Sunday, June 23, 2013

Xbox One.1 and remaining defenders of Microsoft's original support Sony plan

Xbox One preorders jump past PlayStation 4 after Microsoft drops DRM

The majority of gamers were against the Xbox One, Microsoft reversed their changes, pre-orders increased, so what's the problem?

Matt Baxter: damned if they do, damned if they don't

basically trying to move to a world where game content was delivered online rather than being dependent on a physical disc

Why do people keep repeating this? Bullhorn: YOU CAN BUY XBOX ONE GAMES DIGITALLY. So why do all these Xbone defenders think Microsoft should have stuck to their guns and thrown away money? Here is a news flash: You can already buy full 360 games on the Xbox marketplace. And guess what? Here's your fucking savings from being a tech-hip douchebag that feels special for not buying discs:

Borderlands 2
Amazon: 29.99
Microsoft Digital: 39.99

Black Ops 2
Amazon: 39.99
Microsoft Digital : 59.99

But where are the savings from being tech-hip and disc-free? There are no disc/packaging costs, no distribution, no shipping, so in how many cases should the digital version cost more? Answer: Never. But where did the savings go? Microsoft fucking ate them. If anyone looks past the Steam hype about sales you'll find the same thing. Amazon is normally cheaper for $40-$60 games. Why didn't they pass on the savings? Why should they? They piss on your head while you stand there waiting for retailer's cut.

And that's with competition from retailers and used games. Microsoft fanwhores however would want us to hand over all pricing control to Microsoft and let them piss on the savings. Open your mouth and get ready for teh future!

Matt Baxter sez: The answer could be "fix the messaging". 

Uh no the answer is to fix the damn product so the majority doesn't hate it. What message were they missing? Microsoft was going to take away first sale doctrine which has never been done in console history. Are you going to deny this? How should they have candy coated taking away the ability to hand a game to your little brother or sell it on Ebay? You tell us Matt, tell us exactly what they should have said.

The Xbox One was a terrible plan and the only logical business move was to reverse the changes or hand over money to Sony. The pre-order data before and after the changes show this so why does Matt and others think that Microsoft should hand over money to Sony? The Xbox One was such an awful business plan that Microsoft might as well have supported Sony directly by making all their games PS4 compatible. I honestly think that would have made them more money than "sticking with their guns" when those guns were pointed at their own heads.

71 comments:

  1. Who cares about any of this? Why does anyone care if the Xbox One sells or not?

    I say we all go outside and forget about all of this.

    - Not a Microsoft employee

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I saw we go to TMR and discuss how discussing anything on techbroil is pointless.

      Then we'll check in on the Linux Movement and see if he is still blogging about gardening.

      Delete
    2. "Who cares about any of this? Why does anyone care if the Xbox One sells or not?

      I say we all go outside and forget about all of this."

      Why are you here?

      Delete
    3. A wild DrLoser parody appears!

      Delete
    4. A parody but it's what fanboys resort to when they don't have much left.

      Sorry sluts but the internet was made for porn and nerd talk. Xbox One definitely qualifies as nerd talk so go read the latest post from The Linux Movement aka Pogson.

      Delete
    5. Then we'll check in on the Linux Movement and see if he is still blogging about gardening.

      Hahaha, awesome.

      But, seriously, he's right. Why care about some rinky dink company like Microsoft when the ext4 war still wages on after nearly 10 years?

      http://tmrepository.com/fudtracker/delayed-allocation-for-fun-profit-and-absolute-dis/

      Delete
  2. Re: Matt Baxter: damned if they do, damned if they don't

    I noticed this particular piece of idiocy, wanted to post it here myself.

    It's a thought pattern MS shills have been promoting for years, that goes along these lines:

    a) MS has really bad/weak PR (which absolutely isn't true)

    b) MS has good products but nobody understands them

    c) MS gets attacked no matter what they do

    These ideas were, over the past decade, planted so firmly that it is now impossible to criticise NuM$ without getting attacked by brainwashed volunteer-shills that are on a mission to defend the mothership from "unjust attacks."

