yeah yeah yeah...LOVE-LY titles. Did you know "I" was on Speedvision?
HAH! NNNNNNOwwww how do you feel about all your supposed
accomplishments.
Oh ...and I have personally EATEN an Oscar Meyer Weener. Neener Neener.
dave henrie
yeah yeah yeah...LOVE-LY titles. Did you know "I" was on Speedvision?
HAH! NNNNNNOwwww how do you feel about all your supposed
accomplishments.
Oh ...and I have personally EATEN an Oscar Meyer Weener. Neener Neener.
dave henrie
God Damn!!! Another keyboard lost to POTN.
Elrikk
POTN = Pepsi Out The Nose. ;o)
Also from that ragsheet (the Inquirer) you quoted:
"It's tempting to think that IBM will be supplying Microsoft with a modified
PowerPC chip for the Xbox 2...but there would be a huge number of problems
for Microsoft in switching to that architecture.
"Microsoft would need to port the latest version of its [DirectX-based] Xbox
operating system to PowerPC...a large task just by itself. Then there are
the problems of backwards compatibility, even the latest G5 probably
couldn't run an x86 emulator fast enough to play games from the original
Xbox.
"The biggest firm in console *** by far is Sony with its Playstation 2.
The juiciest leaks that have appeared about the [PS3's] Cell processor put
that architecture a country mile ahead of any other mainstream processor
performance wise. It looks likely to offer capabilities that will be well
beyond the...PowerPC...when it is released, even taking into account the
latter processors improving considerably over the next couple of years.
"That leaves Microsoft with a big problem. If it chooses PowerPC...it might
end up trying to sell an Xbox 2 that at best offers only half the
performance of the Playstation 3."
At any rate, I wasn't talking abt. chips (frankly, I don't care what's uder
the hood), but abt. the converging commonality between the Xbox 2 and the
PC. I think that bodes well for PC games. If totally separate
architectures (or operating environments) were to prevail, methinks PC games
(including hard-core racing sims) would wither on the vine.
> >> Right. The PS2 is the technically inferior platform. And GT3 is a
game
> >> superior to anything MS ever even dreamed of...from the perspective of
> >> one
> >> who has been a car guy all his life, has driven everything from the
Oscar
> >> Meyer Wienermobile to the Rover Turbine that ran Le Mans, who raced in
> >> the
> >> RW Trans-Am, who was the Editor of Car and Driver in the 60s and the
> >> founding Editor of PC Computing in the 80s, who has reviewed console
> >> racing
> >> games for auto magazines going all the way back to Papy's original
> >> Indianapolis 500: The Simulation, and who has written the strategy
guides
> >> for CART Racing/ICR2 and Grand Prix Legends. And your credentials
> >> are....?
> > I like your writing, but do you ever read the posts to which you
> > respond? I reply that Microsoft is considering using a PowerPC
> > processor and you rant about my credentials?
> And as far as credentials go... How are you enjoying your PS2 1/2? The
> one you were promoting a year ago. You know the one, the redesigned,
> more powerful PS2 that supports HDTV and 1080p?
"In February, Microsoft bought Virtual PC from Connectix, that allows
X86-designed programs and games to run on Mac PowerPC-based hardware. In
addition, Microsoft's Windows XP Embedded operating system also runs on the
PowerPC, Glaskowsky pointed out. Either piece of software would still entice
developers to write games for the Xbox that they could later port to the PC,
he said."
> Also from that ragsheet (the Inquirer) you quoted:
> "It's tempting to think that IBM will be supplying Microsoft with a
modified
> PowerPC chip for the Xbox 2...but there would be a huge number of problems
> for Microsoft in switching to that architecture.
> "Microsoft would need to port the latest version of its [DirectX-based]
Xbox
> operating system to PowerPC...a large task just by itself. Then there are
> the problems of backwards compatibility, even the latest G5 probably
> couldn't run an x86 emulator fast enough to play games from the original
> Xbox.
> "The biggest firm in console *** by far is Sony with its Playstation 2.
> The juiciest leaks that have appeared about the [PS3's] Cell processor put
> that architecture a country mile ahead of any other mainstream processor
> performance wise. It looks likely to offer capabilities that will be well
> beyond the...PowerPC...when it is released, even taking into account the
> latter processors improving considerably over the next couple of years.
