Ballmer Teases Software-Plus-Services in '07

Robert writes with a link to a CBR article hinting that Microsoft's vision of software-plus-services may begin to form this year. The idea is that an online version of Windows, plus a 'cloud' of related services and collaboration software, will allow a user to access their content from anywhere and (theoretically) be more productive. "In broad strokes, that vision is to build a set of services for servers, clients and mobile devices in the Internet cloud, with a new model of computation and user interface. Ballmer seemed to suggest the first of these services would launch, in some form, later this year. Underpinning these services would be a "cloud platform," which is the Windows Live Core architecture the company is working on. 'We are in the process today of building out a service platform in the cloud,' Ballmer said. 'We're building out a service-based infrastructure, not server by server but a new management model, a new device model, new storage, networking, computational model from the get-go.'"

Ballmer's response to Google

Monkey see, monkey do, monkey dance.

Super-sharepoint?

We're starting to see the beginings of this concept with Sharepoint 2007. Somehow, at least at my job, this idea of easy, integrated unstructured content sharing has become a big deal. Our users don't seem to care, but the big-wigs writing the checks do. Anyway, it'll be interesting to see how they pull this off.

You mean like - .Mac?

I can already place files to view from anywhere on .Mac, and it also syncronizes a number of things across multiple computers.

Apple hasn't done a lot with it beyond those things to date, but hints that is about to change... I'd say they have a head-start on Microsoft, yet again.

Re:You mean like - .Mac?

Apple hasn't done a lot with it beyond those things to date, but hints that is about to change... I'd say they have a head-start on Microsoft, yet again.

They sure do have a head start on Microsoft, including the "it will only work well with our own OS" part.

I think the real leaders in this area are the companies that have figured out how to offer these services in an OS-neutral way and how to integrate mobile and desktop usage. Neither Microsoft nor Apple have done that.

Software as a service or even plus a service...

...is still fundamentally a form of "computing socialism" with the vendor adopting the role of the "State", and as such, will fail because people fundamentally distrust others and do not like to be reliant on others when it can be trivally avoided (Linux). Let MS move in this direction.

They will be quite lonely in their brave new world.

Re:Software as a service or even plus a service...

(..) because people fundamentally distrust others and do not like to be reliant on others when it can be trivally avoided (Linux)

And nowadays, >90% of desktop users run a closed source OS on their desktop, that automatically downloads and installs updates with unknown contents, whenever the user goes online. And extend it by clicking 'download plugin' whenever something appears to be missing or not working. And keep their mail online on their ISP's servers. And share their family pics online using a photo sharing site that popped up 2 months ago. That is in practice different from software-as-a-service, ehm... how?

If your assumption were true, people would flock en masse to Linux and other Free/OS systems, because it is easy enough (if you care).

Personally, I use Linux because (among other reasons) I have more trust in an open source system maintained by many groups of developers, that work on it for fun and a variety of other reasons, than I would trust a closed source system maintained by a single company, that does it just for the money. But hey, that's just me.

The current state of affairs tells me, that the average Jane trusts a closed source, commercial OS enough to do her daily work, and process sensitive data with it. Software-as-a-service is then just a streamlining of current software distribution methods. So people are ready for that, even if they don't realise it.

Why software-as-a-service is not the norm yet? Bandwidth limitations? Because no company did a solid execution of the idea so far? Copyright issues with 3rd party software? Because people are used to buying install CD's or computers with preloaded OS? As opposed to a bare minimal software install, and downloading the rest after hooking up the broadband connection? Hey wait, aren't folks already doing that anyway, sort of?

Who knows... My guess: it just hasn't been done yet (large scale, and well executed), but not because it wouldn't be possible.

Mosquitos

Think cloud of mosquitos, all annoying you and trying to suck you dry...

Re:Mosquitos is correct.

how is this off topic? if MSFT is involved you will have to pay to access your own data, and if you miss a payment or are late with it you lose all your data. The same goes for network neutrality. it's just the ISPs who want to nickel and dime you to death.

The Dot-Bomb of this decade is brewing and it will be these "software as services" repeating the mistakes of AOL, Compuserve, and Prodigy again. Apparently we don't learn from history, thus making us doomed to repeat it.

Ballmer wears Kick Me Anti-Trust

Microsoft API's for software developers is food for anti-trust lawyers. Now they are requiring Microsoft payments for third party software developers.

• Sherman Acts [wikipedia.org]

or anti-trust tying kicks in on this right away.

Google needs to defeat this digital locker scheme is one hundred percent under the thumb of Microsoft. Time to break up Microsoft, Microsoft Live, Applications and Operating Systems along with Media properties.

Five business units, each shareholder would get a unit of each one in such a great split up.

Vista digital locker seems like a way for forcing all purchases , registrations and technical product keys all go through Microsoft.

Call your congress critter on this break up!

2007 huh?

OK, I'll hold my breath, because Microsoft always ships on schedule.

thin client

Now that internet access is ubiquitous, fast, and reliable, the age of the thin client may really be upon us. Though thin clients have been touted in the past and failed, the state of the internet has never been ready to handle thin clients in the past. This has changed.

Home users and small business simply should not have to worry about maintaining firewalls, patches, backups, revision control, document sharing services, and all the other mess that comes with typical PC use. They have only done it so far because there was no other option. Now things are changing, and I welcome it. The only people who will lose out on this are the low-level tech support types and small business IT technicians. With today's unemployment rates, this isn't a huge problem.

Yay, progress!

Well, there are other hindrances

These are similar to what killed the whole idea back when MSFT first touted it.

Software isn't like Cable TV, Phone, or similar home services. After all, I don't put my personal data into any of those, and I certainly don't use them to store my own files. If Joe Sixpack misses the 'rent' on his thin client, he's screwed... hard. Even if his files were stored locally, he'd have a very hard time opening media files which can only be opened by the thin client (yes, I can see MSFT --or someone else-- doing that very easily to produce a literal lock-in).

A thin client would certainly free up the average user from routine tasks... but what if the user prefers to use, say IrfanView [irfanview.com] for managing and viewing his/her image files, instead of whatever the vendor has provided (prolly the MS default image viewer)? I sincerely doubt that the vendor is going to let said user simply install whatever he/she wants, since it would become a logistical nightmare to support on the back end.

There's still too much room for abuse... on all sides. It removes consumer choice from the equation entirely, unless consumers can organize en masse and simply shift to a friendlier provider. Boycotts of that size, especially with personal data and files at stake, will be infinitely harder to organize and execute. Even regular ones today are tough enough to pull off.

Technically, I think it's damned fine. VM's for corporate users saves a ton of cash in hardware. OTOH, those corporations aren't as willing to trust their secrets and business on VM servers that they don't own. Users have very similar reasons.

Don't get me wrong, I can see it happening on some levels... but I just don't see any mass shift towards it (what... you think Joe Sixpack wants his vendor to keep his tax records --or conversely, his pr0n collection-- and not have them within immediate and total control?)

/P

Re:thin client

Network access within a corporation has been ubiquitous, fast, and reliable for the past 20 years and thin clients haven't gotten far. So now that Microsoft enters the fray with their swiss-cheese virus fodder, we're supposed to surrender our data to some poorly defined "cloud" network. Not only do we have the problems of maintaining a network well enough to get our data in house, but the data is surrendered to a company that has shown time after time that it is willing to cut the nuts off of a business partner for a dollar.

No. This is nothing more that Microsoft's swan song. Vista is a bust, and their lunch is slowly being eaten by Apple and Linux. They're scrambling to find something to replace the glory products of yesteryear as they slowly slip into irrelevancy. The company still has some power left to broker, but it is slipping away at an increasing rate as people realize that there are better products to be had for less money.

Software as a service is a valid business model. It actually works in some situations. But Microsoft's view of it is a way to rent their software, with the idea of retaining more control, the emphasis being on control/revenue retention vs supplying a service. I expect Microsoft will push this as hard as they possibly can, and make some significant wins (No one every got fired....). I also expect they will have an even larger defection rate to open source solutions. If you're going to rent solutions, you might as well rent the ones that work and the prices are lower because there's competition.

You'd think they would learn by now...

"Software as a Service" died back in 2000... why does MSFT keep insisting on bringing it back up?

Sure, the growth of virtualization might make some aspects more palatable, but others (like, you know, "control") are simply not going to be ameliorated by repackaging.

It's almost like MSFT has been on a re-run kick lately... Software-as-Service, Tablets (okay, "tables" now), etc...

It would be damned interesting to see MSFT come up with a new idea that folks actually like, instead of chasing others' successes (e.g. with xbox and Zune and IE, to varying degrees of success), or trying to rehash their failed ones.

/P

Re:You'd think they would learn by now...

It would be damned interesting to see MSFT come up with a new idea that folks actually like, instead of chasing others' successes (e.g. with xbox and Zune and IE, to varying degrees of success), or trying to rehash their failed ones.

Except, as far as I can tell, they've never done that. The core of their business model is to either copy other people's successful ideas (sometimes after buying them, sometimes without), or just take an idea that hasn't ever been successful, and use their weight to ram it down people's throats regardless.

They have no experience in the creation-of-new-novel-stuff department. Someday, that's going to catch up with them and be their undoing, but with so much money to burn, it could take an exceptionally long time.

Re:You'd think they would learn by now...

They're trying to bring it back because they think that there's a fuck-ton of money to be made renting you services and locking your data up in their proprietary formats.

There's a fuck-ton[*] of business to be done through Internet-based services. But competition has a weird effect on this kind of business. It pushes prices so close to zero that it's nearly impossible to make the kind of money that Microsoft is used to.

This is an area that better suits the piranha than the shark, if you'll forgive the metaphor. A swarm of tiny service providers willing to survive on nibbles are going to be much more effective than a lumbering giant that requires the entire beast for itself.

More importantly, working over the Internet will require improvements in interoperability. Whether they arise through formal standards processes or through reverse engineering, you can count on significant movement in interop if the big software players start to commit to the kind of service that Ballmer is describing.

I for one - heh - welcome our online services overlords, because I am going to eat their lunch. Bit by tiny bit. 8^)

[*] That's 0.454 metric fuck-tonnes, for the non-Americans in the audience.

Heh. Seen this before.

I once worked for an incredibly successful consulting firm: 2 to 1500 employees in five years, $1M to $500M in revenue, true employment (not "as long as we have a customer for you"), many other examples of goodness and light. It was bought for cash by a huge telecom, who thought that we could deliver on such a vague promise as "remotely managed software services."

In fairness, the idea was already being floated about, that we could just set up NOCs/ROCs all over the place and somehow, magically, deliver as many services as a demand existed for. The telecom just drooled over it; circa 1997, they were all watching the biscuit wheels falling off of the long-distance gravy train.

Of course, the behemoth telecom sealed the coffin by demanding that we try to make their broken attempts at non-remote service offerings work. I left when they decreed that Windows NT would be the only OS running on any of their machines. They sold off little pieces of the original firm. Last I heard, a few ex-managers got together and bought what was left of it in order to use the brand name.

I'm not saying that M$ can't eventually pull this off. If any existing entity could make it work, they could. I base this on their mind-numbing ability to handle huge problems that, you know, "no one could have expected." That is, if they really try to do this, it will fail, over and over again. Only M$, IMO, has the resources to survive these failures. And only M$ could command such a vast array of excellent talent and manage to turn out such mediocre products.

