The Soul of Windows Revisited

Microsoft might have lost its focus on serving the IT community during the past several years, but the company is now making a valiant effort to get back into this group's good graces. In "The Soul of Windows," January 2003, http://www.winnetmag.com, InstantDoc ID 27392, I wrote that Microsoft was in danger of losing support from the IT community because of two factors.

First, Microsoft's marketing messages to the IT community are unclear. Advertising-driven concepts such as "One Degree of Separation" don't mean much to administrators. The company lacks a clear vision for Windows administrators.

Second, Microsoft takes its enterprise IT customers for granted. The company assumes we'll all upgrade to the newest technology simply because Microsoft ships it. Microsoft's presumption might have cost the company more than a billion dollars in delayed revenue because the company is still trying to get 4.5 million Windows NT servers migrated to Windows Server 2003 or Windows 2000. As several readers commented in letters to Windows & .NET Magazine in response to my article, Microsoft assumed that NT users would upgrade, so the company didn't bother to communicate with IT pros or advertise to them.

Since I wrote that column, I've learned about several projects Microsoft has initiated to better serve its IT customers' needs. The company launched some of these projects long before I wrote my column and initiated others after my column appeared*at least one in response to my column. (For example, Microsoft invited me to present readers' responses to my article to a group of eight Microsoft executives.)

Microsoft's community-building efforts will start with user group representatives. First, Microsoft has formed a 15-member IT Leader Advisory Council whose purpose is "to improve and foster Microsoft's two-way relationship with the IT groups and meet a set of shared objectives." One of the group's first tasks is to determine these shared objectives. The council members include presidents from 14 of the largest IT user groups, plus me. Our job is to help Microsoft assess the needs of Windows IT user groups and promote the Windows community. Microsoft intentionally focuses on a small subset of the IT professional community. The idea is to develop programs that work, then widen the circle based on the successes of the smaller group.

As a result of our first meeting, Microsoft agreed to use the Windows 2003 launch events to help promote the user groups that the IT Leader Advisory Council represents. The council members were able to offer their user group members a free 25-user edition of Windows 2003, Enterprise Edition as well as a Windows 2003 book from Microsoft Press. To get these products, members simply had to attend a specific regional launch event and the subsequent user group meeting in that region. That $2500-plus value helped boost user group memberships in those supported regions and generated goodwill among IT administrators.

In addition, Microsoft is planning to fund and conduct an exclusive Webcast and 1-day training event for each of the council members' users groups. Finally, Microsoft adopted the council members into its existing Most Valuable Professional (MVP) program. MVPs are actively involved in the online Windows community. You can see a list of Windows 2003 MVPs at http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/community/mvp. Microsoft is beefing up its support of the MVP program and corresponding Windows newsgroups, which in turn will boost the Windows IT community online. Again, many of these programs will first benefit the user group council members; then, Microsoft will extend successful programs to the entire Windows IT community.

Beyond user groups, Microsoft is sponsoring regional road shows and Webcasts that provide practical information for migrating from NT Server to Windows 2003 and Win2K. Microsoft intends to triple the number of Windows-related Webcasts available on Microsoft's Web site in an effort to boost the knowledge of the IT professional community.

Microsoft Renews Its Vows
As evidence of Microsoft's renewed interest in IT professionals, I've noticed changes in Microsoft's TV ad campaigns. The new ads show an IT administrator getting excited about the technical reasons he successfully upgraded to Windows 2003, then translating those reasons into terms his chief financial officer (CFO) would understand: "It saved us 1 million dollars." By aiming an ad at both IT administrators and CFOs, Microsoft is hitting what's really happening in the market. IT professionals know they have to go the extra mile to justify every major IT capital expenditure and make the business payoffs quickly obvious to even the toughest CFO.

Microsoft knows it has a long way to go to regain the trust of Windows administrators. But the expressed commitment from senior Microsoft executives is encouraging, and it's starting to bear some fruit. I applaud Microsoft for its phase-one efforts to reach out to the IT professional community, and I want to see this effort grow in the future.

Phase-two efforts will include a rollout of Load Fests, events at which user group members can load Windows 2003 and other Microsoft products on their own machines in a coached session, similar to the Linux community's InstallFest.

If you have specific ideas about how Microsoft can improve relations with the Windows administrator community, I'd like to hear them. Through the IT Leader Advisory Council, we now have a forum we can use to communicate with Microsoft representatives who can act on those ideas.

