MS is desperate. They have missed the first wave of cloud and most likely will not even be on board the second.

History is repeating itself. VOIP. MS has entered the game late on that as well. Yet MS has almost no online service providers for VOIP. Online Voip providers are now getting hit by second wave. ISP integrated VOIP.

Google does sell caches to ISP's. MS is basically not placed for this game Google is. Google makes online applications work. Google gets to sell more servers to ISP's so they can reduce there bandwidth usage and provide most stable online applications.

Where is MS's profit stream in the cloud. Googles is hardware so they can compete by giving there cloud applications away for free.

Next MS deal of tech sharing with Novell. Some how I think Novell will want to run the interface on a non Windows kernel box. On top if MS does not provide Linux Servers and Desktops with access they will have another EU case on there hands. This is what got them into trouble last time just between server and desktop. They are just trying to repeat history. Sorry game has changed.

Do a deal with the devil you die. Please start asking MS the hard questions how is Azure not going to end up another EU case due to lack of Linux support. If there is going to be Linux support were will people get it from.

Really I have no clue how this is good news for MS. They are stuck in a corner with no way out. So they are trying desperation.

Joe says;
"Open source has failed in the enterprise, despite some gains. Linux is a player on the server but has little desktop traction. Server stack is a principle reason.Linux looks cheap, but carries hidden costs in part because it's not as developed as Windows or Unix along the vertical stack of desktop and server applications. On the Linux desktop, there is no compelling alternative to Office"
----------------------------------------------------
First I would say that Joe Willcox experience with Linux and OpenOffice is in major doubt here. He has been asked about this before, and never replied. Second, he most likely typed his article from his MacBook again, you know, Mac OS X, based on BSD, the close cousin of Linux. Joe Willcox is a Mac User.

And Joe, take the challenge here and explain why we should be using MS Office instead of OpenOffice, which is free. Its doubtful you can, as you have most likely never used it, since you so seldom mention it. Give some examples, not your generalities, which are bogus anyway.

Now as far as Linux not gaining any traction on the desktop, I disagree. Since the advent of Vista, Linux desktop use has increased by 4 times. While still tiny, this in a major increase. You have to start somewhere, and that is usually from nothing. Even Microsoft had tiny usage figures when Digital CPM was the going standard. What happened to them. Also, several posters have shown many many links, of converts in other country's. But then, there is no money in promoting Linux, but their sure is in promoting MS products, which this site seems to want to do so well

I cannot see how this will work for MS.

I agree completely that this reeks of desperation from a company that is fighting a battle on so many fronts.

I mention Azure to "average" users of which I know a few(You do know who I mean, dont you MS? The person who has a PC at home to be productive for fun/hobby) and they havent even got a clue what Azure is. So IMO MS are fighting migration to other platforms, trying to draw a line under vista, trying to convince people that Windows 7 is good AND they are also going to have to do some serious educating as to what Azure actually is. Whilst all this is going on, you have wide spread bad feeling about Vista and MS's image (IMO) seems to be severely damaged.
and I nearly forgot, WM has already been overtaken by other mobile platforms, so thats another battle that needs to be sorted.
Good luck MS.

"Methinks, vaporware"

I called it. In little more than three days, Joe has already started bashing Azure.

You're f^*king clueless, Joe. Please just close down the BS M$ watch blog and and just drool over Apple and Google from now on.

Hey Joe, did you happen to run into Andre De La La Costros , at the PDC 2008? You know the MS astroturfer.

@The Hand:

I think on his "blog" he mentioned that he wasnt going to be there.
Maybe MS's generosity only stretches to a free laptop and not to plane tickets.
That wont stop him posting like he was there in person though.

@Jay:
Qoute "I called it. In little more than three days, Joe has already started bashing Azure."
So why do you come here? Youve already called Joe "f^*king clueless" so why bother to return? Someone of your awesome insight would probably be better off at vista.com. Or maybe you should go over to the Windows 7 blog?
You said "Please just close down the BS M$ watch blog" - and I bet you'd love that wouldnt you? there would be no more posts to challenge the press releases of MS, one less place to highlight the alternatives.
If we are talking about predictions, I made a comment earlier that pro-MS posters have to insult because they have no argument. I was right, youve done just that.
Regards.

