Windows 8 May Be End of the Line for the Windows Brand

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Windows 8 hasn’t even made it to the gate yet and there is already talk of the next operating system. The word is out that Windows 8 will be the end of the line for the Windows brand name. It’s time, don’t you think?

The “Windows” name has been around since 1985. 2015 makes 30 years then, which is a nice round number to put the brand to rest on.
Click to expand...
 
My question would be: why? Windows is probably one of the world's best known brand names... People who don't like Windows, won't like whatever will be replacing it as they're already hooked to the icult koolaid.
 
Why should they? Windows is one of the most recognizable brands in the Tech industry.

I see absolutely no reason to get rid of it. It's gone beyond the meaning of having "windows" open in your OS. After all, they call it Windows Phone, but there are obviously no program "windows" as we've come to know them.

It's just a very well known brand. I think it's a stupid suggestion.
 
The aim, as he put it, is to provide “coherence and consistency [between platforms]… particularly with Xbox."
Click to expand...

Windows is a generic term as it is. I don't see how it is specifically for PCs/whatever.

The xbox stuff is disturbing if it is true, what are you going to call it isntead? xOS? xbox command? dashboard? whatever the xbox OS is called? winbros?

Nothing has as much brand recognition and it might be kind of silly to completely retire it to be more like a console a small percentage of people use.
 
I think its time for Microsoft to get better management.
 
I don't have a problem with them keeping Windows name either. You don't see Apple getting rid of the "i" in front of all their products or not calling their computers "Mac".

There is nothing wrong with keeping a brand people know and trust.
 
I´m no business genius, but ending the Windows brand sounds like a lot of unnecessary trouble.
 
Next name probably has something to do with the cloud and mobile devices. "Gateway" or something.
 
I just don't see this happening. It makes sense to have specific software, for specific devices using different brand names, but completely phasing out Windows?
 
They could name it whatever they wanted, and people would still tack Win or Windows in front of the name.
 
Retiring windows...
Welcome to WindOS! Fast, light, goes anywhere.
 
Ascario said:
My question would be: why? Windows is probably one of the world's best known brand names...
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. I can't see why they would want to give up the name familiarity / brand recognition. Windows XP and Windows 7 are both very good OSes.
 
Some else already said it, but seriously, management needs to be 'retired' for this suggestion. Getting rid of the most recognizable brand name in computers to help tie it in with their other products is just plain silly. Their other brands need to swap to the Windows brand, not the other way around.

All this is going to do is allow those people that have been wanting to leave Windows for years to do so. Big name change means big software changes, right? Big software changes mean my legacy software will be obsolete.

Oh, well. That's still a few years off, and it's not yet confirmed positive. On with life. Fear mongering is fun, though!
 
Wasn't a similar comment made when Vista came out. Then again right before Windows 7?

Unless there's a replacement OS that supports tons of hardware and software on the horizon I don't see this happening. I also don't see a company giving up on something where they control 85% of the market share.
 
honestly even with all the bad times the brand had and had again, its a strong brand, especially now that its finally getting more and more momentum from all angles.
 
Why would they change the name?

Makes no sense.

People just buy apple shit cuz they know the name.
 
That's the stupiest idea I have ever heard. Is this what this people in office think all day?
 
Next version after 8 they call whatever but it will still be Windows, just a different name.
 
defunctdoormat said:
Some else already said it, but seriously, management needs to be 'retired' for this suggestion. Getting rid of the most recognizable brand name in computers to help tie it in with their other products is just plain silly. Their other brands need to swap to the Windows brand, not the other way around.

All this is going to do is allow those people that have been wanting to leave Windows for years to do so. Big name change means big software changes, right? Big software changes mean my legacy software will be obsolete.

Oh, well. That's still a few years off, and it's not yet confirmed positive. On with life. Fear mongering is fun, though!
Click to expand...

The "management" never once said anything about retiring Windows, this is all baseless speculation.

Their idea of introducing a coherent experience is using the Metro interface. WP7 has it, Windows 8 Touch interface will have it (Notice I specifically said touch interface, the desktop will still exist) and come the fall the Xbox 360's UI will be Metrofied as well.

Nothing was ever about retiring the Windows brand name except for this blog writer.
 
Might as well change the name microsoft to something more up-to-date too :rolleyes:

Seriously... "microcomputer" and "software"?! Sooo 70's.... might as well just call it Apple.

</sarcasm>
 
insert said:
That's the stupiest idea I have ever heard. Is this what this people in office think all day?
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question.

Outside of the Operating System and Office Software production departments, how many sections of Microsoft have ever been profitable.

The answer?

Zero.

Even the famed department, Home and Entertainment, has yet to actually post a profit. The only reason Microsoft "claims" that H&E is profitable is because Microsoft conveniently wrote off... well... several billion by now... as unrecoverable losses. Just in the first year of the Xbox's life it's division wrote off $26 million, never-minding the billions lost during the Xbox 360's red-ring debacle.

One of Microsoft's biggest problems is that the Windows name doesn't actually have the market traction it is assigned. Cases in point: Windows CE and Windows Phone 7. Despite carrying one of the "biggest" brand-names in personal computing, Microsoft has never been successful in any other market than Desktop / Laptop computers.

So, why is that?

Or more preciously, how is it possible for a company to exist for so long with market and product failures in every single market by two able to survive for so long?

In large part Microsoft's existence is owed to their primary method of earning money, which is a tax. Microsoft depends on computer manufactures to ship Microsoft Operating Systems, and Microsoft Operating Systems alone, in all sold personal computers. When vendors don't ship Microsoft Operating Systems, Microsoft sends either the BSA or their own lawyers around to force the vendor to ship Microsoft Operating Systems.

The reality for Microsoft is that the Windows product name doesn't actually matter. All that matters is computer vendors continuing to pre-load Microsoft Operating Systems exclusively on new computers. It doesn't matter what Microsoft calls that Operating System, just as long as it is "from Microsoft"

Now, is that a smart way to run a company?

No. It's not.

Were Microsoft not so profitable on the strengths of the Microsoft-Tax and Microsoft-Office, it would not be able to afford to run any other divisions. All those other divisions, at some point, would have needed to have returned profits. At some point all of the managers who can not manage would have been weeded out of Microsoft.

The reality for Microsoft is that the rise of their "empire" on the Microsoft Tax meant the rest of the company was being filled with people who were not qualified for the positions they obtained, nor capable of running their divisions in responsible manners.

The reality for Microsoft is that their "tax" is falling apart. Millions of personal computing devices ranging from Smart phones, to tablets, to notebooks, to desktop computers, are now shipping without a Microsoft Operating System. Incidentally, this is also why Microsoft is so eager to get a "tax" on Android phones. Tax leverage is how Microsoft, as a company, makes money.

So, to directly answer your question.

Yes, this is how the people in Microsoft's management think. They don't see it as a bad idea.

The worst part is, in a roundabout way, they would be right.

As long as consumers do not have a choice, as long as consumers MUST buy a Microsoft product directly, or indirectly through a Tax, it does not matter what Microsoft calls their products.
 
Saist said:
Let me ask you a question.

Outside of the Operating System and Office Software production departments, how many sections of Microsoft have ever been profitable.

The answer?

Zero.

Even the famed department, Home and Entertainment, has yet to actually post a profit. The only reason Microsoft "claims" that H&E is profitable is because Microsoft conveniently wrote off... well... several billion by now... as unrecoverable losses. Just in the first year of the Xbox's life it's division wrote off $26 million, never-minding the billions lost during the Xbox 360's red-ring debacle.

One of Microsoft's biggest problems is that the Windows name doesn't actually have the market traction it is assigned. Cases in point: Windows CE and Windows Phone 7. Despite carrying one of the "biggest" brand-names in personal computing, Microsoft has never been successful in any other market than Desktop / Laptop computers.

So, why is that?

Or more preciously, how is it possible for a company to exist for so long with market and product failures in every single market by two able to survive for so long?

In large part Microsoft's existence is owed to their primary method of earning money, which is a tax. Microsoft depends on computer manufactures to ship Microsoft Operating Systems, and Microsoft Operating Systems alone, in all sold personal computers. When vendors don't ship Microsoft Operating Systems, Microsoft sends either the BSA or their own lawyers around to force the vendor to ship Microsoft Operating Systems.

The reality for Microsoft is that the Windows product name doesn't actually matter. All that matters is computer vendors continuing to pre-load Microsoft Operating Systems exclusively on new computers. It doesn't matter what Microsoft calls that Operating System, just as long as it is "from Microsoft"

Now, is that a smart way to run a company?

No. It's not.

Were Microsoft not so profitable on the strengths of the Microsoft-Tax and Microsoft-Office, it would not be able to afford to run any other divisions. All those other divisions, at some point, would have needed to have returned profits. At some point all of the managers who can not manage would have been weeded out of Microsoft.

The reality for Microsoft is that the rise of their "empire" on the Microsoft Tax meant the rest of the company was being filled with people who were not qualified for the positions they obtained, nor capable of running their divisions in responsible manners.

The reality for Microsoft is that their "tax" is falling apart. Millions of personal computing devices ranging from Smart phones, to tablets, to notebooks, to desktop computers, are now shipping without a Microsoft Operating System. Incidentally, this is also why Microsoft is so eager to get a "tax" on Android phones. Tax leverage is how Microsoft, as a company, makes money.

So, to directly answer your question.

Yes, this is how the people in Microsoft's management think. They don't see it as a bad idea.

The worst part is, in a roundabout way, they would be right.

As long as consumers do not have a choice, as long as consumers MUST buy a Microsoft product directly, or indirectly through a Tax, it does not matter what Microsoft calls their products.
Click to expand...
tl;dr
 
lol, some unknown tiny "temporary" news site claims to have multiple sources telling them MS long term marketing strategy (shift in product naming) while those with known contacts are completely in the dark about this? It strains believeability.
 
They should call it PC. Finally, all those Mac vs PC commercials would make sense.
 
This is a pointless exercise. It's like wanting to change the name "gasoline" to something else. Whatever the hell you decide to call it has zero influence on the fact that my car won't run without it.
 
In the future, windows will be replaced by force fields.

Force Field Vista. Force Field XP. Force Field ME.

Yes?
 
Maybe they'll simply get "trendy" like Apple does, and simply refer by a code name. Three Toed Sloth - Win9
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top