Rumor: Next Xbox Could Run Windows

[Bacaruda]

I like this, I like this a lot. Console gaming, in my experience, is a more reliable platform than PC.
Sure, sometimes you get disc reading errors(PS2) or overheating(xbox 360). But it doesn't compare to some of the problems you get with a PC.

 

[DracoSuave]

So things that are already running variations of the Windows OS will instead be running the same essential version of the OS

This is no different than when laptops stopped running proprietary stuff and started running the same Windows desktops did.

In other news, your XBox will get viruses.

 

[raankh]

But ... the Xbox already runs Windows? Sure, it's not the desktop version, but it's still Windows.

Consoles have been using windows since the Dreamcast; other operatingsystems have been hacked onto consoles, thereby proving they are general purpose enough to be computers.

I'm highly doubtful the ngBox will run a fully featured Windows release-- would MS really give up their so-called "security" in the console market and open their platform? I would be shocked, to say the least, and might even reconsider my general disdain of Microsoft practices. What would be next? Open source Windows 9?

 

[Ickorus]

Funny because here i've been hearing that Windows 8 is going to be able to play X-box games.

Somethings up.

 

[Epona]

Makes sense, especially since Windows 8 looks like it was designed to be an Xbox interface to begin with..

That's what I was thinking. Windows 8 is being designed to be controller driven. You thought it was bad when PC games were being dumbed down, now it's the whole damn operating system.

So far, Windows 8 is going be like Vista for me, skippable.

 

[tehroc]

As far as I'm concerned it should already run Windows.

 

[Treblaine]

Well there is a major issue here: Licensing

The PC model is completely dependant on free licensing, anyone can sell any software to run on a Windows operating system without having to pay a penny to Microsoft.

Yet on consoles, including Xbox, it is entirely dependant on charging a licence fee for every single game released for the system, about $10-12 per game. That is the ONLY way that consoles are marketable, by selling at a loss and making it back in the hundreds of millions of game sales per system.

So if there is a single OS for both PC and Console... how does software work?

Will BOTH systems charge, which utterly fucks PC over as now every Steam Sale will cost about $15 more.

Or will neither charge, which is bad for consoles as that market loves the low entry price of hardware that is subsidised by game licensing fees.

Console and PC operating systems in many ways do NEED to be different, as they are doing very different things. I can't see this being a particularly good idea.

If they go with "charge licence fee for software on new OS" will uttelry kill the new OS. I mean it was hard enough to get people to move from XP to Vista, even from XP to Windows 7. Now try convincing people to make the jump with the knowledge they can't use any of their old programs and the new programs will cost about 30% more.

No Sale.

 

[Epona]

Well there is a major issue here: Licensing

The PC model is completely dependant on free licensing, anyone can sell any software to run on a Windows operating system without having to pay a penny to Microsoft.

Yet on consoles, including Xbox, it is entirely dependant on charging a licence fee for every single game released for the system, about $10-12 per game. That is the ONLY way that consoles are marketable, by selling at a loss and making it back in the hundreds of millions of game sales per system.

So if there is a single OS for both PC and Console... how does software work?

Will BOTH systems charge, which utterly fucks PC over as now every Steam Sale will cost about $15 more.

Or will neither charge, which is bad for consoles as that market loves the low entry price of hardware that is subsidised by game licensing fees.

Console and PC operating systems in many ways do NEED to be different, as they are doing very different things. I can't see this being a particularly good idea.

If they go with "charge licence fee for software on new OS" will uttelry kill the new OS. I mean it was hard enough to get people to move from XP to Vista, even from XP to Windows 7. Now try convincing people to make the jump with the knowledge they can't use any of their old programs and the new programs will cost about 30% more.

No Sale.

At the very least PC games with the GFWL logo will be treated like 360 games and charge license fees.

 

[Richard Allen]

Seriously

I own consoles to play games, I like that they are adjusted for console use. I like the feel of a controller..putting windows on a game console really. Does nothing good not to mention game consoles need to be priced well, meaning the price to make them has to be kept low. Hence by both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 have about 512Mbyte memory. More would be possible yes but such would cost more and hence this was a sacrifice.

A console with maybe 2Gbyte of relative cheap memory might be possible. But then you get Windows 8 or so.. yeah I don't see it. Sorry but windows is a resource hog that also is a black box. You know it does something but who knows what does what. How more windows ages how more services and background crap. Out of the box even. Sure I know that Microsoft has tried to fix their "mono core" design reality is that you can't change the basics.

My prediction windows on a console... doesn't runs well! Hell linux on the PS3 even doesn't runs that well due to the limited about of memory.

Windows 7 runs fine on older hardware. I have a 5 year old lap top with a gig of ram and it's fine. It runs fine on even less powerful netbooks so claiming it's a resource hog is a meme that you need to get over. Win 7 has great memory managment and is competitive with linux distros. Black box hardly too. IF you want a black box go look at osx, windows is easy to develop for and is easier to manage for the user who doesn't want to work on the cmd line.

As for the feel there is nothing preventing have multiple operating modes for the os. Android does it for their < 3.0 tablets, and while 2.x was not great on tablets they fixed a lot of the issues and they will be included in 4. That being said memory is not what makes a console expensive, it's relatively cheap, it's the processer and gpu that are the killers since they are usually custom made for the console and arguably the most important hardware feature on a new console.

This is how MS will be able to pull people back into their ecosystem. They are pulling the same approach as android, be everywhere and one ecosystem so you can share apps, data, games, etc. If win 8 has 360 support I'll have to drag myself out and put windows back on after years of pulling myself out. Those bastards are good when they want to be.

 

[Richard Allen]

Well there is a major issue here: Licensing

The PC model is completely dependant on free licensing, anyone can sell any software to run on a Windows operating system without having to pay a penny to Microsoft.

Yet on consoles, including Xbox, it is entirely dependant on charging a licence fee for every single game released for the system, about $10-12 per game. That is the ONLY way that consoles are marketable, by selling at a loss and making it back in the hundreds of millions of game sales per system.

So if there is a single OS for both PC and Console... how does software work?

Will BOTH systems charge, which utterly fucks PC over as now every Steam Sale will cost about $15 more.

Or will neither charge, which is bad for consoles as that market loves the low entry price of hardware that is subsidised by game licensing fees.

Console and PC operating systems in many ways do NEED to be different, as they are doing very different things. I can't see this being a particularly good idea.

If they go with "charge licence fee for software on new OS" will uttelry kill the new OS. I mean it was hard enough to get people to move from XP to Vista, even from XP to Windows 7. Now try convincing people to make the jump with the knowledge they can't use any of their old programs and the new programs will cost about 30% more.

No Sale.

At the very least PC games with the GFWL logo will be treated like 360 games and charge license fees.

What will most likely happen is that if you want to make a multi ms platform game you will have to pay the licence fee for the sdk (as it is now). If you want a pc game only then you would be free to use w/e development platform of your choice.

Edit: What are you talking about having difficulty getting people from win xp to win 7. It is the fastest selling os of all time and had a huge rate of adoption. Yea there are still a ton of xp users out there, most of them are in china and other poorer countries where it doesn't make sense to upgrade if it works for you. That's what happens when your on 98% of the computers out there, it takes a long time for all the users to switch over. I'd say in the states and other richer counties that win 7 is the majority of users. If you can find some stats to show me otherwise I'll eat my shoe

 

[Epona]

Well there is a major issue here: Licensing

The PC model is completely dependant on free licensing, anyone can sell any software to run on a Windows operating system without having to pay a penny to Microsoft.

Yet on consoles, including Xbox, it is entirely dependant on charging a licence fee for every single game released for the system, about $10-12 per game. That is the ONLY way that consoles are marketable, by selling at a loss and making it back in the hundreds of millions of game sales per system.

So if there is a single OS for both PC and Console... how does software work?

Will BOTH systems charge, which utterly fucks PC over as now every Steam Sale will cost about $15 more.

Or will neither charge, which is bad for consoles as that market loves the low entry price of hardware that is subsidised by game licensing fees.

Console and PC operating systems in many ways do NEED to be different, as they are doing very different things. I can't see this being a particularly good idea.

If they go with "charge licence fee for software on new OS" will uttelry kill the new OS. I mean it was hard enough to get people to move from XP to Vista, even from XP to Windows 7. Now try convincing people to make the jump with the knowledge they can't use any of their old programs and the new programs will cost about 30% more.

No Sale.

At the very least PC games with the GFWL logo will be treated like 360 games and charge license fees.

What will most likely happen is that if you want to make a multi ms platform game you will have to pay the licence fee for the sdk (as it is now). If you want a pc game only then you would be free to use w/e development platform of your choice.

Good way to push people to Linux.

 

[Richard Allen]

Well there is a major issue here: Licensing

The PC model is completely dependant on free licensing, anyone can sell any software to run on a Windows operating system without having to pay a penny to Microsoft.

Yet on consoles, including Xbox, it is entirely dependant on charging a licence fee for every single game released for the system, about $10-12 per game. That is the ONLY way that consoles are marketable, by selling at a loss and making it back in the hundreds of millions of game sales per system.

So if there is a single OS for both PC and Console... how does software work?

