yeah, but by appearances this would be a very late breaking change, thus they anticipated nothing.
So you think it likely that Microsoft watched Sony announce the 8Gb PS4 in February, didn't consider increasing the RAM. Revealed the 8Gb Xbox One in May, didn't consider increasing the RAM. Priced it in June, didn't consider increasing the RAM. Then suddenly, some Microsoft engineer just woke up one day and said "hey, let's put 12Gb in there".
Yeah, seems legit.
and i still dont believe for a second, in any product line, that announcing a certain product line's specs means you cant increase it's spec later. Not for any Apple product, or any product at all.
Actually, there used to be accounting rules that governed this this, I remember when Apple launched the iPhone and iPod Touch, they had to
charge for OS upgrades on the iPod Touch. But nobody is saying that here, the issue is entirely about a publicly traded company announcing a product with given capabilities, then taking a decision to change the specifications with a resulting increase in cost. They don't
need to do it.
What if Microsoft decides they need to totally rengineer the XB1 and delay it 1 year? 2 years What then? Still bound to 8GB forever? What if they decide to decrease RAM? Fraud too?
No, but they would be obliged to announce this immediately. The way the process would work, is if this happens and somebody cries foul and the SEC investigate, they would be looking for evidence that Microsoft acted as quickly as possible so as to not mislead investors. It's really that simple. Nobody is saying things don't change during production, they do. The key thing is if Microsoft chose to significantly (33% increase) the RAM which will obviously have a cost impact. It'll reduce profitability short term and long term - for as long as they're shipping 12Gb consoles instead of 8Gb consoles, so 5+ years.
Anyways it's still just silly. I dont think for a second even you believe it's more than wishful thinking on your part.
It's the law.
The purpose of these regulations are to prevent companies saying they are doing one thing, getting investors to buy stock, then changing their minds and doing something else.
Consider this, if Microsoft chose to roll a 12Gb Xbox One launching in a year and announce this tomorrow morning, Microsoft's stock will take a hit. Any investors who recently bought in on the original announcement will be left with negative equity. How is that fair? Wouldn't it be great if there was some law to stop that? Oh wait there is, the one you are denying: The Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Section 18.
Read it.
Maybe. Who are we to say? aren't we being constantly told PS4's superior specs are why it's a better value and we should buy it? Why would increasing your RAM (at the same price) not materially affect that balance in a positive way for your product?
How do you increase RAM at the same price?