By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Xbox 360 failure rates are reportedly down to PS3 levels, just as the generation comes to a close

S.T.A.G.E. on 03 August 2012
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:

S.T.A.G.E. is too much of a Sony fanboy in his eyes everyone is afraid of Sony.  He probably also thinks that Nintendo lauched the 3DS early because they where afraid of the Vita even though Nintendo owns the handheld market since the launch of the original gameboy back in 1989.  Even though as dominat as the PS1, and PS2 (more so) where they where never on the same level of dominance as the NES.  Nintendo pretty much controlled all the 3rd party developers during that era they dictated what types of games they could make and how many units they could manufacture.  Also MS was pretty fast in owning up to and resolving all the hardware issuses with the 360.  Sony never publicly acknowledged any of their hardware issuse with both the PS1 and PS2 and did nothing for consumers that where affected. 


It's not that I am a Sony fanboy, it's that I think its decent to fix your problems before the generation ends or have a quality product from the beginning. Your problem is that you're acting like a Microsoft fanboy. I made a clear point that Microsoft had to beat Sony, and articles which showed proof of neglect including manufacturers pointing the finger at Microsoft. They risked the console and it took them the whole generation to fix the problems. I am glad its finished (Proof in this is that I purchased a new 360), but it will forever tarnish their name. You have provided zero facts to back your statement.

You proved zero facts to back your statements also their are no offical documents anywhere that state Microsoft was afraid that the PS3 was going to launch before the 360 or that MS was in a hurry to launch the 360 because they where afraid of Sony.  Again the main thing that caused the 360 to lanuch early was the messed up business deal MS had with Nvidia.


You've blamed NVidia a thousand times for messed up business deal with MS. Even if this is true it doesn't explain why MS rushed the 360. As for the rest of the your statement....what....are....you...talking....about?

You appearently can't understand basic English because I already went over this twice Nvidia stopped making the GPU for the "original" X-box on "Agust of 2005" which means that MIcrosoft "couldn't" make anymore "orginal" X-Boxes.  Read what I said carefuly and mabye the quotes can make you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth.  If not then your english comprehension is worse then Jackie Chan's.


Whats does Nvidia have to do with RROD?



Around the Network
Chris Hu on 03 August 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:

S.T.A.G.E. is too much of a Sony fanboy in his eyes everyone is afraid of Sony.  He probably also thinks that Nintendo lauched the 3DS early because they where afraid of the Vita even though Nintendo owns the handheld market since the launch of the original gameboy back in 1989.  Even though as dominat as the PS1, and PS2 (more so) where they where never on the same level of dominance as the NES.  Nintendo pretty much controlled all the 3rd party developers during that era they dictated what types of games they could make and how many units they could manufacture.  Also MS was pretty fast in owning up to and resolving all the hardware issuses with the 360.  Sony never publicly acknowledged any of their hardware issuse with both the PS1 and PS2 and did nothing for consumers that where affected. 


It's not that I am a Sony fanboy, it's that I think its decent to fix your problems before the generation ends or have a quality product from the beginning. Your problem is that you're acting like a Microsoft fanboy. I made a clear point that Microsoft had to beat Sony, and articles which showed proof of neglect including manufacturers pointing the finger at Microsoft. They risked the console and it took them the whole generation to fix the problems. I am glad its finished (Proof in this is that I purchased a new 360), but it will forever tarnish their name. You have provided zero facts to back your statement.

You proved zero facts to back your statements also their are no offical documents anywhere that state Microsoft was afraid that the PS3 was going to launch before the 360 or that MS was in a hurry to launch the 360 because they where afraid of Sony.  Again the main thing that caused the 360 to lanuch early was the messed up business deal MS had with Nvidia.


You've blamed NVidia a thousand times for messed up business deal with MS. Even if this is true it doesn't explain why MS rushed the 360. As for the rest of the your statement....what....are....you...talking....about?

You appearently can't understand basic English because I already went over this twice Nvidia stopped making the GPU for the "original" X-box on "Agust of 2005" which means that MIcrosoft "couldn't" make anymore "orginal" X-Boxes.  Read what I said carefuly and mabye the quotes can make you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth.  If not then your english comprehension is worse then Jackie Chan's.


Whats does Nvidia have to do with RROD?

It was one of the main reasons the 360 was rushed into production since MS did't have enough GPU's for the orginial X-Box to keep on manufacturing them past August of 2005.  The main reason for the RROD was because the bad deal with Nvida rushed the 360 into production without enough hardware testing.  Again if MS and Nvidia had a great business relationship the 360 would have had a Nvidia GPU instead of a AMD/ATI one.  Also the original X-Box would have been in production a lot longer at least a year more and the 360 itself would have launched later and would have had more hardware tests.  Also one of the main reason the 360 had so much hardware problems at launch is because it lauched with 90nm chips which where a main problem with the system overheating if it would have launched six month later it would have launched with 65nm chips if not that it would have included the extra heat sinks that where the first solution that MS came up with for reducing the RROD problems. 



S.T.A.G.E. on 03 August 2012
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:

S.T.A.G.E. is too much of a Sony fanboy in his eyes everyone is afraid of Sony.  He probably also thinks that Nintendo lauched the 3DS early because they where afraid of the Vita even though Nintendo owns the handheld market since the launch of the original gameboy back in 1989.  Even though as dominat as the PS1, and PS2 (more so) where they where never on the same level of dominance as the NES.  Nintendo pretty much controlled all the 3rd party developers during that era they dictated what types of games they could make and how many units they could manufacture.  Also MS was pretty fast in owning up to and resolving all the hardware issuses with the 360.  Sony never publicly acknowledged any of their hardware issuse with both the PS1 and PS2 and did nothing for consumers that where affected. 


It's not that I am a Sony fanboy, it's that I think its decent to fix your problems before the generation ends or have a quality product from the beginning. Your problem is that you're acting like a Microsoft fanboy. I made a clear point that Microsoft had to beat Sony, and articles which showed proof of neglect including manufacturers pointing the finger at Microsoft. They risked the console and it took them the whole generation to fix the problems. I am glad its finished (Proof in this is that I purchased a new 360), but it will forever tarnish their name. You have provided zero facts to back your statement.

You proved zero facts to back your statements also their are no offical documents anywhere that state Microsoft was afraid that the PS3 was going to launch before the 360 or that MS was in a hurry to launch the 360 because they where afraid of Sony.  Again the main thing that caused the 360 to lanuch early was the messed up business deal MS had with Nvidia.


You've blamed NVidia a thousand times for messed up business deal with MS. Even if this is true it doesn't explain why MS rushed the 360. As for the rest of the your statement....what....are....you...talking....about?

You appearently can't understand basic English because I already went over this twice Nvidia stopped making the GPU for the "original" X-box on "Agust of 2005" which means that MIcrosoft "couldn't" make anymore "orginal" X-Boxes.  Read what I said carefuly and mabye the quotes can make you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth.  If not then your english comprehension is worse then Jackie Chan's.


Whats does Nvidia have to do with RROD?

It was one of the main reasons the 360 was rushed into production since MS did't have enough GPU's for the orginial X-Box to keep on manufacturing them past August of 2005.  The main reason for the RROD was because the bad deal with Nvida rushed the 360 into production without enough hardware testing.  Again if MS and Nvidia had a great business relationship the 360 would have had a Nvidia GPU instead of a AMD/ATI one.  Also the original X-Box would have been in production a lot longer at least a year more and the 360 itself would have launched later and would have had more hardware tests.  Also one of the main reason the 360 had so much hardware problems at launch is because it lauched with 90nm chips which where a main problem with the system overheating if it would have launched six month later it would have launched with 65nm chips if not that it would have included the extra heat sinks that where the first solution that MS came up with for reducing the RROD problems. 


Whats wrong with Microsoft launching a year later if Sonys presence didnt scare them into an early launch in your theory? I see no articles to back this up so please entertain me with this "truth". I love this especially when ATI has been creating the GPU since original XBox.



Chris Hu on 03 August 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:

S.T.A.G.E. is too much of a Sony fanboy in his eyes everyone is afraid of Sony.  He probably also thinks that Nintendo lauched the 3DS early because they where afraid of the Vita even though Nintendo owns the handheld market since the launch of the original gameboy back in 1989.  Even though as dominat as the PS1, and PS2 (more so) where they where never on the same level of dominance as the NES.  Nintendo pretty much controlled all the 3rd party developers during that era they dictated what types of games they could make and how many units they could manufacture.  Also MS was pretty fast in owning up to and resolving all the hardware issuses with the 360.  Sony never publicly acknowledged any of their hardware issuse with both the PS1 and PS2 and did nothing for consumers that where affected. 


