Verno wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 12:23:

jdreyer wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 12:05:
Really? The living room might not be dying a final death, but device fragmentation has absolutely relegated it to a niche, if not completely yet in some households. I'm not rich by any stretch, most of the families I know are middle class. But each person has their own device that occupies the majority of their time. Time in front of the TV with family or friends is pretty much a weekend activity only.

This situation is pretty much mirrored and growing around the globe. Microsoft as usual is years late to the party, the living room is everything dream came and went already. They are competing with everything from Smart TVs to cellphones at this point, not to mention the traditional TV markets. The Xbox doesn't really bring them anything, even if I decided to go whole hog on the Xbox One, my purchase doesn't make me more likely to buy a Windows Phone or use a Surface tablet. Ballmers one company strategy just doesn't make sense for so many disparate markets, maybe years ago before Apple and Android gobbled up the market but now its fruitless.

The Xbox should be sold off and can survive on its own merits or not, Microsoft propping it up makes little sense. They can even continue to leverage interop if they believe in with a partnership and some money instead of the massive capital investments required to continue making consoles. Bing should be put out to pasture, it's a complete joke that survives on users being tricked into using it. We've had 12 years of Xbox and while the brand is one of their few successful ones, they don't really have anything to show for it. Windows and Enterprise software has been and might always be their bread and butter.

Yep. Apple TV just never really hits its stride. Intel is saying to anyone... here come take this from us. There was a time, it just didn't happen and something else happened and changed the whole need for it.

Beamer wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 12:23:

jdreyer wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 12:05:
@ Beam,

Really? The living room might not be dying a final death, but device fragmentation has absolutely relegated it to a niche, if not completely yet in some households. I'm not rich by any stretch, most of the families I know are middle class. But each person has their own device that occupies the majority of their time. Time in front of the TV with family or friends is pretty much a weekend activity only.

Yup. But "control the living room" also means "control the devices people are sitting in their kitchen and bedrooms watching television." This is where people take it too literally.

Growing up I rarely sat in the same room as my parents watching the same tv shows. But I was always watching or playing something, especially with friends.

And single people still dominate the living room. If you have an apartment to yourself that's probably where you spend the bulk of your time. The TV may not be on, or for most people is on but background noise, but that's still where you are. Still, it's looking too literal. "Control the living room" always meant "control computing around the house instead of just in the corner where the desktop is."



Microsoft's strategy there is sound. It's the tactics of going so focused on TV, and especially cable tv, as well as their insistence in going after non-gamers to the detriment of gamers, thinking they can do what Nintendo started to do but failed at, that's killing them (they forget that Nintendo still captured all those non-gamers with games.)

Now I agree with a good part of this, but the MS Living Room is the Beaver Living Room. Watch their bright shiny family commercials. I feel you are right, a lot of people just want their space most of the time, so that is why a singles Living Room is popular, because they are by themselves in their own space... Still no family.

Beamer wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 10:57:

HorrorScope wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 10:09:

jdreyer wrote on Nov 7, 2013, 22:02:
One thing he is right about is that it distracts from Microsoft's central goal of dominating the PC sphere.

Yep they are after the Living Room which is another marketing failure. They should be after our wallets.

And that is different... how?
People here keep going "der, the living room is dead." Which is really an incredibly narrow view of life:
1) Your living room may be dead. You do not represent the country as a whole. This board tends to be the last place where desktops still matter, and this board tends to not own consoles, so this board is not a good judge of how mainstream companies should act
2) The living room is in no way dead. Most people still enjoy doing things socially. They still enjoy watching movies and TV with their friends or loved ones. They still enjoy playing games most when the friend is on the seat next to them, not across the country
3) And yes, the devices used for much of this is shifting. But "control the living room" always meant "expand beyond simply desktops and laptops." The Xbox is their only way to do this. It's an ecosystem many people expect to find their entertainment on. This means that, when they leave the couch, or when they turn off the TV, they still want entertainment coming in some form from some way. Can any of you "living room is dead!" people explain how Microsoft could be involved in that otherwise?

Plus, after that article yesterday, we're getting so many "Microsoft should just sell Xbox" comments. Ok, but if Xbox is really losing that much money, how will it survive without the capital from Office? And how will Microsoft grow if it focuses solely on areas it already dominates?
Microsoft's overarching strategy of "be more relevant in consumer entertainment" is clearly a good one, and clearly the smart one - they predicted how important internet and streaming would be. What they suck at is the tactics. What they suck at is figuring out where to be making money in their equations. But that doesn't mean their strategy is wrong, just their implementations.

I get it, a lot of you hate Microsoft, we all think Microsoft has severely dropped the ball here, and for once it isn't just the niche that's wary about what they're doing with their console. But don't stretch it to "the living room is dead" when that's so obviously both being too literal and ignoring what goes on in most households around the world.

Then why are they losing money? The thing is the Living Room is dying as reported years ago by the likes of Home and Gardens. The nucleus of the family it totally different then the days of Beaver. Dinner at the family table, another dinosaur to most families. And with everyone and their brother with a mobile device in their face, the coup de grace has been put in the Living Rooms heart.

Or go by this rule of thumb, wherever the parents are the children rather not be for long. It's not a hub, it doesn't mean it's not used at all, but it's not like this magnet known as the family office either.

Beamer wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 10:57:
You do not represent the country as a whole.

It is fairly amusing to see you, of all people, taking that stance.

Growing up I rarely sat in the same room as my parents watching the same tv shows. But I was always watching or playing something, especially with friends.

Prosecution rests, your Honor.

jdreyer wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 12:05:
Really? The living room might not be dying a final death, but device fragmentation has absolutely relegated it to a niche, if not completely yet in some households. I'm not rich by any stretch, most of the families I know are middle class. But each person has their own device that occupies the majority of their time. Time in front of the TV with family or friends is pretty much a weekend activity only.

This situation is pretty much mirrored and growing around the globe. Microsoft as usual is years late to the party, the living room is everything dream came and went already. They are competing with everything from Smart TVs to cellphones at this point, not to mention the traditional TV markets. The Xbox doesn't really bring them anything, even if I decided to go whole hog on the Xbox One, my purchase doesn't make me more likely to buy a Windows Phone or use a Surface tablet. Ballmers one company strategy just doesn't make sense for so many disparate markets, maybe years ago before Apple and Android gobbled up the market but now its fruitless.

The Xbox should be sold off and can survive on its own merits or not, Microsoft propping it up makes little sense. They can even continue to leverage interop if they believe in with a partnership and some money instead of the massive capital investments required to continue making consoles. Bing should be put out to pasture, it's a complete joke that survives on users being tricked into using it. We've had 12 years of Xbox and while the brand is one of their few successful ones, they don't really have anything to show for it. Windows and Enterprise software has been and might always be their bread and butter.

jdreyer wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 12:05:
@ Beam,

Really? The living room might not be dying a final death, but device fragmentation has absolutely relegated it to a niche, if not completely yet in some households. I'm not rich by any stretch, most of the families I know are middle class. But each person has their own device that occupies the majority of their time. Time in front of the TV with family or friends is pretty much a weekend activity only.

Yup. But "control the living room" also means "control the devices people are sitting in their kitchen and bedrooms watching television." This is where people take it too literally.

Growing up I rarely sat in the same room as my parents watching the same tv shows. But I was always watching or playing something, especially with friends.

And single people still dominate the living room. If you have an apartment to yourself that's probably where you spend the bulk of your time. The TV may not be on, or for most people is on but background noise, but that's still where you are. Still, it's looking too literal. "Control the living room" always meant "control computing around the house instead of just in the corner where the desktop is."



Microsoft's strategy there is sound. It's the tactics of going so focused on TV, and especially cable tv, as well as their insistence in going after non-gamers to the detriment of gamers, thinking they can do what Nintendo started to do but failed at, that's killing them (they forget that Nintendo still captured all those non-gamers with games.)

@ Beam,

Really? The living room might not be dying a final death, but device fragmentation has absolutely relegated it to a niche, if not completely yet in some households. I'm not rich by any stretch, most of the families I know are middle class. But each person has their own device that occupies the majority of their time. Time in front of the TV with family or friends is pretty much a weekend activity only.

Redmask wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 07:16:

The Half Elf wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 02:24:
Forza 5, that's it.

Even Forza 5 is a fail due to being rushed by Microsoft. Half of the tracks of 4 and less than half of the cars.

I'm sure that's an intentional way of monetizing it. DLC and all.

HorrorScope wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 10:09:

jdreyer wrote on Nov 7, 2013, 22:02:
One thing he is right about is that it distracts from Microsoft's central goal of dominating the PC sphere.

Yep they are after the Living Room which is another marketing failure. They should be after our wallets.

And that is different... how?
People here keep going "der, the living room is dead." Which is really an incredibly narrow view of life:
1) Your living room may be dead. You do not represent the country as a whole. This board tends to be the last place where desktops still matter, and this board tends to not own consoles, so this board is not a good judge of how mainstream companies should act
2) The living room is in no way dead. Most people still enjoy doing things socially. They still enjoy watching movies and TV with their friends or loved ones. They still enjoy playing games most when the friend is on the seat next to them, not across the country
3) And yes, the devices used for much of this is shifting. But "control the living room" always meant "expand beyond simply desktops and laptops." The Xbox is their only way to do this. It's an ecosystem many people expect to find their entertainment on. This means that, when they leave the couch, or when they turn off the TV, they still want entertainment coming in some form from some way. Can any of you "living room is dead!" people explain how Microsoft could be involved in that otherwise?

Plus, after that article yesterday, we're getting so many "Microsoft should just sell Xbox" comments. Ok, but if Xbox is really losing that much money, how will it survive without the capital from Office? And how will Microsoft grow if it focuses solely on areas it already dominates?
Microsoft's overarching strategy of "be more relevant in consumer entertainment" is clearly a good one, and clearly the smart one - they predicted how important internet and streaming would be. What they suck at is the tactics. What they suck at is figuring out where to be making money in their equations. But that doesn't mean their strategy is wrong, just their implementations.

I get it, a lot of you hate Microsoft, we all think Microsoft has severely dropped the ball here, and for once it isn't just the niche that's wary about what they're doing with their console. But don't stretch it to "the living room is dead" when that's so obviously both being too literal and ignoring what goes on in most households around the world.

jdreyer wrote on Nov 7, 2013, 22:02:
One thing he is right about is that it distracts from Microsoft's central goal of dominating the PC sphere.

Yep they are after the Living Room which is another marketing failure. They should be after our wallets.

I think it is fair to say, the power of the living room is over-stated and has been shrinking for decades. With more electronics it becomes less and less of a hub. But how can they back track now with so many billions spent?

Edit: I see this point has been repeated here in, but just solidifies we see it, why can't they? Goes back to Sony's hire. They hired a game software maker who is a long time game player to run them and so far it's looking like a perfect move. How do we dummies who make little from this industry see better then those making 6 and 7 figures? These CEO's have to look it who and how they hire.

This comment was edited on Nov 8, 2013, 10:15.

Kajetan wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 08:59:
Of course the Xbone will do fine. For itself. As a seperate unit. No longer being attached to MS. Just being the product of a Xbox company which concentrates on making attractive offers to video game players. And no longer being simply a worn out tool in the attempt to conquer the family rooms of the world.

Hey man I agree. Just saying that all of the doom and gloom stuff about the Xbox One ignores how much brand loyalty exists in our sad excuse for a consumer base

If it failed out of the gate then maybe Microsoft would be more tempted but it won't due to major brand awareness + marketing. Management is also hellbent on Kinect being some kind of killer app that can be leveraged across the whole company.

TheWitcher wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 00:31:

Creston wrote on Nov 7, 2013, 22:59:

wtf_man wrote on Nov 7, 2013, 20:17:

PS4 Footage Used In Xbox One Watch Dogs Trailer.

/ROFL

The entire Xbone bonanza is just one giant-ass failboat.

It really is. Have they done anything right yet? Anything?

One week to PS4 - woot woot woot! Gonna be a long night!

Verno wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 08:43:
The Xbox One will do fine, it has too much brand inertia to just die out quickly.

Of course the Xbone will do fine. For itself. As a seperate unit. No longer being attached to MS. Just being the product of a Xbox company which concentrates on making attractive offers to video game players. And no longer being simply a worn out tool in the attempt to conquer the family rooms of the world.

The Xbox One will do fine, it has too much brand inertia to just die out quickly. The PS4 will likely sell better for the first few years but after that its a toss up. I can't really see it selling 200 million units or something though, the analyst is correct that it is a pointless distraction from their usual revenue sources.

TheWitcher wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 00:31:

Creston wrote on Nov 7, 2013, 22:59:

wtf_man wrote on Nov 7, 2013, 20:17:

PS4 Footage Used In Xbox One Watch Dogs Trailer.

/ROFL

The entire Xbone bonanza is just one giant-ass failboat.

It really is. Have they done anything right yet? Anything?

At this point they have screwed up so badly I don't think anyone could recognize if they did something right. The only thing that will save the xbone is if the PS4 has a horrible launch. Like where half the units are DoA or something awful like that.

The Half Elf wrote on Nov 8, 2013, 02:24:
Forza 5, that's it.

Even Forza 5 is a fail due to being rushed by Microsoft. Half of the tracks of 4 and less than half of the cars.

Let's see how much money Xbox loses once the PS4 hits. Better double that number to be sure, unless they can sell the spyware data for a lot of coin.

Forza 5, that's it.

Creston wrote on Nov 7, 2013, 22:59:

wtf_man wrote on Nov 7, 2013, 20:17:

PS4 Footage Used In Xbox One Watch Dogs Trailer.

/ROFL

The entire Xbone bonanza is just one giant-ass failboat.

It really is. Have they done anything right yet? Anything?

Redmask wrote on Nov 7, 2013, 22:27:
The living room dream is dead, many families don't even use the family room communally anymore due to household device fragmentation. The TV is no longer the center piece of the modern family.

It's probably not quite dead, but it'll get there eventually. It's funny that by the time the tech world finally gets around to doing something about an entire family sitting there clustered around one device, said family is now off fiddling with phones and tablets, and no longer paying attention to the TV.