Microsoft's Vision Of Future Workplaces

An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft unveils their new office of the near future in a swanky center in Redmond. Inside this article you will find clear evidence of institutional navel gazing like never before and a staggering ignorance of current technology (much of this seems retreaded) not to mention actual business needs or wants. Want proof? How about: '"Surround sound is going to be increasingly important in future offices," says group marketing manager Tom Gruver in leading a tour of the new facility.' Right. More chestnuts inside."

Comments

Yes but...

[secondsun]

With the move to central servers and MS moves like Liscensing 6.0 who will need or want Microsoft in five years?

lame

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure you'd be knocking the notion of VoIP, Video Phones, Netmeetings, E-Mail if it were noted for the office of 2002... in 1982.

Magic Mice?

[xean]

• At one desk, users can move a wireless mouse's pointer from the screen of one computer to the screen of a laptop, with no wire or wireless connection between the computers themselves. That allows copying or moving material between the computers, a task that would otherwise be more difficult.

Does anybody else have difficulties with this particular idea? Since when did the ability to move a mouse pointer mean you could copy and paste?

ZDNet has an article as well

[grylnsmn]

Here's ZDNet's article. It has a different picture with it. You can find it here.

What's the advantage?

[asv108]

I can understand the advantage of dual displays for graphics tasks but what is the advantage of having dual displays for programming? Can't you just use virtual desktops and have a big monitor? My monitor, the sony in the middle runs at 1600x1200. What would be the advantage of running 2 displays at 800x600 over running one big monitor at 1600x1200?

Re:What's the advantage?

[Pfhreakaz0id]

I thought the same thing, until I got my second flat panel at work. If you use an IDE, all your pallet's, toolbars, form design area, etc goes there and your second monitor is a bare window, just code. Even if you don't do IDE's, you can run the program in one window while stepping thru code/watching debug output in another... it's pretty sweet.

Re:What's the advantage?

[MarcOiL]

I used to do videogames programming, and I used not two, but THREE different displays.

When debugging, I had the code on the main screen, the game on another one, where I could see if the drawing routines were behaving correctly and finally I had another (smaller) screen with the documentation. When you program something on MS Windows, you really need to have the docs handy. Yes, their APIs are awful and they usually change things around.

OFFTOPIC: I once was assigned a digital video related project, and during the six months the project lasted, MS changed the name of the APIs we were using three times: ActiveMovie -> DirectMovie -> SomethingMovie, I can't remember. It drove me nuts!

Re:surround sound?

[grumpygrodyguy]

I was thinking the exact same thing after I read the intro:

Want proof? How about: '"Surround sound is going to be increasingly important in future offices," says group marketing manager Tom Gruver in leading a tour of the new facility.' Right. More chestnuts inside."

At face value this does sound really dumb. But if someone could build a "wave cancellation" device that listens to the sounds coming into my cubicle...and then transmits that same sound 180 degrees out of phase towards me, thus turning my cubicle into my own private quiet space...I would be very very happy glad for it.

Re:Best quote:

[DDX_2002]

I love how the ability to get "e-mailed voice messages" is supposed to be an immeasurable improvement over the outdated "voice mails". Uh huh... so instead of getting a long rambling message on my phone that I kill by hitting 3, 3, 3, 3, listening to the important bit, 3, 3,7... instead I get a long rambling message on my computer that I kill by clicking skip ahead, skip ahead, skip ahead, listen to the important part, Delete. Wow. That's going to just revolutionize how I work, that is. And the best part is, I can now be annoyed by stupid callers in lovely Dolby Digital Surround Sound!!!!!!!!

Re:Multi headed monitors

[joeljones]

The first part of this article reminded me remarkably of when I was a summer student at Apple. Almost all the developers had multiple monitors, usually one big one and one or more smaller ones on book shelves to one side or the other. Some people had sound effects turned on so windows closing and such made a noise. One of the hot things that got passed around was a little utility that allowed the mouse and keyboard to be shared across machines. The people in the next office over were using speech to control their computers, which was kind of annoying to listen to. There were a few videos being sent around in emails.

So when did this all happen?

1992.

Re:Interesting line

[jasontheking]

A "security issue" could be anything from being fuX0r3d by the latest virus, to M$ deciding to DRM your ass to the wall. (which from a certain point of view would be a "feature" anyway).

So don't take it as anything more than a throwaway line.

Re:More Chestnuts?

[jc42]

> ... the pen copy and paste from computer to computer is interesting.

Hmmm ... What they describe requires the computers to be next to each other. With my X-windows screen I regularly use a mouse and copy-and-paste to transfer stuff between apps on computers hundreds or thousands of miles apart. I've been doing that for 15 years or so, and it doesn't seem like anything special.

Re:Three things

[dublin]

1) That wraparound screen actually looks pretty cool and potentially useful. I find myself glancing back and forth slightly across my large screen, so something like this could help with limited screen real estate. Not everyone's comfortable with X-style multiple desktops. My one worry is that this monitor would be MS-only

It is cool. It's also a blatant ripoff of the work Bruce Tognazzini did at Sun: In his "Starfire" movie (in which we are shown exactly why Bruce should not attempt a career as director) one of the core ideas is the Starfire desktop, a 6-foot wide vertical arc that also sweeps down onto the physical "desktop". While the film is flat, the thinking that went into the world it portrays is excellent, and has stood the test of time quite well.

Not only is the idea presented there, but there are some clever demonstrations of possible features of such tchnology, for instance: The desktop portion of the display incorporates phototransistors as the 4th element of each pixel. The entire screen is touch sensitive, allowing one to "scan" a document by simply placing it face down on the display and rubbing it with your knuckles. The image then visibly flips to "un-mirror" itself and is OCRed into usable form. Cool. Another neat idea is that of merging touchscreen gestures with the giant Starfire display - for instance, a duplicate of a graphics object in Ashlar Vellum for Starfire is created by touching it with thumb and finger joined, then spreading them apart, creating a selected copy of the object.

The MS center sounds interesting, but it looks to be a simple rip-off of the ideas that Sun first expressed in the Starfire film. (That said, I think Sun wasn't quite ready to deal with a vision so bold, either. One of the interesting things about the film is the implied e-business connectedness that underlies the system. In some ways, it is very much like what we have today with Google and large scale information repository sites.)

This vision still needs to happen. Here's hoping it will...

You're 110% right, Microsoft doesn't get it

[Aqua OS X]

Seriously man. Sound systems at the office desk are a BIG no-no. First off, this means every moron will be playing his or her music, which may or may not suck. Secondly, Microsoft's "noises for everything" campain is annoying. Noises that do not pertain to me distract me.

And what's the deal with the video / audio emails? I can guarantee you that they will not catch on. (anyone own a video phone?) Email is great because -we don't- have to listen or see each other. People like it because it is impersonal, you don't have to rush your thoughts, etc etc.

And then there is the data transfer wireless mouse. Now there's something that I'll break or misplace. Whatever happened to networks? It's easier to drag and drop a file over to someone... why should I walk over to someone's office with my mouse? That's idiotic.

It's like MS just doesn't "get it." Moreover, I don't mean to preach, but companies like Apple do (to some extent) "get it."

I mean, why make wireless data mice. Why not work on zero-config wireless networking (like OS X supports now)? And why annoy the HELL out of coworkers with dolby 6.1 "you've got mail" sounds. Why not work on soft silent visual cues insead (ie OS X can do a subtle 'pulse' of a users display instead of using alert sounds)?

The only thing I want from that artical is that monitor :) I'd be down to have my desktop look like Pre-Crime :)

Smoke and mirrors. DRM is their last hope.

[SgtChaireBourne]

Lack of vision about security and other things probably means they've given up and gone over to pure delaying tactics.

Like their recent press release for their next generation of vaporware, this looks like a delaying tactic to give the illusion that the company is going somewhere. From that view, at best it can delay an audit until the company can get a world level monopoly (and thus positive cash flow) through DRM. At worst it can postpone the date when the company flatlines, but postpone long enough for major share holders to offload.

DRM is their last hope. It won't help them out of their security and design problems, but it will let them keep dominion of the desktop and keep using that as a hammer. Otherwise, OS X did an end run around them for the desktop. In general, MS products cannot compete on technical merits, especially security, or price. Even Balmer and Allchin now admit it publicly. And it looks like Microsoft is not likely to catch up, either.

