back to article Goldman Sachs: Windows' true market share is just 20%

Windows might still be the dominant desktop computing OS by a large margin, but Microsoft is in danger of becoming a small player in today's global computing market, according to a new report from financial bigwigs Goldman Sachs. The report, which was obtained last week by The Seattle Times, says that while Microsoft operating …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

        1. Stoneshop
          Linux

          Re: @Khaptain 15:03

          The core of my work is done in character cell terminals. A good chunk of the remainder is by browser, although to get access to those systems I need to open a remote desktop to some Windows crate on the other side of a firewall. Most of those browser-accessed systems tell you to use $DEPRECATED_VERSION of IE, but Firefox (sometimes with its browser identification set to $DEPRECATED_VERSION of IE) works just as well.

          Actual Windows stuff that I currently run on my desktop at work is a problem tracking tool, Outlook, and Office, but there's a WTS I can use for that (a lot of Office stuff is closely tied to Sharepoint, so I suspect that LibreOffice is not quite a viable alternative).

          There's no need for me to have Windows on my desktop, and if the stupid thing karks once more it won't be on my desktop anymore.

        2. Chemist

          Re: @Trevor

          "And yet you guys want to say that you can manage to get your work done on Tablets and Non MS systems."

          What's so suprising about that. Scientist, academics, engineers, designers - lots of them work on non-MS systems. You might not recognize the names of the programs but plenty of them are rather pricy. Before I retired I'd been using Linux plus a host of commercial scientific software for ~6 years, much of that had been ported from SGs and there were several hundred of us in the company so equipped.

          A few comments recently have been along the lines "who needs more computing power - machines are fast enough" - well they may be to edit a document or fill-in a form but there are PLENTY of people who have requirements for as much as they can get. My twin Xeon workstation used to run all the time - many of the day-day requirements needed a run of several days and nights and I had a stack of jobs waiting to run whenever the machine was idle. For the really serious stuff there were several 1-2 K node Linux farms.

          What wimpy kind of work do you do ?

          1. Khaptain Silver badge

            Re: chemist

            A number cruncher...,

            You have just excluded yourself from larger subset known as the majority.. your vote doesnt count. Sorry.

            1. Chemist

              Re: chemist

              A perfectly valid use for a computer - probably the original.

              In any case It wasn't all exotic calculations, there was the real-time use of 3D graphics to study protein structures, analysis with spreadsheets ( no not Excel - that could only handle 16K rows at the time - we had to handle millions) and even writing reports & papers.

              In any case dismissing thousands of people using non-MS solutions just because it doesn't fit your world view or experience only shows how little experience of the world you have. There are lots of other uses out there - CGI, stock trading, machine control ( all the NMR and MS spectroscopy machines where I worked DIDN'T use MS software.

              The majority, by the way, probably only want a browser. If you mean people who work in offices that might be a different matter.

              1. Khaptain Silver badge

                Re: chemist

                @Chemist

                Pushing aside a severe lack of subtlety, it is quite obvious that you cannot be considered as being representative of anything but a tiny minortity of computer users.

                The majority are what is important here, as it is their computer/application usage that determines the sway of what constitutes as Microsofts future income. There are far more secretaries, spread sheet users, accountants etc in this world than there are Chemists, Physicists etc....

                If Microsoft starts to lose market share it will not be because of the people that do jobs such as yours, it will be because IT Managers and CFOs have decided to deploy other solutions to the masses for which they are responsable.

                You have dedicated platforms using dedicated software that was probably not developed for the masses. Is that what you consider to be usefull information in relation to a article which concentrates on the majority not the minority.

                1. Chemist

                  Re: chemist

                  I'm sorry but you were the one who said "And yet you guys want to say that you can manage to get your work done on Tablets and Non MS systems. What kind of work do you do ?"

                  So I told you. This was about MS losing it's stranglehold -well it lost it a long time ago for some people.

                  "I am sitting at work with three screens (1280 * 3 Wide ) * 1024 High of applications, some of which, the following , of which have no viable Unix/Apple equivalants (Avaya ASA, Business Objects, Visio). I have several VMs open which are usually interfaces to the servers."

                  I don't suppose you are representative of the majority either.

                2. alcalde

                  Re: chemist

                  >Pushing aside a severe lack of subtlety, it is quite obvious that you cannot be considered as being

                  >representative of anything but a tiny minortity of computer users.

                  Incorrect. He's representative of the MAJORITY of business computer users. The majority are crunching numbers at their desks - accountants (budgeting, accounts payable/receivable, cash flow projection, etc.), logistics (analyzing bids, optimizing carriers, freight consolidation, etc. along with freight payment), demand forecasting, purchasing is analyzing vendor bids, etc. The other major task is working with data - transforming it (ETL), accepting it, recording it, outputting it, reporting it, analyzing it. It's things like AutoCAD and Photoshop that are not being used by most businesses, let alone most departments or most employees.

                  As such, many of the tools Chemist is using are useful for all sorts of numerical data analysis in addition to any field-specific software. And the reality is that numerical analysis and data manipulation in no way, shape or form depend on Microsoft products.

                  >There are far more secretaries, spread sheet users, accountants etc in this world than there are Chemists,

                  >Physicists etc....

                  And these people, per above, can be quite happy using LibreOffice Writer, Calc, and many other options. In fact, many popular ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) packages which combine everything from accounting and supply chain/logistics to payroll and HR as different modules in one suite use the browser as an interface or are Java-based rendering them OS-agnostic on the client end. Replace Microsoft? Solutions like this enable desktops themselves to be replaced with thin clients or a Chromebook.

                  What I do in business intelligence/data mining today is quite easily done without any help from Microsoft - in fact, given that many Microsoft products such as Excel are historically so buggy that numerous published papers by statisticians warn that Excel simply should not be used for statistical work at all and show Excel failing numerous benchmark tests with some broken functions taking a full FIFTEEN YEARS to fix and getting to the point of having sub-headings like "Does Microsoft Ever Fix Bugs In Excel?" not using Microsoft products is considered the smart move just on pure accuracy reasons. Anyone choosing to employ Excel today - in fact, anyone choosing to continue to patronize a company that lets reported bugs languish (or "fixes" them in ways that make them worse, which is also documented) for a decade or more should be fired for incompetence. They're just choosing the default without doing research. That's without getting into Word's incompatibilities (with itself) and its broken Master Document feature which has also remained broken since Word '95 and leads to data corruption in large documents, Access' various incompatibilities with earlier versions, stripping out features to force the use of MS products, non-adherance to standards, VBA being deprecated, etc.

                  With tools like python (cross-platform), Qt (cross-platform framework), Rapidminer (second-most popular Java-based BI suite), R (amazing mathematical programming language that can essentially do anything math-related and should be used instead of Excel for all but the most trivial tasks and the #1 tool in BI right now), sqlite3 for local databases, PostgreSQL for enterprise-class client/server database functionality (including the unique ability to code stored procedures in python and R), BIRT for web-based reporting, the python modules pandas for class-leading ETL data manipulation (developed by a trading firm and used heavily in financial and scientific areas) and sqlalchemy for ORM, etc. there's no need (or room) for Microsoft products anymore. The R Studio IDE and RapidMiner (via RapidAnalytics) can also run in the browser for use beyond the desktop.

                  I've got more enterprise-class data mining, data analysis, programming, database and machine learning firepower on my desktop today than I did when performing analytics at the HQ of a major billion-dollar U. S. retailer with close to 1000 stores just a few years ago. It's all running on Linux, with one exception it's all Big Three cross-platform (that one exception is a Mathematica-like program that runs on Linux and OS X but NOT WINDOWS), and it's all open source. That's in addition to all of the "glue" from e-mail and browsing to disk burning, backup, mind-mapping, VoIP etc that's also on the system. With slight reconfigurations my setup could be used for developers (replacing the python and IDE with Java/Eclipse, etc.), accountants, authors (slip in Scribus for desktop publishing), everything I used to do in my previous field of logistics, etc. Any general-purpose business task is quite capable of being performed today in Linux or OS X and much of it on more mobile devices as well.

