Let?s Get Off the Xbone Hate-Train Already

[Talvrae]

I wills top hating it when the console will stop trying to spy us and that kinnect will be a requirement

 

[Evil Smurf]

I did read it. I'm just giving reasons not to get off the hate train.

How can you say that you read it when you just wrote the "Kinect spying on you" as a reason for not liking the Xbox One despite the fact that the OP already wrote in his post that the Kinect WOULDN'T spy on you?

You are just proving his point by showing that your decision to dislike the Xbox One is based on misinformation - exactly the kind of misinformation the OP claimed that people erroneously believe in.

Give me a credible source that the Kinnect does not spy on you, also what's stopping Microsoft reversing their decision?

10800th post

 

[Spacemonkey430]

I will agree, it has been pretty quiet. I imagine people have pretty much settled in to either "I still hate it", "I never hated it", or "I hated it and now I'm going to buy it". But really its still the same issue: aside from Microsoft's crap marketing at pointing out what may be good about the Xbone, a lot of people felt that the fact that they were attempting to control what you do with your own property after you have paid for it was not worth it. And there it is.

 

[Genocidicles]

The whole "glorified demo"-thing comes from a completely anonymous comment posted by someone who claimed to be a Microsoft employee, so that information is completely unfounded.

It makes sense though.

Why would publishers be ok with a system that would get them less money than regular used games?

 

[mad825]

Microsoft deserves every ounce of flak they received, and I hope they learned from it.

But that's just the point isn't it? Whas the flak even deserved to begin with? If much of the criticism was based on straight out misinformation, such as the Kinect-spybox bullshit, then it most certainly wasn't deserved.

That's what we need to discuss here: Was the criticism based on a fair evaluation of their policies or good old Internet sensationalism and injudicious ?moral outbursts??

After the allegations with their involvement with the PRISM program you're not going to stick it to the man? Unlike Google, MS do believe that the internet does need censorship and does also believe that their customers cannot be trusted.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

I think it's time for you to stop speaking for a massive group of people who have their own opinions, and trivialising their (in most cases) thought-out and well-substantiated views (that the Xbone is not something they want to support).

Piracy is negligible on consoles, and being against required internet connection isn't necessarily about how much it would affect the user in normal circumstances, although that's as far as some people need to look for severe consequences, it's about how much it would affect the user under unforseen circumstances where it shouldn't.

Console is region-locked, meaning the people who would get the most benefit out of this system (people with families in other countries) wouldn't necessarily be able to use it. Otherwise, yes, if it's the full game (although it's easy for MS to say that once it's already been removed), that seems like good value.

You know how it got out of hand? Because no-one from Microsoft said what you did in your post that I saw. That being the case, that Kinect is actually as optional as you say, that's not that bad, but by assuring developers Kinect support you do encourage Kinect elements in games and basically I'd rather they didn't put any motion control in.

I could not care less about specs because I have no idea what they mean, and I am not interested in any day one exclusives for either console.

There. PS4 comes out on top. In fact the largest mitigating factor is that it will have paid online.

 

[Miss G.]

Microsoft deserves every ounce of flak they received, and I hope they learned from it.

But that's just the point isn't it? Whas the flak even deserved to begin with? If much of the criticism was based on straight out misinformation, such as the Kinect-spybox bullshit, then it most certainly wasn't deserved.

That's what we need to discuss here: Was the criticism based on a fair evaluation of their policies or good old Internet sensationalism and injudicious ?moral outbursts??

I gotta say, from looking over the comments of this thread, seeing half of the people replying that "well I'm still gonna fucking it because I want to" and the other half hilariously repeating the very talking-points that the OP dismantled in his original post, my guess is on the latter.

I did read it. I'm just giving reasons not to get off the hate train.

How can you say that you read it when you just wrote the "Kinect spying on you" as a reason for not liking the Xbox One despite the fact that the OP already wrote in his post that the Kinect WOULDN'T spy on you?

