IBM's new Xbox2 role?

What do you believe IBM's new Xbox2 role will be?

  • AMD x86 CPU provider

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Transmeta x86 provider

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • x86 provider(not sure which company)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • other IC(Northbridge, Southbridge, communications, etc) provider

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Just a foundry partner

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • PowerPC CPU provider and GPU manufacturer

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • x86 CPU provider and GPU manufacturer

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Manufacturer of all 3 major chips(CPU,GPU and other IC)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    350
chaphack said:
IF anything, it is a good tactics to take away some of Sony Cell hype. I mean, PS3 is using IBM so are we! Normal gamers wouldnt know more/less. :LOL:

If you're going to play this game, then face reality and come to the conclusion that the PlayStation and Sony name alone isa more hype than Microsoft can hope to muster in the console realm in the anywhere remote future.

And what Cell will bring to normal gamers, if anything, which is the interconnectivity and data sharing isn't something Microsoft can do period do to their lack of the home CE marketplace. Think of it as this generations DVD that MS can't do. Saying,"hey we make our chips next to Sony at East Fishkill - so we're equal" and then mentioning "casuals" is retarded. So, please...

Besides, I know you're big into this "My nomenclature is bigger than yours, so I own3d you" game, but $1B for fabricating and manufacturing the ICs in XBox isn't that much. Nor is it larger, or even close, than the competition by any stretch of the imaginatio.
 
Take it easy vince! :LOL:

I am just saying IBM for XB2 will take some heat off Cell, I am all ready to give Sony the overall hype crown again. :LOL:
It is not about Fishkill, more like "hey bro, cant wait for PS3, heard its using hardcool IBM stuffs!" and then another causal would go "Yeay but i heard XB2 is using IBM too!" "Really? COooooool!" In short, IBM > Fishkill.

1B isnt that bad, considering we have not taken into account the cost of R5X yet! :oops:
How much have Sony/Nintendo invested in their console R&D?
 
chaphack said:
It is not about Fishkill, more like "hey bro, cant wait for PS3, heard its using hardcool IBM stuffs!" and then another causal would go "Yeay but i heard XB2 is using IBM too!" "Really? COooooool!" In short, IBM > Fishkill.

Ahh Yeah... I have alot of those conversations. Usually come just after the, "How's work... whatcha drinking... was she any good... Dude, they're both from IBM" talk. :rolleyes: Dude, come on now - this is fantasy land.

Seriously, are you serious? What is this... preemptive damage control that relies on ignorance or something? I'm genuinely curious bud.
 
Of coz im serious!

I go to school, and i have often heard crosstalk about how gordaciously awesome Xbox(not that it isnt! :LOL: ) is, just because it uses a Pentium and a Nvidia! I wont even want to go into the clockspeed. :LOL:

How can it be fantasy? If XB2 uses IBM and so does Sony, thats what the casual gamers will see. How many have heard about the Emotion Synthesizer of a chip?

Just like Sony is a hardcool brand, so is Intel/IBM. While stuffs like EE, Flipper and Cell etc has work to catch up in terms of recognition.

Get my point?
 
chaphack said:
Get my point?

Honestly... no. Perhaps "Just like Sony is a hardcool brand, so is Intel/IBM" - but I've never heard it myself in conversing outside of household names like Intel and Sony. I'm sorry.

I also happen to believe that the casual gamers will not see that both contain ICs made by the "hardcool brand" IBM - but rather that one is a Sony PlayStation and the other is a Microsoft XBox... and the rest is history.

EDIT: Come to think of it, I never think I've heard the name Emotion Engine uttered. So, by extention, I doubt people give a care that it is manufactured by OTSS, which includes Toshiba.
 
Well, maybe the age demograph of your hang-out places is different from mine(duh!), but i am sure "my" group of gamers(causal or hardcore) can easily identified the Pentium/Nvidia in Xbox and has heard about Sony ambitious tieup with IBM. As for the likes of EE and Cell with "my" causal gamers...nayy ;)
 
EDIT: Come to think of it, I never think I've heard the name Emotion Engine uttered. So, by extention, I doubt people give a care that it is manufactured by OTSS, which includes Toshiba.

Again, it is not about the chip specifics, but the recognisable big boys. The Sony/MS/Intel/IBM/Nitendo/ATI etc..
 
chaphack said:
EDIT: Come to think of it, I never think I've heard the name Emotion Engine uttered. So, by extention, I doubt people give a care that it is manufactured by OTSS, which includes Toshiba.

Again, it is not about the chip specifics, but the recognisable big boys. The Sony/MS/Intel/IBM/Nitendo/ATI etc..
\

Chap in my experience the postering starts 'after' a purchase is made (particularly if only one purchase is made in the medium term). what has changed since I've been gone?

EDIT: I think you can throw NINTENDO/ATI/IBM out hte window as I'm not sure how much 'cred' they carry for those whom aren't into I.T
 
Offhand I'm still leaning towards IBM for Nintendo, as I haven't gotten the impression they're looking for radically shift their designs, and have likely been working through the same people for updated hardware. I imagine it would be up to NEC to prove its particular designs are worth the shift from a power/cost/ease perspective. Since Microsoft has announced going IBM-a-ways now, Nintendo might ESPECIALLY be keen to keep their same relationship, as they could take advantage of designs IBM is working on otherwise, and two consoles with PowerPC processors and ATi GPU's could perhaps allow amazing ease of porting, which could help Nintendo out with 3rd parties just from that alone. It might also allow MS and Nintendo the ability to perhaps link their consoles VERY closely if it comes to the point of being way overshadowed by Sony. I'm sure neither would WANT that, but the market can do strange things, and both MAY just want to keep those kinda of options open. Synergy can be very handy.

On the Xbox2, if I REALLY didn't like it, I would PRAY the Xbox2 launches in Q4 2004, as I predict it would be a big pile of suck, have no developer support, and totally screw up the rest of the Xbox's current lifespan. I mean to launch in Q4'04 they'd have to start fabbing, oh... <checks watch> Sometime next week? I mean, they just signed up IBM, right? Hence they must be ready!

Heh...
 
notAFanB said:
EDIT: I think you can throw NINTENDO/ATI/IBM out hte window as I'm not sure how much 'cred' they carry for those whom aren't into I.T

Sorry, not sure about you "oldies"( :p ) but consoles are making more headlines in the news. I mean, the info are all there for you.

Im sure by the next day, you will probably be flipping through newspaper talking about this new IBM-MS tieup. Hell, you can see it on the news just then.

Maybe you are talking about the older generations of my dad's dad or something. Then they might have trouble identifying a Sony from a MS. But im sure any kid or adult, interested in getting a console, would be informed of the basics.

Well, at least that is what im seeing around me. :oops:
 
Vince said:
EDIT: Come to think of it, I never think I've heard the name Emotion Engine uttered. So, by extention, I doubt people give a care that it is manufactured by OTSS, which includes Toshiba.

Are you kidding :?: :!: :!: :?: Everyone I know starts rubbing tehmselves in teh privates when they find out a chip is made by OTSS!!!1! :D :) :D :LOL: :LOL:

chaphack said:
But im sure any kid or adult, interested in getting a console, would be informed of the basics.

Yes, the basics. Which essentially amount to "this one is Nintendo, that one is Sony, the other one is Microsoft, and [console-of-choice] is DA BEST while the others SUCK!!!!!!11!!!!!"

Growing up, despite being a huge nerd and gamer, I cared squat about the internal chips themselves. Even now, only myself one one other (the 2nd-biggest tech nerd of us ;) ) friend I imagine competently know who makes what makes up the modern consoles. Most probably know that MS/Intel/nVidia make up the Xbox, but that's rather a commonly-accepted combination in PC's as well, so it's easy to remember. But the Gamecube? Doubt it. PS2? I'm sure they'd attribute all to Sony and don't really understand what the innards are comprised of. Dreamcast? Highly doubtful. Doubt they'd know the derivation of the G5 excepting that I was talking about it for a while. Hehe...

People "know" things by expressing interest in it and either talking to someone who does know or searching out the info themselves. My other most-interested-in-tech friend knows bits and scratches, but I'm the only one of us who peruses and converses on sites like this and bops around to see what's what. This is NOT a common occurrance. If your friends are all like this, then it is because you are all HUGE NERDS, not because you are representative of the populace, nor even your age bracket. ;)

Considering the people who work in stores tend to be utterly incompetent anyway, what little info they might regurgitate you can't really trust because there's a good chance they're idiotic anyway. When shopping at CompUSA looking for a new work computer, my friend was basically told to avoid Pentiums at all costs, because Hyperthreading was the computer equivalent of inviting Satan into your house and having him rape your mother with a canoe oar. (Ok, I might have taken some literary license with that. ;) ) Again, not trustable sources, even if you DO happen to get the correct information.

People see the biggest name before them--usually just the ones on the packaging. They inheret their brand predjudices elsewhere, and though they MIGHT lean one way or the other at hearing "Pentium" or "nVidia" or not, the overriding predjudice comes from the big names on the pretty boxes.
 
Chappers said:
95 -> 98 -> 2001 XP - Longhorn 2004(?)
Thats how i look at it.
Opinions are fine, but how about facts.
98 was repackaged 95 OSR2 with a butchered GUI - if you acknowledge that as a new OS, then you must also acknowledge PS2 colored models as new console on the market.
So, applying your logic to the console market, console cycle is around 1year, if not less.
Hell, at least the new 5000 model brings new functionality with built in ethernet so it qualifies as a new console more so then 98 was a new OS.

What notAFanB touched could also be debated, current OSs are still overhauls of NTcore, although at least user segment saw a major advance there since they were stuck on 9x core prior to XP/2000.
 
It is totally pointless to compare software and hardware.
Most software is just more a .x update than a completely new product, although they are sold as 'new' Windows 98, 'new' Photoshop 10, 'new' 3D Studio MAX 5, 'new' Halo 2...
Still, I do hope (and believe) MS are not planning to bring this same model of 'updates' to hardware.
 
I was sold that 98 was a "new" OS. Im not sure about exact internals, but it was much improved over 95. Many sites love it, espically for games. Many people move onto 98 from 95, just like now from 98 to XP. Colored PS2 are still more limited in homes.

Of cos im not too hardcore with OSes. ;)
 
Faf is correct, 98 was just a repackaged 95 with Service Release 2, however, I do agree that comparing software versions with hardware versions is pointless.
 
Well, its not about software-hardware revisions, more like a new business model. Yeay, it is THE controvesial and risky, but anything is possible. Maybe be better to break Sony fabbing advantage with progressively new and cheap hardware every 3 years. Need not be ultra powerful, just up to date.

That said, its just speculations. MS could be better choice, with a longer hardwarew timeline, if Xbox is intended to be their all-in-one home server box. Again, its just hohoho talk for fun. :oops: :LOL: :oops:
 
chaphack said:
Again, its just hohoho talk for fun. :oops: :LOL: :oops:


yeah... i was thinking exactly the same thing last night.... the hohoho-ness is just amazing isn't it... :rolleyes:

Cthellis:

very very few people know what goes on inside consoles, most people (the casual gamers) just care about how shiny the graphics are, sometimes how fast, and mostly what licence the game is based on.... oh and if Beckam is in it.... :LOL:
 
I was sold that 98 was a "new" OS. Im not sure about exact internals, but it was much improved over 95. Many sites love it, espically for games. Many people move onto 98 from 95, just like now from 98 to XP. Colored PS2 are still more limited in homes.

I'll agree if by 'improved' u mean patched/fixed by that measure faf has a point repackaged PS2 and PSTwo qualify under this line of thinking.

look it's not that they didn't fix issues with subsequent OS's (well excluding ME). it just that that don't really qualify as bonafide 'new' software that's all. even 2000 can be consider a tidied up NT product (with XP giving some nice service packs) that's been around for awhile.

in terms of maybe a radical overhaul/new paradigms I think Lornhorn might feature enough to qualify (looking to se how their new NFS pans out myself). sod it even *NIX distros have been around since god knows how long and updates are mostly modular with the occasional kernal recompilation.
 
To the average person 95, 98, and XP were completely different while the same could not be said of a repackaged PS2 or PStwo. I think that is what Chap was trying to get across but everyone would rather jump on him instead of trying to understand what he said.
 
Dural said:
I think that is what Chap was trying to get across but everyone would rather jump on him instead of trying to understand what he said.


fair enough... problem is, the majority of the people here hardly ever understands what he says... :D
 
Back
Top