begin quoting DJA as of Thu, May 05, 2005 at 07:24:23PM -0700: > I've read somewhere that Microsoft doesn't really like that situation > and that they are working on the next version of the XBox to be more > proprietary and tamper-proof.
I am not suprised. > Naturally, M$ would not be too averse to upgrading if it were on their > terms, and with /their/ branded hardware. Naturally. :) > Todd Walton wrote: > > instead of the willy-nilly > >anarchic tinkering that happens with conventional PCs, it still means > >the game console is becoming just another PC. > > It's your "anarchic tinkering" that made the PC market what it is today. Yes, well, but I'm not convinced that the "PC market" today is really that good of a thing. But then, I really like the trio of (mostly) good natured competition between the Mac, Atari ST, and Amiga. But then, perhaps one of the reasons why the Mac, Atari ST, and Amiga machines were so nice can be given as all those soulless hucksters out there pushing the PCs. > A result of IBM's mistaken belief that their idea was safe if they just > copyrighted their BIOS, it brought what the Apple ][ offered to a new > level. Y'know, I _really_ hate that phrase: 'a new level'. It's come to signify, to me, that someone's excusing the waste of a lot of money and effort. . . > After Compaq did their own BIOS, effectively spawning the /real/ > PC revolution, IBM tried to shunt it to a spur by introducing the PS/2 > line and the MicroChannel bus lock-in. But the horse was out of the barn > and mating. Microsoft still doesn't understand that it was IBM"s > hardware design rather than it's (plagiarised) OS that grew the > commodity PC market. I think it was that people could steal software from work. Coupled with the IBM marketing (Microsoft learned _that_ lesson) and the availablity of cheap knock-off clones (that appealed to American cheapskates), it was hard to beat. I still miss the thriving ecosystem of alternatives. Even if many of 'em were crap. . . [snip] > Not if they can control the hardware market like they control the > software market. M$ surely would shed no tears if the whole third party > hardware industry disappeared in any form other than to service its own > mare. Good point. > >Which doesn't mean that Microsoft's move was bad, necessarily. Better > >to pulverize a business model than to let someone else reap its > >benefits, ja? > > The XBox may well be little more than an exploratory incursion into the > hardware business. Call it an intelligence mission. "Just how gullible _is_ this market anyway?" -Stewart "Less gullible than the PC market, but not exactly shrewd." Stremler
pgpVlHZEVUXcy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