End of Article

Mark Smith's Fast Forward: "The Soul of Windows Revisited" (September 2003, http://www.winnetmag.com, InstantDoc ID 39749) didn't provide a lot of actionable information. Here are my comments about how Microsoft treats its certified professionals: Microsoft doesn't just take its certified professionals for granted; the company deliberately makes keeping up expensive and difficult. Each premier certification becomes extinct, or at least dated, about every 3 years, coinciding
with the release of the next great version of a Microsoft product. In addition, each year it seems we have more tests to take at a higher fee, and we need further classroom time (which is not affordable) to get boned up on the latest technology. (For the record, I am a Microsoft shareholder. I've also been an avid promoter of Microsoft products and technologies.) It seems to me that Microsoft could make an effort to establish more user groups. In addition, especially at a time when work is hard to come by, Microsoft could establish a clearinghouse for employers or certified professionals to find one another and waive exam fees for unemployed certification holders trying to upgrade their credentials. As a longtime user of Microsoft products and a certified administrator, I feel well ignored by the mother ship. I suspect I'm not the only one.

John Sikorski January 12, 2004

I read "The Soul
of Windows Revisited" and would like to give some insight from the trenches. I'm a Microsoft Windows network administrator and geek. I've been working, studying, researching, and attending seminars for the past 4-plus years. The message Microsoft is giving me is that in an attempt to increase profits, the company is decreasing the value of the computer network administrator. I attribute this problem to three factors. First, training is now a profit center. Technicians should be trained to deliver customer support service for a particular product. To deliver a good service, the technician needs to receive consistent training over time and needs to keep up with technology changes and updates. This training philosophy is being totally undermined by ads promising that for "$5000 you can get your MCSE in 5 days." This type of marketing has flooded the market with incompetent technicians. The systems administrator will soon be making $8 an hour. <P>
Second, Microsoft is flooding the market with products. If you're a private consultant and can dedicate 10 hours a day to studying, testing, and evaluating these new systems, you might become fairly proficient in some or all of these changes. But if you're out in the field rebuilding a server, training users, setting up the executive conference room, and making this quarter's technology budget proposal to the general manager, you don't have time for this frenzy. <P>
Third, the total cost of ownership (TCO) initiative hurts the IT community. The most expensive cost in a network infrastructure and computer-based business is personnel. Microsoft's TCO program is intended to eliminate my job. As always, greed exceeds integrity or loyalty. <P>
My response to these three factors is to shift my training, concentration, and recommendations away from Microsoft, Dell, Cisco Systems, and Gateway. Instead, my emphasis is on UNIX, Gateway, and home-built PCs and servers because the general public isn't as familiar with these systems and products, resulting in the increased value and need of my services.

Richard L. English January 12, 2004

I received my MCSE certification for Windows NT in 1999, and I'm frustrated with the way Microsoft treats its MCSEs. I do have some hope after reading Mark Smith's Fast Forward: "The Soul of Windows Revisited" (September 2003, http://www.winnet
mag.com, InstantDoc ID 39749). During the past couple of years, I've completely ignored the rhetoric from Microsoft; I felt that acquiring an MCSE certification had done very little for me and my quest for excellence. I have a steady job, but I like to do side jobs, and the certification showed potential clients that I have the skills to succeed in the project. But Microsoft seems to drop the ball in supporting MCSEs. Would the company consider having a free or reduced-cost support line for MCSEs? Then when we're at client sites pushing Microsoft products and features and we get into a snag while configuring products, we'll have a place to call for immediate assistance.

Matt Bonar January 12, 2004

Microsoft constantly talks about the fact that it is the small to medium size partner that is responsible for the majority of their sales. These "Microsoft Partners" are out there day in and day out pushing their products. Every year they have a partner briefing that talks about how important we are and each year they continue to ingnore those smaller partners. When asked for recommendations or partners in the area that can do the project that the customer requires, they continue to recommend the "Gold Certified Partners". I know that their name is on the line when they recommend someone, but they need to realize that those "Gold Certified Partners" cannot do it all and they are alienating the loyal group of partners that are their backbone. We may not have thousands of employees behind us, but many of us are far better technically than the engineers in those bureaucratically challanged "Gold Certified Partners". We understand that there are some projects that are out of the scope of our abilities (from a manpower standpoint, not a technical standpoint), but if they continue to bypass us, we will have to find areas where the very people we are making successful are not taking the foor off our table.

Gene Kresge February 25, 2004

First I want to say that it sounds like a good idea, but how far and wide is this initiative going to span.I hope its not just in the U.S, because don't forget that a lot of administrators are outside the U.S, and have limited exposure to 1st hand info. Decisions(sometimes wrong ones) are made through a lot of web related research. These could have been eliminated through the proposed channels.
Well, whatever is being considered should involve easily accesible channels to be set up between admins and Microsoft (and not necesarily email), especially for those of us outside the US.

Lekan February 25, 2004

"... ideas about how Microsoft can improve relations ..."

M$, and its customer-victims, could reap untold benefits IF and WHEN it starts to respect its customers as intelligent human beings. How many times have we heard the story that White Hat Hackers find a flaw, inform M$ privately in good conscience, and are simply ignored for months, thus causing public disclosure of the exploit to FORCE M$ to write a patch? This is the boundless arrogance and lack of corporate responsibility that M$ demonstrates on a continuing basis. M$ has created the whole spam/virus/Trojan/Worm/DoS thing by selling the world buggy software and willfully failing to fix it.