You are just proving his point by showing that your decision to dislike the Xbox One is based on misinformation - exactly the kind of misinformation the OP claimed that people erroneously believe in.

Regardless of what you say, PRISM is real and Microsoft has been in bed with the NSA from Windows95. Also, didn't Microsoft come out with a statement somewhat recently that they were gonna try to defend their customers from the NSA using the information it got from them in the first place? That the NSA should be more clear with what they were doing with this information but not a finger pointed back at themselves? Bit of a round-about admittance to what people have been saying about them and now they're just pulling off a 'they're OUR victims and only WE can abuse them' thing to try and make themselves look like the lesser of a bunch of evils. That means that yes, the Kinect is spying on you. And try not to forget that 'Microsoft reserves the rights to change their policies etc at anytime they see fit' and that a day 1 patch is required to use the Xbone without the restrictions they already put in place, meaning any new firmware update could be the one to put all this nonsense back.

You do know the "Family Sharing" was just a glorified demo right? The people who were given the game through that only got to play it for about an hour.

Also the DRM restrictions are stupid. Just because they won't affect you negatively, doesn't mean it won't affect other people negatively.

Sorry, I have this disorder where I feel the compulsive need to correct people on the Internet.

The whole "glorified demo"-thing comes from a completely anonymous comment posted by someone who claimed to be a Microsoft employee, so that information is completely unfounded.

Even though it was from an anonymous source, what official news from Microsoft or from publishers that so badly want to kill the 'evil' used game market has led you to believe that the post doesn't hold SOME water? Why would publishers opt in to something that will mean only 1 unit sold for up to 10 people (for free) plus the owner of the game to play, multiplied by every Xbone owner that would use this feature? One feature, I might add, that they have yet to come out and explain? After all, if you're trying to sell a luxury item, something that in and of itself is unnecessary to have, you have to make it as appealing as possible to own and CLEARLY explain such a feature that would've been a function that is not only unique to your product, but is also a good thing for families to consider during the holiday rush when they see your stuff on the shelf vs your less expensive competition. It makes the most sense to infer that the plan was 'a glorified-demo' with a prompt to buy; if that's not the case and it really was as good as defenders wanted to convince others (like me) that it was, why get rid of it?

 

[SeventhSigil]

Microsoft deserves every ounce of flak they received, and I hope they learned from it.

But that's just the point isn't it? Whas the flak even deserved to begin with? If much of the criticism was based on straight out misinformation, such as the Kinect-spybox bullshit, then it most certainly wasn't deserved.

That's what we need to discuss here: Was the criticism based on a fair evaluation of their policies or good old Internet sensationalism and injudicious ?moral outbursts??

I gotta say, from looking over the comments of this thread, seeing half of the people replying that "well I'm still gonna fucking it because I want to" and the other half hilariously repeating the very talking-points that the OP dismantled in his original post, my guess is on the latter.

I did read it. I'm just giving reasons not to get off the hate train.

How can you say that you read it when you just wrote the "Kinect spying on you" as a reason for not liking the Xbox One despite the fact that the OP already wrote in his post that the Kinect WOULDN'T spy on you?

You are just proving his point by showing that your decision to dislike the Xbox One is based on misinformation - exactly the kind of misinformation the OP claimed that people erroneously believe in.

I'm sorry, I'm confused. First you criticize for someone using an anonymous posting on the family share plan as evidence that casts doubt on it. Then you criticize because people won't use the anonymous forum post of an individual as proof that Kinect would never be used as a surveillance device. We should believe it cause this fella said so? Okie, Sparky.

Because though, yes, OP did insist that it wouldn't happen, he, like most people who make the claim, Microsoft included, have yet to justify exactly why it has to be connected at all times. In fact, he didn't even address that it had to be connected. The only explanation he has made is for why it must be sold with the console, and frankly, I can even see where the company is coming from in terms of packaging it. But I have yet to hear why it is so crucial that I can't even put the Kinect in my closet or in my little game storage cubby if I have no immediate need for it. I can do it for the original device! Is it therefore technologically superior to the 2.0?

