

Please, call a spade a spade - benwerd
http://benwerd.com/blog/2012/02/24/please-call-a-spade-a-spade/

======
homosaur
Given that Microsoft still has a boatload of money, market share, and deep-
profit products, you have to really give them props for realizing that doesn't
really mean that much to the future. Their product lineup has always been
confusing, they've been pimping that awful "Windows Live" brand for years, and
their branding has been a mess. Worse yet, for a long time their products were
not up to standards.

You can love Microsoft products or hat em but it's hard to argue that they
aren't taking on all of these issues head first. Xbox is probably the premier
home entertainment product on the market, Windows Phone is actually really
good now, and much of the problems with Windows from horrible security to poor
performance have really been improved.

No one should underestimate how hard it is to admit your company kind of
sucks, especially when you are still raking in billions. They deserve a lot of
credit.

~~~
twelvechairs
Yes - Microsoft are improving, and props to the people in the company who have
done this...

... but it sure took them long enough. Where did all those profits actually
go? not much into innovation...

------
apenwarr
I'm kind of sad that everyone here seems to think overcomplicated names like
"Windows Live Messenger" and "Microsoft Office Word" have been around forever,
and we're now finally seeing Microsoft come to their senses.

As I understand it, Microsoft was the _originator_ of simple product names.
Remember Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Microsoft Mouse, Microsoft SQL,
Microsoft Mail? It all started to go crazy around the time the monopoly
controls kicked in. Personally, I think the crazy-long names were created so
that in case the government decided to split them up, the names would be the
suggested guidelines. ie. "Microsoft Office xxx" is one company, "Windows xxx"
is another company. Oh, "Windows xxx" is too big? Well then how about "Windows
Live xxx" and "Windows not-Live yyy"? And so on.

Now that the DoJ has finally gotten off their back, they have not-so-
shockingly started to go back to a sensible naming scheme.

------
hemancuso
This strikes me as terrible advice for startups.

"Microsoft" is an extremely well known brand name. Standing behind that name
rather than diluting it with 10 other sub-brands makes a lot of sense.

But if Instagram called itself "Camera" or "Camera Filter" or "Social Camera"
or something exceedingly simple, it would not likely have caught the same
traction. The name Instragram has now come to mean something unique. The same
way the word "Microsoft" is now loaded with all sorts of connotations.

I agree that forcing users into a new vocabulary doesn't make much sense, but
startups need to differentiate themselves on branding. Throwing in a word like
"tweet" to compliment "twitter" makes a lot of sense.

~~~
Bud
I think you're missing the point.

Choosing ONE brand name and making it stick = good. Choosing seven words where
one would do = bad.

For instance, I just found myself browsing through a list of new Microsoft
products. I found a mouse there called the "Microsoft Wireless Mobile Mouse
3500 Limited Edition".

That's just hilarious. Anyone can see that that's hilarious, and not effective
branding.

~~~
function_seven
My first laugh-out-loud experience with this was the Samsung Galaxy S2 Epic 4G
Touch. That's exactly how the TV adverts introduced it. I couldn't keep up.

~~~
moe
Samsung really has a knack for branding, I especially like their Nexus line.

There's the Nexus One, the Nexus S, the Galaxy Nexus and the Galaxy Nexus S,
the Galaxy S, the Galaxy S Plus and the Galaxy S2.

Give or take a few...

~~~
AndrewDucker
The Nexus One is an HTC phone, because the Nexus line of phones are a _Google_
brand, which switches manufacturer (and follow on from the G1).

The Galaxy line is Samsung's brand. Obviously, the two brands have crossed
over a couple of times.

------
larrik
I don't know.

I really like being able to Google for a product's name and get mostly-
relevant results.

~~~
wmf
Now Windows users can suffer along with Mac users.

"What email software do you use?"

"Mail."

"Yes, but which one?"

~~~
tree_of_item
This is why "Mail" is namespaced by "Apple" or "Microsoft" or some other such
thing. That is, you don't say "Docs", you say "Google Docs".

------
mmuro
It is refreshing to see this from Microsoft, but the comparison is inevitably
going to be made with Apple.

And that's not a bad thing.

Mail, Contacts, Messages, iTunes, iPhoto, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, etc. Yeah,
there's a little bit of branding in there but the "spade is a spade" argument
still stands.

Microsoft is making the right call here.

------
Bud
I very much agree with most of this post. Now, choosing names which are much
less annoying than their old, tired, 1980s-esque names will not make their
crappy products magically transform into good products.

But it's a start. Good choices beget good choices.

------
timClicks
The essence of trade mark law is that similar products should have different
names, so that consumers can distinguish between them. Calling a photo gallery
application "Photos" is great until the next trader wants to build a photo
gallery application.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
You buy Windows. They're not re-branding Windows "OS". Once you have Windows
the features in the OS don't have to keep competing for your attention as
furiously.

~~~
wmf
I think you've gotten to the real point. Apps like Mail, Photos, etc. are not
standalone products; they're just features of Windows.

------
dotBen
I used to unknowingly use the phrase communicated in the headline of this post
until someone told me it originates from the era of black slavery and thus has
a racial connotation.

~~~
benwerd
Stephen Downes emailed me personally about that. I'm mortified. I've changed
the title and have left a note, and am in the process of editing the text.

The phrase predates the racist connotation, but nonetheless, I'm more than
uncomfortable with the association.

~~~
dionidium
Mortification is a bit of a hyper-correction. Let's not all freak out about a
situation in which 1) no racism was intended; and 2) most people probably
aren't even aware of the incorrect, racist meaning (you weren't and I wasn't,
either).

------
cenuij
Quite a fleshless piece, but surprisingly easy to pick at.

> Authentically digital interfaces.

The linked aside that was meant to qualify this blander than twilight
statement really doesn't qualify anything. The linked article has plenty of
quite tasteful screenshots of things that bear no resemblance to the gaudy
morris dance that is the metro interface. And the brief and unsatisfying
technicalities only serve to highlight the confusion and uncertainty over
where Microsoft wants it's developers to be investing.

What does "authentically digital" suppose to mean anyway?

> Simplified Windows 8 branding

Well this is not really a simple problem. I think pretty much 90% of the
online world assumed after a while the window's logo was a flag. The wavy
pixelated contrails, the "flag" screensaver, the flag-like symbols across it's
products for years. To claim that it was not a meant to be a flag is
understandable and perhaps quite correct, but to then make the logo look more
like a flag than ever before just screams mixed metaphors. I understand the
Shetland Islands are both delighted and horrified.

And the colour? Mine eyes doth protest.

I think Microsoft have been making great strides to address the stagnation
that was prevalent for so long in much of their product range, but their
marketing & pr is letting them down. I would love to see the billing for that
design: "It's not a flag, make it look like it's not a flag", "how about this
flag design?", "OK, looks cool, can you make the blue a little brighter? My
kids love bright colours".

~~~
mitchellhislop
On your first point - they are doing away with the skeuomorphism that some of
their UI had.

(I totally agree with the rest of your critique.)

