Live Software or software lost...

I am relieved, but not surprised: Microsoft have declared that their "Live Software" is their next big bet.

Reactions are varied, some express fear for software start-ups and other small fry that could stand in the way of the juggernaut.

I agree with Fred though, who says "he sees it as an opportunity".

But for different reasons.

For me the opportunity is that the juggernauts still go the route of singular applications and separated events and actions as the design concept.

Now adding a bit of connection between the events as an afterthought. Making the files follow me like a dog in leash while I'm jumping haphazardly around guided by some vague idea of what I'm supposed to do.

Not to repeat myself too much; but if I enter a to-do or a meeting into a PIM, or when I open a word processor to write a letter - what I do in itself is completely disconnected from reality:

A meeting as such has no meaning at all.

It has a purpose if it is a part of a workflow, to discuss something that we have initiated, to start a sales process...

Writing a letter as such is another pastime.

Unless, of course, that it is a part of a process, to respond, to offer, to communicate something in a row of events.

The workflow is the essence, that is what the software should represent, the actions (read applications) being mere "junctions".

Refining the flow creates value, less so the "effectiveness" of the separate events - those are cost tweaks.

I remember something from my days of chemical engineering: Designing the overall flow came first, second and third, then we tinkered with the smoothness, diameters and details of the pipes. No fancy new pipe-junction could influence the design of the flow, technical solutions followed a good flow design.

So happy that the juggernauts are stuck in the atomised "details driven" school of thinking.

Wonder what their "chemical plant" would look like?

Buckets driven probably. Lots of very smooth and cool buckets that had the software equivalent of nine million lines of code invested in each bucket. Nifty.

Puuh I say, relieved :)

Comments

[Ric]

The danger, as always with Microsoft, is that there are enough people who are not afraid enough of a monoculture to turn Window and Office Live into successes. In software, as in nature, biodiversity is critical. I do not begrudge MS its place - one comment on Fred Wilson's blog pointed out that by extending the market, MS is doing all of us a favour - but it should not be the only species, which seems to be its overarching ambition.