Tag Archive for MSFT

Microsoft Struggles – Exchange Next Cash Cow?

Microsoft Struggles - Exchange Next Cash Cow?The Royal Pingdom reports that Microsoft’s Windows 7 has just overtaken Windows XP as the top operating system in the US. The article cites stats from StatCounter that say as of April 7, Microsoft Windows 7 reached a 31.71% of share, while Windows XP held a 31.56% share.

On a global scale, StatCounter reports that Windows XP still enjoys a significant advantage of 16.1% over Windows 7.Windows 7 takes the lead

The Business Insider noted that investor Roger McNamee a man who Bill Gates credited as a sounding board for his 1994 book “The Road Ahead” told CNBC that Microsoft’s Windows is a dying business.

I think Microsoft Windows, this is the cycle where it stops growing… The availability of iPads and smartphones is allowing corporations to trade down and eliminate the thousand dollars per year of supporting a Windows desktop. And this is the year where Windows has fallen below 50% of internet connected device down from 97% a few years ago.

Despite this, Mr. McNamee would still buy Microsoft (MSFT) because of the company’s strong position in an email.

When you’re a monopolist in an important category — and they are for sure a monopolist relative to email with Exchange — they’re going to be able to crank prices on Exchange. I actually think Microsoft is a buy.

Mr. McNamee is a smart guy who took an early huge stake in Facebook for Elevation Partners. However, the Business Insider thinks that Exchange as a replacement for the Microsoft Windows business is bizarre for a bunch of reasons:

  • Market share. Exchange Server has the majority market share — most estimates put it above 70% and higher in larger enterprises. But it doesn’t have the 90%+ share that Microsoft has enjoyed with Windows for the last 20-plus years.
  • Sales. Windows had about $18 billion in sales last year. The last time Microsoft revealed Exchange numbers was FY’07 when it had sales of $1.5 billion projecting forward, Exchange would have had $2.8 billion in sales in FY’10.
  • Margins. Windows has one of the greatest operating margins of any legal business in history – up to 80%. Exchange sells in lower volumes, faces more competition, and requires longer and more personalized sales cycles, which almost certainly means it’s got lower margins.
  • Competition. Older messaging systems like Lotus are slowly dying, but Exchange faces serious price pressure from Web-based email providers, particularly Google’s Gmail. Microsoft has responded with Exchange Online, its own hosted service, but it’s already had to lower prices on the service once.
  • Strategy. Windows pulls through sales of Office and other desktop software, which in turn pulls through sales of business servers (including Exchange). Its ubiquity helps Microsoft sell Windows Server and other enterprise software. Its huge margins allow Microsoft to pour money into projects like search and Xbox, which pressure the competition.
  • If Windows dies, Microsoft will have to do a lot more than monopolize email to replace it.

rb-

Bill and Steve chat

But Mr. Gates Sir, If I could just get my hands on Jobs, I’d…

Microsoft has had a long struggle to get Windows XP out of the enterprise, and with PC sales dipping the MSFT recovery will be harder thanks to the rise of the iPad. I would rather put my money on the Ballmer Boys to stage a spectacular comeback with Windows Phone Windows 8 than to turn Exchange into a cash cow like Windows.

What do you think?

Will Microsoft be able to continue its hold on the corporate desktop?

Can Exchange become the next great money-maker for MSFT?

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Microsoft Builds Bing for Bodies

Microsoft Builds Bing for BodiesA Microsoft (MSFT) scientist has developed a search engine for the human body according to MIT’s Technology Review. Antonio Criminisi at the Microsoft Research Cambridge campus in Great Britain has developed a search engine to browse through a patient’s anatomy to easily find organs to help in diagnosis.

Microsoft logoThe research created a way for doctors to search the three-dimensional images produced by MRI scans, which are often tricky to view specific areas. Mr. Criminisi told Technology Review “It is very difficult even for someone very trained to get to the place they need to be to examine the source of a problem.

