Slashdot Mirror
The Scoop on the Xbox 360's Embedded OS?
An anonymous reader writes "When the Xbox 360 was launched two weeks ago amid much brouhaha over its custom-designed IBM PowerPC-based CPU with 3 symmetrical cores running at 3.2GHz each, WindowsForDevices.com wondered aloud, 'What OS runs inside the Xbox 360?' Now, the website thinks it has found the answer to its question. No, it's not Linux or BSD, nor a derivative of Longhorn or Windows CE."
Will this compromise hackability?
I can go buy it in stores? I think you mean debuted.
They are making the PowerPC for the Xbox and the Cell for the new Playstation. It seems like they will be the real winner in the next round of game wars.
Madre de Dios! Es El Pollo Diablo! -- Captain Blondebeard
I think it's interesting because, if W2K is good enough for the 360, the latest and greatest console in the world, it's still good enough for everyone else.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
I was hoping it'd be something incredible and barely believable, like OS X or BeOS or Plan 9. But no, it's just a derivative of the original XBox OS. Weak. All that suspense for almost nothing. This story is worse than the ending of Citizen Kane, when "Rosebud" turned out to be his sled.
Another one bites the dust
Well, since Microsoft used to sell WinNT for PowerPC (I used to have a few of the machines), and Win2K is just an update of WinNT, I presume it was pretty trivial for them to do this.
Didn't MS and billg say that stripping down the OS like this was impossible due to integration issues in a court of law? Did someone mislead the court? Or am I mistaken?
Anyway, this is just one more project branch to maintain. They now have Win2K, WinXP Home Edition, WinXP Pro, Win2003 server, WinCE and now another version for the XBox. For the server editions they need to support standard, enterprise and data center versions. And I think there is a version for the tablet PC, or is it just WinCE? No wonder MS wants cheaper code monkeys, keeping all the versions maintained and in synch has got to be a labor intensive nightmare.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
First off, it was pretty obvious that MS were going to use existing code on the original XBOX, if only because it was to all intents and puropses a PC. So at the time MS had the choice between using a Win 9X codebase, a CE codebase or NT/2000 codebase.
.NET or Avalon.
Windows 9X compatibility wasn't a requirement so could be ignored, CE was optimised for lower power CPUs and had been a less than a stellar success in the Dreamcast, whilst the NT/2000 codebase was optimised for higher end processors x86/PPC/MIPS/Alpha. It would seem that the choice was obvious. I dare say that MS stripped it down so that it's just the kernel of 2000 with thin wrappers of DirectX on top of the drivers together with a the minimum requirements of Win32 to keep DirectX and OpenGL running.
If we jump ahead to now, it seems obvious that MS would carry on using the same platform - just this time using the PPC branch of 2000, build new drivers and probably add more Win32 stuff to support the XNA architecture. If anything it seems unthinkable that they would use anything but an NT kernel.
I would be more interested to know if Win360 (I know this is Slashdot and Microsoft is only interesting when it's monopolising the cure for cancer etc - but just allow me to wonder a moment!) supports
$2B OR NOT $2B = $FF
Besides, just because MS doesn't sell a PowerPC version of XP, doesn't mean it doesn't exist inside the company. Similarly, Apple is rumored to have MacOS on an Intel box, just in case they ever need it. (And yes, those rumors long predate the recent Apple/Intel talks.)
> Who, except for /. crowd, expects Microsoft adopts Linux for one of their strategic pieces?
> Windows has the HAL that can absorb hardware differences, so there's no room for Linux and the
> like.
When the Mac came out in '84, M$ told the DOS heads that using their keyboard macros was so much faster than using a mouse that using the mouse and gui will never make it into mainstream business. They published statistics to prove it. Then Windows came out, and M$ told them how great the mouse and gui was, and they switched over in droves, their past biases completely removed from their memory banks.
When the web started taking off in the early '90s, M$ told the faithful that the web was a waste of time. It was run by Universities and will never be applicable to the modern business world. Hell, you had to jump through hoops to even get windows running TCP/IP back then. Then M$ came out with IE, and told everyone that it is the business app of the future. All of the windows heads developed mass amnesia, and told us all how M$ runs the internet.
History says that if M$ changed their stance and started pushing Linux, embrased and extended into proprietary hell, of course, then all the current Linux haters will tell you how great M$ Linux is, and forget they ever bashed it.
M$s main power is brainwashing. They coddle the non-free-thinking masses and give them a sense of community in their M$ness. They will blindly follow whatever Redmond tells them, as long as they have Linux and Apple or whoever to despise. Hated is the easiest way to bind any community.
jfs
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
Just because MS doesn't have a monopoly in every single market (yet), doesn't mean they don't have a monopoly. The problem with the xbox is that they are using the billions of dollars they made from their OS monopoly to push their way into other markets.
No, my post said that using the money from their monopoly in the OS market to sell a product at a loss in another market is the problem. Read it, that really is what it says, and everyone who can read english can see this, including you.
Being too fucking dense to read what you are replying to is bad enough, but being so arrogant as to pretend you are being ignored because you aren't participating in group think is beyond rediculous. Wake up, nobody wants to try to converse with someone who will only ignore what they say and continue arguing with straw men and red herrings.
You decided based on your own twisted view of the world that I am some anti-MS crusader. This is obvious from you complaining about "people like me" using a dollar sign in MS, despite me not doing that, and telling me to complain about Sony, when Sony isn't doing what MS is.
And just so you know, I hate Sony. They have a hidden control panel in their monitors (at least some models) that you can only access using a special cable and special software, which of course only sony authorized repair centers can get. So if there is a power surge and your monitors contrast gets set WAY too high (above what you can even set with the user control panel) then you have to pay $250 for some overpaid fuckstick to plug in a cable and press "reset to factory settings" on this gay software. While I am not a huge fan of MS, because of this monitor scam I outright despise Sony.
But that doesn't change the fact that MS is a convicted monopolist using money from a monopoly that has held PC technology back for years to push their way into a new market with a product that loses money. Why would you expect everyone to be complaining about Sony when they aren't doing this, and MS is?