By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Is microsoft ever going to win a Generation?

Squilliam on 18 January 2009
Impulsivity said:
Microsoft will never win a generation unless they buy one of the major players video game division (particularly Nintendo's) to guarantee a win.

They just never win without some kind of monopoly help, ever. I mean they do win in OS (though that's changing after Vista slowly) and in Office software (though again its eroding with open office, iwork and others) but only from the monopoly they created back in the 80s with IBM's help (and copying the OS of the first mac and calling it windows, see "Pirates of the Silicon Valley")

Since the 80s though there has been no new microsoft success out of dozens of attempts.

Windows Mobile tried to apply the windows model to phones and is now a distant 4th behind symbian, Apple, Blackberry and will almost certainly fall behind Android soon enough.

Internet Explorer was monopolied into Windows to make it hard to break out but as soon as that link was broken firefox, chrom and safari have cut heavily into IE's marketshare, it will be well below 50% before the year is out.

They tried to take on the MP3 market with the Zune, they're happy to sell two million Zunes to Apples two hundred million ipods

There are other failures too, but to get to the video game point they have done just about everything they could to get the Xbox into a position to win from buying exclusives and downloadable content for millions to gutting the price of the console to less then even the FAR lower speced Wii to releasing a year earlier. For all their effort they are behind both Sony and Nintendo in terms of console sales from release (their lead on Sony is 100% due to the one year head start). While they are close to Sony (maybe some could argue ahead) they are as far behind Nintendo as Nintendo and MS were behind Sony last time out.

It's really quite simple why this is. Microsoft doesn't innovate, they copy ideas that already worked for someone else. Windows Mobile was a lot like what palm was doing and what apple did with the Newton YEARS earlier, Internet Explorer was a rip off of netscape, Windows of Mac, The Xbox of systems Nintendo and Sony (and Sega) have been making for years. Even the lauded Xbox live is a take off of Seganet (and at least Sega supplied the ISP for the subscription cost).

Unless they are able to come up with something original like Nintendo, Sony, Apple and other such companies are they will never win anything where they are forced to compete directly without help from the residual 80s monopolies.

Sony may never win again, maybe Nintendo will pull a gamecube with the Wii 2, but I would see another entry to the market from a new company winning 1st (as Sony and Nintendo have both done in the past) as more likely then Microsoft doing it.

I may be wrong, but again Microsoft has tried to muscle into dozens of preexisting industries and has NEVER won (other examples include Live Search at 10%, MSN which bombed, playforsure, webtv, ect). I know some might just claim MS hate and say I'm flaming, but I'm really not just saying things that are untrue (or haven't been said hundreds of places before).

Here's a good link giving a rundown of some of the Consumer Electronics failures I talked about.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Q4.06/2E6D9BB2-FE1B-4556-8389-67BD581FBCCC.html

You know, if we changed the concepts a little and applied them to Sony it would explain why they are currently getting their a$$ handed to them.

 



Tease.

Around the Network
Bitmap Frogs on 18 January 2009
Squilliam said:

You know, if we changed the concepts a little and applied them to Sony it would explain why they are currently getting their a$$ handed to them.

 

 

Oh no you didn't!





Current-gen game collection uploaded on the profile, full of win and good games; also most of my PC games. Lucasfilm Games/LucasArts 1982-2008 (Requiescat In Pace).

Jo21 on 18 January 2009

sony never had a monopoly that i remenber besides ps2.



ZenfoldorVGI on 18 January 2009

I highly doubt it. MS has helped their WW brand image this gen more than they've hurt it, but it's unlikely that they will be able to pass Nintendo in the forseeable future.

That said, it's no telling what the future holds.



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

Impulsivity on 18 January 2009
Bitmap Frogs said:
Squilliam said:

You know, if we changed the concepts a little and applied them to Sony it would explain why they are currently getting their a$$ handed to them.

 

 

Oh no you didn't!

 

   See something like a walkman or a successful video game system or an Ipod is NOT a monopoly.  When the walkman was THE music player, there were dozens of other choices.  If you really wanted a JVC tape player you could get one.  If you didn't want the PS2 you could get a gamecube, if you don't want an Ipod there's the new walkman or the zen or the zune or whatever.