It looks to me more like they're trying to imitate what they think Google is.

Stop with the fucking clouds already!

Seriously, what's up with all the clouds Ballmer?

I suppose it's an apt term. Something that seems big and impressive from a long way away but if you get up close you see it's nothing more than vapour, completely intangible.

access files from anywhere

SO now hackers will be able to access my files from anywhere!

I cant wait to sell my soul to MS!

Who is this good for?

This seems to be entirely for the benefit of Microsoft - their wanting to secure a regular income, with the benefits to the customer a distant second.

After all, why go to all the trouble of pushing Vista or its (likely even less popular) successors on an uninterested public, when you can just bill them monthly?

What do we as customers get out of it? The ability to access our data remotely? I can largely already do that - the things I'm most likely to want access to, such as mail, are well catered for by multiple webmail operations, and it's notable that MS has managed to so badly screw up Hotmail if this is where they're aiming.

As for other apps, I suspect that network bandwidth is going to put a stop to many of those plans.

Not to mention the issue of trust - would *you* trust MS with all your data. Again, judging by the success of their Passport scheme, it looks like a resounding NO!

I find it rather ironic that MS came to prominence precisely because they gave us control over our own computers, rather than being beholden to a single central controller, and now they want to be that controller.

Copycat

Microsoft basically wants to copycat the cellphone 'pay as you go' revenue model. Software 'plus' services basically means the software is useless without some sort of online subscription, specially associated with a single users account.

Want to read mail? better purchase a subscription to MS-Mail+
Want to see up to date help files for visual studio? better subscribe to Developer+
Want to get updates? subscribe to Updates+

expect each of these services to have a small monthly fee, something like you would see on a cellphone bill.

People are used to getting gouged for cell service, the sheep will learn to like it for software as well.

Next step is Microsoft Datacenters, and Microsoft Storage. No need to buy or 'own' a PC anymore, lease/rent it and all your software from Microsoft, for a small monthly fee of course.

.Net squared

This is part of the cumulative Microsoft vision that started when they wanted to make every part of their OS a configurable widget. The idea is that if you abstract the system enough into an insanely complex object model, you can give users control of it, and most programming tasks becoming a question of plugging together the right objects with the right filters and actors. The difference is that now they've brought .net-style wisdom into the picture, and are going to make it a net-wide, OS-less (but Vista-dependent, no doubt) version of the original ActiveX evangelism.

The good news is that this could make many programming tasks less tedious, and when a year later a more efficient (less corporate, fewer people) FOSS team takes on a clone project, it'll be fun for the rest of us as well.

And I just thought up a GREAT name for it...

...they could call this bold new idea ".NET"

Yawn...

...I'm sorry Steve. Did you say something?
I thought I heard, "blah, blah, blah, Internet, blah, blah, cloud , blah, blah, blah...."

/redundant

My sources tell me

Microsoft is hard at work on the DBSOD, the Distributed Blue Screen of Death. Now you can freeze any machine, anywhere in the world!

When you're smoking what Steve and Bill are

you're bound to imagine services "in the cloud"

I see something beyond tech here.

In some jobs people are working too much off the clock as it is. This would just enable, if not exacerbate, that kind of behavior. This I would liken to giving a Video iPod to a porn addict. Being "more prodictive" does have it's downside. I can forsee an increase in employee burnout and fatigue from companies who adopt this technology.

Clouds...

Indeed !

Catching Open Source again?

Just scroll bit down to GNOME Online Desktop [ometer.com]. Open Source desktop guys are talking about this idea for a long time. They want to build interface with contacts list as central place. People (online presences) are to become major pivot point. Telepathy, Galago, Decibel, KIMProxy gave application access to uniform online connectivity and presence information.
Additionally, projects like Stateless Linux break ties between user's documents and his computer. User's desktop moves with him when changing laptops etc.
They even built ,,aggregator for popular online sites and social notworking websites'' -- check Mugshot [mugshot.org].

software in a cloud

*KNOCK*KNOCK*KNOCK* ... "Steve, it's Bill, let me in, man" ... "Bill's not here, man."

Google Apps ... by Microsoft(tm)

From the Microsoft "me too" department ... Ballmer's answer to Google Apps. Evidently they are hedging their bets against the possibility of Google Apps taking hold and eating away at MS Office market share. Orgs that want to control their own destiny aren't going to go for either one. They're going to use software-plus-services technologies, but they'll run them from their own data centers.

Software is your Service

How about instead of consumers surrendering all their data to centrally controlled third parties, those third parties send us their code to run locally on our data. Oh wait, I just described an open source distro repository, lol.

This time for sure!

Once again MS announces it is going to get into the business of networked services. Good luck with that. First the announce that they will release computers in India. That sounds like they are chasing Apple and aiming to become their own OEM like Apple is. Except that unlike Apple they don't have someone like Jobs to manage the intricate details needed for Apple's famed integration and user experience to work. Now they want to get into being an ASP. Again. Which sounds like they want to be like Google. Except that unlike Google they don't have massive server farms or other infrastructure, and their services will probably be linked to Windows only programs.

In short, Microsoft can no longer be like Microsoft since they are losing their lock on the market. However they don't have a plan to become anything new, at least not at a scale that can support them at their current burn rates. All they can do is poorly mimic other company's strategies and business models. That doesn't strike me as a winning strategy. To me this is more signs that MS is collapsing, and over the next five years it will become apparent to everyone that it is doing so.

truth in advertising

Isn't a cloud water vapor?
So he's saying they're working on vapor?
Now that's honesty.

One and ONLY one reason for this scheme

There's one, and only one, reason why Microsoft is hyping this: it's the next big push to acclimate the world to software as a subscription service. They're salivating over the prospect of being able to collect from you every month, just like Comcast does, and to the same degree of excess and (even more) obscene profit. They want to reeducate you to think of software as "content".

If you think Microsoft has made a lot of money selling one-time software licenses, just wait until they've got people accustomed to paying them every month. You ain't seen nuthin' yet.

This is one of those turnkey moments in history, folks. Either we plant our feet solidly and draw a line, or lose the whole farm as Microsoft convinces all the neighbors to sell out.

Uneasiness...

I'm not trying to bash Microsoft, but they don't exactly have the best reputation in the realm of security.

I would be VERY hesitant to use a MS service that allows access to "all of my content" using a nebulous array of servers. I certainly wouldn't want to be an early adopter of this technology until they can prove a secure track record--especially given the problems with their current product lines.

Even if a miraculous thing happens and the "Live Core" thing ends up being pretty secure, my biggest problem with this technology is its reliance on networking. If a second miracle happens and the quality, quantity, and ubiquity of broadband networking over the air and standard transmisson media gets to a point where it is reliable and affordable then we might be looking at a viable useable service.

As it stands today, MS's security holes and the limited reliability/availablity of current broadband services keep Steve's Live Core dream in the lab.

QuickBooks Example

Intuit offers QuickBooks as a web application. It's a great idea (although it relies on ActiveX + IE) and worth paying the monthly fee. We could access it from anywhere and the accountant could get into the data without coming to our office. For us, it was much better than the normal locally installed software.

Lots of apps (SalesForce.com, TaxCut, etc.) will benefit from this model.

Ballmer == instant "don't care"

'nuf said...

Oblig funny

1) Make announcement of a revolutionary new Operating System
2) ... Internet Cloud ...
3) Profit!

The network is the computer...

What do you mean already been done?

With net neutrality dieing and slow adoption of...

broadband in North America, this may not work or be practical at all.

