Symantec's got a bit of that mix-and-match thing going in the cloud. The security giant has pure-play cloud storage offerings and has for a while, but now the company is giving customers the option of going full cloud, in-house "cloud" or both.
The longtime Microsoft partner and security market leader this week released FileStore, a platform that, very simply put, allows companies to build private, in-house storage clouds.
"We want to give enterprise customers the ability to act like a Web company," Sean Derrington, director of storage management and high availability at Symantec, told RCPU last week. "Some customers want a little bit of both -- some aspects of application services they want to serve via the public cloud, and [other] things they want to deliver through their own architecture."
FileStore is about more than storage, though. There are significant management components, and it has the flexibility to connect "any storage environment to any other storage environment," Derrington said. He added that FileStore is aimed at letting businesses start small and grow with in-house cloud storage.
Posted by Lee Pender on 10/06/2009 at 1:22 PM0 comments
It's getting better out there, right? Well, with financial markets seemingly recovering and, at the same time, the unemployment rate bumping up on 10 percent here in the U.S., the messages are mixed at best. And we've stopped listening to most of the experts who got so much wrong over the last 10 years or longer and helped get us here in the first place.
Except for these experts. IDC released a study this week saying that IT will create 5.8 million jobs (worldwide) by 2013. Microsoft sponsored the study, which identified IT as a major driver of a global economic recovery. (This, oddly enough, as Steve Ballmer -- and we think quite correctly -- is spreading the messages that IT budgets will be down for a while and that the economy has "reset" and won't return to the levels it reached before the crash of 2008.)
Of course, Ballmer has to walk a fine line here, as part of Microsoft's current pitch to the enterprise is that companies should save money by spending it. In other words, buy a bunch of Microsoft applications, increase efficiency, eliminate costs and end up having a positive effect on the always-trembling bottom line. In that sense, it makes sense for Ballmer to talk about the economy resetting and IT budgets staying relatively low. Plus, that kind of talk will make for a nice built-in excuse if Microsoft reports disappointing quarterly earnings again.
Then again, nobody likes too much negativity, and Ballmer talking too much about an economy that won't fully recover (although, again, we think he's right there -- and he does work the word "reset" into his quote in the AFP story linked above) might scare CEOs, CIOs and other executives into not buying anything from Microsoft at all. So, fortunately for Microsoft (ahem), the Microsoft-sponsored IDC study can spread some good news without directly conflicting Ballmer's message of caution. Well-played all around there.
So, given RCPU's skeptical take on "experts" and their talk about the economy and jobs, do we believe IDC's projections? Well, not really...but we want to, and given that we're not experts ourselves, we'll give the numbers people (IDC does do numbers very well) the benefit of the doubt. But if we had to choose between Ballmer's prevailing worldview and IDC's gaudy projections, we'd probably lean Ballmer's way.
What's your take on the economic recovery? Are you feeling it, and if so, how? Send your thoughts to [email protected].
Posted by Lee Pender on 10/06/2009 at 1:22 PM0 comments
Champagne all around for the Microsoft legal team. A federal judge this week overturned a great big, $388 million patent-infringement ruling against Microsoft. Apparently, Microsoft didn't infringe on Uniloc's patent, after all. Apparently, the original trial went on for six years before a jury slammed Microsoft with the punitive fine -- which a judge overturned on appeal in a matter of months. Weird how the system works sometimes, isn't it?
Posted by Lee Pender on 10/01/2009 at 1:22 PM0 comments
OK, so maybe we judged a book by its cover, or, more appropriately, by past works by the same author. Earlier this week, we ripped a bit on Microsoft Security Essentials, Redmond's new (and free) anti-virus effort, comparing it to sugary cereals that were always "part of this complete breakfast" in their old TV ads.
Evidently, though, early returns suggest that Security Essentials is actually pretty good and might have some impact on the anti-virus market after all. We note, of course, that these returns are very early, given that Microsoft just released the new product on Tuesday. But given that we expected a flood of articles this week about how woefully short the product falls in terms of providing protection, we're honestly a bit surprised...and humbled.
By the way, if the early reviews are accurate, we don't consider that to be particularly good news for partners. Sure, it's great that Microsoft might be able to finally provide security for its applications, but we're sure that the many Microsoft channel players who also partner with Symantec, McAfee or Trend Micro won't want to lose whatever revenue they're making from those vendors' products to a free offering from Microsoft. (Granted, AV is really mostly a consumer play, but some enterprise partners must be skimming something from it.)
After all, a patchy (sorry) record on security hasn't stopped Microsoft from dominating the software market, so it's not as though partners can really talk up Security Essentials as a deal-clincher for customers. On the other hand, the many users (and partners) who have long clamored for Microsoft to be responsible and secure its own products for free will surely be at least somewhat satisfied if Security Essentials lives up to its early reviews. And that could be positive for Microsoft and its partners in general, especially as rivals such as Linux, Apple and even Google continue to hit Microsoft on security issues.
Besides, Symantec, McAfee and friends are into much more than just anti-virus these days, so, while a successful Microsoft AV effort could give other AV vendors fits, it's not likely to put them out of business. And we figure it'll be a while before consumers or enterprise folks turn their security completely over to Microsoft. A long while.
