Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Talks Handhelds, Xbox Linux
Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing to a Canada.com interview with Xbox head honcho Robbie Bach, which shoots him some wide-ranging and perceptive questions about Microsoft's console strategy. Interesting answers include whether Microsoft wants to get into the handheld console market ("It's like starting a new business...we will focus on making the current Xbox successful."), and their views of Linux for Xbox ("..the numbers are not really that big. It's not a commercial as much as it is an intellectual property issue and we always pursue those.")
I'd be very curious to know how running Linux on an Xbox is cheating.
and we always pursue those.
Yes, far be it from you to let a great injustice, like someone using their Xbox how they see fit, from going unpunished.
"Much work is lost, for the lack of a little more." -Edward H. Harriman
In one breath, "For example, we can sense and disable an Xbox modified with third party "modchips" and not allow it to play online." In the next, "Telling us what we can or can't create, we think is unconstitutional."
Xbox=computer Handheld = PDA just something to think about
From the article: Telling us what we can or can't create, we think is unconstitutional.
But of course if MS tells YOU what you can or cannot create, that's perfectly OK.
"Much work is lost, for the lack of a little more." -Edward H. Harriman
they have been utterly beaten on the console [platform]
I'm curious as to how you consider going from 0% market share to 20% market share, beating out the formerly #2 player (Nintendo) to be "utterly beaten" in the console market?
Removing Windows XP from a newly-bought PC and installing your OS of choice as an alternative can be argued to do the same. Should Microsoft prosecute everyone who uses GNU/Linux or *BSD on their property?
Once a person purchases hardware [such as the X-Box], that hardware becomes his property, and he can do with it as he pleases - calling modding it "piracy" is no more than an egregious violation of consumer rights.
First posting isn't trolling. It's...first posting.
This isn't piracy, in any sense. Of course it doesn't involve boarding ships at sea and stealing cargo/kidnapping passengers, which is actual piracy. But it's not copyright infringement, which sometimes gets called piracy, either.
There's no "intellectual property" issue here at all, however much MS wishes they could find one. This is hardware. You buy it, it's yours. Period.
Of course we can all understand that they'd prefer to have people only buying their loss-leaders in order to run the games that they make heaps on. And most people do. But those who don't are perfectly within their rights. If MS really doesn't like it, they can start pricing the boxes more reasonably. It's their choice. But of course they want to have their cake and eat it too, and the sad thing is they have enough money to buy politicians with that they may yet get it.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
And to add... look how long Ninendo was kicking sony's ass before that turned around.
Interesting math not-withstanding, as I understand it, every X-Box that microsoft sells, they sell at a loss. The idea is to get you to buy the console and then spend money on games which are much cheaper to manufacture.
So, by buying an X-box and not purchasing any games, you are hurting Microsoft's bottom line.
Because 20% doesn't count for shit in that industry. Nobody wants to write games for 20% of the market just like hardawre manufacturers don't want to drive drivers for linux.
War is necrophilia.
Market share only counts for so much. I'm sure Nintendo is perfectly happy to be beaten, given that they're actually making money, whereas Microsoft has been bleeding money and still, despite superior hardware, can't seem to get an upper hand on Sony.
Nintendo's gotten along just fine selling to small portion of the market. Apple's another fine example of a niche market.
Not only that, but 20% is a pretty good amount for a new product introduced in competition with a very popular system with a large install base. Xbox has exceeded MS's hopes for the first iteration of the system.
Where they could begin to get at you is if you ran Linux on an XBox, and then connected up to their online gaming system. If the system was designed to reject anything that wasn't running the MS XBox OS, and you spoofed it into thinking that your XBox-Linux was in fact the original OS, then you could be in trouble (because the TOS for the online service would undoubtedly prohibit you from connecting with a less-than-virgin box).
