Xbox Hackers, Linux, the DMCA, And Modchips

HardcoreGamer writes "The New York Times has a long article on Xbox hacking, why Microsoft hates it, and who does it (Google). 'Xbox hackers are exploiting Microsoft's business model, which is to sell Xbox hardware at a loss...' but Microsoft doesn't make the money back on software -- as it planned to -- if you decide to load up Xbox Linux. Where else can you get a PIII-733 with graphics and audio for $180? The reporter talked to the IDSA; Andrew Huang, author of 'Hacking the Xbox: An Introduction to Reverse Engineering'; a Manhattan exec who hacked his Xbox and said 'The reality is that if you could bypass Microsoft's operating system you would end up with a fairly powerful computer for less than $200;' and others. The article discusses the DMCA, modchips, the Xbox Linux Project and lots more. A good -- if long -- read. A shorter version of the story is at the International Herald Tribune. Best quote? 'Microsoft is a company passionate about innovation and creativity. We are also very committed to respect for others' intellectual property and we request the same respect applied to our innovations.'"

Comments

Respect ?

[theefer]

Since when is this word part of the capitalist vocabulary ? Doesn't seem to consistant with the ongoing lawsuits, FUD wars, hypocrisy, etc.

Exploiting other company's business model flaws is the basis of the world economy, so let's not be stupid, if they don't want flaws to be exploited, they've better not have flaws in the first place. Too bad, it's too late now.

Re:Respect ?

[gilesjuk]

Indeed, they would encase the whole PCB in opaque resin or glue the case shut if they wanted the XBox to be a huge secret. They didn't and so they must live with their decision.

Sure the business model is sell for a loss and make back the money on licensing etc.., this just exposes how stupid that business model is. It's being tried on printers and printer ink now, the consumer is getting screwed. Sure printers are affordable, but heavy users of inkjets would sooner pay more for the printer and have cheaper ink.

Re:Respect ?

[mikewolf]

are you kidding?

this is the same business model that gaming systems have used for years.

it makes perfect sense for video games...

the hardware is expensive, but if you can sell it for cheaper you can triple or quadruple your game sales revenue...

don't think this is some new business strategy that MS through the years, this is standard practice, and it works for gaming systems (otherwise all of the gaming companies would be out of business by now)

it might not make sense for printers, but i'm not sure that i agree with your comment about the ink cartridges, b/c why couldn't you buy generic cartridges and circumvent giving the manufacturer any money back????

Re:Respect ?

[Waffle Iron]

don't think this is some new business strategy that MS through the years, this is standard practice, and it works for gaming systems (otherwise all of the gaming companies would be out of business by now)

The main difference is that older gaming systems had hardware that was either an underpowered toy, or totally incompatible with any software, or both. It was intrinsically useless for most other purposes.

Microsoft may have made a mistake by boxing up a standard PC that can run off-the-shelf software, selling it below cost, and then trying to lock it up with a flimsy electronic scheme. I realize that they were trying to leverage PC game software for their platform, but there are downsides to that approach that they have to live with now.

Re:Respect ?

[fiftyvolts]

I would like to point out that the above post provides incomplete information. Console companies have done this for a long time, but all it has done is run their profits into the ground.

"Lies!" you say? well its not. Take exhibit A: the case of Sega Saturn vs Playstation. While Sega was trying to make the "Ultimate 2D machine," Sony was flexing its CE muscles and spending millions on researching how to manufacture their own chips cheaply and quickly for the playstation.

When they both were released the Saturn retailed for $399 and the playstation at (drum roll please) $299. Sega attempted to get in on the market by selling their product at a loss and match the $299 tag on the PSone. Sony on the other hand was _making_ money on the console because it had spent its time and effort on mass producing its own components. The Saturn, as we all know, was a business failure.

The same goes for the DreamCast and N64 which were both also sold at a loss. Time will tell on the XBox and GC. I think Nintendo might have learned their lesson and will tred more carefully, but MS... well, let's just say that the odds of the XBox making them money is quite low.

Sony is not selling the PS2 at a loss either, keep that in mind...

