Slashdot Mirror


Xbox for $99? Xbox 2 in 2005?

TimeForGuinness writes "CNN is reporting that Microsoft's Xbox may be on the verge of a substantial price cut, falling from $179 to $99 by Labor Day, and Microsoft will launch its next generation console in late 2005 - a year earlier than has been previously rumored. That would put the Xbox 2 on store shelves up to a full year before Sony's PlayStation 3."

738 comments

  1. Sweet by loserbert · · Score: 1

    Now I can finally set up my media server!

  2. loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Weren't microsoft selling these at a loss already?

    1. Re:loss by savagedome · · Score: 2, Informative

      From the article:
      When Microsoft launched the Xbox in 2001 for $299, it reportedly lost $100 for every unit it sold.

      I know this is /.
      Of course you did not RTFA.

    2. Re:loss by luckylindy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A person I know was originally assigned to support engineering at the Guadalajara plant in 2001. I heard of production rates of 100,000 a week. 2 years later that person went to mainland china for the startup of the replacement xbox plant and later in 2003 he helped shut down the mexico plant, which had been in operation barely 2 years. Thats how they cut the costs.

    3. Re:loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, but in a product's lifespan, manufacturing processes are streamlined (ever seen the inside of a 3G Playstation 1?), and cost falls dues to volume manufacture - initially tooling up a production line to make a new item costs a lot too.

      But, a lot of these are one off costs that need to be recouped. You spend $10 million on a production line, then your consoles are selling at a loss, then they break even, then you streamline the process and make profit, recouping costs etc...

      So, loss initally, recoup costs, profit eventually. Welcome to the wonderful world of manufacturing.

    4. Re:loss by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Weren't microsoft selling these at a loss already?

      Last I saw this division (home entertainment) was hemorraging significant cash. Odds are they've lowered their losses, but the launch of Xbox 2 will undoubtably pick up the burnrate again. Maybe they won't throw away as much money on the roll-out and let word-of mouth do the work it should.

      ASAIK the XBox is supposed to pave the way for homes to get all manner of services from Microsoft and partners, but I don't see much evidence of that. Game machines have been and continue to be boxes you play with until you get bored or the next best thing comes out and you relegate it to the garage, attic or eBay. If you're a typical obsessive gamer you sure aren't thinking about how wonderful this innovation can make your life by handling TV, email, web surfing, etc. for you. You'd rather be kicking ass.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    5. Re:loss by RoLi · · Score: 2, Insightful
      ASAIK the XBox is supposed to pave the way for homes to get all manner of services from Microsoft and partners, but I don't see much evidence of that.

      Yes, I also think that. Also Microsoft has to be very careful not to piss off their PC-hardware partners, I think they changed the USB-connector for exactly that reason: PC-makers shouldn't be afraid it could be used as a PC-replacement.

    6. Re:loss by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Weren't microsoft selling these at a loss already?"

      Do you really think component cost has been a constant all these years?

      They may be selling at a loss, but dropping to $99 doesn't mean they're losing another $80 per unit.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    7. Re:loss by enrico_suave · · Score: 1

      well, the article mentioned (paraphrased) that they were selling them at a loss, and costs have come down per unit, but it NEVER reached the break even point...

      I doubt by the time they shave even more ducats off the retail price in 8/9 months, that the cost of manufacturing will dip down *that* low.

      But what do I know?

      e.

      --
      Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
    8. Re:loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ""So, loss initally, recoup costs, profit eventually.""

      That's a fine nutshell explanation of the concept of mass production manufacturing. But it doesn't exactly explain the Xbox business model. I don't think MS's master plan is to rely on recouping costs down the road on 3rd generation Xbox1 consoles...

    9. Re:loss by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However, I don't think microsoft is ever going to see the savings in integrated manufacturing that Sony has.

      The reason is quite simple. Inside a PS2, Sony owns everything. The emotion engine, the audio hardware, the mpeg decoder, everything. So, when it decides to put the video silicon and the emotion chip silicon on the same die, there are not any problems. Microsoft on the other hand has to contend with all these disperent companies who wouldn't be too keen to letting each other have a look at the insides of their hardware...

      Also, unless Microsoft has set up its own fab plant, Intel is running a line of celerons just for Xboxes. Likewise, Nvidia has to put manufacturing capacity aside to make video cards for Xboxes. I don't see either of those companies negoiating a lower contract to continue to build an antiquated product...

      Sony has none of those problems. In fact it could be argued that it goes the otherway for Sony. As Sony works to create a more integrated PS2, that know how gets used to integrate other products in the Sony line and visa versa.

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    10. Re:loss by saden1 · · Score: 2

      That is not entirely true of Sony. Sony works with IBM, Toshiba, and a whole lot of other companies to produce PS systems. The only difference between Sony and MS is that Sony has partners where as MS has contractors. There are subtle differences between these two. In a partnership everyone works for the good of the product because they have vested interest in its successes. While this might seem true of contract work, look closer and you will have the mess you have with MS and nVidia. MS is a control freak and there is no such thing as partnership with them. You are in essence their minion who is supposed to do what they damn well please or else.

      If you get too close to MS you will either get bought out or get burned like Orange/Phone mess.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    11. Re:loss by zelphior · · Score: 1

      I think that they are able to afford to sell the XBoxes and other consoles at a loss by making up for it with the cost of games. Most games cost around $50 when they first come out. That's about half the price of a GameCube, and almost a third the price of an XBox now. People only buy one XBox usually, but lots of games. I spent $200 on my XBox, and probably close to $1000 on games for it. I know the money for the games don't all go to microsoft, but they get a pretty good chunk of money for the games that sell on their consols.

      --
      If you can read this then I forgot to check "Post Anonymously"
    12. Re:loss by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 3, Informative

      Microsoft on the other hand has to contend with all these disperent companies who wouldn't be too keen to letting each other have a look at the insides of their hardware...

      Fortunately for Microsoft, they're not dealing with as many companies as people seem to think they are. Sure, nVidia and Intel aren't going to swap specs so that one or the other can build an integrated CPU/GPU, but they don't really need to in order for Microsoft to save money, because Microsoft would still be paying Intel and nVidia the same amount. In fact, nVidia claimed that they were losing money on the XBox because of some problems where Microsoft wasn't buying parts from them as quickly as they had scheduled production.

      Also, unless Microsoft has set up its own fab plant, Intel is running a line of celerons just for Xboxes. Likewise, Nvidia has to put manufacturing capacity aside to make video cards for Xboxes. I don't see either of those companies negoiating a lower contract to continue to build an antiquated product...

      nVidia and Intel both have fixed price contracts as far as I know, but Microsoft doesn't pay for a part until it's delivered to them. nVidia's building the entire motherboard, GPU, and sound processor, too, not just the video card. nVidia then turned around and leveraged the technology for the GeForce 3 line and the nForce line, which is pretty much the only way they made any money from the deal. The Intel chip is a special line anyway, as it's been modified to the specs MS and nVidia came up with to optimize performance for games, so Intel can't just shovel whatever chips they didn't ship from that era over to MS, either.

      In the end, though, MS has come up with ways to reduce the cost on the assembly end. They still have the problem of Intel and nVidia being at fairly fixed prices, but they may have learned their lesson on that one. Notice that the official releases regarding the deal with IBM on the next XBox don't mention IBM actually producing chips, but rather Microsoft licensing technology. MS is currently limited in how much they can cut their costs, and they still will be in the future because they are licensing technology, but not to the extent they are now as they are buying hardware (at fixed cost afaik).

      Sony has none of those problems. In fact it could be argued that it goes the otherway for Sony. As Sony works to create a more integrated PS2, that know how gets used to integrate other products in the Sony line and visa versa.

      This is true, but it still costs Sony money to change their production lines for the updated (cheaper) chips. They have to weigh the costs against the gains, and I'm sure they only change the chips when they stand to make significant amounts of money off of it. At the same time, this whole concept is what allowed them to do PS1 compatibility, and now that they've reduced the PS2 functions outside the PS1 chip to a single chip, they can possibly do it again on the PS3 (and are currently using the single-chip design in the PSX afaik). On the other hand, there have been rumours that the next XBox may have to emulate the XBox hardware in order to successfully play XBox games. While this would result in lower hardware costs, to some degree, it would also result in a significant investment on the front end to produce the emulation.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    13. Re:loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If microsoft made up for it with the costs of the games, then why have they lost a billion dollars a year on the x-box?

    14. Re:loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are very high barriers to entry in the console market. The other Console companies (Sony and Nintendo) have a huge advantage having established there positions over several years. Sony and Nintendo have exacted exclusive deals with publishers and retailers to establish and promote there consoles. There are huge barriers to entry for new consoles. So it isn't about cost as much as having to spend a lot to even enter or leave the market.

      Exclusive software deals include the following bed mates. Electronic Arts has a deal with Sony for exclusive online games for the PS2 despite Ultima Online and Everquest competing. Sony also manufacutures a majority of PS2 CDs in house. Nintendo also manufactured the cartridges and could dictate software houses having to buy a run of several hundred thousand cartridges despite no gaurantee they'd sell them (which is why Square went with Sony for the Final Fantasy).

      Having established a relationship it would be impossible for any small company (such as Atari) to compete successfully. Atari was muscled out of the console market by Sony and Nintendo.

      The console market is a cut throat market. One where it makes odd bed fellows. Just look at Rare. Rare negotiated buy out Nintendos stake and then sold the company to Microsoft.

    15. Re:loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they can lose money like the federal fucking gubment and still post a profit?

      You forget, they still have a huge monopoly on operating systems, office applications, etc..

    16. Re:loss by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because if Microsoft got into the *joystick* market... oh, wait.

      It's really so that they could keep the prices of their console joysticks high, to help ameliorate the losses on the console itself. Microsoft would stand to lose a lot if cheapasses like me just started buying $5 USB joysticks.

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
  3. This is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    This nice thing about consoles is that you didn't have to worry about constantly buying new ones. Count on Microsoft to fuck that up.

    1. Re:This is bad by Ayaress · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Err... 2001 to 2005. Four year turn around. I've been buying a new console every year/two years, with only one gap of 5 years between my NES and my Sega Genesis, which was broken by buying no less than five system in two years.

    2. Re:This is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please tell me you are not still using an Atari 2600.

    3. Re:This is bad by Tony+B+Liar · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      what the hell else do you expect? yet again a cheap attempt at world domination by macroshaft. We can see through it though... (hmmmmmz... just like windows :/ ) does the xbox crash btw? Will they sell the cheap ones with bsod as a freebie? Love, Tony xx

    4. Re:This is bad by ill_mango · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I believe Nintendo and Sony have a 5 year guarantee - they will keep supporting a console for up to 5 years after its launch.

      I wonder how well the Xbox will be supported when the Xbox2 comes out.

      If Microsoft starts the hardware rush game, I am hoping Nintendo and Sony will not play along. I doubt Nintendo would (look at how long they took to make the N64 compared to when Saturn came out), but Sony might fall for it

    5. Re:This is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Count on Microsoft to fuck that up."

      Nintendo: NES, Super NES, Nintendo 64, Game Cube
      Sega: Genesis, Saturn, Dreamcast
      Sony: PS1, PS2
      MS: Xbox

      You're right!!! Bastards!!

    6. Re:This is bad by danknight · · Score: 1

      This deserves a MOD UP, (imho)

      --
      wanted: one clever sig,apply within
    7. Re:This is bad by stuph · · Score: 1

      Ya forgot Sega: Mastersystem. A fine console for it's time, that just got it's ass handed to it by Nintendo's NES

      --
      --Less Thinkin', More Drinkin'...
    8. Re:This is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heck, what about Atari 2600, 5200, 7800, Jaguar

    9. Re:This is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, there was a 7 year gap between the release of the famicom and the super famicom. and then there was another 7 year gap between the super famicom and the n64. and then there was a 5 year gap between the release of the n64 and the gamecube. So that is a poor example.

    10. Re:This is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who modded this garbage up? It's the length of time between successive consoles that counts, not the number of consoles.

    11. Re:This is bad by Bobman1235 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Doesn't seem like anything's changing here folks....

      Nintendo :
      NES : 1985
      SuperNES : 1991
      N64 : 1996
      Game Cube : 2001

      Avg Time Bet Releases : 5.3 years.

      Sega :
      Master System : 1986
      Genesis : 1989
      Saturn : 1995
      Dreamcast : 1998

      Avg Time Bet. Releases : 4 years

      Sony :
      PS1 : 1995
      PS2 : 2000
      PS3 : 2006 (projected)

      Avg Time Bet. Releases : ~5 years

      MS :
      XBox : 2001
      XBox 2 : 2005 (projected)

      Avg Time Bet. Releases : 4 years

    12. Re:This is bad by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      If you are going to call the n64 a system you should also list the Master system the Sega Cd sega 32x. I think MSoft could dominate the hand held market. It's a joke. There are PDa's with 800mhz chips full screen kick ass out there and GBA is still a 2d crapfest.

    13. Re:This is bad by metroid+composite · · Score: 1
      Don't forget

      Nintendo Gameboy 1989
      Nintendo Gameboy Advance 2001

      Avg Time Bet. Releases : 11 years
      (Granted, I'm leaving out Virtual Boy, which hardly counts, and Gameboy Color, which was essentially a mod to the old Gameboy)

      Sega Gamegear 1991
      Sega Nomad 1995

      Avg Time Bet. Releases : 4 years

      Also worthy of note, the Nintendo system released most quickly after it's predicessor (N64) is also the most maligned. Sega did fine with the Genesis, then spiralled into obscurity with Sega CD, Sega 32x, Sega Saturn, all in a short period.

    14. Re:This is bad by jb_davis · · Score: 1

      'There are PDa's with 800mhz chips full screen kick ass out there"
      For less than $200? Walmart?

      --
      "Well, it took an hour to write, I thought it would take an hour to read."
    15. Re:This is bad by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 1
      Gameboy Color, which was essentially a mod to the old Gameboy

      How do you figure that? It was a new piece of hardware you had to buy in order to play new games. It happened to be backwards compatible with the old games. But how is this any different than ps vs. ps2, other than maybe how it was marketed?
      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    16. Re:This is bad by metroid+composite · · Score: 1

      The GB was also forwards-compatible for a number of games. Granted, there were a few that would only play on the GBC and not GB, but I can't say any of those games really grabbed my attention.

  4. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Xbox - what's that all about? Is it good, or is it wack?

    1. Re:Obligatory by oscast · · Score: 2, Informative

      Since Ali G got taken off the air in the United States, few Americans will understand the understated reference to Ali's precurser to any type of review. if I had mod point, I would have given you some.

    2. Re:Obligatory by the+Man+in+Black · · Score: 1

      Thank you for FINALLY FINALLY explaining where that fucking meta-troll came from. It's been driving me mad.

      And now I can rest.

    3. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You and the Little Mermaid can go fuck yourselves.

      I don't have the books you want. They must be in La Jolla.

      I'm not going to wait up all night for you. Guh-byyyyye.

    4. Re:Obligatory by yerfatma · · Score: 1

      Ali G's still on HBO in repeats, but there's no mention of the promised Season 2. Has it been cancelled? Google's not telling me anything useful.

    5. Re:Obligatory by cens0r · · Score: 1

      Well they're finding it hard to do the show. So much of it depends on no one knowing who he is. That was one of the reasons he came to the US, everyone in the UK knew him, making his bits difficult to do.

      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
    6. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No...we all understand the reference, it's just that we all think Ali G is a no-talent hack. Not even remotely funny.

    7. Re:Obligatory by bfree · · Score: 2, Interesting
      HBO made a substantial mistake, they should have funded a much longer series, as once you start showing the stuff your potential number of targets drops rapidly. This is by no means unique, Dennis Pennis suffered the same fate having to cross the altantic once he had been overly spotted in the UK, though he at least (somehow) managed to then do seperate LA and NY runs in the states before having to "retire". Personally I always found Pennis far better then Ali G, probably because he took the ripest targets and shattered them with the simplest constructs. Steve Martin allegedly cancelled a trip to the UK after one question thrown out by Pennis when he caught his eye outside an event (around Bilko time), the question?
      Steve. How come you're not funny anymore?
      --

      Never underestimate the dark side of the Source

    8. Re:Obligatory by gblues · · Score: 1

      And here's a blatant karma whoring link for more info on Ali G:

      http://reason.com/0306/cr.js.studied.shtml

      Nathan

    9. Re:Obligatory by oscast · · Score: 1

      Really?

      I'm surprised anyone would say this? His show made me laugh almost as hard as Tom Green used to. (on his first show... not that lame talk show he later got)

  5. $99!?!? by Your_Mom · · Score: 4, Interesting

    $99? For a hackable XBox? Oh my. I'd seriously go against my better judgement and consider getting one if it dropped that low. MythTV would be so nice on one.

    --
    Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
    1. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why not get a second hand one now? And give none of your money to Mikerowesoft.

    2. Re:$99!?!? by pestilence4hr · · Score: 2, Troll
      Would somebody mind posting a summary of what it takes to turn an Xbox into a standalone PVR, from modding to installation, etc.?

      Google and half a brain.
    3. Re:$99!?!? by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 5, Informative
      Would somebody mind posting a summary of what it takes to turn an Xbox into a standalone PVR, from modding to installation, etc.?

      I don't think anyone is using it as a standalone PVR (does it even have PCI slots?). They're using them as a MythTV frontend box. The actual encoding and storage is handled by a seperate backend box (which can be conveniently hidden away in a basement or closet so it can be noisy and not bother you). All the communications between them is just over a network connection. You can of course have a frontend on the same box as the backend though too and communicate over the loopback interface.

    4. Re:$99!?!? by igrp · · Score: 3, Informative
      Well, in fact the XBox is not that easily exploitable any more as "Live 2.0" also includes fixes for various buffer overflows, hence breaking various exploits (which in turn are needed to run unsigned code).

      So make sure you do get a 3rd generation (or preferably older) XBox with the old pre-"Live 2.0" dash.

    5. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    6. Re:$99!?!? by Your_Mom · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Right now I have a p3-550 running the front and back, works fine for recoding and playback, just not at the same time, and Live TV is out of the question. But if I bought a XBox, the 550 would be doing backend encoding (bigger HDD) and the XBox would be doing the display, it might even handle Live TV.

      *wavy dream sequence* Ahhh yes....

      But, speaking of encoding video Doesn't the XBox have USB? I think there is support for a USB adapter for video caputre in Linux, no?

      --
      Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
    7. Re:$99!?!? by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No PCI slots, but it does have USB ports.. If any usb tuners worked under linux it would be feasible to get them running with xbox. Though I'd doubt the 700mhz cpu and 64 megs of RAM would be up for much by way of real PVR features (pause live TV, etc)..

      They make half decent media playback boxes, but as for a PVR, buy a PVR, or build/buy a media center TV.

      Xbox at 99 + HDD upgrade + TV tuner + mod chip + hassles = ugly (hacked usb dongle TV tuner hanging out the front), practically useless and probably cost more than a ReplayTV all told..

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    8. Re:$99!?!? by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 1

      I just checked ebay. There are more broken systems than there are working used ones. Even the used ones are over 100 bucks. The people selling used consoles now probably paid the original $299.

      Considering that MS lost about $100/unit when it was $299 in 2001, they're losing at least that much now. Buying an X-box technically doesn't give MS any money.

      -B

    9. Re:$99!?!? by cyt0plas · · Score: 1

      You don't want a USB capture card - the bandwidth sucks, so quality suffers.

      --
      Contact Me (got tired of viruses emailing me).
    10. Re:$99!?!? by FlipmodePlaya · · Score: 1

      A used XBOX will be _much_ cheaper than it is now when a new one is just $100.

    11. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, I never noticed the Video In on the xbox? Where is that?

    12. Re:$99!?!? by FreakyGeeky · · Score: 5, Informative

      You can hack any version of the XBOX with a hardware modchip, regardless of whether Live 2.0 is installed. This applies to all versions: 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and the 1.5.

      I will agree that the software exploits won't work with Live 2.0. However, most XBOX hackers chip their boxes anyway.

      See www.teamxecuter.com for more information.

    13. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    14. Re:$99!?!? by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I took a similar approach. The XBox does the playback, but instead of PVR backend, I just let someone else record it and put it on eMule, from where I download it.

    15. Re:$99!?!? by RailGunner · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Buying an X-box technically doesn't give MS any money.

      This is a fallacy that many here on Slashdot seem to repeat far more often then they should. If you buy an X-Box - you are still sending MS money - they lose money on the sale based on the cost to produce the unit, but it you didn't buy one MS would lose THAT MUCH MORE money.

      It's really simple - you want Microsoft to lose money? Then don't buy *any* Microsoft products. That means Windows Operating Systems, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Sidewinders / Mice, any game published by MS (FreeLancer, Halo, etc.), or anything else released or produced by Microsoft.

    16. Re:$99!?!? by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      Does the Xbox have a video in port? Or are you recording on one machine and watching on the Xbox? Seems a bit much...

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    17. Re:$99!?!? by monkeyboy87 · · Score: 1
      This applies to all versions: 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and the 1.5.

      So what was the point of having an HD in the XBOX if MS is issuing its service packs through hardware ;)

    18. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't it have USB?

    19. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a loss leader! Buy the things like hotcakes, just never touch the games!

    20. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a fallacy that many in the RIAA and MPAA seem to repeat far more often then(sic) they should.

      It's really simple - companies don't "lose" money when you don't buy a product from them.

    21. Re:$99!?!? by dfn_deux · · Score: 1
      Even that is slightly misleading, software exploits which make use of the buffer overflow in games such as Agent Under Fire, Mech Assault, or Splinter Cell still work fully and are not fixable with a simple Live update. Live is run as software from the HD *ONLY* when the xbox is booted w/o a bootable disc in the drive. Now the bios in an un modified xbox is unflashable unless you make a few jumper connections on the motherboard at which point it's quite easy to use one of the aforementioned game exploits to load a bios reflashing program which can flash the hacked "mod bios" of your choice directly over the original xbox bios/firmware. The result is an xbox that can run unsigned code and load DVDs without a mediacheck and that didn't require the addition of any "chip" or other addon hardware except two 1/8" 30ga wire jumpers.

      feel free to learn more about it here

      --
      -*The above statement is printed entirely on recycled electrons*-
    22. Re:$99!?!? by Isca · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If you like a Microsoft Product, look for other products to see if there is one that does nearly the same.

      Is there anything that does Xbox for nearly the same? Yes, sorta, except it's not an Xbox, and doesn't have the exact same games.

      I have no trouble giving MS cash for a good product. I love my sidewinder joystick. I love my MS USB IntellimousePro, much more than the logitech one that I threw to the side because I didn't like the way it felt.

      Just because it's MS doesn't automatically mean it's not worth purchasing. Does that mean I automatically want all of their software? No.

      Make your choices where it really counts. Some areas, MS is ALWAYS going to have competition. And guess what? They are starting to have competition in the SW dept too. If things had gone just a little different 20 years ago, we could have all been griping about Apple the same way we do about MS.

    23. Re:$99!?!? by aonaran · · Score: 1

      You set up a media server on a $200-300 mini-tower PC with some big-ass hard disks and a couple of TV tuner cards (so you can record more than one show at a time) installed in it and hooked up to your cable/satellite system. You can store this in the basement or a closet or whatever, doesn't matter it's the backend.
      Then you install MythTV client on a bunch of hacked X-boxes (they have support for xbox specifically built into Myth) and hook them up to every TV in the house.

      Now you have VOD on every TV you own and, if you feel like it you can play Xbox games too.

    24. Re:$99!?!? by johnnyb · · Score: 1

      Yes it does. They are coming out with XBOX 2. The whole point of dropping the price is to get rid of their rediculously huge inventory.

      After XBOX 2 comes out, noone will buy an Xbox. They have already spent the money to manufacture it. The only difference is, IF you pay the money THEN they recoup some of their losses, otherwise they recoup NONE of their losses.

    25. Re:$99!?!? by mal3 · · Score: 1

      They would lose less money if you didn't buy one since they'd just make one less.

      --
      Non gratis rodentus anus
    26. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      99$ is great, I just picked up xbox #2 for 170. I have a Box running my fave PVR program stashed in a corner. I am working on populating each room in my house with Modded Xboxs running Xbox Media Center http://www.xboxmediacenter.com to access those recorded shows on a networked share. With the DVD remote thrown in the mix, it's a beauty of a setup. And that's not including the full Mame, N64, SNES, and genesis roms. Hate MS all you want, but xbox has been a great machine.

    27. Re:$99!?!? by harrsk · · Score: 3, Informative
      Very True. People seem to think there are gotchats to hacking the xbox. This is simply not true. You can flip your mod chip off at any time and play XBLive normally... even if you have an upgraded HDD.

      People who say you can't do this or that with a hacked Xbox are just wrong.

      The list of things you can do with a hacked Xbox is lengthy. Dropping to $99 is a steal for the best console out there (due to the hack).

      • Run linux if you want
      • No more VCD burning and MP3 discs, play media files directly. Also, remoteless DVD playback.
      • ALL ROMS from atari 2600 to N64 & MAME (soon cube?)

      For $99 (or $179 imo) + $50 mod, nothing beats it.

    28. Re:$99!?!? by ryanw · · Score: 1
      Hate MS all you want, but xbox has been a great machine.
      From the sounds of it, if you hate microsoft buy an XBox and use it as a PVR. They're taking a serious financial hit for each person doing this. Sounds like a great way to bring down the empire.
    29. Re:$99!?!? by Zedek · · Score: 2, Informative

      You don't even need a modchip now either...

      You can use a gamesave exploit and flash the onboard TSOP.

      After that they make great low-cost servers with debianX on them ;)

    30. Re:$99!?!? by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are some problems with certain XBoxes though. The Executor 2.2 (lite and pro) have a switch which disables the Mod chip so you can play online, (or if M$ comes out with a sneaky solution). But the 1.0 Xbox lacks a good bios so you can't acutally disable it.

    31. Re:$99!?!? by King_TJ · · Score: 1

      ... And if you're not a half-witted zombie, you'll buy whatever product offers you the best value for your dollar. Choosing all of your purchases around the "I want Microsoft to lose money!" mentality makes little to no sense, unless you own one of their direct competitors.

      I see quite a few Mac users with *Microsoft* mice attached to them. Know why? It's because these folks *liked* the MS mouse and thought it was a decent buy. So what? More power to them. Buy the products that are worthwhile, and don't waste your money on the others - and even a giant like Microsoft could eventually start modifying their offerings so they're more attractive.

      I wouldn't willfully buy another copy of Windows myself, yet I'd consider most of their input devices (game controllers, keyboards, etc.) as good quality, competitive products.

    32. Re:$99!?!? by Naerbnic · · Score: 1

      Speaking for myself, I do not believe that MS always makes bad products. Their game controls are pretty good, the XBox is a decent gaming platform (with a few minor design issues but hey, who doesn't have 'em?), and many of the games they publish aren't half bad. The reason that I do not buy from them is not an economic decision in the least. The reason I (and many on Slashdot I'd wager) do not buy from MS is for ethical reasons. I believe that MS is throwing its weight around a bit much, not by simply using marketing but by attempting to lock companies into using their services and products. While I would warrant that MS does deserve money for those products of high quality that have been released, I don't want said money going towards their efforts which I find ethicaly questionable. As long as such a thing is possible, I don't see any pressing need to give MS my money.

      --


      So there I was, juggling apples and small animals, when I accidentally bit into the wrong one...
    33. Re:$99!?!? by FictionPimp · · Score: 0

      I wish i could, but sadly, MS keyboards are the only keyboards my hands really like (mostly from using them at work) and sadly Microsoft games seem to be the least shady of publishing companys out there. I mean, i would rather give my money to microsoft then attari anyday. At least I would get a easy to back up game on a good quailty cd.

    34. Re:$99!?!? by gunga · · Score: 1

      Google? I got that. What do I do next?

    35. Re:$99!?!? by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1
      If you buy an X-Box - you are still sending MS money - they lose money on the sale based on the cost to produce the unit, but it you didn't buy one MS would lose THAT MUCH MORE money.

      That's just silly.

      It might be true if Microsoft had a billion X-Boxes sitting around in their warehouses and had no hope of selling them. In that case, yes, selling them for any amount is better than not selling them at all. But the reality is that Microsoft continues to produce new X-Boxes as their exissting stockpiles are sold.

      My decision to not by an X-Box doesn't mean that there is some sad little X-Box sitting on a shelf that will never be sold. Ultimately (in aggregate with many other non-X-Box-buying people) it means that Microsoft will have decided to produce one less X-Box. Not producing an X-Box is free.

    36. Re:$99!?!? by BrerBear · · Score: 1

      A used XBOX will be _much_ cheaper than it is now when a new one is just $100.

      Exactly. So anyone out there is planning on buying an Xbox of any kind over the next few months, you should probably hold off. And tell your friends, too.

      Now we'll see what 8 months of rumors of impending and drastic price cuts do for current Xbox sales.

    37. Re:$99!?!? by MrBlue+VT · · Score: 1

      I didn't think you could run N64 roms because there is no hardware accelerated opengl drivers for the xbox yet. It wouldn't work very well in software mode.

      Correct me if I'm wrong.

    38. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And guess what - Microsoft couldn't give a damn whether you buy their products. You're obviously a snithering little geek that pounds away on a keyboard in his mom's basement. You're either shaped like a pear or like a straw. Either way, you're very unattractive and probably don't have a real job that results in purchasing decisions - therefore, MS could care less about you or your stupid reasons not to buy their mice.

    39. Re:$99!?!? by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      If you go with Myth, you'd have to have a PC to record with, and you could drive the TV from the Xbox. Myth is a client-server system - the server does the recording and everything else needed involving the tuner card(s). The clients can be anything that Myth can run on. Don't expect it to be painless to set up though - the documentation is spotty and sometimes lacks important information. It took a while to get my single CPU system set up, and even now there are still some bugs that require an occasional reboot.

      /me still loves his Myth system

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    40. Re:$99!?!? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Why not get a second hand one after the new ones come down to $99, which should lower the used ones to eighty bucks?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    41. Re:$99!?!? by jasontheking · · Score: 1

      The goal of the excercise wasn't to make M$ lose money on the systems , it was to make sure that the xbox didn't become a popular gaming system , by keeping it out of the hands of willing gamers.

      M$ could claim huge numbers of consoles sold (and would have to keep to itself the fact that not many people would be buying games), which the gaming companies would then use as an excuse to make games for it. They are the ones who would be bitten badly by this , and hopefully never write a game for an M$ console ever again.

      Of course , the fact that the games that came out were all shit meant that we didn't have to bother anyway.

    42. Re:$99!?!? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Many MAME games and N64 games don't work. As I understand, the PSX emulator is pretty shaky too. All the older systems seem to be pretty well-emulated, but actually lots of NES games still don't work either.

      You're still right that Xbox is quite a bargain for all you get, although I'd still like a way to play VCD and SVCD without booting Linux...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    43. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you read the article? Do you know what MS' inventory levels are? I bet no. Nowhere in the article is it mentioned that MS has large inventory. Think before you type

    44. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1 Troll? WTF?

    45. Re:$99!?!? by aminorex · · Score: 1

      Not buying their stuff isn't enough for me.

      Here are some other ways to help them lose money:

      1) When they put their money down, move it
      while they're not looking. The back of the sock drawer is a good hiding spot.

      2) Give them their change in Sacajawea dollars, then make them wait for their happy meals on a big leather couch.

      3) Put up fake powerball jackpot signs.

      4) Sue them for some crime they did.

      I'm sure you can think of more.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    46. Re:$99!?!? by gordonius · · Score: 1

      Sidewinder Joysticks suck. They break too easily. Same with intellimouses. I've received two of those as gifts, first the wired, then the wireless, and they both broke within about 3 months.

      MS generally blows at product quality. I own an Xbox I've already gotten a second one because the first one's dvd drive stopped working. I will however support the idea of a $99 xbox. For that price I can finally have my room-to-room mosix cluster and have a decent machine all over my apartment!

    47. Re:$99!?!? by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      Once you've modded it though, you can't play live unless the original drive layout is visible and the drive is lockable, and of course the mod chip needs to be bypassable.

      If you're not playing on Live, you don't need to worry about whether the drive is lockable or not.

    48. Re:$99!?!? by FreakyGeeky · · Score: 1

      Yes you can! I just put an Xecuter 2.3B Lite chip in my XBOX last week. The chip came with a small switch that I affixed to the front of the XBOX under the player 1 and 2 controller ports. What does the switch do? It allows you to shut off the modchip! With the modchip off, you can play on XBOX Live without issue.

      Lockable hard drives aren't hard to find. I haven't replaced my XBOX's drive yet, but I have friends who have, and they plan on Live all the time.

    49. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Supporting Microsoft in any fashion is detrimental to any and all of their competition in all fields. I will not contribute to the death of traditional gaming culture by buying an Xbox, and I get by on my Macs and linux boxes just fine, thanks.

      I will never knowingly spend money on Microsoft products, nor will I knowingly use their products (legally or illegally). To do so would be to support a corporation so large that, by sheer size alone, superior products from more scrupulous companies are pushed out of the market (over which consumers have LESS THAN TOTAL CONTROL, no matter what the general public has been led to believe).

    50. Re:$99!?!? by FreakyGeeky · · Score: 1

      This is wrong. The Xecuter 2.2 and the 2.3 both work with 1.0 Xboxes. These modchips bypass the Xbox's built-in BIOS and run a different BIOS from the modchip itself.

    51. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But... you can't pirate mice or keyboards or joysticks! We'll still have to pay for those!

    52. Re:$99!?!? by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      If you're using the original drive you can do that.
      If you put in a new drive that isn't lockable, or has the wrong layout you won't be able to play on live. It looks for files in specific locations. So if you put a bigger drive in, you just stash everything else on F or G, and leave the other drives virtually untouched. No issues.

    53. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your "soon cube?" comment is laughable.

      Show me an x86 processor of any speed (no less the 733 MHz Celeron that's in the Xbox) that can emulate a 485 MHz PPC, plus custom hardware, at anywhere near full speed.

      Besides:

      - You can run linux on other consoles, or (gasp) your computer

      - You can stream media files directly to the PS2 using third-party tools

      - Emulators exist for other consoles and for computers (although for real gamers, emulation is a last resort, isn't it?)

      Basically, I'm saying that you can sum up all of the Xbox's advantages to the fact that it is so close in architecture to a c.1999 x86 PC as to be considered exactly that. And even at $150, you can find similarly-spec'd PCs lying around, that will do all of the above tasks with far greater flexibility and power than the Xbox can.

      Face it, the Xbox is only appealing to hackers who are concerned more with trying to turn a console (a Microsoft-branded one, at that) into a PC, when PCs of comparable and greater power already exist.

    54. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought 5 Xboxes for friends (3 of them used), modchiped them and now burn around 50 games per month for them. I've given about 25 copies of pirated Windows XP away, and about 10 of Office 2003. Am I helping M$ here?

    55. Re:$99!?!? by Zedek · · Score: 1

      Roger that.. Also, the 1.0 and 1.1 versions come with a 1 meg TSOP and if you put Address line 19 to VCC and Gnd on a SPDT switch, you can effectively split the tsop into 2 512K sections and therefore run two bios's. If you want to go even further, you can also put the same scenario switch on A18 and split it into 4 256K sections. But 4 different bios's is getting a bit retarded (at least to me)

    56. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I cannot bring myself to support Micros
      OOOOH! SHINY!
      I WANT GIMME NOW!

    57. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, for the part about costing MS money, it's more complicated. Not buying an xbox only hurts MS if they've got a ton sitting already made. If they are making them exactly to demand, then they are doing the best they can. Us buying the things to hurt MS does the most damage if they are REALLY losing money on each unit and if they are flying off the shelves as fast as they can. An even better thing to do is make them think the demand is going to get huge so they produce more of them, then noone buys. Any ideas on that one?
      the main point in my mind is if the thing really costs more to make than they are selling them. Getting money back for each sale would only mean that part of the money gone into the box comes back. It's still losing money, just slower than if they don't sell one that's been made.

    58. Re:$99!?!? by Doogie5526 · · Score: 1
      "Buying an X-box technically doesn't give MS any money"

      Perhaps, but it will when Xbox2 comes around. The cost of game licensing is usually based on the amount of units sold.

    59. Re:$99!?!? by JDWTopGuy · · Score: 1

      Ditto... Anybody know how fast RC5-72 is on an XBox?

      --
      Ron Paul 2012
    60. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right On.

      The number of dodgy releases Atari have made is absurd, the only reason I buy their games is because they're the publisher of my favourite game series'. Here's a few of the worst I've run into:

      Pool of Radiance:
      Out of box, saving games would corrupt other files on your HDD. After patching, it's still pretty buggy.

      Master of Orion III:
      The game's still buggy and unfinished, after 3 patches, and the game's installer produces a corrupt install every 3 or 4 times it's used.

      Neverwinter Nights - Shadows of Undrentide:
      The Australian release of the game was completely buggered up, everyone I know who bought the game ended up with virtually unreadable CDs (that couldn't be read on ANY cd/dvd drive tried). Atari eventually mailed out replacement CDs to most of those who requested them, but never actually admitted they'd screwed up.

    61. Re:$99!?!? by katarac · · Score: 1

      I don't know the technicalities, but my roommate plays N64 roms on his, and they run fine.

    62. Re:$99!?!? by nathanh · · Score: 1
      "Buying an X-box technically doesn't give MS any money."

      This is a fallacy that many here on Slashdot seem to repeat far more often then they should. If you buy an X-Box - you are still sending MS money - they lose money on the sale based on the cost to produce the unit, but it you didn't buy one MS would lose THAT MUCH MORE money.

      It depends on the rules for inventory. If Microsoft keeps their warehouse stocked with a fixed number of Xbox (eg, 1000 Xbox) then buying an Xbox causes Microsoft to manufacture another Xbox. If the manufacturing costs are higher than the sale price then buying an Xbox costs Microsoft more than not buying an Xbox.