> "That leaves Microsoft with a big problem. If it chooses PowerPC...it
might
> end up trying to sell an Xbox 2 that at best offers only half the
> performance of the Playstation 3."
> At any rate, I wasn't talking abt. chips (frankly, I don't care what's
uder
> the hood), but abt. the converging commonality between the Xbox 2 and the
> PC. I think that bodes well for PC games. If totally separate
> architectures (or operating environments) were to prevail, methinks PC
games
> (including hard-core racing sims) would wither on the vine.
> > >> Right. The PS2 is the technically inferior platform. And GT3 is a
> game
> > >> superior to anything MS ever even dreamed of...from the perspective
of
> > >> one
> > >> who has been a car guy all his life, has driven everything from the
> Oscar
> > >> Meyer Wienermobile to the Rover Turbine that ran Le Mans, who raced
in
> > >> the
> > >> RW Trans-Am, who was the Editor of Car and Driver in the 60s and the
> > >> founding Editor of PC Computing in the 80s, who has reviewed console
> > >> racing
> > >> games for auto magazines going all the way back to Papy's original
> > >> Indianapolis 500: The Simulation, and who has written the strategy
> guides
> > >> for CART Racing/ICR2 and Grand Prix Legends. And your credentials
> > >> are....?
> > > I like your writing, but do you ever read the posts to which you
> > > respond? I reply that Microsoft is considering using a PowerPC
> > > processor and you rant about my credentials?
> > And as far as credentials go... How are you enjoying your PS2 1/2? The
> > one you were promoting a year ago. You know the one, the redesigned,
> > more powerful PS2 that supports HDTV and 1080p?
> > yeah yeah yeah...LOVE-LY titles. Did you know "I" was on Speedvision?
> > HAH! NNNNNNOwwww how do you feel about all your supposed
> > accomplishments.
> > Oh ...and I have personally EATEN an Oscar Meyer Weener. Neener Neener.
> > dave henrie
> God Damn!!! Another keyboard lost to POTN.
> Elrikk
> POTN = Pepsi Out The Nose. ;o)
its like Sega rally, but in your house!
pez
> Also from that ragsheet (the Inquirer) you quoted:
> "It's tempting to think that IBM will be supplying Microsoft with a
modified
> PowerPC chip for the Xbox 2...but there would be a huge number of problems
> for Microsoft in switching to that architecture.
> "Microsoft would need to port the latest version of its [DirectX-based]
Xbox
> operating system to PowerPC...a large task just by itself. Then there are
> the problems of backwards compatibility, even the latest G5 probably
> couldn't run an x86 emulator fast enough to play games from the original
> Xbox.
> "The biggest firm in console *** by far is Sony with its Playstation 2.
> The juiciest leaks that have appeared about the [PS3's] Cell processor put
> that architecture a country mile ahead of any other mainstream processor
> performance wise. It looks likely to offer capabilities that will be well
> beyond the...PowerPC...when it is released, even taking into account the
> latter processors improving considerably over the next couple of years.
> "That leaves Microsoft with a big problem. If it chooses PowerPC...it
might
> end up trying to sell an Xbox 2 that at best offers only half the
> performance of the Playstation 3."
> At any rate, I wasn't talking abt. chips (frankly, I don't care what's
uder
> the hood), but abt. the converging commonality between the Xbox 2 and the
> PC. I think that bodes well for PC games. If totally separate
> architectures (or operating environments) were to prevail, methinks PC
games
> (including hard-core racing sims) would wither on the vine.
> > >> Right. The PS2 is the technically inferior platform. And GT3 is a
> game
> > >> superior to anything MS ever even dreamed of...from the perspective
of
> > >> one
> > >> who has been a car guy all his life, has driven everything from the
> Oscar
> > >> Meyer Wienermobile to the Rover Turbine that ran Le Mans, who raced
in
> > >> the
> > >> RW Trans-Am, who was the Editor of Car and Driver in the 60s and the
> > >> founding Editor of PC Computing in the 80s, who has reviewed console
> > >> racing
> > >> games for auto magazines going all the way back to Papy's original
> > >> Indianapolis 500: The Simulation, and who has written the strategy
> guides
> > >> for CART Racing/ICR2 and Grand Prix Legends. And your credentials
> > >> are....?
