Slashdot Mirror
Xbox 360 Update Will Lock Out Unauthorized Storage
itwbennett writes "The other shoe has dropped on the upcoming preview program for the next Xbox 360 update and it's going to cost you. In a post on the Major Nelson blog, Xbox's Larry Hryb reveals that this next update will lock-out unauthorized storage devices. As blogger Peter Smith reminds us, 'the Xbox 360 comes in two (currently) SKUs, one with a hard drive, and one without. The drive-less Xbox 360 Arcade unit is cheap ($199) but to realistically use it, you'll need to buy a "Memory Unit" (basically a proprietary USB stick) or an Xbox hard drive.... A 512 MB Microsoft branded Memory Unit goes for $29.99 at BestBuy.com. A 2 GB third party Memory Unit from Datel goes for $39.99, and the Datel unit is expandable using microSD cards....If you bought the Datel and it's full of data, between now and the launch of the new update you're going to have to run out and buy 4 of the Microsoft units at $29.99 each, or more likely, pick up the $99.99 60GB Live Starter Pack for Xbox 360.'"
... or more likely, pick up the $99.99 60GB Live Starter Pack for Xbox 360.
Or (in an even more likely scenario if you're reading Slashdot) you will opt to do it yourself to get twice that storage for a little over half the cost. This is, of course, assuming that locking out "unauthorized storage" does not also target in some crazy way locking out hard drives.
My work here is dung.
just when the hackers were getting ready to focus their efforts on the iPhone and Apple, there you go again, throwing down the gauntlet. Are you that much of an attention hog?
-- All this knowledge is giving me a raging brainer.
What monopoly? I walk into the living room and see a Wii. Are you sure Microsoft has a monopoly on video games?
Indeed. A 512 MB card shouldn't cost more than $5 right now, while a 2G card should be under $20. They're nickel and diming their customers in the wrong places. If I could buy a nice 100 GB hard disk for $50, I would not only spring for that, but also download far more content - which in turn would drive up my perceived value of the system.
Instead, I'm getting the impression that I'm being fleeced every time I want to do something useful. Maybe that PS3 isn't such a bad idea after all.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
This is something I've been wondering about for a while with devices that receive software updates. People base their purchasing decisions on the list of features announced for the devices, the payoff of what features you get against the price. Then, as part of an upgrade, the manufacturer deliberately cripples part of the device and removes some functionality. This removal of support for third-party storage is a good example, or Amazon pushing an "update" to remove the text-to-speech feature for many (all?) books.
There are all sorts of arguments made about software because we're typically sold licences, not an actual copy of the software. But in cases like this, we've actually bought a physical object. It's now ours, not the manufacturer's. So do they really still have the legal right to reach out an remove features? They advertised a function, which it now doesn't have. It feels like a sort of retroactive false advertising. A lot of Xbox owners will now need to spend extra money simply to restore the original functions; if they'd known this was necessary before purchase they might only have been willing to buy the XBox at a correspondingly lower price, if at all. So as MS have changed their end of this bargain, surely their customers should have the right to change theirs? A partial refund (to represent a lower original price) or the option of a full refund both seem fair to me,
I know people can, in principle, unplug their XBox to avoid accepting this update but then, again, they're losing the functionality that was originally advertised and that they originally paid for. Does this seem fair to anyone? Does it seem legal?
This is the wave of the future with all devices.
You don't need to upgrade it yourself, let Microsoft give you storage, for a "small monthly fee".
Next will be, you don't need to "own" a PC, or software, rent it, for a couple of "small monthly fees"
Let someone else manage your data, for a small monthly fee.
Let someone else update your programs, for a small monthly fee.
Let someone else manage the hardware, for a small monthly fee.
You will pay your "small monthly fees" and you will get NO WARRANTY, NO FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NO RECOURSE, NO REFUNDS, and NO SECURITY.
Most of the caps text is taken from the license agreement from most 'online only' software.
Think it won't work? It already does.
You don't "own" your cellphone, SIM card, or it's data. You simply rent it, for a "small monthly fee".
Good luck selling any of it, getting a decent warranty, or being able to cancel your contract.
Small Monthly Fees, get used to paying them , for everything.
What they should be doing is selling storage for the inflated prices but including download credits for a good chunk of the purchase price of the storage. Charging $99.99 for the 60G product would seem more reasonable if it came with a ~$75 code that could be used to purchase downloads since it would lower the apparent cost of the physical object to $24.99 while not lowering MS's profit on the product by all that much.
It would have the added benefit of getting people in the habit of purchasing downloads.
I can't create a car that artificially locks out 3rd party replacement parts and upgrades... why should Microsoft be able to create a gaming box that does the same thing?
Actually the auto makers have been trying to essentially do that by denying training and key software to independent garages. story here