Microsoft gets outside the box with software

(continued from previous page)

are used to getting paid up front for licensing and then again for either consulting or ongoing support services. In a service-based model, all of those costs must be factored in to the monthly fee.

Gates verbatim

Continued from previous page

"Microsoft has done a lot with things like hosted Exchange. You'll see us do more with things like hosted SharePoint and hosted environments that the MBS applications can then sit on top of.

"It's very hard to do service-level agreements and resource pricing when things get arbitrary, and that's a tricky thing. Say you have logic that you as a company want to run. In a hosted environment, your logic can starve out the resources of somebody else's on that hosted thing, and it's very hard for people to price for you. But say it's a high-priority thing for you to get something done; you want to be able to know that can happen, whereas in the hosted world that's very hard to do.

"So there are some drawbacks to the hosted world--of course, there are some benefits, too--there are some drawbacks that you need to address at the platform level, particularly if you allow customization. If you don't allow customization with third parties with different business logic then it's not nearly as hard.

Continued on next page

In addition, there's a shift in expectations, Wainewright said. With traditional software, companies like Microsoft are offering a set of capabilities that customers must either work into their businesses themselves or pay consultants to do. With a service, customers expect the product to work immediately and contain enough connectors to hook up with other business applications.

Another key question is how Microsoft might deliver future software-as-a-service products. Although Office Live and some other Microsoft products are delivered directly, the company has traditionally relied heavily on partners to sell and tailor its software.

But Gates and the analysts agreed that as there are definitely challenges, so too are there benefits.

One of the benefits for companies such as Microsoft is a consistent revenue stream. Since the late 1990s, Microsoft has been trying to get more of its sales to come from subscriptionlike contracts rather than through one-time licenses.

"I don't think there is any question that Microsoft would love to get there," said Paul DeGroot, an analyst with market researcher Directions on Microsoft. "It's quite evident, particularly as product release cycles get longer."

DeGroot said Microsoft's historical method of getting paid for a one-time license worked pretty well when major releases came every two to

[Sentinel]

Puh-lease!!

Software as a service? Puh-lease! This is another Microsoft attempt to impose their criteria on the end user (who doesn't have much of a choice anyway). IF Microsoft thinks that such a strategy will work, they must be smoking something (I wonder in fact, why many people still use Office2K instead of 2003...). There will be those who subscribe and use their software while connected to MS's servers, but I think most clients prefer a one-time purchase, the traditional way. It is far more economic for the end user (but then again, MS doesn't care, all they want is the users' money). Oh, but what about the piracy problem, it's hurting poor Microsoft, isn't it? Well, this strategy may help somewhat, but I believe that hackers will most likely try to go against the "hosted application" servers. And then Microsoft will have a bunch of angry clients calling because they can't write the project they need to hand in tomorrow. Or what happens when the "server is too busy" (like happens with Hotmail sometimes)?

Microsoft: instead of forcing users to pay over and over for the same crappy software, maybe you should think about bringing down your prices a little. Why will I pay over $300 for MS Office when OpenOffice is free, is a one-time download and does basically everything else MS Office does. And even the HTML it generates is much better than Microsoft Office's propietary "Save as Web Page" feature.

[Jon N.]

Who is M$ Kidding?

What?! Is this a joke? If so, it's possibly the biggest "joke" on the net!
Yea, piracy, virii, & crackers are a problem, but is this the way to solve the problem ? NOOOOO!
If you want to see a mass exodus by the mass market constituancy switch to open source code, and OS X & the Tux on top of the dogpile, then by all means do this! It would be like committing corporate hara-kiri!
Everybody wants the convenience of download, but I know that I will NOT pay $2-$300 annually for this software! Omar's right! Somebody in the boardroom must be smoking somethin'!

[PolarUpgrade]

They ain't smokin': They is developin' .NET for LoooongHorn

The strategy is clear enough. This is.NET reprhrased. Shame on CNet for not reporting the obvious.

It seems evident that Microsoft will simply roll out Longhorn, whose functionality will be browser indifferent and .NET subscription centric. That is, the .NET platform will be the communications vehicle for desk-to-host, obsoleting Firefox et al, and making things such that all software has to be developed on the .NET paradigm to work meaningfully on the C Sharp Looooooong Horn.

