Skip to main content

Home/ In-the-Clouds-with-SOA-XML-and-the-Open-Web/ Group items tagged comes

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Gary Edwards

Independent study advises IT planners to go OOXML: The Bill Gates MSOffice "formats and... - 0 views

talkback.zdnet.com/5206-12558-0.html

anti-trust browser-wars comes gates iowa msoffice netscape ooxml w3c

shared by Gary Edwards on 30 May 08 - Cached
  • 3.2.2.2. A pox on both your houses! gary.edwards - 01/22/08 Hi Robert, What you've posted are examples of MSOffice ”compatibility settings” used to establish backwards compatibility with older documents, and, for the conversion of alien file formats (such as various versions of WordPerfect .wpd). These compatibility settings are unspecified in that we know the syntax but have no idea of the semantics. And without the semantic description there is no way other developers can understand implementation. This of course guarantees an unacceptable breakdown of interoperability. But i would be hesitant to make my stand of rejecting OOXML based on this issue. It turns out that there are upwards of 150 unspecified compatibility settings used by OpenOffice/StarOffice. These settings are not specified in ODF, but will nevertheless show up in OpenOffice ODF documents – similarly defying interoperability efforts! Since the compatibility settings are not specified or even mentioned in the ODF 1.0 – ISO 26300 specification, we have to go to the OOo source code to discover where this stuff comes from. Check out lines 169-211. Here you will find interesting settings such as, “UseFormerLineSpacing, UseFormerObjectPositioning, and UseFormerTextWrapping”. So what's going on here?
  • From: Bill Gates Sent: Saturday, December 5 1998 To: Bob Muglia, Jon DeVann, Steven Sinofsky Subject : Office rendering "One thing we have got to change in our strategy - allowing Office documents to be rendered very well by other peoples browsers is one of the most destructive things we could do to the company. We have to stop putting any effort into this and make sure that Office documents very well depends on PROPRIETARY IE capabilities. Anything else is suicide for our platform. This is a case where Office has to avoid doing something to destroy Windows. I would be glad to explain at a greater length. Likewise this love of DAV in Office/Exchange is a huge problem. I would also like to make sure people understand this as well." Tuesday, August 28, 2007
  • Gary Edwards on 30 May 08
     
    The IOWA Comes vs. Microsoft antitrust suit evidence is now publicly available. This ZDNet Talkback posts an extraordinary eMail from Bill Gates concerning the need to control MSOffice formats and protocols as Microsoft pushes onto the Web. The key point is that Chairman Bill understands that the real threat to Microsoft is that of Open Web formats and protocols outside of Microsoft's control. It's 1998, and the effort to "embrace and eXtend" W3C HTML, XHTML, SVG and CSS isn't working well. The good Chairman notifies the troops that MSOffice must come up with another plan. Interestingly, it's not until 2001, when OpenOffice releases an XML encoding of the OpenOffice/StarOffice imbr that Microsoft finally sees a solution! (imbr = in-memory-binary-representation) The MSOffice crew immediately sets to work creating a similar XML encoding of the MSOffice binary (imbr) dump. The first result is released in the MSOffice 2003 beta as "WordprocessingML and SpreadsheetML". XML was designed as a structured language for creating specific structured languages. OpenOffice saw the potential of using XML to create an OpenOffice specific XML language. MSOffice seized the innovation and the rest is history. Problem solved! So what was the "problem" the good Chairman identified in this secret eMail? It's that the Web is the future, and Microsoft needed to find a way of leveraging their existing desktop document "editor" monopoly share into owning and controlling the Web formats produced by Microsoft applications. MSOffice OOXML is the result. ISO approval of MSOffice OOXML is beyond important to Microsoft. It establishes MSOffice "editors" as standards compliant. It also establishes the application, platform and vendor specific MSOffice OOXML as an international "open" standard. Many will ask why this isn't a case of Microsoft actually opening up the MSOffice formats in compliance with government antitrust demands. It is "compliance", but not in the sense of what
Gary Edwards

