All posts by nancy@freetrainingkey.com

If your preparing for career change and looking for CCNA Training the best online training provider that provide the all the and complete MCTS certification exams training in just one package, actualkey.com self study training kits, save your money on bootcamps, training institutes, It's also save your traveling and time. All training materials are "Guaranteed" to pass your exams and get you certified on the fist attempt, due to best training they become no1 site 2009 & 2011.

LG may be looking to switch on Google TV

Logitech jumped off the Google TV train earlier this week, but now it looks like another consumer-electronics maker, LG, may be hopping on.

Citing unnamed sources, Bloomberg Businessweek reports that Seoul, South Korea-based LG plans to unveil a television based on Google software at CES in January. LG is the world’s second-largest manufacturer of TV sets.

Representatives for both LG and Google have declined to comment. But the report, if true, could signal welcome good news for Google TV. In the past two weeks, the Google product has not only been dismissed by Logitech, but also dogged by reviewers, including CNET’s Matthew Moskovciak, who said a recently released major update aimed at simplifying the user interface is frustratingly unready for prime time.

Samsung and Vizio are said to be working on Google TV-based devices, as well.

Google TV, which lets users view Web sites and Internet video on their home TVs, launched last year with Sony, Dish Network, and Logitech. The product, of course, has one less partner as of this week as Logitech said it will let existing inventory of its Revue with Google TV set-top box run out this quarter and won’t make another set-top box in its place.

At an Analyst and Investor Day hosted by Logitech on Wednesday, CEO Guerrino De Luca told investors that Logitech lost more than $100 million in operating profits on the Revue after bringing it to market almost a year ago. He went so far as to call production of the Revue a “mistake of implementation of a gigantic nature.”

Logitech’s move didn’t come as a giant surprise. The company earlier this year revealed seriously disappointing sales numbers for the product and accompanying gear.

Microsoft’s ‘Linux Threat Level’: Down to Green or Redder Than Ever?

“Those tablets and smartphones and web-based apps and ChromeOS laptops with their Google DNA and Linux underpinnings are all direct threats to the Windows OS, so I wouldn’t say this is a downgrading of Linux, but an acceptance that Google is going to be the primary way that most people will adopt Linux without realizing it,” said Slashdot blogger Barbara Hudson.

From Laid-Off to Entrepreneur: Launching a Web Biz on a Shoestring. “That day” has arrived. For whatever reason, the job you’ve been working for years is no longer there for you. Times are tough; people are facing unemployment in droves. In today’s economic age, however unfair, it’s a reality. What do you do now? [Download PDF: 10 pgs | 558k]

Now that Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) wants to be Linux’s new best friend, there’s bound to be no end of sweet nothings and touching gestures emanating out of Redmond.

After all, we’re pals now, right?

Lo and behold! For all you skeptics who doubted the software behemoth’s amorous words, consider a few phrasing changes it recently made in its last two annual financial filings.

MCTS Training, MCITP Trainnig

Best Microsoft MCTS Certification, Microsoft MCITP Training at certkingdom.com

‘So Much for All Those Predictions’

Whereas said documents used to include Linux as a primary threat to Windows — alongside Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) and Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) — Redmond’s documents now reportedly don’t mention any competitive threat from desktop Linux at all, according to a recent article on Business Insider, which cites a tweet by Directions on Microsoft’s Wes Miller.

Rather, the documents list only Apple and Google as Windows’ primary threats on the desktop.

Of course, embedded Linux is still acknowledged as a problem in that arena — not to mention servers, of course — but author Matt Rosoff (formerly with Directions on Microsoft as well, it most certainly should be noted) comes to a very happy conclusion anyway: “So much for all those predictions that Linux would kill Windows,” he writes.

Awww, isn’t that nice? We really *are* friends now!

‘MS Is Very Afraid of Linux’

Then again, maybe not.

“The actions ‘speak’ louder than the words,” wrote SAL-e in the comments on Business Insider.

“Microsoft is acting like patent troll and filing law-suits left and right,” SAL-e explained. “MS is very afraid of Linux, especially in the mobile arena.”

Similar sentiments could be heard down at the blogosphere’s Broken Windows Lounge.

“They only downgraded Linux as a threat on the desktop, so the underhanded FUD and legal attacks are likely to continue,” consultant and Slashdot blogger Gerhard Mack told Linux Girl.
‘The Reality Distortion Field’

Indeed, “the last time I looked, the threats Google represents to both Microsoft and Apple all carried ‘Powered by Linux’ stickers,” noted Barbara Hudson, a blogger on Slashdot who goes by “Tom” on the site.

“Those tablets and smartphones and web-based apps and ChromeOS laptops with their Google DNA and Linux underpinnings are all direct threats to the Windows OS, so I wouldn’t say this is a downgrading of Linux, but an acceptance that Google is going to be the primary way that most people will adopt Linux without realizing it,” Hudson explained.

“Of course, it would take a Microsoftie to tweet that this means ‘Linux isn’t a threat to the Windows desktop any longer,’ she added, quoting Miller’s words. “This proves two things: Apple and Steve Jobs don’t have a monopoly on the Reality Distortion Field, and Twitter — with its 140-character limit — is never going to be the source of any serious analysis.”
‘Threat Level Is Red’

Linux is “not an operating system but a component of many operating systems, all of which are taking a slice of M$’s pie: GNU/Linux, Android/Linux, Meego and WebOS,” agreed blogger Robert Pogson. “Whereas M$ used to have weak competition from GNU/Linux and MacOS, they are now surrounded and holed at the water-line.”

