5 ms·
I certainly didn't kill Microsoft, but it's tens of billions of dollars they didn't get. It's significant, even at Microsoft's scale.
by ignite 4y ago
I certainly didn't kill Microsoft, but it's tens of billions of dollars they didn't get. It's significant, even at Microsoft's scale.
- chipgap98 4y agoThere is also opportunity cost though. Maybe if they succeeded in mobile then they would have missed Teams. Its hard to say that the side effects from missing that wave were exclusively negative.
- lotsofpulp 4y agoUsing Teams as a not negative example is very odd.
- chipgap98 4y agoThey have crushed Slack with Teams and it is the backbone of their enterprise offering. Am I missing something?
- lotsofpulp 4y agoI am referring to the near universal opinion that Teams is shit software that is only worth forcing employees to use because it is free.
- bombcar 4y agoArguably Microsoft is actually well-placed to continually miss major advancements in areas they should be king in (or adjacent to them) and yet continue.
- xiphias2 4y agoQuite the opposite. If they have owned mobile + desktop, they could have a much stronger integration, and we wouldn't be Google first with our apps.
- chipgap98 4y agoYeah that's a good point with regards to integration. I still think the Microsoft that wins in mobile looks very different from the Microsoft we know today.
- neffy 4y agoAnd this is Google's core business. Nothing came along yet that replaced corporate use of microsoft office, and that is were they make most of their money.