Bradley Howard's Blog

Views of digital media, innovation, loyalty and business in the real world

Windows 8 first review

It's funny how the 'computer busy' state is shown on PCs. 15 years ago we all got frustrated when we kept seeing an hourglass that prevented us from doing some work. So Microsoft rebranded the egg timer/ hourglass, probably because some psychologist recommended taking our mind off of 'time' being wasted. And so we ended up with a circle. Well in Windows 8, even the circle has been replaced (perhaps Google trademarked 'the circle' as part of Google+?) – this time it’s dots flying around the screen, usually in some oddly attractive patterns.

The ‘please wait’ icon isn’t the only change to Windows 8. It’s very, very different throughout. I’ve been using Windows 8 for a couple of weeks now.

WIMP 

I remember the acronym "WIMP" when Windows 3.1 was launched. It stood for Windows, Icons, [dropdown] Menus and Pointer. It was the move away from black and white text terminals into graphical interfaces so that humans could start using computers without a Computer Science degree.

In Windows 8, the only part of WIMP that is left is the ‘I’. Windows have been replaced by full screen, errrr, Windows. It’s a bit like using a tablet on your PC – more of that later. You can switch back to a desktop that looks like the current Windows XP or Windows 7 desktop, and I guess that users will spend most of their time in this view.

Where to start 

One of the most obvious missing features in the desktop view is the start menu. ‘Start’ has been totally overhauled into a separate interface. If you’ve used an Xbox before, it will look very familiar. And if you haven’t used an Xbox before, well, Start is like a games console.

Start is the default screen, not the desktop. In ‘Start’, you see a link to the commonly used apps, and some of the icons contain extra information. For example, the email icon contains some of the subject lines of your emails. The first time I saw this it was really disconcerting because I’d just installed Windows 8, and I was looking at the icons, when a personal message caught my eye and I thought “How does the computer know about that???” – only to realise soon afterwards that it was an email subject line from my wife.

And disconcerting is a recurring theme. It’s only natural to use a different interface and wonder where certain familiar features have been moved to.

Then, by luck, you realise that if you right click on various areas of the screen, you get a simple, context menu appear at the bottom or sometimes the side of the screen and have a Eureka moment.

Right click back

I remember going to the launch of Windows Vista when Microsoft announced that their usability strategy was to remove right clicks from as many operations as possible because it’s just not obvious to end users. I get the feeling that guy left Microsoft before Windows 8 was created, because right click is everywhere.

As well as using your mouse’s right button more, you’re also going to be using the Windows key on your keyboard more during Windows 8. I already use shortcuts like Windows +E (to get a new File Explorer window), Windows+M (to minimise everything) and Windows+L (to lock my PC), however in reality I hardly need any of those commands over a working day. To use Windows 8, you’re constantly pressing Windows+C to get the context menu working. I can’t remember how I heard about it, but before you know about Windows+C, it is almost impossible to use Windows 8 because you can’t ‘get to’ any other installed programs.

Similar to when you use any Google product where you use your Google account to sign in, Windows has the same feature with its Live ID. In fact, you sign into Windows 8 with your Live ID. Anyone with a Hotmail account will have a Live ID already.

Like all new Operating Systems, half the previous functionality feels like it’s playing hide and seek. Doing Windows Update for example, I had to go to desktop view, open IE, press the Alt button to get the old drop down menus back, and then select Windows Update.

New apps

Some of the apps aren’t quite finished. Windows 8 comes with SkyDrive, which is a bit like Dropbox – a file system ‘in the Cloud’. Skydrive shows all the files you’ve uploaded, but when you want to edit say, a Word document, the interface to use Office Live is quite clunky and doesn’t even start to compete with say, Google Docs. Also, because the Windows 8 SkyDrive and Windows 8 Internet Explorer are all full screen experiences, you start getting a bit lost after opening a couple of documents.

