I figure I may as well post since my name is in the thread.

This is what I figure an Xbox 360 released in 2012 will look like.

Performance (Whatever they want that uses about between 75-125W of power) Speculation on exactly what will be in it has been done to death and really it doesn't matter. This gen pushed heat output too far so I can see them scaling it back considerably. As a general idea an 8800gt produced on a 55nm process uses about 100W of power currently so probably only 4x the compute power of the current generation of consoles. I would suggest efficiency would be quite important in the next generation, having general purpose silicon would help them there so I would expect a unified CPU/GPU architecture. Larrabee could be perfect in that role, especially mated with Sandy Bridge because they both have a ring bus.

Storage/Devices, it really depends on what floats their boat at the time. SSDs, HDDs, Blu Ray and Flash game media all have compelling advantages and disadvantages. It doesn't matter how the game gets to you really or how its stored when it gets there.

Memory: Probably 4x 4gbit ram chips, if you take into account two process shrinks for memory. So that'd yield about 2gb of total ram. They'd want to simplify the system and thats one of the ways to do it.

Interface: They have the Xbox 360 with standard controls, so they won't have a problem trying something new. Im predicting a two piece symetrical controller with motion, pointing and 3d position sensitivity for each.

I realize I'm late on this one so I hope I'm not repeating anyone else.

I think the argument is agreeable except for on two points.

1. the graphics issue. This is exactly what Nintendo had in mind going into the Wii when it was called the Revolution. Software companies can't/won't do it, too costly. So on and so forth. Look at what the difference is in the Wii and PS360. Because of this I feel certain that next level graphics, perhaps on a 256 bit-bus? could be just what the doctor ordered. Obviously if your looking at Wii's success and profit ratio you might think I missed the point. However, looking at the statement they don't want to alienate their core fans, this is exactly what that would do. Besides MS is known for the horsepower, their fanboys love that.

2. I don't believe as people have stated that PS3 "gave up on PS2" and alienated their install base. PS2 sales are beating out XBOX and Gamecube combined (well, I guess cause GC is not in production anymore sooo yeah). I think what PS3 "did" to cause this is Price and LACK of backwards compatability on all models. I don't knoe which ones do or don't have it, but I do knoe that my nephew found out the hard way that they don't all  have it. I think when the player sits their and weighs his options. Ok I have 15 PS2 games 7 I don't really play 8 I do, and 2 I still play all the time! Some games are still coming out in PS2 version and the PS3 for $600 doesn't have BC. Only the $700 does (I don't knoe exact prices). SO DO I want to spend $700to keep my games or trade them in, to lose what I still want and pay only $450 for a PS3 and hope I like it as much as I have my PS2. Or should I just get a 360 for $300 and keep my old games and enjoy new ones more affordably. Sure I'll miss out on LBP and Resistance 2. But there are a lot of Killer titles that are on both.

I think after this, only the hardercore PS fans stick with SONY and others have jumped to 360.

Thats what I think anyway.

Hope the new Xbox will not have blu ray capability.
So that it will be cheaper in terms of console and games.(no sony product plz)

Thanks for the input Commando.

As I stated before, I do believe that there will be an improvement in the graphics. But this will not be focal point of the console. Just better graphics is not going to create new momentum for the console. It is too evolutionary and with the current level of the 360, it will not be extremely noticeable. So as long as the improved graphics fits in the $250 price tag - Microsoft should add them.

Regarding the PS2 comment. I think the point is that once the PS3 was introduced, PS2 owners knew it is the end of the road for their console. It was "last gen". The new games were not supporting it. They were forced to upgrade or stay behind. This made the PS2 owners a viable target for the 360 (and Wii).

Microsoft should try to avoid repeating the same mistake and should make sure that the 360 community does not feel left behind when the new console is launched. All of the new games must be available on the 360 as well. Perhaps will less poligons, pixels or colors. Perhaps with no 3D or motion controls. But they should all be there. It should also find a way for the old 360, for an extra payment, to be upgraded to enable at least some of the new experiences (motion controls, video camera for the old 360).

Every 360 customer that decides to stay on the 360 is a paying customer who is not at risk of churn. Each one of the 360 new titles will also play on the new console and will provide the full new experience so that the titles library investments are not just preserved but also improves.

Microsoft needs to aim at getting 150M users on its gaming platfrom. The only way to do that is not to start from zero. They must start with the 360 installed base - which should take them already about half way there.

Most posts in this seem good and make sense. I just hope for 2 things, 1, the games are on a physical media, DVD Blu-ray whatever (I'm sorry but I am not waiting for a 25gb game file to download).

And when they work out when they are releasing it. DON'T. Test the fecker over and over again. RRoD was a $billion mistake (litterally) and if Nintendo or Sony did it, they wouldn't be in the industry now.