Oh, I can turn the 2.0 completely off! Yay! So that means that it doesn't need to be plugged in right?

Wait? It does still need to be plugged in? Even when turned off? But if it is completely off anyway, what could possibly be needed from the completely disabled Kinect that the entire console would cease to function were it removed? Does it actually have some crucial component that keeps the console running, or is this like the SimCity incident where they have built a restriction in deliberately for ulterior purposes? If the latter, then what purposes?

If the former.... well, you can't seriously be thinking that it was a smart design choice. If nothing else, surely you concede it was a shoddy idea to build it that way.


As for misinformation, consider this.

-Microsoft, along with plenty of other involved companies, denied any participation in any clandestine monitoring program. Even after the government admitted to the existence of the program, (PRISM being a data collection program under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that permits the monitoring and collection of data of non-US citizens and any US citizens that are in contact with them, without requiring the conventional warrant, instead simply an order by the organization's own officials) they have been loathe to release information on the extent of shared data. This is a real program. It is not fabrication. It is not a fantasy. The Obama administration is currently getting a great deal of shit flung on them over it. As far as Snowden's leaks have suggested, the program would allow the NSA to gain direct access to company servers, and there have been more recent leaks suggesting that Microsoft may have loosened the encryption of Skype and SkyDrive, to allow the NSA direct access when they required it.

-Just to be specific, under the program, authorization for monitoring comes from FISA's own courts; Those petitioning for authorization to monitor must apparently provide reasonable justification, but there is no indication as to what is considered reasonable. Because there is no real public accountability, there is little to prevent a court from just permitting things left and right. Just in case, right? Furthermore, it is a one-sided affair, as you only have someone arguing that this monitoring is justified. There is no balancing viewpoint, no individual with security clearance who offers a dissenting opinion to allow for equal representation. This would be like having a trial with only a prosecutor and no defense counsel. This and the highly sensitive nature of the program, and lack of significant external oversight, greatly limits the potential checks and balances that can keep it from being abused.

-Even the government's own explanation as to the extent and practices of the program haven't been upfront, even after admitting it existed. a fact sheet they released was criticized by a couple of senators for being extremely inaccurate, and the sheet was later withdrawn. Some of the examples of terrorist acts that were said to have been thwarted by the monitoring program were revealed to have been thwarted by other means entirely.

-Not only would companies who provided information be compensated financially for the cost involved, but legally protected from the consequences of doing so.

-There is suggestion that the program uses a three hop system. What this means is you don't have to be a suspected terrorist, hacker or spy for them to gather and analyze data on you. You could have spoken to someone who themselves spoke to someone who is a suspected terrorist, hacker or spy.



So. They have enabled the monitoring of their non-American consumers, and American citizens who talk to non-American consumers. They have lied to us about the extent of it. This has happened. Not misinformation, in fact the only misinformation has been from those denying its existence up until about last minute, and those in government and industry who have released inaccurate and misleading information about the program.

Granted, this was all done by the order of the U.S. government, but there's little to stop it from happening again. If these leaks had not happened, it would continue to putter along with none the wiser. Also Granted, several other companies have been implicated as participating in the program, but this shouldn't be taken as justification or permission to peddle it all the more.

If you wish to to believe that Microsoft will turn over a new leaf and never again permit a government organization access to programs and facilities that allow it to monitor individuals without the usual legal red tape designed to prevent misuse, after it's already been going on for over half a decade, then feel free! That's your prerogative. Maybe their hearts did grow three sizes that day and they will wash their hands of it forever.

But drop the sanctimonious attitude, because insisting that it isn't even in the realm of possibility is foolish.

You're lifting your nose and decrying anyone who believes that it COULD be a surveillance device as misinformed because the company looked you in the eye and brofisted a promise. But Microsoft has given us absolutely no reason, other than its super solemn pinky swear, that it wouldn't, or couldn't be used as one. It assures us that the Kinect can be completely shut off. It hasn't assured us as to why it has to be plugged in anyway. Which means that it is either some ulterior motive, or more likely simple incompetence.

Oh, And as mentioned, if we're talking about secretive federal programs, they will quite happily lie through their teeth about it. I can't even blame them necessarily. With an immunity to legal repercussions, and recompense for the financial costs, it would literally be more efficient as a company to just go along with it then it would be to fight it out in court, especially since court battle would mean reviewing information to the public that could get the company in a fair spot of legal trouble.

Seriously. Don't think that a company is above spreading misinformation as well.

 

[wulfy42]

I don't consider it a "hate train"....more just a "no point in buying an xbox train".

Seriously, the op even pointed out the low number of exclusives for both consoles. There are no exlusives I really am dying for on either system to be honest...although long down the road there may be some for the Ps4 eventually (I'm not a halo or dead rising fan).

So...it comes down to buying one console for the next gen. Outside of me enjoying way more games on my ps3 compared to my xbox360 (so it makes far more sense to go with the ps4), the system itself is $100 cheaper..and seems to have slightly (not a huge deal) higher specs.

I also prefer playstations subscription plan (free games etc from it) over the xbox's.

So....say I have 3 games I want to play in the first few months on either system. I can buy the Ps4...and 2 of those games....for the same price as the Xbox one. That seems like a pretty good deal to me.

Not interested at all in the kinect..and in fact if it still needs the same room/space as the xbox 360's version...I wouldn't even be able to use it. That would really blow if the system rely's on it for normal controls instead of a controller etc....but it sucks even if I'd just have to turn it off every time etc.

In the end the Xbone just doesn't bring anything special to the table for me, and it costs more. I think that is going to be the largest problem they have. What....to the majority of gamers...does the xbone offer that is worth $100 extra dollars?

I know they think it offers plenty...but to me, and lots of other gamers I know....it doesn't offer enough.

 

[Spacemonkey430]

I don't consider it a "hate train"....more just a "no point in buying an xbox train".

Seriously, the op even pointed out the low number of exclusives for both consoles. There are no exlusives I really am dying for on either system to be honest...although long down the road there may be some for the Ps4 eventually (I'm not a halo or dead rising fan).

I would agree that the few exclusives for the xbone, mostly Halo, would be the only reason for anybody to consider buying it.

 

[Lilani]

Let?s Get Off the Xbone Hate-Train Already

And how about you stop telling people what to feel about a product? I don't like the X-bone because it has no redeeming features that I can't get from the PS4 for less, the only reason they made those changes is because their preorder sales were being cut into too much, and throughout the whole process of reveal > failure > attempt at redemption they were complete and total jerkwads to their audience. Their reaction wasn't, "We understand your concerns and we will do our best to alleviate them." It was "Yeah, well this is the future! Get used to it or get run over, SUCKEEEEEEEEEERS!"

So fuck no. Don't tell me how to feel about their product, or anyone else for that matter. Believe it or not, you're allowed to not like a console. You aren't obligated to like it just because it makes up roughly a third of the console market. Microsoft is a big boy, it can handle itself. No need to coddle them or kiss the boo-boo they got on their knee when they tripped. You like it? Fine. I don't care. Just stop telling me I should. You have your reasons for your opinion, and I have mine. So let's respect them by not pretending one of our opinions are more right than the other's.

 

[V TheSystem V]

I don't hate the Xbox One...I just hate the company that is behind it.

I love my Xbox 360, but what Microsoft has done to it (focusing on the TV/Movies aspect of it rather than the gaming aspect) has turned it from a games console into a multimedia unit which is something I didn't pay for. The constant stream of advertisements I see on my dashboard for things I don't even care about is astonishing.

