If people are going to talk about Microsoft selling of Xbox, they should be providing proof that Microsoft is making steps to do so.
Yep. Until there's evidence, it's heresay. however, this is a rumour thread.
Until something concrete happens to signal they are going to sell, it just sounds like a bunch of brand warriors trolling.
It has nothing to do with brand warriors. The rumours stem from reports of investors wanting it dropped - the rumour originates from the
financial sector and not the gaming community.
Have Microsoft every outright denied it.
Not that I know of. However, whenever it was raised the response was, 'no, XB1 needs Kinect'. That 'no' may or may not have been true at the time (they may have had plans on the drawing board as they watched sales numbers and considered options, or not. As it turns out, the change was very abrupt), but the assurances that Kinect would remain a part of the standard XB1 package didn't hold water in the long run. If Ms had plans to drop Kinect well in advance, why would they want to tell the world that? They wouldn't, so they'd be evasive. Similarly,
if there were plans to sell the XB division, they wouldn't ever confirm that. So a denial isn't really much use in determining the validity of a rumour.
I can say same thing about every other company, and I don't need to have an example or even a weak/unrelated correlation for doing this.
Yes, they are all evasive and keep their plans close to their chest. What makes you think my opinion was unique towards MS's response?
Selling Xbox division is entirely different from unbundling Kinect.
One can argue that, but it's immaterial. Selling Kinect was never an argument for selling the whole division. I repeat, it is only presented as proof that evasive answers aren't useful answers. The only true denial would be something like, "We have a 3 year plan for XB1 including non-negotiable, non-transferable contracts for production. We are not going to be selling the Gaming Division any time before then." And we never get such answers. This is how rumours get to persist even without much merit to them, because they are as hard to disprove as they are to prove.
Read Penello's argument's in favour of Kinect. Kinect is fundamental to the DNA of XB1, yet it's gone. Now look at an argument saying XBox is a vital part of the DNA of MS's long-term strategy. A change in plans can see the gaming division dropped just as well (this can happen for Sony or Nintendo, and does. Just needs a catalyst. Shareholders telling Sony to sell Playstation, or shareholders telling Nintendo to release on mobile).
Note, because some people seem to get confused that arguing against the validity of a point is the same as arguing in favour of its opposite counterpart, that I do not believe MS are planning to sell Xbox. I'm just being very particular about the logic of interpreting rumours. They often deal with very hazy information and people typically form an opinion based on faith (look for example at Eastmen's surprise on this board the Kinect was dropped where he and others firmly believed in MS's earlier position that Kinect was essential). IMO it's better not to form an opinion and just entertain all reasonable possibilities.
