Dell Urged Microsoft to Reconsider Windows RT Branding

Dell executives asked Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer to reconsider using the Windows RT branding for its ARM-based version of Windows 8, noting that the name would confuse consumers into believing that the OS could run Windows applications. This is of course exactly what happened.

Jeffrey Clark, the president of Dell’s PC business, admitted to this exchange at the Dell World Conference in Austin, Texas, last week. He said the PC maker was adamant that the Windows RT name was confusing because the OS looks and works exactly like Windows 8 but can't run the millions of existing Windows desktop applications. (Windows RT and Windows 8 can, however, run many of the same “Metro”-style mobile apps.)

According to Clark, Ballmer’s response was pointed: The Windows brand was too important for Microsoft not to use it with Windows RT.

Of course, Dell wasn’t alone in noticing the problem with Windows RT. As long ago as BUILD 2011, I asked Microsoft’s Steven Sinofsky, then running the Windows and Windows LIVE division, how Microsoft would avoid confusing customers about the differences between Windows 8 and the ARM-based version of the product, which was then going by the code name Windows On ARM (WOA). He claimed that Microsoft already had a plan to educate users about the differences and that this wouldn’t be a problem.

With the Windows 8 and Windows RT launch behind us, I have yet to see any evidence of such a plan. And the branding confusion is still very much a problem.

In October, I penned the editorial "What is Windows RT? Redmond, We Have a Problem" in the wake of Microsoft’s bizarre decision to launch Windows 8 in tandem with its first Surface tablet, which would run not Windows 8 but the incompatible Windows RT. Based on the hundreds—now thousands—of questions I’ve received from readers, it's clear that very few people preordering the tablet had any idea that it ran an OS that looked and worked just like Windows 8 but wouldn't run beloved desktop applications like Outlook, Photoshop, and iTunes.

Despite the confusion, Microsoft’s decision to stick with the Windows branding was, of course, pragmatic. Had the firm used a different brand, Windows RT would most likely have been completely ignored by consumers—the same fate suffered by its superior Zune products. By calling this thing Windows, Microsoft was at least guaranteed an audience. Unfortunately, it’s a pretty confused audience.

Discuss this Article 22

brianvoip
on Dec 27, 2012
I say if people are not smart enough or too lazy to try to understand the differences, then you shouldn't be using a computer. We didn't have confused users back in the 80's because the non-savvy users used paper and penile. ;-)
trooper11
on Dec 17, 2012
I really think this whole confusion issues is blown out of proportion. Sure, MS could have come up with a completely unique name to point out what such devices are meant for, but then they lose the market recognition, which in my opinion, is more important. No the key here is education. It seems like no one wants to actually make the effort, but it really does not take long to explain to a person what the difference is. So at the retail level, it requires employees that are properly trained and at the online level, it requires clear documentation. Again, it really does not take much to explain the difference even to your average computer user who knows little about computers. I've already had to explain it to several people and they were able to pick up on it quick. I have been through many new product releases whether it is a new windows or any other new device and there is always a learning curve. Sometimes its bigger then others, but it always requires a bit of education to really make use of it. Windows RT is no different, but I don't think its an overwhelming issue.
mbedan
on Dec 17, 2012
It seems that MS holds on so tightly to the Windows and Office brands that they continually fall behind. People recognize the Windows name but I don't think they see the Windows name being associated with the best of breed any more, especially in the mobile space. Who cares if it has the name Windows in it. Why is 'Microsoft' not enough of a name?
pdxtechdoctor
on Dec 17, 2012
I've been noticing this problem everywhere... Yesterday on slickdeals, there was a posting on the Yoga 11 for a good price.. said in the OP that it was Windows RT and couldn't run windows apps.. 3 posts down someone said " I can just put Win 8 on it right?".. People just don't understand at all that something that says Windows can't run Windows programs.. I think if the Windows RT devices were all tablets it wouldnt be such an issue... people seem to understand Windows phones don't run windows programs... But devices like the Yoga 11 look exactly like laptops so people expect a windows laptop to run windows programs...
jersey72
on Dec 19, 2012
I think people are focusing on the wrong word when criticizing Microsoft here. The issue isn't "Windows". The issue is the "RT". In the past Microsoft didn't have to explain what "CE" meant because it was on devices that were clearly not designed for any form of desktop use. Now Windows tablets can do light desktop work. A better name would have been Windows Express" or "Windows Lite" or... That sends the right message - this can do some Windows things but not all.
jcoons117
on Dec 17, 2012
First the disclamer - "I didn't spell check this" so nose-pickers be forewarned. That pretty well nails it! Microsofts ineptitude in action - once again they are poised to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I must be a moron to still support and develope for the platform. I've been with Windows since v2... before VB even. Things keep getting worse and worse (except for SQL Server, Windows Server, and Visual Studio). Dumb, with a capital "D" I mean - no real effort support Windows Phone on Verizon, Roll out and give exclusives to AT&T ( the crappiest cell carier on the planet unless you live in a totall flat part of the country). Balmer - the biggest idiot in IT management - they should have canned that joker a long time ago - he'll finally bankrupt them sooner or later. It goes on and on... Please Microsoft, get rid of the dinasours and medieveal mentality that pervades your organization - I don't want to go back to Java programming (for Android) or get into that crappy Objective-C (ugly, ugly code...) Please Microsoft, look at whats going on around you - Either get in the Social segment of the market game or get out and just keep making good server and development tools - currently you're not doing a great job of either. How about just fixing the fiasco you've created with this "Windows" branding crap (looks like a ponzie game to most) in RT for the "normal" consumer (like my wife - a physician that doesn't know or want to know a darn thing about computers) they just expects it to work as advertised without having to read the microscopic print at the bottom of your ads. Microsoft - lots of people have bailed on you already, sooner ofr later there are not going to be many bridges left - crap, looks like I better get out those old Java and C books...
MSTAYLOR
on Dec 17, 2012
MS hasn't done the greatest job over the years in differentiating Windows from Office to the end users. I don't know how many times I've asked someone on the phone when they call me for assistance "What version of Windows do you have?" and the response is "I have Microsoft 2007" or "I have Word and Excel" or something of the sort. This just adds to the confusion, because there are RT versions of Office (preview) and other applications. This is what MS needs to get better at. With iOS, even though it is, at its core, OS X people know that you can't run Mac software.
chuckb84
on Dec 18, 2012
Paul is right about the branding confusion. Ballmer is so wedded to the "Windows Everywhere" approach that he's made a decision which muddles his own brand. I agree that what iOS and the iPad demonstrate is that many people, for many tasks, including light office work, don't need or want a full PC (Windows OR Mac). Apple has tacitly made the distinction of the simplicity and lightness of the iOS system with the ponderous PC, which is mostly desktops, mostly Windows, and for many people now, mainly the clumsy thing that they use at work. It's a brilliant strategy, the inverse of the strategy that Microsoft used to leverage office PCs through the "I want at home the same thing I have at work". I'd suggest that these days, that's the last thing many people want, particularly since so many offices are still on Windows XP. Microsoft could have succeeded with a different branding process. They did it with Xbox. Windows RT is at best an uphill fight and that's amazing given that Microsoft still holds all the high ground in the OS business.
mwagner@indiana.edu
on Dec 17, 2012
Not everyone pays attention but Microsoft has not kept any secrets here. They have been completely clear about the differences between Windows 8 and Windows RT. Whether or not different timing would have made a difference or not, I just can't say but neither Dell nor any other traditional OEM has anything to gain from a successful launch of ARM-based Windows-RT. Microsoft, on the other hand, has a very great deal to gain. The success of the iPad demonstrates that consumers want something less complex than Windows and Windows RT fills the bill.
nim81
on Dec 19, 2012
I really cannot understand why Microsoft is still under the impression that "Windows" is a good brand to use. They finally came up with a really good OS with Windows 7, but nonetheless I think that this brand will forever be associated with bugs, service packs, viruses and blue screens of death by most consumers. They'd be much better making a clean break with the tablet product. Windows RT is just a stupid name. They managed to make a success of Xbox despite (or maybe because of) not using the Windows brand so I don't see why they need to cling on to it for the tablet OS.
pthurrott
on Dec 18, 2012
Claiming that Microsoft has done everything it can to differentiate Windows RT and Windows 8 is false. Certainly, they've cleaned up the language on the Surface web site in the wake of complaints. But I *still* get emails from people that prove the differences are not well understood. This is a problem of Microsoft's own making, and of its blind allegiance to the Windows brand.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• The Microsoft
Technology Roadmap
• Office 365 Implementation
• Hyper-V Optimizing
• Windows 8 Deployment
and much more!

Come See Paul Thurrott & Rod Trent in Person!

Early Registration Now Open

Upcoming Training

Mastering System Center 2012

During over 6 hours of training you can join John Savill from your computer as he will walk you through the key components and capabilities of System Center 2012, what’s involved in using the components, and the benefit they can bring to your environment.

Register Now

Current Issue

May 2013 - The NameTranslate object is useful when you need to translate Active Directory object names between different formats, but it's awkward to use from PowerShell. Here's a PowerShell script that eliminates the awkwardness.

CURRENT ISSUE / ARCHIVE / SUBSCRIBE

Windows Forums

Get answers to questions, share tips, and engage with the Windows Community in our Forums.