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

Of course they are - but Microsoft only knows how to make platform plays.

It seems to have forgotten that platforms are bootstrapped on the basis of killer products, and sustained by interop between a continuous stream of great products. For so long, its platform play was based on extending the Windows platform ("windows everywhere"), and it seems to have institutionally forgotten that the only reason this worked is because WORD AND EXCEL ARE KILLER PRODUCTS. If Word ceased to be the way that 99% of business users interfaced with text of any significance, and if Excel ceased to be the way that 99% of business users capture and analyze data, then the Windows platform "advantage" would evaporate overnight.

So, Microsoft's DNA is to attempt to create "ecosystems" because it considers itself a platform company, whereas most smaller or saner companies look to build great products. Heck, even Apple has to do this. Could it have created an iOS ecosystem if the iPhone was a dud?

(An aside: Android might seem to be an exception to this, because it's not a killer product in the way that iPhone and iPad were. But that's only if you think that phone subscribers are the customers of Android. They're not - the carriers are. Which is why Google's acquisition of Motorola is so interesting and yet so expected at the same time. They've gotten as about as far as they can get on the back of an "OK" product, and need to make a stellar product in order to build an ecosystem of users instead of partners. The carriers don't have it in their DNA to deliver stellar software, and the hardware guys don't either, so Google has to buy a hardware company so it can build a great integrated device.)



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

Search: