Memory Deal Bolsters Xbox 2 HD Removal Rumors

friedknut writes "According to a CNET News article: 'Flash memory maker M-Systems announced on Wednesday that it has signed a contract to provide storage products for future versions of the Xbox, bolstering speculation that Microsoft may ditch the game console's hard drive', since the flash-based memory devices will 'be of significantly higher capacity than the 8MB Xbox memory units Microsoft currently sells to save game and user data.' But of course, Microsoft representatives declined to comment on the company's plan for next-generation Xbox hardware."

Comments

Wow.

[JanusFury]

If this is true, this is an absolutely brilliant idea. A few hundred megs of storage memory and you've basically eliminated the need for memory cards for the average game player, and without having to spend ~$40 or more on a hard disk for each console (of course, I'm sure MS got volume discounts.) That, and switching to some sort of flash system would cut down on noise, heat output, energy usage, and failure rate. This is a really good idea.

Re:Wow.

[MoonFog]

Not only that:
"The hard drive became a liability in relation to those units that were hacked," Doherty said.

Seems like they are willing to go further to stop the modding of the x-boxes. IIRC, Microsoft didn't make any money on the x-box itself, but wanted to make that up selling enough games. I have a couple of friends which have switched the standard hard drive in an x-box with one having 120gb disk space (I understand it's even possible to have more). This will perhaps make this kind of hack more difficult. Though I am fairly sure the x-box 2 will also be modded fairly easy.

Re:Wow.

[-brazil-]

and without having to spend ~$40 or more on a hard disk for each console

...and instead having to spend rather more thant that on "a few hundred megs" of flash memory, the console will become more expensive and slower, while of the advantages you mention only the failure rate seems significant to me.

Re:Wow.

[h0tblack]

With the original Xbox Microsoft ended up with an extremely open and hackable console mainly because of their single-minded drive to get into the console market. It was a sensible decision, use hardware and software that you'r already familiar with, throw a load of cash at it, get a good market share.
We're now coming upto stage2 of the plan. Now microsoft have proved themselves as a serious player in the console market and gained some experience, they can look forward to the future. They're creating something that will be more of a traditional closed-architecture console in many ways and far far less of a pc-in-a-box. They'll have more control over the platform, less hackability and although through the original Xbox they've got a lot of users and developers on-side, they may have to prove themselves over again.

Re:Wow.

[*weasel]

The reason is that Flash and a HD would be redundant. If you're paying for the HD, why include a couple hundred meg of Flash? Flash's unsuitable as swap and you wouldn't get a performance improvement there - so what would justify the additional cost?

Furthermore, Microsoft has basically stated there will be no hard drive, unless Sony puts a HD in the PS3.

PVR does sound like a killer dual-functionality that would move 10s of millions of units, as DVD playback did for the PS2. However, if Sony doesn't try to do PVR in the PS3, then that functionality wouldn't be required to beat be competitive. So again, it's all a matter of necessary cost.

IMO, if MS does a PVR/neXtBox - it'll be a seperate product, akin to Sony's PSX. That way they won't lose marketshare by having a unit too expensive for those who just want 'a console'. As a bonus, if they release it after the vanilla console, they may be able to sell this second unit to those who desperately want PVR, and wouldn't mind a second neXtBox for LAN gaming.

BTW: M$ is only as funny as $ony. And neither is very funny.

This will change nothing

[RoundTop-VJAS]

The XBox 2 will still have a hard drive in it. The reason for this is that one of the reasons that the xbox has been a success is the ability to rip your music onto it and play it in your favorite games.

This feature demands a hard drive as flash memory, while getting cheaper, does not have the amount of memory avaliable for 100+ songs for as cheap as a hard drive.

That said, I think we will see larger memory cards as saves get bigger, also I hope to see them drop in price.

Above all else, remember that no console has removed major hardware functionality yet.
NES->SNES->N64->GC was all upgrades, each having more features than before
GB->GBP->GBC->GBA->GBA-SP Same deal
PS1->PS2
Dreamcast-> damn you for going under. We loved you.

I look forward to the xbox 2, and while I may not be a person to preorder it, or even get it within 6 months of release, it is on my list of things to get.

Re:This will change nothing

[Westley]

Actually, I can see there being two models of XBox 2 - one with a hard disk (and a *big* one at that), and one without. Developers will be told not to *rely* on the disk, but to include optional extras which use it (much like GBA/GC connectivity).

The big difference between the model with the hard disk and the model without is whether or not you use it as your media centre, not the add-ons in games - the "with hard disk" one could be a PVR, music centre, etc. Basically, I would expect MS to release a version of the XBox 2 which included XP Media Centre (or some variant thereof). Such a device would be great for those who wanted an all in one box, but would be too expensive for those who only wanted games.

