
Microsoft kills Zune, Windows Live brands; Live ID renamed to Microsoft Account - Suraj-Sun
http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/24/2821128/microsoft-kills-zune-windows-live-branding-in-windows-8
======
tcskeptic
Every time they rebrand or kill a technology that they rolled out with great
fanfare, I become less and less likely to trust them with an investment. (This
is true both for consumer stuff and for development stuff ) Product
rationalization is good, but there is a real cost when they change direction.

~~~
ax
The services are still there right? This is just a name change?

~~~
m_for_monkey
And Visual Basic? Only the name stayed after they replaced the product with
.NET.

------
FrancescoRizzi
The article begins with "Microsoft appears to be killing off ...", which is
quite different than the title here on HN ("Microsoft kills...". The article's
original title is also "How Microsoft is killing off..." - which is a bit more
honest: this is speculation/analysis. It might be correct, but it's not the
same as "Look, we got an official statement from MS saying these brands are
now dead" - Sad to see title tweaks for sensationalism on HN, of all places :(

~~~
Suraj-Sun
I would've gone for a detailed title too, like __ "How Microsoft is killing
off the Zune and Windows Live brands in Windows 8; Live ID to be renamed to
Microsoft Account" __ but that would be 118 characters(with spaces) well over
title limit(80) at Hacker News.

------
ChrisNorstrom
Finally, they're consolidating all their incoherent branding nonsense. As a PC
user I'm wasn't sure of how much more of this I could take. "Windows Live
Office Live for Games for Windows Live. Lets not talk about the "Windows
Update" & "Microsoft Update" or "Windows 7 Starter", "Windows 7 Home Basic",
"Windows 7 Home Premium", "Windows 7 Professional", "Windows 7 Enterprise",
"Windows 7 Ultimate". Office Live, Live.com, Windows Live, Games for Windows
Live, Windows Live Mail.

It's like they have a whole department at Microsoft dedicated to making as
many brands out of the words "Windows" and "Live". Finally, I can tell my mom
to just open up "Mail", or go to the "Calendar" instead of "Outlook Express"
or "Windows Live Mail". Oh I forgot, I got sick of MS's multiple personality
disorder and got my family Gmail accounts.

~~~
freehunter
The various versions of Windows are actually very important. I haven't heard
news if they're going to be continuing multiple products in Windows 8.

Windows has a very broad reach. It's on a lot of computers, used in very
different ways, and Windows 7 naming is quite easy to understand.

Windows 7 Starter is not sold in stores but rather preloaded on netbooks and
low performance devices. This is how Windows 8 on ARM will be.

Windows 7 Home Basic is a version of Windows 7 that is only generally
available in emerging markets. It has geographic limitations on activation. I
don't think you would find it on the shelf in the US.

Windows 7 Home Premium is what the consumer sees on the shelf in the store, or
on their computer from Best Buy. It's Windows for "home".

Windows 7 Professional is for professionals to use on their work computer.
Businesses use it. It adds the ability to sign onto a domain, software
restrictions, EFS, etc. Home Premium and Professional are the only two you
should see on store shelves or preinstalled.

Windows 7 Enterprise is only available if you have an enterprise contract with
Microsoft. You buy it through volume licensing.

Windows 7 Ultimate is fairly restricted in its distribution. The only way for
a normal user to know about or get Ultimate is an Anytime Upgrade, for a fee.
It's Windows 7 Enterprise with individual licensing.

Each serves its purpose, and they're not all easily combined in features or
hardware requirements. There should be no confusion amongst the public on
which Windows 7 version is meant for them unless whoever does their tech
support intentionally tries to confuse them.

~~~
unexpected
Why does it have to be like this? Why the distinction between Windows 7
Professional and Windows 7 Enterprise?

If Windows 7 Ultimate is the same thing sa Windows 7 Enterprise? Why the
distinction?

Window 95 was just...windows 95. Windows XP was simply "professional" and
"home".

99% of people (including work people) use their computers for checking their
email, surfing the internet, using office, and playing media - this is why
other companies (Google, Apple) are kicking ass and stealing MS's "home"
customers.

The pervasive MS integration with everything is MS's only defense on the
corporate enterprise. Their advantage in the home market is eroding. People
just don't need to buy PC's any more.