      Think of it this way. Let's say for every Xbox sold, Microsoft produces another one. Let's guess that an Xbox costs $M to make and $S to sell. You buy an Xbox for $S (credit you, debit Microsoft). Microsoft then manufactures another Xbox for $M (credit Microsoft, debit manufacturer).

      If M is greater than S (and we believe it is) then Microsoft just lost another $(M-S) despite you giving them your money! The fault here is Microsoft keeps a fixed stock in their inventory.

      Now if Microsoft were running out their stock (ie, not manufacturing more Xbox) then you would be right; the best way to harm Microsoft would be to not buy it at all. But I'm pretty sure that they're still manufacturing Xbox.

    63. Re:$99!?!? by harrsk · · Score: 1

      True. However, these are software issues. Luckily, emulator development is very active for Xbox. I have found that many games that were once unplayable now work (esp the N64 on Surreal64). I admit that I'm biased, since I like keeping up with the latest and messing with the box itself.

    64. Re:$99!?!? by johnnyb · · Score: 1

      So what?

      I did think. Thinking is what led me to believe that they probably will have excess inventory in the months leading up to their new release. I mean really, how many people are going to buy X-Box 1 when #2 is going to be out soon?

      Lowering the price is probably the only way.

    65. Re:$99!?!? by Your_Mom · · Score: 1

      and, if you feel like it you can play Xbox games too
      Holy #$@#!! It plays games too?! Wow, is there anything that this thing won't do?

      --
      Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
    66. Re:$99!?!? by corpsiclex · · Score: 1

      Buy used and M$oft gets nothing. :-D

      --

      eBayDig 1s a typo saerch engien
    67. Re:$99!?!? by Rangsk · · Score: 1

      I'd still like a way to play VCD and SVCD without booting Linux

      Simple enough - just get Xbox Media Center :) It uses the mplayer core and works right from any dashboard (except the MS one, of course). This means it can play pretty much any audio/video file, including real media, wmv, and quicktime. It also has a filezilla ftp server and some other goodies, which work while you're playing the videos.

      --
      "Don't believe anything you read on the net. Except this. Well, including this, I suppose." --Douglas Adams
    68. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will not contribute to the death of traditional gaming culture by buying an Xbox

      So you wont contribute to the "death of traditional gaming" by buying an Xbox, and you "get by" with your Mac and Linux boxes.. Do you play any games? Solitaire? Duck Duck Goose?

    69. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple enough - just get Xbox Media Center :) It uses the mplayer core and works right from any dashboard (except the MS one, of course). This means it can play pretty much any audio/video file, including real media, wmv, and quicktime. It also has a filezilla ftp server and some other goodies, which work while you're playing the videos.

      Media Center looks to be a great piece of software. From what I understand, it was started by the guys who broke off (I'm assuming) from the XBOX Media Center project. I haven't used the Media Center that much - I almost always use XBMP (atleast right now) - but the Media Center looks to have some great features, such as built-in webserver. One thing you can do with the webserver is queue up music/movie files from a PC. So if you have your Xbox working as a pure media player, you can store it away somewhere (maybe near your entertainment center) out of the way, and queue up music how you like, over the network. It also does have a much cleaner look, and some great new features such as an improved file explorer, and I believe you can also delete/add files and folders, which I dont think you could do in XBMP.

      Atleast with the build that I was using, it appears to need a little work before it is really usable to the full extent. But it is still a great piece of software, and check it out if you get the chance.

      XBOX Media Center: www.xboxmediacenter.com

      Also heres the link if anyone was looking for the older product, less features but appears to be a bit more usable at this time (IMO).

      XBOX Media Player: www.xboxmediaplayer.de

    70. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      you stress that MS keeps consumers from having total of what they use, and yet you use Macs.

      "Are you familiar with the old robot saying 'Does not compute!'?" -Bender

    71. Re:$99!?!? by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      If you buy an xBox, but don't buy any games, that is pretty much the worst case scenario for MS because they are loosing money on the hardware. However, you benefit them because you increase their install base.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    72. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      define snither

    73. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahem, if you must know, hide-the-sausage, thank you very much.

    74. Re:$99!?!? by ssstraub · · Score: 1

      good god man. The tv tuner cards alone are $150 EACH. Xboxes are $150. Misc PC parts are hundreds of dollars.

      Why not just buy two TiVos and be done with it?

      Also, with satellite, wouldn't each tuner card require it's own receiver box? That's another $5/7 per month for each both, and that's only assuming you got them for free on a promotion.

    75. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but it you didn't buy one MS would lose THAT MUCH MORE money.

      Actually, if you didn't buy one, MS would lose 0 money! By selling an X-Box, MS performs 3 financial transactions:

      1) Pay $COST to manufacturer.

      2) Invest $DIST into distribution channel.

      2) Receive $PRICE from consumer.

      Now, if $COST + $DIST > $PRICE, MS' bank account gets smaller throughout the process. I don't know how YOU define "losing money", but a lessening of one's pocketbook fits my definition of "losing money" just fine.

      Not too good with teh maths, are you?

    76. Re:$99!?!? by aonaran · · Score: 1

      I don't know where you shop but I've seen plenty of TV tuner cards in the $20-$40 range, any of them should work fine.

      We are talking about after the Xboxes drop to $99 each, so $99 per Xbox...

      The biggest advantage is MythTV works in Canada, and other countries, Tivo doesn't work anywhere but the USA. (unless you set up your own server for TV guide listings, which brings up the price of the tivos, and actually make them more complicated to set up than myth.) Then there is also the ability to burn your taped shows for archiving, or have any size hard disk you like, at $99 per Xbox, Xboxes are cheaper than tivos by a fair margin, and after 3 or more TVs you have made up the difference, plus you didn't have to subscribe to an additional service if you are in the USA where service is provided.

      Do Tivos allow you to watch a show you taped on 1 tivo on another? I don't think the older ones do, but it would really suck if the new ones don't still.

    77. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never stated such a thing. I emphasized that consumers do NOT have complete control over the market: Exterior forces such as Microsoft's monopoly are so strong that they can guide/lock/force consumers to BEND to market trends, as opopsed to shaping them.

      Re-read.

    78. Re:$99!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was never part of the PC gaming culture. I went from Apple ][s, to the Apple //gs and Amigas, to Amigas and Macs, to Macs and linux.

      Throughout all of that, I've owned almost every major console from Atari (except 5200 and Jaguar), Nintendo, Sega, NEC, and Sony (whose products I only reluctantly purchase). Consoles that I've never considered (or considered and dismissed) include the 3D0, CD-I, PC-FX, Neo Geo (screw the fanboys, I like SNK games well enough, but the NG is not what I want in a console), the MSX, and the Xbox. Why? They do not represent what a console shoud be to me. I even waited five years to buy a PS1, just because it took about that long for the substantial games to be released. The first few years of its life were Sony's butt-in-head phase, where everything had to look impressive and new, as opposed to BEING impressive and new. That's where I think Microsoft is today, and they will have to convince me that they are serious about the kinds of games that I want to play before I will move them out of the "do not consider" category, and even then will I be reluctant to support them (history of shenanigans = teh sux).

    79. Re:$99!?!? by ssstraub · · Score: 1

      I don't know where you shop but I've seen plenty of TV tuner cards in the $20-$40 range, any of them should work fine.

      This is true. I guess I was only considering the creme of the crop Hauppage 250, which includes a hardware decoder/encoder (I think it's both, not sure though).

      Do Tivos allow you to watch a show you taped on 1 tivo on another? I don't think the older ones do, but it would really suck if the new ones don't still.

      The new ones do.

      BTW, I'm considering building a MythTV box *first*, so I can see if it will pass the girlfriend test and be used instead of a Tivo. I would hate to pay $12/mo just for freakin program guides and not have the burn-to-DVD option.

    80. Re:$99!?!? by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      Ah I said you can't disable the chip with the bios I have perhaps you could offer a solution?

  6. So... by skink1100 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Modded X2's in early 2006?

    S

    1. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds futuristic!

      (In 1994, did people write stuff like "New Windows operating system expected in 1995"?)

    2. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In 1994, people wrote stuff like "New Windows operating system (Chicago) expected in 1994".

    3. Re:So... by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1

      Well if we go by Windows XP's stellar record. Don't you mean the Hack will be available in early 2005 before the official release, with modded X2's showing up the same day as the official release.

  7. isnt the ps3 out? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what were they taking apart at lik-sang?

    1. Re:isnt the ps3 out? by silentbobdp · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's the PSX - it's got a PS2 inside and basically a high capacity TiVO and a DVD recorder. A few other nice things.

      --
      --Moo.
  8. For those of us who don't follow such things... by JessLeah · · Score: 0

    ...what exactly are the specs on current Xbox hardware, and are there any barriers to hacking one to run Linux at present? (grins) This could be a great way to make a cheap Linux (or NetBSD) workstation...

    1. Re:For those of us who don't follow such things... by e2d2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      xbox linux project

      There are others too. Just do a search on google. But thats a good start. Not sure about NetBSD.

    2. Re:For those of us who don't follow such things... by e2d2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ahh, here we go:NetBSD on xbox

    3. Re:For those of us who don't follow such things... by freidog · · Score: 1

      P3 733

      GF graphics card somewhere between GF3 and GF4 power.

      64mb DDR ram.

      A mod Chip is required to bypass the normal startup routine and allows you to install a custom version of Linux
      on your Xbox, most of them will play XBox games, along with allowing you to place and play most types of media on your Xbox. Often even including the ability to ftp files up to your Xbox via ethernet connection.
      The bad part is you can't play XBox live with a mod chip running. (unless you enjoy being banned from MS severs...)

    4. Re:For those of us who don't follow such things... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry dude:

      Yes, this was an april fool joke. I never ported NetBSD to the X-BOX, heck, I don't even own one. :) To all the people who visited and actually bought this hoax: APRIL FOOL! If you saw through it right away, well, clever :) I hope you liked it. I certainly did my best to fool you guys :) I'll just leave this here for you to enjoy. Oh, note that the download links don't work anymore. 180 MB's of /dev/zero output is a kind of pointless thing to have on a webserver :)

    5. Re:For those of us who don't follow such things... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical arrogant SOB BSD jackass...

    6. Re:For those of us who don't follow such things... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, with the new Xecuter bios, if you try and play xbox live it will patch memory to make it look like the ethernet cable is unplugged. Pretty nice if you forget to disable the mod.

    7. Re:For those of us who don't follow such things... by e2d2 · · Score: 1

      DOH!

      About as funny as a heart attack... not at all.

      Oh well. Thanks for pointing out my lack of quality assurance. Can you tell I'm a software developer? I'd jump on a glory hole if it looked like a solution.

  9. Familiarities by a5cii · · Score: 1

    This seems familiar, when saga lowered their dreamcast to 99 it spelled the end could this be the same for microsoft? They announce the Xbox2 but i dont believe it will come out. Microsoft does a good job they just need to make more secure operating systems and forget about hardware IMO

    1. Re:Familiarities by frankthechicken · · Score: 1

      If the rumours are true about the Xbox 2 coming out so shortly after the price drop, I would assume they feel they have extracted as much value as possible from the original machine.

      Now Microsoft are probably turning towards brand loyalty, get as many people familiar with the product in the hope that this will lead to increased sales in the newer, bigger(hopefully not literally) and better version.

    2. Re:Familiarities by AnyNoMouse · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Microsoft != Sega

      Sega was hurting financially (and still is) when they cut their system price to try to sell through their remaining inventory. Sony FUD + lack of confidence inspired by their Saturn bomb + lack of marketing practically killed the company despite the 1 year lead and easy to develop for system.

      Microsoft has plenty of cash and seems content to bleed it on X-Box to give X-Box 2 a market advantage. I wouldn't count Microsoft out of the game until *after* an X-Box 2 launch. And then, only if XB2 bombs.

      --
      -Redundancy Man strikes again!
    3. Re:Familiarities by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      It's likely that Sony and MS will cut the price of bother their leading generation consoles to something in the $99-$129 range between E3 and Labor Day. If the price is $129 speculation will be rampent about a cut to $99 around Thanksgiving. The new buzz is in response to several game makers who are expecting some variant of these price cuts this year. It's pretty common for prices to fall as you move further up the adoption curve, each generation has cuts, it only becomes a problem if you need to generate a signficant profit from hardware, now, or if you continue to have falling sales after the hardware price cut. I think Sega was running into both problems and got a pretty sweet offer to move their internally developed titles to the X-Box.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    4. Re:Familiarities by Benw5483 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What most people don't understand about the Xbox is that it was adopted first and most widely by adults with actual paying jobs. The Gamecube played only "kids games" and everybody on the block had a PS2. So people who actually have the money to spend on these hobbies are the ones that initially bought them.

      For this reason, Xbox has the highest number of software sold per system. I myself bought one of these with Halo the week it came out and it cost me almost $400 bucks. But I had the money and the job to buy the games I wanted and now I have nearly 20 games for the system. 20 games * $50 = $1000.

      Obviously not every one of my games was $50 but that's still a lot of return money for the $100 they were losing on the system sell. I think MS has the advantage of having support from a large group of users who can afford to buy the games themselves rather than wait until mommy or daddy can pick one up for their birthday.

      Add to that Xbox Live which is easily the better of the two online gaming entities and you've got a lot going for the Xbox. There's no way MS will let this system go by way of the Dreamcast, they have too much muscle and too much money already invested. The cases just aren't similar at all.

      --
      what?
    5. Re:Familiarities by MojoMonkey · · Score: 1

      Well, Microsoft is shipping the Xenon dev kit already. So I'd say that's a good indication that it's coming out if studios are working with the dev kit for release titles.

      --

      ----- "Blame the guy who doesn't speak English." -- Homer J. Simpson
    6. Re:Familiarities by aonaran · · Score: 1

      Microsoft does a good job they just need to make more secure operating systems and forget about hardware IMO

      My opinion is the exact opposite, MS should focus on what they are good at (hardware) and dump what they suck at (software).

      MS hardware always impressed me. Intellimouse was cool, thier joysticks were cool, Xbox is a bit clunky looking, but still cool from a hardware perspective, although it lacks any games I'd want to play that I can't already get on PS2.

    7. Re:Familiarities by dogbowl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      XBox has the highest number of software sold with the system .. because it has the highest number of games that come bundled along with every system purchased.

      But anyway, if your theories above were true, then how do you explain the yearly billion dollar losses of the MSFT Home division? If all these adults are buying xbox and PS2 games, then why is Nintendo the only company who's actually pulling in serious cash?

      --

      These pretzels are making me thirsty.
    8. Re:Familiarities by erasmus_ · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wrong, bundled games don't count towards the "software sold with system" number that Microsoft always touts, since the user is not actually buying them, but getting them for free. Instead, it refers to the actual $50 spent for each additional game at the time of the console purchase. In my case, that would have been 3 - Project Gotham Racing, Dead or Alive, and of course Halo.

      I also don't know where you got your "highest number of games bundled with any system" notion. It originally was not bundled with any games, and at one point or another had either 1 or 2 games bundled with it, which is not that high. If I were to recommend a bundle, the Sega GT Racer and Jet Set Radio seems to be the best.

      --
      Please subscribe to see the more insightful version of th
    9. Re:Familiarities by erasmus_ · · Score: 1

      Can you back that up with any facts or quotes? The last thing I heard, they were hiring for a code project Xenon, which is where people got that name, but it has been specifically said that dev kits cannot be shipped until the hardware is further determined, which it has not been, at least publically.

      --
      Please subscribe to see the more insightful version of th
    10. Re:Familiarities by dogbowl · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression that every xbox came along with 2 games .. Tetris and Star Wars.

      The only other current consoles that came along with a game were the short lived ATV PS2 pack and Zelda for the GC (not sure if the GC bundle was a limited time thing). Regardless, since no other console includes 2 games, then thats how I figure that the xbox comes bundled with more than anybody (since, 2 is greater than 1 .. you see?)

      Does anyone have a link/proof as for what the sell through numbers actually show? If they're reported by MSFT, I'm 100% they include the pack in games. If they're reported by resellers, they may not.

      --

      These pretzels are making me thirsty.
    11. Re:Familiarities by MojoMonkey · · Score: 1

      Can you back that up with any facts or quotes?

      No, just insider knowledge I guess. However, you are right they are not currently shipping, I fluffed that a bit to make my point. All I can tell you is what I was told and that is at GDC in March will be when studios (who qualified) receive their kit.

      --

      ----- "Blame the guy who doesn't speak English." -- Homer J. Simpson
    12. Re:Familiarities by erasmus_ · · Score: 1

      I don't have a link with the exact wording as proof that attach rate does not include bundled games, but I am just using common sense, as Microsoft started ringing the church tower bells about how great their attach rate was very soon after the console was released, back when no games were bundled.

      Yes, you're right that Xbox currently includes the 2 games you mentioned, but I believe they're on the same disk, so if you're counting those as 2, then the Zelda disk with Gamecube should count as 5, since it includes Legend of Zelda, Adventure of Link, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, and Legend of Zelda: The Windmaker.

      --
      Please subscribe to see the more insightful version of th
    13. Re:Familiarities by unclethursday · · Score: 1
      It originally was not bundled with any games

      True and untrue at the same time.

      Microsoft PUSHED bundles on Xbox launch pre-orders through outlets such as Electronics Boutique and GameStop. The bundles were REQUIRED for a pre-order, and people who pre-ordered were FORCED to purchase 2 Microsoft published games from a list, and a third game of their choice (first or third party game) from another (shorter) list, as well as a Microsoft made controller, and either a Microsoft made memory card or the Microsoft made DVD Playback Kit.

      Prices for pre-orders came to well over $500.

      It's obvious these were Microsoft pushed bundles, or else the retailers would have allowed a wider choice of games as well as the choices of third party accessories.

      People didn't need to pre-order, though, since there would be places like Wal-Mart and Toys "R" Us which did not do pre-order bundles; but when it became apparant that Microsoft was going to ship around half of what they initially promised (they promised between 600k-800k at launch, but only delivered around 400k for launch day), it was 'safer' for people to pre-order their Xboxes. And, even then, pre-orders were not garaunteed their Xboxes on launch day, some had to wait for the second or third shipments before they got their pre-ordered Xbox (I live 10 minutes outside of Philly, and local stores around me recieved less than half their pre-orders on launch day, and had to wait for repleneshments to finsih their pre-orders) .

      So, while it was never 'officially' a bundle-only launch, Microsoft did force retailers to only allow pre-orders if the pre-orders were a forced MS-centric bundle (gaining them the most revenue from the bundles).

      EB, also, even after the launch, continued to force bundles on customers who wanted an Xbox all the way through the 2001 holiday season, although this wasn't as restrictive as the initial MS bundle.

    14. Re:Familiarities by Daetrin · · Score: 1
      Wrong, bundled games don't count towards the "software sold with system" number that Microsoft always touts, since the user is not actually buying them, but getting them for free.

      From this article at Gamesindustry.biz:

      "Beyond mere console sales, there's interesting reading in the other figures as well. The software attach rate for the system, a key indicator of its viability as a platform, is at a healthy 5.2 units per console - although it's thought that this encompasses bundled games (Microsoft was unable to confirm this at time of publication), which would make it altogether less impressive since few Xboxen are sold without at least two cut-price (or free) software titles in the box."

      And as someone else pointed out, when the XBox first came out people were strongly encouraged or required to buy extra games in a kind of bundle pack, which may also skew the figures.

      You're right, games the user gets discounted or for free with the system probably shouldn't count, however just because they _shouldn't_ count doesn't mean that Microsoft won't count them anyways.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  10. Ouch by Erwos · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My first thought upon reading this was, "That's gonna hurt Nintendo, big time."

    Nintendo, at least from what I can see, got their big sales kick this season from slashing down the price so that consumers would see it as the most affordable of the third generation consoles. However, that value proposition is going to be dead if the X-Box goes to the $100, or $120 range. I don't think most people have an issue with kicking in an extra $20 for DVD-playing, a hard drive, and a broadband adapter.

    Hell, for that price, _I_ might get one.

    -Erwos

    --
    Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    1. Re:Ouch by Acidic_Diarrhea · · Score: 1
      The third generation? How are you counting these generations? Are you starting with the Colecovision or an Atari or what? Do you start counting post-crash with the NES? That would make the XBox, at least a 4th generation unit [NES/Master System, SNES/Genesis, PS1,Saturn,N64, PS2,XBox,Gamecube].

      I'm curious, how did you get third generation?

      --
      I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
    2. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think it's going to hurt Nintendo very much... the reports are saying the price drop will be in time for labor day.

      That's almost 9 months from now, and by that time I don't think Nintendo will have a problem lowering the price of the Gamecube again... to maybe $70 or $80.

    3. Re:Ouch by DrEldarion · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, but the GameCube has already been at $99 for quite a while. Pretty much everyone who would buy one at that price has already bought it. It's not very likely that Microsoft will absorb many sales that Nintendo would have gotten.

    4. Re:Ouch by Erwos · · Score: 1

      I suppose I should have written fourth generation, assuming it goes something along the lines of:
      1. NES, SMS
      2. SNES, Genesis, TG16
      3. Playstation, N64, Dreamcast
      4. PS2, X-Box, Gamecube

      Good catch. You are totally right, and I am totally wrong. Relish that, because you don't hear it often on /. :).

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    5. Re:Ouch by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      Most of the industry measures generations in bits, I've heard this is more like 5th generation. (Atari, etc, then using Nintendo NES, SNES, N64, NGC) with very broad groupings of systems around those timeframes.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    6. Re:Ouch by andih8u · · Score: 1, Troll

      I think Nintendo will stay pretty secure in its market, since its games are geared towards children mostly (think MarioKart, etc). They also have an exclusive license to all of these, so I don't think they need to worry about it. Same goes for Sony, there's so many good games that you can only get for the PS2 (think Gran Turismo) that they don't really care what Microsoft will come out with. Also, in Japan, all of the Xbox's sold there mysteriously started scratching the dvds, so retailers stopped selling them. No way to penetrate that market.

      --


      slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
    7. Re:Ouch by 13Echo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think so. Nintendo still has its own exclusive games that people want. In addition, it has the GBA which is still selling quite well. There will also be quite a few new RPGs for release on the Gamecube this year, all of which are exclusives. I don't really see this causing much of a problem for Nintendo, who definately has the market edge of Microsoft in Japan, and is still doing strong in the USA. Europe is Nintendo's only real weak area right now.

      If Microsoft were to drop the price to $99, it would be purely to dethrone Nintendo from the "#2" position. Nintendo would probably retaliate with a great game pack-in or promo before dropping the price any more. The $99 price range is where the added hardware features of the XBox begin to matter a lot less. They are so cheap, most people would just buy both machines. In the end, it will be the games that matter for the number 2 position. Though the XBox does have "Live" and the wasted hard drive feature, it doesn't have the franchises that Nintendo has. All of the talk about XBox's games is "Halo this" and "Halo that." Halo alone cannot sustain a console. While people are awaiting Halo 2, I'll be playing Baten Kaitos, PSO 3, Chrystal Chronicles, and the Tales of Destiny games, Metal Gear Solid remake, Metriod Prime 2, All of which will never come out on the XBox.

      Check out these games - most of which are exclusives.

      http://cube.ign.com/articles/474/474953p1.html?f ro mint=1

    8. Re:Ouch by Sick+Boy · · Score: 1

      The Dreamcast really ought to be in the 4th generation list. Just because it's dead now doesn't mean that its hardware was any less impressive that the PS2- in fact, most people would say that the Dreamcast looked much better than the PS2. Damn shame Sega's console division went tits up. /me huggles his Dreamcast

      --
      Does narcissism count as a hobby? --Shawn Latimer
    9. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never say never in regards to PSO 3 (which really, come on, is a niche game anyhow) and the Metal Gear remake. I wouldn't doubt you'll see both on a MS platform eventually.

      As for Xbox exclusives: Fable, True Fantasy Online, Ninja Gaiden, DOA Ultimate, Halo 2 (of course), and of course some pretty strong first party stuff from MS in Sudeki and Kameo...

      Plus of course Splinter Cell's sequel hits the Xbox first, as does Starcraft Ghost I believe. I'm not sure if either of those ever go to the Gamecube, so I think that's a pretty strong deck for the Xbox.

    10. Re:Ouch by MojoMonkey · · Score: 1

      Especially, since he forgot Saturn which was Sega's 3rd generation console.

      --

      ----- "Blame the guy who doesn't speak English." -- Homer J. Simpson
    11. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Metal Gear Solid came out as a remake on Xbox, I'm sure they could do a remake of the remake, or just MGS3 in time.

    12. Re:Ouch by YomikoReadman · · Score: 1
      SC:Ghost was announced as a multi platform release when it was announced, although I've yet to hear that XBox is getting it first. Splinter Cell will go to GCN eventually too, and if they do what they did with it last time, it'll do just as well there, which, IIRC was better than on either other platform due to the exclusive GCN content.

      As for PSO being a niche game, when was the last time you saw a 'niche game' having it's userbase take up running the servers after the company dropped support for it, which was the case for PSO2? As for Metal Gear, it was announced as a GCN exclusive at E3 last year, so don't expect to see that on an XBox any time soon.

      --
      I have no regrets, this is the only path.
      My whole life has been "UNLIMITED BLADE WORKS"
    13. Re:Ouch by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      the dreamcast ranks pretty much as a 3.5 generation console... it was pretty much the xbox-beta... nearly identical API, runs CE, same damn controller as the xbox...

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    14. Re:Ouch by Christopher+Bibbs · · Score: 1

      So then where does Pong factor in?

      -1. Pong
      0. Atari 2600, ColecoVision, Intellivision

    15. Re:Ouch by blogboy · · Score: 1

      Yes, XBox has no character. Gamecube is for kids, Playstation is for teens and adults and Xbox is for what...? People who like Halo, or maybe the color green.

      The games surrounding a platform form a community. Microsoft, in their ad nauseum attempts to be all things to all people, to control the universe, has no personality. Ironic it's accents are the same color as money ;-)

    16. Re:Ouch by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      Third generation? Off the top of my head and probably slightly inaccurate:

        • Odyssey 1
        • Fairchild Channel F
        • Bally Astrocade
        • Atari 2600
        • Odyssey 2
        • Colecovision
        • Intellivision
        • Atari 5200
        • Nintendo NES
        • Sega Master System
        • Atari 7800
        • Nintendo SNES
        • Sega Genesis
        • Turbo Duo
        • Nintendo N64
        • Sega Saturn
        • Sony Playstation
        • Sega Dreamcast
        • Nintendo GameCube
        • Sony PS2
        • Microsoft XBox

      Just wanted to clairify things a bit. Gaming didn't begin with the SNES after all! :)

    17. Re:Ouch by h0mer · · Score: 1

      All of the talk about XBox's games is "Halo this" and "Halo that." Halo alone cannot sustain a console. While people are awaiting Halo 2, I'll be playing Baten Kaitos, PSO 3, Chrystal Chronicles, and the Tales of Destiny games, Metal Gear Solid remake, Metriod Prime 2, All of which will never come out on the XBox.


      I'm going to go with the standard canned reply here. Halo is not the only game for Xbox. I own a GCN too, so I'll be playing the games you mentioned as well. But I'll also be playing the excellent Xbox games: Halo 2, Half Life 2, Max Payne 2 (the crap PS2 port doesn't count), Project Gotham Racing 2, Ninja Gaiden, Links 2004, etc.

      Your list contains mostly Japanese-styled RPGs. As you know, the Xbox doesn't have any of those. But then again, my list contains a lot of FPSes.

      You know what we can determine from this? People will go where the games are! If people want to shoot things, they'll get an Xbox. If people want to cast spells with doe-eyed characters, they'll get a PS2/GC.

      You can't compare game lineups anymore. It just comes down to taste.

      As an aside, I take issue with your comment about the hard drive being wasted. No, games aren't taking full advantage of it. That'll be for the next generation. But how can you possibly tell me that spending an extra $20 on a *slow* memory card is superior?

      --


      I'm on top of my game like I'm standin' on Xbox.
    18. Re:Ouch by Illissius · · Score: 1

      Halo alone cannot sustain a console.
      It can't? Evidence is to the contrary...

      --
      Work is punishment for failing to procrastinate effectively.
    19. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I began to lose touch with this sentence: "Though the XBox does have "Live" and the wasted hard drive feature" Wasted? I'm currently downloading ghosts of top players in Project Gotham, keeping all of the games I've ever played on the system in one place (no need for a memory card), not to mention getting updates like Live 2.0 that essentially gave me free long distance. Bash if you will, but try to keep some semblance of fact.

    20. Re:Ouch by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      Dreamcast is a 4th generation, though an early one, rather like the PS2. The Sega Saturn should go in the #3 space.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    21. Re:Ouch by RevAaron · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Mario Kart is for children? Heh!

      Wow!

      Mario Kart is a bad ass game, regardless if you're 6 or 16 or 60. I mean, a game doesn't have to be a sports game or something violent to be "for adults."

      I couldn't give a rat's ass about gran turismo or the newest rpg. my roomate has a GC and I've not been left wanting... other than knights of the old republic...

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    22. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Dreamcast should be considered on the same level as the N64 and original PlayStation. Its hardware was more powerful, but nowhere near as powerful as the PS2, GC or Xbox. I'd measure the generations like so.

      Gen 1 - Atari 2600, ColecoVision
      Gen 2 - Atari 7800, Famicom, Master System
      Gen 3 - PC Engine, Super Famicom, Megadrive, 32X/Saturn (Saturn was just a beefed up 32X), Jaguar
      Gen 4 - PlayStation, Nintendo 64, Dreamcast
      Gen 5 - PlayStation 2, Gamecube, Xbox
      Gen 6 - PlayStation 3, Gamesphere? (GC 2), Xbox 2

      Of course, with the cell processing capability of the PS3, its power could very well scale way beyond a mere 6th generation console.

    23. Re:Ouch by bn557 · · Score: 1

      or maybe the color green.

      ok, blatantly off topic here... I know, prepare the onslaught of offtopic mods.......

      the transgaming site always reminds me of the x-box for some reason, and you're color green comment reminded me of that.

      --
      Humans are slow, innaccurate, and brilliant; computers are fast, acurrate, and dumb; together they are unbeatable
    24. Re:Ouch by mr.capaneus · · Score: 1

      As an aside, I take issue with your comment about the hard drive being wasted. No, games aren't taking full advantage of it. That'll be for the next generation. But how can you possibly tell me that spending an extra $20 on a *slow* memory card is superior?

      I think he meant wasted in the sense that it didn't turn out to be worth the expense for Microsoft. That is probably why there are rumors that there will not be a hard drive in the Xbox2. MS really needs to focus on miniaturizing their console and making much cheaper if they want to stay in the console game.

    25. Re:Ouch by AnyNoMouse · · Score: 1
      the dreamcast ranks pretty much as a 3.5 generation console... it was pretty much the xbox-beta... nearly identical API, runs CE, same damn controller as the xbox...

      Wrong, mostly wrong, and close. The Dreamcast could run one of two OS's. Windows CE was not used very extensively and then only for cheap-o titles that didn't really need much horsepower. Most games ran on Sega's OS. There are quite a lot of similarities between the Dreamcast and X-Box, however. Unfortunately, the DC controller was pretty rough on the hands and the analog stick wasn't very accurate. X-Box's controller is a definite improvement in both regards.

      Regarding 3.5 gen VS 4.0 gen, I disagree. The Dreamcast has some damn impressive hardware. It's not quite as powerfull as a PS2, but it makes up for it by being easier to program and having a lot more texture memory that can use compressed textures (a feature the PS2 lacks). It took a couple of years for the PS2 software to actually start looking better than the DC software.

      --
      -Redundancy Man strikes again!
    26. Re:Ouch by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      If you want to shoot things without being laughed at, I'm afraid theres no other choice to play FPSes on a PC. :P

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    27. Re:Ouch by pballsim · · Score: 1

      Nintendo hurt themselves by not releasing the Zelda collection by itself. I know I would by that for $50... I'm not going to buy a new gamecube for one.

      Now I have to bug the gaming shops to see if they have a used ones.

    28. Re:Ouch by Dragoon412 · · Score: 1
      If Microsoft were to drop the price to $99, it would be purely to dethrone Nintendo from the "#2" position.

      The only reason that Nintendo is in the #2 position is due to the GBA. Sales of the Gamecube, although up from the major price cut, are still dismal, and games aren't selling well, either.

      Metroid, Zelda, and most of Nintendo's big guns are rentals, not buyers. They have zero replay value, despite their quality. And many gamers have come to realize that. The only games worth actually owning on that system are Mario Kart: Double Dash and Smash Bros. Melee, neither of which are really any fun with a bunch of friends around.

      To offer more anecdotal evidence, my roommate's the 3rd key at the local Gamestop. He says the only way they can sell the Gamecube anymore is to hype it as kid-friendly (which it admitedly is) to soccer moms looking for something to shut their brats up.

      I agree, the Xbox's hard drive has, so far, been underutilized (there are a couple MMOGs planned for release this year, and the downloadable content via Xbox Live has been a nice touch), but as far as a quality gaming platform, Xbox beats the living snot out of the Gamecube. The Xbox has strong third-party support from companies like Ubi (Rainbow 6 3 is a masterful game), Team Ninja (Ninja Gaiden), and Bioware, as well as a very strong and growing in-house development studio in FASA and Bungie.

      I'm no Microsoft apologist, but I simply think that the Xbox is just a Final Fantasay-esque franchise away from being the PS2's superior, and that Nintendo's not doing well. Their portable, the GBA, is anything but inspired or high-quality, and has an absolutely terrible, one-dimensional game line-up. If Microsoft cuts the Xbox price to the same as the Gamecube's, it could cripple Nintendo's already tenuous grip on the home console market, and if Sony's upcoming PSP is anything but a giant piece of crap, it'll put the hurt on Nintendo's monopoly in the portable market.

      Nintendo's going the way of Sega. Give 'em a few years, and they'll turn their major franchises into even bigger whores than Sega's turned Sonic into.
    29. Re:Ouch by crgrace · · Score: 1


      Re:Ouch (Score:1)
      by Erwos (553607) on Thursday January 29, @09:48AM (#8125238)
      I suppose I should have written fourth generation, assuming it goes something along the lines of:
      1. NES, SMS
      2. SNES, Genesis, TG16
      3. Playstation, N64, Dreamcast
      4. PS2, X-Box, Gamecube



      Should be:

      1. Atari 2600, Magnavox Odyssey, Matell Intellivison
      2. Atari 5200, Colecovision
      3. NES, SMS, Atari 7800
      4. SNES, Genesis, TG16, NeoGeo
      5. Playstation, N64, Dreamcast, 3D0, Saturn
      6. PS2, X-Box, Gamecube

      This only includes non-hardwired systems.

    30. Re:Ouch by bigman2003 · · Score: 1

      You are sooooo on crack.

      First of all- the 'wasted hard drive feature' is awesome.

      Never had to buy memory cards. ALL of my saved games in one place. I've ripped my CD's to play during games. I've downloaded tons of content from Live. Some games use it to load levels faster.

      If nothing else, the content from Live would be enough to make the hard-drive worthwhile. 49 gazillion saved games is another reason. I've got hundreds and hundreds of saved games, from rentals, games I'm playing, games I've finished etc. It's nice to know that when I go back to play a game a year later, my saved games are still there- I don't need to figure out which memory card it is on. I've downloaded new songs for Dance Dance Revolution..and I don't need to change out discs- very nice. What other console allows you to download new maps, new vehicles, new types of games, etc?

      The second point of your message, that makes it clear you smoke too much crack, is that you insinuate that Halo is the only good game.

      Really- you should try to mask your ignorance just a little bit. I play games on my Xbox almost every day. In the last year and a half, I've probably only put Halo in 3, maybe 4 times. Mainly because a friend comes over who thinks the only good game is Halo. It doesn't take too long to show him that there are a lot of other great games. (Halo is good though, don't get me wrong.)

      Tonight I'll probably play Crimson Skies, using Live, and flying a plane I downloaded, that is now saved on my hard-drive. After that, maybe I'll put in Links, or Top Spin- playing on-line again, possibly on a course I downloaded- but against another real person, somewhere.

      Dude- you are just soooo wrong.

      I don't think there is a lot of room to dog out the Gamecube, because it does a good job on games. But your comments on the Xbox just show a very high level of ignorance. Live and the hard-drive are not over-hyped and underused...they are very, very cool.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    31. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most overrated game ever!

    32. Re:Ouch by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      I can only suggest that you look at game of the year articles and comparisons between games on both systems if you still think that the cube is a third generation system. It's basically a dreamcast with no vcd or online capabilites.

    33. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? If you include GBA sales, Nintendo is firmly #1 in terms of sold units. Without GBA sales, Nintendo is still #2. If Gamecube sales are dismal, XBox sales must be truly pathetic, considering that Gamecube is outselling XBox worldwide.

      MS is one major franchise away from dethroning Sony? Maybe in the USA, and that's a big maybe, but not worldwide. Not this generation, certainly.

      It boggles the mind that any self-respecting slashdot poster would be willing to pay a Microsoft tax for the privilege of playing what are essentially PC games.

      I won't comment on your anecdotal evidence, except to say that it's asinine.

    34. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His anacdotal evidence is his prestigious news source - the "revered third key at Gamestop!"

      That's about as reliable as Forbes.

    35. Re:Ouch by Anonymous+Slacker · · Score: 1

      The only disagreement I have with what you said is with the last line:

      But how can you possibly tell me that spending an extra $20 on a *slow* memory card is superior?

      When I visit family/friends out of state, I'd rather bring along a 1" x 2" x 0.25" memory card so I can play on my brother's GCN or friend's PS2 than a big honking hard drive-based console.
      For me (and I may be in the minority on this), portability of this nature alone is worth $20 for something I can fit in my shirt pocket. There may not be other advantages to it, but that doesn't matter to me, I don't need anything else.

      --
      "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!" -Rush
    36. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think MSFTs Home Divisions yearly billion dollar losses are proof enough that Halo can't support the xbox. Only because MSFT is willing to blow a billion a year out the door is the xbox staying alive.

    37. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you not aware that the GBA has clobbered the PS2 in number of consoles sold?

      If you add the 2 together, Nintendo is the biggest guy on the block (and the only one seriously making bank).

    38. Re:Ouch by h0mer · · Score: 1

      If you want to spend $20 so you can bring your saved games, Xbox has memory cards available as well for exactly that purpose. :)

      --


      I'm on top of my game like I'm standin' on Xbox.
    39. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But then again, my list contains a lot of FPSes.

      it's that reason that i didn't buy and xbox and went with a gamecube. the only games on the xbox i was interested in i can play on my computer in a format that i prefer.

      plus i already had a dvd and cd player. i just wanted something to play games on.

    40. Re:Ouch by onelin · · Score: 1

      DVD playing? that's an extra $30 on the xbox...which for $50, you can get a quality DVD player that will also do CDR/CDRW, VCDs and SVCDs all with no work.

      Now if PS2 was $99...maybe you'd have a point.

    41. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No the Sega Genesis is better cause it has blast processing and there isn't a Super Nintendo CD.

      Seriously, grow the fuck up.

    42. Re:Ouch by metroid+composite · · Score: 1
      You can find a nice list here

      That said, I hesitate to count generations before the NES. The Atari 5200 couldn't compete sales-wise with the 2600, so that continued to dominate up to and including the crash (much like how the NES outstripped the SNES for quite a while). So...is that a separate generation, or is that still 2600-land? Furthermore, releases before that time just seem more randomly distributed so that they don't divide well into generations, the industry was much smaller, and the crash just provides a convenient place to start counting. This, I believe, is why most videogame sites basically start counting with Nintendo, i.e.:

      Generation 1: NES

      Generation 2: SNES, Genesis

      Generation 3: N64, Playstation

      Generation 4: PS2, GC, XBox

      (With all other consoles not being worried about too much as they never gained significant market share).

    43. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought a Nintendo Power subscription for one. The game was well worth the price, and now I have an extra thing to read while I'm on the can.

    44. Re:Ouch by default+luser · · Score: 1

      I believe you can pay $20 for a Nintendo Power subscription and select it as your free gift. I was actually thinking about doing this...

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    45. Re:Ouch by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      Starting with "post-crash" systems sounds too much like revisionist history for me, I suppose next people will be claiming that Windows versions start with Win95.

      There was no "crash", the focus simply shifted for a few years to home computers until the NES brought it back to console gaming (and personally I wish the home computer trend had continued instead). Now, I must get back to programming my C64.. ;)

    46. Re:Ouch by macserv · · Score: 1

      First, it should be know that you can get the Zelda disc by registering a console (GCN/GBA/GBA:SP) and 2 registerable games (I used Mario Kart:Double Dash!! and Mario & Luigi: SuperStar Saga). They automatically sent me the compilation disc in the mail.

      The 8-bit games are great to have on the GameCube. It's also pretty cool that, if you have a GameBoy Player, you can play every Zelda game ever made on the GameCube (except of course the CD-i games).

      However, I'm disappointed by a few things. There's no snapshotting in the 8-bit games. I know, it's not the way the game originally worked, but it seems that you should be able to freeze and that games like you can with an emu'.

      Also, there's some buggy stuff happening in Ocarina of Time. Most notably, how it lags when opening the menu. The audio also hangs a bit there.

      I love having the disc, and it's great overall, but I wish it had the polish I've come to expect from a Nintendo product.

    47. Re:Ouch by Compenguin · · Score: 1

      Gamecube isn't just for kids. My frat has uses more cubes than any other console. We have 2 cubes, 2 PS2s, 1 SNES, 1 NES and no Xboxen. The cube by far simply has the best multiplayer games (Mario Cart Double Dash, and Super Smash Brothers Melee).

      PS (Yes we still use the SNES and NES).

    48. Re:Ouch by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 1

      So the 32-bit Xbox is in the same generation as the SNES? The number of bits has very little bearing on performance. Same goes for megahertz on the processor.

      --
      True story.
    49. Re:Ouch by unclethursday · · Score: 1
      And Sony's shipped over 70 million PS2's, worldwide.

      By your logic, everyone who wants a PS2 would have one by now.

      Also, I hardly consider the time between October and now "quite a while". The PS2 and Xbox have been at their respective price points since May (5 months longer than the GC's $99 price point). Shouldn't your faulty logic dictate that people would have them already at that rpice as well?

    50. Re:Ouch by unclethursday · · Score: 1
      Sales of the Gamecube, although up from the major price cut, are still dismal, and games aren't selling well, either.

      Really?

      Xbox Lead before GC price cut in North America: 1.4 million units.

      Xbox lead at end of 2003: 800,000.

      That's a loss of 600,000 on their million plus lead.

      (the following between Xbox and GC only)

      Console that sold more in North America in calendar Q4: GameCube

      Console that sold more as of end of year estimated sales in North America: GameCube

      Console with more million selling games, worldwide: GameCube: 10 games (Xbox has 4)

      Time it took Mario Kart Double Dash to reach 1 million units sold in North America: 7 weeks from launch.

      Console currently in second place, worldwide: GameCube

      So, let's recap:

      MS sold LESS Xboxes than Nintendo sold GC's in 2003.

      Xbox North American lead cut almost in half in under 4 months from GC price drop.

      The GameCube has over 2x the amount of games that have sold over 1 million copies, wolrdwide.

      The GameCube is still outselling the Xbox, worldwide.

      Yep, looks like you're totally right on your facts.

      To offer more anecdotal evidence, my roommate's the 3rd key at the local Gamestop. He says the only way they can sell the Gamecube anymore is to hype it as kid-friendly (which it admitedly is) to soccer moms looking for something to shut their brats up.

      Funny, my local stores can't keep GC's in stock right now. And over the holidays? Forget it. They sold more GC's than either the Xbox or the PS2. They'd sell out of GC's almost the very day they came in; while they still have PS2's and Xboxes from Christmas to sell.

      My anecdotal evidence any better than yours?

    51. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The only reason that Nintendo is in the #2 position is due to the GBA" No, I believe that's the cube alone. Nintendo would be #1 if it was GBA + GC.

    52. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other than the online capabilites and the fact that it is certainly graphically superior to the PS2. VCD-Support was sorely missed though - it's something everybody looks for in a games console.

    53. Re:Ouch by blogboy · · Score: 1

      I agree. I just think Nintendo's *marketing* towards kids, and Playstation towards the older crowd. I'm a GameCube fan too...just got Ikaruga. Rocks!

    54. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Metal Gear Twin Snakes will never be seen on a non-Nintendo platform. Do the research, and you'll see why.

    55. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MGS2 came out as an extended version of the PS2 version. It was then ported to PS2. The extended PS2 version is the better version, graphically and play-wise.

      MGS is coming out as a very extended (fully overhauled) version on the GameCube, from the Playstation original. But the coding work is a collabo between Namco, Nintendo, and a Nintendo second-party company, Silicon Knights. This game will never be ported to any other system other than the GameCube. It is a definite exclusive.

    56. Re:Ouch by MatthewB79 · · Score: 1

      I'm forced to agree

  11. Is that what the controllers look like? by Jin+Wicked · · Score: 1

    I've never seen an Xbox. That thing looks hideously uncomfortable.

    Maybe I am just a luddite, I am still playing games on the SNES and I just got a Playstation 1 for Giftmas last year.

    --
    My Webcomic: Asylum on 5th Street
    1. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by MKalus · · Score: 2, Informative

      I loved the original controller. Perfect size, could play with it for hours without cramping.

      The new one (S Controller) is smaller, not as comfortable for me.

      SNES, PSX etc. controllers? Too small for my hands, I just freaking cramp if I play longer on them.

      Too bad that they stopped producing the original controller :(

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    2. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by Ulrich_Skarsol · · Score: 1

      I actually like the orginal X-box controller better than any of its contemporaries. The only quibble I have about it is the way the black and white buttons line up, but its no worse than the horrible layouts on the other controllers.

      Side note: amusing to see someone I know commenting on here. :)~

    3. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by irokie · · Score: 0

      maybe the x-box 2 will have a controller that can "fit in the human hand"...
      i'm not even going to bother... all the good jokes have already been made...

      --
      and if you see me strut, remind me of what left this outlaw torn...
    4. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by RevAaron · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Yeah, that original controller is huge. And a mess of buttons.

      gcn controller. .. mmm.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    5. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by Castaa · · Score: 1

      Personally I think, the S-type Xbox controller is the best controller to ever come out for any console. The feel and layout is better than PS2's and the gamecube's controllers. And it has analog button that actually can be used as analog buttons (or triggers). P2's analog buttons are a joke.

      --
      Chew: You Nexus, huh? I design your eyes.
      Roy: Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes.
    6. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by Apocros · · Score: 1

      yes! all the standard controllers seem sized for 8 year-olds. if i play for too long with one of those (30 minutes), i find that i can't really use my hands at all for several hours afterwards.

      i haven't played much with the xbox controller, but it seemed the right size. i had to buy a two dollar piece of crap controller for the psx, otherwise i just can't really play.

      --
      "onward!" cried the copper man, little knowing brass corrupts...
    7. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by Zangief · · Score: 1

      Oh, so it was you?

      In other news, if you buy an Xbox, you are supporting Microsoft, a Monopoly. No matter if you are going to run Linux.

      Xbox. Just say No!

    8. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by MKalus · · Score: 1

      Well,

      let me put it to you this way: Things are all in porportion with me.

      As for the Support of M$.

      Well guess what: If you buy a PS2 you support the PSX Monopoly, if you buy a Gamecube, you support the Nintendo Monopoly.

      You can't win on that. And I use my XBox actually for games.

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    9. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So your head doesn't fit through doorways, you've got a 150" waist, and you're expecting to die at about age 30 from gigantism related organ failure?

    10. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      I loved the original controller.

      What are you, the big-hand actor from that Yahoo! dating commercial?

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
    11. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by MKalus · · Score: 1

      Don't hate me because I am tall!

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    12. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      Heh. I'm 6'3". You must be six foot forty.

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
    13. Re:Is that what the controllers look like? by MKalus · · Score: 1

      How did you know?

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
  12. A boon for Linux! by MooKore+2004 · · Score: 1, Funny

    With these cheap 99 Xboxes going around, it makes more sense to try and get Linux on them. Currently the cheapest commercially availbe pcs are $169, this is a whole $70 cheaper!

    1. Re:A boon for Linux! by millahtime · · Score: 1

      "...try and get Linux on them..."

      they already did... just look.

  13. Verge? by Schlemphfer · · Score: 4, Funny
    From the summary:

    CNN is reporting that Microsoft's Xbox may be on the verge of a substantial price cut, falling from $179 to $99 by Labor Day.

    I'm sorry, but given that I just got back from trudging through the snow, and practically getting frostbite on my face, I don't see how we're on the "verge" of labor day. On a day like this, it doesn't seem like we're even on the verge of spring, let alone the end of summer.

    --
    I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
    1. Re:Verge? by Erwos · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think you're misinterpreting it. Labor Day is given as the deadline for the total cut (ie, they want it at that $99 price for that weekend). However, the article reports that there may be an intermediate cut to around $130 in between. So, indeed, there is a substantial (20%-25%?) price cut coming soon, and then another one coming after.

      If it's all true, anyways.

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    2. Re:Verge? by AnswerIs42 · · Score: 1
      Read the article closer, it could drop to $129 by Labor Day.. the $99 price would be later in the summer.

      But still, this is why I have held off on getting an X Box.. price.. and games I would actually play.

    3. Re:Verge? by Mr+D.+Logan · · Score: 1

      In what year has Labor Day (in September) come before summer (you know, sometime between June and September)?

    4. Re:Verge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Read the article closer, it could drop to $129 by Labor Day.. the $99 price would be later in the summer.
      Read your calendar closer, Labor Day is pretty much the end of summer. Also the article said the $129 price would be in May but wasn't tied to any particular holiday. Unless you celbrate the contributions of our fallen soldiers with a shopping spree.
    5. Re:Verge? by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "I'm sorry, but given that I just got back from trudging through the snow, and practically getting frostbite on my face, I don't see how we're on the "verge" of labor day."

      It's only 1Q away.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    6. Re:Verge? by Quasar1999 · · Score: 1

      Clearly CNN is european, and thus Labour Day is on May 1st... not that far away... possibly in time for spring... ;)

      --

      ---
      Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
    7. Re:Verge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On a day like this, it doesn't seem like we're even on the verge of spring, let alone the end of summer.
      I live in the southern hemisphere, you insensitive clod!

    8. Re:Verge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what we keep telling ourselves about Duke Nukem Forever, buddy.

    9. Re:Verge? by Suicide · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but given that I just got back from trudging through the snow, and practically getting frostbite on my face, I don't see how we're on the "verge" of labor day. On a day like this, it doesn't seem like we're even on the verge of spring, let alone the end of summer.

      Weather Forecast for Culver City, CA: Provided by The Weather Channel(R)
      Today: Fair 61F

      Not only that, but its sunny and beautiful out. I drove to work with the sunroof open, and all the windows down. If you lived somewhere nicer, you would think it is the verge of Spring.

  14. Forget cheap consoles..... by big-giant-head · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah so I can get an XBox for 99, the good games are still 50$......

    --

    So Long and Thanks for all the Fish.
    1. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      A few words for you:

      Mod Chip
      HDD Upgrade
      Gamefly account

    2. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by NamShubCMX · · Score: 1
      One word for you...

      thief!

      Ok ok, copyright infringer..., whatever.

      --
      We've always been at war with Eurasia.
    3. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by penultimatepost · · Score: 1

      Buy Used games, you can usually get 3 to 6 month old games for less than 50% retail (GameStop, Half.com etc)

    4. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by kgbkgb · · Score: 1

      Good games have been around $50 for every console since my good old Sega Master System (at least). Get used to it, because it's not going to change any time soon.

    5. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by shaka999 · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean "recent games" are $50.

      You can find a ton of older games that are considered classics for much less. You can also buy used.

      --
      One should not theorize before one has data. -Sherlock Holmes-
    6. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      does it really exsist people that buy games for the xbox.

      i know many xbox owners but one that buys xbox games
      i have never met.

      the closest thing to buing ive seen is renting and uploading to hd

    7. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by javatips · · Score: 1

      That's true...

      Actually, a used N64 hit (MarioKart64 for example) sell for a higher price than most shrinkwrap XBox titles (even classic ones like Halo).

      It tells a lot on the popularity of the XBox and it games ;-)

    8. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by dubiousmike · · Score: 1

      consoles ar elike printers - they drop rapidly in price, but they still pork you for ink... I mean games

    9. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by BigJimSlade · · Score: 1

      Same goes for the GameCube also. $40-$50 for most premium titles. One thing the X-Box (and PS2) definitely have over the Cube right now is "Greatest Hits" titles. Nintendo has all of, what... 10 titles? And they're priced at $30, whereas the X-Box and PS2 GH titles are right around $20.

      Don't get me wrong, I love my Cube. It's the only "next-gen" console I own right now. But I might be buying a PS2 pretty soon just for those Greatest Hits titles, and possibly an X-Box at $99, just so I can play Project Gotham Racing 1 & 2.

    10. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by LoudMusic · · Score: 1

      Agreed. A long time ago I promised myself to not purchase games for their release price of $50. I've been pretty good at waiting for them to come down to $30. This also gives me time to play it on other friends' consoles and decide whether or not it's going to be worth that $30 I'm still reluctant to let go of.

      The biggest thing a game manufacturer could do would be to drop their release prices from 50 to 40 dollars in the US market. They'd sell so many more to make up for lost profit that the end result would be amazing.

      --
      No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
    11. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by mr.capaneus · · Score: 1

      I am always confused when I see posts like this. I have a PS2 and GCN and I am usually able to find the cheaper, better games for the GCN and not the PS2. I almost never pay more than $20 for a console game. I guess part of that is that I often buy used games but there are some really good games for the GCN that you can buy dirt cheap. I got Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem for $13 and it ruled. Granted there are some really cheap games you can buy for the PS2 but most of them really suck. I have been considering buying an Xbox if the price drops but whenever I look at Xbox games it seems like the ones I am interested in are all fairly expensive.

    12. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by h0mer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The biggest thing a game manufacturer could do would be to drop their release prices from 50 to 40 dollars in the US market. They'd sell so many more to make up for lost profit that the end result would be amazing.


      Let's do some simple math, boys and girls!
      The $50 price point is made by the retailer, the wholesale cost per game is around $45. So let's assume that $35 will be the new amount that's going to the publisher.

      Let's say that I have a moderately successful game that sells 100,000 copies. Therefore:

      100,000 * 45 = $4,500,000
      100,000 * 35 = $3,500,000

      That leaves a million dollar gap between the two price points. To make up that deficit by volume, you would need to sell 28,500 more copies, or 28.5%.

      Sony has been putting their 1st-party (technically 2nd-party) games out at $39.99, and I don't see them flying off the shelves any faster than games priced at $49.99.

      Lower prices makes sense for smaller games, like Contra: Shattered Soldier or anything that doesn't have mass appeal. The price increases the chance of someone buying it. For GTA or Zelda or anything like that, the people who want it are going to buy it. The $10 difference isn't going to double sales of it or anything ludicrous like that.

      --


      I'm on top of my game like I'm standin' on Xbox.
    13. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by smackjer · · Score: 1

      Simple solution: Create an account at http://www.tradegamesnow.com and start swapping with other gamers.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    14. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last time I checked the games were $0 at your favorite p2p pitstop.
      Why support Mikerowesoft (direct or indirect..)?

      Yes, I know some non-ACs will proudly spring out of their boxes and announce that this hurts game publishers and all that jibberjabber. Face it, the last two independent game publishers will be bought by hollywood (hint: ?IAA) probably by the end of this year. Then you'll have two reasons not to buy games for the xbox. One should be enough, though...

    15. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

      I think a publisher would be deliriously happy if they could persuade a retailer to only take a markup of 11% (and the manufacturer didn't take such a huge cut either). Or have major retailers gone soft on their suppliers in the last few years?

    16. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah so I can get an XBox for 99, the good games are still 50$......

      Most new games are infact $50 (and older ones that are still worth the price), but there are alot of games that are in the $20-40 range now. Of course alot of those are either A) Older version of a new game, or B) a Bad Game. But really though, all you need is a modchip with your Xbox, and I'll let you figure out the rest on how to not have to pay for your games.

    17. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by Ondo · · Score: 1

      Yeah so I can get an XBox for 99, the good games are still 50$....

      Halo is $30, actually.

    18. Re:Forget cheap consoles..... by DeadScreenSky · · Score: 1

      People are usually talking about new games in this kind of case, not used. (I personally feel too guilty to usually buy used - I want the devs to make some money off their game.) Though you won't find all of them in every store, the PS2 has literally dozens and dozens of big games that cost $20 retail. Xbox has only a couple dozen of games like that, but still does it far more than the Cube. Online is really your best bet for many of these discount games, since the selection is always bigger.

      For cheap non-"greatest hits"/whatever games I usually check out this site. Sometimes it has some exceptionally good deals listed, though the interface does leave a lot to be desired.

      And the reason Eternal Darkness was so cheap is because it bombed. Same thing exists for games like Panzer Dragoon Orta for Xbox (which didn't really bomb that bad in comparison) - you can pick it up for $30 or under pretty much any place that has it.

      --
      There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
  15. Sure.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Xbox will be out ahead of schedule just like Longhorn is going to be right on time. Oh, wait....

  16. $99??? by WC+as+Kato · · Score: 1

    Ninety-nine bucks?! What kind of cheap crap are they using to make this thing?

    --
    --- I'm Green Hornet's sidekick not Inspector Clouseau's!
    1. Re:$99??? by sqlrob · · Score: 1

      The money in their bank account.

      You're assuming they actually make money selling the console.

    2. Re:$99??? by -Grover · · Score: 1

      I don't think it really matters. Nobody makes money on the console itself, all the money is in game sales and ancillaries, like XBox Live subscriptions. Why get a one time $179 bucks when you can get $99 one time, $40 from the adapter and $15 a month for a year?

      M$ could more than likley give them away at this point and still stay profitable in that division.

    3. Re:$99??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      plastic, an 800mhz processor, a motherboard, and an nvidia (IIRC) gpu that is now "old". They may still sell the things at a loss on each.

      This shouldnt be so hard to fathom, look at the $199 lindows pcs. Ive spec'ed out newish cheap machines for ~200. Consolidate the shipping, use your MS might to get dirt cheap wholesale prices and there you go. By integrating everything and not worrying about upgradability or backwards compatibility, I can easily see how this is accomplished.

  17. Backwards Compatibility by JoeFaust · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I personally hope the XBox 2 is fully backwards compatible, including XBox Live functionality.

    I use my GBA and PS2 to play old games all the time. If the Gamecube let me, I'd be playing old N64 and Super Nintendo games, too.

    1. Re:Backwards Compatibility by morelife · · Score: 1

      I was just going to ask that. Betcha you won't be able to use existing Xbox games on xbox2, a la MS planned obsolescence. I'd be surprised..

    2. Re:Backwards Compatibility by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      Actually, it does, but Nintendo chose to sell these games back to you, rather then having a "generic emulator". This is why you see things like the Zelda game pak on the gamecube.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    3. Re:Backwards Compatibility by DenOfEarth · · Score: 1

      Yeh, I read an article somewhere about the current rumours regarding the consoles of the future, and they mentioned the backwards compatibility issue. Sony did it with the PS2, and I believe it was nothing but a good thing for them. Xbox should be in a better situation because it's all built on PC hardware, which should change so drastically that you can't run the onld games on a new system. I personally think that this 99$ drop will only be useful if all those people who buy cheap xboxes with games can then use those games on a new system. Otherwise it's just a bit more incentive to change to another system in the next round.

    4. Re:Backwards Compatibility by ZaMoose · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Since the X-Box is going to be based on the PowerPC, backwards-compatibility might be out of the question.

      Unless you know of an x86-to-PPC compatibility layer that can be plunked into a $300 console...

      --
      I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
    5. Re:Backwards Compatibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft VirtualPC.

    6. Re:Backwards Compatibility by ZaMoose · · Score: 1

      I had thought of that, but will it actually be capable of running X-Box games at full speed?

      In reality, the GBA and the PS-2 are the only top-flight consoles that have managed to do backwards compatibility, so maybe MS is figuring on going the traditional (i.e., not maintaining backwards compatibility) route.

      --
      I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
    7. Re:Backwards Compatibility by Erwos · · Score: 1

      Interesting coincidence that Microsoft bought the makers of some PPC-to-x86 virtual machine software, isn't it? It's much easier to emulate an x86 machine in a PPC than vica-versa, due to some architecture differences, too, so I wouldn't count backwards compat out yet.

      And in any event, that Wired story is based on a single IBM press release and an IBM rep who may or may not have known what he was talking about. I would take it with a grain of salt.

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    8. Re:Backwards Compatibility by GizmoToy · · Score: 1

      Many believe that MS purchased VPC specifically to use it to make the XBox backwards compatible. If the next XBox has a significant performance boost over the first generation, and they write an application-specific version of VPC with emphasis on speed, I don't think it'd be impossible for them to make the X2 compatible with the older games.

    9. Re:Backwards Compatibility by larry+bagina · · Score: 2, Informative
      Word on the Web is that XBox 2 uses IBM PPC chips. Current XBox, of course, is x86.

      Of course, MS did buy Virtual PC, which had an x86 emulator for Macintosh/PPC.

      Of course, XBox 2 will have a different graphic chip than XBox 1.

      So we'll have to wait and see.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    10. Re:Backwards Compatibility by sckeener · · Score: 1

      I don't think that is going to happen. Microsoft wants to kill mods and is looking at custom hardware to do it.

      Unless they've got some special transmeta chip to fake an xbox1, I don't think it'll play Xbox1 titles.

      --
      "Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
    11. Re:Backwards Compatibility by RailGunner · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Did you read the article you referenced?
      It says "Microsoft will use the Virtual PC technology it acquired from Connectix last year to provide backward-compatibility with the current generation of Xbox games."

    12. Re:Backwards Compatibility by ZaMoose · · Score: 1

      Eeep. Right you are.

      Now why'd they do that, go and hide relevant details in the last graf of a sentence? Don't they know that the average American has an extremely short atten... oh, look, shiny things!

      --
      I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
    13. Re:Backwards Compatibility by ZaMoose · · Score: 1

      *sigh*

      s/sentence/story/g [my last post]

      --
      I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
    14. Re:Backwards Compatibility by unclem0nkey · · Score: 1

      I'd question whether the xbox 2 is capable of being backwards capatable because xbox uses an intel x86 chip, while microsoft has already made a deal with IBM to put a ppc (supposedly a derivative of the power 5 or 6) in the xbox 2. This hardware difference might make backwards capability.... slightly uneconomical for ms.

    15. Re:Backwards Compatibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now why'd they do that, go and hide relevant details in the last graf of a sentence?

      They did it just to make you look like more of an idiot. Just about all slashdotters dont read the articles anyways, so don't feel alone. There are other idiots amongst us.

    16. Re:Backwards Compatibility by scabb · · Score: 1

      Well, "Sell" being more like "Give away". So far I have two free Zelda discs, and the original Metroid. I think there are a few NES games on Animal Farm, but there's not much. Personally, I'm not really concerned with backwards compatability anyway.

  18. A wise move by magicsquid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    $99 is widely known to be the magic number when it comes to the casual consumer and an impulse buy. Nintendo already beat them to that punch last year and during the Christmas season the GameCube sales numbers skyrocketed because of it. If Microsoft can accomplish the same thing, they'll make all the money they need to off of the additional software that they sell.

    --


    "Chances of RHIC-induced Armageddon are exceedingly rare, but... you never know." - MIT Physicist Bob Jaffe
    1. Re:A wise move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many copies of Halo 1 & 2 can they sell? There are those who don't like FPS type games.

    2. Re:A wise move by escher · · Score: 1

      The $99 price tag on the GameCube was what caused me to impulsively buy one a few months ago. Now I'm spending about 3 hours a day on Windwaker...

    3. Re:A wise move by Bluesman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Definitely. I'm a casual gamer, and the reason I own a gamecube is because of the zelda bundle for $99. I'm sure I'm typical of the Christmas crowd.

      I'm having a lot more fun with it than I thought I would, however. I might jump in early on the next generation...but I can't see myself spending substantially more on a game system than $100-150.

      The biggest selling point for the Xbox I think is the hard drive, so you don't have to waste time and money on memory cards. This is one of the hidden costs the casual gamers don't think about, so now I'd lean toward a hard drive based system in the future.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    4. Re:A wise move by Control-Z · · Score: 1

      I thought $19.95 was the magic number! ;)

      I'd take 2 at that price!

    5. Re:A wise move by Jboy_24 · · Score: 1

      As a casual gamer (own around 10 games) and a PS2 owner, I must chime in and state i have bought one memory card for it and have yet to fill it past 60%.

      Plus, what does it take to make an Xbox 2? A new graphics card, faster processor, more mem... I mean its just a pc inside.

      "wow with the new Xbox2 with 2.4Ghz P4 Celeron, and ATI9600, can render 250 frames per sec at HDspec 1080i. Wooo hooo!"

    6. Re:A wise move by webbroberts · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem is not memory cards. The problem is *proprietary* memory cards. If the machines would take CF cards, or USB drives, it would make life easier for those who want to play in multiple locations.

    7. Re:A wise move by Bluesman · · Score: 1

      From what I understand Microsoft learned their lesson from the Xbox and the next generation will not be a glorified PC, but rather a more proprietary platform.

      I think this is for a number of reasons, mostly security, but I think cost is a concern too. Using commodity PC hardware didn't really save them much money, in the end, and may have ended up costing them.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    8. Re:A wise move by RoLi · · Score: 1
      I don't think it's a wise move. First, they are dumb by announcing price drops. Now everybody will wait for the drop and resellers will take a hit for XBoxes rotting away on shelfes.

      Then, by releasing the XBox2 shortly afterwards, those who have just bought the XBox1 (and causing huge losses for Microsoft) most likely won't buy a XBox2.

      IMO, it would have been much smarter if they would have waited for XBox2 and waste billions on XBox2, not on XBox1.

      But of course it remains somewhat questionable wether Microsoft is willing to lose billions on XBox forever and without huge cash-transfusions the platform will die anyway. So IMO an even smarter move would be to discontinue the whole XBox-moneypit ASAP.

    9. Re:A wise move by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      Dont forget the wasted overlap between the games/ports that come out for both XBox and the x86 PC given their relatively indentical architectures.

      As much as I dislike MS, I'd get an XBox if many of the good games on it didn't come out for the PC later on anyways (see: Halo.)

      I think they lose some lustre in the market for PC gamers who want to add a console to their setup, because you end up overlapping the catalog of available games /w a PC and an XBox in the same house.

      PS2 for insane amounts of games/imports, Nintendo for arthouse games (Eternal Darkness, Viewtiful Joe) and the classic franchises, and XBox for .. uh ... lets just say most of the people I know who own an XBox are either neophytes who wouldnt know a good game unless it was slapped in their face with a national prime time ad campaign, or 30-something mid level managers who consider themselves past the age where they would have constructed their x86 gaming rig themselves ...

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    10. Re:A wise move by James+Thompson · · Score: 1
      The biggest selling point for the Xbox I think is the hard drive, so you don't have to waste time and money on memory cards.

      I'm going to have to disagree with you here. I currently own all the major consoles. And my release day XBox is now in the process of breaking down for the 3rd time. It has to be turned off and on several times before it can read the disc.

      On both the previous breakdowns MS tech support had me "format" the HD. I don't recall the exact details but a certain sequence of controler actions from a specific dashboard screen will wipe the HD clean. Before I did this of course I had to run to the store to purchase a xbox memory unit if I wanted to backup my files. Prior to this I never worried about save space so when it came time to "backup" my system I had to simply lose a lot of save files due the to high cost of the backup media (the memory cards).

      On a side note, my 2nd xbox breakdown involved the lose of audio over the optical cable. MS Tech support had me run to the store and buy a second adv. audio connector to prove that my 1st one was still working properly.

      To wrap this up I'll share a bit of a letter I wrote to send to MS.....

      So experience has shown me that I can't just buy an xbox and expect it to work. I have to buy the xbox, buy a memory card to backup game files for when the unit fails, and buy an extended warranty. Then I'm going to have to spend time dealing with the unit failures. I'm going to have tech support sending me to the store to spend more of my money to diagnose their problems. And I'm fairly certain that after my extended warranty runs out that the XBox will fail yet again and the collection of games I have for it will be useless.

    11. Re:A wise move by dyte · · Score: 1

      I just found this link myself. I have not tried it yet.

    12. Re:A wise move by NormalVisual · · Score: 2

      Of course it cost them - they're forced to buy components from their distributors and are thus at the mercy of their prices. Sony actually makes their own hardware, and so it's a no-brainer for them to continue to lower the chip count for each revision of the system, and consequently lower the production cost. Microsoft simply doesn't have that luxury.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    13. Re:A wise move by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I actually already owned a gamecube, but it was kind of scratched up, and getting old. I traded it in and got my $50 credit, and bought a nice shiny new GC with the zelda bundle; the game was gonna cost $50 anyway, right? Or $40 used? So for fifty bucks I got the game, AND a shiny new gamecube. The $99 price is brilliant.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:A wise move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only big difference I can see is by next Xmas are people going to impulse buy a product that will be upgraded within the next year.

      With the gamecube this xmas, you at least know you have a good two years with the system, is it going to have as big an impact when you know that XBox2 and PS3 are right around the corner?

      Nintendo's big advantage was timing and a boat load of games you can't get on the PS2 or XBox. Your XBox and PS2 libraries are very similar when compared side to side. So for any PS2 user, chances are they would want a Cube over an XBox for their secondary system.

      While MS has been trying to steal Sony's customers for a year or so, Nintendo was actually quite happy to share customers with Sony :) Wise, wise move. Sometimes it's not bad to be #2, especially when you are making great money on both the hardware and software side of the sales.

  19. Shilling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Would CNN also be so kind to announce that I *may be* on the verge of receiving a very large raise?

    I could really use the dough. :)

    1. Re:Shilling by LookSharp · · Score: 1

      Would CNN also be so kind to announce that I *may be* on the verge of receiving a very large raise?

      I could really use the dough. :)


      *Taking responsibility - I'm glad people thought this funny; I had to post anonymously in case nobody shared my sense of humor about the rumormongering. :) Especially since I posted early-- mods were sure setting their browsers on "Troll."

  20. Wait a minute... by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 4, Funny

    A Microsoft product, coming out EARLY?

    Inconcievable!

    1. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, just full of bugs ;)

    2. Re:Wait a minute... by millahtime · · Score: 1

      " A Microsoft product, coming out EARLY?"

      No no no, its just more Microsoft porpaganda.

    3. Re:Wait a minute... by originalTMAN · · Score: 1

      You keep using that word... I don't think it means what you think it means.

    4. Re:Wait a minute... by landoltjp · · Score: 1

      Inconcievable!

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    5. Re:Wait a minute... by Locutus · · Score: 1

      No, it's just their SOP. Most likely it's just the PR that's getting released early. You know, publish all kinds of lies in an attempt to stall purchases of existing, and better, systems until they can release the beta for sale to the public. NT 3.1, Bob, Windows 95, etc, etc, etc.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    6. Re:Wait a minute... by LadyLucky · · Score: 1
      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

      Oh the insanity. Won't someone please think of the children?

      --
      dominionrd.blogspot.com - Restaurants on
    7. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      A Microsoft product, coming out EARLY?

      Yes, but the controllers won't be out until the first Service Pack.

    8. Re:Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Inconcievable!"

      That word. I think it means what you think it means.

  21. Wait a generation by Brahmastra · · Score: 1

    I'll get an Xbox when the Xbox2 comes out and the Xbox2 when the Xbox3 comes out. I'll get it dirt cheap and heck.. a game is a game.. A few hours of fun. I don't feel a pressing need to have the latest and greatest games. Games that are a few years old are cheap (and if they are PC games, they perform well on average hardware).

    1. Re:Wait a generation by tommck · · Score: 1

      Wow... a Slashdot reader that doesn't buy new gadgets just because they're new... What's this world coming to?

      --
      ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
    2. Re:Wait a generation by kgbkgb · · Score: 1

      Good points, but they don't apply if you're an online gamer. By the time the Xbox2 comes out, hardly anyone will be playing Xbox games online anymore.

    3. Re:Wait a generation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Good points, but they don't apply if you're an online gamer. By the time the Xbox2 comes out, hardly anyone will be playing Xbox games online anymore.

      Well, won't the cheap bastards who waited until the Xbox2 to come out before they bought an Xbox all be online with each other then? Hmm, no, I guess not. If they won't shell out $199 for a game system they probably aren't going to pay $15/month for the Xbox Live service.

    4. Re:Wait a generation by kgbkgb · · Score: 1

      The reason there won't be anyone playing Xbox games online when the Xbox2 comes out isn't that they probably aren't willing to pay $15/month for Xbox Live. There are plenty of ways to play Xbox games online perfectly free, having nothing to do with Live, and there are whole communities who do so.

      The reason is that there are so relatively few people who would wait to buy an Xbox until the Xbox2 comes out that you would very rarely find anyone online. Without a very large base of players, online gaming just doesn't work.

    5. Re:Wait a generation by toopc · · Score: 1

      Where is everyone getting this $15/month number? Xbox subscription Offers

      Xbox Live Starter Kit
      MechAssault (full version)
      Xbox Communicator voice headset
      12 months of Xbox Live service - $69.99

      Renewal: After 12 months, automatically renews to an annual subscription at $49.99 or the then-current rate.

    6. Re:Wait a generation by 17028 · · Score: 1

      That's the EverQuest rate, so every online game service in the world must have the same rate. Duh!

  22. Analyst Guesses by Schnapple · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Guys, these are guesses done by Analysts, they're not based off of anything Microsoft has said for a fact. The analysts base it off of what Microsoft might do, not off of what might be intelligent in the marketplace.

    So whatever you do, don't bet on Xbox dropping to $99 or seeing Xbox Next/2 in 2005. And don't complain that Microsoft lied to you when neither of these things happen.

    This just speculation.

    1. Re:Analyst Guesses by lpret · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but, these are the same analysts who predicted the GameCube's price drop, the PS2 price drop, and the XBox price drop. They've done well before, and they will probably be spot on about this one too. Now, as for the Xbox 2 in 2005, I think they'd have to have some serious balls to try and do that, but I wouldn't put it past them.

      --
      This is my digital signature. 10011011001
    2. Re:Analyst Guesses by slamb · · Score: 1
      Yes, but, these are the same analysts who predicted the GameCube's price drop, the PS2 price drop, and the XBox price drop. They've done well before, and they will probably be spot on about this one too. Now, as for the Xbox 2 in 2005, I think they'd have to have some serious balls to try and do that, but I wouldn't put it past them.

      That's all true, but how close do analysts need to be for their guess to be considered correct? The price of a console will drop several times before they stop selling it. We don't need analysts to tell us that. So all these people are predicting is when and by how much. How close did they come on those earlier predictions?

    3. Re:Analyst Guesses by phalse+phace · · Score: 1
      Spot on about dropping prices? There's really only one logical way the prices can go -- and that's down. Predicting that the prices will fall is like predicting that the sun will rise from the east the next day. It's pretty darn obvious that the prices will drop.

      Here's my prediction if Xbox 2 does come out in 2005 -- the price will drop in 2006.

    4. Re:Analyst Guesses by ad0gg · · Score: 2, Informative
      So whatever you do, don't bet on Xbox dropping to $99 or seeing Xbox Next/2 in 2005. And don't complain that Microsoft lied to you when neither of these things happen.

      They are educated guesses. IBM already began taping out processors for the new XBOX. Couldn't think of reason why IBM would start getting their manufactoring line ready if the launch date was 2 years away.

      --

      Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

    5. Re:Analyst Guesses by Locutus · · Score: 1

      and check those analyst's checking accounts for blips of increased income when these things get published. ;-)

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    6. Re:Analyst Guesses by GPLDAN · · Score: 1

      Here is the game - analysts are really just thinly veiled spin men for the company, hiding behind the front of the magazine or "research group". Look at Computerworld magazine. Those guys just sit around and wait for the press releases to print. A "company man" tips off the analyst to run with a story. Just like the way it works in Washington DC.

      Microsoft could be attempting to get Sony to crunch development times down, spend more R&D dollars to keep up. They may have no intention of coming out with anything early. There are other players involved, Nvidia, ATI all are players in this game. They may be looking to get Sony to force it's hand, Microsoft needs to know what it will be up against.

      Another part of the equation is the dev groups. EA Sports spit on Microsoft, so Microsoft will fight back with Sega Sports, and now there are other dev shops whose hearts and minds need to be won. Make them think there will be more immediate profitability if they start working on the DirectX toolkits, give them direction that way.

      What Sony needs to do is concentrate on the Asian and European markets, where Microsoft has less pull and can't buy shelf space and distribution marketing as easily as they can in the US, where they basically own Best Buy and CompUSA, and tell them how high to jump and when.

    7. Re:Analyst Guesses by edwdig · · Score: 1

      These are also the same analysts that keep saying that Nintendo is dying, despite Nintendo continually raking in huge profits.

      Don't start about their loss for the first half of this fiscal year. They posted a net loss of 3 million yen due to a 40 million investment loss. That means that if there wasn't a huge drop in the value of the US dollar, Nintendo would've posted a rather nice profit. You win some and you lose some when you invest your money in different countries. Note that Nintendo said they still expect to meet their projected profits for the entire year.

      The analysts also predicted that the price of all the consoles would have a significant drop back at E3 last year, which didn't happen. The PS2 got replaced by a version that came with the network adapter for the same price, with existing stock getting a $20 price drop. The Xbox got a $20 price drop. Nintendo did nothing. This was with the analysts expecting $50+ price drops.

      Saying that the console's price will drop sometime within the next 9 months is a pretty safe bet to make when you consider that the last price drop was 7 months ago. That price drop was a pretty minor one ($20). The last significant price drop was in May of 2002 when it dropped from $299 to $199.

    8. Re:Analyst Guesses by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      They are still using old video card in their consoles, there has been DirectX 8 and 9 since then. Pushing DirectX 9 would be a good move for Msoft and putting out a DX9 Console would do that admirably.

    9. Re:Analyst Guesses by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      Isn't that what analysts are for?
      To tell us things (wrapped up in shiny powerpoint slides) that anyone with half a brain and a calculator could figure out alone?

  23. First to market? by funny-jack · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That would put the Xbox 2 on store shelves up to a full year before Sony's PlayStation 3.

    And we all know that being the first next-gen console to market virtually guarantees success.

    --
    You probably shouldn't click this.
    1. Re:First to market? by happyfrogcow · · Score: 1

      yeah, but it will be atleast a half-gen behind playstation when sony releases the next version of that. so the next playstation will be the first next-gen all over again.

      this document may contain bassackwards looking statements.

    2. Re:First to market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once again, sarcasm goes flying over the troll-like heads of the Slashdot proletariet.

      Someday, you'll be sitting at a bar, minding your own business, and a pretty girl will walk up and buy you a clue.

      We can only hope.

    3. Re:First to market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and of course, we all know that 2 is less than 3, and that's the number that really counts. Maybe they should name it "XBox MS 3" or something so that it can compete on and even footing with the Playstation 3

    4. Re:First to market? by jared_hanson · · Score: 1

      Thank you for a blatant repeat of the information that is in the article.

      Thanks even more to the mods who modded this up.

      --
      -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
    5. Re:First to market? by stretch0611 · · Score: 1
      My guess is that they will add all of the x-box live equipment to an x-box, maybe give it a slightly larger hard drive and call it X-box 2. When it comes out it will realy act like x-box 1.5 (or less)

      However, with M$'s PR it will be over-hyped and still sell.

      --
      Looking for a job?
      Want your resume written professionally?
      DON'T USE TUNAREZ!!!
    6. Re:First to market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod this down. If you RTFA they state that example. You don't even provide a link that discusses it. Just a blatant karma whore.

    7. Re:First to market? by freeweed · · Score: 1

      And we all know that being the first next-gen console to market virtually guarantees success.

      If by "virtually", you mean "almost always", you are correct. Let's see:

      (Winner, released first / Loser(s), released later)

      Atari 2600 / Intellivision, Colecovision, Odyssey 2
      Nintendo Entertainment System / Sega Master System
      Nintendo Game Boy / Sega Game Gear, Atari Lynx
      Sega Genesis / Super Nintendo (although this one was pretty much neck and neck)
      Sony Playstation / Nintendo 64, Sega Saturn
      Sony Playstation 2 / Microsoft Xbox, Nintendo Gamecube

      Other than the Sega Dreamcast (and I won't even touch the Genny/SNES debate), virtually all first-to-market game systems have won in their respective generation. Something tells me you were trying to be sarcastic, however :)

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    8. Re:First to market? by k_187 · · Score: 1

      Nope, the saturn came out 6 months before the PS1 and look how that turned out. I also believe that the Sega Master System was about before the NES, I'm not sure, but I believe that Sega had a 3-4 month lead on Nintendo and just didn't market it as well. On the Genesis v SNES, I would personally not put those two systems against each other for most of their life spans. The Genesis was designed to compete against the NES. If you look at where both peaked in sales, the Genesis did before or right after the SNES came out and the SNES after the Genesis was being downplayed in favor of the Saturn.

      --
      11 was a racehorse
      12 was 12
      1111 Race
      12112
    9. Re:First to market? by k_187 · · Score: 1

      new xboxes already come with the stuff for xbox live, so that can't be a selling point of the xbox 2 over the original. What would a bigger hard drive do either? The game caches are dynamically added and removed, and there's more space for game saves than anybody's going to use for a while. Methinks this was just an overblown attempt at bashing "M$"

      --
      11 was a racehorse
      12 was 12
      1111 Race
      12112
    10. Re:First to market? by freeweed · · Score: 1

      Not quite. The Saturn/PS1 thing is very close, I admit. Depends on what part of the market you were in. Sony beat Sega by several months in most areas afaik.

      The Master System came out a full year after the NES, and was Sega's attempt to compete with the NES. Remember, this was during the time when NO ONE thought video game consoles would make money. The NES was a huge risk in North America, which is why Atari declined to market it (as was originally proposed by Nintendo Japan). Once the NES was a success, and this was by no means overnight, other companies joined in. But Nintendo had no competition for a long time in console terms.

      By the time the Genesis was out, Sega knew they had lost the 8-bit war, and was going for a pre-emptive strike against Nintendo's 16-bit entry. If you want to claim any of the 16-bit consoles were trying to compete with the NES, the closest fit would be NEC's Turbograpx16. A nice failure, far too late into the market to do any good. It was just too much of a middleman, and the Genesis being so much more advanced ensured it wouldn't last. Because of the market penetration of the Genesis, the Super Nintendo never sold anywhere near what the NES did. Of course, the installed base of the NES didn't help Nintendo, either. Many people were simply happy with keeping their NES.

      Remember, the Saturn wasn't even public information until 1994, and the SNES came out in 1991, so it's not like Sega spent those 3 years killing off the Genesis in favour of the Saturn. Instead, they tried the CD and 32X units, and that managed to kill it :) Ok, there's another example: first CD-based console to the market died a horrible death.

      Regardless, coming first or not has very little to do with a console's success. There are many other factors involved, and as Sony has shown, marketing trumps all. Because until the Dreamcast, there had never been a next-gen platform so completely ignored for so long, until it had competition. And now everyone brings up the Dreamcast to claim that first-to-market means death, when in fact historically it's almost always been the other way around, which was my original point. Most people don't know squat about console history (hell, half of the readership of Slashdot is younger than most of my consoles), and figure they look smart by trashing Sega, one of the most successful video game companies of all time.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  24. Standard components by LinuxInDallas · · Score: 2, Informative

    Given that the Xbox is based on hardware that is just a supped-up PC with mostly off the shelf components and Sony's is more custom, it's not big surprise that MS would be able to make it to market much faster. Wasn't the Xbox based on a 733 MHz P3 with a semi-custom Nvidia graphics chip? And I think the PS2 was a semi custom 128-bit DSP that handled pretty much everything (graphics + logic).

    1. Re:Standard components by cens0r · · Score: 1

      But a previous story already stated that the Xbox2 is not using off the shelf components.

      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
    2. Re:Standard components by Tony+B+Liar · · Score: 1

      ok, so if its hackable, surely its moddable. If its moddable, then its just a small pc case with specially modified ports for game controllers. If this is actually right, then why will they be bringing out a new xbox at all, when you could just mod the contents of the case yourself?? Also, why would you want one in the first place? Buy a pc, copy a version of an os, get adsl, get copied games and save yerself a fortune in the long run. Love, Tony xx :O

    3. Re:Standard components by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XBox is a Celeron, not a P3, just look at the cache size (or lack thereof), running on what is essentially an NVidia NForce motherboard.

      And where do people come up with this 128 bit crap? The PS2 processes 32 bit number, just like the rest of them. My PC has a 64 bit memory connection, does that make it a 64 bit computer? No. The PS2 actually has a 1024 bit wide internal bus, does that make it a 1024 bit system? No.

  25. so? by nordicfrost · · Score: 1

    So far the Playstation 2 has made a tour of duty above and beyond any expectations any of us have for it. While the graphics on the xbox seem to be on launch date level, the Playstation 2 always seem to reach into the guts of the machine and pick up some more power.

    So far, the best application I have seen for the xbox was a distributed multilevel map zoom system. The inventors bought several xboxes at Elkjop and eventually sold one system til the Pentagon.

    1. Re:so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lay down the crack and slowly move away .. PS2's technology is way primitive.

    2. Re:so? by kgbkgb · · Score: 2, Insightful
      the graphics on the xbox seem to be on launch date level, the Playstation 2 always seem to reach into the guts of the machine and pick up some more power.

      That might have to do with the fact that programming well for the PS2 is such a complex and difficult task. The architecture is completely custom and proprietary, and you need all kinds of tricks and workarounds to "reach into the guts of the machine", as you put it.

      Programming for the XBox, on the other hand, is an easy task for anyone who's used to programming PC games with DirectX (and that's a lot of people). So it's not that XBox games haven't gotten any better since launch date.. it's that they can't, because from the start they've been able to use the machine to its full potential. No horrendous learning curve.

      It should also be noted that, IMHO, the XBox's launch-date graphics are far and above the PS2's graphics, even when PS2 devs "reach into the guts of the machine".

    3. Re:so? by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      you honestly believe that DirectX is using the hardware to its full potential? christ, you're a loon.

      its a lowest-common denominator game library - sure its ok performance wise, but there is no way that you can optimize to the hardware any better than MS did.

      familiarity breeds performance. if you look back at well-documented and understood systems that had ample lifetimes, such as the C-64, you will notice that because developers were able to mash at a low level on a non-changing platform, that the performance gotten out of these systems was absolutely amazing.

      The XBox hardware isnt being utilized fully - how can it? everyone writes to common libraries, and relies on a generalized set of operations to do everything.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    4. Re:so? by kgbkgb · · Score: 1
      You've made that reply with absolutely no knowledge about what you're talking about.


      Xbox games are NOT written with DirectX. They're written with the XDK, which is (of course) completely optimized for the very specific Microsoft hardware. So your entire post is predicated upon the false assumption that XBox developers use DirectX. Do you often make arguments with completely incorrect information?


      The point of my post was not that the Xbox is a PC and Xbox software is written using DirectX. The point of my post was that the XBox is very much like a PC and parts of the XDK are very much like DirectX. Knowledge that programmers have about getting great performance out of PCs is often useful knowledge when it comes to the Xbox. This is not the case with the PS2.

  26. Xbit labs reports the XBOX2 processor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...has taped out using a 65nm process. No word on what ATI is up to with the graphics, although the NV40 vs R420 speculation promises some excitement in the next couple of months.

  27. Danger of being first by Trimbo2 · · Score: 1

    "That would put the Xbox 2 on store shelves up to a full year before Sony's PlayStation 3"

    Perhaps being first to market isn't the best idea. These consoles have a shelf life of 3 - 5 years and if the PS2 comes out later, it will probably be a more powerful machine, and hence for the remaining 4 years they are both alive in the market the PS2 will have the technical edge over the Xbox2.

    Mind you, if current generation conoles are any guide, technical superiority is no match for a strong (and well funded) marketing department!

    1. Re:Danger of being first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The logic is, that normally there is a year or so before developers really get to grips with the hardware, so the first year's software releases tend to look worse compared to later releases.

      Thus, by releasing earlier than the competition, in theory, your developers will be 'up to speed' on the advanced features by around the time that the competition is hitting the market with their first generation titles. Thus, even if your machine is technically slighly inferior, your titles can look better than the competition's.

    2. Re:Danger of being first by Trimbo2 · · Score: 1

      Fair point, best looking game for the PS1 was MGS, as they had a couple of years to get the most out of the console (afaik they implemented their own kernal for it?)

  28. That's all well and good by ChinaJoe · · Score: 1

    So what if X2 comes out a year early? MS will still be losing money and will accelerate that loss with the cut of price for the Xbox.

    Yea, yea, yea, it's not as if they can't afford it. I just don't understand the business plan here. I doubt that they'll make any money on X2 when it comes out, and with the majority of Xbox games being crappy, they can't be making money there, either. So what the hell is the purpose of making a product line that will do nothing but cost you money? To get more name recognition? Like who hasn't fricking heard of Microsoft?

    1. Re:That's all well and good by spells · · Score: 1

      MS doesn't want to be left out of the living room. MS believes that the "Home PC" is a dying market and most people want a "Media Station" that does everything. I haven't seen specs for XBox2, but imagine if these include the same functionality as Tivo, with the ability to surf the web / read email, all for the price of a game console and a wireless keyboard/mouse
      I know most of my families Home PCs would start gathering dust pretty quick.

    2. Re:That's all well and good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the majority of Xbox games being crappy"

      Knights of the Old Republic
      Halo
      Project Gotham Racing 2
      Crimson Skies
      Prince of Persia: Sands of Time
      Splinter Cell
      Rainbow Six: 3
      Madden Football
      Tiger Woods Golf ...

      I won't bother linking to all the reviews of these excellent games, im sure you know how to use google. Suffice to say there are MANY excellent Xbox games - the ones above are simply ones i own, there are many more. But nice bias you have there.

    3. Re:That's all well and good by PepperedApple · · Score: 1

      So what the hell is the purpose of making a product line that will do nothing but cost you money?

      The purpose of selling the Xbox at a loss is to make up for the loss by the huge premium on the games. Consider how much the materials to make a $50 Xbox game cost.

    4. Re:That's all well and good by StocDred · · Score: 1

      Most of which are available for other platforms. Xbox has managed to generate only a handful of exclusive, must-have titles. PS2 and GameCube have been doing much better on that score, but the Xbox is winning the online battle.

    5. Re:That's all well and good by cens0r · · Score: 1

      Of course the online games I care about are all from EA. Which means the playstation is where it's at.

      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
    6. Re:That's all well and good by Babbster · · Score: 1
      I didn't know that production costs and retail prices on the next iteration of Xbox had been released. Thanks, therefore, for letting me know (well over a year before anyone sees the thing) that Microsoft will be losing money on the next Xbox.

      /sarcasm

    7. Re:That's all well and good by ChinaJoe · · Score: 1

      Oh, yea your right. There are many more good games than bad. Such as:

      Drake of the 99 Dragons --Gamespot Finalist for WORST game of 2003
      Gravity Games Bike: Street Vert Dirt
      Batman: Dark Tomorrow
      Pulse Racer
      Stake: Fortune Fighters
      Aquaman: Battle for Atlantis
      Kabuki Warriors
      Robocop
      Sneakers
      Fila World Tour Tennis
      Smashing Drive
      Bruce Lee: Quest of the Dragon
      Shrek: Super Party
      Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
      MTV's Celebrity Deathmatch
      Superman: The Man of Steel
      Antz Extreme Racing
      Star Trek: Shattered Universe
      Metal Dungeon
      Bionicle
      Nightcaster II: Equinox
      Ultimate Beach Soccer
      Pro Cast Sports Fishing
      WTA Tour Tennis
      SeaBlade
      Dinotopia: The Sunstone Odyssey
      Mike Tyson Heavyweight Boxing

      According to Gamerankings.com of the 384 titles reviewed 217 have a score UNDER 75 (which is NOT GOOD) and 184 under 60 (Which SUCKS!).

      This from a bitter Xbox owner.

  29. Happy Meal by cyber_rigger · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm waiting for them to come free with a happy meal.

    1. Re:Happy Meal by originalTMAN · · Score: 1

      people only get the happy meal for the toy.

    2. Re:Happy Meal by BigJimSlade · · Score: 1

      I know I'd buy an X-Box if it came with a free happy meal.

      Oh wait...

    3. Re:Happy Meal by Twister002 · · Score: 1

      ARGH, I suck. I made this joke an hour after you!!

      http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=94766& ci d=8125946

      --
      "For a successful technology, honesty must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." -Feynman
  30. Virginia Tech? by Saven+Marek · · Score: 4, Funny

    If they could be easily hacked into running Linux, it might be worth contacting Virginia Tech. Make the mac heads eat their words! 3rd biggest suppercomputer in the world for $108,900!

    1. Re:Virginia Tech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      3rd biggest suppercomputer in the world for $108,900!
      I forget... does Dinner come before or after?
    2. Re:Virginia Tech? by mcmaddog · · Score: 1

      Is that because the XBox is bigger than the G5's?

    3. Re:Virginia Tech? by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Where's the infiniband hardware in the Xbox again?

      Why would you waste your money on something you have to hack, when you can get the same
      thing but faster for about the same money, and have the ability to customize it all you want?

    4. Re:Virginia Tech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be silly, they're not going to replace all of the hardware they worked so hard to install, configure, wire, and set up climate controls again for another month or two. Just wait a few weeks.

    5. Re:Virginia Tech? by unusualsuspect · · Score: 1

      because celerons aren't worth the silly-con they're made with...... Plus, it's infinitely more l33t to use xboxes.

    6. Re:Virginia Tech? by Golias · · Score: 1
      Let me get this straight...

      You think that an exposed motherboard, cpu, and HD, with no memory, no video board, no networking, no case, and no power source is the "same thing" as a hacked X-Box?

      Try again.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    7. Re:Virginia Tech? by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I believe what I implied was that for HPC, they were better than a hacked X-Box.

      Of course since you clearly know more than me about large scale clusters, you must be right....

    8. Re:Virginia Tech? by Wog · · Score: 1

      You do know that the XBox comes with a Celeron processor, right? ...Right?

    9. Re:Virginia Tech? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      For the price of one Dual G5 2.0GHz PowerMac, assuming $99/Xbox, you can buy 30 Xboxes.

      The mac has Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5, 512MB DDR400 128-bit SDRAM, 160GB Serial ATA disk, a DVD burner, an ATI Radeon 9600 Pro with 64MB, GigE, a 56k modem, 800Mbps firewire, and USB 2.0. 30 Xboxs have 30 733MHz P3s, I believe 64MB per system for a total of 1920MB memory but I forget what kind, 8*30 for 240GB of total disk space, 30 DVD-ROMs, NVidia GEforce graphics (not at all irrelevant in the cluster; you can offload mathematics processing to the GPU with the proper libraries, as was reported here a little while back), 100Mbps networking, and USB 1.1.

      Assuming your supercomputing tasks can be broken down into bite size chunks (which can be handled in 64MB) the Xbox solution will be much cheaper for the same amount of processing power, but will take up much more space and consume much more power (30 hard drives for example, even 8GB ones, will consume about as much power as the one hard drive in the Mac.)

      Xboxes are a decent choice for a small Linux cluster. You can even use the Cromwell BIOS and you're not even violating copyright law. Pick up one refurbished PC from geeks.com for $500 or so to be the cluster master, and 20 Xboxes or so, and you have some fairly significant processing power available to you. However, with 1U dual opteron systems down to about two grand with similar disk/memory to the powermac, if you want to build a cluster of Linux systems, there are probably more cost-effective ways to go about it than using Xboxes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:Virginia Tech? by Golias · · Score: 1
      Actually, I believe what I implied was that for HPC, they were better than a hacked X-Box.

      Believe whatever you like. What you said was "the same thing," and saying so is completely ignoring the facts.

      The modified X-Box is a working stand-alone Linux PC, and clustering a network of them is a matter of software configuration only.

      Following your reccomendation, there would still be a crapload of stuff to buy before you could even get started. Power supplies, for example. You can argue that it is worth the extra expense to have something that you can tweak to your specific needs, but don't imply you are getting the same thing for less money, because you're not.

      Of course since you clearly know more than me about large scale clusters, you must be right....

      Not sure where I said or even implied that. I obviously know more about basic math, though, because I can see that a $79 logic board plus $50 - $100 worth of parts will cost more than $99.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    11. Re:Virginia Tech? by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Let's go for some context here rather than having you pull shit out of your ass about basic math. Here's a quote from the comment I was replying to:

      3rd biggest suppercomputer in the world for $108,900!

      Now, Using the same linpack benchmark they use to determine the top 500 supercomputers, I would argue that due to the lack of built in low latency interconnect, and the lack of capability for expansion, you could never build the third fastest supercomputing cluster out of XBoxes, no matter how many of them you had. Ever. Period.

      Let's assume that you could expand it. The interconnect card's price would be many times that of the price of the Xbox, and for that reason it would be cheaper to build your cluster out of more expensive, more powerful nodes because you'd need less (expensive) interconnect adapters.

      If you want to build a 4 or eight node cluster, perhaps it wouldn't be so bad to use Xboxes, but I would still bet that I could build a faster cluster for less out of standard components because I wouldn't put a hard drive in every node, among other things, keeping my node cost well under $100. (Don't forget that $79 is for 1.1ghz instead of 700Mhz like the Xbox...) I wouldn't have to waste time "hacking" my nodes either.

    12. Re:Virginia Tech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Believe whatever you like. What you said was "the same thing," and saying so is completely ignoring the facts.

      I obviously know more about basic math, though, because I can see that a $79 logic board plus $50 - $100 worth of parts will cost more than $99.

      Are you aware that you're a total prick? I'd hate for you to ignore that fact.

    13. Re:Virginia Tech? by Golias · · Score: 1
      If you want to build a 4 or eight node cluster, perhaps it wouldn't be so bad to use Xboxes...

      Which is all I was ever saying. A massive cluster of X-Boxes to crack into the "top 500" would be a fantastic waste of electricity anyway.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    14. Re:Virginia Tech? by unusualsuspect · · Score: 1

      ooooops. no I didn't. I can't believe it. my bad. great 1st post for me, no? My sarcasm deserves the spanking I s'pose.

  31. In case you were serious: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  32. Can you say by nocomment · · Score: 0

    "Market saturation" I think that you can.


    Sorry to troll but gamecube is way better anyway.
    Don't beleive me? Compare yourself:
    Nintendo
    xbox The only real plus is the internal drive makes things convenient.

    But at $5 for a memory card for GC it's not that big of an issue. Besides that, Zelda's wind waker is worth it anyway. ;-)

    --
    /* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
    /* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
    1. Re:Can you say by wheany · · Score: 1

      I can if you write it phonetically.

    2. Re:Can you say by L10N · · Score: 1

      The comparisson leads me to believe the xbox is the way to go because for an already decent price at 160.00 you get the fastest cpu for consoles, a good sized hard drive, dvd player, and it can be hackz0red to do more stuff...

      damn, now I have the urge to splurge...

      --
      "What we do in life echoes in eternity." Maximus Decimus Meridius
    3. Re:Can you say by cens0r · · Score: 1

      It would be the way to go except: The playstation has/had the games I wanted. Pretty much every game I wanted to play on the X-Box was available for the PS2 (the exception being KOTOR, and that's now on PC). The playstation on the other hand has the GTA series, Gran Turismo 3/4, Final Fantasy, SOCOM, and EA online. All things being equal the X-Box would be my choice. However, based on the games available and price I'd like my PS2 best, and if I wanted a second console it would be a Gamecube.

      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
    4. Re:Can you say by L10N · · Score: 1

      Totally. If the games you want are not available on the xbox then you won't be happy no matter what kind of geek goodness you can get from the hardware. But I am primarily a computer gamer and have not really done much console gaming since I bought my Playstation. I am in the market for a console and a dvd player and the xbox will let me do both. My wife and I are both avid PC gamers, both are the founding members of our online gaming clan, and I can see us sitting side by side on the couch headsets and controllers locked and loaded using xbox live to game with our fellow clan members when on "Console night". But our primary gaming experience will still come from IRC and RTCW, E. Terrirtory, NWN, etc etc.So for us a console that can serve as our dvd system too really seems like pure goodness.

      --
      "What we do in life echoes in eternity." Maximus Decimus Meridius
    5. Re:Can you say by nocomment · · Score: 1

      not quite the fastest CPU, the on in the GC pumps out 10.5 gflops. The dvd is a plus, but really, when you can pick up a decent dvd for your tv for $40 then it becomes less of an issue. Why not just buy a regular dvd and get a remote for it? ;-)

      --
      /* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
      /* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
    6. Re:Can you say by cens0r · · Score: 1

      I already have two DVD players (not counting the playstation, my pc, or the mac) so That's not really much of an issue. The X-Box live stuff does fascinate me, but the most fun online games I've played on the console are sports games. The best sports games are EA. And EA games are only on line via the PS2. The only thing that could make the playstation 2 perfect for me would be if there was an online fighting game. My GF doesn't like VirtuaFighter, and I am quickly tired of beating the computer.

      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
    7. Re:Can you say by L10N · · Score: 1

      Yesh, wot you say is quite right. BUT STILL *child showing through* this seems FUN!!! I have that impulse urge. Luckily I won't be able to act on it right now as tomorrow I am going out with my wife to get her a new computer system. We are going to pop for a sony vaio desktop with lots of warranty I think. I want her to have a kick ass system. You know my life is very very blessed having a kick ass gamerz0r wife who is rocking with her gamevoice headset on shouting "cum get sum biotch!!! gib this n00b!" /etc ;D

      anyhow, its a console, its a dvd system, its hackable, and its not too pricey...that is why I am considering an xbox.

      --
      "What we do in life echoes in eternity." Maximus Decimus Meridius
    8. Re:Can you say by nocomment · · Score: 1

      well in that case what about this! ;-)

      --
      /* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
      /* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
    9. Re:Can you say by L10N · · Score: 1

      ooooooooooo! Nice! /me reads
      Bookmarked, will read more and give this real thought...
      much appreciated!

      --
      "What we do in life echoes in eternity." Maximus Decimus Meridius
  33. Uphill battle, support the USA by llZENll · · Score: 1

    They should just give them away with a game purchase. MS doesn't care what they lose on the consol, its all about preparing for the next gen release. Its definelty an uphill battle against the PS2 for the XBOX, but if they keep beating them on hardware, its only a matter of time before XBOX has just as good if not better game base than the PS2. And thats when they will start dominating.

    Another thing I get really pissed off about is people in the USA hate MS and the XBOX just because they are MS. Well I don't agree with a lot that MS does and doesn't do, but people WAKE UP, it's far better to line the pockets of Bill G than some Japanese fat cat, so buy and support XBOX, not PS2 :D

    1. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting comment coming from an asshole with ZEN as their username.

    2. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Assassin_for_Atari · · Score: 1

      I think the reason why people don't like MS in the console effort is because as consoles turn into "set-top media hubs" there "trusted" hardware scheme is put in to play and once again the things you could of done, you now can't. That and I have a hunch that half that hardware in that box comes from overseas...much like buying and american car that is made in Korea. I think more hondas are built here in the US than most "american" cars are

    3. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Locutus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I would trust Sony over Microsoft any day of the week/year/decade/etc to provide a level playing field for game developers. And THAT is what will generate great games. Not purchasing the game companies and forcing them to write games for their console and theirs only. ie, owning the game development industry for the console.

      Look at the PC sector, Microsoft has been using it's ownership of the platform( the OS ) to gain more and more of the application development base.

      Anybody over Microsoft at this point. IMHO.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    4. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by ev1lcanuck · · Score: 1
      I'd rather support Microsoft. They're products are much more reliable than Sony's. Anyone ever used a VAIO or a first-gen PS2? Poorly made junk.

      I have a $2800 VAIO paperweight on my desk next to me that sony refused to replace the HDD in. They had previously replaced the LCD and DVDROM drive. In my old HP Pavilion 8490 the Sony DVDROM drive failed after about two and a half years of very little use.

      Disc Read Errors plague the first generation PS2. Mine has started to have it badly. TechTV has a fairly quick fix for it that seems to work but the problem does eventually come back. It was fixed in later generation models.

      Oh and I had a Sony desktop CD player that stopped playing CDs after about a year of light use. I'm very unimpressed by them so far.

    5. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS is anti-USA as it is anti-competition. Don't you get it?

    6. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by cens0r · · Score: 1

      My first-gen PS2 developed the disc read problems (it would only read DVD's) and sony fixed it for free even though I was out of warranty.

      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
    7. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used MSDOS, MS win3.0, MS win3.1, MS win95, MS win98, MS win2k. All junks by any standards.

    8. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Chris+Carollo · · Score: 1

      Please.

      Microsoft has been vastly more friendly to developers than Sony. The PS2 is an unmitigated nightmare to program for and all the tools that have any semblance of user-friendlyness are thirdparty (and thus you have to purchase separately).

      Xbox development, on the other hand, includes Visual Studio .NET (including integration of the Xbox build and debugging processes), some fairly good development tools, and one astoundingly good tool (Pix). It's got its problems, but all-in-all, Xbox is a dream to develop for.

      As far as MS buying companies and forcing them into Xbox development, back that up with some examples. Bungie and Rare are the two that come to mind, but it's hard to imagine how Bungie could have done better, and Rare just went from one exclusive arrangement to another.

      Being able and encouraged by your owner to focus and work exclusively with a single unchanging platform sounds very very good to me, speaking as a game developer.

    9. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by RoLi · · Score: 1
      They should just give them away with a game purchase.

      So that everytime you buy a game, you pick up a XBox, too?

      Microsoft has a lot of money, yes, but they would go bankrupt on a scheme like that.

    10. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now we've seen it all.

      A trade-protectionist argument in support of Xbox.

      Money for Retro Studios or for Microsoft? Easy choice for me; gimme my Metroid.

    11. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woo! Racism and nationalism!

      1) Buying in support of one's country in the face of mediocrity from same country promotes further mediocrity and similar attitudes in other countries. Short version: it is STUPID.

      2) News flash: it's no longer the 80s. Japan isn't going to steamroller the US economically from the midst of their 10+ year depression.

      3) It's not always about quality, but quantity. Look at Game Gear vs. Game Boy: a no-brainer on quality, but comparatively few people remember the Game Gear. Hell, look at the OS market: BeOS, OS/2, the two Mac OSs, and then you have Windows, which just so happens to utterly and completely dominate.

    12. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Babbster · · Score: 1

      Yes, trusting Sony is a great idea. I particularly like their movie advertising as it pertains to honesty.

    13. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      Yeah! Support the US! Buy the console that's made here! Well, designed here at least. And made in Mexico, that's the same continent at least! Er, wait, they decided that cheap Mexican labor was too expensive and moved their manufacturing to China didn't they?

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    14. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by Locutus · · Score: 1

      Until it's shown that Sony blocks movie houses from showing films from competing production houses, produces faked evidence to be used in front of a Federal Justice, attackes it's competitors by publishing statements that their competitors are communists, etc.... I'm still trusting Sony over Microsoft at this point.

      Look at this example you give of Sony's BAD behavior , then look at Microsofts anti-competitive behavior. Tooting your own horn is one thing but cutting the wires of your competitors horn is a whole different thing. IMO.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    15. Re:Uphill battle, support the USA by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      Anybody over Microsoft at this point. IMHO.

      That's because you don't know how Nintendo treats developers. While I'm no big Microsoft fan, the way Nintendo has put its iron foot down in the past is what drove the developers to Sony in such an incredible exodus.

      Go read at WarioWorld.com some time, and realize that this is after nearly ten years of reflection on what their behavior towards developers has caused. Try reading about what the Nintendo Seal of Quality really meant to developers back in the day, why the shell companies used to exist for publishers, et cetera.

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
  34. $99 - Sounds Familiar by WombatControl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I seem to have heard a similar rumor about the price of the iPod mini being $99, and look how that turned out.

    Microsoft is already selling consoles at a rather hefty loss, and there's only so much to be gained by selling them at an even bigger loss. Even Microsoft doesn't have bottomless pockets, and the problem with selling a product as a loss-leader is that the more you sell the worse your short-term financial hit is. Selling a product as a loss-leader assumes that the people who buy that product will buy additional services at a higher markup later.

    The problem with moving the cost of an X-Box to $99 is that you're hitting a market demographic that's far less likely to spend the $$$ to get something like XBox Live or a large number of additional profit-gaining accessories.

    Now, if Microsoft came out with some deal that you could buy an XBox for $99 if you commit to 6 months or a year of XBox Live, that might work. Elsewise don't be lining up at the store to get your $99 XBox...

    1. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by Boing · · Score: 1
      I seem to have heard a similar rumor about the price of the iPod mini being $99, and look how that turned out.

      So what, you're saying the Xbox is going to be repriced at $250? I don't think Microsoft is that stupid. :)

    2. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by wickedj · · Score: 1

      I think you make a very good point. If MS were to lower the price of the XBox that significantly, there would definitely have to be something to tie you in. Another possibility is that MS will support backwards compatibility with XBox 2. By lowering the pricepoint on the XBox to $99, they significantly increase the amount of users for XBox and lay a great foundation of users for XBox 2.

      This is one of the reasons why Sony did so well with the Playstation 2 and will most likely continue to do well with the Playstation 3. I believe Sony is making backwards compatibility a foundation of their consoles.

      Nintendo also did really well when they let the Game Boy Advance be backwards compatible. Look how huge a lead they have in that market. Hopefully, they've learned and will have backwards compatibility on their GameCube Sequel

      I think MS is trying to follow that trend. They just want to build up their user base right now (if they do drop the price).

    3. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by *weasel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      common wisdom has already shown that Microsoft is positioning itself as being in competition with Sony for the top spot, not with Nintendo for second-place. Dropping their price to try to beat Nintendo's second wind growth is highly unlikely.

      As is, Microsoft is doing a very good job at getting the attention of hardcore gamers. Quite frankly, Sony has moved 7 PS2s for every Xbox MS moved - and yet they rack up significantly fewer than 7x the game sales each month. It shouldn't even be a remotely fair competition in console software sales month to month for the top 10 spots, and yet it is.

      So trying for a huge installed base doesn't really behoove them at this point. Particularly not when they are already losing so much per console, and when Sony is selling loads of consoles to people who frankly aren't buying games. (which is giving them a fairly similar net loss on the hardware)

      Sony and MS are in a much tighter competition at this point than anyone expected. They truly don't need to stick their neck out at this point.

      That said, if MS bundles dual functionality (eg PVR capability) in the neXtBox, they likely might see the type of insane early-adoption that Sony saw with its dvd player functionality. PVR in 2005, like DVD in 2001, is functionality people want, but aren't willing to pay a high unit price to acquire. If one can capture an early lead, the risk can pay off. But without such killer functionality, MS would likely win few converts, lose people who are holding out for a bigger/better/faster PS3, and would more likely suffer Sega's fate.

      Without an ace up their sleeve, some technology that people are clamoring for at consumer price levels, a 2005 release by MS is highly unlikely.

      --
      // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
    4. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by leerpm · · Score: 1

      I think you have hit on a very good point. Backwards compatibility is definitly here to stay. The added cost of building in the support for it is small, compared to the benefits they will get from the additional people buying even more games.

    5. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      Selling a product as a loss-leader assumes that the people who buy that product will buy additional services at a higher markup later.

      They really need to do a better job at stopping mod chip makers from hacking their systems. I thought they already used signed binaries, but I guess that didn't stop anyone from hacking the boxes and putting Linux on them. I think it's a fun little idea, but buying an XBox and putting Linux on it seems kind of unfair to Microsoft since it's unlikely you'll be making up their loss by buying the overpriced games. Perhaps they should do a rebate type system where you buy the XBox for $399 and if you mail in the front page out of the manual for 4 XBox games you'll get a rebate for $200. That'd put an end to the Linux leeches buying them to use as cheap hardware.

    6. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by mr.capaneus · · Score: 3, Informative

      um......
      2003 Top 10 Console Video Game Titles, Sorted By Units
      RANK TITLE PLATFORM PUBLISHER RELEASE DATE
      1 MADDEN NFL 2004 (PS2) ELECTRONIC ARTS AUG'03
      2 POKEMON RUBY (GBA) NINTENDO OF AMERICA MAR'03
      3 POKEMON SAPPHIRE (GBA) NINTENDO OF AMERICA MAR'03
      4 NEED SPEED: UNDERGROUND (PS2) ELECTRONIC ARTS NOV'03
      5 ZELDA: THE WIND WAKER (GCN) NINTENDO OF AMERICA MAR'03
      6 GRAND THEFT AUTO: VICE CITY (PS2) ROCKSTAR GAMES OCT'02
      7 MARIO KART: DOUBLE DASH (GCN) NINTENDO OF AMERICA NOV'03
      8 TONY HAWK UNDERGROUND (PS2) ACTIVISION OCT'03
      9 ENTER THE MATRIX (PS2) ATARI MAY'03
      10 MEDAL OF HONOR: RISING SUN (PS2) ELECTRONIC ARTS NOV'03
      Source: The NPD Group / NPD Funworld(R) / TRSTS(R)

      Now, granted, I got these figures from planetgamecube and I don't know much about the place that did the study, but these figures sure seem to contradict what you are saying. Maybe Xbox sales are spread over more titles or something but you would think Halo at least would be in the top 10. As far as Microsoft positioning itself as being in competition with Sony for the top spot, I can position myself as being in competition with Brad Pitt for the top poon but that doesn't mean I have a chance.

    7. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by sisukapalli1 · · Score: 1

      Linux on it seems kind of unfair to Microsoft since it's unlikely ... That'd put an end to the Linux leeches buying them to use as cheap hardware.

      M$FT doesn't have problems with people paying for DELL boxes only to load linux on them.

      S

    8. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by Tony · · Score: 1

      I think it's a fun little idea, but buying an XBox and putting Linux on it seems kind of unfair to Microsoft since it's unlikely you'll be making up their loss by buying the overpriced games.

      They set they price. It's not up to us to make sure they make a profit. In fact, no company is *owed* anything beyond the asking price. That's called "free market."

      And part of the free market is doing whatever the hell you want with the products you purchase, as long as it doesn't interfere with copyright laws. Mod chips do not interfere with copyright laws.

      If Microsoft wants to compete in the market, it's up to them to set the price fairly. It's not up to us to make up their loss leader by purchasing lousy games.

      --
      Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
    9. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "common wisdom has already shown that Microsoft is positioning itself as being in competition with Sony for the top spot" ...and failing miserably with their Xbox, to a worse degree than Nintendo is with the GameCube.

      "It shouldn't even be a remotely fair competition in console software sales month to month for the top 10 spots, and yet it is."

      Right. With the PS2 having six of the top 10 titles shipped in North America in 2003, followed by the GameCube's two, the GameBoy Advance's two, and the Xbox's zero, it's clear that Sony has some stiff competition coming from...someone.

    10. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by Tony · · Score: 1

      It shouldn't even be a remotely fair competition in console software sales month to month for the top 10 spots, and yet it is.

      There are many potential reasons for this. First, the actual number of games sold may be 7x higher for the PS2; with a wide variety of good games from which to choose, it's easy to spread a bunch of purchases over several good titles, instead of the few dozen decent titles on the XBox. Another potential reason is game playability: PS2 games may have a longer play life than XBox games. Another possibility is the demographics: the people who buy XBox may have more money to throw away on games.

      Yet another reason may be bundling. It's difficult to purchase an XBox without bundled games. One of the ways Microsoft (and other console vendors, too) boosts sales (and therefor hype) of a game is to bundle a game in with the purchase of a console.

      Whatever the case, Microsoft has hyped the success of their console way beyond the reality.

      --
      Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
    11. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by k_187 · · Score: 1

      Halo's 2 years old, they just dropped the price, but really everybody that wants it probably has it. Second, half of the games on your list are multi-platform. I don't know if those figures are aggregated for all systems or just for the one listed, but with half of them on all three, it is conceivable that they are on the list because they sell well on all three.

      --
      11 was a racehorse
      12 was 12
      1111 Race
      12112
    12. Re:$99 - Sounds Familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that list (NPD's North American top software sales list for 2003 in total) takes into account each platform individually. Multi-platform sales were not aggregated to reach those ranks. If that were the case, it would be quite remarkable that any system exclusives, such as the four Nintendo titles represented, would be listed at all.

      And GTA Vice City for PS2 is likewise an old game that still sold well into 2003. Halo is off the radar for many reasons, including but not limited to age. It was still one of the Xbox's best sellers in 2003, but there is not a single Xbox game listed in the top ten, exclusive or otherwise. Sony and Nintendo are doing a fair ways better, methinks.

  35. Glad you liked my post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keep up the good work!

  36. What! About! Halo?! by Goldfinger7400 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wait, so if the X-box 2 is scheduled to come out sooner, like in 2005, and Halo 2 was supposed to come out late 2004, does this mean that Halo 2 might be pushed back to be released on the X-Box 2? I mean, I'm all for the new technology, but I want my Halo! Sooner the better I think.

    1. Re:What! About! Halo?! by Mephie · · Score: 1

      I agree. If Halo 2 gets pushed back to, say, launch with the Xbox 2, requiring an Xbox 2 to play, I'll be pissed.

    2. Re:What! About! Halo?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Bungie hadn't been bought out, you'd probably be playing it on your PC by now.

    3. Re:What! About! Halo?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as Halo is a top 10 selling xbox game, then Halo 2 will not be released.

      Its their only money maker .. they've got to squeeze as much out of it as they can.

    4. Re:What! About! Halo?! by sean23007 · · Score: 1

      If you knew what you were talking about, you'd probably be playing it on your PC by now.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    5. Re:What! About! Halo?! by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

      Halo 2 is out on the PC?

      I didn't see it mention that on the page you linked?

  37. I doubt this is true by DrDoombender · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Microsoft, certainly, is in a much stronger position than Sega. The Xbox's buzz factor is on the rise - and will soar higher if the company opts for a $99 price tag. But it hasn't yet established a reputation that's strong enough for it to sway Sony loyalists

    Although Microsoft has money, I seriously doubt they'll try to do what Sega did. Primarily because it is a huge risk, and that seems to be the tone of the article. Pretty much, if they pulled an early release stunt it would either make them or break them. First off, with their next console they have to try and ensure that they are not in the red like they are with the xbox.

    lower the xbox's price down to $99 will not necessarily make people go out and buy one. That's still $100, and the holiday season is over with.

    Sega may not have been in as strong a financial situation as Microsoft, but the dreamcast was a great console. The only thing that really ruined it was the fact that it did not have solid piracy protection. Who's going to make games on a system that everybody can steal? Before that, we saw lots of great games on the Dreamcast.

    The xbox's buzzfactor, I think is as high as it can go. While observing Microsoft's moves, I've noted that they've done PC like stuff for the console. So basically they did things such as gamespatches that had never been done before by companies such as Nintendo. Think about that 20 years 1988-2004, no patching games, and then Microsoft comes along and starts patching games that have major bugs (granted, online games don't count, but think morrowind...etc.)

    was the article worth reading? sorta, its all speculation, and it states the obvious. Basically, if the rumors are true, and Microsoft releases early, then this could hurt them. Like i said before, the article is pessimistic on the idea of M$ releasing early.

    IMHO, Microsoft will probably release around the same day and time as Sony to be safe. By putting their cards on the table early, it will give Sony plenty of time to respond. If they release around the same time, it will be more like a game of rock,paper, scissors (just hope they both choose scissors).

    1. Re:I doubt this is true by tomk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The only thing that really ruined it was the fact that it did not have solid piracy protection. Who's going to make games on a system that everybody can steal? Before that, we saw lots of great games on the Dreamcast.

      I totally disagree. The ease of hacking the Dreamcast probably helped more than it hurt. Because:

      1. It encouraged hobbiests & geeks (slashdot types) to buy it so that they could play around with some of the neat community hacks, or make their own. Personally I loved the idea of running mame & linux on the DC.

      2. It drove up hardware sales because, hey, you can get games for free.

      3. It probably even increased the sales of GOOD games because once the hardware is out there, people will buy the good games that they can't get for free, or that they want to support.

      Piracy probably hurt the bad games quite a lot, but who cares? Those games were bad anyway.

      I believe what killed the Dreamcast wasn't piracy but technical inferiority. The graphics weren't as good as the PS2, it couldn't play back DVDs, and its online support was a joke. (True, the PS2 and Xbox online support was also MIA at the time but at least it was promised to have broadband capability; the DC only had a built-in modem and no broadband capability)

    2. Re:I doubt this is true by dafoomie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree that piracy didn't kill Dreamcast, but technical inferiority and broadband didn't either. Dreamcast shipped with a dialup adapter and you could buy a broadband adapter separately for $50. PS2 shipped with neither until recently and it still costs around that separately. The two things that killed Dreamcast were lack of 3rd party support (EA not making any games for DC hurt) and Sony's hype machine for PS2. When it launched, PS2's graphics weren't any better than Dreamcast, and even today it still hasn't lived up to the hype it generated.

    3. Re:I doubt this is true by Krondor · · Score: 1

      Sega may not have been in as strong a financial situation as Microsoft, but the dreamcast was a great console. The only thing that really ruined it was the fact that it did not have solid piracy protection. Who's going to make games on a system that everybody can steal? Before that, we saw lots of great games on the Dreamcast.

      This wasn't anywhere near the only thing that killed the dreamcast (and if you read DCEmulation.com it isn't anywhere near dead). There were tons of exclusivity deals being cut that made Sega basically have to make all the good titles for its system in house. The Dreamcast had a superior programming architecture, superior specs, and was way ahead of its time. However, when you have no third party support then you don't have much my friend. Sony used its muscle to bully a number of developers into selling only for playstation. Sony even paid retailers to not stock Sega products (*cough Circuit City).

      The xbox's buzzfactor, I think is as high as it can go. While observing Microsoft's moves, I've noted that they've done PC like stuff for the console. So basically they did things such as gamespatches that had never been done before by companies such as Nintendo. Think about that 20 years 1988-2004, no patching games, and then Microsoft comes along and starts patching games that have major bugs (granted, online games don't count, but think morrowind...etc.

      How is the patch idea bad? Games have always had bugs even on systems where you couldn't patch them.. a number of games bugs actually turned out to be usable as cheats, but they are bugs nonetheless. Allowing a developer to patch things is only a negative if the developer decides to release a product before it's undergone good product testing (which is bound to happen sometimes patches or not). At least with a patch you can fix the problem at a later date, add new functionality, or improve the games performance.

      I still don't think it would drop this low but $119 does seem doable. The myth that Microsoft is losing money at their current price has got to end. The components they are building with are cheap enough that they are probably making money on the units now, or if they are losing money it isn't much.

    4. Re:I doubt this is true by sootman · · Score: 1

      "If they release around the same time, it will be more like a game of rock,paper, scissors (just hope they both choose scissors)."

      OMFG are they releasing rock-paper-scissors for the XBox??? I am *so* getting one!!!!!11 ;-)

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    5. Re:I doubt this is true by DrDoombender · · Score: 1
      Well, I tried to imply that patching isn't bad for online games. It is bad when you let serious bugs into your game with the assumption that they can be patched later after people have bought the game. I also think that patching loosens the QA because the patching option is there.

      I will not deny that there are games out there on nintendo's consoles that were perfect, but usually the bugs were not that bad. Most of the games where consoles had no patching option were high quality.

      Your right, piracy wasn't the only factor that killed the dreamcast, but it was a big component. Honestly, who would release a game that is bound to get pirated. I don't really believe the arguement that hacking and piracy actually helped the DC. I've been to the irc channels, seen the bit torrent sites, and kazaa and seen the traffic of DC games.

      If Sony did bully 3rd parties from Sega, making the arguement, that your not going to make as much with the protectionless DC is going to be persuasive.

    6. Re:I doubt this is true by jared_hanson · · Score: 1

      First off, with their next console they have to try and ensure that they are not in the red like they are with the xbox.

      First off, I don't think there has been a console in recent history that has turned a profit on hardware. The hardware is sold at a loss to increase adoption rates, and thus game sales, which is where the money is made.

      lower the xbox's price down to $99 will not necessarily make people go out and buy one. ...
      IMHO, Microsoft will probably release around the same day and time as Sony to be safe. By putting their cards on the table early, it will give Sony plenty of time to respond. If they release around the same time, it will be more like a game of rock,paper, scissors (just hope they both choose scissors).


      First off, I only own a PS2. I've thought about getting an Xbox, becaused I'd like Amped 2 and a few others, but I can't justify it. A $99 dollar console I'd rush out and buy without thinking about it. I'd pick up a couple games too without regrets.

      Here is the kicker. MS in behind Sony by quite a ways in this market. They obviously want to be the dominant player, and they are going to need to turn tricks to do it. They have to release at least 6-9 months before Sony. If they come out within a few weeks of each other, I will not get the Xbox Next. Why? I already have a PS2 and it's a fairly sure bet that the PS3 will be able to play PS2 games, mabey not PS1 games but you should really be setting those aside by now.

      Anyhow, here is my take on what MS should do to put up a decent fight. Drop the Xbox to $99 and announce that the Xbox Next will be backwards compatible on the same day. I'd buy a console and a few games that day and a few more over the course of time. Backwards compatibility is also critical to ensure a decent library of titles for the next gen console and game makers switch over.

      Then, if MS can beat Sony by a 9 months to market, I'd pick up an Xbox Next and probably not get a PS3. The performance differences will be negligible and I will still have my PS2 around to play my current game collection.

      In short, I think the $99 Xbox/backwards compatibility guarantee along with a release 9 months or so before Sony would really level the playing field and possibly swing the favor to MS. MS is behind, and they must do something spectacular to catch up. Just keeping pace with Sony will not work, because it guarantees MS will always be behind.

      --
      -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
    7. Re:I doubt this is true by AzraelKans · · Score: 1

      Thats true! dropping the price wont help sales. look at what happened to nintendo... ooops wrong example!

      What they should do is to make them more expensive thats how they will get extra sales and sale the consoles without a loss just like nintendo did.. oops! wrong example again!

      --
      Go ahead MOD my day!
      More opinions here
    8. Re:I doubt this is true by Flamingcheeze · · Score: 1
      That's still $100, and the holiday season is over with.

      Don't forget state and federal tax refunds... it'll probably time well with them, and people are notoriously loose with that money.

      --
      The Philosophy of Liberty | lewrockwell.com
    9. Re:I doubt this is true by Osty · · Score: 1

      The xbox's buzzfactor, I think is as high as it can go. While observing Microsoft's moves, I've noted that they've done PC like stuff for the console. So basically they did things such as gamespatches that had never been done before by companies such as Nintendo. Think about that 20 years 1988-2004, no patching games, and then Microsoft comes along and starts patching games that have major bugs (granted, online games don't count, but think morrowind...etc.)

      First off, your example is bad because Morrowind was released prior to XBox Live, had no capability to download patches, and didn't get any fixes applied to it until it was re-released in the GOTY version (it also wasn't Microsoft's game, and Bethesda is pretty much known for relatively buggy open-ended RPGs like Sea Dogs and the whole Elder Scrolls series). Second, games on the XBox are hardly the first console games to have major bugs or problems that could do with a patch. However, they are the first games on a console with the possibility of getting a patch. What's the problem with that? Nobody's perfect, and even with stringent testing for console games bugs do occassionally slip through. Would you rather throw away a good game that's ruined by one or two minor issues, or get a patch for it and keep going?

    10. Re:I doubt this is true by DrDoombender · · Score: 1

      Interesting considering that morrowind for the pc didn't have bug that could potentially wipe your hard drive out.

    11. Re:I doubt this is true by Hoplite3 · · Score: 1

      IMHO, Microsoft will probably release around the same day and time as Sony to be safe. By putting their cards on the table early, it will give Sony plenty of time to respond. If they release around the same time, it will be more like a game of rock,paper, scissors (just hope they both choose scissors).

      Amen. Finally someone who views the console wars the right way. We (the consumers) only win while there's a war. I like the three company videogame market. There's more innovation, more cross-platform games, and lower prices. As I see it, Microsoft is no more evil than Sony (paying stores off to not stock DC) or Nintendo (remember the pricefixing conviction they had in the 90's?). But with three of them around and strong, shenanigans are harder to pull. I hope MS holds their hand close and doesn't try to jump generations too soon.

      --
      Use the Firehose to mod down Second Life stories!
    12. Re:I doubt this is true by DrDoombender · · Score: 1

      umm...yeah, those are some good examples, and dropping the price to $99 will just suddenly make a person go out and buy a console? You also still have to go out and buy the games which adds to that total price. Multiplayer? add controllers. In the end, you will pay more the xbox than just the $99, because its worthless without dvds, games, music, linux...etc. Granted, that's a nice price, but it does not guarantee that people will go out and buy the thing. That's not to say that it won't help sales, but I seriouly doubt that everybody is just going to start buying xboxs left and right because now the price is $99. Also, as I recall, nintendo dropped the price and added free games. They also dropped the price during the holiday season. Hey, what do I know, the only point I wanted to really get across is that I think microsoft will release around the same time as Sony

    13. Re:I doubt this is true by mr.capaneus · · Score: 1

      I agree wholeheartedly about not wanting patchable games on consoles. That is half the reason I play console games instead of PC games now. I got tired of rushed, crappy games that only became playable after 6 months of patching. Any of the consoles that allow patching of games will not be consoles that I buy if that feature is heavily used.

    14. Re:I doubt this is true by DrDoombender · · Score: 1
      First off, I only own a PS2. I've thought about getting an Xbox, becaused I'd like Amped 2 and a few others, but I can't justify it. A $99 dollar console I'd rush out and buy without thinking about it. I'd pick up a couple games too without regrets.

      So you don't own a gamecube because?

      Anyhow, here is my take on what MS should do to put up a decent fight. Drop the Xbox to $99 and announce that the Xbox Next will be backwards compatible on the same day. I'd buy a console and a few games that day and a few more over the course of time. Backwards compatibility is also critical to ensure a decent library of titles for the next gen console and game makers switch over.

      A sound strategy, and I would consider buying an xboxnext, but not an xbox. Why buy the console if I now that the xboxnext will be backwards compatible? I can wait, honestly, I can wait. There are few if any xbox games I have to have.

      Then, if MS can beat Sony by a 9 months to market, I'd pick up an Xbox Next and probably not get a PS3. The performance differences will be negligible and I will still have my PS2 around to play my current game collection Perhaps, but again, Sony has breathing room to react to Microsofts tactics. If they release early, Microsoft's cards are now on the table. Sony can react to that. This does not gurantee a win for Microsoft anymore than saying the console will be backwards compatable (although it would be nice).

      Should I also make a console, that I'd like to see Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo all do well? cause that's what I want. I just think that the idea of an early release isn't going to happen. You can say, "Told you so!" if it does come true.

      Anyway, good post and your arguments are all valid.

    15. Re:I doubt this is true by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      DC had broadband. You had to buy it like the PS2 one.

    16. Re:I doubt this is true by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I believe what killed the Dreamcast wasn't piracy but technical inferiority. The graphics weren't as good as the PS2, it couldn't play back DVDs, and its online support was a joke.

      I think you forget the period. The Dreamcast beat the PS2 to market in the US almost a year in advance. At the time, if you wanted the best looking version of the suprise hit Tony Hawk's Pro Skater, you got the Dreamcast version. If you wanted any online play at all, you got a Dreamcast; it would be years before the PS2 had a real offering. The Dreamcast was dead and buried long before there was broadband support for the PS2, suggesting that lack of broadband was a problem is confusing cause and effect. While comparing current PS2 titles to Dreamcast titles does give a healthy edge to the PS2, at the time they were comperable (in much the same way that the PS2 and the X-Box are now comperable). Crazy Taxi and Jet Grind Radio are still great looking games.

    17. Re:I doubt this is true by jared_hanson · · Score: 1

      So you don't own a gamecube because?

      The game collection is generally unappealing to me. I like to play games like Tony Hawk, SSX, etc. Gamecube gets some of these games (the most popular), but definately not all. It is purely personal, but the Gamecube isn't marketed towards my interests.

      A sound strategy, and I would consider buying an xboxnext, but not an xbox. Why buy the console if I now that the xboxnext will be backwards compatible? I can wait, honestly, I can wait. There are few if any xbox games I have to have.

      I guess that's your decision, but either way you are not buying an Xbox so MS has no reason to appeal to you. There are people (myself included) who this will sway. I would purchase an Xbox for $99 (assuming backwards compatibility) knowing full well that it will be outdated in a year or so. $99 over the course of a year is not a big deal to me. It will get me in on the Xbox and buying current games. Otherwise, I'm not going to buy an Xbox, I won't buy any current games, and I'll only consider buying the Xbox Next. Anyone who can't be swayed, isn't going to be. But there are people who can. And the sway is the difference between the gurantee of bringing gamers on to your platform versus the possibility.

      If I buy an Xbox ($99), five games (~$200), and an Xbox Next (~300), I've already spent $600 before buying any next gen games. There's a good chance I spend $0 dollars on the Xbox platform if there is no swaying factor.

      The Xbox is at the end of its lifecycle and if MS wants a chance in the next gen market, they need to use the resources they currently have wisely. Any adopter they can bring on to the current platform is one they will likely keep for the next gen. For people who like to only own one current console (again, myself), they have a chance of eating away at the competition. I've already started evaluating my decision for a next gen console, and I can be convinced to go with the Xbox Next if I see the value in it. If MS just takes the easy road, I'll stick with the PS3 by default. MS is behind, they need to actively win over customers.

      Perhaps, but again, Sony has breathing room to react to Microsofts tactics. If they release early, Microsoft's cards are now on the table. Sony can react to that. This does not gurantee a win for Microsoft anymore than saying the console will be backwards compatable (although it would be nice).

      I don't agree with this. MS had breathing room between the PS2 and the Xbox release, but it hasn't proved to be much benefit. Performance increases in a 9 month or so period for the console market are negligible. Success is based on game quality and slightly improved graphics is not a huge deal to your typical console gamer. Otherwise, the Xbox would be winning right now. I think MS and Sony are equally skilled in creating platforms such that minor hardware differences won't be a selling point.

      The winner of the next gen war will be the one who executes an overall strategy better. Sony is the chip leader, so MS needs to utilize any leverage it can come up with. It can't be conservative if they want to be on top 3 years from now. I think what I outlined would be a good strategy, but we will see how it plays out.

      In any case, I've enjoyed reading your opinions. I thought I'd comment further on your reply.

      --
      -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
    18. Re:I doubt this is true by Troed · · Score: 1

      First off, I don't think there has been a console in recent history that has turned a profit on hardware. The hardware is sold at a loss to increase adoption rates, and thus game sales, which is where the money is made.

      Congratulations, you've fallen for a myth.

      Sega Saturn, Sega Dreamcast, Microsoft Xbox

      Those are the ones sold at a loss. Notice a trend?

    19. Re:I doubt this is true by corpsiclex · · Score: 1

      what'd happen if they both choose rock?

      --

      eBayDig 1s a typo saerch engien
    20. Re:I doubt this is true by DrDoombender · · Score: 1

      scissors they take stabs at each other. Rock they throw stones at each other, but problem is they both sorta have glass houses (if you know what i mean). Paper, would be they are both lame I guess. You figure that one out. At the time, that commment made sense, but even though that comment was mistyped (It was supposed to be "Let's hope they don't both pick scissors"), I have no clue what I was thinking when I typed that. :P

  38. Maybe we we should all buy one... by techiemac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I say this for a simple reason...
    Larger scale adoption of Linux.
    Ok... So how does buying an XBox help Linux become more widely adopted.
    Let's look at what motivate 99% of Computer hardware changes and upgrades.... games. No one needs a hardcore graphics card with an overclocked, liquid cooled CPU to run Word. The primary purpose for upgrading one's computer (OS and Hardware) tends to be for games. Linux simply does not have the same game base as Windows does (yes I know that this is changing... but there still is not enough).
    Microsoft really wants to win with the XBox and the more money that we all sink into the XBox, vendors will have less motivation for targeting PCs for game development. Comparitivly, porting is the easy part (budget wise)... it's testing that kills your budget. With the PC platform, you have to take into account the wide range of systems out there, tech support for those different systems, etc. With the XBox, they have to worry about 1 platform and only 1.
    The widespread adaptation of console games could be really good for Linux. IMHO, there would be less motivation to deal with Windows as it appears as though games are a big selling point of Windows. If Microsoft has tunnel vision with the XBox (most large companies tend to suffer from this), it will probably be too late before they realize that the XBox is cutting into their OS market share. Though games could be a bigger marketshare for MS.
    So buy up those XBoxen and encourage MS in it's game console venture.

    1. Re:Maybe we we should all buy one... by greymond · · Score: 1

      um...Wouldn't it just be better to buy a PS2 with the Linux Development kit....In my opinion its better to support those that help you then those who will use your money to further apposing goals...just my 2....

    2. Re:Maybe we we should all buy one... by DenOfEarth · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I bought an Xbox so I could play games away from a PC (I sit in front of a PC all day long), and on a nice couch. Plus, I think the Xbox is a pretty damn cool system. Halo, KOTOR, now a GTA - double pack, morrowind, there are more than enough good games for the system to make it worth picking up anyways.

    3. Re:Maybe we we should all buy one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No no no, we should all buy one and then never buy any games for it so that we can financially /. them.
      The linux thing is the bonus that makes it all worthwhile: no profit for Microsoft, and a decent linux box to boot!

  39. Luddite? by tommck · · Score: 1

    I think you might qualify as Amish!

    --
    ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
  40. Best Media Computer by Omni+Magnus · · Score: 1

    For $230, to $250, you can get a really good media computer. It can play all kinds of great games that look as good as they would on a $1500 PC, as well as play downloaded video in just about every format. Plus it will have a decent hard drive for storing downloaded video, games or for use as a file server as well.

    XBOX $100
    120 gig hard drive $100
    Modchip $30 to $50 (depends if it is solderless or not, also you do NOT need that DVD playback kit)

    Total $250

  41. 99 Dollar Media Player by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    That would be worth getting in that case, since im not a gamer i cant comment on its 'intended' market.

    I assume the 99 dollar special will still be 'modable'

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  42. Why does it matter that it's $99? by Genjurosan · · Score: 1, Troll

    $99 worth of hardware doesn't mean crap when there aren't any good games. I mean the HALO coolfactor wore off long ago, HALO 2 is still a moving target, the majority of Xbox games suck, and the rest of the games either play on PC or one of the other two consoles. I enjoy my GC and PS2 far much more than my Xbox.

    1. Re:Why does it matter that it's $99? by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 1
      $99 worth of hardware doesn't mean crap when there aren't any good games.

      I beg to differ. The audio and video output on the Xbox is excellent. I have chipped boxes running Linux^H^H^H^H^HSCOWare in my bedroom and living room both. At $99, I'd consider adding it as an vorbis and movie player in the kitchen as well.

    2. Re:Why does it matter that it's $99? by dstyle5 · · Score: 1

      $99 is the "magic" price point if you will. Once you hit the two digit range it falls in the impulse buy price range. Look at what happened to Nintendo's sales once they dropped their price to $99. One could argue that the Cube may have a stronger software appeal in certain categorys as it has Nintendo's exclusive software, but I think a price cut to $99 would increase sales for the Xbox.

    3. Re:Why does it matter that it's $99? by Genjurosan · · Score: 1

      For your purposes, sure, but you qualify as a tiny portion of a percent of the market. How much time, equipment cost, and energy does it take to modify the device to what you are speaking of. More than a majority wishes to take. I'm speaking of the masses here and why the equipment cost doesn't matter if there aren't any exclusive and GOOD games. Also, I don't need a second media server. My HTPC serves that purpose just fine.

    4. Re:Why does it matter that it's $99? by Genjurosan · · Score: 1

      You are correct, it will increase sales; however, the fact still remains that the titles on the XBOX generally fall in the lacking category. I purchased my $99 GC about 2 months ago simply to play titles like Zelda, Metroid Prime, SMB1 & 2, etc.. All of the above are exclusive AND very good/fun to play games.

    5. Re:Why does it matter that it's $99? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Thank you, Captain Serious!

      I bet you're real fun at parties.

    6. Re:Why does it matter that it's $99? by Genjurosan · · Score: 1

      You are most welcome Commander Asshole! Great Ad Hominem post. You really moved the needle today! Thanks for posting.

    7. Re:Why does it matter that it's $99? by lowe0 · · Score: 1

      Crimson Skies and Project Gotham 2 are both fantastic, and both are even more fun on Live. Ninja Gaiden is coming, Halo 2 isn't that far off, and there's enough cross-platform titles (including the Splinter Cell sequel) to keep any gamer happy.

      I have far more Xbox games than PS2 or GameCube titles, and have no trouble finding something fun to play. All three consoles have a good library, but I'm enjoying my Xbox the most (especially with Live.)

    8. Re:Why does it matter that it's $99? by mliu · · Score: 1

      2001 called, and they want their tired old argument back. The fact of the matter is that the Xbox actually has a number of quality titles out there now, like Knight of the Old Republic, Crimson Skies, etc. The fact that the rest of the games play on the other consoles isn't that much of a criticism when you apparently own all 3. The bulk of decent titles these days come out on all 3, and without fail the Xbox versions of the games are always of higher quality in sound and graphics than the other versions. Given that, unless you enjoy buying bad versions of games just because you don't want to support MS or something, it certainly seems strange how you get far more enjoyment out of your other two consoles than your Xbox.

    9. Re:Why does it matter that it's $99? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Please meet my friend, Captain Mellow. You are making him harshed.

      Get laid, my friend.

    10. Re:Why does it matter that it's $99? by Genjurosan · · Score: 1

      1. Never said there were not any good titles on XBOX.

      2. I always buy the title that is rated the highest for the given platform.

      3. I don't care anything about supporting or not supporting MS, it's all about the tool that gets the job done in the best manner.

      4. You contributed to the old tired argument, if you thought it was so old, then why waste your time?

      5. There is nothing I would want more than the XBOX to have the best selection of games, as it comes in first place when you consider the HDD, the graphics, sound, etc...

      6. I enjoy the GC and PS2 more, as i've found more in-depth enjoyable games on those platforms, while I've found the same old games that recycle the same styles and plot lines on the XBOX.

      7. Unless a person owns all three, then there really isn't much room to talk, as the perspective isn't there.

      Oh well.. to each his own.

  43. Needed: Sponser ... by jamonterrell · · Score: 2, Funny

    Upcoming Xbox2 Linux Project seeking sponser to front prize money...

    --
    I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
  44. And yet... by inertia187 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm still waiting for the flying cars. I was promised flying cars. Where the hell are my flying cars!

    --
    A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
    1. Re:And yet... by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      They're currently all being used for a beowulf cluster in Soviet Russia.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  45. Don't underestimate Nintendo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even at $99 Nintendo still makes a small profit on each Gamecube sold. (Sony and MS have been losing money since day one.) They could go to $50 and still lose less per unit than MS did per Xbox at $149.

    1. Re:Don't underestimate Nintendo by cens0r · · Score: 1

      Sony doesn't loose money on the consoles. They break even in the begining and then start seeing a small profit as they slowly improve the process.

      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
  46. That'll be cool if they work... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This scares me a little, as 2 of the 4 people I know with xboxes have had the hardware fail so miserable (and in one case, repeatedly) that they gave up completely on the system and gave away their games. If they are lowering the price, the quality of the unit is obviously not being addressed. Then, they'll rush the xbox2 out onto the market, too fast, just like last time to comete with PS2. The cycle is reapeated and people will once again buy crappy hardware.

  47. Sony by voideng · · Score: 1

    I just hope Sony doesn't make the same mistakes IBM made with OS/2 when Windows 95 was promised at the begining of '95. To beat Microsoft to Market, they released a product that wasn't ready for primetime and Wnidows 95 was late and the PC 32-bit OS fell to Microsoft.

  48. Microsoft rule by vasqzr · · Score: 1


    Isn't the Microsoft rule, 'get it right the third time'?

    If they can get it out to stores BEFORE the PS2, and have some quality games, Sony may become a distant memory. Also, none of this 'multiplayer online support coming in a year or so' mumbo-jumbo.

    I think Microsoft should BUY Nintendo.

    Why?

    Compare the design of the GameCube to that of the X(tra-large)Box.

    Nintendo also brings to the table, IP like Mario, StarFox, Donkey Kong, Zelda, Pokemon...

    Microsoft can have the console for the 'advanced mature adult', and at the same time capture the kiddy market.

    Technically, the PlayStation I and II are junk. Technically, they shouldn't have survived. Just like even though DOS/Windows were'nt the BEST OS (by far) they dominated. Marketing and other things led to this.

    1. Re:Microsoft rule by ganiman · · Score: 0

      That could possible be the dumbest thing I have heard all year. Microsoft should not buy anything. They ruin nearly everything they touch. They know how to do one thing.. marketing. It's all they've ever really been good at.

      PS1 and PS2 are not junk, and it is quite sad that you try to compare them to DOS/Windows (which is ironic, because you support M$ earlier in your post). They may not have the hardware like Xbox does, but they don't need it. They are very good and efficient at what they do. M$ writes code that needs huge honking machines to run on; the rest of the world doesn't.

      --
      geek n performer who performs morbid or disgusting acts, as biting off the head of a live chicken
    2. Re:Microsoft rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Technically, the PlayStation I and II are junk. Technically, they shouldn't have survived. Just like even though DOS/Windows were'nt the BEST OS (by far) they dominated. Marketing and other things led to this.

      Good games, perhaps? There were at least a few good titles, I'm sure.

    3. Re:Microsoft rule by prockcore · · Score: 1

      I think Microsoft should BUY Nintendo.

      Nintendo has $6 billion in the bank, so MS won't buy Nintendo, it would cost them way too much and the shareholders wouldn't approve of the deal.

    4. Re:Microsoft rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MSFT approached Nintendo before building the x-box.

      MSFT was turned down.

    5. Re:Microsoft rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft also tried with Sega. They'd had a history of partnership in the past (similar to Microsoft's partnership with Nintendo in the past). Sega likewise rebuffed them.

      Poor Microsoft. Nobody likes them except for the FPS fanboys, Windows slaves, and P Diddy.

  49. Two words for you... by tommck · · Score: 1

    High Friggin Definition!

    --
    ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
    1. Re:Two words for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats a weak argument .. all the consoles can handle 490p right now.

      Doesn't the xbox only have one game that takes advantage of 1080i?

    2. Re:Two words for you... by tommck · · Score: 1

      490p? Interesting... new mode :-)

      There are many 720p games for XBox too. Can you point me to a 720p PS2 or GameCube games? Plus, I've only seen one 480i XBox game...

      1080i:

      Dragon's Lair 3D
      Enter the Matrix
      Syberia

      That's all I know off the top of my head.

      Anyway... if you have an HDTV, there's so substitute for high-def games. All the PS2 sites talk about "cool progressive scan games" like that's such a huge deal. It's only a huge deal because that's the best it offers.

      --
      ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
  50. Not $99 by kgbkgb · · Score: 1

    Don't forget that in order to get linux on there you need to install a modchip, which typically runs you about $50.

    Sure, you could get someone else with a modchip to flash your TSOP, meaning you wouldn't need a modchip, but that's risky. If anything goes wrong, you have a big black paperweight.

    1. Re:Not $99 by entartete · · Score: 1

      you don't need a mod-chip anymore unless you want to replace the ide drives. there are more options besides the 007 flash rom + soldering trick. http://xbox-linux.sourceforge.net/docs/faq.html#9

  51. compiler farm by mod_parent_down · · Score: 1

    That sweet compile farm I always wanted to build could seriously be worth it pretty soon. DistCC and 4 modded xboxes for around 500 bucks? That sounds Funtastic!

    1. Re:compiler farm by gral · · Score: 1

      I love the comment on discCC:

      distcc is developed on GNU/Linux, but has been reported to work on other systems including FreeBSD, NetBSD, Darwin, Solaris, HP-UX, IRIX, Cygwin and BSD/OS. distcc is not supported on any SCO operating system.

      --
      Scott Carr
    2. Re:compiler farm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just get yourself a 2.8GHz Athlon box this October.

  52. No surprise here by Duke+of+Scarborough · · Score: 1

    I guess it will soon come to the point where one would get a console free upon signing up a 2-year Xbox Live contract. Remember the time you had to fork out two hundred bucks to get a cell phone?

  53. you're welcome... by patrick.whitlock · · Score: 2, Funny

    "In other news, following the purchace of an Xbox console by Patrick Whitlock, Microsoft has announced that it will now begin selling the units at damn near half the price that Patrick has paid for his. When asked for a comment Mr. Whitlock only said, " this sucks""

  54. New product idea... by MrPoopyPants · · Score: 1
    Do you think someone could get sued by releasing an open-source entertainment computer (game machine, PVR, internet terminal, media player, etc...) under the name linuXbox ?

    I see double trouble with that as there's a company in Michigan called "The Linux Box" which does Linux consulting services.

    Seriously, though, that is dirt cheap. I already have PS2 and GC but I would pick one up just to hack it up for fun and profit.

  55. My Prediction by Zebedeu · · Score: 1
    That would put the Xbox 2 on store shelves up to a full year before Sony's PlayStation 3

    My prediction: No it won't.
    One of two thing will happen: either MS is on their usual scare tactics of promissing soon, releasing late, or Sony will just have to release PS3 sooner.

    From what I've heard, the development on Playstation 3 is coming along just fine, the reason they don't want to release it sooner is because the PS2 is still selling like hotcakes.

  56. Just my luck... by JakeSpencer · · Score: 1

    And here I just bought a used Xbox for $139 last weekend.

  57. Price cut?? by TREETOP · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nah, I'll wait til I see it at BigLots. Thats when we know for sure that this endeavour is circling the shark tank (to merge two phrases meant to describe utter failure: circling the drain and jumping the shark tank) Thats where I got my Bonefone!!

  58. I've been wondering about this by Dark+Paladin · · Score: 1

    Mainly, the issue as to whether or not it will be a "big deal" if the Xbox 2 or Gamecube 2 (N5, whatever) is released before the PS3 is.

    There are two scenarios:

    1. No backwards compatitiliby. Remember, this really came along with the PS2 and the Game Boy systems, but most consoles have not been backwards compatible.

    If you believe the rumors that the Xbox 2 will be a PowerPC chip (perhaps even a slimmed down version of the PPC 970 aka "G5" chip), then the odds of backwards compatibility lies in the realm of the possible, but not likely in my book.

    So that means an Xbox 2 might ship without backwards compatibility, which leaves it in the current market problem is has now: powerful system, but not as many games as the PS2, and not as many good "first person games" as the Gamecube. Right now, the only advantage the Xbox has going for it is Xbox Live (though I'm honest curious to know if this is a money making segment of the Xbox division or not).

