Darcy Burner's WebLog

Software vendor central

Master classes

We've been thinking about how we should provide the best, most valuable content we can to large numbers of software vendors.  There are some channels through which Microsoft already does a fairly decent job of this: MSDN and the Professional Developer's Conference come readily to mind.  On an ongoing basis, though, we've been discussing how best to get highly valuable information to ISVs who will actually use it in a timely and compelling manner. (In the last week alone I've spent something like 20 hours talking this issue through with members of my team, some of my peers, and my management.)

One idea we've come up with (credit goes to Betsy Steele, the woman on my team who regularly works miracles for ISVs and runs the .NET Connected logo program in her spare time) is to create a series of “master classes” for ISVs.  The idea goes something like this: if you're an ISV and you're going to develop on one of our strategic new technologies, in exchange for pledging to develop an application that supports that technology, we'll provide you with free access to a set of live, interactive webcasts with key members of the development teams working on the technologies.  They could then describe the parts of the technologies they're working on that would be likely to affect you as software vendors, and you could ask questions, both via the LiveMeeting chat feature and on a call-in basis.  (That pledge to develop an application, incidentally, would also get you other things to improve your odds of succeeding, like free email tech support for issues related to the technology in question.)

That leads me to a whole series of questions, though.

  • Are webcasts a compelling medium?  Would you take an hour of your time to attend one, assuming it was participatory and not just somebody blathering on to a bunch of slides?
  • Who would you most want webcasts with?  The product architects?  The program managers who have spec'd out the features?  The product managers whose job it is to tell you what the product does and is for (and who could help you understand how to describe it to your customers)?  The developers who have worked on certain features?  The documentation folks who are documenting what the product actually does and how it can be used?  (This could have the added benefit of improving the documentation, of course.)  Someone else?
  • How many webcasts would you consider attending over the course of a year?  Who in your company would attend?  (Developers?  Architects?  Marketing folks?  Management?)
  • Have you ever attended a Microsoft webcast?  If not, what would make you consider trying it?  Would you rather we just stuck to white papers?
  • What is the earliest you would have any interest in starting development on a new technology like, say, the next version of SQL Server?  At beta 1, when it's newly stable?  At beta 2, when it's feature locked?  At RTM1?  At launch?  After everyone else has already figured out whether it works or not?

Thanks to the people who attended my webcast last week, by the way.  You were an unusually attentive group; nearly everyone stayed for the whole thing.  Of course, it probably helped that I wrapped it up in 34 minutes rather than the hour it was scheduled for.  You probably didn't have time to leave before it ended!

Published Monday, February 09, 2004 10:25 PM by DarcyBurner

Comments

 

Avonelle Lovhaug said:

I like webcasts, although I don't often participate in them.

I don't have answers to the rest of your questions, but I will say I'm not too interested in webcasts on products that are more than 1 year out. Because it is just me, I can't get too distracted by products that are still in technology-preview mode. I'm comfortable working with, learning about, and promoting products that are in beta, however.

Nice webcast last week. Thanks for your efforts!
February 9, 2004 11:19 PM
 

moo said:

Webcasts are good when working, especially if you have the Prodigy as a backing audiosoundtrack.

February 10, 2004 3:34 AM
 

Mary McRae said:

Hi Darcy,

I enjoyed the webcast - I think it was the shortest one in history that I've attended from MS!

1. webcasts - definitely. must be participatory
2. yes. all of the above. webcasts from the PMs about features/functionality and how they envision it being used, from the doc folks about real-world examples they've created, discussions with the developers re: coding issues, bugs, etc.
3. no limitations. one a week?
4. I love the webcasts - mostly because you get to ask questions and hear other people's questions
5. Beta 1 - as soon as I can get it in my hands; if I'm developing something for it I need it as soon as possible so I can ask questions, provide feedback, and have my product ready when the RTM is available.
February 10, 2004 7:34 AM
 

PaulB said:

I like webcasts, when they're scheduled at a reasonable time for me. Right now most are scheduled somewhere between 6pm and 8pm CET, which collides with my diner usually or just after, so I forget all about it.

5. Beta 1 for researching the product; beta2 start developing for paying customers; RTM finish developing, test and release.
February 10, 2004 2:31 PM
 

Eusebio Rufian-Zilbermann said:

I just attended my first webcast (ASP.NET globalization). It was very good to be able to participate and ask questions. The multimedia training resource from Microsoft that I use most often the MSDN Show and attending this webcast led me to appreciate certain advantages in this format.

Personally I find media files (e.g., an avi or mpg file) best for
1) Presenting an architecture
2) Presenting features/functionality (the PM's or the UserEd people)
3) Archived material (incl. archived webcasts)

The webcast format has big advantages for participatory material. Probably lab/workshop materials that focus on specific features are the presentations that would benefit most. Something important to note is that Detail-oriented presentations are the most beneficial but attracting audience is more challenging. Their success cannot be measured on the same playing level as a generic presentation. Giving a value of 100 to 20 people can be more successful than giving a value of 10 to 100 people.

I'm speaking from a developer perspective. Architects, managers and marketing would obviously have different needs. This shouldn't be a conflict, I'm just mentioning it to set my comments into context. MS training materials are usually very well classified according to audience :)
February 10, 2004 4:57 PM
 

Rob Zelt said:

The webcasts are a great format. They are interactive, but yet if you miss one, you can replay it. I think the major problem currently is you never quite know if you're going to get a broad overview, or detailed technical info. Sometimes the 200,300 descriptions seem off. I suggest more, indepth technical sessions. Instead of trying to get through too much info, have very few slides, and let the audiance participate and guide the flow with questions.
February 10, 2004 8:13 PM
Anonymous comments are disabled

© 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of Use  |  Trademarks  |  Privacy Statement
Microsoft
Page view tracker