Slashdot Mirror


Xbox One Controller Cost Over $100 Million To Develop

mrspoonsi writes "The Xbox One controller went through many radical designs, including a built-in pico projector and a cartridge designed to release smell. Apparently, 'the core base didn't appreciate them,' so these wacky features were dropped in favor of a standard controller. According to VentureBeat, over $100 million worth of research went into the design they ended up using. 'Microsoft’s first tweaks for a new controller focused on the overall size and how it’d fit into hands, golden or otherwise. Using the Xbox 360 controller as a starting point, the engineers would make plastic-molded or 3D-printed prototypes that were each 1 millimeter wider or narrower than the last, testing a full range of up to plus or minus 8 millimeters. “That gave us the ability to test, with actual users including women and children, which width feels best,” said Morris. “We tested with more than 500 people throughout the course of the project. All ages, all abilities.” ... Morris and his team then looked at different thicknesses and shapes of the grips (or “lobes,” as he calls them), plus the angle of the triggers, different styles of analog sticks, and more.'"

133 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Wow... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Seriously? OVER a million? It's a nice controller, but really... Maybe this is one of the things wrong with Microsoft (and perhaps many big corps these days), they are not "nimble" and hevent been for at least 20 years. They have a lot to overcome if they want to remain "relevent", and Ballmer's departure is onle a very small part of that.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft does actually do some good human factors development. The really got it wrong with the very first Xbox controller, but it's been good after that.

      It's ironic though, that they spent a lot of dough to come up with the Start button in Windows 95, and defended it well, only to trash it in Windows 8. That makes me think they do good research, but have lousy management.

      I will not miss Steve Ballmer.

    2. Re:Wow... by ewibble · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It cost over $100 million, the reason is if you have too much money, you spend too much money. There is very little reason for them to be efficient. Why do you think Facebook can offer $3 billion dollars for snapchat, a company that has no revenue. They have more money than they know what to do with.

      Think of it this way if you got a billion dollars today you may go out and by some expensive sport car(s), would they get you from a to b any quicker, safer, more reliably, no, no, and no. You still need to keep to the speed limit, most cars can do that, with that extra power you are probably more likely to crash they are not designed for safety. A car like a Toyota is far more reliable. The only thing you gain is showing people you can afford to spend that much money on a car.

      Sorry about the car analogy.

      Look at these yachts, http://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/entertainment-articles/10-expensive-yachts-world/ number 1 is a fake but number 2. $800 mil for a yacht, that's 8 Xbox controllers.

    3. Re:Wow... by SmaryJerry · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Microsoft have teams that are way too large. Give a small motivated workforce of 5 people one month and they would probably come up with five better controllers. Microsoft loves to use big spend and big numbers as if that really means something. But at the end of the day it comes down the person leading the project and whether they can make right decisions or not. Clearly the leader of this project failed miserably if the best they could come up with with $100 million is just a remake of the previous controller.

    4. Re:Wow... by tysonedwards · · Score: 1

      Cocaine and Hookers are expensive.

      --
      Thirty four characters live here.
    5. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If they're assuming to sell around the amount the xbox 360 sold (~86 million global) then roughly $1 of the consoles price went into developing the controller. Not so bad then.

    6. Re:Wow... by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's only 0.17% of the cost of an xbone when you add the Australia tax.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    7. Re:Wow... by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      You're doing it wrong. If you pay for the party favors, just remember to do the hookers B4 the favors run out.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    8. Re:Wow... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Kinda interesting though.

      Nintendo do some R&D. Ends up with the Wii. Microsoft and Sony copies and make their own versions.

      Microsoft spend $100 million on a new controller. Ends up with same old.

    9. Re:Wow... by putaro · · Score: 2

      Too true, though there is a difference between Facebook buying Instagram and MS spending $100M to create a controller. Acquisitions are often paid for in stock, which is inflated funny money. MS paid real money to develop that controller.

    10. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They did large user studies. Those take time and money. Your 5 people can guess what other people will like and maybe or maybe not produce better controllers, but since MS ran studies, they have documented results on why some controller designs are better than others. If that's worth the $$$ or not only MS and the research community (assuming MS releases those papers) can say.

    11. Re:Wow... by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      This is actually the opposite of something that's wrong with a company. They used the money that they had in order to fund research in order to produce a better product, and somewhat simply to do new and interesting research. I can't see why you would think that this is a bad thing.

      People cite the "nimble" bit when they mean that a company is stuck in its ways or unable to adapt to change. Doing major research and development is the opposite of that. It's where people who are experts in a field use their talents to really thoroughly explore new ideas.

      Moreover, your assertion lies on the idea that, somehow, this research isn't paying off. The consequence of that would be that they somehow fail to make money on the XBox One. It's a little early to be calling the XBox One a commercial failure, given that it won't be.

    12. Re:Wow... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They have more money than they know what to do with.

      and yet, we have so many unemployed GOOD engineers in the US.

      companies are bleeding money but 'cant afford to pay a living wage' to engineers. gotta have lots more h1b's. "we are so poor!"

      I hate capitalism. its time we found a better system. this one is broken beyond repair, if a company can spend this much on a stupid plastic human interface gadget.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    13. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can't just compare whether the new Xbox succeeds or fails to determine if the research was worth it. If the Xbox was likely to succeed either way, and this research had little chance of increasing how much they earn by $100M, then it was probably not worth it. I don't think people have issue with research such things, but more so that it seems out of proportion. Maybe it would have been better to spend $10M research on this, while $90M on developing new games, or improvements to the Kinect, etc. If you were a car company, you could blow a lot of money in the name of research to make the speedometer better, but no matter how awesome it is, you probably should spend more money on making a better engine.

    14. Re:Wow... by symbolset · · Score: 1

      So they tried dozens of different controller sizes, optimizing for the best size that most people could at least use, even if it was not ideal. It never occurred to them to do the obvious thing: sell small, medium and large.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    15. Re: Wow... by denmarkw00t · · Score: 2

      But it's kinda backwards: the engine is the easy part for consoles: moar cores moar ram moar pixels! But, the controller is THE main interface piece (no matter how much they push kinect). It's not a speedometer, it's the goddamn steering wheel...car companies probably put decent budget into making sure that the grip feels good, that it handles well, that the user will feel in tune with the car when they put their hands on it.

    16. Re:Wow... by mobby_6kl · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Too bad Microsoft just burned all that money, and not paid some poor, $100k+ engineers to develop the controller!

    17. Re:Wow... by FileZilla · · Score: 1

      Capitalism itself is fine.

