Steve Ballmer's Wiseguy Name and Other Reader Reactions

Before we get to Ballmer's mafia handle, let's look at a few reader e-mails on other topics.

Colin quite rightly called your editor out for having been too lazy to look up the old magazine cover with Apple's logo and the word "Pray" on it that we referenced last week. Turns out it was Wired, not Upside, that ran the cover -- and it turns out that the cover's quite famous, as you'll see from Colin's note:

"I have to say, you were almost asking for this...I put 'apple pray' (without the quotation marks) into Google, and return No. 5 was: http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2006/03/70538.

"Which led me to http://www.magazine.org/Editorial/Top_40_Covers/ [#33] and http://www.magazine.org/Editorial/40-40-covers/33b.jpg."

Well done, Colin, and thanks.

On Vista activation, suddenly an important topic in Redmond, apparently, Mark says that he's had just about enough -- and he thinks that others might have, too:

"Having been a mostly loyal Windows shop since Windows 3.11, before that DOS going back to version 3.2, I am happy that each version of Windows subsequently released gets better and more stable (with the exception of Millennium Edition; that was a complete disaster!).

"Starting with Windows XP the activation issues have been forcing me to look into the viability of Linux as opposed to Windows. The latest changes in Vista, both OS features/enhancements and increased WGA requirements are actively accelerating my movement away from Microsoft and to the alternatives, which are becoming more viable with each passing day.

"I believe that as soon as Linux can be installed and used as 'easily' as Windows, that will mark the first serious landmark in the downfall of MS Windows. Techies deal with 'stuff' every day; for us, install problems are not insurmountable. Windows has fewer and fewer install issues as time progresses, but Linux is catching up. That day is coming, and I believe sooner rather than later. Driver issues, lack of compatibility with existing software, annoying pop-ups asking to confirm everything one does -- these are all factors that will quietly cause the trickle of defectors to become a roaring tsunami."

We wonder, Mark, whether Redmond hears the waves starting to pound on the shore.

OK, enough of the serious stuff. We told you this week that Microsoft's Wiseguys are about to face a RICO charge (well, lawsuit) and wondered what you thought Steve Ballmer's mafia name might be -- if the mafia actually existed the way it does in "The Sopranos."

We got some great suggestions, the first from Tom: "La Cosa Visto, and his name is 'Balls.' Or shall we just call him 'Big Cahones'?"

Jon, who's in serious danger of becoming a serial e-mailer, chimed in with: "How about 'The emBallmer'?"

Pretty good, both of them. William went with something that makes Ballmer sound a bit more like a '50s rock star than a mafioso, but it certainly fits: "How about 'Screamin' Stevie Ballmer,' for his onstage antics?"

And Chris went with a more violent theme: "Steve 'The Crusher' Ballmer or Steve 'IronFist' or 'The Fist' Ballmer."

Good entries all. But our winner this week comes from Joel, who plays Ballmer's job title off nicely with a Bobby Knight-esque rampage for which the Microsoft chief has become dubiously famous: "Doesn't it have to be 'The Chair-Man'?"

You know, Joel, it really does.

Thanks to everybody for your e-mails on all sorts of topics. Keep them coming to [email protected], and don't forget to get in arguments and call each other names (hey, I know how this Internet stuff works) in the comments section of each entry on the blog site at RCPmag.com. I might even join in from time to time.

Spring is here...have a great weekend!

Posted by Lee Pender on May 11, 20070 comments


How Smart Is Business Intelligence?

As we do sometimes here at RCPU, we're going to throw a topic completely open to you, the faithful reader. In other words, we'll give you a bit of news and just let you run with it in e-mail form or as commentary on the blog. (Yes, this means that we're going to mainly keep our mouths shut on this issue -- for now.)

We did this last summer with Windows Genuine Advantage and got tremendous feedback. So here we go again. This week, it's time to Get Smart, as the topic is business intelligence (clever, huh?).

Here are your bits of news: Microsoft and SAP both made small BI acquisitions this week, with Redmond buying a Java reporting tool called OfficeWriter and SAP snapping up OutlookSoft, which makes applications for budgeting and financial forecasts. Incidentally, we're pleased to see that both giants bought companies that use SmashedTogether words with a capital letter in the middle as their names. We ReallyLike CompanyNames like that. WellDone, Microsoft and SAP.

And lest we forget, last month, BI player Business Objects (two separate words) announced that it would buy OutlookSoft competitor Cartesis (and its somewhat disappointing one-word name).

These smaller acquisitions come in the wake of a really big one, Oracle's multibillion buyout of Hyperion. Obviously the big guys in BI -- Cognos also comes to mind in that category along with the aforementioned players -- are snapping up smaller vendors in a pretty textbook case of market consolidation. And, obviously, somebody thinks that there's money and opportunity in bringing corporate information to the desktops of nontechnical people, especially executives, in a clean and simple way -- which is what BI is supposed to do.

Microsoft is, not surprisingly, becoming a very serious BI player, although reviews of Redmond's effort in the area are a bit mixed thus far. Check out RCP magazine columnist Joshua Greenbaum's comprehensive take here.

What I want to know, though, is what BI is doing for you. If you're selling it (especially from Microsoft), how's it going? How's demand? Do customers understand the benefits of BI, and are you profiting from selling and deploying it? If you're using it (as we have a lot of nonpartner IT folks who read the newsletter), is it delivering everything you expected? Do you consider it a critical part of your enterprise technology strategy?

Send me your thoughts at [email protected]. We'll take the best of your e-mails this week and the next and run them a week from Friday (on May 18). And thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Posted by Lee Pender on May 10, 20071 comments


VMware on the Vista Bandwagon

Here come those third parties Microsoft has been waiting for on Vista. Virtualization kingpin VMware has released Workstation 6, the first of its virtualization products to support Vista.

Posted by Lee Pender on May 10, 20070 comments


New Patches Coming Today

It's Patch Tuesday, and seven critical patches are on their way hot and fresh from Redmond, delivered right to your door (or browser, we suppose).

Posted by Lee Pender on May 08, 20070 comments


Microsoft Buys Mobile Advertising Firm

With a deal for 24/7 Real Media still possibly in the cards, Microsoft went ahead and snapped up a French mobile advertising firm this week. Redmond didn't disclose terms of the deal.

Posted by Lee Pender on May 04, 20070 comments


Redmond Wrestles With Office Security

The developers of Microsoft Office 2007 are confident in their product's security, and some improvement could trickle down to Office 2003. Still, that doesn't keep them from locking down Word and Excel, which are typical targets of malware.

Posted by Lee Pender on May 02, 20070 comments


This Week in Reader E-Mails

OK, so we already snuck a few in on you with the last entry. Well, here are some more. RCPU got an absolute bumper crop this week, so we'll run a few now and save the rest for next week. To those who took time to write, we offer our thanks, as always.

On Microsoft's offer of $3 Windows to students in developing nations, Mackey says it's a great idea:

"I host foreign exchange students, and they tell me that most of the OSes are pirated and cost very little (the cost that malware brings with it does not matter to them). If they have a chance to get a legitimate copy, they would pay the $3 even though they can get Linux free. Hopefully, this will put some of the pirates out of business and slow the malware."

And Nafees writes to us from Pakistan, where he says folks will be thrilled to get their hands on legitimate software almost for free:

"I am a student and also working in a textile firm. Most of the people in Pakistan use pirated copies of Windows and every other software like Microsoft Office because, as you know, it's a poor country, so people can't afford $150 Windows or more costly office software. It will be a great step for Microsoft to help and motivate people to use legal and genuine software for just $3. It will help to create awareness and give confidence to a lot of young future IT professionals. You ask how people can buy $300 computers for $3 Windows. Let me inform you that most of the people in our country use old branded computers, which are imported to most of the European countries in containers. You can buy these computers for only $50, and most of the students use these computers. So I am glad that Microsoft is giving us an opportunity to use legal software and we'll not have to bear the shame of piracy and illegal software anymore."

And we're glad that you took the time to write, Nafees. This is the first e-mail we can remember getting from Asia, so it's good to see that our global influence is growing. As is Microsoft's, we suppose.

We got a couple of rapid-fire e-mails (seriously, minutes after the newsletter went out and not more than a couple of hours after the blog post went up) about Apple's juicy little stock scandal.

Brad suspects that former CFO Fred Anderson might have turned state's evidence on Steve Jobs:

"Suppose Fred Anderson was looking to make a deal, and offered to implicate Steve Jobs."

Brad, anything is possible, and nothing would surprise us. Of course, just as they were on "Dragnet," all suspects are innocent until proven guilty. (And, in this case, Jobs isn't even a "suspect," and Anderson slipped quietly into that fold between guilt and innocence by "settling" with the SEC. Ah, corporate justice.)

Colin, though, says that Apple might have much bigger problems than just looming scandals:

"More important than issues of fiscal oversight, you raise (once again, for Apple fans) the question of succession planning. Who can replace Jobs, and sustain Apple's mastery of the consumer IT market and, maybe more importantly, the public markets?

"Ever since U.S. v. Microsoft from '98-2000, the mother ship has had Ballmer as successor. Jack Welch made succession planning a very public process at GE, well before it was necessary. Most major corporations, and even some sovereign nations (in place of democratic elections, mind you) exercise succession planning well before the need hits them in the face.

"Except Apple (and Oracle, of course). Maybe this options mini-crisis is no more a threat to Jobs' tenure than his cancer. But as time ticks on, you have to wonder if Apple will weather a leadership storm -- and it will come -- with the same dexterity and class they have wielded in consumer tech and electronics market over the last 10 years."

We do wonder, Colin, and we thank you for your thoughts. Thanks again to all who took time to write. Keep those e-mails on just about any topic pouring in to [email protected]. And enjoy your weekend!

Posted by Lee Pender on April 27, 20070 comments


Friday Feedback: Readers on Protecting IP, Microsoft Search and Vista, Vista, Vista

We kick off this week's Friday reader feedback with a message from frequent contributor Robin about Microsoft's pending legal problems in Japan and, more specifically, about how companies should protect their intellectual property from the hungry beast that Redmond can be. Robin has some tips for partners on his Web site, and here's a taste of what he has to say:

"General policy: Focus on the 'what' your product does, rather than the 'how' it does it. Don't be flattered or bullied into over-broad disclosure, even if they say they are talking to the competition. Stick to the business value of your product and how the features support that business value.

"Don't let your engineers talk to their engineers by themselves -- engineers love to brag about how smart they are while encouraging brainstorming on creative ways the larger company could monetize an investment in the product. You may still get screwed, but at least you'll have the satisfaction of knowing you made them work."

Mike, another friend of RCPU, weighed in this week on Microsoft's misguided search efforts. It appears as though Mike really has been reading RCPU:

"A simple question (perhaps) on MS's bid for DoubleClick: If they truly wanted it, why would they merely match Google's offer? If I'm selling anything, a product or a service, I will go with the first of equal bids or to the highest bid. Matching Google's offer basically ensured they wouldn't win the offer. So, now the complicated question: What was their true motivation? If it was to be used as support for their antitrust suit, give them a box of tissues and be done with it. Google kicked their tail on search -- accept it and move on.

"Maybe Microsoft ought to give up the pursuit of world domination -- it didn't work for Genghis Kahn, Napoleon, Hitler or Caesar -- and focus on their core business. They should make sure any new operating systems have value to the consumer as well as businesses (big and small), integrate well with third-party software – including, and perhaps especially, security -- and are genuinely needed. The more Microsoft tries to be all things to all people, the more people will resist. Not to impugn Vista, but most people simply don't need it. I don't want it at home and I work for a company with more than 20,000 employees nationally; Vista isn't a blip on the radar screen. And they've already announced its alleged successor. One sure way to open the door for customers to start considering other alternatives is to keep trying to give them something they don't need or that lacks inherent value. If that's not a red light in Redmond, it sure ought to be."

Speaking of Vista, which we always seem to be doing here, we got a few more e-mails this week that tipped the scale even further toward the negative side of things regarding the new operating system. Theresa writes:

"I cannot recommend Vista to my clients as their third-party line of business applications have not certified their apps to run on Vista. The only hard date I have gotten from any of these vendors is first quarter 2008. I am still dealing with software vendors that are preventing me from upgrading my clients to IE7. Microsoft would do better to spend some effort on seeing why the software vendors are having so much difficulty making their applications work on Vista."

