What Ray Ozzie Didn't Tell You About Microsoft Azure
theregister.co.uk
theregister.co.uk
1. A company whose main business is books 2. A company whose main business is text advertisements 3. A company whose main business is business software"
This is a really, really important observation. First time I've seen it spelled out so clearly.
Let's say you're a business decision maker, and you got yourself on this cloud computing kick. Who would you rather buy your cloud resources from?
1. A company who built its entire business on the high availability of its international network of online transaction engines, 2. A company which has built its business on indexing, and processing one of the biggest data stores in the world, and which has also built and run the world's most popular Internet-based productivity tools. 3. A company whose business relies om shipping a PC operating systems and which also supplies a word processor. "
I'm not saying that my framing is any less biased, just that there is more than one way to view these things.
We used several databases, but none from Microsoft. We used several programming languages, but none from Microsoft. Suggesting either would get you laughed out of the room even quicker than suggesting a free software solution (and in fact, we did use free software for several things like this, which mgmt saw as its fortes).
Managers at bigco want to minimize risk. (We used Windows 2000 until about 2006, i.e., it took a while to trust Microsoft at the one thing we thought they were good at.) When (not if) something goes wrong, they don't want the finger pointed at them. They're risk-averse to an extreme (which drives us programmers nuts), but they're not that stupid -- they know a PC OS is vastly different from a cloud platform. A brand new service from a company not known for this type of service is not minimizing risk.
If they got the itch to try cloud computing, they probably would have started by calling up Oracle.
New and up-rated buzz phrases, same and repackaged and renamed and updated products and services. If you watch, most of the Microsofties will use the same gestures and techniques in the presentations, too.
The languages listed as "soon" would appear to be a freeze-the-market component of the classic competitive strategy, as are the barbs tossed at the competitors.
Almost certainly more technical and operations and licensing complexity and cross-version complexity, though the C-level usually discovers these costs after the deal is done. If at all.
Will it work? Sure. But you'll (still) be using Windows and Windows Networking, with all that entails.
But hey, they got you to look at Windows. Again.
If you think about it, .NET Live Services' service bus = SQS but better. SQL Services = Bigtable. Azure = AppEngine (you give it the code and it makes it run). It's not really that hard to get, different, or superfluous. It's just so easy to use that your average enterprise VB window pusher can use it.
And yes, the marketing sucks. It took me a good hour to see what's going on.