Microsoft Appears to Miss the Boat in Albany

Techwriter10 0 Tallied Votes 253 Views Share

Microsoft is not old by corporate standards, but in the world of technology it is down-right staid. That’s why it takes a while for it to make major changes (or five years to roll out an OS). A few years ago when Bill Gates was still in charge, he recognized that Microsoft had to embrace the internet in a big way or get left behind. That’s one of the reasons he hired Ray Ozzie.

By now, nearly everyone has heard of the Ozzie Memo, a treatise that “leaked” out and outlined Microsoft’s plans to transform itself into a “modern” company. At the time, Ozzie, who has the title of Microsoft’s Chief Technology Officer, recognized that Microsoft had to shift its focus from traditional desktop and server-based deployment to an internet model.

Fast forward to 2008. Under pressure from free services like Google Docs, Microsoft surveyed the landscape and came up with an attempt to take Office online, sort of. But instead of introducing a pure software as a service like Google Docs, it decided to straddle the line between desktop and online and come up with a hybrid service. Aimed at the consumer market, the service, which is code-named Albany for Beta purposes, is the same old desktop client with a convenient installation program, automatic incremental updates delivered in a subscription model along with some online services such as Windows Live One Care and Windows Live Mail. Like so many of its latest efforts, the result appears awkward and a bit off-kilter. It’s as though Microsoft doesn’t get the whole idea of SaaS or lost its core value proposition in a haze of corporate compromises.

The beauty of software as a service, whether free or a subscription model, is not just the fact that updates get delivered to you automatically, although that is certainly a prime selling point. It’s that you don’t have to deal with deployment because the majority of the application is available online. Microsoft’s answer to this is the Microsoft Office Live Workspace Connector, an online storage space where you can upload documents, then share with friends or colleagues. Nice idea, as far as it goes, but shouldn’t my friend be able to edit this document online, not just access it and download it to the desktop?

Microsoft has a lot in common with IBM in the early days of the PC trying to protect its typewriter division. It recognizes that software is moving on the internet, but it can’t let go of its core packaged-software business. So it creates a hybrid solution that doesn’t really move the company forward in a meaningful way. If Microsoft really wants to take the company modern, it needs to come up with a solution that takes it all the way, not one that leaves one foot in the past.

Dani AI

Generated

As pointed out, what was being discussed under the Albany codename did not become a pure, browser-hosted Office replacement — it was rebadged and shipped to consumers as Microsoft Equipt (a $69.99/year bundle that included Office Home & Student 2007, Windows Live OneCare and an Office Live Workspace connector). That press release makes clear Microsoft’s intent: an easy-install subscription that kept the heavy lifting on the desktop while adding online storage and sharing. (news.microsoft.com)

The practical result, and the source of many critics’ frustration, was Office Live Workspace: a convenient online repository but not an in-browser editor. Early reviews called it useful for storage and sharing but not a true online office — you still needed a local Office install to edit, and real-time, browser-based collaboration was missing. That gap explains the impression that Microsoft “missed the boat” relative to pure SaaS alternatives. (wired.com)

That design came from a deliberate strategy rather than simple indecision. Ray Ozzie’s “software-plus-services” thinking explicitly aimed for a hybrid model: keep desktop clients for heavy features, add services for sync/updates/online access. Ozzie argued some workloads and scenarios still require local compute, offline persistence and full fidelity — which helps explain why Microsoft initially favored a connector model instead of an immediate full web rewrite of Office. (wired.com)

What followed is worth noting for readers looking at this thread years later: Microsoft invested in true web Office experiences (Office Web Apps / Office for the web) and eventually migrated Live Workspace users into the Windows Live/Office web stack around 2009–2010 as the browser-driven apps matured. For anyone in 2008 wanting immediate browser editing, the practical options were Google Docs or other SaaS suites; for enterprises or heavy-Office users the hybrid/desktop route preserved fidelity until web apps caught up. (infoq.com)

In short: the Albany/Equipt choice was a strategic compromise — defensible on technical grounds at the time, but understandably unsatisfying to users who wanted immediate, full-featured browser editing. ’s nostalgia for leadership changes captures the sentiment, but the shift required both product engineering and server-side platform work, not just personnel decisions.

jbennet 1,618 Most Valuable Poster Team Colleague Featured Poster

bring back bill

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.