      Unregulated capitalism is a nightmare, a cancer that destroys people, society and whole countries if given the chance.

      --
      You all suck. I hope Slashdot dies soon.
    18. Re:Wow... by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Nintendo do some R&D. Ends up with the Wii. Microsoft and Sony copies and make their own versions.

      That's not quite an accurate statement there.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zin-gK6NEIY

    19. Re:Wow... by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      I say tax write off.

    20. Re:Wow... by tjb · · Score: 1

      If they spent 5 years iterating through various designs and dead ends, that's $20M/year. Figure each engineer/designer/program manager at an average of about $200K/yr fully loaded (wages/bonus/stock/benefits/equipment/real estate/etc.), and that's 100 people working on it each year for 5 years.

      I really don't find that terribly unreasonable at a company the size of MSFT, particularly if they were trying some more ambitious designs before settling on the final HW.

    21. Re:Wow... by Xest · · Score: 1

      The summary is a bit shit, it does touch on the issue but not very well. The $100million wasn't spent just designing the controller, it was spent on pie in the sky research like allowing controllers to emit smell, allowing controllers to project - this wasn't just a case of developing the actual hardware but all the market research that went with that.

      I don't think Microsoft can really be faulted to trying something new, isn't that what we always criticise them for here? lacking in innovation? living off of Windows and Office money?

      I don't really see what the problem is, even focussing on design it's allowed them to have the nicest controllers especially with the Xbox 360. There's a reason that the Dualshock 4 and Wii U pro controllers make those controllers look much closer to Xbox 360 controllers than they do their predecessors (the grips and such are almost identical now).

      We normally give applause to companies that are still trying different things and doing research, I don't understand why just because it's Microsoft it's all "stupid Microsoft", "idiots" and so forth. That's $100 million spent on research, that's exactly what we've been asking companies do - blow money on research in an attempt to innovate, why is this a bad thing? It's better to blow money on research and fail than to just never innovate and always do the same old things. More companies should be doing this - spending their billions on research and innovation.

    22. Re:Wow... by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      They *did* invest in the Kinect 2. The Kinect 2 has also been a major success.

  2. No stinking Xbox by hsa · · Score: 1

    and a cartridge designed to release smell

    Damn, now I don't get to say: "Your Xbox stinks!"

    1. Re:No stinking Xbox by 6ULDV8 · · Score: 1

      I guess the fart app on my phone is as close as I can get for now. Maybe Xbox Deux will bring wholesome smell-o-vision...

      --
      Pull my finger for my public key.
    2. Re:No stinking Xbox by Monsuco · · Score: 1

      and a cartridge designed to release smell

      Damn, now I don't get to say: "Your Xbox stinks!"

      When the game EarthBound came out for the SNES, it came with scratch and sniff stickers and was sold with the tag line "this games stinks".

  3. Obvious by Dan+East · · Score: 1

    I hate to state the obvious, but no one controller design will be comfortable to such a wide variety of people. Either you have to target the core demographic responsible for the bulk of game sales, or you offer more than one size controller. Anything else sounds like a waste of time.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Obvious by CastrTroy · · Score: 2

      One thing I thought was interesting about the WiiMote was that it was one of the only (probably the only popular one) controller which was ambidextrous. I'm not aware of anybody who uses it the other way around, but maybe some southpaws could chime in here. Most of them would likely already be conditioned to using left hand thumbstick from years of gaming, and any advantage to holding it the other way around would be lost by having to relearn all their skills.

      I think you really hit the nail on the head here. What we really need is many different sizes of controllers, as long as they all have the same number of buttons,thumbsticks, and d-pads.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Obvious by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      It's probably not a coincidence, given that Miyamoto is left-handed. And remember, the Wii also targeted people who weren't already avid gamers, and wouldn't be conditioned.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    3. Re:Obvious by vux984 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One thing I thought was interesting about the WiiMote was that it was one of the only (probably the only popular one) controller which was ambidextrous.

      Interesting point. It was physically ambidextrous in the sense that it was symmetrical, but it was far from ambidextrous.

      Any game that required you to hold it like a gamepad presumed it would be the same orientation, (ie like an NES gamepad). To reprogrammit to work the 'other way' would require both the buttons to be swapped and the d-pad inverted. I don't think many (if any) titles supported that.

      And when held like a remote, it was more ambidextrous than most games, but often the game needed to be designed for lefties, or allow for it.

      Wii Sports for example let you set left and right handed use, for each sport individually. (Kudos to Nintendo there; I do most of the sports left handed, but I golf right handed (and not especially well) due to having grown up in a house with only right handed clubs.)

      But many of the 3rd party mini-games & party games did not allow for left handed use. Usually things were fine, but there'd always be one or two spots where it would go all wrong.

      The one that leaps to mind was a frisbee toss minigame in one of the titles we had.

      The game was expecting a left to right-up flick. So attempting it left handed was a right to left flick, and it went all wrong. Most of the time it didn't even recognize the flick at all, would react half-assed before or after the actual flick. You could hold it upside down, but that was still botched because down was now up. And it would react like you just threw it into the ground.

      I just switched to doing it right handed. Kind of annoying really.

      For what its worth as background, as a lefty I liked the xbox 360 controller (don't have an xbox, but have a controller paired with my PC); and I liked the wii-u classic controller. I FPS with my right hand on WASD, and my left on the mouse. The mouse I'm currently using is a razer deathadder left handed model, with the buttons programmed so that the left mouse button is on the left. (I like the left mouse for the ergo comfort, but after years of using RH mice, my middle finger is my 'left click', and my index finger is 'right'. (The fact that Razer defaults them 'backwards' drives me nuts, as after a reboot, the buttons are backwards until the razer programmability software is loaded, which is retarded.)

      I also tried switching them in the windows mouse control panel, but that had all kinds of side effects... they were right on my desktop, but backwards when I RDP into another unit... which was far more annoying than the couple seconds of stupid at startup.

      If Razer is reading this, save which button is left and right right on the mouse itself. But I'm well and off on a tangent now. :)

    4. Re:Obvious by Ambvai · · Score: 3, Informative

      Left-handed writer, right-hand mouse, right-hand scissors, left-hand golfer and... left-handed Wiimote user. It didn't really occur to me that anything was particularly unusual until I was playing one of those dance games that uses the Remote+Nunchuck and I kept failing everything because I was holding them in the "opposite" hand. (Thankfully, a lot of games will either auto-calibrate for that, or have control settings to pick. This one... didn't.)