    Among the brainwashed zealots hides a large number of paid shills, but I bet they end up looking like moderate and reasonable commenters, which gives MS unparalleled ability to steer public discourse and promote themselves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not a Microsoft Employee6/23/2013 12:46:00 PM

      Don't you get it? All it takes for Microsoft to go downhill is a semi-literate retiree blogging about the greatness of Debian. If we don't hit back hard, the company is doomed.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. c) MS Gets attacked by Tech-savvy because they don't cater for them ... instead, Microsoft in their brilliance have started to cater more for consumers than producers. Thats what's wrong with the company atm. Ordinary consumers, dont complain as much as tech-savvy

      b) Microsoft HAD good products - throughout time they have made hits and misses - but their current 2012-2013 products are largely saturated by FAIL... regrettably :-(

      Delete
    4. No they get attacked for pointlessly excluding the tech-savvy when they could serve both.

      The start menu could have been left as a registry change even though Metro really isn't liked by anyone.

      They piss off the tech-savvy and the casual users aren't impressed with their offerings either. They can't really do anything right. Marketing can only do so much for a lousy product.

      Delete
    5. Ordinary consumers, dont complain as much as tech-savvy

      Disagree in principle. While "ordinary consumers" are indeed far less likely to complain online, they are voting with their wallets by avoiding Microsoft's non-entrenched products such as Zune, Kin, Surface, and Windows 8.

      People that are labeled things such has tech savvy, hard core, aficionados, and heavily invested are often dismissed due to their numbers being in the margins, which isn't always true in my estimation, but, even so, these groups of people often mirror, and, more importantly, heavily influence the opinions of the masses. It is not wise to ostracize them.

      throughout time they have made hits and misses

      Microsoft's once competitive advantage was that nearly everything they produced could be considered a hit, and misses were so rare that merely not being up to par was a significant event.

      but their current 2012-2013 products are largely saturated by FAIL... regrettably

      It stretches back long before that, but 2012 was when the number of people noticing that Microsoft is no longer a juggernaut, in mindshare at least, reached critical mass. 2012 was the year everyone realized that no one was afraid of Microsoft anymore. They're still have locked down the areas they've had for years, but no one's quaking in their boots when Microsoft decides to do something new, which once meant the near total elimination of competition in whatever Microsoft set its sights on.

      Delete
    6. it is now impossible to criticise NuM$ without getting attacked by brainwashed volunteer-shills that are on a mission to defend the mothership from "unjust attacks."

      Translation, boo hoo people disagree with me, how I long for a slashdotian circle jerk.

      Face it, you're a slashtard. You even have the giveaway mindset that anyone who disagrees with you has a hidden agenda. It'd be funny if only it wasn't so sad.

      Delete
    7. @Anonymous 6/27/2013 03:54:00 AM

      But you just proved his point.

      Delete
    8. But you just proved his point.

      So in short, anyone who says something the group does not approve of is automatically a shill.

      Delete
    9. There's a difference between disagreeing and flamebaiting.

      Delete
    10. "Translation, boo hoo people disagree with me, how I long for a slashdotian circle jerk."

      Circle jerk? On issues that are completely anti consumer (and possibly anti citizen as well) nobody sane will side with the corporate side, people who do, are either:

      1. paid promoters

      2. employees

      3. share holders

      4. brainwashed fanwhores

      5. idiots who genuinely don't understand the issue at hand

      First three categories (shills, employees and owners) are the worst trolls possible, since they are not interested in any kind of debate, but are just looking to either silence the opposition or bury their comments with non-stop trolling.

      They should not be allowed to have a voice in public debate, but if anyone wanted to actually hear their completely predictable opinion (OurProductIsGreatTM, YouComplaintsAreOverblownTM), they should still be clearly marked so that anyone reading their well prepared PR statements would know what he is dealing with.

      Obligation to disclose employer (and/or other relation to the company/product) should be standard practice on public forums.

      As far as the last two categories (fanwhores and idiots) are concerned, it is impossible to tell if there is anyone in them, until we can see who is employed (or otherwise in bed with the company). In any given debate, for all we know, everyone supporting "friendly (read: hostile) corporate interests" may be a shill.

      "You even have the giveaway mindset that anyone who disagrees with you has a hidden agenda."

      When we're talking about issues that are so obviously bad for one side (consumers) and so obviously good for the other (corporation), I have to assume that those on the corporate side of the argument have a good reason to support corporate interest (wage, profit, employment) and that they are merely hiding their true purpose.