It's not that I am a Sony fanboy, it's that I think its decent to fix your problems before the generation ends or have a quality product from the beginning. Your problem is that you're acting like a Microsoft fanboy. I made a clear point that Microsoft had to beat Sony, and articles which showed proof of neglect including manufacturers pointing the finger at Microsoft. They risked the console and it took them the whole generation to fix the problems. I am glad its finished (Proof in this is that I purchased a new 360), but it will forever tarnish their name. You have provided zero facts to back your statement.

You proved zero facts to back your statements also their are no offical documents anywhere that state Microsoft was afraid that the PS3 was going to launch before the 360 or that MS was in a hurry to launch the 360 because they where afraid of Sony.  Again the main thing that caused the 360 to lanuch early was the messed up business deal MS had with Nvidia.


You've blamed NVidia a thousand times for messed up business deal with MS. Even if this is true it doesn't explain why MS rushed the 360. As for the rest of the your statement....what....are....you...talking....about?

You appearently can't understand basic English because I already went over this twice Nvidia stopped making the GPU for the "original" X-box on "Agust of 2005" which means that MIcrosoft "couldn't" make anymore "orginal" X-Boxes.  Read what I said carefuly and mabye the quotes can make you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth.  If not then your english comprehension is worse then Jackie Chan's.


Whats does Nvidia have to do with RROD?

It was one of the main reasons the 360 was rushed into production since MS did't have enough GPU's for the orginial X-Box to keep on manufacturing them past August of 2005.  The main reason for the RROD was because the bad deal with Nvida rushed the 360 into production without enough hardware testing.  Again if MS and Nvidia had a great business relationship the 360 would have had a Nvidia GPU instead of a AMD/ATI one.  Also the original X-Box would have been in production a lot longer at least a year more and the 360 itself would have launched later and would have had more hardware tests.  Also one of the main reason the 360 had so much hardware problems at launch is because it lauched with 90nm chips which where a main problem with the system overheating if it would have launched six month later it would have launched with 65nm chips if not that it would have included the extra heat sinks that where the first solution that MS came up with for reducing the RROD problems. 


Whats wrong with Microsoft launching a year later if Sonys presence didnt scare them into an early launch in your theory? I see no articles to back this up so please entertain me with this "truth". I love this especially when ATI has been creating the GPU since original XBox.

Your dead wrong the original X-Box has a Nvidia GPU it even said so on its box.  Also I own a original X-Box so I'm %100 percent sure it has a Nvidia GPU.  Sure I invented the bad business deal between Nvida and MS but guess what everyone with the slightest knowlege about MS knows about it, again you live in a dream world and see the world through Sony branded glasses.



S.T.A.G.E. on 03 August 2012
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Chris Hu said:

S.T.A.G.E. is too much of a Sony fanboy in his eyes everyone is afraid of Sony.  He probably also thinks that Nintendo lauched the 3DS early because they where afraid of the Vita even though Nintendo owns the handheld market since the launch of the original gameboy back in 1989.  Even though as dominat as the PS1, and PS2 (more so) where they where never on the same level of dominance as the NES.  Nintendo pretty much controlled all the 3rd party developers during that era they dictated what types of games they could make and how many units they could manufacture.  Also MS was pretty fast in owning up to and resolving all the hardware issuses with the 360.  Sony never publicly acknowledged any of their hardware issuse with both the PS1 and PS2 and did nothing for consumers that where affected. 


It's not that I am a Sony fanboy, it's that I think its decent to fix your problems before the generation ends or have a quality product from the beginning. Your problem is that you're acting like a Microsoft fanboy. I made a clear point that Microsoft had to beat Sony, and articles which showed proof of neglect including manufacturers pointing the finger at Microsoft. They risked the console and it took them the whole generation to fix the problems. I am glad its finished (Proof in this is that I purchased a new 360), but it will forever tarnish their name. You have provided zero facts to back your statement.

You proved zero facts to back your statements also their are no offical documents anywhere that state Microsoft was afraid that the PS3 was going to launch before the 360 or that MS was in a hurry to launch the 360 because they where afraid of Sony.  Again the main thing that caused the 360 to lanuch early was the messed up business deal MS had with Nvidia.


You've blamed NVidia a thousand times for messed up business deal with MS. Even if this is true it doesn't explain why MS rushed the 360. As for the rest of the your statement....what....are....you...talking....about?

