Great video, Charles. The sound quality is so remarkable...crisp, clear...and I didn't hear a "bzzzzzpt" at the end of this video.Charles wrote:I like the idea of a wireless mic. Good thinking.
Interesting way of looking at the open source business model. Speaking of donuts, have you been watching Red Hat founder Bob Young's lulu site (lulu.com)? It seems like a promising startup in the e-book/p.o.d. market...I'd be curious to see their business model, too, because basic publishing services start off as "free", but there are numerous "complementary" services around that core concept.
Larbedo wrote:P.S. Re: Supplement Bottles... A video on a Security Boss who is evidently somewhat fragile with 6 bottles of vitamins in the background plus a dead plant, a stuffed happy tiger and a Mr. Rogers sweater doesn't give me comfort that this is the tip of the spear in the WAR against the hordes of serious techno-spetsnaz-warrior hackers and mobsters preying on the net.
A dead plant is a good thing. Consider this study. All plants must go NOW. New policy. The plants are trying to destroy us all.
BBC wrote:Scientists in Germany have discovered that ordinary plants produce significant amounts of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas which helps trap the sun's energy in the atmosphere.
The findings, reported in the journal Nature, have been described as "startling", and may force a rethink of the role played by forests in holding back the pace of global warming.
And the BBC News Website has learned that the research, based on observations in the laboratory, appears to be corroborated by unpublished observations of methane levels in the Brazilian Amazon.
The amount of the gas produced increased when the air was warmer, and when there was more sunlight. The paper estimates that this unexplained phenomenon could account for 10-30% of the world's methane emissions.
Thanks for the video Charles. A handful of videos about women in tech, and people start complaining that this site has gone in the tank? Give me a break. There will be plenty of noise/videos when Vista is rolled out (or right before).
Now, when can we see some videos of the little people of Microsoft? For instance, Microsoft from the eyes of a janitor.
Call it the "Behind the Broom" series.
I wonder what would happen if you played the Vista sound backwards. We should ask Jeff Milner.
Sleuths Seek Messages in Lyrical BackspinWSJ wrote:When Jeff Milner installed software on his Web site that could play digital songs in reverse, he tested it with a snippet of Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven." The song, heard normally, refers to "a bustle in your hedgerow." Played backward, says Mr. Milner, the line sounds like: "Oh, here's to my sweet Satan."
Today, Mr. Milner's Web site plays parts of songs from the Eagles, John Lennon, Britney Spears, Eminem and others -- both normally and in reverse. Mr. Milner, a Canadian college student majoring in new media, offers interpretations of the reverse-plays. A line in Ms. Spears's "Baby One More Time," played backward, becomes "Sleep with me, I'm not too young," Mr. Milner claims. What sounds like mumbling in Pink Floyd's "Empty Spaces," Mr. Milner says, becomes more intelligible in reverse: "Congratulations, you have just discovered the secret message."
Charles wrote: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.
Okay. Let's back up. Perhaps "marketing" is the wrong word here. That implies "selling". Note, in my above diatribe I stated that it is a matter of changing an image, and the end result is selling more product. I'm not trying to imply that you are peddling your warez everywhere. Although it could be argued that you are by the very nature of the videos since they deal with specific products, and more accurately, the people who create them. I think, in this regard, this site has been a great success. It HAS opened up a means of communication between Microsoft and the outside world. Besides, if, by chance, you actually admitted in some form that you do peddle products on here, what would be the harm in that? Is your trust with the public that fragile? Wouldn't a dose on honesty in this regard actually help things? Let the trolls fight their own battles, because inevitably, they'll implode under the weight of their own arguments. Or lack of them.Charles wrote:Sometimes we get a little too product oriented and Scoble gets a smack.
I think somebody should ship you two a couple of sets of boxing gloves and you guys should film that.Charles wrote: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.
Rereading the statement again is not the point.Charles wrote: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...
But...do they change the product as a result? I'm not talking about the Coffeehouse either. Seriously, it would bode well for you to give a tangible example of how this has happened. It is one thing to read posts. It is completely different if they ACT on them. Besides, it would probably draw more traffic if you were looking for that. But make no mistake, Charles, the world is watching you guys.
Charles wrote: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.
Several people already have provided feedback...a lot of it has been very good in fact. Has it changed a product yet? OR is it just another means of preventing somebody else from coming up with a competing product that has great ideas in it? Because your company's history is rife with examples of where your employees moved in on another, small, competing company, sat down with them to set up a "deal", and then basically poached their ideas. Once that was complete, you'd leave them alone and then magically, mysteriously those features would end up in your products while the other company would sort of wither away. I can't see a point in holding such a history as that against your company, or you personally, if that practice stops. Yes, part of it is "business", although some elements are very unethical because at the core of is a lie and a breach of trust.
Does your company teach ethics? Seriously. The videos only occasionally get at that element of your employees. And then, when confronted with a more difficult issue, such as motives, they completely back away from the discussion. Why is that? It's not like the rest of us are carrying a "holier than thou" mantra or anything although I'm sure somebody, somewhere will argue that eventually.
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.
GaryBushey wrote: The real question that didn't get asked. Did she write the infamous "Developers" speech?
Then, of course, everyone will want to see the "Steve Ballmer Workout" video, in which his personal tainer demonstrates the chair-toss exercise.
I personally would love a tour of the actual furniture factory where the chairs are made as a follow up video to that. Then, show me the physics of how a chair flies, and explain the kinetics of impact. Does a chair fly farther if you spin around first? Sort of like a discus throw I guess...