Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Brand In Sharp Decline

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the no-surprise-to-anyone-here dept.

Amy Bennett writes "A recent poll of about 12,000 US business decision-makers by market researcher CoreBrand found that Microsoft's brand power has taken a dive over the past four years. According to the study, Microsoft dropped from number 12 in the ranking of the most powerful US company brands in 2004 to number 59 last year. In 1996, the company ranked number 1 in brand power among 1,200 top companies in about 50 industries. The CEO of CoreBrand said: 'When you see something decline with increasing velocity, it's a concern.' To add some historical context, IBM suffered a much faster and more severe decline in brand power in the early 1990s and it took them 10 years to rebuild the brand's reputation."

28 of 399 comments (clear)

  1. No way! by pubjames · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You mean, they put out a new version of their main product, it was widely ridiculed, and their brand suffered as a result? Who would have guessed!?

    1. Re:No way! by value_added · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You mean, they put out a new version of their main product, it was widely ridiculed, and their brand suffered as a result? Who would have guessed!?

      Well, the article suggest there are more possible reasons than the one you cited, but speaking of suffering, I'll offer up my own jab to add to the fun: No Recession at Red Hat. Maybe not a recognised brand name around the kitchen table, but somebody's noticing.

    2. Re:No way! by dpilot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The flip-side of "diversifying into new markets" is "the death of a thousand paper-cuts". Diversification can lead to newer and better sources of revenue and profit. Or it can give you new and exciting ways to lose money.

      The job of good executive management is to know the difference, better yet, to make the difference go your company's way.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    3. Re:No way! by djrobxx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think Microsoft's problems run much deeper than just Vista. Microsoft has completely lost sight of how to create innovative products that people enjoy using. When they can't seem to innovate, they backtrack and try to compete with existing products. Only it takes them so long the thing they're competing with becomes deeply entrenched in the market and has become a de-facto standard. Examples: TiVo and UltimateTV. iPod and Zune. It surprises me that XBox has done as well as it has. Microsoft has been in the mobile phone business for over 5 years. They've had all this time to refine PocketPC/Windows CE as a phone OS. Still, I don't know anyone who really loves Windows Mobile. It's functional but clunky. Yet Apple comes along and takes their first stab at a phone, it's a smash hit with people overall. Vista is just another example of how Microsoft just "doesn't get it". They keep changing things around in ways that just aren't better, especially for less technical people. They keep taking their common "standardized" UI elements away from their applications. That goes for other products too. The most basic UI staple - the menu bar, is now missing from Internet Explorer 7 and Word 2007 amongst others. i really used to be a fan of Microsoft's products, but not so much anymore.

  2. Redmond weather alert by Facetious · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Today's forecast calls for light showers with a high chance of flying chairs. Seriously, though, I used to doubt the power of "branding," but the more I learn about the average consumer (disappointing as it may be), the more I understand why companies care about this kind of thing.

    --
    Let us not become the evil that we deplore.
    1. Re:Redmond weather alert by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Branding == Reputation. Not quite. Reputation is one component of branding, yes. There's also qualities such as name or brand recognition (do consumers recognize your brand when they see it?), and brand association (what attributes to consumers associate with your brand?) and brand differentiation (how is your brand different from your competitors brands in the eyes of the consumer?)

      People don't always necessarily go for quality. If that were the case, McDonald's and a bunch of other businesses that turn out what are essentially low-quality, cheap or just plain mediocre products would be out of business.

      Some people want a brand because it represents an attitude -- like I'm different. Think of Apple's Think Different campaign. People bought Macs just to be different -- they didn't care about features in the OS or available software, they just wanted a different kind of computer.

      In the end the average Joe Sixpack buys what he finds familiar. He doesn't make buying decisions based on facts or critical thinking or anything related to clear, precise, logical thought. Kinda scary when you think about it.

      --
      My blog
    2. Re:Redmond weather alert by feepness · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In the end the average Joe Sixpack buys what he finds familiar. He doesn't make buying decisions based on facts or critical thinking or anything related to clear, precise, logical thought. Kinda scary when you think about it. Especially when you realize the same process applies to voting.
  3. Wha? by Clovis42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can someone explain what "brand power" is, and how you can possibly measure it? I know that "branding" is important, but ranking companies by "brand power" seems like useless information being created by "CoreBrand". I'm guessing CoreBrand didn't make it very high on the list themselves...

