S.T.A.G.E. said:
Machiavellian said:
I understand your logic but there is a flaw. At the time when MS made all of these nice statements, never was it stated that they could not be reversed. Its still the same thing. MS followed one vision and it was flawed so they they reversed those decisions. In some steps they had to drop everything and go back to square one. Others they had to work out removing certain aspect of a product to fit the new direction. This does not make any statements a lie. It would be a lie if MS continue to follow a flawed plan and told everyone that this is neccessary. That would be considered a lie. Any decision can be reversed if you are willing to pay the price for it. You can believe that all the reversals MS has made cost a ton of money.
You want to compare something that I consider a lie. When you tell people a feature is not needed, last gen and you have better tech all the while you did not implement the tech because you did not pay a license fee for it. Once the license fee was settled, your next iteration of a product had that obsolete feature in it. Guess what product that was.
|
Of course MS was saying their policies and DRM could not just be reversed. Watch Angry Joe E3 edition where he speaks to Major Nelson and calls him out saying MS could take back the ridiculous policies and Nelson told him they couldnt. Basically made him look like an ass and then soon after they dropped the DRM and many policies one after the other. Angry Joe put on a video saying, "I told you so".
Major Nelson is PR, he will lie if he has to. The best thing he should've said was no comment regarding policies. In specific instances there were lies, there was confusion because too many MS employees were saying different things and confusing press and lastly they eventually had to pull the 180.
|
I did watch Angry Joe and how did MS reverse. They had to drop everything. I am sure in Major Nelson mind, he probably didn't think MS would actually do it because of cost. No, they could not just flip a switch and make the changes happen. MS had to drop everythign they invested into for years and start from scratch. What I see is a reboot not a one 180. People were wondering why MS just dropped everything and the reason because such changes cannot be made with a flip of a switch you have to reboot the whole program. I am sure this was not some off the wall decision but something that cost MS millions. Somebody put their neck on the line when they made it. Probably was Don Matt just before he left because it would not cost him anything.
This is why see the whole situation different. I see MS big wigs actually understanding that their course they were going was wrong and someone had the balls to drop the whole thing and restart. Such changes cost millions, infrastructure and plannig all wasted. In the end, they must have gotten in a room, looked at the feedback from customers and developers and decided to make wholesale changes to how they do business.
I am not sure if you guys have ever worked for a multi-national billion dollar company but such course changes in such a short period of time does not happen a lot. Through my career, I have worked at MS in the early 90s, I have worked for IBM, and much smaller software companies. I work for a smaller software company now and we compete with MS and IBM all the time. One of the benefits of working for smaller companies is that we can make big changes much quicker than the big boys and win accounts because of it.
