1. bulls96's Avatar
    that would be huge i think. i think they have the cash to do it.

    ​thoughts?
    11-18-2014 10:23 AM
  2. iamakii's Avatar
    Yes and no. Yes, it will make MS band better. No, it will kill competition. But still, they can just support in the background and make partnerships like what they are doing.
    batboris likes this.
    11-18-2014 10:32 AM
  3. sjjones's Avatar
    no point , I think MS will catch up with hardware and software pretty quickly
    jmshub likes this.
    11-18-2014 01:42 PM
  4. dorelse's Avatar
    I think Microsoft is hoping (encouraging) FitBit & others to adopt the technology in their Band...they get the ecosystem without having to buy anyone, and it grows the Microsoft Health platform...that's the real endgame for Microsoft...
    batboris likes this.
    11-18-2014 02:23 PM
  5. Trill Gates's Avatar
    Normally I'd say yes, but everything MSFT has bought lately has taken much longer to advance and innovate. Look at Nokia for example before MSFT bought them they were consistently pumping out new and bold attractive phones (1020, 1520,920/925/928,Icon/930) because they a were phone company who needed to sell hardware to survive. Now that Microsoft is paying the bills to keep the lights on for the Nokia handset division, all that competitive urgency has been lost.


    In hind sight I kinda wish Microsoft had loaned Nokia the money it needed to fix itself at a low interest rate with the caveat being that Nokia could only make phones that ran on Windows Phone. An outright purchase by a stable rich company like Microsoft slows everything down.


    Answer to your question: I think Microsoft should sign a partnership/licensing deal with Fitbit, not buy them out completely.
    11-18-2014 02:30 PM
  6. jmshub's Avatar
    ^ Microsoft had loaned Nokia 1-2 billion euros.
    11-18-2014 03:05 PM
  7. Trill Gates's Avatar
    @jmshub Ya but it wasn't with the same clauses which I outlined..
    11-18-2014 03:09 PM
  8. DroidUser42's Avatar
    Microsoft Health platform...that's the real endgame for Microsoft...
    I agree that's their real end game. Making sure consumers have multiple choices that lead back to their product is best for them.
    11-18-2014 03:22 PM
  9. undisputed n00b's Avatar
    Normally I'd say yes, but everything MSFT has bought lately has taken much longer to advance and innovate. Look at Nokia for example before MSFT bought them they were consistently pumping out new and bold attractive phones (1020, 1520,920/925/928,Icon/930) because they a were phone company who needed to sell hardware to survive. Now that Microsoft is paying the bills to keep the lights on for the Nokia handset division, all that competitive urgency has been lost.


    In hind sight I kinda wish Microsoft had loaned Nokia the money it needed to fix itself at a low interest rate with the caveat being that Nokia could only make phones that ran on Windows Phone. An outright purchase by a stable rich company like Microsoft slows everything down.


    Answer to your question: I think Microsoft should sign a partnership/licensing deal with Fitbit, not buy them out completely.
    Its not that the Nokia guys no longer have the urge to be competitive, its that they got infected by Microsoft's stupidity of never wanting to take risks and that's why we don't have any flagship or innovative devices anymore. We saw that happen more recently with the Xbox One where the retards in Microsoft infected the Xbox team and that's why they botched their announcement and PR of the console and then went back on their vision of the future. The Xbox team used to take major risks and they usually paid off like Kinect. Everybody expected Kinect to fail hard, but it ended up getting the Guinness world record for being the world's fastest selling consumer electronic product and also became one of the most innovative products to ever come out of Microsoft.
    11-21-2014 12:09 AM
  10. Trill Gates's Avatar
    Its not that the Nokia guys no longer have the urge to be competitive, its that they got infected by Microsoft's stupidity of never wanting to take risks and that's why we don't have any flagship or innovative devices anymore. We saw that happen more recently with the Xbox One where the retards in Microsoft infected the Xbox team and that's why they botched their announcement and PR of the console and then went back on their vision of the future. The Xbox team used to take major risks and they usually paid off like Kinect. Everybody expected Kinect to fail hard, but it ended up getting the Guinness world record for being the world's fastest selling consumer electronic product and also became one of the most innovative products to ever come out of Microsoft.
    No it's not a knock on Nokia's design team and engineers it's a knock on Microsoft being so rich and now owning Nokia. Before Microsoft owned Nokia, the lifeblood of the Nokia brand depended on them selling phones, which meant they had to continue to reinvent and innovate to keep Nokia competitive and afloat. If pre-Microsoft Nokia was this slow to roll out phones they'd have gone bankrupt a long rime ago. Microsoft is so financially stable that there's no rush to pump out phones because the livelihood of Microsoft doesn't begin and end at their smartphone sales.
    11-21-2014 02:14 AM

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-25-2016, 09:22 AM
  2. Wake up Microsoft you just lost Nokia to Android.
    By winrayjay99 in forum Microsoft News & Rumors
    Replies: 114
    Last Post: 12-07-2014, 08:29 PM
  3. What happened to those Playstation 1 games?
    By vlmirano in forum General Phone Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-20-2014, 03:24 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-18-2014, 08:12 PM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-18-2014, 09:19 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD