1. Sorry but this backpedaling non-answer isn't going to cut it. You asked me in a pretty smarmy manner whether or not I knew that the division was "mostly Xbox". So I am asking for the exact breakdown, since you apparently know it. Judging by your non-answer I am going to assume that the comment came directly out of your butt. And your response here just makes my case for me. You list two failures that are also included in the division. So do you actually know how much of that profit is due to the Xbox, how much of it is due to other devices, and hell, whether or not the Xbox profit could have even been double or triple what the whole division profited? No, you don't know that. Just admit you're full of crap and move on, quit digging the hole. I don't think you even knew there was no actual "Xbox division" before we corrected you.

2. Whether they broke even yet doesn't matter. A new product is a new product and the trend is pointing up. If they hadn't broken even yet and showed no signs of profit then that would be a valid point. But the 360 is making profits. I'm just going to drop the GCN stuff, you still aren't getting it.

3. No one said preorders tell the whole story. But your response is silly. You started by saying there are signs that the Xbone will sell less than 360. The only real sign we have right now is demand, and it was higher than the 360 demand at launch. That's as simple as I can make it.

The article you linked discusses all 3 manufacturers. Hope that helps. I am done though, have the last word and give me more laughs.

1. The fact that xbox is the only thing making profit for that division also means that the xbox brand itself has a bigger effect on the losses of that divison rather than their windows phone. Your pretty much damage controlling their losses even though we all know that xbox has the biggest effect and plus their losses just so happen to come from last generation to the start of this generation. How can they lose money from their smart phones if they haven't got any sizable profits from it ? 

@Bold Investors would say differently and plus your opinion doesn't matter if they are making net total losses to boot. 

3. So price doesn't matter ? Geez Then I guess they could sell that thing for a $1000 and see how that will do post launch window. LOL

BTW I'm only pointing a part of the article. 

There is no contraditcion at all. Losses do not accumulate only to be payed when you start to run a profit. It is the exact same thing as if a company make big profits during alot of years only to suddenly take losses instead (Sony comes to mind). The history is irrelevant in that case, instead you need to look at the trend of the company.

MS´s trend the first years were negative and the last couple of years have been positive, do you not agree? Would an investor then recommend removing the XBox brand at the time it is ADDING cash to the company instead of during the time it made LOSSES?

An example: Imagine you run a conveniace store where one segment of the product line is milk. That specific product line is selling bad andactually cost you more than it makes when looking at salaries, cooling and such. After a few years you start to sell better and that segment starts to turn a profit. Would you then focus on the losses it made before or the profits it makes now? :)

Nintendo's arrogance is different from Sony's arrogance.

I think they'll win in the end.

Have you seen 3D World?

There pretty much the same considering they didin't want what the consumers had wanted. Nintendo does not give 2D mario but instead 3D even though they realize that making 2D mario is a smarter idea because that's what the crowd wants just like how nobody liked sony when they made an overpriced console. 

Well that's a pretty far fetched claim you have there. 

3D world looks okay but I would rather something on the lines of wii sports or mario kart wii since these titles are pretty phenomenal.

Lol the 3D World thing is a TitanFall joke.


The issue here that everyone has who doesnt understand how the market plays out here is the  longevity.
PS2 won because it got the install base via that DVD player, games sold okay on it, so it got more and more games.
PS3 has the same hardware strategy. But its expensive as fuck(because Blu-ray's were expensive). Does way worse. Gets split in half because the 360 got more momentum off the beginning but fizzled out with time.
Sony's handheld strategy sucks meanwhile.

MS is trying to win the living room. That's what they always will do. So we wont see anything different from there.
Mabye Kinect Virtual Reality and the whole Room play thing. That is if they dont drop out this gen

Unless Sony and MS change their strategies ( or in sony case they wait until they have a real trojan horse and a cheap console) they will not sustain any form of longevity.

Niether will the mobile market. So that isnt an option for anybody. Who makes money off 1$ games? Nobody. Sorry Angry Birds. Keep sellimg those plushies,you'll need that cash.

Nintendo got out first had a terrible DreamCast-esque year. But now they have software to back it up and they're still ahead in the sales department. If they get the required  support to be a market leader at any point , its fucking game over in that department.  Sony would have to literally scramble for something disruptive to introduce mid gen.  (You'd see a DS vs PSP kinda situation)

The PS2 won because of games.

The PS3 was not the same strategy, in fact I would call it a pretty destructive strategy. 

Microsoft will keep failing to take over the living room if they don't change their focus. It's like malstrom said, a console that focuses more more on other things than gaming will be irrelevant. Most gamers are not impressed by the fact that microsoft prioritized on things other than games, in fact they feel disgust. 

I said the PS2 won because of games. But do you remember the first year it had? Was kinda shitty.
In comparison. But it got the momentum. It got in peoples house., people bought the system. It got games. Over and done, boom market leader.

Sony has no media format or center to utilize here. A chromecast can do more than it can do media wise.

Do you know why Sony's handheld strategy sucks? Because its a console strategy for a handheld. Its a very multimedia centric device with few "system defining" games and million sellers.Half of its purpose is made defunct by phones. Also memory cards.  Interestingly Sony software did terrible on the PSP, but they have a much higher attache rate on the Vita)

Do you know why I said Nintendo will be fine? Because they always give the consumer what they didnt know they wanted.

That is complete and utter bullshit. At any time, there are/were parts in the division that made (huge) profits. as I stated before, Mac Software and Peripherals are two compnents that always made profit. Even that Surface stuff  makes profit. Now its Skype that prints money.

Mac software ? -_- (Are you for real ? Only 5% of the desktop market consists of mac and I doubt.) 

Their peripherals include keyboards and mouse as well as gamepads. (Are you serious that those will make bucket loads of profit ?)