martes, 11 de octubre de 2016

Microsoft does not Need Windows Anymore? Interesting idea...

Eric Knorr of Infoworld published an article in which he claims that Microsoft, moving its focus to the cloud, does not need Windows any longer.  Apart of trying to portray Microsoft as an open company (which it clearly is not), that idea makes me think of several interesting questions:

1.  If Microsoft does not need Windows anymore, why is it pushing Windows 10 so aggressively and in many cases using deceitful means?

2.  If Microsoft does not need Windows anymore, then users don't, either.  That's some happy news!  :D  Users should ditch that platform that its producer does not need nowadays. 

3.  If Windows is about 10 percent of Microsoft's revenue, there must be something hidden behind the aggressive Windows 10 push.  Microsoft wants something worth much more than that 10 percent.  What could that be?  :P

4.  Why would someone want to paint Microsoft as an open company that does not need its flagship product?

5.  If Microsoft does not need Windows any longer, does that mean that this time it will actually produce something innovative instead of simply buying popular software?

I guess the problem with Surface Pro 3 and the market share decrease of Windows 10 last month might be related to this idea of painting Microsoft as a problem-free company.

3 comentarios:

  1. Well... Windows OS indeed is a small part of Microsoft's revenue.

    I see pushing W10 as part of reducing costs: by migrating users to the new platform they can reduce maintenance of older OS services. Also with W10 Microsoft can learn more from its users through data collection and user habits learning. Its a marketing practice, though I won't argue that it seems untrustworthy/shady.

    The writer seems to argue that Microsoft doesn't need Windows as it doesn't represents a large income source. But still it is the main gateway for users to access their main assets, like SQL Server. Now they are opening more gates, but I doubt that businesses that have through all these years remained with MS products will change their servers' OS if they already have a Windows Server License. Specially if they have invested on developing their own tools to work alongside with MS (which is quite common).

    Personally, I am happy for .Net Core. However Visual Studio Core is nothing compared with the real IDE.

    I see all this as just branching out to new customers, but still a long way before being able to leave Windows behind.

    1. What Microsoft is doing makes sense (especially in the midst of its massive layoffs and little success in several areas), but what is still unclear is why the press, instead of reporting, slant facts to favor this company. Microsoft NEEDS Windows as much as those businesses you talk of need it; saying otherwise is just a plain lie.

    2. Hehe well the press usually "bend facts" (ehem... lies) xD Which is sad because as a consumer I like to be well informed before deciding over something. I think that article just wanted to be provocative. Personally I love what is happening, as both worlds start to merge and I don't see the market moving to either Full MS or Full Linux anytime soon.