ie8 fix
madison

Hardware 2.0

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Microsoft's "Entertainment and Devices" division suffers from poor branding

By | April 23, 2010, 6:02am PDT

Summary: While Windows, Office, and server tools pull in billions of dollars in profits for Microsoft, its “Entertainment and Devices” division is barely keeping its head above water. Why? One reason - poor branding.

While Windows, Office, and server tools pull in billions of dollars in profits for Microsoft, its “Entertainment and Devices” division is barely keeping its head above water. Why? One reason - poor branding.

Before we look at Microsoft’s branding or devices and entertainment products, let’s take a trip down memory lane and look at how the company fouled up the branding of its flagship Windows line.

When Microsoft announced that it was naming XP’s successor “Vista,” tech pundits the world over when “Eh?” and “What does that mean?” and “That’s a stupid name!” Rather than continue to capitalize on the ”Windows” brand, the marketing folks at Redmond decided to pave new ground by trying to rebrand Microsoft’s flagship OS product. Sure, it was still called “Windows Vista”, but the emphasis was on “Vista” rather than “Windows.”

When it became apparent to Microsoft that people didn’t really like “Vista” the company carried out an experiment where it renamed the OS as “Mojave” and introduced this OS to those who said they disliked “Vista” despite the two operating systems being the same except in name). The same people who’d expressed a dislike for “Vista” seemed to like “Mojave.”

As soon as Microsoft accepted that the “Vista” name was tainted, the company then had little choice but to return to promoting the “Windows” and “PC” brand (the “PC” branding was, at least in part, a response to Apple’s endless “I’m a Mac, and I’m a PC” ads). Not only did Microsoft accept that its “Windows” brand needed advertising to consumers, but that it was far more effective to push “Windows” as a brand rather than focus too closely on individual editions or versions.

Note: It’s interesting to note that Apple’s “I’m a Mac, and I’m a PC” ads seemed to have dried up in the wake of Vista’s release - there hasn’t been a new ad campaign since Windows 7’s launch day on October 23rd 2009.

Now let’s look at Microsoft’s branding when it comes to entertainment and devices. I don’t make it my job to keep up with every new name that Microsoft comes out for things, but I’m painfully aware of a number of brands that Microsoft is trying to push - “Xbox,” “Live” and ”Zune” are three of the biggest, but there’s also “Windows Mobile,” and “Windows Phone 7 Series” and “Kin.” There’s probably a few that I’ve missed out.

Conclusion: Microsoft likes names. What’s worse, Microsoft likes to choose silly names. Seriously, how many martinis did it take before people started thinking that words such as “Zune” and “Kin” were catchy? These random words tell you nothing about the product. As daft as Apple’s “iPhone,” “iTunes,” and “iPad” might be, they do at least tell you right from the start what you are dealing with.

Personally, I think that Microsoft might be onto something with names like “Windows Phone 7 Series” because if nothing else, it pushes the view of a unified platform of devices that can coexist, rather than disparate entities. “Windows Phone,” “Windows Search,” “Windows Gaming,” “Windows Music” and so on makes a lot more sense to me, and I think it would make a heck of a lot more sense to users than the current jamboree of names. Heck, even adding something as crazy as the “MS” prefix to the services would help pull them together.

Thoughts? Is Microsoft branding a mess, or do you think that there sense in separating out all the products into elements with their own individual names makes sense?

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology.

Disclosure

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

All opinions expressed on Hardware 2.0 are those of Adrian Kingsley-Hughes. Every effort is made to ensure that the information posted is accurate. If you have any comments, queries or corrections, please contact Adrian via the email link here. Any possible conflicts of interest will be posted below. [Updated: February 23, 2010] - Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has no business relationships, affiliations, investments, or other actual/potential conflicts of interest relating to the content posted so far on this blog.

Biography

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology -- whether that be by learning to program, building a PC from a pile of parts, or helping them get the most from their new MP3 player or digital camera.