Only speculation, but it makes sense to me...

Re:This will change nothing

[LostCluster]

Let's say this another way. When you break backwards compatiblity on a console, you have to change the name and start over.

Some XBox games no doubt assume the HD is present because that's what the design specs allowed them to do at the time, and therefore use it in a way that'd crash the game if the HD wasn't there. Unless games were severely limited in how much HD swap space they could have, then the flash solution is going to end up being about as big as the HD... or they're going to have to admit that the XBox2 can't play XBox games. Once backward compatiblity breaks, console designers usually smash it with other changes, and the whole game library has to start over.

So, unless we see flash memory that's going to act a lot like an HD, XBox2 is going to look nothing like the XBox.

You have to wonder

[foidulus]

If the beast of redmond was infuriated by the linux xbox project. Putting a hd there gave the linux distro much more power(ability to store large amounts of data, a fast swap etc), this way they can still get the convience of having all your saved games on one(hopefully quick) memory device, while eliminating the need for a hard drive. Linux will still find it's way to the box^2 of the beast, it just might not be as useful next time around, provided that ms doesn't do anything stupid...though I guess if it has USB that kinda defeats my whole post. Ah fuck it! Free Weird Al!

Mother-of-all-flash memory

[felonious]

I doubt the move towards not having a hardrive is related to making it cheaper to produce...Maybe partly but IMO it's geared towards the mod chips, evox bios's and such which make it all too easy to copy games. Without having the hardrive it's kind of hard to copy the games but there's always ftp via lan connection. Of course I have no direct knowledge of this but I did read about it on the internet once...

Some benefits

[Bega]

Seems like a good idea to me. Xbox having a hard drive, was a good concept, altough it had its pros and cons. The biggest con of it is the need to buy an external 8MB memory card if you would've wanted to move your saves to your friend's console (which made me wonder why not over ethernet..?). And on top of that, most games don't support the memory cards at all. And no, the music ripping feature wasn't really that great - not too many games supported the feature anyway.
Flash is probably a better (and perhaps more secure?) format for use, if they go on like Nintendo and invent their own formats on existing 'hardware' (Cube discs). I hope that the write times aren't the same as with console memory cards nowadays if you need to store big amounts of data.

That's a broken metaphor.

[Inoshiro]

They may not be upgrades, because they're often designed to a superset of features -- not to add features to a set bullet point list.

For example, the GameBoy Player is designed to be a GBA via GCN. It doesn't support Super Gameboy borders at all, neither does the real GBA or GBA SP, or GBC. Despite the fact that the borders are a legit part of the Super Gameboy standard (and on quick a few games, such as DW1&2 and Donkey Kong).

Manufacturers will put whatever features they want into video game systems. It's just that most of those features continue to make sense for years, which is why they're added as a bullet point to the next superset system.

The hard drive will stay

[Openstandards.net]

Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (MMOLRPG) demand hard drive space, so the HD will stay. Sony PS/2 tried it without the hard drive for EverQuest Online (Frontiers), and realized it was a problem because they couldn't significantly upgrade the clients with the self imposed 3M limit. Thus, FXII requires a USB hard drive in order to play. Those that play the games on PCs know that patches can include a lot of changes, which can require a significant download to upgrade the clients. Plus, the clients effectively cache maps and other things, creating large files to permit efficient game play. The hard drive will stay.

Hard Drive not needed

[scum-e-bag]

An xbox hard drive has three purposes. For two of them it isn't necessary, well the important ones from an MS perspective anyway.

1. Savegames. Flash memory would be more than sufficient. There are already hitachi CF cards with 4 GB capacity and don't be surprized to see 32GB CF cards in a year or so.
2. Downloaded content from xbox live. Great feature.
3. Storing ripped music for use as a soundtrack. Those with LAN could use a windows share for this. I don't think this is a popular enough feature or easily implimented by the average consumer to mandate its inclusion in XBox2. An external harddrive peripheral could fill this need.

MS have come out and said they can't make XBox 1 profitable. There is a good chance they are going to try to reduce theirhardware costs with XB2 so that they can actually realise some good profits out of the XB console series. The harddrive is a large expense that could be considered expendable with without too much pain.

The HDD is an important point for compatibility

[Rolman]

As some others pointed out, the HDD is very important should MS want to keep compatibility with their current console.

However, backwards compatibility with the Xbox seems increasingly unlikely, because there are several issues and compromises:

- New CPU and incompatible ISA
- New GPU (again, with incompatible ISA, and don't start the stupid "DirectX API" thing here, I'm talking low-level pixel/vertex shader code and Nvidia's proprietary, probably heavily patented/copyrighted extensions)
- Keeping backwards compatibility could mean compatibility with some current Xbox hacks, like buffer overflows in some games and some BIOS stuff that could allow pirates to.dump "0 day" ROMs/ISOs immediately after the thing hits the market.
- The HDD has not proved to be a market advantage, in fact, it negatively affected Xbox sales in some markets (big, ugly, heavy, noisy consoles don't sell in Japan, vertical PS2 anyone?).

Yes, MS could put the resources forward to solve each and every issue, but after not earning a penny in one entire console generation, I think it'd be a wise decision not to include backwards compatibility.

Now, the benefits of throwing it out:

- Smaller, leaner, cheaper to make console
- Efficient, durable, reliable architecture
- Harder to hack

Basically, MS' strategy seems closer to what Nintendo did right with their current Gamecube console and the hard fact it's the only company capable of making a solid profit with minimum losses (in fact only ONE loss situation in their history). This is smarter than simply throwing money to push everyone else out of business.

If this means MS is taking a honest and technically efficient approach on their next console, I'm all for it. The current Xbox has some great games but it's never been interesting enough, neither from a technical standpoint nor as a game console.

Re:The HDD is an important point for compatibility

[Rolman]

Oh and I forgot to say this, but some argue: "OMG! Halo/My-favorite-game won't work w/o HDD".

Those guys are either too naive or don't seem to have followed the videogame industry long enough, here's some food for thought:

How would you like a $29.99 2-in-1 disc, containing a "remake" of Halo and Halo2, with "improved textures", 7.1 audio, ONE new level, ONE new vehicle and ONE new weapon? I bet you're already drooling =) Backwards compatibility? What's that?

Don't ever think MS or any other videogame publisher would refuse an opportunity to sell you the same game twice. (Resident Evil, Famicom Mini anyone?)

Flash RAM? Can NOT replace HDD.

[haggar]

Flash RAM can support up to about 10.000 write-cycles or less! This makes it unsuitable as a means to replace a hard-drive. NVRAM (Non-Volatile RAM) is a much better solution, but it's more expensive. Also, it will retain your data no longer than 10 years (this is probably not a problem for Xbox users).

Flash RAM's application is to store firmware code that is not meant to change frequently. I imagine that the type of data one stores on a HDD changes frequently, sometimes very frequently.

No HDD = no compatibility = no point to Xbox 1

[Namarrgon]

- New CPU and incompatible ISA

MS just bought a Wintel emulator that runs on a PowerPC.

- New GPU (again, with incompatible ISA, and don't start the stupid "DirectX API" thing here, I'm talking low-level pixel/vertex shader code and Nvidia's proprietary, probably heavily patented/copyrighted extensions)

ATi have said this can likely be overcome, with shader recompilation most likely.

- Keeping backwards compatibility could mean compatibility with some current Xbox hacks, like buffer overflows in some games and some BIOS stuff that could allow pirates to.dump "0 day" ROMs/ISOs immediately after the thing hits the market.

No chance. We're running under an emulator, remember? Anything that tries to step out of the sandbox gets killed immediately.

- The HDD has not proved to be a market advantage, in fact, it negatively affected Xbox sales in some markets (big, ugly, heavy, noisy consoles don't sell in Japan, vertical PS2 anyone?).

For every person that dislikes the extra size that comes from the HD, there's another that likes downloading content from Live, two that are grateful they don't have to buy extra flash cards, and a few more that like game features that use it (like faster loading, massive game saves, custom music tracks, game expansions [e.g as with DOA3] etc etc]. I would be willing to bet it'd be a net disadvantage, from polling the comments here. A better start to reducing size/noise/heat would be to take out the built-in PSU.

The current Xbox has some great games but it's never been interesting enough, neither from a technical standpoint nor as a game console.

Funny, I usually hear that the other way around :-)

Basically, as people have pointed out, no HD effectively means no backwards compatibility. And no backwards compatibility means everything they spent on establishing the original Xbox is wasted.

What's the one thing they'll be left with, after Xbox1's life is over? Brand awareness? Well, mixed feelings at best from the console community. Confidence in MS's ability to succeed in the market? Likewise. Popular, exclusive gaming franchises? Not many at all. Experience? Well yeah, but that's a very expensive training exercise.

What they will have is a library of popular software (remember that the Xbox did very well in selling multiple games to each owner). Windows has succeeded mostly because of backwards compatibility - they can't afford to throw away their one big advantage, especially having seen how it helped the PS2. And they can't afford to port (and enhance) every game that people might want, nor would everyone be delighted to buy them a second time.

Maybe they'll have to sell a separate $70 "Compatibility expansion kit", with a HD & the emulator (and maybe a couple of new features too), but if they don't offer backwards compatibility at all, they might as well write off the last few years/billions completely.