“Soon Microsoft did get into the hardware business by introducing its own Zune player coupled with its un-licensed PlaysForSure platform, thereby leaving its erstwhile manufacturing partners high and dry,” Kontra writes. “The anti-Apple digital music camp hasn’t recovered since.”
Microsoft made its money in software. Its forays into hardware have been far more troublesome: its PC peripherals business has been profitable but non-strategic, Xbox a financial drain since its inception, Ultra-Mobile PC and Surface most forgettable, and Zune an unmitigated disaster,” Kontra writes. “Unlike Microsoft, Google had shied away from hardware until now (except for its lackluster enterprise search appliance). But with the circulating news about its Nexus One smartphone, Google may have decided to complete its ongoing emulation of its archenemy.”
Kontra writes, “I’m sure Google has recognized that 125,000 iPhone apps represent an emerging consumer behavior which obviates traditional browser-based navigation and search in favor of domain specific apps that access data and information in much faster and easier ways. Why go to a web browser, type a search term like it was the 1990s and wade through pages of search results, when you can click a button or flick a gesture to get an efficient answer with a dedicated app? Why suffer through Google-supplied ads when a native app costs next to nothing on the iPhone?”
Kontra writes, “So while the market is still relatively nascent, it looks like Google has decided to do what Microsoft couldn’t successfully pull off: Apple-style vertical integration of hardware, OS, apps and services…direct to customer.”
Kontra asks, “Will Google succeed where Microsoft failed?”
Full article – recommended – here.
@me
Development costs for the xbox were huge, plus marketing/advertising, and below-cost hardware pricing. They were about $14B in the hole within the first year. They continued to sell the boxes at a loss for years, and may still. Game development is not cheap, and while they may stress xbox game revenues for the stockholders, they are so far underwater, no light will ever penetrate. Break even is out of the question.
One might ask why they would commit so much money to hardware envy. They had a notion the xbox would be their Trojan horse into every living room. Of course, as we all know, that didn’t happen, and the only explanation for their persistence is the same as the zune: they can afford the losses, and shutting it down would be a very high-profile admission of failure.
if the iphone is supposed to be such a killa why wont apple set it free.the only way to truly test its worth is to unlock it.make it available for everyone.then we can really see if its the phone or the network.until that day its all hype.sure the iphone changed the game but google is taking it to the next level.if the iphone is truly to compete it needs competition.without that all we will get is little speed bumps and nothing else.they have all but abandoned the ipod touch that has the potential to be soo much more.imagine a touch that came with 3g or 4g .why you say because now i can tether it to my laptop for access to the internet.the ability to add a blutooth headset and use skype or google voice.how about just giving me the choice to put any program that i see fit on my device,without big brother screening things to protect me.im a big boy now i know whats good for me.put down the steve juice.
The Xbox might have been good for gamers, but not for Microsoft.
Both Xbox versions had their time in the limelight. The first generation lost money. The 360 just started making a profit — ironically, just as it has been eclipsed by the PS3 (even more ironically, it had already been eclipsed by the Wii before that).
Winning a round in the game market really doesn’t mean much. If you do it right (Wii) you make money for a time. If you do it wrong (Xbox, 360, etc.) you only start making money near the end of the console’s lifespan. You may have been king for a generation, but it doesn’t cement a permanent position for your platform.