Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Maflynn · Oct 30, 2008, 07:26 AM

Great read about MS azure and its failed predecessor hailstorm.
cnet

It seems for once in its history microsoft was on ahead of the curve when it unveiled hailstorm back in 2001. Now "cloud" computer is the rage which is effectively what they were pushing 7 years ago.

OreoCookie · Oct 30, 2008, 09:44 AM

Ahead? Google has that for years (GMail, GoogleDocs, etc.). If you need it professionally, IBM, for instance, will be happy to offer cloud computing to your company.

I don't think MS is ahead. I'm not saying that they don't improve on the ideas of solutions you can use now, but that they are `late to the party'.

Dakar V · Oct 30, 2008, 09:46 AM

I have a feeling oreo didn't read the article.

OreoCookie · Oct 30, 2008, 09:59 AM

You mean that Azure was proposed seven years ago? Yes, I've read that. But to me it's about applications of a concept, something tangible. And so far, MS hasn't delivered anything tangible while others have. Hence I say they are behind, not ahead of their time.

They've also proposed an object-oriented programming concept and a database-based filesystem when they were developing Windows 95. You can say that they have been ahead of time, because they have proposed something earlier in time. Just because they have proposed an idea some while ago doesn't mean they were ahead of their time as a company.

Back in 2001, my university was already using Sun Rays (server-based computing) -- which is arguably a simplified version of cloud computing. GoogleDocs and GMail can be used by anyone today while we have yet to see an application of Azure.

Dakar V · Oct 30, 2008, 10:03 AM

I think we generally regard the Newton as a head of its time, even though it wasn't the greatest thing in the world. In this case MS was thinking a head of the curve. Seems like they might deserve their due for that.

Laminar · Oct 30, 2008, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

I think we generally regard the Newton as a head of its time, even though it wasn't the greatest thing in the world.

At least it wasn't an ass of its time.

Dakar V · Oct 30, 2008, 10:05 AM

Fack.

olePigeon · Oct 30, 2008, 10:17 AM

Cloud computing? Like PC terminals and teletypes? Apps over the internet, on the internet, or as a service. We've had it for years and years. Suddenly there's a new buzz word like it's a new idea. I think what's happening is that network technologies and APIs are catching up with the network allowing for more elaborate implementations. "Cloud computing" has been around for a long, long time.

OreoCookie · Oct 30, 2008, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

I think we generally regard the Newton as a head of its time, even though it wasn't the greatest thing in the world.

The point is that the Newton was a product you could buy in the store. Yes, it failed as a product (Apple didn't make any money with it). Another such example might be Microsoft's surface computing: technically, you can get a product and in terms of touchscreen interfaces, it is more advanced than Apple's multitouch interface. On the other hand, MS' surface computer is sold in very tiny quantities compared to an iPhone, for instance. So in a theoretical sense, MS is ahead in terms of technology. In the sense of market economics, it's clear that the iPhone shapes the touch interface market much more than Surface Computing. By the way, neither company is the first to `invent this', touch screen interfaces have been the topic of many thesis at universities and there have been plenty proofs of concepts.

Originally Posted by Dakar V

In this case MS was thinking a head of the curve. Seems like they might deserve their due for that.

As I said, some of the ideas of cloud computing have been put into practice back when MS announced Hailstorm. Were they the first? I doubt it. If you count server-side computing as a predecessor, then certainly not. Does it matter? Not really. What matters is who brings it to mass market first. This is where Apple has failed with the Newton. Or MS with the tablet PC. On the other hand, this is where MS succeeded with Windows and Apple has succeeded with the iPod (walkman of the digital age), the iTunes Music Store and the iPhone (touch screen interface).

So yes, MS is late. (So is Apple, of course.)

Dakar V · Oct 30, 2008, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

What matters is who brings it to mass market first.

I think that's debatable. That's why the phrase "ahead of their time" exists.

Laminar · Oct 30, 2008, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

`late to the party'.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

`invent this',

Paging O`i`s`i`n to the Lounge.

OreoCookie · Oct 30, 2008, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

I think that's debatable. That's why the phrase "ahead of their time" exists.

Well, it is debatable.
But I doubt MS has been ahead in this case, even if you just look at it from a technological point of view. I've given you an example: I was using Sun Ray stations in 2000 (essentially thin clients where all apps run on a server, introduced by Sun in 2001). Of course, this didn't happen over the internet (I was still sucking bytes via modem back then, it just wasn't feasible). And this doesn't count scientists who have probably thought of this idea before.

As I said, many companies came up with many great ideas some time ago, including Microsoft. And there are instances, I have no problem giving a company credit for it. But in this instance, it doesn't feel right. MS has had an idea a few years ago, but didn't make anything out of it. Now that Google and others are becoming successful and threatening to them (GoogleDocs is free), they reheat an old idea they've had.

It now comes back to bite them that they are primarily a software-only company. Instead of making the tablet pc they picture, they write the software and some manufacturers modify some of their products a little (I'm exaggerating a little). Apple's approach works better here: they picture the product they want to have (size, features, etc.) and then do it. It doesn't always work (Newton, AppleTV), but I think tablet pcs would be a lot more popular if MS sat down and made a nice piece of hardware for it.

Dakar V · Oct 30, 2008, 10:36 AM

I'm gonna be honest oreo, you're putting much more effort into your posts than I'm willing to reciprocate.

I'm not one to bestow MS with much love. And as you note, if their ability innovate is met with chronic inability to implement, it doesn't speak well of them.

Maflynn · Oct 30, 2008, 10:43 AM

Microsoft has been aching to move their software model to a subscription base. They saw the writing on the wall about selling software long ago. They were early to cloud party, but being the evil empire they were, people slammed them for wanting to control everything. It doesn't matter if they made the product available, but rather proposed this, the public and businesses were not ready for such a move. Now it seems everyone wants to embrace the technology.

I'm with Dakar in not wanting to give them any love, but in this case they were ahead of the time, right technology, wrong reasons (greed).

hayesk · Nov 2, 2008, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by Maflynn

Great read about MS azure and its failed predecessor hailstorm.
cnet

It seems for once in its history microsoft was on ahead of the curve when it unveiled hailstorm back in 2001. Now "cloud" computer is the rage which is effectively what they were pushing 7 years ago.

Not really. Cloud computing is basically access to your files and environment from anywhere. In 1991 I had that with my university accounts. I could run X Windows software with full access to my files from anywhere. NeXTStep also had an even richer environment.

The Godfather · 06:21 AM

Google Docs saved me in a pinch when doing a presentation with a PC with NO MS OFFICE. I was somewhat impressed because the basic features like displaying the slides correctly 95% of the time (problems with fonts). I am going to let it pass because if I create the .ppt in Google Docs, this problem will be no more.

Another problem that bugs me is privacy. Will Google's webmaster get their kicks out of users' intimate photos in Picasa? Will the webmaster fight the feds with her life before relinquishing the key to our documents?

Imagine a vicepresident using Google docs to work on confidential stuff. Her account would be prone to hacking in no time.

goMac · Nov 2, 2008, 01:50 PM

Cloud computing is all bunk. With the large amount of mobile devices out and about, computing is going to go the exact opposite direction. We're going to see shared processing between all our local devices, not processing done by some giant far away cloud. Why send all your processing to be done by some far away server when you likely have more computing power in a 20 foot radius around you?

calverson · Nov 2, 2008, 02:16 PM

Crap name. Ominous - like Vista, or XP, or Longhorn, or Whistler.

The Godfather · Nov 2, 2008, 02:36 PM

Doesn't seem like you know the meaning of "ominous". Unless cows, whistling people, a "view", two capital letters, and the color "blue" represent something threatening to you.

OTOH, Puma, Jaguar, Panther, Tiger, Leopard, etc are ominous things.

mattyb · Nov 3, 2008, 05:10 AM

Originally Posted by goMac

Cloud computing is all bunk. With the large amount of mobile devices out and about, computing is going to go the exact opposite direction. We're going to see shared processing between all our local devices, not processing done by some giant far away cloud. Why send all your processing to be done by some far away server when you likely have more computing power in a 20 foot radius around you?

Funny, my understanding of the 'cloud' was more about the storage of data rather than processing power. Yes I know that you can host apps with Google Apps or Amazon but I just didn't think about processing being handed off.

Dumb terminals anyone?

Doofy · Nov 3, 2008, 05:39 AM

Wasn't Larry Ellison banging on about all this in the '70s?

Anyways. Screw that. I want my data and apps to be local, under my control. I'll not have my work schedule dictated to me by the ability of some knobheads at the other end of a network connection to keep the whole kit and caboodle running.

Plus, anyone who actually likes this idea is obviously an idiot who's never set foot outside a city.