[smurph]

Many of the attempts that had been made, especially at Microsoft, were also just new versions of existing apps with some kind of syncing built in and a higher price. Office Groove is an example. Office doesn't need to have a DropBox built into it, it just needs to be Office. But if you've got an architecture astronaut in charge of the project, then they are going to want to use the position to build a reputation for being an innovator rather than just getting things done.

[seanmcdirmid]

So is architecture astronaut a perojative that we can just fling at people who come up with innovative features when really we want office 2013 to be the same as office 2011 and so on?

What's the point of revving office if there is no innovation allowed?

[jerf]

I believe the key sentence was "Office doesn't need to have a DropBox built into it, it just needs to be Office."

Embeddeing a featureless chunk of DropBox in Office that only works in Office that only works on Office files is the opposite of innovation, where you have a great idea but can only see it through the lens of your existing interests. Pulling features that don't belong in Office into Office isn't innovation, it's just poor product management.

[seanmcdirmid]

It's still there in skydrive pro. Sometimes the idea is ok, the realization just takes awhile. Sharing documents in office is something that the enterprise users want to do even if we don't get it.

[smurph]

I'm not saying that trying to innovate on a successful product team is bad. I am saying that when someone's motivation for innovating is to further their own career and not to solve the customer's problems, then their ideas are going to be bad most of the time. That's when they're an architecture astronaut. They care more about getting their ideas implemented so that they can so "look at that smart thing I did". Meanwhile other engineers are doing things like fixing bugs and implementing features that actual users have asked for.

[seanmcdirmid]

Sounds like a conspiracy theory. How do you begin to tell the difference between an innovator and a career whore? You mean, because their motivations are wrong, their ideas will be toxic if seductive also? Is it really so easy to judge?

[Shorel]

An architecture astronaut embeds the browser in the operating system in a way that the user can not easily use other browser.

It also embeds the cloud storage service in office in a way that the user can not easily use a competing cloud storage alternative.

I'm all about new features, but without the politics of corporate market share tactics.

[chris_wot]

That's not the point. Office is not a file syncing app.

[ucee054]

What's the point of revving office

So you people at Microsoft can sell the same software to the same customer multiple times.

And if it takes "innovation", by golly "innovation" will happen - even if it means putting in then taking out that stupid dancing menacing cartoon paperclip.

[seanmcdirmid]

Ah clippy, how do we miss thee!

I hardly work in product development but from what I've seen, innovation is very focused and extremely thought out within the company. The "rogue innovator" in it for career points would hardly survive very long.

[ucee054]

No, I'm accusing the whole damn company of being the rogue innovator. Personally I find Office impossible because the UI keeps "revving" so I can never find the features I want and which I was using happily 10 years ago.

On another note, I thought you might find this amusing:

http://vigor.sourceforge.net/

[scholia]

Live Mesh was a Microsoft syncing service, it worked well, it was free.... and it got dropped.

Otherwise, SkyDrive (which is the Microsoft equivalent of Dropbox) has had a free Office built into it ;-)