Will BOTH systems charge, which utterly fucks PC over as now every Steam Sale will cost about $15 more.

Or will neither charge, which is bad for consoles as that market loves the low entry price of hardware that is subsidised by game licensing fees.

Console and PC operating systems in many ways do NEED to be different, as they are doing very different things. I can't see this being a particularly good idea.

If they go with "charge licence fee for software on new OS" will uttelry kill the new OS. I mean it was hard enough to get people to move from XP to Vista, even from XP to Windows 7. Now try convincing people to make the jump with the knowledge they can't use any of their old programs and the new programs will cost about 30% more.

No Sale.

At the very least PC games with the GFWL logo will be treated like 360 games and charge license fees.

What will most likely happen is that if you want to make a multi ms platform game you will have to pay the licence fee for the sdk (as it is now). If you want a pc game only then you would be free to use w/e development platform of your choice.

Good way to push people to Linux.

I'm not so sure, how is this pushing people to linux. They would be extending functionality of the 360 sdk allowing them to target win 8, 360, and winphone 7 all with one consolidated code base? Where else can you get that type of market penetration? Publishers would salivate over this.

 

[Red Albatross]

It was really only a matter of time before this happened. Honestly, as ideas go, it's not that bad, and if the system architecture is shared, it makes it much easier on game developers when they decide to develop for that kind of platform.

PC gamers, we shouldn't be freaking out. This means we won't get crappy, half-assed ports. In fact, the same team can focus on one version of the game, and either the development costs can be reduced (and there might be room for some innovation again), or the final product could come out much more polished without the dev team having to split attention.

The way I imagine it, the next-generation Xbox will just be an inexpensive, pre-built gaming PC. Those of us who stick with our actual PCs will still be able to do what makes us happy, upgrade and tweak and overclock and customize and modify to our heart's content. It's also likely that the next gen Xbox and the version of Windows after 8 that receives this functionality will be able to play cross-platform, although cross-platform is a misnomer for what's happening, since it's really not a different platform anymore. It's also possible that this could mean game mods would be available on the Xbox, which could only be a good thing.

I'm very cautiously optimistic. Microsoft has the deep pockets necessary to do something like this and do it right. If they pull it off, it'll completely revolutionize the industry.

 

[Continuity]

So the next xbox is basically just a proprietary gaming PC... This makes sense, I just hope they dont cock it up as Microsoft are wont by forcing shovelware or stupid restrictions on us. **cough gfwl cough**

 

[Epona]

Well there is a major issue here: Licensing

The PC model is completely dependant on free licensing, anyone can sell any software to run on a Windows operating system without having to pay a penny to Microsoft.

Yet on consoles, including Xbox, it is entirely dependant on charging a licence fee for every single game released for the system, about $10-12 per game. That is the ONLY way that consoles are marketable, by selling at a loss and making it back in the hundreds of millions of game sales per system.

So if there is a single OS for both PC and Console... how does software work?

Will BOTH systems charge, which utterly fucks PC over as now every Steam Sale will cost about $15 more.

Or will neither charge, which is bad for consoles as that market loves the low entry price of hardware that is subsidised by game licensing fees.

Console and PC operating systems in many ways do NEED to be different, as they are doing very different things. I can't see this being a particularly good idea.

If they go with "charge licence fee for software on new OS" will uttelry kill the new OS. I mean it was hard enough to get people to move from XP to Vista, even from XP to Windows 7. Now try convincing people to make the jump with the knowledge they can't use any of their old programs and the new programs will cost about 30% more.

No Sale.

At the very least PC games with the GFWL logo will be treated like 360 games and charge license fees.

What will most likely happen is that if you want to make a multi ms platform game you will have to pay the licence fee for the sdk (as it is now). If you want a pc game only then you would be free to use w/e development platform of your choice.

Good way to push people to Linux.

I'm not so sure, how is this pushing people to linux. They would be extending functionality of the 360 sdk allowing them to target win 8, 360, and winphone 7 all with one consolidated code base? Where else can you get that type of market penetration? Publishers would salivate over this.

Do you even give thought to the consumer?

You care about the publishers and Microsoft market penetration but what about the consumers? Licensing fees for PC games is bad for consumers but hey, consumers don't matter right?

 

[twm1709]

Also, the next xbox hill come in a slightly bigger case and feature expansion slots on its motherboard that will allow you to switch your graphics chip, cpu, internal memory and power supply as you see fit. It may become a little more unstable and maybe take some tweaking and dealing with firmware and stuff, but at least it's better than PC, right?

 

[Epona]

It was really only a matter of time before this happened. Honestly, as ideas go, it's not that bad, and if the system architecture is shared, it makes it much easier on game developers when they decide to develop for that kind of platform.

PC gamers, we shouldn't be freaking out. This means we won't get crappy, half-assed ports. In fact, the same team can focus on one version of the game, and either the development costs can be reduced (and there might be room for some innovation again), or the final product could come out much more polished without the dev team having to split attention.

The way I imagine it, the next-generation Xbox will just be an inexpensive, pre-built gaming PC. Those of us who stick with our actual PCs will still be able to do what makes us happy, upgrade and tweak and overclock and customize and modify to our heart's content. It's also likely that the next gen Xbox and the version of Windows after 8 that receives this functionality will be able to play cross-platform, although cross-platform is a misnomer for what's happening, since it's really not a different platform anymore. It's also possible that this could mean game mods would be available on the Xbox, which could only be a good thing.

I'm very cautiously optimistic. Microsoft has the deep pockets necessary to do something like this and do it right. If they pull it off, it'll completely revolutionize the industry.

Yeah because merging the PC and console is not going to affect modding? Keep dreaming. This isn't the console becoming more like a PC as much as it is the PC becoming more like the console.

 

[Richard Allen]

It was really only a matter of time before this happened. Honestly, as ideas go, it's not that bad, and if the system architecture is shared, it makes it much easier on game developers when they decide to develop for that kind of platform.

PC gamers, we shouldn't be freaking out. This means we won't get crappy, half-assed ports. In fact, the same team can focus on one version of the game, and either the development costs can be reduced (and there might be room for some innovation again), or the final product could come out much more polished without the dev team having to split attention.

The way I imagine it, the next-generation Xbox will just be an inexpensive, pre-built gaming PC. Those of us who stick with our actual PCs will still be able to do what makes us happy, upgrade and tweak and overclock and customize and modify to our heart's content. It's also likely that the next gen Xbox and the version of Windows after 8 that receives this functionality will be able to play cross-platform, although cross-platform is a misnomer for what's happening, since it's really not a different platform anymore. It's also possible that this could mean game mods would be available on the Xbox, which could only be a good thing.

I'm very cautiously optimistic. Microsoft has the deep pockets necessary to do something like this and do it right. If they pull it off, it'll completely revolutionize the industry.

Yeah because merging the PC and console is not going to affect modding? Keep dreaming. This isn't the console becoming more like a PC as much as it is the PC becoming more like the console.

Edit: replied to wrong post.

 

[Richard Allen]

Well there is a major issue here: Licensing

The PC model is completely dependant on free licensing, anyone can sell any software to run on a Windows operating system without having to pay a penny to Microsoft.

Yet on consoles, including Xbox, it is entirely dependant on charging a licence fee for every single game released for the system, about $10-12 per game. That is the ONLY way that consoles are marketable, by selling at a loss and making it back in the hundreds of millions of game sales per system.

So if there is a single OS for both PC and Console... how does software work?

Will BOTH systems charge, which utterly fucks PC over as now every Steam Sale will cost about $15 more.

Or will neither charge, which is bad for consoles as that market loves the low entry price of hardware that is subsidised by game licensing fees.

Console and PC operating systems in many ways do NEED to be different, as they are doing very different things. I can't see this being a particularly good idea.

If they go with "charge licence fee for software on new OS" will uttelry kill the new OS. I mean it was hard enough to get people to move from XP to Vista, even from XP to Windows 7. Now try convincing people to make the jump with the knowledge they can't use any of their old programs and the new programs will cost about 30% more.

No Sale.

At the very least PC games with the GFWL logo will be treated like 360 games and charge license fees.

What will most likely happen is that if you want to make a multi ms platform game you will have to pay the licence fee for the sdk (as it is now). If you want a pc game only then you would be free to use w/e development platform of your choice.

Good way to push people to Linux.

I'm not so sure, how is this pushing people to linux. They would be extending functionality of the 360 sdk allowing them to target win 8, 360, and winphone 7 all with one consolidated code base? Where else can you get that type of market penetration? Publishers would salivate over this.

Do you even give thought to the consumer?

You care about the publishers and Microsoft market penetration but what about the consumers? Licensing fees for PC games is bad for consumers but hey, consumers don't matter right?

PC games already are closing in on the price of console games and AAA's have already gotten there. The sdk will not change that either way. It lowers development costs and makes games available to you on 3 systems or more. I'd have an "xbox" in every room of my house, how is that not value added? Like I said before cost of pc games is already rising, sdk won't change that.

 

[ryo02]

if I wanted a gaming pc Id buy one but Im a console gamer at heart this is just going to mean DRM and hackers (more than we have allready).

games will have even more issues with them out of the box and need patches (more than we have allready).

I want to go back to offline dedicated game consoles