Long time listener, first time caller.
I was just on Tom Bishop's blog on SeattlePI.com, and he recently posted about the rumours surrounding the change of the MSN site to the MSN Media Network.
He also added that Greg Linden asks:
...will Microsoft try to maintain two brands, Windows Live and MSN? Where is the dividing line? What is the difference? Will users understand that difference?
I think the last point is very important, as there's no point rebranding stuff without people understanding why it happened, and what the consequences will be for them as a user of the service/product.
I see people years from now still calling it 'MSN Messenger', even though there will probably be no connection to MSN, and with the new Messenger 8.0 already branded 'Windows Live Messenger'.
I think, though, that this would be the basis for a really good interview with the MSN and/or Windows Live team(s), so that we can see what the strategy will be and understand it clearer, as well as understand where this dividing line is.
Anyone have any view?
MSN is a name associated with a failed dial-up ISP and a third place cable news channel, so I think they need to start over with a new name. I like Live, Live Media Network.
Also I believe a media company belongs in New York City, Microsoft's Redmond campus is in a congested suburb of a city that is threatened by earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunamis.