|
|
|
| Authored by: foulis on Sunday, February 17 2013 @ 07:55 AM EST |
<b>From:</b> Jonathan Usher</br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, April 01, 2004 3:26 PM</br>
<b>To:</b> Digital Media Maui Marketing</br>
<b>Subject:</b> FW: Cross group cooperation – two exciting examples:
Maui Media and Spam</p>
Super to see this... well done everyone on the work thus far</p>
--------------------------------</p>
<b>From:</b> Bill Gates</br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thu 4/1/2004 7:31 AM</br>
<b>To:</b> Senior Leadership Team</br>
<b>Cc:</b> Jon DeVaan; Alexander Gounares; Eric Rudder; Steven
Sinofsky; Will Poole; Robert (Robbie) Bach; Doug Burgum; Pieter Knook; David
Cole; Hank Vigil; David Sobeski; Ryan Hamlin; Amir Majidimehr; Todd Warren;
Blake Irving; Will Kennedy</br>
<b>Subject:</b> Cross group cooperation – two exciting examples:
Maui Media and Spam</p>
We talk a lot about the difficulty of cross-group cooperation because it is so
important to our success in providing integrated innovation.<p/>
Two efforts I have reviewed recently impressed me with the strong cooperation
across multiple groups<p/>
Maui Media is the fall launch of a number of Media Center, Portable Media
Center, Windows Media 10, MSN Music, and a chance to show our DRM
progress.<p/>
It involves MSN, MED, and Windows in complex ways. For example talking to media
companies about what technologies to use and whether to licence to
us.<p/>
Customers will see we have thought through the scenarios end-end. Apple still
has simpler UI for many tasks and we still have to craft the message so our
innovation shows through so we still have work to do.<p/>
However, the willingness of the groups to work together and to trust each other
has been a real asset.</p>
Likewise the SPAM effort involves a number of groups. Office, MSN,
MSR,Windows</p>
There are many aspects to it – legal, caller-id, IP address reputation, content
filtering and proof.</p>
We have to work with many other industry participants.</p>
We have already done leadership things on filtering which unfortunately isn't
enough.</p>
We have a roadmap for rolling out the other aspects including the coordination
of the various groups</p>
Like Maui Media a lot of the important work is still ahead of us including
getting credit for our innovation.</p>
However the willingness of the groups to work together and trust each other has
been a real asset.</p>
Personally I am not sure what the lessons learned here are but we should look
into both to make sure we reward and identify the key elements.</p>
We identified the problem set/scenario we are going after. It was a priority
effort of the various groups.</p>
12/7/2004<br>
<p align=center><b>Plaintiff's
Exhibit<br><u>7270</u></b><br>Comes V.
Microsoft</p>
<p align=right>MS-CC-RN 000000256561<br>HIGHLY
CONFIDENTIAL</p>
<hr>
<br>
The groups decided they needed to work with each other. I am sure the attitudes
of the key people has been critical.</p>
<br>
<br>
12/7/2004<br>
<p align=right>MS-CC-RN 000000256562<br>HIGHLY
CONFIDENTIAL</p>
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: foulis on Sunday, February 17 2013 @ 07:59 AM EST |
<p
align=right>PLAINTIFF'S<br>EXHIBIT<br><u>3097</u><
br>Comes v. Microsoft</p>
<b>From:</b> Bill Gates<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, February 18, 2000 5:01 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Eric Rudder<br>
<b>Subject:</b> FW: Our future and the Red Herring Article: Is
Microsoft Losing its Grip?</p>
FYI...<br>
<br>
Maybe you and I need to meet with Brian.</p>
----Original Message----<br>
<b>From: Brian MacDonald</b><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, February 18, 2000 2:36 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Bob Muglia; Bill Gates; Steve Ballmer<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Our future and the Red Herring Article: Is Microsoft
Losing its Grip?</p>
I know how to fix this. Will you guys let me? I don't know.</p>
<u><http://www.redherring.com/insider/2000/0217/tech-microsoft02170
0.html?id=yahoo></u></p>
COM+ and WebForms isn't going to fix this. That's not to say they aren't
important. Fixing this means that the 90 million Office customers are considered
strategic and that a new business must consider how they integrate their web
services into Office or be relegated to the consumer market. Office is so out of
the game on this now. The world is very rapidly becoming a universe of URLs and
Office doesn't know what to do with them. It also really doesn't matter much to
users whether those URLs came from Microsoft technology. With COM+ maybe we can
make it matter to developers but how much is that really going to buy
you.</p>
WHAT WE STILL HAVE A GOOD SHOT AT IS MAKING IT MATTER WHAT CONTEXT THE UNIVERSE
OF URLS PLAY IN. That might be the most misunderstood part of NetDocs. The
framework and platform for web services to tightly integrate with email, PIM,
authoring, viewing is KEY KEY KEY. Its mostly now a client framework but within
our overall knowledge worker service we can lead and add value with middleware
servers that aggregate and normalize XML data & serve up interesting
views to the client. (this is different than message bus - both are important).
