4 ms·

In my opinion, the top that needs to change first is Ballmer. I think the first thing holding back Windows Phone in the markeplace is the name. "Windows Phone"

by fpgeek 15y ago

In my opinion, the top that needs to change first is Ballmer. I think the first thing holding back Windows Phone in the markeplace is the name. "Windows Phone" inherits the baggage of desktop Windows and of Windows Mobile, neither of which is that positive. Something like "Metro Phone" or whatever would inherit less baggage and would be doing at least a bit better. The naming decision was and is Ballmer's, so...

smackfu 15y ago
OTOH, is it not selling because of the name, or because the local AT&T store has one model, and will never recommend it?
- potatolicious 15y ago
  Or because they are completely not marketing it? When it launched they did some incredibly poorly thought out TV ads that looked more like some art-house feature than a television commercial. Only a notch above the completely ioncomprehensible campaign Palm ran for the Pre. Look where that landed them. And since then the marketing has been nearly invisible. Yeah sure, you'll see the Windows Phone Facebook page push some promotions and token events, but where is the real force of marketing? When Motorola first made its maneuver into Android-land, I remember every bus shelter, subway platform, billboard, everything plastered in Droid ads, with clever (if slightly unimaginative) slogans. Microsoft's marketing in everything has been utterly incompetent. They've gotten so used to owning products that require no marketing that they're not incapable of doing it. Just think at the "major" marketing moves MS has made in recent years. Seinfeld? WTF? The Lumia is an absolute gem of a device. It's beautifully integrated and has industrial design that screams elegance. And nobody I know has heard of it.
  - teyc 15y ago
    Actually Nokia has done a lot more than Microsoft. But obviously they too have a way to go before people learn about it.
  - jcitme 15y ago
    >owning products that require no marketing that they're not incapable of doing it. I think you have a double negative there...
  - w33ble 15y ago
    I think this is probably their biggest problem too. I'm a pretty technical guy, maybe not up on the latest and greatest in the land of cell phones, but I get by. That said, I'm still not even sure if I can go buy a Windows Phone device yet. I've seen some reviews of the Lumia, and it looks nice, but I honestly couldn't tell you if it's out or not, and who would even have the thing if it is. Or, for that matter, if ANY of the US carriers have ANY Windows Phone devices yet. I've read about upgrades to the OS, so I suspect there are handsets to be had, but I just don't know. Yes, I could look up information about Windows Phone and available devices, but why should I? Nobody I know has one and the one person I knew that wanted one more than anything else ended up buying and Android phone because he couldn't wait any more. My point, which was OP's point, is that Microsoft should be doing their part to make sure I know this information passively, like all the other phone manufacturers have done. I've seen the interface, it looks slick, but that's where my knowledge of their platform stops. In contrast, I see a new Android billboard (typically some flavor of Motorola's Droid) go up every month. I can't be bothered to keep up with all the variations, but I know they are available, and where to go get one.
  - fpgeek 15y ago
    > When Motorola first made its maneuver into Android-land, I remember every bus shelter, subway platform, billboard, everything plastered in Droid ads, with clever (if slightly unimaginative) slogans. And that shows how powerful marketing can be. The Droid wasn't Motorola's first foray in to Android-land. That milestone belongs to the Motorola Cliq (in US on T-Mobile) / Dext (outside US). The Droid was Verizon's first foray into Android-land and they marketed the hell out of their new smartphone brand (licensed from Lucasfilm), so that's what you remember.
- wglb 15y ago
  Microsoft does enterprise very well. Glow-in-the-dark PR for hot, trendy products, not so well.
  - dman 15y ago
    Xbox? Kinect? DirectX ?
    - wglb 15y ago
      These are all great technologies, particular Kinect. Takes more than great technology to create the buzz. Consider the public excitement of the MS touchpad effort with the public excitement about the iPad just as an example.
- fpgeek 15y ago
  To be precise, I said the name was the first thing holding Windows Phone back, not the only thing. I completely agree marketing is a problem for Windows Phone, I just think the marketing is influenced by the name and that you will have a harder time marketing something called "Windows Phone" than you would have marketing the same thing with a different name.
azakai 15y ago
> I think the first thing holding back Windows Phone in the markeplace is the name. "Windows Phone" inherits the baggage of desktop Windows and of Windows Mobile, neither of which is that positive. I think so too. Calling it "Windows Phone" makes as much sense as calling the XBOX something like "Windows Console" would have (i.e., very little). Using the term "Windows" everywhere is good for the Windows brand. But Windows is already doing fine. Prioritizing the Windows brand over the success of Windows Phone is an odd decision.
untog 15y ago
"Windows Phone" inherits the baggage of desktop Windows and of Windows Mobile, neither of which is that positive. To developers, perhaps. To the average user, Windows is what runs on their computer at home. Most people I meet are perfectly happy with Windows, too. So a Windows Phone really isn't a terrible marketing proposition.
- notJim 15y ago
  I think people are content with Windows, not happy, and more importantly, not excited.
  - dman 15y ago
    Gamers for one seem to be happy on Windows
- protomyth 15y ago
  Had 3 people ask me if they needed virus protection on a Windows Phone if they bought one. I was really surprised by this, but I guess, given what we drill in people about their Windows PC, I shouldn't be surprised. When I tell them that WP isn't really Windows and they will be fine, all 3 seemed confused. Really a shame since they did a good job of coming up with a different UI.

by fpgeek 15y ago

smackfu 15y ago

OTOH, is it not selling because of the name, or because the local AT&T store has one model, and will never recommend it?

potatolicious 15y ago
Or because they are completely not marketing it? When it launched they did some incredibly poorly thought out TV ads that looked more like some art-house feature than a television commercial. Only a notch above the completely ioncomprehensible campaign Palm ran for the Pre. Look where that landed them. And since then the marketing has been nearly invisible. Yeah sure, you'll see the Windows Phone Facebook page push some promotions and token events, but where is the real force of marketing? When Motorola first made its maneuver into Android-land, I remember every bus shelter, subway platform, billboard, everything plastered in Droid ads, with clever (if slightly unimaginative) slogans. Microsoft's marketing in everything has been utterly incompetent. They've gotten so used to owning products that require no marketing that they're not incapable of doing it. Just think at the "major" marketing moves MS has made in recent years. Seinfeld? WTF? The Lumia is an absolute gem of a device. It's beautifully integrated and has industrial design that screams elegance. And nobody I know has heard of it.
- teyc 15y ago
  Actually Nokia has done a lot more than Microsoft. But obviously they too have a way to go before people learn about it.
- jcitme 15y ago
  >owning products that require no marketing that they're not incapable of doing it. I think you have a double negative there...
- w33ble 15y ago
  I think this is probably their biggest problem too. I'm a pretty technical guy, maybe not up on the latest and greatest in the land of cell phones, but I get by. That said, I'm still not even sure if I can go buy a Windows Phone device yet. I've seen some reviews of the Lumia, and it looks nice, but I honestly couldn't tell you if it's out or not, and who would even have the thing if it is. Or, for that matter, if ANY of the US carriers have ANY Windows Phone devices yet. I've read about upgrades to the OS, so I suspect there are handsets to be had, but I just don't know. Yes, I could look up information about Windows Phone and available devices, but why should I? Nobody I know has one and the one person I knew that wanted one more than anything else ended up buying and Android phone because he couldn't wait any more. My point, which was OP's point, is that Microsoft should be doing their part to make sure I know this information passively, like all the other phone manufacturers have done. I've seen the interface, it looks slick, but that's where my knowledge of their platform stops. In contrast, I see a new Android billboard (typically some flavor of Motorola's Droid) go up every month. I can't be bothered to keep up with all the variations, but I know they are available, and where to go get one.
- fpgeek 15y ago
  > When Motorola first made its maneuver into Android-land, I remember every bus shelter, subway platform, billboard, everything plastered in Droid ads, with clever (if slightly unimaginative) slogans. And that shows how powerful marketing can be. The Droid wasn't Motorola's first foray in to Android-land. That milestone belongs to the Motorola Cliq (in US on T-Mobile) / Dext (outside US). The Droid was Verizon's first foray into Android-land and they marketed the hell out of their new smartphone brand (licensed from Lucasfilm), so that's what you remember.
wglb 15y ago
Microsoft does enterprise very well. Glow-in-the-dark PR for hot, trendy products, not so well.
- dman 15y ago
  Xbox? Kinect? DirectX ?
  - wglb 15y ago
    These are all great technologies, particular Kinect. Takes more than great technology to create the buzz. Consider the public excitement of the MS touchpad effort with the public excitement about the iPad just as an example.
fpgeek 15y ago
To be precise, I said the name was the first thing holding Windows Phone back, not the only thing. I completely agree marketing is a problem for Windows Phone, I just think the marketing is influenced by the name and that you will have a harder time marketing something called "Windows Phone" than you would have marketing the same thing with a different name.

azakai 15y ago

> I think the first thing holding back Windows Phone in the markeplace is the name. "Windows Phone" inherits the baggage of desktop Windows and of Windows Mobile, neither of which is that positive. I think so too. Calling it "Windows Phone" makes as much sense as calling the XBOX something like "Windows Console" would have (i.e., very little). Using the term "Windows" everywhere is good for the Windows brand. But Windows is already doing fine. Prioritizing the Windows brand over the success of Windows Phone is an odd decision.

untog 15y ago

"Windows Phone" inherits the baggage of desktop Windows and of Windows Mobile, neither of which is that positive. To developers, perhaps. To the average user, Windows is what runs on their computer at home. Most people I meet are perfectly happy with Windows, too. So a Windows Phone really isn't a terrible marketing proposition.

notJim 15y ago
I think people are content with Windows, not happy, and more importantly, not excited.
- dman 15y ago
  Gamers for one seem to be happy on Windows
protomyth 15y ago
Had 3 people ask me if they needed virus protection on a Windows Phone if they bought one. I was really surprised by this, but I guess, given what we drill in people about their Windows PC, I shouldn't be surprised. When I tell them that WP isn't really Windows and they will be fine, all 3 seemed confused. Really a shame since they did a good job of coming up with a different UI.