Spong.com CEO speaks out.

[Qroach]

I saw this posted at the teamxbox boards by soeone that decided to write spong.com a letter expressing concerns abtou a trend they noticed. Imo, more reason to not believe a stinking rumor from that website.

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: XXXXXXX [mailto:XXXXXXXXX]
>> Sent: 08 April 2003 03:29
>> To: feedback@SPOnG.com
>> Subject: SPOnG Feedback: Technical nitpicking
>>
>>
>> I'm amazed at how ridiculously biased you are in favour of
>> both PS2 and GC, especially GC! You seem to have developed a
>> seemingly unsatiable desire to publish as much negativity
>> about Microsoft's console as is humanly possible.
>>
>> I don't think I've EVER read a single article about
>> Microsoft's XBOX without at least receiving some form of
>> negative spin or distasteful remark to finalize the opinion.
>> I'm sure XBOX has at least SOME desirable elements about it.
>> However, you cannot seem to find one to speak of, which is a
>> shame - I did like your format several months ago. I can't
>> seem to reason why I would want to come back anymore, it
>> seems you're just a heavily disguised MS-hating regime.
>>
>> Your website could really do with a heavy dose of objectivity.
>>

Here's the reply:

> Thanks for your mail.
>
> SPOnG has no particular bias when it comes purely to gaming hardware.
> Members of the SPOnG team own Xbox, PS2, PSX, GameCube, DreamCast,
> MegaDrive, SNES, Amiga, ColecoVision, Intellivision, Atari 2600 etc etc. And
> we love all computer game platforms equally.
>
> But we choose to report the news as we see it. However good the Xbox is as a
> gaming platform, Microsoft's attempts to dominate the home console market
> have NOTHING to do with games. Microsoft just want a way of getting a "PC"
> into everyone's living room so that they can control, and profit from ALL
> forms of electronic media distribution. There will be a time, soon, when all
> games, music and movies are distributed via broadband on a pay per
> play/listen/view basis. The company that controls the ubiquitous hardware
> will control all media distribution. That company will have almost total
> cultural (and political) control. This CANNOT be allowed to happen, yet
> Microsoft are intent on being that company.
>
> Music and Movies are powerful cultural and political motivators, and
> powerful advertising media. Once a single company controls the means of
> distribution, only "big" movies and "big" music will get made. Only movies
> and music which do not attack global capitalism, or the prevailing political
> opinions of the Microsoft board, will get made. We'll live in a world
> literally full of Britney, Westlife and Backstreet Boys, Titanic, and Pearl
> Harbour. There will be no room for Mad Capsule Markets, Jon Spencer Blues
> Explosion or Cuidad De Real. It will be a culturally devoid world, marketing
> to the lowest common denominator.
>
> I realise that, as an Xbox lover, you probably fall into this category, and
> are happy to be spoon-fed crap for the rest of your life. But some of us
> seek creativity and cultural diversity. Some of us need to be moved,
> educated and motivated by art, not just entertained...
>
> There's more at stake here than just what gaming platform you happen to own
> and prefer.
>
> As for objectivity... you are joking aren't you? Are you proposing that
> official Xbox magazine is objective? or Official PlayStation magazine is
> objective? Or CNN, or the London Times newspaper. Each and every one of
> those organisations reflects to personal opinions of the person or company
> which is 'behind' them.
>
> Recently in the US, the financial reporters of Al Jazeera were banned from
> the floor of the NY Stock Exchange, and the NASDAQ. Freedom of speech, don't
> make me laugh! Government and Big Business is (I use the singular because
> they operate as one synergistic, disgusting, cabal) prepared to go to ANY
> lengths to stifle dissent. While this kind of blatant censorship exists...
> how can you trust anything you read in the press?
>
> You accuse us of being non-objective... and it's true, no publication is
> objective, but we're not controlled by advertising dollars. Future
> Publishing, Dennis Publishing, IGN, NewsCorp, Rogers... they all are!
>
> Plus, we really don't think Xbox is all that.
>
> Brgds
> Marcus Dyson
> CEO
> SPOnG.com

...and the original writters reply

Well that entire reply pretty much reaffirms what I thought in the first place.