William is becoming fed-up with Microsoft altogether:

"As a former mainframe software specialist and now just a retired end user, my attitude is moving toward giving up on Windows. If I have to buy new hardware, now may be the time to try Apple. The learning curve from XP to Apple can't be that different than from XP to Vista. Microsoft may drive the end user community into Apple's camp."

And Bryan minces no words:

"I had Window 95, 98, 2000 and now XP. Each was a great improvement and I knew that going from what I had to what I was getting made the upgrades well worthwhile. I don't see that now. My copy of XP runs great. The only times I get blue screens (actually my PC just reboots, then explains the error once booted) is when I have a bad piece of hardware. When a piece of software crashes, I can use 'ctrl-alt-del' and get that app closed, then continue with my work.

"I can run for days under heavy load without rebooting. An example of what I'll have as a heavy load might be like this: doing Web design, I'll have Photoshop, FrontPage, Adobe Audition, Firefox, Internet Explorer, Opera Browser, SnagIt, Windows Media Player, MS Word, Adobe Acrobat and maybe a couple others, sometimes while downloading with Newsbin Pro at a rate of 4.5MBPS. Then, about once a day, I'll close all of them to burn what I've downloaded to a DVD; then open everything back up and continue to work. I reboot maybe twice a week.

"What I'm saying is that I have no reason to upgrade to Vista. I'll hold off until I can't get any support for XP. Even then, I'll look for an alternative to Vista, maybe Linux."

Bryan, you're obviously not alone.

My thanks, as always, goes to everybody who wrote this week. Please keep sending any thoughts you have about anything in the newsletter to [email protected], and enjoy your weekend.

Oh, and Boston-area readers, please don't forget about our upcoming reader breakfast. This is your chance to see your editor with hair (as the picture on the RCPmag.com Web site is more than a year old -- and possibly the worst ever taken of me). We'll get back to you on a location, but the date is set for June 19. We hope to see you there! As for everybody else, please keep an eye out -- we might just be coming to your town in the future.

Posted by Lee Pender on April 20, 20070 comments


Redmond Releases 'Orcas' Beta, Plans More Developer Tools

Beta 1 of "Orcas," the next version of Visual Studio is now available to the Skittles and Mountain Dew crowd. Microsoft has a few other tools in the works for developers, as well.

Posted by Lee Pender on April 20, 20070 comments


Microsoft Plants Web Service Seeds in New Server Farm

Somebody -- this time, Fortune magazine -- has trotted out the old Microsoft-is-becoming-IBM line again, suggesting that Google is rapidly making Redmond look like a dinosaur (or a chicken, depending on your views on evolution).

While it's true that Google is running rings around its more elderly competitor in the search business, and that Steve Ballmer and friends don't always seem entirely sure of what to do with this new-fangled Software as a Service thing, at least the aging heavyweight in Redmond isn't standing still in the face of its younger challengers. (Microsoft did recently offer to help ISVs with their SaaS apps, though).

Witness this week's opening of the company's largest server farm yet, a massive complex spanning the size of seven soccer fields that will hold the geek gear that will provide the back-end for all sorts of Web-based services, from (according to the article linked) Xbox Live to Dynamics CRM Live. (One would hope that there would be little chance of mixing those two applications up, thereby sending the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles game to befuddled sales reps and throwing order-tracking capabilities to frustrated gamers. But we digress.)

There's another massive center in the works near San Antonio that will cost Redmond a half-a-billion dollars. Actually, that's approximately the same amount of money that Microsoft spent to advertise Vista. Let's hope the data center turns out to be a better investment.

Whatever Microsoft's ultimate SaaS strategy is, it's clear that the company is spending some serious money to implement it. Whether it can execute on successfully providing "live," non-packaged applications is another question -- one we won't be able to answer until we see the crops these new server farms yield.

We're still happily taking your thoughts on Microsoft's SaaS strategy. Keep sending 'em our way at [email protected].

Posted by Lee Pender on April 18, 20070 comments


Microsoft Goes Crying to the Government Over Google

If your weekend was a washout, just keep in mind that it could have been worse. You could work for the search team at Microsoft.

Redmond's flailing search ambitions took a major hit late last week when Google announced that it intended to spend $3.1 billion to buy DoubleClick, the provider of online advertising-management technology that Microsoft also coveted. (The worst part about the whole deal for Microsoft seems to be that, according to the Times of London, old bean, Microsoft matched Google's offer -- but DoubleClick turned Redmond down. Ouch.)