> > > I like your writing, but do you ever read the posts to which you
> > > respond? I reply that Microsoft is considering using a PowerPC
> > > processor and you rant about my credentials?
> > And as far as credentials go... How are you enjoying your PS2 1/2? The
> > one you were promoting a year ago. You know the one, the redesigned,
> > more powerful PS2 that supports HDTV and 1080p?
**********************
Two months ago, Microsoft spoke glowingly of bridging the gap between the PC
and Xbox. Now the company is considering erasing that gap completely.
While Microsoft has publicly avoided discussing its next generation machine,
it has been quietly conducting studies on the consumer appeal of a hybrid
device that would play both PC and Xbox games.
"We would be remiss if we didn't look at consumer scenarios that take
advantage of our strengths," said Peter Moore, corporate vice president of
worldwide marketing and publishing for Microsoft's home and entertainment
division.
The B/R/S Group, a California-based market research company that lists
Microsoft and the Xbox division specifically as clients, has been gathering
consumer feedback on a device it refers to as Xbox Next PC, "a videogame
console system with a hard drive and a built-in fully functional PC."
Mention of the device came on one of several slides shown to focus groups.
One slide describes the unit, which would require a PC monitor or high
definition television, as being *backward compatible* [emphasis added] with
current and next-generation Xbox titles. It would also play PC games and
include a fully functional version of Windows, CD burner, DVD player (with
remote control), built-in access to Xbox Live and a hard drive.
Control-wise, the system would come with both a keyboard and mouse and a
standard Xbox controller. The price point this particular study tested was
$599.
"If you put two and two together, there's no doubt there's a great
opportunity to put the two platforms together," said Moore.
"There will come a day--in the not too distant future--that [PC] games will
be interchangeable between Windows and the Xbox," Moore told me at the
recently completed E3 trade show.
**********************
> "In February, Microsoft bought Virtual PC from Connectix, that allows
> X86-designed programs and games to run on Mac PowerPC-based hardware. In
> addition, Microsoft's Windows XP Embedded operating system also runs on
the
> PowerPC, Glaskowsky pointed out. Either piece of software would still
entice
> developers to write games for the Xbox that they could later port to the
PC,
> he said."
> > Right now I'm playing GTx on a debug unit w. a Faroudja deinterlacer
(what
> > used to be called a line-doubler) which produces a razor-sharp 1200x768
> > image on a 21" NEC monitor, i.e., BETTER than hi-def. Alas, no 7.1
> > sound...yet.
> > Also from that ragsheet (the Inquirer) you quoted:
> > "It's tempting to think that IBM will be supplying Microsoft with a
> modified
> > PowerPC chip for the Xbox 2...but there would be a huge number of
problems
> > for Microsoft in switching to that architecture.
> > "Microsoft would need to port the latest version of its [DirectX-based]
> Xbox
> > operating system to PowerPC...a large task just by itself. Then there
are
> > the problems of backwards compatibility, even the latest G5 probably
> > couldn't run an x86 emulator fast enough to play games from the original
> > Xbox.
> > "The biggest firm in console *** by far is Sony with its Playstation
2.
> > The juiciest leaks that have appeared about the [PS3's] Cell processor
put
> > that architecture a country mile ahead of any other mainstream processor
> > performance wise. It looks likely to offer capabilities that will be
well
> > beyond the...PowerPC...when it is released, even taking into account the
> > latter processors improving considerably over the next couple of years.
> > "That leaves Microsoft with a big problem. If it chooses PowerPC...it
> might
> > end up trying to sell an Xbox 2 that at best offers only half the
> > performance of the Playstation 3."
> > At any rate, I wasn't talking abt. chips (frankly, I don't care what's
> uder
> > the hood), but abt. the converging commonality between the Xbox 2 and
the
> > PC. I think that bodes well for PC games. If totally separate
> > architectures (or operating environments) were to prevail, methinks PC
> games
> > (including hard-core racing sims) would wither on the vine.
> > > >> Right. The PS2 is the technically inferior platform. And GT3 is a
> > game
> > > >> superior to anything MS ever even dreamed of...from the perspective
> of
> > > >> one
> > > >> who has been a car guy all his life, has driven everything from the
> > Oscar
> > > >> Meyer Wienermobile to the Rover Turbine that ran Le Mans, who raced
> in
> > > >> the
> > > >> RW Trans-Am, who was the Editor of Car and Driver in the 60s and
the
> > > >> founding Editor of PC Computing in the 80s, who has reviewed
console
> > > >> racing
> > > >> games for auto magazines going all the way back to Papy's original
> > > >> Indianapolis 500: The Simulation, and who has written the strategy
> > guides
> > > >> for CART Racing/ICR2 and Grand Prix Legends. And your credentials
> > > >> are....?
> > > > I like your writing, but do you ever read the posts to which you
> > > > respond? I reply that Microsoft is considering using a PowerPC
> > > > processor and you rant about my credentials?
> > > And as far as credentials go... How are you enjoying your PS2 1/2? The
> > > one you were promoting a year ago. You know the one, the redesigned,
> > > more powerful PS2 that supports HDTV and 1080p?
> **********************
> Two months ago, Microsoft spoke glowingly of bridging the gap between the PC
> and Xbox. Now the company is considering erasing that gap completely.
> While Microsoft has publicly avoided discussing its next generation machine,
> it has been quietly conducting studies on the consumer appeal of a hybrid
> device that would play both PC and Xbox games.
> "We would be remiss if we didn't look at consumer scenarios that take
> advantage of our strengths," said Peter Moore, corporate vice president of
> worldwide marketing and publishing for Microsoft's home and entertainment
> division.
> The B/R/S Group, a California-based market research company that lists
> Microsoft and the Xbox division specifically as clients, has been gathering
> consumer feedback on a device it refers to as Xbox Next PC, "a videogame
> console system with a hard drive and a built-in fully functional PC."
> Mention of the device came on one of several slides shown to focus groups.
> One slide describes the unit, which would require a PC monitor or high
> definition television, as being *backward compatible* [emphasis added] with
> current and next-generation Xbox titles. It would also play PC games and
> include a fully functional version of Windows, CD burner, DVD player (with
> remote control), built-in access to Xbox Live and a hard drive.
> Control-wise, the system would come with both a keyboard and mouse and a
> standard Xbox controller. The price point this particular study tested was
> $599.
> "If you put two and two together, there's no doubt there's a great
> opportunity to put the two platforms together," said Moore.
> "There will come a day--in the not too distant future--that [PC] games will
> be interchangeable between Windows and the Xbox," Moore told me at the
> recently completed E3 trade show.
To get back to your original argument that Microsoft is all about
backwards compatiblity... Only Sony has *proven* to release a backwards
compatible platform. This being Microsoft's first console, they have no
history for backwards compatiblity. So when you state this...
"What's going to happen is that the Xbox 2 will be a huge technical
payraise over the present part---and the old titles will be
compatible--whereas the PS3, while an even greater technical leap
forward, won't (in the Sony tradition) be backwardly compatible."
It's complete and utter BS. Because Sony has been backwards compatible
on their only two forays into the console market while Microsoft has not.
What was the PS1 backwardly compatible with?
--
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.
>>It's complete and utter BS. Because Sony has been backwards compatible
>>on their only two forays into the console market while Microsoft has not.
> What was the PS1 backwardly compatible with?
Microsoft has stuck with compatibility as a pillar of their corporate
culture. They're afraid that if they brought out an incompatible OS (say)
their huge customer base would dare to compare it with other OS's (Linux,
say) based on performance. MS knows most of their stuff prevails not
because it's good, but because MS is a bully, an 800-ton gorilla, as a raft
of lawsuits here and abroad, um, testify.
Sony, OTOH, arrogantly believes their stuff is so good that people will want
it at any price. Hence, almost anything you buy from Sony, is proprietary.
You buy a Sony camera, you have to buy Sony memory, Sony batteries, Sony
lens accessories, etc. The best example of all this was Betamax. And you
don't think Sony looked back when they abandoned it, do you? If it had've
been MS, their new VHS VCR would've been compatible with all their users'
old Beta tapes.
Fast-forward: MS is working hard to bring all their junk together: PCs,
consoles, set-top boxes. There will probably be at least 4 Xboxes within 2
years: a basic games console w. flash memory, a fancy games console w. a HD,
and a pair of set-top boxes, one with TiVo-like capabilities, and one
without.
