
The Story of the New Microsoft.com - robin_reala
http://rainypixels.com/words/the-story-of-the-new-microsoft-com/
======
Lukeas14
The real story is their ability to condense the page down to just the
essentials which was achieved by concentrating the decision power to a small,
capable team, as opposed to a committee of stakeholders. Microsoft has more
teams than most other companies who would all like to see their project
featured on the homepage. It also has to serve a diverse set of customers who
want to buy or need support for any one of their dozens of products. Next time
I need to download a Windows driver or skype I'll start my search at
Microsoft.com instead of Google.

~~~
nostromo
Really? I just typed "Skype" in to the microsoft.com homepage search and got
this: [http://search.microsoft.com/en-
us/results.aspx?form=MSHOME&#...</a><p>Hilariously, there is no link to
download Skype. Click on the "downloads" tab, and it prompts you to download a
webcam (?!) for $35.

~~~
randomdrake
Really? I just followed your link and got this: <http://i.imgur.com/BO7wV.png>

Hilariously, the very first link, "Sharing your world is easy with Skype",
takes me to the home page of Skype.

When you search for "Skype" on Google, to expect the "Play" link to let you
play with it or do you actually look through the results to find something?

~~~
thetrb
Tried the same thing: Searched for Skype, there's a big "Downloads" link at
the top, clicked on it and got the following 2 results:

LifeCam HD-3000

Microsoft Lync Server 2010 Resource Kit

Yeah, not really what I was looking for...

~~~
randomdrake
Interesting. I'm curious, what websites do you use that would've trained the
response to simply click on a downloads link instead of looking through the
results of said search? I don't have the same response and I'm honestly
wondering where that expectation would have come from. When I saw the All
Microsoft, Downloads, Support, Communities links I didn't have any expectation
that those were suddenly related to my search term. I wonder if it is because
they are below the search box instead of above them?

~~~
SoftwareMaven
Are you really saying that Skype shouldn't be in the section of MS' "Search"
page called "Downloads" when I search for Skype? What is the purpose of
"Downloads" then? Guess what, when I click the support button after I've
searched for Skype, I expect to find support-related article about Skype, too.

It is no different than expecting to see images of my search term when I click
on "images" at Google.

------
at-fates-hands
I always been a huge fan of simplicity in web design. I think for such a huge
company, they nailed it.

I know a lot of designers have taken shots at this design, but its not for
them - its for the users:

"For the Microsoft.com team to take a calculated risk and pour their
understanding of their users into a cleaner, smarter, and modern page, the
change had to start with the the source of the, and in my opinion every,
problem: People."

------
tluyben2
Hmmm. The reviews where positive? All designers I know posted on Facebook and
elsewhere (I'll try to find the launch thread here on HN which was not very
positive either) things like 'He! MS bought a Themeforest theme!' and such. I
quite like it I must say, especially the responsiveness (I had to go to some
MS service on my Android S2 and actually it looked nice and worked well). But
overwhelming positive? Not in the press I read (which has a lot of designers &
coders & tech minded people).

~~~
why-el
So what are these designers actually looking for? The information is well
structured (I picked a random Microsoft product or service and I got to their
pages in 2 seconds), and the responsiveness is superb (Resized my chrome and
they were some really nice transitions). This is a big step forward for them.

~~~
tluyben2
Yes, I agree. That's what I said, I was just surprised about his 'overwhelming
positive' while I read so many negative comments. Nothing more. I like it;
it's clear and easy to read.

~~~
jlgreco
Are developers noting (I assume) similarities between it and some stock theme
actually criticizing the theme, or are they criticizing the designers in
question for not being original (whatever that may be worth)?

I suspect some artistic types may mistakenly place too much importance on
originality. Originality is certainly important, but not in _that_ way.

------
bbx
The navigation menu is technically really clean and easy to move through.
Problem is: click on a link and it's gone.

This nav/subnav system suggests hierarchy, like it's a snapshot of the
sitemap. But what it actually is, is a portal. A simple portal to external
dedicated websites to almost all their products.

Microsoft has 2 options:

    
    
      1. make one huge consistent website for all their products
      2. make microsoft.com look like what it really is: a portal
    

It's really confusing.

