Tom Nixon

Turning Microsoft's business model on its head

This is a fascinating article from the New York Times. It's all about how Google is challenging Microsoft by turning its business model on its head - the switch from licensing software that's installed on desktop computers, to free web-based software.

Microsoft changed the software business for ever by being the upstart that challenged the old mainframe model and replaced it with the desktop. IBM didn't see that one coming at the time, and now MS is the entrenched giant with a new upstart changing the game yet again. Only this time the 'upstart' is actually a huge, well-funded company. I just find it UNBELIEVABLE that they  can't seem to see what's coming.

This little case study is a perfect example of how different the Google approach to product development is. The Google engineer at the centre of this story previously worked for 15 years at Microsoft. Can you imagine MS making a product happen in this way?

Early this month, Google released new cellphone software, with the code-name Grand Prix. A project that took just six weeks to complete, Grand Prix allows for fast and easy access to Google services like search, Gmail and calendars through a stripped-down mobile phone browser. (For now, it is tailored for iPhone browsers, but the plan is to make it work on other mobile browsers as well.)

Grand Prix was born when a Google engineer, tinkering on his own one weekend, came up with prototype code and e-mailed it to Vic Gundotra, a Google executive who oversees mobile products. Mr. Gundotra then showed the prototype to Mr. Schmidt, who in turn mentioned it to Mr. Brin. In about an hour, Mr. Brin came to look at the prototype.

“Sergey was really supportive,” recalls Mr. Gundotra, saying that Mr. Brin was most intrigued by the “engineering tricks” employed. After that, Mr. Gundotra posted a message on Google’s internal network, asking employees who owned iPhones to test the prototype. Such peer review is common at Google, which has an engineering culture in which a favorite mantra is “nothing speaks louder than code.”

As co-workers dug in, testing Grand Prix’s performance speed, memory use and other features, “the feedback started pouring in,” Mr. Gundotra recalls. The comments amounted to a thumbs-up, and after a few weeks of fine-tuning and fixing bugs, Grand Prix was released. In the brief development, there were no formal product reviews or formal approval processes.

links for 2007-12-19

• Amazon Helping To Change The Business Of Music
  A good round-up of how the music industry is finally starting to wake up to the implications of a distribution price that's heading fast towards zero.
  (tags: music free)

Facebook won't be evil (probably) - Zuckerberg

From Bobbie Johnson's Web 2.0 Summit blog post.

John Battelle: "Would you endorse the maxim 'Don't be evil'?"

Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook CEO): "We probably would."

Wow, if there was ever an answer that doesn't need the word 'probably' in it. It's almost like he needed to think hard about it. Looks like Umair is right.

Should Twitter drop the 'what are you doing' prompt?

Looking at my Twitter feed, there's a lot more in there than just status updates of people saying what they're doing. I'd say that at least two thirds of the posts are either conversation or micro blog posts (opinions; links; updates from Seesmic and other sources.)

So in the majority of cases, the 'what are you doing?' prompt isn't relevant, and a status isn't really a status - it's just a post. It feels like Twitter has evolved based on how users really want to use it, and new ideas made possible by the versatile API. This evolution is very healthy for Twitter and I think it could be time for it to change its paradigm from status updates to simply being a social micro-blogging platform.

links for 2007-12-17

• digital-telepathy, Inc. Our Projects – Business Strategy, Web App Design, Innovative Marketing
  (tags: agency)

The economics of FREE

Some Monday inspiration: In this video, Chris Anderson (author of The Long Tail) walks us through the new possibilities offered to us by falling costs of technology.

Found via Guy Kawasaki.

Russell Davies' widgety goodness

The stand-out presentation for me at Widgety Goodness this year was Russell Davies. He doesn't claim to be a widget expert, but his talk was fascinating,  inspiring and at time hilarious. Russell has just turned his presentation into four blog posts. It's a must-see for anyone working in marketing. Check it out:

• Part 1
• Part 2
• Part 3
• Part 4

Great use of Let Them Sing It For You too :)

links for 2007-12-16

• Thoughts on the beta of the BBC’s site redesign @ Nixon McInnes: Social media goodness. Translated. Created. Delivered.
  (tags: bbc design widget atomisation)

Could a web agency work a 4 day week?

At the Future of Web Apps conference this year, Will and I were chatting to Ryan Carson about company culture and working practices. Ryan couldn't believe that we have open book accounting (everyone knows what everyone else earns and has full access to the company's books) and I was equally in awe of the 4-day working week that Ryan's managed to implement at Carsonified.

So this got me thinking... Just about everyone would agree that the idea of a 4-day working week is very cool. And if companies like Carsonified can pull it off then I wonder if we could too? Here's where my thinking has got to:

Pros

• It should be amazing for recruiting and retaining top talent. Why would anyone want to work elsewhere?
• Parkinson's law states that a job expands to fill the time available. We wouldn't necessarily be 20% more productive if we worked a 6 day week, so would we actually be much less productive if we only worked 4 days per week?
• More downtime should make us all more productive and happy on the days when they are working.
• It sets a great example to other organisations. If we could motivate other companies to do the same, a huge chunk of the working population could benefit.
• It's a bit whacky and different, which always appeals to me :)

Cons

• If we ever had a project that was running behind schedule (let's face it, in web development, that does happen sometimes) a client might be pretty miffed if they knew we only worked 4 days per week.
• Production work in any busy agency typically involves quite long hours. Even by working smarter, is it really feasible for our type of work? If the policy was introduced and some people just couldn't take the extra day off without their projects going pear-shaped it could be a real de-motivator.

Conclusion

I reckon it's possible, but it wouldn't be an easy ride. Being a professional services firm where your product is your expertise and time presents a problem and an opportunity. You have fewer hours to sell, but you also have smart people on the team who can use their ingenuity and creativity to generate more revenue from less time.

It would take a big commitment from everyone in the company to make it their responsibility (not their project manager or their boss) to ensure that they work sensible hours. This is very hard in a digital agency - especially for people in project delivery roles. I know because I spent months working 7-day weeks a few years ago and I see our own people working late far too often. There is the constant pressure of clients and deadlines that isn't going to go away.

Working long hours is disempowering. But you can empower yourself by doing something about it, or better still taking responsibility for not allowing yourself to get too busy in the first place: Delegate. Help to hire more people. Get involved in the decisions about how work is allocated. Sack problematic clients, and only take on new customers and contracts that can be delivered efficiently.

If the company culture supports individual freedom and organic self-management then anything is possible. It's not easy, and it's quite scary for many people in a society that teaches kids from a young age to get used to a command and control environment.

But the thing that clinches it for me is that there is already proof out there in agency land that companies can generate an extraordinary amount of income per employee, thus proving that we are so much more than a product of the number of hours we spend at our desks. I'm sure these guys could afford to take off a day per week. There's nothing stopping the rest of us from building companies like this.

links for 2007-12-14

• russell davies: conference advice
  some good suggestions for conferences to go to next year
  (tags: conference)