Full Disclosure: I work for Microsoft and enjoy my job. And this blog post is my opinion, not Microsoft’s.

This past week ended up being one of the most intense, yet rewarding, weeks of my career. For the past three weeks, I put my day job mostly on hold and took on the challenge of leading a team to put together a free virtual training event for Windows Phone 7 developers. We had developers in the thousands participating in four 3-hour sessions that covered the ins and outs of developing applications and games for Windows Phone 7.

(FYI- If you’re a developer and missed it, don’t worry, the class resource page with all course materials and demos is open to all, plus recordings of the event are coming soon. Also, see below for some behind-the-scenes pictures from the studio we used to broadcast/film.)

For better or for worse, it seems that tech blogs, Wall Street, and much of my family are using the success of the “smartphone” as the current most important defining characteristic of how a given tech company is doing. Sure, Microsoft had record earnings and sold 175 million copies of Windows 7 in nine months. And sure, Xbox 360 + Xbox Live + the upcoming Kinect is the best thing to have happened to gaming in the past 10 years (speaking as a die-hard PC gamer turned console convert).

I could go on and mention several other billion dollar businesses Microsoft has built over the years, but they’re the unsexy, enterprise type that tend to bore blog readers. The real question on everyone’s mind: how will Microsoft play in the smartphone market? Well now that there’s tons of coverage on that, we’re all in wait-and-see mode. I, for one, have loved what I’ve played with and am also very encouraged by the overwhelmingly positive response we’ve gotten from developers who took our training.

So while Wall Street yawns, I continue to use a more holistic approach to measuring the success of a tech company. Not least of which starts with it being a great place to work!

Thanks to Rob Miles and Elese Moran for the pictures.

This weekend I wanted to catch up on the D8 conference, which is basically a series of who’s who in the tech industry being interviewed by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher. The D8 website has dozens of 5-minute clips but offers no convenient way to watch them in one sitting. Some of us, you know, can handle watching (dare I say, want to watch) certain things more than 5 minutes at a time.

Regardless, I’ll give a go at consuming your content the way you want me to. But how’s the experience? The audio is so low that I can barely hear it even with my laptop speakers maxed out while the viewing window is small, and the same 15-second commercial plays once between clips.

Is there an easy way for me to get this on my TV? No. And, by easy, I mean direct integration with my Blu-ray player (which has Netflix/Vudu/YouTube), my Xbox (Netflix/Zune/Media Center), or my cable box. (Plugging in cables to A/V equipment every time does not fall under “easy.”)

Meanwhile, while watching Real Time with Bill Maher, he continually reminds me to check out something called “Overtime” after the show (exclusively online). Basically, when the shows ends, the cameras keep rolling and Bill Maher continues the discussion with his guests a little while longer. I’m already in front of my TV, what if I want to watch this? Can I get it via my cable box or some other integration with my TV? No and no.

One more example: The always excellent Fareed Zakaria asks his viewers “the question of the week” each week on which he used to respond/comment the following week. Nowadays he’s quick to remind us that if we want to know more about the responses to the question of the week, we have to check out the show’s website.

Great. So I have all these screens in my house (computers, phones, TVs, etc.), and I’m the captive audience many of these media outlets want to engage with. So why not make it easy for me to consume any of your content on any screen?

*Update* How could I forget The Daily Show with Jon Stewart? At least a couple times a month he has interviews run long, which means you have to watch them online all over again to see what was edited out. Why are extended Jon Stewart episodes not available on demand somehow directly on my TV?

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.

Michael Arrington discusses what he thinks is a fantastic idea in his latest post “Paid Twitter Streams Are Here: Super Chirp.” So Super Chirp is this new third party service that allows Twitter users the ability to charge others for access to their direct messages (Twitter’s private messaging system). The idea is that celebrities could say their extra special stuff to people who pay for it!

Here’s what I said in a comment on the TechCrunch post:

Wait, so as we Internet users complain about the last few remaining pay walls for what we thing should be ubiquitous information… we’re now supposed to be super excited for a new pay wall just because it has something to do with Twitter?

What goes around comes around, I guess…

Mike, if it’s such a fantastic idea, why don’t you drop the ads off your site and make every 5th post something I pay for?

I kid. Your site, as cool as it is (and I mean that sincerely), doesn’t have the “get out of jail free” card that makes Twitter, well, Twitter.

But what do you think? Is this something you’d see yourself paying for?

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.

I’ve been lurking on Redfin for quite some time now. What is Redfin? It’s an online real estate company with an easy-to-use website that lets you search/filter/find real estate for sale. It also provides some cool analytics for looking at market trends. It’s nice and web2.0-like, what with custom RSS feeds and other pretty robust tools to make your real estate hunting super easy.

But that’s only part 1 of what they do. They’re also a discount brokerage firm that provides the full service you’d expect from a good agent representing you during a home purchase. The difference being that Redfin refunds you half of the buy-side real estate fee after closing. In our case, that’s going to be a check for $5,500.

We’ve been working with a Redfin agent for over a week now and have been pretty impressed. She did an excellent job representing us through the back-and-forth negotiation process as well as constantly keeping us up-to-date on which forms were needing to be signed by when, etc.

And now… we will be home owners in August! It’s hard to say how this whole ordeal might have gone down without Redfin. Oh wait, actually it’s pretty easy to say:

It would have been more difficult to find the place / compare it to market trends. It would have likely cost $5,500 more. And last but certainly not least, it would have not come with this kind of service (love the quick turnarounds with iPhone email responses during off hours).

