Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Next Microsoft

minimallyminimal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 355 posts

Re: The Next Microsoft

#311

Post by abtinf »

nhashem wrote: post #95

We could debate whether this would "work" on a practical level as if this was a Powerpoint presentation for Steve Ballmer and we're supposed to predict how he'd react. But I'm really just finding myself appreciating the "space/science fiction" metaphor for technology. Steve Jobs has often quoted Apple as "advancing the human race." I feel like this takes it to the next level. I felt myself wanting this company to exi…

This campaign is almost a return a Microsoft branding vision from years ago - their "Where do you want to go today?" line of ads. But where those ads where often very "corporate looking", the integration of photography into the proposed slate logo is appealing and its what I want technology to be all about.

Re: The Next Microsoft

#312

Post by wilfra »

Spearchucker wrote: post #301
cdf wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am obviously biased, but I am terrified, TERRIFIED, if a company with Microsoft's history has a say in delivering the future. I dont want that future. Microsoft has a very very long way to rehabilitate their image for their long history of bad behaviour.

Not biased so much, maybe, but definitely subjective. I have more faith in Microsoft than I do in any other big tech company. It's easy to forget that any commercial organisation's mission is to make money, which makes it inherently self-serving. Microsoft, Red Hat, Google, Apple, Oracle, Facebook and so on all exist to make their shareholders rich. And yet we seem to think that they exist to make cool products, or t…

"...Facebook...exist to make their shareholders rich. And yet we seem to think that they exist to make cool products,"

Zuck specifically said this isn't true in his letter to shareholders. They make money so they can build, they don't build to make money.

If you simply observe his own lifestyle and the choices he's made with Facebook, it is pretty clear money means very little to him and that he absolutely loves running Facebook.

Given that he can veto anything anybody else ever says about the company for the rest of his life, I am inclined to believe him.

Wall Street seems to believe him too, thats why FB's stock is not doing so hot. They know FB's dictator despises them and doesn't care about making them money.

Re: The Next Microsoft

#313

Post by jsprink_banned »

mattdeboard wrote: post #308
jsprink_banned wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternative and far more logical explanation, of course, is that you surround yourself with and network with the kind of people who read HN. I do understand the global impact of a forum such as this, and I certainly understand the ramifications of a networked society. I suggest, however, that the network in this case is far smaller than supposed. The next example is dangerous to pull off as the topic is polarizin…

You're really upset about being banned, aren't you?

Quietly ignoring the final two paragraphs of my original comment since you have nothing to contribute, and are instead attempting to undermine my contribution with a pithy, underhanded dose of snark, aren't you? (The irony is that you unintentionally reinforced my point, so, thanks!)

Hacker News is far too full of comments such as these, and I can loosely translate them all:

I'm completely unprepared for this conversation and have nothing to contribute (or it blew over my head), and that makes me feel inferior, so I'll make myself feel better by culling some cheap upvotes from a few people who I got a rise out of at the expense of actual, interesting conversation.

Re: The Next Microsoft

#315

Post by loup-vaillant »

drostie wrote: post #309
loup-vaillant wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that group-think is definitely unavoidable? If whatever opinion a given community forms cannot be challenged ever , then it's bound to be plagued by affective death spirals[1], evaporative cooling[2], and, well, significant errors in its vision of the world. I'm not saying your counterpoint is wrong. I'm saying I want it to be wrong. Because if you're right, even LessWrong and RationalWiki are hopeless…

If LessWrong is our touchstone then indeed some forms of group-think are presumably unavoidable. I mean, I'm working on a new religion; given only that knowledge and no actual content, can you guess how I'd be received by Less Wrongers? What if a postmodernist came by? An eugenicist? It is often easier to laugh with our community than to really try to see the world from the alternate perspective and really work out a…

Hmm, as an avid LessWrong Lurker, I can share my first impressions:

Religion: does it have any basis in reality? That's a real question, as I know of a religion that does: copyism¹. Also Note that LessWrong did come up with a winter solstice ritual.