Adrian has authored/co-authored technical books on a variety of topics, ranging from programming to building and maintaining PCs. His most recent books include "Build the Ultimate Custom PC", "Beginning Programming" and "The PC Doctor's Fix It Yourself Guide". He has also written training manuals that have been used by a number of Fortune 500 companies.

Adrian also runs a popular blog under the name The PC Doctor, where he covers a range of computer-related topics -- from security to repairing and upgrading.

40
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Open Source suffer the same branding problem as MS
wackoae Updated - 23rd Apr 2010
I'm sorry, but the worst branding names in the world belong to Open Source projects.

Here are two examples. Both projects are very good open source tools, but suffer a branding problem:

GIMP: an excellent tool, with very advanced features that suffers with a ridiculously ugly name and one of the WORST user interface in the world. And NO!! The GimpShop distro wasn't an improvement.

Blender: Not an ugly name, but just the wrong name for a 3D animation tool. The sad part, it is EXTREMELY IMPRESSIVE at doing what it was designed for. It is also very extensible and it has a huge amount of plug-ins available for pretty much anything you want to do. At 1st view, the user interface is hard to understand (some may call it scary). But after you learn some of it, it becomes very intuitive. Unlike GIMP, the UI is optimized for efficiency, not just because some idiot decided that was the best place to put the option. Yet, Blender is a totally stupid name for such a cool tool.

On the other hand, the some of the most popular open source projects have cool names that most people recognize: Firefox, Apache, Audacity, Eraser, etc.

In the tech/gadget world, a brand's name is just as important as the functionality is trying to sell.
0 Votes
+ -
What a relief
Richard Flude 23rd Apr 2010
I thought it was their product offerings. Shouldn't take them long to fix their branding issues.

I expect the Zune to be the big seller this northern summer;-)
0 Votes
+ -
Backwards
Economister 23rd Apr 2010
It is easier to fix a product than a brand.
0 Votes
+ -
...but I agree the name of the device is crappy. Don't have any clue what would be a great name but Zune, it's too vague, it doesn't bring to mind anything specific, which is probably why it's not as well recieved.
0 Votes
+ -
They were trying to confuse grandmothers who were buying iPods for their grand kids for x-mas.

Problem was, Zune became a synonymous with ugly brick of sh!@ (brown Zune) and grandmothers knew the difference between a "sexy" iPod and an the ugly brown brick called Zune.
0 Votes
+ -
with the Zune (or wrong with the iPod) to at least put it in the top 3, so what exactlly is your point?

My guess is that you believe one should buy on the nane, no matter how poorly the product functions for you, as opposed to actually getting your money's worth out of you choice?
0 Votes
+ -
Zune in the top 3??
dave95. Updated - 23rd Apr 2010
The Zune is around 3 percent market share, hardly the top 3 of anything next to the iPod.

And Microsoft hardly promotes the Zune anymore (not like they did much before), so why should people care anyway?
0 Votes
+ -
How do you explain "Google"?
obvio.capitao@... 23rd Apr 2010
How many martinis did it take before people started thinking
that a word such as ?Google? was catchy? This random word
tell you nothing about the product.

The only thing that matters is: make a *great* product.
0 Votes
+ -
Google = "googol" = 1 followed by 100 zeroes,
adornoe@... Updated - 23rd Apr 2010
or the amount of information that the founders hoped their search engine could handle.

Granted, not everyone would know that and most everybody who uses Google is not aware of the why for the name "Google", but when a product or service becomes so much a part of the culture and is so ingrained, it doesn't really matter what it's called.
What a load of crap. This article is nothing more than Microsoft bashing so you can get your Friday pay day.

look at how the company fouled up the branding of its flagship Windows line.

It didn't get fouled up. XP, Vista, Win 7 are all great products. What happened was tech bloggers such as yourself wanted to see Microsoft fail no matter what they released. So then began the articles of bashing Vista even though it was superior to XP in many ways. Luckily and I'm surprised you were able to point out about the Mojave experiment which proved the Microsoft haters wrong. So based on that, nothing fouled up with Vista.