                  There's nothing the masses are doing that they couldn't be doing today on Linux or OS X. In fact, give them Linux and the KDE desktop, and they might not know they're not using Windows!

          2. JEDIDIAH
            Linux

            Re: @Trevor

            A large number of things are being lumped together her just to manufacture a number that's troll bait. They're not equivalent or interchangeable. The only bits that really are are the Macs and PCs. The rest is just silly spin, "statistics", and wishful thinking.

            Although the idea that computing is more than just "secretary terminals" is hardly a new idea. So there is nothing new or shocking in these cooked numbers. They're really nothing to get excited about because nothing has actually changed.

            Phones can now be conflated with desktop PCs but that doesn't alter the big picture much.

            Even if consumers get broken out of their "must be DOS compatible" mindset, you still have to worry about apps and legacy apps especially. "Work" will probably still require terminals.

        3. RudeBuoy

          Re: Khaptain Re: @Trevor

          I agree with you 100% here. I cant stand to use any device with less than DUAL Monitor with 1920x1200 each for serious work. Have two different setup at home two at work one in the warehouse and one set in the office. I also have a couple 47 inch sony FWD-S47H1 that I am waiting for the stands for to add to one of my setup.

          I cant imagine anyone getting serious work done on a TABLET. The question for me is "tool or toy?"When I walk through Sears appliance section and see the sales reps with their tablets I understand their use for that purpose but not for anyone doing serious computing whether it is administration, word processing or development. Makes no sense to me.

          So the big question to Trevor is .. " Is he the exception or the norm?" I suspect that he is the exception. Will he become the norm. That depends on the intensity of the tasks being performed and the frequency. From the amount of comments he has posed on this topic I suspect that it is more a case of him having too much time on his hand and him being more than a little obsessed with tablets.

        4. alcalde
          WTF?

          Re: @Trevor

          > of which have no viable Unix/Apple equivalants (Avaya ASA, Business Objects, Visio).

          You're honestly going to contend that there's no equivalents for telephony, data mining and charting on non-Windows platforms? Really?

          1) Asterisk

          2) Too many to list but Actuate BIRT, Jaspersoft, Pentaho and SpagoBI come to mind, although my BI preference is for a mix of a few different tools rather than one suite

          3) Dia, LibreOffice Draw, possibly inkscape depending on usage

      1. John Sanders
        Linux

        Re: @mutatedwombat

        "'m the fucking customer and you will make what I want, or I'll take my custom somewhere else."

        Example: Many companies developing their software for Linux because you can not virtualize MacOS in VMWare, and the customers want to VMWare everything.

        Linux in the other hand...

      2. albsure

        Re: @mutatedwombat

        easily the best response I've read for ages!! So funny... "hostages" .. "crack ridden ".. lol

        sums it up so well.

        I cant believe that people cant see what is happening out there. Its like stockholm syndrome...

      3. JEDIDIAH
        Linux

        Re: @mutatedwombat

        > You lack imagination and an understanding of how to make technology work

        No. He just realizes that a toaster isn't a computer. He realizes that many devices being conflated with general purpose computers are extremely limited in functionality or usefulness and aren't being bought primarily for their computing characteristics.

        They are PCs masquerading as appliances. Why contradict the manufacturer?

        I would love to see Microsoft knocked down a peg as much as the next Linux Zealot but I would rather not be so obviously delusional about it.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          @JEDIDIAH

          I seriously doubt I qualify as a Linux zealot. I spend too much time actually getting shit done and not enough time submitting bugfixes or compiling kernels.

          If I pay for something, it had better work. More to the point, it had better work as advertised and meet the needs I delineated as requiring to be met when I had discussions with the vendor. I don't care if the solution is Microsoft, Google, Apple or some flavour of Linux.

          So now, I'm not a Linux zealot, or an Apple fanboi. I'm not a Redmondian nor a node in the Google hive mind. I'm that rarest of rare things: a technological atheist. I have no religious affiliation with any of the cults out there (except Ninite, but we all get one, right?)

