Comments

It's a tad more complicated than that, IRenderable...

C

KevinB wrote:

And where is the next singularity vid....

You mean this one?

Saptak wrote:

Great! Will like see/hear more from Rob and his team in the future.

We'll be talking to some of the folks Rob mentioned (the engineers who are making this stuff happen, plus more with Richard Ward on security in Windows...)

Also, stay tuned for a discussion with a couple Shell architects.

It's always a pleasure to listen to and learn from the big thinkers behind our technologies.

C

ZippyV wrote:

Does this new api make it easier to do soundstuff from a .net application?

Did you watch the video?  

All of this API is targeted at unmanaged C++ developers. I'd imagine the COM stuff could be interoped with in the way you interact with COM today from the managed world.

C

waltal wrote:

A really great video about some fantastic technology!

Anyone got a better suggestion for sources on doing it "old style"?

Glad you liked the video!

Can you elaborate more on what you're looking for? Threading is a pretty broad topic. What problem are you trying to solve right now? For example, are you developing a massively parellelized, loosely-coupled, distributed system?

C

CRPietschmann wrote:

Did F5 pay to get this publicity on Channel9? If not, then why were they specifically chosen?

This is not a commercial for F5. If you watch the video, you will learn about some incredible work F5 has done with web services-based device management, a platform for developers to interact with F5 hardware using managed code and scripting language they've created, all of this using Visual Studio as the primary dev environment. We love this stuff.

We want to talk to more companies this year that are doing innovative work with our technologies. Microsoft is not the only place where cool engineering using Microsoft technologies is going on...

Using web services as a means to control and monitor hardware is rather innovative stuff, not to mention the platform they've created to make it easier for developers and network admin types to work together productively.

C

Fantastic.

As soon as there is an SDK available, we will let you know. In the meantime, read the paper by George and Satnam, watch the video a few times, get yourself ready. There's a fair amount to get under your belt in terms of understanding what this is and how/when to use it.
C

PS: Scoble generally keeps quiet and does great camera work for Going Deeps. But, he'll always get a question or two in, which is good! I do think his antics are best served when he's interviewing product team PMs, etc

LaBomba wrote:

Cornelius Ellsonpeter wrote: Charles wrote: That's an interpretation of what we do here (and a flattering one, I must admit). I thought he was a major part of the team.  That's kind of like saying "well, you know, I lay brick for a living. One of my co-workers called it 'building the foundation for a better society'. I like that!" It is still laying brick. Charles wrote: We don't do overt marketing and the goal is not to change our image. You don't do overt marketing? Replace that word with "obvious".  Funny, the sentence does not lose any meaning as a result. Charles wrote: The goals are to help make Microsoft a more open and transparent company, to spotlight the people who make our products, to provide a place for customers to watch us do what we do and provide feedback along the way. It's not just about videos, podcasts, and screencasts, either: Have you been to the Wiki lately? Has any of this feedback actually changed a product in a tangible way? Where's the proof? I don't mean bug wikis/feedback either.  I'm talking about feature requests for legitimate, big time Microsoft products. Charles wrote: Image changing and customer satisfaction improvements are wonderful consequences of what we (including you) do on Channel 9. These are not the reasons behind the things we do. Does this make sense? Read our doctrine. That's the story. Still confused? I never was confused, but thanks for inferring that. It really helps.  I am confused by your vehement denial that this site has anything to do with marketing. Or image changing. Or whatever word you would like to substitute for that concept today.  By offering transparency, your implicit goal is to change customer perceptions. So, where's your USP? How about a benefit statement? You mean to tell me you do not aggregate demographic statistics here? Anyway, whatever you call it, in the end, you sell more product.  Why else would you do it? Out of good will? Please.  You are on the company dole.  Don't get me wrong, the videos here are pretty informative.  And yes, they do make Microsoft more human, and I do learn a lot.  That still does not excuse certain business practices.

Curious to see charles response to this.....

if he has any at that.

The person who wrote that article does not work for this team. Scoble, who does, simply linked to the article on his blog.

We don't sell products on Channel 9. Nothing else to say.

We don't "spin" on Channel 9.

Channel 9 is about the people and the products they build.

Channel 9 is not a place where we wow you with marketing hyperbole and rhetoric.

We are not driven by the product teams or PR or Legal.

Sometimes we get a little too product oriented and Scoble gets a smack.

We do love this company so we won't do things to purposefully hurt our image. We also won't do things that are inaccurate in an effort to make us look good. Make sense? Please read this statement again.

Product groups around the company spend time on C9, either on Video or in the Wiki. The Coffeehouse should not be used as a metric for how well we are integrating your feedback into our products. But make no mistake, many Microsoft eyes read the posts in our forums...

Most every product group at Microsoft is aware of Channel 9 and have a lot of respect for this place. They are paying attention to Channel 9. Take advantage of this by providing useful feedback with them.

KEEP ON POSTING,
C

JChung2006 wrote:

Charles wrote: Marketing has no place on Channel 9 (from our Doctrine). This means, that we don't use Channel 9 as a way to market our products. It does NOT mean that we can't interview interesting people who work in Marketing. Make sense?

And yet...

http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/2005/12/06/the-anti-marketing-marketing/

You might want to get your stories straight.

That's an interpretation of what we do here (and a flattering one, I must admit).  Simply, Channel 9 is what it is. We don't do overt marketing and the goal is not to change our image. The goals are to help make Microsoft a more open and transparent company, to spotlight the people who make our products, to provide a place for customers to watch us do what we do and provide feedback along the way. It's not just about videos, podcasts, and screencasts, either: Have you been to the Wiki lately?

Image changing and customer satisfaction improvements are wonderful consequences of what we (including you) do on Channel 9. These are not the reasons behind the things we do. Does this make sense?

 Read our doctrine. That's the story. Still confused?

C

GaryBushey wrote:

The real question that didn't get asked.   Did she write the infamous "Developers" speech? 

I guarantee that Ballmer came up with that on his own! As she said, he is very involved with what he actually says in his speeches (she's more of a guide than a "here, read this" kind of speechwriter...)
C