For more info on Redfin, see TechCrunch’s extensive coverage.

So after reading TechCrunch’s latest [lack of] news about Twitter, it hit me: Twitter is the new Digg. Remember Digg? Of course you do. It was such a simple concept. A “power to the people” take on news with user-submitted stories that anyone can share/discover/submit with the most popular stuff getting promoted to the frontpage. Once upon a time, before Twitter, it was the best thing since sliced bread.

Don’t remember how huge it was? Yahoo, Microsoft, and Dell all copied the concept along with hundreds of other sites. TechCrunch wrote about Digg practically more than anything (until Twitter, of course). And let’s not forget about the huge valuation and acquisition rumors. But then what happened?

Nothing, really. Digg still seems to exist and is maintaining some serious traffic. But it has/had so many problems that it [sort of] fixed way too late. Whatever it did/does, it never really seemed/seems to live up to what it was/is at its core (reread first paragraph above).

Now think of Twitter. As mentioned (and admitted to), TechCrunch writes about it more than practically anything. Interestingly enough, though, the latest self-reflective post makes no mention of Digg when comparing Twitter to the great innovations of Google, Facebook, the iPhone, and the App Store.

And why would Digg be mentioned? I don’t know, maybe because back in the day Michael Arrington referred to as “…the future of news, and the most disruptive force to mainstream media since blogs were born.”

Now read it again, only with a slight change: “Twitter is the future of news, and the most disruptive force to mainstream media since blogs were born.” Which version sounds closer to current reality?

The question is, will Twitter continue this way or become like Digg? Well, Digg never had Oprah or Ashton Kutcher, not to mention many others. And Twitter seemed to overcome its own issues of fixing its initial problems a bit faster than Digg ever did. Of course, the next big thing for Twitter is search. But wait, one of Digg’s next big things was search to, which released three years after I first heard about it and two years after I cared.

Here’s hoping Twitter doesn’t follow Digg. For now, though, I feel like I’ve been here before.

*Update* Follow me on Twitter @bobcaswell or on Digg at… oh never mind.

Just for fun, see below for excerpts of MG Siegler’s latest post on Twitter (via TechCrunch) only with Twitter references replaced with Digg. Maybe it’s just me, but I swear this could have been written three years ago about Digg:

“Simply put, we write about Digg so often because right now, it matters. From news organizations to movie stars, from earthquakes to fires, from Facebook to Google — everyone seems to be talking about, to or with Digg. In an era of mass communication, it is the latest medium. And it’s fundamentally changing the ways in which people interact with others using the web. What you may view as a stupidly simple service with no real point, I view as one of the few inspirational products in bleak times.”

“I would argue that Digg works so well precisely because it’s so simple… Digg can pretty much be about whatever you want it to be about.”

“And that activity, fuels growth and feeds the system full of its most important life-blood: Information.”

“And that’s why I think it’s worth writing about so often. It’s not just about Digg, the product, it’s also about Digg, the idea. And Digg, the catalyst of change. Digg has shaken shit up in the industry. And it’s exciting as hell when a company does that, because the subsequent chaos almost always breeds cool new things. And “cool new things” is what technology is and always has been about.”

Back when I originally reviewed Twitter (over a year ago), I asked the question: Is it a waste of time or extremely valuable? At the time, I had no idea it would take off like it has today. But now that it has, it seems to moving more toward “extremely valuable” and further away from “waste of time” (though I still think it’s kind of both).

Case in point, a couple new creative ways (among many others) I’ll point out today. The first is TwHistory.com, a site that has created Twitter profiles for key participants in the Battle of Gettysburg that took place during the U.S. Civil War back in the 1860′s. Using the real words of historical figures (from those that kept detailed journals), a fluid conversation is happening that shows the Civil War through a new light.

The site About page explains the concept further:

There were more casualties in the Battle of Gettysburg than any other battle in the American Civil War; the battle is often described as the war’s turning point. We are currently following eleven characters leading up to the bloody conflict in early July… This is more than a ‘what happened on this day’ service. We are interested in telling stories.

The Battle of Gettysburg, or the Cuban Missile Crisis were more than a couple of random events over a few days. There are exciting backstories of many characters who witnessed these events. We feel these stories can be told in 140 characters or less, over the course of many months.

TwHistory is maintained by volunteers. If you would like to help out by tweeting historical characters, or finding out how you can start your own project, please visit our volunteer page.

Interesting concept, to be sure. Right now, the Twitter site itself might not be the best method for following the Civil War since these tweets are likely to get lost among the noise of the other hundreds (or thousands) of friends you likely are following. But leveraging third party applications (such as TweetDeck), you can group friends and create a separate stream of tweets. All of a sudden, this historical conversation comes to life.

I mentioned a “couple” creative uses of Twitter. The second has to do with MTV hoping that integrating Twitter and Facebook into a new show can bring back viewership and fan interaction. It’s still likely be a TV channel less about music and more about celebrities, but at least now viewers can interact with the show as it airs (and even when it’s off the air). Details are sketchy but I think the concept has merit.

So let’s revisit my original question: Is Twitter extremely valuable or a waste of time? Well, for me at least, the more I use it and find others creating new uses for it, the more I think “extremely valuable” and “waste of time” aren’t that far apart.

Speaking of which, if you found this valuable or a waste of time, feel free to follow me on Twitter @bobcaswell.

*Update* In a related story, research out of Nielsen suggest that less than 40 percent of Twitter users stick with the site after one month.