What seems most contradictory about the campaign’s message is that the prevailing impression people often have of Microsoft is that its software often is not ready when the company has said it will be. For example, the release of what is now to be named Vista has been delayed several times, and will initially be devoid of most of the features that would have been of greatest value to enterprises.
In any case, most advisers would not recommend corporate users to adopt a new Microsoft product at least until after its first service pack is made available, due to bitter experience of problems with software releases in the past that seemed not be ‘ready’ for release (in that they failed to work properly).
Perhaps Microsoft believes that ‘people’ do not object to being put in difficulties by such (perhaps premature) releases, a view that would be borne out by the queues of consumers that commonly form to be the first to hand over money for them: however, serious businesses have more at stake.
Microsoft’s policies on resource-hungry upgrades such as Vista, and termination of support for older products even though they still suit many requirements, is known to force ordinary people to buy new computers far more frequently than they otherwise would need to. Consequently, those people often find themselves wrestling with configuring systems that always work in new ways, and it is surely a fallacy even today that all configurations always work as they should – plenty of UK computer suppliers still part perfectly sensible people from their money due to their fear of difficulties with new systems.
Software should not be termed ‘people-ready’ if those same people often have to invest in a new machine to run it, and Vista will be no exception (otherwise why did hardware vendors’ share prices suffer when the last delay to Vista’s launch date was announced?).
Due to the same upgrade and support policies, many Vista users will eventually have upgrades to software and computers paid for from corporate budgets. However, the main features of Vista from a user viewpoint will be changes to the user interface, possibly requiring retraining within enterprises whose staff are required to use the product – clearly this does not constitute being ‘people-ready’, and is a negative point in the case for corporate adoption (which so far appears to have few countering positives).
Another aspect of Microsoft’s practice also seems in opposition to its new message. It is well known that the vast majority of users only use a tiny proportion of the functionality in the most ubiquitous Microsoft products – so who is the rest of the software ready for? It can only be imagined that Microsoft has a ‘geek’ user base in mind, for whose benefit everyone else contributes the higher price that is the result of including so many extra features, although this would run contrary to an industry view that the ‘people-ready’ message is partly an attempt to differentiate Microsoft from IBM, whose products are portrayed as useful only with the aid of services expertise.
The whole issue of what market Microsoft is really serving is a perplexing one, but actions such as its approach to the Vista release lead to a view that, underneath everything, it is really a consumer-facing technology vendor that also wants access to the corporate wallet.
Until Microsoft’s focus changes, as is rumored to be likely, to software delivered as a service, a more appropriate message might be ‘glossy new software – yours if you wait until it is ready, and you have bought a new PC.’
Source: OpinionWire by Butler Group (www.butlergroup.com)