The Xbox One was revealed to the public displaying...TV and Movies. Halo was there...as a TV series reveal. There were games shown...mostly to do with sports. And there were 3 games revealed, one of which looked interesting but not enough details were given (Quantum Break), and then there was Forza and Call of Duty. That was the moment I started to lose faith in the next console generation - Microsoft were not focusing on the gaming aspect of their new console, despite the fact that they insisted that E3 would be when they would show us games. They delivered on that front, but they were also dodging around the questions surrounding rumours of an always-online DRM and the licenses that they mentioned, multiple employees contradicting each other when asked about them. This uncertainty was clarified days before E3, revealing that, yes, there would be DRM, and without internet access for more than 24 hours would mean we lost all access to our games. That did not sit right with me, and many other people, who would buy this console to play games. The games at E3 looked really good (though games like Ryse and Killer Instinct did not look like they'd be entertaining after 3 hours or so), but showing us nice things that we wouldn't be able to play if our internet went down even if they were single player was enough for me to think of purchasing the console.

I know I'm going on about stuff that has since been changed, but these were the first instances of there being something wrong with the marketing of the Xbox One, before Don Mattrick's suggestion that those without internet connections should just buy an Xbox 360, and those wanting backwards compatibility are backwards. Insults coming from a guy who is supposed to be selling us the console? I was hoping he was trolling. He wasn't.

The changes to the policies were necessary, and it was great that they changed them, don't get me wrong, but the message was clear - Microsoft were willing to market a console that would take away game ownership, and in trying to squash piracy, would make them suspect every owner of their new console of being a pirate. I mean, it would be great to be a pirate like Captain Morgan (17th century Welsh pirate, drink named after him), but all these measures they were taking to ensure nobody stole from them? There was no trust in the consumer, which was disgusting. A company that was willing to take away what the consumer had legitimately purchased if they didn't have an internet connection was not a company that I wished to purchase a console from. These changes in the Xbox One's policies (despite Larry Hyrb saying that it wasn't as if the DRM was a switch he could turn off in an Angry Joe interview) wouldn't have been done if it wasn't for the preorders of the console being unexpectedly low, in Microsoft's opinion. It's the company, and not the console, that is dissuading me from buying one.

Mandatory Kinect is also something I don't want forced upon me either. I dislike Kinect, and never wish to own it.

And just to mention Sony - their aim for their console was clear from their two press conferences. It took 2 press conferences and a lot of interviews outside of these conferences for us to be clear on what Microsoft intended to do with the Xbox One. A company that cannot clearly tell us why we should be buying their product is a company I do not wish to have any dealings with.

 

[The Lunatic]

When the prospect of buying one sounds even slightly appealing, I'll be slightly appealed the idea of speaking anything other than negatively about it.

 

[TomWiley]

I did read it. I'm just giving reasons not to get off the hate train.

How can you say that you read it when you just wrote the "Kinect spying on you" as a reason for not liking the Xbox One despite the fact that the OP already wrote in his post that the Kinect WOULDN'T spy on you?

You are just proving his point by showing that your decision to dislike the Xbox One is based on misinformation - exactly the kind of misinformation the OP claimed that people erroneously believe in.

Give me a credible source that the Kinnect does not spy on you, also what's stopping Microsoft reversing their decision?

10800th post

What about one from Microsoft's official website?

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/privacy

I quote: "You'll be in control of what the Kinect sees and hears - The system will navigate you through key privacy options, like automatic or manual sign in, privacy settings, and clear notifications about how data is used."

It kinda reads to me like you'll be in complete control of what the Kinect sees and hears.

This is how it'll work. The Kinect must be connected to the Xbox on a hardware level, yes. But you'll still be able to toggle privacy options on a software level .

Also, congrats!

After the allegations with their involvement with the PRISM program you're not going to stick it to the man? Unlike Google, MS do believe that the internet does need censorship and does also believe that their customers cannot be trusted.

Oh you mean the Google that also sends data to PRISM? Snowden him-bloody-self criticized Google for being "misleadig" in it attempts to cover up it's corporation with PRISM.

Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo...etc, they don't want to share user information because they like to be evil. They are more or less legally complied not to give out the specifics of what they share with the NSA when they get the requests.

As to why people have a tendency to single out and demonize Microsoft specifically, I can't answer that. But I can give you some details about how Microsoft feels about being forced by the goverment to hide their corporation with the NSA from the public who arguably has the right to know.

For one thing, they've sent a strong-worded letter to the Obama administration, they've asked for permission to reveal which information the NSA has asked from then and they've debunked some of the incorrect accusations the press has thrown at them, claiming that the company does not allow NSA access to Outlook and Skydrive. They've done anything they can to come clean and they've received a grossly unfair treatment by the press and media.

You can read more about it here:

http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2013/07/16/responding-to-government-legal-demands-for-customer-data.aspx

http://readwrite.com/2013/07/12/microsoft-denies-skype-spying-allegations#awesm=~odxJ30S9OXEcp4

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2282907/microsoft-puffs-cheeks-gets-ready-to-blow-whistle-on-prism

http://venturebeat.com/2013/07/18/the-full-prism-letter-google-yahoo-apple-facebook-and-microsoft-are-sending-congress/

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23477512/snowden-google-facebook-were-misleading-prism-denials

 

[Evil Smurf]

I did read it. I'm just giving reasons not to get off the hate train.

How can you say that you read it when you just wrote the "Kinect spying on you" as a reason for not liking the Xbox One despite the fact that the OP already wrote in his post that the Kinect WOULDN'T spy on you?

You are just proving his point by showing that your decision to dislike the Xbox One is based on misinformation - exactly the kind of misinformation the OP claimed that people erroneously believe in.

Give me a credible source that the Kinnect does not spy on you, also what's stopping Microsoft reversing their decision?

10800th post

What about one from Microsoft's official website?

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/privacy

I quote: "You'll be in control of what the Kinect sees and hears - The system will navigate you through key privacy options, like automatic or manual sign in, privacy settings, and clear notifications about how data is used."

It kinda reads to me like you'll be in complete control of what the Kinect sees and hears.

This is how it'll work. The Kinect must be connected to the Xbox on a hardware level, yes. But you'll still be able to toggle privacy options on a software level .

Also, congrats!

After the allegations with their involvement with the PRISM program you're not going to stick it to the man? Unlike Google, MS do believe that the internet does need censorship and does also believe that their customers cannot be trusted.

Oh you mean the Google that also sends data to PRISM? Snowden him-bloody-self criticized Google for being "misleadig" in it attempts to cover up it's corporation with PRISM.

Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo...etc, they don't want to share user information because they like to be evil. They are more or less legally complied not to give out the specifics of what they share with the NSA when they get the requests.

As to why people have a tendency to single out and demonize Microsoft specifically, I can't answer that. But I can give you some details about how Microsoft feels about being forced by the goverment to hide their corporation with the NSA from the public who arguably has the right to know.

For one thing, they've sent a strong-worded letter to the Obama administration, they've asked for permission to reveal which information the NSA has asked from then and they've debunked some of the incorrect accusations the press has thrown at them, claiming that the company does not allow NSA access to Outlook and Skydrive. They've done anything they can to come clean and they've received a grossly unfair treatment by the press and media.

You can read more about it here:

http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_on_the_issues/archive/2013/07/16/responding-to-government-legal-demands-for-customer-data.aspx

http://readwrite.com/2013/07/12/microsoft-denies-skype-spying-allegations#awesm=~odxJ30S9OXEcp4

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2282907/microsoft-puffs-cheeks-gets-ready-to-blow-whistle-on-prism

http://venturebeat.com/2013/07/18/the-full-prism-letter-google-yahoo-apple-facebook-and-microsoft-are-sending-congress/

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23477512/snowden-google-facebook-were-misleading-prism-denials

I don't trust microsoft, call it reading too much Orwell, or being cynical. I don't trust corps or people that willingly fuck you over.

Thanks

 

[TomWiley]

Regardless of what you say, PRISM is real and Microsoft has been in bed with the NSA from Windows95.

What does the PRISM thing keeps coming up? I mean, even if Microsoft was in bed with the NSA, why are people acting like the NSA would be interesting in recording a video stream of someone playing Watchdogs?