If Azure is Vaporware, then Windows Seven will be in for a ruff reception. As it will turn out to be not much more than Vista. Why pay for it?

Even if Azure does turn out to be part of Seven, expect it to be much more part of the business release. And you just know, there will be charges to users who use part of this cloud OS. MS is all about revenue, people, there has to be the way to make users pay at some point. Expect more lock in, and more spying on users, especially if all your data belong to us, meaning fools put their data on MS cloud data servers.

Quote sameul l bronowitzh:

Agreed. Talking of "data belong to us"
http://www.lurkertech.com/bill-the-borg/boardwatch_borg.jpg

I don't condone Jay's comment above, but he did call your flipping the bit on Azure. I have a really hard time reconciling this very pessimistic view of Azure with your previous more balanced one. Also, many of your criticisms (early, still more to do, mobile absent, etc.) were all acknowledged and explained by no less than Ozzie himself. Also, Azure's scope, as I review it, is much broader than EC2. So obviously it's beta and not fully fleshed out. The same is true of Google's more comparable offering.

Hi Paul
Quote "I have a really hard time reconciling this very pessimistic view of Azure with your previous more balanced one. "

Could it be that Joe is wanting to promote healthy debate and is presenting two sides to the Azure story?

People have questioned Joes motives before, but maybe he believes this site is a good platform for all users of any platform to get together and talk? For the readers who dont comment and just read, it probably provides quite an interesting insight to what actual users are thinking and maybe is even entertaining.

Just an idea.
Regards.

"If Azure were a skyscraper, Microsoft held the grand opening before all the outside glass was in place or essential services were ready."

Oh boy Joe are you mistaken in that statement. Microsoft always has the outside glass in place for the grand opening. That's what sells. Only later do you realize what you've really bought into.

Details aside I totally agree with you and it is a trademark of Microsoft products and other closed source tools as well. It is a clear distinction to open source alternatives which are much rougher looking in the outside, but more robust and stable in the inside. Those 0 point y point z versions so popular in the open source community are more robust than a big fat 6.whatever version from Microsoft.

Paul wrote: "I have a really hard time reconciling this very pessimistic view of Azure with your previous more balanced one."

I don't see either as pessimistic, Paul. Microsoft has got lots of work to do here for Azure to achieve its potential. This is a hugely ambitious project. I didn't say that Microsoft did the wrong thing announcing Azure at PDC, just that it felt premature.

I purposely contrasted the difference between my feeling about Longhorn (which ran aground) and Azure (which looks promising). But it is vaporware, because the service is a big piece of work in progress. But come next PDC, who knows? Maybe it will be ready.

Joe

Joe's strategy is simple...

Firstly say something good about Microsoft and demonstrate how he is in the know, is in with the "the crowd", and by summarising other more informed blogs can be considered a credible source of information.

then follow that up with an insightful Microsoft bash to feed the beliefs of those Mac-wielding creative types #you know - those that all wear the same clothes, use the same gadgets and talk the same language# that they alone will liberate us from evil.

I bet you they wont be able to resist replying to this post ;-)

The Cloud... We already have been here. Mainframes. It's just "mainframe outsourcing" with a snazzy marketing name. ;) Terminal Server, Citrix - nothing new here, please move on and start writing good software instead of finding places to store software. It's like investing in infrastructure without investing in the cars to run on the infrastructure - balance people... balance.

The computer sitting in your house can do alot of processing on it's own. That's why we use Javascript and AJAX, so we can unload what was static HTML server processing back onto the client machine. Now we are in a cloud, loading that processing back onto a server. It seems as if we want to push "thin clients" to the masses. We've been here with private industry, thin clients at banks! Well I've worked for banks... we got rid of them when we found out those desktops were more powerful than our mainframes.

Now we develop more powerful mainframes to run the cloud and we can scale them! Well kudos! But one day, someone's going to come along and say Bob and Julie can scale their "thin client" to the cloud and won't have to use Google to index their life and can have their own mail box and it will be marketed as something new - again.

It's a game and if everyone was smart, nobody would get ahead.

Joe,

I can only assume like most press that you attended the first keynote, and then went off and created your prose.

Having just come back from PDC 2008, and having attended most of the Azure (Cloud) lectures, I would say that you are way off the mark.

I believe Azure is well thought out, but most certainly not fully implemented (As Microsoft correctly stated in the keynote and lectures).

This is process level hosting with very rigid controls on how the application is developed, how it interfaces and how it is monitored.

Unlike PDC03 (which I also attended), this is very real.

PS: Joe, remember the universal canvas from PDC03, well they now call that XAML.

Joe:

Correction to my last post:

Later in your note you correctly state that Azure does not have the feeling we got from PDC 2003.

While this may indeed be the world's largest beta (I don't disagree), I also think that it is quite radical.

Microsoft no longer wants you to just drink from the fountain, they want us to dive head first into the well.

For those that do take the plunge, the competitive advantage to traditional hosting could be substantial.

So far, cloud computing from Amazon, IBM, etc. has been about hosting, or cloud data storage.

This is the first end-to-end solution that I have heard, and Microsoft certainly has the intelligence, man power and money to make it happen (Assuming they don't do something stupid like purchase an over priced Yahoo).

Paul,

I think Joe has a pretty impressive, if sneaky strategy here.

Notice how he quotes himself often times. "I said 15 months ago...", "I have been saying for the past three months now...", etc.

If you play for both the teams, can you lose?

If Azure succeeds, Joe called it right away after PDC 08.

If Azure fails, once again, Joe called it right away after PDC 08.

@Sufficiently Labotimized:

Quote "I bet you they wont be able to resist replying to this post ;-)"
In the process of trying to be clever and make an insulting remark (and putting that comment at the end to try to prevent users from responding) You forgot about Linux users. I am a Linux user so I can respond to it without proving your silly attempt correct.
You've get again proved that there is no counter argument to looking at alternatives over MS. Just like every pro MS supporter before you, you cannot provide argument, so you do it through some sort of distorted stereotype and insult.
Now its my turn to play your silly little game: I bet Sufficiently Labotimized wont be able to resist responding to this one.
If youre going to try to be clever, I suggest you get debating tips from a book other than "Posting on Blogs, A MS-Shillers guide" Its out of date and Andre's probably used most of its techniques already.

Amazon had it right; start small and build up slowly over time. Unfortunately for Microsoft they are late to the game and a bloated company so they chose to start huge. That's not the way you deliver something of this scale.

Microsoft has only had 90 days to pull together a mass of hidden projects they weren't able to allow to be shown in public or even talked about lest they be hit with an injunction.

The MSFT engineering teams can work as quickly as they can, but, they won't be able to reclaim the time wasted by Steve Ballmer and his juvenile game of chicken played with reality from 2004 to the summer of 2008.

It's quite obvious Microsoft must pull together a development base for their developers to be weaned from their traditional methods. Whether that effort comes together soon enough to keep Microsoft from becoming a takeover target is the question. Ballmer's juvenile game of chicken played from 2004 to the summer of 2008 ha ve left MSFT nude and stressed while the other software players are free to roll out their work at their own pace.

Microsoft should be broken up by shareholder initiative instead of waiting for a coalition of vultures to descend and strip Ballmer of his presumed possessions.

portuno_diamo says :
"The MSFT engineering teams can work as quickly as they can, but, they won't be able to reclaim the time wasted by Steve Ballmer and his juvenile game of chicken played with reality from 2004 to the summer of 2008.
Microsoft should be broken up by shareholder initiative instead of waiting for a coalition of vultures to descend and strip Ballmer of his presumed possessions."........

At last, I think you have hit the nail on the head here Portuno, and finally realized why the patents may not mean as much to MSFT trust as you have been saying. MSFT is a monopoly, that will have a lot of legal problems implementing these. Longhorn/Vista was the waste of time you talked about, righty so, it did not do anything the previous operating system, XP, could do, but do it slower.
My guess is that you are referring to Azure, on the "they can work as quickly as they can remark." And yes the vultures are circling on this one. One wonders if Azure was bundled with the first two alphas that were submitted to the DOJ for review? I doubt it. Typical of MS to add in more stuff after submission in violation of the DOJ agreement. Therefore, the Vultures will have many grounds upon to go after the software giant. Only question is who are the Vultures? Think we can safely include the DOJ. the EU, maybe the governments of South Korea and China. As far as other possibilities, how about IBM, Novell, Red Hat, various open source entities, perhaps even Apple (should they get their head out of the sand).