      I can't immediately assume I'm dealing with an idiot (or a bunch of idiots) who's arguing against his own best interest.

      Delete
    11. Circle jerk? On issues that are completely anti consumer (and possibly anti citizen as well) nobody sane will side with the corporate side, people who do, are either:

      It reads to me like you're playing the whole on the side of light thing, and everyone who's opinion differs is evil or something. I've seen this sort of behavior before, can't seem to put my finger on where.

      but are just looking to either silence the opposition

      And right after

      They should not be allowed to have a voice in public debate

      Who is looking to silence who again?
      It's not a debate if there's no opponent. It's a circle jerk.

      In any given debate, for all we know, everyone supporting "friendly (read: hostile) corporate interests" may be a shill.

      Based wholly on the faulty premise that you're on the side of light and anyone disagreeing with you has a hidden agenda. Okay then.

      When we're talking about issues that are so obviously bad for one side (consumers) and so obviously good for the other (corporation),

      It's a bit less black and white than that. Not everyone realizes that they're shilling or for who. I suppose someone shilling on the consumer end would be a zealot rather than a shill.

      I have to assume that those on the corporate side of the argument have a good reason to support corporate interest (wage, profit, employment) and that they are merely hiding their true purpose.

      Based on the faulty premise that anyone not payed to express opposing views is insane. Okay.

      I can't immediately assume I'm dealing with an idiot (or a bunch of idiots) who's arguing against his own best interest.

      I refer you again to the this.



      Delete
    12. It reads to me like you're playing the whole on the side of light thing, and everyone who's opinion differs is evil or something.

      No, that's just a strawman you came up with.

      Who is looking to silence who again?

      You're looking to silence the guy you're replying to using non-stop trolling.

      Based wholly on the faulty premise that you're on the side of light and anyone disagreeing with you has a hidden agenda.

      Except that's not remotely his premise. Lie some more.

      It's a bit less black and white than that.

      Nope. There's were no consumer benefits whatsoever to the Xbox One features MS backpeddled from. That says some things about the people who defended them.

      Based on the faulty premise that anyone not payed to express opposing views is insane. Okay.

      His premise is that anybody who says it's a good thing to get fucked up the ass without lube by MS is either a paid marketer, a mindless fanboy, or an idiot.

      You have yet to demonstrate any faults with this premise.

      Disengenuous strawmanning doesn't count.

      Delete
    13. No, that's just a strawman you came up with.

      Not really. I'm not the one who suggested that everyone in disagreement is on some corporate marketing payroll or insane, try again.

      You're looking to silence the guy you're replying to using non-stop trolling.

      Looks like an attempt to silence dissenting voices (rewad: me) more than anything else. I'm engaging in a debate.

      Except that's not remotely his premise. Lie some more.

      Except s/he clearly implied a hidden agenda, backpedal more.

      Nope. There's were no consumer benefits whatsoever to the Xbox One features MS backpeddled from. That says some things about the people who defended them.

      Watch the video, absorb Buckley's wisdom, then parrot your talking points.

      His premise is that anybody who says it's a good thing to get fucked up the ass without lube by MS is either a paid marketer, a mindless fanboy, or an idiot

      I never said that it was either a good or bad thing, why the hostility? You're both making baseless presumptions about people. My point of contention is the presumption that everyone and anyone who does not pronounce themselves in agreement on your point of contention is automatically in favor of it and automatically has a hidden agenda.


      You have yet to demonstrate any faults with this premise.

      Then you need to either remove your blinders, or acquire some reading comprehension. You've simply refused to acknowledge any points made and decree that there are none being made. If that's not an attempt to silence...

      I'm cool with the MS hate. Just hold yourselves to the same standards you hold everyone else to.

      Delete
    14. Why is Buckley so popular, and why is he considered wise? All his videos boil down to, "I don't really care about this issue, care to do no research on it, and my presentation is amateurish. I also make fun of everyone who does the same thing as I do and pretend I'm above them." People also say he's funny. I chuckled once or twice but wouldn't describe him as a comedian. I don't see what sets him apart from all the similar vloggers that get 500-10,000 views per video, most of whom do a better job covering the subjects in question.

      Delete
    15. "It reads to me like you're playing the whole on the side of light thing, and everyone who's opinion differs is evil or something."

      The obviously anti-consumer stance that shills and employees take for granted cannot be considered positive or worthy of debate, they're a dangerous pest (since many naive idiots may not comprehend they are reading corporate PR) plain and simple.

      "Who is looking to silence who again?"

      A corporate entity has no citizenship rights (free speach, etc.) there is no reason to tolerate it (in any way), or its PR drones, unless it's performing some useful service.

      "It's not a debate if there's no opponent. It's a circle jerk."

      Corporations are not humans, their opinions have no value, same as opinions of sheep or cows (or autonomous home devices), they either provide service or are taken away.

      In cases where the issue at hand is so clearly anti-consumer (and pro-corporate) there can be no one (sane) among consumers arguing in favor, everyone aware of what's going on would be against it (in this case, DRM).

      "Based wholly on the faulty premise that you're on the side of light and anyone disagreeing with you has a hidden agenda."

      You've tried to use Star Wars like parody here, to present the issue as some sort of trivia; but, unfortunately for you, even if we take your point of view, there is no fault: DRM (what we're talking about in the case of Xbone) is clearly anti-consumer, anyone defending it is a shill, employee or a shareholder (anyone else who would defend it, is unaware of what he is doing - i.e. an idiot).

      "It's a bit less black and white than that. Not everyone realizes that they're shilling or for who."

      Yes, there are idiots out there, but, unless you are out to brand everyone an idiot, your first response, in all such cases, should be "I'm talking to shill here." We've certainly seen enough of them around here, haven't we?

      "I suppose someone shilling on the consumer end would be a zealot rather than a shill."

      A consumer defending his own rights is completely normal (should be standard IMO) behaviour; I see no reason why would you want to brand anyone who's willing to make his voice heard a zealot.

      "Based on the faulty premise that anyone not payed to express opposing views is insane."

      When the views expressed are directly harmful to the person making them, then yes, it's either insanity (more likely an idiot who doesn't understand what he's defending) or a corporate drone with an agenda.

      "I refer you again to the this."

      Do you have to put up links to stupid YouTube videos? Do you think it enhances your faulty arguments somehow?

      Delete
    16. Not really. I'm not the one who suggested that everyone in disagreement is on some corporate marketing payroll or insane, try again.

      The guy you're arguing with didn't suggest that, either. Hence why it's a straw man. Troll harder.

      I'm engaging in a debate.

      Condescending to your opponent as you lie about what they said isn't "engaging in a debate".

      Except s/he clearly implied a hidden agenda

      No, he said that defending Microsoft's anti-consumer madness requires one to either have a vested financial interest in them, or be a brainwashed fanboy, or be an idiot. But of course you have to ignore those last two points because they kill your argument.

      backpedal more.

      You clearly don't know what backpedaling means.

      Watch the video, absorb Buckley's wisdom, then parrot your talking points.

      Buckley said fanboys are dumb, don't buy something if you don't like it, and Sony, MS, and Nintendo only want to make money. They are not your friends.

      None of that contradicts anything me or the other guy have said. I don't think you even watched that video, did you?

      I never said that it was either a good or bad thing, why the hostility?

      I wasn't being hostile in the quote you're replying to. Why the lying?

      My point of contention is the presumption that everyone and anyone who does not pronounce themselves in agreement on your point of contention is automatically in favor of it and automatically has a hidden agenda.

      And nobody made that presumption. Again with the straw manning.

      You've simply refused to acknowledge any points made and decree that there are none being made.

      Because none were made. You just attacked imaginary points that me and the other guy didn't make.

      I'm cool with the MS hate.

      Sure, that's why you're trolling people for speaking against NuMicrosoft. Because you're so cool with it.

      Just hold yourselves to the same standards you hold everyone else to.

      But then I'd be harsher on you.

      Delete
    17. The guy you're arguing with didn't suggest that, either. Hence why it's a straw man. Troll harder.

      he said that defending Microsoft's anti-consumer madness requires one to either have a vested financial interest in them, or be a brainwashed fanboy, or be an idiot.

      so he didn't say that but he did. Pick one.

      here was a rather humorous thread on the previous entry here, where the argument was that even those on your side have a vested financial interest in these things (ex Jerkface as a .NET developer).

