tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post819619336183242857..comments2024-03-18T12:52:48.117-07:00Comments on Mini-Microsoft: Ack! As in Ack!quisition...Who da'Punkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18205453956191063442noreply@blogger.comBlogger170125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-46976381411518143262007-06-29T20:05:00.000-07:002007-06-29T20:05:00.000-07:00I hope that brainless guy who is calling everythin...I hope that brainless guy who is calling everything "sunk cost" is gone for the Summer.<BR/><BR/>As many people have already explained to you, investment is not a sunk cost.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-7618693026407727082007-06-13T00:28:00.000-07:002007-06-13T00:28:00.000-07:00Aren't you a partner yet, Ben?Aren't you a partner yet, Ben?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-20548063305459689192007-05-31T09:15:00.000-07:002007-05-31T09:15:00.000-07:00Here is a posting I made to an internet mail list ...Here is a posting I made to an internet mail list about this blog. Feel free to take it or leave it. No need to protect my identity. (I did edit this version to remove internall MSFT parts) - you can see the whole mail in the POGO archive.<BR/><BR/>From: Ben Smith <BR/>Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 4:04 PM<BR/><BR/>Subject: On Mini-MSFT<BR/><BR/>I have promised my thoughts on Mimi as a change agent to a few people for a few months I am going to take a few minutes to give some thoughts on Mini. As always – I welcome your thoughts too.<BR/><BR/>On Mini-Microsoft – I get asked by people a lot about what I think o Mini-Microsoft and the blog that he or she runs or if I know who this person is (I don’t). Here are my thoughts on Mini.<BR/><BR/>First, whether one appreciates the individual’s methods or not, I think it would be naïve for anyone to believe that the work of Mini-Microsoft in raising awareness the lack of transparency in HR in the rank and file of MSFT and causing some senior execs heartburn wasn’t a huge catalyst in the HR renovations Lisa (and really the entire HR organization) have begun. Kudos to Mini for this – certainly not the way I would have done things or would recommend anyone to pursue, but the results are the results. <BR/><BR/>Second, I do read mini occasionally with a smile because there is a large amount of “be careful what you ask for…” in action here. One of Mini and Mini’s audience (which at times boarders on cult of personality) primary calls was for increased transparency around Exec compensation. In part due to changes in SEC regulations and increased pressures on exec comp and in part to due to Mini’s awareness building work, and a host of other factors, our compensation system is remarkably more transparent than before (a change I think very much for the better). Now the egos and envy come into play. It is an inevitable fact of transparency and human emotion that this happens. Nobody’s fault – just is. I do think that the company has not handled the messaging of this very well. As I have said many times, Microsoft is an entrepreneurial company – one that has largely been built on the ambition of people to make their dreams come true from financial freedom. We are no longer in an era where are all boats will float. Get over it and don’t begrudge those that through luck or skill were part of it. You can’t change it. But Microsoft still does offer opportunities for both people who want to make a great living and those who want to be truly wealthy.<BR/><BR/>For perspective in 2005 (latest year data is available) the median pretax income in the US was $46K. The 80% percentile is $88K (which in total comp is around L61/62). and 95th percentile is $157K (which in total comp is level 64/65.) as can be seen in the salary info leaked last year. Let’s all keep this in mind before we bite the hand that feeds us too many times. While the comp process itself is highly sub-optimal, the overall comp numbers are not as tragic as one might think from reading Mini or Lisa’s blog. My take is that instead of calling for the heads of Partners at MS, we should be celebrating each of their successes, learning for them, and building the next generation of leaders. I do think though we need to consider more exec like awards for all employees (particularly team awards and cross company performance awards).<BR/><BR/>Third, one aspect of Mini that I find very troubling is what I see as a culture of victimization and disempowerment. At Microsoft, this is the beginning of a vicious feedback cycle because we have a culture and comp system that favors creative, ambitious, results driven technical and management leaders. Frankly put, people who are self-disempowering aren’t going to get a lot of helping hands (maybe to a fault). Microsoft is a company of opportunities if you don’t take them, someone else will. As a lawyer here once told me, Microsoft’s internal slogan would aptly be “Who’s eating your lunch today?” To be clear, this does not mean we each need to be sharks looking for the bloody water; rather to excel at Microsoft each of us must find our own way to contribute to the great products and services we build. I love Ad Astra and POGO because is a different way of contributing to this end that broadens the number of empowered people.