Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The implicit context for that claim is the consumer mobile market.

What works or doesn't in the desktop market is as relevant as what works or doesn't in the server market.

Microsoft has never generated anything of note in the mobile or consumer markets via an OEM strategy. And the only things it has generated of note in the consumer market are all first-party offerings. (Peripherals, XBox)

None of that suggests Microsoft must try end-to-end integration to succeed. But neither does their success on the desktop invalidate the fact that their OEM strategy has failed them horribly for a decade. (Tablets, UMPCs, Media Players, Phones)

The fact that Apple's attention to detail wasn't nearly as much of an advantage on the desktop, while Microsoft's 'ubiquity via licensing' strategy was, only underscores the point that the consumer mobile market is different.

And even the consumer phone market is demonstrably different from the rest of the consumer mobile market. Because while an OEM strategy is arguably working for Android in the phone market, it isn't going any farther in media players or tablets than Microsoft's OEM-based offerings.



>And the only things it has generated of note in the consumer market are all first-party offerings. (Peripherals, XBox)

That statement makes sense only if you define Windows not to be in the consumer market, which is, uh, stretching it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: