Ask Paul: May 30 (Premium)

Happy Friday! After a hectic couple of weeks, I’m looking forward to catching up and maybe even relaxing a bit. But first…

?‍? If you Build it, you are dumb

train_wreck asks:

Is Build dead? (More broadly, is there a future for big conferences, at MS and elsewhere?)

Before Build, I had had conversations with two people who both expressed concerns for the future of the show, based on low ticket sales. Microsoft cut prices, and I later learned that the internal target was 3,000 paid attendees, a figure it ended up exceeding, but only because of the price cuts. So it’s unlikely that it allows this condition to persist. Whether that means changes to the show–perhaps online only, as per Apple, perhaps as one or more targeted shows (like an AI Build or whatever), or something else is open to debate. I assume it’s being debated right now internally.

Related to this, .NET is on whatever schedule trajectory, and I’ve been wondering for a while now if the monolithic annual schedule with major and minor releases every other year is sustainable. Microsoft just changed the Windows App SDK, which isn’t part of .NET, such that developers will be able to install individual components instead of the full package, and that will help with agility in the same way that the Windows team can and does deliver new features all the time and doesn’t need to wait for feature updates (version upgrades). I wonder if .NET should do the same. Have the core platform on whatever schedule, and just ship language and framework updates separately. That could extend the lifecycle of each .NET release from a support standpoint, which I think developers would appreciate.

I mention that because the current schedule, with an annual release in November, doesn’t necessarily make any sense. If Build is going to keep happening, and in May, perhaps the .NET schedule, and the associated messaging, should shift to that schedule too. The .NET releases–and thus the virtual .NET Conf event that accompanies each–are always timed near Ignite, which is primarily an IT conference, and in some cases have actually overlapped, which is not ideal.

But the broader question here is whether Build makes sense as a single big annual show, or whether it should evolve or change into something else. This is a tough call. After the pandemic, many were looking forward to doing in-person events again, and of the companies I follow that do this type of thing, Microsoft moved the most slowly. And it lost things because of that. It lost all the people, in-house and external, that it had contracted with for that type of work, and so it also lost that institutional knowledge and memory about how to best do these shows. It lost contracts with the convention centers that could host such an event, and those places are often booked out years in advance. And it lost a significant portion of those companies that had been willing to pay to send developers and other employees to these shows because they were saving money not doing so and got comfortable with that. The Build and Ignite events I’ve gone to since the pandemic just aren’t the same. They’re similar, at a surface level. But they are diminished.

One thing that hasn’t changed is the quality of the sessions, which have long been recorded, at least most of them, and can be watched (and rewatched) later online or offline, thanks to downloads (and associated materials). I downloaded over 20 Build 2025 session videos and have been going through them in order of preference, as I long have with previous shows. And perhaps this is the core strength that future shows could revolve around. Do something like Apple and Google now do with a minimal in-person footprint, perhaps on campus even, and make Build at least mostly virtual. I realize the importance of in-person events–for me, this was the best part of Build this year, maybe the only truly positive bit, just catching up with people–but there are ways to accommodate that more efficiently and with fewer costs. Maybe a return to more roadshows and other local events. Or maybe smaller, more targeted “mini Builds” near the campus/Seattle. For example, there could be quarterly events for .NET, Windows, AI, cloud, or whatever.

The protester activities at Build–and, before that, at the 50th anniversary event in April–are a new wrinkle. I think that this is a slippery slope, meaning it only gets worse. And I found out since the show that the 25-30 protests number I cited as of that Tuesday was over 100 by the end of the week. In some ways, Microsoft’s biggest success with Build was keeping that out of the public’s eye for the most part, and certain the sheer volume of these protests, which seemed like individuals from a distance but are clearly an organized strategy by some group. Ignite will be interesting. It’s only a matter of time before there is violence. This will escalate, and that makes holding in-person events even more costly across the board. It may just not be worth it for Microsoft or other companies to do so.

I’m curious what Microsoft does here. I feel like something has to change, and will.

?️ OneDrive to rule them all and in the darkness wind them (up)

CharlesVincent2 asks:

Paul, topic: = OneDrive… I have often heard you critical of one drive. (e.g., the pushy reminders, resetting back to MS default settings behind your back without notice).

Yes.

But beyond that, like to know more why ir does it not work well for you? For me, i have ma 365 family plan and accepted their default settings and i don’t get the pushy messages. it just works. And plenty of space. smooth operations And confort files saved on cloud and accesible online offline and across devices. At a decent price as i also use office apps as my daily drivers. I have used icloud, drop box and gogle drive. For me one drive simpler and just as effective. Curious where it falls short in your mind.

It doesn’t, and maybe this is something I should be clearer about. Functionally–features, performance, reliability, usability, whatever–OneDrive is terrific. If you’re a Windows user and are in any way in the Microsoft ecosystem, which you are, with a Microsoft account, a Microsoft 365 subscription, and so on, OneDrive is a no-brainer. I still use it in Windows, though my core document work has recently been in Google Drive and, more recently, Synology Drive. And I still use OneDrive to back up all the photos on my phones. (I also use Google Photos for this and, soon, Synology Photos.)

I find myself writing something like this a lot these days for some reason, but this is yet another example of a topic I’m writing about but haven’t yet published the article. In this case, the current title of this thing is Giving In, and it’s about how I configure the PCs I review in whatever ways and then, at some point, I go to copy a file from the Desktop or whatever and realize that OneDrive has quietly and unexpectedly (well, expectedly, at this point) enabled Folder backup. I do not want that feature enabled, and so I will tediously disable that across all three folders, which you have to do one at a time, and then go into File Explorer and just as tediously remove all the placeholder shortcuts that doing so creates, and then move/delete the files and folders that the backup created in OneDrive. I hate doing this. I can’t believe how often I have to do this.

The week that we got back from Mexico, I received 3 or 4 laptops, and since then, a few more, and I went through that configuration process with each. And then saw OneDrive auto-enable Folder backup against my wishes on each. And because I had done this across each at roughly the same time, which all happened at the same time. And I just couldn’t stand to take the time to fix this on all of them. And so I thought, maybe I should just try to live with this. It’s been a while, and my reasons for hating this so much had sort of faded from memory. So I gave it a shot.

I will publish that article soon, so I don’t want to give this away quite yet, but accepting this nonsense behavior quickly reminded me why I do hate it so much, and this is why I have since taken the time to do what I’d been doing for the past few years and put it all back the way I want it. I will document the issues in that article. And then hopefully never think about it again … Unless Microsoft just stops doing this.

But from a functional or usability perspective, OneDrive in Windows 11 is terrific. I would love to go back to using it semi-exclusively. And if you’re not experiencing the issues I have–Folder backup, as noted, but also other behaviors like nagging me to save Office files to OneDrive by default—then there is absolutely no reason not to use it. Ditto for those who prefer this default behavior or just live with it and don’t care. OneDrive in Windows 11 works great.

? Is that a Mozilla in your pocket, or are you just happy to read it later?

helix2301 asks:

Paul what are your thoughts on pocket shutting down I know you were a user.

I used Pocket for many years, but because I review so many laptops, the tedious nature of having to sign in and 2FA authenticate repeatedly on each device, across multiple browsers, just became too much. And so I explored alternatives last year and went back to Instapaper, which I’ve been using since and recommend highly. It’s a cleaner experience and I actually prefer it.

Mozilla buying Pocket was always a little suspicious/controversial, and they did add it directly to Firefox and then tighten up security on their accounts. I also had worries that they might somehow deemphasize Pocket in other browsers or whatever, which thankfully never happened. But killing Pocket without trying to find a new home is a bizarre decision. Surely, there is a company or organization that would be happy to take this on. Or even a competitor that could just merge the two services. This whole thing feels unnecessary.

Mozilla shutting down services to get ready for a future without Google not sure what that looks like maybe smaller team with open source contributors and sponsors maybe like mastodon or Apache.

Mozilla downsizing itself was inarguably overdue. I know there’s a lot of nostalgia and high-mindedness around this organization and the role it plays in keeping the Internet open. But it also needs to make sense as a business. And I feel like this payoff from Google should be seen for what it is, and that it made Mozilla lazy. I’m also fighting to rationalize the logic and ethics of accepting money from a company you are actively trying to protect the world from. It’s just hypocritical, it’s a crazy contradiction. As it is now, Mozilla doesn’t make sense as a business–in some ways, it’s similar to Xbox, another business people get emotional about–and that has to change. Pocket is a distraction, and it’s just not core to Mozilla and what it stands for.

I’m finding co pilot being built into snipping, notepad and pictures useful. More useful then anything on iOS at this point lol

Well. Microsoft has gotten very aggressive on AI as it sees it as being key to future growth. It kicked off the AI boom we’re still dealing with every day, and it has never slowed down in the release of new services and other features. But Apple has always been more methodical, and while there’s a lot of criticism around Apple Intelligence, it is at least a base level of helpfulness where that makes sense in Apple’s core platforms. It will only get better, but then it can only get better.

I don’t expect Apple to ever move quickly on this, however. Certainly, nothing like Microsoft and, even more dramatically, suddenly, Google. That dynamic is unchanged: Where Apple generally moves relatively slowly with iOS and its other platforms, Google has always been quicker but more chaotic. I guess there’s something for everyone out there. And you can of course use a ton of other AI apps and services on Apple devices.

Just wondering your thoughts on both Mozilla and why Apple ai so useless n uneventful. Even on macOS ai just not there yet. I’m Mac fan boy and still say at work my windows machine leaps n bounds a head Mac with ai usefulness.

Some will point to the lack of AI on the Mac, in particular, as a strength. This is as it always is. My personal take is that Microsoft updates Windows too frequently, and that Apple has a better–almost more respectful–update cadence on the Mac, in particular. These are legacy platforms. We use them not for the OS but to get work done in apps. Obviously, OS capabilities can be important, too. But the rapid change probably confuses most people. I suspect it enrages many as well.

It’s difficult to put ourselves in the minds of the decision makers at these companies. If you look at what the smaller browser makers are doing with AI, or the smaller search services, you see a sort of agnostic “bring your own AI” approach that makes sense for those businesses: Developing their own AI services is expensive and will never match what Big Tech provides. But Apple is stuck in a weird position of its own making. It has the resources to do AI well. It markets privacy heavily, which impedes progress on a technology that is all about violating your privacy. And it is not at all interested in just passing the buck (literally, in this case) by opening up its platforms and letting users pick their own AIs. That’s throwing money away. And Apple does not throw money away.

So this is like a flowchart that never resolves. There’s no clear way forward that satisfies all its needs. Mozilla is simpler, and much smaller and cash constrained. So the decision on its path forward is at least more easily made as there are fewer choices to worry about. The limits have a clarifying effect.