Seriously, how many martinis did it take before people started thinking that words such as ?Zune? and ?Kin? were catchy?

The word Zune is short, easy to pronounce, and rolls right off the tongue. Probably why they chose such a simplistic name. Kin is short for kindred spirit. I think the names work, they all have symbolism. I know you don't want them to name stuff very stupidly like jackedup jackelope, kramped koala, or loony lynx. Talk about a marketing disaster, those names will definitely provide one.

Branding is the least Microsoft has to worry about. You go into any household and ask if they know the name Microsoft and you will hear a resounding yes. Microsoft is one of the biggest names in the tech industry. Everyone uses a computer, everyone knows about Microsoft. You pick a few rare names that are not within normal consumers vocabulary and run with it. That is just in bad taste.
0 Votes
+ -
Branding and problems
Economister 23rd Apr 2010
Knowing about a brand vs liking/trusting/respecting/admiring the brand are two VERY different situations.

Windows/MS does have a brand image problem in some market segments.
0 Votes
+ -
Awwwwww...
Dave32265 23rd Apr 2010
poor LD, someone wrote something critical of MS (Boo hoo, sniff sniff). Sorry to burst your bubble but branding has been a real issue for MS for years. Hell, I remember when "Zune" came out. My first reaction was "WTH is a Zune?" And did you notice how quickly those "WOW" ads got pulled after vista went RTM? Like it or not vista pre-SP1 was unusable crap. How many times was windows live re-branded? and on and on and on... Now go take your Valium and get some rest little boy. Someone will write something nice about MS soon, I'm sure.
0 Votes
+ -
Not really
Loverock Davidson 23rd Apr 2010
Sorry to burst your bubble but branding has been a real issue for MS for years.

Not really. I gave examples of why this is not true in my previous post.

And did you notice how quickly those "WOW" ads got pulled after vista went RTM?

Yes, to work on the next ad campaign so it doesn't get old and dry.

Like it or not vista pre-SP1 was unusable crap.

Wrong.

How many times was windows live re-branded?
Once or twice, typical behavior for any company to rebrand products.

Now go take your Valium and get some rest little boy.

Drugs are bad mmmkay.
0 Votes
+ -
You just keep...
Dave32265 23rd Apr 2010
apologizing for MS. That's fine.

"Like it or not vista pre-SP1 was unusable crap.

Wrong."

Actually this is right. Pre-SP1 it was a memory leaking sieve. Can't begin to tell you how many of my clients complained how slow and irritating it was.

"How many times was windows live re-branded?
Once or twice, typical behavior for any company to rebrand products."

Ummmm more than twice because they were losing ground on search and security.

Botom line is, until your God (Monkey Boy Ballmer) is ousted and MS' marketing is totally revamped, it will remain a joke.
0 Votes
+ -
No apology needed
Loverock Davidson 23rd Apr 2010
Just sorting the facts from fiction.

Actually this is right. Pre-SP1 it was a memory leaking sieve. Can't begin to tell you how many of my clients complained how slow and irritating it was.

I'm going to say none of them said that. What really happened was that you read an article on engadget of a blogger who hates Microsoft anyway and they said it had memory leaks so you decided to follow suit and make the same claim.

Ummmm more than twice because they were losing ground on search and security.

And look at it now, it is quickly rising up the ranks since they rebranded and improved the site. They reworked it to make it more user friendly and functional. I can't see any faults with doing that.

Botom line is, until your God (Monkey Boy Ballmer) is ousted and MS' marketing is totally revamped, it will remain a joke.

I'm guessing your referring to the monkey boy statement as the very famous Microsoft speech that Steve Ballmer gave. Well look at that, you already know their brand name and Steve Ballmer's enthusiasm for the crowd at that speech, so we can conclude that Microsoft's marketing is working as you made this reference. LOL, joke's on you.
0 Votes
+ -
Alrighty then...
Dave32265 23rd Apr 2010
"I'm going to say none of them said that. What really happened was that you read an article on engadget of a blogger who hates Microsoft anyway and they said it had memory leaks so you decided to follow suit and make the same claim."