@Roy:
Re: "The Cloud... We already have been here. Mainframes...."

Wow! You are so right.

The "cloud" is nothing more or less than centralized control. Give up your freedom and control, and in return the cloud will keep your applications up-to-date, your data safe, and your access secure.

It used to be called the mainframe. Now it's the cloud. The technology changes, and the name changes. But people don't change.

Some people are always driven to maintain control over others. They promise safety, security, and convenience in return for full control over you.

Some people are always driven to trade in their freedom and responsibility to that first group. They like the initial feeling of safety, security, and convenience and don't mind the loss of freedom.

And then the people wake up and start to miss their freedom. Too many broken promises and the dark side of being controlled start to weigh heavily.

In computing, it was Apple and then Microsoft who saved us from the tyranny of the mainframe. But now the cloud is emerging with the same promises that the mainframe made. And the cycle repeats itself.

Thanks, Roy, for pointing this out. I think that a new twist on an old familiar phrase really applies to you:

"Those who remember history are condemned to watch those who don't repeat it."

Do you know why we don't respond to you Mr. Linux. It is because you are irrelevant. Proof is that people would still rather pay for a OS from Microsoft or Apple instead of your nerdy OS. Sad, in rough economic times, 98% of users would still rather pay than use Linux. It is even more ironic, but where is the mass developer community for this? I thought that was the entire point to open source. Allow developers to develop freely. Well as soon as they found out there was no money in it, they reverted back to platforms that allow them to make money. I'll even bet that your parents are using a Mac or a PC and not free old mr. linux. So keep up the good fight. Not problem with competition. But seriously you cannot believe that Linux is a threat. It is a distraction.

Trojan virus steals bank info

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7701227.stm

Quotes from the link: "The details of about 500,000 online bank accounts and credit and debit cards have been stolen by a virus described as "one of the most advanced pieces of crimeware ever created. The RSA's Fraud Action Research Lab said it first detected the Windows Sinowal trojan in Feb 2006."
----------------------------------------------------
Yep, you got it, another "windows" trojan virus. One that is affecting bank and credit cards in most of the western world. When will Microsoft fix its terrible lack of security in Windows operating systems? It seems Microsoft is not concerned, and has done nothing to enhance security, or fix it, in Windows Seven.

Do yourself a favor, if you use your computer online, use a far safer Operating System than Windows, use Linux, BSD, Solarius, or Mac OS X. Windows is the Typhoid Mary of Operating Systems.

@Linux very amusing

I believe your percentage is mistaken. I'd say about 99.999% of users would still rather pay than use Linux. Basically because:
- you get OS X with you're new Mac so you've paid for it already
- you usually get Windows with your new PC and at a lower cost than getting the boxed set. So why not pay for it with the PC purchase? You'll pay more later on if you don't.
- installing Linux is much easier than installing Windows so it is better to have the OEM install it for you and then just drop in an Ubuntu install disk, resize the partition and install Linux in 20 minutes.
- getting the refund for the Windows in case you don't accept the EULA takes too long and is not worth the trouble (at least at my hourly rate, don't know about you).

BTW, I used to work a lot on Microsoft platforms, but at some point it was more hassle to keep up with the revisions than to move to web based apps and open source platforms. I've found there is money to be made here and I'm doing well thanks much. I understand other companies are also doing well running and developing on top of open source stacks.

@Linux very amusing,
I can't believe that some people still don't know that the CEO of Microsoft is so scared of Linux that he constantly issues patent threats against Linux, creates expensive "Get the FUD... er, I mean Facts" campaigns that specifically target Linux, and makes open pleas to the open source community to welcome open source to innovate on top of Windows instead of Linux.

So if you want to lambaste someone for claiming that Linux is a threat, go lambaste Steve Ballmer. Please be assured that it is he, and not I, who gets his knickers in a knot over people using Linux.

And contrary to your diatribe, I really don't care at all what other people use. I only really care that they do NOT try to stop me from using what I want to use. There's a BIG difference there, in case you are interested. And even if you can't be bothered to be interested.

And here's something else to chew on, Mr. Statistics very amusing: Based on the combined populations of people and flies, 99.9999% (or thereabouts) of that population prefers to eat animal excrement. I guess that proves is good to eat, doesn't it? A hundred billion flies cannot possibly be wrong, can they????

@Goblin

Goblin, you're even more clueless than Joe is. First, in only four days time, Joe has trotted out the vaporware FUD. I mean come on, Goblin/Joe. Hell! At least let the PDC conference end before you start casting the vaporware stone.

Second, what the hell does everyone think M$ is going to do? Sit around on their ass and let Google and Apple completely pass them by? Certainly, Joe's recent comments about Windows Mobile are pretty much right on the money, but with Azure and Live Mesh, these technologies are just starting to launch. Give them time to bake and see what kind of developer reaction does or does not come to pass.

Third, I haven't read all the details about Azure, and I probably won't, but it certainly does seem like M$ is moving pretty damn rapidly towards web 2.0 and cloud computing. Assuming they can deliver WM7 early in '09, trot out some nice hardware at a compelling price, and integrate Zune functionality, then they should be well on their way towards righting that ship.

Finally, will they make mistakes as any company does? Sure, but stop acting like I'm the only one taking sides here, while Joe just seems to be letting more and more BS fly out his a$$.

So far the only company that has a clear vision of what the next generation of computing would look like (some call it Web 2.0) and has the resources to implement is Microsoft.

@ Joe

"Little more than vaporware", is hardly a neutral term. From Wikipedia:

"Vaporware is a somewhat derogatory term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product. The term implies unwarranted optimism, an as yet unannounced abandonment of a project, or sometimes even deception; that is, it may imply that the announcer knows that product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility."

Similarly the comparison to Longhorn, with the "I don't _yet_ discern anything like that with Azure" caveat. Also, the negative Cringley quote with no corresponding counter-balance.

Again, for me, the tone of this one is decidedly negative, whereas the previous was quite balanced, arguably even positive.

@Goblin

"Could it be that Joe is wanting to promote healthy debate and is presenting two sides to the Azure story?"

It could be. But since you apparently agree that this takes the other side, something Joe appears to disagree with, wouldn't it have been easier to follow if it had been prefaced accordingly?

@Paul - Youve got a point, and to be honest it was only a suggestion. I personally think joe has his pro and anti days, but whatever the motives behind his posts, I think he's very good at starting a discussion either way and thats what probably brings people to his site.

@Jay:

Quote "Goblin, you're even more clueless than Joe is. First, in only four days time, Joe has trotted out the vaporware FUD. I mean come on, Goblin/Joe. Hell! At least let the PDC conference end before you start casting the vaporware stone."
--- and im not the only one casting stones. Since I dont believe you have anymore "insider" info than me your theories are just are clueless, we just dont know what will happen. In regards to Azure and in particular WM7 I have no experience. I state that.
All I can do (and anyone else) is draw from experiences of people that have tried the system (or heard the lecture) anyone can do this, just do a google. I also draw from the history of MS and its other "offerings". Anyone for Windows Mobile?
Jay, again youre proving me right. I always say pro-MS dont give reasons, and yet again you havent. Why ISNT it vapourware then? Lets have a discussion, not a one liner insult of me being clueless.
I ask you again, why do you come here? You dont agree with Joe, you obviously get annoyed by anti-ms posting, so why do you return? Wouldnt you be better off at microsoft.com? You wont get much negativity there, or I wholehearted recommend the blog of Andre Da Costa, if you ignore the posts of people asking for help with Vista problems, you'll find his articles textbook MS.
If you stop and think for a minute, how many MS products have ACTUALLY delivered on the promises made, pre-release?
Jay, on a final note, would you like me to quote professionals who are actually at the PDC and their comments? They've put their names to them.
What makes your opinion (who isnt there) better than theirs?
I put it to you that its you who is clueless, either that or have a very short memory.
Regards.