Anyway, I covered the whole PRISM Microsoft issue above. In summary; they are obligated to share information, as did pretty much any tech company and lastly, Microsoft is doing everything they can to fight PRISM's involvement in their company which includes prompting Obama to shut the whole thing down, asking for permission to reveal the information they've shared and be completely transparent about it.

Also reports that NSA could directly access Microsoft's servers and pull stuff from Skydrive, Outlook etc were apparently false.

Fuck, I'm getting sick of writing this over and over again. I'm gonna need a new keyboard after this.

Even though it was from an anonymous source, what official news from Microsoft or from publishers that so badly want to kill the 'evil' used game market has led you to believe that the post doesn't hold SOME water?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Do you mean that because you read so many comments on Reddit about how the big evil Microsoft wants to kill used games, it somehow has to be true, despite the fact that the very source it's all based on proved to be completely irrelevant?

Anyway, you are confusing two very separately policies here. Family sharing is one thing, used game is something completely different.

Used games - Microsoft would allow you to resell your bought games, but they would have had it so that a small percantage of each resell goes to the devs so they can quit complaining about how used games are destroying the industry. At that, Microsoft would not be adding any fees of their own.

Family sharing - a proposed system whereby a user can share selected titles in their cloud library with third parties (could be anyone, anywhere - not only your "family"). The only thing we know about Microsoft plans for family sharing is what's written in the OP's post.

I don't trust corps or people that willingly fuck you over.

Thanks

Yeah, the point of my smaller novel of text is sorta to prove to people that Microsoft never wanted to fuck you over. But, yeah, let's just agree to disagree.

 

[Zeckt]

I disagree on that TomWiley, Microsoft has fucked me over again and again with the 360's hardware and awful wireless controllers that die every 3.5 months as well as the canadian to american microsoft live points conversion. They hurt me where it hurt the most, my wallet. When my console died I was already too invested in the system to not buy another one. They have given me every reason to hate them with every fiber of my being.

I have gone to great strides to replace everything on pc and playstation and rid myself of the microsoft garbage system. Till the day a microsoft rep comes to my door and reimburses me for a system and 3 wireless controllers they can go to hell. There is absolutely no reason for their shoddy hardware, its ALL on them and to forgive them for simply making a new system and giving them a clean slate in my opinion is foolish.

 

[TomWiley]

Right, you actually took the time to type down some arguments (which is a refreshing change) even though I don't agree with all of them, so I'll do my best to answer you below.

I'm sorry, I'm confused. First you criticize for someone using an anonymous posting on the family share plan as evidence that casts doubt on it. Then you criticize because people won't use the anonymous forum post of an individual as proof that Kinect would never be used as a surveillance device. We should believe it cause this fella said so? Okie, Sparky.

No, you're not confused. You're deliberately trying to make me seem like a hypocrite, so I'll explain exactly what I meant:

I'm not ready to accept the anonymous Microsoft employee theories because the company hasn't, to the best of my knowledge, confirmed any of it. In fact, it seems that he wasn't even hired by Microsoft to begin with so whatever he had to say about the family sharing system was just that - theories.

As to the OP's post, I'm not relying on it for facts. Yes, he is too anonymous but I know he's right about, let's say, the Kinect being deactivated because that's what Microsoft has stated.

Sure, you could say you don't trust Microsoft which leads us to the question: if they aren't trying to spy on us why does the Kinect have to be plugged in to begin with?


Yes, it has to be plugged in for the hardware to function. Why they picked that implementation is not difficult to understand; making the Kinect an optional add-on would effectively kill any chance of it becoming better than the original Kinect. Could it be detached, people would just do that and throw it in their closet. Microsoft obviously doesn't want that to happen and they are selling the Xbox One as an integrated package to avoid that - a trick to have users at least give it a chance before they decide to disable every single function on it.

Microsoft wants it to be an integrated package so that the devs might develop for the Kinect in mind. They want it so that users won't forget about it's existence. It's not strange, it's not confusing, it's not uncommon, it's a business practice that makes complete sense from their perspective.