You appearently can't understand basic English because I already went over this twice Nvidia stopped making the GPU for the "original" X-box on "Agust of 2005" which means that MIcrosoft "couldn't" make anymore "orginal" X-Boxes.  Read what I said carefuly and mabye the quotes can make you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth.  If not then your english comprehension is worse then Jackie Chan's.


Whats does Nvidia have to do with RROD?

It was one of the main reasons the 360 was rushed into production since MS did't have enough GPU's for the orginial X-Box to keep on manufacturing them past August of 2005.  The main reason for the RROD was because the bad deal with Nvida rushed the 360 into production without enough hardware testing.  Again if MS and Nvidia had a great business relationship the 360 would have had a Nvidia GPU instead of a AMD/ATI one.  Also the original X-Box would have been in production a lot longer at least a year more and the 360 itself would have launched later and would have had more hardware tests.  Also one of the main reason the 360 had so much hardware problems at launch is because it lauched with 90nm chips which where a main problem with the system overheating if it would have launched six month later it would have launched with 65nm chips if not that it would have included the extra heat sinks that where the first solution that MS came up with for reducing the RROD problems. 


Whats wrong with Microsoft launching a year later if Sonys presence didnt scare them into an early launch in your theory? I see no articles to back this up so please entertain me with this "truth". I love this especially when ATI has been creating the GPU since original XBox.

Your dead wrong the original X-Box has a Nvidia GPU it even said so on its box.  Also I own a original X-Box so I'm %100 percent sure it has a Nvidia GPU.  Sure I invented the bad business deal between Nvida and MS but guess what everyone with the slightest knowlege about MS knows about it, again you live in a dream world and see the world through Sony branded glasses.


Wait you're right I just double checked. You're right about the original Xbox. Now go on back to the point where that caused the 360 to have to rush their launch. 



Around the Network
Chris Hu on 03 August 2012

Read what I said early with the quotes because I'm tired of repeating myself if you still can't understand it, then maybe its time to sign up for a remedial English class at your local junior college.



Chark on 03 August 2012

Ugh, this is terrible. You are both right! The sour Nvidia deal created a situation that would make it appealing to launch new hardware for Microsoft, but since Sony had a strong marketshare lead in the industry Microsoft would find it difficult to launch side by side or after the PS3. In a sense, though I wouldn't use this term, they were afraid of Sony. I would call it, wanting to ensure the best possible environment for their product and launching early would maintain momentum from the Halo craze and allow them to sell their hardware without competition.

An early launch was the best option for them hands down. The RRoD fiasco was a hiccup in this plan, but they managed to hold their own not fall apart themselves.

Seriously, just because A is valid doesn't mean B isn't.



Before the PS3 everyone was nice to me :(

Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 on 03 August 2012

OMG you guys, just agree to disagree.



Yay!!!

slowmo on 03 August 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
slowmo said:
happydolphin said:
Chris Hu said:

In peoples lives hiatus are usally a good thing in business hiatus are pretty much a bad thing already mentioned Atari can't think of another example because usually when a company takes a hiatus it means that they are gone forever.  Your either in business or out of business.  Also businesses launch faulty products all the time just look at the Chevy Cruze it had numerous problem when it launched in the US but really its should have had close to no problems since its basicly a rebranded Holden Cruze/Daewoo Lacetti Premiere  that was available in other markets two years before the US launch.  The should have resolved all the kinks overseas before the US launch.

And that's exactly what S.T.A.G.E. was trying to say. I mean, of course I'm just offering theoretical workarounds which would include the need for more time and push the launch closer to the PS3 release date. A mild HW-only hiatus with full SW support, in exchange for a reliable HW launch, is not that much to ask for. That's why I weigh more in agreement with S.T.A.G.E., it would seem like something else was rushing them to launch the 360.

Not getting involved discussing a member who is banned, it's not really good etiquette but as for the bolded:

The simple fact is Sony aimed for the same release date Micrsoft did and missed it by a country mile (for a number of reasons) while Micrsoft having spent a lot of money and effort to hit that date decided they would go ahead and gamble on the hardware knowing they could fix any possible issue in future hardware spins.  It was the right corporate decision but in hindsight poor customer service.

Sony is aiming for a similar release date to Microsoft now, not then. 


Are you saying Sony didn't aim for a 2005 release???  I can assure you Sony were aiming for a xmas 2005 launch as is well documented in the book Race For A New Games Machine by David  Shippy.  The following link in the synopsis proves this: http://www.amazon.com/The-Race-New-Game-Machine/dp/0806531010



Argh_College on 04 August 2012

Interesting ...