XML-Empowered Documents Extend SOA's Connection to People and Processes | BriefingsDire... - 0 views

briefingsdirect.blogspot.com/...red-documents-extend-soas.html

cloud-computing collaborative-computing paas saas soa woa

shared by Gary Edwards on 17 Apr 08 - Cached
  • We're going to talk about dynamic documents. That is to say, documents that have form and structure and that are things end-users are very familiar with and have been using for generations, but with a twist. That's the ability to bring content and data, on a dynamic lifecycle basis, in and out of these documents in a managed way. That’s one area.The second area is service-oriented architecture (SOA), the means to automate and reuse assets across multiple application sets and data sets in a large complex organization.We're seeing these two areas come together. Structured documents and the lifecycle around structured authoring tools come together to provide an end-point for the assets and resources managed through an SOA, but also providing a two-way street, where the information and data that comes in through end-users can be reused back in the SOA to combine with other assets for business process benefits.
  • Thus far we’ve been talking about the notion of unstructured content as a target source to SOA-based applications, but you can also think about this from the perspective of the end application itself -- the document as the endpoint, providing a framework for bringing together structured data, transactional data, relational data, as well as unstructured content, into a single document that comes to life.Let me back up and give you a little context on this. You mentioned the various documents that line workers, for example, need to utilize and consume as the basis for their jobs. Documents have unique value. Documents are portable. You can download a document locally, attach it to an email, associate it with a workflow, and share it into a team room. Documents are persistent. They exist over a period of time, and they provide very rich context. They're how you bring together disparate pieces of information into a cohesive context that people can understand.
  • Gary Edwards on 17 Apr 08
     
    There is a huge productivity jump to be had by sinking data management into the "system"!
  • Gary Edwards on 17 Apr 08
     
    Dana Gardner transcript of podcast interview with JustSystems and Phil Wainwright. Covers the convergence of the portable XML document model with SOA. It's about time someone out there got it. You know the portable XML document has arrived when analyst finally get it.
Gary Edwards

Comes v. Microsoft - 0 views

iowa.gotthefacts.org

antitrust comes formats iowa microsoft msoffice protocols

shared by Gary Edwards on 30 May 08 - Cached
  • Comes v. Microsoft
  • Gary Edwards on 30 May 08
     
    list of email evidence presented in the antitrust action Microsoft rushed to settle.
Paul Merrell

HPC Developer at OpenSolaris.org - 0 views

www.opensolaris.org/...hpcdev

hpc opensolaris sun

shared by Paul Merrell on 01 Jun 08 - Cached
  • This is a community for anyone interested in High Performance Computing (HPC) on OpenSolaris. Its purpose is to: Provide a home for the OpenSolaris HPC distro, Highlight existing features and future enhancements relevant for high-performance computing, Provide a forum to discuss issues and possible solutions to problems faced by HPC developers, and Provide pointers to pertinent resources and tools currently available
  • Paul Merrell on 01 Jun 08
     
    The developer site for OpenSolaris High Performance Computing project. Site contains major clues about things to come with OpenSolaris, e.g., the Projects index page includes entries for KDE and Gnome porting projects.
Paul Merrell

My take on why Microsoft finally decided to support ODF « Arnaud's Open blog - 0 views

lehors.wordpress.com/...finally-decided-to-support-odf

antitrust arnaud ibm microsoft odf

shared by Paul Merrell on 23 May 08 - Cached
  • Let’s just now hope that Microsoft won’t try to play games anymore. Besides their rather poor track record at delivering on the ongoing chain of announcements about becoming open and caring about interoperability (as opposed to intraoperability), there are other reasons one might want to take today’s announcement with caution. One trick they could try and pull for instance would be to put just enough support for ODF to claim that they support it but not enough for people to really use it systematically. They could then tell customers who complain something isn’t working that it’s because ODF isn’t powerful enough, and if they want the full power of Office they need to use OOXML.
  • Paul Merrell on 23 May 08
     
    IBM's Arnaud La Hors on why Microsoft should be blamed for what is inevitable given that ODF is not designed for interoperability and is not application-neutral. One might rationally fault Microsoft for not having joined the ODF TC earlier, but the ODF TC studiously avoided enabling interoperability even among ODF implementations and ODF has almost no mandatory conformity requirements, with application-specific extensions classified as conformant. The real ODF standard is the OOo code base controlled by Sun Microsystems. IBM played along with that game and cloned the OOo code base instead of fighting on the TC to make the myth of ODF interoperability come true. I don't see a lot of moral high ground for IBM here.
Gary Edwards

'Enough with WOA, stick to SOA,' say IT architects - I say drop WOA and SOA | Dana Gard... - 0 views

blogs.zdnet.com/Gardner

cloud-computing ria soa woa

shared by Gary Edwards on 22 Apr 08 - Cached
  • So, true, WOA, isn’t an architecture, it’s a webby style of apps and integration, of mashups and open APIs, of using REST and RIA clients, all from a variety of Internet sources. It’s integration as a service, too. These can all be composited, accessed and managed by an enterprise’s internal SOA, or not. The services can come from a cloud, public or private. Forrester says the growth curve for Enterprise 2.0 is steep, but I think it will be even steeper. These webby assets could just as well come together as portals, standalone Web apps, SaaS, or RIA front ends for composited ecology services that support extended enterprise processes. The point is there’s no need to wait.
  • rapid ramp-up of services hybrids — of public/private clouds, services ecologies, internal and external hosting, social enterprise media tools, mashups in myriad forms, integration of services regardless of origins or types of aggregation. You can today begin a business online and scale it without an IT department, or an on-premises datacenter. You just can.
  • The fact is that the definitions of and distinctions between applications, platforms, services, tools, clouds, portals, integration, middleware are — all up for grabs. IT as a concept is up for grabs. The shifts in the software arena at that disruptive. It’s why Microsoft is seeking to buy Yahoo, and not Oracle.
Gary Edwards

The problem with Forrester's $4.6 billion prediction | Irregular Enterprise | ZDNet.com - 0 views

blogs.zdnet.com/Howlett

bpm cloud enterprise20 soa web20 woa

shared by Gary Edwards on 22 Apr 08 - Cached
  • Collaboration is about problem solving in the flow of business processes - or at least it should be. That’s where cost sits and where all the automation in the world will not rescue the business manager. Enterprise 2.0 doesn’t solve problems per se but it may serve to expose them. The question then comes, how does business go about solving the problems it has discovered? In many cases, this comes down to one of several things.
  • Forrester has missed a trick. It has fallen into the evolutionary trap of assuming that existing processes will accommodate the new world of socially networked operations. If anything, the adoption of these technology solutions will raise the specter of how business process designed to release value is articulated through software. That alone could kill off many an otherwise worthy project as business managers stop to rethink what they need to build in order to solve the real problems of the day. Collaboration will go some distance, but without a fast track way of implementing BRP, it will represent a lot of wasted effort.
Gary Edwards

Open source SOA infrastructure project CXF elevated to full Apache status | Dana Gardne... - 0 views

blogs.zdnet.com/Gardner

apache cfx j2ee soa woa

shared by Gary Edwards on 21 Apr 08 - Cached
  • CXF is really designed for high performance, kind of like a request-response style of interaction for one way, asynchronous messaging, and things like that. But it’s really designed for taking data in from a variety of transports and message formats, such as SOAP or just raw XML. If you bring in the Apache Yoko project, we have CORBA objects coming in off the wire. It basically processes them through the system as quickly as possible with very little memory and processing overhead. We can get it to the final destination of where that data is supposed to be, whether it’s off to another service or a user-developed code, whether it’s in JavaScript or JAX-WS/JAXB code. That’s the goal of what the CXF runtime is — just get that data into the form that the service needs, no matter where it came from and what format it came from in, and do that as quickly as possible.
  • the fascinating intersection of SOA and WOA — with on-premises services and cloud-based resources (including data) supporting ecologies of extended enterprises business processes
  • Creating federated relationships between private and public clouds and their services and resources requires more than just industry standards. It requires visibility and access, the type that comes from open source communities and open use licenses.
  • Gary Edwards on 21 Apr 08
     
    The Apache CFX "Interoperability Framework" for SOA Project is ready. We really could have used CFX in the 2003 Comcast project where a Tomcat/MYSQL Web-Stack connected to many disparate blackboxes. The blackboxes were standalone "Inventory and Billing" transaction processing data centers aquired by Comcast during a five year burst of acquisitions. Of course, none of these blackboxes could talk to any other! Enter SOA with XMLHTTPRequest streams. 2002-2003. We needed CFX to scale!
Gary Edwards

Is HTML in a Race to the Bottom? A Large-Scale Survey of Open Web Formats - 0 views

dsonline.computer.org/...index.jsp

cdf css html ooxml xaml xhtml

shared by Gary Edwards on 18 Apr 08 - Cached
  • The "race to the bottom" is a familiar phenomenon that occurs when multiple standards compete for acceptance. In this environment, the most lenient standard usually attracts the greatest support (acceptance, usage, and so on), leading to a competition among standards to be less stringent. This also tends to drive competing standards toward the minimum possible level of quality. One key prerequisite for a race to the bottom is an unregulated market because regulators mandate a minimum acceptable quality for standards and sanction those who don't comply.1,2 In examining current HTML standards, we've come to suspect that a race to the bottom could, in fact, be occurring because so many competing versions of HTML exist. At this time, some nine different versions of HTML (including its successor, XHTML) are supported as W3C standards, with the most up-to-date being XHTML 1.1. Although some versions are very old and lack some of the newer versions' capabilities, others are reasonably contemporaneous. In particular, HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0 both have "transitional" and "strict" versions. Clearly, the W3C's intent is to provide a pathway to move from HTML 4.01 to XHTML 1.1, and the transitional versions are steps on that path. It also aims to develop XHTML standards that support device independence (everything from desktops to cell phones), accessibility, and internationalization. As part of this effort, HTML 4.01's presentational elements (used to adjust the appearance of a page for older browsers that don't support style sheets) are eliminated in XHTML 1.1. Our concern is that Web site designers might decline to follow the newer versions' more stringent formatting requirements and will instead keep using transitional versions. To determine if this is likely, we surveyed the top 100,000 most popular Web sites to discover what versions of HTML are in widespread use.
  • Gary Edwards on 18 Apr 08
     
    What makes the Internet so extraordinary is the interoperability of web ready data, content, media and the incredible sprawl of web applications servicing the volumes of information. The network of networks has become the information system connecting and converging all information systems. The Web is the universal platform of access, exchange and now, collaborative computing. This survey exammines the key issue of future interoperability; Web Document Formats.
  • Gary Edwards on 18 Apr 08
     
    Excellent link from marbux.
Gary Edwards

BOOK Offered Or Kept: Digital reading without Epub? | TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home - 0 views

www.teleread.org/...t-digital-reading-without-epub

ajax book css ebook epub html-5

shared by Gary Edwards on 30 May 08 - Cached
    • Gary Edwards
      Gary Edwards on 30 May 08
       
      .wiki is the native wikiWORD language for MSOffice "editors". It's really AJAX for documents, with HTML+ handlign the "structure", and CSS+ handling the "presentation". We need javascript to perfect the full range of typographical options used by knowledge workers makign their way from MSOffice to the web. BOOK is a good place to start.
  • The structure of a BOOK would look like this: …BOOK/ ……index.html ……images/ ………cover.png ……css/ ………base.css ………skins/ …………modern.css …………classic.css …………nouveau.css ……scripts/ ………prototype.js ………base.js ………extensions.js
  • As for the Javascript, it’s based on the ECMAScript standard, which has evolved into a strongly-typed, object-oriented programming language and is one of the few web “standards” which really is a standard. BOOK authors will welcome the addition of a scripting language, as it is NOT currently supported in the IDPF specifications. In fact, it’s forbidden for .epub reading systems to execute scripts. It’s also forbidden for them to display a file called index.html without first loading and parsing several other files.
  • ...10 more annotations...
    • Gary Edwards
      Gary Edwards on 30 May 08
       
