Even as Microsoft continues with the most aggressive product rollout in its history with the launch of the Live series of hosted applications, it is showing no inclination to consider alternatives to its long-standing packaged software approach.
IBM's on-demand model is "crazy" and Open Source is "really a developer phenomenon" that does not stand comparison with "customer experience of Windows Live", said Charles Fitzgerald, Microsoft's general manager of platform strategy, last week.
In an interview with ZDNet UK, Fitzgerald said that there was no comparison between Microsoft Live, which offers on-demand features, and IBM's on-demand strategy.
"When people are talking about on-demand, I don't know whether they are talking about the crazy, IBM approach — "I'm going to host everybody's mainframe and there is nobody in the market who knows how to run a mainframe, so if we are going to preserve that business we are going to have to run it ourselves," said Fitzgerald. "Then my cable company talks about on-demand when I can video on-demand. It's not a super-useful term for me."
According to Fitzgerald, the real magic of Live "is that it will be a combination of client software, peer-to-peer interactions and cloud-based services so it is not any one of those — it is actually the mix of all those things".
Equally, Fitzgerald has no time for open source, which he claimed is not an end-user experience but "is really a developer phenomenon that speaks to infrastructure."
"With Windows Live and Office Live we are talking about customer experiences, whether it is a personal set of services for Windows Live or things that are aimed at helping people grow and manage their businesses," said Fitzgerald. "I doubt if you talk to users of Office Live that they have any interest in dorking around with source code. This is about customer experience rather than developer experience so it's largely irrelevant."
You can read the full text of Fitzgerald's interview here.
Talkback
More FUD from M$. The only future they see is windows through rose colored glasses.
Sounds like the guy has a screw loose, he definitely doesn't seem to have a clue about what the competition is doing, and it doesn't sound like he has looked at any open source offerings in the last 10 years.
I've been using various open source offerings for different tasks over the last 5 years and even though I am a consultant and developer, I am not interested in anaylsing source code, I use open source because it is easy to install, use and is cost efficient. Of the products I use, I have never looked at a single line of source code or needed to compile anything. The option is there if I need it, but if I just want to install the product and use it, I can.
If I had to fiddle with code I wouldn't bother, I need it to just work so that I can do my job. Some products are quicker and easier to install than the MS equivalents and need less configuration after installation.
It is time that MS stopped poo-pooing their opposition with 10 year old rhetoric. MS's comeptition has moved on in the last 10 years, in some cases their products and offerings are better than those from Microsoft. MS should work out how they are going to catch up before it is too late.
Oh PLEASE spare us another Microshaft user eXPerence. Gee these dodos can't even update their sales talk. They are still talking about the "user expereince" -- the exact same B$ they told us when they rolled out XP. I have heard that babble so many times I think I'm going to do "tune in and drop out". (The 60s still rule). It is time to gove M$ the shaft!!!!
Reminds me of the gibberish talked in a noisy pub after work on a Friday when everyone is well oiled. Name calling is about all they can muster when FUD fails. I doubt this Microsoft person has ever seen a mainframe, let alone understand one. Their recurring theme is that no one out there is capable of understanding anything that doesn't have a Microsoft label and if you understand Microsoft products, you are a total ignoramous about anything else and doomed to remain so. Nice to know your vendor thinks you are certified stupid.
Just anouther propaganda techniqe.
Just because you can have a programmer customise a part of a program to better suite your needs doesn't mean that you have to.
Today, one doesn't have to compile anything. It's all done for you. With the neweast releases and stability among the whole distributuion I might add.
http://www.ubuntu.com
Open source can be an advantage even to end users.
The fact that a program's source code is available for virtually anyone to hack on can give software a longer useful lifespan.
How many times has a commercia vendor dropped a product even though you found it useful?
How many times has a software company forced you to upgrade a product with features you don't like or need in order to obtain continued support (leaving the users of older versions effectively abandoned)?
Users of similar software that is open source do not have that fear of abandonment.
Even if the original author(s) lose interest in the software, it's perfectly possible for someone else to pick up the reigns and fix bugs or add new features.
If a product goes in a direction someone doesn't like, the project can be forked into two different projects, with each one going in the direction that its authors deem best.
How cool is that?
What Windows Live and Office Live mean is simply that you will need to buy new Microsoft software to make use of some special online Microsoft tools, and that you will need high-speed Internet access to make use of all those new softwares you bought. Then, you look at Google thinking about providing an online office suite based on Openoffice, it will allow you to do whatever you want with all online advantages, without needing to install anything but a decent Web browser, without paying anything more than what you want and what you really need. Personally, between paying twice for something I might need in part and paying only what I need other what I can already do for free, excuse me but I prefer saving my cash.
Yes! there can be no comparison with the live versions of office and Windows. I mean Linux doesn't have the security holes that Windows does due to it's architecture. Being that you don't have to download a thousand and one service packs just to have a secure and stable OS. Furthermore Open office doen't have the security holes that office does either.
So here's a question that all who are pondering trying out the MS live apps... If the packaged stuff you've used in the past has a ton of security holes in it. Then how many more will you get with Microsoft applications that require an Internet connection in order to function? Also, remember that Microsoft tried bundling various applications together into Windows before, and ended up with a massive bloatware that crashes all the time, and had extra security holes in it.
Try a flavor of UNIX for a change folks. I guarantee that you'll love it, and never want to turn back!
Sales talk to convince people who have too much money anyway to see things as certain sales people would like to see things. However, ignorance is not an excuse for incompetance.
Please - Google News beta works better than windows live - I can't get it to run on a windows machine - the strange thing is works on a linux box.
m$ is a financial co presently trying to survive (in) the software industry. If it hadnt those B$$$ really wonder if it would survive one single year.
Great words! :) I have no time for dorking with source code, leave it to entusiasts and give me reliable, ready-to-use products from the box!
Who wants to be in the pants of a jige of t first instance:
Business as usual.
Bullshit! Open Source software is very usefull