Steve Ballmer emphasizes importance of the cloud, Google pretty much does likewise
By Darren Murph 
posted March 5th 2010 12:34PM
posted March 5th 2010 12:34PM
Microsoft has had its run-ins with the cloud before, but if CEO Steve Ballmer is being serious (and we're guessing he is), the company is about to get even more connected. Speaking with computer science students this week at the University of Washington, Ballmer was quoted as saying that "a year from now... 90 percent [of Microsoft employees would be working in the cloud]." He went on to say that the cloud base "is the bet, if you will, for our company," and he noted that it'll "create opportunities for all the folks in [the] room to do important research and build important projects." It's not like any of this is an epiphany, though; we've already seen a shift to Google Documents given the ability to access it from any web-connected computer, and with the proliferation of broadband on the up and up, it's only a matter of time before it's more convenient to open a web app than to wait for your taskbar to stop bouncing. In related news, Google Europe boss John Herlihy has essentially mirrored those thoughts, calling the desktop an item that will be "irrelevant" in three years. Why? Largely because most everything you'll need a tower for will be available via a mobile or the web, but we all know that sect of hardcore gamers will keep the beige boxes rolling for at least another score.
Serious Ballmer looks serious.
SRSLYers SRSLYers SRSLYers SRSLYers
@Christian Martin They’re not just getting around to this now. This was just a speech where he dispelled any confusion about their commitment. Microsoft has been doing “cloud” for longer than Google has existed with MSN, Hotmail, Messenger etc. XBOX Live is one of the best ‘cloud services’ in the world. They have thousands of corporate customers using hosted Exchange and SharePoint
On the other hand google is planning to go an all out cloud for their devices, starting with their chrome netbook: http://bit.ly/google-chrome-netbook-rumor-overview
@Christian Martin My face has a serious look right now, since I am afraid most people will jump on the cloud train. Nothing bad about having a little bit in ze internetz. But the whole OS plus all data???
Yeah, I know, if you have nothing to hide...
Cloud is pointless if ISPs are being bitches about how much bandwidth we can all use...
@albinomexi Hence Google's new ISP initiative...They know the ISP game needs changing, even if they have to launch their own to do it. Even if they never spread from the areas they start in, they'll be creating competition and innovation in the field, which is just what they need.
@albinomexi
I think Google's FTTH is even more than just a 1 Gbps line... it will likely be unlimited bandwidth, which is, as you mentioned, the second area where most ISPs are little children.
@albinomexi
This has to be one of the greatest points I have ever read on Engadget man.
I paid for my internet at a certain speed yet I can't always get those speeds and sometimes it's not even working.
Modem mysteriously goes off and needs a call to Comcast customer service to fix (I really needed to wait 30 mins listening to crappy music only for you to ask me if I tried switching it off and on?). Yet I want my computing experience to depend on my internet connection?
And yet people are saying desktops will be dead in 3 years? Ha!
Be honest with yourselves, how many of you guys are fully confident in loading all your precious pics, movies, resumes and music into the cloud out there and knowing it's secure only because someone told you it is and gave you a guarantee.
I'm sorry Google CEO but cloud computing as a standard has a ways to go.
I see this more as an enterprise type thing where different offices can view and edit the same documents without having to send massive attachments and have the resources to keep them secure online.
But for personal use, I don't really think so IMO.
@albinomexi couldn't agree more!
@albinomexi, here's the rub (IMHO).
'The cloud' is not the problem as this is a great idea in theory. The problem, as I see it is, who OWNS the cloud??? You mention this as a enterprise solution when, in fact, I see it as just the oposite. NO WAY an enterpirse (small or large) will be willing to stick all their important (e.g.) Outlook contacts, etc. on Google's or Microsoft's cloud. NO WAY, BABY !!!
Which brings me to Droid..... I don't get it AT ALL !!?? Open architecture? Unless you're a developer and want to shove more worthless content down my throat, WHO CARES !! As I understand it, I can sync with Outlook (a MUST) but all that info is sitting on some Google cloud? ARE YOU KIDDING !!?? That ain't happening. Droid's OK for my son in college with a devise full of music, video and phone numbers for hot girls but, sorry, I have work to do, and data to protect !!
