What Happens To The X-Box If Microsoft Is Split? 19
"There are plenty of rumors and speculation about the demise of OpenGL because of the XBox. This at least shows peoples' concerns about Microsoft getting back into the anti-competitive ball game. Will they do it? Should they be given the opportunity?
If the Xbox were to be deemed OS like enough to be bundled into the OS company, you get into a whole mess regarding the games. It is traditional in the console industry to sell the console cheaply and make the money off of the games. Surely the OS business couldn't get into selling other software immediately. It would be ridiculous to allow one company to sell the XBox at a loss and for the other to make money off of the games."
Re:X-Box goes to MS-Apps, Windows to MS-OS (Score:1)
That sounds almost exactly like Internet Explorer - it's tightly integrated with the OS, it comes bundled with everything, and it provides services to applications (such as WinAmp and StarOffice, both of which use MSIE's browser engine).
--
Re:And what about.. (Score:1)
Gotta respect Bill, though, for winning big even when he loses.
--
Re:Who gets to decide? (Score:1)
By screwing around too long, you mean they keep submitting proposals that the DOJ doesn't approve of? The DOJ won't just say yes or know; they'll say what they don't like and negotiate a compromise. If they have trouble, the judge will probably step in and make a compromise for them.
--
Re:And what about.. (Score:1)
True enough, but there is a slight difference between integrating a web browser and simply providing a zip utility. IMHO a simple compression tool is really something that should come with the OS.
They can include Notepad, not Office. They can include a simple zip/unzip tool, not Archiver 2000 (or whatever neat backup and compression suite there is).
Re:Who gets to decide? (Score:1)
Re:X-Box goes to MS-Apps, Windows to MS-OS (Score:1)
Making Money (Score:1)
>be bundled into the OS company, you get into a
>whole mess regarding the games. It is
>traditional in the console industry to sell the
>console cheaply and make the money off of the
>games. Surely the OS business couldn't get into
>selling other software immediately. It would be
>ridiculous to allow one company to sell the XBox
>at a loss and for the other to make money off of
>the games."
That is why game box companies charge high licensing fees from developers. Look at Sony, they don't do any of their own PS development (or at least they didn't when the machine came out), and they still made a bundle. How? By charging a percentage of every copy of every game sold. And that is probably what MS is going to do also. They just wish they could do the samething with Windows 2000 on the desktop.
Programming the X-Box (Re:Options with X-box) (Score:1)
Interestingly, on the Dreamcast developers have the option of developing for WindowsCE and using DirectX, however almost all developers use the Sega OS, where they are much closer to the hardware and can selectively replace parts of the OS that they don't like.
On a related note, how many really good single player games come out for the PC? Diablo 1 and 2 are the only ones that I can think of. So lack of OpenGL doesn't seem to be hurting the good games, I don't expect that it would hurt the X-Box. I do think that being forced to actually use Windows and DirectX might hurt the X-Box though, since if the hardware is constant and unchanging, then an OS isn't really needed (it's helpful when starting, but eventually you'll get to the place that you want to replace it all with your own OS taylored to your game).
Wouldn't it then become the two V boxes?? (Score:1)
Die rebel scum,
Lidontno1
Re:Programming the X-Box (Re:Options with X-box) (Score:1)
Lots. Lots and lots and lots of really good single player games come out for the PC. A large number of them also have multi-player modes, but there is no shortage of good single player games out there. Ones I've played recently include Diablo 2, Vampire, Homeworld, Half Life, System Shock 2, Freespace 2, Age of Empires 2, etc. Of course, I've probably forgotten some and I certainly don't have time to play everything. But there's no shortage of good single player games out there.
PC gaming isn't dead. It's alive and well.
winace - best zip / unzip utility (Score:1)
yes this is off topic but if people are looking for MS to bundle a zip/unzip.. well I'd want this one
Re:And what about.. (Score:1)
Simple (Score:1)
That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
Just like every other MS product... (Score:1)
The OS company would get the OS/HW part of the X-Box, and the Apps company would do the games for it.
Of course, this may all be moot, because by the time the glacial U.S. court appeals process is finally over 7-8 years from now, the X-Box may already be a dead platform.
Re:Simple (Score:1)
Microsoft would then make money on licensing their operating system.
This is always assuming the Microsoft will ever get the damn thing out there. Talking to some folks from Electronic Arts reminded me that Microsoft has a pretty pitiful track record on this sort of thing.
Options with X-box (Score:2)
If the DOJ did put the X-box into the OS Group then instead of the OS Group eating the monetary loss they could just spin off the X-box group and the non-OS Group could buy it or let it sink or swim on its own.
/***
Below are my thoughts on the OpenGL part the question. I and not very knowledgable about it so these thoughts are just kindof meandering ideas.
***/
As far as the concern of OpenGL being killed by the X-box, I dont really understand those concerns. I think it would be nice if OpenGL could be used on the XBox because then it would make it easier to port from computer to the X-box but if companies did what I thought was best the world would be a lot better place. If the X-box does not use OpenGL then that just means that if a game is written for the computer w/ OpenGL then it is a game that won't be ported quickly to the X-box which would just hurt the X-box and Microsoft's income.
Rich
Hmm... (Score:2)
X-Box goes to MS-Apps, Windows to MS-OS (Score:3)
What's scary is that MS-Apps will probably also own Direct X, which they'll somehow tie in with Internet Explorer and MSN and Office and Microsoft.NET and everything else but Windows.
--
And what about.. (Score:3)
I never got the two-part split up. If apps gets everything but the OS then there's still a big company that will integrate Office, IE, DirectX, MS-Java^H^H^H^H^H^H^HC#, IIS, ASP, services, MSN and paperclips. I believe Apps will be a lot stronger than OS.
On the other hand - bare OS might have to deliver some good stuff to stay alive. And finally include a zip/unzip utility by default for example.
Seems like this MS break-up debate will probably be endless, but so will the procedure be. Don't expect any change the next few years.