There was more to the Skylight rebrand than Live. The idea was to bind the services to the Windows brand, a strong brand in the US, instead of MSN, which is a stronger brand outside the US.
Also, the integration was tighter, so the experience was supposed to be seamless. YMMV. It wasn't like we grabbed a can of "Live" spraypaint and hit everything we could see.
> It wasn't like we grabbed a can of "Live" spraypaint and hit everything we could see.
To me, it sure seemed that way. Went from a perfectly usable, lightweight "MSN Messenger 4.0" client to some slow-as-molasses abomination "Live Messenger".
As I said the very sentence before, the goal was a smooth integration, but your mileage my vary. Restated, I know it ended up sucking, but that wasn't the goal.
Also, the integration was tighter, so the experience was supposed to be seamless. YMMV. It wasn't like we grabbed a can of "Live" spraypaint and hit everything we could see.