Microsoft Ups Online War, Says Google's 'Failing'

CWmike writes "Raising the stakes in its war of words, Microsoft said on Tuesday that Google simply doesn't understand what businesses need, and is failing at pushing its way into the enterprise. In this edited version of his interview with Computerworld, Microsoft's senior director of Online Services, Tom Rizzo, talks about Google's privacy issues, scanning user data, the difference between consumer and corporate needs, and his doubts about Google surviving in the enterprise space. He also said he thinks Google will be shocked to see Microsoft's momentum into the enterprise cloud sector."

Comments

meh

[Anonymous Coward]

when your shit stinks, focus attention on someone else.

And if you believe this

[DragonFodder]

I have a bridge to sell ya!

Succesful troll is failing

[geegel]

Given the market share that Google has in contextual advertising, I tend to disagree with Microsoft's conclusion. Of course I could be wrong, but I highly doubt it.

Who is failing again?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

So Microsoft took its vaunted Ms-Office to the cloud, and decided to give it away at throw away prices instead of its usual highway robbery prices. Its Exchange server is forced to play ball with mobile devices running Android and iOS, instead of pulling a fast one with obscure proprietary protocols. And now it is claiming Google does not "get" corporations? Shows how sorely Microsoft does not "get" google.

Google does not care about its Office products. It does not want any revenue from its cloud based office offerings. Google understood that as long as Microsoft is having a cash cow in the form of Microsoft Office, it will be able to out last any competitor. It can take losses in the billions, quarter after quarter and simply wait for the competitors to run out of money. Putting a crimp on the income stream of Ms-Office is the primary goal of Google. That it has achieved. No matter what, people are not going to pay the old norm prices for MS-Office.

Re:has any fortune 500 company gone Google Apps?

[jimicus]

Don't know about Fortune 500 but if you look at:

http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/business/customers.html

you can filter by business type - and there are some well-known names there.

I can't say I'm surprised. The value for money versus any Microsoft product is night and day - you get more services for about a third the price. (The balance has started to tilt back; when I first said that the closest alternative was hosted Exchange from a major reseller, that's not the case any more).

Know what? I think Ballmer knows, somewhere in his wizened black little heart, that quite a few of Microsoft's products are not actually particularly good.

That's not been a huge problem in the past, mainly because the competition was frequently just as awful and even if it wasn't, their position in the market meant "nobody got fired for buying Microsoft" became the mantra for many IT directors of the late '90s-early '00s, just as "nobody got fired for buying IBM" was the mantra for their predecessors. Now we're finally starting to see some healthy competition opening up in parts of the industry where previously there was almost none, and my God it's a breath of fresh air.

Re:Microsoft lecturing anyone on privacy

[Enderandrew]

There are two precedents.

1 - The government in Brazil wanted information on a group in Brazil circulating kiddie porn via Orkut. Google fought serveral court orders before handing over data. To my knowledge, this is the only time they've ever handed over data.

2 - George W. Bush asked the major search engines to hand over search data with corresponding IP addresses. Google flatly said no while AOL, Yahoo and Microsoft handed over data. If that wasn't enough, Google started anonymizing IP addresses earlier, and started building an off-shore mobile data center than can go into international waters to keep your private data away from the government.

Again, between the two, does Microsoft have a leg to stand on when it comes to critcizing Google here?