------
yread
His blog design is so responsive. Thats great. But the images get cropped to
the width of the screen making it impossible to read the content on WP7:-/

~~~
Livven
Same here, doesn't render properly on Windows Phone. Works perfectly on
Android though.

------
dreamdu5t
My takeway: Building a good responsive webpage requires significantly more
engineering resources and expertise than most people have access to. Just to
accomplish one responsive page required a team of engineers experienced in the
full front-end stack along with industry experts to lead them.

What if in the near future only large businesses like Microsoft will have the
resources to produce responsive websites? What does this mean for small lean
startup teams?

~~~
IanDrake
Really? I've done one and it's pretty easy if you know how it works and design
with the constraints of responsive design in mind.

The hard part is how to redesign ANY large scale website. There are so many
stakeholders involved, so many languages/cultures to consider, so many product
lines vying for attention, and lots of legacy content to retro-fit or cut.

~~~
dreamdu5t
Is it more than just a blog/text? I'd like to see it since you claim it was
"pretty easy."

I know a lot about how responsive design works and designing within those
constraints, and I would say "pretty easy" is a huge understatement.

~~~
IanDrake
Yes, it's a fairly large iPad/iPhone app (using phonegap), but unfortunately
it's an enterprise app and not in the app store.

------
windle
Oh good, now it only takes 24 people to design and implement a page with
'proper' HTML 4/5 + CSS 1/2/3 + JS that is 'responsive'.

I stopped reading A List Apart when it became rather apparent that they either
delight in adding more tedious work to a web designers check-list, or just
truly seem to think every project needs this many people working on it (or
someone with insane mental capacity that can actually do half the stuff they
recommend).

The mental overhead involved in modern web design automatically precludes the
vast majority of either normal folks, or companies not big enough to have 24
people make a web page.

When we can reduce the effort needed to do this properly, then it'll be worth
giving people a pat on the back. Not when it takes 24 people to make a page
that works properly on a few devices.

------
jimsilverman
the homepage is beautiful. huge step forward in both design aesthetics and
marketing clarity. congrats to all involved.

but as far as i can tell, only the homepage is responsive. this is terrible. i
understand that mountains must be moved in order for the full microsoft.com
site to change to a single responsive layout, but in the meantime this may
actually be a step backward in terms of mobile usability. users are going to
be confused as hell navigating through from responsive to desktop and back
again.

it's a little premature to celebrate a responsive victory.

------
shuw
The beauty appears to be only skin deep. All the 1st level links I followed
led to a totally different aesthetic.

As far as I can see, Microsoft.com is an improvement on a single page. I would
be far more impressed if the changes extended across the site.

~~~
eternalban
"It's easy to dismiss this project by saying, "It's just a page. Big deal."
That would miss the point entirely. It would also be entirely inaccurate. The
Micrsoft.com ..."

------
parasubvert
I like the design, and the story of what went into it, but I'm curious about
the QA of this thing for all regions.

In the Canadian region:

1\. There are typos (Under Products hover, "Business Solutions" heading,
there's a link "Microsoft in the [sic] eneterprise").

2\. There are 404s (Under Products hover, "See all products" goes to a 404
page).

Just seems rather amateurish for such a big website, but then again, Canada is
only the population count of California.

~~~
panacea
I wanted to take this "Bing it on" challenge that they have banners for all
over the site. Clicking it takes me to vanilla bing.com, not a challenge site.

------
jcromartie
When they rolled out their new logo, and the new site, people were surprised
to learn that the old logo was 25 years old. It didn't look 25 years old, and
it stuck around because it never looked dated like their other logos.

