Google veep calls out Microsoft's cloud software licensing 'tax'

Google is very publicly adding to the chorus of complaints about Microsoft's alleged restrictive cloud software licensing policies, claiming that unless the European Union formally tackles it, the industry and customers will suffer lasting damage. Amit Zavery, vice president, general manager, and head of platform at Google …

[alain williams]

Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

to get together and produce free/FLOSS replacements to the MS software that their customers use in the cloud ?

They do not need to start from scratch, there is plenty that would need a few extra features and interfaces to allow the enterprises' applications to work.

Obviously it will be more work than I suggest but it does not need to be 100% compatible - just as long as the effort to port workloads is not too hard.

Releasing this as Open Source will be vital so that enterprises can test it in-house ... some may use it in-house as well.

Note: they do not need to replace everything that MS produces, just what most of the cloud customers need. Start with the easy low hanging fruit.

Yes: it will cost but being able to take customers from MS should result in an overall gain.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

If they were going to do that, it would have been done by now.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

In other words people do things but never for the first time.

[NoneSuch]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

The greater the monopoly, the harder it is for the average person to leave.

This isn't a Microsoft thing. It began centuries ago and will remain as long as people are too embedded (or lazy) to go elsewhere.

Decentralized services are the key, but the accountants want one simplified payment, once a month.

[unimaginative]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

The problem with that is not replacing the functionality, it is migrating the huge amounts of existing data people have in MS systems and formats.

If what your trying to migrate is huge numbers of complex spreadsheets on individual PCs, plus everything in your mail and calender servers plus a custom .Net application or two that uses an SQL server back end, it will be a lot of work to move to a FOSS solution.

That is why you should use FOSS from the start - to avoid vendor lock-in.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

OTOH for a new project - and people do have new projects - starting with FOSS would not only be possible but a good thing.

[theOtherJT]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

Won't help. People are too deeply wedded to MS applications. You cannot convince office workers who have been using MS Office for 25 years now that there's an alternative. They won't hear it. They're not interested in the technical reasons why some alternative is just as good, or even better, they only want Office. It's been their entire career and they will refuse to change.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

And yet they did change when MS imposed a UI change. And they'll do so again any time MS repeats the tactic.

[ecofeco]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

I'm not kidding when I tell you I heard these exact words, "I hate this new menu, but I still want Office."

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

Wifey asked me to get her away from MS. She now rocks Arch (well she has no idea what her laptop is running - it just works)

I have taught word processing professionally - I have used Word since before v2.0 and Writer since it was "Sun". Wordstar and Word Perfect have slid off the CV. To be fair I have been the MD for 23 years so the CV is a bit of an anachronism for me personally.

I cannot fault LO and it still gets better - who wouldn't need a Logo interpreter in a word processor? Anyway it is easily (In my opinion) the best word processor. Word has that bloody awful ribbon thing and I do not like it. Whip up Writer now and in three seconds you have something like a blank page with some icons and menus. Do the same with Word and it wheezes into life eventually (COPD - overdid the fags!) and looks hungover and rather inscrutable.

I taught Word to various people for around a decade so you can't say I don't know it. I do love it but as an ex lover! It's now a bit odd and getting odder and slower with each release.

I am torn about that ribbon thing. I think I'll perform an experiment with my grand-daughters about it. I still have Word 2.0 on floppy - which may still work. Let's see what the GKs think of modern Word vs Word 2.

[WakeTheGimp]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

Yeah, I prefer LibreOffice now too.

I even recommend it to many of my clients.

I own a small IT support business where many of my clients are small businesses or home users that don't require the overly bloated MS office apps so LO is a no-brainer.

Why pay MS an ongoing subscription for a product that includes so many features that most people will never need or use, when there is a perfectly good, free alternative that can easily do everything you average user needs to do?

Having been a Windows user and supporter since V1.0, but I am now becoming more and more disillusioned with the direction Microsoft are taking Windows and the Office applications.

I've really started liking using Linux. Zorin OS is my preference as it's very similar to use/navigate to Windows. Or at least the 'good' Windows versions (7 and 10).

I also recommend eM Client as a good (free and paid for) alternative to MS Outlook (on Windows or Mac, unfortunately not Linux) if someone really wants a good email application. If or when they do a Linux version of eM Client, I will probably go Linux full time myself.