I too, have PS2, GC, XBOX, a PC, a Macintosh, Saturn, Dreamcast and a Gameboy Advance currently in my possession and have owned practically every console and portable that has ever been released. It’s a hobby/sickness of mine, I’ve always loved technology and electronic gaming. I've been playing games since way back when the ZX81 hit the market from Psion in the U.K., etc. (I won't bore you with the minuscia.) And I'm absolutely unbiased in favour of either or any console or platform - I love my PS2, XBOX and GC - there are great games available for all of these platforms and if you were to ask me what my favourite is right now I'd tell you it was Microsoft's Xbox - next week it will probably be PS2, and when the next GC mega-game arrives, it will be Nintendo's console.

I’ll say again though – your news reporting of events relating only to Microsoft’s console cannot be simply reported. Every minor article has to be intricately rendered as a soap-box for your personal vendetta against one console’s manufacturer. No other console’s articles have this flavour or bent. It’s quite obvious and irritating.

Now getting back to your reply: to say that you're not biased against any particular console in your opening statement and then in the next paragraph detail an apocalyptic alternate future ruled by Microsoft's 'iron hand' totally erodes the original message you were trying to dictate. Although I agree that MS are certainly trying to conquer the electronic media world, so too are many, many other companies; Apple Computer may have purchased Vivendi's Universal Music chain for $1.9 Billion as we speak, CanWest Interactive purchased 165 newspapers, weeklies and several branded broadcasting TV news stations in North America and Australia (for $3.5 billion) in November last year in an attempt to control the reception and availability of news media to large portions of the northern and southern hemispheres, Sony are hard at work signing hardware manufacturers and software developers to absolute exclusivity contracts, etc, etc, etc. EVERYONE’s at it! It’s how business works.
To extole Microsoft as the pinnacle of corporate draconianism is stretching it waaaaaaaaay too far. I actually laughed out loud when I read that paragraph - I can just see you hiding under your desk with a copy of George Orwell's '1984' in one hand and the second edition AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide in the other.
This future-world you created relies totally on the fact that there are no government policies and economic mandates in place dictating the lengths by which one single entity can control such a large segment of any market without allowing for an aspect of competition. Monopolies in this new world are very hard to come by, especially monopolies concerning majority interests such as electronic media. Don't be so naive to believe that Microsoft will one day control all media and the method by which it is delivered. Perhaps your vision also has Microsoft absorbing ALL existing media companies - I mean, they ARE the richest company in the world, right?! Well, let's see them try to absorb Matsu****a or Vivendi or...Sony... Somehow I don't see your vision playing out in quite the same way that you do.

You're even painting all consumers with the same dumb-ass-brush! Not every consumer is a mindless proletariat! As consumers, we all have freedom to choose, just as we have the freedom to choose which brand of underpants we wear today we also have the rights to decide between which console or consoles we buy into and how we receive our entertainment. And to be quite honest, if Microsoft's future entertainment solution offers me exactly what I wish for as a consumer - I'll damn well buy it and dance a merry jig! Why wouldn't I? And if for some insane twist of fate there happens to be a competitor offering something better or dare I say it, different – maybe even artistically inclined? I'll buy that as well! Hell, maybe I'll buy a whole bunch of different products or services! I really don’t care how the media is delivered to me – Microsoft or Motorola or Nokia or Sony or Apple, etc. can make the product, as long as I have exactly what I want, when I want it. There’s always going to be room for creative expressionism – it’s a genetic predisposition of the human race to want to be different and heard and noticed in the greater scheme of things. Please don’t misconstrue evolutionary advances in technology as the welcome mat to all the evils of the world. Fear of the unknown is another genetic predisposition.

> I realise that, as an Xbox lover, you probably fall into this category, and
> are happy to be spoon-fed crap for the rest of your life. But some of us
> seek creativity and cultural diversity. Some of us need to be moved,
> educated and motivated by art, not just entertained...

Give me a break! You were actually designing a fairly interesting, if not flawed, argument until you decided to attack me personally. So I'm an 'Xbox-lover' and I'm 'happy to be spoon-fed crap for the rest of my life'? And you know this because...??? That statement was obviously demonstrating your amazing journalistic skills and psychic abilities. So, from my brief statement you managed to deduce that I own one product and therefore fervently support one manufacturer...interesting. I would dearly love to see what artistic viewpoint motivates someone with such an extremely narrow mind. Your website is testament to your ethics and motif.

Thanks for taking the time to reply to me and explaining in no uncertain terms that infact you truly ARE a horribly biased news site. I’ll let everybody know from now on...

Regards,

XXXXXXXXX

Well I've heard the same reason used by spongs CEO from other people. The exact same reasons, yet there some things those people are clearly missing. All of these companies are out to control the living room, or even worse more than that. look at some people entertainment centres and you can see:

Sony stereo
Sony TV
Sony DVD player
Sony VCR
Sony speakers
Sony recievers
Sony pictures movies (DVD and VHS)
Sony Musics audio CD's
etc, etc, etc... and that's JUST the living room

This fellow from spong is all worried about microsoft controlling the living room? Ummm, looks like MS has a long way to go if they want to catch up sony right?

Anyway the point I'm getting at is this:

Who cares who controls the living room provided we all get the experience and choice to buy what we want in the end? Unlike the spong CEO (who is obviously a moron) implies, he thinks people are getting brainwashed into buying MS products like Xbox even though that's not what's happening. People are buying xbox because there's games they want and or like on the platform. That's the only reason. MS wouldn't and won't succeed in the console game market, if they don't give the console buyers exactly what they want/need. I was one of MANY people that heard rumors of MS wanting to make a console and laughed my a$$ off at the mere though of it. Yet, after seeing what they tried to do and games coming out for it, I thought I'd give it a shot. Ever since that point, I've enjoyed my Xbox and think MS has delivered a decent product. I'm not brian washed, or paid by MS as many people on this forum have accused me in the past.

Anyway, I'm certain most people don't think of spong.com as a reliable website. I'm just rather dissapointed at so called "online new reporters" when I see stuff like this. You can throw the morons at the register into that bunch. It's fine not to like somehting when it's based on't on facts, but when you base you opinion on some crazy prediction of the future, you're just judging a book by it's cover that's not a good way to look at anything.

I thought this might make a good discussion topic, so feel free to post your thoughts and arguments.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

Spong.com is a joke and a half, they report nothing but farfetched insane rumors to provide hype..

but from the letter, its not like he isnt right for the most part.

 

[randycat99]

I don't think Sony stereo, Sony TV, Sony DVD player, Sony VCR, Sony speakers, Sony recievers is indicative of anthing, either. It is just one brand out of many other electronics brands. I don't know anyone who has all Sony brand electronics in their system. If you are smart you get the individual components that best fit your needs, and there are certainly plenty of other brandnames to pick from. Sony is far from dominating that market as the only thing you can get. Even if someone does have an all Sony layout, it's their money. If that's what they want, then how can you blame Sony for having an extensive product line to service that need?


Same for Sony pictures movies (DVD and VHS) and Sony Musics audio CD's- there's plenty of other brands to choose from, as well.

 

[Qroach]

If you are smart you get the individual components that best fit your needs, and there are certainly plenty of other brandnames to pick from.

That's exactly the point I'm making. People get what's best to fit thier needs, the aren't mindless like he implies. Just like the way you can go out there and do that with all of the components I listed above. So where does this guy come off thinking MS is going to try and rule the living room? or that MS is going to dominate the video game market? Nothing but foolish talk.

...after all it's just one brand out of many.

 

[Tahir2]

I would just like to add that MS forced me to buy an XBOX and when I refused they pointed a gun at my head and made me play XP Solitaire for 12hrs straight.

 

[zurich]

Wow, if EGM did that they'd loose all their subscriptions in a heartbeat.

 

[randycat99]

If you are smart you get the individual components that best fit your needs, and there are certainly plenty of other brandnames to pick from.

That's exactly the point I'm making. People get what's best to fit thier needs, the aren't mindless like he implies. Just like the way you can go out there and do that with all of the components I listed above. So where does this guy come off thinking MS is going to try and rule the living room? or that MS is going to dominate the video game market? Nothing but foolish talk.

...after all it's just one brand out of many.

Yes, people typically do buy whatever they choose when given the choice. This is still apart from what a company (disposed toward monopolies) would like to happen. I don't see Sony as a threat in this respect, but that could just be my personal bias. MS, OTOH, I wouldn't trust them any further then I could throw'em with that sort of market presence. In that respect, the CEO reply does hold a thread of credence, IMO (though don't take that as me staunchly standing behind everything that was written in that response).

 

[Qroach]

Yes, people typically do buy whatever they choose when given the choice

You always have the choice. if you don't like MS and windows then use linux. After all, it is free.

I don't see Sony as a threat in this respect, but that could just be my personal bias.

Well I think it's obvious that you are biased towards them if you don't think they are in a simialar position as MS. Infact, how could one person think MS is going to dominate the homevideo game industry when Sony is clearly in a better postion to do so?

MS, OTOH, I wouldn't trust them any further then I could throw'em with that sort of market presence.