The point is that a rich framework client & middleware can make this URL
universe a less random place and one where targeting Microsoft's high end
service is important not irrelevant.</p>
I'm not sure I've done a good job getting buy-in that the platform has
trifurcated into a stack. At the bottom level, Windows is still important but
its importance is as the underpinnings of the platform layers on top. i.e. its
importance as a platform is hidden and the next higher level platform is what
needs pushing and evangelization. For users and developers, its importance is at
the device driver level. The shell is a historical artifact, exposes a mess
along with the good, and isn't of much go-forward value. People are going to
fell[sic] allegiance to one shell and that will be the one that goes with their
core service offering. Beyond being a default, the leverage of the OS isn't what
it use to be. We'll still take it though - but like with MSN an inferior one
won't get a lot of traction just because its the default.</p>
The next tier is the browser/Trident level. This is a super important level and
we've done a great job. We did a great job because Silverberg prioritized and
focused on it and Adam brought a great concentration of talent onto the problem.
We achieved our goal of ousting Netscape. The good news is that we own the
platform. The bad news is that its so free & generic that beyond
reinforcing the Windows layer underneath and preventing someone else from
stealing that limelight, it doesn't go further. i.e. it was our defense but not
our offense.</p>
One other thing about this layer is that it showed that once a good abstracting
value add layer existed, the development world flocked to it. A large part of
the flocking was because the abstraction allowed for a bigger flock. Big
influential things are done by companies with marginal talent that would have a
tough go of things making GUI apps.</p>
The last point about this layer is that while we rocked in creating it we have
let this team go from being the best at MS to a B class. Letting the team
implode is one of our biggest [redacted] of the last year.</p>
Then there is the shell/viewer/core service platform on top. The value add for
third party developers is to integrate with the core schemas for Email, PIM,
documents, to attach to the right contexts in the shell, to be able to assume
& target an on-line doc type based on XML that can edit payloads
& spit out HTML, that can persist state info in a better way than
cookies (e.g. fully roamable), that can leverage viewing controls, that can
piggyback on logon services, that can piggyback billing services (eventually)
without a huge infrastructure investment, that exposes Exchange storage
services, etc. Like with the Trident layer, this layer provides an even greater
abstraction that can increase the size of the flock than can build on our
platform. It also reinforces both layers below it.</p>
There is a network effect with adding services to a rich feature set at this
level of the platform. If we can get to critical mass, we can make the Office
level as essential as the Windows level but even more relevant to the URL world.
We also get to double dip the revenue stream.</p>
<p align=right>MS-PCA 1451994<br>HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL</p>
<hr>
<br>
All of that still adds up to running in place. Not quite because we can increase
Office penetration but at least its the same order of magnitude. We can go
beyond by better integration of core value-add services than anyone
else.</p>
Bob is a bit chagrined that I've done a poor job of driving home the points
about the platform aspect of NetDocs with the two of you. I agree. Its key to
get buy in from you two in order to support the rest of what needs to be done to
make a NetDocs/Exchange knowledge worker service world class in the first run.
Its the KW service but the platform can migrate to the OS and become what
Neptune never was and the skin can change and be what Mars should be from a
platform perspective.</p>
<p align=right>MS-PCA 1451995<br>HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL</p>
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Comes 3097 - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, February 20 2013 @ 08:42 PM EST
|
|
|
|
