But if PS1, PS2 and PS3 were basically trojan horses for their other products, then by default, doesn't that kind of prove my point? I'm not saying they view gaming as just another product like MS. After all, a vew of the lead players in that company were developers. But in no way do I think they have the same love of the craft as Nintendo or as dedicated to gaming.

Sony is an enterprise that sells many products much in the same way MS does. The only difference imo, is that some of the people in CHARGE, know what they're doing or at least have some common sense when it comes to gaming.

Microsoft isn't primarily about entertainment, so it isn't an integral part of their vision now. It's just one of their many branches of their business. That said, they do want to be a part of the entertainment industry, but they, like every company in the gaming industry, want to be more than just games. Let's face it, even Nintendo said they consider themselves an "entertainment company" that just has considerable focus and strength in games, and is now moving to expand their entertainment business into quality of life. Sony is offering other forms of entertainment now, and even focused some of their E3 presentation on it.

Microsoft went all out with it though, which didn't sit well with the Xbox fanbase. If Xbox ever ceases to be part of Microsoft's long term vision for entertainment, it will be because they come up with a new solution that appeals to a wider market. In other words, I could see Microsoft creating an all new device, similar to the XBO, that realizes their original vision for the device, but in a way that gets consumers to perceive it positively.

Picture this: Microsoft releases the Nextbox next generation, which focuses on games, but also releases a new device which they market as the "all-in-one" entertainment device that they wanted the XBO to be. Hardcore gamers get the Nextbox, while the average consumer gets the all-in-one device. The device would have streaming, Skype, internet, etc., and would probably be integrated with their tablets. There would be some games as well, both in tablet apps, maybe some PC game compatibility, and probably some games that are cross platform with the Nextbox. Microsoft gets their dream of an all-in-one entertainment device that takes over the living room, without angering gamers, at least not as much as at the beginning of this gen.

Sounds like the Surface Pro 2 with Windows 8.  I don't disagree with what you're talking about but I think MS will retire the Xbox brand.  Probably not immediatly, but in another generation or two.

I didn't want to say something so controversial as that! XD

But yes, if what I said comes true, then the Nextbox would be the last Xbox. If Microsoft were to create a seperate all-in-one device and make it successful, they could phase out the Xbox brand in a couple of generations. I see it going like Nintendo did with the Game Boy brand. They made the DS as a "third pillar" and said they'd continue the Game Boy line, but when DS exploded, and Game Boy stagnated, they got rid of Game Boy because it was no longer needed. I see something similar happening here with Microsoft. Their entertainment vision is an "all-in-one entertainment" device, and Xbox hasn't been accepted as that, and probably never will be, so I see them either pushing really hard to redefine the Xbox brand to become what they want, or creating two brands and phasing out the one they don't need.

Yeah it seems they really wanted to trade an all in one experince for the ability to bottleneck as much profit as possible with the DRM, always online, used games, etc, practices.  It has failed and I think MS - while gluttonus of a company as it is - won't take some money if it can't have all the money.  

And before anyone thinks I'm attacking/hating on Xbox, I'm mearly stating that when you have the market share in something by an incredible margian(Windows), there's no need to waste money in a project with diminishing returns like an Xbox.  

Yes I noticed that, but what I want to know is who are these two shareholders mentioned in the  article and do they have a firm enough grasp to lure the company into a different direction?

It does not.  Sony is much more like Nintendo than they are like MS.  If anything, would you agree Sony is an Entertainment Company?  TVs, Movies, Music then going into Gaming (PS1 = CDs when they were popular and massively being adopted = Music.  PS2 = DVDs when they were popular and in the initial stages of being massively adopted = Movies.  PS3 = 3D/BlueRay when it was first released and they were trying to make it the primary HD dvd replacement = TVs/Movies  

MS is much more of a Business Software Company (Going more towards Business as a Service IE The Cloud)  While you say MS chases trends (and maybe they do) Sony looks to be more of trying to create a trend, sort of like Nintendo does.  The difference is Nintendo for now IS a Gaming company and tries to make trends in gaming, where Sony is also looking out for the other parts of the company besides Gaming.

I think its pretty awesome that the three players in the game are so different.  Makes things interesting.

Why are people talking about entertainment boxes being the next big market? Smart TVs are going to make them absolutely useless. I keep trying to find cheap TVs for rooms in my house and all I can find are smart tv this and smart tv that. Whoever makes the TVs will be the ones calling the shots in the living room not Chromecast or Amazon Fire whatever.

Consumers mean the people that purchase your product and the market you are targeting.  

@Bolded:  They all have long term goals.  Sony had to restructure their goal with the PS3 when it sold very low and cost to much.  They still planned how to regain marketshare even though it cost them big time.  MS is the same, you look at the evolution of the 360 from the beginning to now.  You look at all the things the 360 brought to the market like giving indies a system to develop for that is not being embraced by Sony.  Everything that is XBL.

@2nd Bolded:  I believe you are confusing planning with support.  Sony says they will support their console for 10 years because it makes money.  The reason Sony supported the PS2 for so long because it was very profitable more than anything else.  MS is not copying Sony, they are getting the same thing Sony is getting for a mature console with a large fanbase.  The 360 continue to sell and makes MS money so they will continue to support the console for as long as it continues to bring in revenue.

@3rd Bolded:  Do you really think Sony would be embracing indies like they are today if not for their competitors showing them the way.  Do you think PS+ would be the service it is today without XBL.  Basically you believe Sony today has nothing to do with the competition which is putting on blinders.  There are plenty of contributions that MS has done during the 360 years that people consider as standard today and Sony has embraced just like MS has embraced what Sony has done this generation.

Those 2 guys have been going on for years trying to get MS to go in a direction that would be best for short term goals which increase stock prices but nothing else.  Sony have their own type of investors they have to fight as well that want the PS brand spinned off.  These are the type of investors that are purely for profit and nothing else.  They would turn and burn a company in a minute if it would help their botton line.