Here's a well thought through article about "Nintendo's Role in Sony's demise," although that's sort of a red herring. Really what this article is "13 reasons Microsoft and Nintendo are going to kick Sony's butt."
I'll add a huge reason that these guys missed - Sony and Microsoft have been benefitting by preferential treatment in the GameStops and Electronics Boutiques of the world for years. The result is that the experience of purchasing games in these stores totally sucks. You know what I mean if you've ever been in one - rude employees, unsorted games, tiny aisles with kids running through at 25 miles an hour. Revolution is more tightly integrated with Nintendo Wifi than even the X-box - and Nintendo Wifi is free. The above article does point out that Sony has no on-line strategy, and that's going to kill them.
A further scenario that isn't mentioned is the relative health of MS. The article mentions that Sony may have problems resulting from its diversification, in that other divisions are currently (and may in the future) draining from Sony's overall financial health. It does not mention, but it should be said, that the same is true of MS. For the most part, MS makes money from Windows and Office, and runs pretty significant losses in other areas. MS has shareholders who may not support continued revenue loss, and despite popular opinion, MS has backed away from certain markets in the past (television being one example).
Also, MS is fighting battles on many fronts, and so it may be vulnerable to the kind of problems that the diverse Sony has as well. The popular mythos is that MS simply outlasts competitors in all areas by relying on its war chest, but if it is stretched too thin in other areas, the 360 may suffer. Think, for example, of the challenge Google and Linux represent to MS as a company. It would seem that MS's first priorities would be to the protection of its valuable assets rather than currently unprofitable ones on the speculation that they will lead to future gains.
MS also has certain (though not very severe) limitations on its flexability due to its monopoly conviction. It is possible that divisions of MS, including the entertainment section, could spin off to avoid these complications, but the resulting company or companies would not have the consolidated MS's resources.
In all of this, it should be noted that Nintendo focuses pretty tightly on one industry, and this may make them more nimble than MS or Sony. Diversification may end up being something of a liability, depending upon how other divisions perform.
Personally, I hope Sony and MS bleed each other dry a bit; having choice in consoles and games is generally a good thing (although in this era of ports it seems to be less of a factor), but both MS and Sony don't need to cement their oligopolic positions even further. That would be detrimental for everyone except them in the long run.
Posted by: bouncicles | November 16, 2005 at 11:57 AM
Wählen Sie der wichtigste Standard ist in der Lage zu "reparieren langbeinige Typ", "Stil, gut zu sein", haben natürlich die Kleidung mit dem populären Sinn tragen
Posted by: Levis Jeans | September 14, 2012 at 05:55 AM