Since this isn’t a business blog, we shan't comment on Microsoft's latest demonstration on how not to do something (that list is rather long and includes topics such as take over companies, build operating systems, listen to its users, etc)
No.
We're going to try and focus here on some of the basics that the overgrown chimpanzee got wrong, and the reasons it has to go running after prissy little companies like Yahoo. Let's start with dedicating this entry to the primary reason: Search. (Yes, yes, it's online advertising… but really, think about it, its search.) Or more specifically, the invitation to search.
Google, as of date, serves more search users than MSN and Yahoo put together. (I don’t know if it really does, but before you start throwing numbers at me think for a moment… does it matter? They're way ahead of either and that gap is only growing. And Microsoft knows it. And they're shitting their pants. Ask Jerry Yang, who by all accounts, is also now shitting his pants.) Google is ahead because of a simple fact: it actually runs a search engine whereas both Microsoft and Yahoo are still stuck with that bastard child of the big bust: the 'Portal'
The Portal, put simply, is byte-based proof that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The idea behind it was (thought to be) simple and effective… Make your homepage the epicenter of everything you think your audience wants. So when you visit the MSN homepage, there are links to Air Tickets, Lifestyle, Maps & Directions, Money, Music, and a wide variety of other things. Of course, at first sight you don’t know what these links really do… but predictably each takes you to a mini-site, which is dedicated to the topic you've chosen. While this makes excellent theoretical sense, it still doesn’t amount to the reason the site exists: Search.
Which isn’t to say that there isn’t a search box.
Oh no, its there, right above all of these links and that ad, and just below the banner ad, to the left of… well, you get the idea. From the perspective of someone who's come to your site explicitly to search for information, everything else is a distraction. The amount of pixel space actually dedicated to search on the site is considerably lower than the ad's on the homepage. If, and I'm not saying this is the only correct measure, but if one were to gauge Microsoft's seriousness with search simply by the amount of space they dedicate to it on their homepage, I'd have to say they're about half as serious as getting me to search for something as they are about getting me to order roses. (No kidding… that's actually the ad playing on the site as I write this). They also want me focusing on several different things simultaneously… in fact, in comparison with the everything else that’s on the homepage, it would seem Microsoft wants me to do everything but search. Not good for a company that wanted to spend nigh on $50 Billion to get better at searching, is it?
I do not know how the design guru's phrase it, but there is essentially a design principle that states that you should be asking your users to do only one thing at one time. So if you're designing a search engine… and I don’t know if this can be put in any simpler a manner… allow your users only to search. (This would be a good time to head over to a certain www.google.com)
But homepages are now dead. It's all about personalization. Search engines are about more than just search. When most people open up their browsers, a search engine is probably the first page they hit… and they come there to do more than just search (though I'm willing to bet, search is still what they do most at the homepage). People come looking for information that is important to them, and the marvelous little technology called RSS is enabling it for them. Now, the need for personalization of homepages forces us to bend our design principle somewhat… Keeping the central task in mind, allow users to design their pages in a manner that gives them the information they want.
On my iGoogle homepage (Google's effort at personalization), I have RSS feeds coming in from ZDNET, to Time, to Wired, to ExtremeTech and everything in between. You can choose the information you display on your homepage from a variety of sources that have nothing to do with Google, and using them does not add a single penny to Google's pocket. But Google allows me to syndicate content from these sources because I feel it is important to me. I have that choice.
Now try personalizing your MSN Homepage. Let's take a look at the options I'm allowed… lifestyle.msn.com, news.msn.com, entertainment.msn.com, sports.msn.com, education.msn.com, video.msn.com, msn.com/mobile… the list is long. There is no way for me to add content from any source that Microsoft couldn’t come around to partnering with. As of now, my personalized MSN homepage looks like Ted Turner's wet dream.
There are several other things that are wrong with the MSN homepage. Aesthetics have been chosen over practicality. The two tone background looks nice on a blog, but when I'm looking for ways to maximize the amount of content visible on a screen, slimming down the content area isn’t really practical. The ad's have no semblance of organization… there is actually a Thinkpad ad in the middle of three ad's dedicated to Mothers Day flowers. There is actually a shopping section on the homepage of a search engine. Do you have a web search on Amazon? Why not?
All in all, Google's homepage invites you to search. The MSN homepage screams 'WE WANT YOUR MONEY!'
Of course, you could just replace the words 'MSN' and 'Microsoft' with 'Yahoo', and everything would still stand true. One wonders what Microsoft really aimed at achieving with the Yahoo acquisition anyway. Steve Jobs' veritable doppelganger likened it to taking the runners up and second runners-up in a race, tying up one leg together, and then expecting them to run faster. I'm yet to find a better analogy. The take-over bid smacks of a technology company run by people who (think they) understand business, not technology. You cannot solve basic technical and usability problems by spending money on another company with those same problems, and I don’t really care if you were actually willing to spend 50 billion on it.
Of course, not all of us want Microsoft to suddenly change into a serious technology player. Namaste fakesteve. It really has been rather long since the last Godzilla, hasn’t it?
