-
because they would sell more? they'd eat into sram's 1x adventure market for sure. lots of people out there want huge range doubles (with near mtb low gears) and big top end too, like 46/11 or 50/11. i can't see any possible business reason to make your shit less versatile when it doesn't cost you anything.
i also don't see it as fragmenting at all, rather the opposite. i'd almost sell my xc bike because i like combining xc/cx type rides with paved riding much more than either on its own.
zmjones_-
That's my point. You've prefaced most of your post with 'I'.
We on this forum are generally an exception when you think about it. We're knowledgeable about the market and see how consolidation would work. Lots of people at the end of the day, isn't the complete market.
Road bikes still dominate cycling by a long shot, and the groupsets on that are still road based. OTP bikes still come with mostly road components. Making a one groupset to rule them all would just push everyone to just say 'errr, let's just put this on everything' and bam, why buy anything else?
Think of it the same way as Apple does things.
Do I agree with you on a cross compatibility and how fucking convenient it would be? Hell yes. Does Shimano, I don't think so.
Chak
@miro_o has a point though.
Non paved riding isn't new, but cycling is fragmenting faster than companies can crank out stuff to match.
Also why would Shimano want to make their top-of-the-range stuff cross compatible. They're a business. I mean, I can see why, and SRAM does well enough out of it, but I don't see Shimano heading that way to be honest. You can till mix Di2 well enough. As long as you stick to 1X config.
@B0N0R Well, apparently the rest of the cycling world disagrees with you.