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-4168287066662689532007-05-30T21:45:00.000-07:002007-05-30T21:45:00.000-07:00Agile is yet another software development buzzword...Agile is yet another software development buzzword. The only people I know who feel strongly about these buzzwords are windbags who are in love with the <I>idea</I> of developing software. Usually managerial types who have never written anything significant themselves. If you talk with a good developer, he will go on and on about the performance or maintainability or robustness of some piece of code and never mention agile or Ruby or design patterns etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-53337224147394895572007-05-30T16:14:00.000-07:002007-05-30T16:14:00.000-07:00Robbie Bach dumping a s--t load of shares on the m...<I>Robbie Bach dumping a s--t load of shares on the market today...what a shocker!!!! Prick. </I><BR/><BR/>If Mini has decided to enable comment moderation again, this is most likely why.<BR/><BR/>I may share the opinion, but let's try to employ a bit more self-regulation so Mini doesn't have to do it for us.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-35345280880251095762007-05-30T14:44:00.000-07:002007-05-30T14:44:00.000-07:00Gates has been pushing convergence for almost a de...<I>Gates has been pushing convergence for almost a decade and using consumer electronics</I><BR/><BR/>Bill Gates has always been a sci-fi obsessed embarrassment with too much time and money on his hands and not enough critical thinking skills.<BR/><BR/>His ideas about home automation are patently ridiculous. Great, you can wear a radio tag and have your TV show/light settings/music/whatever follow you from room to room.<BR/><BR/>What he doesn't seem to realize is that it's not killing anybody to flip a light switch, or go to the living room to watch TV/listen to the stereo. There is absolutely no motivation to spend thousands of dollars (and set up extra TVs, speakers) on home automation.<BR/><BR/>Same with "convergence." His bright idea is that TV should be more interactive, integrate with the web, etc. But people watch TV for passive entertainment. Ideally you get engrossed in a TV show and pay attention to it, not try to surf the web at the same time. Who goes to, e.g., a play or an opera and says, "hey, this opera is great but I wish it was more interactive and I could surf the web at the same time." And here's the nail in the coffin--now that everybody is switching from desktops to laptops, all you have to do is take your laptop into the living room when you watch TV and you can use it to check IMDB, etc. and you have absolutely zero need for this media center convergence nonsense.<BR/><BR/>Bill did a great job with DOS and Windows and building the company but I am happy to see him go--more than half of his bright ideas and pet projects have no basis in reality. Unfortunately Steve doesn't seem to have any bright ideas or pet projects at all. :/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-34018364209396134062007-05-30T07:41:00.000-07:002007-05-30T07:41:00.000-07:00Keeperplanet said: What I am talking about is that...Keeperplanet said: <I>What I am talking about is that with the statement from Bill Gates that he intends to own the living room and that Xbox division is likely the division to do that. If Gates is talking about software sold to your OEMs then its not an issue, but if he is talking about building dozens of specialty products to serve the consumer needs in the living room, he is talking about being a Sony with the caveat computing devices for the consumer in the home. Hardware, coupled with software, like the personal computer. The poster said it was the intention of Microsoft to make a computer for the living room. Direct hardware+software manufacturing competition to your OEMs.</I><BR/><BR/>Gates has been pushing convergence for almost a decade and using consumer electronics (most recently game consoles and 'surface computers') as the vehicle to push MS technology.<BR/><BR/>Best case, Microsoft is so far out ahead of what consumers might actually want that they've failed to bridge from need/want to solution, i.e. consumers stopped following.<BR/><BR/>Worst case, Microsoft is yet again telling consumers what they want and consumers continue to shrug off being told they should want convergent appliances (mobile devices excepted).<BR/><BR/>Yes, Microsoft wants to "own the living room" and thinks convergence of TV, phone, games, and email/message on MS device is the future. But, no, the consumer opts for keeping their various 'appliances' separate from each other and especially keeping their increasingly headache-prone PC quarantined (imagine your TV & phone not working because Vista detected a DRM violation... lol)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-53742405206001535602007-05-29T22:16:00.000-07:002007-05-29T22:16:00.000-07:00Like Apple sells it product at as many channels as...Like Apple sells it product at as many channels as possible similarly Microsoft should, but it actually does not do for most of the products.<BR/><BR/>Hardware is an outlet for selling software. So Microsoft even if it creates its PC would be at the same analogous standing as Apple selling at its own store.<BR/><BR/>What you could argue against is if Microsoft takes a loss on its PC hardware and subsidizing it by the profit on hardware. As long as Microsoft does not do this, it is equal standing with its partners.<BR/><BR/>Whereas, it is known that Apple is at advantage while selling its product through its own outlet. For an example, Apple provides free inscription on iPod. Most products are available at Apple store while not at other stores. Provides extra add on services, for free, at Apple stores which other resellers can't afford. Provide better customer service if the product is bought from Apple than the same product if bought from another place.<BR/><BR/>Basically Apple puts its resellers at disadvantage by competing against them. On the other hand if Microsoft decides to make a PC today, and does not sell it at a loss, and does not provide OS sooner to itself, then it does not put other manufacturers such as Dell at disadvantage.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-4458403420381359112007-05-29T19:30:00.000-07:002007-05-29T19:30:00.000-07:00>What do you mean Keeperplanet?I was talking about...>What do you mean Keeperplanet?<BR/><BR/>I was talking about MS competing against the manufacturers of computers, (Dell, HP, Gateway, etc.) who buy your operating systems to put onto computers, used for games, home entertainment devices and so on. Hardware that is being substituted in the PC gamer and home entertainment business by existing and future living room products--hardware devices currently existing and planned manufacture by Microsoft. These are Xbox and Zune at the moment but I am sure MS is planning a lot of these devices. <BR/><BR/>The sales channel issue is not an issue, as you are correct that manufacturers can and should market and sell their products in as many channels as possible.<BR/><BR/>What I am talking about is that with the statement from Bill Gates that he intends to own the living room and that Xbox division is likely the division to do that. If Gates is talking about software sold to your OEMs then its not an issue, but if he is talking about building dozens of specialty products to serve the consumer needs in the living room, he is talking about being a Sony with the caveat computing devices for the consumer in the home. Hardware, coupled with software, like the personal computer. The poster said it was the intention of Microsoft to make a computer for the living room. Direct hardware+software manufacturing competition to your OEMs.<BR/><BR/>My point is there are millions who prefer/would prefer computers (pc's or notebooks, umpc's) as the device of choice for running the living room, including games, movies, HDTV, internet access, mechanical and electronic devices via controllers (lights, security, heating, cooling, and so on). If you are going to own the living room, you have to manufacture computers, the hardware+software, that is.<BR/><BR/>Any way you cut it, all the excitement on the consumer products arena will be in these kind of devices. I can't see that division being a part of your operating system division without burning some feathers in your OEM markets. It looks to me like a necessary break up in order to do both.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-75478896310326741562007-05-29T18:46:00.000-07:002007-05-29T18:46:00.000-07:00"Last I checked, Apple Mac sells at more than 5000...<I>"Last I checked, Apple Mac sells at more than 5000 outlets and iPod many times more outlets. So Apple is pretty much competing against its own resellers by 180 self owned stores.</I>"<BR/><BR/>this isn't the correct analogy -- apple is selling the same apple product both through channel partners and in its own stores.<BR/><BR/>what keeperplanet is talking about here is the case where microsoft encourages manufacturers to create hardware products to support microsoft software and services, and then decides to create its own hardware products that compete against those of its partners. <BR/><BR/>keeper is absolutely correct about the zune competing with hardware partners directly but not so much with the 360 -- the 360 will never replace the PC, as its mission is pretty much fully dedicated to media and games. if you start seeing ms office for the 360 then it's time to worry about competing with dell and our other PC partners.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-38935364787141785292007-05-29T18:28:00.000-07:002007-05-29T18:28:00.000-07:00What do you mean Keeperplanet?There is a differenc...What do you mean Keeperplanet?<BR/><BR/>There is a difference between resellers (what you call customers) and the actual end users.<BR/><BR/>Microsoft does not compete with end users.<BR/><BR/>Regarding competing with resellers, most manufacturer do compete with their own resellers. <BR/><BR/>Last I checked, Apple Mac sells at more than 5000 outlets and iPod many times more outlets. So Apple is pretty much competing against its own resellers by 180 self owned stores.<BR/><BR/>Airlines sell tickets on their own websites as well as on travelocity where $10 surchage is added. <BR/><BR/>Microsoft on the other hand shows the most amount of self control of not entering in partner's businesses, as much as possible. And in some exceptional cases when it does it tries to compete on equal footing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-65020867276847089552007-05-29T12:42:00.000-07:002007-05-29T12:42:00.000-07:00Mini, it seems the previous post was truncated. P...Mini, it seems the previous post was truncated. Please remove it. Thanks, KP.<BR/><BR/>>"We entered game console business because we wanted a computer in the living rooms. It is not like we were dying to have a hardware business."<BR/><BR/>Wow. You just confessed to something we on the outside have seen happening for a long time, i.e., that Microsoft has decided to compete directly with its customers who also build computers. It is a tempting activity for a cash rich technology company. And Zune it is doing exactly the same thing, competing against your customers, who make play for sure hardware. Such a move has probably been quite damaging to your OS customer relations. <BR/><BR/>As Linux and On Line applications become more competitive, why wouldn't an MS OS customer just go away if in the end Microsoft were just going to compete directly? Microsoft cannot straddle the fence on this. Microsoft is either in the PC hardware business like Apple or it is not. And committing to be IN has incredible consequences for Microsoft: such as owning offshore manufacturing capacity and the reality that companies like Dell and HP will quietly look for alternatives to their OS sources in lieu of Microsoft becoming a direct competitor. <BR/><BR/>In order to fix this you need to understand your mistake in vision from the industrial design side. Exactly how can industrial design damage a company? Primarily it happens by not understanding how to manage ID, and mostly by managers not having the technical knowledge to manage both engineers and designers to achieve desired results. <BR/><BR/>My examples will be Xbox, Vista, and Macbook. First, Xbox, looks great, has all the trimmings, controller, computer looking small case, but it is a fixed product with little or no modularity and it cannot easily be upgraded (that includes hardware and software) by the user or the factory. And it costs more to build than the price point for the product allows. <BR/><BR/>A typical IDSA (Industrial Designer’s Society of America) designer with heavy styling-non-engineering prejudices will first, not be able to deliver the engineering CAD models needed to tool the enclosures, and second is coming from a 20th century set of tools preventing direct concept to tool designer development. Most industrial designer training and experience has severe problems in solving specific development issues related to keeping the product price to manufacture on target.<BR/><BR/>Looking at the interface design of Vista, one has to admit that the design is great looking, cool to use and unreasonably slow to load and run older machines. And the human factors defining the adoption of Adobe and Apple style tagging and file manipulation is confusing at best. What happened? ID lost sight of the target or had no realistic target in mind which when communicated with the developers caused delay and havoc in the product vision.<BR/><BR/>Regarding the Macbook there has been significant heat management problems because the industrial design teams insisted on no compromise in size and the engineering teams were unable to make it work properly until after release. I am not confident at this juncture that the components will have longevity because of the packaging issues, but time will tell. There has been documented shut downs by the thousands of Macbooks due to heat. How many borderline components are affected over the long term is unknown.<BR/><BR/>The industrial designer without engineering background gets sucked into the old saw that putting money into the perception of a desirable product (be it hardware or the styling and goodies for the customer) will be made back regardless of cost by increased sales volume caused by the cool design. This is an incredible self-deception that is almost never true. Products make money when efficiently engineered, cheap to build and great in design and style. This is almost always true.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-86220593568730475492007-05-29T12:34:00.000-07:002007-05-29T12:34:00.000-07:00Note: while this is a little off Most industrial d...Note: while this is a little off Most industrial designers get sucked into the old saw that putting money into the perception of a desirable product (be it hardware or the styling and goodies for the customer) will be made back regardless of cost by increased sales volume caused by the cool design. This is an incredible self-deception that is almost never true. Products make money when efficiently engineered, cheap to build and great in design and style. This is almost always true.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-78658482245690714512007-05-29T11:17:00.000-07:002007-05-29T11:17:00.000-07:00Robbie Bach dumping a s--t load of shares on the m...Robbie Bach dumping a s--t load of shares on the market today...what a shocker!!!! Prick.