Home Interviews Developers Our View Feeds The List

OurView: The Opinion Blog

These are the personal opinions of the respective authors.

October 2007 - Posts

  • What's the status of MSN Groups? Are indications of its demise "a hoax"?

    Hmm I seem to have created a bit of a stir over at MSN Groups.  When I posted this week on the Spaces worldwide numbers, I mentioned Windows Live Groups, and it was picked up at Managers Helping Managers, an MSN Group for Group managers.  They're concerned (can't blame them, really) about my reference to "all indications are that it will soon begin a migration of MSN Groups into a new Windows Live Groups":

    This situation is a repeat of the "secret" Adult Groups closure/moving which was also accidentally found out about on the internal MSN/Live website and which MSN denied right upto the last minute of the Adults Groups closure/moving.

    (Historical note: MSN Groups transferred all "adult" groups to the independent 3rd party World Groups in 2005, and then shut down all adult groups on November 28, 2005). 

    So the hardworking folks at MHM contacted MSN Groups Technical Support, and after being escalated they received this reply:

    My name is Dolores and I am a Subject Matter within MSN Groups department. Your e-mail was escalated to me and I would like to assist you with your concern about the information you saw that MSN Groups is closing down and that it will be changed to Windows Live Groups.

    I realize how important MSN Groups is to you. I appreciate that you have written to us regarding this.

    Joyce, the posting you saw is a hoax. MSN Groups is not closing down and Microsoft has no plans of decommissioning MSN Groups at this time.

    Microsoft has no control over email messages, Web sites, or postings that imitate company trademarks, logos, or copyrighted materials. The sources of these hoaxes only attempt to spread malicious rumors about Microsoft and may sometimes even encourage people to divulge personal information willingly. This information is frequently used maliciously or fraudulently. 

    To avoid the spread of these types of information, we advise you to delete any email you receive, or disregard postings on MSN Groups regarding this rumor.

    Any important announcement from Microsoft about MSN Groups will be posted at the MSN Groups homepage (http://groups.msn.com).

    On the other hand, it is true that Windows Live Groups is coming in the future, but it is a separate product. As of this time, we do not have any information yet about the features of Windows Live Groups.

    We appreciate your continued support as we strive to provide you with the highest quality service available. Thank you for using MSN Groups.

    Sincerely,

    Dolores

    Subject Matter Expert

    MSN Groups Technical Support

    So OK, I would prefer that you don't delete my emails, and am not too happy about being labeled as "only attempt(ing) to spread malicious rumors about Microsoft", but whatever.  Now here's where the fun begins.  If you recall, MSN closed MSN Chats on October 16, 2006.  Well someone at MSN Groups emailed Tech Support three months before then, too, and received this reply:

    Thank you for writing to MSN Groups Technical Support.

    My name is ________ and I apologize for the delay in responding to your email.

    I understand that you need to know if it is true that MSN Groups chat rooms will be closed down.

    _____, the posting you saw is a hoax. MSN is not closing down Groups chat rooms and Microsoft has no plans of decommissioning MSN Groups at this time.

    Microsoft has no control over email messages, Web sites, or postings that imitate company trademarks, logos, or copyrighted materials. The sources of these hoaxes only attempt to spread malicious rumors about Microsoft and may sometimes even encourage people to divulge personal information willingly. This information is frequently used maliciously or fraudulently. 

    To avoid the spread of these types of information, we advise you to delete any email you receive, or disregard postings on MSN Groups regarding this rumor.

    Any important announcement from Microsoft about MSN Groups will be posted at the MSN Groups homepage (http://groups.msn.com).

    Thank you for using MSN Groups.

    Sincerely,

    (Italics mine, showing the duplication between emails)

    Doesn't leave you with a sense of security that MSN Groups will be around much longer, does it?

    Now while we are expecting Windows Live Groups any time now, and indeed our friend Delores above is as well, we are not at all sure of what will become of MSN Groups.  Will there be a migration?  Certainly when Windows Live Groups appears there will be some from MSN Groups who may want to use it, and will migrate.  While we don't have any insider information about the future of MSN Groups, we do have a list of thoughts:

    • Windows Live has been making a serious effort to clean up its focus.  Does it make sense to fire up WL Groups and continue on with MSN Groups? 
    • Windows Live revamped Hotmail, in large part to clean up the code base.  Certainly  MSN Groups must be getting a little rickety by now? 
    • Maintaining a separate code base and doubling developer and management costs for little or no gain is a dubious proposition. 
    • According to Microsoft Digital Advertising Solutions, MSN Groups has some 8 million unique visitors per month, but wouldn't the bulk of those numbers look better attached to Windows Live Spaces?
    • Groups would seem to fall under The Windows Live mantra - "to connect and share anywhere", much more than MSN's concentration on commercial content.

