Microsoft reveals Xbox One, the console that can read your heartbeat Microsoft has shown off its next-generation gaming console, the Xbox One, with an upgraded Kinect and voice-recognition system, Skype integration, seamless switching between viewing modes, and a massive ramp-up in server support for the Live online community. Xbox One One console to rule them all "We've designed an all-in- …
You shouldn't make a decision based on what you have listed, because most of it can be implemented by the competition or via software. The only thing that has any weight at all to me and also apparently to you, is the HDMI input. However, anyone paying attention to this particular detail already knows it can be implemented via PC very cheaply.
The xbox controller does suck, but honestly, I only know one other person that doesn't like it, so apparently it is good enough for most people. I still prefer the very first PS1 controller with analogue sticks, or even the one before that without the sticks.
I think what you should consider is that these consoles look like they are going to run x86 code. Considering that, these things are grumpy, locked down PC's. Maybe we should stop considering either console, and get off our asses and setup a proper gaming/HTPC rig with controllers. All the benefits, almost none of the lock down!
BTW, if you have ps3 "navi" remotes (the ones without the mocap ball), do know you can sync those to a bluetooth adapter and use them on your PC (Windows or Linux, maybe Mac too). They make wonderful HTPC remotes for simple interfaces like the one for XBMC. Also, I've been reading that they also make great keyboard replacements for F.P.S. type of games.
Really? That would make you considering switching?? I think this is a total fail of a feature. It is just HDMI pass through, there is no cablecard slot in it, so it can't record anything, and probably can't even pause live TV.
If you switch channels you'll still see the cable TV box's banner on top, with whatever banner Microsoft has partially on top of that. If you want to record something on your cable DVR (since the Xbox can't) you'll still need to use the cable box's guide to find the program to select for recording, the Xbox's overlay guide won't be able to do it. IR commands are pretty simple, and aside from the odd discrete command like on, off a handful of others, are always modal. This greatly what the Xbox can do with the cable box without having it activate all the cable box's menus to get there. Having those on the same screen partially overlapped with the Xbox's menus will be UGLY! But then Microsoft never did care about aesthetics.
I'll bet the only cable "box" this Xbox gives a good experience to is Windows Media Center. I have a feeling that Microsoft read all the rumors of Apple's TV (most of which are probably way off the mark, just like they were for the iPhone before it came out) and read about the future plans for Google TV, and they figured they had to get out there with something to avoid looking as behind as they really are. If Apple ever does introduce a TV, and/or Google makes Google TV not totally suck, Microsoft will disown this functionality in the Xbox faster than they forgot about Kin. They'll release something else and anyone using this functionality in their Xbox will never see another update ever again.
Don't believe me? Let's watch how quickly Windows RT is orphaned now that Intel has some Atom CPUs that comparable to ARM CPUs...
Indeed, I don't see that as particularly beneficial. WHAT WOULD absolutely destroy the XBOX One would be if Sony were to include full "Nasne" functionalty in the PS4 as standard. DVB-T and DVB-S tuners, full DVR functionality, and the ability to stream live or recorded content to any other DLNA device in your household!
If Sony had any sense they could do this and own near enough the complete STB market in one swoop.
nothing here that will make me buy one either. I only bought a (refurb) first gen XBOX to install the first incarnation of XBMC, I dont think the "bundled" games ever got opened.
to the poster a few blocks back, I didnt know you could sync PS NAVI remotes to a pc. I'll look into that (and if it works in linux for my more modern XBMC)
"I'll bet the only cable "box" this Xbox gives a good experience to is Windows Media Center. I have a feeling that Microsoft read all the rumors of Apple's TV ... and read about the future plans for Google TV,"
Or more likely, they looked at what is already possible with a range of TV streamer/Internet boxes, as standard with a range of "smart TVs" - and yes, already being done with consoles, including the X Box, and decided to build on that.
"Let's watch how quickly Windows RT is orphaned now that Intel has some Atom CPUs that comparable to ARM CPUs..."
I'd be glad if they do - it's a shame that the lower cost Window starter version got replaced with Windows RT (that lacks x86 and "desktop" compatibility), which is mainly why we saw the end of the low cost x86 "netbooks", and why the current Atom Windows 8 laptops are more expensive than both Windows 7 "netbooks", and the Windows RT devices.
Out of interest, do you have any references for Atom vs ARM speeds? It's easy to find benchmarks comparing different ARM processors, but I've yet to find ARM vs x86... Also I wasn't aware that the newer Atoms were that much faster, but would gladly be proved wrong :)
Have you played an XBOX360 to compare it with your PS3?
I have. My XBOX essentially is never used. The PS3 does everything better imho (though the 360 is very good for just games, though if available on PS3 that's the game version bought leaving only HALO and GOW to the XBOX).
I see they still say 'LIVE subscription' so presumably the insanity that is playing twice for your SKY, Lovefilm and Netflix is still there.
I'd say, pending the PS4 release with an official spec list and features (including that streaming backwards compatibility thing), that MS just handed a large chunk of the gaming market to SONY with this.
It even looks like a 70's alarm clock radio without the clock or radio.
