Home Interviews Developers Our View Forums Blogs We Like The List

Featured Article:

Live Search comes to Facebook with custom search page

Mashable just spotted the new implementation of Live Search integrated into Facebook.  According to Mashable:

The implementation is fairly straightforward: in the search box on the top right of Facebook, which is also used for quick access to your friends’ profiles and intrasite search, there is now an option to “Search the Web,” which in turn triggers a query of Microsoft Live Search. Results then display within a custom interface designed for Facebook.

by Kip Kniskern on 07 Oct 2008, 02:08 PM with 5 comment(s) and 1,002 views

Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live

What happens when you take the man in charge of the world’s most-used operating system and ask him to talk about the future? Not a lot when that man is Steven Sinofsky.

Ina Fried from Cnet today posted an interview she did with Sinofsky, asking him about Windows 7 and Microsoft’s plans for the future. Full credit goes to Ina for mentioning the Translucency vs Transparency memo that Mary-Jo Foley published in her book. Josh over at Windows-Connected has the translation out of corporate-speak, which in summary equates to:

“i iz keeping it on lockdown, kthxbai.”

The reason for our mentioning this over here in the online services land is that Sinofsky is also the chief of Windows Live. Oh dear. While we can see some rational behind his corporate disclosure policy for Windows, unfortunately we stand on the total other side of the fence when it comes to the Internet.

  • Microsoft isn’t winning in web services. Sure stay quiet when you’re The Man, but when your social networking products are barely a footnote and search share is going nowhere, you should probably start telling users how you’re going to deliver.
  • Microsoft isn’t making money online. Unlike Google, the Online Services Business Unit has been loss-making ever since Microsoft announced Windows Live. Sure we’ve mentioned that this is due to high-levels of investment, but what about the bloated staff numbers, continued recruitment and the total lack of monetisation plans. Softies ask yourself how many Windows Live services would get VC funding. Microsoft shareholders have a right to know how its leaders plan to turn this ship around, and frankly the silence is deafening.

Perhaps the most worrying aspect about all this is a comment made at the recent MVP Summit, where Chris Jones (Sinofsky’s under-study in Windows Live) apparently said that Microsoft could learn from Apple. From what we heard, his logic was that part of the iPhone’s success was due to there being no leaks, meaning that the PR was controlled and carefully managed. I guess Chris doesn’t read Techmeme then.

To help spell this out:

1. Develop products that are innovative, make money and people actually want

2. Don’t try to control the PR, viral marketing has taken off for a reason

3. Ship on time!

In recent months we’ve also heard that there is a pr team ready to combat any Windows Live Wave 3 leaks, which makes me wonder why Microsoft doesn’t put them to better use and actually start working with the community and putting out positive pr. The Community Clubhouse on Spaces is a start, and any Windows Live uber-users who blog on Spaces should go and fill out this survey to take part (currently private for the time being).

This movie quote is perhaps the most fitting conclusion I could find [NSFW].


Posted May 27 2008, 10:52 PM by Chris
Filed under:

Comments

AndyD wrote re: Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live
on 05-27-2008 11:37 PM

Props for the Sum of All Fears quote!

I took that survey today after receiving an alert in WLM about the blog post on the Messenger Says blog.

domanite wrote re: Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live
on 05-27-2008 11:58 PM

Without offering any personal opinion about my leadership's approach to openness, I'll point out that Windows Live has a much shorter ship cycle than Windows does.  Therefore, even if we remain mum at the beginning of our ship cycle, its not going to be *that* long before you see the goods from us.  Not to mention that for various reasons, bits and pieces of Windows Live get released out of sync with the overall ship cycle - like the recent SkyDrive update.  You don't see that from Windows.

achh1 wrote re: Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live
on 05-28-2008 1:39 AM

I think the lockdown of information is good.

It is too early to give information for creating a viral market for a product that should be shipping in 2 years time.

Also it does not make sense to talk about feature which are not 100% sure will make it to the product in 2 years time.

Like WFS which was dropped at last moment created a lot of negative press for the Vista as a product. Vista is a great product but that negative press does not help and give advantage to like of apple hippies to make fun of it.

