Thank you Sarah Lacy, for introducing me to this video.

Engineers and Cats...The Two Life-Forms I Spend Too Much Time With!

...and now back to preparing for re-entry into retirement. :)

http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2008/06/10/microsoft-bernstein-trims-outlook-for-vista-adoption/

"(DiBona) asserts that “it is now critical for MSFT to inform and educate IT professionals involved in the Vista decision in order to reinvigorate enterprise interest in the OS.” But he cautions that “amid mounting evidence that the product’s reputation has been badly tarnished and that there are looming usability and satisfaction issues…continued assertions that everything is fine with Vista will not only fail to bolster the upgrade cycle but also could serve to damage management’s credibility and the interests of MSFT’s shareholders.”

Well, isn't that a fine how-do-you-do. Nineteen months after Vista's release and still, Microsoft management is covering their ears and shouting "La La La, I don't hear you" to the Windows customer base.

Windows 7 is not an exception to the need for more transparency. In fact, based on what we know of third-party and OEM development in the Vista cycle, Windows 7 development should be *more* open and exposed than Vista development was. Alas, the command-and-control atmosphere in place today make certain that any engineer who doesn't toe the Windows PR line gets pink-slipped.

Unlike Intel's "tick-tock" processor roadmap, Microsoft's inability to make hard engineering choices early in the project is dooming the project. Of the three important project constraints, time, "resources" and quality, Microsoft appears to be choosing time and resources and letting quality go.

Based on Steve Ballmer's published comments that five years is too long between releases, Windows 7 is sure to be released "on-time" in 2010 or even in 2009 if speculation is to be believed. This tactic is sure to pay off when management is able to argue plausible deniability as the new offering is sure to disappoint if the only new feature offered is Windows Touch Technology v2.

In order to maintain or even regain some credibility, Microsoft Windows engineering management must:

• round up third-party support. The driver situation for Vista was horrible
• properly set the public's expectations of Windows 7. Vista was touted as the next coming, while in reality, we in engineering knew that the only user-centric improvements were superficial. The main attraction was that Vista is more secure and has improved reliability. Security and reliability are qualities that customers say they want, but won't actually pay for.
• achieve a bang-for-buck value on marketing that is somewhere above zero. Somehow, despite spending $500M, public opinion has not been swayed in the least. Do you even remember a Vista advertisement, much less think positively on it?
• simplify the user choices. Does the world really need so many Vista SKUs? There are actually seven SKUs if you include Business, Enterprise and Starter. So many SKUs makes testing the product much more complex.

Aspersions aside, Vista did not take five years to develop. We famously "reset" two years into the project (August 2004), which means that Vista was actually a more typical three-year development cycle. I'm proud of my contributions and of the Windows team's achievement. For Vista, we "rebuilt the plane in-flight" of the largest ongoing engineering project in the world and successfully shipped.

That said, Windows can do better. The public is saying "show-me". From what I've seen so far, they're headed for disappointment.