      Is it that it applies to both sides, or that it applies when it is convenient, and it's a okay when it works in your favor, but also terrible when it works in your favor?

      Sure, that's why you're trolling people for speaking against NuMicrosoft.

      I've been pointing out flawed logic, and again my point of contention is the faulty presumptions being made. I've neither defended Microsoft, nor shit on people expressly for speaking out against it. Strawman more.

      Delete
  3. If you have a good offering then you don't need to rely on marketing. Does Disneyland need to run gimmicky ads to get people to show up?

    Just look at Sony, all they needed to say was that you can own PS4 games. They didn't need to spin anything.

    But I think Matt should go work as a manager at Microsoft. He seems to think that people are irrational sheep that need to be corralled. Let's not try to give people what they want, let's blow a few hundred million on advertising to try and convince people to buy our focus group rejected products. It's the NuMicrosoft way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Disney does market pretty heavily in the slow parts of the year when they have trouble reaching capacity, but the ads assume the watcher is already familiar with the product and just needs to be reminded of its existence and offered an incentive.

      On the same token, Apple could make the simplest possible ad, something well within their repertoire, and make bank out of it. Just imagine a white screen, "sound stage" white, with an iPad in the middle. It's so white you have trouble seeing the iPad and might question the wisdom of making contrast so low. After some sort of camera pan or rotating the iPad on a platform or something, it cuts to light gray Helvetica text on the same white background. Taking up nearly the whole screen is "$249". That's it. No music or voiceover. Not even mentioning the product name. They'd flash the Apple logo but wouldn't even need to.

      People would go gaga over such a thing. Everyone already knows what an iPad is and the main impediment is price for many people. Apple doesn't need to spend a dollar "educating" people as to the value of their products and can even be actively against it and still launch a successful campaign.

      Okay, okay, Apple is in a special position, but the Kindle Fire is also established enough where it could do something similar and get similar results.

      I'll bet despite the marketing, people don't even know that the Surface is. That might seem to side with those that say, "See! Microsoft needs more advertising" but if the product were any good, it would already be in public consciousness and the ads would merely serve as a reminder, as they are for Disney, Apple, and probably Amazon.

      Delete
    2. Think about how many great programs you learned about without advertising. If there is tech that is really good then word of it usually gets passed around the interwebz.

      Advertising works but only to help get the message out. It doesn't fix a bad product and in fact can backfire if the company comes across as trying to dupe everyone.

      Delete
    3. The techies they hate so much are the ones that almost always recommend things to the "regular" consumer. Everyone has that techie friend, unless you're him. That's how firefox "killed" IE 6.

      Delete
    4. By the time the 1.0 announcement full page ad made it to the New York Times it was basically a vanity piece. Firefox went mainstream while it was in beta.

      Delete
  4. Sinofsky's brilliant "Design Decisions" strike another poor customer:

    http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_8-desktop/how-to-add-desktop-gadgets-to-the-sidebar-in/92aeb64c-d844-4374-9fb2-c1a49d58f668

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just as sad is that the consumer didn't search for 3rd party apps that basically does it. Not fully, but you can get a lot of them working. MS should have never pulled it in the 1st place, but there are a bunch of free 3rd party apps out there that simulate the Win7 experience. Even Aero Glass! (http://glass8.berlios.de/)

      Delete
  5. Whoops I mean it's for education.

    How sweet Microsoft.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Perhaps in an effort to offer cheaper machines without expensive Windows licenses or Intel processors, the PC OEMs are increasingly beginning to experiment with Android in form factors one wouldn't normally expect. The HP Slate 21 follows the previously announced HP Slate x2 convertible laptop, which is itself reminiscent of Asus' long-running Transformer Pad series. Asus is also responsible for a few other Android-equipped curios, including both an all-in-one computer and an upcoming laptop that have full Android tablets inside their detachable screens."

    Or perhaps, it's an effort to offer a PC without Metro, a PC that will actually sell; just a guess.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The Korea Times reported on Monday that the Seoul-based corporation is killing off its desktop business.

    [...]

    Reps for Samsung told the news service that because "demand for conventional desktop PCs is going down," Samsung will now divert its "resources to popular connected and portable devices.”

    The Galaxy S maker routinely comes out on top of mobile OEM sales and shipments charts, occasionally trading back and forth with Apple on both domestic and global accounts.

    Samsung's focus on mobility and its now lack of interest in PCs are not mutually exclusive.

    It wouldn't come as a shock if more tech companies with diverse product portfolios cut ties with PCs to conserve resources and boost their bottom lines.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is actually good news. Microsoft's Windows 8 is pushing the industry forward in a new, dynamic, mobile-friendly way. Those who can't keep up will be left behind. Samsung couldn't keep up.

      Delete
    2. Ah look, it's Dot MetroTard herself.

      With that mouthful of marketbabble I would guess that M$ has finally gave in and hired you, correct?

      In what universe could anyone say that "Windows 8 is pushing the industry forward"? That is the perhaps the most insane conclusion possible. It is definitely pushing them, but not forward at all. It's more like backwards to Windows 1.0.

      And "Samsung couldn't keep up"? LOL! They are on fire and in a few years just might buy your beloved Micro$oft for pocket change.

      Delete
    3. Where art thou from fair sir Metrotard? Neowin? Channel9? Some other, particularly Me'tarded, place?

      Delete
    4. This is actually good news. Microsoft's Windows 8 is pushing the industry forward in a new, dynamic, mobile-friendly way.

      Hahahhahahha oh boy never in all the loon prophesies did anyone predict that Microsoft would wreck their own market and then have shills telling us that fewer sales are better.

      Samsung couldn't keep up.

      HAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAH even funnier. Samsung can't keep up in the mobile universe, that is a good one. Other than their wildly successful Galaxy line, they can't keep up. Oh man you shills make the best comedy relief. First we had the over the top loons but you guys have definitely taken their place. Wow thanks for the laugh, no really that was good.

      Delete
    5. Probably an employee given that he spends all day defending Windows 8.

      Delete
    6. I didn't even know Samsung made desktop computers.

      Delete
    7. This is actually good news. Microsoft's Windows 8 is pushing the industry forward in a new, dynamic, mobile-friendly way. Those who can't keep up will be left behind. Samsung couldn't keep up.

      That's a parody, right? Even a shill couldn't write something that delusional and vomit inducing. Right?

      Delete
    8. I am actually disappointed that you didn't notice the parody.

      Sure, metrotards can post something like this seriously. But the real DotMatrix wouldn't show up on Techbroil. And even if he did, he would surely not using his scorched-land nick.

      Delete
    9. I thought it was someone from TMR looking for pee stream material.

      Delete
    10. I am actually disappointed that you didn't notice the parody.

      Trolled!

      Delete
  8. Why not just bundle kinect instead of requiring it for the console to function? That and the $100 price difference will still give next gen to Sony.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I could buy the console and then sell the kinect in that case. Kinect devices are very useful in HCI research for example.

      Still, the kinect is terrible as a main input device, and shouldn't be packed with the console at all.

      Delete
    2. I could buy the console and then sell the kinect in that case.

      It wouldn't be worth much since every Xbox owner would already have one.

      Delete
    3. Like I said, Xbox owners don't give 2 shits about the kinect, people doing research however do (I have colleagues working in HCI and they use kinects a lot). Cheap kinects would make them very happy.

      If you can't detach the kinect from the console, you can't sell it.

      Delete
  9. Right, because Sony is just a wonderful company that cares oodles about its consumers, which is why PSN will no longer be free of charge. Sony cares.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just goes to show you how bad Microsoft has gotten when Sony looks like sunshine and puppies by comparison. This is the company that was hosing computers with rootkits 10 years ago.

      Delete
    2. Sony is just a wonderful company that cares oodles about its consumers

      I don't think anyone believes that but they are the lesser of two evils and saved disc based console gaming for another 10 years.

      Delete
  10. I wonder how someone as insane as Dr. Loser is able to work. First of all, how does he manage to stay unharmed? Given his personality, he must make gazillions of new enemies in a typical work day.

    How is he able to write correct code at his job? (he's a programmer, right?) If his prose is any indication, he would write a graphics library and it would contain more code that does sound manipulation than graphics. And the comments would be verbose nonsense, sprinkled with random quotes, held together through various colorful insults against anyone who is mad enough to read them.

    Or is he using the internet as some sort of mind-toilet? Like he jizzes all his crazy into a forum away and stays level-headed and calm after the shot? Just like lots of investment bankers do with coke?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think he is the anti-Pogson. 15 years younger or so.

      Delete
    2. Psychophrenia is a hell of a disease.

      Delete
  11. Is "Xbox Music" the dumbest name for a product of all time?

    Let's say Sony would launch a streaming service called "Playstation Music", which would not be tied to the Playstation at all. Somehow this stupidity is lessened when Microsoft does it.

    Actually "Playstation Music" would make even more sense (Playstation = music playing station) than calling it Xbox.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I can't believe the vote is split here:

    Is Microsoft winning or losing the war for developers?

    NuMicrosoft must have lots of fanboys to carry such a vote, after Windows 8 and its "performance" in the market and the WinRT library.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh god, even with fanboys and shills stuffing the virtual ballot box that poll result is horrible.

      Thanks for gifting Apple with more developers, NuMicrosoft, I'm sure Tim sincerely appreciates it.

      Delete
    2. Poll developers and not Microsoft employees or fanboys.

      Delete
  13. Just bend over and take it.

    That's what you Winwhores told us. Remember?

    ReplyDelete
  14. More stupidity from Redmond. New Kinect wont interface with Windows PC's. Another reason not to buy the Xbone.

    http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/microsoft-kinect-for-xbox-one-will-not-work-on-pcs/

    ReplyDelete
  15. Unexpected move:

    http://www.neowin.net/news/internet-explorer-11-will-be-coming-to-windows-7

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If they really wanted to make IE relevant again they'd release it for XP. If Microsoft is attempting to prevent another IE6 they're several years too late. The new IE6 is IE8.

      Delete
  16. Man, the backlash will be fucking huge when the public finds out what the "start button" truly means in Windows 8.1.

    ReplyDelete
  17. http://www.dailytech.com/Microsoft+Windows+Phone+is+in+Third+Place+and+Were+Proud/article31850.htm

    "Led by Finnish phonemaker Nokia Oyj. -- once the world's largest smartphone maker and currently the company behind roughly four out of every five Windows Phones shipped -- Windows Phone shipped 7.0m units in Q1 2013 for a 3.2 percent market share; slightly ahead of BlackBerry Ltd.'s 6.3m units shipped (and 2.9 percent market share). Google Inc.'s Android widened its lead for the quarter, outselling Apple, Inc. more than 4-to-1, with a 79 percent market share."


    The first comment rips this piece of PR fluff apart:

    LOL!
    By BabelHuber on 6/27/2013 12:48:54 PM

    These are the smartphone sales for Q1 2013:

    BIGGEST SMARTPHONE OPERATING SYSTEMS BY UNIT SALES IN Q1 2013

    Rank . OS Platform . . . Units . . . Market share . .Was Q4 2012 . .Manufacturers in Top 10
    1 (1) . .Android . . . . . . .159.0 M . 74.6 % . . . ( 68.5 %) . . . Samsung, Huawei, ZTE, Lenovo, Sony, LG, Yulong/Coolpad
    2 (2) . .iOS . . . . . . . . . . 37.4 M . 17.6 % . . . .( 22.2 %) . . . Apple
    3 (4) . .Windows Phone . 6.3 M . . 3.0 % . . . . ( 2.7 %) . . . . Samsung, Nokia
    4 (3) . .Blackberry . . . . . 6.0 M . . 2.8 % . . . . ( 3.2 %) . . . . RIM
    5 (5) . .bada . . . . . . . . . 1.8 M . . 0.8 % . . . . ( 1.4 %) . . . . .Samsung
    6 (6) . .Symbian . . . . . . 0.5 M . . 0.2 % . . . . ( 1.0 %) . . . . . Nokia
    others . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0 M . . 0.9 % . . . . ( 1.0 %)
    TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . 213.0 M
    Source: TomiAhonen Consulting Analysis 17 May 2013, based on manufacturer and industry data
    This table may be freely shared

    Source: http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2013/05/q1-numbers-in-bloodbath-year-four-smartphones-galore.html


    If this is what MS calls a success nowadays, I do not want to know what they consider a failure.

    MS is in the smartphone business for more than 10 years now. Being third with a pathetic 3% market share really is nothing to brag about.

    I really would like to have more competition in the smartphone market, but MS does not seem to get it right.

    Microsoft Corp.'s Windows Phone product manager Larry Lieberman gave an interview to The Verge this week cheering the third place "victory". He comments, "We think we're solidly the third ecosystem right now. That's a huge announcement in some respects. [Windows Phone is] growing faster than anyone else right now."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Solidly in third? They barely slumped over Blackberry, which has been on life support for years. Even then, the amount difference probably fits into margin of error.

      With Android and Google combining for over 90% of the market share (and growing), Microsoft is looking like Linux circa 1999 claiming victory over the "other" category containing losers like OS/2, Amiga, and half a dozen BSD variants.

      And the same thing will happen again. "Linux" will hope to absorb the remainder of "other" when in reality those scraps will be absorbed entirely by the top two players.

      Microsoft is even using the "fastest growing" argument. How many times did we hear that about Linux over 15+ years whenever some counter tracked a 0.1% uptick?

      Delete
    2. MS is in the smartphone business for more than 10 years now. Being third with a pathetic 3% market share really is nothing to brag about.

      They are since 17 years in the smartphone business.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Windows_CE_Timeline.svg

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. Anyone else thinks Symbian would still be in third place if Elop hadn't forced it into the back alley and shot it in the head? Remember, Symbian was capable of running in very constrained hardware, which made for some really cheap internet and chat centric "smartphones", and the Belle revision had cool widgets and homescreens, even compared to iOS and Android.

      PS: The chart above is garbage. It doesn't clarify if "Blackberry" refers to old Blackberry OSes or that new Blackberry OS. That 2.8% might be old Blackberrys (corps still rely on those). Anyway, it will be so amusing if the new Blackberry OS overtakes Windows Phone. It probably won't happen, but if it does it will be hilarious.

      PPS: Needless to say, speaking as an ex-Symbian freak, I hope Elop gets biten by a poisonous snake in the crown jewels and dies a very painful death.

      Delete
  18. Metrotards are truly the freetard successors. On places that were once overfilled with freetards, I see so many metrotards, it's ridiculous.

    Heise.de for example, considered to be the "German Slashdot". That place was brimming with hardcore freetards. Say something against Linux and you were grilled. Now it's flooded with metrotards!!

    OSNews, once a freetard bastion, gets increasingly metrotarded too.

    Read:

    http://www.osnews.com/comments/27150

    "Nelson" is working really hard there.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Google Is Making a Console?

    http://techland.time.com/2013/06/28/google-is-reportedly-making-a-games-console-and-smartwatch-why-not-everyone-else-is/?iid=tl-main-lead

    If this is serious, does anyone think it will seriously contend with Xbox/PS4/Wii? I don't. I think Google thinks a little too highly of their OS if they think they can pull this off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aren’t game consoles supposed to be on the outs, like Jurassic dinosaurs squaring off against stealth bombers (i.e. smartphones and tablets)?

      Can't believe how many people are buying into this and it's good to see at least somebody pushing back from the idea. I could accept being accused of "denying the future" but none of the people saying that consoles are dead are gamers. They're just generic tech writers who see that a new market has been created with Angry Birds et al and are proclaiming the old market dead without anything beyond the assumption that it's a zero sum game.

      I do agree that it is likely that smartphones will eventually displace portable game systems like GameBoy, even though the controls are worse.

      At least this writer seems to get it:

      the economic health of the industry depends more on revenue than volume. According to an NPD Group survey of core and mobile gamers published in September 2012, while the audience for mobile gaming has been outpacing core gaming (whose audience shrank slightly in 2012), the total revenue from the most popular mobile game series in history, Angry Birds, is a pittance compared to the revenue from a single game like Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, which topped $500 million during its initial 24 hours and went on to surpass $1 billion by its two-week sales mark. In NPD’s words, “It’s the revenue contribution of the Core Gamer segment that continues to outpace all other segments, and remains vital to the future of the industry.”

      Delete