          Pick any company or product and I will gleefully rip it to shreds. Even the best designed stuff has some flaws. The difference between me and the vicious pack of internet piranhas around here is that I don't have technology Stockholm Syndrome. I don't sympathise with my hostage takers. I don't cut them slack and say "next time, next time it will be better…right guys?"

          Bizzarely enough, it seems that consumers are becoming equally fickle. (Which should terrify marketers, because building consumer loyalty has been a cornerstone of the profession for bloody ages.) Something about being bombarded with PR and marketing 24/7 everywhere we turn is raising a new generation of individuals that are functionally immune to this crap.

          Humanity has evolved more reliable bullshit detectors. I just don't let a change in the winds which might threaten my job keep me from acknowledging the fact of it's existence. I rail against VMware for actually spending hundreds of millions of dollars to put people like me out of a job while I spin up their latest greatest on my test lab to prep it for install, documenting it for an article the whole time.

          Technology means adaptation. It means thinking back even 10 years ago to when Google was nobody; a start-up that couldn't possibly threaten the mighty Yahoo. It means remembering dial-up and Netscape, the rise of Linux and the Code Red worm. It means remembering when Exchange shipped with an instant messenger and the wonder of migrating a workload from your SQL server to Azure for the first time.

          Things change. As technologists we need to adapt with that change. Loyalty to any one technology or company is not only stupid…

          …it could ultimately cost you your career.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: @JEDIDIAH

            Too bad I can upvote only once. I can't say that I agree with Trevor every time (not even on the original article), but this is the best comment I've seen here in years. Spot on sir !

            Back OT: I, as most commentards here, am not an average user. But I do deal with them, and since distributing Windows Phone 8 devices I've seen only happy faces. These are basic users who need to call support to change basic settings. And they don't, which is a Good Thing.

            Why WP8 ? Simple: where I work people get a budget for smartphones. iPhone isn't an option for most users (price too high), the Android devices in the price range (between 200 and 250 euro unsubsidised) are mostly crap. The EAS implementation sucks, they are often not responsive, and most importantly: the users don't like them. The HTC8S devices now in use have none of these issues. they have others which would be an issue for me, but I'm not the average user. Remember: these are the average users/employees where I work. We have a BYOD policy, they get budgets, and... They don't care. No one, and I mean NO ONE, wanted OSXon the desktop or Android on a phone.

            So don't count on MS being out of the game just yet.... Especially since (I haven't read all the comments yet, I,m halfway through) no one here has said anything about Exchange/Sharepoint/SCCM or any other MS server product yet. Those products are, in my opinion, where the profit is for MS. After all, business users with iDevices or Android tablets are more often than not getting their mail from MS servers.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "Certainly Autocad isn't going to run on Android anytime soon..."

        To be fair, the apps that Autodesk have produced on both Android and iOS are looking mighty promising. I'd say the real reason that we won't see AutoCAD is because manufacturing is mostly PLM and architecture is moving to BIM solutions, so there isn't much need for AutoCAD any more.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: "Certainly Autocad isn't going to run on Android anytime soon..."

          @AnotherNetNarcissist I'll defer to your subject matter expertise on that. I havent' had any opportunity to use Autodesk's iOS or Android apps.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: LOL

      And digital watches...and handheld games consoles..

    2. Mark .

      Re: LOL

      Couldn't agree more.

      If we're looking at "any kind of computing device" this is nothing new. I'm sure that the media want to pretend it's something new, as part of some Windows decline, but we've had mobile phones being mainstream for ten years (Symbian was dominant until 2011 - and why stop at "smartphones" when "feature" phones are also mobile computers, just with a different marketing name?), and before that, we also had games consoles. It's also long been obvious that phones will sell more than PCs (phones are intrinsically something one person has, where as many people still share computers; and people upgrade phones more often).

      I'm sure people could make the same claim about the popularity of ARM versus Intel - but again, it's nothing new! I remember in the 1990s reading an article pointing out that actually it was ARM that was very popular, on par with Intel, because of all their use in embedded and mobile hardware.

