Microsoft's Shaw Strikes Back at New Coke Comparison

[spond123]

Frank X. Shaw speaks out against all the Windows 8 comparisons to New Coke.

Earlier this week, Richard Doherty, an analyst at tech research firm Envisioneering, compared Windows 8 to The Coca-Cola Company's failed attempt to alter its base flagship product with a new, sweeter formula called New Coke back in April 1985. The consumer reaction was so negative that the company reintroduced the old formula as a separate Coca-Cola Classic product less than three months later. Windows 8, it seems, may be suffering a similar fate.

"This is like New Coke, going on for seven months – only Coke listened better," he said.

Now Frank X. Shaw, Corporate Vice President of Corporate Communications at Microsoft, is striking back at all the Windows 8 critics who have taken to the recent New Coke comparison. He said we live in a world where everyone is a publisher, and those who want to stand out opt for sensationalism and hyperbole over nuanced analysis. Page views are currency and heat is often more valuable than light.

"In the center, selling 100 million copies of a product is a good thing," he states. "In the center, listening to feedback and improving a product is a good thing. Heck, there was even a time when acknowledging that you were listening to feedback and acting on it was considered a good thing."

"Windows 8 is a good product, and it’s getting better every day," he continues. "Unlike a can of soda, a computer operating system offers different experiences to different customers to meet different needs, while still moving the entire industry toward an exciting future of touch, mobility, and seamless, cross-device experiences."

He goes on to talk about how Microsoft will improve Windows 8 as it does with all its products. There will be people who agree with what Microsoft does, and those who don't. "So perhaps this week’s lesson is look less to the edges and more to the center," he concludes. "There’s more light there."

The idea behind the New Coke comparison is understandable: if it's not broke, don't fix it. The Coca-Cola Company changed its formula to match the sweeter-tasting Pepsi-Cola. Microsoft has altered Windows to battle Apple and Google. In both cases, consumer feedback hasn't been entirely positive. But with Windows 8, the platform will evolve to meet consumer demand. It's part of a bigger picture that spans multiple devices. This feat cannot be easily accomplished in a matter of months.

Shaw is correct: Windows 8 is a great product. Sure, there are certain features like the Start button/menu that should be returned for the desktop user. The overall change may have been too much too quick. But that's irrelevant now. Unlike New Coke, Windows 8 is here to stay, and Microsoft is intent on making it the best multi-device platform yet. As Shaw's blog points out, Microsoft is indeed listening.

Source

[irefay]

Time will tell. Windows has to and will change, but its how the features change that is important. Removing the start menu was a poor choice to change on the desktop version. Creating a metro inference for the desktop mode which does not allow for more than one app to be access at a time was expecting a drastic change in user behavior, and one that I would argue, went backwards in the evolution of productivity.

Good things will come, but not by trying to be like Apple.

[stylemessiah]

Seems some at Microsoft are still drinking the KoolAid, even after all the criticism....once upon a time it was only Apple sheeple that did that.

Sad.

Windows 8 is just about the most epic fail ever, even Vista was hated less.....

[smallhagrid]

Innovation, invention and/or development have no place in the same paragraph as the name 'microsoft'.

Any man or company that 'acquires' the work of others and keeps pasting it together into different shapes and painting it different colours while giving it new names can only remain profitable by keeping it's users in the dark.

As long as OSs were regarded as voodoo that worked pretty well - but as folks have become more and more used to using technology for just about everything they do - it had to become obvious sooner or later that there's only so many paint jobs that can be put on top of word processing, emailing, browsing the web, bookkeeping and data-entry.

Why go through all the trouble & expense of buying new PCs and adjusting to a different OS -just- to do the same work with brighter colours - what's the point ?!?

Arguing about vista vs. 7 vs. 8 is alot like the old peepsi vs. cooke, or butter vs. margarine or even wheat vs. corn comparisons; it makes no difference for a single reason IMO:
They all suck.

(And anyone with a mind to can do without them all quite easily.)

It has always amused me in a sad sort of way to see & hear the biggest, greed-driven pirates of ALL whining about piracy.

I will not BUY or use any of the things they've offered after XP for the very same reason I did not buy or use MSDOS 6; there's just no point.

They thought they were making a great joke on the users, making fun of them with M$BOB - but they had it backwards then and still do...

MSBOB was a clear statement of their corporate IQ and capabilities as the only thing they EVER truly developed.

[mosaji]

With start menu, windows 8 is great...

Using startisback, it performs better than windows 7

[DKT27]

If there would have been no Metro, Windows 8 would have been the best OS even by default settings. Reason is, huge amount of time had to be spent by the main Windows team to connect both desktop and Metro together. If they didn't have had to spend time on that, Windows 8 would have received great total "baking" of the OS and great final touches too.

[stylemessiah]

If there would have been no Metro, Windows 8 would have been the best OS even by default settings. Reason is, huge amount of time had to be spent by the main Windows team to connect both desktop and Metro together. If they didn't have had to spend time on that, Windows 8 would have received great total "baking" of the OS and great final touches too.

Exactly, desktop and tablet should have remained two different things. If they had done that it would have been a success (once you get past the ugly GUI, there seems to be some promise there, i just cant suffer the GUI), instead of a failure, and it was hailed a failure like 8 months (our leading IT mag here in Australia rated it a failure 6-8 months before launch) or more before it even appeared. And they still ignored the feedback.

Guess this will discourage anyone else from trying the "use same interface across wildly disparate devices" thing in future.

And hopefully Microsoft will not wait like 14 months to listen to feedback, if i was a shareholder id be pretty fricking pissed off by now.

The other thing i hope comes out of this is that the OEM's now have more power in their relationship with Microsoft, not the way it was with Windows 8 where they got steamrolled, and steamrolled into losing money.....

[Karlston]

Good things will come, but not by trying to be like Apple.

But Apple recognises that desktops/laptops and touch devices need different UI's, hence Mac OS X for the former and iOS for the latter.

It's M$ that thinks the two can use a common UI.

Using my LCD monitor as a touch screen would give me serious arm ache after a short while. Not to mention encouraging the knocking over of my cup of tea regularly :)