decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Nope | 310 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Nope
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 02 2013 @ 12:31 AM EDT
The cloud is just the latest buzz-word. At MS it's not the product, it's the licence. They don't mind licensing Linux or Windows or whatever as long as the fee is paid.

People aren't buying licenses for emerging markets from Microsoft though, and why would they? Microsoft is like the mainframe vendors were at the start of the PC era. The mainframe vendors didn't care if they failed in the PC business, because they "knew" that PCs weren't any use unless they could be connected to mainframes and they "knew" that mainframes weren't going away. The mainframe vendors didn't care if anyone bought their PCs as long as they still sold mainframes. And then people stopped buying mainframes. Mainframe profits were fantastic up until near the end, and they they fell off a cliff. IBM is still selling mainframes, but there's no long term future in it.

Microsoft's problem is that selling shrink-wrap software licenses is starting to look like selling buggy whips. Their core product lines are becoming zero margin commodities (operating systems, databases) or are becoming anachronisms (such as word processors). Their biggest competitors are companies that don't sell (significant amounts of) software. The market is changing out from under them. They're a legacy vendor and all their attempts to find a new market have been flops. They can milk their legacy customers for a while and locked in customers can be quite profitable while they last, but sooner or later Microsoft will face the same fate as the mainframe vendors.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )