Why Ray Ozzie can't save Microsoft
Category Microsoft
From the ComputerWorld blog of Preston Gralla: Why Ray Ozzie can't save Microsoft
When Ray Ozzie took over as Microsoft's chief software architect in 2006, he was hailed as a visionary who would save Microsoft by bringing it out of the doldrums and into the Internet age. But based on his poor stewardship of the "Live" brand, and Microsoft's ham-handed attempt to take over Yahoo, it's clear he's not the one to save the company. Maybe nobody can.
Finally, someone questioning whether the emperor has clothes...
I have a lot of respect for Ray Ozzie. You can't argue with what he did with the concept of Notes... still essentially the same solid architecture after all this time. Groove was another interesting idea, and I know that Microsoft was touting it big time when they bought Ray and his company. But let's face it... Groove is pretty much a non-starter and a niche software offering now. I won't blame that entirely on Microsoft, as Groove would have died completely a long time ago if not for MS buying them out. Think IBM rescuing Lotus, only with *that* story having a far better outcome (but not without some rough patches, either).
The expectations of Ozzie were extremely high when he was absorbed into the Borg. His quiet, behind-the-scenes style has had everyone wondering what he was up to... what revolutionary ideas would he come up with to take Microsoft to the next level. Personally, I've had my doubts. Is his silence because he's hard at work, or is there another element in play here? If he *is* the architect of the Microsoft Live concept and brand, then it's either been less than successful, or corporate bureaucracy has badly executed on his technical concept. Perhaps it's a bit of both...
He was put in charge of the company's Internet push, through its "Live" brand. And now, more than two years later, Microsoft has done such a poor job with the Live brand under Ozzie, and found itself so far behind Google, that it's trying to bail itself out by buying Yahoo.
It's the same point I made in a posting yesterday... On top of the billions they've spent trying to succeed on their own (and failed), they're now trying to throw more than $40 billion at the problem in hopes of winning. Not a good track record there...
Ozzie hasn't been able to change the overall outlook and direction of Microsoft. If the Live brand was supposed to compete against Google, it's been a failure. Microsoft remains a company that sells software that lives on people's PCs. That brings it in plenty of revenue today, and for years to come. But ultimately, it's yesterday's business plan.
Ozzie's memo of several years ago was prescient. "Our business as we know it is at risk," he said then. That's true even more so today. And it's because Ozzie has overseen a Live brand that hasn't done a thing to help Microsoft compete.
Yes, elephants can be taught how to dance. IBM pulled it off under Gerstner. But it's for sure that the current crop of management at Microsoft don't have a degree in choreography...
From the ComputerWorld blog of Preston Gralla: Why Ray Ozzie can't save Microsoft
When Ray Ozzie took over as Microsoft's chief software architect in 2006, he was hailed as a visionary who would save Microsoft by bringing it out of the doldrums and into the Internet age. But based on his poor stewardship of the "Live" brand, and Microsoft's ham-handed attempt to take over Yahoo, it's clear he's not the one to save the company. Maybe nobody can.
Finally, someone questioning whether the emperor has clothes...
I have a lot of respect for Ray Ozzie. You can't argue with what he did with the concept of Notes... still essentially the same solid architecture after all this time. Groove was another interesting idea, and I know that Microsoft was touting it big time when they bought Ray and his company. But let's face it... Groove is pretty much a non-starter and a niche software offering now. I won't blame that entirely on Microsoft, as Groove would have died completely a long time ago if not for MS buying them out. Think IBM rescuing Lotus, only with *that* story having a far better outcome (but not without some rough patches, either).
The expectations of Ozzie were extremely high when he was absorbed into the Borg. His quiet, behind-the-scenes style has had everyone wondering what he was up to... what revolutionary ideas would he come up with to take Microsoft to the next level. Personally, I've had my doubts. Is his silence because he's hard at work, or is there another element in play here? If he *is* the architect of the Microsoft Live concept and brand, then it's either been less than successful, or corporate bureaucracy has badly executed on his technical concept. Perhaps it's a bit of both...
He was put in charge of the company's Internet push, through its "Live" brand. And now, more than two years later, Microsoft has done such a poor job with the Live brand under Ozzie, and found itself so far behind Google, that it's trying to bail itself out by buying Yahoo.
It's the same point I made in a posting yesterday... On top of the billions they've spent trying to succeed on their own (and failed), they're now trying to throw more than $40 billion at the problem in hopes of winning. Not a good track record there...
Ozzie hasn't been able to change the overall outlook and direction of Microsoft. If the Live brand was supposed to compete against Google, it's been a failure. Microsoft remains a company that sells software that lives on people's PCs. That brings it in plenty of revenue today, and for years to come. But ultimately, it's yesterday's business plan.
Ozzie's memo of several years ago was prescient. "Our business as we know it is at risk," he said then. That's true even more so today. And it's because Ozzie has overseen a Live brand that hasn't done a thing to help Microsoft compete.
Yes, elephants can be taught how to dance. IBM pulled it off under Gerstner. But it's for sure that the current crop of management at Microsoft don't have a degree in choreography...
| Permalink |
Comments
Given how little Microsoft did with Groove in Office 2007 (the UI is updated to fit better with the rest of the Office tools, and the server architecture has been re-factored to some extent, but other than that, nothing) it does now seem highly probable that Groove is sadly a dead-end technology. Or 'niche' as you generously describe it.
Does Ray have something stunning up his sleeve to recapture the hearts and minds and convince people that Microsoft is a thought-leader? Well, Bill Gates doesn't step down fully until July, so the Ozzie wings might be clipped until then. If we haven't seen something pretty dramatic from him by January (a REAL Lotusphere spoiler - now that WOULD be news) then I would tend to agree that he's not the answer to their problems. Gut feeling is that we won't and he's not.
Posted by Julian Woodward At 03:21:32 On 18/02/2008 | - Website - |