The Only Truly Failed Project

August 19, 2009

Do you remember Microsoft Bob? If you do, you probably remember it as an intensely marketed but laughable failure – what some call the "number one flop" at Microsoft.

Microsoft Bob, front Microsoft Bob, back

There's no question that Microsoft Bob was nothing short of an unmitigated disaster. But that's the funny thing about failures – they often lead to later successes. Take it from someone who lived and breathed the Bob project:

I was the one who sent Bill Gates email at the height of the positive Bob-mania that said we were likely to face a horrible backlash. Tech influentials had started telling me that they were going to bury Bob. They not only didn't like it, they were somehow angry that it had even been developed. It was personal.

And that's exactly what happened. Bob got killed. But first, it was ridiculed and stomped.

For Microsoft, it was a costly mistake. For the people who worked on it, Bob taught many lessons. Lessons that came into play for subsequent products that made a big impact, both at Microsoft and beyond.

How many people know that the lead developer for Bob 2.0 was also the co-founder of Valve and the development lead for Half-Life, which became an industry phenomenon, winning more than 50 Game of the Year awards and selling more than 10 million copies?

Or that Darrin Massena - development lead for Bob 1.0, most recently named Technical Innovator of the Year here in Washington State - and Valve co-founder Mike Harrington are the co-founders and partners behind Picnik - which is now the world's leading online photo editor, attracting almost 40 million visits a month and a million unique users a day.

And then, of course, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Melinda French – Bill Gates' future wife – managed the Microsoft Bob project at one point. Bob was the first Microsoft consumer project that Bill Gates personally had a hand in launching. Well, at least he got a wife out of it.

Yes, Bob was an obvious, undisputed and epic failure. We can point and laugh at Bob. But to me, Bob is less of a comic figure than a tragic one.

Unless you're an exceptionally lucky software developer, you've probably worked on more projects that failed than projects that succeeded. Failure is de rigeur in our industry. Odds are, you're working on a project that will fail right now. Oh sure, it may not seem like a failure yet. Maybe it'll fail in some completely unanticipated way. Heck, maybe your project will buck the odds and even succeed.

But I doubt it.

I own a boxed copy of Microsoft Bob. I keep it on my shelf to remind me that these kinds of relentless, inevitable failures aren't the crushing setbacks they often appear from the outside. On the contrary; I believe it's impossible to succeed without failing.

Charles Bosk, a sociologist at the University of Pennsylvania, once conducted a set of interviews with young doctors who had either resigned or been fired from neurosurgery-training programs, in an effort to figure out what separated the unsuccessful surgeons from their successful counterparts.

He concluded that, far more than technical skills or intelligence, what was necessary for success was the sort of attitude that Quest has – a practical-minded obsession with the possibility and the consequences of failure. "When I interviewed the surgeons who were fired, I used to leave the interview shaking," Bosk said. "I would hear these horrible stories about what they did wrong, but the thing was that they didn't know that what they did was wrong. In my interviewing, I began to develop what I thought was an indicator of whether someone was going to be a good surgeon or not. It was a couple of simple questions: Have you ever made a mistake? And, if so, what was your worst mistake? The people who said, 'Gee, I haven't really had one,' or, 'I've had a couple of bad outcomes but they were due to things outside my control' – invariably those were the worst candidates. And the residents who said, 'I make mistakes all the time. There was this horrible thing that happened just yesterday and here's what it was.' They were the best. They had the ability to rethink everything that they'd done and imagine how they might have done it differently."

I recently watched the documentary Tilt: The Battle to Save Pinball.

It's a gripping story of a pinball industry in crisis. In order to save it, the engineers at Williams – the only remaining manufacturer of pinball machines in the United States – were given a herculean task: invent a new form of pinball so compelling that it makes all previous pinball machines seem obsolete. I don't want to spoil the whole documentary, so I'll gloss over exactly how that happened, but astoundingly enough – they succeeded.

And then were promptly laid off en masse, as Williams shut down its pinball operations.

Unlike Microsoft Bob, the Williams engineers built an almost revolutionary product that was both critically acclaimed and sold well – but none of that mattered. It's sobering to watch the end reel of Tilt, as the engineers involved mournfully discuss the termination of their bold and seemingly successful project.

Everyone was in awe. They couldn't understand why it happened. Here we'd just done this thing that from all we could tell was a total success. Why would they do that?

We succeeded. Management gave us an impossible goal, and we sat there and we actually did what they thought we couldn't do.

You know, we didn't really win... we lost. I gave it everything I had. I think that those fifty guys that worked on it, they also passionately did everything that they could.

Sometimes, even when your project succeeds, you've failed. Due to forces entirely beyond your control. It's depressing, but it's reality.

The trailout isn't all doom and gloom. It also documents the ways in which these talented pinball engineers went on to practice their craft after being laid off. Most of them still work in the video game or pinball industry. Some freelance. Others formed their own companies. A few went on to work at Stern Pinball, which figured out how to make a small number of pinball machines and still turn a profit.

These two stories, these two projects – the abject failure of Microsoft Bob, and the aborted success of Pinball 2000 – have something in common beyond mere failure. All the engineers involved not only survived these failures, but often went on to greater success afterwards. Possibly as a direct result of their work on these "failures".

Failure is a wonderful teacher. But there's no need to seek out failure. It will find you. Whatever project you're working on, consider it an opportunity to learn and practice your craft. It's worth doing because, well, it's worth doing. The journey of the project should be its own reward, regardless of whatever happens to lie at the end of that journey.

The only truly failed project is the one where you didn't learn anything along the way.

Posted by Jeff Atwood
114 Comments

Like A.J., my mom also loved Bob, and mourned when she couldn't use it any more.

Jim on August 20, 2009 2:02 AM

Bob might have been Microsoft's greatest failure, but Microsoft Plus was their 2nd ... oh, wait, I forgot about ME. Silly me.

PaulG on August 20, 2009 2:17 AM

ARGHHHH!!!!! All of my failures are in production. None of them were canceled when they should have been.

Grant on August 20, 2009 2:20 AM

Bob was pretty bad.

I'll have to check out Tilt. Sounds interesting.

Scott Marlowe on August 20, 2009 2:21 AM

+1. Indeed. Without doubt, this is one of the best entries on this blog.

Mehrdad on August 20, 2009 2:32 AM

btw, MS Bob runs on XP! give it a try :)

extrapixel on August 20, 2009 2:32 AM

Reminds me of this quote found in "The Drunkard's Walk", attributed to Thomas Watson:
"If you want to succeed, double your failure rate".
Failure for the Win!

Mathias on August 20, 2009 3:19 AM

What the heck is this post about? I must have gone left at Albuquerque instead of right.

Murdoch on August 20, 2009 3:28 AM

"The only truly failed project is the one where you didn't learn anything along the way."

So true. Once worked on a project that was obviously heading for failure from an early age. I kept pressing that when the project ended there needed to be a post-mortem review, find out why it failed, what could have been done to avoid problems and, what could be learned from the experience. Of course, none of this happened, the project was quietly forgotten about as if it had never existed. I think lessons are not learned if nobody admits when there's been a problem.

"Success has a thousand parents, failure is an orphan."

Phenwoods on August 20, 2009 3:28 AM

Microsoft's real genius has always been their willingness to fail. They fail and fail and fail (Windows 1, 2, 3 ... Word 1, 2, 3 ...) and keep failing until they get something that people buy. Whether you like them or loath them, Microsoft has succeeded by not giving up. I admire that.

modeler on August 20, 2009 3:44 AM

If you have nothing better to write, please don't make up thoughts and end with such a pedestrian conclusion to generate traffic given the reputation of your website.

sg6 on August 20, 2009 4:07 AM

I love the quote “Fail faster, succeed sooner”, attributed to David Kelley, founder of IDEO. As long as the mistakes aren't repeated, failure can be a very efficient way to gain experience quickly - while the timid pick their way thru the minefield afraid of any setbacks, the bold go full steam ahead, learning and adapting from each setback.

Brad Osterloo on August 20, 2009 4:21 AM

i'm done with this blog. it was good while it lasted.

MC on August 20, 2009 4:26 AM

I can't agree more with this, every days a school day for programmers.
Even if your project doesn't fail, mistakes WILL be made and hopefully learnt from fixed and improved.

If a programmer doesn't accept their failures and learn from them you probably wouldn't enjoy working with them.

Pete on August 20, 2009 5:38 AM

You claim "a practical-minded obsession with the possibility and the consequences of failure" is needed for success. I say that leads to inevitable failure, as you are written off as a chronic worrier and general killjoy every time you anticipate a risk and try to do something to overcome it.

In the current mindset of the masses, we are required to be delusionally happy and impossibly confident, right up to the moment of easily avoidable disaster. And then, we are required to be convenient scapegoats because, at some time, we weren't quite delusionally happy enough and our negativity somehow must have caused the failure. After all, how could a positive mental attitude (ie a refusal to consider possible problems and look for solutions) cause failure?

Steve on August 20, 2009 5:52 AM

Our one time assistant provost held a meeting on improving student retention (we're a private institute, so students = $, and retained students cost a lot less than recruited ones).

Anyhow, she said our goal should be "to ensure our students can't fail."

To which I replied, "I see it as essential that our students fail, and our goal is to help them recover and learn from failure."

I know that in my own professional career (in industry and academia), I've learned a hell of a lot more from my failures than I have from my successes. Success may just reinforce your current ways of doing things - and some of these ways are most assuredly poor. Failure makes you reflect, starting from first principles.

Mike on August 20, 2009 6:02 AM

A great, thought-provoking entry, but in addition to learning from each project one needs to be able to concisely describe what they learned. Even better if they can write it down, like in an email to themselves. Not only helpful for interviews but also as a periodic reminder.

I also believe it's important to look at each project and ask what you would've done different, especially where you wish you had acted sooner. Holds true for glorious failures and quiet successes.

