I think the death of Xbox is a warning sign to anybody else thinking of filling that space. If Xbox cannot succeed with Microsoft behind it, what can they bring to the table?
They can bring to the table the offer of NOT being Microsoft.
Xbox failed BECAUSE they have Microsoft behind it. Yes, MS had been pumping money to keep Xbox alive, but Microsoft is also the reason Xbox was dying to begin with.
Because Microsoft was never interested in having a console ever since the "taking over the living room" plan became irrelevant.
I really am trying to be as polite as I can, but I still feel a bit annoyed that so many people here are in the camp that "If Microsoft can't succeed, no one can". Where did THAT idea came from? Microsoft failed all the time. What about the Zune? The Windows Phone? The several attempts at a PC gaming store? They all failed! Since when did Sony became some indestructible Juggernaut that can't do wrong?
Microsoft failed because they sucked. Stop worshiping a company that never deserved it. They can get replaced by a smarter company who can spend money more wisely. PlayStation has plenty of flaws and someone else can challenge them, as long as that someone is not Microsoft.
they can. there still time to prepare for next gen. the 'formula' are infront of them. both Sony and Nintendo learning hard from their failure. they deliver after each failure. only one didnt, is Xbox. they keep jumping in hole another after another despite there is a signboard. they also need to cast away their greed and impatient. they need to discard the mentality of searching over sudden magical formula to dominate a whole industry in blink of an eye.
but things wont help if they undecided and still dont know what to be. things wont help if they pretend to be trendsetter hipster and didnt want to look at exisitng working traditional way.
most importantly fire phil spencer and sarah bond. they didnt fix or learn a shit. they just keep moving goalpost over and over again. however biggest problem is the fanboys who evangelist them. these people need to stop first.
let the products do the talking. not the executive keep bla bla bla.
About your first point:
Microsoft just doesn't want to be a traditional console owner earning a nice income, because that is not enough for MS. So they won't do what you ask because they would rather not do it.
About your 2nd point:
Phil Spencer and Sarah Bond can't be fired because there are no replacements in the company. As in they are the only executives INTERESTED in running a console platform. They are all you got. If they are fired, anyone replacing them would immediately shut the whole hardware division down and just kept selling game software.