Doesn't this conflict with your ability to turn it off? No, again, the OS will have menus with privacy toggles, and when you start a game, the Xbox will probably inform you of which data the game is going to want to access.

Kinda like how an app on your iPhone asks if it's okay if it loads your photo library.

So they're giving you the tools to control what the Kinect sees and hears, but they still doesn't want to give you the ability to just rip it off the Xbox and throw it somewhere. They are trying to introduce their consumers to it slowly whilst insuring them that it's not a threat to their security.

You can still hate it if you want to. You can turn it off or wrap it in tin foil or turn it off completely. But Microsoft wants it at least still be there if you decide to use it.

As for the whole PRISM thing, I've already covered it twice above. No, I'm not saying that you're wrong in that Microsoft "cooperated" with the NSA. But as you wrote yourself, so did virtually any other major tech company.

You said that Microsoft has blatantly lied about this involvement. To the best of my knowledge, Microsoft never blatantly lied about their involvement, neither did any other company on the list, but by all means, feel free to prove me wrong. (But with a link or something, not an even longer post).

Also, there are some factors you left out of the equation. It has, as you mentioned, been rumored that Microsoft allows NSA direct access to the Skydrive, Outlook and Skype servers. What you left out is that Microsoft publicly declared that this is simply not the case, nor has it ever been. Do you think they are blatantly lying?

Secondly, Microsoft has done pretty much anything the company could possibly do to come clean with the whole PRISM thing, even going as far as to pushing NSA (a joint effort with Google and Facebook) to allow them to disclose exactly which kind of data NSA have requested.

Microsoft claims that they want NSA do allow them this so that they can offer the public complete transparency, but they probably also want to prove that they extent to which they've shared data with the NSA has been grossly exaggerated.

They've even contacting the Obama administration, trying to push the administration to scrap this whole PRISM thing.

Lastly, consider this: Why would Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Yahoo and all the rest want to share data with NSA? I find it hard to believe they "sell" the data. They have nothing to gain, but they risk losing public goodwill.

From what Snowden has said about PRISM and the NSA, it seems like these companies have little choice, and these requests from NSA are difficult to refuse.

So if you want to determine whether Microsoft is trustworthy or not, you should take into consideration that they're trying to fight the very system they've been part of, that they are fighting for the right to share with the public the details of these requests, that Microsoft is just one of several tech companies you use and trust with personal information everyday, and that lastly, Microsoft never asked for any of this to begin with.

And indeed, even if Microsoft are lying through their teeth when they say that you won't be able to completely control what the Kinect sees and hears, how likely do you think it is that the Government would have any interest what so ever in the kind of data the Kinect can record?

We're talking about a video stream of some gamer playing on their sofa, or perhaps some audio capture and heartbeat data. If they're lucky, they can determine whether you're smiling or not.

I can assure you that before you should start worrying about Kinect, you should be way more concerned about the emails you send using Microsoft's outlook, not to mention Gmail, Facebook, Yahoo and similar services. This kind of user data is infinitively more valuable to the NSA.

It seems to be that when you really analyze this whole PRISM-scandal, the equation is a bit more complicated than just Microsoft + PRISM = Evil.

In fact, I would go as far as saying that bringing PRISM up as a reason why you can't trust the camera hooked up to your Xbox is fucking retarded. Really fucking retarded.

But if that's your problem, there is a universal solution:

 

[Strain42]

The only thing I would wish of the Xbox One haters is to stop calling it the "XBone". I hate stuff too, but at least I don't make immature petty insults at it because I don't like it.

Its not just "haters" that call it the Xbone, the haters now call it the Xbox 180. The Xbone is just short for X Box ONE. Its not really a petty insult.

I agree we should stop calling it the Xbone. That just sounds stupid, and does make us look fairly immature (not saying we ARE, just from an outside perspective, that's what it looks like)

I understand that it's an abbreviation of Xbox One, but why not just say XBO or XB1? That's even shorter, and doesn't constantly make us sound like schoolyard bullies.