Fast

Finally, the performance: I’m running Windows 8 in a virtual machine (perversely it only runs inOracle’s VirtualBox, not Microsoft’s Virtual PC) and it’s very, very fast. It’s faster than running Windows XP in Virtual PC, and just as responsive as my native Windows 7 installation. Bearing in mind the virtual machines only uses 2Mb RAM (half my laptop), I’ve been very impressed.

Summary

In summary, Windows 8 is very different. It’s clearly targeted at consumers more than corporates, and just as much a tablet Operating System as a desktop. It will take a lot of getting used to, and with the refined start menu, although using ‘classic’ apps such as Word or Excel it will feel the same as Windows 7. Perhaps that’s Microsoft’s strategy – it’s like releasing two Operating Systems at the same time for its different sets of users.

The one thing that will drive you annoy you within a couple of hours are those dots! Bring back the egg timer.

 


 

Amazon removing more cost centres

Capture
It’s quite rare in most industries for a market innovator to become the strongest company in the sector. Usually the market creator is overtaken by a more efficient competitor, who has more time to see what not to do. This has been the case with most industries, not just IT.

One of the first ecommerce web sites I remember using was Amazon. It reduced the cost of books by a huge factor and its recommendation engine is still seen as one of the best in any website. The fact that it launched in 1994 and is still one of the most profitable companies in the World is impressive.

In terms of financial scale, for UK readers, Tesco has a market capitalisation of £31bn and Amazon has a market capitalisation of $89bn. For US readers, Target has a market capitalisation of $35bn.

Turning costs into profits

One of the business initiatives that most people admire Amazon for is how they turn their costly IT organisation from a cost-centre to a profit centre - called AWS (Amazon Web Services). Essentially, running Amazon.com and all the international sites requires a massive amount of servers in data centres all around the world. When I visited one of our US data centres a few years ago we had an area (called a cage, because it is one) and our next door neighbour was a cage several times larger for Amazon.

Anyway, Amazon realised it had a huge IT infrastructure and converted the spare capacity into a facility enabling anyone else to use their infrastructure. Companies can rent this capacity on an hourly charge. And many companies do use it.

Amazon won’t release revenue figures directly, however some reports have estimated its more than $500m annually.

Marketplace

Another innovation that Amazon had to implement, this time by force was their Marketplace. eBay started taking some revenue away from Amazon, so Amazon started allowing third party sellers to sell products on Amazon.com. Fast forward to the present time, and it’s quite often that a consumer will buy something on Amazon, which is actually another merchant – whether it’s a sole proprietor or a multi-national organisation.

If a consumer currently buys something from Amazon, if it’s actually Amazon who sell the product, it will come from an Amazon warehouse and be delivered directly. If it’s a third party seller, Amazon have a clever interface (and contractual terms) which notify the seller to deliver the goods within a set time period.

Removing more cost centres

However the latest area that Amazon is moving into is fulfilment.

Amazon is encouraging merchants who use its platform to send their stock directly to Amazon’s warehouse and Amazon will take care of the rest. They’ll fulfil (pick and package) the order and deliver it to the customer. So if you sold glass vases, you would instruct your supplier to deliver a pallet of vases to an Amazon warehouse and spend all your time and energy making the Amazon pages look as good as possible.

This is ingenious for a number of reasons:

  1. It turns Amazon from a traditional retailer who needs to buy a certain commitment of goods for x and sell at x + y% markup – into a risk free business because it doesn’t need to buy the goods up front
  2. To compete against this model becomes ever more expensive, because the sheer capital infrastructure costs are now prohibitive
  3. Amazon will increase its economy of scale for delivery costs
  4. It encourages merchants to use Amazon as the primary channel, because Amazon performing merchant’s fulfilment requires less overheads and easier.

The fulfilment model is an interesting concept, because it turns retail and distribution into a service and it moves a lot of the risk (of buying the items up front) up the supply chain from the retailer (Amazon) to the distributor.

 


 

How I would Yahoo!

Yahoo-logo1
So, apparently Yahoo! is up for sale, and even better, Google are willing to help fund it's resurgence. This sounds so familiar – in 1997, Apple were having serious problems and Microsoft, their once main competitor, invested $150 million in the company, and now Apple is worth more than Microsoft!

Back to Yahoo!, it’s amazing how many people are so dismissive of Yahoo!’s (that’s a lot of punctuation) value.

Here are the high level stats:

Yahoo has over 500 million unique visitors each month, around the World, in over 30 languages.

In the UK alone, adults spend over 3 hours a month just on Yahoo! Mail.

To build that audience of 500 million would cost a HUGE amount of money (and time), so in my opinion there's never been a better time to Yahoo! Stock is set at a very reasonable price, and Google are willing to invest a significant amount of money.

Here’s what I would do if I took over Yahoo! tomorrow:

Focus

  • An Internet content portal above all else. In terms of competition, Google provide mail to compete with Yahoo! Mail however there is no one with similar a traffic size which provides the level of content as Yahoo!
  • Generate a cost/revenue model for services such as Yahoo! Mail and Flickr to see if it’s worth selling these on or keeping them and reinvesting.
  • Create a cloud development service model to compete with the likes of Amazon and Microsoft - turning a cost centre into a profit centre

Analytics

 Work out where my users are coming from – is it mainly from PC manufacturer-set-browser-homepages which haven’t been updated for 5 years? In fact, I’d probably do most of my initial work on the analysis of who uses the individual Yahoo! services to ascertain the users’ value, or even try to derive an ARPU (Average Revenue Per User).

Innovation

Yahoo! strikes me as a company which is struggling to innovate. How many new services of note have their launched recently? I would look at why this has happened – have they all left to go to competitors? Internet companies need to have innovation at the centre of their philosophy, vision and corporate structure in order to keep users returning. I would reignite this passion for innovation immediately.

And finally, I think I’d rebrand Yahoo! to drop the exclamation mark! (Pun intended).

 


 

The web world map

Map221
Thanks to Richard Watson for noticing this excellent new map from Tim O’Reilly via Ross Dawson.

I've seen a similar map before, concentrating on social networking. This new one however shows how different industries including payments, platforms and so on, all inter-relate.

 

Personally I’m not sure I would put payments & cashflow next to content (yet) – and I would put payments closer to the ‘Land of Identity’. I guess the issue here is that everything actually inter-relates to everything else anyway.

Either way, at least the map gets the thought process going.

 


 

Shouting at the clouds

Cloud

As a Digital Media agency, we are regularly being asked our view on whether we use cloud services from Google Analytics to Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure full hosting.

My answer at this point in time is really simple we don't use them because if these services go wrong, we (and our customers) have no one to pick up the phone and shout at.

For example, we generally use Omniture (Adobe) for site analytics rather than Google Analytics. I know the name and mobile phone number of our Omniture account manager. I guess that just knowing who to contact gives a level of reassurance.

One of our partners uses one of the large cloud services for it’s main business operations. It makes sense to them – they need to simulate hundreds of computers during tests, for short periods of time. Trying to do that from a standard Internet connection in the office is fraught with problems, and it’s easier and cheaper to rely on the cloud’s infrastructure. Except recently they have been experiencing problem after problem in that cloud’s environment, and their entire business is dependent on that specific cloud provider.

When you experience an outage on Azure or Amazon, who can you call? How can you offer an SLA to end clients when you can’t contact your infrastructure provider?

There are companies who have invested in setting up their own ‘cloud’ environments (we are one of them), with proven support systems in place, and the real USP… a manned 24x7 helpdesk complete with an Account Manager.


 

Bradley Howard

Head of Digital Media at Endava, although all the views in this blog are purely mine and not necessarily those of Endava.

 

Subscribe to my RSS feed

 

 

Other ways to find me:
TwitterBuzzLinkedInDelicious