Redmond Review

Redmond, 'Start-up' Your Engines

Last month, I wrote about the community of Microsoft MVPs and Redmond's coming of age. I also discussed the strength Microsoft derives from this maturity. This month I want to talk about the flip side: Microsoft's more subdued success among Web start-up companies, and younger developers in general.

Relative to the LAMP stack, NoSQL databases and other open source technologies, Microsoft technology is sometimes viewed as stodgy, non-innovative and expensive. For some, the Microsoft .NET Framework, SQL Server, SharePoint and certainly Windows and Office are impressive and reliable, but not the things that Web breakthroughs are made of. Let's face it: Microsoft has a coolness deficit. The question is, what can it do about it?

Microsoft already has programs -- including BizSpark, WebsiteSpark and DreamSpark -- in place to enhance its market position with start-ups, independent Web developers, small Web companies and the students that aspire to work for them. These programs provide multiyear, free-of-charge access to all or part of the Microsoft stack for these constituencies and, by and large, they do a good job of eliminating cost as a competitive liability. But is that enough?

Victim of Its Own Success
Web start-ups, especially the well-funded ones, don't use open source technology simply because it's free. They use it because, to them, the free aspect of the software makes that software better. There's a certain vitality and, literally, youthfulness, to the communities around open source technologies. And Web start-up CEOs and CTOs don't see that same vitality around Microsoft technology and its community. As members of that community, we may ask ourselves, why not?

One big challenge for Microsoft is that it has such cash cows in Windows and Office that it's difficult for the market, and even for Microsoft itself, to see the company as one that proffers other products that are newer and more innovative. That's a shame, because just about everything out of the Microsoft Server and Tools Business is hugely powerful and constantly modernized, and cutting-edge features exist within the individual products. That story needs to be told. A lot.

Another well-kept secret is Microsoft's huge R&D budget and the activities of Microsoft Research, which is a powerhouse for incubating and commercializing a great many innovative ideas in software. Microsoft Research has an annual event called TechFest that showcases many of its projects. But that event is aimed at Microsoft employees, external influencers and select members of the press. Why isn't it bigger and more public? Wouldn't that help Microsoft's position among computer science faculty and their students, at a time when their brand loyalty is in its formative stages?

There's a business side to this, too. Start-ups want to be well-funded, well-run and poised for significant revenue as soon as possible. A company of Microsoft's size and stature can help: By working with start-ups that use the Microsoft stack, Redmond can provide them real exposure to the press and their markets, match them with CTOs who know the Microsoft stack really well, and put them in touch with venture capitalists. Through the "BizSpark One" program, Microsoft already does some of this. I'd argue it needs to do a lot more.

From Sparks to Fire
Microsoft needs to multitask. Pursuing high-innovation technologies and companies need not run counter to pursuing cash-cow businesses and the enterprise. Microsoft must do both.

Microsoft Research should be more prominent and more transparent, to shed light on an important part of the Microsoft story. Redmond should give start-ups more support and exposure; that's at least as valuable, to both parties, as producing case studies on the enterprise side. Microsoft should also engage more with academia, both evangelistically and in platform-neutral research projects of significant relevance to computer science and to industry.

Finally, getting the word out is important. Microsoft needs effective marketing and PR that tells its cutting-edge R&D story and proudly melds it with its enterprise story. The two strengthen each other, especially because Microsoft is formidable in both.

Microsoft needs to change and tell people it's changing. At the same time, it needs to be genuine and take pride in its legacy, rather than running away from it. In numerous columns we've cited various ways Redmond has begun to do this. Top-priority engagement with start-ups, Web companies and academia is one more.

About the Author

Andrew Brust is Founder and CEO of Blue Badge Insights, an analysis, strategy and advisory firm serving Microsoft customers and partners. Brust is also a Microsoft Regional Director and MVP; an advisor to the New York Technology Council; and co-author of "Programming Microsoft SQL Server 2012" (Microsoft Press, 2012). A frequent speaker at industry events, Brust is co-chair of the Visual Studio Live! family of conferences and a contributing editor to Visual Studio Magazine. Brust has been a participant in the Microsoft ecosystem for over 20 years, and has worked closely with both Microsoft's Redmond-based corporate team and its field organization for much of the last 15. He is a member of several "insiders" groups that supply him with insight around important technologies out of Redmond. Follow Brust on Twitter @andrewbrust.

comments powered by Disqus

Reader Comments:

Wed, May 4, 2011 André Moraes http://andredevchannel.blogspot.com

No way Microsoft can become "cool and fun" because they don't do things in a open/free/libre way. Microsoft, and many other companies, have that problem. When people choose free software, they don't choose because is cheap or unpolished. They do because they want to own the program and use it in a free way. Microsoft can't do that. At least for now. Hope that someday we will se the C source for kernel32.dll :D

Tue, May 3, 2011 Anonymous

Microsoft doesn't need to change. The market will move on without Microsoft and that will be fine. Does Microsoft really have a history of supporting innovation?Or is it synthesizing state of the art innovations developed elsewhere? This is not to say Microsoft Research and other departments at Microsoft don't offer innovation, because some do. But developers in general are not blind to Microsoft's copy and paste mentality. Maintaining quarterly revenue appears antithetical to incubating innovation at Microsoft. And thats ok. Theres a time and place for everything, including desktop software and office applications. But evolution moves on. And investors continue to price Microsoft accordingly.

Add Your Comment:

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above