Well I've very much different view these are total failure for sure
- iPod : Zune
- Google : Bing
But these product it's a very different stories
- iPad : Surface = Ipad OS + Keyboard and Pen with an iPad Pro it's more like a Surface by Apple as well as the many (inferior product) Detachable 2in1 PC by every other PC vendor in the industry vs the Microsoft Original vision
- PlayStation : Xbox = GAMES are subjective to everyone tastes and Sales figures are useless to a gamer but as product Xbox was a much better console vs Ps2 , X360 turned out a much more viable console vs Ps3, Xbox One was a failed project , Xbox One X it's a better product vs Ps4 pro
- Steam : Microsoft Store = actually I prefer very much the Xbox Store approach and integration vs Steam ( excluding price )
- Siri : Cortana = Siri it's much more integrated companion, but both ( and Alexa) are failed design vs Google
It's ok to disagree. Some people may have a real soft spot for some of those MS products even. The litmus test for me on this is not how do the fans of those products feel about them. But which of the two would an average man (or woman) on the street associate with that product area?
How are they a dollar short and somehow are the most valuable company in the world? Even when they aren't they're still in the top 3. Stuff that we collectively dismiss like Bing, it is Google's only competition and is profitable. I don't they're going to be passing Playstation's console sales even next generation but the business model they're aiming for doesn't seem to require that for Microsoft's gaming initiatives to be successful.
The sum of their parts is greater than the whole.
That doesn't alter the fact that those "me too" products are underperforming against the market leaders in the product segment they're competing in. These markets are so huge that second or even third place can still be profitable if run efficiently.
All of these companies are publicly traded with leadership that can and will change. As such, goals and the speed of adjusting to market changes can vary greatly over a companies' history. I think saying Microsoft is dropping hardware with this current leadership just isn't realistic. Its one of those things like 'Nintendo going third party' that will just continue to get pulled out whenever they appear to be "losing."
Yes, times change but in corporations that rate of change can be glacial. Waiting for the VP in charge to die, retire or shoot themselves in the foot before anyone else gets a chance to hold the reigns for a while. Then who moves into that slot? Another company man that has been playing it safe, biding his time, risk adverse. So much for changing things quickly.
Look at it this way, if Xbox hardware sales contract even further next gen against the competition, do you think MS will throw even more money at the problem the generation after too? Given that they're already seem to be making moves to exit?
The current popular IPs will have already have had their popularity tested on other platforms outside of Xbox. If they're popular elsewhere or even worse, not popular elsewhere, why continue with hardware?
Failing to meet expectations can result in the leadership changes accelerating faster than anticipated for all involved.
Alternatively, GamePass may be a roaring success and expand gaming outside of current Xbox owners. So why cling onto the hardware in that case? It will just get killed faster.
They grow up so fast!
alt comes from german it means old btw my account is not so old...
