Template talk:Microsoft/Discussion December 2006

Software

Personally, I feel that software is an important category, and should be included. It is also concise, something that "Product families" is not.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes software is very important. Much more important than the rest of categories. If we want separate line for gaming and hardware, then Windows, Office etc deserve their lines as well. Wikiolap 02:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

This section probably should be the longest, just because Microsoft is primarily a software company. --W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 03:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Windows

Windows is a MAJOR component of Microsoft and should be included.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, and if Hardware is expanded, so should Windows Wikiolap 02:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

How much detail should we go in to, though? I'm thinking, do we need every version ever made listed? Are we talking about components in the expanded list? What would the Windows section include? --W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 03:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Windows Mobile

I think that Windows Mobile is important, but maybe not enough for inclusion. Possibly a link to "List of Microsoft's Mobile Products" or whatnot would work.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Depends on how you look at it. Microsoft has sold many millions of WM-based products. CNet's "Top 10 handhelds/PDAs"[1] lists five Windows Mobile products, more than anyone else. If it's not listed in the template, it should at least be easily found through the "more..." link I added to the end of the Software line earlier this year. -/- Warren 02:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Windows Mobile is important and should be either under Windows or under Devices as PocketPC Wikiolap 02:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

We could move the Windows Mobile OS to software. That makes sense. However, Microsoft doesn't actually make the PocketPCs do they? If we keep PocketPC, wouldn't that go under "Platforms" or something like that? --W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 03:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Office

Office is another important factor, and should be included.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Agree - just like Windows deserves its own line Wikiolap 02:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

What all would go in the Office line? I'm thinking Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Outlook are musts if this is expanded, or were you thinking in another direction? --W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 03:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Server System

Again, server system is vital, but might be better suited as a link to a list of products in the Microsoft Server system. Not everyone realizes what all it encompasses.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Same as Windows and Office Wikiolap 02:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

What products fall under server system? Would Windows Server be classified as server or windows? I don't know a whole lot about this kind of thing. --W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 03:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Encarta

Encarta seems a little too focused for a general purpose template. I think that it should not be included, except for on a list of Microsoft software from a "More..." link.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Agree. Wikiolap 02:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Money

Money, like Encarta seems a better fit on a list page.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Agree. Wikiolap 02:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Defender

I would propose that Defender either be included on a list of sorts (my preference), or moved to Technology.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

This is minor thing - should not be included. I can cite tens or even hundrends more important ones. Wikiolap 02:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Technology

Definitions

I feel that the technology section should talk about MAJOR part of the windows operating system, the frameworks, etc. As to what exactly to include, I'm not sure. --W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:21, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I am OK with having Technology section, but in its current form it is pretty random. Perhaps User:Warrens can shed some light here. Wikiolap 04:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Web properties

MSN/Live

MSN is an important product for MS. However, the other "web properties" seem to be lacking in major importance for a general user template. MAybe MSN could go in some sort of "Other" category.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 18:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Xbox Live

Xbox live, in my opinion, should be listed under games. To me, web properties refer to sites on the open internet, and xbox live is a closed gaming network. --W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Hardware

If Hardware deserves its own line - so should the rest. Wikiolap 04:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I've given this some thought. Microsoft isn't really a hardware company, is it? Really, the only thing in this short list that I could see in a general purpose template in Zune. The rest seems rather trivial. Perhaps we could get rid of the hardware section, turn Games into Entertainment (or Home Entertainment), and place Zune there. Any thoughts? --W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 04:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Xbox

Xbox should appear under games.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Gaming

Why Gaming deserves its own line in the template ? I think it should be gone, in fact there is no article dedicated to Microsoft Gaming, so why is it important enough to get to template ? Wikiolap 18:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

That's a good point. However, we need some place to put the Xbox and 360. If we get rid of the gaming section, we almost have to have a hardware section. --W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 18:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

This would also be integrated into Games and Entertainment, is we decide to include that line item.--W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 18:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)