Next Xbox for debut at E3 2012?

[Shifty Geezer]

For surfing, get a tablet. Much easier to read than a big screen far away.

Much more expensive too. If the cost to surf the web in the living room after gaming is one console+one tablet, versus one console and a browser or OS software purchase, the latter is way more cost effective. Of course a browser doesn't need a full OS, but it definitely has value, as evidenced by the many complaints from PS3 users about how rubbish its browser is!

 

[pc999]

I am not so sure if people want a PC, they need a PC, want just very few IMO.

What they want is a gigant mp3 player for they music/movies/pic associated with social networks, google and youtube.

Anyone that can covers this will be fine for 50%+ of the persons IMO.

 

[ninzel]

Just came into this discussion late but have you guys talked about the security issues with offering an WinOS in the NextBox.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I have mentioned that as a reason against. It'd provide a great attack vector to undermine the console-side security to play pirated games.

 

[Tchock]

Err...why would a near-full-blown copy of Windows be needed when Win 8 apps are going to be predominantly HTML5+JS or Silverlight (which is on the 360 powering some stuff already)?

Xbox app store and added functionality in bite-sized purchases, definitely. Windows? Hell no. Windows to a large extent still implies content consumption + creation, whilst Xbox is sorely consumption only, but is darn focused and has its ecosystems centered around it.


What I *can* see though, is NextBox and Windows 8 sharing more accessible games- coded through C++ or Silverlight (now supporting XNA overlays), whose interface paradigms can be translated to joypad/Kinect, and those games/apps sold through the store.


p/s: the value-add argument is dung if it can't do it well (aka PS3 Web browser). People have other devices, likely smartphones or laptops, if they can afford to get a PS3- and they'll browse on those devices instead. Nobody tweets/Facebooks on the 360- it's slow, cumbersome, and is pretty useless (and not fixed- just a tech demo to show how apps might work!); same for the browser- something that can aggravate users even easier if it's clunky.

 

[AlphaWolf]

That's not a big issue supporting a closed-hardware platform.

How big? How much resources is it worth them spending on a net 0 profit proposition?

That doesn't really make sense. People want to play games, and people want a computer. They're not deliberately wanting two different boxes and will avoid any combination device. Traditionally there has been need to have a division between the two, because the computer platform didn't provide a particularly good games platform. But one box that does it all will have appeal. There'll be some who play games only and won't need to buy the OS; those who'll focus on the games but use the computing aspect occasionally and value the convenience; those who switch between the two regularly, such as students; those who'd value a cheap yet capable computer with excellent support (because it's closed hardware with fixed resources, so much easier to support device drivers) and squeeze in a bit of gaming; and those who'd use it just as a computer, making MS the cost of an OS license which is no worse than they get from anyone buying a laptop, while also installing another box in a home that may one day be used to buy software or content.

It makes perfect sense. If you want a PC, buy one. MS already has the solution in place right now, buy a windows PC, get a free console. No need for them to port their OS to the xbox, and worry about the security holes it could potentially open up, and no need to worry about infringing on their own live platform.

MS are writing the OS anyway for x86 and ARM, and DX11 GPUs. If they design their system around such a box, supporting the OS will be negligible cost. They'll also give customers a better Windows experience, because those customer will have less OS and application issues.

You're (and RudeCurve) seriously glossing over the issues they would face.

 

[AlphaWolf]

What I *can* see though, is NextBox and Windows 8 sharing more accessible games- coded through C++ or Silverlight (now supporting XNA overlays), whose interface paradigms can be translated to joypad/Kinect, and those games/apps sold through the store.

this makes a lot more sense than a full windows install that almost no one would use

 

[Shifty Geezer]

p/s: the value-add argument is dung if it can't do it well (aka PS3 Web browser).

Which is an argument in favour of full Windows support which can do everything well. No issues with missing codecs or lousy browsers etc.

How big? How much resources is it worth them spending on a net 0 profit proposition?

Where do you get the 0 profit notion from? They'll get $50 or whatever from every purchaser.

It makes perfect sense. If you want a PC, buy one. MS already has the solution in place right now, buy a windows PC, get a free console.

Are you seriously quoting a current, limited, short term deal as a long-term option? You're saying next gen MS are going to offer everyone a free $300 XB3 when they buy a new $700 PC? Even then that's not as cost effective as buying a $300 console and buying a $50 OS to stick on it. Why does a PC have to be a discrete box from a console when the hardware is the same in both? You are away that into the 90s there were many computers used as PCs and for gaming, right?

No need for them to port their OS to the xbox, and worry about the security holes it could potentially open up, and no need to worry about infringing on their own live platform.

Okay, explain to me how these two scenarios are different for MS's financials:

1) Bobby buys a $600 PC with a $50 OEM OS license going to MS and never buys an XB3 game
2) Bobby buys a $300 console, then a $50 OS license and never buys an XB3 game

You're (and RudeCurve) seriously glossing over the issues they would face.

Hmm, you'll have to explain to me how putting PC components already supported by Windows into a box and sticking an XBox badge on the front is going to throw up a load of complex issues in getting Windows to run.

this makes a lot more sense than a full windows install that almost no one would use

I agree, and said as much here, and have said as much in the HTML5 thread. That doesn't change the value of a full PC OS on a console. It's still a valid option and most of the complaints with it don't seem well founded to me. Security is a major one, as I've already said. The complexity of implementing it on a new platform designed to run Windows, the financial costs, and the possible cannibalising of console function, are all unnecessary concerns - there impact is no different than the impact of Windows PCs.

 

[Squilliam]

What if the Xbox next acts like a 'cloud processor' only locally for Windows Tablets and desktops and in addition to this also acts as a hub for storage?

 

[AlphaWolf]

Where do you get the 0 profit notion from? They'll get $50 or whatever from every purchaser.

Except they lose the windows machine sale from the person that wants that functionality. Net 0.

Are you seriously quoting a current, limited, short term deal as a long-term option? You're saying next gen MS are going to offer everyone a free $300 XB3 when they buy a new $700 PC? Even then that's not as cost effective as buying a $300 console and buying a $50 OS to stick on it. Why does a PC have to be a discrete box from a console when the hardware is the same in both? You are away that into the 90s there were many computers used as PCs and for gaming, right?

It makes as much sense as offering windows on the xbox.

Okay, explain to me how these two scenarios are different for MS's financials:

1) Bobby buys a $600 PC with a $50 OEM OS license going to MS and never buys an XB3 game
2) Bobby buys a $300 console, then a $50 OS license and never buys an XB3 game

Explain to me how those become the only options. It would prevent them from offering the next console as a loss leader, the last thing you want is to sell a loss leader to people who don't want game on it.

Hmm, you'll have to explain to me how putting PC components already supported by Windows into a box and sticking an XBox badge on the front is going to throw up a load of complex issues in getting Windows to run.

It doesn't need to be a load of complex issues, it can be a few minor issues, it still requires additional support for the few people who actually want this functionality. And it opens up security issues and additional support issues. If you offer it, you need to support it.

I agree, and said as much here, and have said as much in the HTML5 thread. That doesn't change the value of a full PC OS on a console. It's still a valid option and most of the complaints with it don't seem well founded to me. Security is a major one, as I've already said. The complexity of implementing it on a new platform designed to run Windows, the financial costs, and the possible cannibalising of console function, are all unnecessary concerns - there impact is no different than the impact of Windows PCs.

It's ok value for the few people who actually want to have a PC hooked up to their TV and don't want to pay for it (you're still probably going to need a keyboard and mouse and perhaps additional USB ports for them and maybe a network printer before its actually replacing a PC). For everyone else including Microsoft, not so much.

 

[RudeCurve]

Except they lose the windows machine sale from the person that wants that functionality. Net 0.

MS doesn't sell computers....IHV do...MS only sells the WinOS license. It's the IHV that loses a sale not MS.

Explain to me how those become the only options. It would prevent them from offering the next console as a loss leader, the last thing you want is to sell a loss leader to people who don't want game on it.

But didn't many early PS3 adopters buy that console just to use as a BR player? How's this different?

It's ok value for the few people who actually want to have a PC hooked up to their TV and don't want to pay for it (you're still probably going to need a keyboard and mouse and perhaps additional USB ports for them and maybe a network printer before its actually replacing a PC). For everyone else including Microsoft, not so much.

Keyboards and mice are cheap you make it sound like it's a huge obstacle, why are you so concerned about what people need to buy in addition to the Xbox to build a "workstation"? Look at all the PC devices on the market today, do people have to use their little netbooks as full blown PCs doing 3D computer modeling and computational fluid dynamics? Whatever they use XboxPC for is up to them.

Also why do you keep saying that most people don't hook up their PCs to TVs? What does that have to do with anything? Here are the 3 scenarios:

1. Joe buys Xbox and WinOS to use as computer only and never uses it for games. It's hooked up to monitor or TV.
2. Joe buys Xbox and WinOS to use as computer and game console. It's hooked up to monitor or TV.
3. Joe buys Xbox only to use as game console. It's hooked up to monitor or TV.

This isn't the friggen 90s...

 

[pc999]

MS doesn't sell computers....IHV do...MS only sells the WinOS license. It's the IHV that loses a sale not MS.

How healthy would that be for MS, if IHV start to fell the pressure they may start to sell Linux/Androind/WebOS/... PCs.

 

[AlphaWolf]

MS doesn't sell computers....IHV do...MS only sells the WinOS license. It's the IHV that loses a sale not MS.

yes, what's your point? I said, net 0. MS sells the license either way.

But didn't many early PS3 adopters buy that console just to use as a BR player? How's this different?

Sony wanted/needed to push blu-ray adoption.

Keyboards and mice are cheap you make it sound like it's a huge obstacle, why are you so concerned about what people need to buy in addition to the Xbox to build a "workstation"? Look at all the PC devices on the market today, do people have to use their little netbooks as full blown PCs doing 3D computer modeling and computational fluid dynamics? Whatever they use XboxPC for is up to them.

