Home Interviews Developers Our View Blogs We Like The List

OurView: The Opinion Blog

These are the personal opinions of the respective authors.

February 2008 - Posts

  • Windows Live ID issues continue - Transparency: 0, Switching to GMail: 1

    The Times of London is reporting an admission by Microsoft that problems that surfaced two days ago in signing in to Windows Live services continue for some, in spite of Microsoft's proclamation that the issue had been resolved.  In a statement to the Times, Microsoft said:

    In a statement this afternoon, Microsoft said: "We are aware that some customers may be experiencing difficulty accessing their Windows Live accounts. We’re actively investigating the cause and are working to take the appropriate steps to remedy the situation as rapidly as possible."

    Earlier, Microsoft had acknowledged the problem but considered it resolved:

    "Yesterday, an issue began that has caused some consumers worldwide to experience difficulty logging in to their Windows Live ID accounts," Microsoft said in a statement. "This issue has since been resolved and normal operations have been restored to all customers."

    We wrote earlier this week about the importance for Microsoft to "win the hearts and minds" of customers who aren't locked into corporate contracts, who can easily switch to other competing services.  This is the perfect example of how a less than transparent Microsoft, with unclear and under-utilized avenues of communicating with those customers, can backfire.  We don't live in a perfect world, and there are going to be outages, even sticky-to-fix ones.  Just ask Blackberry, or Twitter.  How you handle those situations, however, is what separates the companies that will win in this new space, and those that won't.

    The Times of London goes on to quote from readers who say they are switching to other services. 

    "I think I'm most irritated about the fact that Microsoft is downplaying the extent of the problem," wrote one Hotmail user yesterday. "The outage is not resolved, and is now going into its second day."

    The company has not given any indication as to the cause of the outage.

    Several others have also suggested they will shifting to rival mail services such as Yahoo! or Gmail, Google's offering, as a result of the outage.

    "I've just swapped from Hotmail to Gmail yesterday," wrote Martyn, from Dubai. "Not being able to access my account yesterday was the final straw. I've found Hotmail increasingly unreliable and I get lots of spam too."

    'JCP', from La Jolla, in California, wrote: "For me, this is the last straw. It's hard to migrate to another service like gmail or yahoo, but the unreliability of hotmail has just gotten to be too consistent."

    Of course you can find someone to say just about anything, and we don't want to imply that there is a wholesale migration taking place (or even that the exodus is greater than these two Times readers).  However some honest communication, built into a system of transparency, in our opinion, would make a world of difference here, and in outages and problems to come.

  • Musings on MSFT-YHOO

    I keep dropping stuff in both the NewsGator Clippings folder and del.icio.us on our MSFT-YHOO page, but since Dare was kind enough to work up a chart I was just thinking about, I thought I would add a few thoughts of my own (as well as a couple of additions to his chart - DJIA and YHOO):

    msftchart (click on the chart for up to date figures)

    Much has been written about the acquisition attempt, and while things are actually playing out pretty much right to Microsoft's schedule, in the absence of any real news the speculation seems to get wilder and wilder.  From "Microsoft's investors hate the idea", to "Microsoft should buy SAP instead", pundits are scrambling for stories.  While this serves to  keep readership up, really we're just waiting for the inevitable: Microsoft acquires Yahoo!, for pretty much the offer it made in the beginning, the deal to be completed sometime in the second half of this year.

    This little lull between bombshell announcements allows us to take a look at the numbers as they settle in, however.  Pretty obvious from Yahoo!'s stock price where the acquisition announcement was made (on Feb 1), but after a drop in stock price that leveled out at something less than 10%, MSFT has followed the Dow Jones closely, both before and after the acquisition announcement.  A quick reading of the numbers shows that investors are looking at a stock price for YHOO right around at what MSFT is offering, as YHOOs price is tailing off from around $29.  And if Microsoft is seen to be a big loser in the deal, it sure isn't reflected in the stock prices of its competitors, which would seem to gain in Microsoft's loss.