    We really don't know what the plans are for MSN Groups.  In the long run, it probably doesn't look good.  Will a closure take place soon, or further on down the Windows Live roadmap, or indeed, at all?  Your guess is as good as ours, so place your bets in the comments.

  • Windows Live Spaces at a crossroads: will the US catch up to the world?

    One thing the LiveSide Stickers Around the World project really brought home, for someone who lives and breaths a US-centric life, was how much goes on in the world that is not neccesarily happening in the US.  I watched Robert Scoble whiteboard the Techmeme phenomenon recently, and noted his comments on how Techmeme in particular, and A-Listers in general, were English speaking and US centric.  Over here, its been all Facebook all the time lately, but when I ran across some ComScore numbers on Social Networking sites around the world, it got me to thinking, and to digging a little deeper.

    Now before we get started it may be a good idea to talk about terms a bit.  Of course some would argue that Blogger or WordPress or even Windows Live Spaces aren't "Social Networking sites", and if you mean that they're not like Facebook, then you're probably right.  However these are sites that people use to connect with their friends, to share their thoughts and ideas, and to learn more about each other.  That all of them don't have a development platform (yet), or that Scoble doesn't maintain 5,000 friends in Spaces or Blogger, really is part of the issue here.  For now, let's let the users define what a Social Networking site is by what they actually use.

    ComScore was good enough to provide me with a very interesting set of numbers:  Social Networking sites, by unique visitors per month (all ages 15 and over), broken down by region.  I fired up Excel 2007 and knocked out some charts of the data, which Sarah from Comscore was kind enough to provide in a spreadsheet.  Let's start with the North America numbers:

    (click on any of the graphs for a larger image)

    Social Networking Sites - North America: Unique visitors per month (000)

    NorthAmerica

    As expected, MySpace is in a runaway lead, Facebook is coming on strong, Blogger is hanging in there, and Spaces pretty much brings up the rear.  If you read the blogs and follow Techmeme, TechCrunch, and Scoble, these numbers aren't anything surprising.

    But take a look at the Worldwide numbers, and a somewhat different story emerges.

    Social Networking Sites - Worldwide: Unique visitors per month (000)

    Worldwide

    While Facebook is growing steadily worldwide, here the numbers tell a far different story.  Windows Live Spaces is battling it out with Blogger and MySpace for the top spot.  Just for reference, we can see that the Worldwide usage of Social Networking sites is growing steadily:

    Social Networking Sites: Total Worldwide unique visitors per month to the top ten sites (000)

    TTLWorldWide

    (note also here that for clarity I took the top 6 sites for each region, but the totals above represent worldwide numbers for the top 10 sites)

    So 800,000,000 unique visitors in the month of September 2007 to the top 10 Social Networking sites around the world.  Not an inconsequential number.

    In Europe, Spaces and Blogger again are leading the pack:

    Social Networking Sites - Europe: Unique visitors per month (000)

    Europe

    And in the Asia Pacific region, similar numbers for Spaces, but a whole new set of competitors, MySpace and Facebook not among them:

    Social Networking Sites - Asia Pacific: Unique visitors per month (000)

    AsiaPacific

    Lots of talk about Orkut in Latin America (well, Brazil):

    Social Networking Sites - Latin America: Unique visitors per month (000)

    LatinAmerica

    but Orkut is still not anywhere close to Spaces and Blogger. And to round out the numbers, in the Middle East and Africa:

    MiddleEastAfrica

    where again it is Spaces and Blogger at the top, with Facebook definitely making a move.

