Keep Trying

Robert Scoble Leaves the Stumbling Goliath

2006-06-11T16:44:00.000-04:00

Good luck to Robert Scoble who is leaving Microsoft to go to a start up called Podtech.net.

I thought for sure that Robert would stay until after the release of Vista, so I'm assuming that Vista will be a big disappointment for Microsoft, although Robert is too much of a mensch to ever say such a thing.

Who are we gonna talk to at Microsoft now? Most of the other bigger Microsoft bloggers don't do what Robert's done in terms of emailing and linking to other bloggers, nor do they see it as their responsibility to communicate with their customers.

Although it is always silly to count a big rich company out, I'll reiterate Mini Microsoft's proposal to split Microsoft up it to smaller smarter companies.

In the new world of the Army of Davids, Microsoft is playing the role of the Stumbling Goliath.

Mini-Microsoft Helps Change the Dinosaur's Insides, But the Outside is Still Ugly

2006-05-19T09:34:00.000-04:00

On April 7, 2005 I blogged the following:

I like Robert Scoble a lot. He's a really nice guy who answers emails and he's even linked to me a few time. I truly wish him continued success in whatever he does. But I don't think he's really a good example of the power of Corporate Blogging. His success constrains him in enabling his blogging to improve his company. Instead he is compelled to become a cheerleader in blogging pajamas.

If you want to see the real power of Corporate Blogging, then check out Mini Microsoft. Here's a Microsoft employee who truly realizes Microsoft is in trouble and actually has some constructive suggestions to deal with it. He recently suggested that perhaps Microsoft would be better of without old-schooler Ballmer. I'm not sure if he thinks Gates should go, but he doesn't absolve him of blame in the current Microsoft mess.

Here's to hoping that the big bloggers start pointing to this guy, because a more humble, honest and customer-oriented Microsoft will benefit everyone.

On April 11, 2005 Doc Searls objected to Mini Microsoft's anonimity, to which I responded in this post:

Doc Searls pointed to my recent post on Microsoft Blogging (Thanks Doc). He makes the following point

Problem is, Scoble has a real name, while Mini Microsoft is written by "Who da'Punk," whose unrevealing profile is here.

Who da'Punk may be right as rain, but he's also borderline anonymous. It's a lot easier to be frank and hard-hitting when nobody knows who you are.

I agree with Doc that "It's a lot easier to be frank and hard-hitting when nobody knows who you are". Sometimes people are forced to be anonymous to make important hard-hitting points. If changing Microsoft for the better is a valid goal, I would not dismiss the anonymous blogging of Mini Microsoft so quickly.

Well lucky for the Microsofties, Mini-Microsoft was not dismissed and yesterday he optimistically blogged that Microsoft was making major changes on how it treats its employees.

And to top it all off, let's see what Robert Scoble had to say about this:

Oh, and thanks Mini! These changes are due in no small part to you. Even if you don't get official props in the press releases.

Can one person change a huge company? Mini did. And we don't even know his name.

In this particular case, Mini could not have done what he did without being anonymous. And I think that the fact that he was focused on improving his company more than becoming an A-list blogger contributed greatly to his success.

Of course, Microsoft still has a long way to go as it still barely listens to its customers. I've tried communicating my concerns to Scoble many times and he is never really interested in hearing what this customer has to say, despite the fact that my Wall Street location gives me a good pulse on why the NY market loathes Microsoft.

Which is why I agree with Mini's basic premise that Microsoft must be split up into smaller more responsive companies to regain its competive edge.

Thanks to Dave Winer for the New A-Listing Mechanism

2006-05-08T10:36:00.000-04:00

Thanks to Dave Winer, Michael Arrington, Robert Scoble, Steve Rubel and others for the invention and publicity of this new A-Listing Mechanism.

It's exactly what the blogging world needs at this time.

Nick Carr - The Web's Leading Contrarian Strikes Gold Again

2006-04-27T17:49:00.000-04:00

Nick Carr is one of the most insightful writers on the Web. His latest piece cogently explains why Wikis will not be successful in most corporations.

His amazing ability to de-hype all the latest fads helps me understand why some leading bloggers try to marginalize him by unfairly classifying his sharp wit as snarkiness.

