The war Microsoft should have won
medium.com
The war Microsoft should have won
1–10 of 53 posts
Re: The war Microsoft should have won
#2“Success is a lousy teacher. It makes smart people think they can’t lose.” – Bill Gates.
Re: The war Microsoft should have won
#3“Success is a lousy teacher. It makes smart people think they can’t lose.” – Bill Gates.
According to Christian Hernandez, it makes smart people think they can't loose.
Re: The war Microsoft should have won
#4tl;dr:
Ex. micro-softie laments all the ways ms failed in the mobile space, while completely overlooking the elephant in the room:
MS, in the mobile space, did not have an already entrenched monopoly upon which to leverage other market share.
Re: The war Microsoft should have won
#5Corporate smart phones, sure.
Consumer smart phones are a very different prospect.
Re: The war Microsoft should have won
#6Way to have a typo before the article even begins.
Re: The war Microsoft should have won
#7tl;dr: Ex. micro-softie laments all the ways ms failed in the mobile space, while completely overlooking the elephant in the room: MS, in the mobile space, did not have an already entrenched monopoly upon which to leverage other market share.
Is this a fair analysis, though? It's not like Apple or Samsung had monopolies that they leveraged to their advantage to drive mobile share.
Unless this is a subtle commentary on Google's use of their search monopolistic power to drive adoption of Android (which drives further adoption of Google products) -- if so, then kudos to you.
Re: The war Microsoft should have won
#8I started writing Android programs in 2011. With Android:
* I can develop the apps on Windows, Mac or Linux
* There is a lifetime developer fee of $25
* The source code is available
For all the hassles of Android's ever-changing API and such, they do try to make it painless for developers to get onboarded.
Re: The war Microsoft should have won
#9I think the article is a nice summary of why Microsoft lost, but it doesn't fulfill the promise of its title. "Should have won" implies that there were steps Microsoft should have taken to overcome the difficulties it faced. Let's explore some:
Lack of vendor trust, not wanting to get locked in with Microsoft like PC-makers did. No easy solution there.
Hampered by success of cash-cows like Windows/Office. Shouldn't Microsoft have been focusing on its strengths? Hindsight is 20/20, but those strengths are still doing well for Microsoft. Who's to say throwing more resources at Windows Phone would have gotten a better result?
Even difficulties that seem like they had obvious solutions, such as lack of mobile web, may have been very hard to do, technologically, pre-2008, with smaller screens and lack of mobile bandwith.
The article points out that Windows Phone never got above 15% share. Why was it entitled to win? Or, to rephrase, why should it have won?
Re: The war Microsoft should have won
#10tl;dr: Ex. micro-softie laments all the ways ms failed in the mobile space, while completely overlooking the elephant in the room: MS, in the mobile space, did not have an already entrenched monopoly upon which to leverage other market share.
Is this a fair analysis, though? It's not like Apple or Samsung had monopolies that they leveraged to their advantage to drive mobile share. Unless this is a subtle commentary on Google's use of their search monopolistic power to drive adoption of Android (which drives further adoption of Google products) -- if so, then kudos to you.
Other than the XBox, what new thing has Microsoft launched that has not hinged on its existing dominance?
It seems that the people that brought Microsoft to where it became the dominant force either left or were no longer listened to and Microsoft simply expected to succeed because they where already huge 'over there.'