Sony, OTOH, has probably bitten off more than they can chew with the
Cell-powered PS3. All the design studios I've talked to have told me that
the new architecture will be a nightmare to program for (and has nothing in
common w. the PS1-2 family). At first, MS thought (like Trip Hawkins' 3DO
before them) that it was all abt. the h/w. Sony has known all along that
it's the s/w, stupid. Over-reacting to each other, they've swapped
positions (hence MS enticing a reluctant EA into the fold). Sony is too
smart to come out with a new console and no s/w, so they have to delay the
debut until they have a decent library (the PS1-2 library has over 7,000
titles).
MS isn't even close to amortizing the $4 billion cost of the Xbox adventure,
but they can afford to roll out new variations on the Xbox every six months
or so until they know the arrival of the PS3 is imminent. Then they'll
strike with a PS3-killer (wannabe), which will have slightly less impressive
specs, but a huge library to put the final nail in Sony's coffin.
Am I right..or left, as the BFG sez....
> > **********************
> > Two months ago, Microsoft spoke glowingly of bridging the gap between
the PC
> > and Xbox. Now the company is considering erasing that gap completely.
> > While Microsoft has publicly avoided discussing its next generation
machine,
> > it has been quietly conducting studies on the consumer appeal of a
hybrid
> > device that would play both PC and Xbox games.
> > "We would be remiss if we didn't look at consumer scenarios that take
> > advantage of our strengths," said Peter Moore, corporate vice president
of
> > worldwide marketing and publishing for Microsoft's home and
entertainment
> > division.
> > The B/R/S Group, a California-based market research company that lists
> > Microsoft and the Xbox division specifically as clients, has been
gathering
> > consumer feedback on a device it refers to as Xbox Next PC, "a videogame
> > console system with a hard drive and a built-in fully functional PC."
> > Mention of the device came on one of several slides shown to focus
groups.
> > One slide describes the unit, which would require a PC monitor or high
> > definition television, as being *backward compatible* [emphasis added]
with
> > current and next-generation Xbox titles. It would also play PC games and
> > include a fully functional version of Windows, CD burner, DVD player
(with
> > remote control), built-in access to Xbox Live and a hard drive.
> > Control-wise, the system would come with both a keyboard and mouse and a
> > standard Xbox controller. The price point this particular study tested
was
> > $599.
> > "If you put two and two together, there's no doubt there's a great
> > opportunity to put the two platforms together," said Moore.
> > "There will come a day--in the not too distant future--that [PC] games
will
> > be interchangeable between Windows and the Xbox," Moore told me at the
> > recently completed E3 trade show.
> A PC in the living room has been the goal of Microsoft for awhile and
> the XBox is their most successfu attempt to date. Whether it's backward
> compatible is yet to be seen. The deal with IBM and early reports that
> the Xbox 2 will not contain a harddrive indicate that it won't be. But
> neither Microsoft nor IBM have discussed the details of the chip deal,
> and only the flash memory manufacturer has stated that the next XBox
> won't have a hard drive.
> To get back to your original argument that Microsoft is all about
> backwards compatiblity... Only Sony has *proven* to release a backwards
> compatible platform. This being Microsoft's first console, they have no
> history for backwards compatiblity. So when you state this...
> "What's going to happen is that the Xbox 2 will be a huge technical
> payraise over the present part---and the old titles will be
> compatible--whereas the PS3, while an even greater technical leap
> forward, won't (in the Sony tradition) be backwardly compatible."
> It's complete and utter BS. Because Sony has been backwards compatible
> on their only two forays into the console market while Microsoft has not.
> Also from that ragsheet (the Inquirer) you quoted:
> "It's tempting to think that IBM will be supplying Microsoft with a modified
> PowerPC chip for the Xbox 2...but there would be a huge number of problems
> for Microsoft in switching to that architecture.
> "Microsoft would need to port the latest version of its [DirectX-based] Xbox
> operating system to PowerPC...a large task just by itself. Then there are
> the problems of backwards compatibility, even the latest G5 probably
> couldn't run an x86 emulator fast enough to play games from the original
> Xbox.
> "The biggest firm in console *** by far is Sony with its Playstation 2.
> The juiciest leaks that have appeared about the [PS3's] Cell processor put
> that architecture a country mile ahead of any other mainstream processor
> performance wise. It looks likely to offer capabilities that will be well
> beyond the...PowerPC...when it is released, even taking into account the
> latter processors improving considerably over the next couple of years.
> "That leaves Microsoft with a big problem. If it chooses PowerPC...it might
> end up trying to sell an Xbox 2 that at best offers only half the
> performance of the Playstation 3."
> At any rate, I wasn't talking abt. chips (frankly, I don't care what's uder
> the hood), but abt. the converging commonality between the Xbox 2 and the
> PC. I think that bodes well for PC games. If totally separate
> architectures (or operating environments) were to prevail, methinks PC games
> (including hard-core racing sims) would wither on the vine.
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> > Also from that ragsheet (the Inquirer) you quoted:
> > "It's tempting to think that IBM will be supplying Microsoft with a
modified
> > PowerPC chip for the Xbox 2...but there would be a huge number of
problems
> > for Microsoft in switching to that architecture.
> > "Microsoft would need to port the latest version of its [DirectX-based]
Xbox
> > operating system to PowerPC...a large task just by itself. Then there
are
> > the problems of backwards compatibility, even the latest G5 probably
> > couldn't run an x86 emulator fast enough to play games from the original
> > Xbox.
> > "The biggest firm in console *** by far is Sony with its Playstation
2.
> > The juiciest leaks that have appeared about the [PS3's] Cell processor
put
> > that architecture a country mile ahead of any other mainstream processor
> > performance wise. It looks likely to offer capabilities that will be
well
> > beyond the...PowerPC...when it is released, even taking into account the
> > latter processors improving considerably over the next couple of years.
> > "That leaves Microsoft with a big problem. If it chooses PowerPC...it
might
> > end up trying to sell an Xbox 2 that at best offers only half the
> > performance of the Playstation 3."
> > At any rate, I wasn't talking abt. chips (frankly, I don't care what's
uder
> > the hood), but abt. the converging commonality between the Xbox 2 and
the
> > PC. I think that bodes well for PC games. If totally separate
> > architectures (or operating environments) were to prevail, methinks PC
games
> > (including hard-core racing sims) would wither on the vine.
> I'm sure this is more myth than reality, but this is interesting.
> http://www.racesimcentral.net/
***********************
FORGET the rumours about the looming launch of a mobile Xbox device,
Microsoft is already in the handheld sector - and games could well figure in
the mix within the next few months.
Speaking exclusively to MCV, Microsofts regional VP, home and entertainment
division, Eduardo Rosini offered a reminder of the firm's Windows Mobile
platform which is already licensed by consumer electronics firms like
Creative and Samsung to create Portable Media Center (PMC) devices. These
products will allow users to playback music, movies and, in theory, games.
"We've been impressed with what we've seen of Nintendo's DS and Sony's PSP,"
said Rossini. "For the time being, we will concentrate on Xbox as we
continue to grow our market share.
However, it is worth noting that we are already in the handheld sector with
the Portable Media Center. And I don't see any reason why games will not
figure in the strategy for that."
Editor of PC Retail magazine Mat Bettinson agrees that Microsoft is very
likely to introduce a *** element to the PMC devices.
"I think they'd be foolish not to introduce enthusiast *** into the
platform," he said. "Games are key, but I think Microsoft is keeping its
head down until it can get the devices out into the market and prove
themselves - and then sell publishers on the system."
The first PMC devices will launch in Europe this Christmas.
***********************
> Microsoft has stuck with compatibility as a pillar of their corporate
> culture. They're afraid that if they brought out an incompatible OS (say)
> their huge customer base would dare to compare it with other OS's (Linux,
> say) based on performance. MS knows most of their stuff prevails not
> because it's good, but because MS is a bully, an 800-ton gorilla, as a
raft
> of lawsuits here and abroad, um, testify.
> Sony, OTOH, arrogantly believes their stuff is so good that people will
want
> it at any price. Hence, almost anything you buy from Sony, is
proprietary.
> You buy a Sony camera, you have to buy Sony memory, Sony batteries, Sony
> lens accessories, etc. The best example of all this was Betamax. And you
> don't think Sony looked back when they abandoned it, do you? If it had've
> been MS, their new VHS VCR would've been compatible with all their users'
> old Beta tapes.