Microsoft is “still dishonest,” Pogson added. “A ‘PC’ is a personal computer and not necessarily one with M$’s OS. There is not much indication that demand for PCs will reduce, but PCs running M$’s OS certainly are being replaced with more functional units at lower prices.

“M$, after decades, is now having to compete on price/performance,” he concluded.

Bottom line? “Threat level is Red,” Pogson added.
‘The Year the Desktop All But Goes Away’

Hyperlogos blogger Martin Espinoza took a similar view.

“It looks like there won’t be any year of the Linux desktop, mostly because it’s going to be the year the desktop all but goes away,” Espinoza told Linux Girl.

“Pundits have long predicted the virtual disappearance of the computer as we know it, and the broad acceptance of powerful smartphones seems to be putting the truth to that once seemingly ridiculous proclamation,” he added.
‘Filled to the Brim with Zealots’

Slashdot blogger and Windows fan hairyfeet saw it differently.

In fact, Linux really isn’t a threat to Microsoft, hairyfeet told Linux Girl.

“For little shops like mine it would be really nice if it was, but it really isn’t,” hairyfeet said.

Linux also hasn’t improved in the past two years, he added: “Drivers are just as buggy, upgrades still kill hardware, waaaay too many things are tied to what kernel version you have, and the whole thing is filled to the brim with zealots that act like you kicked a puppy if you dare to point out what is wrong.

“It has been 20 years since Linus released the Linux kernel, and it still hasn’t gotten above the margin of error,” he concluded. “Why? Simple — Linux is BY geeks and FOR geeks, and not a single one with any power will listen to the users.”
‘Linux Will Continue to Make Inroads’

Chris Travers, a Slashdot blogger who works on the LedgerSMB project, wasn’t convinced that Microsoft’s changed wording had much significance.

“It does represent a developing understanding that Windows is deeply entrenched in some markets and Linux as a general operating system is not really able to unseat it at the present moment,” Travers said. “I think that Linux will continue to make inroads into these areas slowly, however.”

In the long run, though, the real threats to Microsoft and Windows may have nothing to do with operating systems, Hudson suggested.
‘The Tech Elephant Graveyard’

“It’s become an ingrained truth that Microsoft cannot take the initiative; its actions are knee-jerk responses to products and services from Apple and Google,” she explained.

“Nobody believes that Microsoft is capable of planning and executing anything really new and innovative, or even buying successful technology and integrating it,” Hudson added. “Rather, it is the tech Elephant Graveyard, the place where other companies (Danger, Nokia (NYSE: NOK), etc.) go to die.

“Of course, a more up-front appraisal would have listed Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer as the biggest threat to Microsoft,” she added. “But that’s a whole other story.”

Microsoft wants a share of Huawei’s Android profits

As a reward for its growth and successful product launches, Huawei now finds itself on the grim radar of Redmond’s patent fee hunters, who claim that Android-based hardware impinges on their intellectual property.
MCTS Training, MCITP Trainnig

Best Microsoft MCTS Certification, Microsoft MCITP Training at certkingdom.com
“Microsoft has come to us,” said the Chinese manufacturer’s chief marketing officer at an event in London last night, confirming that “negotiations are in progress” and hinting that Huawei could soon be another head on Steve Ballmer’s wall — which is already crowded with trophies.

Android’s Biggest Fan Is Microsoft, of Course

 

“Even if Microsoft were able to extract Danegeld for every Android device …, every license sold is one less WinPhone sale, one more mobile device using Google instead of Bing, one more customer lost to Android apps, one less customer for Microsoft’s mobile gaming and other services,” said Slashdot blogger Barbara Hudson. “Microsoft is basically selling a ‘license to kill’ — to kill WinPhone7 dead.”

The world’s leading SSL certificates now offer more protection and security. Now from Symantec. Download your free trial of the world’s leading SSL certificates at verisign.com/ssl/free-30day-trial.

It’s been obvious for some time now that Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) is a big Android fan, thanks to the tidy sums of cash the software giant has managed to extract from the companies that use it.

What wasn’t necessarily apparent until recently, however, is just how far Redmond’s devotion goes.

With last week’s addition of Compal Electronics to Microsoft’s Android licensing lineup, it’s becoming truly clear. It doesn’t seem premature, in fact, to declare Ballmer et al. Android’s biggest fans *ever*, so passionately dedicated have they become.

MCTS Training, MCITP Trainnig

Best Microsoft MCTS Certification, Microsoft MCITP Training at certkingdom.com

 

Compal was the 10th victim of Redmond’s lucrative new licensing line of business, of course, and its acquiescence means that Microsoft now gets a piece of more than half of all Android devices out there.

If that won’t inspire a little adoration, Linux Girl doesn’t know what will!

Redmond’s lawyers have surely been doing the Happy Dance all week. As for those in the Linux blogosphere? Not so much.
‘A License to Kill WinPhone 7 Dead’

“I think this is yet another data point (as if anyone needs any more proof) that Microsoft’s mobile strategy is on the ropes, if not down for the count, and can’t compete in the marketplace,” opined Barbara Hudson, a blogger on Slashdot who goes by “Tom” on the site.

“And just to rub salt into the wound, even if Microsoft were able to extract Danegeld for every Android device manufactured by anyone for sale anywhere instead of just the US market, every license sold is one less WinPhone sale, one more mobile device using Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) instead of Bing, one more customer lost to Android apps, one less customer for Microsoft’s mobile gaming and other services,” Hudson added.