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-33852301252272500522007-05-29T08:36:00.000-07:002007-05-29T08:36:00.000-07:00Something is terribly wrong with Xbox strategy. We...Something is terribly wrong with Xbox strategy. We entered game console business because we wanted a computer in the living rooms. It is not like we were dying to have a hardware business.<BR/><BR/>Now whenever somebody says Xbox is for hardcore gamers and wii for casual gamers, then that person is effectively saying that we failed terribly. Microsoft's purpose had been better served if Xbox had been accepted by casual gamers. We wanted ordinary people to put a computer next to their TV so that we could enhance this computer with entertainment offerings. For an example today the online xbox movie offer is for people who are hardcore gamers. Xbox is a media extender for PC is also for hardcore gamers. No need to take heavy loses if Xbox division had defined the right goal itself. Eventually Apple can start putting a computer next to TV and that too at a profit. Right now Apple TV is expensive but expect to see a huge cut in price when Apply enthusiasts are done with buying Apple TV. Apple TV could easily be sold, even with today's cost, at less than $200 at profit. Apple is making huge profit today on Apple TV to extract out development cost from willing Apple enthusiasts. Even if the cost of harddrive etc remain the same, the device could be sold at $199 tomorrow or cheaper if you account for falling hardware costs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-33974524032042587912007-05-29T08:24:00.000-07:002007-05-29T08:24:00.000-07:00Looks like your blog is going to get even more tra...Looks like your blog is going to get even more traffic now, Mini. Lisa's taken her ball and is going home.<BR/><BR/>She's officially as big a failure as Ballmer now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-69659185322496118712007-05-28T19:27:00.000-07:002007-05-28T19:27:00.000-07:00- MSN is not allowed do anything that will negativ...<B>- MSN is not allowed do anything that will negatively affect the revenue of the main cash cows of Windows and Office.</B><BR/><BR/>A trip down memory lane ... IBM notices that Apple etc, are on to something, and decide to do something for their programmers to take home, a Personal Computer. They estimate some small number for the total number to be sold,ergo, such a small number is produced - and sells like hotcakes, because it's got those three magic letters behind it: <I>IBM</I>.<BR/><BR/>IBM rub their hands and smirk. They're on to a winner. Only to find that it's a double-sided win, because now we have everybody else jumping onto the bandwagon, and we hadn't built it near big enough.<BR/><BR/>And then, they realize they run the risk of this new <I>PeeCee</I> eating into the sales and contracts for their massive mainframes and minicomputers. No, we can't have that, can we?<BR/><BR/>PS/2 shoots itself in the foot, along with the micro-channel architecture - pity, it actually made sense.<BR/><BR/>Now we have the same things happening with Microsoft. Do people seriously imagine that things will be different for us, just because, well, <B>we're Microsoft</B>?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-34783692019203277342007-05-28T16:10:00.000-07:002007-05-28T16:10:00.000-07:00>"what part of this conversation are you failing t...>"what part of this conversation are you failing to understand? halo 3 will drive sales of the 360, which in turn will allow microsoft to make money on every game those new customers buy for the system and every download they pay for and every monthly fee they pay for xbox live.<BR/><BR/>this is the same exact strategy that nintendo and sony employ for their console-exclusive titles. it really isn't anything unusual."<BR/><BR/>The part I don't understand is why you want to drive up sales on a product that costs more to build and market than you will get in return. You could multiply your sales tenfold, eliminate your losses on hardware and make all your customers very happy by doing what I suggest. <BR/><BR/>Its a win win, while your strategy is a lose, lose even for those who have an Xbox because the hardware is fixed and already obsolete. <BR/><BR/>Note that copying Sony and Nintendo does not make you smart or right it just shows you can't think and don't know how to innovate (by making hardware at a profit). <BR/><BR/>You have assumed that the total market consists of the closed leveraged system of a)money losing console, b)games and c)live games. Remove money losing console from the formula by either selling at a profit or not selling it at all. What part of that is it you don't understand?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-89688204185387080362007-05-28T15:53:00.000-07:002007-05-28T15:53:00.000-07:00"duh. My point exactly. What is your expected sale...<I>"duh. My point exactly. What is your expected sales volume on release of Halo 3 for Xbox. Now what would be your expected sales volume on Halo 3 for PCs, Xbox, Wii, and PS3 all released on the same day. Do the numbers, including your losses on each Xbox sold and tell me why you are still employed at Microsoft. Yeah, Duh, big time."