> Fast-forward: MS is working hard to bring all their junk together: PCs,
> consoles, set-top boxes. There will probably be at least 4 Xboxes within
2
> years: a basic games console w. flash memory, a fancy games console w. a
HD,
> and a pair of set-top boxes, one with TiVo-like capabilities, and one
> without.
> Sony, OTOH, has probably bitten off more than they can chew with the
> Cell-powered PS3. All the design studios I've talked to have told me that
> the new architecture will be a nightmare to program for (and has nothing
in
> common w. the PS1-2 family). At first, MS thought (like Trip Hawkins' 3DO
> before them) that it was all abt. the h/w. Sony has known all along that
> it's the s/w, stupid. Over-reacting to each other, they've swapped
> positions (hence MS enticing a reluctant EA into the fold). Sony is too
> smart to come out with a new console and no s/w, so they have to delay the
> debut until they have a decent library (the PS1-2 library has over 7,000
> titles).
> MS isn't even close to amortizing the $4 billion cost of the Xbox
adventure,
> but they can afford to roll out new variations on the Xbox every six
months
> or so until they know the arrival of the PS3 is imminent. Then they'll
> strike with a PS3-killer (wannabe), which will have slightly less
impressive
> specs, but a huge library to put the final nail in Sony's coffin.
> Am I right..or left, as the BFG sez....
> > > Or, as CNN Money put it:
> > > **********************
> > > Two months ago, Microsoft spoke glowingly of bridging the gap between
> the PC
> > > and Xbox. Now the company is considering erasing that gap completely.
> > > While Microsoft has publicly avoided discussing its next generation
> machine,
> > > it has been quietly conducting studies on the consumer appeal of a
> hybrid
> > > device that would play both PC and Xbox games.
> > > "We would be remiss if we didn't look at consumer scenarios that take
> > > advantage of our strengths," said Peter Moore, corporate vice
president
> of
> > > worldwide marketing and publishing for Microsoft's home and
> entertainment
> > > division.
> > > The B/R/S Group, a California-based market research company that lists
> > > Microsoft and the Xbox division specifically as clients, has been
> gathering
> > > consumer feedback on a device it refers to as Xbox Next PC, "a
videogame
> > > console system with a hard drive and a built-in fully functional PC."
> > > Mention of the device came on one of several slides shown to focus
> groups.
> > > One slide describes the unit, which would require a PC monitor or high
> > > definition television, as being *backward compatible* [emphasis added]
> with
> > > current and next-generation Xbox titles. It would also play PC games
and
> > > include a fully functional version of Windows, CD burner, DVD player
> (with
> > > remote control), built-in access to Xbox Live and a hard drive.
> > > Control-wise, the system would come with both a keyboard and mouse and
a
> > > standard Xbox controller. The price point this particular study tested
> was
> > > $599.
> > > "If you put two and two together, there's no doubt there's a great
> > > opportunity to put the two platforms together," said Moore.
> > > "There will come a day--in the not too distant future--that [PC] games
> will
> > > be interchangeable between Windows and the Xbox," Moore told me at the
> > > recently completed E3 trade show.
> > A PC in the living room has been the goal of Microsoft for awhile and
> > the XBox is their most successfu attempt to date. Whether it's backward
> > compatible is yet to be seen. The deal with IBM and early reports that
> > the Xbox 2 will not contain a harddrive indicate that it won't be. But
> > neither Microsoft nor IBM have discussed the details of the chip deal,
> > and only the flash memory manufacturer has stated that the next XBox
> > won't have a hard drive.
> > To get back to your original argument that Microsoft is all about
> > backwards compatiblity... Only Sony has *proven* to release a backwards
> > compatible platform. This being Microsoft's first console, they have no
> > history for backwards compatiblity. So when you state this...
> > "What's going to happen is that the Xbox 2 will be a huge technical
> > payraise over the present part---and the old titles will be
> > compatible--whereas the PS3, while an even greater technical leap
> > forward, won't (in the Sony tradition) be backwardly compatible."
> > It's complete and utter BS. Because Sony has been backwards compatible
> > on their only two forays into the console market while Microsoft has
not.