Someone tell me I’m wrong. Attach links to the contrary. I would LOVE to be a buyer of the HD2 and the Dell Mini 5 but NOT with Android and Google’s ‘cloud’!!!!
i still have no clue waht a cloud is.what ever it is as long as it looks good and functions perfectly i will have it :P
@timmyjan
Cloud is the internet. Kind of a simple concept.
@timmyjan
The cloud is not the internet. The cloud is a concept that divorces data and applications from physical machines. So if I, as a developer, develop a cloud application, I build it on top of a cloud computing framework like Microsoft's Azure. The true distinction comes when you need to scale your application up. In the standard client/server internet model, you need to buy more servers and install the application on them. In a cloud framework, you pay by bandwidth usage, so if 15 people are hitting your application, it works fine and if 30,000 people are hitting it, it still works fine because the cloud provider allocates resources to the program dynamically.
I could be a bit off on the technical details because I've never written a cloud application myself, but that's the general idea.
@Delta
That may be a compelling reason to develop for the cloud.
As a consumer/client, however, I'm still waiting for a good reason to completely rely on the cloud for my day-to-day needs. 'Sounds like a solution in search of a problem.
Jesus is that like Engadget-soft.com all of a sudden? How much is Balmer paying you!*
*Yes, I'm just kidding.
I'm a PC
No wait, I'm a Cloud
Yes Engadget gamers build beige boxes, keep telling yourself that on your way to the Apple Store.
@fourthletter YEAH! Mine's black. :D
@fourthletter every thing i need is on my netbook. everything i WANT is on my quad core desktop.
Sure Cloud is pretty cool but what about Tifa?
also many claims about the cloud are rather vaporous...
@vVv
Tifa computing would just be porn.
@Christian Martin
Both of these comments made my day. Highlarious.
Not as relevant perhaps, but I found Pivot by Microsoft Live Labs pretty impressive in their TED showcase: http://www.ted.com/talks/gary_flake_is_pivot_a_turning_point_for_web_exploration.html
considering they are turning of Xbox (original) servers off next month, and the danger servers that went down last yeah
Is really a good idea to store something on microsoft servers considering they can turn them off when they want
@OCEAN CLAK
Considering they are turning off Xbox (original version) servers off next month, and the danger servers that went down last year
and they turned of windows player servers drm servers a few years back
Is it really a good idea to store something on microsoft servers considering they can turn them off when they want ?! and loose all your data instantly
@OCEAN CLAK
I dont think you can use xbox live as a reason. There not turning it off, there just stopping it for a product thats 10 years old. They have also given a couple of months notice.
Now the clanger on the danger, that is a reason! lets hope they learnt from it!
seriously...what are they talking about,cloud?what is cloud?
@sillyhermitcrab
The main protagonist in Final Fantasy VII.
Lol. I have over 2 Tb of media on my home server, and growing. They're really going to let me put all that stuff in "the cloud", not charge me an arm and a leg for it, and be able to access it whenever and wherever? Surrrre they will.
They simply want us to give up ownership of our content, and have to pay them every time we access something, whether it be a document, mp3, photo, movie, etc.
On top of that, I don't trust them to keep it backed up. Look at that T-Mobile/MS fiasco. No thanks. I haven't lost a file in over 15 years.
@Spiny Norman, I think you can take to the bank the fact that 2 TB in harddrive will cost a lot less than what Google/Microsoft will want to charge you over time to visit their 'cloud.'
As I said earlier, this is exactly why I don't understand the interst in Android ???? Why do I want to put my important contacts, etc. on Google's cloud???? Even If I trusted them (which I absolutely don't), why would that be a prudent thing to do?????
@rcc
I totally agree that it's not something I would do, but i see value in it for less tech-savvy people. Those that just want a computer to work would love this. They would never have to be concerned with backup, hardware failure, security. Can even connect to it with your TV... wouldn't even need a 'traditional computer' anymore unless you WANT one.
@tolarindr :
I guess that's the point of my confusion. Droid isn't going on just less tech-savvy phones. We're talking about the Dell Mini 5 and the HD2. Why, on God's green earth would HTC and DELL put Droid on these highend phones? I'm sure someone gets all this, just not me.
I would rather the cloud be home based rather than in the possession of some corp's server farm. Someone make a home server (WHS Vail perhaps?) that can stream everything I want to my clients inside the home as well as my mobile devices.
I really don't care for the idea of these content providers holding all the cards. I like to be the one in control.
I've noticed that most of the Paradigm-Shift Predictions in the IT world turn out to be completely wrong. We've been hearing this cloud shifting thing for a while now.
Remember network computers?
Thin Clients?
Moving apps from the corporate desktop to the server room didn't work, so now they're trying to get home users/smartphone people to do it.
I just don't see it.
@harley3k I don't know, I consult for a company that uses Google's business infrastructure with a great deal of success. When you have a lot of remote staff, it makes a lot of sense.
@Dale P
I see your point. I recommend google-apps e-mail all the time; however my clients preferred way to access it is by using Outlook on their "desktops".
Beige?! They still come in beige?
I haven't seen a beige computer in quite some time.
I was reading up on Windows Azure and SQL Server Azure last night. I'm trying to work out what the disadvantage is over similar services from Amazon and Google. The advantage is I already work exclusively with .NET and SQL Server in my day job, and this system allows me to leverage that and have the ability to scale quickly as I need to.
I really am starting to think someone slipped something in the water supply up there in Redmond. They are on a roll this year.
Microsoft recently dissolved their cloud team in favor of a new one that will tell them what they want to hear. Expect them to follow the trend rather than lead anywhere.
I really don't see everything switching over to the cloud. Even down the road. I do really see the benefit for it on portable devices, especially with how small and lightweight we want everything.
I'm seeing a nice compromise between the two. For the stuff in the home, your personal programs, media, information, etc would still be kept locally either on a desktop or just move it all to a home server and use that as a local cloud of sorts.
Yes, all those amusing hard core gamers wanting actual control of the hardware. Can you imagine?
Hardcore gamers haven't had beige boxes for a decade. They've had black with various neon colored tubes and fans.
I really hate the whole concept of the Cloud personally. The internet access is a must, you're relying on someone else to store your sensitive information, and really, I just hope it doesn't become the norm. We'll end up with no control over our programs, we won't be able to modify anything, customize applications, etc.
If it's used to compliment what we already have, I won't mind. Some people might find it useful. But I'll be god damned if I'm going to be forced into it.
Now that Google, Yahoo, Amazon, MS, Apple, and hardware companies and Wall Street (aka hype machine) are getting onboard with the 'Cloud'.
Let remember 2002, give credit where credits due, when we all talked about that the network WAS the computer (aka cloud?). I guess you can say its time has come?
I really think that the PS3 and xbox 360 will be the last true consoles released. Seeing how it would be cheaper and easier for Sony and M$ to release any firmware update that allows cloud based gaming for a monthly fee. If done right I'd love to try it.
It will be a cold day in @#$% before I give up my "desktop" I cant wait until a virus takes out the cloud. so instead of one machine acting up 20,000,000 microsoft employees cant work?
Sony, Verizon, T-mobile, Blackberry all know this very well that one small glitch can take out ALL your customers and then what?
Why do we keep flip flopping on computer usage, first came unix, then single computers, now they want us to go back to a single point of failure system again?
Sure the cloud is not just one computer, but I do not want to be connected to the cloud to function.
What are we the borg? are we being assimilated ?
yikes....
Everyone keeps on making comments about programs, software, and data being 'out of your control' if/when this happens, but i dont see that being an issue. I see this more as you have dedicated server space (X amount of processor time, memory dedication, and hard drive space) on the cloud and you connect with a dumb client to that space. It will be the same amount of control you currently have, you just wont be able to physically touch it.
I see this as a good thing as long as a few things are true.
1) totally not client dependent. I can connect to the same space from my netbook/desktop/mobile device.
2) They undertake the burden of security, this is really the main thing i'm worried about. I would hope there would be healthy competition in this market and security would be a selling point for each company.
3) The company or the law has no access to the data without a warrant. I don't want it to be considered 'not my property' just because its not at my house.
It could be good for lots of people, because things like security, backup, and hardware failures would be handled by the people who run the cloud. The dumb terminal would require very little hardware, and would probably be cheap enough to just throw in with the subscription charge. Only thing the customer would be responsible for is the display, which could be any device the customer chooses.
Still dont think everyone will dig this model though, especially as the 'tech generation' gets older and older, and the people that don't know anything about computers keep dying. I know i wouldnt buy into it, but i've discussed this with less techie friends and its something they would be interested in.
Google emphasized it first.
Is Microsoft starting an ISP if not the internet in most US households/businesses is not fast enough to really use cloud computing.