Just like that, the second holiday season for Microsoft’s Windows Phone 7 platform has come and gone without the mobile OS making a name for itself. Windows Phone continues to hover somewhere in the single digits of market share despite the brand recognition offered by Nokia in its new partnership with Microsoft. With the version 7.5 Mango update, Windows Phone has become a more than capable platform, and even Android has taken some design cues from it.

So what’s the problem? With hindsight being 20/20, let’s see how Microsoft has failed to capitalize on Windows Phone 7.

Announcement and launch

Microsoft officially unveiled Windows Phone 7 at Mobile World Congress in February of 2010, but it was originally called “Windows Phone 7 Series.” The name was such a mouthful that even Microsoft had to back off and shorten it to Windows Phone 7. Microsoft was up front that the platform wasn’t going to be out until the end of 2010. That was the first problem.

By the time Microsoft had started to push the new platform on users, iOS and Android had built up huge market share. Redmond wasted time and resources working on the catastrophic failure that was the Kin, and allowed inter-department rivalries to slow Windows Phone’s development.

It does take time to build a good mobile operating system, but Windows Phone was late before it was even announced. In that awkward few months between announcement and release, carriers were still selling Windows Mobile 6.5 phones. If that doesn’t pollute a brand, nothing will.

Bad ads

Microsoft spent big on advertising Windows Phone 7, as much as $500 million according to some reports. What did that get Microsoft? Not a whole lot, as it turns out. The opening volley of ads were all based around the idea that Windows Phone was easy to use. “Get in, get out, get on with life,” was the tagline. It’s a nice idea, but it completely misses the psychology of the average smartphone user.

People really don’t like to be told something it too complicated for them, even if it is. The implicit tone of Microsoft’s original ads might as well have been, “Here’s a phone that’s easy enough for you to use, dummy.” The ads completely ignore the fact that smartphone users often have their noses buried in a screen because they like using the device, not because they have no choice.

The Windows Phone ads also failed to really show the device in-use. There were a few ads with some generalized features shown off, but they were not widely aired. Apple has had massive success making ads that focus with laser-like precision on a single feature at a time. People respond because we’re very visual creatures. Seeing how a device works is more compelling than being told it’s good in a flashy ad.