When it comes to Windows Live, there are a lot more questions than there are answers (at least public ones).

A transcript of the Microsoft Watch Q&A between Microsoft Watch Editor Mary Jo Foley and Windows Live's Irving follows. This transcript has been edited for length.

Microsoft Watch (MSW): When I define Windows Live (in ten words or less), I call it Microsoft's services extensions to Windows. Do you have a better shorthand way to refer to Live? Is Live really more than MSN services rebranded – another definition some have applied to it?

Irving: When I explain Windows Live, I describe a service that seamlessly brings Web experiences together with Windows software and provides greater relevance in people's lives. Saying that Windows Live is simply extensions to Windows is too Windows-centric, and saying that it is MSN services rebranded also sells Windows Live short.

MSW: Could you sum up in a few sentences your take on why Microsoft made these moves (strategy-wise/business-wise, etc.)? Why not just continue with MSN as it was?

Irving: The Internet and personal computers have both become more central to people's lives over the past years, and the seams between the two have created boundaries for users. In my opinion, it's been inevitable that the Internet and the PC experience come together in a way that makes a user feel like they don't just "go" to the Internet or "get on" the Internet – which is the way it's described today. I think we've missed an opportunity to bring the benefits of personal computing and the Internet together and that is what this change is about.

MSW: When Allchin was on the road on a press tour in January, a number of reporters – myself included – asked him about how Live will fit in with Windows Vista. He said, at least for now, the MSN Live folks and the Vista development team have fairly little to do with one another, and are completely separate entities. My question to you is the same one: How much will the Vista user experience depend on or draw from Windows Live? Will we have to wait until some post-Vista Windows release to see Windows Live and Windows desktops really gel?

Irving: They are wholly independent products. However, when they are used together, Windows Live can enhance the user experience, as can Office Live. The business models and the products are complimentary. We will continue to innovate in Windows and Office as evidenced by our work on Windows Vista and Office "12." There is no doubt that customers will continue to upgrade to newer versions of our products — we expect Windows and Office upgrade velocity to be faster than ever before with our 2006 releases. The new Windows Live and Office Live service offerings enable us to expand the value we deliver to customers in Vista and monetize additional innovation through the ad-funded and subscription business models.

Neither Windows Vista nor Office "12" is designed to be Live. It is the specific role of Windows Live and Office Live respectively to extend the capabilities of Windows Vista and Office 12 to include seamless software-and-services scenarios.

MSW: The way I am thinking about Windows Live and Windows "the operating system" these days is Windows features won't be contained solely in shrink-wrapped software going forward; they also will reside in the "network cloud." Is this an accurate portrayal – from your standpoint – of how Microsoft software/services vision is evolving? Or would you explain it differently?

Irving: Increasingly you'll see packaged software that's "Live-Ready." This means software that is designed to work in concert with an Internet service. To deliver these experiences, Live-Ready client-side software must be capable of connecting to the Windows Live Cloud and must have the necessary plumbing and infrastructure — including XML, RSS, Web services — to support Live service experiences. Connecting to and contributing to the Windows Live Cloud and consuming and publishing content, state, and contacts with other live services are the key live characteristics that make classic software Live-Ready.

Go to the Next Page for More From Windows Live's Irving

("Windows Live: The 50,000-Foot View" Page 2)

MSW: I have heard that Microsoft has plans for as many as 50 Windows Live services. Is this accurate? If not, could you give me a more accurate count? Is Microsoft considering allowing any third-party-developed services to be branded as Windows Live?

Irving: Creating live experiences on top of Windows is done through a public Windows API that is readily available to any developer. People have always been able to build third-party offerings on top of Windows, and the same is true with Windows Live. We expect the breadth and depth of the software and hardware ecosystem created on the Windows Live platform to share the same characteristics as today's Windows API. However, we have no specific number to share at this time.

MSW: Google and Yahoo have equivalents to almost all of the Windows Live services that Microsoft has announced. Are there any services areas where you believe you are ahead and/or thinking differently from your competitors?

Irving: We see this as the next step in platform computing, and it shouldn't surprise anyone that our competitors do as well. We already have a number of software-based services available to customers today, but the vision of a holistic software-based platform is something we've been delivering on for some time, culminating in Live software.

While there's been a lot of interest and "point products" or services in this area nobody has really articulated, or delivered upon, a broad vision that touches both the work-style and lifestyle that Live will enable. Microsoft has the opportunity to really build on the assets of Windows, Office and our existing MSN services to deliver that seamless unification of operating system, application and online experiences.

MSW: So far, almost every Windows Live service Microsoft has announced can be considered a consumer-oriented service. Are you folks also thinking about Windows-Live-branded services that would appeal to IT/business users? If so, can you provide any general statement of direction here? (I already am aware of what's cooking in Office Live, Visual Studio Live and CRM Live – I'm asking here about Windows Live specifically.)

Irving: Windows Live is targeted primarily at an individual we call an Internet Optimizer. Internet Optimizers live in enterprises, small and medium sized businesses, homes, and yes, they're all consumers I suppose. But if you think about the value that Windows Live will offer, for things like protecting you and your PC, or keeping in touch with the folks you care about, or finding the information you care about, or simply personalizing your entire Internet experience, this transcends the "consumer." Many of the capabilities we're building into Windows Live, like our Windows Live Custom Domains, or Windows Live Mail, or even a particular feature like sharing Folders in Windows Live Messenger, have a bunch of appeal and utility for business users. You'll be seeing more of this.

MSW: Are there any other points about Windows Live that you think are overlooked and that will matter to Windows users in the months and years ahead?

Irving: I think there are probably two things that come to mind. I think the unification of Web and client experience is being overlooked, and actually some of your questions kind of bear that out. This isn't about rebranding MSN, it is about building holistic and unified experiences. Additionally, the platform capabilities that we're building out are overlooked. Now, given the lack of ample evidence in the market that these things are happening, I can understand why it is being overlooked. We're delivering what we think will not only be a powerful and unifying experience for customers, but an incredibly powerful end-to-end platform that will extend opportunities for developers across the Web.

(This is an edited version of an article which ran in the March 1, 2006, edition of the Microsoft Watch newsletter. To see what you've been missing, give our two-week free trial a try.)