Okay Per... apparently you're not the only one who completely misunderstood what I was saying, so sorry for that. Lets break this down.
1) Apple does not offer cheaper solutions than Microsoft.
Yes, but...I explicitly mentioned both Apple
and Google.
In the context of what I said, I thought it would be clear that Apple is viewed as the entity who provides more accessible products (the stuff anybody can use, as they are perceived as the company who's products "just work". Whether that's objectively true or not doesn't matter because perception "is" reality), while Google is the entity who provides products and services that are cheap (the stuff anybody can afford, because nobody can beat "ad supported and free").
Apple and Google occupy those two market positions, so those two roles are split between two companies rather than being combined into one, but the net result is the same. MS doesn't occupy either of those two positions, but is competing against both, in exactly the same way IBM had to compete against cheaper and more accessible MS products two decades ago.
That was my point.
2) Microsoft's mainstream products (Windows 10, Xbox, Outlook, Bing, Groove and their PC/mobile hardware) do not require formal IT education or a high level of enthusiasm to use. I would argue that Windows 10 Mobile is the easiest system out there currently, and the same goes for Windows 10.
I agree that Xbox, Bing and Groove require no actual skills to use. I think the vast majority of people would say that is
not true of Windows however. Very few people love Windows. They use it because they must. Many depend on tech savvy friends and/or family members to help maintain and administer their Windows PC environments, and those PC's are the centerpiece and standard bearer of MS' ecosystem.
If left to fend for themselves, most people would prefer an environment without Windows PCs, as most consider iOS and Android tablets and smartphones simpler (which they are, as they are appliances rather than full fledged computers).
Huh? The Surface line is not exciting enough for you? or how about HoloLens, Xbox One, Visual Studio etc. etc.?
Being in the W10M forum, that's what my post was about. I'm not talking about HoloLens, Xbox or what have you. Specifically in regard to WP and W10M, no, MS has not provided anything which a majority of users would consider unique and/or exciting. W10M does do some things better, but not to an extent that would convince a notable number of people to switch. So no... not exciting enough.
What battle, and what war?
I'm not sure if you're one of those people denying fundamental economics, but it's a fact that MS can't and will not indefinitely subsidize the development of a multi billion dollar software ecosystem that benefits primarily consumers, if MS doesn't see a viable path to earning that money back over time.
Sustaining a
competitive software ecosystem requires that MS extracts from the market an amount of money that is at least somewhat comparable to that of their competitors. MS is nowhere close to that point, and while I disagree with the notion that WP is dead or MS is going under, MS does at some point require a notable number of customers to start wanting and paying for their consumer oriented products and services.
There's this thing called supply and demand. Without demand, there will eventually be no supply. The battles are about creating demand. I'd consider the war won if MS can generate enough demand so their ecosystem becomes at least similarly profitable as their competitor's. Doing that is not possible without a decent mobile presence.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram