When I research something and build a plan for it, I really get invested and passionate about it. Then, I hope to see it fruition so I can believe my instincts were correct. As we begin to see Microsoft open up its Minecraft platform and launch larger education initiatives, I look fondly on this deck I created while interviewing with Microsoft two years ago.
At Kellogg, we learned that people in aggregate tend to be quite correct (for example, say you have a random amount of jelly beans inside a big jar. Ask people to guess the amount of beans. When you average all the guesses, it will come out quite close to the real number, even if the real number is large and random, like 1,724).
According to How Microsoft got so good at predicting who will win NFL games, Microsoft Bing is an awesome prediction guru of human intelligence, machine learning, and big data:
Bing Predicts is run by a team of about a half dozen people out of Microsoft’s Redmond, Washington headquarters. It uses machine learning and analyses big data on the web to predict the outcomes of reality TV shows, elections, sporting events, and more.
In 2014, Bing was 67% accurate predicting NFL winners.
In all, the Bing Predicts model considers hundreds of these different signals, or data points, for each event, like an election or game, Sun said.
So far this year[2015 to game three], Bing is about 60% accurate in predicting NFL matchups.
Sounds great, right? However, my first thought was, who cares about winners? I can’t bet on winners, this is why the spread exists, to create (theoretical) 50/50 bets that bookies can make stable revenue from.
My next question is, in this awesome model built from millions of dollars in labor and computing power, are the prediction results better, hopefully at a statistically significant (p = .05) level, than information I could get free from a public resource? How little can I spend to get reasonably close results to aid in my for-profit wagering?
Let’s look at Las Vegas betting spreads.
From 1989 to 2013, Las Vegas favorites were correct 66.8% of the time. With a sample size of 15 years, and looking at the chart above, I can say that Vegas is pretty good.
1 signal – Vegas odds – versus hundreds of signals – Microsoft Bing = the same result.
Great work, Microsoft.
After seeing this article (Microsoft Is Launching A Portal For Teachers To Use Minecraft In The Classroom) about Microsoft’s push to get Minecraft into schools, this reminded me of the strategy I put together as I interviewed for a role with the Xbox Minecraft team a couple of months ago. Although I was rejected, I still feel I was on to some solid thoughts, and I wonder how much of my strategy will be in the real one. You can see it below:
Context: Today, Minecraft is used as a tool by students and teachers to learn different subjects. Awareness of Minecraft is high. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that we are launching a new education specific version of Minecraft that leverages Minecraft IP and can be downloaded to be used in the classroom. Let’s also assume that today we are in 100 schools. We need to be in 10,000 schools in 2 years.
Question: How would you grow the EDU business, taking us from 100 schools to 10,000 schools? You are not allowed to bundle. Everything else is on the table. In your answer, please (1) be specific about your strategy and execution, (2) quantify revenue gain, (3) be specific about your pricing/distribution decision – how and why you did you price the product the way you did, (4) highlight any risks that you see.
You are free to use any publically available data and to make any assumptions that you think are reasonable. Attached is a number of public sources on the entertainment industry. Friendly heads up – many are not applicable.
Over the Winter Quarter, our Technology and Innovation Strategy class at Kellogg culminated in a final research paper. The paper looked at the shuttering of Google Glass and what Google’s next steps should be. As part of this, I got to look deeply into the current state of Virtual Reality, which I have been following and waiting for (hello Oculus!) since I was a child, and Augmented Reality. I will be posting portions of the paper (it’s quite long) in digestible chunks here over the next week. Our team was comprised of Melissa Caldwell, Raghu Chirravuri, Olga Gordon, Jeff Hoffman, and me, Michael Nguyen.
To see all of the sections, see my tag virtual reality.
Microsoft (Hololens – Augmented Reality)
The most direct threat to Google’s existing business is from Microsoft’s Hololens headset. Similar to Google Glass, Hololens is a stand-alone, untethered AR headset extended from the Xbox Kinect platform that will be released with the launch of Windows 10 by the end of 2015. Hololens differs from Glass, as it has a full computing platform built within the headset. Running on Windows 10, this headset can project images not just on top (as Google Glass) of what the user sees, but also can place 3D holographic objects into the real world and allow people to interact with those objects naturally with hands, fingers, and voice. This functionality means a Hololens wearer could watch a holographic large screen TV on a real living room wall, play with digital Legos on a kitchen table, or even walk across the surface of the moon and view details on the ground in high resolution.
The potential of Hololens lies in its integration into the complete Windows 10 ecosystem. Microsoft is focused on having one Windows 10 operating system across PCs, tablets, and mobile phones, and Hololens is meant to serve as a complete communications, productivity, and entertainment platform. This would allow apps running on any other Windows 10 platform would run just as easily run on Hololens, eliminating the inertia present in creating a developer ecosystem. Microsoft sees the evolution of the tablet as a portable computing device in Hololens, and possibly as an eventual replacement for the monitor. This is an attempt to define a new product category and jump-start it with an existing ecosystem, as Apple did with the iPad. Success will depend on how well the Windows 10 unified ecosystem works in reality.
We expect several shortcomings from the initial Hololens product, similar to Google’s own experience with Glass, including battery life, overheating, and outdoor usage. While Microsoft does have hardware experience from its video game and mobile phone (formerly Nokia) divisions, it is unlikely that a launch with such new technology and learning curve will soon reach a mass-market audience in both reception and pricing.
It is possible that in a future in which Hololens becomes successful, users will no longer rely on a Google search box to look for information, instead using the Cortana personal assistant interface in Windows 10 by pointing at an object in view or issuing a vocal command. Regardless of whether Hololens can be an immediate mass-market success, as an early mover, this is a significant attempt by Microsoft to own the category and define standards for how people engage and interact in AR, similar to how many standard mobile touch gestures were defined by Apple.