How Will Microsoft Get to Albany?
|
News Commentary. I think the blogosphere and even some news sites are making too much out of Project Albany. |
There is crazy speculation that the Microsoft beta program is a hosted productivity suite for consumers, something to compete with Google Apps. The feeding frenzy has increased, as this myth spreads across the Web.
There's nothing substantive here. For starters, the cryptic beta invitations don't mention hosted productivity anything.
I hadn't planned to blog on the Albany nonsense, but this urban legend keeps getting bigger with each telling. Somebody has to yell, "Stop!"
Albany is supposed to be a consumer product, which should be information enough to know that it absolutely is not going to be an online productivity suite. Why? Most consumers don't need an online productivity suite. In December, a NPD survey found that 94 percent of U.S. consumers had never tried an online productivity suite; a mere 0.5 percent have substituted Web-based productivity suites for desktop software such as Microsoft Office.
Weak adoption would seem to validate the value of desktop software over Web-based alternatives. Absolutely not, because:
- Most software applications, like e-mail and messaging, that people use everyday pack most of the formatting and other content creation features that most everybody needs.
- Most consumers create content that stays in digital form and in formats that are easily shared (like text, HTML or JPEG).
- Other than plain or lightly formatted text, most created or consumed content is in some form other than word processing or spreadsheets. The sole productivity exception could be presentations.
Office isn't better than, say, Google Docs just because Web-based alternatives have low comparable usage. One is just less relevant than the other, and that's not saying Office is hugely relevant to consumers. Most people don't need Office, either, because the suite doesn't produce the kinds of content that's most important to them.
If I'm wrong and Albany is a hosted productivity suite, then Microsoft is run by a bunch of obsessed Google chasers incapable of making sensible business decisions. Albany is more likely about content that consumers regularly create or consume. These content types include blog posts, e-mails, instant messages, photos and music. The context for most common content types is social interaction. Most any Facebook or MySpace page is evidence enough of the trend.
Around these interactions identity, privacy and security are among the sensible concernsthat people are who they say they are and content sharing won't lead to malware infection or loss of personal information.
Based on what consumers do create and their online social behavior, Albany could be anything from an amalgamation of Messenger, OneCare and Spaces to Hotmail, Photo Gallery and Popfly. I won't speculate. Yet.
Today's bigger news isn't Albany but Adobe Photoshop Express. The exciting Flash-based service compliments Adobe's Buzzword word processor. Both services are in beta.
If anybody is cobbling together an online content creation suite, it's Adobe. Microsoft should worry loads more about Adobe than Google. Besides Buzzword and Photoshop Express, Adobe has in testing:
- Brio (Web conferencing)
- Kuler (color theme chooser)
- myFeedz (social newspaper)
- Share (content collaboration and sharing)
A truly competitive online suite would look more like the above products combined and less like online versions of Office or Works. Again, the possible productivity application exception: Presentation software. Adobe needs a video application at least, or a Web-based version of Vlog It! or Premiere Elements. But the pieces are in place for an online content creation suite.
Something else. Adobe is doing a surprisingly better job embracing Web 2.0 platform services than Google and, not surprisingly, Microsoft. For example, the Photoshop Express supports Facebook, Picasa and Photobucket content. Flickr and MySpace would be important additions, but Facebook makes an important social connection.
Circling back to Albany, Microsoft would be smart if the product/service amalgamation focused more on what most consumers do create and how they share it. Maybe when Microsoft gets to Albany, it will live in an Adobe adobe house.


Comments (11)
the albany legend...
Great observation Joe. I also picked up on this. Each day, another more concrete article would be spread... yet no new details in the article. Just the tone of the article was different.
Posted by uhura | March 27, 2008 8:37 PM
Joe, you release few entries a day.
But that do not show that you are productive as all of the entries are crap
Posted by Peter | March 28, 2008 1:22 AM
We have no such plans!
Posted by steveballmer | March 28, 2008 1:28 AM
who is this steveballmer ??
Posted by Abhishek | March 28, 2008 3:31 AM
Don't know, but a Green Hornet fan can't be all bad.
Posted by Ken Houghton | March 28, 2008 11:10 AM
OK, so here's the big question:
How is it little Adobe is able to stand taller in the web saddle than Microsoft or Google?
Anybody have an answer to that? Or do I have to go back to harping about what kind of technology Adobe appears to be using?
Posted by portuno | March 28, 2008 2:29 PM
portuno- after googling your name it seems that you are big on this Vertical Computer Systems Inc company. How is it possible for this company to be trading at 1.5 cents and be a company that Adobe relies on for that kind of technology.
Something does not smell right there.
Posted by billigoat | March 29, 2008 4:16 AM
@billigoat.
Adobe appears to be relying on the kind of applications that can be built using the patent claims.
Microsoft is accused of using patent 6826744. Adobe AIR bears a very strong resemblence to 7076521.
What does smell is Microsoft using its market muscle to "say" they're doing things that the above patents would bring out... but, they don't deliver and their projects fade away before the public gets a chance to examine the underlying work.
That's the kind of tactic Microsoft is famous for using against small companies, stifling the small company's marketing effort and drowning the small company in front of the public while Microsoft has nothing to show for all their market speak.
THAT smells.
Posted by portuno | March 29, 2008 11:35 AM
And to buttress what I say above and to point out the tack Joe's article takes, read this:
http://hdvoice.tmcnet.com/topics/unified-communications/articles/24062-microsoft-prepares-albany-compete-with-google.htm
It certainly sounds like Microsoft is pushing out a productivity suite for the web, doesn't it? Joe points out where that reasoning fails... but this blogger believes the BS.
"Reasoning" isn't what Microsoft counts on in these tactics. They count on the average ignorant believing what they're told... and, by that, Microsoft marketing quietly drives others away from more real and existing efforts while MSFT plays with smoke and mirrors and fails to deliver once the hoorah is over.
If MSFT didn't have this method of working in the past, you could rightly come back and say all this is unfair to accuse MSFT. But, they DO have that history and a history with the same CEO is a very difficult thing to change or improve.
I believe Microsoft intended to steel what they used to make them appear dominant in XML years ago. And, when they found out they would be fighting against patents and the company that owned the IP wouldn't die, MSFT killed off their public XML efforts and hunkered down to see if the company would die of natural causes.
So, here we are full-on into the 21st century and Adobe is about to kick Microsoft's ever-loving ass with a photo productivity application and Microsoft is doing... what? "Competing" with Google?
"Competing?" Fine. Let's see it instead of the secret betas and stealth projects.
Posted by portuno | March 29, 2008 11:49 AM
thank you portuno but still can not see how the price is .017 if the company has any real value.
Posted by billigoat | March 30, 2008 1:16 PM
Billigoat. I understand the perception.
Posted by portuno | March 30, 2008 2:11 PM