Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th Sep 2012 23:41 UTC

Thread beginning with comment 534375
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I think you're calling from the (unspecified) future.
Last time I checked I still had to use Windows on my home PC for one reason or another even though my core activities (development for that matter) aren't even remotely Windows related.
While it looks that in consumer computing they may face being sidelined (and that's good for the consumer), there are sizeable chunks they still hold an iron grip on. And make no mistake, the ecosystem talk is a pretext to lock their desktop and mobile plaforms to each other like never before.
Member since:
2006-01-06
I want to emphasize once again: killing not competing (I admit that Apple isn't any better recently).
They are not about choice for the consumer but removing that through network effects that are totally outside of consumer control. Ok, XBOX is another story, a sign or "new" MS, but answer me is XBOX a sustainable business for them? Aren't they still making most revenue from their monopolies?
I'm all for competition but be it RIM, WebOs, Japanese super duper mistery OS, but pleeeaase not MS.
Paging, dsmogor. The 1990s are calling you. Seriously, dude, it's a new world. Microsoft isn't squaring off against a few poorly coordinated, inept players anymore. Google, Apple, Etc are all very well-financed and dominant in their markets. Any fears that you have are utterly muted by current reality. Microsoft will be *lucky* to gain even relevant market share in search, mobile, tablets. And given that, anything which makes the dominant players continue to compete, produce better products, and lower prices is good for everyone. Rooting for monopolies is what you're doing. Bad, bad idea. Apple and Google are the new Microsofts -- and in some ways, they are a lot worse.