Why Does Microsoft Frequently Use Generic Product Names?

Question

Microsoft seems to use such generic names for their core products that it seems like it must be or have been part of a deliberate strategy. It is so common that I think it may have originated as a way to overawe some business customer or junior college striver -- who vaguely knows that SQL servers exist -- that SQL servers are Microsoft-specific products. Same with mail exchange server.

Namely:

SQL Server (most general term possible, despite which they claim a trademark)

Exchange Server (see rfc's from the 1980's onward describing mail exchanges and calling them precisely that)

Windows (the generic term used with windowing applications since their invention)

Office (if you are inclined to protest that it's really Microsoft Office, go to the product splash page and look for the word 'microsoft')

Has anyone ever come across a discussion of this from someone involved in the early naming decisions or marketing, or have any knowledge if this is in fact a pattern intended to associate in the public's mind core general technologies with Microsoft products (while stretching the outermost limits of trademarkability)?

Answer 1

The practice dates back to the 80s when Rowland Hanson was the head of marketing at Microsoft. He devised the naming practice of putting Microsoft in front of a generic word that described the function of the application. This was done as a way to immediately convey what an application was for as well as a way to work Microsoft into the name.

More information in the context of Microsoft Windows: Windows Vista: What's in a Name?

Answer 2

It's very clever - it makes them seem like the default choice.

So Microsoft becomes synonymous with word processing (MS Word), GUIs (windows), SQL etc They are subconsciously the obvious choice, you have to make a conscious decision to trust WibbleBlah for your new word processor over whatever Microsoft make.

It's as if Ford called their products the car, or the truck.

Answer 3

It's not new with Microsoft. Let's go back to the days when IBM ruled the earth.

The most obvious nowadays is the Personal Computer, along with the Personal Computer Disk Operating System.

To go back in time, consider one of their earlier minicomputers, the System/36 that primarily ran programs written in Report Program Generator (RPG, anyway). The IBM 360 was a perfectly good name for a computer in those days, but it came (originally, anyway) with Basic Operating System, Tape Operating System, Disk Operating System, or Operating System (which everybody wound up using after a while). Many programs were written in Basic Assembly Language and run with Job Control Language. IBM was also active in computer languages, promoting such languages as Programming Language One and A Programming Language. (Some of these may be more familiar as acronyms.)

I don't know if this is necessarily a characteristic of a market-dominating company, but it sure looks like it (for a sample size of two).

Answer 4

Apple:

Keynote

iWork

Final Cut Pro

Garage Band

Adobe:

Illustrator

Photoshop

(don't mention Dreamweaver or ColdFusion they are bought products)

Answer 5

I truly believe that renaming Avalon to Windows Presentation Foundation is responsible for at least 25% drop in confidence and enthusiasm regarding this technology.

Answer 6

Microsoft upper management is very much run by MBA types which means names are probably analysed and manipulated so much that only a generic name can come out the other side. Just being a 'cool name' isn't enough. I think Apple go by feel a lot more, and then just do what Steve says.

Answer 7

What gets me is using some generic word in a way that has nothing to do with the original meaning of the word.

.NET assemblies -- as far as I can tell, this has nothing to do with assembly language

managed code -- sounds as if the cat-herding problem has been solved

Visual Programming -- sounds like it's just like NI LabVIEW G and other visual programming languages

SideWinder -- that's a kind of venomous snake, right?

Answer 8

Because more generic product names might be more easily shared between people,
it's also a lot quicker to see what the application is about.

Compare Microsoft Door Bell to Microsoft Ring. (Don't see this as Bing, which is a catchy name)

Answer 9

Whichever word you use to describe your product, you considered the authority on that product or service. Generic terms are used more frequently and have a distinct advantage to anyone who can be positively associated with that word.

As a reminder, Microsoft is short for "micro-computer software". Isn't that as generic as you can get?

Microsoft Office: PERFECT! Microsoft Word: PERFECT! Microsoft SQL Server: Okay. Microsoft Access: Poor. Microsoft Excel: Poor. Oracle: Poor! (Is Oracle a company or a product? Both? Neither?) Adobe Acrobat: Sucks. (Totally non-descriptive.) Adobe ColdFusion: Okay. (Cold fusion is a process that never happened. It sounds quite intriguing though.)

Answer 10

Back in early nineties I applied for my first ever computer science certification short course of 3 months duration. The enrolled asked me for my preference of programming language : "BASIC or C" ?.

I thought for about 100 milliseconds and replied ... "BASIC obviously !!" . He tried to persuade me to learn C instead but the damage had already been done :)

So that's probably why they do it

Answer 11

Product names composed of invented words, or misspellings of words, tend to annoy me. I prefer product names to be self-descriptive whenever it's practical.