Yeah, I understand that. But the upside to succeeding is basically a license to print money, ie., so large that it would be worth it for
someone to do it... Microsoft focuses on making software that supports as many hardware configs as possible and Google does the same with Android/ChromeOS, but Apple focuses on making the hardware-software integration seamless. They each succeed in different ways, but Apple devices feel like premium, high-quality things where other software-hardware integrations (Windows, Android, etc) feel less polished and less seamless.
It seems like Microsoft or Google could double-down on the software-hardware integration and build a seamless, premium product that really, truly competes with Apple. It seems like it would be beneficial for MS or Google to identify and partner with (or acquire?) a hardware partner and develop their systems hard against that, creating a seamless hardware-software interface like Apple does with its devices.
And I guess I'm just baffled that nobody else is doing that. On the contrary, everyone seems to be going the Microsoft route of developing for as many hardware configs as possible.