The Lost Xbox 1.5 Plan

[Megadrive1988]

Xbox 1.5 / Freon / Homestation would have launched in 2002 or 2003.


Xenon / Xbox2 / Xbox 360 was originally targeted, some say (not MS) for release in 2004. Microsoft claims they have always targeted Xenon / Xbox 360 for a 2005 release.


I don't expect 3rd-gen Xbox until 2010, but there is a chance we will see it in 2009 if MS decides to keep a 4 year life-cycle. but I think Xenon ~ Xbox 360 has alot of room for growth (i mean the software) with that triple-core CPU, and could possibly last 5 years before we see a successor launched.

 

[Solzhenitsyn]

MS may have wanted to make a Xbox "1.5" but I imagine those plans were kiboshed by the original contract they made with Nvidia. This poorly negotiated contract was a huge profit killer and is in my own humble opinion the primary reason the Xbox1 had such a short lifespan and was replaced so quickly. Although in the end my understanding is the need for backwards compatibility (and there was much rumbling on forums such as these when it was hinted that PS3 would have it but not Xbox2) required them to pay some royalties to Nvidia in order to emulate the old hardware. damned if you do, damned if you dont.

 

[pipo]

I don't expect 3rd-gen Xbox until 2011, but there is a chance we will see it in 2010 if MS decides to keep a 4 year life-cycle. but I think Xenon ~ Xbox 360 has alot of room for growth (i mean the software) with that triple-core CPU, and could possibly last 5 years before we see a successor launched.

2010 would be a 5 year life-cycle... And is most likely IMHO.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm sure B3D posters could derive many reasons for not making a follow-up on the Xbox design, a few notable ones being that x86 chip makers won't deviate from PC architecture much or license out IP (with desired modifications).

Which would be why the idea was dropped, and not reason to think it was never considered. Goto isn't what I'd call a 'tabloid' site, and Megadrive has evidence elsewhere of something similar, which adds credence to the idea.

 

[Megadrive1988]

2010 would be a 5 year life-cycle... And is most likely IMHO.

yeah, that's what I meant actually. corrected.

 

[Megadrive1988]

this article differentiates Microsoft Homestation from Microsoft Freon

http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=25752&DisplayTab=Article

[July 1, 2002]
Microsoft Preps Freon Upgrade to Xbox

Paul Thurrott


Microsoft's long-rumored HomeStation--a combination Xbox and UltimateTV device--never made it past the planning stages, but a follow-up to the company's Xbox game console is indeed in the works. Dubbed Freon because it's the "coolest" project at Microsoft, the Xbox successor adds important consumer-oriented capabilities such as pausing live TV and hard-disk-based digital video recording. This description sounds suspiciously like the HomeStation. What differentiates Freon from other efforts (including HomeStation), apparently, is the fact that it has the backing of Microsoft Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates, who is reportedly a "big fan."

A combination Xbox/DVR is almost a no-brainer. The first-generation Xbox was the first video-game system to ship with a hard disk as standard equipment, meaning that most Xbox owners already have gigabytes of unused hard-disk space. And, like the UltimateTV project, the Xbox has sold far below Microsoft's predictions. Perhaps combining the two devices would jumpstart sales. It would almost certainly lower prices: Purchasing an Xbox and UltimateTV device today would cost consumers $500 to $600; presumably a combination device would cost much less.

But Freon, which will probably ship in late 2003 or 2004, isn't just about saving money or consolidating Microsoft's product line. The company expected to make a big splash in the video-game market, and although it's definitely a player, Microsoft is also in third place behind Sony and Nintendo. Freon will help to technologically differentiate Microsoft from the competition and, perhaps more important, reduce the traditional 5-year lifecycle of most video-game systems to a time period more in line with Microsoft's successful PC software lifecycles, which average about 2 years.

this article also kinda implies that Freon (unlike Homestation) is a more powerful console. but I don't think that Freon and Xenon are the same thing.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Freon == Xbox PSX. Perhaps they saw how lousy PSX did and bailed?!