   A successful product is NOT a monopoly.  What IS a monopoly is when there is only one choice and the company with the monopoly makes sure that remains the only choice.  There are very few people who felt compelled to buy the ipod or PS2 or whatever, but there are a TON of people who feel compelled to buy windows.  Hell I HATE windows, and yet I own a copy to play some computer games and business applications I can't get on OSX because Microsoft has taken tons of steps to make sure they can't be used elsewhere (like making direct X instead of adopting open GL to make porting very difficult to any non windows/xbox system).

   Anyway the point is with devices there is no such thing as a monopoly since all major segments have many competitors.  When I say microsoft can't win I mean in any competitive market (consumer electronics being one).  Sony has won MANY times in many competitive markets.  They dominated with the walkman and then again with CD players early on, their dominance has waxed and waned in TVs but they have always done well, they do very well with pro video gear (a TON of movies/TV shows are shot using Sony equipment primarily), they've won a few video game gens ect.  In all of the places they've won they've faced HEAVY competition with no real monopoly powers (IE at any time everyones free to choose a non sony product and get similar functionality).

   Sony is a strong competitor as is Nintendo, they have won generations but never because of monopolies (even the NES had to fight off the master system).




 PSN ID: ChosenOne feel free to add me

Around the Network
Bitmap Frogs on 18 January 2009
Impulsivity said:
Bitmap Frogs said:
Squilliam said:

You know, if we changed the concepts a little and applied them to Sony it would explain why they are currently getting their a$$ handed to them.

 

 

Oh no you didn't!

 

   See something like a walkman or a successful video game system or an Ipod is NOT a monopoly.  When the walkman was THE music player, there were dozens of other choices.  If you really wanted a JVC tape player you could get one.  If you didn't want the PS2 you could get a gamecube, if you don't want an Ipod there's the new walkman or the zen or the zune or whatever.

   A successful product is NOT a monopoly.  What IS a monopoly is when there is only one choice and the company with the monopoly makes sure that remains the only choice.  There are very few people who felt compelled to buy the ipod or PS2 or whatever, but there are a TON of people who feel compelled to buy windows.  Hell I HATE windows, and yet I own a copy to play some computer games and business applications I can't get on OSX because Microsoft has taken tons of steps to make sure they can't be used elsewhere (like making direct X instead of adopting open GL to make porting very difficult to any non windows/xbox system).

   Anyway the point is with devices there is no such thing as a monopoly since all major segments have many competitors.  When I say microsoft can't win I mean in any competitive market (consumer electronics being one).  Sony has won MANY times in many competitive markets.  They dominated with the walkman and then again with CD players early on, their dominance has waxed and waned in TVs but they have always done well, they do very well with pro video gear (a TON of movies/TV shows are shot using Sony equipment primarily), they've won a few video game gens ect.  In all of the places they've won they've faced HEAVY competition with no real monopoly powers (IE at any time everyones free to choose a non sony product and get similar functionality).

   Sony is a strong competitor as is Nintendo, they have won generations but never because of monopolies (even the NES had to fight off the master system).

 

You missed it alltogether mate.

Sony loves monopolies, just a particular form of them

Besides, he was gunning for the innovation...





Current-gen game collection uploaded on the profile, full of win and good games; also most of my PC games. Lucasfilm Games/LucasArts 1982-2008 (Requiescat In Pace).

Squilliam on 18 January 2009
Impulsivity said:
Bitmap Frogs said:
Squilliam said:

You know, if we changed the concepts a little and applied them to Sony it would explain why they are currently getting their a$$ handed to them.

 

 

Oh no you didn't!

 

   See something like a walkman or a successful video game system or an Ipod is NOT a monopoly.  When the walkman was THE music player, there were dozens of other choices.  If you really wanted a JVC tape player you could get one.  If you didn't want the PS2 you could get a gamecube, if you don't want an Ipod there's the new walkman or the zen or the zune or whatever.

   A successful product is NOT a monopoly.  What IS a monopoly is when there is only one choice and the company with the monopoly makes sure that remains the only choice.  There are very few people who felt compelled to buy the ipod or PS2 or whatever, but there are a TON of people who feel compelled to buy windows.  Hell I HATE windows, and yet I own a copy to play some computer games and business applications I can't get on OSX because Microsoft has taken tons of steps to make sure they can't be used elsewhere (like making direct X instead of adopting open GL to make porting very difficult to any non windows/xbox system).