That's the thing, you DON'T have to trust these companies. All you have to do is buy the best product that suits your needs. People get all wrapped up in what these companies do instead of the products they deliver. All corporations like this would love a monopoly. Sony isn't any different then the rest of them. They all do things that aren't moral.

In that respect, the CEO reply does hold a thread of credence, IMO (though don't take that as me staunchly standing behind everything that was written in that response).

IMO the CEO of spong is completely out of his area of expertise (whatever that may be) i think he's delusional if he's thinking MS is going to kill off everyone in this market while not providing a product worthy of purchase. If anyone comes out dominant in this market, it will be because they are providing the best product. That's the way it works.

 

[zurich]

I bet this CEO is a linux freak slash dot goon too

 

[randycat99]

Well I think it's obvious that you are biased towards them if you don't think they are in a simialar position as MS. Infact, how could one person think MS is going to dominate the homevideo game industry when Sony is clearly in a better postion to do so?

Yes, it is a similar position, but what the company does with that position is the important distinction. It is already self-evident what MS would do given the chance. Sony, OTOH, I can buy their TV, stereo, speakers, etc, and it still works with any other brand of equipment you already have or plan to have. There is no sign there that they are trying to push others out of the market with proprietary, functionally exclusive measures. You could argue media formats, but as you can see, they haven't been particularly successful at monopolizing even when they try.

That's the thing, you DON'T have to trust these companies. All you have to do is buy the best product that suits your needs. People get all wrapped up in what these companies do instead of the products they deliver. All corporations like this would love a monopoly. Sony isn't any different then the rest of them. They all do things that aren't moral.

So why get all upset that I do not trust MS and decide it does not fit my needs? Seems like some people get all too upset when you don't trust MS or follow them like sheep. They can do no wrong, evidently.

IMO the CEO of spong is completely out of his area of expertise (whatever that may be) i think he's delusional if he's thinking MS is going to kill off everyone in this market while not providing a product worthy of purchase. If anyone comes out dominant in this market, it will be because they are providing the best product. That's the way it works.

...and you were speaking of me being biased? Yes, of course, people "buy" MS products simply because they are the best, of course they do...

 

[JF_Aidan_Pryde]

I am waiting for Vince to come in and totally rape him.

 

[Qroach]

Yes, it is a similar position, but what the company does with that position is the important distinction. It is already self-evident what MS would do given the chance. Sony, OTOH, I can buy their TV, stereo, speakers, etc, and it still works with any other brand of equipment you already have or plan to have. There is no sign there that they are trying to push others out of the market with proprietary, functionally exclusive measures. You could argue media formats, but as you can see, they haven't been particularly successful at monopolizing even when they try.

What a company does with that postision doesn't matter in the end to the consumers. they can whine and complain about it, but they never had to support the company in the begining. Don't try and tell me that the sony corporation are a bunch of good boys while MS is just plain bad. I get so sick of seeing arguments like this. Just ask any music artist that signed big contracts with sony music and I'm sure they'd paint a picture of some "bad" things they do. Just because everything they do as a company isn't scrutinized on the internet.

I've seen first hand things MS has done to get rid of smaller competing companies. Yup I didn't like to see it, but now I could care less since my current OS does what I need it to.

There is no sign there that they are trying to push others out of the market with proprietary, functionally exclusive measures. You could argue media formats, but as you can see, they haven't been particularly successful at monopolizing even when they try.

Um, what do you think the PS2 is? Is it not proprietary and functionally exclusive? It's a closed game platform designed to beat out the competition. It's currently killing the competiton to be honest! Perhaps sony hasn't been sucessfull being a monopoly in other markets due to the sheer amount of competion. When they entered the video game market it only had two competing players at the time (sega/Nintendo) both of which have been beaten by sony. If

So why get all upset that I do not trust MS and decide it does not fit my needs? Seems like some people get all too upset when you don't trust MS or follow them like sheep. They can do no wrong, evidently.

Why do you think I'm getting upset? I'm not even close to being upset about anything in this thread. Oh please, stop withthe "they can do no wrong" nonesense. I'm not the person here defending anythign MS has done in the past. I'm simply saying that all of these companies would do it if they had the chance. They want to make money and will do whatever they need to do in order to reach that goal.

Nintendo also had problems with being a monoply during the NES days. yet they didn't hold onto that since they were beat out by BETTER products in the future. I'm sure there some market sony was in where they were accused of something similar.

...and you were speaking of me being biased? Yes, of course, people "buy" MS products simply because they are the best, of course they do...

