Mark Lucovsky，微软曾经的Distinguished Engineer和Windows架构师，曾经设计了HailStorm（即.NET My Services）但最终失败，在微软工作了十六年以后，去年此时跳槽去了Google。
刚才看了此君在今年二月，即加盟Google三个月以后写的一篇Blog: "Shipping Software"。概括起来说，Mark Lucovsky对Google、Amazon等互联网公司的软件发布方式大加赞扬，他说“They have embraced the network, deeply understand the concept of 'software as a service', and know how to deliver incredible value to their customers efficiently and quickly”。他举例说，当Amazon的工程师修复了网上书店中的一个Bug以后，经过一天的测试，晚上就可以发布到服务器上，第二天顾客就可以用到更新过的代码了。相比之下，MarkL认为微软的软件发布方式太慢、太落后了——“In best case scenarios, the software will reach end users a few months after the Release To Manufacturing (RTM) date. In many cases, particularly for users working in large corporations, they won't see the software for a year or more post RTM”。
Mark Lucovsky恐怕是太热爱他的新公司了，或者是因为HailStorm最终未能发布而耿耿于怀，在他的这篇题为"Shipping Software"的文章里，他对微软有强烈的反噬情绪。他显然眼里只有Google和互联网。但他不应该一味追捧Release To Web而忘记了软件世界中其他的领域——还有很多“传统”的软件公司（例如Oracle、Adobe、AutoDesk、Apple、IBM）仍然在用和微软类似的软件发布流程：光盘、不定期的补丁在网上供下载、每隔几个月或几年发布一个major release。
并不是所有的软件都适合“Software as Service”的，有些软件可以是Hosted，比如一些LOB系统（Salesforce.com）以及与沟通协作相关的软件等；而有些软件必须是local的，例如Office、Photoshop、Final Cut、DB2、Quake III等——如果强行把他们一一都挪到浏览器里面，浏览器就又会变得像现在的操作系统一样庞大无比。
至于MarkL所提到的"in large corporations, they won't see the software for a year or more post RTM"，这简直太正常了。说到底，Google的所有软件和服务，都不是Business Critical的。
事情源自于今年七月，CNET的一篇题为"Google balances privacy, reach"的文章公布了Google的CEO Eric Schmidt的大量私人资料，包括收入状况、他的妻子、他的业余爱好等，而这些资料全部是从Google搜索得来的，只花了不到三十分钟——尽管Eric Schmidt在他的个人主页上并没有公开这些信息——这说明Eric未必愿意让太多人知道这些事。CNET的文章因此对Google搜索导致个人隐私被侵犯表示忧虑——如果Google挖掘到了这些数据，而不怀好意者又加以利用。
CNET的文章无可厚非，但Google很快做出反应，决定封杀CNET一年（"Google representatives have instituted a policy of not talking with CNET News reporters until July 2006 in response to privacy issues raised by a previous story"）。Google的这一举动招到了广泛的质疑（1,2,3,4,5）。
Rob Enderle认为，"they (Google) were increasingly behaving as if they were the center of the universe"，"companies, particularly those that grow very quickly, can lose track of their ethics and, by placing their needs in front of all others, move from being widely admired to widely despised"。
msmobiles.com上的文章：
Siemens dumps Symbian
November 09, 2005 [General]
During a press conference yesterday representatives of Siemens Mobile (now owned by BenQ) have confirmed:
... that they are not interested in further development of smartphones based on Symbian operating system. Instead they will be producing and selling phones based only on Microsoft's Windows Mobile. Of course Siemens Mobile / BenQ will be producing also phones based on proprietary (non-smartphone based, closed) operating systems, but as far as smartphones are concerned: only such that will be based on Windows Mobile! The first one will be Siemens P50 (formerly known as BenQ P50) but more is coming.
There are many reasons why it is bad business decision for mobile phone manufacturers to make Symbian phones but among top reasons may be: a) fact that given manufacturer must compete with Nokia on Nokia's terms and since Nokia spends millions of USD on marketing, such competing can't succeed - it is like fighting fire with fire - it simply doesn't work and one needs to fight fire with water and one needs to use Windows Mobile! ... or b) fact that by using Symbian one is directly supporting main competitor.
Please note also that although Samsung has not dumped Symbian yet, it is producing its most advanced (Wi-Fi, hard disks) smartphones only with Windows Mobile. On the other hand Palm has clearly denied that it will pick Symbian for upcoming Treos. Increasingly phone vendors are realizing that Symbian is bad idea. Bad business decision.
我同意这篇文章对原因的分析。没错，去年Nokia收购Psion的股份以后，已经持有Symbian超过60%的股份——事实上，Symbian就是Nokia的。
Psion告别Symbian了，摩托罗拉彻底告别Symbian了，西门子彻底告别Symbian了。在剩下的还开发基于Symbian的手机厂商里，有份量的只剩下诺基亚、索尼爱立信和三星了（松下、LG、联想等都份额太小）。
三星脚踏几条船，同时还在做Windows Mobile和Palm的智能手机，Symbian的新机越出越少。只剩下索尼爱立信还跟着诺基亚在干......我猜，要不了一两年，索尼爱立信就会像今年年初索尼抛弃Palm一样抛弃诺基亚。
索尼总是扮演往棺材上钉最后一根钉子的角色。
我很赞同Microsoft Watch上这篇题为"Microsoft Needs to Say No to Web 2.0"的文章中的某些论点：
Only a few Softies seem to be all caught up in the Web 2.0 hype. The majority of them seem oblivious to the weak business ideas, buzzwords and bloviation that make me think "Bubble 2.0" every time someone mentions "Web 2.0."
And with its emphasis over the past couple of years on convincing developers and customers to forsake the Web client in favor of the "smart" (fat) client, Microsoft seemed like it was pedaling backwards instead of forward.
But just as there were some folks in the tech industry who wisely decided against trading their real, tangible jobs for spots at DrKoop.com, Kozmo.com and Pets.com, there are thousands of Microsoft employees who seem interested in building less-glamorous but more useful products like Visual Studio, Office and BizTalk Server.
Microsoft needs to just keep saying no to Web 2.0, at least until Web 2.0 means something more than just "we want venture funding."
没错，"Web 2.0"怎么听怎么像"泡沫2.0"。不过Smart Client的确也有点逆潮流而动的味道了，尤其是当AJAX如今如此遍地开花之时。
Microsoft今天在旧金山宣布了两项新的软件产品战略：Windows Live和Office Live。Bill Gates在演讲中将"Live Software"列为继1990年的PC Desktop、1995的Internet、2000年的.NET以后微软的又一个重大战略转变。
原先的MSN品牌下的产品将分为两部分：
- 软件部分，例如Hotmail、Messenger、Spaces、Search等，将使用新的Windows Live品牌；
- 内容部分，例如msn.com，仍然继续使用MSN品牌
以后，就是Windows Live Mail、Windows Live Messenger、Windows Live Spaces了：
但是，在微软中国的新闻主页上，看不到Windows Live有关的中文版press release；在新浪科技的主页上，也看不到Windows Live有关的报道。
