8 ms·
The logo is O.K. Their homepage http://microsoft.com http://microsoft.com looks like a mix between a "corporate" website template you'd buy for $50 and a domain
by sudonim 14y ago
The logo is O.K. Their homepage http://microsoft.com http://microsoft.com looks like a mix between a "corporate" website template you'd buy for $50 and a domain squatting page with amazon referral links.
Gosh I want to cheer for microsoft but they make it real hard.
- eckyptang 14y agoIt was only this morning that my wife said exactly the same thing about it looking like a domain squatting page (while she was trying to find MSE download on their web site).
- brudgers 14y agoThe web came to Microsoft after the IPO. At the time, there were a lot employees with "fuck you money" and the web was still the wild west not a corporate branding commodity. Thus Microsoft's approach has been generally hands off and the first priority has always been to get information out on the web. The idea of a monolithic website like Apple's or Google's just doesn't apply. It's not part of Microsoft's DNA. Compare: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/ http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/ http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/home http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/home https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/ http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/ http://www.microsoft.com/windowsphone/en-us/default.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/windowsphone/en-us/default.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/en-us/products/2010-editions/express http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/en-us/products/2010-ed... http://expression.microsoft.com/en-us/cc184874.aspx http://expression.microsoft.com/en-us/cc184874.aspx http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/ms376608.aspx http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/ms376608.aspx Other than white backgrounds, it's not very consistent.
- k3n 14y agoConsistently bad.
- brudgers 14y agoDepends on the relative values one places on form, content, and completeness. In HN terms, Microsoft's website[s] is[are] great as MVP's and improvements thereupon. On the other hand, in terms of Apple's ex cathedra philosophy, then perhaps, yes it[they] is[are] bad.
- saraid216 14y ago> yes it[they] is[are] bad That was mind-breaking. My brain processed it as, "yes it they is er, what are aaaaah bad".
- shell0x 14y agoI don't like it either. Design isn't one of Microsofts strengths.
- thomasf1 14y agoWell... They try to get to a new simplicity. I agree that they fail at making it great, but you´ve got to give them some love for trying. Metro is actually innovative, yet not ideal for desktop PCs. And it´s just the same with the new Logo: Strict simplicity (which makes Apple great), but not thought through in a way. To me it feels like there´s a gatekeeper at the top missing asking the tough questions before the product is out of the door. The one that asks: "But does it really make sense and how can we do better" when the managers self-congratulate themselves on the bold moves.
- bjornsteffanson 14y agoI understand what mean about it not being part of Microsoft's DNA, but it seems like you're trying to blame Microsoft's poor web presence on its age. How do you then rationalize other pre-Web companies like IBM and Apple who have managed to successfully embrace it?
- noblethrasher 14y agoIBM and Apple each have a more homogeneous audience. IBM is a consulting company and courts mid- to upper-level manager types with purchasing authority. After few seconds on the page you are invited to speak with a sales consultant via a popup. Apple is focused exclusively on the (premium) consumer space. Both companies represent top-down totalitarianism (I say this without value-connotation): IBM suggest corporate command and control, Apple has a well-curated walled garden. Microsoft's site reminds me of one of the more effective university websites. Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with any of those companies except as a consumer. My iPhone is my favorite toy.
- d4nt 14y agoWhile its probably correct to say that Microsoft does not have a homogenous audience and that that is why their online presence lacks the clarity of, say, Apple. I think the lack of clarity is a bad thing and Microsoft only really have themselves to blame for their audience. If you're going to go after a very varied audience you should probably think carefully about whether you need to have lots of sub brands (e.g. Proctor & Gamble) so that your customers simply google for the sub brand, or whether you actually can attach some core values onto the parent brand that will be meaningful in all these different markets (e.g. Virgin or Disney). It's no good having a scatter gun product strategy then neglecting your branding and online presence because you sell to everyone everywhere.
- Trufa 14y agoApple sold 18.65M iPhones in Q2 2011, that's iPhone alone, I think calling Apple's audience homogeneous is ridiculous, and falls under the same as "mac is for designers" old-fashion statement.
- grueful 14y agoThe layout looks rational enough in the context of the tiled GUI layout they're trying to push. But the top bar could be a few times thicker. It's too cramped. I tried a quick hack increasing the min-height attribute on hpHdr_PriRow to 50px, which gives much nicer proportions.
- mitjak 14y agoI agree. It's fairly in line with the new Metro and Phone 7 UIs. Not as polished though: * In Chrome, the carousel controls at the top right are cut off. Intentional? * The "For home" and "For work" buttons on the right shrink the margins between themselves and the carousel on hover but never quite bridge the gap, which looks awkward to my eye. * The carousel is gigantic and hides all the content below it on all but the largest screen resolutions (and I thought Windows 8 is supposed to be running on small portable tablets?). * The top menu under the logo is extremely cheesy with its thin 1px border on hover, never mind that it's next to invisible next to that massive carousel. When it comes to actually navigating the site to getting the user to Microsoft's products, this menu is failure. * … Generally, the entire layout feels a bit like the team that's been responsible for the page for years has been told to 'clone' the newest UI to the best of their abilities.
- systems 14y agoi think the worst part about their new homepage is the "Welcome to Microsoft" white bare/space at the top, they could, and should have made better use of that space
- DASD 14y agoNot only that but why is "Welcome to Microsoft" an image(png) and not text?
- snarfy 14y agoThe nav links render like crap in Firefox and Chrome. Of course, it looks fine in IE, which sums up a lot of Microsoft's problems.
- colanderman 14y agoNot to mention the URL… http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx, really? Have they not heard of internal/external URL mapping and Accept-Language? Not to mention it won't even load for me; I guess they don't cache this stuff either.
- rplnt 14y agoWhat is wrong with that url (except default.aspx)? It's widely used and I like if I'm not forced to some region or locale based on my IP and Accept-Language. Well, I still am but I can change it easily if they give me this url (or even better link on a page).
- colanderman 14y agoIP-sniffing is evil; I'm not advocating that. Accept-Language is trivial to change; on Opera, it's one of the three things on the first tab of Preferences, and I can set it for all sites rather than on a per-site basis.
- Argorak 14y agoI wonder how you change it in the browser of another person that you sent this link to.
- colanderman 14y agoWhy would you want to do that? The content is (should be) identical, and the recipient of your link would most likely want to read the content in his/her preferred language. If you really wanted to point out to them some discrepancy in the content of some particular language, then just tell them "switch your language to Chinese and look at xxx here". On sites where linking to a particular language version of some resource makes sense (e.g. Wikipedia), by all means, accept a ?lang=de parameter… it's exactly as much mechanism as a directory component, but it doesn't imply any hierarchical structure, and can be dropped to obtain a "canonical" URL.
- silverbax88 14y agoAt the risk of sounding snarky, not all change is good change. Of course, it's not like Microsoft EVER had a decent or even remotely stylish logo. The bigger concern I would have over the logo is the website, which is amateurish. Honestly, if I did not know this was Microsoft, I would think it was a startup company that paid $50 for a website template, as you stated, and not a very good one.
- dhimes 14y agoThe web page actually looks ok on my phone. However, putting m.microsoft.com into FF on my laptop just belched xml all over my screen.
- its_so_on 14y agothis comment is great. I didn't believe you and clicked through, with your comment still ringing in my mind - I had to laugh. you nailed it.