Quote:
Originally Posted by
TenoBell 
But they were not always giants. There were Palm Pilots before Windows Mobile even existed or before Nokia was a big player in the US market. Palm had the opportunity to be the market leader but did not make the right choices.
I'm amazed at how many people don't understand how this works.
It makes absolutely no difference whether these giant companies were in the business at the time, or not.
Netscape had almost 90% of the browser market when MS belatedly came on the scene. What happened?
Going back further, Apple had most of the enterprise personal computer market when IBM wised up, and decided that they didn't like that fact. What happened there? Don't forget, that, in the beginning, IBM's machines comprised as closed a market model, as Apple's did. They still took the market from Apple in short order.
The point is that a very large company, or a monopoly, has the funding to make their product a success, no matter how popular a competing product may be, as long as they already have built-in customers, or can afford to lose money on vast scales, as MS is willing to do. That's why we have laws limiting what monopolies can do.
The XBox, and the entire games division at MS, has lost at least $6 billion since the first XBox came out. That hasn't stopped MS from continuing in the business. The only reason the Wii, right now, is so popular, is because it is so cheap. Otherwise, MS is number two in sales. Nintendo hasn't the money to compete with either MS, or Sony, so it doesn't. The game machine market that MS and Sony SEEM to be competing in, is only a distraction. It isn't what they really care about, so they spend billions building it up, so that what they DO care about, which is the online game component that will eventually take over, will be under their control. Nintendo can't compete there.
They also want the consoles to be an entertainment networking center. Nintendo can't compete there either. In the long run, this might kill Nintendo.
You may not remember, but Palm was killing Windows CE PDA's for years. In fact, the PDA market still exists, and Palm is still killing Windows CE!
But, as the market has moved to smartphones, Palm has not got the money to pour into that market that MS has. Despite the fact that not even one review has given any version of Windows Mobile a good rating, esp. when compared to Palms' offerings, whether made by Palm or not, it has surged ahead of Palm in marketshare, after lagging for years. Why is that?. Because, even though the accounts were that MS lost considerable money on CE and Mobile, they kept pounding away at it.
You may have heard the, now, old expression:
Microsoft's products aren't good, but they're good enough.
With enough money, and reach, companies like that don't have to be in a market when others dominate, they can be very successful, and when the other players are small, dominate it, because they can afford to lose the money that the other, smaller, players can't afford to lose.
Palm could have done everything right, as far as their small size, and limited reach, would have allowed, but the outcome would still be the same, even though it might have taken a bit longer.
)
