Pages

Amherst Bytes #31: Microsoft Needs a Muse

Microsoft is finally getting around to releasing a competing music player to Apple’s iPod. They’re calling it the Zune, and it’s currently set for release “sometime this holiday season.” It has the usual features for a small media player, including a larger screen than the iPod with video and wireless connectivity capabilities. Other than the wireless feature, which is admittedly a few months ahead of its time, the specs all very standard for a device that’s trying to compete with the monstrously successful iPod. Alternative portable audio players have been around long before everyone knew what an iPod was, but it was Apple’s device that ended up defining the market with their slick marketing and easy-to-use interface.

So here comes Microsoft with their own entry, nearly half a decade after the fact, and it just makes me wonder: What exactly are they trying to prove? The very existence of the Zune is baffling to me. Do they actually think they have a chance at significantly eroding Apple’s nearly 80% market share? Is it pride? Are they just trying to prove that they can play the same game as Apple? The only new feature its bringing to the table is wireless connectivity, which can be used to synch with your computer or swap files with a friend. Beyond that, why would anyone want to buy a Zune over an iPod or any other MP3 player on the market?

Personally, I think Microsoft is wasting its time with the Zune. It’s simply a fairly unremarkable media device. More importantly, it seems to me that the thought processes that led to its inception are an all-too-common source of stagnation and misdirection at Microsoft. It often seems that Microsoft is content with just taking an existing “fresh” idea, improving upon it slightly, and releasing it as their own. Some may call this progress, I call it lazy. This sort of thinking puts them in the business of constantly playing catch up, and in such a place innovation is dead.

It just takes a quick glance at Microsoft’s upcoming projects to see just how “fresh” they really are: Windows Live (www.live.com) is their response to Google’s search, mail, and personalized home page. A new and improved Windows Mobile software may finally make them competitive in the smart phone market where Blackberry leads. They’ll be taking a dip in the social networking scene with “Windows Live Spaces” with sights aimed at the MySpace crowd. And MSN will be getting Internet video a la YouTube and Google video. While they do need to stay competitive in some respects, one would think the biggest software company in the world would be setting standards instead of merely adapting to them.

So why didn’t Microsoft figure out the YouTube or Gmail formula for success before their competitors? The answer lies in innovation. Perhaps it’s because they’re just too big, or maybe the newer tech companies are more eager to succeed–whatever the case, it seems that Microsoft is severely lacking in innovation today. The only solution to this is a shakeup in the administration that forces the company to seek out innovation as if their very existence depended upon it, because it may just as well.

With software genius Ray Ozzie (creator of the once-popular Lotus Notes) taking over for Bill Gates as chief software architect back in June, Microsoft may already be on its way towards a modernized era of software design. According to the October ‘06 issue of Wired, Ozzie seems focused on making the company less of a lumbering giant and more directly competitive with its younger rivals. While this will entail moving the company away from its current safety zone and guaranteed revenue, it’s a gamble that may mean more for Microsoft than any amount of profit. Hopefully, this means no more playing catch up.


Similar Posts

 

Trackbacks

(Trackback URL)

close Reblog this comment
blog comments powered by Disqus