Reasonable said:
Squidward said:
Unreasonable said:
I have a question on this. Given Ballmer recently derided Oracle for buying SUN, stating that MS isn't going to muddy the waters getting into hardware (ignoring the fact that strictly speaking the 360 and Zune, etc are hardware unless I'm missing something), does this post imply that, strictly speaking, MS would prefer not to be responsible for the hardware, but wants to own the software, OS, etc. for home consoles, etc?
In other words, if Sony and Nintendo said, hey MS, why don't you provide the GUI, OS, etc. and we'll use DirectX and other MS standards will you let us provide the consoles would MS prefer that?
I'm not asking out of preference, but many posters seem to be stating that MS reason's for entering was not so much for the HW as the SW aspects and that implies that MS might well prefer a monopoly on OS, etc for consoles rather than supplying the consoles themselves.
|
Microsoft already offered Sony the software platform of Live + Windows IIRC, Ken turned them down. Which kind looks silly now that Sony is staring massive losses in their SCE business in the face. But I think in general they would let any other console maker use their standards really. It protects their Windows business which is more important to them.
Also I heard rumours that Intel offered to build and design the hardware for the next Xbox so long as it included the Larabee GPU. So maybe that indicates something, maybe not. Oh and I think Toshiba makes the Zune, not Microsoft. Its just a rebrand really.
|
Thanks. And what's with the Unreasonable? I don't know these things and want to know more! I have to say Sony response seems silly in some ways - surely a combination of dedicated hardware provider and dedicated OS/SW provider would make sense? I'm a PC gamer lost in the depths of the console world and this is the first I heard MS was more protecting DirectX and other standards than wanting to get into console hardware.
BTW where is your secret read again on why next Xbox might come sooner than thought? I was planning to give it a read.
Ta.
|
Its just a joke, sometimes I change the names of people I quote. Hence the Unreasonable tag! 
I did it to myself as well, see?
Sony was both reasonable and unreasonable. There are many reasons for or against doing what they were doing, like losing full control over part of their platform. I think Microsoft was more protecting Windows from a potential disrupter gaining ground in the living room than the Direct X standard which is a much smaller part of the whole. The dreamcast had Microsofts software inside, which enabled them to offer online before anyone else and develop their games faster, hence part of the reason why they could develop so many games so quickly.
PM sent.