The search engine creates an index of the human body which allows the user to search a specific body part by detecting patterns of light and dark within the scan itself. According to the article, the search engine will make it possible to display the necessary results in seconds to compare scans to see how it has changed, offering a quicker way to detect changes in a problematic area.

Microsoft Bing logoThe MSFT team is also investigating different ways to interact with the search engine. The researchers are looking into voice recognition and using Microsoft’s Xbox Kinect controller. Technology Review says that the use of the Kinect device could mean that surgeons will be able to consult a patient’s scan images mid-surgery without compromising their sterile gloves by touching a keyboard, mouse, or screen.

Kenji Suzuki, at the University of Chicago, told Technology Review, that if the search engine does offer a user-friendly way of searching then it could drastically improve patient care,  “As medical imaging has advanced, so many images are produced that there is a kind of information overload. The workload has grown a lot,” he said.

rb-

Steve BallmerImagine if this were online, the search providers could data-mine your online persona, but also your physical being. I don’t think it is too far of a reach for the search engine firm to mine scans online and sell the info to some huge pharma firm so they can target scripts to people online. But hey that would be OK since it would not be evil.

What do you think?

Would you trust your health to the folks from Redmond?

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Big Blue Wants to Patent Patent Trolling

Big Blue Wants to Patent Patent TrollingConceivably Tech reports that IBM (IBM) has filed a patent application with the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to automates the management of intellectual property. The system that would manage Big Blue’s intellectual property (and others who could afford IBM’s costs) comes with a “defend” module to formulate a strategy in the case of patent infringement.

IBM logo TechEye says that Big Blue’s patent is designed to automate the patent process from beginning to end including suing other companies that the computer believes are infringing on a copyright. The patent components are divided into a “direct” part, which includes the overall strategy such as R&D, portfolio, filing, budgeting, and forecasting. “Control” covers factors such as market alignment, invention evaluation, IP valuation, and inventor training. “Execute” includes trade secret protection, trademark creation, IP landscaping, technology monitoring, and competitive intelligence. Conceivably Tech quotes the “defend”, “influence” and capitalize modules of the application:

“defending against infringements and invalidations of said IP rights based on said business strategies and monitoring market and competitor actions to develop risk management plans; an influence computer module including a standards influencing unit, a legal and regulatory influencing unit, and a policy influencing unit; and capitalize computer module for identifying potential licensees and potential assignees of said IP rights, and managing licensing negotiations, cross-licensing negotiations, and assignment negotiations based on said business strategies.”

TechEye points out the irony of how the software was created. They point out that an IBMer collected all the experience IBM gained from filing more than 100 patents every week and put the data into a chart. From there Big Blue decided that given the way the IP world is shaping up these days, they should patent IP themselves. Thus IBM has patented the patent process. What they came up with is:

TechEye concludes that IBM’s patent application is really an automated troll. They conclude that if the patent office approves this, then it means that every time you patent something you have to give IBM a fee to see if you did it differently from Big Blue’s process. Otherwise, its software might send you a subpoena.

rb-

This must seem like a god-send to organizations whose business model has de-evolved into patent trolling. Some of these cases I have written about are the CSIRO Wi-Fi patent activities, all the craziness in the smartphone market, and MSFT co-founder Paul Allen’s attempts to sue most of the web.

Gotta give it to IBM, its like TechEye says, “If you can’t beat the trolls, patent the process that creates them.”

Do you believe the U.S. Patent Office is still useful?

Does IBM deserve to collect a tax from every innovator?

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Paul Allen Internet Tax Collector

patents trollMicrosoft co-founder Paul Allen has reloaded in his attempt to sue the world for patent infringement. Allen’s Interval Licensing filed an amended patent infringement suit against most of the leading online tech companies. The first try (which I wrote about here) was tossed out by the judge because it failed to point out exactly how each firm stole Allen’s ideas.