    5. Re:Obvious by Cinder6 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if I use it any differently than right-handers, but as a leftie I hold the "remote" portion in my left hand and the nunchuck in my right. I take a hit on joystick accuracy, but my aim is even worse with my right hand. What this boils down to is that the Wii remote just isn't a very optimal controller for lefties--at least, until you get used to it. Right-handed people would probably have a slight advantage in the short run, assuming familiarity with a left-sided joystick and holding the remote in the right hand.

      That said, as another poster said already, the games themselves aren't necessarily ambidextrous, which is damn annoying. It's like the (3)DS--certain games are basically unplayable for me because they demand a right-handed playstyle. On the (3)DS, it would be pretty trivial to fix if you could remap the D-pad to the right side and the XABY buttons to the left; this would allow you to hold the stylus in the left hand and still have full use of D-pad functions, much like you would get by holding it in the right hand in the current configuration.

      --
      If you can't convince them, convict them.
    6. Re:Obvious by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      the games themselves aren't necessarily ambidextrous

      Tangential aside: Link from the Zelda games has always been left-handed, but for the Wii version of Twilight Princess they flipped the entire game left-to-right so it he'd be right-handed like the majority of players.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    7. Re:Obvious by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I was mainly thinking about how the nunchuck can be held in either hand. It's intuitive enough to just use the wii-mote with the other hand, especially for things where you just point at the screen. On a side note, I remember something about them having to redo a lot of stuff in twilight princess because Link usually held his sword left handed, and this didn't make sense when 90+% of people would be holding the wii-mote in their right hand.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  4. All that time and money spent by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And they still end up with a single one-size-fits-all controller. If they just made two controllers to fit more of the broad range of hand sizes, they'd be so much better off for it.

    1. Re:All that time and money spent by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Informative

      They tried that with the first xbox.

    2. Re:All that time and money spent by king+neckbeard · · Score: 4, Funny

      I thought they released one for giants, and then realized that humans made up the overwhelming majority of their demographic, and released a second one for humans.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    3. Re:All that time and money spent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

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

    4. Re:All that time and money spent by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      You forgot this one and this one.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    5. Re:All that time and money spent by felixrising · · Score: 2

      It's that kind of thinking outside the box that risk averse, blame shifting, bureaucracy loving big business can't tolerate.

    6. Re:All that time and money spent by skine · · Score: 2

      I know that a lot of people hated the original Xbox controller, but I liked it better than any other Xbox controller.

      Even at 14 when it came out, it fit my hands perfectly.

    7. Re:All that time and money spent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A freak giant baby.

    8. Re:All that time and money spent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I bet your parents told you horror stories about "Jack"...

  5. If it ain't broke... by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

    Looks like they didn't make any substantial changes to it besides moving the home button and going with a different design for the D-pad, which was more or less perfected in the SNES/Genesis era.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  6. Why not release multiple controllers? by mveloso · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The researchers probably found there isn't just one controller - there were many, many good controllers, each for a different audience.

    Why didn't they release multiple controllers, one for kids, one for adults? One for women, one for men? As Prego discovered, there isn't one spaghetti sauce that makes everyone happy; there are many, many sauces, all of which will make some people happy.

    1. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or one basic controller and a series of variable-sized outer moldings you can just slip on/off depending on the size you want.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Yes. If they went the iPhone route, they could have a large third party custom attachment industry come out of this, AND sell a small set of custom moldings themselves for marked up prices -- and sell it with the default. I bet you'd get a lot of easy revenue out of that; and since they've already done the testing, they know exactly what moldings to make themselves. File a patent and make a smart bus for add-on electronics :)

    3. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by quenda · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As Prego discovered, there isn't one spaghetti sauce that makes everyone happy;

      Well, its all the same sauce, but you need different packaging and marketing to appeal to all consumers.

    4. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      ... and install a hollow cube outfitted with kinect 2, that would measure your hands and recommend a suitable sized controller for you?

      $100 million is a lot of money.

      What about addressing the tons of us, who still prefer a KB/mouse combo to thumbsticks on a XBox controller? There are even XBox mouse/kb adapters out there to fulfill this demand.

    5. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by msobkow · · Score: 1

      Meh. They all still use those abortion-from-hell thumbsticks. I hate those things with a passion, "standard" or no. It's the main reason I don't have a console, and no interest in buying one.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    6. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by msobkow · · Score: 1

      Whatever you like to plug into a USB port. But unlike PCs, console games don't give you the option of using anything but the default controllers. Given the "huge cost" of adding standard USB ports to what is little more than a specialized PC, there is no excuse for that.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    7. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Western markets don't seem to like spending money on peripherals. If you look at the Japanese market they have special controllers for all sorts of things, but their consumers are more willing to spend the cash it seems.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      I hate WASD (and keyboard focused controls in general) with a passion. It sucked in the 80's when home computer/PC developers added keyboard controls to action games for all those elitist PC guys too cheap to buy a joystick...and we still have that mess out of tradition.

      The mouse is a nice pointing device, but the keyboard sucks as a movement controller.

    9. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      But unlike PCs, console games don't give you the option of using anything but the default controllers.

      .That's not quite an accurate statement, because there are console games that DO give you the option.

      I have several within 5 feet of my current position.

    10. Re: Why not release multiple controllers? by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      Can't say I agree with you. I have a nice keyboard, and for any game that can interpret 2 directions as a combined direction, keyboard offers the fastest direction change and response of any input. Granted, it can't distinguish between different levels of speed or varying small angles of direction, but many games don't interpret that anyways.

      And, for FPS, there is a big advantage to walk left, walk right, walk left, instead of walk left, stop, walk right, stop, walk left.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    11. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      Developers find that their games need to be rebalanced for thumbsticks vs. kb/mouse users. Rebalancing their whole game around the input device takes budget away from other features and from their polish time. Ultimately, developers know they can just balance the game once around controllers(have you noticed how much slower modern shooters are compared to classic PC shooters?), then just release the game on PC for KB/M lovers.

      This ensures singleplayer isn't too hard on controller users, and avoids multiplayer imbalance between controller users vs. kb/m. Developers don't need kb/m support on consoles, they can sell to those players on PC instead.

      Due to lack of demand from the developers, it's hardly surprising that Sony/MS aren't interested in going into supporting kb/m. Plus Sony/MS would lose out on sales of their proprietary control input if they supported generic kb/ms.