I donate to LibreOffice and other FOSS software providers I use as I appreciate the good work they do and admire what they are doing.

[VoiceOfTruth]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

-> Won't help. People are too deeply wedded to MS applications.

So true. Alas I meet and hear a lot of open source advocates who simply do not understand the issue. It's easy enough for a one man band who writes a few letters in Word or works on a few Excel spreadsheets to move to LibreOffice, for example. But in a company where there is a long history of processes using Office, Outlook, SQL Server, it is a completely different prospect. We see it here in The Reg about people saying "try this distro, try that distro" when it comes to Linux. Pretty much all companies are not in the business of "trying distros", they just want to get on with their work.

[ecofeco]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

...they just want to get on with their work.

And yet they stick with the least productive software platform in existence.

[tyrfing]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

I can:

a) answer this memo, or

b) uninstall this OS, install this new distro, install the versions of my "working set" of applications that the new distro supports, learn the tweaks that the new applications require, and two weeks later...

answer the memo.

The above is the optimistic scenario, and assumes no "give up on the distro and replace it with the old one" step.

This is fine if you're a YouTube streamer whose life is trying distros and filming the results - you get paid for that (although possibly quite badly, depending on what Google thinks it's worth).

It's not fine if you get paid for "answering the ^&$% memo"

[Orv]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

An example of this is Excel macros. Complex Excel macros simply do not work in any of the FOSS alternatives, mostly because they'd have to do a clean-sheet reimplementation of the entire Visual Basic for Applications stack. And the accounting departments of most companies use Excel macros extensively.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

And when Fred, who's been piling macro on macro and is the only one who (thinks he) knows what they do, retires the company is screwed, has to work out what it was all about and, if it's got any sense, does a clean sheet reimplementation.

[Orv]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

Yup. And they'll re-implement it on Excel, because that's what they used in their previous job and they don't want to have to re-educate the entire company about how to use something else.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

The thing with this sort of situation is that the spreadsheet was the wrong platform to start with. LO Calc would be equally wrong. MS Access would have been better than Excel (and probably better than LO Base; any time I've looked at that I've just shaken my head at it and I was an RDBMS specialist back in the day).

[Orv]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

I tried to use LO Base for a small, toy project once, and very quickly gave up. Sometimes you can just tell a team didn't really want to write a piece of software, but wrote it anyway out of a sense of obligation. This was such a case.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

I've often felt that way about Excel. And it seems the Word and Excel teams not only don't talk to each other but are sworn enemies who strive to make their interface as different from the other as possible.

[NLCSGRV]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

Agreed. Base is by far the weakest link in the LibreOffice suite. Like you, I've taken it for a quick spin and found it distinctly lacking.

[Zippy´s Sausage Factory]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

Having seen a lot of Excel macros over the years, I can confidently say that most complex Excel macros simply don't work in Excel either.

[Tim99]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

I'm retired but still do some pro bono volunteer work for a national accreditation authority. I typically have to assess Excel spreadsheets containing thousand of data points. A particular problem is having to find outliers which can skew the result set, usually for the worse. Most organizations use visual inspection to find each likely problem datum, and then use statistical analysis on that point to see if it is an outlier. Typically there will be about 0.3% that are outliers, and many organizations miss about a third of them. My initial thought was to publish a spreadsheet that could be used to find, check and flag outliers. An easy way would be to produce a number of (convoluted) macros.

The problems were: They are convoluted and, even with "adequate" documentation, I might be the only person who understands them. Most organizations are (rightly) suspicious of downloading and running a document with macros. The solution was to use only cell formulae. The formulae are normally protected by being "hidden", but can be easily unhidden for inspection; and each was adequately documented as to its purpose and expected outcome with an adjacent linked cell. The only significant issue turned out to be that several large organizations are still using Excel 2013 (the last version that doesn't use the subscription model) so a couple of functions were missing (like XLOOKUP) which required replacing.

[MrDamage]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

>> They're not interested in the technical reasons why some alternative is just as good, or even better, they only want Office.

Then they can pay for it, and the operating system, and background infrastructure to support it, themselves, or from their cost centre.

[Binraider]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

I disagree. Everyone in our rather large office is sick to death of teams ruinous performance, share point and the search-for-everything paradigm that means data is lost when people leave, excel’s widely documented inadequacies, word formatting essentially being gambling and generic reliability that can be compared to a Trabant.