For now, however, we'll give a preliminary tip of the cap to Microsoft and Security Essentials, which looks closer to being Total than to being Cocoa Puffs, cereally speaking.
We've had some good comments on Security Essentials on the blog site. Add to them there or send your thoughts to [email protected].
Posted by Lee Pender on 10/01/2009 at 1:22 PM0 comments
Here we go again with this ridiculous tablet thing. Talk about a tempest in a teapot -- rumors and reports are swirling about a product that we predict nobody's going to want, anyway. But if you really want to know what's going on, there's some info here.
Oh, by the way, if we're wrong about our prediction and tablets take off like PCs in the '80s, we'll just do what the analysts do and hope that you forget that we ever said anything about tablets at all (which you probably will).
Posted by Lee Pender on 10/01/2009 at 1:22 PM1 comments
To those of you out there who have taken pay cuts recently (or been laid off by Microsoft), rest assured that the big wigs in Redmond are suffering right along with you. Steve Ballmer's salary cratered from $1.35 million to $1.28 million year-over-fiscal-year, and other Microsoft execs took pay cuts, as well. (Of course, compared to what the real losers on Wall Street have made over the years while helping wreck our economy, Ballmer's base compensation doesn't seem that outrageous.)
We've been wondering something lately, though. Remember a couple of years ago, when the economy was still swimming along, how there were calls for Ballmer to step down as Microsoft CEO? Where have those calls gone? Where are those skeptics now? We're not saying that Ballmer should step down (and we never have). In fact, with Windows 7, Azure and a major virtualization push, he's got Microsoft moving in a lot of good directions.
But did a bad economy absolve Ballmer of what some perceived to be his sins? Did it serve as a scapegoat and an out clause for a once-embattled CEO? It sure might have. Discuss or send your thoughts on this to [email protected].
Posted by Lee Pender on 10/01/2009 at 1:22 PM2 comments
There's no way we're not going to start this entry with Jack Webb, so cue the biting monotone of Sgt. Joe Friday and that iconic opening theme: "This is the city, Los Angeles, California. Every 60 seconds, a crime is committed in Los Angeles..."
And apparently, every couple of decades or so (we're not sure how often, actually), L.A. does an IT refresh. That time has come again. City Hall in the City of Angels is looking to boot an old e-mail system and upgrade to something more modern than what Joe Friday might have used very, very late in his career. (Or maybe not, given that Jack Webb left us in 1982. But we're trying to stick with the theme here.)
The decision has come down to a choice between two contenders: Microsoft Office and Google Apps (not present: Lotus Notes). From what we can tell, this isn't just a Microsoft-Google battle. This is an on-site vs. cloud computing showdown. This is old-school, reliable Office vs. cheaper, intriguing but still somewhat enigmatic Google Apps.
That, we say, is bad news for Microsoft. From what we can tell, Microsoft isn't really talking much about its own cloud offerings surrounding Office and productivity applications. Instead, it's taking a decidedly old-fogey tack and attacking the very notion of cloud computing (again, as far as we can tell) along with Google's ability to reliably store data and make it accessible.
No, no, no, no, no. Now is not the time, Microsoft, to look like the heavy. You might win the Battle of Los Angeles with this tack (although things don't seem to be headed Redmond's way at this point), but you'll do terrible damage to yourself and your partners in the War of Computing Models. Sure, attack Google. That's fair enough. But don't attack cloud computing -- it's here to stay, and you're going to want to be a player in it, as well. Remember the whole reason for hiring Ray Ozzie? Remember Azure?
Tout a hybrid system (Software + Services, anyone?), or talk about how you might be able to move some functions into the cloud at some point -- if not immediately, given that there are already lots of Exchange hosting partners -- but don't bash the idea of the cloud quite as much as you seem to be doing now. You're going to want to sell it one of these days -- soon, maybe even immediately.
Besides, unless the L.A. Times reporter who wrote the linked story is just showing massive Google bias (and we don't have a reason to believe that to be the case), Google's talking advantages and cost savings while you're talking negatives and potential pitfalls. Negative campaigning is no way to win these days.
Times are bad enough as it is without Microsoft executives reminding us that they could get worse and bashing a model that, at the very least, offers a (probably) cash-strapped city in a cash-strapped state drastically cheaper start-up cost than the on-premises platform offers. (Oh, and who was saying this week that IT budgets will be down for a while? That's right: Steve Ballmer.)
Microsoft, you're better than this. You know better than this. If you're not doing so already, integrate some cloud talk into your proposal. Talk up the benefits of old models and the promise of new ones. Get some partners involved. (Google got one mentioned in the Times.) Right now, Microsoft, you're looking about as up-to-date as Jack Webb's Joe Friday. And while we love Joe Friday, we wouldn't want to buy an e-mail platform from him.
How well do you think Microsoft is handling cloud computing? How much of a factor is cloud computing for your business? Tell all at [email protected].
Posted by Lee Pender on 09/30/2009 at 1:22 PM0 comments
Steve Ballmer -- or, quite possibly, somebody who writes e-mails for Steve Ballmer -- sent a message this week that went on a bit about the new economy and so forth and how Microsoft's products will fit into it. Then, at the end, Ballmer got to the interesting stuff: companies that have adopted Windows 7.
The names are not insignificant, with Ford and Continental Airlines among the charter customers. In fact, here is exactly what Ballmer said in his "executive e-mail" to subscribers (which we at RCPU received because we're plugged into the scene in Redmond, of course):
"At Intel, for example, Windows 7 is providing improved performance, greater application responsiveness, and a better platform for mobile workers. Ford is taking advantage of Exchange 2010 and Windows 7 to streamline communications, improve decision making, and boost productivity. Continental Airlines expects to save more than $1.5 million annually in hardware, software, and operational costs through the server virtualization capabilities of Windows Server 2008 R2 Hyper-V technology.
"At Convergent Computing, an information technology consulting firm based in California, Windows Server 2008 R2 and Windows 7 will eliminate the $40,000 in annual spending that was needed to maintain a virtual private network for the company's 55 employees. In addition, employees can now access the company's corporate network instantly and download files 30 to 40 percent faster than before.
"Another example is Baker Tilly, a London financial services firm with more than 2,000 employees and a network of partners in 110 countries. One of the first businesses to deploy Windows 7 on a company-wide basis, Baker Tilly expects to save about $160 per PC by reducing deployment, management, and energy costs. And because Windows 7 improves productivity, it offers the potential to increase billable time for mobile workers at a rate of nearly $600 per PC. This could return the equivalent of one-half of one percent of the company's current gross annual revenue to the bottom line.
"Businesses aren't alone in their struggle to respond to the new normal. Governments must figure out how to deliver more services on budgets that are sharply constrained by falling revenue. As part of its response, the city of Miami deployed Windows 7 and expects that it will save nearly $400,000 a year in reduced security, management, and energy costs."
Miami officials noted that the money saved will keep the city's citizens stocked with thong bikinis and automatic weapons. Just kidding. We think.
Posted by Lee Pender on 09/30/2009 at 1:22 PM0 comments
For some reason, despite the fact that soccer teams around the world have been putting ads on their shirts for years, we here in the U.S. freak out when sports teams start talking about renting out space on their jerseys.
So it made news this week when Microsoft and the (thus far woeful) Seattle Seahawks agreed to slap a Bing ad on the Seahawks' practice jerseys (yes, the practice shirts, not whatever this was supposed to be), and then trotted out a bunch of hilarious "synergy" quotes about the deal.
Bing and the Seahawks -- they certainly make a...team. We guess.
Posted by Lee Pender on 09/30/2009 at 1:22 PM0 comments
Duty calls this week from the mother ship (Redmond magazine), so we're going to have to keep RCPU short and, hopefully, fairly sweet.
Anyway, after the fairly unmitigated disaster that was Windows Live OneCare, Microsoft is apparently back in the anti-virus game this week -- today, even, with the release of Security Essentials. We loved this quote from this Stuff.co.nz story:
"Windows business group manager Ben Green says the software alone will not protect against all web threats, but when used with a secure web browser such as Internet Explorer 8 and a fully updated Windows operating system will provide a total security solution."
That reminds us of the old TV ads for sugary cereals. The bowl of cereal was always "part of this complete breakfast," with the complete breakfast usually including bacon (we're going back a ways here), eggs, toast, orange juice and some sort of fruit. In other words, it was kind of incidental as to whether the growing kid ate the cereal or not.
Security, however, is not incidental, nor is it something users can afford to scrimp on or experiment with. Given Microsoft's record (or lack thereof) of releasing quality anti-virus wares, we're not quite ready to scarf down Microsoft's free bowl of sugary Security Essentials, and we figure that most partners and users won't be, either.
What's more disturbing here, of course, is that Microsoft seems once again to be trying to undercut some of its most important partners and dominate yet another market. In this case, though, Symantec, McAfee and friends aren't likely to be too worried about Redmond's play -- for now. Still, it's not the nicest gesture Microsoft ever made to its third-party partners, but then Microsoft didn't get where it is today by being nice.
What's your take on Security Essentials? Will you use it? Sound off at [email protected].
Posted by Lee Pender on 09/29/2009 at 1:22 PM4 comments
Few people can make news by stating the obvious, but Steve Ballmer is one of those people who can. Ballmer apparently said at a press-less Venture Capital Summit that Microsoft "screwed up" with Windows Mobile. Oh, really? Thanks for letting us know, Steve.
Ballmer has said a bunch of other stuff, as well, in recent interviews. One of the more extensive ones is here.
Posted by Lee Pender on 09/29/2009 at 1:22 PM0 comments
The firm once known as "the document company," with a brand as strong in the copier game as that of Kleenex or Google is in tissues or Web search, is trying to branch out of paper and into managing datacenters. Xerox this week bought Affiliated Computer Services for the not-small price tag of more than $6 billion. Will datacenters someday be known as Xerox centers? Stay tuned.
Posted by Lee Pender on 09/29/2009 at 1:22 PM0 comments