      Good point! The IDPF ePUB format does not support javascript! Which makes "BOOK" a better format to target.
  • EPub is an excellent, high-fidelity format for both direct rendering and for user-side conversion to other formats for particular platforms such as very limited resource handheld devices.
  • Jon Noring Says:
  • For BOOKs, it offers true pagination, typesetting, skinnable and collapsible layouts, footers and headers, footnotes as popups, inline text, true footer notes, or endnotes . . . the list goes on. YUI, JQuery, dojo, MooTools, and Prototype are just a few of the frameworks available, and they’ve been addressing these issues for some time now.
  • Javascript is useful mainly for rendering, not bells and whistles. Without Javascript, the non-normalized implementations of CSS out there become useless–you can’t rely on them to produce a consistent rendering of a document. Unfortunately, with CSS3 the rendering game is only going to get more complicated. I don’t advocate executing scripts from epubs, I advocate executing scripts in epub reading systems. Two very different things, as you’re aware.
  • Scripting is *essential* for many digital publishing projects and not understanding it is a major failure of IDPF. Saying that “we will reconsider scripting when adoption of epub grows” is also inadequate, because nobody will wait patiently, but will choose some another platform for their publishing needs, Adobe AIR for example.
  • My criticism of epub is not about details but about its fundamentals. It seems to me that while preparing the spec the most fundamental question was left out of view: what is the right model for digital publication: is it a physical book? Or is it something else? If something else, then what? From my point of view, not a physical book, but a website should be thought as the right model. Why website? - because of the well supported and ubiquitous mix of technologies (html, css, javascript) and because of the workflow (publishing early versions of the publication on the website for gathering feedback and then publishing as downloadable file). If a model for a digital publication is a website, then any format which does not allow to have everything which we have on websites and does not allow to take all website’s html, css and client-side scripts and publish them as downloadable file without much changing them, is doomed to failure in the long run. It seems that epub is now on this way to failure.
  • What I’d like to see is a sort of epub spinoff, another specification from the IDPF, if you will, with slightly different requirements. Instead of BOOK, we could call it epub-lite. The basis for this simplified, consumer-oriented version of .epub would be the same browser-centric building blocks under the IDPF specs. The difference would be in the file structure and in the way a browser deals with it.
    • Gary Edwards
      Gary Edwards on 30 May 08
       
      What we really need are "webDOCS". Laisvunas is absolutely right. The web is the target, with print and device "flow" an auxillary offshoot. I think we can have it all, and Aaron's "BOOK" is a good place to start. My thinking though is that javascript has to come from standardized libraries such as jQuery or Yahoo's "BrowserPLUS". Yahoo BrowserPLUS does have a security model and off-line capability built in. It's nowhere near as robust and sweepign as the jQuery javascript library, but i don't see why the two can't be combined. Good thinking on the part of Laisvunas!
  • What I wish for is this: a simple ebook format which allows me to use all technologies there are on the web with exactly the same freedom as on web and imposing no additional limitations. Secondly, some browser-based reader (browser add-on or some program based on some quality browser engine). Thirdly, some program (editor/compiler) for producing publications from preexisting web-pages.
    • Gary Edwards
      Gary Edwards on 30 May 08
       
      Once again Laisvunas nails it. I really like his "AIR" suggestion. It's also true that flowing content ready device browsers like the webKit "Safari" and SkyFire will be far more widespread than any ePUB reader!!!!! So why not write for both the web and the device at the same time?
  • The system I’m referring to is alive and well at bookglutton.com. It features an AJAX reader and Package Creation tool. The package tool is currently part of the upload feature which enables people to convert .doc, .rtf, and html documents to epub packages that can be viewed in the Reader. Once we have more epubs out there, direct epub upload will also be an option. We may also eventually enable epub download. Right now, we’re having some doubts about the value of that.
    • Gary Edwards
      Gary Edwards on 30 May 08
       
      How about "eWEB" as a format name? Is it better than "webBOOK" or webDOC"?
  • Gary Edwards on 30 May 08
     
    Aaron Miller writes about the limitations and difficulties with ePUB. He suggests a new format, "BOOK" based on ePUB but web ready. BOOK is an AJAX format in that it includes (X)HTML, CSS and JavaScript! Excellent stuff! The discussion on this page is one of the best on the Web. ePUB gets thrashed, but with arguments very difficult to contest. The web is everything, and Aaron's friends fully understand this. Sadly, the ePUB crowd does not. I found this site looking to solve the problem of numbered lists in ePUB.
Gary Edwards