So Microsoft, having lost what many observers considered to be its final opportunity to make up ground on Google in search -- unless you believe, as Mary Jo Foley suggests, that this whole thing is playing right into Microsoft's hands -- is turning to the last refuge of the desperate company: the antitrust complaint.

Oh, yes. Drink in the irony. Microsoft and friends -- including AT&T, AOL and Yahoo! -- want antitrust regulators to look into the Google-DoubleClick deal. (Microsoft's own official statement is here.) Check out what oft-quoted Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith had to say about the whole thing in this Seattle Times article:

"By putting together a single company that will control virtually the entire market...Google will control the economic fuel of the Internet."

Uh, Brad, are you sure you want to be the one to bring this up? Do we even have to point out the attendant irony here, especially in light of current events? Probably not. But we will say this: We spend a lot of time here at RCPU defending Microsoft from Europe's voracious antitrust regulators, and we're very disappointed to see Microsoft taking the same sad tack that so many of its competitors have taken: running to the government when it gets beaten in a market. To paraphrase Anthony Michael Hall's line in Pirates of Silicon Valley, Google got the loot, Steve. (In this case, of course, the "Steve" is Ballmer, not Jobs...but we digress.) You bid for DoubleClick, and you lost. Heck, if the Times of London has its story straight, old chap, DoubleClick turned you down.

It's time to reevaluate Microsoft search -- and, actually, it has been for a while. Redmond needs to scale back on the search effort, develop technology internally or find some other way to compete. But please, Microsoft, don't go running to the government for protection. You, of all companies, should know better.

What do you think of Microsoft's search business now that Google has bought DoubleClick? Are you worried about the resources Redmond is sinking into search? Let me know at [email protected].

Posted by Lee Pender on April 17, 20070 comments


Microsoft Patches Flaws, Pushes Forefront

Maybe it's a little funny to see both messages at the same time. On one hand, there've been numerous news stories the past two weeks about Microsoft patching several critical security flaws in Windows and now looking into potential vulnerabilities in Office. At the same time, the company just announced a new enterprise marketing campaign for Forefront. (In this case, Redmond is using the "geek" factor to try to sell businesses on its new Forefront suite.)

We've talked about this before in RCP magazine, and the issue lives on: It has to be hard for Microsoft partners to sell Redmond's security applications when the company's reputation for securing its own products is so...well, let's say "mixed." And beyond that, Forefront actually takes the mound a few runs down in this situation: Already, on the anti-virus side, Windows Live OneCare has made a less-than-stellar debut, even by Redmond's own admission. We're not questioning Forefront's capabilities on the enterprise side, just Microsoft's credibility in launching itself as a security vendor.

After all, the best way for Microsoft to build credibility as a provider of security applications would be for it to better secure (primarily) Windows and Office. That's something it has, in general, not really done that bad a job of doing lately, especially considering the large number of attacks that focus on those products -- both of which are easy targets with their 90-plus percent market share. But, of course, the better Microsoft secures its own stuff, the more businesses (and consumers, for that matter) will wonder why Redmond is charging them extra for security applications rather than just making security more of a built-in part of the deal with the Microsoft stack than it already is. It's a nasty little Catch-22 that partners are going to have to face when selling Forefront. But you probably know that by now.

So, on the other hand, think about this: Security makes a lot more sense as a business for Microsoft to get into than, say, search. It's directly tied to Microsoft's bread and butter, Windows and Office, and despite the presence of fierce competition in the form of (former partners, and now "coopetitors") Symantec, Trend Micro, McAfee and others, there is no "security Google" that has a mortal lock on mindshare in the market. There's revenue there for the taking -- if Microsoft can find a way to not trip over its own reputation and leave customers feeling as though they're paying protection money. We suppose that's why marketing folks get paid the big bucks.

What has been your experience with selling or using Forefront so far? What do you think of Microsoft's position in the security market? Tell me at [email protected].

P.S.: Keep those e-mails rolling in. Friday is reader feedback day here at RCPU. And thanks to those who have already written about a variety of topics.

Posted by Lee Pender on April 12, 20070 comments