Silverlight: What's in a Name?
|
The technology formerly known as WPF/E, or Windows Presentation Foundation/Everywhere, has a new name. The rebranding is a smart move, although foreshadowing. Does Microsoft see three syllables, with Silverlight, as being better than Adobe's one, with Flash? |
Overnight, Microsoft revealed the new brand at the National Association of Broadcasters conference in Las Vegas. But NAB 2007 is just the early coming out party for Silverlight, which will be available as beta at Microsoft's MIX07 in two weeks.
"We changed the name because of the need for broad consumer appeal," Forest Key, director of product management for Microsoft's design tools, told Microsoft Watch.
Microsoft nomenclature is typically complex. Silverlight is a heck of a lot better than WPF/E. Acronyms like that one give advertising agency executives near catastrophic heart failure. Silverlight is huge improvement.
Microsoft product names typically fall into two extremes. There are the overly generic: Excel, Windows, Word or Vista. Overly generic names create their own confusion as does Microsoft's product year naming. Current version of Windows Server is 2003—with an "R2" for punctuation—and that is oh-so four years ago. How many car dealers could sell 2003 models as new for full price today?
At the other extreme are the long names, of which there are many. Memorable names include Windows CE for Smart Displays, Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 and Windows XP Service Pack 2 with Enhanced Security Technologies. My recent favorite: Windows Internet Explorer 7 for Windows Vista. Other technologies or product names are just too similar, like Windows Media Connect, Windows Media Extender and Windows Connect Now.
Compared to the complex examples, Silverlight is seemingly genius and truly inspired—and it's the right approach if Microsoft wants to go after Adobe's Flash. Brand is everything in product marketing, and if Microsoft wants Silverlight to be everywhere, the marketable brand has to be a whole lot better than WPF/E.
Related Posts:
- Microsoft Changes Expression on MSDN, Microsoft Watch, April 3, 2007
- Apollo is no Flash in the Pan, Microsoft Watch, March 19, 2007
- Microsoft's Expression Means What?, Microsoft Watch, Jan. 16, 2007
- Gauging Microsoft's Expression, Microsoft Watch, Dec. 6, 2006
- Microsoft Goes After Adobe, Microsoft Watch, Oct. 10, 2006
Comments (14)
ouy-vay... seriously Joe, they sell Clue at Wal-Mart; you should get one.
Consumers just click the OK box when they hit a website running Flash or Silverlight. If Microsoft plans on building consumer brand with a developer framework, then Microsoft has officially jumped the shark.
The target market for Silverlight is developers. If developers use it, then consumers will use it. If Amazon does thier whole application in Silverlight, what choice does a consumer have?
The consumer doesn't get a vote in this platform game between Adobe and Microsoft, designers and developers do.
Posted by Paul | April 16, 2007 1:07 PM
I liked it when they called it "Sparkle."
Paul: Your funny and right, in the end it will be developers-designers that decide which platform is best. I use flash now, but I will try out WPF/E, oops I mean SilverLight!
Posted by Tom | April 16, 2007 2:25 PM
"Does Microsoft see two syllables—as in Silverlight...". Isn't that three syllables?
Posted by Frank | April 16, 2007 2:49 PM
You get paid for this stuff? No wonder Jupiter let you pursue greener pastures. Hammering home keen insights like syllabic count is just what readers need in the market right now.
What's next? Microsoft has 3 syllables but Google has two! They are so much cooler...
Posted by Andreas | April 16, 2007 3:37 PM
Unsurprisingly, while Adobe plays relatively 'nice' with GNU/Linux, Microsoft snubs it [1]. It's no accident. Web developers would be wise to choose the Adobe route if they must deviate from Web standards (including wonderful stuff like Ajax and CSS3).
___
[1] Microsoft's 'Everywhere' excludes Linux
,----[ Quote ]
| This browser add-on enables rendering of WPF content, but
| "Everywhere" doesn't include Linux.
`----
http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/7794/53/
Posted by Roy Schestowitz | April 16, 2007 7:23 PM
Typical of you Americans when you lay on the platitudes you lay them on REALLY THICK !!
Nothing wrong with this article persay ... but Joe Wilcox lays it on really thick with this one !
Who the hell cares how many syllables it has that is totally irrelavant !
And in the end all Joe can say is: "the marketable brand has to be a whole lot better than WPF/E."
Joe has TRIED to put himself into this article and has blown it badly.
I just heard about the shootings there in the USA condolences to those affected.
Get rid of guns !!
Posted by Neil | April 16, 2007 7:32 PM
Why the hell should "Silverlight" include Linux, you guys are only too happy to tell MS "where to go" (in otherwords to "get s*****d).
So why should MS be nice to you !!
And anyway MS have not said that at all !!
Here is what they did say http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2114418,00.asp
"As for which platform Silverlight will support next, Key said, "Linux is an open question. We're looking at the desktops and browsers by volume. We want to put muscle behind supporting the bulk of the market." And Linux support is still under discussion, he said." (
Now "Roy loves Suse" read it !
It says "Linux support is still under discussion"
That is totally different to what you have said.
You just can't help yourself knocking MS can you "Roy loves Suse" !!
Posted by Neil | April 16, 2007 9:41 PM
Neil, please calm down and be civil. For your information, I co-edit BoycottNovell.com, so don't associate me with SuSE. Your messages are a bit out of control today and this reflects nagatively on your stance, which does not serve your intent.
Take care.
Posted by Roy Schestowitz | April 17, 2007 6:17 AM
Roy Loves SuSE
I am calm mate, I went to your site once and found your saying there, and I quote "Roy Loves SuSE".
I don't care what you co-edit, Novell is Linux isn't it and so is SuSE !
As for editors well... Joe Wilcox is editor of "Microsoft Watch" isn't he (it should say Microsoft Bash).
And does a person who LOVES Linux, like MS ... In your case (and most others) NO !!!
Posted by Neil | April 17, 2007 7:51 AM
By the way for a co-editor you spell really badly... "nagatively" is spelt "negatively".
Posted by Neil | April 17, 2007 7:55 AM
Silverlight reminds me of Publisher: another execrable Microsoft product unleashed upon the world when there are already similar products that do a much better job.
The idea that Silverlight will be a serious competitor to Flash is laughable; MS products are created with market share in mind, not innovation. Adobe, on the other hand, is a widely recognized leader in graphics-related products.
Posted by Eric Layne | April 17, 2007 9:25 AM
"As for which platform Silverlight will support next, Key said, "Linux is an open question. We're looking at the desktops and browsers by volume. We want to put muscle behind supporting the bulk of the market." And Linux support is still under discussion, he said."
Yes, Key did say that. To me, that's exactly like telling your child, "Giving you food is an open question. We want to wait until you become stronger before we feed you.".
Congratulations, Microsoft! How else better to put another nail in your competitor's coffin? Replace the cross-platform Flash with your own Silverlight, and then tell people "Linux support is still under discussion" and hope they are foolish enough so they don't notice you are actually discussing its demise by extending your illegal monopoly.
Posted by Brian | April 17, 2007 1:04 PM
Silverlight as a unique name? My guess is that you probably think Internet Explorer is unique too. IMO, Silverlight is a flash and Flash is Adobe's product they're going after. Just like Internet Explorer was going after WebExplorer back in 1994/1995.
Not innovative IMO.
Posted by barney | April 17, 2007 2:48 PM
Neil (from Down Under) is getting very tiresome. In article after article after article, he keeps telling us about Joe Wilcox's bias. Okay, already! We get it--Joe Wilcox is an anti-Windows, Microsoft-bashing bigot. You don't have to go and on and on about it. Cripes!
If you don't want to read Microsoft Watch, then DON'T READ IT! What's the point in constantly berating Joe? It's not as if you're going to put a stop to his column. Ziff Davis won't stop paying him just because you drone on about his biased views.
Microsoft Watch will get the readership it deserves. With or without your harassment. Please get over it.
Posted by Richard | April 17, 2007 5:50 PM