To everybody:

I'm rather mystified but this anti- versus pro-Microsoft or Azure debate. Azure is a work in progress that could easily succeed or fail based on Microsoft's execution, competitors' response or how the market receives the services strategy and its supporting tools, products and services. Because of Microsoft's past behavior of promising one thing and either delivering nothing or something else, even more caution is required in any analysis or commentary.

So my trying to give the 360-degree perspective strikes some of you as taking one position, then switching, or playing both sides of the argument. Neither is true. I don't form an opinion at once, but absorb information that molds my analysis over time. Good journalism and analysis is about following the reporting and data rather than starting from a preconceived opinion.

My analysis and commentary will change many times as Azure goes forward, based on numerous factors. At the start of a marathon race, there may be favorites to win. But who wins is uncertain until somebody crosses the finish line. The sports commentators' opinions and analysis change constantly over the course of the more than 26-mile race. Until there is a winner.

Joe

Joe thanks for that comment on what you are doing, but.

Its does not change the fact that users or businesses cannot trust their software and or data on Micro$oft servers, which is what Azure really really is, and for a price too. I give you the following example:

http://audiotuts.com/web-roundups/5-biggest-music-drm-debacles-of-all-time/

Scroll down to the number 2 example, titled "2. MSN Music Closes, Makes A Liar Of PlayForSure"

Now this is just music that they dropped the support and servers for. But anytime the bottom line is affected, you can count on MS to just drop the support. Also when they want to change the lock-in, and make users pay more, or again, you can also count on this play to squeeze more money out of users.

The question I ask user, is it wise to trust Microsoft with all your data on a server they can stop at any whim?

Joe says: "I'm rather mystified but this anti- versus pro-Microsoft or Azure debate."
----------------------------------------------------
I do not mean this in a mean way at all Joe. But its about perspective, direction, and motivation. Ed Bott and George Oui both have those, they are big time Microsoft fanboi's, that is what they advocate. When for awhile you announced that you wanted to be an advocate for MS products, like you thought SJVN did for Linux, well, that was wrong for many reasons. First in advocate's Bott an Oui posts, the first thing that suffers, is the truth. Prehap's suffers is not the correct word, it should have been died.

Now I am made out to be a Microsoft hater or basher. Thats fine, I can live with that, even though they are wrong. What I do advocate, is good software and good products, and yes of course free products that work well. And I do like the Stallman philosophy, as opposed to the never ending greed of MS. While I advocate Linux over other products, I clearly state why its better for users. I see myself as more like Ralph Nader, trying to get Microsoft to improve itself. The only way to do this is to point out their failings, and what they should be doing to correct their abuses.

What I see that this should have been the role that you should have preformed yourself, but left it up to us, many many members of the open source commmunity and mac users to do. By the way, I am not in any way employed by any company that has any connection with Linux, and only speak for myself.

What you never really understood about SJVN is that he was not an Linux advocate at all. But that he only reported fairly about what he actually used and learned on. So, I think its your role, mission, or advocate position, that needs for you to give some real thought about here. Do you want to be an "advocate" like Botts and Oui? So many out there like them. Andre is a wannabee, that will never quite make it either. Or do you want to do something meaningful, and at the same time, help users, help MS correct its problems? That is where I am coming from.

In the middle is not a good place to be Joe. Especially if you goal is to just be in the middle and never take any sides, sort of to just draw a paycheck position. We all have had jobs where we have has to do this, you case is different for many reasons.
So you rather mystified but this anti- versus pro-Microsoft or Azure debate. Its simple Joe, its about money, lots and lots of money, Microsoft money that it steals from users and businesses. Why else would they have so many astroturfers on this site posting in the comments, if Microsoft did not feel it affected its bottom line somehow?
You should feel important for that reason alone, even if MSFT would not treat you right at PDC. The complete suckups got the laptop, and you, not ever a chance to play with a laptop with Seven on it for a couple of hours. This should be a wakeup clue to you, that the company Microsoft, is not a nice bunch of folks after all.
Again, we talking about a lot of money, billions that MSFT takes in, you think they going be nice here in comments? And you think the rest of us are going cut you free reign to be like Andrew? Being in the middle not taking a stand against evil, will get you in trouble with both sides.