Microsoft Should Break Up Microsoft

2006-04-24T10:59:00.000-04:00

Robert Scoble has a courageous post titled How Microsoft can shut down Mini-Microsoft. He's angle is that by improving Microsoft from within, Mini Microsoft, the anonymous and increasingly influential Microsoft blogger will change his airing-the-dirty-laundry tune.

The courageous part of the post is where Robert says:

...if Mini were fired I'd quit on the spot.

I give Robert a lot of credit for truly trying to change Microsoft from within, but I think Mini-Microsoft's solution of breaking up Microsoft is the way to go. Here's what I told Robert in his comments:

I think it comes down to trust. Neither developers nor customers trust Microsoft. Developers like me don’t trust you because of technology churn and lock-in. My business customers don’t trust you because of the price gouging and the forced update cycle (without commensurate payoff) of your flag ship Office products.

Personally I think that Mini’s solution of breaking up Microsoft so they can become more customer and developer centered is the only solution, but it’s nice to see that you are trying.

Seven Rules for Corporate Blogging

2006-03-27T13:38:00.000-05:00

I don't know if it's because I like the number seven (ie 7 Habits) or because I like Nicholas Carr or because I like Robert Scoble and the fact that he can take a lot of heat, but I had to dust off the old blogging shoes and link to Mr Carr's recent Seven Rules for Corporate Blogging. Here's a sneak peak at rule number one:

Don't do it.

Getting Things Done in Blogging

2006-01-18T09:25:00.000-05:00

I accidently deleted "Blog" from my Getting Things Done list and thus have not blogged in close to a month.

One of the nicest things about blogging is that you can disappear for a long time and the blogsphere will carry on fine without you. It's nice to know you can take that long blog break when needed.

Dave Rogers on Consumerism and Commercialism

2005-12-21T08:04:00.000-05:00

Dave has another thoughtful piece on Consumerism and Commercialism. Here's a paragraph that hit home with me:

The second theme, or organizing principle is a belief in consumerism. By that I mean the preoccupation of society with the acquisition of consumer goods. It seems to me, based on what I am able to observe around me, that we have the belief that the main purpose of life, its meaning, if you will, is to be found in the production and consumption of things. This is more than simply materialism, because it is not just the mere possession of things, that is meaningful, it is the desire, pursuit and acquisition. Put simply, the distinguishing difference between consumerism and materialism is that in consumerism we value what we don't already have more than what we already do. This is at the expense of more abstract, some would say spiritual values, which might otherwise define or shape our views on the purpose of life and its meaning. And it is often to our material disadvantage as well.

Please read the whole thing.

The Benevolent Corporation - No User Lock-In

2005-12-06T11:50:00.000-05:00

Dare Obasanjo, one of the top bloggers at Microsoft posted an interesting piece on Social Software as the Platform of the Future last year. I just saw it on this populicio.us aggregator, which is why I am posting about it one year later. Here are some of the thoughts on Dare's post.

To me there are five broad classes of social software. There is software that enables

1. Communication (IM, Email, SMS, etc)
2. Experience Sharing (Blogs, Photo albums, shared link libraries such as del.icio.us)
2. Discovery of Old and New Contacts (Classmates.com, online personals such as Match.com, social networking sites such as Friendster, etc)
4. Relationship Management (Orkut, Friendster, etc)
5. Collaborative or Competitive Gaming (MMORPGs, online versions of traditional games such as Chess & Checkers, team-based or free-for-all First Person Shooters, etc)

I would include a class that I believe is the number one business application of social software and an important part for consumers as well - Project Management. Integrating that into the social software platform would be very useful.

Many people will admit that the reason they can not migrate from a platform is due to the fact that they have data tied to that platform they do not want to give up. For the most part on Windows, this has been local documents in the various Microsoft Office formats.

I recently blogged about the lock-in caused by Microsoft Office and the senseless billions we waste because of this Microsoft engineered lock-in.

Lock-in based on office document formats can't last forever and I suspect that within the next five more years it will cease to be relevant.

It's good to see that a key Microsoft employee sees an end to this destructive Office lock-in.

The interesting thing about the rise of social software is that this data lock-in is migrating from local machines to various servers on the World Wide Web. At first the battle for the dominant social software platform will seem like a battle amongst online portals.

(The above quote actually came before the end of office lock-in quote.) It is sad that Dare just hopes to replace one form of lock-in with another. Although lock-in is the key to corporate success measured strictly in dollars, it does not benefit the customers the corporation is supposed to serve. Google and Yahoo are no better than Microsoft in regard to their lock-in intention although they currently own a much less substantial piece of the lock-in pie.

What we really need is some group of Silicon Valley millionaires to decide they already have enough money (let's pick $5+ million for argument's sake) and decide that they are going to build a company that will really serve their customers interest first. And their rallying cry will be No User Lock-in.

They'll build a platform, that's useful, open, interoperable and portable - where they are not looking to have a monopoly on all the moving parts. Yes they might not be able to IPO or be taken over for $100M+, but by changing the equation and moving away from the lock-in monopoly attitude, they will be better able to serve their customers and perhaps even their employees.

Isn't their anybody out their with the strength and courage to break out of the it's-all-about-the-money trap? One can always hope and pray.

Ten Things We Love About Microsoft

2005-12-02T12:34:00.000-05:00

In the spirit of fair play, let me end the week by pointing to Download Squad's Ten Things We Love About Microsoft:

We love that Microsoft spread computing beyond geekdom.
We love to hate Microsoft.
We love Microsoft's recent openness.
We love Microsoft's remarkable agility in the marketplace.
We love Microsoft's unheralded wealth creation engine.
We love Microsoft's own wealth creation engine.
We love The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
We love Paul Allen's ventures.
We love Steve Ballmer.
We love that, from time to time, Microsoft really does innovate.

Have a Microsoftic weekend!

Is It Time to Take $8 Billion Out of Microsoft's Pockets

2005-12-01T11:29:00.000-05:00

Tim Bray of Sun recently posted Office Profits and Politics which discusses the obscene amount of money Microsoft extracts from Office lock in. Mr Bray relates that he often tells journalists that market share is part of this story:

"..., but we think that our interests, and the customers’, are both best-served when there’s no file-format lock-in and there’s a wide-open competitive market.”

Mr Bray then gets into the dollars and cents perspective:

"But indeed, there is a dollars-and-cents business dimension. And to help broaden the knowledge of those dollars and cents, I went and checked Microsoft’s Investor Relations page to look up the Office-related numbers. In the fiscal year that ended July 1st, they reported profit of $7.915B on $11.013B in revenue. The trend continu*es: in the most recent quarter (ending last September), it was $1.934B on $2.675B. Just FYI."

It's safe to say that Microsoft's $8 billion dollar a year cash drain from the Office products is not serving the interests of other businesses and consumers. We can finally start to do something about it by encouraging the use of Open Document Formats wherever we have any influence.

Why Office Formats Matter

2005-11-29T09:35:00.000-05:00

Tim Bray of Sun recently called for one standard Open Document Format (ODF) based on the current Oasis standard.

After smearing Mr. Bray with a hypocrisy label, Dare Obasanjo of Microsoft explains that Microsoft needs to move forward with a legacy compatible format (O12X) as soon as possible and can not wait for the standards process to plod forward.

Dare's answer sounds reasonable, but it is clear that Microsoft's primary business objective is to retain control of the enabling Office architecture (O12X). Even after Microsoft's ECMA approval, they will still effectively control the direction of the standard.

Dave Winer complains that he doesn't care about this issue and therefore it's not important.

The reason this is important is that every year businesses of all sizes spend billions of dollars on Microsoft Office for features they never use or could live with out. This is due to Microsoft's brillant lock-in strategy which Mr Winer often complains about.

If the Oasis ODF standard is widely adopted by the business community, we will see increasingly improved Office Suites at one tenth the price and great free versions as well. The money no longer going into the pockets of Microsoft will be used on development projects that add real value to the business and help their customers.

In addition, developers of all stripes will create unbelievable mash ups of Office Docs which will make Google Map mash-ups look like the toys that they are.

So this is an issue that does matter and it is clear that the Oasis Open Document Format is best for almost anybody who is not a Microsoft employee. So do all you can to push for ODF adoption in your organization.

Contrarian Carr on Blogging

2005-11-23T12:10:00.000-05:00

I've always got a lot of mileage reading contrarians. Which is why I regularly consume the words of both Dvorak and Winer. My current favorite is Nicholas Carr, best known for his "Does IT Matter?" writings.

In a recent entry, Mr. Carr addresses the topic of what's wrong with blogging. Here's an excerpt:
The blogosphere's a seductive place - it's easy to get caught up in it - and there's lots of interesting thoughts and opinions bouncing around amid the general clatter. But does it really provide a good way of becoming informed? Experiencing the blogosphere feels a lot like intellectual hydroplaning - skimming along the surface of many ideas, rarely going deep. It's impressionistic, not contemplative. Fun? Sure. Invigorating? Absolutely. Socratic? I'm not convinced. Preferable to the old world? It's nice to think so.

For all the self-important talk about social networks, couldn't a case be made that the blogosphere, and the internet in general, is basically an anti-social place, a fantasy of community crowded with isolated egos pretending to connect?

Mr Carr takes it a little too far, as is the tendency of many contrarians. But I agree that the pace of blogging does not allow for much depth. And to call it Socratic, like Dan Farber did, is quite humorous. As far as information, I think we would all be better off if we spent more time reading books.

But at the end of the day, many of us have created meaningful friendships and have learned a bit more about the human condition, which may justify the time cost of admission. I'm not sure, but here I am still playing the game.

Oogling Google

2005-11-22T18:56:00.000-05:00

Some more interesting articles about Google.

Here are some Disturbing Facts About Google including:

2. Google records everything they can:
...
3. Google retains all data indefinitely:
...
4. Google won't say why they need this data:
...
5. Google hires spooks:
...
6. Google's toolbar is spyware:

And The Great Google Wipeout Chronicle of a Corporate Death Foretold:

Having plunged into too many businesses at once, Google had become distracted. Regulators throttled its local Wi-Fi initiative. Its plan to build out ad-supported computer services—word processors, spreadsheets, databases—for end users had died when Microsoft jumped in first with a superior polished suite. Google, as users of its desktop search had learned, wasn't good at writing client applications. Microsoft, now run by Scott Moore, who had defected back to the company from Yahoo!, continued to trump Google on the desktop and used its know-how and market muscle to write lingua franca search and communications software for all the smart devices, services, and nano-gizmos that people were plugging into the Web: phones, media players, medical monitors, life recorders, cars, houses, ships at sea, personal satellites, and USB-ready newborns as well as the Club Webs belonging to individuals and institutions.

I feel a little guilty about blogging negatively about Google using Blogger on Blogspot, since I do appreciated the years of solid service they've provided. But if Google's mantra is to "Do No Evil", which of course is impossible for a public company, then I'm sure they appreciate all input to set them in the right direction.

Cringley On Google's Domination

2005-11-21T08:00:00.000-05:00

Robert Cringley has an interesting piece on how Google will dominate the Internet:

There will be the Internet, and then there will be the Google Internet, superimposed on top. We'll use it without even knowing. The Google Internet will be faster, safer, and cheaper. With the advent of widespread GoogleBase (again a bit-schlepping app that can be used in a thousand ways -- most of them not even envisioned by Google) there's suddenly a new kind of marketplace for data with everything a transaction in the most literal sense as Google takes over the role of trusted third-party info-escrow agent for all world business. That's the goal.

All this is based, of course, on Google's proven network and hardware expertise. Have you seen Google's Search Appliance? They ship you a 1U prebuilt server. You connect it to your network, fill out a simple configuration screen, and it scans and indexes your web site (or sites) for you. Google monitors and manages it remotely, and sucks up the data and adds it to theirs. You just plug the thing in and turn it on. It just works. You need do nothing else to keep it running. Google understands how to do this stuff. Microsoft definitely does not.

And there lies the differences between the two companies. Last week, I wrote about Windows Live and Office Live as Microsoft's best attempts at pretending to be Google. And Google will do those kinds of applications, too. But they'll build them atop a network infrastructure that Microsoft can't match.

Worth a read if you have five minutes. But the recent breach of Gmail might put a damper on the scenario that Cringley has laid out.

Seth Godin on How to Get Unstuck

2005-11-15T10:45:00.000-05:00

Seth Godin has one of the best minds in the blogosphere today. Recently he blogged an entry on how to unstick your life or company, which he titled "Understanding Local Max".

Since he uses a simple chart to make his point you need to read the post to get the flavor. It is short, insightful amd an easy read. If you haven't already seen it, give it a spin.

37 Signals Stands Up For Honesty

2005-11-14T13:10:00.000-05:00

Jason Fried of 37 Signals recently posted:

Jason Kottke is blogging his trip to Hong Kong. In an entry about having dim sum with a few girls writing an article on blogging, he mentions:

"A favorite conversational tidbit was that when you buy fake electronics in Hong Kong, they ask you which logo you want on it (Sony, Panasonic, NEC, etc.) and then affix the proper sticker. Awesome."

Tongue-in-cheek or not, there’s nothing awesome about IP/brand theft. On the surface it’s funny for a second, but that’s where the humor and awesomeness end. When it becomes ok to steal someone’s brand, copy someone’s product, or blatantly rip off someone else’s design for your profit, well, we’re all in trouble.
...

You know, everyone wants corporations to be more like people — more responsible, more honest, more respectful of the environment, etc. Yet we’re not as quick to treat corporations like people. We want to see what we can to do scam them. We want to see what we can do to take advantage of them. We call it awesome when people take their brands or their IP. Respect is a two-way street.

In the 37 Signals' comments, the overwhelming sentiment is against Fried. I blogged the following comment there:

There seems to be two points here, what was Kottke’s reaction to the brand theft and what is our personal reaction to brand theft.

Let’s give Kottke the benefit of the doubt for a second and assume he’s not a fan of brand theft. It does seem clear that many of the commentors to this post have no problem with some form of illegal brand theft.

I think Jason’s clear point is how can we ask for more honesty from corporations, when we are not willing to be honest ourselves. That seems to me to be a pretty good question.

If any of the clearer thinkers out there can give me some solid justification for brand theft, I'd love to hear it.

Understanding the Microsoft Gorilla

2005-11-09T11:45:00.000-05:00

Dave Winer points to two recent memos from Bill Gates and Ray Ozzie. Scoble is still reeling from their significance. Personally, I'm trying to keep from falling asleep as I read them.

To understand what is going on at Microsoft, it might be helpful to refer back to a quote from this article by the legendary strategic marketing expert Geoffrey Moore: "Companies that have proprietary architectural control over a product that has high switching costs are gorillas". And as Moore points out in the article and his book the Gorilla Game, "the market confers a tremendous competitive advantage on that vendor".

For Microsoft, Office enables the production of Word Documents and Excel spreadsheets which is why Microsoft can't switch to open formats. The Windows API (and now the .NET api) enables the creation of client software, which is why Microsoft is pushing so hard to keep the client relevant.

Open standards, the browser and Web Services are changing what matters and if Microsoft can not lock the world in with a proprietary and enabling architecture they will lose big time. In addition, the Office cash cow is coming under relentless attack from open document standards and cheaper tools like Open Office.

What they need is a Ruby on Rails for Web Services, which could possibly induce developers to lock themselves into Microsoft, but I think the problem space is too big and complex to provide a simple enough solution.

So the bottom line is Microsoft seems cooked regardless of their current product pipeline, which is drawing tremendous yawns from the community. The only question left is whether it is proper to be joyful as we watch the mighty and arrogant giant descend.

The Flattening of the Capital Hierarchy

2005-11-07T16:07:00.000-05:00

Although I certainly don't think the world is currently as flat as some in the blogging hierarchy assume, there is ample evidence that the deflating of various hierarchies is making it flatter.

In the Venture Capital Squeeze, Paul Graham illuminates the current deflation of the VC hierarchy due to the lessening need for money by startups due to four factors:

...open source, which makes software free; Moore's law, which makes hardware geometrically closer to free; the Web, which makes promotion free if you're good; and better languages, which make development a lot cheaper.

Graham points out the companies such as Google are buying companies earlier because:
What they really want is the software and the developers, and that's what the startup is in the early phase: concentrated software and developers.

Graham suggests that VCs allow founders to cash out for their first million (which is the most important to the founders) in the first round of financing to make the VC value proposition more attractive to the startup company.

It's a short and easy read and it might convince you that a good idea and a some serious elbow grease can lead to nice rewards. It might make sense to take your ideas to the next step in the current tech environment.

Some Truth From the Cluetrain

2005-11-04T09:33:00.000-05:00

I was just reading this short review of the Cluetrain Manifesto. Although I disagree with some of the substance of the book, there are clearly some great insights thoughout. Here is one the reviewer quotes:

"Every business is dysfunctional because everything human is at least a bit broken. It's not an accident. It's the human condition."

There is so much truth and insight in that statement. If I could just internalize this a little bit and try to understand and deal with my own brokeness, my own world would improve immeasurably.

Thanks to Doc, David, Chris and Rick for that one.

Have a nice weekend.

37 Signals Vs Microsoft

2005-11-03T10:40:00.000-05:00

I love the people at 37 Signals and regularly read their words and watch their products. Sometimes they generalize their particular challenges to those of the whole technical world providing some good entertainment in the process.

Today they 37 Signals guys seem to be calling out Microsoft after their Windows Live announcement.

The “run your business on the web” space is getting interesting. With Microsoft jumping in the ring in 2006, with our 4 new apps currently in development, and with some other plans yet to be announced, we’re very much looking forward to this battle of the bands 2006.

I think Scoble makes the obvious, but often overlooked point that Microsoft has a huge financial obligation to its shareholders and therefore must be in this business to make *significant* sums of money.

37 Signals seems to be growing nicely and I am looking forward to the day that somebody makes them an offer they simply can't refuse for investment or buy out. They still won't be even close to facing Microsoft's challenges, but at least it will align their perspective a little bit.

Microsoft and the End of the Intellectual Hierarchy

2005-11-02T10:48:00.000-05:00

The three most important hierarchies in the Western World are the power, wealth and intellectual hierarchies. It is very interesting to watch the intellectual hieararchy deteriorate throught the prevalent market-speak in technological circles.

Let's start with some quotes from Tim O'Reilly's take of the Microsoft Conference from yesterday:

The big takeaway: Microsoft is fully engaged with thinking about what I've called "Web 2.0." They are focused on the internet as the platform, on software as a service, on creating rich experiences across multiple devices, on live update as a metaphor for both software and documents, on grassroots adoption as a result of user conversations. They are also very clearly focused on advertising as a new business model. We're hearing all the Web 2.0 buzzwords: RSS, AJAX, social networking.

I might be missing something, but I thought this was one of the most underwhelming major announcements I've heard from Microsoft in the past 15 years. But Tim seems to be excited as the announcement was sprinkled liberally with the appropriate buzzwords and phrases.

I went to Dare Obasanjo's site to see his take on this:

From a practical perspective, when I think about Windows Live I think about three things:

1) User-centric web applications with rich user interfaces: You can expect more applications with rich, dynamic, user interfaces such as has been shown in the Mail beta and on http://www.live.com. For the geeks out there this means that you'll be seeing a lot more AJAX applications coming out of us and a focus on software that puts the user in control of their online experience.

2) Smart desktop applications that improve the Windows user experience: The MSN division has slowly become Microsoft's consumer software division. From desktop search to instant messaging, a number of key applications that were once thought of as bits that ship with the operating system are now being shipped on a more frequent basis by MSN. With Windows Live, this reality is being acknowledged and embraced. Expect to see more beneficial integration between consumer applications coming from Microsoft and our web properties such as the integration between MSN Messenger & MSN Spaces.

3) The Web as a platform: http://msdn.microsoft.com/msn was just the beginning, expect a lot more. Coincidentally I just finished giving a presentation to a few hundred of my co-workers from across the company on MSN Windows Live services as a Web platform. This is definitely an area I will be spending a lot of my time on in the following months.

