He means within the Devices division - in which case yes, it is true.

Do you genuinely not know how the mod system here works yet?

If Xbox is really costing M$ 2billion a year, my question is: How? Where is all that money going, exactly? That seems like an impossibly large sum.

OT: I can't believe I'm saying this, but...I agree with Pachter. Xbox has been M$'s first truly successful venture into the hardware business - especially when compared to Windows Phone and the flop that was Zune. I even agree that they've done everything right with the One - or at least haven't done anything outright wrong since the 180. They may be a bit too vocal in responding to every little thing, but I'm sure we can all agree that this is much preferable to the ominous silence preceding the XB1's initial reveal, and leading into E3.

In 2010 it was reported that Xbox live alone was bringing in 1billion a year. The hardware for the 360 has been profitable for 4 years now and MS has not changed the price for over 2 years. MS already stated that the 360 is very profitable for them just like the PS2 for Sony in its tail end. Right now the X1 is barely costing MS any money and if you count game sells and other pieces of hardware including the 360 and Xbox live, I am sure MS is in the black.

Patcher LOL

About all that money extorted from Android for nothing, let's just hope that scam end soon

http://www.osnews.com/story/27485/Google_sues_Apple_Microsoft-backed_patent_troll_Rockstar

Besides stopping a filthy exploiting (just one of the countless ones, alas) of awful US patent laws, it would finally clear this matter about those huge revenues covering other losses or not.
About losses of MS divisions, though, MS routinely hids part of them in another way, a separated balance sheet item called "Corporate-level activities" where it accounts for many losses or costs that can be attributed to more than one division (for example, if they plan to use Kinect on PCs and not just for entertainment, they could put its R&D costs, or part of them, in this balance item, although they almost surely account for production costs in the entertainment division). "Certain other corporate-level activity is not allocated to our segments, including costs of: broad-based sales and marketing; product support services; human resources; legal; finance; information technology; corporate development and procurement activities; research and development; legal settlements and contingencies; and employee severance." http://www.microsoft.com/investor/reports/ar11/financial_review/segment_geo.html

If it's making money (even if only a little bit) it's worth keeping to be in that part of the "computer" market. If it's failed to make a profit in 13 years who the hell would ever buy the brand off them? So they might as well stick it out.

This speculation is driven by opposing video game fanboys. Simple and obvious as that.

Then you need to read that...

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=178029&page=1#

The speculations come from investidors... nothing to do with fanboys.

Those investors are vulture capitalist only care about the short term.  They don't understand nor care about growing a company.  Xbox makes plenty of money, but not as much as say Windows or Office.  Bing loses money, but Microsoft isn't going to be selling that either.  Those gusy have been saying the same thing for many years.

It's like how that political guy bought US mattress manufacture Sealy.  Lowered quality, lost sales, ended up ruining the company and selling off the parts.  The US lost thousand and thousand of jobs.  He didn't care cause he got money to pump into his (failed) presidential champagne.

Fortunately, they are tiny shareholders and nobody cares about their opinions but some people trying to get page clicks.