Comments on: Microsoft's Dead Naming Strategy

By: Microsoft Live Maps Finally ‘Gets’ It. Sorta. « Jeff’s Weblog

Mon, 22 Oct 2007 07:18:56 +0000

[...] to ‘one-up’ everyone else and called it ‘Windows Live Local’. See, the ‘flavor of the month’ branding this time around was ‘Windows Live’ — itself a miserable branding failure. ‘Windows [...]

By: ???IT?? » Blog Archive » Google ? Microsoft????????????

???IT?? » Blog Archive » Google ? Microsoft???????????? — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 15:59:10 +0000

[...] ??????????????????????????????James Joaquin????Microsoft?????????????????? [...]

By: Brian Goffman

Brian Goffman — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:05:26 +0000

The fundamental issue around branding at Microsoft is that product groups get to plan and name products in advance of a grand scheme to unify them. By the team corporate marketing catches up, it’s too late.

It’s even more complicated that noted here: there also Live Meeting http://office.microsoft.com/en.....fault.aspx (previously Placeware) and Live Communications Server http://office.microsoft.com/en.....11033.aspx.

Some of the confusion around LCS may get cleared up with the next release, artfully now called Office Communication Server 2007. Note that neither Live Meeting nor LCS is directly connected to Office Live.

Unless Microsoft takes a different, unified approach to product planning, not really in the DNA of the company, the branding confusion will remain a symptom of deeper issues.

By: Tunde Whitten

Tunde Whitten — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:19:31 +0000

The “iGoogle” brand has one advantage that most brands don’t: “Google” possesses Verb Status in the popular venacular, that is, people recognize the action “to google” … thus a name that would severly dilute most brands could work for google by creating a self-affirmative meme within its consumer impressions.

By: Snark Hunting | Naming strategy: Microsoft vs, Google

Snark Hunting | Naming strategy: Microsoft vs, Google — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:32:47 +0000

[...] [More] [...]

By: Sean Malone

Sean Malone — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:05:14 +0000

At some point, when a “branded house” has lost its lustre or tied itself too closely with it’s primary product, I wonder if a “house of brands” doesn’t make more sense.

Microsoft has created an indelible impression around the world with its brand. It’s name is synonymous with an operating system and office productivity software (as you point out, James), and that impedes the growth of the other businesses inside that are trying to grow. The company is competing with it’s own sub-brand, and that comes at the cost of opportunity. The parent is holding back the children.

Coke doesn’t try to sub-brand Fanta, Sprite or Fanta. MS: Let Live live on it’s own, go forth and prosper – but give her every ounce of support – like there’s no tomorrow.

By: Ted Barnett

Ted Barnett — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 02:30:14 +0000

Sad but true. The chaotic, Darwinian organizational structure that Microsoft has established has its advantages. Alignment is not one of them.

By: This Week In SEO - 6/15/07 - TheVanBlog

This Week In SEO - 6/15/07 - TheVanBlog — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 02:17:15 +0000

[...] Microsoft’s Dead Naming Strategy [...]

By: MSN Search by Any Other Name Might Not Be As Sweet | Marketing Pilgrim

MSN Search by Any Other Name Might Not Be As Sweet | Marketing Pilgrim — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 22:20:39 +0000

[...] read an interesting article today by, of all people, a venture partner discussing Microsoft’s evolving brand strategy. [...]