So no doubt, you're going to see the press/blogs around the US (+ some other markets) as we launch the new Live Search 2.0 experience and you're wondering what about us canucks?  Well I'm happy to say that this Friday we'll be launching our new search experience for us in Canada (and yes in English and French).  So, what's coming?

Better Performance

• 4X the index size (boo-yah!)
• Much better relevance and query intent
• New results UI (fonts, colours, text, sizes, wording, etc.)
• Better integration with Windows Live and Sympatico/MSN (via the standardized header)
• Faster results
• More images in our sick image search experience

On the horizon

• New homepage for Canada
• More kick-ass relevance improvements (like query refinement!)
• Better integration with Windows Live Translator
• Updated mapping experience

Are you excited?  Try it out at www.live.ca after Friday, and send me your feedback.

Important:  Make sure your browser language (in IE or Firefox) is set to EN-CA/FR-CA to ensure the most relevant and performant (is that even a word?) experience.

So Liveside has already noted that pieces of Live Search 2.0 are slowing coming to live the site.  Until more things are visible on the live site, I'll refrain from commenting further.  If you're from Canada you will not see the new homepage (yet!), but make sure your browser language is set to EN-CA/FR-CA for the most relevant experience.  This applies for now and the future :)

E X C I T I N G !

In other news, not sure if anyone caught Beauty and Geek yesterday.  But is it just me or does Google VP Marissa Mayer look almost identical to Beauty and the Geek's Katie in the new season (she's on the beauty side)?  I'm not saying anything about about Ms. Mayer's beauty or geekiness, but every time Katie came on screen I kept thinking back to SES or Searchnomics.

Anyway, food for thought.  Will be interesting to see how far Katie gets.

1. Too many clothes
2. Many clothes not being worn
3. Some clothes are on hangars, some in bins and some on a shelf, so the new system would have to work within those constraints**

Solution : Closet Inversion (or 1/closet )

So, I figured that I'd follow the age old tradition of "If you haven't worn it in 1 year, you must throw it out".  In my case, throwing it out meant giving it to Erika's cousin.  But how would I mark the clothing in a way that was easy and that would let me know that I hadn't worn an item in over a year?  Simple. 

1. Write today's date on a post-it note (with the year!) and post it somewhere in your closet. 
2. Since I like my hangars all lined up with the open-ends pointing into the closet, I took all my clothes and turned the hangars around.   Now all the hangars had the open-end pointing outwards.
3. I took all my clothing on the shelfs, and also reversed them.  So before if I had my jeans all lined up with the folds pointing outwards, now they were pointing inwards.
4. The closet is now ready.  Now everytime I wear something, when I put it back, I put the hangar in the regular way (open-end towards the inside), or put my jeans back with the fold towards the outside.
5. In one year (you have the date on the post-it note remember!), examine the closet.  For every item that has the hangar inverted, or fold inverted (for things on the shelf), toss it.  You haven't worn it in a year!

This system has the nice property that, when you put things back into the closet, you put them back in in the way you are used to.  The only pre-think you need is to set-up the closet in the first place.  The downside is that if you start now, you won't start getting rid of any clothes until a year out.

*For those who know me, know that I rigorously follow the McKinsey three model (I made up this name).  In this model, all data is represented in groups of three after taking a course on presentations and finding out that McKinsey does this.

**This solution does not work for the items in the bins like socks, underwear and pyjamas.  Instead, I use the relatively populary "If it has a rip in it, throw it out" system.  This means I have lots of socks, underwear and pyjamas in relation to other clothing.

Scenario 1

The other day I was at the Atrium on Bay and I experienced something peculiar.  As I was waiting in a 20 person line for the bank machine I noticed that all the human tellers were free.  Notice, it wasn't that there was a shorter line at the human tellers (likely the human tellers take longer to service a customer than a bank machine) but there was actually no line at all. 

Why?  Why didn't people rush over to the tellers like people do at a fast food chain when a new cashier opens up?