      It's also worth noting that this kind of argument makes every platform look smaller. So Windows is only 20% - but OS X and GNU Linux are also a lot smaller. And Android is no longer at 75% in mobile, it's a lot smaller. Let's throw in all those feature phones too, as I say, and watch the share for Android and Windows go even smaller... (Nokia's S40 still probably sells more than Android, for example.)

      That's not to say that it isn't interesting to look at operating system share as a whole, on all kinds of devices - but it's nothing surprising to see a different picture, nor is it anything new.

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Yay! Die MS die.

    I for one will help in MS's demise by dissuading anyone from buying MS stuff.

    1. dssf
      Joke

      Re: Yay! Die MS die.

      For ms, i bet Goldman "SUCHS"...

      (ok, grumble...)

  2. Jan Hargreaves
    Coat

    Yup I bet all the traders for goldman sachs are using 4 iPads or Nexus' hooked up to each other...

    Oh... wait....

    Tablets are okay for a bit of work on the go but if you want to do anything serious you need a proper machine.

    Goldman Sachs... they took all our money five years ago.. why should we listen to these fraudsters. They've probably just shorted a load of Microsoft stock before releasing this "report"

    1. Kev Beeley

      Exactly my thoughts

      When companies such as Goldman Sachs, or credit agencies like Standard & Poor's 'announce' such things, my first thought is "So, who are they attempting to make money for NOW?". Strikes me as nothing more than a self-fulfilling prophecy after this.

      1. ShadowedOne
        Meh

        Re: Exactly my thoughts

        When companies such as Goldman Sachs 'announce' anything, my first thought is usually along the line of 'pull the other one, it's got bells on'.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Few use the "smart" features of smart TVs

    Yeah, I'm sure several Reg readers are getting ready to thumb me down and/or reply because they use these features all the time, but Reg readers are hardly representative of the world at large. People buy smart TVs for the same reason they buy 3D TVs - because these features are included in all but the low end models despite the fact that few would pay anything extra for the feature if were a separate add on (for example, if when you bought a TV you were given the opportunity to pay $10 to enable smart and/or 3D functionality)

    TV makers are struggling to find an added-value feature people are willing to pay for. It wasn't 3D, it isn't smart, the next try will be 4K, which will be another miss and back to the drawing board to try to come up with the killer feature no one wants.

    When it becomes normal for the typical smart TV owner to fire up the built in browser to check a web site or use it to check their Gmail or work Exchange account, I'll agree with Goldman Sachs that smart TVs are as disruptive as the tablet. I won't be holding my breath. BTW, before someone claims that streaming Netflix makes a TV a "smart TV" I'll preemptively disagree. That's just giving the end run to the high prices/small selection your cable/satellite company charges for on-demand, not actually adding any new functionality - you're still using your TV as a TV.

    1. Richard Plinston

      Re: Few use the "smart" features of smart TVs

      > someone claims that streaming Netflix makes a TV a "smart TV" I'll preemptively disagree. ... - you're still using your TV as a TV.

      Which replaces using your Windows PC as a TV.

      1. dogged
        Stop

        Re: Few use the "smart" features of smart TVs

        Almost nobody uses a windows PC as a TV. They use XBoxes and other STBs to add value to TVs. Therefore, there's hardly any market share to lose.

        1. alcalde

          Re: Few use the "smart" features of smart TVs

          >Almost nobody uses a windows PC as a TV. They use XBoxes and other STBs to add value to TVs. Therefore,

          >there's hardly any market share to lose.

          Nobody's watching YouTube videos on their PC? Netflix? Hulu for tv shows? Amazon Video On Demand? Bittorrent for... well, you know? Why is XBMC still in existence if no one is using their PC to watch tv? What about the periodic articles on Lifehacker and elsewhere about how to get rid of cable and just use your PC/the Internet?

          I got RID of my tv years ago and my PC does double duty... well, it's also my stereo, my phone, my DVD player, and I guess it's also my mail box thanks to e-mail and online bill pay.

