Microsoft Delivers Major Piece of Nothing; NYT Does It Up Front Page

Despite it’s somewhat muted announcement some months back, Microsoft’s imminent official unveiling of a Windows Live installer (alleged to arrive for public use and critique sometime this week) still manages to leave me wondering if folks in Redmond are as “on the ball” as some of them may appear to be (Ray Ozzie, for one).

It’s one thing for the largest software company in the world to deliver new services like Windows Live Mail, Windows Live Messenger 8.5, Windows Live Photo Gallery, and Windows Live OneCare Family Safety. (Oh how I wish Microsoft could get to simplifying the nomenclature of its product lines, don’t you?)

It’s quite another for Microsoft to create a “small” localized piece of software (apart from one’s Web browser) built so as to ensure its users “an easy way to access the [Live] suite of services”. Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t that seem to be a little, you know, pointless?

I must say, it seems typical of the software giant to assemble precisely this kind of useless contrivance. But even more troubling is the fact that a news organization such as the New York Times has given this delivery space within its pages. That none other than John Markoff, the veteran journalist responsible for covering some of Silicon Valley’s most important occurrences, has taken it upon himself (with the aid of an editor) to put this the front page of today’s Business section, opening it with a claim of the empire’s plan to “strike back.”

Really, Markoff? Really? How disappointing it is to hear you say so. I know, I know, you’re writing to a broad readership that may not be quite so in tune with the stuff going on in the Web 2.0 universe. You’ve got to keep things generalized, and maintain a big-picture perspective. But considering the basic ingredients of which you speak – you know, the webmail service, the instant messaging client, the photo gallery solution – and the complete irrelevance of a local gateway (again, separate from one’s Web browser) built solely to access said Web-based products, there really appears to be nothing of significance for you to announce at all. So why do so?

I’d most certainly react differently if Markoff had told of Microsoft’s imminent delivery of a Web-based Word or Excel or even a complete Live Office package. (Which, by the bye, isn’t happening, at least not anytime soon.) That would be big news, warranting the use of valuable space in one of the world’s preeminent dailies. But this? An installer? Built to help users “conveniently” access a collection of Live services, of which several will never reach heights worth noting?

Please. This story is more appropriate for placement in the Times’ Bits blog, if its to be presented anywhere in the folds of the publication. Markoff’s efforts in reporting the latest news in the tech industry would’ve been better spent on another item. Such as the failure to build solid municipal WiFi networks in the US, the most notable of the moment being the San Francisco stalemate.

Ironically, that piece of info made it to the NYT’s Bits page.

(Note: I’ll be looking into America’s Muni WiFi here on Profy in a piece soon to come.)