5 ms·

Microsoft Research does some really cool stuff. Do they really work for the same company as the people who make Windows and Office? I can't imagine two more d

Microsoft Research does some really cool stuff. Do they really work for the same company as the people who make Windows and Office? I can't imagine two more diametrically different organizations.

masklinn 13y ago
Bell Labs was founded by Ma Bell, it's hard to top that and MSR does not come close.
- sremani 13y ago
  are you privy to research in either of the organizations. I know its great to revere age old organizations but as we are speaking the best research is probably being conducted in a place we least expect. I am not privy to research at Ma Bell or only the published elements of Microsoft Research - so your reaction is more of an instinct than any factual basis.
  - masklinn 13y ago
    I've got no idea what you're talking about, I was responding to GP's comment about diametrically opposed spirits in subsets of the same organisation.
  - loumf 13y ago
    Bell Lab's results are widely known. I'll just point to two: C and the Transistor, as being pretty hard to beat (there's much more). In any case, the parent commenters point wasn't the difference in the two research lab's results, but the difference in philosophies between the labs and their respective parent companies.
    - angersock 13y ago
      Erm, lasers, Unix, communications satellites...
    - mturmon 13y ago
      Your two are good. Another notable one is the original discovery of the cosmic microwave background, the primordial echo of the Big Bang, which is still being investigated today. That was a 1974 Nobel Prize. A nice list is at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Labs#Discoveries_and_developments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Labs#Discoveries_and_devel... Basically, the GP comment is really quite wrong.
  - darkarmani 13y ago
    > so your reaction is more of an instinct than any factual basis. Do Nobel prizes and Turing awards count as instinct or are they facts?
    - sremani 13y ago
      My broad point was comparing an age old institution with Young one is not fair and more or less 100 years from now, who knows where things would be are. Its not comparing apples to apples but again, if dissing MSR for not being Bell Labs - great then.
      - sthu11182 13y ago
        My point it is there can never be a Bell Labs again. Very few organizations have the resources to fund basic sciences and have all the talent they had under one roof. Some argue that you can again, but I just don't see how it is possible. See, e.g., http://www.amazon.com/The-Idea-Factory-American-Innovation/dp/0143122797 http://www.amazon.com/The-Idea-Factory-American-Innovation/d...
- sthu11182 13y ago
  I think it is hard to top what AT&T did with Bell Labs. They had a government mandated monopoly with tons of money to fund basic scientific research and ended up with a few Nobel prizes in the process. I think the more apt organization for the OP however would be Xerox PARC.

Microsoft Research does some really cool stuff. Do they really work for the same company as the people who make Windows and Office? I can't imagine two more diametrically different organizations.

masklinn 13y ago

Bell Labs was founded by Ma Bell, it's hard to top that and MSR does not come close.

sremani 13y ago
are you privy to research in either of the organizations. I know its great to revere age old organizations but as we are speaking the best research is probably being conducted in a place we least expect. I am not privy to research at Ma Bell or only the published elements of Microsoft Research - so your reaction is more of an instinct than any factual basis.
- masklinn 13y ago
  I've got no idea what you're talking about, I was responding to GP's comment about diametrically opposed spirits in subsets of the same organisation.
- loumf 13y ago
  Bell Lab's results are widely known. I'll just point to two: C and the Transistor, as being pretty hard to beat (there's much more). In any case, the parent commenters point wasn't the difference in the two research lab's results, but the difference in philosophies between the labs and their respective parent companies.
  - angersock 13y ago
    Erm, lasers, Unix, communications satellites...
  - mturmon 13y ago
    Your two are good. Another notable one is the original discovery of the cosmic microwave background, the primordial echo of the Big Bang, which is still being investigated today. That was a 1974 Nobel Prize. A nice list is at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Labs#Discoveries_and_developments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Labs#Discoveries_and_devel... Basically, the GP comment is really quite wrong.
- darkarmani 13y ago
  > so your reaction is more of an instinct than any factual basis. Do Nobel prizes and Turing awards count as instinct or are they facts?
  - sremani 13y ago
    My broad point was comparing an age old institution with Young one is not fair and more or less 100 years from now, who knows where things would be are. Its not comparing apples to apples but again, if dissing MSR for not being Bell Labs - great then.
    - sthu11182 13y ago
      My point it is there can never be a Bell Labs again. Very few organizations have the resources to fund basic sciences and have all the talent they had under one roof. Some argue that you can again, but I just don't see how it is possible. See, e.g., http://www.amazon.com/The-Idea-Factory-American-Innovation/dp/0143122797 http://www.amazon.com/The-Idea-Factory-American-Innovation/d...
sthu11182 13y ago
I think it is hard to top what AT&T did with Bell Labs. They had a government mandated monopoly with tons of money to fund basic scientific research and ended up with a few Nobel prizes in the process. I think the more apt organization for the OP however would be Xerox PARC.