It's an interesting statement against Apple that Google considers Microsoft a competitor and Apple isn't. This is kind of weird because I thought that Apple was actually Google's biggest competitor with the iPhone going against Android.
Or is maybe Google just taking the classic Linux user approach where they are just against Microsoft, no matter what they do? And in that case, maybe Microsoft should just wholeheartedly accept Google so that Google has to be against itself!
But I guess it just comes down to CXOs making decisions without the understanding of the reality of what goes on beneath them. Totally not understanding what the ramifications of their actions really are, you know, just like the U.S. Congress.
Hopefully this just didn't transpire because Google is so cheap that they are going to hoard the $10M or so that they would be paying Microsoft for licenses.
As many complaints that I have concerning Microsoft, Google, et al, won't catch them for years to come, if ever. Not only do they dominate the marketplace, the interoperability between their vast array of products is almost profound.
Linux is for geeks. Macs are too expensive. Google operates in the cloud market, which won't be trusted by most businesses for years to come.
Microsoft is for business. And since business do the overwhelming amount of computer training, everyone knows Microsoft. It will continue to dominate for at least another generation or two.
FYI, I'm implementing Small Business Server 2008 w/Office Communications Server 2007 R2. What a sweet package for the Small Business. It has everything they'll ever need for IT, and it's unified.
What I have seen at some tech companies is a big divide between the technical/production side of the company and the business side -- when it comes to what machines they need. The technical side uses whatever they need: Windows/Linux/Mac, etc. But at the business end, while the PC dominates, the Mac has gained a cool status and can usually support the business end, when they are using Microsoft Office for the Mac -- there's that pesky Microsoft again. But, Macs are far more expensive than a PC with Windows, with no added cost/benefit (except for the cool status). I guess Google feels the need to spend the extra cash on Macs for the business staff.
But do we really think GE or another enterprise will wake up and say to themselves: "Gee, let's spend all that extra cash on more expensive Macs." The cost benefit is just not there. Maybe someday, but not yet.
As I understand it, the Google hack was successful because they were still running IE6 on some of their systems. Upgrading to 7 or 8 was recommended long ago because of security issues with 6. And, yes, it was Gmail that was hacked. Is that thing out of Beta yet?
No, Microsoft isn't under pressure from Google's drop of Microsoft products, nor by the iPad. If anything, Microsoft's cell phone market is practically dead. Windows Mobile 7 is taking far too long to be released and other cell phone OSs, particularly the iPhone and Android OSs, are grabbing a huge portion of the market share. This is where Google and Apple are taking a bite out of Microsoft. Windows Mobile 7 is going to have to be spectacular for Windows Mobile phones to come back with a vengeance.
The last company to take such a bold stand with MS was Netscape and that did not end well. Before that was IBM and they seem to have since joined MS rather than fight them.
Share your thoughts with the editors of this newsletter! Write to firstname.lastname@example.org. Letters printed in this newsletter may be edited for length and clarity, and will be credited by first name only (we do NOT print last names or e-mail addresses).