*Note that I didn’t post this prior to Don’s most recent news. But the point is still valid, and maybe more so.
By now the dust has settled and the pundits have weighed in about what a huge mistake Microsoft made letting Don Dodge go.
You can see the some of the commentary here:
But those issues may just be the tip of the iceberg. I think the real problem is just now manifesting itself.
If you read Don’s most recent blog post it is clear that the collateral damage may overshadow the initial blow.
Sure, losing his services as the face of Microsoft to the start up community is huge, as Michael Arrington of TechCrunch pointed out.
But that is dwarfed in my opinion by the fact that one of your biggest proponents of ‘all that is Microsoft’ has so quickly “seen the light” regarding the value and utility of the competing products now available to him.
Outlook has been replaced by Gmail with glowing praise “I can already see why people have been raving about it” .
Windows mobile is out and an Android phone to take it’s place. “Windows Mobile is OK, but not great”
I don’t think he is the kind of person to do this for spite. My take is, I sense a great relief to have removed the corporate blinders and the burden of legacy products and preserving cash cows.
*Note: I didn’t post this soon enough, and Don’s most recent post underscores my points.
He has announced his move to Google and once you have read it, you will understand that losing Don’s service was bad, but gaining his adversarial punch will prove to be much worse.
For example from his recent post:
Thanks Microsoft Outlook, but I’m going to Gmail.
Thanks Microsoft Office Office 2007, but I’m going to Google Docs.
Thanks Microsoft Windows Mobile 6.5, but I’m going to Google Android.
Thanks Microsoft Internet Explorer, but I’m moving to Google Chrome
Most could have seen this coming from a mile away. Certainly Arrington did as you see from his Exit interview. Seems like a problem to me.