Scenario 2

I'm at a large grocery chain and I notice they have one of those new self-checkout counters.  Basically I can self-check out my groceries, pay and leave.  Overall, I have to do more work (usually I just stand there and watch the items go by) and the self-checkout offers me no additional discount to use it.  But I use this option instead of going to the regular cashier and it takes me longer to finish my grocery shopping.

Why?  Why do some people prefer to go to the self-checkout and do more work than to relax and let the checkout experts do their thing?

Man vs. the Machine

So my theory is simple.  In many scenario's people don't walk to talk to other people.  The bank line, the grocery store checkout and for me actually when I'm in a retail store, I'd rather talk to a machine.  A good example is those UPC readers at the large department stores that can read an item and tell you the price.  So far, those have been 100% accurate and fast for me.  The sales staff?  Not so much.

When on the phone to my cable provider and I get a human, I say "Can I speak to a machine?".  Usually the machines are more helpful.  I would love it if when I called company the first menu (after the usual English/Francais one) was:

1. Press ONE for a human
2. Press TWO for an android

Right away this gives the consumer the power to chose which experience they like better.   But here's the kicker, at anytime I want to be able to press ZERO to toggle!  How cool would that be.  If I was speaking to a computer, I could hit ZERO (this is the experience today) and it would put me in the queue for a human, but even if I was speaking to a human I could hit ZERO and it would switch to a computer!  There are so many benefits:

• shorter customer service calls (users can toggle out at any time)
• increased customer satisfaction (users can toggle back and forth, allowing them to switch customer service reps at any time)
• new behaviours (reps can actually ask customers if they want to use the automated service on their calls, and easily switch them back).  "Do you want me to transfer you to our automated service to get your bank balance?"
• increased engagement (likely people will hang out more on the phone if they could toggle back and forth.  Usually I like to get off the phone as soon as possible if it's a person on the other end)

Likely this will transfer nicely to the PC as well. 

Help

• Click here to get automated help
• Click here to get live help

Yah yah... we're working on it :)

About a year and a half ago I read an article about people who always buy the latest gadgets & toys.  The gist of the article was that if you're one of these people (as I am) and you stop buying the latest gadgets (as I did) then you may fall behind the curve and never catch up.  The reasons for my lack of purchases were a combination of:

• I had little time to play with new toys and gadgets
• Toys are expensive :)
• I was becoming weary of the ever eventful learning curve of new technology

This scared the crap out of me so I quickly went on EBay and bought an Imate SP3i.  What I realized was that the new technology actually made my life better.  How?  Well, I don't have to enumerate the benefits of the Windows Mobile platform, but one key feature was being able to have my calendar with me at all times so I wouldn't miss birthdays and I could plan my weekends with friends and family.  Notice, that this wasn't a work productivity improvement but a social one.

Now I was able to upgrade to this phone without changing my phone number because I already had a GSM phone and a SIM card.  This makes my phone hardware not sticky (or easy to change).  (I spoke about stickiness in my first post).  The cost of switching phones is not zero, since I had to purchase this phone, it wasn't free.

Now on the web, switching costs are mainly about habit.  For example, when I found out that I could keep up-to-date by reading blogs (with a blog reader) and not have to surf the web sites, I changed my behaviour to read news this way.  It was faster, more relevant to me and allowed me to browse news offline.

When we're young we like to try new things, but as we get older we become accustomed to our habits and routines.  For example I like to drink a glass of orange juice as soon as I get up, and then I check my email.  My fiancee likes to watch Breakfast Television when she gets up.  This is our routine. 