    12. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

      I agree. This is what I would recommend if I worked for them: Make the "frame" of the controller standard, allow adjustment maybe in one or two directions, but then make it possible to replace the moldings with custom parts of different shapes and materials. Fancy people could even buy surfaces with natural materials like ebony, leather, silk and wool. Because, you know, sometimes you get bored of the tactile experience of plastic. I actually use my dremel tool to make custom wooden moldings for my mouse. I have large hands and love the satisfaction of making the geometry exactly match what my hand naturally wants to do.

      I am not a business type, but if I was, here is one thing I would consider: Allow people to make a model of their perfect mouse, or perfect game controller, out of play-doh. Then have them take photos of it from all angles, enough so that software can reconstruct the 3D shape. Send those pictures to some new business with standard parts, 3D printing tech and a CNC machine, who could just print them out a mouse from whatever material they like. It wouldn't have to be cheap. The world has plenty of rich people who are being underserved in the tech-for-the-super-rich market. For example, very rich people typically use an iPhone 5s, but so do many ordinary folks that ride with me on the bus. Very rich people tend to use some normal Logitech or Razer mouse, just like me. And they use the standard Playstation controllers. There is no Aston Martin or Maseratti option for the tech devices that they (like the rest of us) probably interact with most often. That seems like a market gap waiting to be filled.

    13. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by N0Man74 · · Score: 2

      I hate WASD (and keyboard focused controls in general) with a passion. It sucked in the 80's when home computer/PC developers added keyboard controls to action games for all those elitist PC guys too cheap to buy a joystick...and we still have that mess out of tradition.

      The mouse is a nice pointing device, but the keyboard sucks as a movement controller.

      You are clueless. You acknowledge how good the mouse is as a pointing device, and yet you think that WASD was popularized because "elitists" that were too "cheap" to buy a joystick?

      The reason that these "elitists" preferred keyboard and WASD was that mouse look is so superior to joystick that it was worth the compromise of using WASD for movement (yes, an analog movement scheme would be preferable but adapting to quick taps is not hard). Also one hand on keyboard gives you easy access to a fairly large number of keys (though I often remapped WASD to ESDF for easier muscle touch-type memory).

      The only "joystick" that I found worth a damn for FPS type games was the Space Orb.

      Keyboards do make crappy controllers, but joysticks make crappy mice.

    14. Re:Why not release multiple controllers? by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      yet you think that WASD was popularized because "elitists" that were too "cheap" to buy a joystick?

      Yes, those over-privileged upper-middle class guys in the 80's who bought DOS machines and then played demanded that arcade games and action games have keyboard controls because they didn't have joysticks. Mice weren't even a thing then I'm talking about days when there weren't any mouse-look games. the current WASD thing is a relic of that age!

  7. a cartridge designed to release smell by fisted · · Score: 1

    Cool. How many smells fit in one cartridge?

    1. Re:a cartridge designed to release smell by Tough+Love · · Score: 2

      Surely Microsoft at least experimented with inflatable dolls.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    2. Re:a cartridge designed to release smell by Anarchduke · · Score: 1

      Only during their time off.

      --
      who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
    3. Re:a cartridge designed to release smell by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Just cheetos. It's a Pavlovian thing.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  8. That's not exactly right... by Apathist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "over $100 million worth of research went into the design they ended up using"

    Well, that's not quite true. Perhaps $100M went into designing and testing all the different prototypes they ultimately discarded, and the one they used... but the one that they finally decided upon only cost a fraction of that.

    1. Re:That's not exactly right... by real+gumby · · Score: 2

      Indeed, and Microsoft only spend $2 on that disk and box of Windows you bought.

      And come to think of it the price they charge for Widows is outrageous, since I not only have to pay for it but also each bug that was written, then found in testing, and then fixed. And why should they consider the money spent on writing test cases as part of their costs? Outrageous!

      At least with Linux I can get a full refund. Take that, Microsoft!

    2. Re:That's not exactly right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      When I was in a large bleeding edge project, we went through making multiple ASIC, our own processor, PCB design and a large software team and that burn rate was about $1 mil per month.

      I can't believe that a game controller would need 8 years worth of R&D that we were doing into it.

    3. Re: That's not exactly right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't follow your logic. If I have to spend 100M on prototypes for a project to get to a final solution, which itself only had cost of $50, I can't just ignore the 100M and say it only costed me $50 to develop. Without the initial 100M I would have never got to the solution that costs $50.

    4. Re:That's not exactly right... by Apathist · · Score: 2

      Normally I'd agree with the point you almost managed to make, which is that development costs necessarily include dead-ends and mistakes... but in this case they're including the development cost of things like smelly controllers, which should have been an obviously* stupid idea to all involved.

      *Oh, the fragrance of faux-blood/gunpowder/explosions. Just what I wanted in my living room.

    5. Re:That's not exactly right... by Wintermute__ · · Score: 1

      Mmmm, I love the smell of zombies in the morning.

      Or was that napalm? I never can remember.

    6. Re:That's not exactly right... by Ambvai · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Very likely. If they did a good job testing things, then they had to actually design and produce, in limited quantities, all the actual controllers to be given to be people, or at least have them with interchangeable parts when possible.

      I participate in surveys and focus groups when I can and they can be quite interesting, and expensive on the part of the tester. A few months back, I had the opportunity to try various formulations of a hard cider produced by a major beer company. (I want to say it was Coors, based on the demo packaging, but that's probably wrong.) One at a time, they gave me sealed cans of slightly-different ciders in nondescript packaging with instructions to pour it into a (new) cup, munch on various snack foods, fill out the survey, call the guy in for the next can, repeat, for a total of 8 different versions. For my trouble, I got to keep the half-eaten bag of crackers, drink all the cider I wanted until I decided to leave (or got drunk, I suppose), and 50$ cash.

      Another time, I got a steak dinner, with dessert, and a voucher to some mail order company where I got a free set of pots and pans. What were they actually testing? Steak sauce.

      There's a lot of random stuff in R&D... and paying the subjects are an area that can add up to be intriguingly costly.

    7. Re:That's not exactly right... by Lodlaiden · · Score: 1

      They kinda blend together like an almost burnt steak. You're not sure if you've ruined it till you slice into it to be sure.

      --
      Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
    8. Re:That's not exactly right... by s.petry · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "over $100 million worth of research went into the design they ended up using"

      Well, that's not quite true. Perhaps $100M went into designing and testing all the different prototypes they ultimately discarded, and the one they used... but the one that they finally decided upon only cost a fraction of that.

      Even that is a sad joke. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that they could fudge numbers to make it appear like they really spent an insane amount of money on the controller design. That said, when they design full weapons systems (unmanned drones, and numerous military vehicles) including the virtual prototypes and FEA for less than $100M it should become obvious that someone from Microsoft is trying to bullshit someone for some reason.