~~~
freehunter
> _Why does it have to be like this? Why the distinction between Windows 7
> Professional and Windows 7 Enterprise?_

Windows Enterprise is volume licensed. Windows Professional is individually
licensed. Enterprise also has BitLocker and UNIX support. Again, I don't see
where the confusion should lie for the user. Consumers shouldn't even be aware
that Enterprise exists, or that there are differences. No consumer is ever
going to even have the _chance_ to purchase Enterprise.

> _Window 95 was just...windows 95. Windows XP was simply "professional" and
> "home"._

Not true. Windows 95 had a couple editions. The two consumer-facing editions
were Windows 95 and Microsoft _PLUS!_ for Windows 95. There were a handful of
other versions that were only sold preinstalled on computers. Fun fact, if you
bought "Windows 95", you didn't get USB support. Only available in Windows 95b
aka Windows 95 OSR2.1

Windows XP had a Starter edition for emerging markets. It had Media Center
Edition which featured a new interface and WMC (along with DVR support).
Tablet PC edition included touch screen software. There was also 64-bit
edition, which may as well have been its own OS, since 64-bit support was not
fully realized by all the existing software and drivers.

That fact that you didn't know these other editions existed goes to show
you're blowing the whole thing out of the water for Windows 7. The point of
their existence is to provide for what you are alluding to as the "other 1%"
(which is actually a much, much larger percent and makes Microsoft a huge
amount of money). The niche cases and the business requirements are satisfied
with the niche Windows products and the business-oriented Windows products.

Apple and Google have no presence in the corporate OS world because they offer
nothing to compete. "One size fits all" generally doesn't, and there's money
to be made outside of that.

~~~
unexpected
What's the disadvantage in giving something like Bitlocker and UNIX to regular
professional users? Windows XP Starter Edition and MC edition came after their
regular editions had launched. In the case of MC edition, it was launched
almost a full two years later.

Market segmentation to this degree is a 1990's model of doing business. The
proof is in the pudding. MS's stock hasn't moved in the past decade.

Meanwhile, Apple has taken over corporate phones. More and more phones are
dumping their blackberries and moving to iPhones. Fortune 50 companies are
moving their email systems to Gmail and Google Apps.

If MS wants to compete around the edges, they certainly can, but they won't be
the world's largest computing presence (and they're not anymore).

MS needs to re-introduce people to their products. Why block off BitLocker?
Everyone has a right to privacy! Why block off media streaming? If MS could
stream easily, people woudn't be buying Roku boxes, Boxee boxes, PS3's.

This same thing happens with MS Office. What exactly is the difference between
Microsoft Home and Office and Microsoft Professional (it's access and
publisher - but this is a common google query!)? Why does there have to be
this confusion. Why not just give Access away! If MS had simply given away SQL
server licenses, Apache would have never taken off.

MS varies dramatically in caring about their whole ecosystem and stack vs.
running different product lines. If MS wants to run each product as a separate
entity with separate P&L statements, that's their right - but their revenue
growth has slowed!

Speciation is dying. To take a different example, look at how hard it is to
order a computer off of Dell.com. It's impossible now. What's the different
between a "vostro" and an "optiplex"and an "inspiron" and an "xps". Why am I
shown different deals if i'm a home user, a small business user, a medium size
business user, or a larger business user? Why are my computing needs different
if I'm a small business user vs. a medium size business user? Why is it such a
struggle for me to order a machine with an SSD and 16GB RAM? It's a complete
design-by-committee mess, and a complete eyesore. It's become the used car
salesman of computing.

~~~
freehunter
> _What's the disadvantage in giving something like Bitlocker and UNIX to
> regular professional users?_

The cost. These features cost money to develop and they cost money to support.
Imagine if Microsoft was getting calls from everyone who enabled BitLocker and
then forgot their password. Enterprise costs a lot more than Home Premium.