No innonvation but flashy marketing

Microsoft has issues as they have not really innovated anything for some time now. It is all updates to previous versions of software they bought or stole (based on the patent lawsuits they are dealing with) Marketing will only carry them so far these days. I think non technical people are starting to wise up. I mean hell even Al Sharpton is advocating the use of Ubuntu. So the more non techie decision makers are aware of alternatives and their potential benefits the better. Apple or Linux is a good way to go over Vista personally.

Platform in the cloud?

We are in the process today of building out a service platform in the cloud

That would seem to be the very definition of "vaporware".

But I can already do this for free!

The problem with Microsoft now is I think that it has decided that users want to use their computers in a more efficient way. The problem is that it hasn't quite got round to understanding that for the model that are hoping to adopt they will need to effectively offer their product for free.

I could give you the most obvious answer, Linux - most distributions are free, you pay for the support. But even more importantly companies such as LOGMEIN.COM are now offering free basic services like those discussed in the article that allow users to remotely log onto MAC and Windows PC from virtually any web browser (I suppose that would even include the iPhone). In addition, with many companies already using VNC and Citrix (whom admittedly are in parntership with Microsoft), it seams that they are a little late to the party.

As far back as 2004...

...when I worked in Redmond, I already overhear many MS employees enthusiastically talking over lunch about selling people the "right" to use Word at $0.25 a pop. Some of them really feel like they're curing cancer or something.

How dumb could a CIO be?

...to buy into an OS/Software model that M$ can just throw the switch and turn off your company if you have not paid your monthly extortio^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H payment on time.

Software on demand.

Imagine if your init scripts contain the following:

aptitude install kubuntu-desktop

This is essentially what "software as a service" does. Oh, but what about data shared over the network with a bunch of people collaborating on the project ? Simple. Just add another line...

svn up

Really, that's pretty much all there is to it. Oh, but what if I want to run code on the remote server? Well...

ssh username@host

Hey, you could even add in an NX client if you want it really fancy. Software as a service is nothing new.

All that is old, is new again

Here we go, back to the 'data center' idea for basic computing.

I still remember when Microsoft was the alternative to the 'big boxes' with their leased resources. "a computer of your own"

Tho its not much consolation, it is nice to see people starting to realize it was the better way of doing things.

Cloud?

We are in the process today of building out a service platform in the cloud, Ballmer said.

Sounds like vaporware to me. By the way, I'm willing to bet that at some point he really wanted to say the following:

The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud! The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud, The Cloud!

Ballmer Teases?

(Not FTA...)

Ballmer: [whilst dancing around and sweating profusely] "HA HA, Software-Plus-Services! Your mom is dumb and ugly and stupid and everyone thinks you smell!!!"

You know, it sure is strange to hear about Ballmer teasing something. Isn't he usually the one getting teased [flamingmailbox.com]?

Ohhh, wait, different kind of teasing. My mistake.

Services?

These aren't services. It's another attempt to fully realize the pay-forever model.

I don't know whether to embrace it or hate it. This more than anything could actually hasten the adoption of OSS.

Reminds me of something...

Antitrust [imdb.com], anyone?

lol

Microsoft does a great job of following what others are already doing. But my bit question is how am I going to reboot this new system when I get the BSOD :p Microsoft needs a new saying. Innovation, nah that requires out of the box thinking :)

What Ballmer really meant to say

was "We're building a cloudbase [tvcentury21.com] from which I will RULE THE WORLD"

He's *such* a tease!

Mr Ballmer was spotted running up to Software-Plus-Services, smacking it around the ears and shouting "Nyah Nyah Nyah Nyaaaaah-Nyah!"

Pictures at 11.

remember...

All your data are belong to Microsoft Somebody set up us the antitrust

Re:Storm Comin'

Coming soon...Microsoft Cloud...taking vaporware to new, stratospheric heights!!

Re:But....

Oh, and Does it run Linux?

Re:the linsux fanboys must be going wild

Ballmer is no Fucking Joke(TM). After he Fucking Kills(TM) Google, he's coming for the fanboys, and you.