The issue in moving is the procurement and management world that think people don’t want something else and/or they don’t have a clue how to do anything else; because they are the ones stuck with 30 years of MS legacy.

Believe me, we do.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

It has been tried, but Google, for one, has walked away from such projects, leaving users out in the cold, which makes corporate customers nervous. There was the Open Office initiative, but then MS integrated their content management system - Sharepoint - into the Office suite and that nailed down too many users to make a move then. There is also the copyright problem which appear to prevent identical interfaces to features, even within spreadsheet forumlas, that act as a constant frustration to dealing with the transition.

The only chance industry had was to put a wall between the OS and desktop applications groups to prevent them building mutual defense mechanisms that prevent taking over either one without completely taking over both. Since they have the embedded position they can spend money on new features while competitors are spending similar amounts just catching up. I have tried Libre Office and it is clunky compared to Office - it's going to take a lot of development to close that gap and MS will be working to increase the gap the whole time.

Microsoft looked at how they overtook IBM and have taken steps so that no one can do that to them. The only weak spot they had was in cell phone OS development where, like IBM, MS was too slow to respond with an internally developed new OS that might compete with MS existing OS products. To do that required Google to give Android away for free.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

Google has form for starting and abandoning all sorts of things.

[Charlie Clark]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

So, your argument to the board begins with what they won't be able to use under your plan? Thank you for your time.

To get anywhere, you have to at least convince them that there are financial benefits to the proposed change, which is exactly what Microsoft is doing.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

The thing the board needs to consider is what happens if it has a cash flow problem; the business will have replaced capex by opex and now has to meet those bill on schedule or go under.

[Charlie Clark]

Re: Would it not be cheaper for Google, AWS, Alibaba

Yes, I'm well aware of that. But, for companies that have already gone that way (putting everything on rented hardware), they're finding it hard to hear anything over Microsoft's siren song of: "cheaper licences with us". Embrace, extend, extenguish redux.

[gitignore]

Migrate to FOSS

As a SaaS provider we are gradually migrating everything over to FoSS - operating systems, databases, runtimes. So much simpler to manage as well as being about a third of the cost overall. Running cloud native architectures really helps too, rather than just porting your old microsoft SQL server over as-is.

[43300]

Don't forget that there are some things - Azure Virtual Desktop springs to mind - where they won't license it at all for use on other cloudy hosting providers.

[Vincent van Gopher]

Break it up

Microsoft should be encouraged or forced (probably forced) to spin off the various parts of their enterprise in to separate entities. eg. OS, Office and other software, cloud, games, hardware, etc. etc. Until that happens MS have far too much clout over other vendors.

A golden opportunity to do this was missed when MS was convicted of being a monopolist - it's never too late.

[Pascal Monett]

"put some kind of checks and balances on Microsoft's policies"

No, Google, what you should be saying is "put some kind of checks and balances on Cloud Provider policies".

The rules should apply to all clouds, not just your competition.

Because I see what you're doing there, Google. You're just trying to climb to the #2 spot, and you do that by dragging down the others so as to float your own boat. Par for the course, as it were, but you're fooling no one. You're not doing this for your customers, you're doing it for your own bottom line.

[43300]

Re: "put some kind of checks and balances on Microsoft's policies"

Big Tech needs reining in generally, not just the cloudy stuff.

[v13]

Re: "put some kind of checks and balances on Microsoft's policies"

That's the literal definition of allowing competition and not allowing anticompetitive behaviour. There's nothing wrong with that.

What's wrong is that Microsoft prohibits *me*, as a user, to take *my* Windows license that *I paid for* and use it on a Windows VM on AWS or Google Cloud. But it allows me to do it on Azure (which, lets face it, isn't a great Cloud).

[Claptrap314]

Re: "put some kind of checks and balances on Microsoft's policies"

Are you taking the Ron Swanson approach to what a license is? A license is a form of contract. It gives you certain rights, but not others. And you don't get to write it. You can accept or reject.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: "put some kind of checks and balances on Microsoft's policies"

But a license or contract can still be anti-competitive, which is where MS uses its market dominance in OSs and Office apps (as just two examples) to impose anti-competitive restrictions that limit their customers' choices. That is the central point that competition law seeks to address.

