This isn't just for Microsoft.
When I was at IBM in the late 80s and early 90s, they destroyed the company with this type of nonsense. The reason we use Windows now is because of IBM internal issues, and has little to do with Microsoft.
Bill Gates actually wanted to create OS/2 for the 386, but IBM said it had to be for the 286. Why? Because their hardware division was selling a bunch of 286, and IBM didn't want the PC line overlapping into higher margin areas like the AS/400 line, or later the RISC/6000 line.
So, OS/2 couldn't multi-task DOS apps (286 didn't have Virtual 86 mode, so the processor had to be essentially rendered unconscious and brought back up into real mode every time you task switched into the "penalty box" as the DOS compatibility box became known), and Windows/386 could. People care more about this than all the advanced features of OS/2, and eventually IBM got frustrated with Microsoft and told them to stop supporting Windows so well. Microsoft refused, IBM and Microsoft broke up. Microsoft was working on OS/2 3.0, which was what became Windows NT (which, we derisively referred to as Windows NotThere). As we all know, Windows NT/2000/XP/Vista/7 isn't the greatest. OS/2 was, in my opinion and many others, so much better.
Whenever companies pull this crap, it's almost invariably to their detriment. The whole arrogant presumption that if a group in your company doesn't create it, your other product will not be impacted by the technology dismisses the inevitability that someone else will invent it! Microcomputers moved upstream anyway! IBM just didn't benefit from it, other people did.
It's almost always (I hate sbsolutes, thus the "almost") to let your company create something that marginalizes a product you're making. There are bright (and for that matter, stupid) people all over the world, and they'll do it if you don't.
Intel, to their credit, rarely, if ever does this, so this is not a shot at them. But, if we look back just a little ways, we remember how Intel didn't want to create a 64-bit extension for the 386 instruction set, because it would compete with the Itanium instruction set. It happened anyway, despite their arrogance. They learned quickly before it was very damaging, but it just goes to show even the most powerful companies, even today, are not immune to these lessons. It's a recurring situation, with the same result. Why don't they learn this?