"Microsoft's Entire Marketing Campaign for Windows 7 is Predicated on a Lie"

Sometimes you hear a quote that is simply too good to pass up. It is one you want to repeat. Today I read an article where Randall Kennedy stated that "Microsoft's entire marketing campaign for Windows 7 is predicated on a lie."

Wow.

Their entire marketing campaign for Windows 7? That is a bold statement.

InformationWeek states that Microsoft is pushing the idea that the community helped to make what Windows 7 is. They state that Microsoft is indicating that customers shaped what Windows 7 is. InfoWeek then goes on to state that this is not true. That Microsoft had a solid understanding of what they wanted Windows 7, Microsoft didn't really bring on people until later, and that they are on record as ignoring feedback and requests for earlier access.

So did customers shape Windows 7?

InfoWeek goes on to make an even bolder statement. They take credit for shaping Windows 7.

Windows 7 is a Better Vista

Windows 7 is a better version of Vista. I believe nearly everyone will agree to that. I agree that feedback on Windows 7 was late in the process and had limited impact on the final product. I do believe, however, that most of the changes for Windows 7 were decided before a lot of the public input was obtained from the betas. I believe most of the public feedback on the product was obtained with the release and use of Vista. I believe the community did drive Windows 7, but that they did it as feedback on the horrible issues that Windows Vista presented. I believe Windows 7 is more like a new release of Windows Vista, only done better because little things are fixed and drivers already exist.

Did we shape Windows 7 like Microsoft stated? I'd argue that we had a big impact on it. I surely wouldn't give InfoWeek all the credit, nor would I state that Microsoft ignored its community. After all, ignoring your community is a quick way to failure.

What do you think? Is Microsoft lying?



More...

Wow! If Win7 has great sales then that guy will be kicking himself. Well, I have seen some of the ads for Win7 I can't remember the how Microsoft pushed there message about Win7 across though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brad jones

Sometimes you hear a quote that is simply too good to pass up. It is one you want to repeat. Today I read an article where Randall Kennedy stated that "Microsoft's entire marketing campaign for Windows 7 is predicated on a lie."

Wow.

Their entire marketing campaign for Windows 7? That is a bold statement.

InformationWeek states that Microsoft is pushing the idea that the community helped to make what Windows 7 is. They state that Microsoft is indicating that customers shaped what Windows 7 is. InfoWeek then goes on to state that this is not true. That Microsoft had a solid understanding of what they wanted Windows 7, Microsoft didn't really bring on people until later, and that they are on record as ignoring feedback and requests for earlier access.

So did customers shape Windows 7?

InfoWeek goes on to make an even bolder statement. They take credit for shaping Windows 7.

Windows 7 is a Better Vista

Windows 7 is a better version of Vista. I believe nearly everyone will agree to that. I agree that feedback on Windows 7 was late in the process and had limited impact on the final product. I do believe, however, that most of the changes for Windows 7 were decided before a lot of the public input was obtained from the betas. I believe most of the public feedback on the product was obtained with the release and use of Vista. I believe the community did drive Windows 7, but that they did it as feedback on the horrible issues that Windows Vista presented. I believe Windows 7 is more like a new release of Windows Vista, only done better because little things are fixed and drivers already exist.

Did we shape Windows 7 like Microsoft stated? I'd argue that we had a big impact on it. I surely wouldn't give InfoWeek all the credit, nor would I state that Microsoft ignored its community. After all, ignoring your community is a quick way to failure.

What do you think? Is Microsoft lying?



More...

---

I think he needs to get a grip on reality. They ALL lie. Marketing is nothing but lies, lies, and more lies. The sooner he gets to understanding this fact of life, the less bitter and angry his posts will be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UITDEV

I think he needs to get a grip on reality. They ALL lie. Marketing is nothing but lies, lies, and more lies. The sooner he gets to understanding this fact of life, the less bitter and angry his posts will be.

---

Lie is such a harsh word lets just say they twist the truth. :lol:

Of course the Win7 campaign is a lie, but that doesn't mean Win7 itself is bad, it's rather good.

What else would Win7 be based on? WinXP? The thing is, they took Vista and made it work, they really put effort into this so Vista can just bite the dust like WinME quickly did.

I guess it depends on how you look at it. I'd say indirectly customers shaped Windows 7. By making NetBooks popular, customers forced MS to make 7 run better on lesser hardware. Also with customers being drawn to Apple, MS took some design and usability cues from Apple.

Plus the growing state of touch computing and devices helped shape it as well.

In the end though, customers win. Who cares if some ego maniac wants to take credit. MS is the one rolling in the cash. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brad jones

What do you think? Is Microsoft lying?

---

To be quite honest ... who actually gives a flying rip?

The product works. It works damned well and is a reasonable value for the money. What difference does it make, eh?

We sure do get our panties in a wad over things sometimes!

-Max :D

InfoWeek sounds like they want to ride the coattails.

Users shaped Windows 7 because users hated Windows Vista. Their negativity on Vista was the groundwork for the functional improvements of Windows 7.

Granted, some DESIGN decisions were made regardless of user input. For example, Microsoft wanted the core of Windows 7 to be much lighter than Vista. Why? Netbooks. Vista is simply too bulky for Netbooks. Moore's law kinda took two steps back as computers with the processing power and RAM of last-generation suddenly became popular because they could now be made super tiny, battery economical, and lightweight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JuggaloBrotha

...The thing is, they took Vista and made it work....

---

They started to work on what eventually became a Windows 7 long before Vista.
Vista [imho] was an intermidiate product because they [MS that is] had realized that it would a lot longer to develop new os.
So, the way I see it Win 7 is definitely not Vista - it looks like one but that's about it.
As far their marketing goes... Since OS itself is so superb I couldn't care less about it.

The Win7 kernel is the Vista kernel with some minor enhancements and some pretty big fixes, which is why Win7's internal version number is 6.1, so Win7 is a fixed Vista, the rest is fluff, which they've improved as well.

Win7 is what they intended Vista to be but due to marketting they released it waaay early, given the financial situation they kind of had to take the bad rap to get the sales to finish the product (Win7)

Another way to look at it is that people can say Windows 7 is not Vista. This saves the Vista naysayers eating crow when they cave in and adopt it. ;)

The nice thing is everybody wins, at least until the next round of naysaying.

Nayyyy

Keeping the Windows 3.1 faith hmm? :D

I roll with Windows 3.11

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JuggaloBrotha

I roll with Windows 3.11

---

http://chitchat.at.infoseek.co.jp/vmware/win31svga.png

:D

You killed it with the WinXP background man

:D :D you know you love it

Indeed I do, I should set up a VM for win3.11, I wonder how big it'll be... 0.13 GB ?

Well according to one website I just looked at, the installer is 11 MB haha

I also just stumbled across this image showing the pre-installation screens for Windows 3.11 - I cant believe they didnt change that at all until Vista! Even in XP and Server 2003 you saw that same crappy blue screen with white writing when selecting the partition to install on etc

http://robertsundstrom.files.wordpre...virtualpc9.png

When installing Win95 the process reaches a certain stage and you get GUI setup from there on. It is actually running a stripped Win3.1x at that point that was called "MiniWindows."