    Fun with numbers

    So what does it all mean?  For one thing, the future for Windows Live Spaces does not appear to be as bleak as US pundits make it out to be.  If anything, the competition with Blogger may be much more of a challenge worldwide for Spaces than Facebook or MySpace.  Certainly the market seems lucrative, with lots and lots of people blogging and posting pictures and sharing.  Spaces just upgraded its photo storage and sharing capabilities, already has the basics of a friends network in place, and all indications are that it will soon begin a migration of MSN Groups into a new Windows Live Groups to complement the recently announced Windows Live Events.  Spaces also offers tight integration with Windows Live Messenger and Windows Live Hotmail, and Messenger integration is something both Blogger and Facebook lack, or at least not integration with some 300 million Windows Live Messenger users.  Certainly Spaces has had its share of growing pains.  The old way it handled photos was unacceptable, really, but that has been addressed if not totally fixed.  Although Spaces has been out of beta since April 2005, it is only just coming into its own in feeling like a complete product, but there is a lot of work left to do. 

    Mary Jo Foley wrote recently on Microsoft's seeming reluctance to promote Spaces within the US, and indeed if you read the press in the US or follow the blogs, Windows Live Spaces is not much more than an also ran.  From looking at these numbers, though, and the discrepancies between the US numbers and those worldwide, my US centric colleagues and mentors may be a little premature in crowning Facebook king of the social network sites.

    A note on Comscore

    comscore

    The numbers used in preparation of this post were provided free of charge from ComScore, with no strings attached, and for that we thank them. 

  • What's the deal with Windows Live Home?

    Or more precisely, why are there so many Windows Live home pages? A blog post on Windows Live Wire the other day announced:

    As you probably know by now, Windows Live Home is the central page for Windows Live on the Web. It provides an easy jumping-off point to all your Windows Live web services and gives you at-a-glance status for some of them. On the Home page, you can quickly check for new e-mail, new comments on your blog, or updates from your Spaces friends without having to go to each of those pages.

    Today we’ve released a new version of the Windows Live Home page. We've taken off the "beta" tags, which means we're no longer just testing this page out--it's here to stay. 

    But is it the central page for Windows Live on the web?  What about Live.com, or MSN.com?  What about the Spaces home page?  Heck, what about Get.live.com, or even the header bar?  All of these pages offer very similar sets of offerings, but none of them seem to, as yet, pull Windows Live together all in one place.  That's been a problem with Windows Live since it was first announced, a lack of cohesive identity.

    Here's a quick recap of the major home pages for Windows Live, and some similarities and differences between and among them:
    (click on the pictures to go to each of the sites)

    Windows Live Home Pages

    Similarities

    Differences
    Just the Header Bar
    header

    New header bar, of course
    Orb
    Search
    Home
    Hotmail
    Spaces
    OneCare


    Calendar
    Office Live
    Xbox Live
    Gallery
    Windows Live Home
    home


    New header bar
    Orb
    Search
    Hotmail
    Messenger
    Spaces


    Weather info at a glance
    Updated SkyDrive upload info
    Link to Live Wire
    Link to Events home page
    Get.live.com
    get

    Hotmail
    Messenger
    Spaces
    OneCare

    No new header bar
    No search
    No orb
    Expo
    Toolbar
    Betas
    Live.com
    (you must be signed in to see your personalized information)
    live

    Orb
    Search

    No new header bar
    Personalized info
    Live.com gadgets
    Detailed mail at a glance
    RSS feeds
    Spaces Home
    (you must be signed in to see your personalized information)
    spaces

    New header bar
    Orb
    Search

    Friends updated info
    Events
    SkyDrive
    MSN.com
    msn

    Hotmail
    Messenger
    Search

    Not a Windows Live property,
    so no Orb or header

    As you can see, each of these pages are slightly different, but most contain mostly similar information. I haven't broken down everything completely, but the effect is that many of the same services are offered on most of the pages, but there are some slight differences.  Are the differences enough to warrant a completely different page?  Why isn't Windows Live Home a newly redesigned Live.com?  Is there any reason to have them both?  The new Spaces Home page, once you're signed in, is by far the most intriguing offering here, but it lacks Hotmail and Messenger integration.  An ability to add Gadgets to the Spaces page, similar to Live.com, could make all the other pages obsolete.

    And while the shift from Windows Live Search to Live Search separates Windows Live offerings into its own suite of communications related services, there's a distressing lack of support/promotion for cool new services offered by Live Search.  Certainly Live Maps 3D and the improved driving directions should be featured here somewhere?

    Windows Live has been making strides to try and consolidate the vision, to clean up the unfocused and haphazard mess that marred the beginnings of Windows Live.  Looking at these home pages, there's still work to be done.

  • Windows Live strategy session: "Go Ahead and Be Honest"

    Larry Hyrb, known to the Xbox Live community as "Major Nelson", revealed that he will be in a meeting next week with Ray Ozzie, among others, to talk about the future of Live Services at Microsoft.  Major Nelson asked on his blog for suggestions or questions to bring to the table, and as of this writing he's received almost 900 comments.

    Early next week I am attending a small internal meeting where many of the key service decision makers (like Ray Ozzie) from across the company are going to get together and have an open discussion about our service offerings, compare practices, and talk strategy. What do you think we don't 'get'? I know Google may be better in some areas, but what makes them better? What makes us not as good?

    If you had ten minutes with the CTO of Microsoft, what kind of advice would you offer? What questions would you ask? During the two day meeting, I'll be sharing some of the comments here with the attendees to let them know what the community thinks of the companies offerings and strategy. So go ahead and be honest, I’m listening and I’ll share it with the right people next week.

    Somewhat coincidentally, some notable Microsoft employees voted with their feet this week, as Erik Selberg from Live Search, Danny Thorpe from Windows Live Platform, Bubba Murarka from Windows Live, and Bungie all announced their intention to leave the company.  People come and go in any business, so it isn't right to point to a few individuals announcing the end of their employment and draw conclusions, but the Bungie announcement adds a bit of perspective.  Its pretty clear that the creative / innovative types at Bungie were unhappy with their relationship with Microsoft, to the point that a significant exodus was brewing if they were to have to remain Microsoft employees. On their blog entry announcing the split, Bungie said:

    Bungie has long been built on creativity, originality and the freedom to pursue ideas. Microsoft agreed, and rather than stifle our imagination, they decided it was in both our best interests to unleash it.

    And from the email sent to Seattle PI blogger Jake Metcalf, who broke the story last week:

    Apparently MS just wants Bungie to make Halo for the rest of their natural days, and Bungie doesn't like how MS is constantly trying to "handle" everything they do; the way they market their games, the way they interact with their fans (basically the fact that they do appreciate their fans), and how stingie they are with the profits (comparable to the rest of the industry).

    Bubba Murarka gained a bit of notoriety within the company last year as he published a Think Week paper, An Exit Interview, that caused quite a stir.  Bubba wrote on his blog about it, summing up the purpose of the piece:

    My goal with trying to impact the culture at MSFT started out of pure self interest - how can I stop complaining and actually change things that bothered me.  Specifically, I was concerned about what it would take for me to continue working at microsoft from a variety of angles. My key questions were/are:

    • Is this the place to build world class consumer internet software?  Can we make decisions fast?
    • Does the senior leadership care about the "newer" (near) leaf node people at the company?
    • Why are there so many "secrets" and "hidden" programs?  Do they have to be opaque?
    • What is the opportunity at MSFT to reach a level of impact that moves the needle and changes the marketplace?
    • How much upside is there from a personal financial point of view?  Is it interesting enough to work hard to get it?

    So, since Major Nelson has been so kind as to ask the question, and since LiveSide has never been shy about voicing an opinion, of course we have some advice:

    First: Develop a solid, deep-rooted, fast moving, and complete transition into Live Services.

    I spoke to an ex-Microsoft employee when I was at Gnomedex this summer, who told me that the culture at Microsoft was to treat anything but Windows programming as "not real programming".  AJAX and Web Services work were looked down upon, he felt.  We've certainly seen numerous instances where Windows Live and live services have been treated with pretty much open derision by others within the company.  The man to lead this charge, of course, is Ray Ozzie, but all he has done since he's arrived from an external viewpoint is given the same lofty speech about Software + Services over and over again.  'Softies refer to Ozzie's "pet projects", while externally no one knows whether the company is really behind the live services vision.  The first hurdle is to convince Microsoft employees that the world has changed, that it is time to re-invigorate or lose.  When the Windows Live initiative was first announced, the idea was promoted that the fresh faces and fresh ideas at MSN would teach the old guard at Windows how to be innovative and ship quickly.  Instead, the level of innovation and the turnaround time for new products coming out of Windows Live has slowed tremendously, and it appears that Windows has taught Windows Live how to be stifling and stodgy.  Microsoft needs to learn how to get out of its own way, to ship quickly, with fresh innovative content, and a focus on the Live Services vision.

    Next: Put names and faces on the future of Microsoft: to gain trust, to show leadership, and to focus the vision.

