My analysis? Developers killed it.

Why did they kill it?

1) Because it was simply MSN Communities with SOAP interfaces tacked on. 2) Because it was centralized and closed. 3) Because it was aimed at getting the world to subscribe to software services.

First, let's look at MSN Communities like my Train Simulator Fan Site. These are centralized Web sites with lots of cool features, but some very scary aspects.

1) You have absolutely no control of your data. I can't take the Train Simulator site and move it to another service (or my own servers). It's the ultimate in lock in. You can move to it, but you can't leave it. Uggghh.

2) Reliability is low. Because it's centralized if Microsoft takes down the servers you're screwed and have no control. In fact, in June of last year my Train site was down for more than 48 hours as Microsoft upgraded the software. There was nothing I could do, and I didn't have control of the content so I couldn't move some place else.

3) The feature set is closed. Because Microsoft has control of the servers, there was nothing I could do to add features. Developers particularly hate not being in control.

4) Automatic upgrades. When Microsoft decided my calendar needed a new feature, I got it, and I have no control over it. Urgh.

Add in all these problems the business model problems that surround centralized services and you run into a lot of trouble.

So, if I were Jim Allchin, what would I do?

1) Realize that developers do want easy-to-use, high-performance, high-security, high-availability, and fully controllable Web services. Heck, look at what Google just did today.

2) Realize that the business model for selling these Web services will be on a "per server" basis (much like UserLand sells Frontier today). Developers (and users) don't wanna pay Microsoft a "subscription fee" or give up a percentage of revenue. Maybe other companies can get away with those kinds of models, but Microsoft is not trusted enough due to its monopoply power. Paying Microsoft a percentage must feel like the farmers did in the late 1800s who paid the "robber baron" railroads high fees.

3) Realize Microsoft's strength, which is selling Windows and Office (platforms, not services).

Realizing these three things, if I were Gates/Allchin (Allchin is rumored to be the one who killed Hailstorm/.NET My Services) I would:

1) Fund third-party companies to build innovative Web services for the .NET Framework/Platform.

2) Build a good core set of Web services and sell them inexpensively so that developers can use them in their own applications. For instance, I'd love to pay $50 to add a weather map, a stock quote server, a calendar, a news applet, and other such Web services to my Web site. I'd even pay that per year. You could even get me to upgrade my copy of Office to get these new Webservices. (I'd love to see Outlook turned into a Web service, for instance).

3) Give me tools to build my own Web services easily. For instance, I want to build a little "rate the speaker" Web service. This should be easy to build since it'd just be a slider that'd let you select between "Excellent" "Decent" and "Sucks" and report that into a database and build a little graph for me so I can see what the average and mean ratings are for each conference speaker. Visual Studio today is too difficult to use.

There's more I'd like to see too, but I'm getting kicked out of the exhibit hall at TechED here. More tomorrow since I'm going to dinner with Ernie the Attorney.