Try reading that statement correctly next time? I didn't say anything biased in the statement you're quoting. You can throw the name MS into that statement if you like but it's really a waste of time. What I said currently stands. the dominat player tends to be the company with the best product. In the console biz it's currently Sony. If that changes, then so be it. There's certainly no point in crying about it.

Are you using windows right now? are you using any MS programs on your computer like MS word or anything like that? If you have something better then go purchase it. EVERy consumer has the choice to not buy something that doesn't do what they want. The software I'm using currently works and serves my needs. That might not make it the best for your purposes, but for what I need to do, it's the best software I could get. Hey go use linux then if you want, the choice is yours.

 

[Magnum PI]

where i'm working we studied the possibility to migrate some of our desktop to openoffice. (they're using microsoft office)

but a lot of the users need to use domain-specific applications which have dependencies with microsoft office...

the same for the OS: these applications only run on windows..

so it's not exactly like we have a choice :/

 

[randycat99]

What a company does with that postision doesn't matter in the end to the consumers.

??? Of course it matters, especially if it leads to a monopoly. The consumer loses out on choice or has to make considerable sacrifices to implement the weakened alternatives as a result of the monopoly.

Don't try and tell me that the sony corporation are a bunch of good boys while MS is just plain bad.

Of course I'm not telling you that Sony are a bunch of good boys, but your assuming that I would is very telling of you. Do you assume I must have all Sony gear in my house since I bothered to give a bit of Devil's Advocate to your topic? I only have 1 product, actually, and it's a PS2. Big deal. It's just a piece of electronics, not a personal statement.

I get so sick of seeing arguments like this.

Just what argument are you assuming I'm making? Because I didn't pat you on the back for your MS defense, I must be "that guy" who thinks Sony is teh roxor?

Just ask any music artist that signed big contracts with sony music and I'm sure they'd paint a picture of some "bad" things they do.

Ah, the music business- a fine, upstanding industry until Sony got in... Great example!

Just because everything they do as a company isn't scrutinized on the internet.

...the poor, downtrodden MS! The agony they must endure...

I've seen first hand things MS has done to get rid of smaller competing companies. Yup I didn't like to see it, but now I could care less since my current OS does what I need it to.

I sure wanna be just like you now!

Um, what do you think the PS2 is? Is it not proprietary and functionally exclusive? It's a closed game platform designed to beat out the competition. It's currently killing the competiton to be honest! Perhaps sony hasn't been sucessfull being a monopoly in other markets due to the sheer amount of competion. When they entered the video game market it only had two competing players at the time (sega/Nintendo) both of which have been beaten by sony.

Are you actually lamenting that console makers should enable games from competitor consoles play on their console? The console industry model is a bit different than making A/V gear to be in your living room. You know that, I know that, everybody should know that, so making such a quirky argument really surprises me. What exactly do you expect of them with regard to the PS2 and what you deem as fair?

Why do you think I'm getting upset?

You sound a bit confrontational, as if you are just waiting for someone to be pro-Sony/anti-MS to wander in here so you can unload your MS isn't so bad material. Clearly, it appears there was only one acceptable response for the topic you started here.

Nintendo also had problems with being a monoply during the NES days. yet they didn't hold onto that since they were beat out by BETTER products in the future.

...or maybe they just weren't as aggressive and ruthless about maintaining that monopoly as MS- just a thought, not saying that is what I believe to be true.

Try reading that statement correctly next time? I didn't say anything biased in the statement you're quoting.

Yes, of course you didn't. Only those who hold a different viewpoint than yours can have bias.

Are you using windows right now? are you using any MS programs on your computer like MS word or anything like that?

No, but can't say this is the first time I've heard this line of reasoning (You don't like MS, then why are you using their stuff? You=hypocrite). Why does one need to be not using Windows or xyz MS app to voice that they don't like it? Maybe it is exactly because they use it (and know of no other alternatives) that they feel the way they do. This is just a cheap argumentative device to dismiss those who use Windows/MS apps, but have realized how much grief it causes them. So all you have left after you dismiss that group is everybody who thinks Windows is great. Well, hah-hah! We then have unanimous agreement by all those who matter that Windows is great! The fact is they do use it, they know it pisses them off in one way or another, and if you ask them, they tell you. Simple. If you don't like to hear it, don't ask, I suppose.

Question is, is it that inconceivable that somebody may have bad feelings toward MS? Evidently, it is for some (reference this topic). Evidently, anybody who vocalizes this remorse over MS must be a raving lunatic and thus is then subject to vitriol until they believe otherwise.

Hey go use linux then if you want, the choice is yours.

[imagines the elevated state that linux could be in had it been allowed as a secondary or optional OS install on every single x86 machine sold since 1988...] ...as if Linux is the only other choice in this day, but that is another discussion altogether...

 

[Vince]

I am waiting for Vince to come in and totally rape him.

Why, when your so much more tempting.....

Now, I'm off to wash my mouth out for mumbling that and look at some <heterosexual> porn

PS. Seriously though, they both make valid points. While Sony, especially as of recently, is heading in a more open direction (joint dev of a LinuxOS with Panasonic, et al) - I don't believe for a moment that they'd refrain for a second if they could get a MS-like grasp on the industry. I just think they've leaned that they can't do it alone and have made a few friends, not that this changes their blood-sucking corperate nature. Lets face it, the purpose of a corperation is to survive and create profits - not feed the starving and build homes for the homeless.

 

[Phil]

Although randycat99 did take care of most things already - I'd still like to add a few things from my viewpoint.

Qroach:

You always have the choice. if you don't like MS and windows then use linux. After all, it is free.

That's pretty easy to say actually. In reality though, it *unfortunately* doesn't hold much ground. I am well aware that Linux is free etc, however, as a software engineer and webdesigner/developer my basic computer needs aren't exactly easily satisfied. I use various products and quite frankly, they have grown on me and do not really want to change. The problem? They only run on, you guessed it, Microsofts one and only Windows OS. Given the free choice to change to any other operating system I want, Microsoft takes me the one decision away simply because the products that I do use are not offered on the alternative OS. Hell, I'd love to just get rid of Windows, but the "free choice" as you put it just isn't there.

This is something that is very unlikely to change. As long as Microsoft has that monopoly, you won't be able to get that "free choice" because sofware companies will continue to support it. There's no need to support the alternative OS, as 90% of all computer users run Windows at home. And as long as those software companies will continue to support the one and only dominating OS software outthere, people like me will have next to no reason to change, no matter how much they dislike MS's OS. It's a never-ending cycle. A monopoly.

What a company does with that postision doesn't matter in the end to the consumers. they can whine and complain about it, but they never had to support the company in the begining. Don't try and tell me that the sony corporation are a bunch of good boys while MS is just plain bad. I get so sick of seeing arguments like this. Just ask any music artist that signed big contracts with sony music and I'm sure they'd paint a picture of some "bad" things they do. Just because everything they do as a company isn't scrutinized on the internet.

That's funny, because I remember a few things in Microsofts history that contradict what you're saying. Sure Microsoft had many things going for it and it certainly is *the* OS for most users out there - it did take a bit of helping though by the Microsoft people to ensure their monopoly. One that comes to mind, is their cunning move to implement Internet Explorer into their OS. Sure it was a good move for Windows users, but the people at Netscape sure didn't find that amusing. Especially after Netscape refused to run properly under windwos... how strange...

There are other examples. A recent one is where people with Windows XP + newer Radeon/Nvidia cards (as I remember) magically weren't able to run Half-Life with OpenGL anymore. Strange enough, they found out that those drivers were clearly missing, while DirectX naturally were ready to work from the get-go.

That move was pretty harmless, I agree, but it just goes to show what a company is capable of given their position. With every step that they get more powerful, the less freedom you will enjoy as a consumer. And the scare thing is, most people are totally unaware of this. Most Microsoft lovers as I see them, are so ignorant in that regards, it's quite sad really. They praise Microsoft as the rich company that they are and disregard everything else without even have used them. Those blind supporters are those people that I deeply dislike, yet at the same time feel sorry about.

I've seen first hand things MS has done to get rid of smaller competing companies. Yup I didn't like to see it, but now I could care less since my current OS does what I need it to.

It's pretty obvious. Yes you could care less since obviously you are happy with the OS you're using. There are many though that aren't, yet they have to use Microsofts OS. Obviously it suites YOU fine. The same thing can be said btw about the monopoly. I guess as we continue to have so many that blindly follow anything Microsoft does and brings out without giving anything else a glance, we'll be stuck with what they shove down our throats. With saying that, I am not accusing you of being one of those supporters, but with no doubt, the products Microsoft would be dishing out would be half as expesive and double as good would it be a more competitive market.

the dominat player tends to be the company with the best product. In the console biz it's currently Sony. If that changes, then so be it. There's certainly no point in crying about it.

It tends, it doesn't need to be. Read up on a bit of Microsofts history and you'll see that not everything was done fair. Of course, you can disregard that by saying that you don't care unless you are happy as one of their consumers - it however doesn't reflect the opinion of all users out there.