The PS3 suffers from various weaknesses over the Xbox 360.
Firstly Sony's crap security, which took their online services down for ages. Secondly the PS3 is a nightmare to program, hence why games like GTA4 ran in a lower resolution on the PS3 and they couldn't be bothered to optimise the code for the PS3.
Going forward the PS4 and XBox one will both be more easy to code for. I imagine Sony didn't show the PS4 case as it was going to be a huge doorstop too, X86 running full pelt creates a lot of heat compared to other CPUs.
I'm not an owner of any games console, so I'm not a fan boy.
"The PS3 suffers from various weaknesses over the Xbox 360.
Firstly Sony's crap security, which took their online services down for ages. Secondly the PS3 is a nightmare to program, hence why games like GTA4 ran in a lower resolution on the PS3 and they couldn't be bothered to optimise the code for the PS3."
Umm... GTA4 runs on 1080p on the PS3 w/o trouble. The actual FAIL there is to Rockstar, which seems to have b0rked something in their code which makes it prefer 720p over 1080p. If you change Video settings on the PS3 so that only 1080p and 480p are enabled, GTA4 will run on 1080p. There are two other games I think that have the same bug, can't remember which ones.
I do think the x86 switch is a huge step backwards, we should be getting rid of x86 crap instead of propping up consoles with it.
"though if available on PS3 that's the game version bought leaving only HALO and GOW to the XBOX"
Why? - the Xbox is usually the best version (higher refresh rates, higher resolutions, etc.) of both consoles - due to it's more powerful GPU and hardware scaler. If you have both, usually the Xbox version is the one to get....
Myth. Microsoft fooled idiots. They put 1080 on the box without clarifying if that was native or upscaled. They then went off and talked about the Xbox scaler and gave it a cute name. Xbox fanbois and Microsoft shills the globe over then went passed the message....
The reality: The NATIVE resolution of Xbox games is lower than the PS3. The resolution on the PS3 box represents the true resolution of the game, not some artificial upscaled fudge number.
That said, the PS3 has a hardware scaler too, it's part hardware, part software, but the mighty grunt of the cell makes it pretty awesome. Watch a DVD and it's up-scaling performance is clear, wiping the floor with expensive DVD players....
Almost all the PS3 FUD this gen is false and spread by the Microsoft marketing machine When your audience is 14yr old spotty teenagers, they are too naive to understand they are being played for fools.
Actually most X360 and PS3 games are the same resolution (1280x720p), but SOME PS3 games (Wipeout HD for example) are 1920x1080p
PS3 just has a very high speed bus between Cell and RSX and is able to pass graphics tasks to the Cell.
PS3 is about 10% more powerful than X360.
Upscaling DVD, no better than my TV via the RGB Scart. And yes I compared, so I use my DVD player for DVDs and PS3 for BluRays.
I run the PS3 in non upscaling mode as this is recommended.
I still find the quality good on it. The water in Uncharted 3, the snow in Uncharted 2, the multiplayer map detail in Killzone 3.
A resizable HDMI input stream sounds like a neat feature, especially if there is a protocol so Tivo, Sky etc. can be updated to make for better integration. I like the idea that I can mix/match games, apps and TV services from my Nexus 7 or voice (iff the speech support is improved over 360).
Wonder if we will be able to input a feed from 360, PS3 or PS4 consoles "Xbox play TS4" ?
Why the negativity? Will be cool if implemented well.
There is nothing terribly interesting about taking a TV signal and overlaying stuff on it. That's just picture-in-picture. You still have to control the other device(s) suitably well. You still have to deal with content from other sources.
HDMI passthru is really just a big fat surrender. You're advertising that you've given up on being a central media hub. At that point, you might as well use better discrete devices because that's what you are doing anyways.
Games are what game consoles do better than a $60 Roku or $100 BluRay player. If the games aren't compelling then you have no point as a game console. Being a more expensive and more complicated version of what everyone else is already doing is not compelling.
Xbox One DRM:
You buy the disk, you put it in the console, it copies the content to the HDD and then connects to the internet to obtain a license (using the unique serial number of the disk).
Give the disk to someone else, or trade it in, and that person has to go through the same route. However as the unique disk serial number has been used, they have to pay full price for the disk...
What's unclear is:
How often it connects to check the game you have on the HDD is still licensed to your Xbox Live Account.
If you remove the game does it free up the license for resale. (knowing Microsoft, unlikely). However even if it does, there is no way for a potential future buyer to know if the previous owner removed the content or not and if they have to pay or not.
Microsoft are being cagy about all of this, giving mixed messages and intetionally clouding the issues. But the above is what they HAVE said...
This was a feature they had to add to keep the games developers happy. They most likely threatened to pull the plug on future XBox games if MS didn't do it, saying they would only develop for the PS4.
Now that games devs have twisted Microsoft's arm, they will now make the same threat to Sony, "implement this feature or we'll pull the plug on PS4 development, Microsoft has this feature".
PS3 has a proven track record of platform security and virtually no piracy.
Xbox the exact opposite. If anything Microsoft were forced down the DRM route because of the rampant platform piracy problem.