I think microsoft is on right target by information lock down and keep on doing what you do to keep this exictment going and show us the product when you are ready to comfortably say, this is it and we will only fix bugs and nothing more.

Let the lockdown be...

MisinformedDNA wrote re: Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live
on 05-28-2008 3:24 AM

Sorry Chris, but you are way off. If Apple had announced the iPhone earlier, MS would have had more time to get started on competiting products. If MS announces its features for Windows Live, then Google and Yahoo have more time to work on competing products. There is certainly a time to come forward, but that must be carefully calculated and not just announced as soon as they're pretty sure what the next version will or won't be.

Inky wrote re: Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live
on 05-28-2008 9:09 AM

MisinformedDNA:

Over the past few years, and especially for Windows Live Messenger (but also other popular products like Writer), a  huge community has come into existance, a community that contains a lot of what Microsoft likes to call "influencers". People who actively promote Windows Live products to others.

This community was at its height during versions 6 and 7, and perhaps at the start of WLM (i.e. 8.0). Ever since it's been slowly declining, and especially influencers are now moving on to other products. My guess is because they feel they have too little influence on where the product is heading, even though they are virtually Microsoft's best free PR campaign. Less information is "leaked", and you have to see that leaks DO create a buzz, and buzzes attract new users! Also, less feedback is taken into consideration (see the recent 9.0 Connect debacle), showing further that it seems that the various product teams are distancing themselves from their users.

Do you really think complete secrecy works? I don't.. and it surely won't stop Yahoo! nor Google. The two respective companies have excellent engineers themselves, and they (especially Google) are at the center of the web. They pay close attention to what happens on the web at the moment, and they sure as hell don't need to copy Windows Live products (leaked or not) to stay ahead in the game.

I agree whole-heartedly with Chris on this matter. Windows Live is NOT headed in the right direction at the moment, and it's time for someone else to step up and take over Sinofsky's job.

wlai wrote re: Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live
on 05-29-2008 7:14 PM

Right on Chris.  Sinofsky is the WRONG guy to do this job, and perhaps Chris Jones as well.  

Case in point:  at leat two out of the five people above who cared enough to comment on this post are MS employees.

Achh1:  "too early to comment on a product that ships in 2 years time" is exactly the problem with Sinofsky's Windows Ways.  In a mature market like Windows, like Office, maybe you can envision two years out.  On the web, two years is many lifetimes.  If you are building a product that will take two years from now to ship, I hope it's something completely groundbreaking, and even more so I hope that it's something that will be relevant.  

Centralized planning didn't work for the Soviet Union, I don't get why Sinofsky thinks he can see what's worthwhile two years out.  "Ship Early and Ship Often" beats "Centralized Planning with Long Execution Time" any day, and history is on the side of the former.

ScottIsAFool wrote re: Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live
on 05-29-2008 11:30 PM

"If you are building a product that will take two years from now to ship, I hope it's something completely groundbreaking, and even more so I hope that it's something that will be relevant."

Live Mesh? ;)

Greg_H wrote re: Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live
on 05-30-2008 6:44 AM

6+ for Vista...

With Sinofsky and team in charge, they better deliver one compelling OS release.  How many times do they expect customers to return to Microsoft for a major OS release?  I think they have one last chance.

If we need to log into LiveID to use even of the new whizz-bang functionality then they have failed...

Chris wrote re: Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live
on 05-31-2008 2:53 AM

So I refrained from commenting until today just to see how this went. MisinformedDNA picked up the only negative point about pushing information out there early, however I don't believe that applies to WL (Windows yes due to the long development periods involved).

At some level, nearly every Softie I speak to isn't a fan of this policy, which imo says it all.

Hb8 wrote re: Why Sinofsky’s head-in-sand approach doesn’t work for Windows Live
on 06-03-2008 1:26 AM

So, This "Community Clubhouse" is to teach people and share how to use Windows Live Services, yet...it is closed to the public?  That's not a way to get new users to learn how to use the services.  

Too bad for Windows Live

Powered By Community Server Themed By nb development
Copyright © 2006-2008 LiveSide All Rights Reserved
Microsoft, Microsoft logos, Windows and Windows Live are trademarks of Microsoft Corporation.