[from
Real-Time Revolution]
G[urdeep Singh Pal]: Yes. That's why CTI (Computer Telephony Integration) crashed and burned. Even at Microsoft, we tried like 23 goes at CTI, but they failed because they didn't integrate with what was already there. They used a separate address book, they had no idea of presence: it was a totally different user experience. But imagine instead the example we had before, where the pawn associated with the paragraph's author could also allow you to right-click and dial -- I would be able to get them, without even having to know what phone they were using, or the number. Again: applying the same user experience makes it easy.
S[towe Boyd]: You are starting to dig into another theme I wanted to ask about: the increasingly clever devices that folks are using, and how they can incrementally improve things. A friend of mine has a Bluetooth enabled cell phone, and when it rings, the Outlook contact pops up on his Bluetooth enabled PC. He already understands how to use Outlook, he knows how to use his cell phone, and now they provide a higher-order value through this in-context integration. I know, obviously that Microsoft is involved in many initiatives clever devices: PocketPC, Smartphones, tablet PCs, game machines, and who knows what else. So how does that vision converge with the vision in collaboration technologies?
G: There are going to be some devices that will be more mobile, always with you. And you want to allow collaboration on that device to the extent of the fidelity possible on that the device. You won't want to bring down the fidelity of the entire collaboration session just to the least common denominator.
S: You don't want to force everyone to use WAP just because one guy is on his cell phone.
G: Right. One very important case for us is PDAs and Smartphones, and not particularly smart phones, too. We have a number of critical partnerships, specific development we are doing, and some research we are doing in Microsoft Beijing.