Sony have no problems, they have 30 or so game studios. Microsoft have 3.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/gaming/xbox-one-gamers-unhappy-about-proposed-fee-for-preowned-games-8629720.html
"Microsoft has said it will control the re-sale of games for the Xbox One, drawing angry reactions from the online community.
Once customers have bought a game they will receive a unique code to activate their purchase. Once the code has been used the game will be linked to that individual’s Xbox Live account. If a friend borrows the game CD then they will have to buy a new activation code before they can play.
The new code will cost as much as the original game and consoles will have to be connected to the internet to authorize their purchase."
"Give the disk to someone else, or trade it in, and that person has to go through the same route. However as the unique disk serial number has been used, they have to pay full price for the disk..."
I don't know about America, but that is illegal under EU law - EULA or no EULA
>once upon a time it was all about the launch games :)
Yep. since before the Mario and Sonic days...
It used to be so, but at the launch of the PS3 Sony didn't seem to bother- I can't recall any big PS franchises making much of a splash. Now that this new Xbox and the PS4 have similar hardware (so more likely to share AAA 3rd party games), it might be less about the 'title exclusives' and more about the details... clearly MS have done well to recognise that Online Multiplayer could be better, which is but the first step to fixing it. d
Oh, and screw MS's Halo franchise - Bungie's 'Destiny' (available on both next gen platforms) is where its going to be at.
Sadly, this is the best that you can expect from Microsoft's branding people. I mean really, could you think of a group of people that do any less work? As best as I can figure, the conversations around their office must go something like this:
"Oh gee, what should we call the follow-up to Windows 7?"
"How about Windows 8?"
"Brilliant! Lets go collect out unjustly over-sized paychecks!"
"What should we call our new tablet PC?"
"I don't know. I don't feel like doing any work today. Lets just steal the name from one of our other products and then call it that."
"Well, our large Microsoft Surface tables that we sell to hotels are pretty cool. Let's name our tablet after that!"
"Brilliant! Now we can go drink some lattes, smoke some expensive cigars, and play a round of golf to congratulate ourselves!"
And when these people finally did find themselves faced with some real work after they had to rename the "Metro" user-interface at breakneck speed due to some international trademark concerns, the best that these geniuses could come up with was calling it "The Windows Store User-Interface." Yeah, that really rolls off of the tongue, doesn't it? So it doesn't shock me in the least that they would call the new XBox console the "Xbox One," despite the fact that it is the third-generation of Xbox console and that it would be potentially confusing. In fact, we should be happy that they didn't rename the new Xbox the "Microsoft Game Console 2014," because that is how they get out of doing so much work (or even having to suffer the nuisance thinking) by naming so many Microsoft products that way.
This is reminiscent of the Sony Ericsson P-series, going from 800 to 900, 910, 990. Then, the P1.
Even Xbox Infinity would have been a better name (still leaving Continuum for one final stab at the console hardware business).
MICROSOFT STUPID NAME FAIL. (They deserve this Eadonism, they really do.)
Okay, but which company does have a wonderful naming scheme? And what exactly is wrong about naming things by numbers (re Windows 8 after Windows 7) anyway? Seems perfectly sensible to me - later on you criticise them for not following the correct number, which is it?
Let's see - Samsung: S, S2, S3, S4.
Apple: counted their operating systems by number too since the first one, except now when they've oddly switched to 0.1 counting because they want to stick with number "X" forever.
Intel: Pentium, Pentium 2, Pentium 3, ...
As for names, I don't see how Surface is any worse than any other names in use. It's still a damn sight more original than taking the generic term for the product like "phone", "app", "store", "TV", and then at best adding an "i", or perhaps not even that.
It is annoying when the numbers don't follow the correct order, but then the 5th iphone is actually the 6th, and HTC did the same thing with "HTC One".
(Maybe they should have called it "X Box Aleph One", if people liked X Box Infinity so much...)
"the best that these geniuses could come up with was calling it "The Windows Store User-Interface"
Citation needed? What I read said it was "Modern UI" or "Windows 8 UI".
"the best that these geniuses could come up with was calling it "The Windows Store User-Interface"
Citation needed? What I read said it was "Modern UI" or "Windows 8 UI".
Microsoft calling the user-interface formally known as Metro "Modern UI" was extremely short-lived, and abandoned extremely quickly in favor of calling it the "Windows Store" UI because it runs "Windows Store" apps. As far as a citation to back my assertion up goes, The Register covered the name change for starters back in September. Check out this article here:
One more try: Metro apps are now 'Windows Store' apps
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/13/metro_apps_are_windows_store_apps/
If that's not good enough of a resource for you check out Microsoft's "Windows Store Apps Dev Center Page" here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/apps/jj679957 All throughout the page the apps are referred to as "Windows Store Apps."
The name is clearly about market repositioning hence the rather lame ONE is about re-educating the consumers to think it's not just a games console as suggested by a previous poster. Microsoft's wider strategy of claiming the hub in the living room is off to an earlier start than the competition, Sony are the only ones to be close to competing if they release more features along these lines with their new console.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