BTW; Microsofts monopoly today isn't because consumers are happy with their choice - it's because the "free choice" isn't there as long as said software houses support the one dominant player. Why do you think there are so many MS haters? Those haters are usually those that do use Windows - and hate it. Microsoft has a monopoly thanks to cunning and smart company decisions made in the past.

Who cares who controls the living room provided we all get the experience and choice to buy what we want in the end? Unlike the spong CEO (who is obviously a moron) implies, he thinks people are getting brainwashed into buying MS products like Xbox even though that's not what's happening. People are buying xbox because there's games they want and or like on the platform. That's the only reason. MS wouldn't and won't succeed in the console game market, if they don't give the console buyers exactly what they want/need. I was one of MANY people that heard rumors of MS wanting to make a console and laughed my a$$ off at the mere though of it. Yet, after seeing what they tried to do and games coming out for it, I thought I'd give it a shot. Ever since that point, I've enjoyed my Xbox and think MS has delivered a decent product. I'm not brian washed, or paid by MS as many people on this forum have accused me in the past.

Provided we do get the experience we were hoping for, that is. What if it doesn't? I can clearly say that I am not happy with the experience Microsoft is giving me with their OS. Microsoft has proven to me with their market dominance that I would not want to see them do the same with this industry.

On a different note, as long as consoles remain to have a 5 year cycle and are not upgraded, it will be hard for *any* company to gain market dominance. I don't see Sony changing that trend just yet - Microsoft however seems to be slightly different in that regard IMO.

Last but not least, I agree completely with Vince that any company will do what is necessary to bring in their profits and milk us customers. I strongly believe however that what sets companies apart is not their goal of making money, but a company's vision and ambigious goals of delievering a well accepted product.

 

[Qroach]

Hi Vince,

I compeltely agree with you. All of these companies would do the same if they had the chance. Some people here, like Randy don't seem to understand that.

Randy,

??? Of course it matters, especially if it leads to a monopoly. The consumer loses out on choice or has to make considerable sacrifices to implement the weakened alternatives as a result of the monopoly.

Oh of course now, I guess we all had to make sacrifices in the portable console market since the GBA wasn't the best product in that area? Nintendo has a monopoly in the portable console market and they deserve it. All new comers end up getting squashed. In the end does this really matter to consumers as long as the GBA is the best portable with the most support? Doesn't matter to me if there's no other choice out there considering it's the best portable around for a good price. That's the point I'm making.

Of course I'm not telling you that Sony are a bunch of good boys, but your assuming that I would is very telling of you. Do you assume I must have all Sony gear in my house since I bothered to give a bit of Devil's Advocate to your topic? I only have 1 product, actually, and it's a PS2. Big deal. It's just a piece of electronics, not a personal statement.

Judging from your response here, I don't think you really understand the argument at hand. I can see your post is starting to get off topic, so i'll sum things up again:

The Spong CEO Is painting a bleak picture of the console market due to microsoft and the xbox. He predicts that microsoft will own the living room if they are sucessfull while giving specfic anti competitive practices MS used int he past.

Yet, the point I was making in my post listing all the sony components (one COULD have in the living room), shows that Sony is in an even better postion to "control the living room" if the spong CEO even wants to predict the future (which is plain foolish and paranoid). Sony wants to put ther custom chips in every appliance so one device can communicate with all the other devices (for reasons I'm not fully aware of yet). So the CEO is complaining about MS and worries about them being a monopoly yet, he doesn't see how Sony is in a BETTER postion to do that, and have yet to become a monopoly area. As I said before and vince agree, if sony was in that postion I'm sure they would become a monopoly if they had the chance.

Now you come in, saying you don't see Sony as a threat to become a monpoly, but you DO see microsoft as a threat. Despite the fact Sony hasn't done it yet, and is in a better potstion to become a monpoly than MS. You also don't acknowledge, (just like the portable console market) if someone was to become a monpoly in the home console biz, it's be because they had the best console with the most games people want to play. That's how nintendo became a monopoly with the NES & GBA. These companies wouldn't become a monpoly if they didn't give cosumers what they want.

The CEO seems to think people would blindly buy a MS made xbox product because they are zombies. I've been saying that if MS (or anyone else) does end up controlling the living room, it's because they were able to give a product consumers WANTED. If the consumers didn't want it, they could never reach that postion.

In your very first post you said the following that illustrates the point I've been making.