 

[Megadrive1988]

things from Microsoft that the consumer will never get to play with

*WebTV division's proposal for a game console using either a GigaPixel GPU, an CagEnt (3DO Systems) MX-derived GPU or some other GPU

*Xbox division's X-box with AMD Althon CPU + Nvidia GF1 or GF2 GPU
Xbox with Intel CPU + GigaPixel GPU

*Homestation (Xbox + UltimateTV)

*Freon (Xbox or Xbox++ with lots of other features)

*Xbox Next PC `Xbox 2 PC ` Xbox 360 PC (unlikely anyway)


I think it's overall better that Microsoft just goes from Xbox to Xbox 360 to Xbox 2010 (or whatever) with 4-5 year cycles rather than come out with a new model every 2-3 years.

 

[mckmas8808]

I think it's overall better that Microsoft just goes from Xbox to Xbox 360 to Xbox 2010 (or whatever) with 4-5 year cycles rather than come out with a new model every 2-3 years.

I agree.

 

[DudeWheresMyXbox]

Xbox 1.5 / Freon / Homestation would have launched in 2002 or 2003.

Xenon / Xbox2 / Xbox 360 was originally targeted, some say (not MS) for release in 2004. Microsoft claims they have always targeted Xenon / Xbox 360 for a 2005 release.

I don't expect 3rd-gen Xbox until 2010, but there is a chance we will see it in 2009 if MS decides to keep a 4 year life-cycle. but I think Xenon ~ Xbox 360 has alot of room for growth (i mean the software) with that triple-core CPU, and could possibly last 5 years before we see a successor launched.

Which would be why the idea was dropped, and not reason to think it was never considered. Goto isn't what I'd call a 'tabloid' site, and Megadrive has evidence elsewhere of something similar, which adds credence to the idea.

I'm not familiar with Goto's reputation, and with all due respect for Megadrive, I know the some of the points made in the previous post are inaccurate.

There was no plan to make an x86-derived Xbox successor. That was the kind of tradeoff made to quickly get a product into market and apparent within a year as not worth repeating.

Freon is an example of a concept's codename leaking out and people making up a backstory that's more exciting than reality.

Homestation, from what I know, was just another group at Microsoft's idea on where they wanted Xbox to go. Also a case of a codename leaking out and growing into an actual project where it was nothing more than someone with MS Word's "Wouldn't it be neat if?" Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if some people still believe Nintendo was planning a virtual reality head bucket for Revolution at one point, thanks to that fan video.

The prior two are examples of ideas posed within a short period of time after the console launched while future direction was decided. By fall 2002, there was no question about the single focus on a PowerPC-based Xbox 360.

The date for Xenon/Xbox 360 was always fall 2005, from the beginning. The only reason I could see someone thinking 2004 was if they actually believe MS was trying to rush past Sony to market, not the reality, which was just about not shipping a year after Sony.

There never were plans for a 4 year life-cycle. Hardware switches are painful for Microsoft, not something delighted in. Xbox just shipped late into a given cycle. It's really that simple.

 

[mckmas8808]

There never were plans for a 4 year life-cycle. Hardware switches are painful for Microsoft, not something delighted in. Xbox just shipped late into a given cycle. It's really that simple.

This statement right here is something that thousands of people need to understand. I wish you were here when we had the, "will MS continue the 4 year life cycle in the future" debates. I always knew that MS wouldn't want to release a console every 4 years.

 

[Megadrive1988]

I'm not familiar with Goto's reputation, and with all due respect for Megadrive, I know the some of the points made in the previous post are inaccurate.

I never said those things were concrete fact or official information / ideas from MS - I am just going by what was reported & rumored by the press.

There was no plan to make an x86-derived Xbox successor. That was the kind of tradeoff made to quickly get a product into market and apparent within a year as not worth repeating.

that very well may be true. well it is true because Xenon/360 was begun in 2002

Freon is an example of a concept's codename leaking out and people making up a backstory that's more exciting than reality.

I'm not questioning that.

The prior two are examples of ideas posed within a short period of time after the console launched while future direction was decided. By fall 2002, there was no question about the single focus on a PowerPC-based Xbox 360.

I agree

The date for Xenon/Xbox 360 was always fall 2005, from the beginning. The only reason I could see someone thinking 2004 was if they actually believe MS was trying to rush past Sony to market, not the reality, which was just about not shipping a year after Sony.

well, as I said in my post, it was reported that MS wanted to launch Xenon/360 in fall 2004, but officially, MS plan was always for 2005

There never were plans for a 4 year life-cycle. Hardware switches are painful for Microsoft, not something delighted in. Xbox just shipped late into a given cycle. It's really that simple.

I disagree there - Microsoft said during a press conference /w Q&A for the original Xbox in 2000 that they would not change hardware for 4 years. they always intended on having a new machine out in 2005. with that said, I am not saying Microsoft plans to release a console every 4 years. the current 4 year cycle for Xbox might be just a one time thing. I expect Xbox 360 to last 5 years. the original Xbox was a knee-jerk reaction to PS2. MS threw a system together as fast as they possibly could -- well they could have had a GeForce2-based Xbox out in 2000 but that would've been far too weak. MS did the best they could. the Xbox 360 is their first well thought out console. I feel it is what the original Xbox should've been given the massive specs MS announced for the original Xbox
(hundreds of millions of polygons, 4 gigapixels fillrate, 4x anti-aliasing, 3 times more power than PS2, etc)

 

[3dcgi]

I disagree there - Microsoft said during a press conference /w Q&A for the original Xbox in 2000 that they would not change hardware for 4 years. they always intended on having a new machine out in 2005. with that said, I am not saying Microsoft plans to release a console every 4 years. the current 4 year cycle for Xbox might be just a one time thing. I expect Xbox 360 to last 5 years. the original Xbox was a knee-jerk reaction to PS2. MS threw a system together as fast as they possibly could -- well they could have had a GeForce2-based Xbox out in 2000 but that would've been far too weak. MS did the best they could. the Xbox 360 is their first well thought out console. I feel it is what the original Xbox should've been given the massive specs MS announced for the original Xbox
(hundreds of millions of polygons, 4 gigapixels fillrate, 4x anti-aliasing, 3 times more power than PS2, etc)

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with as it sounds like you agreed to me.

 

[DudeWheresMyXbox]

well, as I said in my post, it was reported that MS wanted to launch Xenon/360 in fall 2004, but officially, MS plan was always for 2005

That reporting was wrong. Even before public announcements, the plan was always fall 2005.

There were easily over three years worth of must-have-for-launch work items, assuming development would be able to keep up at a nonstop pace throughout. This made a launch within three years already risky. Anyone suggesting two years would have been laughed out of town.

Overall, as 3dcgi points out, we are in violent agreement.

 

[one]

That reporting was wrong. Even before public announcements, the plan was always fall 2005.

So you work for Microsoft? If so please stand up and deny the story with a better credential, if not this stays moot. Well, even if you work for Microsoft, some people scream "PR!" so no problem with it really Just like the "unrefined" NVIDIA RSX contract.

As early as 2002, the only design was triple-core PowerPC and a very close match for the actual shipping Xbox 360 hardware in 2005.

As far as I can read from
http://www-03.ibm.com/chips/news/2005/1025_xbox.html

The chip was delivered to Microsoft in less than 24 months from original contract signing in the fall of 2003 in time to meet Microsoft's massive worldwide product launch for the 2005 holiday season.

...

"Microsoft's aggressive timetable required that IBM take the Xbox 360 chip design from concept to full execution in just 24 months," said Ilan Spillinger, IBM Distinguished Engineer and director of the IBM Design Center for Xbox 360. "IBM's success in delivering the chip to meet Microsoft's worldwide launch illustrates our commitment to innovative processor design that builds on IBM's wealth of intellectual property."

"Full execution" would be the mass production stage. IBM suggests the concept of the chips was created some months before the fall of 2003. I don't know if there is a PowerPC-licensed vendor with the capability to design a high clockspeed custom MPU other than IBM, so I wonder why they didn't start the design at IBM in 2002 as you suggest. In addition, regardless of the existence of the Xbox 2 (360) concept in a head of a Microsoft employee in 2002, an intermediate Xbox plan can exist in parallel with it.

The external PSU was also a design decision planned long ago. Not something thrown in after E3. Not sure why the demo units at E3 mean anything, considering they were purely plastic shell case mockups with G5-based alpha kits driving the displays. A large PSU doesn't entirely qualify for great powerpoint slide material, either

What Goto writes in his old article just after E3 (this May 20 article http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2005/0520/kaigai181.htm ) is, in Xenon, you plug a DC plug into the space designed for an AC plug. In addition, Goto writes in his new article in the first post in this thread that he heard from a Microsoft insider at E3 that they actually wavered on the choice.

 

[DudeWheresMyXbox]

So you work for Microsoft? If so please stand up and deny the story with a better credential, if not this stays moot. Well, even if you work for Microsoft, some people scream "PR!" so no problem with it really Just like the "unrefined" NVIDIA RSX contract.

I'd prefer to keep my job, thanks.

And would anyone really believe that your average PR type knows about IGN, let alone B3D? I sure don't

As far as I can read from
http://www-03.ibm.com/chips/news/2005/1025_xbox.html
"Full execution" would be the mass production stage. IBM suggests the concept of the chips was created some months before the fall of 2003. I don't know if there is a PowerPC-licensed vendor with the capability to design a high clockspeed custom MPU other than IBM, so I wonder why they didn't start the design at IBM in 2002 as you suggest. In addition, regardless of the existence of the Xbox 2 (360) concept in a head of a Microsoft employee in 2002, an intermediate Xbox plan can exist in parallel with it.

Contract signing took a long, long, long time.

If there was a postmortem article, sticking with x86/PC architecture would be listed as a #1 decision not to repeat. A multicore PowerPC-based successor was the focus of pretty much everyone from 2002 onward and it certainly went without saying that no one was going to divert efforts to an intermediate console, especially one that would be cursed with the "decision not to repeat" attribute.

What Goto writes in his old article just after E3 (this May 20 article http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2005/0520/kaigai181.htm ) is, in Xenon, you plug a DC plug into the space designed for an AC plug. In addition, Goto writes in his new article in the first post in this thread that he heard from a Microsoft insider at E3 that they actually wavered on the choice.

I'll admit that my understanding of your post was incorrect. The "E3 mockup" part threw me off.

 

[rounin]

It takes MS less than 24 months to devise a CPU and they complain that PS3's RSX is unrefined? Based on what?

 

[DudeWheresMyXbox]

It takes MS less than 24 months to devise a CPU and they complain that PS3's RSX is unrefined? Based on what?

I think you missed my comment about long, long, long time spent in contract-signing while design was ongoing.

That and the "unrefined" comment came from ATI's Richard Huddy in Edge.

 

[rounin]

That and the "unrefined" comment came from ATI's Richard Huddy in Edge.

Oops, my bad. Either way, if IBM and MS can make such a claim (long long long dev time during contract signing??!) then so can Sony and NV

 

[DudeWheresMyXbox]

Oops, my bad. Either way, if IBM and MS can make such a claim (long long long dev time during contract signing??!) then so can Sony and NV

Could any of us imagine Microsoft and IBM coming to a quick agreement on anything?

Being serious, it actually went very well; just a lot of details to work out. Mostly over stuff like "I confess my undying love for Tux" statements IBM's lawyers snuck in while Microsoft's lawyers were showing off their Windows NT 3.1 tshirts.