The Gates/Ozzie equation: (software + services) (servers = service)

The Gates/Ozzie equation: (software + services) (servers = service)

Summary: In September 2005, Bill Gates promoted the formula: server = services as part of the Microsoft Live rollout He described the server = services as follows: The architecture we are interested in we call server-equals-service, so that we will have the full Exchange capability that you can subscribe to, where we run it, or you can have it on-premise with the traditional licensing approach.  ...

SHARE:
TOPICS: Servers
8

In September 2005, Bill Gates promoted the formula: server = services as part of the Microsoft Live rollout He described the server = services as follows:

The architecture we are interested in we call server-equals-service, so that we will have the full Exchange capability that you can subscribe to, where we run it, or you can have it on-premise with the traditional licensing approach. 

...our services have started out as very inexpensive but not feature-rich. Our servers are very feature rich. So as we bring these things together, we give you the richness and also the choice of having it as server or as a service. And that is a very big deal to us. The place we are strongest in this today is in instant messenger, where the MSN Messenger is the service, and Live Communications Server is the server. So those things are very symmetrical.

At the same time, the concept of software + service appeared (see below), but took a back seat to server = service. Now Microsoft is emphasizing software + services. Recently, Chief Software Architect Ray Ozzie responded the chorus, led by Salesforce.com's Marc Benioff, that is predicting all software will be delivered as a service over the Web.

software service.jpg
 Bill Gates introduces Microsoft Live in September 2005

The shift toward services is complementary to the rich client model, Ozzie said, speaking to investors and reporters at the annual financial analyst meeting held in Redmond. With software + services, Windows Live is at the core, and it integrates with other services and existing desktop-based business software. It's the hybrid approach in which customers can choose what is hosted in the cloud or on premise, rich or lightweight client. However, most of Microsoft's core business software wasn't build with the Web in mind. The busy Microsoft developers must be cooking up a load of lightweight applications. Ozzie has said that some applications, especially those that require lots of disk access, aren't ideally suited as Web-based services. That may not always be the case, but for now it's accurate. Many Web-based applications are too slow and clunky for everyday use.

So, we have the Gates/Ozzie equation: (software + services) (servers = service). But what does it equal? The basic premise is that servers = service means that servers deliver services to any kind of device.  Software + services means that those services delivered by servers are made of software. Got it? Anyone else want to try to crack the code?

See also: Joe Wilcox comments on Ozzie's remarks...
 

Topic: Servers

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

8 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • A Crack for the Code

    There is a crack for MS code. Microsoft is looking to further
    monetize software development at a time when a threshold has
    been reached and our needs have been met. This is a money
    grab for license revenue from every corner, OS and App software
    for both the server and client. More importantly, software as
    service is an invitation to pay ad infenitum. Running an old
    system for the sake of economy won't be an option. Passing on
    upgrades won't be an option. This is a software enema.
    Harry Bardal
    • Our needs have been met?

      My, you have a very low threshold of needs. My needs will never be met because each time a new solution is offered, it automatically creates other needs. Microsoft is a commercial software company. They exist, first and foremost, to make money for their stakeholders.

      Do you know what it cost's to run a separate VPN client for 100,000+ users just so they can get access to email? Outlook Web Access (and then RPC over HTTP) completely obviated the need for VPN access and saved my organization $ millions. What do you think the extra cost was in the Outlook client or the Exchange server?

      Zero.

      With SharePoint 2007 in conjunction with ISA 2006 (and federated identities in AD) I'll be able to run Office and access all of my files that reside on my corporate network FROM ANYWHERE.

      Do you think that is a valuable service? I certainly do.
      justthinking
      • Since you ask

        [i]My, you have a very low threshold of needs. My needs will never be met because each time a new solution is offered, it automatically creates other needs.[/i]

        At some point the cost of satisfying those needs exceeds their value, however:

        [i]Do you know what it cost's to run a separate VPN client for 100,000+ users just so they can get access to email?[/i]

        Yeah -- nothing. There are too many SSL clients and servers to count that can do what your MS platform does; most are free and many of them are much more secure.

