Subscribe to Windows IT Pro

 

Get Newsletters

  • Get the Latest News
  • Product Updates
  • Helpful Tricks
  • Productivity Tips

Subscribe Now!

February 28, 2007 12:00 AM

Microsoft Hits Snooze to Google "Wake-Up Call"

Windows IT Pro
InstantDoc ID #95317
Rating: (65)

Yesterday, Microsoft Chief Software Architect Ray Ozzie described the software giant's most recent Internet-based competitor, Google, as a "wake-up call." Ozzie, who made the comments during a Goldman Sachs investor conference in Las Vegas, has been Microsoft's biggest proponent of its recent online initiatives.

The success of Google--which somehow managed to turn its Internet search service into a revenue-generating engine based on tiny, textual advertisements on Web pages--has caused Microsoft to reevaluate its competitive strategies, Ozzie said. "This very clearly caused an inflection point within our industry and within Microsoft of understanding advertising as an economic engine."

Despite Ozzie's internal efforts, Microsoft has floundered in the online space since Google's rise. Part of the reason is Microsoft's corporate inertia: The company's biggest businesses--Windows, Microsoft Office, and Windows Server--are traditional software products whose internal supporters have only recently realized the threat of Web-based software services. Microsoft fears that it will have to cannibalize its most successful products to effectively compete with companies such as Google.

"The services opportunity is ... really more than just taking what's on the PC and putting it up on the Web," Ozzie said yesterday, also noting the "tremendous business opportunities" of Web-based services. Publicly, Microsoft has pushed a complementary approach, continuing to offer its traditional cash cows, such as Windows Vista and the Office 2007 system, alongside new online services such as Windows Live and Microsoft Office Live. However, these initiatives have largely failed in the marketplace, despite often being superior to similar Google services.

Why that's so could be fodder for an interesting debate. One thing is pretty clear: A decade ago, Microsoft was willing to do whatever it took to take down Netscape, including bundling Microsoft Internet Explorer with Windows despite protestations about the technical and moral problems of such an approach. Stung by the innumerable antitrust battles that followed, today's Microsoft seems unwilling to change as dramatically. And the company's current complementary approach, from what I can see, has failed. Put simply, Microsoft might have gotten a wake-up call, but it's been punching the snooze button ever since.

Related Content:

ARTICLE TOOLS

Comments
  • Joe
    5 years ago
    Mar 06, 2007

    "However up to XP the default was an Administrators account and the default NTFS file permissions were access for Everyone."

    actually that's not true. when you create user accounts in XP Pro on first boot, only the username in the first slot is an admin by default. all other users below that (slots 2-5) are standard by default. at the time, home users were not considered to be a security threat, but also at that time, spyware and system hijacker software was not prevelant.

    "I don't know if things changed that dramatically in Vista though (and I don't care so far)."

    spoken like true ignoramous. cheers!

    XP

  • gnu-user
    5 years ago
    Mar 06, 2007

    @Waethorn:

    If I recall well, in a WinInfo article one MS employee said something like, it isn't a security feature and if it gets bypassed, it will not be a security break.

    I can imagine what MS recommends (not logging in as an Admin), and it makes sense. However up to XP the default was an Administrators account and the default NTFS file permissions were access for Everyone. I don't know if things changed that dramatically in Vista though (and I don't care so far).

  • Joe
    5 years ago
    Mar 05, 2007

    "So if it is not a security feature, what exactly is it?"

    it is and it isn't.

    for standard users it is because it requires an admin's login and password, but for users that choose to assign themselves as "Administrator" (again, Microsoft recommends AGAINST this for regular users doing day-to-day operations) without knowing the consequences, it only warns them that the activity could affect other users on the system because they are global settings.

    XP

  • gnu-user
    5 years ago
    Mar 05, 2007

    @NateB2:
    "I would strongly advise you *not* to log in as root. There is a *huge* security risk if you do that. Vista has 3 user permissions levels- Administrator (root), limited administrator (the normal mode for the first user in Vista), and standard (any accounts made after the initial one will default to this). The Administrator doesn't get any prompts, the limited administrator gets a dialog with "continue" or "cancel", and the standard user gets a dialog which prompts for an administrator password. Yes, you can disable that, but again, you could be at risk."

    You are right, but I will state some facts: Being used to "log in" as administrator by default, since DOS 3.30, it obviously has become a very strong bad habbit, that I have to get rid of. :-) I am planning to log in as a normal user, after I have read some book on GNU/Linux administration, scripting etc. Regarding Windows, even in XP Pro I was logging as Administrator (with a password), although it was creating a new user account (belonging to Administrators group if I recall well) during setup. I had the new user account as a backup account, in case something happened. Anyway XP was about the same, as Windows before, we could say.

    Regarding UAC, I recall I read in WinInfo that an MS employee said that UAC isn't a security feature and that it is employed above an insecure infrastructure and can be bypassed. So if it is not a security feature, what exactly is it? In any case, we should try to be as secure as possible, so disabling UAC should be avoided (unless it is much irritating, I haven't checked Vista RTM).

  • Joe
    5 years ago
    Mar 04, 2007

    "Take it up with the editors of InfoWorld, not me. I didn't write the article, I just quoted it."

    that tone makes you sound like you don't even believe them. wasn't it tayme who even said the exact same thing i did (in fact, i'm only repeating his original comment)?

    "And they have a lot more experience with Enterprise-level IT"

    one only wonders with a story like that.

    XP

You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here

advertisement

advertisement

White Papers

Get your Windows 7 deployment off to the right start by implementing PC lockdown. A locked-down environment is easier and cheaper to support since users are less likely to make unnecessary changes to the core system configuration - read more here!

Essential Guides

Is your iSCSI "lossy"? The reality is that most off-the-shelf Ethernet hardware deployed for iSCSI can lose packets, resulting in slow performance or application downtime. Learn how to assess your current iSCSI infrastructure and engineer an advanced iSCSI SAN infrastructure.

Web Seminars

What's the best way to keep your network safe from malware? In this web seminar, security expert Greg Shields suggests an alternative method to the traditional blacklisting approach that is common with anti-virus and anti-malware solutions.

eLearning Series

We bring the experts direct to you to share their real-world perspective and expertise. During each event, three sessions stream in real time, so you can learn, ask questions, and get solutions.
Upcoming event: Getting the Most with Exchange 2010 with Paul Robichaux

Subscribe to Windows IT Pro!

Windows is a trademark of the Microsoft group of companies. Windows IT Pro is used by Penton Media Inc. under license from owner.