RSSGates: MS 'Must Act' on Web Services
By Ed Oswald | Published November 9, 2005, 12:36 PM
Microsoft is not about to take the Web 2.0 revolution sitting down, says Bill Gates. In an internal e-mail sent out October 30 and obtained by BetaNews on Wednesday, Gates writes that Microsoft must change to take advantage of the evolution of computing from a software-based to a Web-based model.
The venerable leader of the Redmond company harkened back to his Internet Tidal Wave memo in December 1995. In that missive, he correctly argued that the Internet was about to change everything about computing, and Microsoft risked being left behind if it didn't adapt.
Nearly ten years later, Gates again called for a similar switch in the company's business model.
"This coming 'services wave' will be very disruptive," he wrote. The company is being attacked on all sides, and non-Microsoft products are increasingly becoming the tools of choice among consumers on the Internet: Skype, Flickr and Google for example.
Gates wrote that he feels Microsoft has the "vision, assets, experience, and aspirations" to take the lead in the services arena, but acknowledged time is of the essence. "As we've done before we must act quickly and decisively," he wrote.
The memos detailing the change in strategy at Microsoft could be seen as a clearer reason why the company underwent a massive reorganization in September. Each of the three divisions is participating in the effort and would be creating some kind of Web service to enhance Microsoft's product lines.
Also, it seems that Ray Ozzie, Redmond's new chief technical officer, is playing a large role in coordinating and overseeing this change, while ensuring the company maintains it's dominance on the Internet.
A copy of a note from Ozzie was attached to Gates' memo, and in it, the former Groove Networks executive laments Microsoft's sometimes slow response to its competitors' offerings.
Ozzie outlined a list of opportunities where Microsoft may have missed the boat, including AJAX, search, RSS, Office's failure to become a de facto source of Web data formats compared to PDF, and Skype's success in harnessing VoIP to make it a viable consumer communications service.
"Just as in the past, we must reflect upon what’s going on around us, and reflect upon our strengths, weaknesses and industry leadership responsibilities, and respond," Ozzie warned. "As much as ever, it's clear that if we fail to do so, our business as we know it is at risk."
With the increasingly widespread use of broadband, and the return of Internet advertising, Ozzie said now is a good time for Microsoft to be focusing on Web services. He even harkened back to the Hailstorm project -- the company's first attempt at a Web services architecture -- saying "the effort would certainly have benefited from having a known-viable services business model for which to design."
Some industry watchers have said that Microsoft's Windows Live and Office Live products are basically repackaged versions of idea and services proposed in Hailstorm.
Google, Yahoo and Apple all received mentions for their work in the services arena in Ozzie's missive, but he seemed to criticize their approach to the business.
"Google is obviously the most visible here, although given the hype level it is difficult to ascertain which of their myriad initiatives are simply adjuncts intended to drive scale for their advertising business, or which might ultimately grow to substantively challenge our offerings," he said.
Ozzie also said that Yahoo has considerable communications strength that is combines their software with their service, however the company seems to be using it as an "internal asset."
"The same is true of Apple, which has done an enviable job integrating hardware, software and services into a seamless experience with dotMac, iPod and iTunes, but seems less focused on enabling developers to build substantial products and businesses," he continued.
Analysts say the leaks of the Web strategy memos were intentional, as stories appeared nearly simultaneously late last night on the Web sites of several tech publications, the New York Times, and the Wall Street Journal.
"Microsoft is embarking on a major, new strategy with almost no products to show," Jupiter Research senior analyst Joe Wilcox explained to BetaNews. He added that competitors like Google, salesforce.com and Yahoo have gotten a jumpstart on Microsoft.
"The memos signal Microsoft's intention to shift course and that the other boats had better get out of the way," Wilcox continued. "Similarly, the strategy leak is meant to tell passengers of competitor boats that they might want to wait for Microsoft's ship to sail."
Both Gates and Ozzie feel that Microsoft is ready to move in a new direction. "The next sea change is upon us," Gates wrote.
"We are just now completing a wave of innovation that has never been seen in this company," Ozzie said. "2006 is going to be an amazing year for shipping products, and many across the company will be ready to take on a new mission."
"This coming 'services wave' will be very disruptive," he wrote. The company is being attacked on all sides, and non-Microsoft products are increasingly becoming the tools of choice among consumers on the Internet: Skype, Flickr and Google for example"
Do I understand this sentence correctly? Is Microsoft supposed to have monopoly (dominance) over every single software produced? What is the sense in saying it is "attacked on all sides"? Why would anyone want a Microsoft-only world? (except MS ceo's of course)
Score: 0
|new
rat hay
me chung may
Score: 0
|I have been trying to figure out where Microsoft has been headed for years. I can see the overall plan of trying to expand into any area possible, such as navigation, appliances, home theatre and more. However, it seems that Microsoft doesn't truly commit their resources unless threatened. Case in point: Google Earth. Google Earth is something that Microsoft had vision for never really got around to truly developing. However, other companies are putting their money where their mouths are. The browser wars are also interesting. Microsoft only sped up development of Internet Explorer 7 because they finally had a competitor in Firefox. Shame on you Microsoft.
What I'd really like to see is another OS war that really forces innovation. I'm really fed up with having all sorts of problems or improvements that Microsoft waits years to act on because they have a Monopoly. Google OS anyone? (Google Operating System - Heuristically Integrated Technologies)
Score: 0
|"I have been trying to figure out where Microsoft has been headed for years"
So has Microsoft !
"it seems that Microsoft doesn't truly commit their resources unless threatened. Case in point: Google Earth."
You noticed ~that~, too ?
Microsoft is in such a fog about their identity and strategy that they haven't any !
They've allowed themselves to be placed in a completely reactionary position.
"What I'd really like to see is another OS war that really forces innovation. I'm really fed up with having all sorts of problems or improvements that Microsoft waits years to act on because they have a Monopoly"
There ~ain't~ any Microsoft OS "monopoly" ! It's an urban legend.
What's stopping anyone from buying the Mac or Linux OS's this afternoon ?
This "monopoly" stuff is just an excuse for the Mac OS being over-priced and over-rated, and the Linux OS being under-developed.
Case in point: The success of FireFox and Opera against Internet Explorer and Outlook Express.
OS-10 and Linux just don't have the value to consumers to effectively compete against WinXP !
The Computer Rodent
Score: 0
|"OS-10 and Linux just don't have the value to consumers to effectively compete against WinXP !
."
No, people just don't know or if they do they don't realize that it can work for them on their desktops.
Score: 0
|Isn't Bill Gates still the richest man in the world? I think Microsoft has an idea of what they are doing.
"it seems that Microsoft doesn't truly commit their resources unless threatened. Case in point: Google Earth."
- Yeah right, they are coming out with Xbox360 this month and everyone says it was rushed, Windows Vista next year and everyone said it took too long, MS Defender not enough updates, Windows XP too many updates, man it's a no win situation. Don't get me wrong I don't praise everything Microsoft does, but they have some pretty cool applications. VS2005 and the .Net 2.0 framework is great (just as the 1.x framework was great).
So they are stepping into the realm of web services, well good for them, it should be interesting (especially with the Windows Communication Foundation coming out next year).
And as far a Linux goes, yes it is free and works pretty well, but I have to search through a million pages just to find out how to setup my ndiswrapper to get a simple thing like my wireless card to work (and even then I had to get the driver off my windows partition). It just needs to be simpler for the masses to use it (Kubuntu is the best flavor I've found so far). I've never tried the Mac OS so I can't comment on that, but then again I can't try it because I don't have Apple hardware (other than my iPod).
"Opinions are like a**holes, everybody's got one."
Score: 0
|"Gates wrote that he feels Microsoft has the 'vision, assets, experience, and aspirations' to take the lead"
Actually, Microsoft has ~no~ "vision". They're a hapless giant living off their WinXP and MS Office products. And it takes nearly a half-dozen years to even get a crippled version of their Windows OS out the door !
Google doesn't have to sweat anything.
The Computer Rodent
Score: 0
|Whatever...
Score: 0
|Well...if MS makes their products better, Google, Yahoo, and other companies will have to improve their products and services too. Everyone wins, even the competition (unless the competition just lies dormant while MS improves, though I doubt that will happen).
Score: 0
|"unless the competition just lies dormant while MS improves, though I doubt that will happen"
Yeah... I doubt it too. It hasn't happened yet.
Score: 0
|Joy!
Score: 0
|