      If Microsoft really spent $100M on designing the controller, a whole bunch of executives should be forced to return any bonus checks received and swiftly receive their walking papers. After the first million, they were just peeing away the companies money.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    9. Re:That's not exactly right... by F34nor · · Score: 1

      Waste not want not. No that's not right. Monopolize sodomize? Hmmm better. Seriously as in investor I'd like to kick everyone involved in the balls MANY MANY TIMES.

  9. A hundred million to change nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Thankfully there's Valve, who isn't terrified of any change to the Dualshock design whatsoever. Looking forward to getting my hands on a fully programmable controller, supposedly much better at shooters than a dualshock as well. "Consumers don't know what they want, because I haven't shown it to them yet" is apparently a phrase not heard of at either Sony or MS. They seem to stick to "do what already works and then charge them hundreds of dollars for it."

  10. Putting it in perspective by Alex+Vulpes · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apparently it cost SpaceX around $300 million to develop the Falcon 9 rocket. That is one expensive controller.

    1. Re:Putting it in perspective by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Or 1/6 the cost of the software the runs the entire medicare/medicaid/ACA system which manages 1000X the entire development cost ($600B+) of all the software every.single.year.

      I wonder, does the XBOX eco system generate $100 Billion a year? If not, maybe MS should farm out their work to gov't contractors. It's not like MS won't fuck it up anyway - might as well get it cheaper.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    2. Re:Putting it in perspective by Anarchduke · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, you know you've fucked up if government contractors can do it cheaper.

      --
      who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
  11. It was either that or cure cancer. by dccase · · Score: 1

    Priorities.

    Imagine how much they spent on DRM.

  12. The middle path by korbulon · · Score: 1

    Seems that in much the same way that having too little stifles creativity, so does having too much.

    What they did here, basically, was shit a bunch of times into nice neat little carefully marked boxes, and then picked the one which stank the least.

    I would call this process anti-creativity. Also, coincidentally, how most movies in Hollywood are now made.

    1. Re:The middle path by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      Except in Hollywood, the box is bigger.

    2. Re:The middle path by korbulon · · Score: 1

      Except in Hollywood, the box is bigger.

      Indeed, there's a whole office of boxes.

  13. Re:Someone is embezzling... by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 2

    I agree that someone is embezzling, if taking a pointless research job and proving what you already know to be true while taking paychecks counts as embezzling. Some people call that a "jobs program". I call it Microsoft.

    --
    Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
  14. What an improvement! by LoRdTAW · · Score: 2

    So it took them 100M to change the basic shape, switch to micro USB for charging and move the Xbox button to the top?

    In the end they settled on the same design with a few changes. That pretty much sums up Microsoft, they cant innovate. It sounds more like they were so desperate to try and outdo the PS4 they threw money at any stupid idea that came along without really thinking it out. Instead of trying to truly be original, they took a half-assed shotgun approach. Smell O vision, really? I understand it takes money to make prototypes but 100M sounds desperate.

  15. Hmm... by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    So they can drop 100 million on controller design but can't be bothered to make a surveymonkey poll to find out that their users still want to be able to sell used games before they shoot their mouth off about it at the opening presentation? The only thing that was more fun than watching that train wreck is the anticipation for SONY somehow managing to fuck up the golden opportunity they've been handed. However they do it, I'm sure it'll be epic. I mean, they could NOT fuck it up, but it's SONY we're talking about here...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Hmm... by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      "... to find out that their users still want to be able to sell used games..."

      Shhhh - don't tell anyone, but they knew that all along. If they thought their users wouldn't want to there would be no need to cut off that non-residual revenue source, would there?

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  16. It's sad, really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's something really sad in looking at all those research groups who fail to get adequate funding for medical research or research to otherwise improve a person's life, and yet a company is able to waste $100 million developing a single component for a fucking GAMING CONSOLE of all things.

    Microsoft isn't a Government department and they can do what they like, but it's just so damn disproportionate the amount of money that goes into research in terms of long-term importance. People are dying because there's not enough research to treat various diseases, but fuck that, the angle permutations of a life-wasting device must be calculated precisely, gimme more money. OK, thanks. Fuck this planet.

    1. Re:It's sad, really by FuegoFuerte · · Score: 1

      Remember though, that the shitloads of money Microsoft made for sir Gates has been dumped into all manner of medical research, and while the company may spend millions on development and investigation of smelly ideas, they also spend millions on disaster relief around the world, donations to charities, matching gifts for employee donations, etc.

      There are many, many things wrong with Microsoft's corporate culture, but the amount they give to charity in support of all manner of humanitarian efforts is one of the things I've always really liked about them.

      Disclaimer: I'm currently employed by Microsoft (for just a short while longer), however the opinion above is entirely my own.

    2. Re:It's sad, really by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      You don't realize this but at the end of that research it is unlikely you have improved anyone's life. At best you've made a small contribution which will sum to the whole which might eventually, someday, form the basis of a viable treatment for some new issue.

    3. Re:It's sad, really by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Isn't it Gates who do that? Why would Microsoft do it? Seem weird.

    4. Re:It's sad, really by lgw · · Score: 1

      Bill Gates is spending around $1B a year through his charity, much of it to eliminate malaria from the planet. Meanwhile, biotech startups and big pharma R&D groups collectively burn way more than $100 MM/year on research. Healthcare is over 1/6th of the US economy - leave a little for fun, yeah?

      Wow, I can't believe I fell for the "why are we spending money on this when people are dying of cancer" troll that is older than /.'s mod system.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:It's sad, really by lgw · · Score: 1

      Wow, "blood money"? Get over yourself. Microsoft's "acquisition and destruction of companies" is the normal way all big tech companies work. They buy startups, and try to do something useful with whatever the startup made and dominate that market. Everything in Silly Valley revolves around this practice - almost all innovation happens in startups, but bringing a product to the world market is capital intensive and often requires a large and established sales force, so small companies get bought by the big players to sell that product to everyone.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    6. Re:It's sad, really by FileZilla · · Score: 1

      No need for the insults, heck I even said "I'm not so sure" as to mean "I'm not so sure I agree with the sentiment". I was just explaining the general feeling I get from reading comments here about Bill's fortune and how it was acquired. Why else do you see such hatred for Microsoft here?

      Sorry if it it appeared as though I agreed with the sentiment.

      --
      You all suck. I hope Slashdot dies soon.
    7. Re:It's sad, really by FuegoFuerte · · Score: 1

      They both do it... "corporate philanthropy" (or whatever you want to call it) is a big thing with Microsoft. There are a few reasons for that, I think... part of it is because Microsoft is actually made up of people, some of whom actually care about other people. Part of it is also because there are interesting technical problems involved in disaster response, and places where software can help. Finally, being involved in humanitarian efforts gives corporations a bit of a better public image.

  17. Your name wouldn't happen to be Smith, would it? by Valdrax · · Score: 5, Funny

    As someone with an overly sensitive nose. who once worked retail. you people reak. yes. even you. all of you.

    I hate this place. This zoo. This prison. This reality, whatever you want to call it, I can't stand it any longer. It's the smell, if there is such a thing. I feel saturated by it. I can taste your stink and every time I do, I fear that I've somehow been infected by it.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  18. I remember that one by hduff · · Score: 1

    It always felt too big for me. And I'm a big guy with big hands.

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  19. Something to keep in mind ... by MacTO · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even though you can whip together a simple controller for $10 (including labor) from a few switches and bits of wire, doesn't mean that you've accomplished the same thing as Microsoft.

    On the technical end, you're dealing with a fair bit of electronics and software to support everything from reading a button's state to streaming audio from the console. On top of that, they have to consider factors such as ergonomics and marketing. For a company like Microsoft with competitors like Nintendo and Sony, it is best to do their homework first even if it ends up costing a lot more.

    1. Re:Something to keep in mind ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Even though you can whip together a simple controller for $10 (including labor) from a few switches and bits of wire, doesn't mean that you've accomplished the same thing as Microsoft.

      I find it difficult to believe that Microsoft has accomplished ten million times as much, though.

    2. Re:Something to keep in mind ... by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Even though you can whip together a simple controller for $10 (including labor) from a few switches and bits of wire, doesn't mean that you've accomplished the same thing as Microsoft.

      Of course not. You'd be $99,999,990 better off.

      But in all seriousness what they did was completely unjustified. Spending errr.... wasting that much money on a loss leader is not a wise business decision. I may not accomplish the same thing as Microsoft with $10, but I'd be interested to see how their actual competitors are doing. I wonder how much the PS3 controller cost. Hell I doubt the Nintendo Wii controller cost that much, certainly the Steambox controller didn't, and both of those are more technically advanced.

    3. Re:Something to keep in mind ... by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Yes, because you can plug in a stereo headset with mic into the PS4 controller and route all audio to the controller.

  20. $100 Million by KlomDark · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...and instead, the Russians just used a pencil.

    1. Re:$100 Million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Myth... some guy approached NASA with an alternative to the hazardous pencil in space.

  21. The Wii made bank with a controller by PPalmgren · · Score: 2

    A good area to put research into, in my opinion. Valve may have won the new controller research, but we'll have to wait and see.

    The single most important factor in a console is the control scheme. If the control scheme sucks, it feels like PC console ports do.

  22. Not quite $100 Million by GrendelT · · Score: 1

    No, no, no. They spent $100 Million to develop it, but it didn't cost that - there's a difference.

  23. Re:Only 500 People? by c0lo · · Score: 1

    That is a lot of cash for such a small sample size. How is that meant to be representative? Willing to bet they where all from the same place too (ie: US city) not Asia, Europe, etc.

    You'd probably lose this one: the Indian hands are cheaper.

    (ducks)

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  24. Someone wasted some money by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    If you think about it, there should be one ideal basic controller shape. Yet Sony and the XBox One have different controllers...

    I guess it comes down to which 500 people you are using as testers.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Someone wasted some money by Xest · · Score: 1

      Actually if you look at all controllers this generation they all closely resemble the 360 design.

      The Wii U Pro controllers are pretty much identical to the 360 controller albeit without the battery pack sticking out the bottom. The Dualshock 4 is a split between the Dualshock 3 and the 360 controller - the shape of the Dualshock 4 is basically exactly that of the 360 controller but with Sony's stick/button layout and style stuck onto it.

      Given that Microsoft spent all this money trying to innovate and ended up finding that people basically just liked what they already had last time around (which is pretty much what the new controller is) it may well be that the 360 controller was that one ideal controller shape.

      It seems a little coincidental that literally everyone in the game has copied the important bits of it's design in terms of ergonomics this time round.

      I think that was one of the 360s major successes, it pretty much did perfect the console controller - it was extremely comfortable, very responsive, and about the right weight which is again hence why everyone else has copied it this time around and why Microsoft despite spending $100 million couldn't come up with anything better.

  25. Re:Smell-o-Vision by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

    If you actually believe everyone stinks, you may be experiencing olfactory hallucinations, which are a common symptom of schizophrenia.

  26. Re:Microsoft's abhorrently human factors design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    the idea that making a button would require **any R/D at all** is insane...

    Considering a large portion of computer interfaces involve the use of buttons, it shouldn't be surprising that R&D could be done to determine when a button is needed, what that button should do and where/how best to place it so people would use it or at least find it. Even if the research done was crap, finding it surprising research was done on one of the main ways to launch programs in an OS seems rather shortsighted for someone that says they used to teach about the subject.

  27. re: Shneiderman, Shannon, Weiner by globaljustin · · Score: 4, Informative

    for someone that says they used to teach about the subject.

    here's why you can know I am not making up my credentials...I really have done the work I claim

    there are volumes of research that have already been done about *buttons* however you want to define the concept

    also, why research *where* to put a button with that funciton? you should **let the user have the option** to have the button or where to locate it! as for where to put the button by default, by necessity it has to be on the edge somewhere, after that, since almost all languages read from right to left, virtually all users (except those that read hebrew as their primary language) would **expect** to see the 'start' button on the **left side of the screen**

    You absolutely do not need to do anything more than a **simple literature review** and apply some basic technical design theory...that's to arrive at 'either top or bottom of left edge'

    so that's two fairly similar options...from there let the design team decide!!!

    *and of course let the user have the option to change the location at will or remove completely*

    back to your question about 'buttons'......Ben Shneiderman's work is industry-standard here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Shneiderman

    Here's a link his University page: http://www.cs.umd.edu/~ben/

    I'm not claiming Shneiderman is the magic bullet to all design questions, or that his design conceptualizations are fundamental to the industry...he made significant positive contributions...but his concepts are too linguistic-based 'make X more visible' sometimes & marketing people just have their way with it...

    One of Shneiderman's major contributions, starting in the early 1980s, was formalizing a way to academically analyze all the research in computing across disciplines about things like 'how to design a good button'

    Designing the User Interface is a current text written by him that is used in 100s of universities nationwide & globally. (btw don't pick him apart to me...i have my quibbles...) He ends up with very linguistic-based heuristics mostly, but if you combine his ideas with more formal language from true cyberneticists like Claude Shannon and Norbert Weiner then you can get some highly quantifiable data...

