I just got done reading an op-ed by former Microsoft VP David Brass entitled Microsoft’s Creative Destruction.   The article was about why, in his view, Microsoft is no longer an innovator in the technology marketplace.  His end conclusion was that the company did not create an “environment” for innovation.  His arguments were based on his experiences with two technologies (ClearType and Tablets) that he helped pioneer.  And, he makes it clear in the first line of the op-ed, that this lack of innovation is in direct contrast with that of Apple.

Now, I know absolutely nothing about Microsoft’s internal workings.  So, I am not going to argue the premise of the article.  But, what I do find completely disparaging is how loosely Brass throws around the word “innovation”.  Is the iPad really innovative?  To me, it is a giant iPod touch.  I actually stopped watching Job’s keynote half way through because the device was so utterly unimaginative and boring that if you would have asked me to write its key features out 6 months ago, I would have been about 98% accurate.  Now, I am not saying it isn’t a cool device…but, it is far from innovative.  Now contrast this with a truly innovative device—Project Natal.  With Natal, you can actually move your body in front of the TV and the device senses the movement in 3D and maps it to the game in real-time.   This is Avatar-type stuff.  It is not coming out 10 years from now…it is coming out this year.  And, who is it coming from?  Yup, Microsoft.

Now, I am not (as the kids say) “hatin’ on Apple”.  I am just saying that not everything that has an “i” in front of it is innovative.  And, sometimes VP’s are better off doing what they do best—crashing yachts into Ferraris—than, speculating on what innovation is.

This entry was posted on Thursday, February 4th, 2010 at 11:46 am and is filed under Technology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.