6 years since my first smartphone and smartphones still don't have good battery life. So excuse me if I choose to believe statements like that when I see it. Thinking about it - game streaming launched 6 years ago too and here we are, still playing games on consoles.

Why would that be a problem, and why would anyone have a problem "admitting it"?

So Microsoft will put out the same hardware they normally would, only it's a "Windows 10 box" instead of an Xbox? So it gets the same games and the same OS Xbox fans enjoy using? Well then who cares? Would it bother you if the PS5 was called the Electronic Game Machine or something, if you knew it was still Sony behind the curtain? Also, MS has already said why they are putting games on PC. They are entrenched in both markets and can expand their userbase by combining them. Eventually others here will understand there's not nearly as much overlap between the two as they'd like to think. I thought surely deals like SFV or No Man's Sky would make it apparent, but I guess not.

You need to spend more than $200 on a GPU to match the rumored specs of the Scorpio. And if you want to beef up your PC instead, that's fine with MS. You buy their games, use their ecosystem, they get your money either way. And what do you think makes MS more money, hardware sales or software/service sales? It's been common knowledge for generations that these companies lose money for a time on hardware but make it up in software and more recently, services. So it's bizarre seeing all these people who apparently have great PC's saying MS is missing out because they'll just buy their games on PC. Well.. MS doesn't care. Papa Phil actually touched on this in one of the many many E3 interviews about how MS doesn't care about selling you hardware. They could not care less if you're using a Scorpio, an Xbone, an Xbone S, or a PC. They care that you are in their ecosystem spending money and playing games.

And it still has exclusives. You can't play Forza Horizon or Halo on a Playstation/Nintendo platform :)

Rebranding the music and video services of Microsoft as Xbox Music and video was so dumb, and unnecesary that I can believe that some people are using it as an argument about the commitment of MS with the Xbox Brand.

If anyone try to jump from the console Market the other consoles will sell much more because the Console Market will not die.

Phill isn't the Xbox's CEO ?, so why he talk about Windows 10  more than anything else ?. 

We are not talking about Microsoft making money we are talking about Neo and Scorpio, Releasing all their games for the PC is extremely harmful for the Xbox One and the harm is even greater out-side of the USA where they already have problem to increase their install base.

If the PS5 was called Eletronic gaming Machine but still had Exclusives so this would not be a  big problem for the console, Microsoft isn't changing the name of the Xbox One they are changing its identity of the console now that all their games will be avaliable for the PC and this will take people away from the Xbox One on the USA and even more Worldwide.

We are talking about 2 consoles so there is no sense to talk about software revenue  on the PC (which is pretty low right now) to say that Scorpio will be sucessful,  otherwise there would be no reason to release the Scorpio.

Whatever the power of the most powerful model of a platform, games will have to run on the base model too. You all can deduct the rest.

Not everyone is going to assemble a gaming PC for the W10 games you fools!

Click bait is allowed, it's on the users, whether the thread stays open, or gets closed. This isn't the 7th gen. So all will remain civil I'm sure.

Whilst true... There can still be a stark contrast in graphics regardless of the base platform.

Take most frostbite games that released on Xbox 360 and Next Gen Consoles/PC like Battlefield 3, 4, Hardline, Dragon Age Inquisition etc'.

The difference this time around is that the lowest-common-denominator is still fairly acceptable to scale things downwards.

Yes, engines that scale up and down well can do wonders, and games with large budgets can also have different sets of textures optimised for different resolutions, maybe even more detailed models, with more polygons. In the worst case, higher res and more powerful versions of effects that can be applied without explicit implementetion in the game, like AA, can still make a game look better, without jaggies, with crisper but smoother edges, and so on, in this case though the improvement from SD to full HD is hugely more noticeable than from full HD to 4k.
To put it short, no doom and gloom, sure, but also no heaven granted without some additional efforts, and even more efforts required to get the most from the powerful model while keeping the same game compatible with the base one too. Probably for the most ambitious games the best solution to offer the best, but save some money, will be to develop for the high-end model and downscale for the base one.