    It probably doesn't even matter much whether or not Microsoft acquires Yahoo! through a "bear hug" sale, or through a proxy fight, the end result will be the same.  While I lamented Microsoft's use of back room tactics the other day, I'm sure not betting against them when it comes to getting down and dirty.  Sure there was talk about it being cheaper for Microsoft to go through the proxy fight, but my gut feeling is that it won't get that far.  There's more pressure from Yahoo! investors to sell than there is (if any) pressure from Microsoft investors to back out, even with this wild speculation.

    It's also interesting to speculate what would be happening to Yahoo! right now if Microsoft hadn't made the offer.  Jerry Yang's plan to save the company hasn't amounted to much so far.  A vague Open Search (not OpenSearch) offering, and some hand waving in the direction of new advertising tools, in light of what's happening to Google, might well have sent Yahoo! into an even deeper tailspin than what it was experiencing just before the acquisition attempt was announced.

    Of course we've got a ways to go before this all plays out, and then it starts to get interesting, with corporate culture clashes, and Asia, et al, but it sure is fun.

  • Re-branding Microsoft

    In our conversation with Bill Gates at Mix n Mash last December, Jonathon Snook opened up a can of worms by asking Gates about Microsoft and innovation:

    Jonathan Snook: There's a myth that Microsoft doesn't innovate. How do you feel that Microsoft can change that attitude?

    BILL GATES: We can't change it. If you think we just imitate, then that's -- you just can't change it.

    I was surprised at the time by the attitude, that Microsoft can't change the way it is perceived in the marketplace.  Since then, with the proposed acquisition of Yahoo!, and the announcement last week of a change in policy regarding open source, Microsoft is setting itself up for significant change, with significant risks.

    In fact, if the Yahoo! acquisition is to be successful (and many are betting that Microsoft won't be able to merge two such different "corporate cultures"), Microsoft must make significant changes: it must re-brand itself as more open, more honest corporation, and move the corporate culture from a company that succeeded by back-room bargaining and winning by intimidation, to a company that wins the hearts and minds of a consumer focused audience.

    In his letter to employees dated Friday, Feb. 22, Kevin Johnson, Microsoft's Platform and Services President, talks about the Yahoo! brand:

    Q:   How would we address the multiple brands and technologies within Live, MSN, and Yahoo!?  Which brand would we keep? 

    A:   Both Microsoft and Yahoo! have great brands and technologies.  Yahoo! has a very strong consumer brand and we are committed to build on the Yahoo! brand as a major part of the combined products and services we deliver to customers.  The Yahoo! brand is one of the reasons the combination of the two companies would create so much value.  (...)

    Microsoft won't win the hearts and minds, however, by sticking to the old-school tactics that got it where it is today: making deals behind closed doors; being less than open about its intentions; and creating a corporate culture that punishes rather than rewards openness.  Microsoft's sales tactics of old, where making a big sale after some intense wining and dining added thousands of customers, are simply irrelevant in the new world order Microsoft is trying so hard to enter.  By definition, consumers are not locked into contracts, and indeed are constantly looking for what is new, exciting, and cool, and what is personal to them.

    Danah Boyd, in her blog Apophenia, writes about technology's one sizes fits all approach to branding, and how it must change:

    I would like to offer two bits of advice to all of the major tech companies out there: 1) Start sub-branding; and 2) Start doing real personalization.

    If you're creating a new product, launch it with a new brand. Put your flagship brand on the bottom of the page, letting people know that this is backed by you - this is not about deception. Advertise it alongside your flagship brand if you think that'll gain you traction. But let the new product develop a life of its own and not get flattened by a universal brand. Some products should be niche, especially those targeted at youth; while youth are happy to use well-established tools, they also like to distinguish their practices from those of adults and mature into new brands. In other words, they aren't going to fall to your lock-in for very long. If you're buying a well-established brand, don't flatten it, especially if it's loved by youth. Kudos to Google wrt YouTube; boo to Yahoo! wrt Launch. Even at the coarse demographic level, people are different; don't treat them as a universal bunch, even if your back-end serves up the same thing to different interfaces.

    ...

    Above all, understand that no brand is universally loved and one size does not fit all. Most of us look like idiots in XXL shirts and we don't want our technology interfaces to be XXL. People like brands that fit them like a glove. The tech industry serves up ads this way; why doesn't it get this when it comes to their own brand? Technology is well positioned to create sub-brands and personalize those brands from there. It's high time for the tech industry to grow up and start doing so.

    Clearly, the Yahoo! brand is an important part of the acquisition, and Microsoft will have an opportunity to do something unique in brand marketing: take some pretty successful brand names, and give them new focus and new life. No one will expect the Yahoo! brand to just stand for what it stood for before the acquisition.  Consumers will be expecting new focus, not only a new version of Yahoo!, but a new version of Microsoft.

    However, as Microsoft has hopefully learned with the debacle that marred the launching of the Windows Live brand, they need to get this right.  Windows Live was a mess from the beginning - unclear motives, unclear branding strategy, and a less than honest approach with consumers which hurt far more than the new brand helped.  Rather than "Windows Live, the cool new brand from Microsoft", it was "Microsoft doesn't know what it is doing, the Windows Live brand is a joke".

    Danah Boyd is right, Microsoft has an opportunity to recreate its consumer face into not one new brand, but a number of smaller, more agile, more focused ones.  We've been giving some of the Windows Live official team blogs a bad time this past week, somewhat in fun, but we can't emphasize enough how important building relationships between the product teams and customers will be in building these new brands.  One commenter on our post on The Space Craft missing the boat on their own product launch said:

    most Microsoft team blogs are useless, including all Windows Live ones and others such as Vista Ultimate.

    That's a long ways from the days when Robert Scoble was leading the charge for a more open Microsoft, and we were getting real news, and getting to know the people behind the curtain.  Since those days, that curtain has been closed again.  Translucency (read: "don't blog") is the new watchword, and Softies are scared to openly communicate with consumers for fear of losing their jobs.  When the Shipping 7 blog surfaced, the word went out quickly that the person responsible would be fired, from what we heard from sources within Microsoft.  Yet from the outside, Shipping 7 was perceived almost entirely as a good thing, a breath of fresh air.

    Bill Gates steps down in July, and hopefully his attitude that "you just can't change it" steps down with him.  With an acquisition of Yahoo!, Microsoft is buying itself a unique opportunity to rebuild its image, to incorporate some "cool" into the corporation.  Microsoft needs to begin to create some of that cool now.  Aggressive, open, honest blogging, encouraged by a management that gets it (and clearly, some of the current management simply don't get it), with the realization that connecting with these new customers is far more important than protecting old-school ways, would be a good start. 

  • Windows Live Messenger, the "Installer", and XP64bit, so what's the deal here?

    Yesterday, another one of our favorite but seemingly long lost Windows Live blogs, Inside Windows Live Messenger, posted (first time since Dec. 5, woohoo!) an announcement that version 8.5 of Windows Live Messenger is to be pushed out to anyone who hasn't upgraded yet, through Windows Update.  But as an aside, one that seems to be setting off a little firestorm, the Messenger team wrote:

    A special note for those of you running Messenger 8.5 Beta on Windows XP 64-bit or Windows 2003 Server: the final version of Messenger 8.5 will not install or run on your OS. We don’t want you to get stuck out in the cold so you will not receive the mandatory upgrade to the final version. However, these operating systems won’t be supported by future Messenger versions. You may stay on your current beta version, or to get to a more stable final version we recommend that you uninstall Messenger 8.5 and go back to Messenger 8.1.

    Now Long Zheng, and Jonathon Kay, and Raphael Rivera, and others, I'm sure, are all up in arms: starting petitions even!

    OK so there are two issues here: one is that at some point Windows Live made a decision to install a "suite" of Windows Live apps through, and only through, their installer.  There has been some speculation that this is purely a marketing ploy to force allow people to try other apps in the suite when they are looking for just, for example, Messenger, or Windows Live Photo Gallery, or whatever.  And for whatever reason, the installer doesn't work with XP64-bit: that may be because one of the apps in the suite, Windows Live Family Safety, doesn't work in XP64 bit (or didn't, I haven't checked recently and don't plan to).