    But regardless...Shneiderman's concepts are industry standard...how they are applied in the lab...well that's up to the researcher!

    All of what M$ did with their 'Start' button was covered by Shneiderman in the 80s & continued to refine iteritively since then...

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  28. Re: Smell-o-Vision by denmarkw00t · · Score: 1

    "Common" might be misplaced -
    In general, hallucinations are "common" in many forms with Schizophrenia, but there are so many factors that play into it...I've been exposed to a community of people with it (or schizoaffective disorder) and they share some common ground but on the whole have very different hallucinations. "Common" would probably be voices, but even those vary remarkably from one person to the next.

    Olfactory hallucinations may be closer to common in people on psychedelic drugs than those suffering from schizophrenia.

  29. Re:talk about R&D gone wild by lgw · · Score: 1

    You should really get over that whole Windows 95 thing, you're getting to old to carry a grudge that heavy. They had NT back then if you wanted a real OS. Ahh, playing StarCraft on WinNT, those were the days (sure, it was the only real game that used DirectX back then, but that was one more real game than Linux had).

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  30. misleading..it didn't take anywhere near $100M by schlachter · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Ok, let's set the record straight. These articles are totally misleading. It didn't take anywhere near $100M to develop this controller. What happened is that MSFT spent $100M on an R&D adventure to design, build, and evaluate many different types of controllers before deciding that the current design, with a few tweaks, is the best way forward. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's a good use of the their R&D dollars. I bet the actual dev costs for the controller were closer to $20M. And considering that it will probably generate at least $3B in revenue for MSFT, $20M is small potatoes. Nintendo, by comparison, spends billions on interface/controller R&D.

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    1. Re:misleading..it didn't take anywhere near $100M by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Not only is everything you said the most likely story, but there's probably all kinds of other stuff that they took a look at, decided it wasn't ready yet, and will continue looking at for the next generation.

      Sometimes R&D doesn't pay off on the project you're currently working on, but instead presents it's value in some other project.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  31. Re:I'm calling B.S. by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    Thing is, when you're told that revenue for that deoartment was $17.27 billion rather than $17.37 billion, and it was all invested in one of the more profitable divisions it doesn't seem all that bad.

  32. Re: re: Shneiderman, Shannon, Weiner by Hellsbells · · Score: 1

    If you're interested in Norbert Weiner there's an ieee conference with some good speakers organised for June next year:
    http://21stcenturywiener.org/

  33. Re: re: Shneiderman, Shannon, Weiner by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    thanks for the info!

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  34. Shneiderman's 8 Golden Rules by globaljustin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here is a list of Shneiderman's 8 Golden Rules for anyone who might be interested. It's has been typically used as an introductory 'U/X' concept for years (me personally I introduce. the Law of Cybernetics first).

    They've been restated many times since the 80s. From the source(http://faculty.washington.edu/jtenenbg/courses/360/f04/sessions/schneidermanGoldenRules.html)

    These rules were obtained from the text Designing the User Interface by Ben Shneiderman.

    To improve the usability of an application it is important to have a well designed interface. Shneiderman's "Eight Golden Rules of Interface Design" are a guide to good interaction design.

    1 Strive for consistency.
    Consistent sequences of actions should be required in similar situations; identical terminology should be used in prompts, menus, and help screens; and consistent commands should be employed throughout.

    2 Enable frequent users to use shortcuts.
    As the frequency of use increases, so do the user's desires to reduce the number of interactions and to increase the pace of interaction. Abbreviations, function keys, hidden commands, and macro facilities are very helpful to an expert user.

    3 Offer informative feedback.
    For every operator action, there should be some system feedback. For frequent and minor actions, the response can be modest, while for infrequent and major actions, the response should be more substantial.

    4 Design dialog to yield closure.
    Sequences of actions should be organized into groups with a beginning, middle, and end. The informative feedback at the completion of a group of actions gives the operators the satisfaction of accomplishment, a sense of relief, the signal to drop contingency plans and options from their minds, and an indication that the way is clear to prepare for the next group of actions.

    5 Offer simple error handling.
    As much as possible, design the system so the user cannot make a serious error. If an error is made, the system should be able to detect the error and offer simple, comprehensible mechanisms for handling the error.

    6 Permit easy reversal of actions.
    This feature relieves anxiety, since the user knows that errors can be undone; it thus encourages exploration of unfamiliar options. The units of reversibility may be a single action, a data entry, or a complete group of actions.

    7 Support internal locus of control.
    Experienced operators strongly desire the sense that they are in charge of the system and that the system responds to their actions. Design the system to make users the initiators of actions rather than the responders.

    8 Reduce short-term memory load.
    The limitation of human information processing in short-term memory requires that displays be kept simple, multiple page displays be consolidated, window-motion frequency be reduced, and sufficient training time be allotted for codes, mnemonics, and sequences of actions.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:Shneiderman's 8 Golden Rules by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      Thanks, that was very interesting for a layperson like myself. Itâ(TM)s so obvious to the user when a program has a great interface design, but itâ(TM)s so hard to tell exactly what the designer did correctly to make it feel that way.

  35. Re:Microsoft's abhorrently human factors design by Russ1642 · · Score: 1

    People think you're in ***marketing*** because you frame words with asterisks like a ten year old girl texting.

  36. Re:Microsoft's abhorrently human factors design by somersault · · Score: 1

    yep, I'd have thought someone interested in design would make more use of H T M L m a r k u p..

    --
    which is totally what she said
  37. Re:Microsoft's abhorrently human factors design by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

    I still do that quite a lot myself to represent bold text, and it has more to do with the fact that I started using the Internet circa 1993 when most discussion still took place over BBSs accessed via telnet, or via Usenet, both of which were text only and didn't offer markup. Nowadays, I'll often use HTML markup where available, but even then I sometimes use asterisks out of habit and/or laziness.

    That said, dual asterisks *and* capitalisation are **WAY** over the top ;-)

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  38. Re:talk about R&D gone wild by Locutus · · Score: 1

    I was getting at their great research they talked about so much which resulted in that UI and they later nailed onto the NT tree.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  39. how about this? by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

    make it possible to plug your "microsoft" keyboard and mouse into the xbox and allow people to play with those. you already have basic usb support on these boxes and with most games having PC ports the controls would be a snap to import.

    if they did this i would gladly play games on the xbox (as one of my thumbs doesn't bend at the knuckle it makes controller games practically unplayable, or at the least hurt very bad) especially FPS games..

  40. Re:talk about R&D gone wild by lgw · · Score: 1

    I'd say the taskbar is one great piece of UI advancement that MS can claim credit for. The start menu was just cleaning up the Win 3.1 clutter of nested icons into a standard menu tree, and nothing all that original, but the taskbar was special. I still force my new version of Windows into the Win2k/XP style of one-click-to-change-focus (the new combined button approach in Windows and Unity where it's 2+ clicks really annoys me).

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  41. Re:talk about R&D gone wild by Locutus · · Score: 1

    anyone would have come up with that given just a bit of time. Personally, I didn't have a problem with how the OS/2 task list popped up on key stroke command and still think it's a waste of time/space showing the tasks at the bottom or top of the screen. If you recall, OS/2 3 had a task launcher at the bottom of the desktop. It wasn't docked to the screen edge but it wasn't bad with with little drawers which popped up/out to show more options.

    I really think Microsoft was using PR instead of real research when they came up with the 95 desktop UI. At the time, OS/2's Workplace Shell was an amazing object oriented desktop with independent folder color settings, folder background settings, developer inheritance so all the bells/whistles you expect from a folder would be part of a new folder which might have a split view. I just recall how many times Microsoft claimed lots of money was spent on research when nearly everything they ended up with was sub standard from what others had already done. Unfortunately I don't think we'll ever get to where OS/2 or NEXT was 20 years ago.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  42. Mod parent up by Xest · · Score: 1

    They did some genuinely new stuff here, adding scent to gaming hasn't really been done before even though it's dreamt about before. I understand the user studies didn't respond positively but at least they were willing to research the idea and try it - it's not really their fault that an idea that many people have to date thought was an awesome new idea didn't turn out to be appreciated by users in reality, but without spending that money to try it how the hell could they possibly know if it was a terrible idea in practice, or the next hot new idea? What if it had been appreciated? what if it triggered a new path in the technology world? what if it could've been extended to allow say people's smartphones to let them preview scent based products when shopping online for perfume or whatever? If that had happened it would've more than paid for the $100 million.

    Of course if they knew from the outset that they were just going to end up with something similar to the last gen controller then they could've save tens of millions, but if you don't try new things how do you ever advance?

    Good on them for trying new shit and taking a gamble, it didn't pay off this time but I hope the negative comments don't put them off trying to innovate in future. Innovation is exactly what stale old boring Microsoft is in desperate need of.

    1. Re:Mod parent up by SmaryJerry · · Score: 1

      I agree with taking chances but some people just have good ideas and some don't, and their project leader didn't. I don't agree that $100 million in research dollars would show the Xbox controller is as good as it gets. The points made about millimeters in the article come off as a waste of money since everyone has different hands. I'll even give them the next idea for a controller. Make it have moving/adjustable parts, if a millimeter of comfort is really going to be their focus..

    2. Re:Mod parent up by Xest · · Score: 1

      "The points made about millimeters in the article come off as a waste of money since everyone has different hands."

      It's about finding the best on average.

      This is exactly how the clothing industry has worked for years, notice how some brands have "small, medium, large"? What does that mean? what is large? if you're 6ft are you medium or large? It's about taking samples and dividing them into groups and selecting the most prominent. If you have 10 different sizes of controllers and they were all equally deemed as good across a wide sample size of people you'd expect 10% of the sample group to like all of them, but if say, 40% like one controller then that means that that controller is a size that is comfortable to far more people than any of the others, so makes sense to select. The 360 controller was popular and well remember because it was comfy, Dualshock 3 in contrast was awful and I'd wager had it undergone similar study it would not have made the cut.

      They didn't spend $100mill on just determining the size so it's nonsense to keep repeating that, that will only have been a fraction of the cost, again they tried lots of new ideas and technology, smell, and so forth and others they've no doubt not published, possibly even because they've still got potential but haven't perfected yet and will release at a later date but need to keep secret from the competition in the meantime.

      The millimetre changes was a classic optimisation problem, it was about optimising the controller to be preferable to the largest group of people.

    3. Re:Mod parent up by SmaryJerry · · Score: 1

      It's nonsense that a millimeter anywhere on the controller will make a difference, it's just a small measurement that they used to give the illusion of precision. Unlike a T-shirt this is a one size fits all solution that is not flexible whatsoever. We're talking hard plastic. Comfort is important but when is the last time you pleased anyone with a non-adjustable one size fits all item that is used by both adults and children. It's ridiculous to assume their shape is the best, then again to assume you can manufacturer a millimeter precision that is "best on average."

  43. I'm ****never**** going to change by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    n/t

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  44. Re:Microsoft's abhorrently human factors design by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    I started on BBSs too...that and playing around with the AUTOEXEC.BAT file to cause the monitor and text to be the same color ...

    I just want to point out that using a conspicuous ammount of text art isn't my only problem...I don't punctuate properly (i use 'old American' punctuation style where I just capitalize w/e I think is important like in the Delcaration or Constitution...can also be seen in old newpaper articles), I digress too much,

    I make seemingly random breaks in paragraphs

    THEN DO IT AGAIN

    my spellign is for shit ...

    bottom line: i'm trying to convey **emotion** with my text...b/c it communicates much more information in the same ammount of text...that and I type fast b/c my mind races when i have a thought so i make mistakes...

    if you research emotion from a neurosceince perspective you can see why it *can* be a very valuable method of communication

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  45. Re:talk about R&D gone wild by lgw · · Score: 1

    You know what they say about the very best, true genius inventions in the world? "I could have thought of that!" All the very best ideas are blindingly obvious in hindsight.

    At the time, OS/2's Workplace Shell was an amazing object oriented desktop with independent folder color settings, folder background settings, developer inheritance so all the bells/whistles you expect from a folder would be part of a new folder which might have a split view.

    Microsoft always did make products for non-geeks. From the start of /. this has made geeks fly off in a rage whenever MS dominates the market, but that's nonsense: of course the mainstream market isn't what geeks want. Now, when Ubuntu does the same thing? I'm joining in the nerdrage there, to be sure.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  46. Discount jordan shoes outlet, save 60% Off!!! by tuiandnk · · Score: 1

    Hello, everybody!!! Are you ready for the Christmas gift? Share a website with you , the good shoping place, the Christmas approaching, click in. ( http://www.sheptrade.com/ ) Believe you will love it. The price is competitive. We accept any form of payment. ( http://www.sheptrade.com/ )