The Fall of Microsoft Office - 0 views

www.fool.com/...-fall-of-microsoft-office.aspx

iso odf ooxml xaml

shared by Gary Edwards on 29 May 08 - Cached
  • On the same day that the state of New York published a report supporting open formats for electronic documents, mighty Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) said that it would support the open-source ODF format in Office 2007. Redmond's own Open Office XML specification may be heading for the great Recycle Bin in the sky, never to come back.
  • The company's biggest revenue generator may be a shadow of its former self in a few years. I just hope that Microsoft has some alternative business prospects on tap
  • Gary Edwards on 29 May 08
     
    More confusion about the MS announcement of native support for ODF, with delayed support for whatever ISO finally determines to be ISO 29500; "OOXML". Damn but these guys are all twisted up about this. The truth is, ISO National Bodies traded their vote in favor of OOXML for MSOffice support for ODF and Microsoft's joining the OASIS ODF TC. It's not complicated. MS wants ISO approval of OOXML because it established MSOffice as a "standards" editor. The rest of this kurfufull is all about anti trust concerns and Microsoft's need to put htose concerns to bed before the world figures out that they are leveraging the MS desktop monopoly into an MS Web monopoly. ISO approval of OOXML is the final piece of very complex puzzle. The harmonization of OOXML-ODF is impossible. MS knows this. So why not join OASIS ODF TC if it means putting aside the anti trust claims from ISO NB's and getting that all important standardization of OOXML? Both ODF and OOXML are both XML encodings of entirely application specific binary formats. There is no possible to way to reconcile the file formats without also reconciling the applications! Incuding feature sets and layout engines!!!! Impossible!! The real game is the transition from client/server to the emerging client/Web-Stack/server model. MS is the "client" in client/server. No way were they about to give that up without a plan to control the transition of MSOffice documents to the emerging client/Web-Stack/server model. They sought to fully control the formats, protocols and API's of this new model. ISO handed it to them. The thing to watch is the MSOffice SDK where one can find a very cool OOXML <> XAML converter. XAML is totally proprietary, but "web ready". Meaning, MSOffice is a "web ready" application. It's just that the web readiness is 100% MS .NET-Silverlight. The great transition to client/Web-Stack/server is now on. Thanks to ISO. All this ODF stuff is just background noise designed to quiet the anti t
Gary Edwards

Meshing the desktop into the cloud | Software as Services | ZDNet.com - 0 views

blogs.zdnet.com/SAAS

mesh soa wainwright web20 woa

shared by Gary Edwards on 25 Apr 08 - Cached
  • Live Mesh brings that to life, as product director Mike Zintel explains on the brand new Live Mesh blog: “[It] blend[s] the web, Windows and other computing endpoints in a way that preserves the ‘it just works’ feel of the web with seamless integration into my common workflows. The coolest thing about Live Mesh is how it smashes the abrupt mental switch that I have to make today as I move between being ‘on the web’ and ‘in an application’.” At first glance, that may seem a perfectly reasonable and innocuous statement — and indeed it is, if you take a Web-centric view of the world — but coming out of Microsoft, it’s dynamite. Instead of seeing the Web as an extension of the desktop, it includes the desktop as part of the continuum of the Web. Where then does the application sit? Not on the desktop, or on any identifiable server machine, but simply in the mesh. In other words, it becomes a service, capable of running anywhere in the cloud, including on the desktop.
  • “The core philosophy is to make it easy to manage information in a world where people have multiple computing experiences (i.e. PCs and applications, web sites, phones, video games, music and video devices) that they use in the context of different communities (i.e. myself, family, work, organizations) …” “At the core of Mesh is [the] concept of a customer’s mesh, or collection of devices, applications and data that an individual owns or regularly uses.
Gary Edwards

