- Related Stories
-
Microsoft 'not happy' with search results
January 25, 2007 -
Playing catch-up with Google
November 21, 2006 -
Online Works might be in the works
September 14, 2006 -
Microsoft eyes ads as consumers close wallets
November 16, 2005 -
Microsoft eyes making desktop apps free
November 14, 2005
On Thursday, Microsoft lowered its sales forecast for its Internet services business for the full year from 11 percent to between 3 percent and 8 percent. It also acknowledged that its search market share has dropped. Windows Live Search saw its searches drop nearly 10 percent from a year ago, while Google's rose more than 22 percent, according to figures released this week from Nielsen/NetRatings. Google has 50.8 percent market share, followed by Yahoo at 23.6 percent and Microsoft with only 8.4 percent.
While it's too early to write the obituary for Windows Live, things aren't looking good in its first year, analysts said.
"There are concerns that there has been some slippage or (Microsoft) has moved backwards" with regard to its push to better compete against Google in the market for consumer software that is supported by ads, said Michael Cherry, lead Windows analyst at Directions on Microsoft. "This is a long-term thing, so I'm not sure how to measure it on a quarter-by-quarter basis."
While Microsoft doesn't break out the financial figures for its new Live services from its established MSN content services, both of which make up its Internet services business, it's likely the newer brand is what is weighing things down.
"Microsoft's Live branding has been tremendously confusing and has hurt the company, and it is very likely contributing to the situation they are in right now," said David Smith, an analyst at Gartner. "They've created another brand and have not differentiated it."
It's too early to pass "final judgment" on the strategy, Smith said. But now is the time for Microsoft to clearly explain its strategy, he said.
Microsoft has invested billions of dollars in creating the Windows Live brand, separating the free, online consumer Internet services like e-mail and instant messaging from its MSN brand and building its own search engine and paid search platform from scratch.
Microsoft launched its paid search program, AdCenter, last May and is still working to gain traction and compete against market leader Google. In the meantime, No. 2 search provider Yahoo has launched its next-generation paid search platform, albeit a quarter late.
But the advertising program will only succeed if there are eyeballs to view the ads. How many people think to type in "www.live.com" to search the Web? Users at a Web 2.0 panel in November said they didn't even know Microsoft had a search engine.
Adam Sohn, a director in Microsoft's online services group, acknowledged that the growth in search queries and search advertisers hasn't been as good as the company had hoped.
"We feel good about the transition, but we continue to see some challenges with search query growth," he said. "There is some room for improvement there and we are going to work to increase the speed of that growth and increase market share.
"We will see more advertisers in the system--which, frankly, will drive prices up because it's an auction system," Sohn said. "More folks in there bidding will mean prices will go up."
Number of users, page views growing
Microsoft still has a tremendous number of users of its Windows Live Mail and Live Messenger services and readers of its MSN content, he said. The number of users grew as much as 40 percent from a year ago, while the number of page views was up at least 30 percent, he said. And ad revenue rose 20 percent from a year ago.
"The pieces are falling into place," he said. "Would we like the numbers to be more positive more quickly? Of course we would."
It's not just that Microsoft wants to expand its business beyond software. The company also sees the potential that more and more software, particularly consumer software, will be delivered online and, in many cases, backed by ads. Some inside the company have been pushing for the company to offer some of its titles for free.
The company even has said it is exploring whether it makes sense to have versions of its low-end Works software that are either online, ad-supported, or both.
Cherry complained that some Live services do not work on browsers from rivals. "For example, Microsoft Windows and Office Live services really are not browser independent. They really only work with Microsoft's browser and only the latest versions," he said. "So I have to question whether they even understand the marketplace."
Consumers can use any browser with Live Search and most of the Live services, except for a few, such as Virtual Earth and some MSN services, Sohn said. "We're working on this."
Despite the hurdles, don't expect Microsoft to throw in the towel any time soon.
"This is a long-term bet," said Sohn. "The big challenges are worth fighting for and worth succeeding at, and we're absolutely willing to commit the resources."
CNET News.com's Ina Fried contributed to this report.
See more CNET content tagged:
David Smith,
paid search,
branding,
Microsoft Windows Live,
Internet service
Why use a standard compliant and great browser only to surf a crappy proprietary Windows centric website.
