CNET had an info-jammed story yesterday about Microsoft's product naming strategy. A sample:
"When Microsoft showed off Silverlight at an April conference, it generated near-instant buzz.
Interestingly, though, it was not the first time Microsoft had talked about the technology. But when the company had done so a year earlier, it was under the name 'Windows Presentation Foundation/Everywhere,' which just didn't excite people the way Silverlight did."
From May 9, with rumors of MSFT purchasing YHOO swirling, here is a sampling of my thoughts of that being a bad idea for MSFT, as posted here at worthreading:
"The solution is simple, really: just make up a creative-sounding word that in no way implies any association whatsoever with Microsoft, and then take a small percentage of the billions that would be used to buy a Yahoo and instead start building the new brand."
I've learned over the past 5 months of blogging that most people don't bother to click on outgoing links to full stories, which is why I'll occasionally quote some of them directly in posts along with pasting the link. That said, if you have any interest whatsoever in how branding works (and doesn't work), head over to the CNET article and learn something useful.
Comments