Ed Power on August 20, 2009 6:52 AM

Without the cancellation of the Arrow http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_CF-105_Arrow NASA would've been very different.

FD on August 20, 2009 8:48 AM

Hi,

The real problem, in my opinion, are companies and people who don't learn from their mistakes. Even though they see what went wrong, they do it again and again. I've ranted lately about focusing just on revenue, not on software itself on my blog which for me is a major mistake. I'm currently working on a project that is an epic fail, however I hope that it would be a lesson not only for developers who now work with it, but also for management.

Greetings.

empi on August 20, 2009 8:53 AM

I think Big Enterprise CEO are a bit to loving themselves. Why do you teache history at school, so that next generation dont make the same mistakes then befor, but in an enterprise the big CEO just say he did that wrong and dont watch his on front yard...

Paul Pacheco on August 20, 2009 8:57 AM

You, sir, have a pinball addiction :)

Kevin Fairchild on August 20, 2009 9:09 AM

Yeah -- on a project now and there's one person at the client office who just hates having to learn something new ... and so she's done nothing but try and derail things and create problems where there are none.

She's largely succeeded, but, at least, we've got lots of reusable stuff and lessons to file away for 'the next one'.

Ah well.

N on August 20, 2009 9:10 AM

I am a bit young for Bob, but I read about its story in Joel's book about UI, well Bob failed but at least some of the characters where used to create the Help of Microsoft Office suite hahaha.

Omar Al Kababji on August 20, 2009 9:12 AM

I am a bit young for Bob, but I read about its story in Joel's book about UI, well Bob failed but at least some of the characters where used to create the Help of Microsoft Office suite hahaha.

Omar Al Kababji on August 20, 2009 9:13 AM

Make fun all you want, but I'd rather have Bob on my resume than the nameless, faceless stew of middleware, stored procedures, Windows services and batch processes I've worked on and promptly forgotten.

Chris McCall on August 20, 2009 9:15 AM

It's good to see that you didn't give in to the "Bob was just ahead of its time" nonsense that many of the commenters on the blog post to which you linked did. Maybe that's just considered the polite thing to say when talking to someone that was involved with a failed project, because I have no idea what they can be talking about. Bob was just plain idiotic (selecting a program from a list is difficult and intimidating, but if I put it in a gift-wrapped box on a shelf in a pretend living room then I'll feel happier when I run it?).

It's also good to see that, unlike the author of that blog post, you frame it more as good people that got stuck working on Bob rather than Bob somehow spawing all these great people. The only thing I'd take issue with is you somewhat imply that Bob was not a failure for them because they learned something from it. You know what? I doubt it. It's more likely they got stuck on the team, gritted their teeth while churning out what they knew to be a really stupid piece of software, and thanked their lucky stars when it was finally over. About all they probably learned was to do whatever they could to avoid being put on a dumb project like that in the future.

Chris McCall would rather have Bob on his resume than nameless middleware, etc. It would be a good conversation starter ("ha ha, seriously, you really worked on that thing?") and so might be a good interview ice-breaker, but it certainly by itself isn't going to make anyone more apt to hire you.

Bob on August 20, 2009 9:28 AM

"...nameless, faceless stew of middleware, stored procedures, windows services, batch processes..."

Is there a shortcut name that describes such projects? Failjects? Soupware? Broodsoft?

Goran on August 20, 2009 9:30 AM

Yeah seriously, wouldn't it be better to blog about experiences with StackOverflow and some real-world issues? Like @sgh writes, it's all been quite pedestrian lately. Say this is how we did this or that, or achieve performance of xyz?

It's gotta be hard though. You start blogging, get popular, probably don't care a toss about blogging anymore, but have to. lol.

Tea Time.

ps where's catto lately?

NoMo on August 20, 2009 9:31 AM

The point about the surgeons sounds like an extension of the Dunning-Kruger effect. The best surgeons are aware of how much they still need to learn about surgery while the worst surgeons believe they know it all. I do have to say thanks for pointing out a good way to determine your surgeon's self-evaluation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

jmucchiello on August 20, 2009 9:42 AM

I love failure, it allows me to learn. I've had many failures in my past, and my current project, which I believe will work (You have to believe or it will never!) has been a slow build up of my past failures which were out of my control, now that I have it all in my control, I feel I can do better. Here's to the future and the past!

Sentax on August 20, 2009 9:53 AM

When I first saw Bob I was 18 and I, like many other users, hated the thing. My mom, on the other hand, loved it. I guess she couldn't figure out how the Start menu worked or something. She was all gung-ho about making her "house" in Bob and tried to get everyone in my family to do it too. One day, my 8 or 9 year old brother figured out my mom's password (probably by just asking her), logged into her house and placed animated fires all over every room. When Mom logged in the next time, she found her precious house in flames. Virtual arson. Gotta love it.

A.J. on August 20, 2009 9:57 AM

It was this exact problem which prompted the "Worse than Failure" post on thedailywtf.com

http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/What_Could_Possibly_Be_Worse_Than_Failure_0x3f_.aspx

eoin murphy on August 20, 2009 9:59 AM

Many of the former software engineers at Williams are fans of the site and I'm sure you'll be hearing from them. I was working there at the time myself in the slot department, waiting for a spot in pinball that obviously never arrived. Watching it happen was one of the most amazing things I've ever seen though, you've never witnessed such dedication, passion, and inspiration. I'll never forget it, thanks for recognizing and spotlighting a truly amazing thing.

Greg Dunlap on August 20, 2009 10:01 AM

It's always a crappy feeling to fail, but you're right. Some of the most epic failures of my life have actually made me better. It applies to much more than programming.

Robert Greiner on August 20, 2009 10:03 AM

"The road to wisdom? Well, it's plain
And simple to express:
Err And err And err again
But less And less And less." - Piet Hien

Matt Wyatt on August 20, 2009 10:03 AM

And A.J. brings up the best anecdote. His mom loved it after she started using it. We digerati hated it with a passion.

Remind you of another much-malinged product?

The lesson is not about failed projects. It's about how divorced from normal reality we in the tech echo-chamber are. For example, have you ever played Deer Hunter (the computer game)? Do you know how many copies it's sold?

Tom on August 20, 2009 10:04 AM

Great post Jeff. I remember when I came to this realization a few years ago, working on a project that *I knew* was going to fail even as I was being assigned to work on it - it just wasn't staffed for success. So every day I had to come to work to do my assigned job, knowing that it made no difference to the company because the project would eventually be canceled. I had to figure out how to keep motivation, and what you mentioned is where I eventually came to: Every day was a chance to become a better software developer, and every day I could take pride in writing great software. Realizing that gave my job meaning again, and made me a much better professional.

Matt Ryan on August 20, 2009 10:04 AM

So, would YOU hire someone who's resume is full of failed projects?

John W on August 20, 2009 10:05 AM

This reads like a Full House episode except more retarded.

Andrew Phillips on August 20, 2009 10:07 AM

Great blog! As you write above, it's hard to imagine anyone in the industry who *hasn't* encountered failure. I think after every project one has the responsibility to himself to go back and ask 'Where are all the places I totally screwed the pooch?' It's hard to ask yourself this, though, and even harder to answer honestly. I can't think of a single project I worked on where there wasn't at least one thing where I looked back and said 'God, you were a dumbass'. The people who instead prefer to point fingers at others, lay the blame on fate or circumstance are the ones you really have to look out for.

Code Monkey on August 20, 2009 10:13 AM

Yeah, Jeff, I went to the entire trouble of coming all the way to your blog, and I didn't like this entry. So now I'm going to go to a bunch of trouble to write a comment about how I, with my highly developed blog-assessment skills, now consider your blog worthless and -- wait, I'm not done! -- and how Real Soon Now I'm going to stop reading it. So there. Hope you read this and reconsider what a failure the blog is. If you want to read a REAL blog that gets a LOT of traffic, be sure to visit ... uh, well, I don't actually blog. I just spend a lot of time complaining about how other people's blogs suck. On their blogs.

Anyhoo ... I was on Bob. Bob had a vision that several people have alluded to, which is that it was a computer UI for people who are 180 degrees removed from anyone who reads a blog about programming. People should go down to the local library and volunteer to teach beginning computer classes to old folks for a couple of quarters, and THEN come back here and talk about how stupid Bob was. Of course, one might ask them to actually use Bob for a while, not just read an Infoworld columnist's opinion about it.

Did folks on Bob learn from it? Sure. How many people who are dissing Bob here learned from Bob, and what did THEY learn that they then applied to THEIR projects?

mike on August 20, 2009 10:14 AM

Love it! As much as I love clean code I think developers should focus on delivering good products and learning from mistakes in failed products. Sometimes we tend to say something along these lines: "Well, it failed, but the code was awesome". I try to stop thinking like that. Clean code is the means for releasing a successful product, not the objective.

Itay Maman on August 20, 2009 10:24 AM

@John W - If that person says:

Project 1 - Was fun, but then sucked, and it failed
Project 2 - Wasn't fun, always sucked, and was determined to fail

Now, I wouldn't hire them. But if a person put on his resume:

Project 1 - Was fun, learned a lot, but unfortunately, didn't work out
Project 2 - Was tough, pushed through it, still wasn't meant to be

Then yes, I would hire him. It's all about how they project themselves and their attitude towards the project, if they are bitter and sour, then they wouldn't be good candidates, but if the overall description of the failed projects is positive, they are the type of person that learns from failure and is the good candidate, like Jeff explains above.

Sentax on August 20, 2009 10:27 AM

Thanks Jeff, for the most thoughtful and insightful post I've seen in a blog for a very long time.

I've noticed plenty of fellow readers seem quite unhappy that you're writing something 'pedestrian'. Well don't stop, please. It's the pedestrian posts that kept me coming back to your blog, because it makes the blog more than just a 'tip of the day' feed. There are plenty of those on the web already; your blog is unique.

I love your blog, and I'll keep coming back for more. Keep it rolling. :-)

NGCH on August 20, 2009 10:27 AM

Is it just coincidence that Microsoft Bing is sort of a Web version of Microsoft Bob and Bing Crosby is the older, more successful brother of Bob Crosby? I mentioned this on Twitter when Bing went live, but it didn't get much traction and haven't seen it noted anywhere else.

Peter Turner on August 20, 2009 10:40 AM

@ John W You'd have a hard time not getting a question like "describe a time when you failed miserably" at a job interview. If your answer is "Bob", then I guess you've answered well.

Peter Turner on August 20, 2009 10:43 AM

I am still looking for a program to do everything Microsoft Bob claims to do on the box. But I somehow feel the problem was to trying and put all those functions in one box.

Marc on August 20, 2009 10:44 AM

"the engineers at Williams - the only remaining manufacturer of pinball machines in the United States"

Stern were (and still are) going. They are now the only manufacturers of pinball machines worldwide.
The Williams pinball 2000 machines (Revenge from Mars and Star Wars Episode 1) is considered by a lot of people to be a 'toy' pinball. They are very simple (almost always just going for the centre shot) and get boring very quickly.
I work at a place that specialises in pinball sales and so have seen a very broad range of the pins out there.

There is no doubting that the innovations of pin2000 were exiting but in the end they did nothing to reinvigorate the industry. Too much attention was spent on the screen to the detriment of the rest of the game (the 'traditional' pinball part).

In fact there is very little difference between pins manufactured now (by Stern) and pins manufactured in the '90s.

Oh, and definitely a +1 for the Simpsons Pinball Party - possibly the most complex pinball ever made (in terms of rules). What a great machine.

omin on August 20, 2009 10:45 AM

Not everyone who becomes a "success" rides on the back of failure. Facebook is a good example of that - the creator was originally just the programmer, but "backed out" and stole the code for himself. He never failed, and now is rich because of it.

Izkata on August 20, 2009 10:46 AM

It's so sad that pinball is dead today. I'm only 31 and yet pinball's high water mark was just when I was a teenager. The early 90s pins were incredible (Twilight Zone being my favorite for its depth and challenging ceramic ball). As recently as 1999 I was actually cash flow positive on pinball for the year due to tournament winnings. I'm glad Stern is around because after Williams demise they figured out through trial and error how to make a good machine (Simpsons Pinball Party is incredible when everything works).

The problem today is that the remaining pinball machines in public are poorly maintained, which means they are no fun because often the flippers are so weak or elements are broken so that it's impossible to actually play the game. Casual players are then put off by how boring it is without even realizing what the problem is. The sad part is that video games are still a pale pale shadow of the physicality of pinball. Maybe in 30-40 years they will be able to create a video game that has the realism to simulate the pinball experience, but I doubt it. Guess I'll have to become a private collector like everyone else who still loves pinball. $0.50 hobby turns into a $1000.00 hobby overnight.

Gabe da Silveira on August 20, 2009 10:47 AM

You have a boxed copy of MS Bob. I have a full-sized battery-powered rotating Bob display unit. (Only the head is in my cube; the rest is at home.) http://www.twitpic.com/elnq0

Travis Illig on August 20, 2009 10:57 AM

The Recaptcha on this message is "cilantro Bob" .....!

Bob was a failure not because it was badly programmed, not because it did not do what it was specified to do, not because the technical specification was bad.... it failed because it was a program looking for a problem that did not exist, the only people who liked it played with it rather than get stuff done, most people thought it just got in the way ...


Jaster on August 20, 2009 11:05 AM

Well, I suppose I'm all set for the biggest success ever...

Daniel Sobral on August 20, 2009 11:06 AM

c'mon jeff. Bloopers from MS BOB are still built-in features, originating from not thoroughly thinking through what should and should not go into a product.

securityhorror on August 20, 2009 11:30 AM

This is why I always ask "of all the projects you worked on, what was the worst failure and why did it fail" at interviews and why I have a hard time trusting any candidate that denies participating in a failure.

Personally, I was involved in a software development effort that got written up by CNET under the title "worst ten software disasters of 2005". There were a lot of good people on that project and, of course, a lot of really, really stupid ideas.

sburnap on August 20, 2009 11:46 AM

"Failure is de rigeur in our industry." N.B. Misspelling it as "de rigeur" is, I've found, de rigueur, in our industry and in many others. :-)

Michael Hartl on August 20, 2009 11:52 AM

Great post, failure is inevitable and something we should not fear but rather embrace. We stand to learn more from failure than from success sometimes.

Martin Rue on August 20, 2009 11:53 AM

Jeff, you've lost me at this point with the prose, but it is boldly visionary and elegant writing. Get back to coding -- that's your day job.

I can't quite follow what project is failed or not, but yeah: there's probably not many projects where you learn nothing.

Steve on August 20, 2009 12:11 PM

This was a nice one..after a long time!!
enlightening indeed...

