Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Will Be Largest Infrastructure As A Service Vendor By 2019, Says Morgan Stanley Survey (geekwire.com)
An anonymous reader writes from a report via GeekWire: According to Morgan Stanley's 2016 CIO Survey of 100 CIOs (75 CIOs based in the U.S., and 25 based in Europe), Microsoft's Azure will overtake Amazon Web Services (AWS) by 2019 to become the largest Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) and Platform as a Service (PaaS). The survey finds that roughly 31 percent of the CIOs will be using Azure for IaaS, compared to roughly 30 percent using AWS. Today, roughly 21 percent are using AWS and 12 percent are using Azure. According to the survey, Azure is already leading AWS in PaaS, used by about 18 percent of the respondents, versus AWS's 16 percent. Azure's lead will grow slightly by 2019, growing 9.8 percent versus 6.4 percent. Nearly 30 percent of all applications will be migrated to the public cloud by the end of 2017, up from 14 percent today, the survey said. On-premises apps will decline to 58 percent, from 71 percent today. Predictably, hardware vendors, including conventional and flash storage makers, will continue to suffer as their market is eaten by the cloud. Hardware spending growth is down this year to 3.2 percent, from 3.4 percent last year. Microsoft recently announced it will be entering the legal marijuana industry. It will partner with Los Angeles-based startup Kind on a system for tracking the legal growing and sale of marijuana, with Microsoft powering the software through its Azure cloud computing service.
There is no hardware in the Cloud®? All my data is stored in water droplets?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Having used both Azure and AWS, I can honestly say that AWS is light years ahead of Azure...
Azure storage services has got some awesome consistency guarantees.. But it won't scale like S3, not in terms of requests, throughput or features.
Microsoft has an abyssal story for authorization and access policies... There is nothing like IAM that crosses all services, some services have policies, other services you get shared secrets (to be shared between all users)..
Honestly, they can't even figure out to make a consistent naming policy between different storage services... Figuring out what characters is allowed in names of fields, resources, urls, etc. is a nightmare... Even with azure storage services (queue, table and blob) they have vastly different restrictions... It's a joke.
The only thing interesting with Azure is their table storage service, price and simplicity wise it's a joy. But given how bad everything else, I'm tempted to move my stuff to AWS and pay a bit more for dynamodb...
..says Morgan Stanley", is what that headline should read. What a crappy-sounding future that is!
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Isn't their cloud services growing?
Yes, they need to catch up to amazon feature-wise--but then again aws just barely released their EFS whereas google has had its own enterprise distributed GFS baking and in use for over a decade, among other feature they may be more mature on.
They have lived a long prosperous life, but it is time to move on.
if IBM will finally kick the bucket. See, the nice thing about web apps, stacks (LAMP, MEAN, etc) and all that is you can move your app to any provider you want. Meanwhile a lot of companies have tons and tons of old code on pricey IBM mainframes. Everyone I know is trying to move their code off those systems. Sure, it's often a disaster, but with the economy perpetually weak saving $$$ is too important and even if it's a bad customer experience does it really matter when everyone's doing it?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Azure is a lot more expensive than AWS, and they tend to increase price and decrease services. Meanwhile, AWS is on a mission to constantly lower prices.
The logical outcome would be for AWS to see their market share grow, but the opposite is happening. Why? I think it's because they don't give a shit about enterprise customers. Even if you spend $55,000 per month on AWS you'll never get incentives or personalized service from AWS. On the other hand, enterprise customers get VIP treatment from Microsoft, wth steep discounts and effective, even proactive support.
A while ago maybe it mattered to get rock bottom price for cloud computing. Now people want more than the Walmart experience when they expand their infrastructure in the cloud, and that's why Azure is growing faster than AWS.
I still use AWS for my own projects, but I'm spending tiny amounts of money compared to the two clients I've recently helped move from AWS to Azure. And their main reason to switch was that they want to rely more and more on the cloud, and AWS couldn't be bothered to answer emails while Microsft sent PEOPLE to meet and wow them and make it enticing to consider Azure.
lucm, indeed.
Microsoft was founded on the principles of local computing and in effect 'anti data center/mainframe'. Now people ( companies ) are seeing that it really was the right idea after all.
Someone needs to log these predictions by the Gartner types of this world to see how they pan out.
I don't have hard data, but my memory tells me they get it wrong a lot more often than right.
Last I checked, Azure had possibly the slowest disk and ssd IO performance of any cloud service. Amazon crushes them in this space.
Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
Need a bit more value eh MS?
In oher news ...
Windows Phone will overtake iPhone by 2015.
Azure is definitely useful. It is a strong competitor.
However, I'd say that Amazon's biggest future competitor will be OpenStack related offerings. Right now, OpenStack still has a ways to go before it is something that people consider production-stable out of the box [1], but it has gone from a novelty to something that businesses are at least researching, because of the F/OSS nature.
OpenStack still has some weaknesses. If the database Keystone uses even hiccups, the entire thing will hang.
[1]: HP Helion and Rackspace are good at making OpenStack work for individual customers.
Microsoft Infrastructure as a Service.
Achille Talon
Hop!
Setting aside the accuracy/sample bias of a survey like this, they seem to fundamentally misunderstand the business.
How much infrastructure does the average customer on each one actually use? I mean if it's 30 and 31 percent, but the average customer on AWS is using five times the resources, Azure is still much, much, much smaller.
and become as relevant as Sun Microsystems with outdated arcane software because it is closed source and unable/unwilling to allow anyone to modify & rebuild, sourcecode is no mystery anymore, kids in school are now working on source code so when they get an idea to build something they are more likely to opt for GNU/FOSS/Linux to have more control of the operating system,
when it comes to speculation there is two sides to that coin,
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
"Microsoft Will Be Largest Infrastructure As A Service Vendor By 2019"
What with them changing Windows to a subscription service and the insane success of their Azure stuff, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if this turns out to be true in a year or two.
I don't know what it is about Azure that's so compelling, but it does seem like a shitload of businesses are going for it in a big way. MS can't build datacenters fast enough to keep up with demand and that's gotta mean something.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...