It's not a huge obstacle, just another obstacle. Why does me pointing out flaws in your plan become "I'm so concerned". I could care less if MS does it or not, it won't affect me in the least (unless it opens a security flaw), I have several PCs that I could hook up to my TV if I wanted, I just limited use for it and those uses have declined as MS expands xbl services. (even if I wanted to hook up a mouse and keyboard to my xbox I'd need 30 ft cables, or I'd have to run them through the middle of the room, it's actually easier to hook up a laptop as it's only one cable and it brings the mouse and kb functionality with it, although I'm sure you'll point out there's kb's you can buy with a track pad or whatever...).

Step out of the forum world and into the real world where most people wouldn't use this feature (for a number of reasons, including living rooms being less than conducive to mouse and keyboard, and windows text being hard to read on an HD display at 10 feet). Mobile style apps make more sense in the living room environment, simplified controls, and larger text. It also allows MS to expand Live functionality, bringing more value to the platform in that way makes a lot more sense.

Also why do you keep saying that most people don't hook up their PCs to TVs? What does that have to do with anything? Here are the 3 scenarios:

1. Joe buys Xbox and WinOS to use as computer only and never uses it for games. It's hooked up to monitor or TV.
2. Joe buys Xbox and WinOS to use as computer and game console. It's hooked up to monitor or TV.
3. Joe buys Xbox only to use as game console. It's hooked up to monitor or TV.

This isn't the friggen 90s...

I keep saying it, because it's true. Most people don't use a PC on their TV, because they don't want or need most of that functionality on their TV. It's important to the discussion when your whole point is turning the box into a PC. Even people I know who use HTPCs don't use the computing ability, they are just using the home theater/DVR aspect. These are features that are already available or coming to xbl. The date has changed little in this regard.

 

[RudeCurve]

I keep saying it, because it's true.

Yes it's true but it has nothing to do with the 3 scenarios possible so it's irrelevent. You're stuck in the old way of doing/seeing things. You need to look at it from the person who WILL be buying WinOS for Xbox. These people will either hook up the Xbox to a TV or a "monitor". A TV is just a montior with a tuner...makes no difference. You need to look outside the box.

There is a growing number of people who do not want a separate device for every little thing. Just becuase YOU have a workstation with a desk and "computer monitor" doesn't mean everyone in the world see's that as attractive or convenient. There is a huge market for convergence devices. Look at the smart phone and how many things you could do with it. Ten years ago there were people just like you who said they don't have a use for a camera in a phone because they have a much better standalone camera....ok. Seen statistics for camera usage lately?

To be honest I am seeing XB3 as the first of future PCs where you use your hands and Kinect as the "invisible touch interface". It's going to be a change in paradigm for th whole PC market.

Xbox3 + WinOS + Kinect interface = New type of PC

Add in facial and voice recognition and you the future of PCs.

MS could even license out the design to IHVs to lower cost of production and boosting economies of scale. This will even be beyond what Apple has on their roadmap.

 

[RudeCurve]

How healthy would that be for MS, if IHV start to fell the pressure they may start to sell Linux/Androind/WebOS/... PCs.

If you look at how IHV work, they don't make that much money on selling hardware because all the hardware is made by some other company anyway.

Take for example a DULL or HP PC, everything inside the box is made by some other company. IHVs are just system integrators. As for the other OS's I think that's just a natural evolution. IHVs will put whatever OS in their systems that people want the most. If people want Mac OS then the market will move in that direction.

 

[AlphaWolf]

To be honest I am seeing XB3 as the first of future PCs where you use your hands and Kinect as the "invisible touch interface". It's going to be a change in paradigm for th whole PC market.

Xbox3 + WinOS + Kinect interface = New type of PC

MS could even license out the design to IHVs to lower cost of production and boosting economies of scale. This will even be beyond what Apple has on their roadmap.

Maybe if they get the resolution up to where you can type on a virtual keyboard at a reasonable pace, that's a bit out of the scope of kinect at this point.

Licensing anything out is beyond anything Apple has on their roadmap.

 

[pc999]

Maybe if they get the resolution up to where you can type on a virtual keyboard at a reasonable pace, that's a bit out of the scope of kinect at this point.

Licensing anything out is beyond anything Apple has on their roadmap.

Voice recognition could help?

Anyway it is dangerous, each time more big companies like open source like stuff, android is the perfect example but not the only one (linux on servers or blender in studios are others), MS would need to be very careful.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Voice recognition could help?

Help yes, replace typing perhaps, but would you prefer it to typing for a serious application? Probably not.

 

[RudeCurve]

Help yes, replace typing perhaps, but would you prefer it to typing for a serious application? Probably not.

I guess wireless keyboards don't exist....sigh.

Wow so much fear of change and technological progress.

 

[AlphaWolf]

I guess wireless keyboards don't exist....sigh.

Wow so much fear of change and technological progress.

Hey you're the one who suggested a kinect driven OS, don't blame me.

and try wrap your head around the fact that it has nothing to do with fear of change.

If I wanted to hook a pc up to my TV I could do that right now (or 15 years ago)... Why don't most people do that? Nothing about bringing windows to the xbox platform overcomes any of the currently existing issues preventing it from happening in peoples homes right now. (issues I've mentioned before and that you've completely avoided)