Microsoft co-founder Paul AllenInterval’s amended, 35-page filing (PDF) claims that Apple (AAPL), Google (GOOG), Facebook, and eight other online companies use Allen’s patents whenever they use a browser for navigating through information, managing a user’s peripheral attention while using a device, and alerting users to items of current interest. The filing claims that features as Apple’s Dashboard software, the notifications interface in Google’s Android operating system, and Netflix’s (NFLX) viewing suggestions are infringing on Interval patents. It asks for unspecified damages from those companies as well as an injunction on them shipping any products with allegedly infringing features.

It looks like Google’s Android operating system is directly targeted by the lawsuit including its notification system for texts, Google Voice messages, e-mails, and other alerts display information “to a user of a mobile device in an unobtrusive manner that occupies the peripheral attention of the user.” As before, the suit doesn’t target Microsoft (MSFT) or Amazon (AMZN) (which pays rent to Allen’s Vulcan Real Estate), even though both company’s products would seem to infringe on the same patents.

Rob Pegoraro at the Washington Post writes:

the Interval claims continue to be insultingly generic. For instance, an allegation that AOL and Gmail’s spam-filtering software infringes on an Interval patent because it is “based at least in part on a comparison between the new email and other emails that have been received.” (Sure: Like nobody ever thought to make such a statistical comparison until Interval came along.) Later, it contends that when Netflix “generates a display of related content items” after “a user views a particular content item,” that infringes on an Interval patent too. (Right, because the concept of a store or a catalog suggesting a related item to a shopper didn’t exist until Interval scientists had a brainstorming session.)

Mr. Pegoraro continues:

Interval’s patents are junk. They describe general concepts that should have been obvious to anybody of ordinary skill in this field in the mid 1990s–and for which it shouldn’t be difficult to find “prior art” showing that other people had thought of the same thing years before. Had the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office provided the “high quality” examination of patent applications it promises, it’s hard to see how these patents would have been granted in the first place.

Mr. Pegoraro also cites PaidContent.org’s Joe Mullin in a commentary (emphasis in the original):

If patent claims on such basic ideas are found to be valid, there are surely hundreds of other potential defendants that could be sued by Interval Licensing. Paul Allen would be essentially a tax collector for the internet.

The firms named in the suit are:

Do you believe the U.S. Patent Office is still useful?

Does Paul Allen deserve to collect a tax from every Internet user?

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Big Tech Increases Lobbying

Big Tech Increases LobbyingThe Business Insider has a great post that lays out the lobbying spending by most of the techs stalwarts. Arik Hesseldahl at All Things D compiled the data. The data says that the telecom’s spent the most on lobbying last year. The biggest spender was Verizon (VZ) which spent $3.83 million, an increase of nearly $1 million over last year. AT&T (T) spent $3.47 million on lobbying.

Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) spent $1.6 million on lobbying in 2010, which is nearly double what it spent last year. Microsoft (MSFT), Oracle (ORCL), Google (GOOG), IBM (IBM), and Yahoo (YHOO) also increased the dollars spent on lobbying from 2009 to 2010. Only Intel (INTC) decreased its lobbying spending in 2010.

Tech Spending on Lobbying 2010

The Business Insider points out that despite their incredible influence in the world of tech, Apple (AAPL) and Facebook are hardly spending anything on lobbying. The post speculates that while Apple is influential, it doesn’t dominate anything other than mp3 players, so the government has had little reason to mess with it. (Apple rules the tablet world, but that’s an 8-month-old market.) Also, Apple doesn’t do big blockbuster acquisitions that the government looks at.

Facebook spent the least of anyone with just $120,000. The author expects this will change soon as the company’s power is growing quickly, drawing the eye of regulators.

rb-

The telecom monoliths spent $7.3 million on lobbying, which is more than HP, MSFT, Google and IBM combined what are they up to? I wrote about AT&T’s activities previously, clearly, these firms expect something back from the politicians they bribe donate to. History has proven that the politicians on the receiving end of the bribes donations generate results for their largest contributors and not the SMB or end-user.

What do you think? What are these tech stalwarts getting for their money in Washington DC?

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.