    It's well known that there's an easy workaround: the installer uses individual MSIs to install the individual apps, and the MSI for Windows Live Messenger 8.5 installs just fine, and works well, on XP64-bit.  Now this is not "supported", by MS, for whatever lame marketing reason, but it works just fine.  We wrote it up quite a while ago, during the beta (actually at the urging of some nameless product team members who weren't very happy that their app suddenly wouldn't work any more).  It still works.

    The second issue is the unfortunate wording in the Inside Messenger blog entry - "Messenger 8.5 will not install or run on your OS".  Well it will, we know it will, it works just fine.  Just the installer doesn't work, for whatever lame reason.  Maybe it's because the Messenger team is so out of practice in writing blog posts (try it, it's catching on! - just ask the Spaces team!), or maybe it's just that they like to feel disconnected from their users.

    Now we're sure there are probably other factors at play in not supporting Windows Live Messenger 8.5 and beyond on XP64-bit, of course one is that support for the OS is nearing an end as well, so why bother.  The issue here isn't about supporting it, it's saying it won't install when it will.  Posting misleading, condescending, and insulting lies misinformation about what does and doesn't work, especially in this era where every Joe or Long has a blog and can call you on it, is uncalled for. 

    You can post a comment on the blog entry, or sign Jonathon's petition

  • MSFT-YHOO: Why this deal makes sense for Microsoft

    As Microsoft and Yahoo! continue to entertain us with what is becoming great high theatre, we've been hearing a couple of themes repeated over and over by the bloggers and journalists.  First, that this acquisition is some kind of desperate act by Steve Ballmer and Microsoft, a last gasp effort to catch the mighty Google before Microsoft melts away.  And then there's the assertion that Microsoft is so far behind in advertising that it must resort to such desperate moves, that the whole endeavor is basically beyond hope, and that Microsoft should have never gotten into the advertising business in the first place.

    Microsoft is setting exactly that trap in order to pull off an acquisition that will greatly enhance its position.  Microsoft wants to be seen here as the great underdog.  It wants the Justice Department and the EU think that it is far behind in advertising, and that search share equals advertising potential.  However, as a new report by IDC (U.S. Internet Advertising Grew by 27% to $25.5 billion in 2007, According to IDC - Google Loses Market Share for First Time in Two Years) points out, the far more significant numbers show Microsoft, especially with the addition of Yahoo!, to be in a much better position than most of the TechMeme top 100 would lead you to believe.

    According to IDC, a MSFT-YHOO combination would put Microsoft at some 17% of online advertising, to Google's falling 23%.  That's not text based search ads, that's all online advertising, which is what Microsoft is after, and which, by the way, is growing at its fastest pace ever.  It's why MSN makes sense, it's why adCenter makes sense, it's why acquiring Yahoo! portals makes sense, and it's why acquiring all the eyeballs that a combined Hotmail/Yahoo! Mail and IM merger bring to that advertising platform makes game changing sense.

    A Yahoo! acquisition puts Microsoft in a strongly dominant position in mail and IM, where Google has been making inroads but would be far behind the combination of Microsoft and Yahoo!.  Mail and IM are important because they are sticky.  Search isn't sticky.  There's nothing to keep you from switching search providers if you find something better.  However mail and messenger are different stories.  Changing email addresses is a pain.  Being on an IM service where your friends aren't just doesn't make sense.  And when online advertising really starts to take off, then a huge numbers advantage with an audience that's not going anywhere, with built in demographics information, becomes, well, a huge advantage.

    Google, on the other hand, while it is the far and away leader in text based search advertising, really has no where else to go.  While Gmail has done well, with about 60 million mail users (to something over 10 times that for a combined Microsoft - Yahoo!), and Google Apps is a good idea and may actually be the way we do things in the future, the numbers using Google Apps now are laughably small.  Google has nothing to bridge the gap between the time when Microsoft's search begins to really catch up in relevance and users (a gap possibly narrowed with a Live Search - Yahoo! combination), and that time in the hazy future where Google Apps has taken down the mighty Office ogre.  That clean white screen brought Google lots of users but there is no other compelling reason to use it other than search. Google has no way to attract eyeballs to rich online advertising.  Yes, there's YouTube, and significant inroads into China (in the same old text based search advertising), and mobile, but Microsoft isn't giving up in mobile, either.  Microsoft + Yahoo! could change the game quickly in a quickly changing space.