Tangent

My roommates in Austin, used to joke that my morning routine was a little too consistent.  Open room door -> open cabinet to get glass -> drop glass on counter -> close cabinet door -> open fridge -> grab OJ jug -> shake twice -> pour OJ -> put jug back in fridge -> close fridge door -> take sip -> then say "AAAHHHHH"

New technology changes people's habits

So I think it's interesting when people say the web is sticky.  True, there are things that can make a web site sticky (like all your email and contacts, or your relationship network), but there are some things which just aren't sticky enough.  Yet.  One thing all the major search engines are trying to figure out is how to make search stickier.  Right now, it's too easy to switch between Google, Yahoo and Live.  If any one of these engines makes a huge leap forward, savvy searchers will jump.  So I guess you have to ask yourself: 

Are you ready, or are you just stuck?

With all this new technology talk I guess this means I better go buy an Xbox 360 for Christmas, before I fall behind the curve :)

With our recent housing purchase I've been wondering about how real estate agent fees work.  Not that I don't understand that the selling and buying agent split between 4-6%, but actually why is it that we pay realtors between 4-6% of our total house cost!  Why isn't their value based on a higher percentage of the upside of using a realtor and not a lower percentage of the total asset cost.

Let me explain.  While in Negotiations class in the summer of 2004, Glen Whyte gave us the following example:

Scenario 1

I can probably sell my house myself for about $400k.  So in theory, if I do sell it for $400k, I get to keep all the proceeds.

Scenario 2

Now, if I use a realtor I may be able to sell the house for $420k.  If we assume a total of 5% commission, that's $20k.  That's $20k of upside, that is quickly eaten by the realtor.   Why isn't my realtor fee based upon a percentage of the $20k upside that they provide?  I'm sure a 20-50% fee could be worked out on the extra $20k.  This clearly quantifies the value of the realtor.  I think the show Property Ladder quotes a hefty 5-15% price jump if you use a realtor.  Their commission should be on that extra 5-15% increase.

While I haven't seen this model pop-up yet, I have seen some different pricing models.  In Texas (where I used to live) for example, we're already seeing the emergence of 1% commission realtors.

Now in some cases, your realtor can save or make you money.  For instance, I used the outstanding Linda Pinizzotto for both the purchase of my condo (2% below asking), the selling of my condo 4 years later (sold for 2% above asking in 1 day!) and the purchase of our house (3% below asking).  The difference here being that Linda goes above and beyond the call of duty.  She helped scout out new areas, advised us on cool neighborhoods and expertly negotiated all our contracts (hence all the money saved).  We easily saved money even after paying her fee.  She even booked our condo elevators, got us a discount on the house inspector and measured our lot for the insurers!

Morale:  Think hard about your realty fee, or use Linda :)

I'm appalled at the number of people who don't turn on the "Let us gather anonymous statistics" option or who don't press "Send this information to the software publisher" buttons on their software when it crashes.  Since, they are already using the software (so they must already find it somewhat useful), why not try and help make it better?  It's not as painful as answering a survey on your experience (which is the phone call I always seem to get after an oil change).

I liken this to going to the doctor.

User: It hurts.

Doctor: Where?

User: [blank stare]

Doctor: Where?

User: [blank stare]

Doctor: Where?

You get it.  How can the doctor help you if you don't tell him/her where it hurts?  So how can anyone make their product better without any feedback?

Tangent

A friend of mine once told me that one of the reasons the US is more competitive than Canada is that US customers complain more than Canadian customers.  The reason was that if a customer in the US felt like they were treated unfairly or that a product/service was sub-par, he would tell the proprietor.  This would cause the proprietor to change her ways and make this and any new customers's experiences better.  By offering criticism to her, he was actually helping.  Apparently in Canada we are too nice and we don't complain enough (and you thought Americans were just mean). 

To test this theory out, I complained at a Yorkville restaurant when I felt the service and food were of poor quality.  Unfortunately, instead of taking my advice and helping to improve the experiences of all customers from now on, the manager decided to get pissed off instead.  Oh well, I tried.  Maybe Canadians have to learn how to take criticism as well.

Start Complaining Damnit

Ok, so first turn on all the anonymous quality agents on all your software (you want it to get better right?).  Start telling your friends they dress funny or that their haircut is stupid.  Go to restaurants and tell the owner the food is cold, not spicy enough or that the waitress was rude.  Click on the feedback links on the sites you don't like and say so.

And finally, if you're using a Windows Live or MSN service in Canada you have something bad to say, you know who to tell.

Tell me where it hurts.

My friend (let's call him Z) runs this massive soccer pool.  I think we had over 100 participants for the World Cup this past summer, and the payout was something like $2,000 to the winner.  Big bucks for only a $20 entry fee!  Anyway, to make the pool bigger I routinely forward Z's invite to my friends and family.  Since I'm engaged, I thought I'd invite my cousins-in-law as well to participate.   This year, my cousin-in-law, let's call him G, decided to participate and he gave me a cheque for $20.

This is where it gets interesting.

As I was collecting the money from the various people who I forwarded the invite to, G would call routinely call me and ask when I was going to cash his cheque.  He also liked to throw in the odd F-bomb in these conversations.  This lead me to a few thoughts:

• G manages his money very tightly
• G doesn't keep much cash in his chequing account (he notices a $20 un-cashed cheque)
• G is anal
• G is asking to be screwed with

This got me thinking.  What could I do to G to really piss him off?  I mean, come on, he was literally calling me like every 2 days to ask when I was going to cash the cheque.  So I compiled a list of all the things you could do with someone's cheque:

1. Never cash it: for G, this would hurt, as he'd be waiting and waiting for his cheque to be cashed, all the while watching the $20 in his bank account not go towards other intentions. 
2. Cash it at the last minute: I think a cheque lives for 6-12 months.  I was very close to calling the bank to confirm the exact day and cash it on the very last day.  One could even hope for the cheque to bounce (causing further hilariousity and fees to G).
3. Give it back to him as a gift: G's wedding was coming up, and how perfect would it have been to have his own cheque as a gift.  I could have even deduced the $20 from my gift and put them in the same envelope.
4. Make a donation:  G had unwisely left the name blank on the cheque.  I don't think I have to spell out to you some of the organizations that G could have donated money to, and perhaps how he would have looked suspicious travelling through some airports
5. Add money to the account: With the chequing account #, I would easily be able to walk into a bank and add money to the account.  This may sound odd but think about the other party here.  G is very anal, he would have racked his brain for days trying to figure out why he had a deposit of $0.10, $1, $11.11 or even $20.  I even toyed with the idea of depositing $20 and then taking it out again.  Just for fun.

Tangent

Back in dot-com days I used to work for Trilogy Software in Austin,Texas.  There was an urban legend about two employees that used to manage their money VERY tightly.  I'll call them JK and TW.  The story goes that at night of poker, JK put a dime in TW's jacket pocket when TW was in the bathroom.  Two weeks later, when they met again for a night of poker TW proclaimed "You know, for two weeks I've been racking my brain trying to figure out why I have an extra 10 cents.  I couldn't figure out where this 10 cents came from.  Then I finally got it.  It's yours."  He then slammed the dime in front of JK.  Awesome.

So what did I end up doing?

G would have liked JK and TW.  Well, G continued calling me and I simply held on to the cheque.  I actually told him I was never going to cash the cheque, and he called to threaten me to put a stop payment on my cheque (I actually don't think this would have been easy for him, he'd have to know the cheque #).  In any case, he called me all the way up to his wedding (which is awesome, he's got all his wedding planning to think of and he's thinking about my stupid $20!), and I finally cashed it while he was on his honeymoon in Greece.  Unfortunately it didn't bounce :(

Moral:  Don't give me a cheque?

