It was definitely an eventful Mix - and a great experience. Certainly one of my favorite shows. The event started off strong with a keynote by Ray Ozzie, who is putting his mark directly on Microsoft. There is a new tone, a new attitude and a new commitment to not only useful technology, but what I will call “nice” technology. I think that Microsoft has decided that it is more fun to compete in the marketplace on the strength and quality of products than to compete in the courts and other non-market places. I think the trend started last year at Mix - or at least that was the first time I noticed it. It was striking to see a panel of Open ect type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” data=”http://www.vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=763975&server=www.vimeo.com&fullscreen=1&show_title=0&show_byline=0&show_portrait=0&color=323ad9″ heiSource luminaries on the program… and an outsider, Michael Arrington chairing a high profile panel and sessions that were focused on interoperability and heterogeneous systems.

This year continued that trend, in an even bigger way. .Net on Linux is not only tolerated, but embraced. Silverlight is designed to run on Linux, Mac and Windows (except Win2K - don’t ask me how I know). There is a clear desire to both compete and to cooperate - “coopetition” as Ray Nooda used to say.

And probably the biggest indicator of this new attitude that pervades Microsoft, was the invitation extended to Guy Kawasaki to interview Steve Ballmer. Obviously, Steve could have just had a speech drafted and delivered it in a powerful, unilateral manner, but rather he willingly went under the pointed and brutally honest questioning of Guy. Whether this was intended or not, it came off as a symbol of “the new Microsoft” - open, honest, introspective and even playful.

I’ve been a harsh critic of Microsoft for a long time, but I must say that I’m liking what I am seeing… I hope it continues. Now don’t get me wrong, I haven’t turned into a fan of Vista, nor do I think the Yahoo deal is good for the industry, nor do I welcome even more features into Office, but I want to recognize the change in attitude and the (apparent) commitment to being a good technology neighbor.

I’m looking forward to next years Mix.

I had a chance to catch up with Miguel Wood and asked him about his impressions of Mix -

This presentation started out with a nice little demo of building a simple application using Silverlight and Ruby.

The theme of the presentation is that it is all about freedom. Choose or opt in to whatever you want. Pick what languages you want to use.  Pick what server side things you want to use.

As a non-developer, a lot of the technical stuff is interesting but unintelligible. But what is fascinating is the underlying fact that Silverlight is really cross platform and potentially universal.

One of the tools that was used is Kiron - a local web server that provides a local development environment.

They demonstrate an amazing array of things that actually prove their theme.

Jon Lamm on Software - this blog has a series of entries that detail what is going on with each of the demos in “excruciating detail”.

A rather interesting demo took a spell checker written in 25 lines of Python - Peter Norvik (sp??) - and integrated it into their demo application.

The theme of the presentation is to “adopt what you need”. So far they have used Pyton, C sharp, JavaScript and Silverlight.

Ruby is fully supported inside Visual Studio.

Open source model “Our Potential - Your Passion” as the “new Microsoft, as opposed to the old model which is “Your Potential , Our Passion”.

I’m pretty impressed with the reality that Microsoft is not only developing their own world, but also supporting what is going on out there in the real world.  Pretty impressive.

After attending several panels that I found mostly disconnected and diffuse, I decided to attend a good old fashioned presentation.  This one should be interesting in that it ostensibly is an open source

Rich Freeman coo UVNTV
Luke is the developer of UVNTV

The presentation will focus on how the site was built on Silverlight technology.

UVNTV is described as a community broadband channel with an overlying social component.  Fully self programmable in real time simulating the real TV experience. By self-programmable, the developers mean programming from the perspective of content/channel owners.

On the issue of Silverlight vs Flash, Luke indicated that Flash posed some significant problems. And not only technical problems but tech support problems from the folks at Adobe.  They report that they were able to get decent resolution but had problems optimizing bit rates.

Once the decision to move to Silverlight was made, there were minimal conversion issues and time in moving from Flash to Silverlight. Cross browser compatibility was one of the major factors that Silverlight provides. Tools for workflow such a VS 2008, Expression Design and Blend and Encoder provide a comprehensive and functional package.

Originally the site was designed with Windows Media.  Unfortunately it just didn’t work particularly on Macs.

In moving to Silverlight, there have been no deployment issues.
Limelight is the CDN using a Windows Media Server technology.

The UVNTV revenue model depends on who the content owner is. There is no middle ground, either the content is “YouTube garbage” and the top tier major studio professional content. On one end there is a revenue sharing model on the content and on the higher end an artist might purchase an entire channel.

The amazing thing is that the entire site has been developed by a single developer. In addition, it is interesting to note the impact that designers have had on the site. This is a classic example of a developer creating program functionality and flow and a designer making a unique and artistic site.

I’m not a hip-hop kind of guy, so the site is of marginal interest to me on a content level, but the architecture of the site and the use of Silverlight is pretty amazing… particularly since this entire site is essentially coded and developed by a single person.

Yes, Miguel again set the crowd atwitter with his new band. With Elvis on drums and support from some of the finest guitar talent in Vegas as backup the band is on fire. In this video, we catch Miguel rehearsing for the big event, the Battle of the Bands.

The panel is focused on a wealth of ecommerce business applications, not only the Amazons and eBays of the world but also the whole range of other opportunities that exist out there on the internet.

The host is from Schematic who developed the NBC Olympic application and talked about how the things that they are working on are designed to provide immersive user centric features. Advertisers find that the format performs better than other alternatives.

Matthew Rechs -moderator

Jerry Johnson - HSN Home Shopping Network
Steve Nelson - NetFlix
Nicholas Rockwell - MTV Networks

The panel is focused on the inherent tensions that exist between what the user implicitly wants and what the business realties might dictate.

The panel identified one major issue as being how much advertising is the right amount on video. The problem being that YouTube has set the bar at zero.

The panel then got into the whole range of issues related to compromises that companies make in dealing with monetization. The example of Apple and iTunes was put forth as a great example of a strategy that has made it easy to get music even thought there is DRM attached.

I’m a little disappointed in this panel, because the focus is not on e-commerce, but rather creating a compelling user experience primarily with video. Not a lot about conducting e-commerce per se.

Oh, well, can’t win them all…

The Facebook investment and other aspects of what Microsoft is investing in point to a great interest in the social aspects of the internet. This panel should provide some interesting insight into where things are headed and what to expect.

The panel members consist of

Moderator Guy Kawasaki

Panelists:

Ray ?? Microsoft

Mark Kantor Broadband Mechanics People Aggregator

Garret Camp Web discovery

Jessie Spar - Plaxo

?? Vorath - Facebook platform

On the topic of what about the Apple announcement in iPhone? The panel was pretty noncommittal on this topic, generally, however they felt that the  openness provides some new opportunity.

What are the problems with social networking at the present time?

The fact that data is not portable is a problem. The panel definitely feels that social data should be portable - the fact that it is not provides some issues and problems. Everything works better when it’s social. But the fact that data can’t be moved is problematic. The panel felt that relationships are not discreet enough - friends, family, business and other categories are needed.

Privacy is a big issue and taking your privacy with you and your data as well is a problem that has to be solved.

The panel discussed the issue about things like predators on line and what the kinds of issues are around this, and whether it is a problem. The problem isn’t as big as might be inferred from press reports and other stories. The issue of “real identity” and verifying that against verifiable real data helps prevent abuse. Spam, on the otherhand is an ongoing, persistent problem.

The panel then turned its attention to Open ID and what is going on. Yahoo has provided Open ID to all of its users. This is fundamentally a way to build cross reputation. Open ID seems to be a valid solution to a problem, but it is too early for people to be able to use it effectively.

What happens if the bubble bursts? Guy seeds the panel with this question. The premise of the question was not accepted. The feeling is that things are just getting started and that any issue of bursting is well out in the future.

Then the panel considered the issue of security. Obviously everyone believes that security is critical and that people interact more comprehensively on line when they feel safe and secure. So this becomes the major motivation for providers to ensure that the sites are safe.

Obviously, the whole area of social networking is just plain hot. As is the case with each new technology, as the products evolve issues arise that need to be solved and those that are best at solving the problems tend to succeed.

Again, we’re being treated to a fantastic performer who does Johnny Cash songs. He is a dead ringer for the late country singer.

I must confess that I’m really looking forward to hearing Guy Kawasaki, live and in person. I’ve been a great fan of his book, The Art of the Start, and I’ve watched his videos on YouTube and Google Videos. I hope he’s got some new and compelling ideas to share. Certainly in the Web 2 arena, or maybe we’re already headed for the post web 2 era, his ideas about startups, entrepreneurship and business development should be helpful and exciting. We’ll also see what Ballmer has to say and whether it is consistent with the very strong message Ozzie put forth yesterday.

Well unfortunately, I was blogging along and all of a sudden lost the internet connection and the loss crashed by blogging application. So Let me just say this, that Guy Kawasaki asked every question that every IT professional has wanted to ask and see what Ballmer might have to say. I would simply say this - the video is linked below - watch it. It is entertaining, informative and enlightening.

Watch Steve Ballmer and Guy Kawasaki Live

Watch out Larry King… Guy is the interviewer master.

I assumed that this whole event was staged to demonstrate Microsoft’s new openness that is so widely touted. If anyone knows Guy Kawasaki, they know he is frank, unabashed and completely spontaneous and unintimidated. I thought that Guy was the perfect interviewer to ask the tough questions in a friendly and humorous way. Such was not the case. I was told by a Microsoft press insider that this was not what happened. None of the tough questions were expected. Interesting to say the least, but I for one, was impressed with the way Ballmer handled himself. If it wasn’t scripted, it should have been because it is exactly what needed to happen.

This is always an interesting panel as it demonstrates the fact that Microsoft is in process of acknowledging the impact and importance of open software. Significant progress has been made in “playing nice” in this space, and part of that nice-playing is inviting key players in the open source arena to present in a mainstream panel. In fact this is the same panel from last years Mix event.

• Moderator Sam Ramji, Microsoft
• Mike Schroepfer - Mozilla (Firefox and Thunderbird)
• Andi Gutmans - Zend (original developer of PhP)
• Miguel de Icaza, Novell (developer of Mono)
• Rob Conery, Microsoft

Microsoft has made the committment to open the protocols and formats for Office products as well as working with Linux on Silverlight porting, Novell on interoperability, and formats for things like web pieces
The panel quickly moved from a discussion about open source to a discussion about open data and open identity. It appears that these are the big questions moving forward. It is almost as if the debate about open source is over and we are on to a new arena of discussion and debate.

There is a healthy tension that exists between the proprietary and the open and the debate about whether one or the other should exist is over with the acknowledgment that each has a role to play and the market will determine the place and role for each.

The following are my raw notes on the panel which is focused on the Business Value of Design. This was an interesting panel that was designed to focus on the aspects of product development and marketing that are primarily focused on user experience. Again, understanding the architecture of the conference (The Next Web Now) as being the integration of technology, business and design, this was another panel that did not once mention the word Microsoft. This is appropriate in that the technology tools get one to the point of a functional product, but design gets one to the point of a valuable  and compelling product.

Panel Members
Dave Blakeley Ideo
David Watson Disney NBC
Luke Wrobleski   - Yahoo  publishes Functioning Form
Jason Brush  Schematic
Jimmy Kim Nexon (online gaming) and Innotive

The moderator indicated that one of the major foci for the panel is to determine What is the vocabulary of design that can be used in business. He started with a compelling first question.

What is a design problem?
not understanding what needs to be designed (DW)
managing perceptions and expectations (JB)
anything that you are trying to communicate to someone else (LW)
integrating engineering and design  (JB)
maintaining a sweet spot between graphics and user experience (JK)
sometimes it is simply a matter of reframing (LW)

What is the Vocabulary of design value?
Analyze, construct, evaluate (JK)
Find metric and purpose first (JK)
Metrics is the right place to start - what is the impact and quantify it  (DB)
Improved revenue and retained earnings (DB)
brand extension or brand reinforcement defined in terms of business metrics (DB)

Conscious Business - wholistic tension between conflicting metrics (LW)
Tension between ads and content (JB)
How many ads can a set of content withstand? (DW)
you have to pay for the customer experience (DW)
negotiation involved in getting to that point of balance (JB)

How does a designer arbitrate between conflicting goals?
get everyone involved with the end user experience (DB)
use actual end users in the process of arbitrating (DW)
ask the question, what is the most important component to design for (JK)
Steve Jobs is an example of unilaterial design - but not a good example to replicate (consensus)

Once you have your metrics, then you have to rapidly prototype (JK)
run the cycle over and over until you get it right
If you don’t have “point of view” you will fail and is essential to success in design (DB)
Be flexible, be remarkable, be brave (DW)
Focus on the outcomes don’t worry about your techniques [used example of finance] (LW)
The tools are not the prouduct (JB)

Business people get focused on their own “stuff” and the interesting thing is that designers do the same thing too often - designers need to speak the language of the business (moderator)

How is design thought of within the organization?
Design is the culmination of the entire process(JK)
Technology know-how and design prowess (JK)
Disney is an expdrience company - proof “I’m going to see a Disney movie” (DW)
People play lip service to user experience - just saying it (LW)

Are customers talking abuout design in a new way
Customers are talking about design in the context of innovation (DB)
Still hearing user, user, user (JB)
People still use the iPhone as the model for innovation and design (JB)
This is interesting because iPhone was a “bulldozer through Apple” (LW)
The bravery and leadeership it takes to make something really innovative is really hard (JB)
Rapid prototype is the ultimate “mirror” (DW)

What is the next thing that businesses need to think about in terms of design?
Things are going to circle back to functionality (DW)
A shakeout in tools and process (DB)
The major thing is metrics - those firms that will survive are the ones that can demonstrate business metrics(JK)
Experience economy is going to hit the wall (LW)
As the economy slows there will be a return to core functionality - saturation is coming (LW)

This was an interesting panel that helps focus on the reality that any complling product not only needs to function properly, but be attractive, engaging and even fun. We all know products that function and are well designed. The iPod for example.

The conversation in the Web 2.0 panel got off into the topic of mobile. The consensus is that the way to think about mobile is as YACD (Yet Another Computing Device - my word, not theirs). This is consistent with what Ray talked about this morning in terms of a personal mesh of devices. Applications are moving toward device independence and as browsers are available on a wide variety of devices, opportunities open up dramatically. In fact mobile provides some even more interesting capabilities because of localization opportunities. The user moves about and proximity becomes an important issue.

So, certainly today Web 2.0 is all about PC-centric activities, but everyone needs to be cognizant of the migration to mobile as the capabilities expand. There is a distinct parallel to stationary development. The things that have held mobile back have been size, bandwidth, screen real estate and resolution, processor performance, open O/S and keyboard input capability. Suddenly these are realities and the environment is therefore changing to take advantage of the platforms.

This is a very interesting concept to think about. As is thinking about education in the context of mobile. How can training content migrate to mobile devices to help solve problems and make learning anywhere, anytime a reality?