> _MS's stock hasn't moved in the past decade._

That's a sign of a mature company. They rake in a lot of money. They're no
longer "cool" but they're a steady source of a lot of income. And unlike
Apple, they actually pay dividends on their stock. [1]

> _(and they're not anymore)_

I'd like to see some numbers on this, because every number I've seen shows
Microsoft in the mid 90% range for computer install base.

> _If MS could stream easily, people woudn't be buying Roku boxes, Boxee
> boxes, PS3's._

And where are people streaming _from_? Their PC, among other places. Because
Vista and 7 have it built in, and XP has the feature as a download.

 _> Why not just give Access away!_

You would make a great businessman.

> _If MS had simply given away SQL server licenses, Apache would have never
> taken off._

Because if there's one thing Apache servers are known for, it's SQL (wtf is
this?)

> _Why am I shown different deals if i'm a home user, a small business user, a
> medium size business user, or a larger business user?_

Because home users buy one computer. Businesses buy dozens or hundreds.

> _Why are my computing needs different if I'm a small business user vs. a
> medium size business user?_

Business machines need to be stable, supported, and perform well for the task
they do. Home computers tend to be less stable, less supported, easier to
break, but above all closer to bleeding edge and cheaper.

> _Why is it such a struggle for me to order a machine with an SSD and 16GB
> RAM?_

Because you can't figure out how to read? Your mouse is broken? Monitor is
unplugged? I don't know, you tell me.

Listen, complain all you want, but it makes sense from a business standpoint.
If you can't wrap your head what Microsoft is doing, just take a step back and
realize that there are really only two options for Windows 7: Home and
Professional. That's all you need to know.

And I don't want to hear you say "why do they even _make_ semi trucks?! Now I
can't figure out if I need an 18-wheeler or a scooter!"

[1][https://www.microsoft.com/investor/Stock/StockSplit/default....](https://www.microsoft.com/investor/Stock/StockSplit/default.aspx)

~~~
unexpected
MS's strategy hasn't produced a noticeable return on investment over the past
decade. Argue with the business logic all you want, but all logic supports a
theory that MS should be split up into various businesses.

The big problem at MS seems to be an unwillingness to cannibalize existing
products in favor of new ones. This has led to new products only when its too
late. Microsoft had a virtual insurmountable lead in phones, and it took Apple
and Google creating revolutionary devices for MS to come up with a decent
offering.

I own MS stock, and I have seen it pretty much stagnate. The company had
tremendous potential. It is mature in its space, but its ever-looming shadow
in its dominant space (windows) has prevented it from nurturing new products.

Most of it's revenue generation comes from products developed in the early
1990's. It's track record over the past 15 years for new products is terrible
(with the exception of the Xbox).

~~~
ghshephard
If you own MS Stock then you've had dividends, quarter after quarter. That
"Stagnating" stock you talk of is as much a reflection of the dividends as it
is anything else.

How is it that everyone forgets that Microsoft has continued to be a massively
profitable enterprise for the last 10+ years, and continues to dominate in the
Desktop OS and Office Productive suite space in the same time period.

Nobody even _tries_ to challenge Microsoft in those two sectors, they are so
dominant. Plus, they've seen some good traction in the Game-Console
environment as well.

With all that said - I actually agree with you in principle, it would be nice
if someone just said "We have two versions of Microsoft Windows, Professional
and Home" - and call it a day. The seven versions result lots of angst for
small IT managers visiting CDW - this thread, 2 years laters, (and
freehunter's _excellent_ description) is the first time I've ever really
understood the difference between all the versions. (BTW Freehunter - if you
aren't already in it, you've got a great future in product management - great
and succinct product descriptions)

~~~
freehunter
Thanks for the glowing recommendation. I'm quite happily employed in
Information Security where I often have to give reports to people who likely
aren't going to understand the exact magnitude of the risk. Communication is
huge, and I'm sad to say I do have a patience problem which became evident the
longer this thread continued.

------
MichaelApproved
Microsoft's services are so fragmented, any attempt to consolidate them is
welcomed. It would be nice if they also worked on a consistent UI throughout
all their properties. It feels like they outsource divisions to other
companies with no UI specifications included.

The only unifying element is the Microsoft name in the URL.
<http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx> <http://office.microsoft.com/en-
us/> <http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/en-us>
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/> <http://www.microsoft.com/bizspark/>

And you can't say it's because they're a large company with many products
because Apple manages to do a good job.

<http://www.apple.com/> <http://www.apple.com/iphone/>
<http://www.apple.com/iwork/> <https://developer.apple.com/>

~~~
brudgers
> _"And you can't say it's because they're a large company with many products
> because Apple manages to do a good job."_

I have a theory about Microsoft's web presence and the diversity of
presentation styles and plethora of discontinuous information channels
associated with it.

My impression is that it is as if Microsoft management is trying to herd cats.
And perhaps it is.

Unlike Apple, Microsoft made a lot of it's employees rich (probably more than
any other company, ever). When your critical talent has fuck you money, a top
down "implement the leader's vision" management style is probably less
appropriate model than something drawing some features from academia's "share
what you have learned from pursuing your interests" model.

Google has been somewhere between the two - people have had time to pursue
their interests but sharing work product has had more management control
(though far less management control than Apple).

What I suspect Microsoft is trying to do internally, is to rely on its new
design aesthetic to be preferred on its merits rather than implemented by
fiat. Not so much because there is a high percentage of employees with fuck
you money any longer, but because doing so is consistent with the corporate
culture developed at a time when their were.

At least that's my theory.

~~~
r00fus
> Unlike Apple, Microsoft made a lot of it's employees rich (probably more
> than any other company, ever). When your critical talent has fuck you money,
> a top down "implement the leader's vision" management style is probably less
> appropriate...

That's not the problem - the solution to that has been known for years - stock
options/grants and bonuses tied to corporate performance.

The problem is that Microsoft continued to grow rich by stagnating. The
company got so good at milking it's cash cows, everything else had to be tied
to those.

Furthermore, there was no vision at the top for over a decade. Ballmer may be
many things but visionary is not one that most people would agree with. Vision
is what allows you to see the iceberg looming in the distance, or the opening
into a golden opportunity if you steer properly.

------
pedalpete
The only thing being 'killed' is the names, the services are being 'unified'
under more logical brand names.

~~~
brudgers
Furthermore, the changes are consistent with the fundamental rubric of Metro
Design - fierce reduction.

------
untog
The only one I still think was a missed opportunity is Zune. I have a Windows
Phone and love it, but a lot of my friends consider the concept of a Windows
Phone "icky". I don't think that Zune was such a failed brand that a Zune
Phone couldn't have happened. Of course, I doubt business buyers would like
that.

~~~
freehunter
I really love the Zune product (to the point where I'm afraid of being branded
a shill whenever I talk about it). Windows Phone is a nice system, but the
Zune aspect is what sold me on it versus an iPhone. There's literally nothing
that compares, and I'm amazed Apple has fallen so far behind.

Microsoft needs to do some image control to become "cool" again. They've got
some amazing products that are right on the bleeding edge (Xbox, Zune/WP7,
Windows 8 is kind of out-there and radical for better or worse), but Xbox is
the only successfully "cool" brand they have. Because it doesn't have
"Windows" attached to it.

If Zune was redefined as a phone (Not Zune Phone, just Zune), it would sell
like hotcakes.

~~~
ajays
I have never owned or seen (IRL) a Zune. What's so great about it? What makes
it better than an iPod?

~~~
PhrosTT
For starters the software doesn't crush your machine as iTunes does to
Windows.

Second of all, the physical player doesn't magically get a 'corrupted OS' or
'unhappy folder face' problem once a year - requiring trips to the Genius Bar.

The software does everything iTunes does like recommendations, folder
tracking, etc - except you could get 'all you can eat' music for $10 / month.

In general the Zune HD device is just sick. Metro UI, intuitive touchscreen,
and most importantly, completely unbreakable.

~~~
nlogn
I have to second the completely unbreakable part. I have dropped it whilst
biking many times (seriously I'm embarrassed to say like 4 times) and it has
only a few minor dings to show for it despite tumbling on asphalt at 10-15
mph. It seems like the thickness of the aluminum bezel coupled with the
thinner screen width protects the screen better than the ipod touch's. I also
prefer the UI and basically what it came down to when deciding between the two
for me was what I wanted: a really good touchsceen mp3 player or a more
generally useful device/portable gaming machine. I already have my phone for
the latter purpose so I went with the best mp3 player.

~~~
freehunter
I did have mine "break" but I can still use it. Somehow the screen cracked
from the inside. Speculation is the battery was overcharged and swelled. I
looked it up on the Internet and pretty much every discussion about it was
filled with people claiming those with broken screens must be lying or had
damaged it somehow. Microsoft doesn't acknowledge a problem.

Oh well. It still works, and I have my WP7 now. The Zune is just for biking.

------
thought_alarm
The death of the Zune brand was announced ages ago. "Zune" has been nothing
more than the punchline to a joke for years now.

And the failure of the Live brand is, well, not unexpected. It caps off a
decade of weird and unfocused branding strategies from the Big M.

------
rvcamo
Good to see Microsoft making some changes as regard to these services. They
were confusingly named to begin with and the integration of them all into
Windows seamlessly is what is going to hold them afloat while they figure out
what they are doing on the mobile space.

------
AznHisoka
I had a Hotmail account 10 years ago.. did it change to a Live account
before.. and now it's a Windows account?.. or wait is it now my MSN Messenger
account?... I'm confused.

~~~
ChrisNorstrom
Microsoft Windows Live Mail Office 365 for Games for Windows Live. Get it
right.

~~~
shadowfox
I couldn't find anything that looked like that. Are you just making stuff up?

~~~
ceejayoz
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole>

~~~
shadowfox
I must admit that I expected Hacker News to be (well) not very much in to
hyperbole :(

------
reidmain
I'm glad to see more companies moving away from overly invasive branding. I
don't need to see the name of the company in front of everything.

No one would ever say "open Windows Live Photo Gallery". They would say
something like "go to Photos" or "open the Photos app" and now this simplified
branding will make these things more obvious and easier to find for the
average consumer.

------
xtc
As a Zune user since the first gen I'm pretty disappointed it didn't take off.
I honestly can't imagine having to find another decent portable media player
that works so well. Now I just need to keep my Zune HD functional for the rest
of time.

------
TomAnthony
I'd forgotten about the existence of Zune until this article!

------
mhurron
How many renamings have these things been through already?

~~~
Legion
If at first you don't succeed, rebrand, rebrand again.

------
aChrisSmith
This reminds me of the "Windows Live Hotmail" fiasco.

Annoying as all the brand vacillation is, this move looks like it is in the
right direction.

------
jinushaun
Finally! Sane naming conventions from Microsoft? Hopefully, no more "Windows
Phone 7 series phone" nonsense in the future.

------
joejohnson
And yet it's not enough to catch Apple. Even Google's products are better
integrated now.

------
spoiledtechie
Link-bait. Aren't killing anything. This is an opinion article.

------
georgieporgie
Forget DDE, we're on to OLE now. Forget OLE, it's COM. You added a
DispInterface to COM? Let's call it ActiveX, even though it has nothing to do
with DirectX or any other -X. No, wait, let's put the X on the other end!
XBox. Sweet. Windows CE makes too much sense, let's call it Windows Mobile, no
wait, Windows Phone (so, no tablet vision?). Let's call it Outlook Express,
even though it has no relationship to Outlook whatsoever. No wait, Outlook
Express is dead. Oh, actually, it's now Windows Live Mail.

Microsoft should just give up on their perpetual rebranding and do some real
work. I still can't put my HID Bluetooth device into park or sniff (low-power)
mode because their Bluetooth stack _still_ sucks, but they've managed three or
four rebranding efforts since Bluetooth hit the scene a decade ago. All of
their rebranding efforts are just snapshots in time. They should just stick
with naming things by year (or half decade), since that's really what it boils
down to.

------
javery
To be fair these brands were dead long ago.

~~~
spoiledtechie
Disagree and unfair. These brands are alive and well. I use Zune, Contacts and
pictures on a daily basis. Please make sure you know the topic before making
unfair claims.

~~~
glhaynes
The name "Zune" is used as a punchline. Which is not to say a thing at all
about the actual product or whether it should be used as a punchline, but it
is.

