« Microsoft's Business Intelligence Platform | Main | Oracle Buys a Setting Sun »
Azure - Cloud Computing in Redmond
It's no surprise that Microsoft has its eye on the cloud. Cloud computing, that is.
What is surprising is the news that the Microsoft planns to build 20 datacenters at a cost of about $1 billion each in hopes of dominating the cloud.
Now that's chump change compared to the TARP, but in a more rational world $20 billion is still real money, and there aren't that many techs out their with pockets that deep. Google is in that financial league, and it's clear that Microsoft is hoping to "out Google" Google.
"Google has done a great job of hyping its prowess. But we're neck and neck with them," Debra Chrapaty, Microsoft's vice president for Global Foundation Service, told Burrows.
I'm not so sure about neck and neck Maybe from a technology perspective, but Google seems way ahead in the mindshare game. Microsoft, the organization, is not structured efficiently to dominate the architecture of the cloud. There are several negatives that Microsoft will need to overcome.
1. An 'ENTERPRISE' salesforce - Great technology means nothing unless someone decides to buy it. And when we're talking about enterprise customers, we're talking about a direct salesforce. In most enterprise software companies those feet on the street are incented to sell a certain type of product. It takes time and a lot of trial and error to find a compensation structure that the salesforce accepts. Until Microsoft tweaks this bit of organizational oversight they'll keep selling products in the same old way. I'm not discounting the partner channel; but this channel will need some enterprise represetnation in place to make it more efficient.
2. Brand equity - Microsoft's brand is primarily about the Windows OS and Office. It's not about the cloud or software as a service. It's no accident that Web-based e-mail, probably the simplest cloud service, is dominated by Google and Yahoo.
3. Cannibalization - The majority of Microsoft's revenue and profits still comes from Windows and Office. I find it difficult to beleive that Microsoft can will encourage users to emigrate from Office to a cheaper, Web-based alternative. So it probably won't be cheaper; but if they build it will users accept it?
Sure, Microsoft will roll out a new version of Windows Live that includes Web-based apps, but will they be heavyweights? Google, on the other hand, has core business built on the Web that will only be enhanced by its efforts in cloud computing.
4. Azure Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) - the Azure architecture provides a complete IaaS platform for Microsoft centric developers to seed their enterprise clouds. The problem is that it's not as open as the IAAS offering from Amazon or Google; even after you look deeply into the WCF class libraries. Now open is subject to interpretation but I'm using the adjective to describe the LAMP/LAMJ software stacks.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)