Post modernism: as far as I know, this is just confusion. Even if it's all in our heads, well, that's how the world works. Anyway, it empirically seems that magical thinking doesn't work, so… there is a world out there, and it seems to be ruled by relatively simple rules. It may be not so, but my estimate is so low that investigating that isn't worth my time. Now if I get the chance to probe a postmodernist's brain…

Eugenics: slow, unreliable in the short term, and have incredibly dangerous political implications. Probably not worth investigating much further. Now, if you go beyond mere selective breeding, and start to directly (and precisely) manipulate our genome, we may go somewhere. But at that point, uploading (if it can work) could be a better option.

Your second paragraph sounds correct. Now how do we make people feel whole?

[1]: http://www.copyism.org/

Re: The Next Microsoft

#316

Post by nickbauman »

Branding is lying. Plain and simple. In order to execute this strategy, Microsoft would need to corporate equivalent of a brain transplant. Will never happen. Given these truths, this branding exercise is masturbation.

Re: The Next Microsoft

#317

Post by bluthru »

mkr-hn wrote: post #142
bluthru wrote: post #27

"Purely digital." There is no such thing. That's like saying "purely hologram". Pixels have no inherent materiality. There is nothing about the Metro UI that couldn't be recreated on a piece of paper. The goal is visual communication and delight. Sterile for the sake of sterile isn't virtuous.

"Purely digital" means it avoids real-world metaphors like postal mailboxes, analog clocks and magnetic tape.

Metaphors are part of visual communication. Blatantly disregarding metaphors creates unnecessary confusion and abstraction--it separates the interface from culture.

Remember, all of this stuff is ultimately (and most truthfully) 1's and 0's. There is always abstraction. It is best to choose the abstraction that is most DESCRIPTIVE.

Re: The Next Microsoft

#318

Post by ekianjo »

tissarah wrote: post #304
ekianjo wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Careful, it's not just about branding. You have to live the brand idea as well, it has to perspire in your products, down to the tiniest detail. Anyone can hire a new brand team, pour millions in TV ads and new copies, but that won't change squat until the products themselves follow the very same idea. At a company scale such as Microsoft's, true rebranding will take significant time and resources, or they will have…

Isn't it true that strong vision that people have a true emotional response to and believe in can move 100k people (or even more)? Maybe an expensive "true rebrand" is a way to make a promise to your people and help build trust in your new direction. Also making it so visible and present can help remind people of this direction when they make every day decisions.

The problem is not only the number, it's the overall inertia between what management wants and what workers are all levels can get to. Management may have a forward moving vision, but it takes time to communicate it, to ensure everyone understands what it means, etc... and there are always resistances, too.

Plus, in a 100k company, I don't think 100% of employees are blindly following what the CEO wants them to do.

Re: The Next Microsoft

#319

Post by ekianjo »

brsim wrote: post #294
ekianjo wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does the Xbox fit in this New Microsoft, though ? There was no mention of it, while it's become a big part of Microsoft business over the years.

The Xbox user interface has been changing to look similar to the new "Windows 8 style" recently. I think you could easily take one of the proposed "Slate" images, duplicate and flip it, then overlay it over the original to make an "X" shape. That would create a nice fresh brand image for the next generation of xbox's and fit in with the proposed brand redesign as a whole.

Yeah but why was it not even mentioned in the whole brand redesign ? Xbox is clearly NOT a windows branded product, it stands on its own and should have been part of the "New Microsoft" brand image.

Re: The Next Microsoft

#320

Post by eavc »

alexirobbins wrote: post #281
nhashem wrote: post #95

We could debate whether this would "work" on a practical level as if this was a Powerpoint presentation for Steve Ballmer and we're supposed to predict how he'd react. But I'm really just finding myself appreciating the "space/science fiction" metaphor for technology. Steve Jobs has often quoted Apple as "advancing the human race." I feel like this takes it to the next level. I felt myself wanting this company to exi…

The "slate" logo is okay. The promise of delivering the future is brilliant. I had the same exact reaction to it - there needs to be a multi-billion dollar company devoted to this philosophy! I think microsoft is in a unique position to become this company - they suck right now and they have the resources. I also think Ballmer probably will see this. I bet he'll see it and he'll like it, but worry that it's too big o…

Some of Google's projects seem ambitious in the way you are describing. The self-driving cars, in particular, are straight out of sci-fi.
Post reply on HN