    --
    Clovis
    ^ Clovis, look! It's that guy you are!
  4. No suprise... by ZenDragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In my opinion they need to stop trying to take over the internet and look internally to focus and improve their core product lines. The release of vista and its lack of acceptance in the business sector was a huge blow to their reputation. I personally am aware of several VERY large companies that were considering Vista a year ago and have completely turned 180 degrees towards open source. I dont know how far MS thinks they are going to get by forcing Vista down the corporate throat.

    Im not a microsoft hater, in fact I depend on MS products to make a living, but I know Im not alone on this sentiment.

  5. What Microsoft has forgotten.... by Rod+Beauvex · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsfot has forgotten, like many other corporations, is that all one needs to focus on is making a quality product. If you do that, all other things, quartely earnings, shareholder returns, marketing, ect, will take care of themselves natually.

    1. Re:What Microsoft has forgotten.... by trongey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Microsfot has forgotten, like many other corporations, is that all one needs to focus on is making a quality product. If you do that, all other things, quartely earnings, shareholder returns, marketing, ect, will take care of themselves natually. That explains why Apple is on the list and McDonalds isn't. Oh, wait, it's the other way around.
      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
    2. Re:What Microsoft has forgotten.... by z80kid · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Microsfot has forgotten, like many other corporations, is that all one needs to focus on is making a quality product.

      Forgotten?

      Seriously - at the risk of sounding like a basher - has Microsoft ever produced a product where they focused on providing better quality than the competition?

      I've known many people who have purchased Microsoft products for compatibility with existing infrastructure (basically vendor lock-in). I've never personally known anyone who has bought a Microsoft product because they perceived it as having more features, being easier to use, or being more stable than competing products.

    3. Re:What Microsoft has forgotten.... by mikael · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Microsoft's strategy has always been to bundle everything together, so no product ever really had to survive on its own. Bundle Windows 3.0 with MS-DOS. Bundle the internet browser with the OS and make it part of the desktop. Bundle Windows 95/99/NT/XP/Vista with new PC's being sold. Bundle Microsoft Word with Excel and Powerpoint, and so on...

      Five years ago, a corporate environment had to use Microsoft word for creating documents and Outlook Express to send/receive E-mail. Now, you can use OpenOffice or PDF files to exchange documents, and use any type of client to send/receive E-mail.

      Nobody would really want to buy each item individually when they could get the equivalent applications from the open source community.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    4. Re:What Microsoft has forgotten.... by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Microsfot has forgotten, like many other corporations, is that all one needs to focus on is making a quality product.

      I'm not convinced Microsoft ever knew that - at least not in the way you mean it.

      Now, don't get me wrong, I'm sure at some levels there are people trying to ensure that it is, in fact, a quality product -- at least as much as it can be.

      But, Microsoft has always been focused on making sure you buy their products, no matter what. They managed to get IBM to make it mandatory, then it became the de-facto standard, then it took a lawsuit to try to be able to buy a PC which MS wasn't paid for. They've not been above strong-arming people and saying that you must do it on our terms, or not at all.

      Their entire corporate strategy has been to try to push out competitors by making them not work with their stuff, and try to make sure that top to bottom you use their stuff for everything you do.

      Microsoft has never truly been interested in competing purely on the quality and merit of their products. They have always had an evangelical position that essentially said "we're good, we're getting better, stick with us and keep paying us, and eventually we'll deliver something which does what we promised the last version would do". And, they're not above a little deception to do it.

      And, quite frankly, Microsoft has never had to compete purely on quality. They started off with an unfair advantage, translated that into an assload of cash, and then they used that to get themselves further entrenched.

      Cheers
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  6. Interesting.. by Idaho · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft may be down quite a bit, but Apple is not even on that list at all.

    IBM is at spot #18, which is quite surprising really - as far as I noticed there are no other software companies that high on the list at all. Most of the top 25 seems to be car companies, food/drinks/restaurant franchises and the like.

    --
    Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
  7. Re:Brand Dilution by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The difference between Vista and ME is that now people have a choice. Back then Linux was too hard to use, too hard to even find out about. Apple was a has-been, and OS2 had made a good attempt, but clearly failed. Also, for those who complained too much, there was Windows 2000/NT, so there was enough goodness coming out of Microsoft to keep people happy.
    Now, on the other hand, Apple is cool, Linux is for sale at Dell and Walmart, people realize that Windows XP isn't too bad, and there is no great potential for a new OS in the pipeline from Microsoft(as there was with win2000). Yeah, there's Windows 7.....don't hold your breath). Their brand power was good, now it's getting bad. The winds of change are in the air from a lot of different directions.....no company can hold a monopoly forever, it is destiny that there will be a change. The only question is when.

    --
    Qxe4
  8. Re:When you come to the fork in the road, take it by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the point of being cool is you're not just another random person That's the nerd definition, perhaps, which makes sense considering it's a culture that celebrates the love of obscurity and shunning anything anyone else likes.

    The reality is, being cool is about being cool. Can't be defined. Any attempts to do so peg you as uncool, and you'll probably never know why.
  9. Re:You don't say... by quag7 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have a hard time telling here whether you're serious or not, but really, more people hate Microsoft than love any alternative. Most casual computer users I have met (therefore I very carefully make no broad sweeping statements about "all" of any population of people), gripe constantly about Windows but use it anyway.

  10. Microsoft brand declining? Depends... by Techguy666 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the TFA:

    Among its peers in the category of Computers, Peripherals and Computer Software, Microsoft is second to IBM in brand power, with Toshiba a close third, Gregory said. If Microsoft's downward trend continues, Toshiba could pass it in brand power next year, he said.


    I'm an educator and work with kids (and some university students) all day. Ask anyone aged 10-25 what Microsoft is known for and they'll say Xbox (or Xbox 360). Sit kids in front of a Mac and they'll start messing with it; sit kids in front of a Windows box and they'll start messing with that. They don't "see" the operating system or the cognitive dissonance of the Office ribbon... They're still platform agnostic. And Microsoft is counting on that.

    We associate Microsoft with "Computers, Peripherals and Computer Software", we hate their stuff, and we take glee in the decline of the Evil Empire that brought us Windows, IE, and OOXML. If I were to be associated with the Vista debacle and ActiveX exploits forever, I'd want my brand to die, too!

    Don't be fooled by the article however, Microsoft still has the mindshare of future consumers - they're the cool company that brought us the Xbox, Xbox Live, and the Halo franchise... In another 20 years, wouldn't you want to buy technology from the guys who brought you all the great memories from your childhood??

    Apple went from a declining "Computers, Peripherals and Computer Software" company to a hot mainstream company, and used the iPod halo effect to come back into their old, failed "Computers, Peripherals and Computer Software" market, hotter than ever. Microsoft is simply stealing a page from Apple and guaranteeing its survival for the next 20 years, when the Xbox gamers of today take their turn at being CIOs and CTOs.

  11. Re:When you come to the fork in the road, take it by p0tat03 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unlikely. Apple only owns about 14% of the laptop market right now. Just look at the iPod - initially it certainly did impart some coolness on its owners, but in the end it simply became a hip commodity item, like driving a hybrid.



    Until we see another company as consumer-savvy as Apple come along as the next underdog chic electronics manufacturer, I think Apple's position is pretty safe.



    As a Mac user I can only see the pattern continue. The Mac has seen an explosion of popularity ever since the Intel switch (the best move ever, really), and that has started to remove the main weakness of the platform: lack of software. Many app developers are now clamoring to port apps to the Mac, and most encouragingly a lot of open source projects now have stable Mac ports as well. As the software barrier becomes removed it will only become easier to switch to the Mac.

  12. Re:So who is the current #1? by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hahahahahahaha.... they might be if you could actually trust them to run reliably. A lot of people don't ride their harleys to the bike rallies: they drive their car and cart the harley in a trailer. One of the reasons that's so is because riding a motorcyle long distance is very tiring, the other is the rate of failure of Harley's is atrocious.

    I can't believe I'm doing this, but if Harley Davidson is ranked number 4, then this study has little or no bearing on the reliability of products the company makes. At best, it's showing what the public perceives the reliability of the products the company makes.

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
  13. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  14. Another Columnist Discovers The Real World by Whuffo · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Having a strong dislike for Microsoft is nothing new around here; we've seen their products and practices up close for years. It's only now that the media is discovering what we've known all along.

    The problem with Microsoft isn't Vista or Clippy or XBOX360; those less-than-good products are just the result of the arrogance that runs through everything they do. They've turned out a few good products, too.