There is no other reason for MS to have these restrictions in place other than to hinder competition.

As for whether you can just accept or reject the contract, we'll, no, you can't. Most, if not all large organisations have built up a dependency on MS over many years, so cant simply say "thanks, but no thanks MS" - this is abuse of market dominance by MS(I.e. anti-competitive)

[Falmari]

Re: "put some kind of checks and balances on Microsoft's policies"

@v13 "What's wrong is that Microsoft prohibits *me*, as a user, to take *my* Windows license that *I paid for* and use it on a Windows VM on AWS or Google Cloud. But it allows me to do it on Azure (which, lets face it, isn't a great Cloud)."

That's not how I read the article. Your Windows license would not allow you to do it on Azure either. If you want to run Windows in the cloud a standard license is no good, you require a Software Assurance license instead. Now that's not anticompetitive, there is no discrimination between clouds, the customer is equally shafted moving to Azure as they are moving to AWS etc.

Now this is where MS get crafty you can exchange your standard Windows license for a SaaS-based license for Azure. If you want to move to AWS or Google Cloud etc you have to buy a new license, that's the anticompetitive behaviour.

So if you want to move to the cloud MS are going to shaft you, just if go to Azure you get a choice of how. SaaS-based license if you want to be slowly shafted over time or Software Assurance license if you like it swift and hard. If you go AWS or others then it's just swift and hard.

[v13]

Microsoft being Microsoft

From the company that forcefully installed Edge on all PCs and used to ask for additional money in order to enable TCP/IP on Windows.

[ecofeco]

Re: Microsoft being Microsoft

Fun fact about Edge: Did you know when you close Edge it doesn't actually close? It actually becomes a hidden TSR.

[cookieMonster]

Re: Microsoft being Microsoft

Edge?

I’ve heard I about that.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Microsoft being Microsoft

More concerning is that they have done this recently with ChatGPT.

[Grogan]

Re: Microsoft being Microsoft

Today, they'd try to ban Trumpet Winsock... weaponize some of their patents etc.

[ColonelDare]

If Microsot were like booze, I'm happily tea-total!

15 years ago I stepped out of my college lecturing job and vowed I would never use another M$ product [the UK ICT and Computing A level syllabuses were awful and the implementation at my college was no more than just training students to use M$ products - it was just training, not education in the wider sense].

15 years later a Venn diagram of 'my computer usage' and 'Microsoft' would be two non overlapping circles.

(Assuming we ignore any web sites I visit, or vending machines & petrol pumps I use that run on Windows behind the screen - I can't help that.)

[Kev99]

Isn't it possible to block mictosoft's ears so it doesn't know one is running on AWS et al instead of azure?

[Throatwarbler Mangrove]

Short answer: no. Microsoft (and other enterprise software vendors) can audit your licenses to see what's being used where. If you are found to be in violation, prepare to grab your ankles and bite the pillow.

[Claptrap314]

35 year old memo

"This is really good infrastructure. Word runs better on AWS than on Azure"

[CowHorseFrog]

Oh yes i love the good old days when only the king made public announcements and everybody could listen ...

repalce kind with leadership, same smell, same useless pigs. Same pattern just the names and titles change, but as always they give themselves lots of pointless titles.

[Greedy Goblins]

Never mind the article, who uses "veep"?!

When a journo uses "veep" instead of just "VP" you have to wonder. LOL!

[Excellentsword]

Re: Never mind the article, who uses "veep"?!

Bet you're fun at parties

[sitta_europea]

"Google veep calls out Microsoft's cloud software licensing 'tax'..."

Did the tea-pot say something about the kettle?

[Anonymous Coward]

My heart bleeds for thwm

Tough luck Google you have to pay for this it’s not your right to just have everything free

[Zorba]

While I agree that "the cloud" has its uses, this insistence on EVERYTHING being "cloud based" is ridiculous. We've come full circle - wasn't the "Microcomputer Revolution" of the late 1970s all about owning and using our OWN computers, not ones located elsewhere and controlled by others? As for Office, I've hated Word ever since I first saw it. Crashed all the time, all our secretaries were constantly yelling about lost data, etc, etc. I never had that problem with WordStar on MS-DOS or CP/M. I still use a WordStar clone to this day.