    And then there's cloud computing.  I swear, sometimes I think that people think that "the cloud" really exists in some kind of cloud, that you can store all this Web 2.0 goodness "up there" somewhere.  The cloud, however, requires massive investment in data centers.  The storage required for Flickr or for Office Live Workspaces is miniscule compared to what is coming, and that is going to require not only investment, but engineering expertise in how to build and maintain massive data centers.  Microsoft has been building data centers as fast as it can, and so has Yahoo!.  A combined Microsoft - Yahoo! effort there will greatly enhance Microsoft's position.

    So, for a mere 40 some billion dollars, Microsoft is instantly only percentage points behind Google in total online advertising, has leapt well ahead in mail and IM, combines MSN and Yahoo! portals to provide a compelling reason to view all the new rich ads that are rapidly heading online and away from television and print, gets a great jump start on data centers, and causes a hell of a stir all at the same time.  This deal is a no-brainer, and we get to watch a hostile takeover, too.  Doesn't get much better than that.

  • The End of Live Search? Codename Rome - A new brand for a new generation of search

    yahoo The Microsoft-Yahoo! deal, when and if it is finalized, will bring on many changes to branding across offerings from both companies.  Some have speculated on the end of Windows Live, replacing it with the Yahoo! brand, but I don't think so.  Microsoft's strategy to use Windows Live as a value add on top of Windows is a good one.  For one thing it keeps the EU and the US Justice Department at bay, for another it allows the Windows team to focus on the core operating system and leave add-ons like Mail and Photo Gallery to Windows Live, and it allows Windows to morph into a cleaner, leaner operating system more suited to media mobile devices and the appliances of the future. 

    msnsearch Of course there are a thousand possibilities for what might happen in the months to come (and Microsoft expects the Yahoo! deal to happen in Q3 2008).  Here's my take: Yahoo! becomes the online brand, replacing MSN.com for content services, and even possibly combining mail and messenger, utilizing the strength of the Yahoo! name and cleaning up some of the residual Windows Live mess.  That would allow Windows Live to continue to deliver value adds for Windows (Windows Live Mail, Windows Live Photo Gallery, Windows Live Writer, etc).  Office Live of course will remain, and what happens with branding for cloud storage and file synch services such as SkyDrive, Foldershare, and the upcoming Horizon we'll have to wait and see.  Or not, but expect Windows Live to continue in some form, and Microsoft to make full use of the strength of the Yahoo! brand.

    google What most pundits who have chimed in on the acquisition news haven't grasped is that Microsoft plans are more far ranging than just some deranged mania bent on catching Google.  Let's stop for a minute and look at the current state of affairs.  For Google, search drives almost all of its revenue.  Google counts on consumers looking for products online to search for them using Google, and to then buy them by clicking on ads.  There's an inherent problem with this model, that there is no compelling reason to utilize Google if you aren't searching for something.  Now obviously lots of folks are looking for products, based on Google's revenues.  However, as proficient and dominant as Google is, it's easier to build a world class search product than it is to build a world class content network.  The music and television industries are rapidly giving way to content provided over the internet, content that will drive web traffic in increasing numbers, with Google having little to offer other than a clean white search box and 10 blue lines.

    windowslive What Microsoft is betting on, and what the Yahoo! acquisition puts it in position to deliver, is in the provision of next generation content to the web.   Content with a rich advertising model far surpassing what Ray Ozzie condescendingly referred to as the "10 blue lines" of Google's text ads, and integrating search of a quality to equal Google's built into that content in a seamless and convenient way.  This isn't about building a Google competitor that copies the model and hopes to catch up, its about building a new model that will better serve both users and advertisers.  And it isn't about beating Google, it's about leapfrogging Google into the next generation of online advertising.

