MSR is a very powerful research org, agreed. In, say, machine learning and computer vision, this has been so for over 15 years.
But the point, and it is a valid one, is that this research does not seem to be turned in to actual products.
What is the systemic problem? Why has Google, which historically has had nowhere near the research depth, been able to innovate demonstrably, but not MSR?
One hypothesis is that research innovation starts with a small idea. It's easier to deploy a small idea on the web than as part of shrink-wrap software. Google can field the small idea, and iterate it on the web.
But to be included in the kind of software MS ships, you have to do things like (a) convince a project like Office to take it on, or (b) pitch it as part of a "big concept future system". Avenue (a) is very hard. And avenue (b) tends to produce vaporware. Sound familiar?
But the point, and it is a valid one, is that this research does not seem to be turned in to actual products.
What is the systemic problem? Why has Google, which historically has had nowhere near the research depth, been able to innovate demonstrably, but not MSR?
One hypothesis is that research innovation starts with a small idea. It's easier to deploy a small idea on the web than as part of shrink-wrap software. Google can field the small idea, and iterate it on the web.
But to be included in the kind of software MS ships, you have to do things like (a) convince a project like Office to take it on, or (b) pitch it as part of a "big concept future system". Avenue (a) is very hard. And avenue (b) tends to produce vaporware. Sound familiar?