TechFlash lists "Five things we really wouldn't miss" if Microsoft cut them. It's probably not a surprise to many that Zune tops the list.
But Ina Fried of cnet is adding Windows Home Server to the list as well. Two words come to mind: poppycock and ridiculous. The WHS powered HP MediaSmart Server won Macworld ”Best of Show” award just a few weeks ago. How could Microsoft ever cut a product with so must potential?
I don't know Ina Fried, but I think that on this one, he/she's dead wrong. What do you think?
Stumble Upon
Bookmark on Microsoft Social
Subscribe to RSS
13 comments:
I have to agree with you. That is just ridiculous. Microsoft would be making a big mistake if they cut WHS.
Well, personally I think they'd cut Windows 7 before they cut Windows Home Server.
My guess is that ina has never used WHS, nor sees the use of owning one!
I would hate to see it cut, but think about it in business terms. How much money do they stand to make from WHS even if its "really" successful. It's still a niche market. Microsoft is generally only interested in market categories that have the potential to be $1billion/year earners. In this context, I'd be worried about WHS a lot more than Zune.
I'm also a bit worried about Surface.
Personally I love WHS (not using HP) and think it is more than a niche since it sits on the normal Win2K3 it will increase the sales of that product too.
Also I think in the long term home servers will become more of the standard where each house has the need to centrally manage more data and devices. The WHS is just starting to break into this and I see a lot of potental there for the WHS to serve other product in the home which MS could sell.
I love the Zune, and Windows Home Server...
I have stopped listening to what cNet puts their spin on. Feel its being run by a bunch of idiots.
They were more relevant back in the early 90's, but it seems they are way out of touch on a lot of things and have fallen in complete love with Apple. Hell, they practically live in Apple's backyard.
There's no way in Microsoft's right mind that they would cut WHS, since they see a greater market developing than the enterprise server market. As some MS folks have put it, not a lot of people can afford to deploy the high level Enterprise software. Very limited market, but the Home Server market is just in its infancy and has grown faster than they have expect. And not to mention is worth billions more.
And plus they wont kill off the Zune, its got name recognition. Just too many people don't give it a shot since the big bang of the ipod in the marketplace.
I believe Microsoft is looking to thin out areas rather than dropping products. Much of that can be achieved by not extending consultant contracts after projects have completed.
- Zune will stay with us. But I do believe they will exit hardware manufacturing. Obviously mobile phones are the initial target for the Zune platform.
- Windows Home Server will also stay with us. It goes after the more affluent customer base (multiple pcs) that PC software/hardware makers need during these economic times.
I think that INA is just jumping on a FUD bandwagon, is confused and/or has sold their soul and is shamelessly doing someone else's bidding. Now that is my emotional response. What is hher premise for the choice? I am loathing having to go find what she is using to justify this point, as i to think it is ridiculous, but there must be a justification. WHS is the ultimate home computer appliance, up there with centralized air and a dishwasher.
@Ray
It might be a great appliance now, but that's only because it hasn't yet become feasible to store all this data in the cloud. Once that happens, there's really no reason to have a dedicated device sitting in your house just to store and serve up data. That's what the cloud will be for.
@seraph Do your work for a phone company or cable company? I have lived through the couple of generations of computing paradigms and have watched trend ebb and flood. As u get older you will see life is all about choice.. I am talking about MY choice, u r talking about yours. I would rather keep my data at home and not pay $120/mo for cable, $120/mo for a cell phone and $120/mo for a the "cloud". Everything in the cloud is, a choice, and to be dismissive of your opinion (seems to be the challenge), everything cloud is a "pie in the sky" approach. The nicer out is, it's about choice... neither is right or wrong. i want my data at home and my appliance has API's that does a lot more than just disk/file I/O thanks you :)
@Ray
wow, I kinda take offense to the "as you get older" statement. How old do you think I am?
I was in no way attacking you. I was merely expressing my opinion that over time the need for local storage will diminish as distributed storage becomes ubiquitous. I obviously could be wrong, and of course you are entitled to do whatever you want. Those things go without saying. But the discussion was not originally about personal choice, it was about whether MS will make a business decision to stop developing WHS. My view is that it's likely the need/desire for home servers will stop growing and start shrinking as people realize they don't need to spend money for a separate box when (practically) free storage is available from anywhere via the net. Personally, if there were no latency issues, I wouldn't have a problem putting my media online. For right now, I'm very happily using my WHS and I hope it sticks around for a while longer. But I could also understand if MS considers it a dieing business.
You don't have to take everything so personally.
@seraph
hey buddy... I think your vision is wrong. Dead wrong. I will never give up my WHS so that makes you wrong. I gladly paid for it, that makes you wrong again. AND i will pay microsoft for online storage, so u r wrong again. All of this amounts to business for microsoft. Sorry you think me telling you YOU are wrong, wrong and wrong (all 3 business $$ reasons). U r response of me taking it personally is pretty comical.
Post a Comment