      2. JEDIDIAH
        Linux

        Re: Few use the "smart" features of smart TVs

        >> someone claims that streaming Netflix makes a TV a "smart TV" I'll preemptively disagree. ... - you're still using your TV as a TV.

        >

        >Which replaces using your Windows PC as a TV.

        Nope. A Roku doesn't quite manage that. Neither does an AppleTV. Both represent pre-alpha releases of what a PC was capable of doing 6 years ago. That's why those of us prone to using PCs with our TVs are not stopping any time soon.

        We are demanding early adopters. We won't eat dirt. We might even pay a premium that "normal" people would refuse.

        That's why there will always be a place for something that's not an appliance. That's what caused the rise of the PC to begin with. (people needed/wanted more)

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Few use the "smart" features of smart TVs

          "there will always be a place for something that's not an appliance."

          Why does "not an appliance" have to mean "must be x86 PC". Unless you're Wintel dependent, obviously.

          What is a Wintel PC if not an expensive and somewhat programmable appliance available in various skins all of which are largely built to specifications written by (and largely benefiting) Intel and Microsoft?

          Before you hit the downvote button, look at the names behind the industry standard PC "system design guides" such as PC97 (to PC2001) and the less visible successor documents which have largely dictated form and function of PCs for the last decade or more.

    2. Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik

      Re: Few use the "smart" features of smart TVs

      As a tech savvy owner of a non-smart TV purchased 2 years ago. I must say I really don't like the idea of smart TVs. I rather hav a RaspberryPi or something similar hooked up to the TV(or even a x86 system). It gives me *shock* CHOICE of what I can do. And am not limited to a specific system.

      1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

        Re: Few use the "smart" features of smart TVs

        I have lots of choise with my TV. Shipped with some backwards-ass Linux derivative. I rooted it and installed Android. How do you not have choice just because the hardware is in a case?

  4. MIc

    Ms hate

    Its weird that there is all this hate towards MS still. The anti trust stuff is long over. There is plenty of choice in the tech world. Why is it so vogue to hate that company?

    1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      Re: Ms hate

      Because they don't listen to customers, attempt to bamboozle us at every turn, have byzantine and purposefully misleading licensing, are insanely expensive and generally treat customers like shit.

      The better question is "why do some people feel that pointing out flaws in Microsoft's actions, products or strategies is akin to personally attacking them as individuals?" How and why do people let themselves get so attached to a company that they marry their sense of self worth to it?

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

      2. dssf
        Thumb Up

        Re: Ms hate

        A thumbs up to you, sir. Bang on description.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Ms hate

        "The better question is "why do some people feel that pointing out flaws in Microsoft's actions, products or strategies is akin to personally attacking them as individuals?" How and why do people let themselves get so attached to a company that they marry their sense of self worth to it?"

        Trevor, you've been in this industry for a while and you should know. You're suggesting that the livelihoods of a large percentage of the Register's readership are in danger, and people, no matter how rational they think themselves to be, will generally go apeshit if they think someone is taking away their cheese. Not to mention these are the readers who've staked their entire careers on one company's technology when times were good, and now that the market is changing, as it always does, refuse to believe that their choices could possibly be wrong. "A few minor incursions into Gaul and Dalmatia, but Rome itself is safe."

        Realistically, Microsoft is so entrenched that even if every decision Ballmer, or whoever replaces him, makes totally flops, they can coast on the installed base for another 10 or 20 years. And that's often a deadly trap, because it hides the effects of incompetence until it is far too late to reverse course.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: Ms hate

          You're probably right. Personally, I think that these people don't need to worry; their skills will port away from MS and to other platforms. Mine did. I guess they just need to have a beer and think about things more calmly.

          As to "they can coast on the installed base for another 10 or 20 years," I think that depends entirely on how hard they squeeze the lemon to extract the juice. Oracle started squeezing too hard and there was a mass exodus. Now they have to continually ramp up the prices, turning the lever on a shrinking number of customers to get any traction. Meanwhile, NoSQL and other Big Data technologies are exploding.

          As I've said before, Microsoft isn't going to disappear overnight. Novell is still with us, as is RIM…people still buy IBM mainframes, for $deity's sake! The question is simply "how much of the empire do they lose to the Gauls?"

          Microsoft is not irretrievably fucked. They have a massive amount of cash, a huge install base, millions of loyal fans and some of the smartest, most capable people on the planet. They have to make a a handful of really hard decisions to be able to adapt to the new world. So far, they don't seem capable of recognising the necessity; they still believe that they can alter the course of the market through the force of their sheer largesse.

          I don't believe this is the case. I don't believe that they can simply force "Microsoft on every device" on the world and licence – and CAL – appropriately. I don't think that their obsession with fat clients, with licensing one copy of Office, Windows and everything else for multiple devices is really going to work. I don't think people are going to buy into this subscription thing…at least not at the prices they want.

          If I am right, and Microsoft is wrong, then the market will shift under them in a big way, and it will shift fast. Microsoft can prevent this all with a simple licensing tweak; a few changes and they can maintain their dominance. Unfortunately, I don't think they see the necessity, let alone have the corporate will to implement it.

          What then? What do they become? How much of the empire do they lose and how fast?

          That depends more on their competitors executing properly than it does on Microsoft's failure to read the market. Microsoft's competitors are not standing still, and Microsoft's inability to make the tough calls is giving Apple, Google and others the opportunity to fail their way to success.

          The next two years are going to tell the tale.

          1. danolds
            Thumb Down

            Re: Ms hate

            The thing that many seem to overlook is that there are usually good and valid reasons why firms buy technology that some seem to think are archaic. You, and others, seem to be holding up the mainframe as an example of a stupid buying decision. But even today, there are things that mainframes can do that other systems can't do as easily or as inexpensively. The same follows for commercial Unix's too. Unix based system running AIX, HP-UX, and Solaris are highly integrated solutions that do things and have characteristics that can't be duplicated in Linux or other alternatives without a lot of clunging, cost, and risk. Smart phones don't have the same functionality as tablets and tablets can't do the same kind of work as efficiently as laptops. And there aren't any laptops that can handle the same power-hungry chores that come easy to a beefy desktop or workstation.

            My main contention is that these competiting technologies aren't exact substitues for each other. Implying that an organization or individual is somewhat thick if they buy a mainfram, commercial Unix box, Windows based systems, or whatever technology you happen to NOT be in love with at the moment is provacative and makes for a fun flame war. But it doesn't have anything to do with the reality that tech decision makers wrestle with daily.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Ms hate ... Not to mention

          @4:07

          [i]You're suggesting that the livelihoods of a large percentage of the Register's readership are in danger, and people, no matter how rational they think themselves to be, will generally go apeshit if they think someone is taking away their cheese. Not to mention these are the readers who've staked their entire careers on one company's technology when times were good, and now that the market is changing, as it always does, refuse to believe that their choices could possibly be wrong.[/i]

          Those people are such Bitches!

        3. toadwarrior

          Re: Ms hate

          I'd say Microsoft is as strong as it is now purely because people don't want to learn new things for their job. They'll get enough mileage out of the current generation of employees but as they retire them MS may have problems.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @Trevor_Pott

        <quote>

        The better question is "why do some people feel that pointing out flaws in Microsoft's actions, products or strategies is akin to personally attacking them as individuals?" How and why do people let themselves get so attached to a company that they marry their sense of self worth to it?

        </quote>

        You could easily replace the word "Microsoft" with "Apple" there...

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: @Trevor_Pott

          Or Google, or Oracle, or IBM...

      5. VaalDonkie

        Re: Ms hate

        "Because they don't listen to customers, attempt to bamboozle us at every turn, have byzantine and purposefully misleading licensing, are insanely expensive and generally treat customers like shit."

        Ever had dealings with Apple?

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: Ms hate

          Apple is expensive, but their lisencing is clear and simple. They are pirates olundering your wallet, but they are straightforward about it. I respect that.

      6. MIc
        Stop

        Re: Ms hate

        I didn't mean to imply that its not ok to direct some hate. It was a genuine question as to why. I realize that genuine questions on the interWebz are hard to come by so I understand the confusion.

        However I do have more genuine questions regarding some of your comments.

        How exactly do the bamboozle "us" and why should I think their licensing is purposely misleading?

        Data please...

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: Ms hate

          @Mic

          Okay, that's a huge topic. Please understand that if I try to be brief with my answer here it isn't because I am trying to dodge the topic. The motivation is far more mercilessly capitalistic: I think your question is a damned good one, and it deserves the kind of answer that A) I'd really like to get paid for providing and B) The Register should be able to advertise against.

          In short: I'll give you the info here in the comments that will allow you to do the research on your own, but the full run down will have to wait for the Feature I am working on. (You'd be surprised just how much research I've put into this already.) I hope that comes across as fair.

          First item: VDI licensing. Remote access of any kind, really. That means VDI as "a virtualised copy of an operating system you access only remotely" or "RDPing into your home/work PC." The rules surrounding this are byzantine and asinine. They are designed to strongly discourage the use of VDI in an attempt to cling to the fat client model. Look it up, but make sure you have a bottle or six of scotch to hand when you do.

          Second item: CALs. The entire concept of CALs belies the way modern systems work. "Per CPU licensing" for things like SQL is strongly discouraged if you ever actually talk to MS reps – such as during an audit – in favour of a CAL for every user. So how – exactly – are you supposed to use SQL for things like a web application? How do CALs work when something like SQL has no users, because the only things using it are automated services?

          This gets really, really complicated quite quickly. I've been asked to hand over my customer list by one auditor because they felt that the only fair way to license this was to ensure we paid a CAL for every single customer we had, as they had "the potential to submit an order to a web service which would (via shell script) convert that order into something injected into SQL which would then be picked up by a robot for action." Others said I could/should just get a per-processor SQL license. Still others said that I should only get two per-device CALs, one for each automated system accessing the server.

          Are we having fun yet?

          Third item: Backups. There are still provisions in Microsoft licences that basically say "you must pay a licence for every copy of this software, whether it is in use or not." This has been interpreted by MS auditor types to mean "every copy of a VM in cold storage must have a license." #facepalm

          Fourth item: Service Provider licensing for VDI. I just…I can't talk about this. I have too much rage.

          There's more – don't get me started on exchange or Lync! – but it should give you a place to start, and this is already 500 words…

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Ms hate

            @Trevor

            You've got a valid point regarding licensing... But the same can be said of all EULA's. I deal with it in a simple manner: we pay what we deem reasonable, if an auditor thinks it's not enough I have a quiet chat with an MS sales droid (no pun intended) and the problem miraculously goes away. I don't work for a Fortune 50, 500 or 100000 company, but it still works. I haven't even had to use the old sock-and-a-half-brick argument yet.

            1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

              Re: Ms hate

              @21:53

              Well, bully for you then. That doesn't work here. I can generally negotiate with any other company just fine...but Microsoft doesn't negotiate a damned thing below 500 seats around here. Even then, if you are less than 1000 seats, be prepared to fight for months.

              When I factor in the cost of my time to do those negotiations, it is less cost to simply pay to have staff retrained for an alternate solution and exit Microsoft's ecosystem. They provide me software I want with standardised, comprehensible licensing at a price I am willing to pay or I purchase from an alternate vendor.

              What is so hard to understand about that? The fact that Microsoft's licensing has gotten more byzantine (and expensive) while competitors have reached not only "good enough" but are starting to close the feature gap on the more obscure features only hastens the jettisoning of these heavy-handed fools.

              I am not a substance-addicted prostitute reduced to turning tricks for my next hit. I resent being treated as such by a vendor who should instead be seeking to form a partnership with me and vying for my ongoing loyalty.

              It's 2012. I am no longer the dependant one in this relationship.

      7. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Ms hate

        Guess what: they're a vendor like any other. If you don't like pricing or licensing but you do like their product, you can negotiate. I've done so with great success. Granted, t took a month or two... But it saves about 20K quid a year. AC because I'm not really allowed to discuss this. Not because of MIcrosoft, but because of rules and regulations at the workplace.

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like