Having been found guilty of illegally maintaining a monopoly, MS will no longer be able to rely on purely on existing marketshare either. In fact many key applications types (spreadsheets, wordprocessing, fincancial software) are starting to appear on faster, cheaper, more secure, more easily maintained platforms. Quite a few execs and VPs have been hopping off recently. Bill himself stepped down as CEO the first year Microsoft posted a major loss.

Why am I forced...

[Ethelred Unraed]

...to think of the GM Futurama from the 1940 and 1964 World's Fairs? (Take a look at this site and this one for a little about their "future vision".) Or how about the movie "Metropolis" from Fritz Lang? At least Metropolis didn't try to predict the future -- just to be a work of art. MS's thing just strikes me as bald-faced marketing just like GM's Futurama was.

In the 1960s, Ford said we'd be driving atomic-powered cars in 20 years. In the 1930s, just about everyone assumed we'd all have our private helicopter or airplane by 1980. (Imagine the air congestion and accidents with that...soccer moms flying their SUV-copters.) And we're still waiting on our Mr. Fusion powerplants...

Yogi Berra said it best. "It's tough to make predictions. Especially about the future."

Cheers,

Ethelred

Na, more like "Metropolis" or "Brave New World"

[Ethelred Unraed]

Quoth the article: Instant-messaging buddies are grouped to reflect their hierarchy in the company, or where they're logged in. E-mails, instant messages and Web pages can be grouped into "Info Clusters" and then e-mailed or quickly turned into a Web site.

Nah, this is more like "Metropolis" or "Brave New World" -- where everyone knows their place in the Great Corporation, and the technology is there primarily to enforce that hierarchy (oh, good Ford!).

Maybe MS should have been more honest and obvious and referred to the managers in the "widget factory" as Betas, with the bosses Alphas. And handed out lots of soma. Orgy-porgy...

So much for the Internet flattening out society. Looks like MS wants it to be the tool for The Man to keep us peons where we belong.

Cheers,

Ethelred

With regard to IE..

[Trollificus]

They may have the stability thing down pat. And ease of use? Can't beat it.
But that's the problem. It's too simplistic. I know they're trying to reach the largest demographic, the user who just wants to log on and go. But I'm still waiting for a version with the little bells and whistles that make Mozilla such a joy to use. Tabbed browsing, for one.
I recently started using Opera. Wonderful browser! It's as stable as IE(to me, anyway), and has everything(and then some) that I loved about Mozilla. Tabbed browsing. Translations, search and dictionary options right from the right-click menu. The ability to turn off images, popups and banner ads. E-mail client integration from within the browser. Refreshing at intervals. Mouse gestures. I could go on.
I think even average Joe user would do well to try out a browser like this. It's an all-in-one solution.
Actually, I'm surprised Microsoft hasn't caught onto these ideas and "embraced" them like they do everything else.

Either way, say what you will. But I'll likely never use IE again. Heh, and that's quite a statement coming from a staunch ass like me. ;p~

MS vs. Engelbart

[wowbagger]

I think about the ideas Douglas C. Engelbar did, vs. the Microsoft "vision of the future".

Consider: Douglas Engelbart didn't just come up with wizzier ways to do the same old crap ("Look, this thing AUTOMATICALLY puts the memo in the pneumatic tube FOR YOU!"), he looked at technologies that didn't exist yet and asked "And how could this be used to be more productive".

Ever since seeing that video I have been asking "And where is that sort of demo TODAY?" "What would a demo that is as far in advance of today's state of the art look like?"

It would take ENORMOUS resources to pull off such a demo. It would take an organization that has plenty of R&D money to be able to do that kind of research.

Microsoft could do it - they have the people, they have the money. What they don't have is the vision .

My apologies to the various Microsoft employees that read Slashdot, but I assert that MS does not have the vision to create a demo on the scale of the Englebart demo. Englebart's vision was "How can we improve our ability to work on complicated projects", Microsoft's vision is "How do we gain even more monopolies and make even more money". MS employees, this is not a slam against you - it is an indictment of the very top level of management at Microsoft.

And mind you, Microsoft is not alone in this - most companies today are as myopic as a mole in this. They have no motivation to really improve the world, they improve the world only as a side effect of trying to "maximize shareholder value". But the companies that REALLY take off are not the ones trying to artificially inflate their stock price, but rather those companies who's products truly revolutionize the world.