“Microsoft is basically selling a ‘license to kill’ — to kill WinPhone7 dead,” she asserted. “This is not the way to get the critical mass of users needed to start a ‘virtuous feedback cycle’ for your product.”
‘Like Squeezing a Chocolate Bar’

Eventually, Microsoft is “going to have to bite the bullet and start giving away WinPhone licenses, and even that is probably too little, too late,” Hudson told Linux Girl. “Apple and Android have a solid lock on the market.”

Making matters worse is that “licensing fees are real balancing act,” she pointed out. “The strategy of trying to collect royalties is like squeezing a chocolate bar — squeeze too hard and you’re going to have a sticky mess on your hands as manufacturers look for alternatives.”

Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) has shown that “it’s possible to switch the underlying OS — they’ve done it several times,” Hudson noted. “In a worst-case scenario, BSD can replace Android’s Linux underpinnings.”

Meanwhile, “to milk the current situation as long as possible, Microsoft will have to be very careful not to exceed the manufacturers’ collective pain threshold,” Hudson warned. “But even that’s a loser’s game over the long term.”
The Problem With Patents

Roberto Lim, a lawyer and blogger on Mobile Raptor, saw it differently.

“If the Android manufacturers feel it is to their benefit to pay the license fees, we should assume that they do have a good reason for doing so, and not assume that Microsoft is milking Android,” Lim opined.

After all, “HTC paying license fees to Microsoft did not prevent it from having a banner year,” he pointed out.

Still, software patents — which are the foundation for Microsoft’s current licensing strategy — “do seem too broad,” Lim added. “If we applied this to technology that has developed in the past 30 years, it would have restricted innovation.”
‘Something Is Wrong With the System’

Imagine, for example, “if someone had patented clicking an image displayed on a screen to launch an application, or manipulating a television set with a remote device, or adjusting volume by sliding an indicator displayed on a screen,” he mused.

“There is a need to really look at the entire system of software patents and see to what extent they are necessary to protect investments in research and development for new ideas and to what extent patents are sought to try to create a monopoly,” Lim told Linux Girl. “Apple, for one, appears to be trying to utilize broad patents to create a monopoly.”

Today’s patent wars, in fact, are similar to domain name squatting, he concluded: “There are companies that do not manufacture anything, have no product other than patents, and obtained patents for the sole purpose of seeking royalties. When you start to see things like this, you really know something is wrong with the system.”
‘A House of Cards’

Indeed, “M$’s taxation of Android/Linux is an anticompetitive act propped up by bogus software patents,” agreed blogger Robert Pogson. “It’s all a house of cards which will fall when SCOTUS finally rules them illegal.”

For proof that software patents don’t promote innovation, one need only look at the “gridlock” that results, Pogson explained.

“Look at Oracle (Nasdaq: ORCL) v Google,” he said. “The judge is very busy and has to find a whole month to deal with it on top of the weeks already spent on the matter. The end result is that the legal fees will amount to more than the value of the so-called patents.

“In the high-tech world, patents are inhibitors of innovation,” he concluded. “These guys are not working out new ideas in their garages.”
‘They Spend Billions on R&D’

Slashdot blogger hairyfeet took a different view.

“Android DOES infringe!” hairyfeet told Linux Girl. “Have you SEEN how many patents MSFT has? They have tons, folks — they spend billions on R&D cranking out more every year.”

That, in turn, is why “FOSS needs badly to kill ‘free as in beer’ and make it, as RMS has said, ‘free as in freedom,’ because you simply have no way to build a sizable patent war chest,” hairyfeet asserted.
‘Have a Scary War Chest or Pay Up’

“Look at some of the companies that have died, like Novell (Nasdaq: NOVL) — how much better would it have been for FOSS if ALL their patents were now property of the community?” he added. “This is why, even when they were suing each other, AMD (NYSE: AMD) and Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) had cross licensing agreements, and even though they are rivals, AMD and Nvidia (Nasdaq: NVDA) have them as well.”

There are simply too many patents, in other words, to deal with them any other way, hairyfeet concluded: “You either have a scary enough war chest of your own that rivals want to do cross licensing, or you pay up — your choice.”

Google’s absence from Microsoft’s licensing campaign is “a strong sign that Microsoft is afraid of litigation in this area but trying to find some way of monetizing the competition,” suggested Chris Travers, a Slashdot blogger who works on the LedgerSMB project.
‘Every Incentive to Fight to the End’

“In other words, only the devices are licensed, not the allegedly infringing operating system,” he added. “The goal of litigation against Motorola and others is solely to flesh out licensing deals and not with the intent to bring anything to trial.”

Travers wonders, in fact, “if Google acquired Motorola Mobility (NYSE: MMI) solely to take over the patent litigation,” he told Linux Girl. “This increases the stakes considerably, and decreases the chance of an 11th hour, out-of-court settlement based solely on device manufacturing.”

Google has “every incentive to fight to the end,” he pointed out, “and Microsoft has important incentives not to.”

In the long run, “I think the only lawsuit that matters is the Motorola one,” Travers concluded.

How Windows 8 KO’d the innovative Courier tablet

Pitting product groups against one another is almost as much a part of Microsoft’s culture as complaining about the employee review system or grabbing a free soda from the employee kitchens.

Win that Darwinian battle and your group can often find itself at the heart of Microsoft’s next big product push. Lose, and you can only hope that all of your technological achievement eventually finds its way into some product in some form.

Last year, an innovative tablet concept, borne from the consumer braintrust at Microsoft, was being incubated. The vision of Courier, as the tablet was known, featured two screens, each about 7 inches diagonally. That way, users could research ideas on one screen, while drafting essays, sketching concepts, or brainstorming product plans on the other. It supported both pen and touch computing, and folded in half like a book for storage. The tech press, such as the Web site Gizmodo, which broke the story of Courier’s development, raved about the gadget’s potential.

