Google+ launched nearly a year ago, and I remember it vividly. It seemed like such a cool concept: an answer to all the annoyances that were found throughout Facebook. I got in on the action early, before the wider unveiling. And I found myself meeting new people and engaging in fascinating conversations.

The Google+ crowd was savvy and smart. Granted, much of the conversation initially was pretty meta. We were using a new tool to discuss how cool it was to be using a new tool to discuss how we were using it… that sort of thing.

But I could ask questions like “do you tip when you order takeout / to-go orders?” or “what’s the best way you’ve found to discover new music you like?” and end up with dozens of solid responses. And it wasn’t just questions that made for good conversations. People on Google+ were genuinely more interested in dialogue and engaged sharing than people on Twitter or Facebook.

So what’s changed in the last year? I’m not sure exactly. Perhaps the magic wore off. Another prevailing theory is that the atmosphere somehow changed once the unwashed masses joined the party (as compared to the techie early birds). The irony is that while my follower count has steadily increased to over 15,000, it has been inversely correlated to the rate of engagement.

Nowadays Facebook is where most of my online engagement takes place even though I tend to cross-post most everything I share onto Google+ as well. As it turns out, high Google+ engagement was an anomaly while Facebook engagement has always been pretty steady.

Facebook, with all its annoyances, is more effective than ever at engaging and connecting me. With all its flaws, it feels closer to how human interaction happens in the offline world insomuch as I’ve met personally almost every one of my 400+ friends.

And perhaps that’s the way it should be.

*Update* Two days later and Fast Company has quite the article on the same topic: Exclusive: New Google+ Study Reveals Minimal Social Activity, Weak User Engagement

Back in 2008, I was finishing up my MBA at Purdue University when an opportunity presented itself. I was the teaching assistant to Scott Jones (yes, that Scott Jones) who was, at the time, teaching an entrepreneurship capstone course.

A PhD student approached me with a demo of patent pending technology that had already received $50,000 of funding and asked if I’d be interested in putting together a business plan. I said yes. We entered three competitions in the area and placed first in one and third in the other two.

Here’s the first paragraph from that business plan (from March 2008, unchanged):

iPrivacyManager (iPM) is an intelligent Internet application that allows online users the ability to manage how their information (profiles, pictures, etc.) is shared on social networking sites (e.g. MySpace, Facebook). iPM is based on patented technology invented at Purdue University by PhD student Arjmand Samuel and professor Arif Ghafoor. This technology allows users a simple but powerful approach to managing subsets of friends, conditions of access, and specific rules for sharing of personal information.

Paragraph two continued on to explain how it worked (again, unchanged from 2008):

iPM easily integrates with the existing information store of an online user profile (via the open standard XML) and uses a unique, graphically interactive way for the user to define criteria (also known as “context-aware disclosure rules”) that dictate who can see what under what environmental conditions.

Later on in the business plan we referenced Facebook and explained a key disadvantage of social networking as compared to “real life”:

Currently, user profiles posted on Facebook and other sites are potentially accessible in an identical way by a wide range of acquaintances, who are typically kept separate in real life (employers, coworkers, fellow students/alumni, friends, family, and relatives).

Sound familiar? It should, unless you’ve been ignoring tech news for the past two weeks. Google, via Google+, has essentially built from scratch the magic we were trying to bottle up in hopes of selling to social networking sites circa 2008.

So what happened to iPrivacy Manager? Arjmand and I both received offers from Microsoft (coincidentally, from unrelated business groups) and each decided to go the cautious route. We knew that we had something potentially big on our hands.

But that’s just it, we weren’t really past the potential stage, competition winnings notwithstanding. We were both married. We were both students. We were both cautious entrepreneurs.

*Update* I have been asked what the moral of the story is and thought I’d add a mini-epilogue here. For me, this is the story of entrepreneurship often untold. You have to give up a lot for the hopes of a nice pay off, and the odds are against you. But what happens when you go with a decision where the odds are in your favor?

I’m cautious by nature, so also being entrepreneurial is a bit of a paradox. But I have no regrets on this. I think being cautious worked out well for me, actually. That said, if you choose the cautious route, be prepared for someone else to do exactly what you were planning (in my case, Google!).

