Who gives a shit if it was faked. It was a presentation of things to come.
Like making your Forza decals on your cell phone and stuff?
Who gives a shit if it was faked. It was a presentation of things to come.
Do people honestly want a new UI for their cable box? New way to watch TV?
Like...I just don't understand it all.
If I wanna watch TV, it's already 1 button press away (switch tv input).
So what exactly is the deal here? DirecTV's UI is fine...Comcasts UI is fine...Charters UI is fine (only ones I've seen)--all of which are a button press away.
I just don't get all this.
I've seen it referenced over and over again in the past several months that Sony managed to lose all the profits they accumulated from the PS1 *and* PS2, with the losses they sustained as a result of the PS3. Not to mention the rest of Sony's financial woes in the past decade or so. There are plenty of companies that can't or wouldn't sustain that kind of business, Marty. It isn't "special" but it isn't exactly business as usual for most companies. More to the point it's a major hurdle and one they had to clear before they could get to the point they're at now.In the case you're referring to, aren't both companies overall losing money? They had profitable years, but as a whole aren't both divisions losing money? Big companies do this all the time, so I don't think it's so special that somehow Sony is moving forward despite what happened this generation.
Of course, but some of things matter in the first place because they aren't happening in a vaccuum by themselves.Some of these things that people are jumping on Microsoft's case for are either wrong, premature, or it won't matter.
IDK. It certainly hasn't been helping their electronics divisions and I've not seen any press trumpeting Blu-ray movie sales boosting their studio divisions profits significantly.How much money has been made by their other divisions by squashing HD-DVD out of existence so quickly? They lost a tremendous amount of money in their gaming division, but ensuring blu-ray victory has made them money in other areas.
It's a press conference and the primary audience is still the press. They may not be very techically savvy, but they certainly should be familiar with WIP and Betas at this point, since they report on them regularly. Given how much access to public betas there are these days across the technology landscape, I don't think there should be many that are interested in this kind of product who aren't familiar with the concept.MightyHedgehog said:I dunno 'bout disgusting, but the audience of a what is essentially a guided infomercial/tour of their new platform isn't going to understand or appreciate work-in-progress or beta states of an unfinished feature or product.
It's a press conference and the primary audience is still the press. They may not be very techically savvy, but they certainly should be familiar with WIP and Betas at this point, since they report on them regularly. Given how much access to public betas there are these days across the technology landscape, I don't think there should be many that are interested in this kind of product who aren't familiar with the concept.
C'mon, you can't expect them to come out and reveal their system with what is probably an alpha or earlier build of the OS running.
"Hey guys, this OS is slow and choppy right now, but come this Fall, it'll be blazing!"
No, you show what you're aiming for, not what it's currently at when you're showing the system off as a whole. They're months away from launch and that will easily be fixed. Look at Nintendo, they should of had their OS optimized long before they did but it's better now.
Do people honestly want a new UI for their cable box? New way to watch TV?
Like...I just don't understand it all.
If I wanna watch TV, it's already 1 button press away (switch tv input).
So what exactly is the deal here? DirecTV's UI is fine...Comcasts UI is fine...Charters UI is fine (only ones I've seen)--all of which are a button press away.
I just don't get all this.
Do people honestly want a new UI for their cable box? New way to watch TV?
Like...I just don't understand it all.
If I wanna watch TV, it's already 1 button press away (switch tv input).
So what exactly is the deal here? DirecTV's UI is fine...Comcasts UI is fine...Charters UI is fine (only ones I've seen)--all of which are a button press away.
I just don't get all this.
They're hoping the Kinect integration will make you want it. "Xbox, find NBA game" or something along those lines.
It's nice I guess if you want to be talking to your TV on a regular basis. Otherwise I don't see how using a controller via xbox is any better than using a controller on DirecTV or Cable.
So really, you have to enjoy using Kinect to control your TV for these features to have meaning to you.
Really they're making a huge gamble that people want to use voice and hand gestures to control their TV.
That's not really true, though. There are plenty of things that the cable/satellite providers don't and would never bother with. That's why it took so long for someone to have an actually decent albeit expensive universal remote in the Harmony line. If someone is looking for a next-gen gaming console with these features, there's only one choice on the horizon.If the market wants it then cable providers will make it. It's not like no one has implemented voice and gesture controls into a tv interface before. Come to think of it the next Apple TV with Siri integration and possibly a camera included could do this and more people would buy a $99-150 product from Apple than a $400 product from Microsoft.
They're hoping the Kinect integration will make you want it. "Xbox, find NBA game" or something along those lines.
It's nice I guess if you want to be talking to your TV on a regular basis. Otherwise I don't see how using a controller via xbox is any better than using a controller on DirecTV or Cable.
So really, you have to enjoy using Kinect to control your TV for these features to have meaning to you.
Really they're making a huge gamble that people want to use voice and hand gestures to control their TV.
I'm starting to think both companies are rushing again. I really hope we don't get a bunch of half-baked games as that would be awful.
That's not really true, though. There are plenty of things that the cable/satellite providers don't and would never bother with. That's why it took so long for someone to have an actually decent albeit expensive universal remote in the Harmony line. If someone is looking for a next-gen gaming console with these features, there's only one choice on the horizon.
You'll do a lot of the stuff through the Xbox One and the only area where you'll see any type of delay is on a channel change. It's probably not going to be any noticeable difference and in many ways it will be faster than what it was before. So at the absolute minimum, it'll be better.
Well, they are seeing a trending drop in subscribers that they would love to stem. By partnering with someone who isn't competing with them directly and, rather, helping to make more palatable their services by unifying their interface with a popular product platform, they gain more exposure and benefit by having more ways to embed their existing services within a customer's lifestyle more seamlessly. Think about when you turn on a console, it's on exclusively until you hit the remote or switch on the television/DVR/cable box. With X1, their services are never preempted by a fully separate device and interface. It's not going to be them doing the hard work, anyway, as MS is the one who is writing and designing the X1 interface. Working with them and providing all that they need access to doesn't represent much if any risk or cost. By passing up any collaboration at all, they risk being left out when others choose to. Seems pretty simple to me. So, what's the Live subscription cost increase you're expecting? Haven't heard anyone say that was actually happening, just speculation on this board.What incentive do cable/satellite providers have to work with MS? At best, I see MS will get one provider on board in exchange for exclusivity. I think that might be satellite based because there are less local infrastructure concerns with satellite. So Dish Network or Direct TV. I don't see multiple providers playing ball. In any case enjoy the increased Live subscription fees.
My understanding is that the cable box is still doing all the work (of decoding and receiving tv signal) and the Xbone is just taking that decoded video output and plopping it into it's own UI. Commands issued through the Xbone still need to be sent to the cable box and handled in the same way you have to now. I don't think there is ANY way it could be faster than what I already have as the weak link here is still my cable box. Not unless they put a tv tuner into the Xbone and allow it to be the decoder, which is what I originally thought would be the case. They haven't sold me on this TV thing when it doesn't even replace my cable box
Here's why it will be faster. Let's say you want to see what's on TV, you pull up the guide through the Xbox One. It'll pop up faster, likely be able to navigate faster and so forth. Even better. You want to go to ESPN, but you don't memorize the channel number. Normally with a regular box, you pull up the guide and scroll until you go to ESPN. I typically know around where it is in the channel range, but not the exact channel. Now all I say is, "Watch ESPN" and I avoid all that sluggishness and extra steps. That's how it will be faster. Anything that the Xbox One can do instead of your cable box is likely to be faster, anything it can't that relies on the cable box will be pretty much the same speed as you're used to. The overall experience is faster and not any slower than what you have now.
Here's why it will be faster. Let's say you want to see what's on TV, you pull up the guide through the Xbox One. It'll pop up faster, likely be able to navigate faster and so forth. Even better. You want to go to ESPN, but you don't memorize the channel number. Normally with a regular box, you pull up the guide and scroll until you go to ESPN. I typically know around where it is in the channel range, but not the exact channel. Now all I say is, "Watch ESPN" and I avoid all that sluggishness and extra steps. That's how it will be faster. Anything that the Xbox One can do instead of your cable box is likely to be faster, anything it can't that relies on the cable box will be pretty much the same speed as you're used to. The overall experience is faster and not any slower than what you have now.
"Here's why it will be faster."
"Because it will probably be faster."
Gee, what insight. While the speed difference in being able to say "watch ESPN" vs using the normal guide might be meaningful, we still don't know if normal tasks like switching channels, or using the DVR will be faster, or if the speed difference will be enough to make it worth hooking your cablebox up through the Xbone.
Oh look, it seems like quite a lot do. You're in the minority.
Passing off fake demo as the real thing, not good. Sony got shit for it in the past, MS are now.
I'm well aware of the showmanship and the intent of it. That doesn't change the fact that the press that will cover this kind of thing, gaming or otherwise (but tech-oriented in general), and the audience that will express the remotest interest in buying another ~$400 box for their living room in the next 2-3 yrs, is the kind of audience that mostly understand a simple, genuine "target render" disclaimer.The planted audience of those cheering all the points they'd like applauded shows that their target audience isn't the gaming press despite their attendance. They want mainstream exposure for what is essentially mainstream features and focus. It's just like the Kinect debut. They know all they have to do is show enough of the right games for the enthusiast gamer crowd, but the rest is to give the new platform widespread appeal. That's all that initial show was really for. Later on, tech sites, gamer sites, and the rest can get hands-on at E3 and beyond. I mean, GAF and the enthusiast gamer crowd isn't nearly enough to support a new platform by itself, so why keep pretending that they are for the first three or four years of a new console's lifespan? Why not just hit both ends of the spectrum at once and from the start to benefit all in the end?
I'm well aware of the showmanship and the intent of it. That doesn't change the fact that the press that will cover this kind of thing, gaming or otherwise (but tech-oriented in general), and the audience that will express the remotest interest in buying another ~$400 box for their living room in the next 2-3 yrs, is the kind of audience that mostly understand a simple, genuine "target render" disclaimer.
I've read my fair share too, Marty, and this really isn't that difficult a concept for people to get their heads around.
Yes, because that contingent has really shaped the narrative for the PS4 since it's reveal, haven't they?
Who gives a shit if it was faked.
Who gives a shit if I'm in the minority.
I expect to put "Proof of Concept" at the bottom of the video
like most companies do when they're faking demonstrations.
How does that change what I said? You're attempting to refute my point that most people could handle transparency regarding the true state of this product, by holding up a contingent of people whose opinion was just a flash in the pan, a vocal minority, by your own acknowledgment here.Come on, Sony got a lot of flack for it on the day of announcement. It was a dumb complaint at the time. People moved on but it was certainly something that people complained about. Hearing people complain they had a system unveiling but didn't show the system was everywhere.
How does that change what I said? You're attempting to refute my point that most people could handle transparency regarding the true state of this product, by holding up a contingent of people whose opinion was just a flash in the pan, a vocal minority, by your own acknowledgment here.
So all this apparent cynicism about what the average person can properly comprehend is still just a strawman argument. And so far that kind of cynicism seems to be backfiring for MS.
Well, they are seeing a trending drop in subscribers that they would love to stem. By partnering with someone who isn't competing with them directly and, rather, helping to make more palatable their services by unifying their interface with a popular product platform, they gain more exposure and benefit by having more ways to embed their existing services within a customer's lifestyle more seamlessly. Think about when you turn on a console, it's on exclusively until you hit the remote or switch on the television/DVR/cable box. With X1, their services are never preempted by a fully separate device and interface. It's not going to be them doing the hard work, anyway, as MS is the one who is writing and designing the X1 interface. Working with them and providing all that they need access to doesn't represent much if any risk or cost. By passing up any collaboration at all, they risk being left out when others choose to. Seems pretty simple to me. So, what's the Live subscription cost increase you're expecting? Haven't heard anyone say that was actually happening, just speculation on this board.
As ever, I am constantly amazed by the "common person" and their ability to be just precisely as ignorant as one's argument needs them to be. Can't understand the concept of under construction but can apparently selectively choose to remember one fact about a product under construction to the exclusion of everything else that was reported and has been reported since.Because that crap got printed in the press. While enthusiasts moved on because they keep up to date, the common person just remembers the negative stigma. Why purposely go for bad press when you know you can avoid it? MS screwed up anyway, but the decision to not explain it as being simulated makes sense given what happened previously. Hell people already are flipping out about all sorts of things that they shouldn't be so it's clear that people have trouble understanding simple things.