Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Ex-Chief to Launch Web-Based Software

prostoalex writes "Search for Paul Maritz and you're most likely to find Microsoft references. However, next month his new venture, PiCorp will start distributing Web-based software applications that might compete directly with Microsoft offerings. Former Microsoft exec also has an opinion on the future of software industry: '"The strength of the PC is also its weakness," Maritz says. "People don't want a single dedicated computer. They don't want their whole lives bound up in one piece of hardware. People want to get access wherever they are, from whatever device they're using."'"

8 of 102 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah . . . by base3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    . . . I might not want my life "bound up" in one piece of hardware, but I sure don't want it depending on paying some "service provider" every month while they share my files with every three letter agency, investigator, advertiser, and anyone else under the sun who will pay, either. I'll stick with open source software running on my desktop for my personal files, thank-you-very-much. If I need to not be "bound up," I'll VNC in over SSH.

    --
    One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
  2. Nonsense! by Jerry+Coffin · · Score: 5, Insightful
    People don't want a single dedicated computer. They don't want their whole lives bound up in one piece of hardware.

    This, of course, is why people own iPods, PDAs, cell phones that store dialing lists, etc. They can decide on the type of machine that's best suited to storing particular data.

    At least to me, his service doesn't seem like much of an improvement on that. In fact, it seems to do rather the opposite: while I suppose with his service, my data might be spread across a bunch of machines in a web server farm (plus back end servers, etc.) it all looks and acts like it's on one centralized computer.

    I have a small number of devices, each with a particular purpose. He probably has more devices, but they all seem to have the same purpose: taking my money, while reducing functionality.

    --
    The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
  3. Mainframe to PC and now back to Mainframe by jt2377 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Weeeeee!!!!!!!! the wheel goes round and round.

  4. "whole lives bound up" by l3v1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    whole lives bound up

    I'd very much more prefer my whole life bound up to pieces of hardware that are mine, than "trusting" it to some company whom I cannot influence, can change policies and terms as they see fit, have usually some obscure and ignorant thinking about "Security" and "privacy" as such, and have no control over, thankyouverymuch. Especially if that company has a leader with such a long term "education" in MS's way to see and do things.

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
  5. Re:Makes me think by ClosedSource · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "I'm not so sure about the whole 'tied to one piece of hardware' bit, but Google is definitely proving that the industry is shifting from a product emphasis to a service emphasis."

    I'd say that the same media band-wagon jumpers from the heady dot-com era have decided that Google is a sure thing. What I don't see is any great reduction in desktop application sales in favor of web services. That day may indeed come, but there's little evidence of it today.

  6. I can already access my system from anywhere by Bent+Mind · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "People don't want a single dedicated computer. They don't want their whole lives bound up in one piece of hardware.

    No, I don't want my information "bound up" in a single, non-networked device. However, this statement shows just how out of touch this guy is. The Net, in it's current form, has been around since the 90s. Non-tech people have been doing remote connections since the mid 80s. Is "I left the data in my work computer" really still a viable excuse? Do computers still exist that can't be remote accessed (excluding systems designed that way for security reasons)? And no, I'm not talking about systems that just need some switch turned on, I mean they completely lack the ability. I ask because that is the only type of system I can think of where your life might be "bound up in one piece of hardware."

    One thing I can say, I don't want my whole life bound up in a single dedicated pay service. Not when it's so easy to remote access my own systems or even just take the data with me (via USB drive or some such). Why pay someone else to keep my data for me when I can keep it myself for free? On top of that, I feel much safer securing my own data. I don't want to worry about someone snooping without a warrant.

    People want to get access wherever they are, from whatever device they're using."

    I already have this ability without this service. Of course, this service will probably sell. I keep seeing ads for a remote access service on TV. It amazes me every time I see it. I think to myself, people really pay for a service that lets your computer do something it could already do? Wow. I wonder if I could sell a service that changes your wallpaper for you once a month? Of course you would have to supply your own wallpaper.

    --
    Request a Linux Shockwave player here: http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform/
  7. Re:Bastards. by MarkWatson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wow Tim, that was quite a little rant. Have you ever been to India? (If not, I have some travel photos at http://flickr.com/photos/mark_watson/sets/1622965/ - enjoy :-)

    Seriously, India has been investing heavily in education for decades, and they are justifiably reaping some well deserved benefits from that policy. Overall, I had a very positive feeling about India and the people there.

  8. Re:Why not just use USB drives? by SCHecklerX · · Score: 3, Insightful