    livesearch But while all of this is occurring, Microsoft needs to do something about search in its present form, and indeed there are plans, soon to be unveiled, that will do just that.  Microsoft has had a plan to re-brand Live Search for some time now, we first heard about it early last fall.  There was some talk of making the move with Searchification, the update to Live Search that took place last September, but instead it won't come until the next main bi-annual search update, which we're hearing will be April (regular disclaimer applies). Security is tight around the new brand name, which has already been chosen, and internally it is being referred to as Rome.com, a placeholder code name. Ina Fried picked up on Steve Ballmer using it in Microsoft's latest SEC filing today, though the only information he and Kevin Johnson gave was that it would be ready for a "release in the Spring".

    qmark Re-branding Live Search on its own, without the Yahoo! acquisition, would be a move ripe for derision by Microsoft's detractors, seen as another flailing attempt to make a move on Google.  But a new brand combining Live Search with Yahoo!,  when it comes on board, makes much more sense.  The new brand, with new market share and the combined engineering talents of Microsoft and Yahoo!, would lead the way in restructuring Microsoft's live services to accomodate the inclusion of Yahoo!.  And for those who dwell in the past at Microsoft's laughable naming conventions, consider Silverlight and Popfly and a new generation of Microsoft branding, and that Live Search has already been disassociated with the Windows Live brand, possibly in preparation for exactly this move.  With the need to consolidate search products as the top priority once the Yahoo! acquisition is in place, a move now to establish a new brand, neither Live Search or Yahoo! but a new brand for a new generation of search, comes at the right time.

    Oh and if you wondering about the choice of Rome as a codename, the well known phrase "Rome wasn't built in a day" gives some pretty good background.

  • MSFT-YHOO: Striking while the iron is hot

    y3Today's announcement by Microsoft that it is offering $31/share to purchase Yahoo! outright sees Microsoft doing the right thing at the right time.  Why?  For a number of reasons, not the least of which being that Microsoft has been planning this for quite some time.  The first indication of that, of course, is that Steve Ballmer didn't wake up this morning and decide to spend $44 billion dollars.  This is an acquisition that will have to be handled very carefully, across a number of fronts, and one that has been in planning for a long time.  Some early indications of the direction Microsoft was heading came last fall when Microsoft announced it planned to own 40% of search share.  In looking at our chart of the last year's search performance, with all of the major players maintaining their share but only growing slowly if at all, it was clear that a big play was in the works.

    Microsoft's acquisition at first glance is an effort to shore up search, and indeed that may be the main reason.  However there are other benefits to a Microsoft acquisition of Yahoo:

    • it immediately establishes Microsoft as a major player, or increases their influence,  across a number of internet properties, not only search
      • Maps, where Microsoft has great technology but not the reach it wants
      • Photo sharing.  Flickr is a great acquisition for Microsoft
      • Messaging.  Besides greatly expanding the reach of instant messaging, MS gets the new Yahoo Messenger technology, based on WPF.
      • Personal homepage: Live.com has been languishing of late, and the Yahoo homepage is probably the next best thing about Yahoo after search
      • QnA/Answers.  Yahoo Answers is the leader in the space, and Windows Live QnA hasn't taken off
    • it takes a swing at Google, the day after an underperforming earnings report and before the DoubleClick acquisition goes through
    • it preserves Yahoo's structural assets before the company's problems start tearing the assets apart
    • it sets up Microsoft's strategy going forward, at a time where it makes sense to make a course correction

    The Justice Department has already expressed interest in looking at this acquisition, and the problems of amalgamating the two companies are best taken in a slow and careful way, so you won't be seeing the full effects of this acquisition for 2-3 years, but Microsoft has been planning this move for a long time, the timing is right, and the future just got a lot better for Microsoft, for Windows Live, and for users of both Microsoft and Yahoo.

    We're going to be talking a lot about Yahoo! in the next few months and beyond.  For now, here's some links to some more on the story:

    Microsoft: Press Release

    Yahoo!: Press Release

    Danny Sullivan, Search Engine Land: Microsoft Makes $45 Billion bid to buy Yahoo!

    Todd Bishop, Seattle PI: Microsoft's Big Yahoo! Bid: Behind the scenes details

    Long Zheng, istartedsomething: Microsoft + Yahoo = Big Mess?

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