Even if someone does have an all Sony layout, it's their money. If that's what they want, then how can you blame Sony for having an extensive product line to service that need?

If one company ends up being the dominant force (as the CEO pridcts MS) Just replace MS with the word Sony in that above statment. If Ms or sony, or nintendo ends up owning the living room as the CEO predicts, then that's the users choice, so how can you blame MS, Sony, Nintendo, for having an extensive product line to service those needs.

 

[Qroach]

Phil,

It's pretty obvious. Yes you could care less since obviously you are happy with the OS you're using. There are many though that aren't, yet they have to use Microsofts OS. Obviously it suites YOU fine. The same thing can be said btw about the monopoly. I guess as we continue to have so many that blindly follow anything Microsoft does and brings out without giving anything else a glance, we'll be stuck with what they shove down our throats. With saying that, I am not accusing you of being one of those supporters, but with no doubt, the products Microsoft would be dishing out would be half as expesive and double as good would it be a more competitive market.

You guys are completley missing the point and taking this topic "off topic". This thread isn't made to discuss the anti competitive practices MS used to be the dominant player in the PC market. I already KNOW everything they did as a company to gain the postion they are in. Do I agree with it? No, of course not, Did I want to see MS broken up after the government got invovled? Yes I did, MS should have paid for the things they did to Sun, Netscape and a large number of other companies. I dont' think you have any idea how much I hate MS and thier OS's ( I do think they suck, but I haven't seen anything better all this time, so I'm not going to compalin about it). however, I don't let my distaste for certain practices and software MS has released, taint the way I objectively look at everything. Like I said earlier i thought Xbox was going to be a joke. Now I'm very happy with the product since it's providing good enjoyment for the money I'm spending.

However, even back then I was using MS dos, MS windows, and a few other MS products becuase they had the best developer support. Back 10 years ago Linux wasn't an option for me, infact I hadn't even heard of it at the time. The only choice we had was dos/windows, OS2, and a plethra of dos clones. the majority of people ran the MS Os's since they did what people needed. you seem to look at that and think it's just people blindly following everything MS does, when that's nto the case. if nobody bought MS products to begin with, they wouldn't be in the postion they are today. I once used netscape, that is until the program started lagging behind in features. Once that happened, I stopped using it.

Nintendo became a monpoly back in the NES days. Many people don't know the anti competitive practices they used at the retail and distribution level to make sure sega couldn't get product into as many stores. ontop of other things nitnendo did. The point is, that ALL of these companies would do the same thing if they had the chance.

Now I'm not going to continue talking about MS and the PC market after this post since it was VERY different from the home consle market today. The PC market was a total mess back before win95. There wasn't a clear direction for hardware support and software support, it was an unstructured open mess. That's my opinion since i like to use games and other software and had nothing but problems and difficulty. Things are much easier now.

The consle biz is very different, in that the people who make consles are in complete control of hardware/software support. MS came into this market with well established players instead of a relatively open market with hardware/software incompatabilities. In oher words, this market has such strong competitors i don't think any of the anti competitive practices once used could be used again in the future. Not only that, the government is constantly watching them and will shut them down if they attempt to grow out of conrtol again.

 

[Phil]

Qroach,

You guys are completley missing the point and taking this topic "off topic". This thread isn't made to discuss the anti competitive practices MS used to be the dominant player in the PC market. I already KNOW everything they did as a company to gain the postion they are in.

I don't believe to have taken this off-topic (neither did Randycat99). The reason for me pointing out the anti competitive practices of Microsoft is exactly what the CEO of SPOnG and many others are refering to, when confronted with such a topic. It's Microsoft's history that gets people like "us" worried about what Microsoft may be capable of, once they get the chance to. Another reason for replying was a few things you said that I didn't quite agree with, which I addressed in my reply.

I do agree however that the PC industry was a mess before Win95 debuted and is partly the reason why Microsoft had it that easy to become the worlds most dominant company.

I also agree with you that the console business is very different, in the end, not only because of its established players, but because hardware is replaced in more or less 5 year cycles. This should ensure a beginning at the start of every cycle, meaning that all companies have a chance to convince us buyers into supporting their product. Mindshare is one thing, but Sony proved that it can be overcome with their PSX. Out of this reason, I welcome Micrsoft as a competitor as they will ensure even higher quality among the other two which, in the end, is better for all of us.

I guess what it comes down to, is bias, which we all have in some form or the other.

 

[Qroach]

ok, I fully understand yours and randy's point and I thnik you worked things out nicely regarding the current situation.