Once software makers are compelled to developed along the .NET lines, which originally specified that even developer tools and code libraries might go subscription, the market will all go subscription just to support the cost of developing .NET wares.

There is the simple fact that once software firms are forced to invest in .NET they shall need to recoup the investment, by adopting the subscription paradigm as well.

This was the stratgey with the move from VB6 to VB .NET--one had to buy the whole Visual Studio package to update to VB.NET in a way that allowed code distribution. Once one has paid for all of Visual Studio, the incentive is to go to the pure .NET language as one has bought it all.

[landlines]

Potential trap for M$

If software is a service, customers might have a much better chance of holding M$ to PERFORMANCE STANDARDS!!!!

OOPS!!! MAJOR MISTAKE!!! UNDO! UNDO!

[publicstatic]

Because .NET is too hard to those VB idiots

It is very very difficult to M$ to educate those VB "programmers" how to use OOP language. So M$ decide to do it on its own.

[genemosher]

Network Computing is the inevitable future

Network computing is the inevitable future. Intelligent displays plugged into the network will replace dumb displays plugged into PC's. The PC will become an optional, undesireable, unneeded part of the software experience. It's aready happening. It doesn't matter that the idea of the PC being functionally uninvented gives PC lovers hemorrhoids. That's not going to matter. The software user of the future can do so much more with the network than he can with a PC that he simply does not need a PC.

[Michael Grogan]

And all of everybody's data...

...is on the net too! What a grand day for big government and mega corporations! There is not, and never will be, any possibility of data privacy on a network. ANY security scheme on a net can and will be cracked; and that most easily by those who implement and oversee the implementation of the security attempts.

[Thomas, David]

Blah Blah Blah

I've heard this same crap for thirty years. The truth of the
matter is this Microsofts attempt to gain more control over the
market place. We already being forced to use .Net and follow
microsofts "best practices". Networked computing is already
here. But do you want to do it the way microsoft dictactes it?
Do you want them to think for you? They seem to have a great
:-P track record so far in that category. Guess that's why they
have such a plethora of successful business apps. Oopps they
didn't buy Siebel, PeopleSoft, JDEdwards, Intuit, and a ton of
others yet. Hmmmm ... oh yeah they have great development
tools. Darn.

[Stomfi]

The Network is the Computer

64+ bits gives the power to create telco managed grids of telco supplied end user connection machines. A Unix or Plan 9 like OS would give users the unprecedented power of a supercomputer grid. End user boxes would not have to be very powerful.
The enduser pays for the grid network box, instead of the ADSL or cable modem.
The rest of money is spent on sophisticated human interface devices. Software will probably be free.
Because the network is the computer and managed by the telco, the possibilty of illegal activies would be restricted.
I don't see the MS model fitting in to this architecture, but maybe the XBox is their grid machine.

[Michael Grogan]

I should have spoken more carefully.....

....when I said the data will be on the net I actually meant that it would be more inherently network accessable. These guys aren't talking about downloading programs whenever you need them, they're talking about uploading the user data to be manipulated on central computers. Now they have access to ALL of your data as well as controlling all of the processing power; you can bet the next step is keeping all the data on the server for 'faster access' I would cite gmail as the precedent.

[John Kuzak]

sophisticated human

http://www.analogstereo.com/lincoln_owners_manual.htm

[Below Meigh]

Terminal & Mainframe...again...

Hmmm, let me see...run programs remotely...hmmm...big iron
at one end and client/terminal/desktop/console at other end.

And this is new?? This is Bill Gates brainstorm? Puh-lease is
right!

Cyclical.

Bill...get your head out of the sweater dumpster and just walk
away. You have enough money now. Stick with Melinda and just
donate to those that need it. Let the real people that actually
NEED, USE and WRITE software do their thing. Enough with
putting ideas in Adobe's head what WE need versus what you
THINK we NEED.

"Hmm, not only are the sheeple buying a license to even power
on their computers, they also fork over $50/month just to
connect to the net! And now, we can nickel-dime them for
content, xbox goodies and the subscriptions to even launch and
run something that isn't even there! Brilliant!"

(I should have my own (insert magazine, blog, article, tv show)
on predicting the future of computing...)