Comments on: Microsoft Competes for the Web 2.0 Backbone http://webworkerdaily.com/2008/03/07/microsoft-competes-web20-backbone/ Rebooting the workforce Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:04:14 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Paul http://webworkerdaily.com/2008/03/07/microsoft-competes-web20-backbone/#comment-289436 Paul Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:37:54 +0000 http://webworkerdaily.wordpress.com/?p=1876#comment-289436 "I still don’t like using the year in the name because you wind up looking very slack and make your customers feel as if they’re using old out-dated technology" Perhaps that's why they *do* have the year in the name, to make everyone acutely aware that you don't have their latest and "greatest" software. Like the auto manufacturers in the 1950's, giving their products a minor (but noticeable) facelift every year so that people would know you had last year's model in your driveway. The world would be a happier place if they put as much effort into fixing security issues as they do into dreaming up new names for the same old stuff. “I still don’t like using the year in the name because you wind up looking very slack and make your customers feel as if they’re using old out-dated technology”

Perhaps that’s why they *do* have the year in the name, to make everyone acutely aware that you don’t have their latest and “greatest” software. Like the auto manufacturers in the 1950’s, giving their products a minor (but noticeable) facelift every year so that people would know you had last year’s model in your driveway.

The world would be a happier place if they put as much effort into fixing security issues as they do into dreaming up new names for the same old stuff.

]]> By: Jon Beattie http://webworkerdaily.com/2008/03/07/microsoft-competes-web20-backbone/#comment-289382 Jon Beattie Sun, 09 Mar 2008 04:43:21 +0000 http://webworkerdaily.wordpress.com/?p=1876#comment-289382 If I had to sell an enterprise client on storing their data offsite with Microsoft or Amazon, it would probably be an easier decision for them to go with the Microsoft option. The other contender that is often overlooked I've noticed is Salesforce. They are pushing the whole Force.com proposition whereby you can basically build anything on their platform. As well as providing a cloud computing database, there is a whole lot more they offer http://s.wordpress.com/wp-content/themes/vip/webworkerdaily2/images/content/btn_submitcomment.pngin terms of an existing third party developer community and their products. I'm signing up for the beta, it will be interesting to see how it looks. Oh yeah and Jay, you are dead right. Why can't they get names right? Now they are changing everything to Live! - originally they made everything .NET when they launched that, confusing the hell out of everyone. MSN Messenger suddenly became Microsoft Messenger .NET in 2002, I think, now it is Live! Messenger. How hard could it be? They've got like a gazzillion people in their marketing department. If I had to sell an enterprise client on storing their data offsite with Microsoft or Amazon, it would probably be an easier decision for them to go with the Microsoft option. The other contender that is often overlooked I’ve noticed is Salesforce. They are pushing the whole Force.com proposition whereby you can basically build anything on their platform. As well as providing a cloud computing database, there is a whole lot more they offer http://s.wordpress.com/wp-content/themes/vip/webworkerdaily2/images/content/btn_submitcomment.pngin terms of an existing third party developer community and their products.

I’m signing up for the beta, it will be interesting to see how it looks.

Oh yeah and Jay, you are dead right. Why can’t they get names right? Now they are changing everything to Live! – originally they made everything .NET when they launched that, confusing the hell out of everyone. MSN Messenger suddenly became Microsoft Messenger .NET in 2002, I think, now it is Live! Messenger. How hard could it be? They’ve got like a gazzillion people in their marketing department.

]]> By: paisano http://webworkerdaily.com/2008/03/07/microsoft-competes-web20-backbone/#comment-289367 paisano Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:57:02 +0000 http://webworkerdaily.wordpress.com/?p=1876#comment-289367 Good point Jay. Microsoft has always had problems with naming their products/services. I still don't like using the year in the name because you wind up looking very slack and make your customers feel as if they're using old out-dated technology such as Windows 2003 Server or Office 2000 (both still corporate standards in many organizations). Remember the notorious Outlook Express? It had no relation to their flagship email client Outlook! Brilliant move. As for their current strategy involving web 2.0 and beyond, they obviously still have problems with naming conventions. For example, besides this misnomer for SQL Data Services, they've also gone astray with their web based Office services. For example, Microsoft Office Live Workspace isn't really a web version of Microsoft Office like Google Docs or Zoho Write and Sheet. It is more like Box.net than anything else. Just an online storage service. OK, then what is OfficeLive.com? Is THAT an online version of Office apps? NOPE. Not even close. It just offers their workspace storage service as well as something called Office Live Small Business which is basically a glorified Geocities service offering a domain name and website building tools. Yawn. Anyway, I am happy that the lumbering giant has finally decided to stick its head into the cloud, literally. Yeah, they still need to learn a lot about marketing and branding their products and services (can't they just steal that too from Apple?), but they are a necessary evil. We NEED Microsoft almost as much as they need us. pai Good point Jay. Microsoft has always had problems with naming their products/services. I still don’t like using the year in the name because you wind up looking very slack and make your customers feel as if they’re using old out-dated technology such as Windows 2003 Server or Office 2000 (both still corporate standards in many organizations).

Remember the notorious Outlook Express?
It had no relation to their flagship email client Outlook! Brilliant move.

As for their current strategy involving web 2.0 and beyond, they obviously still have problems with naming conventions.
For example, besides this misnomer for SQL Data Services, they’ve also gone astray with their web based Office services. For example, Microsoft Office Live Workspace isn’t really a web version of Microsoft Office like Google Docs or Zoho Write and Sheet. It is more like Box.net than anything else. Just an online storage service. OK, then what is OfficeLive.com? Is THAT an online version of Office apps? NOPE. Not even close. It just offers their workspace storage service as well as something called Office Live Small Business which is basically a glorified Geocities service offering a domain name and website building tools. Yawn.
Anyway, I am happy that the lumbering giant has finally decided to stick its head into the cloud, literally. Yeah, they still need to learn a lot about marketing and branding their products and services (can’t they just steal that too from Apple?), but they are a necessary evil. We NEED Microsoft almost as much as they need us.

pai

]]> By: Jay http://webworkerdaily.com/2008/03/07/microsoft-competes-web20-backbone/#comment-289291 Jay Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:58:40 +0000 http://webworkerdaily.wordpress.com/?p=1876#comment-289291 Gotta love their habit over the years of naming un-or marginally related things in a confusingly similar way. Gotta love their habit over the years of naming un-or marginally related things in a confusingly similar way.

]]>