        Admittedly locking yourself into MS' "our way or the highway" collective does narrow your options, but even there you have some alternatives.

        Which brings us around to the fact that you're paying a steep price for that "free" SSL access.

        Is that a "need?" Maybe, maybe not. However, if you have a nontrivial number of users like me who have to have the VPN capability anyway ...
        Yagotta B. Kidding
  • Service = server functionality exposed as web services

    I believe what they are saying is that originally when your software, such as Outlook, accessed Exchange server on premises, it had access to rich server functions, such as email, shared calendar scheduling, etc. However when your email client was connected to email services on the Internet, you didn?t have that great a range of server features to use. Apparently MS is working on the ability to expose a lot of its servers? functionality as web services, so that they can be consumed over the Internet by web and Rich Internet Applications. This would mean that a small business could e.g. do shared calendar scheduling with business partners, etc. over the Internet, using Windows Live. This would mean that a small business wouldn?t have to buy Exchange server, in order to be able experience the benefits of the server software.

    The above is significant, because e.g. with MS putting strong collaboration into Sharepoint, people will be able to collaborate with others across the Internet from Office ? via Windows Live, or some third party also hosting Sharepoint on the Internet.

    The above gives you an idea of what MS means when it says software + services.

    Regarding lightweight clients, I believe these may include RIAs.
    P. Douglas
    • Adjustment

      I included the following in my message above.

      [i]Apparently MS is working on the ability to expose a lot of its servers? functionality as web services, so that they can be consumed over the Internet by web and Rich Internet Applications.[/i]

      Actually I meant to say:


      [i]Apparently MS is working on the ability to expose a lot of its servers? functionality as web services, so that they can be consumed over the Internet by web and [b]rich client applications[/b].[/i]
      P. Douglas
  • MICRO$OFT IS ONLY TRYING A SNEAKY, DRAWN OUT, METHODICAL PROGRESSION......

    TO THEIR ULTIMATE GOAL(which,by the way, hasen't changed since their success with charging Austrailians for the O.S. as well as all applications) OF PUTTING US ALL ON THE "LIFETIME PAYMENT PLAN", JUST LIKE THE CHEAPIE FURNITURE STORE. SELL THEM BARELY USEFULL, FLAWED, BUG RIDDEN O.S.'S AND APP'S AND MAKE THEM PAY FOREVER; THIS IS THE MICROSOFT BUSINESS MODEL THAT WILL NEVER DIE. THEY CAN BARELY CONTAIN THEMSELVES WITH THE VAMPIRISH LUST THEY FEEL AS THEY RELISH THE DAY WHEN THEY CAN PUT AN I.V. INTO OUR BANK ACCOUNTS AND SUCK US DRY!!!!!!!!!
    iconoclastt
  • Microsoft Needs to Go Away ...

    ...on a long vacation, and take Marc Benioff along with them.

    I think it's a sign of Microsoft's defining arrogance that sooo long after SaaS became an economically viable business, they decide to get in on this little party. The problem is that they are already behind and rather than gracefully ceding their loss to the smaller, more nimble technology companies that are already winning this game ? namely, PCS ? they decide to sing the ?me too!? song.

    It will make coming in last that much more painful for them...so sad.
    FiannaPCS
  • RE: The Gates/Ozzie equation: (software services) (servers = service)

    You know I was told growing up what goes around comes around. Well if this takeover is permitted I would like to see Microsoft go belly up.There so busy wanting to rule before other OS's can hit the market.Well one is there and it is LINUX. It needs some work but VISTA well it needs a lot more. Check out Microsoft's theory of Window XP's life. Because from what I have read VISTA can tell them a lot about yourself"Profile You". Well I thought Invasion was illegal. Now maybe I misunderstood what I read. You tell me
    john.payne@...