One effective technique for improving relations would be to actually RELATE, as opposed to ignore. A simple, inexpensive way to do this would be for M$ to run a newsgroup for EACH software product and actively solicit bug reports and suggestions for improving the functionality of its bugware; and then, squash the bugs and improve the software's functionality.

Too simple for a megabillion dollar company and tens of thousands of engineers to think of??

laurie forti February 26, 2004

During the past 24 years I have manufactured, installed and supported thousands of computers and servers, and I administered to hundreds of networks. Often I support other consulting firms when they cannot find sufficient answers to their woes using the avaialable (and often costly) support options that MS offers, and they in turn have supported me when I could not find answers or help I was seeking. I personally maintain my working knowledge of the industry daily. I read computer manuals every night, test network scenarios and solutions, and I do so for hours after coming home from working in the field every day. I test new MS products as (usually) received through my action pack subscriptions, and I attend events as I can afford to or when time allows. I serve my customers needs daily and when a client calls me I do everything possible to resolve problems quickly and do so without the benefit of Microsofts backing or support. Sure, I get the same calls from Microsoft (almost daily) asking if I'd like to add "this and that" service to my network inventory, but everything comes at a cost and the price is almost always just too high. In 1996 I received my MCSE certification while in my 6th year of administering a small network of just over three hundred machines, most of which I built by hand, run by servers I built to make use of the latest technology. Quickly enough after that certification was earned, I was hired to administer a fairly large network of 11,000 pcs that had over 30,000 end users. I did so with the support of only two other individuals (both in their young 20's) and quickly found that while we had officially contracted for MS support we had no Microsoft techs in the wings that knew anything more about their systems than I did? Within a year I had enough e-mail siasters with Exchange, server crashes from and AD integration with Novell that couldn't officially be supported, and other woeful tales that soon led me to the decision to return to the more sane surroundings of my own small consulting business. What I found in terms of Microsoft supporting me in all these environments has often left me looking for alternative means of resolution when faced with the really tough issues. If you seek suport for MS products when integrating with any other products, the support line goes dead. User groups and webinars are about all I can stand anymore as all the professional launches, conferences and various sponsored events still leave me selling sold short, if not short of cash and they give little or no information on how things get done as much as they are ad events promoting the latest and greatest whatever. AD migrations prove to be hard to achieve, and without secondary support options which now are far too costly for me, and adding the idea that anyone would ever have to integrate a Novell system in the mix, or Linux is professional suicide in my eyes? Today, I manage small business networks (50 pcs and under only) and my end users who often find themselves treading the qaugmire of Microsofts wake of product saturations have lost intereest in the stereotypical rederick. With the constant upgrades, patches, new products and lack of support for those still existing products which seem to have been forgotten by the rolling Microsoft machine, many of them (like me) have felt like turning back to paper and pencil. I'm not so sure that MS is wrong for doing what they do when they charge for support resolution. But, to mass market their products to so many admins, who understand so little about what they are getting into and to lend so little real support when things go bad... it's a wonder some days that Businesses get along as well as they do? From someone that holds 16 certifications from Microsoft, Novell, Prosoft and Comp-TIA that may sound sadly familiar to far too many admins who are hurting for answers. I still run Windows 2003 servers, and manage Novell networks as well but the thrill of working in IT has soured because of the lack of support I receive as an MS administrator, MCSE and end user of their products. Even though I still feel good when I can help others get their businesses back on track when things go bad, it's hardly enough. And still I hold out hope for better tomorrows. If Microsoft really wants to help the worlds admins and businesses in general, it has to start with the people that support how business gets done. If they can really do that, I might just become a believer again. Until then though, I'll hold onto my doubts since thats about all I can afford.

Wade Hoffarth February 26, 2004

Costs, Microsoft charge for a server licence, they charge for a client OS licence, they charge for a client access licence to use the two together, they then charge to train the administrators who require the knowledge to technically implement their software. Administrators are currently Microsoft's only real friends, IT business managers are only interested in going to the board with cost savings and will not go and ask for money to implement a new solution when the old one works fine and this is the problem. Windows98 and NT still work so why move is what the board ask? They are told there are technical reasons and they dismiss the request. More and more it is the technicians who have to make the business case and they are not given enough support, credit or reward to do this by the employer or companies like Microsoft. Microsoft should be doing a lot more for this group, without their support Microsoft do not have a future because open source will take over, because on paper it looks cheaper and that’s the bottom line.

Chris Marsden February 27, 2004

How does one find out who these user groups are, that are involved with this Advisory Council to Microsoft?

Ben Ahlquist March 03, 2004

You must log on before posting a comment.

If you don't have a username & password, please register now.