    2. Backwards compatible. Suppose that MS uses its recently purchased Virtual PC technology or some hardware based solution to emulate Xbox 1 titles, that might give it a leg up in the future. Rather than releasing a system and starting from scratch again, they would have the current library (especially Halo), and whatever Xbox Online subscribers would be making the jump.

    But even if they do make the jump, will it still be enough? Japanese support started halfway decently, dropped, and now it seems some developers (Konami, Sammy, and a few others) are giving it another chance.

    As things stand, the Xbox and the Gamecube are neck-in-neck in sales, with the latter actually being profitable by itself while the Xbox, from most of the financial reports seen, is still a major loss leader for MS.

    A cheaper Xbox *will* drive sales of the consoles, but the best thing MS can do is get some better first-party games out, and do *something* to bring in more Japanese gamers. Their biggest fear should be that Sony finally gets their online game in order, because once that does, the wealth of PS2 titles that could be brought online would quickly bury the Xbox Live segment in total users.

    Time will tell. I'm pretty patient either way, though I wish I could get my kids to bed earlier so I could play more of "Fatal Frame 2". (Man that game is creeping me out.)

    1. Re:I've been wondering about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "first party"

      I think they both have about the same number of good first person games: Halo vs. Metroid Prime. :)

    2. Re:I've been wondering about this by Mephie · · Score: 1

      Backward compatibility is great, but.. how difficult would it be to get developers to jump onboard for the new console? If you can create games for the old console and appeal to the market for both the Xbox and the Xbox 2, where's the real advantage (other than power) of creating a game that will only work on the Xbox 2? Sony ran in to a similar issue early in the life of the Playstation 2, as I recall. On the other hand, down the line, that worked out rather well, since the PS2 has a huge library and to this day you can still buy PS1 games at Wal-Mart, which stopped selling N64 games long ago.

  59. I've heard this kind of marketing crap by MS b4 by xutopia · · Score: 1, Insightful

    it's all about making us wait to see if it will be 99$, in case we'd be thinking about buying a different console which would cost less.

    1. Re:I've heard this kind of marketing crap by MS b4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Sony has that strategy perfected to a science. How do you think they killed the Dreamcast?

    2. Re:I've heard this kind of marketing crap by MS b4 by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      There is no other console. Anyone who was going to buy a GC (for $99) has already done so, probably with the Zelda bundle. The PS2 with the broadband pack is up to two hundred bucks or 180 or whatever, like an Xbox.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  60. How much loss per unit? by EulerX07 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a cheap hardrive and cheap ram get you pretty close to 99$.

    This is an example of the power of a monopoly trying to break into another market. There is NO way that a company could start out and keep losing tons of money like they're doing on the xbox. That's what's wrong with monopolies. They get so much income from selling windows xp pro (full version 449$CAN at futureshop.ca) and office Pro full (sells for 650$CAN at futureshop.ca) that they can keep losing until they make competition in an area go bankrupt. Then you start paying.

    The xbox doesn't seem cheap when you realize you're paying for it when you buy software from Microsoft's monopoly areas. Same goes for IE, media player and all the little utilities included in the OS that used to be made by various companies. It's never free, you just pay elsewhere.

    1. Re:How much loss per unit? by SpaceCadetTrav · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the info, trustbuster. I think you've confused results of being a "monopoly" with simply "having alot of money".

    2. Re:How much loss per unit? by mliu · · Score: 2, Funny

      "The xbox doesn't seem cheap when you realize you're paying for it when you buy software from Microsoft's monopoly areas. Same goes for IE, media player and all the little utilities included in the OS that used to be made by various companies. It's never free, you just pay elsewhere."

      Unless you run Linux, in which case your Xbox purchase is being subsidized by the oppressed masses of Windows users....

    3. Re:How much loss per unit? by MMaestro · · Score: 1
      What if you were to buy just one copy of MS's software and just keep using it, nearly endlessly? I know there are thousands of people out there who still use Windows 98 (I do) and some even use Windows 95. With this in mind, where is MS getting their money? Certainly not from software thanks to weak systems against installation on multiple computers. Not every computer is on the internet either, so there are some people who never patch their software or download new utilities (I have a computer still running DirectX 3.0).

      Companies such as MS don't really make money off of their software thanks to individuals like me and Joe Average. Companies make money off of huge distributers like Dell or Gateway who have to pay MS for every computer they build and send off with Windows installed on it.

      Its simple economics. Whats going to be a better deal? The 5000 individual consumers who buy your software for $500 each? Or the one big company who buys 50000 copies of your software for $300 and signs a contract stating that they'll use only your OS for the next 5 years?

    4. Re:How much loss per unit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      64MB RAM + 8GB HD = $100 ???? No way, man!

      You can find 64MB RAM for less than 15$, and a 20GB HD for less than $40. And that's the retail price...

    5. Re:How much loss per unit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      64MB RAM + 8GB HD = $100 ???? No way, man!

      You can find 64MB RAM for less than 15$, and a 20GB HD for less than $40. And that's the retail price...


      Yes, grandparent poster is smoking crack. Just as he/she equates having lots of money with being a monopoly.

    6. Re:How much loss per unit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You had to say it a second time spacecadettrav? Are you so angry that I said something bad against microsoft?

  61. Oh, it'll come out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why? Because the FUD engine is gearing up, there are no new consoles on the horizon for the foreseeable future, and you're forgetting the most important point:

    Microsoft consoles are built around off the shelf components.

    None of this emotion engine crap or 3" DVDs. Consequently, the PC market has moved forward under its own steam to enable an Xbox 2 to be built quite cheaply, but with a notably better spec.

    Add to that the fact that it's a great machine to develop for, and they're pretty much onto a winner.

  62. my timing is t3h win! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just sold my Xbox with 6 games on Ebay last week, got $255 for the whole thing.

    Stoked!

  63. Now all we need... by Bohnanza · · Score: 1

    ...are some decent games. It's been years since anything original or even slightly interesting's been released in any electronic format. I've seen lots of "awesome graffix!!!", though.

    --

    -----

    Sorry, I'm only a 1336 h4x0r.

    1. Re:Now all we need... by egomaniac · · Score: 1

      ...are some decent games. It's been years since anything original or even slightly interesting's been released in any electronic format. I've seen lots of "awesome graffix!!!", though.

      Damn. What the hell have I been playing for the last two years, then? I suppose Metroid Prime, Viewtiful Joe, Halo, and Devil May Cry (to name a very, very small sample) have all been both unoriginal and completely uninteresting.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
  64. If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by telstar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible;

    Here's my logic ... They want to gain users. Sell the systems at a huge loss, to pump up the number of games sold. That's always been their strategy.

    Now, Sell the XBOX2 with backward compatibility so the barrier to entry for new users isn't that large ... all of their old games still work. Past ownership of games ... plus a percentage of users that are tied to their "XBOX Live" accounts will encourage this transition. By dropping the XBOX price to $99, they'll be signing up a legion of future potential customers that are more likely to buy the XBOX2 than the PS3. Anyway, that's my speculation.

    1. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by Xeger · · Score: 1

      Your reasoning is sound. Also, note that Sony set a precedent with the backward compatibility of the PS2. Sony knows they'd damn well better make the PS3 play PS2 games. Even if the PS3's architecture is so radically different that their clever hardware-reuse trick won't work, it should have enough horsepower to emulation the Emotion Engine in software, perhaps even with code morphing akin to Transmeta's and -- the most important part -- some sort of emulated 3D pipeline.

      So: if Microsoft wants to stay in the game and woo future XBox customers, they need to strive for backward compatibility as well.

      Finally, note that the XBox is built on the Windows platform and the DirectX APIs, which are particularly good at handling version and driver differences. Your old XBox 1 games target DirectX 8, DirectInput, DirectSound, etc, and are completely agnostic of the actual underlying hardware platform, or the actual version of DirectX. Backward compatibility in the XBox world is virtually guaranteed. This is where Microsoft's "PC in a tiny box" strategy will really pay off.

    2. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by angle_slam · · Score: 1

      Backwards compatibility is meaningless to me. I had a PS1 and guess how many I played after I got my PS2? Zero. Why would I want to stick with old technology. Plus, if one has Xbox games, they can play them on the Xbox 1, regardless of whether they play on the Xbox 2.

    3. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by scrypt · · Score: 1

      If they switch to the PPC architecture, which I believe is still the rumor, then DirectX would be out the window wouldn't it, unless they use something similar to MacDX?

    4. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by AnimeFreak · · Score: 1

      One major flaw to your statement is the fact that the Xbox 2 will have a completely different processor than from what the Xbox has no. Instead of having an Intel Pentium III inside the sucker, it will probably have some RISC-based chipset from IBM, maybe PowerPC.

      Unless they get some decent emulation going, I really don't see how these Xbox games are going to perform well on the Xbox 2 if it has a completely different processor.

    5. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by dogbowl · · Score: 1

      Sony didn't set the precedent for backwards compatability. That had been done numerous times before (Atari, Gameboy)

      What set a precedent way back when that would totally blow people out of the water today would be to take the ColecoVision approach. Could you imagine if MSFT released a product that would allow PS2 games to play on the x-box?

      --

      These pretzels are making me thirsty.
    6. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by Xeger · · Score: 1

      No, silly, my post said Sony set a precedent -- namely, that their newer-generation Playstation consoles would be backward compatible with their older-generation consoles. :) The precedent for backward compatibility would, I think, be exemplified in the x86 architecture. Thanks to instruction-level compatibility and BIOS, it is still possible to install and run DOS 1.0 (shipped circa 1980) on a modern PC. I may be in the dark about an even longer-running stretch of compatibility in some architecture out there. Out of curiosity, can you think of any other hardware that spans 23 years of backward-compatibility?

    7. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by Xeger · · Score: 1

      If MSFT truly is switching to PPC architecture, that implies one of two things.

      1) They're replacing the entire XBox operating system, tossing the approach of "let's bundle a stripped-down copy of Windows 2000 on every DVD" and going with something else -- perhaps Windows Embedded, which runs on just about any architecture you can imagine.

      2) They're keeping the current OS (or switching to a more recent revision of Windows) and have ported the whole kit and kaboodle to PPC architecture. This is not too far-fetched, considering that they supported Windows NT on PPC and Alpha architectures until fairly recently.

      In either case, recall that Microsoft recently bought Connectix' Virtual PC software. Thus far they've revamped it and will be releasing it for both Mac and and Windows platforms. On Mac, it will serve the same market it always has. On Windows, it will act as a competitor to VMWare.

      Now, with Microsoft's total control over the DirectX API and intimate knowledge of the internals of their own OS, I rate it as "difficult but not impossible" for them to adapt the Virtual PC software for use as an x86 emulation layer on a PPC XBox.

      The first sign that this is happening might be sudden, unprecedented support for 3D graphics cards in the MacOS version of Virtual PC. If we see such support crop up, it's a good indicator that MSFT is (a) using PPC for XBox 2 and (b) making plans for backward compatibility with XBox games.

    8. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by dogbowl · · Score: 1

      The gameboy is at 14 years no, thats not a bad run there, and there's no end in sight for that product.

      How old could VHS VCR tapes be considered? They were around in the 70's so I would say off the cuff that they're gaining on 30 years there.

      Who knows what the longest run could be? I could be totally annoying and bring up something like the Hebrew language.

      I still say MSFT needs to release a PS2 emulator for the x-box. The industry would go nuts!

      --

      These pretzels are making me thirsty.
    9. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Unless they get some decent emulation going"

      Thats just it fuckhead, Decent emulation.

    10. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by Xeger · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I would consider VHS to be a storage medium more than a hardware platform; in the realm of analog storage media, the undisputed winner would have to be the venerable gramophone record, which is still a going concern (albeit just barely). First introduced in 1888, it was standardized to the 78rpm format we know and love sometime in the 30s. Then again, there's always paper, papyrus and carved stone which predate even LPs. ;)

      If we're concerned more with stuff that can be displayed on a screen, however, then you're right: the VHS is older than the PC.

      I wonder just how backward-compatible the Hebrew language really is. I know for a fact that American Hebrew-school Hebrew and modern colloquial Hebrew (as spoken in Israel) are pretty different, though a speaker of one can generally understand a speaker of the other. I also know that Israeli Hebrew and is radically different from pre-WWII Hebrew which, as I understand, didn't have a single dialect. Every pocket of Jewish culture added its own quirks of pronunciation, according to the tongue of wherever they resided. And of course, even then, I'm sure the language has drifted since biblical days. The grammar and spelling are probably quite similar, thanks to all of the ancient writings and the strength of Jewish tradition, but I'd bet the pronunciation is radically different.

    11. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by dogbowl · · Score: 1

      I think you're right there. If we kept the argument to items that run on electricy, I bet the longest run would be the record player. I think that its compatible run would be longer than the light bulb.

      Way to go music industry!

      --

      These pretzels are making me thirsty.
    12. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by pjp6259 · · Score: 1

      What I would love to see, would be for microsoft to come out with "Patches" for all/most of their xbox games when xbox 2 comes out. Since the xbox2 will obviously be much more powerful, these patches would simply consist of minor mods to take advantage of the new processor power.

      Imagine if you could go out and purchase xbox2 with xbox2 live, and not only can you play all your old xbox games, but they've got new textures, and models so they look like current generation games. Hell, huge sellers like HALO or GTA might even deserve a whole new super-large level that you can only play if you've got xbox2, and xbox2 live.

      --
      Computers don't make mistakes. What they do, they do on purpose.
    13. Re:If(XBOX == $99) XBOX2 = backward compatible; by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the murmurs I've heard (Im in the game industry), Xbox2 will be PowerPC-based. Unless its damn fast or they can throw in an Intel chip too, no backwards compatibility for you.

  65. Total agreement... by arashiakari · · Score: 1

    ...in fact the PS1 did the same thing, if you recall. It didn't have impressive statistics but somehow programmers "reached into its guts" as you so eloquently said it and produced good games. Like FF8 vs FF7, looked so much better and on the same platform. MGS1... I've no clue how the pulled those graphics out of such meager hardware.

    The PS2 gives people a lot of canvas to paint on, and an excellent set of brushes. Everything from variable-pressure-sensitive buttons on the controllers, to a graphics pipe that is highly hackable for all kinds of graphics effects. People can really get creative with the PS2's offerings and deliver great games.

    Dreamcast and XBox give the programmers little PCs in a box so designers fall into the patterns and expectations they are used to.

  66. Geez! Now I'm going by va3atc · · Score: 2, Informative

    Now I'm going to have to sell my Apex DVD player!!!

    C'mon 99$USD for an Xbox?? Most of my movies are in divx/xvid and only playable on a computer so this will be heavenly.

    --
    Candle burns its brightest in the dark
  67. $99 XBOX? No way. by dstyle5 · · Score: 1

    I doubt that Microsoft would be willing to cut the cost of the XBox to $99 dollars since they have already lost around $800 million the last fiscal year on XBox related costs.

    They are competing very well with Nintendo on a worldwide basis (number of units sold) so why would they lose even more money to what would only amount to a few percentage points gain in market share. If a price drop was going to occur it probably would have happened around Christmas so that they could've countered Nintendo's drop to $99.

    Perhaps if they cut the cost in Japan it would help them there because they are getting destroyed over there, but with their lack of Japanese software titles it probably wouldn't help very much.

  68. aka Dreamcast, pre-xbox and ps2 by ayeco · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Msoft better be careful, they'll end up with a dead console like Sega had after it realeased the dreamcast right before xbox and ps2. People might just to see what the ps3 has to offer and avoid x2.

  69. Re:I'd like to see... by stephenisu · · Score: 1

    Too bad it would be a huge waste of electricity to power all of the needless components... (video, sound, etc...) and you have a cheapo CPU

    --
    Sigs? We don't need no stinking sigs!
  70. People buy a console for games, not vice versa by MunchMunch · · Score: 4, Insightful
    " I don't think most people have an issue with kicking in an extra $20 for DVD-playing, a hard drive, and a broadband adapter."

    Except that I think a majority of people in the console-buying demographic already have a hard drive (with a PC connected to it) and a DVD player (seeing as they can be had for $29 on their own now). Finally, the broadband adapter, good only for the console and requiring a separate connection, really isn't for the impulse-buy crowd. The features the XBox has don't really seem to be all that impressive anymore, and because the normal impulse buyer won't mod their XBox into a Linux media player and already have a DVD player, I don't see much of an advantage in getting an XBox for those features.

    Like always with game consoles, it just comes down to the games- I want to play a lot of Gamecube games, but I don't really want to play many XBox games. Gamecube at $99 is a steal because you have things like Viewtiful Joe, Zelda, Metroid, Mario (Kart), etc...Honestly, somebody correct me if I am missing something, but I haven't seen even one must-buy game for the XBox since Panzer Dragoon Orta.

    1. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by li99sh79 · · Score: 1
      Honestly, somebody correct me if I am missing something, but I haven't seen even one must-buy game for the XBox since Panzer Dragoon Orta.

      A little game called Knights of the Old Republic comes to mind. Though I don't recall off the top of my head what the release dates of the two games were.
      -sam

      --
      I was just here, where did I go?
    2. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by pogle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      PC version of KOTOR is much nicer. Comes with all the nice extras instead of having to get them thru Live. Plus with semi-nice hardware it *flies* even at max res/details.

      I only consider a game must-buy for a system if its only available for that system, or inherently unplayable on any ports that may exist.

      --
      http://thechubbyferret.net - Ferret pictures and informative links.
    3. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by dhamsaic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Disclaimer: I am a huge game nut, and own (and love) all three current home console platforms. (Up to date as of about a month ago - http://users.ign.com/collection/dham)

      Xbox really has a lot going for it. It is indeed a bit weak on the exclusives, but its overall library is very strong. Everything that's come out on all three platforms is almost uniformly better on the Xbox (Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, Soul Calibur II, TimeSplitters 2, etc), and it's now got Grand Theft Auto Double Pack, which is spectacularly polished when compared to the PS2 versions of the games (the load times alone made it worth a re-purchase; the fact that the cars look amazing is just icing on an already delicious cake).

      If you only have a GameCube, then I would think that GTA and Panzer Dragoon Orta would be compelling enough to warrant a purchase (but then again, I have nearly 40 Xbox games and two Xboxes). Knights of the Old Republic is also seen by many as a must-own title, but that really depends on your affinity for RPGs.

      Where Xbox is really strong, I think, is when compared to PS2 from the standpoint of the casual gamer. The Xbox does not require a multitap (saving you ~$30), does not require an online adaptor (saving you ~$40) and does not require memory cards (which are running about $25 each for PS2 and Xbox). Casual gamers want to play titles like Prince of Persia, Soul Calibur II, TimeSplitters 2, Grand Theft Auto, etc - all of which the Xbox has, in far superior form than its PS2 counterparts.

      Xbox will never have all the franchises we love and wax nostalgic over, mainly because those were all born on Nintendo, by Nintendo. The exclusives you mentioned are all great games (and I own all of them but Wind Waker). When we were growing up (I'm 22), Nintendo was the console. Microsoft can't compete with Samus.

      I honestly feel that the Xbox and the GameCube work very well together. I bought a GameCube at $199, two at $149, and will probably pick up another one at $99. I use it to play the great exclusives it's got (Animal Crossing is my current addiction and Ikaruga is a beast). For everything else, I turn to Xbox, because its versions of the games are simply better than on the other consoles.

      The point I'm really trying to make is that Microsoft cannot compete with Nintendo for gamers' hearts, and they know that. Don't look at Xbox as competition for GameCube, look at it as competition for PS2.

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    4. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by egomaniac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Like always with game consoles, it just comes down to the games- I want to play a lot of Gamecube games, but I don't really want to play many XBox games. Gamecube at $99 is a steal because you have things like Viewtiful Joe, Zelda, Metroid, Mario (Kart), etc...Honestly, somebody correct me if I am missing something, but I haven't seen even one must-buy game for the XBox since Panzer Dragoon Orta.

      I'm in the same boat. I have an Xbox, a PS2, and a GameCube.

      I have four Xbox games.
      I have five PS2 games.
      I have twenty-six GameCube games.

      I'm pretty platform-agnostic, too. All three of my systems are hooked up via an autosensing switchbox and have wireless controllers, so playing any one of them is no more complicated than turning it on and grabbing the controller. Because of that, it's not like I have a excuse for wanting to play one system more than the other (well, the Xbox is in the closet, so I'd have to drag it out and hook it up...). Nothing like that.

      I just find that there are very few games on the other two systems that interest me in the least, whereas the GameCube has a ton. Plus the GameCube has a lot more female-friendly games, which is important to me because it's a lot easier for me to score gaming time if my wife wants to play too.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    5. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      Casual gamers buy a mod chip. China town is the second stop after EB for most kids. They are simply more up to date technically then the majority of slasdotters. And the equation 1 game $65 1 Mod chip $60 (cdn) isn't too hard to figure out.

    6. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by dhamsaic · · Score: 1

      Get real, dude. I'd be willing to be that fewer than 20% of the installed base of Xboxes are modded. The PS2 is even harder to hardware mod. Casual gamers don't mod consoles. Fucking nerds do. (Not that there's anything wrong with it. I whole-heartedly approve.)

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    7. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by FatherOfONe · · Score: 1

      Good points, but as I see it Microsofts flaw is that the Xbox is just about the same as a PC. So developers have a choice to spend time developing software for the PC first, then port to the Xbox and or the PS2. Now seeing that the PS2 has about a 90 million install base, people will take that on. Seeing that the Xbox has around a 5 million install base and the PC has well over 100 Million.... It makes the decision simple.

      The other issue, you mentioned in your post. Nintendo has the hearts and minds of customers to develop childrens games. This does not mean the games are not fun for adults, but it does mean that there will be a large selection of games that smaller children can own and play. Microsoft by their own words gave up that market to focus on the 13-30 year old boy/men. The problem is that that market was really 13-18 year olds. Most people over 18 bought good computer systems and played their games on it. This coupled with the poor economy has caused the Xbox to be almost a complete failure. Yes it is the number two or three console, but the cost of it was HUGE and Microsoft will never recoupe that loss.

      Sony on the other hand, has done a few things very well. One was to keep the price of the PS2 on par with the technically better Xbox. So when the average Joe went to buy a new game system, he saw the two at the same price and thought they were "about" equal, AND he new about the Playstation AND he saw the large game base it had. The other thing Sony has done well is to control the manufacturing process. Microsoft is held hostage by Nvidia and Intel. Sony has been able to combine a few chips together in to one, and hense save money.

      What can Microsoft do? Well they can continue to dump large sums of money at this market hopeing to chew in to Sony's lead. I strongly disagree with you that most people will buy multiple systems. Most families will not do this. They will buy a new system every three of four years, but they understand that the console is just a small part of EVERYTHING you have to buy. You are the exception to the rule here.

      Now seeing that Microsoft is going to TRY and release a new game system before Sony, is a great move, but I would ask "What market are they going for now?" That question needs to be anwered, and it needs to be executed far better than Xbox1.

      Lastly, I believe that you are starting to see the sign of the problems to come for Microsoft. They still enjoy an illeagal monopoly with Office and client computers, but their profits were lower for last quarter, this even though sales were up significantly. There will come a time when those profits will be to low to sustain the "give away the product" to own the market strategy Microsoft has done in the past. Not to mention the board of directors is probably getting tired of seeing how much money they are loosing with MSN and Xbox....

      --
      The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
    8. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by Isca · · Score: 1

      I honestly feel that the Xbox and the GameCube work very well together. I bought a GameCube at $199, two at $149, and will probably pick up another one at $99. I use it to play the great exclusives it's got (Animal Crossing is my current addiction and Ikaruga is a beast). For everything else, I turn to Xbox, because its versions of the games are simply better than on the other consoles.

      Ok, someone has to ask..... Why do you need 4 of the same console??????

    9. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by dhamsaic · · Score: 1

      Had a house fire, shit got burnt. :)

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    10. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by Peeet · · Score: 1

      Halo

    11. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by BigKato · · Score: 1

      While this is undoubtedly true, it's off topic. This is a discussion about consoles, not PC's. I don't know how many times someone has chimed in that Halo and KOTOR aren't XBox exclusive anymore. At the time of their release and for quite some time afterwards (about 2 years for Halo and maybe 3-4 months for KOTOR), both games were XBox exclusive. And to this day they remain exclusive to the Xbox among consoles.

      BTW, is there any new content for the XBox KOTOR? It's been a while since i last checked.

      For me there are no 'must buy' games. The only 'must buys' for me are food and drugs.
      Have a good day.

      --
      So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
    12. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hate to say but KOTOR for PC sucked. It made a mockery of PCRPG genere. Oh the story line was great, the game play was great but it felt like a console game ported to the PC. After beating it on the PC a couple times I went out and bought a copy for XBox. I found it much more enjoyable on it's native platform.

      So what I am trying to say is it was inherently unplayable on the PC port. It played like a console game and in my opinon that makes it broken. Some of the broken features: inventory, movement speed, controls... I have got to say I have all 3 consoles along with a PC and certain games only fit on some systems.

      I only play madden on PS2. I only play KOTOR and Halo on XBox. I only play zelda on gamecube. My PC is not mostly used for MMO games at this point because the PC game market has disappeared. When I want a new game I look at it and decide what system it is best for and buy it. I never buy games on a whim. I've generally decided to buy a game months before it hits the shelves and weeks before it hits the shelves I know know what system I will buy it for.

      Of course I am a gamer and have been one for so many years that this is all second nature to me. But to claim that KOTOR on PC was as good as the XBox version is bording on ignorance. It just does not play like a PC RPG game should.

    13. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by instarx · · Score: 1

      Sheesh! With all that gaming how did you find the time to post to /.? Have you even seen the sun since 2003? Do you have food delivered?

    14. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by MolecularBear · · Score: 1

      You missed the best GCN game out there: Eternal Darkness. How can you not love a game that has a Sanity Meter?

      --

      Magnatune: Quality (DRM-free) MP3/FLAC/
    15. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you dysfunctional? The control was cake. Could be played with one hand. Yeesh.

      For having been a gamer for years, you're a pretty lousy one. I'd rather have my keyboard and/or mouse controls for KOTOR than an x-box controller. Actually I'd rather chop my hands off than use an xbox controller, less damage to my wrists over time.

    16. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by pogle · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, it is perfectly ontopic for the thread, which up a few parents is asking if there is anything 'must buy' for the xbox, implying that such a game would henceforth make it worth purchasing at all for gaming, versus mods or tinkering. The parent to my original post claimed KOTOR was a valid game in such a category, and I merely disagreed with him that it is not xbox exclusive and thus by no means is worth paying for an xbox and the game when one has a PC already upon which to play the game. That is strictly my opinion and inline/ontopic with discussion of whether or not a $99 xbox brings anything new to the table for games.

      I don't know about KOTOR updates on XBox, as I have it on PC only (PS2 and GCN being more suited to my console tastes).

      And its fine if you don't consider any game a must buy. Its an opinion issue, after all. I certainly don't rush out and buy 'must buy' games myself. I bide my time, as in the case of both Halo and KOTOR, and every $20 best seller console game I own. I was merely stating my views on what makes a game a must buy for a system.

      Oh yes, and isn't replying to threads calling them offtopic inherently offtopic? Whats the point in that? ;)

      --
      http://thechubbyferret.net - Ferret pictures and informative links.
    17. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like always with game consoles, it just comes down to the games- I want to play a lot of Gamecube games, but I don't really want to play many XBox games. Gamecube at $99 is a steal because you have things like Viewtiful Joe, Zelda, Metroid, Mario (Kart), etc...Honestly, somebody correct me if I am missing something, but I haven't seen even one must-buy game for the XBox since Panzer Dragoon Orta.

      You don't seem to be looking too hard, as you stated yourself, you don't really want to play many XBOX games anyways.

    18. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by silentbobdp · · Score: 1

      Soul Calibur II is NOT better on XBox than on GC. Link is an infinitely better character than Spawn.

      --
      --Moo.
    19. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by lorcha · · Score: 1

      Couldn't have been a shorted-out console or 3 that caused that fire, could it?

      --
      "Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
    20. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by dhamsaic · · Score: 1

      You're talking opinion, I'm talking fact.

      Fact: SCII load times on Xbox are shorter than on GC (though not by much, and certainly nowhere near as long as the load times on PS2 - I have all three versions)

      Fact: Xbox delivers a better looking picture than the GameCube version.

      I'm not saying that Link isn't a great extra character (though he's kind of... cheap), or that the GameCube version isn't a great one. I'm simply saying that technologically speaking, the Xbox version is superior to the GameCube version.

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    21. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by dhamsaic · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Believe it or not, I am a Perl programmer/systems enginner full-time and even have a live-in girlfriend (and have had for the past three years). I only get a few hours to game each day, which is why so many of the games on that list have not been completed (I'm waiting until retirement).

      I never really had any systems as a kid, so when I started making money, I got the bug. I just got a package with 2 Atari Lynx, another PlayStation, another Super Nintendo and a bunch of games. (I now have 3 Sega Saturn, 4 Super Nintendo, 3 N64, 2 original PSX, 1 PSOne, 2 Dreamcast, 2 GameCubes, 3 GameBoy Advance SP, 1 GameBoy Advance, 2 Neo Geo Pocket Color, 1 GameGear, 2 Xbox, 1 PS2, 2 Sega Genesis, 2 Atari Lynx, 3 Atari 2600 and an original GameBoy. Just wait until I start with the TurboGrafx, 3DO, Intellivision, etc. And I still need to replace my original NES, which was destroyed in my house fire.)

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    22. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by dhamsaic · · Score: 1

      No. It was a Sony Trinitron 27" TV, circa 1996. As you know, they don't have hard on/off switches (no TVs do nowadays), so power is always flowing to them. Apparently the model had a history of causing fires (or so the insurance company's investigator told us). I only had 8 consoles hooked up at the time of the fire (which started on a completely different floor on the opposite end of the house).

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    23. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      I'd be willing to be that fewer than 20%

      $150 for electricity

      Are you British?

    24. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by Funk_dat69 · · Score: 1

      Wow,
      Dude, you are the console makers wet-dream. That's quite a bit of hardware you got kicking there.

      Seriously, though, I suppose you're just a collector, huh? I KNOW you can't have all that hooked up and being used regularly. Wish I still had some of my old gear.

      --
      FUNK!
    25. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by dhamsaic · · Score: 1

      Currently hooked up I have:

      2 GameCubes, 2 Xbox, 1 PS2, 2 Dreamcast, 1 Super Nintendo, 1 N64, 1 Saturn, 1 PSX and 1 PSOne. I have another N64 specifically for playing games that don't work without the Expansion Pak, so I don't have to swap it out of the main one when I want to play an older game.

      We use all four GameBoy Advance systems (the 3 SP's and the 1 regular) pretty frequently. My girlfriend uses the Fire, I have the Onyx and Platinum, and the glacier GBA is my eReader system, which I use for SMA4:SMB3 and Animal Crossing.

      I do basically collect, yes, but I play everything pretty regularly. I pulled out a Genesis a few weeks ago for some WWF Royal Rumble action with a friend, for example, but I don't generally leave it hooked up.

      I play the Super Nintendo, GameCube and Xbox most frequently. I'll take a picture of my TV setup and post it later, if you're interested.

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    26. Re:People buy a console for games, not vice versa by dhamsaic · · Score: 1

      No.

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
  71. Re:I'd like to see... by Menkhaf · · Score: 1

    Yup, it would be very cheap. If I had more money I'd buy a bunch and install clusterLinux on them. Then I'd bring the whole thing to Dreamhack Summer in Sweden next summer and just let all the other geeks have a look of it before I wasted them all in distributed computing with my supercomputer.

    Xboxes were pretty cheap here in Denmark around fall 2002. An Xbox costed 1199 DKR (link is in danish), around 160 USD at the time.
    The two chains that were competing about selling both PS2 and Xboxes at the lowest price, Bilka and ElGiganten admitted that they lost around 800 DKR on each PS2 sold (link is in danish). The loss on Xboxes was probably the same...

    --
    A proud member of the Onion-in-Hand alliance
  72. Sony will do it first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet at E3. It happens all the time. Of course they are hurting themselves slashing the price on a piece of hardware that costs them twice that to make.

    Also if they come out a year before PS3. They'll end up like Sega with the Dreamcast, where everybody will be waiting for PS3 with the massive Japanese developer support.

    I'm sure Square will suddenly decide to make games for Xbox2(next)whatever, because it was out first. /end cynicism

    I'd get one for that price though.

  73. Still an online fee by read-only · · Score: 1

    $99 is an attractive price, but lets not forget that to play games online with the Xbox, you must pay a fee ($6/month or $50/year).

    As long as PS is free to play online, I'll stick with it.

  74. .. And if you act now... by Keitero-sama · · Score: 1

    we'll throw in a wireless router to turn your $99 xbox into an apache server. ^_^

    --
    -Kids in the back seat causes accidents.- -Accidents in the back seat causes kids.-
  75. I plan to... by alchemist0405 · · Score: 1

    ...wait until the price drops, then go to second-hand places (who will likely have to drop prices as well) and get one there.

    Use the built in networking for an interface and if you really feel like it, you can just plug it into a tv and use it that way.

    After that, it's just a quick Stage 3 from GentooX, and I am on my way to the cheapest server I have ever built. (~$60)

    I wouldn't buy much of anything from Microsoft, but I could justify a second-hand purchase for these kinds of savings.

    --
    Cameron King
    1. Re:I plan to... by Hassman · · Score: 1

      Gentoo makes me cry. Every time I try to install it something fails, and it won't finish. Then I get pissed and frustrated and swear I'll never try again... then after a month or so, I jump back on the horse only to be disappointed again.

      Bah!

      --
      -Mark
      Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
    2. Re:I plan to... by alchemist0405 · · Score: 1

      The only problems I have ever had with Gentoo (my personal preference) is that it is a pain if you have an over-zealous IT dept. I have trouble making the connections I need to download the sources. But other than that I enjoy using it. Often if you finde a package which is "broken," you can just come back in a day or so after re-syncing and someone will have fixed it.

      --
      Cameron King
  76. Must Feed Troll by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

    Yep. You come from the clueless club.

    I know out of the 3 games I got, NONE of them can be considered "geared toward kids", and one of them is questionable if it should even be sold to minors. I know *I* didnt buy the only games out there like this. See: Zelda Game Pak Gauntlet Dark Legacy Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem

    --

    "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    1. Re:Must Feed Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      back in my day, you 10 year olds were taught to show more respect to your elders.

    2. Re:Must Feed Troll by macserv · · Score: 1

      I don't understand how people can continuously bash games with "Kiddy graphics", and then buy a GameBoy Advance, which still outsells every other console.

      16-bit graphics are rarely mature in nature... there's just no depth for presenting realistic gore, unless you're playing a MK incarnation, or something. Indeed, the most popular games for GBA have VERY kiddy graphics indeed: Pokemon Ruby, Final Fantasy Tactics Advance, Golden Sun, and Mario&Luigi:SuperStar Saga, to name a few.

  77. Re:I'd like to see... by akuma624 · · Score: 1

    Yeah and we're gonna need you to come in on Sunday too. Need to play a little catch-up. Thanks.

    --
    ... if music be fruit of love, play on ....
  78. MS doesn't understand the console industry by RoLi · · Score: 1, Insightful
    They release far too often. The whole point of a console is that you buy it and not have to worry about updates, the thing becoming obsolete, etc.

    Also if XBox couldn't beat the PS2 with a 2-year technical advantage and huge losses, how do they expect to beat the PS3 being 1 year behind? When the PS3 comes out, it will be faster, have more games and be cheaper than XBox2.

    Also MS made the mistake of choosing PC-components which is the reason why XBox will always have a worse price/performance ratio than the Playstation. Of course as long as Microsoft is willing to lose 1 billion/year on XBox, you don't see the price in the stores...

    XBox2 seems to me an even bigger moneypit than XBox1. Also XBox faces the constant danger of being discontinued when the Office and Windows profits no longer grow, it is a product that cannot survive on it's own merit, it needs constant and huge flow of cash, which isn't really a good long-term strategy.

    1. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by mliu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Also if XBox couldn't beat the PS2 with a 2-year technical advantage and huge losses, how do they expect to beat the PS3 being 1 year behind?"

      Man, I think I'm still whirling from all that spin you just put out. Let me get this straight, are you seriously suggesting that being first to market now is a disadvantage? That coming out first is being 1 year behind? And somehow I just know if MS delays the Xbox Next to 1 year after the PS3, you'll just be saying how does MS expect to beat PS3 while being beaten to the market again?

      So is the only way for MS to act effectively to base all of their release dates strictly around their competitor's and come out at the exact same time or something? I know we hate MS and their Xbox here, but really....

    2. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Also MS made the mistake of choosing PC-components which is the reason why XBox will always have a worse price/performance ratio than the Playstation.

      Um... last I checked, the XBox and PS2 cost about the same, but the XBox had far, far better performance.

      XBox2 seems to me an even bigger moneypit than XBox1.

      You are very generous of spirit to be concerned about Microsoft's profits, but most of us who are not MS shareholders (and even some who are) don't care. They can afford to throw money into losing ventures if they think it might have future potential. I don't give a damn about all this "Inside Baseball" crap about market share and profit margins. I make my console choices on three factors only: 1. Can I afford it? 2. How good are the graphics? 3. Are there enough games worth owning for the platform to keep me happy? (Keep in mind for point 3 that I'm not a 12-year old with time to play and own 300 different games. I just want a dozen or so that are good enough to keep me entertainined until the platform becomes obsolete.)

    3. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent is troll, please mod down (yes also if you are a PS2-fan, read the moderation guidelines).

    4. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by dhamsaic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Also if XBox couldn't beat the PS2 with a 2-year technical advantage and huge losses, how do they expect to beat the PS3 being 1 year behind? When the PS3 comes out, it will be faster, have more games and be cheaper than XBox2.

      By this reasoning, Xbox would have been smashing the PS2 for the last two years. If a console launches early with must-own titles, it will find a base. Developers are asking for more power from the consoles (so they can, you know, do cooler things, so suckers will buy their games and they'll make money), so any developer that wants to get a jump start on the market will start developing for the next generation leader. If that's Microsoft, then so be it.

      In not-so-kind words, your argument really makes no sense when it's paired with reality.

      Also MS made the mistake of choosing PC-components which is the reason why XBox will always have a worse price/performance ratio than the Playstation.

      Yes, because at the same price, the PS2 performs so much better than the Xbox. That is, if you like long load times and graphics that are no better than Dreamcast's.

      I'm not convinced you know anything about gaming or the industry. It's a travesty your comment got modded up, because there isn't a single accurate piece to it.

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    5. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by RoLi · · Score: 1
      Man, I think I'm still whirling from all that spin you just put out. Let me get this straight, are you seriously suggesting that being first to market now is a disadvantage?

      It always was, just look at Dreamcast. The marketing of the PS2 destroyed them. Everybody was waiting for PS2 and then decide which to buy. And of course the newer console looks better. The same will happen with XBox2 and PS3. Only when the other console is still years away, it won't have an effect on the released one, IMO. For example XBox didn't have a negative effect on the PS2-launch because at that time nobody knew MS is going to make a console. Also it was much longer than one year.

      And somehow I just know if MS delays the Xbox Next to 1 year after the PS3, you'll just be saying how does MS expect to beat PS3 while being beaten to the market again?

      That would be much smarter, first because releasing some months after the competitor is better IMO and second because the XBox1 is still very young and Microsoft will piss off many people (resellers, game makers, gamers) by making it obsolete in such a short time.

      So is the only way for MS to act effectively to base all of their release dates strictly around their competitor's and come out at the exact same time or something?

      As a newcomer MS is of course facing an uphill-battle. From a marketing POV, the best thing to do IMO would be to release about 3-4 years after and before PS-releases. That way, the XBox could develop without being disturbed by the huge hype around every PS-release.

      You don't understand the situation, I think. XBox has much more to fear from the Playstation than vice versa.

    6. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by MakoStorm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      wtf?

      Xbox is superior to the Ps2 in almost every way!

      And that's just the way it is.

      Playstation graphics are dated, all the games use the same crap engines they used from the PS. The only game to really show off the Ps2 Graphics is Ratchet and Clank. All the games just look the same. Role playing games are the PS2's only saving grace.

      The PS/PS2 Controller is horrible when compared to Xbox\Cube

      The Online Play is severely lacking compared to Xbox Live. Yeah, live costs money, but it beats waiting 20 minutes to find a decent socom server.

      Let us not forget Sony Quality. As a owner of a "model 3001" unit, when it crapped out, I vowed not to buy another playstation 2. I plunked down 350 bucks for the damn thing about 4 months when it came out, and the thing is dead, D-E-A-D. The graphics chip fried on the board. Plus PS2 systems are still 179... for what? The PS2 is a legacy system, and it was from the Get-Go.

      The Xbox and Cube are faster (seemingly) more capable hardware and better game support. The Game Cube is only 99 bucks! I mean DAMN its Nintendo, that means it's a tank. My Super Nintendo, N64, and Playstation still work fine, how come my PS2 cant?

      The only reason I miss having a ps2 is because I didn't get to finish Socom2 before the damn thing died.

      I will get one when they become like the PSone and sell for 50 bucks.

      Till then F*ck Sony. I wont buy crap hardware, great way to reward consumers who initially bought your product.

      And for the Xbox not being the same hardware quality as the ps2? What the hell are you smokeing? If my Xbox died, I would pay 179 for it again, at least the system does things that are worth the price, the PS2 does nothing to deserve 179 for it's sorry @$$.

      The Cube has better graphics and play control then both oh them but only costs 99 bucks.. go figure.. ( i know, know ethernet, no hard drive)
      Metriod Prime kicks ass though.

    7. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by RoLi · · Score: 1
      By this reasoning, Xbox would have been smashing the PS2 for the last two years.

      No, when the PS2 was released nobody knew about XBox and everybody was buying PS2s. Also 2 years is a bit too long to wait. You might be willing to stall that console purchase for a months or a year, but hardly 2 years.

      Also MS was the newcomer and will not be able to generate a similar hype as Sony could. The Playstation-hype could easily destroy the Dreamcast, but an XBox1 hype would have hardly have any effect on PS2.

      If a console launches early with must-own titles, it will find a base. Developers are asking for more power from the consoles (so they can, you know, do cooler things, so suckers will buy their games and they'll make money), so any developer that wants to get a jump start on the market will start developing for the next generation leader. If that's Microsoft, then so be it.

      Well, since all consoles will be backwards-compatible, that factor isn't as important as it used to be. PS2 was bought like crazy even though there weren't many PS2-games for it at the beginning.

      As far as release dates go, I think for XBox it would be smartest to either release at roughly the same time as Playstation or at completely different times (like 3 years before and after each PS-release).

      Yes, because at the same price, the PS2 performs so much better than the Xbox. That is, if you like long load times and graphics that are no better than Dreamcast's.

      Of course I was talking about production prices, not retail prices.

    8. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by dhamsaic · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, when the PS2 was released nobody knew about XBox and everybody was buying PS2s.

      Please, stop. This is demonstrably false. Xbox was officially announced in March of 2000, specs and all. PlayStation 2 shipped in North America in October of 2000.

      Of course I was talking about production prices, not retail prices.

      What? Those matter how? The consumer doesn't care how much it costs the company to make the console. If price/performance matters, then the price is what the consumer pays and the performance is what the consumer sees. Anything that's behind the scenes is not even taken into consideration.

      Neither Sony nor Microsoft have ever publicly disclosed how much each unit costs to produce. Surely the PS2 is cheaper for Sony than the Xbox is for Microsoft, but the Xbox includes a lot more. It doesn't really matter, however, because both sell at the exact same price.

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    9. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      And for the Xbox not being the same hardware quality as the ps2? What the hell are you smokeing? If my Xbox died, I would pay 179 for it again...

      Not me - I bought mine new last year and recently discovered that it seems to be one of the early units with a bum Thomson drive in it. All 15 or so of my games plays wonderfully except my recently-purchased copy of Crimson Skies, and Microsoft's statement is "sorry, it's out of warranty, fork over some cash and we'll fix it". Well, given that this is only game I own that exposes this problem that was present from the date of manufacture (I verified the read problem on another older Thomson-equipped box, and verified the media was good on a newer Samsung-equipped box), I don't guess that warranty does one a lot of good - I'm not paying an extra $50 just so I can play one game, and because MS insists that I have to, they won't be getting any more of my business - I sold Crimson Skies and will just be happy with what I have.

      I'll agree that the basic hardware is *supposed* to be better, but I'd at least like a functioning DVD drive in the damn thing - I'm not buying any more games when the odds are questionable about whether the game will even run on my console or not.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    10. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open up your XBOX (your warranty is over anyway, right?) and do the pot-tweaking trick found on the tutorials section of www.xbox-scene.net.

      Then bask in the glow of your Thompson being able to read CD-Rs.

    11. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Seriously how did this guys comment get modded up. I hate Microsoft like anyone else here,but this guys comment was pure dribble. Wait till you graduate from High School before you comment on video console sales or industry practices SON.


      As the other 2 people who responded to your comments already said, by your logic Xbox1 would be the best selling console right now. Playstation2 graphics SUCK compared to Xbox. The only reason PS2 sold so well is because it came out a year before Xbox and Nintendo. On a performance chart PS2 comes in dead last of the 3.


      When the PS3 comes out, it will be faster, have more games and be cheaper than XBox2
      It may be faster but probably only slightly. It wont have more games because Xbox2 will have been out for a year by the time PS3 comes out. It wont be cheaper because it will have just come out. The longer something is out the cheaper it gets. Newer products DO NOT COST LESS!!!


      Also MS made the mistake of choosing PC-components...
      The only PC component that costs so much in Xbox is the hard drive. So your comment indicating multiple PC components drive up the cost show you dont know what your talking about. Only 1 PC component is relitivly expensive for console systems.


      Also XBox faces the constant danger of being discontinued when the Office and Windows profits no longer grow,
      Ok, like I said, people usually dont like Microsoft here, but Windows and Office will continue to garner HUGE profits for Microsoft for decades to come.



      Doe your home room room teacher know your looking at Slashdot while your at school?

    12. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by leifm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft should buy Rockstar, then sit back and watch Sony die. I think Sony owes a lot of their marketshare with the PS2 to haveing GTA3 exclusive for over a year.

      --

      "Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
    13. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by MakoStorm · · Score: 0

      Nod I understand.

      After doing some reading I am seeing a lot of the Thomson drive problems.

      MS wanted 50 bucks? That's better then what Sony wanted out of me. Sony wanted me to ship it to them and possibly face a 135 or higher charge for fixing the unit.

      That is if the unit was "fixable"

      And it wasn't since the Graphics chip/board was friend, you cant get your pliers and fix that. So they would have charged 135 dollars or more for a "refurb unit of the same model class".

      Why would I want to pay almost full price on a known-to-be-faulty system.

      If Sony said they would charge me 50 bucks and it would be fine, I wouldn't be so mad.

      Besides the Xbox is generally a computer, and I can fix those, the PS2 on the inside is like looking at a cheap gateway everything is soldered together and its just a mess. They cover everything in resin so it's hard to get anywhere in that damn PS2 box, much less take it apart, and buy a new part for it.

    14. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Digi+Dude+Takato · · Score: 1

      Well no, it has another PC part. The graphics interface. Its from nVidia. I know that from the screen savers. I heard them talking about it. But still that's not a very expensive part either way. I still don't know how big the HDD is on the XX, so I couldn't tell you if its cheep or not.

      --
      ---For philosophy and fun,---

      THERE IS NO POWER GREATER THAN X
    15. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If you think the PS2's graphics are not better than the DC's, you've been playing the wrong PS2 games. They typically don't look any better, but they're much smoother and support much more motion. You're right about the Xbox being price:performance-competitive to the PS2 though. A PS2 with a hard drive and ethernet costs the same as an Xbox.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    16. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by TheScottishGuy · · Score: 1

      fair points, but remember that sony was in exactly the same position when it launched the playstation that microsoft was in when they launched the xbox, they were newcomers to the field going up against well established videogaming companies, sony got some great publishers and designers working ongames for their platforms, square for example, and that's why people will buy the platform, not for hardware specs, not because it was or wasn't first to market, but because it has the games theyw ant to play, personally i feel that the xbox is a better machine than the ps2, (built in hd, built in LAN, online play that actually works well and isn't all that expensive if you play multiple games online) If MS can get the Xbox2 to market that far ahead of the PS3 and have some great games for it, it stands a good chance of bringing Ms up to Sony's level in market share. i think that with sony's immense back-catalogue of games over Ps1 and PS2 that MS will be hard pressed to compete on game selection but hopefully they can get some of those killer apps out before the ps3 launch and level the playing field. oh and i bet halo2 is delayed till xbox 2 launches, i've been saying it for a year, the bastards are gonna make me buy more hardware just to play the damn thing

    17. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by metroid+composite · · Score: 1
      Please, stop. This is demonstrably false. Xbox was officially announced in March of 2000, specs and all. PlayStation 2 shipped in North America in October of 2000.

      That is correct; in fact if I remember correctly stores were paid by Microsoft as much as a year in advance to advise people to hold off buying a console until the X-Box came out. Nintendo denounced the practice saying it was bad for the industry as a whole.

      That said, releasing early is hardly a precedent for winning any console wars. The Genesis released early and lost. the PSX and Saturn released fairly early, but neither could compete with the Super Nintendo (but gladly took over when Nintendo prematurely jumped to a new system). Dreamcast released early and simply died despite adoration by the critics.

      Another issue is that people don't like upgrading systems too often. Screw what developers want, a lot of the Super Nintendo's most popular games were released in 1994 and 1995; that system could have easily lasted another couple years, and the good ol' Gameboy is a testament to that having dominated for 10.

      Don't let the Slashdot community distort your vision of the general populace. Upgrading electronic components regularly isn't a normal part of contemporary entertainment (which includes things like CD players and VCRs). Most people don't buy a new VCR every four years, and tend to think "why should this videogame stuff be any different?"

    18. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "If a console launches early with must-own titles, it will find a base."

      Saturn came out early and bombed, 3DO actually came out earlier than that and bombed even more, Dreamcast also came out before PS2 and didn't fare well either. All systems had good games at launch, Dreamcast probably the most out of all of them and yet they all failed.

      Will the XBox2 and PS3 be as great a jump as the PS2 was over the PS1...probably not. I believe we've started to reach a technical peak for a bit.

      Even if the XBox2 is superior to the PS3 (which I doubt), I don't believe the differences from the current systems will be as great and people will wait for the PS3 since "there doesn't seem to be a reason to upgrade to a XBox2 so we'll wait and see what the PS3 can do" kind of mentality.

      Another reason, with 2005 as a release date, you need people making games now for the XBox2, which I doubt is really going on.

      Lastly, XBox doesn't have any "must own" titles, and if someone says Halo I'll swear I'll slap em :) One game over a 2 to 3 year period doesn't really make it a must own system :) Plus you can PC that one anyway (and in my opinion is a very dated first person shooter).

      First doesn't mean the best sales, hasn't yet for any system I can think of, and probably never will be due to costs, developers "waiting to see what happens," and usually a hurried launch.

    19. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by NoseSocks · · Score: 1

      Square.

      Pure and simple.

      Sony PS1 was doing all right, then FF7 came out and POW, the amount of people that owned a PS1 went way up.

      You bring up a good point, though. If Microsoft could get exclusive Console rights to the GTA series, the XBox 3 stands a chance. Halo 3 (or 4, or whatever) just won't cut it. PS has Final Fantasy cornered (though Nintendo is getting some of the action, I digress), which is another huge boost for them. If Sony were smart, when Microsoft starts advertising, they should start hyping up that the next FF online and console game are coming out on the PS3. That alone will deter many people.

      The main point is that if a console can get exlusive rights to Rockstar and/or Square (and on a smaller scale, EA), they will be number 1 in the console market.

    20. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      The only PC component that costs so much in Xbox is the hard drive. So your comment indicating multiple PC components drive up the cost show you dont know what your talking about. Only 1 PC component is relitivly expensive for console systems.

      Are you saying that Intel CPUs, nVidia Motherboards/Graphics, and RAM are cheap? Last time I checked, at least one of these three were more expensive than hard drives were...

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    21. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by erasmus_ · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, since all consoles will be backwards-compatible ...

      As the other poster noticed, you really don't keep up, do you? According to what we currently know about Xbox 2, "backwards compatibility is out of the question". Thanks for playing.

      --
      Please subscribe to see the more insightful version of th
    22. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1

      Let me get this straight, are you seriously suggesting that being first to market now is a disadvantage?

      It always was, just look at Dreamcast.


      Actually, the Dreamcast is one of very few consoles to show a disadvantage by being first. Look at the 64. Look at the Gamecube. Both systems came after a Sony, and had graphics twice as good, and were by an established, competitive company. But in both cases, Sony has massively outsold them, and there is good evidence, especially in the case of the 64, that the delay had something to do with it. At the time of the PS1's release, Nintendo was by far the leading console maker, but buy the time the 64 came out, Sony had too far of a lead. If the 64 had came out at the same time as the Playstation, things would have looked a bit different.

      best thing to do IMO would be to release about 3-4 years after and before PS-releases.

      Since a console's lifetime tends to be 5 years, making something 3-4 years after and before is kinda hard. From the SNES to 64 (1991 - 1996) was 5 years, then the 64 to Cube (1996 - 2001) also 5 years. Sony PS1 to PS2 (1995 - 2000) also 5 years. Sega was kinda random about their release dates, and look what happened to them. So 2005 or 2006, being 4 or 5 years from the release of XBox, is a typical timeframe for them to look at. I think if they release a year or two after PS2 (2007/2008) everyone will forget about XBox and be playing their pretty PS3s. But if MS can through enough money at XBoxNext (or whatever it is) and get it out the door slightly before the PS3 and make it look about as pretty as PS3, they've got a decent shot at being the one on top for the next generation. No matter what MS does, it will be disturbed by hype from Sony, but as Sony has shown us (with the PS1) it takes just one good, smartly handled console to get to the top of the market.

      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    23. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      It was my understanding that the majority of the Thomson DVD problems were owing to a bad lens assembly - is the pot adjustment supposed to clear that up? I don't need to read CD-Rs, I just need to be able to run original Xbox games. :-)

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    24. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its a 700mhz p3 $50 on pricewatch and 64megs of ram $8 on pricewatch. Surely those numbers go down when bought in bulk/whatever deal microsoft has with intel and memory provider.

    25. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      $135 for a refurb? Screw that, a new one is only $40 more.

      Unfortunately, the Xbox is different enough from a standard computer such that you can't just put a different DVD drive in without modchipping the unit. Absent a modchip you have to use a drive that works specifically with the Xbox. Unless you buy one on eBay, that pretty much means either paying the MS repair tax or buying a Samsung drive and modifying it to work with the unit. You can't buy OEM replacement parts from MS, either. I see absolutely no reason why MS designed the Xbox this way except to drive the profit from the repair center - PC DVD drives are substantially faster and more capable than the crippleware they put into the Xboxes

      One of the things that really snarked me off in my situation was that MS made it clear that they would neither tell me what was fixed on the unit, nor would they return the original parts (that I've already paid for) back to me. If you run an auto repair shop and you try to pull that, there's all kinds of trouble you get into - I don't see why MS should be any different. I'm sure MS is well aware of the Thomson problems, but they refuse to publicly acknowledge them. No matter, I'm not spending another dime on this unit and MS can kiss my ass on the matter as far as I'm concerned.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    26. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by MakoStorm · · Score: 0

      Yeah I see your point, its just crap how they deal with the counsel systems themselves.
      The next one I buy I am getting at best buy or circuit city with the replace warranty so I just bring the dead one and they give me a new one. Screw the sending it off and waiting two weeks.

      That's probably what its going come to anyhow. Nintendo is really the only company I think really cares about its stuff, probably Nintendo only does games, that's it, that's Nintendo. Sony and MS' systems are just side projects of a bigger company that already has a big foothold on their respective markets.

      I really love the cube, I just wish it had online play for it. If CS was released for it like Xbox I would be playing the cube all the time. I already play it a lot for Metriod and Wario World. I just see a lot more work going into Nintendo products and they treat their customers well (one reason is I never had to deal with them). One thing is that Nintendo comes with a year warranty instead of 90 days....

      Anyhow, That's just my $.02 I am mourning my PS2 since Christmas and since I am unemployed I cannot afford to replace it, and since I only played it maybe once a month, I doubt I will replace it until the PS2 hits about 50-70 bucks, maybe 100 but not until then. I can wait a couple years to pick up SOCOM II again. I put my memory card in a small Tupperware container just waiting for the price break.

      Screw the PSX, I aint going to jump for it. EAT THAT SONY... Er... wait wernt we mad at Microsoft?

    27. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Rakthar · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can purchase any Xbox failed part, and get lots of FAQs on how to do repairs, at this site: http://www.llamma.com/xbox/ And a few specific articles: http://llamma.com/xbox/Repairs/xbox_dvd_repair.htm They also sell all the parts, so you can replace your defective DVD drive with a non-defective one, and since you're out of warranty, no one will stop you. I know the whole "I have to pay MS hundreds of dollars to fix my unit!" cry is an easy one to make, but it's untrue if you do a little digging around.

    28. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      Microsoft, Sony, whatever - none of them seem to really provide a quality product that they'll really stand behind. 90-day warranty? What is that shit? I've got a 3 year/36000 mile warranty on my vehicle, and I likely won't have to avail myself of it. The el-cheapo Wal-Mart PC that sits under my desk and cost less than my Xbox at least has a 1 year warranty. Also, what's with these proprietary memory cards? I guess they just wouldn't make enough money selling equipment that could use a standard CF card.

      I guess I'll stop, because now I'm just bitching in general and I'd probably mod myself down for it if I could. :-) I did at least take the time to send MS a real snail-mail letter expressing my views on my situation. I don't expect a reply, but you never know.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    29. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Cornelius+the+Great · · Score: 1

      "Microsoft should buy Rockstar, then sit back and watch Sony die."

      Monopolizing developers thereby forcing competitors out of business???

      How Microsoft of you to consider that!

      --
      Sigs are for losers
    30. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      I appreciate the link, but I think I might have not been clear enough on my point - I'm not spending any more money on the machine, in either hardware or games. I'm not going to shell out $100 for a modified Samsung drive or spend $50 and two hours of my time modding a standard drive to fix the damn thing just so that I can play the one game my system refuses to read. I'd rather just sell the copy of Crimson Skies, be happy with the games I've got, and be content that MS isn't getting any more money from me.

      I also like how Microsoft will not let you cancel the automatic renewal on pre-paid Xbox Live subscriptions without either jumping through some hoops near the renewal date, or forfeiting the balance of your current subscription. I chose the latter because I just didn't want to mess with them any further.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    31. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your statement about the Xbox costing the same as a Playstation 2 is Incorrect. An Xbox is a better deal.


      The PS2 doesn't cost the same as an xbox. A PS2 costs 179 minus the network adapter and 199 with a network adapter and doesn't have a hard drive. A PS2 hard drive is also more. Whereas at 179 you buy an Xbox with an ethernet adapter and hard drive. The xbox live kit also allows a more integrated online experience wheres PS2 is pay as you go and a la carte or every game for itself.


      The Xbox also has HDTV support and Dolby sound and networking as well as more memory built in. An Xbox also includes an NVidea processor. People are arguing more about ideology instead of value and dollars.

    32. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Xbox does have must own games. It has GTA3 among others. Xbox has over 150 games. Halo isn't the only Xbox game. Other titles include Half Life Counterstrike and Deus Ex and Amped 2 and Project Gotham racing and Unreal and KOTOR. Some Xbox games you can't buy on a PC or Playstation.

      Halo 2 is also available and coming out. Halo can also be played with HDTV. Halo is not a dated fps (You haven't seen Halo in HDTV). It takes a high end graphics cards to run Halo reasonably well on a PC. There are things the Xbox can do that a PC can't which the PC porters stated.

      You should be wacked with a fish.

      Also, Halo 2 will be even better. The story to Halo is also unique due to it's taking place near a ringworld. Yet, Halo isn't the only Xbox game.

      Even if the XBOX2 is superior to the PS3 (which I doubt)

      This is an obvious sign of bias. The Xbox has already differentiated itself from the Playstation.

    33. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by Frobozz0 · · Score: 1

      Who modded your poorly formed arguements as "insightful"?

      Let me begin by deconstructing the "New products do not cost less" statement.

      The problem is that new products have nothing to do with their cost versus an older product. Each system is created off an entirely different set of subsystems, components, and in short-- parts. Those parts, depending on the suppliers, licensing costs, and volume discounts will make ALL THE DIFFERENCE.

      Let me explain why the X-Box is going to cost more. They will use all the basic components that a PC uses. Well, at least they did the first time around. This bites them in the butt because they loose money on each CPU sale. They can't actually compete on costs because their suppliers are exclusively third party.

      The PS 2, and the PS 3, will have the majority of it's architecture built by Sony or it's partners. This means that the Playstation makes money on every unit sold because over the life time of the product, Sony is able to integrate more chips into single chips and consildate the components and their cost. XBox can not, unless they build much more of their machine from components that can be consolidated.

      The XBox will cost more. Even if MS takes a punch in the gut every time one goes off the shelves, by trying to match Sony's price, MS loses money and Sony makes it.

      Now lets move on to performance. You can certainly argue that the XBox's graphics are better, because they are. But that doesn't make a better game. Better games sell, and XBox has maybe 4 games that are good that are not ripoff copies of a PS2 title. The games sell the platform. Look at history and you will see this. There are exceptions where mismanagement has caused interference with this general rule, of course.

      Look, I'm not saying the XBox2 will not have great features-- but I will never buy one. Like most people on this site, I am not pro-Microsoft. The PS3 Will have just as many great features, and I'll keep playing all of my PS2 games until it's out. Why? Because they don't suck.

      --
      "Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
    34. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by evanothespanishbasta · · Score: 1

      try copying your xbox games onto your hard drive and then see how your load times compare...do i need to continue??

    35. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by izzo+nizzo · · Score: 1

      XBox2 seems to me an even bigger moneypit than XBox1

      Good! Let Microsoft foot the bill for us to have fun. Those jerks owe us for the monopolistic tactics they have always loved which have left the average computer user with an insecure, dysfunctional system and an empty bank account.

      I don't care how well XBox2 competes against PS3, I just plan to have a blast with both systems.

    36. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      The nvidia processor makes writing games (graphics engines really) easier but it doesn't necessarily make them any better or the graphics any better. I was under the impression that the PS2 ethernet+disk combo was $199 though, I'm sorry to hear I'm wrong about that. I have no need of a PS2 before GT4 comes out anyway, so I'm not THAT sorry, but of course I hate to be wrong :)

      Anyway, I feel that even if the PS2 and the Xbox had precisely the same features in terms of processing power, graphics, storage, and networking for the same amount of money the Xbox would still be the better console because it's a cheap PC in a box and that means there's a huge wealth of software which either already runs on it, or can run on it with minimal reconfiguration.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    37. Re:MS doesn't understand the console industry by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      Yes, because while Sony's platform has almost ten times as many games (that number is real!,) clearly it's one publisher that makes the difference.

      If you want to hang your hopes on one publisher, hang it on EA, not Rockstar. Rockstar has two big hit games. EA has five times as many big hit franchises.

      XBox' only hope is XBox live, because Microsoft has gotten the network right the first time, and everyone else is juggling mouth rocks trying to catch up. Moreover, Microsoft has done a magnificent job of making the network work across games (admittedly via a heavy hand towards developers) and has gotten a large number of high quality network games out to push the system.

      I hold no opinion on the weight of such a network versus an order of magnitude more games, including almost all of the popular hits and virtually all of the single-platform hits. The call is too close. It's a tipping point - if it gets momentum, which it has been, it becomes a Juggernaut.

      Sony better have the network ready with the PS3, or that PSP had better knock the AGB and DS completely off of the map, or else there's gonna be trouble.

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
  79. Wasted Hard Drive? by Christopher+Bibbs · · Score: 1

    I don't believe the hard drive has been wasted. Between additional level downloads and custom music tracks almost every game worth playing has made use of the hard drive in a way that the memory cards would have been too small for.

    I've owned a console of one type or another since we picked up a Pong set back in '79. While the XBox isn't the revolutionary device the Atari 2600 was, it isn't an Intellivision either.

  80. MS may lower Xbox Prices! by Frennzy · · Score: 2, Funny

    In other news, Ed McMahon announces that frennzy may have already won $10,000,000!

  81. On the other hand by mcc · · Score: 1

    One of the theorized reasons for the GC price drop to $100 was just to hurt MS and Sony. Not just because more people would buy Gamecubes, but because MS and Sony would feel obligated, eventually, to price drop their consoles to reciprocate.

    A price drop is something that Nintendo could afford, since they were making a profit on the Gamecube-- and they still are. Sony meanwhile is having financial difficulties and the XBox is losing obscene amounts of money.

    The logic goes though that by forcing everyone into a price war, Nintendo is hurt little, Sony is hurt, and Microsoft goes from pissing away huge amounts of money with the XBox to pissing away massive amounts of money with the XBox. I'm not sure MS cares, but it's possible that this is what Nintendo had in mind.

    I just wonder if at some point people are going to go from "the XBox has a marginally larger installed base in the US, the XBox is winning" to "Nintendo is making sizeable profits and the MS Games division is losing money like a huge gaping gut wound and looks to continue to do so for the concievable future, Nintendo is winning"...

  82. MS, Put a POWER switch on the REMOTE this time by Grokko · · Score: 1

    I complained bitterly to Microsoft after I purchased the Remote control to play DVDs (for $50CDN) only to find that it does not have a POWER ON/OFF switch on the remote.

    I'd even settle for just an OFF switch. Sometimes when I'm on the verge of falling asleep, I prefer not to get up and wake up all the way. I would leave it turned on, but it's just too damn noisy.

    Even the cheapest of TVs, DVD players and recorders are able to pretend they are powering down, mostly by shutting off fans and motors, because they are often still warm or powered.
    Even slowing down the fan substantially would help.

    1. Re:MS, Put a POWER switch on the REMOTE this time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fan's already at +7v, even though its actually a 12v fan. Its that way to quiet it as is, so don't expect them to drop it any more...it gets warm in that thing!

  83. Gears, Cells, and Ghosts... by Ian_Bailey · · Score: 1

    PSO3 will probably follow its brothers and be ported to XBox, but Metal Gear Solid is being developed by a Wholly-Owned Nintendo Studio (Silicon Knights). Nintendo has no interest whatsoever in porting to a different console, so unless they are existing the manufacturing biz, I don't think the MGS remake will ever show up on a non-Nintendo console.

    I agree with you on the Xbox Exclusives for this year, many of them could make the Xbox the system of 2004, but they might not as well. (Witness Metroid:Prime's relatively tame reception on GameCube).

    Splinter Cell:Pandora's Tomorrow and Starcraft:Ghost will be hitting all 3 consoles at the exact same time, and both will be identical on all consoles, except for perhaps minor graphical and sound issues, including online functionality.

    This is quite different from last year, when the SC-'exclusivenesss' was a major selling point for the Xbox.

    In conclusion, I'm personally happy that owners of any console will be able to enjoy great games this year!

  84. I can't believe they haven't given up yet. by Frobozz0 · · Score: 1

    Why bother? The last thing I'm going to do is let Microsoft dominate my living room and my office.

    --
    "Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
  85. I look at the quality of games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Personally the price of the consoles is not the issue, its the quality of games for the consoles that I look at. I don't care what the price of the console is if the games suck then I won't buy it. When it comes to game quality I think the xbox has them all beat. Halo2,DoomIII,Fable,Ninja Gaiden, this is what I would look at if I were in the market to buy a console. Others don't even have the power to play these games.

    1. Re:I look at the quality of games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you didn't buy an xbox, did you?

    2. Re:I look at the quality of games by scot4875 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Halo2,DoomIII,Fable,Ninja Gaiden

      You're a marketing goon's wet dream. Neither you, nor anyone else outisde the dev teams has ever even *played* these games, but you're sitting there drooling over them like a moron. And to top it off, you're convinced that you shouldn't buy a competitor's product now because these things that will probably come out some time in the future could/should be prettier and may or may not be fun.

      As an aside, while the other 3 should be good, all I have to say about Fable is: Black and White, anyone?

      While you're waiting for the next big thing, (most of) the rest of us will be enjoying what's currently out. And believe it or not, there's a lot of top-quality stuff out for those 'inferior' systems right now.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    3. Re:I look at the quality of games by antin · · Score: 1

      It doesn't really matter that nobody has ever played them, some developers you just take on faith. For instance I think most PC gamers are prepared to buy Blizzard games for the developer alone. I know that I would buy a Bungie game on name alone, and most FPS fans would think similarly of id.

      Plus, it isn't like we haven't seen anything of these games, they have been putting out footage of all four for a while now, and additionally two of them are sequels to already loved games.

      Finally, contrast this to movies. Everyone drools over trailers to movies, without seeing the movie first (it would defeat the point); and with sequels to movies, everyone looks forward to the second if they have already enjoyed the first. I don't think the original poster is anyones goon...

  86. Maybe it's an inventory move by TrollBridge · · Score: 1

    Perhaps they've got a big stockpile of XBoxe(n?) to move, and they're simply trying to get rid of the excess to make room for the XBox2 when it comes out.

    --
    There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
  87. New hardware feature: upgrade cycle acceleration by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 2, Informative

    MS just loves to accelerate the hardware upgrade cycle, don't they?

    I played my Atari 2600 from 1981, when I got it, until 1988, when I finally got an NES. And in 1981, the console was already several years on the market. It finally quit working in 1990-91. I bet, if I still had it today, that I could probably repair it, too. Damn that was a solid machine.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  88. USB change by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    I think they changed the USB-connector for exactly that reason: PC-makers shouldn't be afraid it could be used as a PC-replacement.

    I'd chalk it up to getting buyers to have to purchase yet more stuff, which can only be obatained from Microsoft or a partner. Same old proprietary crap everyone else has pulled at one time or another with video game machines. Remember, the box is a loss leader, anything they get you to buy to go with it is where they make their money, not limited to games.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:USB change by RoLi · · Score: 1
      Yes, but put yourself into Microsoft's boots: The thing that really matters is Windows and Office. If XBox can be used as an PC-alternative, the huge profits from Windows/Office are jeopardized.

      Just imagine Dell no longer pushing Windows whenever they can and instead take a neutral position. Imagine them even pushing towards Linux. Imagine them offering the same hardware with and without Windows (with price passed on).

      And without the profits from Windows/Office, XBox is dead as well.

  89. Virginia Tech eat your heart out. by fireteller2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    For 5 Million we can have a 50500 node beowulf cluster.

    fire

  90. That's not all he forgot by Soul+Brother+#1 · · Score: 1

    He also forgot Sega CD and Sega 32x, the lucky bastard.

    -W

    --
    All unfair meta-mods are now being meta-meta-modded as retarded.
    1. Re:That's not all he forgot by BackwardEngineer · · Score: 1

      Which weren't consoles. I've never gotten my Sega CD or 32x to play games by themselves. How did you get them to work without the Genesis?

  91. Off topic - mod down by kyoko21 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I just want my Halo 2 please. Then we can talk about Xbox2.

  92. What's next? by Twister002 · · Score: 2, Funny

    A free XBox with every happy meal? How low will they go to elbow their way into the market?

    --
    "For a successful technology, honesty must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." -Feynman
  93. If this is true... by AzraelKans · · Score: 1

    And knowing MS it probably is this is bad news for all of us who bought the console at full price.. but great news for those who dont have it yet..
    And with Ninja Gaiden, DOA online and Doom 3 aproaching this is the best time to get one.
    I just wish I had a way to look into the future so I could wait for six months before buying... oh well.

    Anyway Im expecting Sony to do the same with the ps2 (monkey sees, monkey does) they dont want to lose their first place in market after all.

    Nintendo would drop their price at $50 due to this? thats an interesting question.

    --
    Go ahead MOD my day!
    More opinions here
    1. Re:If this is true... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would Sony give 2 shits?

      As the highest priced console, they're still outselling everyone. MSFT dropping their price would only help sony by further increasing MSFTs losses.

  94. One year won't mean anything by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 1

    Remember, the Sega Saturn jumped its initial launch date to try to get the edge on the Sony Playstation. In the end the jump hurt them more than helped. Hopefully Microsoft got the developers of launch titles to agree to an aggressive schedule, or they'll be playing second fiddle to the PS3.

  95. Marathon 5 err halo 2 by cyrax777 · · Score: 1

    Gah how long are they going to Milk Halo its not that great of a game. "OH MY GOD HALO!" um dude its just a FPS with vehicles on a console.

    1. Re:Marathon 5 err halo 2 by ChaoticLimbs · · Score: 1

      It's fun enough for me to own Halo for PC since I don't own a console. I only play multiplayer online. In that, it really shines in gameplay if not graphic richness.

  96. Nintendo is no longer making a profit on GameCubes by Ian_Bailey · · Score: 1

    From this article where they claimed victory over the Xbox, Nintendo's PR person Perrin slipped that "I would say that our losses are really negligible. It's such a small amount." She backs this up with "Plus with the amount of software that's being sold we're still definitely in a solid profit situation. We're not in the position that I know that Microsoft has been in with the loss Xbox hardware."

    The key point is this, though, Nintendo is losing money on GameCubes now (if only just a little).

  97. Maybe they should make better games first... by a1cypher · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I really dont see the need for another generation of consoles yet so soon. Could they have really made that many mistakes on the xbox1 that warrants a complete new system??

    Come on, get serious. Lets see them concentrate on making good games rather than cramming the games full of high end 3D graphics.

    A good game doesnt need to rely on quality of graphics to be good. I still play the various mario series (for snes/nes) and I think they are alot better than most of the junk thats come out recently.

    I thought that Microsoft was selling their consoles below cost anyways. Why would it be profitable for them to get another system (which will probably be sold at cost as well) when have just finished getting the xbox1 out there?

  98. A day late and a dollar short. by person-0.9a · · Score: 1

    At $99, the temptation to buy an XBox becomes pretty strong, but I still couldn't bring myself to spend the dough.

    Nintendo, by dropping their price to $99, filled the second-cosole niche early on [and quite nicely]. Besides, I already have a Windows PC dedicated to gaming. Even at $100, I just can't get that worked up about another gaming platform.

    I'll take my $100 and buy a couple games.

  99. What does it take to trigger 'anti-dumping' laws? by Rob+Y. · · Score: 1

    Just how much money does Microsoft have to lose on every unit, and for how many years, before they run afoul of anti-dumping laws?

    Seriously, is it legal for a monopoly to spend their monopoly profits to buy their way into a related market that they're unable to win fairly? Cheap introductory pricing is one thing, but a business model based on losing money indefinitely on the off chance that Sony might someday come up with something that renders *some* PC's unnecessary?

    Is it only dumping when a foreign company does it?

    --
    Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
  100. Hacking the Xbox by bluethundr · · Score: 1



    Looks like I'll finally get to delve into Hacking the Xbox. I'm not willing to potentially compromise my main gaming box for a developing set of skills and competencies that I could acquire from this book. Not while the Xbox is at the $200 level. But at the $100 level I am. It seems like a really nice guide to reverse engineering other low-level stuff that could also possibly help me get more out of this book now that it's finally in print.

    --
    Quod scripsi, scripsi.
  101. CNN Hype by Torgo's+Pizza · · Score: 2, Informative
    While everyone at CNN seems to be latching on to the $99 price point, everyone else seems to think different. EA thinks that the price is more likely $149 and Activision is pressing things by suggesting a $129 price point.

