10 Apr 2012

The Marketing Disaster that is Windows 8

From the marketing savants that brought you "Googlighting" and "Gmail Man", I give you......

The New Windows logo

Windows 8 Logo

Now, I have written about Windows 8 being a strategically flawed product, but Microsoft seems dead set on complementing it with a flawed marketing plan as well. There have numerous, mixed reactions from across the globe, which to be honest, seem to be missing the point. Microsoft revealed the following rationale for the change:
At this point, I really have to wonder if Microsoft has handed over their entire product & marketing strategy to designers. Nobody in Microsoft should care what the design principles behind the logo are. What they should care about is that a logo is their first, visual touch point with a potential consumer, which should highlight or serve to remind consumers of Microsoft's strengths.

What is Windows' biggest draw, from the perspective of the average consumer? It's not Microsoft Office. It's one word - Familiarity. Now, Microsoft has already succeeded in weakening this strength, thanks to Metro user interface. The Metro UI is about as alien to the average windows user as it can get. When this is combined with the fact that, half of those who have tried the Windows 8 consumer preview wouldn't recommend it, Microsoft already has a problem on its hands. The one last factor that could give a potential consumer an air of comfort, in terms of product recognition, was the well-known Windows logo..... which is now history.

The WOA Problem

Sadly, the problems don't stop at the logo. Microsoft has decided to ship the following editions of Windows 8:
  • Windows 8 
  • Windows 8 Pro
  • Windows RT
Anyone see a problem here? Why is Windows RT, or Windows On ARM (WOA) as we know it, lumped in with all the other editions? Shouldn't the announcement or any marketing campaign be separate?

Because WOA does not support legacy applications, it is in essence a completely different product as compared to the x86 version, from the perspective of consumers. This is one situation, where you should not be mentioning any semblance of familiarity - even the name "Windows". At the very least, I will give them credit for not calling it Windows 8 RT and not announcing the previously rumored 9 editions.

The main problem is that Microsoft is going to be launching tablets based on Windows 8 (the x86 version), as well as Windows RT (WoA), and most consumers will not know the difference between the two. If Microsoft is going to depend on sales people to educate consumers on the difference between x86 and ARM versions of Windows, both Microsoft and their consumers are in for a rude awakening.

Conclusion - At the root of it, this whole mess has been caused by Microsoft attempting to fuse two different products into one schizophrenic whole, because of their fear of the potential impact of tablets on PC sales. Ideally, Windows 8 on x86 and Windows RT should have been two completely different products from a marketing perspective, with different logos & brand names, to ensure that consumers understand this. Instead of solving the two problems at hand, Microsoft's marketing strategy seem to have made them worse.


    IT Company India

  2. I think your recommendations would be diluting the brand. I also think the majority of consumers will understand the different products. I am not in favor of repeatedly changing logos. If you stick with a logo (like Chevrolet) the value increases over time as more people become familiar with it. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. 

  3. Appreciate the comment, but I have to disagree. It wouldn't dilute the Windows brand any more than Windows Phone does. They're just completely different products and they're meant to be branded differently.

    And I agree with your second point that the value of a static logo increases over time. Which is exactly why they should have left it alone (for x86) in the first place.

    But everyone has opinions around the time of a new product launch. Only time will tell. Interesting times we live in.

  4. NotMyRealFakeName22 April 2012 at 19:19

    My guess is that the hardware OEMs will want to target the consumer market with ARM units so that they can keep prices high on the business-oriented Intel units. Consumers will see affordable "Windows tablets" that don't really run (what they think of as) Windows, or Windows applications. The "real" Windows tablets (the Intel ones) will be priced well above the iPad, because many business will be willing to pay that much.

    The ARM tablets will very quickly end up in a "fair fight" against the iPad where the "Windows" brand carries no weight (and might even be a detriment if consumers perceive WinRT as an attempt to fool them).

  5. The Metro UI is definitely designed for tablets and (possibly) entertainment centers/living room PCs. Im sure corporate environments will disable the Metro UI.

    I believe Windows RT will be a disaster - at least in the beginning. There definitely will be some people who will buy it thinking they can run their old Windows software and have a rude awakening. However, porting applications shouldnt be that difficult. Redesign for the Metro UI, recompile, and get approved by the MS store. I would expect to see applications quickly get populated in the MS app store. And they have the potential to be real applications, unlike those you find in the Apple app store.

  6. sameer_singh177 July 2012 at 04:03

    I doubt that will happen, and this is why. Developers need a large install base to justify the investment of porting apps. Even though Metro apps will work on both Windows 8 and Windows RT, they will be designed for touchscreen devices while the vast majority of early Windows 8 devices will be traditional PCs. In addition to this, traditional PC users wouldn't use apps even if they could. For example, Chrome is the most popular browser in the world, but the number of downloads on Chrome's appstore is abysmal.