Hey the Web is big enough to find what anyone wants.
Nobody is looking for MSN. That is why it is a failure. Microsoft cannot shove MSN down yoour throat like they can their software.
On the Web only the best survive.
So.. I guess Microsofts mad because they coppied Googgle, and Google is still beating the pants off them.. maybe thats just because it works better ehh guys?
How about .Vague I'e heard that when Windows.Vague comes out, it's going to have that new WinFS file system... Except, it's going to be called FSlive!
Another example: Check out MSN Live's image search and Google's. They look pretty much the same, eh? Well, MSN's has ALWAYS looked like this... Google just adopted it in the last couple of weeks.
What else... mail. Since adding greater AJAX functionality to Hotmail and a better spam filter, it's quickly catching up with Gmail.
That said, Google's search is still the best. The point is, MSN is doing what it's ALWAYS done best... catching up (ask Apple and Netscape).
Come-From-Behind-Kids and Google SpreadSheets you say! It will appear though that they are not the only ones that are good at the "catching up" game by the look of things!
That said I guess in my eyes so far they are split:
Search - Google
Homepage - Microsoft
Email - Google
Map - Microsoft
great innovator (imitator) does much catching up. I am still
waiting for windows to catch up to the excellent user interface
of Mac OS. Well honed, intuitive user interface is a challenge for
them, for some reason. Even their Mac software is so unMac
like. They don't even support standard Mac services, which
makes their software less user friendly. It also either lacks many
useful features or they have to write their own features
duplicating work unecessarily.
microsoft continues to stick to its old way of thinking. Their
internet services are only compatible to their browser. Why?
They make no money from IE. Why not embrace open standards
design so that any browser can take advantage? They really only
want to see their software in the marketplace.
Mac OS X then you're out in the cold. I wouldn't know about with
the homepage but Mail is very weak and looks even worse than the
Hotmail design..
E.g., Coca Cola may be the most recognizable brand in the world, but what would happen if they tried to sell cars? It would dent their brand and waste their time and money.
Microsoft doing search and weblications confuses people. People think Google when it comes to Web apps and Search.
Think about Windows or Office Live. What the hell are they? We know what Windows and Office are, and perhaps some could understand them providing some kind of online extentions, but Office Live isn't an online version of Office as one would expect and that is a big problem. God knows what it is suppose to be.
When I think Office Live, I think Google Docs. I can do spreadsheets and documents online with Google. I would never buy MS Office now and Office Live doesn't appeal to me because I don't even know what it is.
had to compete. Now they're trying to move into other markets
where IT departments can't help by forcing people to use their
products.
They have to compete on the basis of quality and innovation
now, but those are two things they know very little about,
because they were never in a position where they needed those
skills. Why should anyone be surprised that Microsoft can't be
successful outside of their OS monopoly, especially now that
even that monopoly may be in danger?
Can the ever, ever, ever create a new market? Can they ever, ever
not merely copy? Can they ever innovate?
I think the ribbon in the new office might be the one thing in past
25 odd years...
F'ing sad...
I can just image what headaches Vista will bring this year alone.
- Not Branding!
-
by ogman
January 29, 2007 7:42 AM PST
- Live has NOT been hurt by bad branding. It's been hurt by bad functionality and bad support. It's amazing how companies delude themselves into believing that customers just haven't gotten the marketing message. Products fail when they don't deliver what the CUSTOMER wants. Unfortunately, most companies only want to give the customer what benefits the company: cheap products that serve mostly to advertise others; value for the company, not the customer; and low cost, under-qualified support.
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
- Well actually...
-
by lcromwell34289
January 29, 2007 2:44 PM PST
- If history teaches us anything, it's that product quality is completely unrelated to sales. Microsoft products have always had poor functionality, poor quality and poor support. But for some reason they've managed to dominate the marketplace. I guess the geniuses in Redmond expected that strategy to continue to work for them.
-
-
(52 Comments)Office Live is a great example. The service does not work for many customers and the support is so frustrating that many give up after receiving nonsensical answers that have little to do with the problem the customer is having. The service is still beta quality and does not seem to be improving. That's NOT a branding problem and some clueless executives need to get a grip on that concept.