MCTS Certification, MCITP Certification

Microsoft MCTS CertificationMCITP Certification and over 2000+
Exams with Life Time Access Membership at https:://www.actualkey.com

Inside Microsoft, though, Courier found itself in competition with a competing vision for tablet computing–Windows 8. It was late 2009, and Windows 7 had just launched that October. Plans were well under way for the next version of the operating system. Apple’s iPad wouldn’t launch until the following April. But it was already clear to several Microsoft executives that the tablet market was poised for growth. Windows chief Steven Sinofsky’s plan called for the next version of the operating system to run tablets as well as personal computers.

That vision carried plenty of weight at Microsoft. Sinofsky was a proven leader at Microsoft, having run the Office division for nearly eight years, before taking the helm of the Windows group in 2006. During his Microsoft tenure, he’s developed a reputation for shipping quality products on time, a skill that carries huge weight at Microsoft.

For Courier to come to life, the team creating it would have to convince the Microsoft brass that the device would offer the company substantial opportunities that Windows 8 could not. In the end, that proved to be too large a hurdle for J Allard, Courier’s leader and Microsoft’s chief consumer technology visionary.

To tell this story, CNET interviewed 18 current and former Microsoft executives, as well as contractors and partners who worked on the Courier project. None of the Microsoft employees, both current and former, would talk for attribution about the project, worrying about potential repercussions from the company. Microsoft’s top spokesman, Frank Shaw, offered only a brief comment for this story and otherwise declined to make Microsoft’s senior executives available.

While dramatically different personalities, Allard and Sinofsky are deeply connected in Microsoft lore. As young Microsoft employees in the mid-1990s, the duo separately warned then-Chief Executive Bill Gates about the looming promise and threat of the Internet.

In 1994, Allard, a 25-year-old programmer only three years into his Microsoft career, wrote a memo titled “Windows: The Next Killer Application on the Internet,” which found its way to Gates. He urged Microsoft to create tools to help Internet users before rivals did.

“Embrace, extend, then innovate,” Allard wrote. “Change the rules: Windows becomes the next-generation Internet tool of the future!”

Just about the same time, Sinofsky, five years into his Microsoft tenure, was working as Gates’ technical assistant. He had a revelation on a recruiting trip to his alma mater, Cornell University. While there, he watched students using e-mail and checking course lists on the Web. He sent a breathless e-mail to Gates upon his return with the heading, “Cornell is WIRED!,” urging his boss to embrace the Web. Back then, the company turned to both Sinofsky and Allard to help create Microsoft’s initial Internet strategy.

Over the years, Sinofsky, like Allard, climbed the corporate ladder. But his climb was very much on the corporate software side. After eight years at the Office helm, Ballmer asked Sinofsky in 2006 to clean up the mess that Windows Vista had created. The much-panned operating system, released that November, took Microsoft five years to produce. Almost immediately, reviewers and corporate tech buyers expressed reservations about its compatibility with legacy technology. Others complained about the operating system being bloated and slow.

Windows 7 debuted in 2009 under Sinofsky’s leadership. And while it wasn’t a revolutionary operating system that users craved, it fixed many of the problems that Vista created and surpassed the low expectations its predecessor had set. In its review, CNET described Windows 7 as “stable, smooth, and highly polished.”

Business savvy vs. innovation
Fixing Windows coupled with Sinofsky’s track record for producing successful products gave him clout with Ballmer and Microsoft’s senior leadership team, which ultimately decided Courier’s fate.

“Steven (Sinofsky)’s business savvy trumps everyone’s innovative instincts,” said a former Microsoft executive who worked on Courier. “He is soberly looking at how to protect the company.”

It’s impossible to know whether Courier would have been a success. When Gizmodo published the internal pictures and videos of the device, they were met almost universally with kudos from the technology press. But it’s unclear if the final product could have met those lofty expectations.

Like Sinofsky, Allard has his critics inside Microsoft as well. They argue that Allard, whose star soared with the creation of the Xbox, was losing his touch. He led the team that created the Zune digital media player, which barely dented the market lead of Apple’s iPod.

To those detractors, Allard created a fantasyland inside Microsoft where Apple fanboys could tinker on stylish products that would never see the light of day. They point to the opulent 36,000-square foot office of Pioneer Studios, headquartered in Seattle’s Pioneer Square, that featured huge open spaces, dotted with cushy Eames lounge chairs, angular white desks, blond wood floors, and exposed brick walls. It may have been 16 miles from Microsoft’s far more corporate Redmond, Wash., campus, but it was a galaxy away in terms of workplace design.

When the Courier project was eventually shuttered in April 2010, Ballmer made that 16-mile journey to Pioneer Studios to tell the team in person. The group gathered in the biggest conference room there, and Ballmer told them of his decision. Strategically, Courier wasn’t aligned with Windows or Office. While Allard, Entertainment and Devices division President Robbie Bach, and a handful of other senior leaders knew of the corporate debate, the rest of the team was heads down, racing to create what they felt was a world-changing product. As Ballmer detailed his decision, several Courier workers’ eyes began to well up.

“You could hear a pin drop in that room,” one worker recalled. “People were like, ‘What just happened? That couldn’t be.'”

“It was a shock,” said another team member. “It was hard to move onto something else because I so much wanted to see it come to life.”

Lessons from Courier
In hindsight, some on the Courier team wonder if their efforts might have been more successful had they worked to align the strategy with Windows and Office from the start. That might have created an altogether different looking device. But it would have been a device that had a better shot at coming to market.

“A big lesson is that it may be easier to go into your quiet space and incubate. But when you want to get bigger and get more resources, you want to make sure you’re aligned,” a Courier team member said. “If you get Sinofsky on board from the start, you’re probably going to market.”

It’s unclear what, if any, pieces of the Courier technology are finding their way into other Microsoft products. Longtime Microsoft reporter Todd Bishop noted last year that Microsoft filed a patent on technology that appears to be the Courier concept. In previewing the tablet features in Windows 8, Microsoft showed a user interface that takes advantage of both touch and pen computing as Courier did.

Courier team members scattered. Many moved on to other products at Microsoft, such as Xbox, Windows Phone, and Bing. Others are involved with different incubation efforts at the company. And a few employees who contributed to the product’s development have left the company altogether, joining other tech firms such as Amazon, Zynga, and Facebook.

The biggest departures: Bach and Allard. Both have said their departures were unrelated to the Courier cancellation. These days, Bach is on the boards of the Boys & Girls Club of America and the U.S. Olympic Committee. He recently joined the board of Sonos, maker of wireless digital music systems.

Allard has almost completely dropped out of the public eye. Shortly before leaving Microsoft, he became a director of The Clymb, a flash sale site featuring outdoor products. In June, The Clymb raised $2 million from a handful of angel investors, including Allard.

It’s clear Allard still harbors some passion for Courier. Shortly after the project was killed, two developers from the Seattle suburbs, Benjamin Monnig and Ricky Drake, decided to bring the Courier concept to the iPad. They turned to Kickstarter to fund the app, dubbed Tapose, which is slated to debut near Thanksgiving. The duo quickly raised $26,561 on the site and roughly $100,000 more in private investments, Monnig said. One of the largest backers, according to Monnig: J Allard.

“J has been an adviser to me and our team,” Monnig said. “He has made sure to keep enough distance, but has helped guide us in the right direction.”

As he left Microsoft, Allard penned a farewell mail that offered a slight wink at the Courier debate as he explained leaving on his own volition.

“In response to the curiosity, no chairs were thrown, no ultimatums served, I am not moving to Cupertino or Mountain View, I did not take a courier job and I require no assistance finding the door,” Allard wrote.

And then he issued something of a call to arms for The Tribe, a term he used to describe Microsofties. He encouraged employees to seek out new colleagues with diverse backgrounds who could challenge Microsoft’s conventions and push the company to approach new opportunities in different ways.

“Infuse them with our purpose,” Allard wrote. “Give them the tools. Give them lots of rope. Learn from them. Support where they take you. Invite them to redefine The Tribe.”

The inside story of how Microsoft killed its Courier tablet

Steve Ballmer had a dilemma. He had two groups at Microsoft pursuing competing visions for tablet computers.

One group, led by Xbox godfather J Allard, was pushing for a sleek, two-screen tablet called the Courier that users controlled with their finger or a pen. But it had a problem: It was running a modified version of Windows.

That ran headlong into the vision of tablet computing laid out by Steven Sinofsky, the head of Microsoft’s Windows division. Sinofsky was wary of any product–let alone one from inside Microsoft’s walls–that threatened the foundation of Microsoft’s flagship operating system. But Sinofsky’s tablet-friendly version of Windows was more than two years away.

MCTS Training, MCITP Trainnig

Best Microsoft MCTS Certification, Microsoft MCITP Training at certkingdom.com

For Ballmer, it wasn’t an easy call. Allard and Sinofsky were key executives at Microsoft, both tabbed as the next-generation brain trust. So Ballmer sought advice from the one tech visionary he’s trusted more than any other over the decades–Bill Gates. Ballmer arranged for Microsoft’s chairman and co-founder to meet for a few hours with Allard; his boss, Entertainment and Devices division President Robbie Bach; and two other Courier team members.

At one point during that meeting in early 2010 at Gates’ waterfront offices in Kirkland, Wash., Gates asked Allard how users get e-mail. Allard, Microsoft’s executive hipster charged with keeping tabs on computing trends, told Gates his team wasn’t trying to build another e-mail experience. He reasoned that everyone who had a Courier would also have a smartphone for quick e-mail writing and retrieval and a PC for more detailed exchanges. Courier users could get e-mail from the Web, Allard said, according to sources familiar with the meeting.

But the device wasn’t intended to be a computer replacement; it was meant to complement PCs. Courier users wouldn’t want or need a feature-rich e-mail application such as Microsoft’s Outlook that lets them switch to conversation views in their inbox or support offline e-mail reading and writing. The key to Courier, Allard’s team argued, was its focus on content creation. Courier was for the creative set, a gadget on which architects might begin to sketch building plans, or writers might begin to draft documents.

“This is where Bill had an allergic reaction,” said one Courier worker who talked with an attendee of the meeting. As is his style in product reviews, Gates pressed Allard, challenging the logic of the approach.

It’s not hard to understand Gates’ response. Microsoft makes billions of dollars every year on its Exchange e-mail server software and its Outlook e-mail application. While heated debates are common in Microsoft’s development process, Gates’ concerns didn’t bode well for Courier. He conveyed his opinions to Ballmer, who was gathering data from others at the company as well.

Within a few weeks, Courier was cancelled because the product didn’t clearly align with the company’s Windows and Office franchises, according to sources. A few months after that, both Allard and Bach announced plans to leave Microsoft, though both executives have said their decisions to move on were unrelated to the Courier cancellation.

