Retail Demo Experience
Redesigning the operating system of retail intent across 210K+ devices and 25K+ stores worldwide.
Team
Jeremy Cimafonte
Services
Design
Date
2025
— 2026
Overview
Key Decisions
75% of shoppers have already researched their PC online. When they walk into a store, they're not browsing — they're deciding. But Microsoft's retail demo experience — the software running on every Windows PC at Best Buy, MediaMarkt, FNAC, and retailers worldwide — was answering that decision moment with rotating marketing content and spec sheets full of jargon.
Project RISE was a ground-up reimagining of this platform. I redefined the content strategy, interaction model, and governance framework for an ecosystem spanning 24+ OEMs, 150+ retail partners, and 210K+ devices — then led the end-to-end design across all device types and retail contexts.
25K+
Retail Stores
210K+
Active Devices
30+
OEM & Retail Partners
The Challenge
Key Decisions
75% of shoppers research PCs online before stepping into a store. They've read reviews, compared specs, and narrowed it down to two or three models. Now they're standing in front of a row of open laptops, ready to commit. This is the most valuable moment in the entire purchase journey.
And we were wasting it.
The existing RDX experience had evolved into a passive carousel of rotating marketing slides disconnected from the shopper's real question ("Is this the right one for me?") and overloaded with information that didn't drive decisions. The result: confused shoppers, missed conversions, and 210K+ devices across 25K+ stores that weren't earning their shelf space.
Designed for Discovery, Not Decision
Shoppers come in-store to decide, not browse. But the experience added noise when they needed clarity. Research showed it took 3+ walk-throughs to understand how devices were organized.
A Passive, One-Size-Fits-All Experience
The same rotating slides played on every device regardless of collection, price point, or intent. A $599 student laptop and a $2,400 creator workstation told the same story.
Specs Without Context
The information that mattered most was the hardest to understand. Raw technical jargon with no explanation of what it meant for a shopper's purchase decision.
Invisible Test Drives
Hands-on demos existed but were buried in a separate section. The most persuasive evidence needed to be front and center when evaluating a device.
No Framework for What Ships.
Every stakeholder (OEMs, silicon partners, retailers) wanted their content front and center. There was no priority hierarchy and no mechanism for saying "no." The result was clutter that served every agenda and no one's decision.
No Way to Measure What Works.
24+ OEM brands, 150+ retailers, 25K+ stores, 210K+ devices, and no consistent way to know what content was driving purchases and what was just taking up screen space.
Research & Discovery
Key Decisions
I led research across retail audits, stakeholder interviews, competitive analysis, and shopper journey mapping to ground the redesign in observed behavior rather than assumptions.
The shopper's question was simple, but the experience wasn't answering it. In-store audits across multiple retailers revealed a consistent pattern: shoppers approached devices, glanced at the screen, got nothing useful, and moved on. The demo experience was designed for discovery attracting attention and surfacing content, but shoppers were arriving to decide. The content needed to answer "Is this the right one for me?" not "Look what this can do."
The platform needed governance, not just better design. With 24+ OEMs, silicon partners, and retailers all competing for screen real estate, better layouts wouldn't solve the core problem. The platform needed a framework for what content takes priority, what gets cut, and who has authority at each level. Without this, any redesign would regress to the same clutter within a release cycle.
Ten stages, ten different needs. Shopper journey mapping revealed distinct interaction patterns across the full in-store arc. From the Attract Loop that catches a passing shopper's eye to the Compare and Purchase moments where information density and decision tools matter most. Each stage required different content types, interaction models, and information hierarchies. A single "demo experience" couldn't serve all ten but a single system could.
Design Solution
Key Decisions
Rather than walking through the design chronologically, the solution is organized around the core problems it addresses.
One Device Experience
Before: The same rotating marketing slides played on every device. A shopper approaching a $1,700 creator laptop saw the same content as someone at a $399 student machine. No immediate signal of what kind of device this was or who it was for.Rather than walking through the design chronologically, the solution is organized around the core problems it addresses.
After: Every device opens with its Collection identity front and center, the device name, starting price, and a hero image of the actual device. Below, key specs are surfaced as icons with plain-language hover tooltips. The shopper knows what this device is, what it costs, and what it's good at within seconds of walking up before they tap anything.
Below is the before and after.
From Jargon to a Decision Tool
Before: Specs were raw technical data ex. "Intel Core Ultra 7," "16GB DDR5" with no explanation of what any of it meant for a shopper's actual needs.
After: Every spec has a hover tooltip that translates jargon into plain language.
Surfacing Test Drives
Before: Test drives existed but lived in a separate, buried section. Most shoppers never found them. The most persuasive evidence (actually using the device) was the hardest content to reach.
After: Test drives are promoted to the primary tab-level navigation alongside features. Hardware features link to their test drive with a hover card showing the feature benefit for the shopper a direct link to specs and compare. The evidence sits right next to the claim.
Compare & Decision Tools
Before: A comparison tool existed but presented raw spec tables side by side - the same jargon problem at twice the density. Shoppers could see that two processors had different names but nothing explained what the difference meant or whether it was worth the price gap.
After: The redesigned comparison starts with the shopper's question: "Not Sure Which Model to Choose?" Shoppers filter by what matters most to them and the comparison adapts dynamically highlighting the better match. Spec differences are visually highlighted. Every spec retains its hover tooltip so jargon never goes unexplained. The tool doesn't just show differences, it helps the shopper decide.
Below is the before and after.
Impact
Key Decisions
The redesign transformed RDX from a passive content carousel into a decision-support system. The first fundamental reimagining of Microsoft's retail demo experience with the shopper in mind.
From browsing to deciding. The experience now adapts to the device, the collection, and the shopper's intent. A parent buying a student laptop and a creator evaluating a workstation see different content tuned to different collections on the same platform, governed by the same system.
From jargon to clarity. Every technical spec on 210K+ devices now carries a plain-language explanation. Shoppers understand what they're looking at without needing a sales associate to translate.
From buried to primary. Test drives moved from a hidden subsection to tab-level navigation. The most persuasive content is now the easiest to reach.
From clutter to governance. A seven-level content authority hierarchy replaced ad hoc stakeholder negotiations. For the first time, the platform has a framework for what ships and what doesn't with a rationale every partner can understand.
From raw comparison to guided decision. The compare tool no longer just shows two spec sheets side by side. Shoppers filter by what matters to them and the system highlights differences and surfaces recommendations.
Learnings
Key Decisions
Designing for the physical world changes every assumption. Web and mobile design reward scroll depth, information density, and long sessions. Retail is the opposite. Shoppers stand, use one hand, and give you maybe 60 seconds. Every interaction model I'd relied on had to be reconsidered for a context where the user might walk away at any moment. The "hover reveals meaning; click is commitment" stance came directly from watching shoppers in stores using laptops.
Governance is a design decision, not an operations problem. The biggest threat to this redesign wasn't bad design it was regression. With 24+ OEMs and 150+ retailers all wanting screen space, any experience without a clear content authority would revert to clutter within a release cycle. The seven-level hierarchy and ship criteria weren't process documents - they were design decisions that shaped every screen and protected the experience at scale.
The best demo is the device itself. The most persuasive moment in the entire experience isn't a marketing slide or a spec comparison. It's when a shopper types on the keyboard and it feels right, or watches a video and the display looks better than they expected. Every design decision pointed toward getting out of the way and letting the hardware make its own case.