</I><BR/><BR/>what part of this conversation are you failing to understand? halo 3 will drive sales of the 360, which in turn will allow microsoft to make money on every game those new customers buy for the system and every download they pay for and every monthly fee they pay for xbox live.<BR/><BR/>this is the same exact strategy that nintendo and sony employ for their console-exclusive titles. it really isn't anything unusual.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-36084538726482474872007-05-28T15:50:00.000-07:002007-05-28T15:50:00.000-07:00"This may be true, but you're neglecting to factor...<I>"This may be true, but you're neglecting to factor in that the attach rate isn't as important to Nintendo because they are actually making money on the console, unlike the 360.</I><BR/><BR/>i don't think this is a fair statement -- they're making money on the hardware, but they're not making huge money per unit and they're certainly relying on a rich stable of games to bring in revenue throughout the 5ish year lifespan of the console.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-65040175558861239862007-05-28T15:47:00.000-07:002007-05-28T15:47:00.000-07:00"Let's be honest. Every gamer sees the "core" syst...<I>"Let's be honest. Every gamer sees the "core" system as a crippled version of the premium. No one looks at the core as a fully-functional game system comparable to the Wii in price."</I><BR/><BR/>but the wii isn't targeting gamers, remember... and hardcore FPS gamers are not interested in buying the wii.<BR/><BR/>that said, i fully agree that the core 360 without a hard drive was a mistake. but you can buy the hard drive for about 75 bucks, which still makes the 360 about 100.00 more than a wii, and doesn't put it in a different price point league.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-31763384189639703022007-05-28T15:46:00.000-07:002007-05-28T15:46:00.000-07:00>ok, this is just getting silly. there are plenty ...>ok, this is just getting silly. there are plenty of cross-platform games out there -- but each platform has some flagship exclusive titles *to drive sales of the platform*. duh.<BR/><BR/>duh. My point exactly. What is your expected sales volume on release of Halo 3 for Xbox. Now what would be your expected sales volume on Halo 3 for PCs, Xbox, Wii, and PS3 all released on the same day. Do the numbers, including your losses on each Xbox sold and tell me why you are still employed at Microsoft. Yeah, Duh, big time.<BR/><BR/>You must be the same guy who talked Gates into buying aQu for $6 billion; same lame logic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-29996257928327414572007-05-28T15:45:00.000-07:002007-05-28T15:45:00.000-07:00as with other efforts, nintendo tends to release n...<I>as with other efforts, nintendo tends to release new consoles with a very spartan portfolio of top-quality games, and although they're selling a ton of consoles they're not doing as well in the number of games sold per unit.</I><BR/><BR/>This may be true, but you're neglecting to factor in that the attach rate isn't as important to Nintendo because they are actually making money on the console, unlike the 360.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-63465818567109149562007-05-28T15:41:00.000-07:002007-05-28T15:41:00.000-07:00the Wii is not so low-priced -- it's about 279.00 ...<I>the Wii is not so low-priced -- it's about 279.00 for a basic system compared to the 360's 299.00 basic system.</I><BR/><BR/>Let's be honest. Every gamer sees the "core" system as a crippled version of the premium. No one looks at the core as a fully-functional game system comparable to the Wii in price.<BR/><BR/>I still think the core option was the biggest mistake we made this generation. In gamer's minds, it's not really a cheaper alternative, it's a less-functional red-headed stepchild. Meanwhile, we gave up the ubiquity of the hard drive and forced developers to code for a lowest-common-denominator platform which almost no one has.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-50483320225920343242007-05-28T15:37:00.000-07:002007-05-28T15:37:00.000-07:00>but consoles vs. PC is a religious battle that's ...>but consoles vs. PC is a religious battle that's been ongoing since the beginning of gaming and it's not going to end any time soon.<BR/><BR/>Not so different than the religious battle over open vs proprietary software or the battle over severe DRM restrictions vs a more open and looser format that is customer centric. And the music business is dying, being killed off by itself, and DRM, (while the game business has not yet peaked, but it will.) And the OS business, well that religious battle has not really even begun except for a few GPL skirmishes.<BR/><BR/>It is obvious that Microsoft has engaged in a sony-esque strategy of selling dedicated hardware devices starting with mice, keyboards, expanding to music players and game consoles and so on. <BR/><BR/>No judgment on that, except that from a strategic decision standpoint, you want to maximize your sales and keep prices low. The only way you can do that is stick to software and drive out the two kinds of software mentioned above (OS, Games), as cheaply and as fast as possible, before the public gets bored and uses their resources on something else, like they are with music.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com