So in addition to working at MSN (on the Windows Live side these days), I'm also enrolled at Rotman.  While there are many things that are inherently different about being in school now vs. during my undergrad:

1. Students with Laptops
   • IMing/browsing during class (about the class material of course!)
   • taking notes with Word/Onenote
   • recording lectures with recording software or Onenote
   • discussing topics on our portal (Rotman uses Sharepoint)
2. Profs in Lectures
   1. using PowerPoint instead of a blackboard
   2. using a Tablet PC and writing notes with a pen
   3. posting slides before hand on our portal

Some things are the same

When we have exams there are 3 types:

1. Type: Open book
   • Tools allowed: bring textbooks, notes, articles, basically anything on paper
   • Toughness: extremely hard exam, most things won't be found in your notes or the text
2. Type: Cheat Sheet
   • Tools allowed: bring 1-2 pages usually double side of anything you want
   • Toughness: medium hard exam, some easy memory testing questions
3. Type: Closed book
   • Tools allowed: bring only your brain
   • Toughness: easiest exam, since they can test your memory

Test Criteria

So, what's the hack?  Well the hack is promoting tools of Level 1 to Level 2, while keeping the toughness of the exam the same.  So you'd be writing a Level 2 exam with Level 1 tools.  Obviously this is an advantage. 

The courses we tried this on were Advanced Derivatives (MGT 2307) and Financial Risk Management (MGT 2308).  So arguably some pretty tough courses.  The goal was to not fail these courses by spending our time on our cheat sheet vs. traditional studying and cheat sheet creation.

How?

Well, it all begins with the genius of my colleague Chris Schindler.  Basically the task is to make our cheat sheet contain all the information in either the text book or the notes.  Now one may think this is insane, but it's not as hard as you think.  We narrowed down what we felt was the important information:

• all the slides from class
• solutions to assignment questions
• solutions to important questions from the text book

So far, there's nothing new here.  What's new is the way we did it.  What we wanted to do was remove the manual labour required to rewrite everything we knew was relevant onto our cheat sheet.  But we also wanted to have a very very comprehensive cheat sheet.  Many students were typing cheat sheets, but we went a bit further. 

So, starting with the class notes, we added in relevant examples from the text and assignments into their correct sections within the PowerPoint slides.  We even used my Tablet PC to write in comments.  Next Chris wrote a macro which:

1. Copied a PowerPoint slide to a master word doc
2. Shrunk the slide by a high percentage
3. Placed it in an appropriate place on the page
4. Repeat for all slides

Output

What's so good about this?  You can't read it right?  WRONG.  Since we used high-resolution printers (and true type fonts) we were able to simply put the sheet of paper closer and closer to our eyes in order to read it.  We actually found Chris' inkjet/bubblejet to be of higher quality than my Laser or even the Laser's at the printing shops.  We did use colour though, so we could easily scan for section headings and we even coloured our examples blue.

What's good about this result, is that we spent a lot of time studying and making sure we had everything covered in our slides, and not much time doing the manual labour of writing things on our cheat sheet (of course it could be argued that writing things on your cheat sheet IS studying).  As we added more material, we could simply re-run the macro and it would spit out another cheat sheet.

Note: This is now repeatable for all our classes that require cheat sheets and it's completely legal (bonus!).

Result: 1 piece of 8.5" x 11" paper double-sided with 360 slides

I wonder if there's a market for our cheat sheet creator tool?

Ok, so we just launched the new version of Windows Live Local for Canada last night and it is sweet.  What's changed?

1.  We add in a tab so you can switch between businesses and maps.  We found that it was confusing for a user to see two text areas when just looking up a location, so now we remove one of them when you're not looking for a business.  You can always tab back :)

2.  We added 2D (as in 2 dimensional) collections.  The nerd in me just likes saying 2D.  So what's a 2D collection?  Well, in our previous release we allowed you to collect, share and find (through Pass the POI) 1D collections.  A 1D collection is simply a point, or a place of interest.  Now we go farther and present 2D collections so you can share your favourite bike routes, hiking paths and even rollerblade commutes.  It's as easy as drawing a line on a map.  Check out my walk around the parliament buildings.

But wait, there's more!  You can also create 2D shaded areas on a map, like I've shown below.  How cool is it to show your friends your favourite areas and communities to hang out.

3.  We add in our scope bar so you can easily switch to different kinds of searches.

Give it a try, and let me know what you think.