The story of Microsoft’s Courier has only been told in pieces. And nothing has been disclosed publicly about the infighting that led to the innovative device’s death. This article was pieced together through interviews with 18 current and former Microsoft executives, as well as contractors and partners who worked on the project. None of the Microsoft employees, both current and former, would talk for attribution because they worried about potential repercussions. Microsoft’s top spokesman, Frank Shaw, offered only a brief comment for this story and otherwise declined to make Microsoft’s senior executives available.

“At any given time, we’re looking at new ideas, investigating, testing, incubating them,” Shaw said in a statement when word leaked in April 2010 that Courier had been cancelled. “It’s in our DNA to develop new form factors and natural user interfaces to foster productivity and creativity. The Courier project is an example of this type of effort. It will be evaluated for use in future offerings, but we have no plans to build such a device at this time.”

While the internal fight over Courier occurred about 18 months ago, the implications of the decision to kill the incubation project reverberate today. Rather than creating a touch computing device that might well have launched within a few months of Apple’s iPad, which debuted in April 2010, Microsoft management chose a strategy that’s forcing it to come from behind. The company cancelled Courier within a few weeks of the iPad’s launch. Now it plans to rely on Windows 8, the operating system that will likely debut at the end of next year, to run tablets.

Courier’s death also offers a detailed look into Microsoft’s Darwinian approach to product development and the balancing act between protecting its old product franchises and creating new ones. The company, with 90,000 employees, has plenty of brilliant minds that can come up with revolutionary approaches to computing. But sometimes, their creativity is stalled by process, subsumed in other products, or even sacrificed to protect the company’s Windows and Office empires.

‘Not a whim’
Courier was much more than a clever vision. The team, which had more than 130 Microsoft employees contributing to it, had created several prototypes that gave a clear sense about the type of experience users would get. There were still tough hardware and software issues to resolve when Microsoft pulled the plug. But an employee who worked on Courier said the project was far enough along that the remaining work could have been completed in months if the company had added more people to the team. Microsoft’s Shaw disputes that.

“There was extensive work done on the business, the technology and the experience,” said a member of the Courier team. “It was very complete, not a whim.”

Ballmer and Microsoft’s senior leadership decided to bet solely on Sinofsky’s Windows vision for the company’s tablet strategy. Though it crushed some innovative work from dedicated employees, that decision had plenty of logic to it. Corporate customers may be more inclined to use a Windows tablet than, say, Apple’s iPad, because those devices will likely include well-known management and security tools that should make them easy to plug into secure corporate networks.

A new survey by the Boston Consulting Group found that more than 40 percent of current tablet users in the United States want a tablet that runs Windows. That number jumps to 53 percent when non-tablet owners are included. The reason: familiarity with Windows, which still runs nearly 90 percent of all PCs sold.

“They think a common operating system will make this experience seamless across devices,” said Boston Consulting senior partner and managing director John Rose. “The products will be introduced, and they’ll be better (than the iPad) or they won’t be.”

Ballmer went out of his way to underscore Microsoft’s Windows strategy at the company’s financial analysts meeting last month, which it held concurrently with a conference where Microsoft wooed more than 5,000 developers to the Windows 8 platform for tablets.

“The first thing, which I hope is obvious, about our point of view is Windows is at the center,” Ballmer told analysts. “Certainly I can read plenty of places where people will question whether that’s a good idea or not. I think it’s an exceptionally good idea.”

But using Windows as the operating system for tablets also implies that Microsoft will update the devices’ operating systems on the Windows time frame, typically every three years. Compare that to Apple, which seems likely to continue to update the iPad annually, a tactic that drives a raft of new sales each time a new generation hits the market. By the time Windows 8 rolls out, Apple will likely have introduced its iPad 3. Moreover, Amazon’s much anticipated Kindle Fire tablet, which goes on sale November 15, will have nearly a year head start on the Windows-powered tablet offerings.

On the other hand, Courier, with its modified version of Windows, could have been updated more frequently than the behemoth operating system itself.

How far behind is Microsoft? Tablet makers sold 17.6 million devices in 2010, and are on a pace to sell 63.3 million more this year, according to industry analyst Gartner. In 2012, the firm expects sales to jump to 103.5 million devices. Just 4.3 million of those tablets, the ones that go on sale at the end of the year when Windows 8 debuts, will run Windows, according to the firm. Gartner expects Apple’s game-changing iPad to continue to dominate with a two-thirds share.

Building consumer muscle
Microsoft counted on Allard, more than any other senior executive in the last decade, to help it figure out how to reach the types of consumers who are now racing to buy iPads. Once an Internet wonk who helped a mid-1990s Microsoft wake up to the Web, Allard led the team that created Microsoft’s biggest non-PC consumer success story–the Xbox video game business. Always willing to stand up to leadership, Allard successfully argued that Windows wasn’t suitable to power the video game console, something Gates wasn’t initially keen on.

The success of the Xbox led Microsoft to create its Entertainment and Devices division under Bach. And Bach tapped the chrome-domed Allard to be his chief visionary.

Allard is a downhill mountain-biking maniac, who co-founded a cycling team, dubbed Project 529, whose name is intended to reflect the team’s after-hours passion, what they do from 5 p.m. to 9 a.m. He often used Apple products, such as the iPod or the Mac, much to the disdain of some Microsoft colleagues. While he has serious technology chops, Allard also appreciated the importance of design, creating studios, rather than traditional office space, where his teams toiled. A key Allard trait: challenging convention.

Gizmodo broke the Courier story in September 2009, posting leaked pictures of what the device might look like and how it might work. Rather than the single screen that consumers have come to know as a tablet, Courier would have had two screens, each about 7 inches diagonally. The device would have folded in half like a book. It would have supported both touch and pen-based computing. The gadget-loving site drooled over what it had found.

