With the announced acquisition of Nokia’s mobile devices unit for $7.2 billion, Microsoft is positively plowing its way to becoming the devices and services company it feels it must become in order to survive.
But as it stands right now, there seems to be very little chance that Microsoft will survive as anything close to its present state. Microsoft is either beginning a journey that will see it split into at least two companies, or risking the alienation of its existing enterprise and smaller-business customers.
The inclusion of Nokia’s handset business into Microsoft makes sense when looked at from a consumer perspective. After all, both Apple and Google are already playing on variations of the same theme: IT companies that provide end-to-end services that are owned up and down the stack. Apple and Google own the software ecosystems and either own the hardware or, in Google’s case, licenses the software stack to hardware vendors so that Android phones are compatible enough to run Android apps.
Microsoft, which has long been the behemoth horizontal company the provided the operating system layer and some really valuable parts of the application layer to all sectors—consumers to enterprise—will not be expected to pivot 90 degrees to become a more vertically oriented end-to-end vendor.
Much has been said about Microsoft’s ability to make this pivot and become the third part of such a consumer-facing triad, particularly given the rampant non-success of Windows Phone devices in the market to date. But let’s assume, for a moment, that Microsoft can pull it off, and a more focused Nokia-Microsoft synergy actually starts to gain traction in the marketplace.
Here’s my question: where does that leave enterprise customers?
Bring Our Own What?
The message to enterprise customers and channel partners to date has been pretty straightforward: let’s move everything to the cloud. Running apps on Windows server? Move it to the Windows Azure cloud. Building docs and spreadsheets with Office? Migrate yourself right over to Office 365.
From Microsoft’s point of view, getting business customers aligned to the cloud is a better option. There’s money to be made and a cloud-services architecture fits much more neatly with the end-to-end business model they are shooting for than client-server architecture.
There are two big problems with that line of thinking. First, there are a lot of enterprises that are not entirely convinced that cloud is the way to go for them, even private clouds. Second—and even more troublesome—there are a lot of businesses who have spent years and millions of dollars building an IT support infrastructure that is centered around the client-server model. Asking them to stand by while Microsoft tries to pivot and hopefully does not leave them hanging for support or tries to shove unneeded solutions down their throat is a huge risk for Microsoft to take.
Recall, for a moment, how much resistance app developers and device makers are seeing to implement bring-your-own-device policies now. And that’s with mature software and devices that are selling like hotcakes. Microsoft will have to innovate like crazy to push past the business inertia that’s holding BYOD as a safe business process back.
The push to cloud services is especially ironic. For the past couple of years, Microsoft’s marketing team has had loads of fun taking potshots at Google Docs, deriding it in ads as Google’s attempt to “beta test” productivity services. Now, Microsoft is asking companies to forget all those points about security, stability and regulation compliance and trust Office 365 in the cloud anyway.
Microsoft is betting all of its future that enterprise customers will go along with these changes like willing sheep. That characterization is wildly inaccurate: businesses large and small demonstrated through their refusal to abandon Windows XP that just because Microsoft says something is cool and useful, doesn’t always make it so.
Windows 8 is even more of a mental hurdle, because anyone with half a brain can see this is Windows for devices and no one gets real work done on devices.
So, in all of that, where is the attraction for enterprises to stick with Microsoft?
Cleaving Microsoft Apart
I am not alone in this line of thinking. Since the Labor Day announcement of the Nokia buy, there have been a lot of rumors from people in and outside of Microsoft that foresee a day coming soon when Microsoft will have to split itself in two.
One company will carry the Devices group that includes the recently picked-up Nokia, as well as other device services like Xbox. Call this the “digital lifestyles” company.
The other company will be the “enterprise” company, which will hold the Windows Azure, Windows, Office and SharePoint businesses and anything else that faces business users.
Breaking up Microsoft into two entities will leave the enterprise company free to do what should have been going on all along: innovate for the business users, not the device users. Besides enabling such innovation, such a company would also ease the minds of IT managers who are now wondering how they will have to adapt to Microsoft’s continuing allegiance to devices and services.
Because there are a lot of services companies out there, and by pivoting to become another such service vendor, Microsoft has thrown the door wide open for competitors to step in and show nervous enterprise customers the services they have been doing all along, sometimes at a better price and with better results.
If Microsoft does not do something along these lines to assure enterprise customers it has their best interests at heart, then it will have effectively abandoned them to chase a dream many businesses are not yet ready to follow.
Microsoft is to learn the hard way that “a deal is a deal,” at least in the eyes of the European Union, by being forced to swallow a massive fine for breaching earlier promises made with the 27-nation bloc.
The software giant breached a settlement that it signed with the European Commission in 2009, which mandated that it display a “browser choice” screen on all existing and new PCs in the region.
Europe’s antitrust and competition chief, Joaquin Almunia, stressed the importance of maintaining the legally binding commitments.
“In 2009, we closed our investigation about a suspected abuse of dominant position by Microsoft due to the tying of Internet Explorer to Windows by accepting commitments offered by the company.”
He added: “Legally binding commitments reached in antitrust decisions play a very important role in our enforcement policy because they allow for rapid solutions to competition problems. Of course, such decisions require strict compliance. A failure to comply is a very serious infringement that must be sanctioned accordingly.”
A Microsoft spokesperson in Brussels said in an e-mail to ZDNet that the company takes “full responsibility for the technical error.” He added:
“We provided the Commission with a complete and candid assessment of the situation, and we have taken steps to strengthen our software development and other processes to help avoid this mistake — or anything similar — in the future.”
Read the full article: cnet
For decades, Microsoft Windows was the computer platform of choice — not just for the overhwelming majority of computer users, but also for a growing legion of malware creators. As the dominant computing platform, it offered the fattest, most lucrative target, and some of its fundamental architecture decisions made it vulnerable to many kinds of malware.
With the transition to the mobile era, Windows is no longer at the center of the computing universe — for users or for hackers. That role is now occupied by Android. According to Stephen Cobb, a distinguished security researcher for the IT security company ESET, “Android is like early Windows.” It’s now the locus for security attacks and prevention — even if it’s not getting as much attention in this regard as Windows used to.
Flying Under The Radar?
“There’s so much malware on Android, you’d think it would be a huge deal,” Cobb said. And the growth of is “huge,” he added, “both in the number of malware exploits and their increasing sophistication. The rate of growth in Android malware is impressive, and scary.”
At this week’s RSA conference in San Francisco, ESET did a live demo on Android, downloading an infected app that roots the phone and opens it up to whatever the attacker wants to do with it — including dumping out its entire contents in a few seconds over the Internet.
Why aren’t we hearing more about Android’s security problems? “It’s death by 1000 cuts,” Cobb said. Instead of emptying the bank accounts of infected users, the malware is more often used to for premium-rate SMS fraud against mobile carriers, “which isn’t bankrupting anyone immediately. They’re flying under the radar.”
“I don’t think the criminal underground is sophisticated enough that it is holding back,” Cobb said. It’s just that when a mobile platform is the target, “the model is many times a smaller attack — or you can look at it as part of a larger attack.”
Read the full article: readwrite