    Microsoft is suffering mightily with the perception that it is a nameless, faceless, overbearing "Borg", intent to destroy rather than empower, that its purpose in moving into new markets is to "Win" at the cost of all others losing, that it is not to be trusted.  In some respects, as the richest man in the world and a man driven to success, Bill Gates has personified that relentless overbearing Microsoft of old.  If the live services are to succeed, they need more than good technology, they need support from the hearts and minds of the community.  Of course Ray Ozzie is key here, and from an external standpoint he has been a dismal failure up until now.  Ray Ozzie looks like he could be a kinder, gentler software visionary, and indeed the things he believes in could and should change the way we interact with computers and the internet.  He needs to sell that vision, first as I said above within the company, but just as importantly he needs to get out here and talk to us.

    But Microsoft is a big company, with many services to sell, and one person does not need to do it all.  The power of blogging, although it is supported much more at Microsoft than at many other companies, is largely untapped.  When Steven Sinofsky took over as head of engineering for Windows and Windows Live, he clamped down on blogging about what 'Softies are most passionate about: the future.  The "secrets and hidden programs" mentality that Bubba references didn't start with Sinofsky, but he's reinforced it, and that is hurting Microsoft's ability to be more transparent about what it is doing and why it's going to be good for us.  Major Nelson has provided a face for Xbox Live, and the gamers eat it up.  Here's someone within the company that wants to know what they think!  My guess is that Steven Sinofsky is going to be at that set of meetings, too.  Where is he to ask us what we think?

    Finally: Openly and honestly face the future.

    Microsoft is in a unique position to lead us into a new era of connected living.  It possesses the massive scale necessary to connect up our online lives, an evolving but deep rooted commitment to security and privacy, a world-centric vision, and the tools and talents to put it all together. What Microsoft lacks for this transition into live services is support: from within the company,  from a distrustful public, and from competitors and partners that have been treated badly or swallowed whole.  And yet gaining trust and support is the one area Microsoft places the least emphasis.  That trust can only be gained by embracing honesty at the risk of letting a few secrets slip through, by supporting innovation without "trying to handle", and thereby stifling, creativity, and by recognizing what power real interaction with real people has on how Microsoft is perceived.  

  • Why "is MSN losing $1billion a year"?

    Today I saw a somewhat interestingly timed post about MSN's profitiability, or lack of. The analysis is based on the Online Services Business (OSB), which is split out as one of the reportable segments in Microsoft's annual and quarterly company statements. From the just published 2007 accounts, you can see that OSB has experienced a drop in profitability since 2005, which on the analysis is shown to occur in the March 2006 quarter. However the analysis fails to mention that OSB actually includes Windows Live along with MSN, and consequently this means the financial results make a lot more sense.

    1. Windows Live was announced in November 2005, there is a corresponding increase in costs in the next full quarter of March 2006. This gives OSBs first quarterly loss in the current run.
    2. Preparation for Windows Live started before November 2005, there is a corresponding smaller increase in the December 2005 costs.
    3. Research and Development costs cannot be capitalised, so that's Ozzie's Windows Live Core and other secret projects taken straight to the income statement. (Total Microsoft R&D is up $1billion from 2005 to 2007)
    4. Windows Live needs to recruit and retain the best staff in order to compete with Google, think Ozzie's dream team. Payroll costs will have increased significantly in this division as a result.

    Also this quote caught my eye:

    "In the past 12 years, in fact, Microsoft's online story has had any number or re-orgs, restarts, and revampings, but the reality has never changed." 

    Windows Live reflects a change in Microsoft's whole approach to online services. The concept of integrating the services where possible and then providing a software counterpart is like nothing MSN did before November 2005. Also comparing MSN's internet access business model to the current advertising/S+S business model doesn't work, particularly as the latter is on such a different scale both in terms of costs and potential revenue.

    So back to the question, why is Microsoft losing $1billion a year from its OSB? Investment in the future of web services, not uncontrollable advertising costs. I don't think anybody at Microsoft expects OSB to be making a loss indefinitely, they have the Entertainment division to fund after all ;)

LiveSide Latest Posts

Web Slice coming soon...
Copyright (c) 2006-2007-2008 Liveside
Listed on the Offical CS Listings Powered by Community Server, by Telligent Systems Themed By nb development Banner Logo By pxb Designed By Mark Sutherland