Hmmmmmm, do you know me or any of my clients? Or have you actually been on their computers? Amazing how you know all of this. I seriously believe you need more than valium my friend LOL

"I'm guessing your referring to the monkey boy statement as the very famous Microsoft speech that Steve Ballmer gave. Well look at that, you already know their brand name and Steve Ballmer's enthusiasm for the crowd at that speech, so we can conclude that Microsoft's marketing is working as you made this reference. LOL, joke's on you."

Actually the joke IS MS (Steve "Monkey Boy" Ballmer in particular). I'm sorry, but a CEO of a major corporation dancing around on a stage, sweating like a pig and totally out of breath is undignified and just plain stupid and was rightly maligned for it. I'm sure even Gates was cringing over that one
0 Votes
+ -
RE: No apology needed
fatman65535 23rd Apr 2010
I guess you don't apologize when you cash your Microsoft (see - I spelled it right this time) paycheck.
  • Flagged
This article is nothing but an apology for Microsoft, dismissing everything found bad about their products as "people just didn't like the name".


One thing's for sure, "Lucid Lynx" is a far better name than "internet exploder" (hey look, I can make up incorrect names for things too, you're not alone!)
0 Votes
+ -
Simple - once people see there are viable alternatives, they don't want Microsoft.

Witness the growth of the Mac (and Linux)
Witness the death of Windows Mobile
Witness the dominance of the Wii (vs the Xbox)
0 Votes
+ -
Ok, I'll bite
Cylon Centurion 23rd Apr 2010
Linux share hasn't changed in years. They still suffer being the lowest common denominator, still barely holding onto 1% of the market.

Windows Mobile may be in the position for a comeback. We'll see what happens with WP7.

Honestly, I think the Xbox just plain sucks. I'll agree with you on that one. Not once since the 360 came out has it seen a refresh. Although console gaming sucks all around.
0 Votes
+ -
Xbox just plain sucks... objective how?
VulakAerr 23rd Apr 2010
Out of the "core gamer" consoles, the Xbox is doing better. The Wii is a freak of nature on which Nintendo have cleverly capitalised. For the serious gamer, Xbox is where strides are being made. Look at Project Natal. That had people's jaws hanging open.


Let's just hope that when they come to actually brand it, they don't give it a stupid name.
0 Votes
+ -
I had just posted a couple of links
John Zern Updated - 23rd Apr 2010
for itguy which would tend to support your opinion on the Wii

The Wii is a freak of nature on which Nintendo have cleverly capitalised

It would seem that the fad is wearing off, there's just no real excitement around it anymore as those that wanted it have bought it, and the level of interest is dropping.

The XBox and PSP have for the most part stayed realivelly the same level of interesest.
0 Votes
+ -
Open Source suffer the same branding problem as MS
wackoae Updated - 23rd Apr 2010
I'm sorry, but the worst branding names in the world belong to Open Source projects.

Here are two examples. Both projects are very good open source tools, but suffer a branding problem:

GIMP: an excellent tool, with very advanced features that suffers with a ridiculously ugly name and one of the WORST user interface in the world. And NO!! The GimpShop distro wasn't an improvement.

Blender: Not an ugly name, but just the wrong name for a 3D animation tool. The sad part, it is EXTREMELY IMPRESSIVE at doing what it was designed for. It is also very extensible and it has a huge amount of plug-ins available for pretty much anything you want to do. At 1st view, the user interface is hard to understand (some may call it scary). But after you learn some of it, it becomes very intuitive. Unlike GIMP, the UI is optimized for efficiency, not just because some idiot decided that was the best place to put the option. Yet, Blender is a totally stupid name for such a cool tool.

On the other hand, the some of the most popular open source projects have cool names that most people recognize: Firefox, Apache, Audacity, Eraser, etc.

In the tech/gadget world, a brand's name is just as important as the functionality is trying to sell.
0 Votes
+ -
Actually that's where you're wrong...
PollyProteus Updated - 23rd Apr 2010
When people have a choice, they tend to choose what they are familiar with over what they are not familiar with.

People who have used Macs all their life know about Windows and Linux but tend to choose Macs, because they don't want the learning curve of a different OS>

People who have used Windows all their life know about Macs and Linux but they still tend to choose Windows because, again, the learning curve of a different OS.

As for choosing Linux, having used it a bit, it is, by far, the least user friendly OS available. What it has going for it is that base cost for the OS is free.

What it has going against it is that there are how many different distros? Also there are other, inherent costs like time, and if you want quality support, you have to subscribe to some "for a fee" service, etc.

So you can't just say "I use Linux", you really have to qualify it with which distro, and if it's something like Ubuntu, which critter name.

Everyone here knows that you don't like Microsoft, not sure why you feel compelled to advertise it so readily and prolifically, but I sure wish you'd stop drinking so much coffee and calm down.

And no, I'm not a Microsoft apologist because I can see the merits of each OS as a separate entity. That said, Loverock also irritates the hell out of me and I sure wish he'd shut up too.
0 Votes
+ -
You make some excellent points...
Dave32265 23rd Apr 2010
however I will disagree with you on one thing...

"What it has going against it is that there are how many different distros? Also there are other, inherent costs like time, and if you want quality support, you have to subscribe to some "for a fee" service, etc."

Actually there are only 4 or 5 truly user friendly distros that I would recommend to my clients. The rest are really not designed for the average user. Many of those (clients) that now use Linux find Google (aside from calling me) a powerful tool when seeking an answer to a Linux question.

There are a lot of great forums out there for newcomers to Linux but my main gripe with some are the acerbic attitudes of the few "elitists", but that is becoming a rarity these days (thank goodness).
0 Votes
+ -
I agree
Rama.NET 23rd Apr 2010
but basically the issue with Linux is how fragmented it is by having a lot
user interface options, distros etc. you need a qualified person to check
and spread the right distro to his/her client, whether it is a family/home
computer or business. I don't want to say, but there are some folks here
who simply troll bashing Microsoft or Apple and praise their choice is
better and think OSS is the only solution to all. they just forget that it is
just technology, created by people and will have bugs. Linux needs to
remove those lunix. They create more damage to the movement.
--Ram--
0 Votes
+ -
You forgot "witness the wittless"
John Zern Updated - 23rd Apr 2010
so go look in the mirror, and you'll have covered that last one.

This was interesting, though

http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/archives/197628.asp

so was this

http://www.dailytech.com/Nintendo+Profits+Plummet+on+Lower+Wii+Sales/article16664.htm

So you're saying that you think a 43% sales decline is an indicator that it will continue to kick both MS's and Sony's numbers down the tube? happy
0 Votes
+ -
5 Companies, not 1
Timpraetor Updated - 23rd Apr 2010
Many business students have examined the Microsoft beast over the
years and one consistent theme comes up in the results of the studies
-

Microsoft should be 5 separate companies. This would alleviate any
monopolistic tendencies from the legal side, and provide
organizational level responsibility from the shareholders' side.

Microsoft Operating Systems
Microsoft Applications
Microsoft Development Systems
Microsoft Games
Microsoft Hardware

Each division would been to work with each other in the same manner
as any other third party. This would alleviate hidden APIs and more
quickly identify weak points in the development chain.
0 Votes
+ -
5 Microsofts? The more the merrier! (NT)
Loverock Davidson 23rd Apr 2010
__
0 Votes
+ -
The name wasn't the point
Timpraetor Updated - 23rd Apr 2010
I used the "Microsoft" simply out of ease. If each new company is
independent with no ties to the others and the same mechanisms for
accessing the various APIs/SDKs as other companies, there wouldn't be
"5 Microsofts".

Can't you please just GTFA and let the rest of us discuss things?
0 Votes
+ -
oh ho
Rama.NET 23rd Apr 2010
it seems LD stepped on you. In fact there was another study sometime
back, (I couldn't recall the URL, I am sorry), why it would be bad to divide
Microsoft. This happened when some loon, who had personal gripes over
Microsoft and Bill Gates, decided to break the company in the name of
monopoly. Peace.
--Ram--
0 Votes
+ -
Huh?
Timpraetor 23rd Apr 2010
Apparently you and Loverock are buddies, but it still has no bearing on
my point.
0 Votes
+ -
Uh...
Muttz 23rd Apr 2010
Do you mean kinda like GM?

That didn't work out so well for them, did it?
0 Votes
+ -
And the failing divisions folded
Timpraetor 23rd Apr 2010
In GM's case, that is. That's the whole point to the exercise. If one
division can't stand on its own, POOF - and then there were 4 ...

But, doing this for MS isn't the same as the GM divisions. Each would
be interdependent and independent at the same time. Additionally,
while I used the "Microsoft" moniker for the examples, the names are
unimportant - it's the separation that matters.

This way, if the "Entertainment and Devices" division were two
separate companies, they'd have the ability to build their brands
without either riding the coattails of big brother or failing because one
of the others failed.
0 Votes
+ -
Actually, I do have to agree
Muttz 23rd Apr 2010
That was just more or less a joke. GM and MS are apples and oranges. Forget that lol and it changes everything.

I have another post below and basically what I am saying is that Vista did bring a lot of other products down with it. A lot of people didn't trust anything MS for awhile. If it had been a separate division, maybe it wouldn't have affected other products.

It would end the "monopoly" stuff too. I have no problem with MS making money, but some people do. If separate companies are reporting profits, the numbers won't be so high.
0 Votes
+ -
This should have been done...
Dave32265 23rd Apr 2010
years ago and should have been forced by the legal system to do so.
0 Votes
+ -
That's what got the studies started
Timpraetor 23rd Apr 2010
When MS started being chased by the various states and countries legal
branches, a lot of business schools asked students "How would you
resolve this outside of legal action?"

Breaking the company up was the resounding common theme. 5
segments was the most probable winning scenario for both the legal and
shareholder interests.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Microsoft's
Muttz 23rd Apr 2010
I don't think that it was the Vista name that people disliked. There were several mistakes made when Vista came out.

I think that the main problem with Vista was that people had to discard a lot of older hardware and applications. That also happened when XP came out, but non-tech people don't remember that.

The second problem were those Vista-capable computers running Home Basic. They were barely capable of running at all! Again, non-tech people would not have been aware of the difference between capable and compatible and they concluded that Vista was junk. Say it enough and it becomes true.

I think that Windows Live One Care was also a victim of Vista's bad press. I loved that AV, but people just refused to trust it. Now many of those same people are using Security Essentials. They really like it and trust it. The new price tag, (free) may have something to do with that. However, the people that I know who have made the switch are pretty much split evenly between former AVG users and Norton users.

You could go on with all the other products. MS was just not a trusted name for awhile after the Vista fiasco. That could have been handled so much better.

No, I don't think that it's the names of the products. I think that it is the marketing department that needs a shakeup.

Apple could introduce the iDogPoop and I swear, there would be a lineup...
0 Votes
+ -
Is that a surprise?
John Zern 23rd Apr 2010
A great product still won't sell if people don't know that it exists.
0 Votes
+ -
"Barely keeping its head above water"
The Star King 23rd Apr 2010
According to the first article you linked to:

"The entertainment and devices division turned a profit of $165 million on revenue of $1.66 billion."

Seems like a pretty handy profit to me! MS is selling millions of Xbox's and millions of Xbox games which retail at $50+. I'd be surprised if it didn't make a profit out of the xbox.

Be interesting to compare profitability with other console manufacturers...
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Barely keeping its head above water
fatman65535 Updated - 23rd Apr 2010
Quote; "The entertainment and devices division turned a profit of $165 million on revenue of $1.66 billion."

Didn't you know, that in order to appease Monkey Boy, each division is expected to make at least a 30% profit. And clearly with only a 10% (more or less) profit; that doesn't cut it. Also, the quote does not specify whether or not that is gross or net profit. It would be worse if it were gross profit.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix