I get around 40 emails a week from people sending me a particular post or something they’ve seen with questions. Much is from university students that have been to a talk/lecture/keg party with me.
There have been a bunch recently on what determines the last letter.
In other words, when does good fuN become good fuD. (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt).
The 90 second thing on FUD. Basically it is a tactic that is used to screw with the competition. A bunch of hand waving, wait, wait, it’s coming, it’s around the corner, cooler, faster, etc, etc. It’s a stupid practice.
One newly minted MBA/Marketing wonk just pointed me to this blurb from Scoble.
“Oh, when I get to share just today's videos I'll finally be able to give you the answer. The networking stack alone was totally rewritten. How impressive is it? Well, you'll just have to wait for the video. But the performance gains they are seeing floored even me.”
The full post is here.
The student asked “isn’t this the same as you carping about Windows NT to keep people off OS/2?” I wanted to make the point that I ran OS/2 on a Novell Netware LAN inside bldg 6 but didn’t think she’d get the joke.
It was an interesting question and not the first time I’ve been asked. So, here’s my shot at an answer.
First, I’ve met Scoble, his lovely wife, and have spent enough time with the guy that I now ‘filter’ what he writes meaning I “hear it” and “know” (or think I do) what’s going on when he posts something. So, my opinion of Robert’s postings are biased. I know em, respect em, and like em. Just so you know.
Consider this additional example from Josh Einstein, CEO of Einstein Technologies which makes TEO an amazing Outlook enhancement product for the Tablet PC. It’s awesome and worth ten times the price. So, version 3.0 is coming. There are a couple of others out there with products that claim to be better and offer ‘missing features’ of TEO. Good for Josh, he’s on the radar screen. If you read his blog (I do), he mentions this or that about Version 3. He even has a little logo thingy talking about TEO 3.0, coming soon.
I don’t know Josh, never met him personally, but know about him and his company.
Josh’s posts are, in my opinion, fun. If he blogs something to the effect of last night I was up til 3a trying to get this stupid bug out of this killer networking feature that I can’t wait to announce but the damn compiler froze up and now……, you’d get an insight, raw, into the making of software. Fun stuff and, even to the most cynical of us, a very good (ok, slick) way of getting the customers, users and potential customers to emotionally bond up with him and, hopefully, the software. All of can translate into dollars for Josh so he can continue. No harm, fun, etc, etc.
When I read Josh’s posts, it truly puts a human face on the work he is doing. James Shaw, another super smart CEO, is good example of putting a human face on software and a company.
There are countless examples inside Microsoft (and other large companies) of the human face.
Consider Sanaz, the program manager for Start.com. In her blog, you will find all kinds of interesting things about her, her older brother, her car, Microsoft, and Start.com.
In one entry a ways back, after talking about the older bro, a book and San Francisco, she says this:
“out... btw, some exciting start news is on the way next week :)”
Human face on the process? FUD to thwart those do gooder Googlers?
Clearly not FUD, clearly fun.
Robert’s posts are, in my opinion, a good faith attempt to put a human face on his work. They are mostly informative and fun.
Sometimes this stuff doesn’t scale and sometimes posts, like the one above, can swing back to bite. It’s risky stuff and requires a balancing act that isn’t particularly easy. In fact, the larger the company or organization is, the harder this balancing act becomes.
So, in general, unless they’ve proven to be a card carrying shill machine, cut the writer a break.
On your own efforts to doing this type of stuff, my council to you is this: Focus on the customer.
What would the customer who gave you money (or time) think. Would they think what you wrote is useful? Do they learn more about you or the product? Can they get a sense of what you/your company stands for, etc, etc. Don’t get caught up in all this link love nonsense or who is on what list stuff, just focus on the customer.
Run what you write through those sets of filters and you will, for the most part, stay in the Fun zone and out of the FUD zone.
Keep them cards -n- letters coming and as you’re enjoying this labor day weekend, give to the Red Cross.
It's not FUD if you're talking about the terrific stuff _your_ company is doing. It's FUD if you're spreading nasty rumors about your _competitors_.
The worst possible outcome of "these terrific new things about our stuff" is that your audience of potential customers won't agree that those things are terrific. Difference of opinion...big deal.
If you're not talking about the competition, it's not FUD. If you're not within smelling distance of the line between marketing and libel, it's not FUD. Indeed, if there's any way what you're doing could possibly be thought of as anything other than FUD, it's not FUD.
Even though I hate Microsoft and everything they stand for, I'm not dense enough to think that anything they say about software must necessarily be FUD. And if the folks inside MS are excited about the stuff they're doing and they think these features are cool...well, good for them.
Posted by: Matt | September 03, 2005 at 03:33
Matt is correct. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FUD
Posted by: Richard Schwartz | September 03, 2005 at 15:08