Thanks for taking the time to explain this, I honestly appreciate it.
I would say that I agree with you in that TV-entertainment as the trojan horse is an outdated concept, and I would clarify that in my post I never said that (TV, specifically). It's likely that what I'm assuming is Microsoft's end game is either just wishful thinking on my end or just me being delusional. It could be both to be honest.
But, the fact is that Microsoft was touting this line right before the console launched (
http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/8/5075216/xbox-one-tv-microsofts-plan-to-take-over-the-living-room). Granted, it could be just marketing talk (very likely), but they continue to push towards the AR-Living Room scenario. Is it an outdated concept of the future? Perhaps. I don't know that Microsoft thinks so (or doesn't, for that matter). I understand that smart phones and isolated experiences trump the old "getting the whole family together" and/or "tethered entertainment", but on the other hand I wouldn't completely ignore the fact that Microsoft wants their software to be ubiquitous, and that having a device which responds to your voice, gestures, presence, etc, AND manages your cable content, games, etc may very well be the proverbial foot in the door for the whole home automation craze.
Yes, not everybody owns a house, a TV or has the money to invest in home automation systems/services, but then again, I don't Microsoft is going after the "kids without electricity in Africa" market. To say that home/living room entertainment is dead (like pagers) is kind of... I don't know, off, perhaps?
So you're saying me that 4+ million consoles sold (is that what the number is at the moment) means nobody wants the Xbox One?
Trust me, I know that, if not right now, sometime soon the heads of Microsoft will sit down and talk about sales, profit and the direction (or lack of) of the Entertainment and Devices Xbox Division. And let's say there's no higher goal. There's no Living Room Trojan Horse ideal anymore. Let's say Microsoft just wants to sell games and consoles. And they're not making money at it. Let's say this is a repeat of the Zune. They *will* cut their loses and drop the division/product, like they've done in the past. I'm not arguing that they won't. I'm just saying that Microsoft is not afraid to lose money as long as they think they will make back more. Microsoft lost boatloads of money with the Original Xbox (and I wouldn't be surprised if they did with 360 as well), but I'm certain they also made A LOT of money with Xbox Live/Services in general. I don't think they recouped the loses though, but perhaps that's part of their long-term goal. Otherwise why would they enter the race again?
Let me be clear here: I don't think Microsoft can (or will)
continue to throw money at an issue until money starts bouncing back. But I do think that they're not afraid to
try until they know for certain it's not going to work. I don't think that they are in a position where they can say "you know what Bill? I don't think this whole Xbox thing is going to work out for us. Let's axe it." *If* (when?) that time comes, I'm certain they'll take it behind the woodshed. No tears.
As I've said before, I don't have a way of knowing one way or another what's going to happen in the end (obviously), so I can't say for certain what's going to happen. But if you look at Microsoft you know it is not afraid to try things out until they don't work for them. I said so above, and it's true. Do you think Microsoft "knew" it was going to take the MP3 device crown from Apple with the Zune? Or the Tablet crown from Apple/Samsung with the Surface? They didn't know. And it didn't work out, of course. I don't think they
knew it wasn't going to work. I think they looked at the market, hired some pretty smart people, ran some projections and it looked like something they could afford to try. And then they tried and didn't like the outcome and that was it (for the Zune, not yet the Surface).
So yeah, my argument is that Sony is making money with PlayStation but losing it everywhere else. They're cutting/closing/selling divisions to try and save the ship. Microsoft has deep pockets. IF (huge if, I know) Microsoft (and when I say Microsoft I mean investors, CEO, etc) want to stay in the market, they can. They can afford to,
IF they see value in it. If they don't (let's say Nadella + board say games/living room/TV is a waste of money and time and they should go back to software and services) then they'll cut it. As simple as that.
So I guess what I'm saying in the end is: Microsoft is a cool guy and he doesn't afraid to spend money.
We all go out and sing Kumbaya while Nintendo sullenly watches from the shadows. Biding its time and knowing that when the Dark Lord Yamauchi returns, all of us will crawl in fear like the worms that we are.
