Yeah imagine if they had unique product names for "AI in OneDrive", "AI in SharePoint", "AI in Outlook"... That would be even more ridiculous.

▲

mynameisash 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think this is the right answer. I am frustrated by Copilot and by many aspects of AI, but to me it seems like straightforward branding: you use a Microsoft product, you want to use AI in it, you look for Copilot (name and/or icon).

To me, the issue isn't that they've named so many things 'Copilot' but rather that Copilot is in every goddamn product.

	▲	marcosdumay 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You are the second person that implies that "Copilot" is just a complement that identifies part of some software... Microsoft has been replacing most of their brands by Copilot. There's no searching for it in a product, the product is named "Copilot".

▲

ddtaylor 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Not if AI is ultimately a commodity, which it likely is. We don't want or need branded terms for other common features, like networking or files. In the early days of networking, before it was standard, there were attempts to brand things like NetBIOS with IPX and such. I don't want to repeat all of that every time some company wants to establish vendor lockin or branding.