But if all you were doing was just running Linux on your XBox, just for the pure hell of it and because you can, without connecting up to their servers, I think you're probably safe. At least, I don't see how this would possibly infringe on their IP. Seems to me like they're just trying to discourage people...toss around the threat of an IP lawsuit and watch any large-scale effort to distribute an alternate XBox OS disappear.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Maybe you've forgotten that the Xbox can be made to run (almost) standard linux distros. For me, that set it apart from the other consoles more than being from microsoft.
PS2 runs linux right out of the box - Sony itself sells the kits. No futzing with mod-chips.
...Also, I didn't know Buggalo could fly.
Compare either Nintendo's or Sony's profits to MS's loss of $300M (claimed by MS in the article for division) or loss of $1B (as claimed in PC World article). The other two companies made more than infinitely more than MS. That's a pretty good beat down.
Go to gamers.com and check the user reviews for any Gamecube game. You'll find an equal number of idiotic Xbox zealots. Shall I make idiotic generalizations like you just did?
You can modify you car if you like but if you want to enter that car in a competition it will have to meet the technical requirements of that competition.
Just as most competitions severely limit what modification can be done to cars in order to keep the racing "fair" it is perfectly reasonable for MS to limit modifications made to the XBox if you want to use it with their XBox live service.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
Are you serious?
You fail to recognize the sunk cost of R&D in creating the X-box. All this has to come from somewhere. The measily amount of money made from selling the hardware will not come close to making up the 100s of millions of dollars spent on developing the system.
The X-box is just a low spec PC in an ugly box with an assortment of hardware and software dongles. It's not exactly ground breaking technology. 100's of millions of dollars in R&D, paid for by flying pigs no doubt.
Um... only in the US is the XBox #2 in sales. Worldwide, #2 in sales is Nintendo.
That being said, I'm completely amazed at what people will pay and tolerate to be able to play uh, hmm... *goes to go look up a name of a game for the XBox*... Halo.
One thing I will say about the XBox. It's amazing what pumping an endless amount of money into something can do to grab marketshare.
Nosce te Ipsum
How is he an asshole by saying, "If you are on our Xbox Live! service, we reserve the right to boot you if you have a modchip or other cheat device (such as Action Replay hacked saves) turned on for your Xbox Live! games."
I love that they ban cheaters and people who are just assholes. Why do you think I stopped playing PC games? People'd always accuse me of cheating if I was winning.
Whinning that he has rights but won't let you mod chip Xboxs that are on Live! is like Bill Gates whinning that he can't just come into your house and pee on your floor. It's your private property to use as you please, just like the entire Live! network is MS property to do with as they fucking well please.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Sony supports Linux because they can make money off of it. When you have to pay another $200-$300 on top of the $200 (well, $180 now) price of a PS2, almost all of it pure profit, it just makes sense. However, Sony certainly doesn't support modchips. IIRC, it wasn't just Microsoft that went after Lik Sang for selling mod chips -- Nintendo and Sony also had a hand in that. What company would willingly support any market that at its core is all about stealing games? (blah blah just want to play imports blah blah bullshit.)
When it comes to online gaming (which is the only area where Microsoft can really control what you do with your XBox), I'll happily take Microsoft's approach over Sony's. Add a mod chip, and you're banned from Live. No questions, you're gone. On the flip side, one of the major PS2 online titles, SOCOM, suffers horribly from cheaters. Yes, you can cheat in XBox Live games too, but you're limited to only in-game bugs. Those can be patched (see Unreal Championship's recent patch to fix a number of exploits with weapons and maps).
They produced the hardware, with their DRM, running on their service. They can do with it whatever they like, and there's nobody holding a gun to your head to buy into it.
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
You can't really go by "history" because each generation and market seems to be different than another. It's true that Sony overtook Nintendo in the home console market but that had less to do with Sony being a big company than Nintendo's foul up with the N64.
The GBA has a large 30 million unit lead, backwards compatability, and a name that works well in that market. Sony's PSP is the biggest threat yet but I find it too ambitious, much like previous handhelds that got crushed by the Gameboy. One reason the Gameboy line has been so successful is because they have been small, affordable, durable, and they don't eat batteries.