Cool trailer, but what's the relevancy to this post?? hehe
Facey Spacey Development
· 1 year ago
I definitely agree. MS should not try to compete with google on search. They should invest their resources into something totally new and innovative. I think without the likes of a powerhouse like Bill Gates, MS will never be the same. I also think that Mesh is not their ticket. I just think that hardware has many years before we the following dream as described by Stan Schroeder is actualized:
"To put it really simple: the promise of the Mesh is that you won’t have to care where you are or which device you’re using - your data will always be there. You’ll only have to care about which data you want to share with whom."
But, hell, why don't we just build a whole friggin computer into our body and a lens in our eye for a screen lol, and something on our fings for a mouse--kind of like a built-in Minority Report system. What's the hold-up about making everything work in the cloud no matter what hardware you're using. Just build me what I described above that I can take everywhere, and keep perfecting wirless bandwith speeds, and I'll be happy.
James from FaceySpacey - "The Startup Incubator"
PaulGlazowski
· 1 year ago
The thing is, the cloud hasn't been fully realized. No one who travels the streets and the roads regularly can be connected all the time, so an ideal Mesh isn't yet possible.
3G and 4G networks can help to achieve that, but at least in the US, we're still quite a way from achieving ubiquity.
In Microsoft's case, the company generally succeeds in numbers. The sheer volume of Microsoft and Office sales. So in Microsoft's case, it'd have to rely on a solid, always-there network PLUS the ability to talk with with competitors' developments in order for Mesh to get the full effect and for it to become really really lucrative for the company and supplant their existing business models. (That's my comment on your "totally new and innovative" line, just to be clear.)
Facey Spacey Development
· 1 year ago
It seems that MESH is kind of like Google's purpose of Open Social and Friend Connect, but for hardware.
I've been thinking about why Google's doing Open Social if they don't intend on indexing that data. It seems they're doing it just to neutralize a bunch of companies (like Facebook) from profiting off of being the king of such data-portability. They realize that if one company is able to successfully convince people to let them have access to that data, they will kill Google. So Google decided to hedge their bets. They realized that the fastest way to come up with the ultimate Data Portability solution if a company like Google releases a truly non-centralized option. That's not a very revolutionary idea, but the main idea--for Google--is just that it was done as such a non-centralized way so that a Facebook cannot do it in a centralized way and therefore become the google of social data and user generated content.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but obviously the whole hubbub about Facebook blocking Google Friend Connect is that Google doesn't actually persist Facebook's data. Google does in fact follow Facebook's requirement that the data is always pulled from Facebook when needed, rather than permanently stored by developers that use the FB API.
But anyway, back to Mesh. I guess the question is how do they plan to monetize such software? Is it a neutralization tactic? I'm honestly just curious, Paul. I'm not well versed in Mesh at all. How does Microsoft plan to monetize Mesh???
Mash monetization? I'm not sure, exactly. I presume it'll be supported via sales associated with each component. Whether it's paid Web services, the software payments derived from mobile phone and desktop and laptop sales.
Ling
· 1 year ago
You know, even for a giant like MSFT, direction is often very important, more so than nuts and bolts management. Bill Gates had/has an uncanny ability to produce winners. From what Ballmer has shown, especially with regards to taking on Google, I just don't see it happening. Call me biased, but I reckon Microsoft is going to be in big trouble heading forward without Gates.
PaulGlazowski
· 1 year ago
Could be, but maybe the two-year transitional phase that the company has undergone to deal with Gates's departure was their way of ironing out the details of corporate strategy. Rather than, you know, "Hey, Bill, so you're leaving, huh? That's cool. Enjoy 'retirement'!"
PR NY
· 1 year ago
Does anyone have the feeling that Gates will run for Political office.
He is only 52. Can he not get restless after a few years.
How about Mayor or Governor or Senator?
PaulGlazowski
· 1 year ago
If previous suggestions have been accurate, Bill will his hands quite full with the Gates Foundation. Having a political career on the side wouldn't be a smart use of time.
I would draw the same either/or analogy to the talk about NYC mayor Bloomberg either running for higher office or devoting his energy to broader philanthropic efforts, as has been hinted in recent past.
armstrong
· 1 year ago
I just hope the new top official in Microsoft knows the existing problem and provide better products.
Facey Spacey Technologies
· 1 year ago
I hope Microsoft withers away, and the same with Google and Yahoo.
All Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgLebl3iNHk
"To put it really simple: the promise of the Mesh is that you won’t have to care where you are or which device you’re using - your data will always be there. You’ll only have to care about which data you want to share with whom."
But, hell, why don't we just build a whole friggin computer into our body and a lens in our eye for a screen lol, and something on our fings for a mouse--kind of like a built-in Minority Report system. What's the hold-up about making everything work in the cloud no matter what hardware you're using. Just build me what I described above that I can take everywhere, and keep perfecting wirless bandwith speeds, and I'll be happy.
James
from
FaceySpacey - "The Startup Incubator"
3G and 4G networks can help to achieve that, but at least in the US, we're still quite a way from achieving ubiquity.
In Microsoft's case, the company generally succeeds in numbers. The sheer volume of Microsoft and Office sales. So in Microsoft's case, it'd have to rely on a solid, always-there network PLUS the ability to talk with with competitors' developments in order for Mesh to get the full effect and for it to become really really lucrative for the company and supplant their existing business models. (That's my comment on your "totally new and innovative" line, just to be clear.)
I've been thinking about why Google's doing Open Social if they don't intend on indexing that data. It seems they're doing it just to neutralize a bunch of companies (like Facebook) from profiting off of being the king of such data-portability. They realize that if one company is able to successfully convince people to let them have access to that data, they will kill Google. So Google decided to hedge their bets. They realized that the fastest way to come up with the ultimate Data Portability solution if a company like Google releases a truly non-centralized option. That's not a very revolutionary idea, but the main idea--for Google--is just that it was done as such a non-centralized way so that a Facebook cannot do it in a centralized way and therefore become the google of social data and user generated content.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but obviously the whole hubbub about Facebook blocking Google Friend Connect is that Google doesn't actually persist Facebook's data. Google does in fact follow Facebook's requirement that the data is always pulled from Facebook when needed, rather than permanently stored by developers that use the FB API.
But anyway, back to Mesh. I guess the question is how do they plan to monetize such software? Is it a neutralization tactic? I'm honestly just curious, Paul. I'm not well versed in Mesh at all. How does Microsoft plan to monetize Mesh???
James
from
FaceySpacey.com - "The Startup Incubator"
He is only 52. Can he not get restless after a few years.
How about Mayor or Governor or Senator?
I would draw the same either/or analogy to the talk about NYC mayor Bloomberg either running for higher office or devoting his energy to broader philanthropic efforts, as has been hinted in recent past.