“It feels like the whole world is holding its breath for the Apple tablet,” Gizmodo wrote. “But maybe we’ve all been dreaming about the wrong device. This is Courier, Microsoft’s astonishing take on the tablet.”

The gadget was the creation of Allard’s skunkworks design operation Pioneer Studios and Alchemie Ventures, a research lab that also reported to Allard. (The lab took the German spelling of “alchemy” to highlight the stereotypical Teutonic traits of structure and regiment it hoped to bring to its innovation process.) The two groups were created to identify consumer experiences that Microsoft could develop and hatch.

“Our job is to incubate those and work with the product teams to bring them to market,” said Pioneer’s co-founder Georg Petschnigg in a video posted to Microsoft’s developer Web site last year.

Allard created Alchemie to focus on innovation process to make sure that the efforts of Pioneer were not scattershot. It studied best practices, both within and outside Microsoft, to “design a repeatable, predictable and measurable approach for building new business” for Bach’s division, according to the Alchemie Ventures Toolkit, an internal Microsoft book reviewed by CNET.

“If Microsoft wants to truly implement effective and sustainable incubation, we have to embrace rigorous, repeatable, and measurable processes–and make those processes available to everyone,” Alchemie’s general manager Giorgio Vanzini wrote in the book.

Courier was born from the minds of both groups. And while Apple was working on its iPad at the same time, Courier was designed to be something entirely different. The iPad is all about content consumption–surfing the Web, watching videos, playing games. Courier was focused on content creation–drafting documents, brainstorming concepts, jotting down ideas.

“We weren’t fearful of it,” a Courier worker said of the iPad. “We were doing something different.”

Early on, the group opted to use Windows for Courier’s operating system. But it wasn’t a version of Windows that any consumer would recognize. The Courier team tweaked the operating system to make sure it could perform at high levels with touch- and pen-based computing. What’s more, the graphical shell of Windows–the interface that computer users associate with the operating system–was entirely removed. So while it was Windows under the hood, the home screens bore zero resemblance to the familiar PC desktop.

Creating a new approach
The Courier group wasn’t interested in replicating Windows on a tablet. The team wanted to create a new approach to computing. The metaphor they used was “digital Moleskine,” a nod to the leather-bound notebooks favored in the design world. In fact, according to a few team members, a small group led by Petschnigg flew to Milan, Italy, to pick the brains of the designers at Moleskine to understand how they’ve been able to create such loyal customers.

“Moleskine was interested but a little perplexed,” said one executive who worked on the Courier project.

Designers working on Courier came up with clever notions for how digital paper should work. One of the ideas was to create “smart ink,” giving text, for example, mathematical properties. So when a user wrote “5+8=” on, say, digital graph paper, the number “13” would fill in the equation automatically. Additionally, if users selected lined digital paper, words would snap to each line as they were jotted down.

The phrase at the core of the Courier mission was “Free Create.” It was meant to describe the notion of eliminating the processes and protocols that productivity software often imposes on workers.

“Free Create is a simple statement that acts as a rallying cry, uniting the consumer’s core need and Courier’s core benefit,” reads a passage in an internal Microsoft book memorializing the Courier effort, reviewed by CNET, that was given to the team after the project was shuttered. “Free Create is a natural way to digitally write, sketch and gather inspiration by blending the familiarity of the pen, the intuition of touch, the simplicity of the book and the advantages of software and services.”

It’s clear there were substantial resources behind the effort. The commemorative book, designed to resemble the journal-like look of the Courier, lists the 134 employees who contributed to the gadget’s creation. Moreover, Petschnigg writes on his LinkedIn profile page that he “managed $3.5 (million) seed funding, (and) secured $20 (million) to develop this new product category.”

Those funds helped build a multi-disciplinary team. It included interaction designers, who worked on new interfaces using pen- and touch-computing. There were also employees who worked on software to synchronize data from the Courier to Web-based services. The project had moved far enough along that there was staff that worked on brand strategy, advertising, retail planning, and partner marketing. Courier even had a deeply considered logo, something of a squiggle that looks a bit like an ampersand, meant to evoke the doodling that often is the start of a creative process.

“The Courier logo expresses the free-flow and formation of ideas,” reads the description of the logo in the commemorative book. “It references simple scribbles that are often the beginning of new ideas.”

While the software prototypes ran on existing tablet PCs built by Microsoft’s partners, they didn’t meet the performance goals for Courier. So Allard’s team also worked with several hardware makers, including Samsung, to create hardware prototypes.

“It was not off-the-shelf tech,” said a Courier team member. “There is no commercial product today that meets the specs we had for it. It was highly demanding and innovative and no one partner had all of the pieces.”

When Courier died, there was not a single prototype that contained all of the attributes of the vision: the industrial design, the screen performance, the software experience, the correct weight, and the battery life. Those existed individually, created in parallel to keep the development process moving quickly. Those prototypes wouldn’t have come together into a single unit until very late in the development process, perhaps weeks before manufacturing, which is common for cutting-edge consumer electronics design. But on the team, there was little doubt that they were moving quickly toward that final prototype.

“We were on the cusp of something really big,” said one Courier team member.

In late 2009, before the iPad had launched, the Courier team recognized the market for tablets was ready to explode. It laid out a detailed engineering schedule and made the case to Microsoft’s top brass that Courier could be a revolutionary device that would define a new product category. The team put forward a vision that Microsoft could create a new market rather than chasing down a leader or defending an established product.

“J (was) incubating with his tribe, very much thinking consumer and very much thinking the next few years,” a former Microsoft executive said. “He was trying to disrupt Microsoft, which hasn’t been good at consumer products.”

In fact, one of the mandates of Alchemie was to look only at product ideas and business concepts that were no farther than three years into the future. The Alchemie book includes something of an innovation process road map that lays out four “gates” that ideas needed to pass through to move from incubation to product development. And a source said that Courier had made it through all four gates.

So why did Courier die? The answer lies in an understanding of Microsoft’s history and cultu

Bill Gates: I’m cool with Steve Jobs dissing me

Some relationships become competitive. And some have competitiveness at their core.

The latter surely was the case between Microsoft’s Bill Gates and Apple’s Steve Jobs. So no one could have imagined that Jobs would have offered too many conciliatory quotes in Walter Isaacson’s biography.

In an interview with ABC News, Gates says he’s thoroughly and utterly cool with Jobs tossing zingers his way.

“None of that bothers me at all,” he told ABC. He added a finely generic eulogy: “Steve Jobs did a fantastic job.”

MCTS Certification, MCITP Certification

Microsoft MCTS CertificationMCITP Certification and over 2000+
Exams with Life Time Access Membership at https:://www.actualkey.com

The thing is that, even in the Isaacson book, Gates offered flaming daggers of his own. He called Jobs “weirdly flawed as a human being.” I thought it flattering that he included the “human being” part.

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

Jobs, in turn, told Isaacson of Gates: “He’d be a broader guy if he had dropped acid once or gone off to an ashram when he was younger.” Yes, he’d have rather that Gates had been more like, well, him. He also accused Gates of “shamelessly ripping off other people’s ideas.”

Gates insisted to ABC News that wafting off to India was not, in fact, a prerequisite for entrepreneurial success. However, you couldn’t get anywhere in life if you weren’t good at math. (I exaggerate, but only by 0.04 per cent.)

Gates added of Jobs: “Over the course of the 30 years we worked together, you know, he said a lot of very nice things about me and he said a lot of tough things.” Jobs was, indeed, mercurial.

Gates couldn’t resist a little, well, Gatesian perspective. He would like to remind everyone just how much Jobs struggled in the face of Microsoft’s pleasantly left-brained onslaught.

He explained: “He faced, several times at Apple, the fact that their products were so premium priced that they literally might not stay in the marketplace. So the fact that we were succeeding with high volume products, you know, including a range of prices, because of the way we worked with multiple companies, it’s tough.”

Critics of Microsoft might offer that Gates still rejoices in the idea that he simply muscled Jobs out of the market. But for Jobs, Microsoft stood for everything he most disdained– not mass production in itself, but a mass lack of taste.

These were two men who simply thought differently. As Isaacson offered to the New York Times yesterday, Gates was the epitome of what academics regard as “smart”, while Jobs was pure ingeniousness.

You couldn’t imagine them hanging at parties together. Or art galleries for that matter. Though they did– once– play nice in 2007.

In the end, though, both must have known that each secured victory within his own sphere of thinking. Gates dominated the left brains, while Jobs dominated the right.

Bill Gates: Being very rich is ‘the same hamburger’

Let’s talk money and hamburgers.

Sometimes you can spend a lot of money on a hamburger, sometimes very little. For example, at the Four Seasons in San Francisco, you can pay $18 for a very nice hamburger with exquisite french fries.

It is spectacularly better than the ones at the Golden State Warriors games, where, please believe me, the burger and fries are almost the same price as the Four Seasons and of a similar quality to the team in 2002. (And 2003. And 2004.)

These–and several other–thoughts on the finance/hamburger axis have been occupying my mind because of a fascinating speech and Q&A session yesterday at the University of Washington featuring Microsoft founder Bill Gates.

The way the Seattle Times records it, one enterprising listener asked Gates how she could become as blindingly rich as him.

MCTS Training, MCITP Trainnig

Best Microsoft MCTS Certification, Microsoft MCITP Training at certkingdom.com

Gates explained that money hadn’t been his goal. He just loved what he was doing. Even better, he could involve his friends in this thing he loved. Soon, he had more money than he knew what to do with. Which he described as “a responsibility.”

But here’s the meat of it.

“I can understand about having millions of dollars. There’s meaningful freedom that comes with that, but once you get much beyond that I have to tell you, it’s the same hamburger. Dick’s has not raised their prices enough,” Gates said.

Not having eaten hamburgers in Seattle very often, I assumed he was, oddly, referring to Dick’s Sporting Goods. But, no. Dick’s Drive-In seems to be a fine place that actually won “The Best Cheap Eats in Western Washington.”

It so happens that Dick Drive-In is very keen on offering its employees financial assistance with college funding. So it’s a hamburger joint where you can begin your journey to becoming a billionaire.

But is there really any such thing as “the same hamburger?” Anyone who’s been to McDonald’s and then popped into In-N-Out knows that they’re a little different. You can’t get McDonald’s “Animal Style,” though there is some animal-style behavior at McDonald’s occasionally.

So isn’t the truth that when you begin to amass your billions, you have some interesting choices to make? They might be between one hamburger and another. But they’re still different.

Walter Isaacson’s biography of Steve Jobs mentions that when Gates came to Jobs’ relatively modest house he wondered how on earth the whole Jobs family could fit into such a place. Perhaps this, to Gates, just wasn’t a big enough Mac.

However, as Gates himself has proved, you can use your billions to attempt to do good. You just have to choose to do that. Most, though, will never have that choice. Most will never get to try the $5,000 FleurBurger created by suave pony-tailed chef Hubert Keller at his restaurant in the Mandalay Bay in Vegas.

I wonder if Gates has tried it.