Samrat Patil on August 20, 2009 12:13 PM

The worst failures are those that endure, they have a greater failure "cross section".

Bobby on August 20, 2009 12:23 PM

I'm working on a project that is clearly doomed to failure. Everyone involved can see it. Everyone shouts loudly everyday about the elephant in the room. Only the PM's are oblivious and keep throwing more and more resources at the project, thereby ensuring it's failure. Maybe they want it to fail?

I'm determined for it not to get me down as I know it will help me develop for the future, but damn it's hard bloody work.

disgruntled on August 20, 2009 12:28 PM

From the Dunning-Kreuger effect wiki:
1. Incompetent individuals tend to overestimate their own level of skill.
2. Incompetent individuals fail to recognize genuine skill in others.
3. Incompetent individuals fail to recognize the extremity of their inadequacy.
4. If they can be trained to substantially improve their own skill level, these individuals can recognize and acknowledge their own previous lack of skill.
So true, sometimes it feels like "ignorance is bliss", then you're confident in your abilities.

blabla on August 20, 2009 12:38 PM

I grew up in a small town where bowling and pinball were the only things for a kid to do. This has me remembering the days of my youth when, according to my father, I "wasted my quarters" on pinball machines. Fast-forward to today when I catch myself nagging at my own kids to turn off the Nintendo-DS or Wii so they can be engaged in more productive activity for their minds. Makes me wonder if I would see pinball as an acceptable line item on that mythical list of activities.

D

BIXpert on August 20, 2009 12:46 PM

Thank you very much for this article.

pestaa on August 20, 2009 1:16 PM

For me the greatest MS failure is the silly MS Office paperclip Help doo-dad that I would have to squash into oblivion.

Steve on August 20, 2009 1:30 PM

"The only truly failed project is the one where you didn't learn anything along the way."

Oh. Oh God. Oh dear, dear God.

And all this time, I thought *I* was the expert at dumping on my own pathetic so-called career.

The Saddest Bear on August 20, 2009 1:51 PM

sure does look like iPhone of yesteryear LOL, promises to organize your household.

securityhorror on August 20, 2009 1:52 PM

I was 8 when MS Bob came out, and honestly, it's one of the few things I can remember loving on the computer. I would go to my friend's house and we would do everything from bob. For some reason it had a good feeling to it.

However, I would consider it worthless shit now that I've grown up. But was it meant for adults anyways?

Max on August 20, 2009 1:54 PM

Tilt was a pretty good tale. Not quite as entertaining as say King of Kong, but far more informative. I never realized that pinball's hay day was the 90s. And that one company can be responsible for pretty much ending pinball as we know it. Thanks Williams.

Morning Toast on August 21, 2009 2:14 AM

Hi Jeff,
Look, lets put content to one side for a minute and look at formatting. What do you mean when you put a section of your post in a light blue box - sometimes it seems to be a quote, and someone else is speaking. Sometime it seems to be just for a change of tone, or you're continuing and might be about to introduce a quote.

With my absurd level of attention to detail, I find it quite the inconsistency quite jarring to a smooth read..

E on August 21, 2009 4:37 AM

@E

I think they're alway quotes, but Jeff doesm't always make it clear who, or what he's quoting. When I saw the line "Take it from someone who lived and breathed the Bob project:", my first thought was that Jeff was confessing to have worked on Bob himself.

Phenwoods on August 21, 2009 5:08 AM

Have I learned from failed projects? Sure. But given that I wasn't directly or indirectly responsible for the failure of any of these projects, I WOULD HAVE LEARNED JUST AS MUCH HAD THEY BEEN SUCCESSFUL.

Projects are projects. And I'd rather have successful ones on my resume than failed ones.

I can't, for the life of me, think of any reasons why anyone would think otherwise.

W on August 21, 2009 5:25 AM

WTF? I had never heard of Bob. I had to look it up on Wikipedia. It wasnt promoted all that heavily in Australia.

I'm left wondering what would happen if Apple did something similar today?

Allen on August 21, 2009 5:47 AM

If the project is scraped due to forces entirely beyond your control, how could that mean you have failed? It's like saying you can succeed at lottery.

Pies on August 21, 2009 6:06 AM

I've never posted here before, but I saw the Tilt thing. I remembering pre-ordering that moving in January before it'd come out and FINALLY I got it in July when it'd been finish. I watched all 6-8 hours of footage they had on there in one sitting. It was fantastic, and I'm not even a fan of pinball, haha; heck, I never even play it when I'm in arcades.

Saturn2888 on August 21, 2009 6:38 AM

I've been a loyal reader of Coding Horror for about two years now, and while the majority of your posts are dead on, I have to say that this one is the most brilliant piece you've ever posted. (i may even have it laminated.)Thank you.

JoanneC on August 21, 2009 8:15 AM

Learning from failure is paramount, we all fail at one point or another (you'd have to be super lucky not to) and it is the learnings that we can extract from it that really matters.

However, there is a well known Russian saying that I'd like to share:

"Smart people learn from other peoples mistakes, idiots - from their own"

Pretty self-explanatory, but in essence, it is great to learn from your own failures, but you can learn much from the failures of others that will minimize your chances of having to learn from your own failures in the first place.

I guess this is why we read blogs and books, we just need to make sure we can extract the same lessons from these sources as we would have if the failures were our own.

Alan Skorkin on August 21, 2009 11:35 AM

Jeff,

Good use you today to speak to my soul.

roncansan on August 21, 2009 1:19 PM

"The only truly failed project is the one where you didn't learn anything along the way."

This is gist. We need not worry more than that.

rajakvk on August 22, 2009 3:03 AM

The surgeons' mistakes are technical.

Bob failed for technical reasons or for management or marketing mistakes? That's the main question.

What I have learnt from the past experience is:
1 do not lose sleep about bugs left in the code, it is not for them the project could fail
2 apart programming, the biggest technical error will have less consequences than the smallest management error
3 dilbert comics teach you more than every technical manual

xlr8 on August 22, 2009 3:47 AM

"Smart people learn from other peoples mistakes, idiots - from their own"...
"I guess this is why we read blogs and books, we just need to make sure we can extract the same lessons from these sources as we would have if the failures were our own."

Well sure, but software development is so rife with opportunities for failure that you can hardly be expect to learn every possible mistake from others. Some failures have to be experienced first hand, and cannot be learned otherwise. Some failures are easy to see in others, but not so easy to see the true cause for the failure.

For instance, the MS Bob was not a programming error, or even really a management error (in my opinion). It was a poorly designed product, and the best marketing, the best management, and the best possible programming could not have saved it.

Unless of course, you work at Microsoft, where management IS largely responsible for the design. Typically a manager is responsible for hiring a designer, and selecting and approving a design. Microsoft management largely abuses these powers, and since they are not designers themselves nor do they at least have "good taste", they abuse them badly. Especially at Microsoft, the management has a track record for rejecting the really good design ideas in favor of the worst possible designs, and overbearingly modifying original designs so that they fail.

See this parody video, "If microsoft designed the ipod"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=36099539665548298

that video, it turns out, was created by the trodden upon bitter designers at Microsoft, who want to create a good product, but can't, because management think they're better designers than the designers.

This goes not just for package designers, I'm sure. I wonder if microsoft has any real interface experts that they actually listen to? Or maybe they just pay someone's salary to have that title, but then proceed to do whatever they feel like?

Breton on August 22, 2009 5:21 AM

Don't forget the part of Microsoft Bob we still live with: the MS Comic Sans typeface: http://www.connare.com/whycomic.htm

Ugh.

Ned Batchelder on August 22, 2009 8:35 AM


Failure is a wonderful teacher. But there's no need to seek out failure. It will find you. Whatever project you're working on, consider it an opportunity to learn and practice your craft.


I really like those words, really inspires an intern like me.
Thanks Jeff

Sherwin on August 23, 2009 8:50 AM

Wow, some great comments.

I must agree with some commentators who point out that the corporate process is a major hindrance, particularly at Microsoft.

I was working as a PM on Bob 2.0 when we got word that the product was cancelled.

I came on the product on 2.0 and was fascinated to learn the project history. It was originally called “Utopia.” It was designed from the ground up to have the computer work for the user in a natural way, the natural evolution from the command line, to WIMP to Utopia. As such it tried to present things in a way for which humans are adapted.

In particular, it let you save documents and program icons in rooms. This reminded me of the Method of Loci (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_loci). This is an excellent idea. Your checkbook is available in the den or office. The information about each child is stored in their bedroom, or in the kitchen. The point is, you get to pick what makes sense to you, and you get to put things, even rooms as I recall where you want them. It’s a natural way for people to work.

It tried to have the computer work as an assistant. This is not a bad idea, and there was much to learn in terms of how best to present assistance. (A lesson still not learned by the time the technology was used in Office.) Never the less, it was user-centered and coaxed the reticent computer user into more frequent interactions as well as to explore the capabilities of the product. I still use the basic ideas from Nass and Reeves to this day (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.07/mustread.html?pg=15).

Another goal was to make the product fun, like a game. The characters worked well for that, too.

Before the 1.0 product was released it was extensively tested by end users. The end users reported enjoying and using the product a great deal, finding it intuitive, fun to use, and productive.

Then the product was released. The name was Bob.
The use of a personal computer signaled that one was technology savvy, intelligent, and successful. The use of Bob indicated you were an idiot who couldn’t use a computer. It was embarrassing to admit if you did like it. And certainly no one who liked Bob felt qualified to stand up for it. The name and the marketing changed everything. Instead of the vanguard of the future, it became as marked a failure as the Edsel.

This pervasive failure had nothing to do with the basic tenets or performance of the product, but had to do with a disconnection between the product, the product goals, and what management tried to shoe-horn it into regardless of real world user concerns.

Fred on August 24, 2009 2:30 AM

A philosophical angle to success and failure:

"The only truly failed project is the one where you didn't learn anything along the way."
Life! 1000 failures and counting, but still no good GUT.

The problem is not short-term failure and The Great Panacea IS NOT long-term success.

The problem is that the system is closed source, cant be hacked, modified or reprogrammed, is often hard-wired, and almost always hidden behind varied and multiple layers of emulation and VMs.

We're basically blind and trying to picture an elephant. We dont want consolation, give us EYES to see the elephant. Without that, anything the system designs is self-defeating.

If you're saying the System Lords are running the system like MS Bob, i.e., an entirely acceptable failure just to improve future games or projects, well, then I dont know what to call sych an attitude.

Your blog, and indeed the fame and status of this blog and its author would be impossible if there were no opensource. The web runs on opensource.

Why then must most components with end-user interaction be fixed, binary, and closed source?

Most of us users do not have the money in the (karma) bank to ask for a read-only source license. We are poor. And in need of a good open system. Forcing us to earn big money to buy a license to just READ the source, while using closed tools to earn the money, is not what built the internet and your blog and status.

Why the partiality? I'm not targetting any blog or author specifically, it's all the same. Consolation2.0 is no substitute for a right to freedom and self-rule.
Well, is that the famously hinted hypocrisy? :-(

If we're just watching the computer play the game's trial run and we're not allowed to change it, it's only a simulation, not even a game. That makes things very different.

Mistaking this simulation for a realtime game is the oldest most standard mistake in the system. What really needs to be free and open, simply isn't.

Please dont take personally, but it's more like "Divine Comedy" than anything else.

consolation2point0 on August 24, 2009 2:44 AM

Hey all, see this on proggit:
http://www.teabuzzed.com/2009/08/the-number-one-reason-my-startup-failed/
"The number one reason my startup failed"

I just thought that someone might want to work with the guy...
It is an analysis on failure of his startup and I think the guy is a fairly good hacker.

StackOverflow, ServerFault, SuperUser... StartupCrash.com?

I think a day job is good thing these days...

brightideajack on August 24, 2009 3:30 AM

Hi Jeff,
This post inspires me. Keep up the good work.

“Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm.” -Winston Churchill

Ben Gichamba on August 24, 2009 5:38 AM

In general, I agree that failures are important.

However, I don't really see the comparison between Microsoft Bob -- which was sort of a bad idea any way you diced it up -- and the pinball guys. The pinball guys were given a huge and impossible problem, solved it technically, but ultimately lost out because of the machinations of business. Microsoft Bob was a big, bad idea that was poorly executed and lost out mostly because it was a bad idea.

It's not quite apples to apples....

Shmork on August 24, 2009 6:59 AM

I like that "What mistakes have you made recently?" question. Alas, most interviewers don't ask it. Instead, they ask "What is your greatest weakness?"

In other words, instead of "What have you learned to do differently?", they're basically asking "What is it that you keep screwing up, and that you're *still* going to screw up while you're here?" It's a stunningly offensive question.

Kyralessa on August 24, 2009 11:11 AM

not sure if this has been said yet but, personally I think the only project that truly fails, is the one that never gets started.

taelor on August 25, 2009 2:05 AM

This post reminds me a lot of the talk that Mythbuster Adam Savage gave a few weeks back at Defcon. Great fun to watch and a very similar message:

http://vimeo.com/6006731

Sebastiaan Janssen on August 25, 2009 3:44 AM

Of course, you must consider what Bob replaced. Compared to Windows program manager, it seemed like a great improvement, haha.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Program_Manager.png

Vadim on August 25, 2009 5:21 AM

Pinball is so great. I want to play one of those "new" pinball games.

Daniel on August 25, 2009 5:47 AM

LOL, never heard of MS BOB! This product is hilarious. Okay, it looks horrible IMHO, but the concept itself is not bad. The graphics are bad and some of the menus are bad... but a similar concept is found in other products and those were not total failures.

Mecki on August 25, 2009 9:09 AM

people think it is ok to be stupid. thats the biggest problem of mankind these days.

honkazonk on August 25, 2009 10:34 AM

Wonder what happened to clippy? he met Cthulhu! (see link)

Joakim Rosqvist on August 25, 2009 12:22 PM

I'm probably going to get some jabs over this, but I actually *enjoyed* Bob. It's actually one of the few things I remember fondly from my beginning days of using a PC.

Christian on August 26, 2009 9:27 AM

Slightly off topic, but I love pinball, and I hated Pinball 2000. I used the play the original Revenge From Mars all the time in college and I completely hated the new one that came out.

Now granted, thats not why Williams killed pinball, but Pinball 2000 just lacked that special something that great pinball games have. I think what I always loved about pinball is that feeling you get working with something physical and real. I don't want to roll the ball towards digital images.

Jonathan Beerhalter on August 26, 2009 11:50 AM

"invent a new form of pinball so compelling that it makes all previous pinball machines seem obsolete... -- they succeeded. "

No they didn't. Pinball 2000 sucked compared to real pinball.

Regis on August 26, 2009 1:18 PM

More comments»

The comments to this entry are closed.