Kevin Schofield's Weblog
Musings on life, kids, work, the Internet, Microsoft, politics, orcas, etc.





Click to see the XML version of this web page.

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
 

 

Friday, December 26, 2003
 

I know I'm not supposed to take it personally when people Microsoft-bash, but it still bugs me when people ignorantly claim that Microsoft Research has never contributed anything of significance to the company. Yes, we publish a lot of papers. That's important, but equally important is the very long list of contributions that MSR has made to shipping products.

  • ClearType. (if you're in the mood to bash and you're about to respond by saying that Wozniak did this with the Apple II, go read the patent. I had an Apple II. I remember all of the weird color fringes around the edges of characters. ClearType is about how to do sub-pixel resolution without color artifacts.
  • The Windows Media audio format. In fact, the whole Digital Media division at Microsoft started as an incubation group in MSR.
  • The natural language parsing engine in Office. The basis of the grammar checker, but also used for language detection (Word can detect what language you are typing in -- even if you change in the middle of a paragraph -- and apply the right proofing tools) and SmartTags.
  • Speech technologies in Windows and Office.
  • Tons of things in DirectX.
  • Graphics libraries in the XBox Developers Kit.
  • The IPv6 stack in Windows.
  • And, of course, spam filters currenly in Hotmail, the MSN client, Outlook, and Exchange.

MSR's Programmer Productivity Research Centerh also develops a wide range of tools to help MS product team develop better and faster code. At this point, essentially every product team in Microsoft uses them, and we are talking to the Visual Studio team about incorporating them into a future version of VS.

Many, if not most, of these technologies are cases where we didn't go develop something completely on our own and throw it over the wall. They were co-developed at some level with MS product groups, which I think was a major contributor to getting the technology shipping int he first place.

This is just a small portion of the list. For a young research lab, we've been wildly successful at tech transfer. Perhaps our only crime is that we don't talk about it publicly enough.


11:14:06 PM    ; comment []


 

There was a Slashdot posting this morning on the Penny Black research project, looking at “computational signatures” for email to add a computational cost for sending email that is trivial for you and me but prohibitively expensive for spammers because of the scale.

Apart from the usual and customary trash-talking of Microsoft on Slashdot, which I’ve become pretty immune to, I think there are a couple of misconceptions in some of the comments that should be addressed.

First, there isn’t one anti-spam technology that will solve the spam program. It’s going to take a combination of complementary ones. Think of a probabilistic filter (choose your favorite variation) as the last step; it’s going to make mistakes because it has less than perfect information. We want to put as many deterministic steps in front of it so that we can make decisions about most messages long before we need to resort to educated guessing. That includes potentially some combination of: safelists/blocklists, digital signatures, HIPs, computational challenges, and other new ones that haven’t been invented yet.

The nice thing about this model is that no one technology needs to be applied universally. Sure, the wider the deployment, the better, but even “naked” email can just eventually fall through to a filter.

That said, a broad solution is going to need a combination of open standards and proprietary technologies. Microsoft has been working for several months now within a consortium to drive more widespread open standards and deployment of some technologies that should have interoperability. But the last-step filter doesn’t require interoperability, and the customer benefits from having many competing solutions. By the way, both Outlook and Exchange have standard APIs that a developer can use to write a plug-in spam filter.

The other thing that bothered me about the discussion thread this morning was the oft-repeated claim that Microsoft Research hasn’t contributed anything to Microsoft products. I’ll blog about that later today. I have to load up the kids and head to the airport to catch a plane…


12:50:14 PM    ; comment []



Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website. © Copyright 2004 Kevin Schofield.
Last update: 8/23/2004; 10:07:26 PM.
This theme is based on the SoundWaves (blue) Manila theme.
December 2003
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Nov   Jan


Blogroll

Robert Scoble
Ross Mayfield
Dan Gillmor
Larry Lessig
Joi Ito
misbehaving.net
simplegeek
Ray Ozzie
Doc Searls
Boing Boing Blog
Paul Andrews
Chris Pirillo
Halley's Comment
Instapundit
Scripting News
Beyond the Beyond
Don Box
Mary Jo Foley
WebMink
Dean for America
kuro5hin
John Batelle
PDA and Tablet PC News
AlwaysOn Network
The Old New Thing
PR Opinions
Critical Section
Backup Brain
Seattle P-I Microsoft Blog

Books I Like

The Diamond Age
Cryptonomicon
The Tipping Point
The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design
The Design of Everyday Things
Contact
Earth
The Mythical Man-Month
Peopleware
Wicked French
Linked: The New Science of Networks
As the Future Catches You
Pattern Recognition
The Da Vinci Code
The Man who Stayed Behind
Angels and Demons
The Confusion
Quicksilver
Free Prize Inside


What I'm Reading Now

Bachelors Brothers Bed & Breakfast Pillow Book