   Anyway the point is with devices there is no such thing as a monopoly since all major segments have many competitors.  When I say microsoft can't win I mean in any competitive market (consumer electronics being one).  Sony has won MANY times in many competitive markets.  They dominated with the walkman and then again with CD players early on, their dominance has waxed and waned in TVs but they have always done well, they do very well with pro video gear (a TON of movies/TV shows are shot using Sony equipment primarily), they've won a few video game gens ect.  In all of the places they've won they've faced HEAVY competition with no real monopoly powers (IE at any time everyones free to choose a non sony product and get similar functionality).

   Sony is a strong competitor as is Nintendo, they have won generations but never because of monopolies (even the NES had to fight off the master system).

You forget that Microsoft is so awesome they can still sell their stuff at a high price when the alternatives are given away for free! (Linux, PSN).

 



Tease.

Dgc1808 on 18 January 2009

Well it's possible, but I don't see it happening.



4 ≈ One

Impulsivity on 18 January 2009
Squilliam said:
Impulsivity said:
Bitmap Frogs said:
Squilliam said:

You know, if we changed the concepts a little and applied them to Sony it would explain why they are currently getting their a$$ handed to them.

 

 

Oh no you didn't!

 

   See something like a walkman or a successful video game system or an Ipod is NOT a monopoly.  When the walkman was THE music player, there were dozens of other choices.  If you really wanted a JVC tape player you could get one.  If you didn't want the PS2 you could get a gamecube, if you don't want an Ipod there's the new walkman or the zen or the zune or whatever.

   A successful product is NOT a monopoly.  What IS a monopoly is when there is only one choice and the company with the monopoly makes sure that remains the only choice.  There are very few people who felt compelled to buy the ipod or PS2 or whatever, but there are a TON of people who feel compelled to buy windows.  Hell I HATE windows, and yet I own a copy to play some computer games and business applications I can't get on OSX because Microsoft has taken tons of steps to make sure they can't be used elsewhere (like making direct X instead of adopting open GL to make porting very difficult to any non windows/xbox system).

   Anyway the point is with devices there is no such thing as a monopoly since all major segments have many competitors.  When I say microsoft can't win I mean in any competitive market (consumer electronics being one).  Sony has won MANY times in many competitive markets.  They dominated with the walkman and then again with CD players early on, their dominance has waxed and waned in TVs but they have always done well, they do very well with pro video gear (a TON of movies/TV shows are shot using Sony equipment primarily), they've won a few video game gens ect.  In all of the places they've won they've faced HEAVY competition with no real monopoly powers (IE at any time everyones free to choose a non sony product and get similar functionality).

   Sony is a strong competitor as is Nintendo, they have won generations but never because of monopolies (even the NES had to fight off the master system).

You forget that Microsoft is so awesome they can still sell their stuff at a high price when the alternatives are given away for free! (Linux, PSN).

 

  Quite simply Windows only sells for X number of dollars because it comes on 90% of PCs sold.  Dell actually tried to make a Linux PC and even made it more expensive and MS basically said if you put Linux on boxes we will cut you off from Windows.

  VERY VERY few people buy a boxed version of windows by choice and install it, the VAST majority end up with windows because it comes on whatever computer they buy from Sony or Dell or whoever; that is especially the case with Vista.

    Notice Microsoft was brought up by both the EU and US for antitrust monopoly crimes, that NEVER happened to Sony, Nintendo or any of the other companies involved in video games. 

   If Windows programs were compatable with any OS (so the OS was just the framework and any program could work with any OS) watch how many people pay 400 dollars for Vista Ultimate.  As more and more programs don't require windows the market share is already dropping.  I mean look at Vista in business (Microsofts strongest market) it only has a roughly 9% adoption rate, OSX has around a 5% adoption rate, thus for new computers MS is only barely ahead of Apple.  As more goes to the web that tide will only continue to go against MS.

   Again though, you can get a Xbox 360 used for about 150 bucks at gamestop, and yet a lot of people (more then twice as many) would rather pay 300 dollars for a Wii on ebay then get the far cheaper 360.  You can claim PS3 sales have stalled on price, what has stalled 360 sales if they're the lowest in price by far if not strong unyielding resistance to buying a MS box on the part of a large number of consumers?

 




 PSN ID: ChosenOne feel free to add me

Squilliam on 18 January 2009

@Impulsivity: A lot of Mac users run Windows. Also Newegg does do quite a substantial business in OEM Windows.



Tease.