Let’s face it: we all love making comparisons. It’s an easy way to simplify a point. The problem, though, lies in the implicit assumptions and interpretations that go along with a comparison. Meaning, as soon as you make your comparison, it’s as if you’re holding all else equal while at the same time elevating your comparison to a higher level of credibility as compared to any of the unspoken alternative comparisons involving the two things you’re comparing.

And so it happened today with a post over at TechCrunch entitled “Is Google at Risk of Becoming the Next Microsoft?” Guest author Peter Sims makes some interesting commentary about Google (after sharing an intriguing story) but then sidetracks an otherwise good read by trying to simplify his point via a comparison of Google to Microsoft (see title above). As a result, that’s probably all this article is going to be remembered for.

Ironically, this comparison is coming from a tech blog that found it necessary to discuss Apple passing Microsoft in market valuation in three separate blog posts. Interesting. Perhaps someone should remind Sims that Google needs to come up with $70+ billion of market worth before it can experience the dreadful risk of becoming like Microsoft.

Sarcastic simplified comparison rebuttal aside, here’s my real point (quoting myself with emphasis added, a comment I left on the post at TechCrunch after Sims defended his comparison based on Microsoft’s 10 years of flat stock performance):

This whole title/question is based on just one angle and flawed as a result: it’s only the shareholder’s perspective. Why not link to MSFT profits or revenues over the past 10 years? Why not link to the growth of computers in households over the last 10 years? Oh right, because we’re talking about success as defined by stock market investors… Is that really the best measurement? For them, maybe, but for the rest of us who don’t actually short or buy millions of shares of certain stocks… not so much.

Bottom line: we need a more holistic measurement when comparing success of companies like this.

Oh, and you forgot to mention (like most do) Microsoft’s not-so-sexy billion dollar businesses in Server, Sharepoint, etc. when listing Microsoft’s “struggles” over the years.

Don’t get me wrong, market valuation, stock performance, and other financial metrics projecting the future have their place in defining success of a company. But what else should be considered? In my comment, I suggest revenue and profit trends (which, in theory, are supposedly accounted for in stock price). But that’s still financial-only thinking.

What about cultural contribution? Innovation? Research? Economic impact? Job creation? Employee satisfaction? Societal improvements? Each of these is difficult to measure for comparison sake (i.e., a bit of an apples to oranges issue both in how we define the parameters for each metric and in how we weigh each metric against the others) but most are still very relevant.

Microsoft, Google, Apple, plus plenty of others have done much for the world here. But saying it that way is bland and boring. We need a way to compare! (Or do we?)

And what about philanthropy? Microsoft’s clearly the winner on this metric. There’s the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation plus the recent news of co-founder Paul Allen giving most his money to charity. None of that would be possible without Microsoft. I’m sure carbon foot print is something else to throw into the success metric mix for good measure.

Even then, I know I’m missing plenty of other good metrics in my quick-and-dirty attempt to redefine how we measure success. But I’m a bit tired of finance being the de facto metric for making company comparisons. Does anyone (with power and influence, i.e., not me) want to take a stab at coming up with a better metric? Or are we stuck, for better or for worse, with financiers ruling the day once again?

*Update* Uh, so for some reason, the TechCrunch post has been taken down (at least for now, as I write this). I’m not sure why. I’m glad I captured my comment (quoted above) before its disappearance with the post!

*Update 2* And now the TechCrunch post is back.

*Update 3* TechCrunch now has a new guest post entitled “The Many Bottom Lines of Businesses” which addresses some of the same issues I talk about above.

How do you like my title? It came from a Wall Street Journal article entitled “Microsoft Plans Shake Up” which Henry Blodget of Silicon Alley Insider linked to, added an intro that added nothing new, and then added quite the Google-bait headline of “Microsoft Shaking Up Entertainment Group In Desperate Attempt To Catch Apple And Google”.

Now, full disclosure, I work for Microsoft but not in this division. And I have nothing to do with whatever this story is about. It seems like an interesting scoop for the WSJ, but Blodget’s title is tricking Techmeme into thinking it should be the leader story. So as a fellow blogger, I thought I’d one up Mr. Blodget with an equally exciting title of my own and a piece of advice:

As the New York Time reminded us recently, bloggers love using the embellished title technique. But you gotta pick one or the other. Either leave out the embellishment and be an echo chamber OR embellish and add something substantial. But don’t embellish and say nothing. There’s a word for that: spam.