Now I'm afraid their new logo and branding is repeating the same mistake as
their old ones. It looks like a 2012 logo now, and in ten years it will
_really_ look like a 2012 logo.

~~~
evolve2k
That may be so but I think the time is right for them to put their best foot
forward. Things have been moving away from them, so all this recent
repositioning comes across as smart. If its wrong later change it later.
Iterate, be responsive. I applaud their efforts and newly engaged approach.

------
bad_user
I really don't see how this design is any good. It's indeed better than their
older designs. And how can anybody classify a design as being good when the
central pieces of it are stock photos with a cheap feel and that just take up
space?

I mean what's up with that girl on the front page, holding a butt ugly big and
old laptop? Or the fellows who climb a mountain, which is somehow
representative of Visual Studio - could they have picked a worse or less
representative clique?

And of course, in every design I've ever seen on Microsoft.com showing people
that look as if they are on crack while holding a laptop, it's mandatory for
them to show at least one black/interracial dude at all times, even if the
pictures are auto-rotating. Not that I have a problem with that, but they are
so consistent in this policy that it reeks of design by committee and
corporate policies.

Compare this to Apple.com ... one big picture of their newest product, one big
title, clear as crystal top menu, 3 thumbnails of videos, either to keynote
speeches, promos or Jonathan Ive.

------
seivan
Treating execution (engineering) like a small treat and highlighting "ideas"
(the marketing team) as the main goal is a bad idea.

Execution (as in engineering) is the art.

As someone once said: "It's not an algorithm. It's not "idea" in, "product"
out."

First problem is this;

"An engineering team implements the actual solutions that are designed by a
group of marketers and designers; among other things, Pita's team oversees the
proper execution of the projects."

Get rid of the different teams. Hire engineers that know marketing/copy
writing and design. And get rid of the "management" and "overseeing" portions.
If you're not executing, you're not doing.

Best quote. "Oh good, now it only takes 24 people to design and implement a
page with 'proper' HTML 4/5 + CSS 1/2/3 + JS that is 'responsive'."

------
vhf
The new microsoft.com. I went through the hover menu and went for "See all
products". Then instead of showing me the page I asked for, it asked me to
sign up, with no way to go back.

I went back and tried again. Impossible to access the page I requested without
signing up.

Too bad. I've been a happy Linux user for the past 10 years but I'm always
curious about what others have to offer. They don't want me to see, fine.
Sorry Microsoft, I won't sign up, I won't see your product, and you lost me
again for the next 10 years.

Just as you did with the new outlook.com, by asking me to either {0} [1] or
give my phone number.

[1] <http://i.imgur.com/auM4J.png>

~~~
jonny_eh
Must've been a bug. I just went to the "All Windows Products" page and it
didn't ask for a signup.

<http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/products>

~~~
vhf
Yeah, that's my point. I wanted to see their new oultook.com (I had seen
screenshot, it was looking great), they fed me a bug. I wanted to see their
new microsoft.com, they fed me a bug.

Trying again gives me this : <http://i.imgur.com/th3sW.png> , same with your
link.

Actually I really don't want to troll about Microsoft, bugs, and how many
times their product had to fail on me before I finally decided not to use
their product again. I have not used their products for 10 years but heard
both here and IRL great things about them. But sorry, "must've been a bug" is
unfortunately not the best way to seduce me again or to welcome me back.

~~~
nivla
It seriously looks like you are trolling. I tried to replicate the bug in
different browsers, both signed-in/incognito mode but to no show. Either you
are on some major ip blacklist or you are just pissed you din't get your dose
of Microsoft hate from everyone this time.

~~~
vhf
I'm not trolling, though. May be it's only bad luck. Shit happens, I know it
as well as I know that shit can happen twice, and it seems that this just
happened to me both with this new Microsoft homepage and with the then-new
outlook.

I don't see any interest into pretending to encounter bugs, don't worry. :)

And I must say this homepage looks great. I like to think that if was
displeased with this design, I would have closed the tab without wanting to
see other pages. Instead of that, I wanted to see more and we (Microsoft and
me) had bad luck. Just as I honestly liked the new Outlook interface, tried to
use normally and ended up with bad luck (i.e. blocked account and buggy error
message).

But you're right, I came here to complain about a coincidence and it looks
like troll. I'm now wiser and see it as what it is : coincidence, bad luck.
(And may be bad cookies due to Outlook problem explained earlier, since I just
deleted all my Microsoft Live cookies and it fixed the problem and can now
enjoy this website as everyone else. :)

------
gokulk
There was an article on front page just few days ago regarding banner
blindness for scrolling carousel style content. HN gives conflicting views.

~~~
Lukeas14
HN is a diverse group of people from all over the world, with all kinds of
opinions. There are very few issues where HN is in consensus.

------
zaidmo
A decade ago when I studied usability, we were taught Geert Hofstede's
Cultural Dimensions, and how we should design a UI that is appropriate for
users in specific locations.

I would like to understand what process followed when designing the new site
that will be accessed by anyone in the world. Did the project team do User
Experience testing? If there was testing, did this happen at local office
level?

------
tomelders
Responsive design is the crack of the web design/development community right
now.

Images that look like crap, and layouts that only work some of the time isn't
normal... but with responsive designs it is.

I don't know what the answer it. But I know responsive design isn't it. Or at
least, it's not the answer we should settle for.

~~~
SoftwareMaven
I despise "responsive design". For years, web sites worked great on my iPhone,
iPad and laptop. More and more often, I'm getting web sites that are nearly
unusable on my iPhone as they become "responsive".

While I appreciate making bigger touch targets and lighter-weight images, I
really like being able to scroll around horizontally and vertically, zoom in
on stuff I want to see details of, zoom out and get an overview, etc., and as
soon as you make your design responsive, I lose that.

~~~
danbee
Sounds more like you're being redirected to crappy mobile sites than shown
responsive designs.

------
rossjudson
It's a good thing Microsoft has patented non-rounded rectangles. They should
get right after Apple as soon as they can find any on Apple's site.

------
zem
people seem to be discussing the new site, but what i liked about the post was
the really good write up on the team dynamics involved in the site redesign.
it sounds significantly more functional (non-dysfunctional?) than most stories
coming out of microsoft.

------
tlow
still sucks.

------
Angelo8000
The story of the new Microsoft.com would be better if I could find what I am
looking for in their MSDN documentation without it going something like this:
Click link to find out about topic, 10 more links, click another link, 20 more
links come up, etc. It's one big cluster f

------
mtgx
Is Microsoft.com working on everything or is it like MSN.com that will only
work in Windows 8 and IE10?

~~~
cooldeal
>..or is it like MSN.com that will only work in Windows 8 and IE10

Not sure if this is sarcasm, but this is another example of of some posters on
Slashdot, here and some other place who seem to have last used MS products
over a decade ago, based on their knee jerk criticisms like BSoDs etc.

~~~
starvingartist
I believe the parent is referring to the recent news of MSN.com serving up a
special metro version of the site for Windows 8 users:

<http://mashable.com/2012/10/01/windows-8-msn/>

------
amil121
Congratulations, Microsoft: your site looks like every other site from 2004.

Simplicity isn't a theme you can apply, it's a philosophy. Simplicity, like
"minimalism", is thrown around a lot, but it starts at the core and extends
outwords. It is _not_ a re skinning.

Apple.com is simple. Google.com is simple. Microsoft.com pretends to be
simple. Clearly, most of you are fooled way too easily.

~~~
epo
Empty cliches from a vacuous internet windbag, it's easy to spout lots of
superficial statements without providing any supporting evidence that you have
any clue what you are talking about (which you don't seem to).

Clearly you are fooled into thinking you have anything interesting or
insightful to say about web design.

~~~
amil121
I hardly think a few sentences mean that I'm a windbag, but if you want proof
that Microsoft is fake, just look at their images. Their using stock images.
If you want to be taken seriously, you shouldn't use stock images. it's that
simple.

~~~
nivla
Well those few sentences does bring out the troll in you.

>If you want proof that Microsoft is fake, just look at their images. Their
using stock images.

So you want them to spend thousands of $$$$$ for a header images than use a
stock which conveys the same meaning? And if you are thinking stock images are
cheap, pay Gettyimages.com a visit sometime.

Btw do you have any proof it is even stock? I did a Tineye search on both the
header images and the results din't return anything.

[http://www.tineye.com/search/368891c7340390b1cec2afe6f1a2cfd...](http://www.tineye.com/search/368891c7340390b1cec2afe6f1a2cfd6613472f9/)

[http://www.tineye.com/search/31156cf0b5b5a963d44e85690689bdf...](http://www.tineye.com/search/31156cf0b5b5a963d44e85690689bdf2daef208e/)

Stop trolling and make your time online useful.