A reminder of why Microsoft wanted Yahoo | Tech news blog - CNET News.com - 0 views

www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9943247-7.html

google microsoft msoffice web-platform windows

shared by Gary Edwards on 14 May 08 - Cached
  • When Windows has a real rival, Microsoft has real problems. As Blodget notes, there are caveats: The unofficial Office monopoly should give Microsoft breathing room for a few more years. But even that could be threatened as Google's more-affordable Web applications improve. This storm has been gathering for years. In 2005, we wrote a piece at News.com about Google's longterm threat to Microsoft. The impetus was a major management shuffle at MSN, but we had fun pulling out some old Microsoft memos about now-defunct Netscape in the early days of the World Wide Web. My favorite was a note written in 1995 by Microsoft engineer Ben Slivka describing a "nightmare" scenario for his company. "The Web...exists today as a collection of technologies that deliver some interesting solutions today, and will grow rapidly in the coming years into a full-fledged platform (underlined for emphasis in the original memo) that will rival--and even surpass--Microsoft's Windows," Slivka wrote. Microsoft didn't pay too much attention to the warning. Ten years later, another internal memo put a name to that nightmare--Google. Now Blodget has advanced that nightmare scenario a few more steps with his analysis.
  • Gary Edwards on 14 May 08
     
    Review of Henry Blodgett's predicitve analysis that within the next year Google's search revenue will surpass Microsoft's revenue from Windows. MS still has MSOffice and the Exchange/SharePoint/SQL Server juggernaut. But Blodgett fearlessly predicts the beginning of the end fo rthe great monopolist. Great quote from Microsoft's Ben Slovika.
Gary Edwards

Google Search To Surpass Size of Microsoft Windows in 2009 - Silicon Alley Insider - 0 views

www.alleyinsider.com/...e_of_microsoft_windows_in_2009

google microsoft msoffice web-platform

shared by Gary Edwards on 14 May 08 - Cached
  • Google's search business will pass Microsoft's Windows business by early next year (at the latest). Good thing Microsoft has another huge, wildly profitable monopoly: Office. Add that to the calculation, and Microsoft can breathe easy for a few more years: GOOGLE SEARCH vs MICROSOFT WINDOWS + OFFICEQuarterly Revenue Q3 2006-Q1 2008 Of course, Google's visible in that Microsoft rearview mirror, too--especially now that it offers a product that is directly competitive with Office. And then there's the most depressing comparison (from Microsoft's perspective). After 13 years of heavy investment, frequent doubling down, and--until recently--a browser monopoly, here's how Microsoft's online business is doing relative to Google's search business. Remember: Google was founded four years after Microsoft launched its online business, and Microsoft's search business is just a tiny piece of Microsoft Online.
  • The "Windows monopoly+Office monopoly=Microsoft" story was absolutely true 10 years ago, but less so now. 1. It looks as if the "Office" revenue figures are coming from MSFT's reported revenues in the Business segment. That's not all Office. Based on what they've said at the last few Financial Analyst Meetings, Exchange is approaching $2B/year, SharePoint is about $1B/year, and Dynamics (formerly Microsoft Business Solutions) is more than $1B per year. I also know that Project has been a $1B/year business for a long time (believe it or not), and products such as Comms Server and Visio contribute around $500m/year. Margins on all these products are lower than on Office, but most (not Comms Server) are profitable. 2. In addition to all the non-Office products that compose its Business segment as mentioned above, the Server and Tools business (Windows Server, SQL Server) is profitable (30% margins) and growing revenues average of 15% for the last six years. Not monopoly, but a good business. Look at all these stats together, and seems like they should get out of search and advertising and sell off (or scale back to maintenance mode) most of the consumer online sites, focusing instead on hosted business apps--they're already doing it with Exchange and SharePoint, why not Office? If somebody's going to canniblize their "real" business, it might as well be them.
  • Gary Edwards on 14 May 08
     
    The Henry Blodgett article comparing Google and Microsoft. Excellent source!
  • Paul Merrell on 18 May 08
     
    Blodgett calls Windows a "natural monopoly," a term derived from the science of economics. But the view of Windows as a natural monopoly blinks past more than a few facts: [i] the monopoly at all times was firmly rooted in government-granted monopoly created by copyrights, patents, and trade secrets; [ii] even the 3.x versions depended mightily on antitrust violations involving DR DOS; and [iii] the dependence on antitrust violations to build, maintain, and extend the monopoly continue to this day. I see scant basis for labeling Windows as a "natural monopoly." Economic theory may blink past the antitrust issues on free market principles, but it may not blink past the government grants of monopolies in similar fashion..
1 - 14 of 14
Showing 20▼ items per page