*Update* I contacted Henry Blodget to let him know my opinion on this. He responded quickly and let me know that he dropped the word “desperate” from his title. Kudos. I’ve done the same.

*Update 2* TechFlash has the latest on the “shake up” (via Techmeme).

The Bing team today unveiled turn-by-turn directions for Windows Phones. Now for those that know me, you may know that I currently am using an Android phone (yeah, yeah, I work for Microsoft and use an Android phone; it happens). And one of the reasons specifically was for the free GPS app available via Google.

Having a phone with this kind of app makes my life less complicated, as it removes one more gadget from my life that I’d just as soon not have separately. But lately my Android phone has felt sluggish (it’s a G1), and with this announcement, I think it’s safe to say that I’m looking at getting myself a nice new Windows Phone 7 this holiday season. Anyone else making a major phone change soon?

Logan and I are at it again with another episode of our new podcast: Practically Ideal (get episode 2 here, right-click and select “Save Link As…”). This week we’re discussing progressivism (general Democrat views) vs. conservatism (general Republican views) and figuring out if/where we fit in.

We also talk about Google’s Thanksgiving present of turn-by-turn GPS directions available on all their phones as well Microsoft Bing’s latest and greatest features just released. And lastly, Logan and I discuss which movies we plan to see this holiday season. Enjoy, and thanks for listening!

*Update* Practically Ideal is now on iTunes.

It’s a slow news day (should be, it’s Sunday) and good ol’ Mini-Microsoft has taken the top spot over at Techmeme. For those unfamiliar, Mini-Microsoft is an anonymous blogger and Microsoft employee who has been calling for radical change to happen at Microsoft for years. He (she?) has been quiet since the last round of layoffs but decided to share some praise today in a post titled “Microsoft Has Turned The Corner.”

From Mini’s blog:

What has helped make the turn?

* Windows 7
* Bing
* Silverlight
* IE EU chutzpah
* …and award worthy, coherent ads that aren’t a demonstration of how best to destroy millions of dollars quickly.

This was quickly followed by a Robert Scoble tweet explaining that Microsoft will announce something cool tomorrow to be added to Mini’s list above:

Mini-Microsoft is right. Microsoft has turned a corner and tomorrow morning I’ll show you another example of how. http://ff.im/58Szj

Of course, Mini-Microsoft wouldn’t be Mini without suggesting further radical changes using unsubstantiated, oversimplified rhetoric (in this case, laying off 15,000 people is the solution). But I enjoy the perspective, and he does get it right sometimes. All things considered, it’s nice to see the complainers getting excited. That, in and of itself, is a corner turned.

*Update* Scoble reveals what he was referring to: “Microsoft’s new Office 2010 brings Office back from the dead (tons of videos)”

I know what you’re thinking: I work for Microsoft, so of course I’m going to use Bing! The truth is, though, that I’ve been using Google as my default search engine up until Bing was released two weeks ago. Previously, I just didn’t find any compelling reason to use Microsoft’s search engine(s). I like to think of myself as someone who doesn’t change habits just because he works for a company. Rather, I need to want to change a habit, if that makes sense.

That said, I’ll give most anything (specific to technology) a try at least once. So I thought I’d give Microsoft’s latest response to Google search another try for a couple weeks. This time: I’m sticking. The difference? I think Microsoft nailed it with the “vertical” search decision concept. You see, Bing is optimized for four types of searches decisions: shopping, travel, health, and local.

What I didn’t realize until now is that those four categories cover around two thirds of all my search decision queries (that’s an approximation for myself, I’m guessing the Bing team has a more accurate aggregate number that explains query breakdown). And now Bing displays those kinds of results very effectively. Here are a couple examples from my past week of searching deciding:

1. I was interested in Indian food, so I searched for “Indian Food 98004” and right away got a listing of all the Indian restaurants in my area. If I click through on one, I get a landing page that aggregates reviews, shows a “scorecard”, provides 1-click directions, and shows photos and pricing information.
2. I was looking for a particular flight, so I keyed in “Seattle to Austin” and right at the top of the list of results was the best price along with a prediction of if it’s going to rise or fall. If I click through, I get a landing page with all sorts of relevant information for booking travel.

Does this mean I’ll never use Google again? Of course not. The thing about search is that switching costs are very low. If Bing doesn’t give me what I want quickly, there’s a good chance I’ll give Google a try (just like I used to use other search engines other than Google when Google didn’t give me what I wanted quickly enough). But now that Bing shines with two thirds of my searches decisions, it’s earned the right to be my default.

According to some, Bing has Google running scared. While I’m not sure about that, I am glad to be in a position where I want to use my own company’s search engine.

Cross-posted to the Microsoft Learning blog.

Microsoft’s new search engine (or “decision engine” as the Bing team calls it via their Twitter profile) is now live at Bing.com. Early adopters already had a chance to preview/review Bing last week. So this launch has left bloggers coming up with more creative ways of covering the release.

Loic Le Meur (of Seesmic fame) thought the best test would be to search for himself followed by a search for sex. TechCrunch, in their infinite wisdom, followed Loic’s lead and pointed out just how cool the video preview feature of Bing is when it comes to searching/watching porn.

You see, Bing presents search results for videos as thumbnails that auto-play when you hover over them. So you can watch lots of videos (of any kind) without ever leaving Bing. Unique coverage of a great feature.

Whatever the case, it’s nice to see Microsoft getting some good press (such as this endorsement) not only with Bing but also with a half a dozen other recent releases.

*Update* Michael Arrington has a good run down of user first impressions in his post titled “Apparently Bing Is Something Of A Hit.” Also, see below for a short video introduction which covers most of Bing’s best features.

First, I work for Microsoft. But I tend to purchase/use Microsoft products only when they are the best option for me personally (and they often are). In this case, I did actually look at Windows Mobile as my first choice. I’m on T-Mobile and not willing to switch carriers (most of my extended family is on T-Mobile, so I use hardly any minutes and like it that way, plus T-Mobile is the cheapest of all carriers and has been good to me the past few years).

Unfortunately, T-Mobile’s selection of Windows Mobile phones is pretty limited (and fairly outdated). I wasn’t impressed. There are some new Windows Mobile phones over at AT&T that got my attention, though the one I really wanted was the Sony Xperia X1. But I ran out of patience. It’s not subsidized by any carriers in the U.S. and has a price tag of $800 (not going to happen).

So I started looking at the G1 (the phone that a T-Mobile rep dubbed the “iPhone killer”) and was impressed by all the possibilities. Meaning, the marketplace of apps. Within an hour of using my phone, I had set it up as a GPS, a price scanner for shopping (scan any UPC and it shows me not only the pricing online but a map of stores around me and their pricing for the same products + it shows user reviews, etc.), a device to recognize any music playing around me, and most importantly a one touch resource for any information I need quickly.

I have an app that has a listing of support / customer service numbers for thousands of companies (huge time saver). A yellowbook app that allows me to look up a name (person or business) and then automatically gives me phone number, address, location on map, and directions (rather than doing many of those steps separately and tediously). I have a dead simple but powerful Facebook app along with an app that gives me movie showtimes/reviews/locations with one touch. One touch stock quotes on my portfolio. One touch access to my Netflix queue, Twitter, etc.

I’m just giving the highlights above. I have about 30 apps installed currently with many (like some listed above) providing features that simply don’t exist on any Windows Mobile phones that I’m aware of (or that I have access to, due to my carrier preference). And the phone is dead simple to use with each of these apps being easily placed on my phone’s desktop in whatever order I want. Being able to customize everything to my liking, I’m not sure I can go back to the days of the more locked down approach.

And now there’s even an app that enables me to get my work email (Exchange support). As a side note, not having Exchange support was one of the main reasons for weeks of me being reluctant to go with this phone. But once I heard about multiple G1 Exchange projects (within the G1 developer community), I made the jump with my fingers crossed.

It’s not perfect, of course. The phone’s shape, size, and look all could be a lot better. And the battery life is a huge disappointment. I often can’t make it through a day without having to charge. Also, it can’t do stuff like edit Office documents (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc.).

So what I’m saying is that my perfect phone would combine the look and feel of the Sony Experia (I like the full keyboard, sorry Apple), the doc editing features of Windows Mobile, the flexibility provided by a community app marketplace, a good battery life for at least a day’s use, and a decent price point (both hardware and carrier charges).

But since the perfect phone doesn’t exist, I went with what filled the most requirements on my list. What’s your perfect “smart” phone?