    Truth is that most people do not expect Microsoft to go to $99 dollars. In fact, a price drop to $129 would keep sales on par with 2003. But hey, $99 is a sexy number that Chris Morris wants to base his entire article on. Remember these are the same analysts that predicted a price drop on both the PS2 and the X-Box at Christmas. Neither one happened.

    1. Re:CNN Hype by dogbowl · · Score: 1

      Chris Morris is the biggest dork out there. Every week, he embarasses himself and shows that he doesn't know shit about the video game industry.

      Remember that Simpsons where Spinal Tap wouldn't give their endorsement out to a radio station because they weren't sure that "nobody rocks like Bill and Marty"? Chris Morris would not only give his endorsement, he'd write up a lame ass article and consider it a job well done!

      --

      These pretzels are making me thirsty.
  102. Some idiocy in that estimate by MysteriousMystery · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Microsoft, certainly, is in a much stronger position than Sega (in reference to the early Dreamcast launch). The Xbox's buzz factor is on the rise - and will soar higher if the company opts for a $99 price tag.

    FINANCIALLY Microsoft is in stronger position then Sega was, otherwise not really. From a support and development perspective Sega had a lot of large third party companies (particularly Japanese third parties) supporting the Dreamcast. Additionally, the Xbox buzz factor isn't that "hot" either. The system is in a tight race in the US and Europe with Nintendo over second place in those markets (while a distant third worldwide) and is for all intents and purposes dead in the all important Japanese market. Microsoft is also taking a signficant loss on every Xbox system they sell which has not been recouped by game and licensed peripheral sales.

    There are also questions around the gaming industry on the retail side of the industry about potentially inflated sales numbers already from Microsofts camp. Microsoft refurbishes their own used systems and resells them to retailers such as EBgames, Gamestop and GameCrazy. This differs from Nintendo and Sony's approach in which "refurbished" systems are handled by the companies that distribute them, not by the manufacturer. Former Microsoft reps have leaked the word out that Microsoft was counting refurb systems sales as new sales until recently, meaning that many Xbox systems were listed as being sold twice.

    There are also questions about inflated Xbox live numbers as many of the Xbox live subscribers are on free subscriptions that come with software rather then paying subscribers.

    With regards to the Xbox 2/next coming out in 2005, I believe that is in fact a possibility. But the Xbox being dropped to 99.99 in the imminent future (or before Sony does so) seems highly unlikely. Microsoft is already taking a much bigger loss on their hardware then Sony. It's hard to imagine them running up an even deeper deficeit merely to move into a distant second place in the US and Europe.

  103. OT: Winnipeg, Canada Weather by citizenc · · Score: 1

    Winnipeg MB
    Current Conditions
    Partly cloudy
    Current temperature: -38C
    WindChill: -50 C
    Wind: 13 km/hr W
    Relative Humidity: 66 %
    Barometric Pressure: 103.7 kPa

    1. Re:OT: Winnipeg, Canada Weather by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      post offtopic without your bonus, smart guy. i'd mod you down if i had points.

  104. 99$ for a total Media station--- excellente by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    99$ is great, I just picked up xbox #2 for 170. I have a Box running my fave PVR program stashed in a corner. I am working on populating each room in my house with Modded Xboxs running Xbox Media Center http://www.xboxmediacenter.com to access those recorded shows on a networked share. With the DVD remote thrown in the mix, it's a beauty of a setup. And that's not including the full Mame, N64, SNES, and genesis roms. Hate MS all you want, but xbox has been a great machine.

  105. Worst Logic I've ever seen by jcrash · · Score: 1

    If they lose money on it, then you can make them lose MORE money by buying it, not less.

    Take it as a Limit Problem

    The limit of the amount of $$ lost by MS as Sales of XBoxes approaches infinity is infinity!

    Therefore, to bankrupt them you would simply buy all the xboxes (and never buy games, XBox Live, etc).

    Yes, the amount they would lose on each one would decrease as they lowered costs due to the marginal costs of producing each xbox, but overall, the hardware will always cost more than $99.


    --
    I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
    1. Re:Worst Logic I've ever seen by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      First, understand that, for Microsoft, producing XBox units is kinda like an investment. They sink a certain amount of capital into a production run under the assumption that they will be sold, thus generating revenue, both in the form of unit sales, as well as software sales.

      Now, with this understanding, let's perform a little thought experiment. Suppose Microsoft produces 1,000,000 XBoxes at a cost of, say, $150 each. This means, at the outset, they must spend $150,000,000 making XBoxes.

      Now, if no one bought any XBoxes, they would lose all the money they spent making the units, meaning a total loss of $150,000,000 (plus loss on games that weren't sold).

      Now, if all 1,000,000 of those XBoxes are sold at a cost of $99, they recoup $99,000,000, for a total loss of $51,000,000. And this doesn't include the money they make from people buying/renting games to play on their new, shiny unit.

    2. Re:Worst Logic I've ever seen by Best+ID+Ever! · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is not producing some random number of XBoxes. They produce them based on demand. Since they are sold at a unit loss, a higher demand will mean a greater loss. Yes, a single person buying an XBox will likely not have a great effect on the final number. But if a lot of people did it, it would.

      And this doesn't include the money they make from people buying/renting games to play on their new, shiny unit.

      The point of the argument is that you don't buy games. MS sells you a console at a per unit loss, which they expect to make up from game sales. Since you don't buy games, it's a loss.

    3. Re:Worst Logic I've ever seen by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      They produce them based on demand. Since they are sold at a unit loss, a higher demand will mean a greater loss.

      Do you honestly think that they'll continue to build units simply because the boxes are being sold, even though they're perfectly aware that they're hemorhaging cash?? Geez... Look, MS will build units as long as the combination of unit sales income, game sales, and licensing revenue results in a net profit. The minute they start losing money in a big way, they'll abandon the XBox and start on the next big console. I mean, honestly, how dumb do you think they are?

    4. Re:Worst Logic I've ever seen by Best+ID+Ever! · · Score: 1

      Look, MS will build units as long as the combination of unit sales income, game sales, and licensing revenue results in a net profit.

      A) They are losing money on the XBox, even with games sales and licensing revenue. $176 million last year. Read their last SEC filing.

      B) We're talking about just the XBoxes. Since they sell at a unit loss, buying an XBox without games is a loss for MS.

      I mean, honestly, how dumb do you think they are?

      I don't think they're dumb at all. Even though MS is hemorrhaging cash that it may not make back on the XBox itself, I think the XBox will be important as these consoles morph into consoles/DVRs/media centers.

  106. Why would anyone buy an XBOX? by IdleTime · · Score: 1

    I'd rather not get a piece of hardware and software that is equally prone to receiving viruses and not to mention security holes, as the current line of MS products.

    Until MS can demonstrate their abilities to secure their products from beeing attacked at all time, a new XBOX with "home multimedia theater" capabilities is scary. I can see all the script kiddies and virus writers attack the box in full force. Esp. since most of them probably will be hooked up to the Internet for on-line game playing, music downloads, movie downloads etc...

    Come to think of it, maybe now is the time to buy shares in security companies?

    --
    If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    1. Re:Why would anyone buy an XBOX? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So did you have to work hard to become a dumbass, or is it just second nature?

    2. Re:Why would anyone buy an XBOX? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is primary nature. Derived from primates, being a dumbass is as natural as having an ass or being an ass.

  107. You'd need a LOT of Xboxes, by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 1

    700mhz 32 bit P3 Xboxes ... or 2ghz dual processor 64 bit G5s with faster ram faster network cards.

    You'd need a LOT of Xboxes, to say the least.

    I feel sorry for the poor saps who get stuck putting mod chips in those stupid things. ( pictures the giant pile of xboxes destroyed by soldering mistakes)

    --
    "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    1. Re:You'd need a LOT of Xboxes, by Boone^ · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because faster network cards will make it a supercomputer instead of a student lab. /sarcasm

    2. Re:You'd need a LOT of Xboxes, by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      You'd need a LOT of Xboxes, to say the least.

      true that...but how many $100 X-boxes can you get for the price of one fancy mac.....a LOT

    3. Re:You'd need a LOT of Xboxes, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least 20.

    4. Re:You'd need a LOT of Xboxes, by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 1

      With mod ships, 20 if your comparing them to a dual 2ghz g5.

      But you get 100bt ethernet, no ability to add secondary interconnects, 700mhz 32 bit Pentiums, a whopping 64megs of (slower) ram, no serial ATA, etc etc. That's a fairly poop-a-liciouse cluster node :P

      If anything, the ethernet alone would severely cripple this cluster. With a G5 cluster node you get 2 Gigabit ethernet cards standard.

      Moreover, the room for these xbox nodes would have to be huuuuuge, G5's will fit in 1u racks. Try explaining to a department chair that you need the whole floor of a campus building to build a cluster made from xboxs and illegal mod chips. I doubt you'll get much funding.

      --
      "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
  108. xbox2 by mj2k · · Score: 1

    I'm actually surprised MS is delaying xbox2 release. I half expected them to release xbox2 in early March, and require users to buy it in order to play halo 2. On the other hand it is feasible that once the xbox2 is released MS can release new versions of halo/halo 2 with improved graphics as an incentive to upgrade to xbox2 (otherwise I don't see why people would upgrade).

  109. Dreamcast by runlvl0 · · Score: 1, Informative

    Let me get this straight, are you seriously suggesting that being first to market now is a disadvantage? That coming out first is being 1 year behind?

    It's counterintutitive, but it does make anecdotal sense. Think about the Dreamcast, first to market, less sophisticated than (at least, poorer graphics than) the PS2, GC, or XBox, and ultimately, the first to go.

    Really sad, since the Dreamcast was relatively DRM-less, and it can not only run Linux "out of the box" (by the way, someone should port Knoppix to...), but even after Sega has dropped support for the console, it supports a healthy homebrew community. I use it for MAME, etc. on my TV with actual game controllers. (Also, you can pick a used Dreamcast up at Electronic Botique for $19.99 these days...)

    --

    Carthago delenda est!
    1. Re:Dreamcast by dhamsaic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Dreamcast died because Sega, seeing the upcoming PS2, assumed their standard crisis mode, which is to roll over onto their backs and put a big red X on their stomach with a sign saying "STAB HERE".

      Dreamcast's must-own titles came too late, and by that time, people decided to wait for the PS2. Its much-hyped online ability was never fully realized because Sega got lazy.

      Dreamcast was killed by mismanagement, not by being first to market.

      It's counterintutitive, but it does make anecdotal sense.

      No, it really doesn't. GameBoy got clobbered by the GameGear, right? NES got ownz0red by Sega Master System, right? PlayStation didn't stand a chance against the newer and better N64, right?

      Even more recently, the PS2 is really getting thumped by Xbox, huh?

      It doesn't at all make any anecdotal sense, because there are fewer than a handful of situations where it's been true, and those have all been due to horrible mismanagement (generally by - surprise - Sega!).

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    2. Re:Dreamcast by mliu · · Score: 1

      But just as easily I can also point to things like the TurboGrafix16 which died unloved deaths because they were beaten to the market by their competitors. Ultimately, there's a lot more to the success or failure of a console than it's order to market. Make it good enough with enough good games from the get-go, and people will buy it if you come out first, and then you'll be in a commanding market position to squash your enemies from.

    3. Re:Dreamcast by runlvl0 · · Score: 1

      GameBoy got clobbered by the GameGear, right? NES got ownz0red by Sega Master System, right? PlayStation didn't stand a chance against the newer and better N64, right? Even more recently, the PS2 is really getting thumped by Xbox, huh?

      Oh, yeah? Well, you're... um, absolutely right. I hadn't thought of those. But, I still don't know that I'd say that Dreamcast's demise was because of mismanagement - rather, I'd agree with many of the posters in this forum who say that it's all about the games. IIRC, the big "must-own titles" for Dreamcst included Hydro Thunder, and... House of the Dead? Whereas, with the Gameboy, PS1 and PS2, the difference seems to have been in their huge software libraries. Also, it's worth noting that the GBA (GB and GBC) and PS2 (PS1) are backward-compatible, with tends to exploit this - new backward-compatible systems start with the library of the old. (I *still* play Nobunaga's Ambition for GB on my GBA/SP, a twelve year old cartridge!)

      --

      Carthago delenda est!
    4. Re:Dreamcast by dhamsaic · · Score: 1

      There is absolutely no doubt that part of the Dreamcast's demise was lack of must-own titles at launch. Soul Calibur was basically it. NFL2K if you were into that sort of thing. Everything else came out way too late, and as I said, by that time, PS2 was mere months away and Sony had hyped it as a huge leap (which it wasn't).

      The point is that the market has always been competetive, and Sega has always found a way to totally fail with their consoles. The consoles themselves have always been great (with the possible exception of the GameGear, one of which I own simply for nostalgia's sake), they've always *eventually* had relatively solid software. But at launch, hmmmm.

      (This, incidentally, is why the Saturn failed so miserably in the United States. It had great fuckin' games, but they came out too late for people to justify the $399 expense. Sony's PlayStation launched at $299, which seems a hell of a lot cheaper to most people.)

      Getting back to the original discussion, Xbox will definitely have its work cut out for it in its second generation, but I do not believe for a second that launching earlier than the competition is inherently bad. It is what Microsoft makes of it.

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
    5. Re:Dreamcast by NoseSocks · · Score: 1

      TurboGrafx 16 did not die because of when it came out. It died due to complete lack of advertising. In the days that SNES and "SEGA!" Genesis-dominated commercials during Ninja Turtles and other youth-oriented programming, NEC continued to just pump out more and more games, completely forgetting to tell the world about them. The only time you read about TG16 games is when you went to EGM or some other magazine and read their respective "Video Game Awards". "Legendary Axe" won in 1989 I believe. Many games after that won awards too; however, if not many people played them, the system was doomed.

      It's a shame too, since numerous games on that system blow away games coming out for the newest systems.

    6. Re:Dreamcast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention the sweet DC games that never made it to the bigger State-side market.

      There is something to be said for Crazy Taxi, which came out pretty early for the DC too.

      If Sega just had even surveyed a few of the US customers, they couldn't have pulled the plug. It was beyond inexplicable.

  110. IMO NO WAY by firstadopter.com · · Score: 1

    I don't think so. Microsoft is just going to copy Sony's moves, the co is already losing tons of money each xbox anyway, especially because they are not vertically integrated like Sony. What are this guys sources anyway?

  111. Re:What! About! Halo (prices)?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And a pre-owned Halo will still be $45 at EB when the XBox is $99.

  112. DC broadband by genner · · Score: 1

    Not true, DC had a braod band add on toward the end of it's life. Unfortunately very few games supported it.

  113. Inside XBox2 2005 by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone have any difinitive evidence (facts figures eye witness accounts) that the XBox 2 will be out in 2005? Other things Xbox owners are interested in are backwards compatibility, and info on chip suppliers (For the stock market inclined).

  114. All Junk By Any Standards by Petersko · · Score: 1

    I've used MSDOS, MS win3.0, MS win3.1, MS win95, MS win98, MS win2k. All junks by any standards.

    Funny... I've used all of these things too, and when I think of how much I've accomplished over the years using this junk I can't help but be happy it was available to me.

    I'm sure if I sat down and figured out some sort of ratio that compares actual work done against the amount of time I spent working on the OS, linux would be the poor, poor loser.

  115. Re:What does it take to trigger 'anti-dumping' law by Hassman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It isn't illegal because the gaming market isn't a monopoly. MS is trying to break into the market, not keep people out.

    Now then, if Sony dropped their prices way below MS and the Nintendo, that may be a different story.

    Also, no company ever has a business model based on losing money. Never. Ever. When a company expands into a new market, it is expected that the market will not be profitable for X number of years. Even when Sony and Nintendo started out, they lost money in the beginning. There is a lot of over-head related to starting a new division / company / market.

    The strategy is always that you reduce your losses every year to meet your goal of being profitable in the future. That being said, if you loose too much money, it is better to get out, though when you're MS that is a mute point.

    In my experience it is general practice to take big losses to begin with so you can establish a customer base. Ya know, get some loyalty. Then once you have a market you are able to run with it.

    --
    -Mark
    Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
  116. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MOD PARENT UP

  117. THEY RELEASE FAR TOO OFTEN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Difficult to establish that fact seeings as they've only released one console, genius.

  118. Oh by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    That might have to do with the fact that programming well for the PS2 is such a complex and difficult task. The architecture is completely custom and proprietary, and you need all kinds of tricks and workarounds to "reach into the guts of the machine", as you put it.

    Oh, I was wondering why all of the XBox games look the same while PS2 games tend to have a more unique style to them (as in different from other games).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Oh, I was wondering why all of the XBox games look the same while PS2 games tend to have a more unique style to them (as in different from other games).

      Your reply makes absolutely no sense, and really is a cheap shot characteristic of a fanboy. You're implying that somehow since the XBox is easier to learn how to develop for, all the games come out looking the same?

      Partisan nonsense, one-sided without any thought... you'd make a good politician.

  119. XBOX PVR by killmeplease · · Score: 1

    What I do not understand that the XBOX has the ability to be a perfectly good PVR, just like any Tivo out there: Fast enough processor, RAM, & video, etc... So why can't they put out a new version with a 120 GB HD and the software to use Tivo's subscription service. This sounds dumb to me. You would have people buying them for $300 without blinking which is better than the Tivo with and 80 GB drive. I am curious whey Tivo isn't biting on this one.

    --
    - Kill Yourself, spare us all! -
  120. CNN Commentary Column? by hethatishere · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I find myself wondering why this is being taken so seriously. Looking at the URL and the article itself makes it more than obvious this is an Opinion Article. Nothing more than a commentary from a writer who has shown his own lack of understanding on how the vide game market works. His only evidence for this immense price-drop comes from an analyst. Last time I checked analysts are not Gods and seem to be more often wrong then right. But of course, anyone who is in the business of predicting an unpredictable future could you expect anything less? This goes back to the old adage, just 'cause it's posted online don't make it anymore true. Of course, I don't know any better it could happen. But this is hardly much to go on.

    --
    Something intelligent here.
  121. saturn also came too early by Frogg · · Score: 1

    the dreamcast wasn't too bad at the time, but sega's saturn also suffered the similar fate of crashing out of the market before the other players did.

    it wasn't technically superior, although it had a fair amount of power to compete with the other consoles at the time - but inside it was technically all wrong for the time....

    what caused the programmers headaches with the saturn was the fact that it's 3d engine/hw all worked in quads (and not tris).

    this meant that you had to develop a radically different 3d engine to all the other platforms at the time (ie: pc, psx - and if you didn't mind *seriously* limited texture memory, the n64 (..but at least it rendered tris)).

    not only that, but the engine would have to undergo different optimisation to a tri-poly engine (aside from any other platform specific differences like texure memory management, etc) ..and, as if that wasn't enough, you also have to write another set of model conversion tools that work with quads... and, if you want performance, you have to get your graphic artist to design models that make use of a lot of quads too - truly horrendous with the tools of the day (3dstudio/etc)

    also, the compiler's backed produced some awful code. not only was the a lot of stuff that was truly sub-optimal, but plenty of it was actually redundant (you should see what a mess it made of compiling our cross platform fixed-n-float maths library - and don't even think about using most of the nice oo features in c++, coz it just made the code lots worst)

    an interesting challenge, but plenty of developers soon decided it was the 'black sheep' of the consoles, requiring too much of its own kind of voodoo to be a commercially viable platform to develop for at the time -- the project manager's soon realised that the saturn was proving to be the awkward one of the bunch, and then during the next project, it was left in the corner with all the other junk hardware, allowing everyone to concentrate on working together more easily.

    i don't know what developers thought of the dreamcast, but it certainly wasn't adopted as quickly as the psx2 was - maybe this was simply a hangover from the saturn legacy? maybe the compiler was still not as good as those on the other platforms (that alone can make coding into a nightmare issue or two)

    whatever happens to the current xbox, i think it likely that the next xbox will simply be another pc-alike-in-a-box [yawn for the gamers, but eventually good for us hacker-geeks]

    microsoft know they are on to a winner if they stick with what (games+/etc) developers already know.

    [technical aside]
    of course, if you've got quads, you can always make a triangle by putting two verts at the same coordinate - which is fine if you've not got a fancy texture on the quad (coz otherwise the non-perspective correct texture mapping would skew it to bits) and you don't mind incurring the cost of using quads for tris (extra maths on a redundant vert) - a lot of games used minimal textures and shading to compensate for all the triangularly-skewed-quads.

    ['scuse the ramble]

  122. Just give em away by borg1238 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why doesn't Microsoft just give the Xbox away? If all they are after is market-share, that's a sure way to guarantee the number one spot in the console wars. Sure they'll lose more money, but they've been losing money on this console since it's launch.

  123. The conclusion to the Mike Rowe settlement? by djeaux · · Score: 1
    A couple of days ago, /. hashed out the MikeRoweSoft.com "settlement" where Micro$oft gave a 17 yr old kid some certification course vouchers & an XBox. Now they cut the price of the XBox.

    Could the cost of MS cert courses & exams be the next price cut?

    --
    "Obviously, I'm not an IBM computer any more than I'm an ashtray" (Bob Dylan)
    1. Re:The conclusion to the Mike Rowe settlement? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Wtf?

      Are you crazy, or just high?

    2. Re:The conclusion to the Mike Rowe settlement? by djeaux · · Score: 1
      Microsoft settles with MikeRoweSoft

      Crazy? High? Are the two mutually exclusive?

      --
      "Obviously, I'm not an IBM computer any more than I'm an ashtray" (Bob Dylan)
  124. I grudgingly played with one recently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had sworn off ever owning/playing/touching an XBOX just as a matter of course (I already have a PS2 and a Gamecube). However, recently a friend of mine has acquired one (along with Project Gotham Racing 2).

    I have to say: PGR2 + XBox Live is probably one of the most MATURE gaming products I've ever seen. From the anti-lag of the game to the way scores (and ghosts) integrate in Single Player mode.

    It's really quite an impressive combination of products. Single/Multi-player is seamless, no bugs to be seen and very easy XBox-Live setup

    If it were to fall to $99, I would definately buy one.

  125. Now the game industry must also suffer from MS by devhen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is horrible for us not-so-rich gamers. I still havent' been able to get enough money together to get an xbox and MS is already threatening to release an Xbox2. The life of a game console must be a lot longer than this if you want to get your money out of it. Games for the Xbox1 haven't even began to use all of the potential of the console. It takes the game-making industry years to get to where they can quickly produce great games that use all of the potential of a console. If PS2 would have been released like this, so soon after PS1, hundreds and thousands of great PS1 games would never had existed. MS needs to give game makers A LOT more time and more resources to produce Xbox games before they try to release a new version. That is unless Xbox2 is very similar and game makers can use all of their Xbox1 knowledge for building Xbox2 games and that the Xbox is backwards compatible with the Xbox1. In this case an Xbox2 wouldn't suck. But, its Microsoft. They don't know what the hell gaming is.

  126. Ditto by G27+Radio · · Score: 1

    I never really was impressed by the X-box until I played PGR2 on X-box live at my neighbor's place. Everything you've said, I agree with.

    My neighbor is currently working at a pawn shop. They regularly sell used X-boxes there for $99. So if you don't mind a used one, you might want to check out a local pawn shop--that's where he got his. Works perfectly.

  127. DUDE it's the YBOX! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anybody who knows anything knows it's not gonna be called XBOX2 - I
    t's the YBOX!

  128. Supercomputer by MATTtheROGUE · · Score: 1

    Sure, you might have the biggest supercomputer. But honestly, do you think all those people renting time on it are doing work?

    I mean, can you say LAN Party!

    1. Re:Supercomputer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could say Lan Party if the Mac platform had a game available to it that was worth two shits.

  129. On the verge... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    7 months later?

  130. Re:CNN Hype [CNN SUCKS] by bach37 · · Score: 1


    Right on man. I have never liked CNN, and think their news is all bloated "hollywood-style." Since when does a CNN commentary deserve slashdot status? And with a story made on speculation, at that!?

    Scott

  131. Realized their true competition by Ra5pu7in · · Score: 1

    Speculation: Sony's PS2 is already holding over half of the overall market share. Nintendo's GC has been grabbing more market share, close to passing Microsoft's Xbox. Xbox has no chance to catch Sony, so this $99 price is a step in positioning their console as a direct competitor with GC rather than the more expensive PS2.

    One question: if a guy now goes and buys an Xbox for $99 (not to mention paying for Xbox Live), is he going to buy an Xbox2 soon after release? Unlikely, unless new and much better games come out for the Xbox2 right away. Otherwise, why bother outlaying a whopping 3-4X his initial investment in the Xbox to buy the Xbox2?

    Second question: How many owners of the Xbox are so satisfied with the console and the titles that they would buy an Xbox2 in its first year? (Remember the PS2? Unable to deliver enough to satisfy demand for months - around 500,000 in the first few weeks if I remember correctly.)

    --
    I was taking one day at a time, but then several days got together and ambushed me. (from a Rhymes with Orange comic)
  132. are the $99 xboxes easilly hackable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't microsoft make some changes to the xboxes now out there (last year), I assume that these $99 xboxes are the same model? Are they hackable using that (bunny) book or is it more difficult?

    1. Re:are the $99 xboxes easilly hackable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 1.5 is the latest and the modding community stays on the ball. It's about 1% harder but definetly do-able.

  133. Welcome to the Console industry. by Dolemite_the_Wiz · · Score: 1

    This is nothing new and it certantly not something that Microsoft started.

    This sort of thing has been going on for ages.

    Dolemite
    ____________________

    --
    Save the World! Use a Quote!
  134. Revisionist History by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "When Sony acted, Microsoft reacted - especially when it came to price cuts." --from the article

    That's revisionist history if I've ever seen it. In actuality, Sony reacted to a leak that Microsoft was dropping their prices in a couple of weeks, and then preemptively cut their prices (Sony didn't even have time to get the proper promotional materials to the stores because they hadn't planned on cutting their prices until they saw Microsoft planning on doing it).

  135. It'll take more than a price drop.. by Gilesx · · Score: 1

    The X-Box may drop to $99, but my Gamecube will still have much better, and more fun in-house and platform exclusive games.

    F Zero GX, Viewtiful Joe, Zelda Wind Waker, Super Monkey Ball, Pikmin, Heck - even Luigi's Mansion are all a *lot* more playable than anything I've played that the X-Box has to offer, and my gf manages a branch of EB, so believe me, I've seen a *lot* of games lately...

    --
    Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
    1. Re:It'll take more than a price drop.. by valkraider · · Score: 1

      BULL CRAP.

      There is no way you have a GirlFriend...

      :)

  136. I think I'll get another just so I have a non-mod by Str8Dog · · Score: 1
    Now you have no reason not to buy one, a mod chip and a 140 Gig harddrive. Then all you have to do is download Slayers, a little solder and you are ready to rock.

    I have one and it is the most amazing damn thing I have ever had. I can play all my internet movies, music files and copy all my games to it making carting my Xboxen easy to cart around. I need to write up an article about it. Maybe this weekend.

    --


    Str8Dog
    using System.Darkside; public
  137. XBox2 Backward Compatible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will it still run TuxRacer???

  138. Re:I think I'll get another just so I have a non-m by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ditto, I dont get all the console loyalty. See it for what it is. And if you hate MS, hell spend the 99$ mod it and rip MS off. The modded xbox is the best piece of tech for the money that I have seen in a long time. So many individual uses - each which makes it worth the money.

  139. Autosensing switchbox by IanO · · Score: 1

    Could you give more info on the autosensing switchbox (ie. brand, inputs, etc)? Most of the ones I've seen look pretty cheap so I question their actual usefulness.

    Thanks!

    --
    ------
    Objects in Mirror are Losing!
    1. Re:Autosensing switchbox by egomaniac · · Score: 1

      Could you give more info on the autosensing switchbox (ie. brand, inputs, etc)? Most of the ones I've seen look pretty cheap so I question their actual usefulness.

      Thanks!


      Audio Authority Component Video Switch

      It's frickin' amazing. There are manual-pushbutton component video switches that cost $500, and this thing does it automatically for under $200.

      Basically, it has four sets of component video / stereo audio / optical audio / coax audio inputs. You order them in terms of priority -- input 1 takes priority over input 2. When you turn a device on, it sees the signal coming from it, and switches to that device. When you turn a device off, it goes to the highest-priority device that is still on. It also has a manual button to override its choice, but in practice I almost never actually need to override it.

      I have all of my game systems attached to it, and all I have to do is turn one on to start playing it.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    2. Re:Autosensing switchbox by unclethursday · · Score: 1
      I also thank you for this. I've been looking for a good component switcher for a while, that didn't cost me $500 or more.

      I will be looking into this.

    3. Re:Autosensing switchbox by Geckoman · · Score: 1
      Plus the GameCube has a lot more female-friendly games, which is important to me because it's a lot easier for me to score gaming time if my wife wants to play too.
      The autoswitching thing is ok, but what I'm really interested in hearing more about is how you got your wife to play games! ;-)
    4. Re:Autosensing switchbox by egomaniac · · Score: 1

      The autoswitching thing is ok, but what I'm really interested in hearing more about is how you got your wife to play games! ;-)

      Heh. My father-in-law raised his daughter right. She grew up playing Mario and Zelda, so while she's admittedly not as much of a gamer as I am, she still plays a lot of games. In addition to the female-friendly set like The Sims, Animal Crossing, Mario Party and whatnot, she absolutely loves Diablo II, and now I've gotten her hooked on Final Fantasy XI. She also owns a Corvette, loves power tools, and is a good shot with a .357. And lest that give you the wrong impression, she's also beautiful and still very feminine (in the right ways) without being a whiny aggravating bitch like most women.

      When we visited my friend's house, where he had just installed a 110" home theater (which his wife hated and was barely tolerant of), my wife leaned over to me and whispered "I thought it would be bigger than that. We should get a bigger screen when we do ours." His wife acquiesced to the popcorn machine, but won't let him put in a soda fountain. My wife informed me that our theater had better damned well include a soda fountain, popcorn machine, and classic arcade cabinets.

      Oh, and she lets me date other women.

      No, I am not making any of this up. Yes, I am well aware that I am the luckiest fucking bastard alive.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
  140. $99 Linux box by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

    Boy o boy. I can run linux without a PC now.

    You didn't actually think I would purchase a xbox for xbox games did you? ;D

  141. Gentoo and SETI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last night I setup GentooX (http://gentoox.shallax.com/) on my Xbox and found that it was very easy to install, and aside from not coming with certain utilities (such as traceroute, etc), it worked great. I don't know, maybe I just didnt look hard enough. But once I had Linux installed, I just had to test out SETI@Home. So I setup the client, and let it run all night. Of course it took like 10-12 hours (about typical for my P3-500 under Windows) to finish the packet, but can you imagine a cluster of Xboxs running SETI@Home!

  142. Not to mention a mighty fine WebServer in that Mod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On top of being a kick ass mediacenter that supports almost any codec available the mediaCenter has a built in WebServer / FTP Server.

    Know anywhere else you can get a 700mhz very capable web server that can boot in less than 10sec?

    I just have a problem with all th

  143. Son of a... by brainthought · · Score: 1

    But I just frickn' bought an XBox! Of for crying out loud... Stupid Crimson Skies and it's making me finally want an XBox...

    Great, guess that's what I get for holding out, but just not long enough. Stupid Microsoft...

  144. Ballroom Blitz ? by Herkules · · Score: 0

    The Sweet!

    --
    CIA Factbook 2002 (US):"Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households
  145. Xbox2? by n0dez · · Score: 1

    A PPC Xbox - The new era?

  146. Preemptive anti-moron comment by EvilSporkMan · · Score: 1

    Mod chips do not interfere with copyright laws.
    This is correct. When sellers of modchips get busted (under U.S. law, anyway) it's because they were including or otherwise supplying hacked version of the Microsoft BIOS for the Xbox with the chips, not because modifying your hardware is illegal.

    --
    -insert a witty something-
  147. Have TV's caught up yet? by Doppler00 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does the average person have a TV that displays more resolution than NTSC yet? How much more powerful can the XBOX 2 system be without people upgrading their TV's and sound systems to take advantage of it?

    Other than new games, how can they justify to the consumer that this new system is better?

  148. $100 iPod flash-backs? by iamhassi · · Score: 1

    Is anyone else getting "$100 mini iPod" flashbacks?

    --
    my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    1. Re:$100 iPod flash-backs? by Pocket+PC+Addict · · Score: 1

      For just $50 more you can get the bigger ipod with 15gigs instead of 4. So I vote no

  149. I'll do you better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think Microsoft should go into competition with Rockstar. There are plenty of ways that idea can be embraced, extended and branded. Then, if Microsoft could put them in decline, hire away the talent, and buy the property cheap.

    I for one would love to see a open ended, task based, multiplayer (massively or otherwise) underworld game with fantastic context sensitivity branded as like a John Woo film. That done well could dominate. With hard drives and Xbox Live!, there could be some real punishment dished out by microsoft. Especially if they wrote the engine, or someone elses, right where they wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel to add new features to the follow-ups.

  150. Losers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to own an Xbox. I believed MS could make a good product (before I started MCSE program). After awhile, I sold it since there weren't enough games to keep me interested. I have a Gamecube (rememberingNES days) and I love it.

    The main appeal of Xbox is the graphics and Live. No more. PS2 can be played online and same with Gamecube. Xbox has a hard drive but made by a cheap company. Xbox looks better for graphics but thats it only strong point. You losers can have wet dreams over Xbox and MS all day but people who want quality will get Sony's or Nintendo's systems. MS is just in it for money and to get more crappy MS code in the home. Suckers.

  151. Going to be linux powered ? :-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pyara Billji,
    Your happy sw extortion days will be over with
    that!. Better get Xbox (Linux Inside (Patent))
    for easy life.

  152. Isn't this what microsoft always does? by Stevyn · · Score: 1

    So they're just going to rush it to market. Alright, it's not the same as their software exactly, in this case it's hardware, but their same philosophy nonetheless. Probably what'll happen is their system will have a lot of bugs and the game developers will have the job of work arounds for their games. Since for a year microsoft could have playstation 3 beat until it comes out, they could just say to the game developers to deal with it if they want to sell their games on XBox. I mean last I checked, the xbox wasn't set up to automatically check for updates on xboxupdates.microsoft.com

  153. Actually.. by Kwil · · Score: 1

    ..this depends.

    If MS produces another X-box to send to the store to replace the one you purchased? They've lost money.

    If they don't, they've gained.

    --

    That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze

  154. The Hard Drives!!!! by Nazmun · · Score: 1

    Silicon chip can be made significantly cheaper over time. But one thing that a lot of people don't consider is the costs of manufacturing a hard drive. Did you notice that you can never buy a "New" hard drive from any retailer for under $50 bucks? They're a very good reason for that. No matter how streamlined or efficient a company gets they still have fixed costs.

    A 10 gig hard drive will cost the same to manufacture as a 20 gig or 30 gig once the plant has been setup. Complications like this and the nvidia bitterness will not allow ms to break even at $99 dollars in a half a year. I'll be surprised if they come close to breaking even to the current price they have now with such a number of components in their system.

    --
    Hmmm... Pie...
  155. Re:Ask Slashdot: man or mouse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's with the recommendation of black music? Is that to let your bitch fantasize about getting fucked by a filthy nigger?

  156. ...And I won't buy one by Choron · · Score: 1

    The price looks interesting but by buying one you will just make what M$ expects : increase their market shares. More consoles sold means they can use those numbers to drag game makers to this platform. Even if you buy one to run Linux on it (a quite stupid idea given what you have to bear to run it) it will help Microsft, and don't even tell me about the urban legend saying that M$ looses money on each console sold, if you're naive enough to believe it then yeah you deserve to get screwed by Microsoft, go ahead and get one, loser ! ;)

    --
    "Naughty, naughty, naughty, you filthy old soomka !"
  157. This will work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft obviously doesn't want to earn money with XBox1 and XBox2. So this seems like a perfect legal way of overtaking the market.

  158. Only a few hours? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    That is a least 2 hours (otherwise it is not plural).

    I just don't believe you, unless you are sleeping only 4 or 5 hours every day, work from home, and have no other hobby.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:Only a few hours? by dhamsaic · · Score: 1

      Up at 5:30, to work by 6:30, out at 3:00, home by 3:15, games until say 5:30, dinner with the woman, watch a movie, read a bit... as long as I'm to bed by midnight or so, it's fine.

      I usually sleep in a whole lot on the weekends to make up for less-than-stellar sleep habits during the week. (I never said it was healthy.)

      Hobbies include guitar, computers and movies.

      But really, it doesn't matter if you believe me or not. I'm not trying to make friends or impress on Slashdot. I'm here to talk gaming.

      --
      Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
  159. Why do you feel guilty? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    The games are overpriced and the game companies stop retailers trying to offer best price by forcing them to sell at the same price.

    If the games would cost 10 or 15 GBP I would buy some, as things stand 35 or 40 GBP for a game is completely irrational.

    I but all my games second hand. It is legal, legitimate and sends the message nicely.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  160. Now thatsa lotsa consoles by Funk_dat69 · · Score: 1
    I have nearly 40 Xbox games and two Xboxes...I bought a GameCube at $199, two at $149, and will probably pick up another one at $99


    I hope you invite all the neighborhood kids over to play all those consoles in your, no doubt, House of Wonders...

    hehe...just messin with ya
    --
    FUNK!
  161. Don't be so sensitive. after all ..... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    .... I was of by only 1/2 hour (only 5:30 hours sleep!).

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  162. Throw in 2 games... by will_die · · Score: 1

    and I would get it.

    Well provided that the games were worth $49.50 each.

  163. Pfffft... It's all the same to me. by MXi · · Score: 1

    Hmm... Well i know Xbox 2 will definately come out before PS3 over here in australia. It's not slated for release here until early 2007 fo sum reason.

    --
    The world would be a better place if...