Microsoft Xbox Roadmap (2013) (VGleaks)

[dobwal]

The Apple TV needs to be "Always On" because it's getting its TV content from the Internet instead of a DVD & not because of deficiency in its RAM or local storage. The same would go for a DVD-less 360. If you don't include a DVD drive, then how do you get your games? Can't buy them on USB. Now if the combo of Xbox Mini + Durango allows you to use 360 disks, then that would be cool.

Tommy McClain

The Apple tv can only stream because it lacks any decent amount of flash. All other apple devices with a decent amount of flash can make use of the same content by streaming playback while downloading in the background. In fact, I can stream from an iPad to an apple tv while the content is downloading to the iPad.

Apple TV is pretty limited without an/a online/wifi connection so comparing 361 with ATV while saying its just as limited without a connection made me consider the potential lack of a HDD or a decent amount of flash.

Doesn't mean that the 361 is only functional when online even though it's fully capable of operating offline as its only disk less. We will ultimately discover if and why 361 only operates with an online connection.

 

[AzBat]

Because they are saying Xbox Mini = Xbox TV/Yuma and vgleaks are saying Xbox Mini = Xbox 360 revision.

It's not logical that they can delay Xbox TV and have Xbox 361 in its place as if they could do that, why bother with XTV in the first place?

No, XTV was put on backburner most likely because Durango was going to slip it's release (from what i've heard)

Tech Radar are reading their own sources wrong. I even gave you the links they used. Xbox TV can be delayed if they have determined they no longer need it if the Xbox Mini can server multiple purposes: stand alone 360, backardward compatible module & Xbox TV set-top box. Why both in the 1st place? The Xbox TV rumor has been around since at least January 2012. A lot of things can change since then. It never made sense to have 3 different products using the Xbox brand & one of them not even playing Xbox games. You really only need 2: high-end(720) & low-end(360).

Tommy McClain

 

[AzBat]

The Apple tv can only stream because it lacks any decent amount of flash. All other apple devices with a decent amount of flash can make use of the same content by streaming playback while downloading in the background. In fact, I can stream from an iPad to an apple tv while the content is downloading to the iPad.

Apple TV is pretty limited without an/a online/wifi connection so comparing 361 with ATV while saying its just as limited without a connection made me consider the potential lack of a HDD or a decent amount of flash.

Doesn't mean that the 361 is only functional when online even though it's fully capable of operating offline as its only disk less. We will ultimately discover if and why 361 only operates with an online connection.

Ahh. OK, I see what you're saying now. I'm not a Apple user, so it was somewhat foreign to me. Thanks for the explanation! Man it sucks we still have over a month left to wait. Grrr.

Tommy McClain

 

[(((interference)))]

Or simply, vgleaks are conflating Xbox TV with the Xbox 360 revision - which makes more sense than MS developing a 360 revision without a disk drive (alongside an ARM box without a disk drive).

They are planning 3 devices as Xbox 360 does not run Win8 or support all the other media features they have planned for Durango (it's a bit hard to fit in the 32MB of OS memory) - nor will it work with Win8 apps and despite more die shrinks, will still be too power hungry to be an always on device.

Xbox TV is for casuals who primarily want a media box and small games they play on their phones/tablets, while the Xbox 361 revision is more for the traditional audience who can't afford Durango and for emerging markets (MS are looking to replicate Sony's success with the PS2+PS3 combo)

Plus, vgleaks since SuperDaE got into hot water, have been posting false info, like with Assassin's Creed 4.

 

[AzBat]

Looks like we're going in circles. You still won't respond to other parts of my posts. So I think we're done now. Come on May 21.

Tommy McClain

 

[(((interference)))]

Looks like we're going in circles. You still won't respond to other parts of my posts. So I think we're done now. Come on May 21.

Tommy McClain

Like what? You seem to be selectively favouring one story from vgleaks over what numerous other reputable outlets/sources are saying.

 

[Tap In]

I don't follow are you saying the mini doesn't make sense?

the xbox mini (361?) is the BC solution, that is its place. that's why it makes sense. you can trade in your old 360 buy a mini and Durango (if you want BC) and play your 360 disks through Durango if you own one with the Durango UI and features and (or if not) you can DL all of your games that you already own XBLA and GoD, and play them on this mini alone.

This small form factor, low price media streaming box that also plays games can be used anywhere alone without worrying about disks. As mentioned previously, in public places or hotels where someone wants to offer game play in a form factor and price with graphics that to most people will look pretty good for years to come. Or small compact unit to take anywhere.

 

[(((interference)))]

The “Xbox Mini” is not a 360 add-on, it is a stand alone product that contains Xbox 360 functions for gaming, and alone it is meant to compete with Apple TV. Since it is likely it will not have a disc drive, it is being designed with “always online” in mind, and with internet being required for Live functions. Xbox 360 Games can be played on it by purchasing Games on Demand on Xbox Live (for new purchases) or if already purchased, simply download it. This also applies to music and movies. To further clarify, the Durango will also have these (TV) functions, just with next-genration gaming hardware instead of Xbox 360 at a higher price.

The bolded all suggests Xbox TV, since it was the one supposed to have a subset of Durango's functions, mostly non gaming, (since it would share the system OS with Durango).
To suggest that a 360 revision will somehow manage this without using the same kernel (requiring x86/ARM) is a bit much.
And any 360 based system would still draw too much power to be 'always online', without ridiculous amounts of re-engineering for an 8 year old chipset that would be better spent designing a new system altogether (which is what they realised and why they are working on the ARM based Xbox TV in the first place).

Durango itself will also always be online like any other device (correct with rumors), but it will not be a requirement to play local content and it will not prevent playing used games.

And this is patently false, given what I know and what Kotaku are reporting is current as of a few weeks ago. They are saying Durango is always online in the same sense the PS4/Wii U will be always online - if so, nothing makes sense, why would Edge/Kotaku think that a noteworthy new rumour to publish? Why would Orth argue with the internet that they should all accept such an 'always online' console, when it is in no way different to the PS4/Wii U?

So I am inclined to view this latest vgleaks story with some suspicion, given their recent track record.

Maybe someone else will come out and corroborate what they say.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

In other words, beware of reporting on leaks, rumors, etc...

But why 'beware'? The worst that can happen is you were wrong. the only alternative to reporting rumours that may not pan out is not reporting on anything, and us all sitting in silence until official reveals. So I say let the rumour mongers spread their information with whatever trust they have in their sources, and let the reader make their own mind up. Just no-one place any importance on whether someone proves right or not except to establish a line of trust for future rumours.

I can understand effort in establishing whether someone is right or wrong on technical matters with absolute answers that can be verified and reasoned. I don't understand this interest in discrediting people on improvable, changeable information. I read (((interferences)))'s rumours and I trust his sources are pretty strong based on previous information, but I have zero emotional involvement in his rumours, nor any money riding on his rumours, so if it turns out he's wrong I'll shrug my shoulders. Won't even be worth a, "well go figure," response because I don't believe in the rumours, only accept them as a possibility worth exploring. The only reason I can see to get annoyed at rumour mongers is when they take a position of authority, like the Guardians of the Truth, and interrupt the open discussion. Then I suppose some folk would like to see such rumour-mongers 'brought down a peg or two'.

 

[dagamer]

The bolded all suggests Xbox TV, since it was the one supposed to have a subset of Durango's functions, mostly non gaming, (since it would share the system OS with Durango).
To suggest that a 360 revision will somehow manage this without using the same kernel (requiring x86/ARM) is a bit much.
And any 360 based system would still draw too much power to be 'always online', without ridiculous amounts of re-engineering for an 8 year old chipset that would be better spent designing a new system altogether (which is what they realised and why they are working on the ARM based Xbox TV in the first place).



And this is patently false, given what I know and what Kotaku are reporting is current as of a few weeks ago. They are saying Durango is always online in the same sense the PS4/Wii U will be always online - if so, nothing makes sense, why would Edge/Kotaku think that a noteworthy new rumour to publish? Why would Orth argue with the internet that they should all accept such an 'always online' console, when it is in no way different to the PS4/Wii U?

So I am inclined to view this latest vgleaks story with some suspicion, given their recent track record.

Maybe someone else will come out and corroborate what they say.

Paul Thurrott on Windows Weekly indirectly referenced some of those rumors in VGLeaks and The Verge as bring directly in opposition to what he's heard about Durango, especially the cable TV stuff. It just seems kinda crazy to even attempt to control a TV box because it doesn't work that well (too many points of failure).

At one point I did want MS to do the whole tuner thing but that really is an old way of thinking if things. The future is streaming so Microsoft should just embrace that and wait for the inevitable.

 

[expletive]

Paul Thurrott on Windows Weekly indirectly referenced some of those rumors in VGLeaks and The Verge as bring directly in opposition to what he's heard about Durango, especially the cable TV stuff. It just seems kinda crazy to even attempt to control a TV box because it doesn't work that well (too many points of failure).

At one point I did want MS to do the whole tuner thing but that really is an old way of thinking if things. The future is streaming so Microsoft should just embrace that and wait for the inevitable.

There is nothing crazy about attempting to control a TV box. While IR blasters are not elegant, they have been reliably used by the mainstream for as far back as the original TiVo and are still being used in new products today.

Steaming may be the future but in the USA we are still very far from being able to replace Live TV and most importantly live regional sporting events. MS can't *wait* for it because it probably won't be even nearly sorted out through this whole console generation.

For example, in the New York area, there is *nothing* i can pay for online that will allow me to watch local NHL, NBA, MLB games via streaming. They are blacked out because the local cable and satellite companies pay high prices for exclusive broadcast rights. All of the league streaming services are blackout for your local teams.

What MS is doing is building a bridge until this gets sorted out. "You can still get all your Live TV, sporting events, and premium channels you pay for (from your cable provider) through our box until such time you can stream everything you need." When people reach that cord-cutting threshold they simply disconnect their old cable box from the back of the Durango.

 

[dobwal]

Paul Thurrott on Windows Weekly indirectly referenced some of those rumors in VGLeaks and The Verge as bring directly in opposition to what he's heard about Durango, especially the cable TV stuff. It just seems kinda crazy to even attempt to control a TV box because it doesn't work that well (too many points of failure).

At one point I did want MS to do the whole tuner thing but that really is an old way of thinking if things. The future is streaming so Microsoft should just embrace that and wait for the inevitable.

The future is streaming. However, it doesn't mean its a good ideal to wait for streaming to become ubiquitous while ignoring any common non-streaming method thats currently employed today.

My ipad can control all my STBs. The actual control aspect functions well but I don't use it because I consider it limited and clunky in its design. Its not a natural replacement for my uverse remote because unlike the ipad, my remote is simple and straight forward. No wait for the app to load. No competition for any non TV use unlike the ipad, which another family member may be using. Can control multiple devices with one interface.

Durango would be well served by providing an all in one control scheme. Where Durango not only offers a motion based control scheme but provides an universal remote as well as remote schemes for tabs and phones. All while serving not just the console and a STB but your blu-ray player, HTPC, receiver and just about anything inside your entertainment center.

Basically a control scheme that serves any individual's preferred way to control their entertainment center while supporting a broad range of devices. Presenting a unified interface with multiple control schemes and doing it well is where most alternatives fail. Maybe I rather use the universal remote, while my son enjoys using Kinect and my wife rather use her phone or ipad.

Durango offering remoteless control is novel from an entertainment center standpoint but a unified interface is still a strongly desired and needed feature especially when you are talking about servicing a whole home with a bevy of devices and not just your living room. If Durango can do both well and allow easy setup, it will be vastly ahead of most offerings.

Thats worth offering now, not until streaming/ip control becomes mainstream enough that all devices support those features.

If the 720 and the PS4 does this now it will provide a level mindshare and expertise that will help against competitors who will wait until implementation becomes easier.

 

[eastmen]

an xbox bc box that doubles as a tv box makes sense .

MS can continue to shrink the 360 with modern nodes and drive the price down even more. IF you remove the hardrive / dvd drive you get ride of two things in which the BOM wont change anymore.

Flash is getting cheap and MS allows you to plug in thumb drives also now.

 

[onQ]

I don't follow are you saying the mini doesn't make sense?

the xbox mini (361?) is the BC solution, that is its place. that's why it makes sense. you can trade in your old 360 buy a mini and Durango (if you want BC) and play your 360 disks through Durango if you own one with the Durango UI and features and (or if not) you can DL all of your games that you already own XBLA and GoD, and play them on this mini alone.

This small form factor, low price media streaming box that also plays games can be used anywhere alone without worrying about disks. As mentioned previously, in public places or hotels where someone wants to offer game play in a form factor and price with graphics that to most people will look pretty good for years to come. Or small compact unit to take anywhere.

I think it's more of a XboxTV solution.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

But why 'beware'? The worst that can happen is you were wrong. the only alternative to reporting rumours that may not pan out is not reporting on anything, and us all sitting in silence until official reveals. So I say let the rumour mongers spread their information with whatever trust they have in their sources, and let the reader make their own mind up. Just no-one place any importance on whether someone proves right or not except to establish a line of trust for future rumours.

I can understand effort in establishing whether someone is right or wrong on technical matters with absolute answers that can be verified and reasoned. I don't understand this interest in discrediting people on improvable, changeable information. I read (((interferences)))'s rumours and I trust his sources are pretty strong based on previous information, but I have zero emotional involvement in his rumours, nor any money riding on his rumours, so if it turns out he's wrong I'll shrug my shoulders. Won't even be worth a, "well go figure," response because I don't believe in the rumours, only accept them as a possibility worth exploring. The only reason I can see to get annoyed at rumour mongers is when they take a position of authority, like the Guardians of the Truth, and interrupt the open discussion. Then I suppose some folk would like to see such rumour-mongers 'brought down a peg or two'.

I guess I was a bit too vague in what I wrote. I meant it as beware of reporting on rumors as they may not reflect the actual product. And probably should have expounded on that as to how people, possibly even the one reporting on the rumor, could take it as the truth or "how things really are."

So didn't mean it in the sense that rumors aren't interesting or worth speculating on. But don't put too much faith into the rumor/leak/whatever until the product launches or the company about whose product the rumor is about confirms it.

Regards,
SB

 

[dobwal]

I think it's more of a XboxTV solution.

If XboxTV is RT based, I think there is a strong chance it will never launch.

Whats the point? RT tabs aren't gaining any real tractions in sales. In most homes in the future a windows 8 device will likely be full blown x86, so why not just allow remote desktop or stream over Durango. And more than likely those win 8 devices will be laptops, where portability makes XTV redundant for anything outside of streaming movies to a TV, which the Xbox mini should be albe to perform.

A 360 based Xbox Mini has access to a huge library of titles all available at launch. So what its not designed for "always on". Its the device being service not the device doing the servicing. It makes sense for Durango to be "always on". If you are in a bedroom and you go to play a 360 game on the xbox mini but forced to go in the livingroom because Durango isn't on, how many times would you have to go through that before you become irritated by that experience. Its the equivalent of going on your computer and then having to call Google to turn on their servers so you can do a search query.

AppleTV is treated by Apple as an afterthought. A ok solution thats only serviceable until Apple release an iOS based TV or STB. Apple considers it a hobby and its sales aren't on the same level of other devices that sells for 3X to 50X the retail price of AppleTV.

I think keeping the 360 ecosystem viable, after MS has spent the last 7 years growing it, is more desirable than spending the next few years of waiting for the library of win 8 apps targeted for XTV to grow.

 

[blakjedi]

If XboxTV is RT based, I think there is a strong chance it will never launch.

Whats the point? RT tabs aren't gaining any real tractions in sales.

WinRT the API is the same as x86 win8. The limitations are only in allowed chipset functionality on ARM. The interface is also of value.

 

[french toast]

Im VERY excited by this...I do wonder whether durango could increase graphics somewhat on BC games?

How that would be done I dont know? Perhaps a more powerfull upscaler? Add AA?

It does seem a bit too good to be true though.

 

[dagamer]

There is nothing crazy about attempting to control a TV box. While IR blasters are not elegant, they have been reliably used by the mainstream for as far back as the original TiVo and are still being used in new products today.

Steaming may be the future but in the USA we are still very far from being able to replace Live TV and most importantly live regional sporting events. MS can't *wait* for it because it probably won't be even nearly sorted out through this whole console generation.

For example, in the New York area, there is *nothing* i can pay for online that will allow me to watch local NHL, NBA, MLB games via streaming. They are blacked out because the local cable and satellite companies pay high prices for exclusive broadcast rights. All of the league streaming services are blackout for your local teams.

What MS is doing is building a bridge until this gets sorted out. "You can still get all your Live TV, sporting events, and premium channels you pay for (from your cable provider) through our box until such time you can stream everything you need." When people reach that cord-cutting threshold they simply disconnect their old cable box from the back of the Durango.

Sure, it's conceptually simple, but it's not so stupidly simple that the average person wouldn't need help to get it to work. I just hate IR because it's a one-way street with no feedback to the controlling device, which means it is bound to fail at some point.

I honestly wish they would kill blackout rules, as it completely changes the TV landscape. It's the only problem cord cutters have, and I'm sure they'd be more than happy to pay $100-250 for their favorite sport and watch ALL of the games.

 

[Gradthrawn]

Random thought (wild speculation). The VGLeaks article doesn't seem to mention anything about DVR like functionality. The focus seems to be on the 360 Mini having Apple TV like functionality, and that Durango will have that same functionality as well (independent of the Mini). It also alludes to a direct physical connection between the Mini and Durango specifically for BC support.

Just a wild guess, but the HDMI-in we've seen in the early leaks could very well be for the Mini to talk to the Durango. HDMI 1.4 with Ethernet allows for an independent 100 Mb connection between the 2 connected devices. That would be 12.5 MB (peak) to copy the optical data from the Durango to the Mini. That's lower than the 360's ODD absolute peak, but I would think relatively irrelevant to the current install process supported on the 360. In other words, put the 360 game in Durango, have your Mini connected via HDMI, game installs on the Mini's HDD and runs from there. If you want to play, you must have the disc in the Durango, but it runs from the (Mini) HDD, just like now (except install is required).

All processing is handled on the Mini, video is sent to (through) the Durango, which allows Durango OS to be overlaid (likely on a separate Display Plane). Controller input either sent through Durango (HDMI latency concerns?), or perhaps directly to the Mini (which has whatever is necessary to be compatible with Durango controllers). VGLeaks stating the current 360s will not support BC with the Durango (due to different external interfaces) would allude to some req the 360 can't meet. HDMI 1.4 could be one of them. On a side note, USB 2 (or 3) would obviously be faster than the 100 Mb HDMI Ethernet for data transfer, but HDMI would allow for a single connection for both A/V and data. Given what could be minimal data requirements, that could be a reasonable trade-off for a simpler user setup.