What it shows, though, is that Microsoft’s competitors are running rings around it. They can’t execute nimbly enough and it’s going to turn them into IBM in the next decade. They’ll keep the dwindling desktop market just as IBM kept the dwindling mainframe market, but they’re going to be marginalized on newer devices because their smaller, scrappier competitors will simply be able to execute better and faster. So much for the Evil Microsoft Monopoly. Viva la capitalism!

I’m not talking about what might be smart for my company; I’m talking about what is smart for Microsoft. Their business model to keep us buying their products is sound. And if I’m wrong? Well, I’ll learn a new platform. No big deal.

In the arena of commercial software, Silverlight has a very promising future, and it’s being developed to run on many devices. MS has a very strong contender there, and it is not a Windows-dependent offering.

As for your comment about iPhones specifically, I don’t think it’ll be a problem. We’re seeing history repeat itself; Apple’s doing the same thing with the iPhone that they did with the Macintosh: build a great product several years ahead of its time, then destroy it by locking down development and keeping the entire ecosystem proprietary. iPhone will be around a while, but like Macs it’ll be niche unless Apple changes their ways. I agree with Joe that pocket-sized mobile computing is the future, though I think it’ll take closer to fifteen years rather than the five he suggests; either way, I don’t expect Apple to be a big part of that future.

Ballmer may have looked foolish with his “Developers, developers, developers!” chant – but he was right. And Apple doesn’t get it.

Now lets take a look at what’s happening in the economy. Is there a market for this type of service? The answer is yes. Do we need to reduce the effects of global warming from fossil fuel usage? The answer is yes. Can add on products be developed by Microsoft and others for their platform? The answer is yes. Need I continue?

This is classic Microsoft and a path that will pay dividends for a whole new ecosystem of products, services, and software, for consumers running Windows Vista and 7 eager to reduce utility bills.

You will either have to write for many different devices, tell your customers to only use Windows branded software or just move to the web and HTML5.

Microsoft make your job harder if your job is not “write applications that only run on Windows for customers that only run Windows”.

Where I think you’re missing the mark, Joe, is in remembering that Microsoft has always built its dominance on making it as easy as possible for developers to build products based on MS’s platforms. This necessitates innovation behind the scenes – in underlying frameworks and tools. In this arena, Microsoft’s innovation is without comparison.

One example is WPF. The technology is only now hitting its stride since its introduction with Windows Vista and .NET 3.0, but it’s a programming concept that has begun revolutionizing the way we think about developing UI. Silverlight is an outgrowth of the concept, and Flash has begun copying the idea with Flex.

Another behind-the-scenes innovation is LINQ. This allows the developer to do amazing things in their code with a tenth of the effort. The very idea of LINQ is a Microsoft original, and I’m unaware of any other platform that has it yet.

You might justly ask, well, what do I as a paying consumer care about how easy Microsoft makes your job as a developer? My response: The easier Microsoft makes my job, the more time and resources I can dedicate to creating a product which amazes you. The effect is that Microsoft’s innovation in the background enables my innovation in the foreground – all on Microsoft’s platform. It’s why Windows has built a 90%+ market share on the desktop. It’s a sound business model, and one which they are trying (with a debatable level of success) to adapt to the Internet and mobile worlds.

No, innovation is not Microsoft’s problem. Their problem is flexibility.

My favourite was the Spot watch – there was some awesome branding applied to that product. Not to mention anything branded Live, or .NET.

How on earth can something be a good brand if it is virtually impossible to pronounce without being told? At first, I thought it was pronounced something like Ho-Hum. It reminds me of Cuil.

I agree, there is a similarity between Hohm and PowerMeter products. But you haven’t mentioned about Dynamics AX (http://www.microsoft.com/environment/business_solutions/articles/dynamics_ax.aspx) product which Microsoft launched last year for businesses.