This sounds a lot like Microsoft's 1995 and 2000 embraces of the Internet but maybe from deep inside Microsoft it looks like something new.

I think I figured it out. Microsoft in the past decades hired a great percentage of the smartest people in America, as Microsoft is fond of telling us. They then spent their time dumbing these people down with endless marketing hype and some good money to keep the restless happy. Now they plan to continue to substitute market-talk for good ideas and useful products.

Unfortunately it seems to be working.

Dismatling the Microsoft Hieararchy

2005-11-01T08:41:00.000-05:00

Almost every software veteran has been burnt by Microsoft at some point, whether through outlandish pricing, technological churn, poor support or buggy software. So the industry is watching with some satisfaction as the Microsoft software hierarchy starts to crumble.

I think it's safe to say that the blogosphere is an active participant in the dismantling. It gets even more interesting when a key Microsoft employee, like Robert Scoble participates in the hierarchy realignment. Today, Robert blogs in response to Ross Mayfeld, about the top 12 reasons Web entrepreneur aren’t using Microsoft’s stuff.

In the comments to the above post, Mr Scoble writes in response to the Unofficial Microsoft Weblog:

John (Microsoft Weblog): I am on a spiritual journey, but I’m not leaving Microsoft. The world is about to change, though, you’re right! Microsoft is going to need to change with it.

It is pretty clear to me that Microsoft in its present form can not adapt to the changing technological world, since breaking the hierarchy is an integral part of that change. The Microsoft Mammoth by definition needs to sit at the top of the hierarchy and can not play on the same field as the entrepeneurs due to pressure from 50,000+ employees, shareholders, the stock market and other large company pressures.

A possible solution would be listening to another important Microsoft blogger, Mini-Microsoft, who has been advising that Microsoft break itself up into smaller more nimble companies. But for the life of me, I can't imagine Bill Gates or Steve Ballmer being content with being the boss of a smaller, less powerful companies, regardless of how innovative they might be because the money/power hierarchy trumps the innovation hierarchy almost every time.

Note: I posted this quickly before a 9:00 meeting, prior to proofreading it and thus the misspellings in the title. I can't change the title now since it will change the permalink and some people have already linked to it. The World Live Web is not always all wine and roses.

Hierarchy Chasers

2005-10-31T17:02:00.000-05:00

Nicholas Carr has an good piece on the Forbes article:

Bloggers haven't been shy about pointing out the flaws of traditional print and broadcast journalism - what they often call the "mainstream media." Up until now, the criticism has been mostly a one-way street.
...
That's changing now. As the blogosphere's influence grows, its own flaws are finally getting the inspection they deserve.

Bloggers have been successfully advancing up the news reporting hieararchy with some good posting and by continuously attacking the main stream media. It should be no surprise when the empire strikes back with some flaw-finding of it's own.

There is an interesting thread at Shelley Power's blog which is discussing the further solidification of the A-List Blogging Hierarchy through tools such a Memorandum.

The promise of blogging was that the little guy can be heard and that is still the convential wisdom spouted by the A-Listers covered on Memorandum. But the hierarchy has solidified and the little guy is just a speck on the collective long tail, which is why there is some discontent.

I think that "Blogging is the Voice of the Little Guy" meme is dying and long tailers need to rethink why we're here and where we're going. Did somebody say bring back the on-the-blog posted Blogroll?

Forbes: Blogging Minus Accountability Equals Damage

2005-10-28T10:39:00.000-04:00

Forbes has a decent article highlighting the problem of lack of accountability combined with the growing influence of blogging. The author documents a few cases where bloggers caused a great deal of damage to individuals and companies. In each case a mob of bloggers acted as prosecuter, jury and executioner.

Of course it is no surprise that the blogosphere has exhibited this same mob-attack behaviour on the writer of the article. Robert Scoble conceded that there was some truth to what Forbes wrote, but suggested conversation with the mob-bloggers was the answer. The article clearly highlighted how conversation was ineffective with the blog-mob.

Power without accountability is a dangerous mix and it is very sad that the blogosphere as a group is Clueless about the potential consequences and possible solutions.