By the way the above can be read about in more detail on this site. It's more entertainning there anyway.

heh

[Wibla]

"We are also very committed to respect for others' intellectual property and we request the same respect applied to our innovations.'" Yea, we've seen some _Very_ good examples of that in the past...

Re:heh

[Anonymous Coward]

"We are also very committed to respect for others' intellectual property and we request the same respect applied to our innovations.'" Yea, we've seen some _Very_ good examples of that in the past...

I am wondering what they think is so innovative about the X-Box? It's just a PC with chip developed by Intel, a motherboard and graphics processor developed by NVidia and piss-poor security developed by god-knows-who. It is the cheapest possible way for them to get into the market. I honestly can't think of a single thing they've done that could be labelled "innovative".

We're not hacking.

[mikeophile]

We're embracing and extending the XBox.

Re:fairly powerful computer for less than $200

[garcia]

Don't troll.

The fact of the matter is that an XBox has
TV-out and excellent graphics and sound cababilities.

Walmart machines do not.

People want to use the XBox as a multimedia center for their living room. A quote from another article related to this one (I refuse to read NYT) said something along the lines of, "the XBox looks excellent next to a TV in your living room, it's more silent than a typical PC, and its small form-factor make it perfect. Not exactly what Bill Gates had envisioned."

whatever, it is for the ability to say you did it

[AssFace]

To claim that they are doing it for price is a bit off. The people do it so that they can feel in some way they have gotten away with something. They are told that they shouldn't, then they do, and they gain bragging rights. They gain a tiny amount of control in a world that has little of it for the average perosn - they are briefly a David to the Goliath of Microsoft. The money isn't an issue.

True, to get a PIII 733, a NVidia graphics card, etc etc for $200 is a good deal at first glance I suppose.
Were I in the States, I could go to pricewatch and order me up some parts.
PIII 733 by itself is $67, you figure you still need a motherboard and case, that is easily another $80 at least, and then you need the graphics card...

But looking again, you can get a PIII 1G and the motherboard as a combo for $65.
You can get a case for about $30. You can get the video card for about $80.
So a better system for cheaper... and the thing is, that is only if you are still looking for the PIII, if you stepped up to an Athlon XP, you would then get far more processing power, and you would only be spending a little more.

Granted, that doesn't help you if you have no clue how to put together a system, and you only have $200... but I have a feeling the type of person willing to hack a perfectly good game system, and then run Linux on it, is going to be able to put together a computer system on their own.

In the end, I think the monetary reasons for hacking are non-existant, aside from those bad at math.
It is the fun factor and the thumb-your-nose-at-MS factor.

So, where's the loss?

[Anonymous Coward]

All evidence I've seen regarding Microsoft 'losing money on the X-Box' is related to dolts who think they can go to pricewatch.com and figure out what an X-Box costs to produce.

Hey - jackasses - you're not Microsoft, and you're not purchasing millions of bits of hardware at a time. You aren't getting bulk discounts. You aren't making deals.

Anyone have any actual evidence that Microsoft loses money on each X-Box?

"My friend's second cousin's husband's acquaintance works for.." isn't evidence.

Re:*sigh*

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, build me a $180 computer.

It must have at least:
733MHz PIII
5.1 channel surround sound audio
GeForce 3 graphics
64 MB RAM
8/10 GB HD
4 USB ports
TV out and support for HDTV
Ethernet jack
DVD-ROM
1 controller
2 games

I'll ignore the other parts of a computer (such as the power supply) as I'm sure you'll factor those into your equation.

Now, assuming you can find a machine with all of those components for $180, let me know how well it plays games, DVDs, etc. Will it play games with the graphical qualities of Halo, JSRF, or Brute Force? Will I be able to hear such games in 5.1 surround sound? Can I watch DVDs on this machine with my HDTV (after some hacks to enable progressive-scan)? Will the machine be able to pump out DTS surround signals to my reciever like the XBOX can?

I'm not saying you can't build a decent media computer for cheap, but I hardly think you should discount the power and capabilities (both before and after hacking) of the XBOX.