    If you need to point a finger at them, how about pointing at - well, how about their anti-trust conviction? Did you notice how they changed their ways after this conviction? No? That's what's wrong with Microsoft. It's the anti-competitive way they insure that every new computer has Windows installed. It's the anti-competitive way they bundle other products. It's all the companies who were crushed by Microsoft - but not before Microsoft "liberated" the intellectual property from those doomed companies.

    How about their shrink-wrap license agreements that they use to bind you - but if you disagree and try to use the remedy they've provided (return product for refund) you'll find that's virtually impossible to do? How about the way they're currently trying to subvert the ISO standardization process?

    Remember when XP went out the door with a list of 50,000 bugs still unresolved? They're still sticking band-aids on it - but rather than complete that product they're off to yet another (arguably less functional) product which was also rushed out long before it was ready.

    For those who want to defend this miserable excuse for a software company, here's a question for you: name 10 technologies that Microsoft has shipped that were invented in-house by Microsoft.

  15. Maybe companies are finally getting fed up with by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    how Microsoft refuses to play well with others. That is my biggest beef with them on a corporate level. We are currently trying to integrate a few windows machines into our all mac/linux network, and it is painful. There are all sorts of "security policies" that need to be fiddled with because they aren't the same, XP gets upset if you have more than one domain controller on different domains it seems, and it doesn't even support NFS....NFS a protocol that will be celebrating its 20th birthday next year, isn't supported by Windows XP. Can you name me one other major PC operating system that doesn't support NFS out of the box? Any Mac box can be an NFS server or client, ditto for Linux, BSD, Solaris etc. But since it wasn't invented at Microsoft Microsoft doesn't consider it to be important, esp. since they could use their lack of NFS support to get you to buy a Microsoft server product that does the same thing but isn't nearly as secure.

    SSH, LDAP, etc. the list of technologies that almost every other OS on the planet supports but XP doesn't(I don't know about Vista, but it's not like XP is that old). Microsoft's client OSs seem to have features that try to force you into buying Microsoft server OSs. Samba is great, and I certainly don't want to denigrate the brilliant people who write the stuff, but it shouldn't be necessary. Maybe back in 1996, when most business networks outside the megacorps consisted of a dumb hub with very little centralized management Windows wasn't all that bad, but the problem for Redmond is that the rest of the world moved on and they didn't. They still seem to think its a Microsoft only world, but the rest of the world thinks differently.

    --
    Monstar L
  16. Re:So who is the current #1? by Ralgha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This study has nothing to do with reliability, only brand recognition. Regardless of Harley's reliability, they are a very, very widely recognized brand name.

  17. Re:You don't say... by cheater512 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For some reason, Windows users feel happy after they fix their computer, not pissed.
    I believe thats the primary reason behind Windows still having popularity.

    You see it all the time.
    E.g. Printer wont print just before something urgent is due.
    They are annoyed when it occurs but are happy when they fix it (usually by rebooting or restarting the app).

    I've been watching people using Windows and most of the time they dont even realise when it crashes.
    Its just automatic for them to reboot/restart the program and they edit what happened out of their memory.
    I've actually had to tell someone that their computer crashed because they didnt notice.
    They have been taught that all computers are like that and they just accept it.

    Whenever I make Windows crash (very often with Explorer) I get really pissed.
    Which is why I make a point on not using Windows unless absolutely necessary.

  18. Re:You don't say... by BlueMoss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft makes money off of defense contracts and their contractors. You can be assured that the Green Zone is a Microsoft zone. The Business Software Alliance sues the customers of Microsoft by proxy. So its more than incompetence, Microsoft is the computer face of Brand America... and we know that brand has been in free fall for some time now. Apple seems more international, and less Amero-centric.

    --
    There are no absolutes.
  19. Re:You don't say... by Gerzel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    With a distro like Ubuntu do those 99% need to deal with config files, CLI, and compiling from source?

    Seriously, using Ubuntu on this machine I rarely if ever have to go to any of those above. Almost anything I could want (except high-end games) is up on Apt/Synaptic with a decent summary, push button installation/un-installation/updates. Configuration is much the same way, with far more options available through nice gui menus than are ever available to the Windows user.

    Even those games that I have for linux such as Second Life and Eve Online have been push button to install. Sure with SL I did have to make my own menu button for it but that was filling in a gui form menu and was not strictly necessary.