
    What if it can run when the servers are down?
  - freehunter 12y ago
    Shoot, it's been how long since Windows XP and they can't keep their own Windows Update servers running properly. All the time I'm sitting at the update screen waiting, waiting, and waiting, then finally it throws an error. I've never been able to leave feedback on the Windows app store. Downloading from Technet was always hit or miss. My Xbox 360 has lost the ability to update, and there's nothing for the error code it's throwing when I search online. Outlook.com has had several major outages since its launch. Even when it's not being DDoS'd, Xbox Live has given a lot of trouble in matchmaking and download speeds. When it comes to online services, Microsoft has never been reliable in my experience. Not then, not now, not ever. When a Microsoft online service works properly, I'm surprised. When it doesn't work, I expect that and I move on. If you know anything about my comment history, I'm not anti-Microsoft in any way. But man their online services really suck when it comes to reliability.
  - wlesieutre 12y ago
    To clarify the Windows 10 situation, they used some unfortunately vague language when they announced it, but it's not a subscription. The 1-year thing is a limited giveaway period to push Windows 7 users into upgrading quickly rather than waiting.
- Someone1234 12y ago
  You're mistaken about Windows 10. When I heard that announcement I thought the same thing, Microsoft's language was very ambiguous. However they have since clarified, and Windows 10 won't require a subscription fee as far as they have said. The year thing is similar to the $10 Windows 8 promotion (upgrade from 7 to 8 for $10 for the first year). Except this time it is completely free from 7 or 8/8.1 to 10, but if you don't do it in the first year then you'll have to buy an upgrade kit at whatever the retail price is. The only subscription they've talked about with Windows 10 is Software Assurance, but that isn't remotely new, and has existed for enterprise customers since at least 2000. It doesn't apply to consumers. Office 365 is subscription though, and it remains to be seen if they'll continue to do boxed software indefinitely. They already tried to alter the box software licensing terms so you could never upgrade your computer without re-buying it until there was a massive public outcry.
  - walterbell 12y ago
    The free version of Win 10 requires mandatory updates from Microsoft, not just security updates but app updates. There is also a variety of user data tracking and integration with cloud services, Bing, storage, etc. Businesses that want a predictable operating system that receives only security updates, will need to pay for support. In other words, if consumers want what was free with Win7, they have to use a support pricing structure designed for business.
    - nvivo 12y ago
      > The free version of Win 10 requires mandatory updates from Microsoft, not just security updates but app updates. Are you from the future when the final version is out or can you back this up with some credible source? > There is also a variety of user data tracking Aren't you just saying that because the preview version was built specifically to provide lots of feedback data to microsoft (and they were pretty clear about it)? Because a "preview build" and a "final product that is not even released yet" are different things, you know... Unless you are just being a dick on the internet talking shit about things you don't know and don't even use. I heard that some people do that.
blumkvist 12y ago
SQL Server, Windows Server, Sharepoint Server, Exchange Server, Dyanamics NAV, Dyanmics AX, Dynamics GP, Dynamics CRM, Dynamics Marketing, Lync Server, Biztalk Server, System Center Server. Windows Desktop, MS Office, Visual Studio, Xbox (platform AND games), Skype. All of these are profitable. Then you have Azure, which I'm not sure if it is profitable, but will most certainly be. Very profitable. Geesh, how are these guys alive even? They should give Dynamics AX for free, otherwise they are toast!
- serve_yay 12y ago
  I agree with the point you're making. However if you look at that list... it's not all the fresh-faced glitzy stuff people are so excited about. So really, what has changed about MS as a company if they make money in the same ways they did 5 years ago. (Skype as one of the examples, though?! Skype is likely never going to be profitable for MS, right?)
  - blumkvist 12y ago
    Who are these people excited about glitzy stuff? SaaS startups? Do you know what a small part of the world those people are?
- hassaderpdole 12y ago
  Yes,yes, nope,yes,nope,nope,nope,nope,nope,yes,nope,maybe,yes,yes,nope,kids,spies.
bryanlarsen 12y ago
That's basically the point of the article. In Ballmer's Microsoft, they spent cash on dividends. In Nadel's Microsoft, they're spending cash on market share.

CmonDev 12y ago

"If Android & Cyanogen both run Android Apps perfectly, and Cyanogen doesn’t have to come bundled with Google’s suite of services….well….hmmmm…do the math." Android: hate the new GUI and every game prompting me to sign in to stupid G+ or whatever it's called. Anyone tried Cyanogen on Nexus 2013 tablet?

soylentcola 12y ago
Depending on what you dislike about the UI, you can probably make it more to your liking by using a different launcher (Nova is the one I use). It lets me make one or two minor changes to bring things more in line with my preferences but otherwise is just as fluid as the stock Google launcher. Cyanogen is fine and has some nice features if they apply to your personal usage but the thing about games wanting to log into your Google account would likely be the same. It's the equivalent of Apple's game center or whatever it's called. It's basically a universal login for games so you can keep progress/settings saved across devices. I haven't found any yet that require it but typically it's an opt-in thing if you care about that functionality. I've only ever been asked to sign in on first run of a newly installed game so it's not nearly as obnoxious as the ones that constantly pester you to connect with Facebook or some other thing that's completely unrelated. On a Google phone I can understand using Google's games framework for your game profile but it's annoying to assume I want to use an unrelated service (Facebook) or even have an account with them.

33mhz 12y ago

Microsoft did miss the boats on open source, search, mobile, social, and cloud, but they continued to #win what they previously cared about: enterprise. No one has meaningfully entered their arena. Now they want to play ball, which is wise... since business is unfortunately likely to pursue social, mobile, and cloud for enterprise.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

crystaln 12y ago

It's true, Microsoft is suddenly a palatable company without the greedy, vengeful, angry attitude of Steve Ballmer. With the anachronistic culture of the founders now entirely purged, I see no reason why they would not become a credible competitor in many markets. They are hungry to prove they are relevant again, giving them the incentive of a startup, while they have essentially unlimited cash. As much as some part of me squirms when I say it, Microsoft really is a player again.

drzaiusapelord 12y ago
Player in what? The Surface looks interesting but its very, very expensive compared to either a laptop or a tablet. Their phones are underwhelming regardless of their massive 'mobile/cloud' first initiatives and are now the bottom-basement phone for the ultra cheap buyer. Office365 is interesting but predates Nadella's leadership. Azure never panned out to be the Windows EC2. OSX keeps eating up laptop marketshare (go to any college campus, no one has windows). Surface RT was a complete disaster. Win8 was underwhelming at best. On the enterprise side of things, a lot of sysadmins are shocked at the low quality of security updates and the massive delay in getting them out. How many were recalled in 2014? Nadella's personal mission at MS was redoing QA and as far as I can tell, he's somehow made it worse. Tabletizing interfaces in Win8 and Server 2013 was a questionable move. Office 2013 is a pig with lipstick and is known for its horror stories. Licensing has somehow gotten more bureaucratic and expensive. I'm not fan of Ballmer, but I think the Ballmer/Gates magic was a real thing for a time, and its obvious this magic needed Gates to work. Nadella's Steve Jobs impersonation is becoming tiresome imo. The cloud/mobile first initiative ate from MS's core competencies- rock solid and featureful enterprise software. The only thing I can say about Nadella is that he's recognizing how important a classic start menu is for enterprise users and its coming back in Win10. Out of all of MS's products, Win10 is the only thing of interest. "Me toos" like its budget tablets/phones or the buying of skype or minecraft, just seem like desperate moves from a company that has lost its way. Frankly, I'd like to see enterprise broken off from loss leaders like surface (which is sold at a loss) and all the things its giving away for free as a sort of catch up to FOSS dominated and Apple dominated areas. One just seems to be eating the other, and the one being eaten is the moneymaker. MS is just too big and is chasing so many tails. Nadella fought to keep the xbox division when investors were pissed about it last year. How much political capital did it cost for him to keep that pig? I certainly don't think MS is going to fail anytime soon, but I don't think its somehow changed its ways. Its still too many chefs chasing too many targets, many of which are probably unhittable for such a bureaucratic giant. Windows phone goes for 50 bucks nowadays and the sales are still unimpressive. Getting this late to the mobile game is a killer. There may be no way to recover lost marketshare that mobile has taken. How many billions will Nadella burn through trying? We're almost three years into the Surface line. When does it finally pay off? When do I actually see one in public?

serve_yay 12y ago

Not to downplay the change taking place, but what portion of the work that MS as a company does is represented by the flashy stuff that has everyone calling it a "new Microsoft"? Did all that middle-management and infighting and bureaucratic stasis just... disappear? In other words, nerds often heap disdain on marketing but they are as susceptible to it as anyone else. The marketing to which they are susceptible is just less recognizable as such.

33mhz 12y ago
They fired tens of thousands of employees, including shifting upper management thoroughly. So yes, they killed a lot of bureaucracy.
- Grazester 12y ago
  and how many of those people were from Nokia that was acquired by them?
  - Gurkenmaster 12y ago
    They acquired Nokia with 30,000 employees then fired about one third of those.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

sparaker 12y ago

Microsoft has always failed when they have tried to enforce their own standards in the industry. Moving away from this mistake and recognizing that promoting something that is relevant and makes sense is the only way to go forward is a huge step. Funding new interesting ideas will always help them also secure a better seat in the open source community as most startups rely on open source technologies.

dbg31415 12y ago

I didn't think this was horribly written until I saw the "move to SF" line about 8 times. Sorry, SF location isn't going to do anything for MSFT. So sick of all the fanboy shit about life in SF.

hacknat 12y ago
I know, what the hell is moving Bing or Xbox to SF going to do? I don't think he realizes how big these teams are, but even if that wasn't issue this sounds a lot like underpants gnomes to me.