11

I recently saw that exists, and has 79 questions tagged as of this writing. Upon checking, , and exist as well.

Facebook I can explain, since the company and the main product are identical. But what about the others? Why do we need tags for companies instead of their product?

I'd argue that these should be burninated:

  1. Does it describe the contents of the questions to which it is applied? Is it unambiguous?

    I would say No to both of these. It's unclear whether these apply to the company, or any product they offer. Most questions e.g. for are about a specific product they offer (e.g. Windows, Office, etc.), not the company themselves.

  2. Is the concept described even on-topic for the site?

    I would say No again. Microsoft is not about security. Neither is Amazon, Apple, etc. Questions regarding security on devices running or are perfectly fine and those tags are used well.

  3. Does the tag add any meaningful information to the post?

    No. A question regarding Windows 7 should be tagged or . The fact that Windows 7 is a product made by Microsoft is completely irrelevant.

  4. Does it mean the same thing in all common contexts?

    Yes. Microsoft is a company. That much is a given.

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
8

Microsoft does more than make products. They have security expertise, they have services and documents. Their product decisions affect the industry as a whole.

I immediately agreed with you when I read your question, but those companies are more than the sum of their parts. I can see a case for keeping them and for removing them.

As with the OWASP tag, if the question is about OWASP, then the tag applies. If the question is about the Top 10, then it shouldn't get the OWASP tag.

The general model to consider: "If it is about the org and not a specific output from the org where that tag exists."

3
  • 4
    I agree that there is a subset of the questiosn tagged microsoft where the tag makes sense. But if the subset is small, and there is little to no hope that people will get the distinction and not use the tag for everything, I am not sure it is worth keeping the tag anyway.
    – Anders
    Commented Jan 31, 2020 at 13:37
  • 5
    @Anders and I agree with that, too. If management of the tag will be greater than the benefit of the tag, then maybe it should be removed.
    – schroeder Mod
    Commented Jan 31, 2020 at 13:41
  • Got my vote. Remove company-specific tags unless they unambiguously describe a product. If someone actually has a question about the company Microsoft, then they don't necessarily need it as a tag, but can use tags like [corporate-policy] etc.
    – Arminius
    Commented Feb 8, 2020 at 18:06
0

There are ways that tagging something Microsoft can be valid. For example, let us consider the big ransomware attacks that occurred in 2017. If someone asked if Microsoft devices are safe, it would be a valid reason to put a "Microsoft" tag, since back then Microsoft not only supported Windows, but they also still had support for the Windows 10 Mobile.

Another way to look at this outside of the ransomware incidents, is the security that Apple uses on their products. For example, if someone were to ask a question regarding why do majority of apple devices act a certain way, or why do apple devices not allow this due to security reasons....? In general when it comes to the security of Apple devices, the reason are the same. Rather than placing "ipod" "iphone" "OSX" "Mac", as 4 tags, "Apple" would be a tag that sums it all together.

Thus there is a reason why I think it exists.

1
  • 1
    I think if a question is relevant for Windows 10 and Windows 10 Mobile, then those 2 tags should be used instead. And for the latter section, using "macos" and "ios" works fine.
    – user163495
    Commented May 25, 2020 at 6:57

You must log in to answer this question.