While looking at the reactions to Microsoft’s acquisition of Skype, I found one tweet that really stood out:
While many users are busy joking about names (personally my money is on “Microsoft Live Skype” – my only hope is that there isn’t an “Ultimate Edition” or “Unicorn Edition” tacked to the end of the name) Microsoft has a significant problem, and I really hope they are looking at public reaction. Users are concerned; what will Microsoft do to the brand, and how will the brand and service change – users need to be reassured that what they love about the service won’t go away.
I use Skype on a daily basis, and for me this brings back memories of AOL’s failed acquisition of Nullsoft (the maker of WinAmp) in 1999, which took a great piece of software and a well-respected brand, and rendered it little better than RealPlayer (and don’t get me started on the Netscape acquisition). I can see this easily going down the same path; as the brand is diluted and merged with others to help boost their marketing goals, and the software is integrated tightly with other products (creating that tight, but invasive feel that the EU had so many issue with when they did it with IE); they could easily find themselves in the same position that eBay did back in 2007.
Microsoft desperately needs to build their online brand to recover the billions that they are losing, and I have to assume they see Skype as a key player in this quest; the question is can the keep their newly acquired user-base from jumping ship.
I don’t think Skype will live or die on technology at this point, I think PR is a far larger issue for them right now.
Recently a programmer I know decided that it was time for a career change, leaving the IT field entirely. This gave me cause to think; what does it take to be a great developer. Many people go through school believing they have what it takes, only to receive a rude awaking once they enter the real world.
Before I go on, I think it’s important to define what I mean by developer, and the differences between a developer and a programmer.
Piracy is bad, right? Maybe not, and it seems Microsoft figured it out. Piracy can be indirectly profitable, both by giving you additional customers that you may collect from at some future point, and it also serves to reduce or limit the market share of rivals. Microsoft chairman, Bill Gates, acknowledged this back in 1998 while speaking at the University of Washington, saying:
Although about 3 million computers get sold every year in China, people don’t pay for the software.
On March 11, 2011, Twitter said goodbye to some of its most loyal and passionate users.
In a message on their Development Talk group entitled “consistency and ecosystem opportunities” – they make their position clear: we no longer need you. To demonstrate this, let me point out a couple quotes that deserve attention:
Twitter will provide the primary mainstream consumer client experience on phones, computers, and other devices by which millions of people access Twitter content (tweets, trends, profiles, etc.
Before I get started, let me make a couple of things clear:
Apple is evil; pure and simple. I’m fully convinced that Steve Jobs has weekly planning meetings with Lucifer himself1. Apple’s policies are anti-everybody. From bloggers to developers2, Apple seems to make life as hard as possible for those that use their products for profit. With these facts in mind, I tend to shy away from their products when I have a choice (which isn’t always the case); though a while back I decided to buy an iPad for some reason.
It has been 20 years since I first used machine learning to solve a complex business problem. The underlying problem was simple: the company was selling a new service and wanted to know who was most likely to buy it. We had millions of records, and each record had hundreds of fields. A vast amount of data, but no idea how to extract insight from it. Countless hours from various data analysts had been invested into finding a pattern, but none was forthcoming.
