Pender's Blog

Blog archive

Gartner Analysts Down on Microsoft's Future

Everybody wants to douse the Windows 7 fire with cold water. Last week, it was a couple of Gartner know-it-alls, who grilled Stephen Elop, president of Microsoft's Business Division, on whether Microsoft's products still had any value and whether the company was in for a bleak future.

Elop, of course, used a lot of words but said essentially nothing, which is the primary form of communication in Redmond. (It is, perhaps, a trick the Microsoft folks learned from the French, who can use their lovely language to make totally nonsensical sentences sound like a Mozart piano concerto.) Anyway, the Gartner inquisitors fired the same old questions and accusations at Elop as everybody is shooting at Microsoft these days. Check out this blurb from the story linked above:

"[Gartner's Neal] MacDonald said that the upcoming 2010 versions of Windows, Office, Exchange, SharePoint and their respective online versions represent more of the same, one-size-fits-all applications that Microsoft has offered in the past. He predicted that people will not be willing to migrate to these new versions because there are so many new competitors offering commoditized versions that are either free or that come at a very low cost.

"[Gartner's Brian] Gammage agreed, saying that customers are now asking where the business value is in Microsoft's products, especially when there are multiple options available."

Now, we're not saying that the Gartner guys are wrong. We're big cloud proponents here at RCPU, and we feel that Azure in particular and a coherent cloud strategy in general will play absolutely critical roles in keeping Microsoft relevant -- and possibly dominant -- in IT in the years to come. (Already, Amazon is launching a major cloud initiative aimed at Microsoft.) But the cloud isn't yet the de facto choice of IT platform for most businesses, especially not for larger ones, and it likely won't be for a while. It's still a developing model, and Microsoft seems determined, after a few missteps, to be at the forefront of its development.

Also, we're acutely aware, as we've said here many times, that competition facing Microsoft's core products is arguably stronger than ever -- from Linux servers and desktops to cloud-based applications and operating systems to even the Mac, which has started to find a niche in the enterprise. So, again, we're not saying that Gartner's grillers are wrong when they talk about Microsoft's products.

We're saying (again) that they're missing the point. The real strength behind Microsoft is the best and almost certainly one of the largest partner ecosystems in the software industry. (Is it the largest? Probably, but we haven't checked lately.)

Why go with Windows over Linux or with a Microsoft stack over something from a competitor? Because there probably isn't another software company with the breadth and depth of expertise available that Microsoft can offer through its partner channel. And, in the long run, support and maintenance -- and not just license fees -- cost money.

Microsoft's products, we believe, are better than the Gartner folks make them out to be. In fact, word is that Windows 7's launch could lead to a jump in PC sales, which kind of deflates the whole Microsoft-is-irrelevant argument, at least for now. But you, partners, are what keep Microsoft ahead of everybody else in the software industry, and that's what the naysayers don't understand. You do, though, and hopefully your customers do, too.

What's your take on the future of Microsoft? Is it headed for a dark era, or will it stay on top? Send your opinion to lpender@rcpmag.com.

Posted by Lee Pender on October 28, 2009 at 11:20 AM


Reader Comments

Wed, Oct 28, 2009 Maxton Boston

I personally lived through the boom and bust of Exodus Data Centers (they were a designated national information asset at one time) and saw 4,000+ customers with their systems inside Exodus secure data centers scramble to find new solutions when Exodus filed for bankruptcy in 2001/2002. Who in their right minds would put their future in something called a "cloud" - just another slick marketing name for an outsourced data center - especially when you have no control over the real data security - the staff running the place remotely from India, Pakistan and or China, and who really controls your data and your ongoing business operations? The term "Cloud" is just the current buzzword flavor of the year and the only thing worse would be a "Virtual Cloud". Try to get Jeff Bezos to give you a tour of his data centers aka "Clouds" and see the response - not going to happen even for a major shareholder as access is strictly on a need to know basis. All prudent business managers need to know who really controls their data and access to it. The answer ??? will get them fired by their BOD.

Wed, Oct 28, 2009 Barry Cohen NYC

I think the need to stir controversy misses the big point. Microsoft' Server products, especially, are too large and complex. They offer features and functionality that's not needed by many customers, require a large investment in infrastructure to support and higher skill sets to manage than in the past. In years past, one of Microsoft's large touted strength was the lower cost of skilled MS administrators. That's no longer really true. Another market strength was that their products were easy to manage, regardless of skill levels, and that's no longer really true or at least not in the competitive sense. OTOH, it appears that the latest generations of Microsoft's servers are becoming more modular, so organizations can install what they really need, omitting features and functions they don't need. Of course if MS went further in modularizing the server prices there would be complaints about too complex an SKU list. The price of being dominant is you can't always win the PR battle.

Wed, Oct 28, 2009 Allen.Morgan NJ

Like you say. Microsoft has been getting a beating lately, and perhaps will alot of revenge for the previous years arrogance. But in the last 4 years Microsoft has learned the lesson and has build a great foundation in its current products (ex: .Net, Asp, New Os looks well or at least better built, Sql, ect). Who else has the breath and depth of product for the enterprise. Not even IBM, not HP, not even Oracle. Believe me, I'm not a Redmond fan, but don't count them out. Microsoft is still King of the Hill.

Add Your Comments Now:

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above