Is Microsoft arrogant?

[MasterJedi2U]

But don't smaller chips = More money? Especially if you're getting so many benefits out of it? Sorry for all the questions. I just like to understand the technology behind the consoles you know...

 

[paintba||er]

price cut in general....it would cost them less to produce so they wouldnt charge as much for the system. In general the cost would drop about 50 dollars just on the CPU. It could go as high as 80 dollars depending if they cut out some fans and other stuff because

smaller cpu = less heat = less fans to keep it cool = less gadgets inside = less money

Yes but Microsoft is already losing money on each console and they are greedy so they may not pass that price cut on to us.

 

[itguy07]

macs are overpriced if anything
a lot of people like PCs for the freedom
i would never like a mac

Not to hijack this thread, but Macs are not overpriced. They don't sell bottom feeder machines, but when comparing like for like in the mid to high range they are very competitive.

Not sure what "freedom" you mean? When I was doing PC repair, few upgraded (upgrading was buying a new box) beyond a hard drive or RAM. Few ran anything other than Windows and the canned apps that came with the machine. So no real "freedom" there.

 

[dds]

But don't smaller chips = More money? Especially if you're getting so many benefits out of it? Sorry for all the questions. I just like to understand the technology behind the consoles you know...

Yea man no problem.

The thing with the 65nm processor is that its cheaper to make but very costly to develop. SO MS would invest some coin into development but then reap rewards of creating a more cost effective box. In the long run they would actually be saving money because the cost of production of each box would go down for many reasons: 1) smaller chip which costs less to make, 2) less fans, 3) not as large a heat sync, 4) less thermal compound.....the list goes on

What I see MS doing is implementing this hardware change but for a period of time keeping the 360 at a fixed price until they make their investment money back. One there level, they would implement a price cut on all 360's with the 65nm chip. This price cut wouldnt be drastic, but it would still be a price cut.

And to the person that said MS losses money on each console......come on man this isnt sony. MS has there sh*t down to the tee. And even if they are losing money on production, which i believe they are not, they are making it back with live and all there over priced accessories.

 

[paintba||er]

Yea man no problem.

The thing with the 65nm processor is that its cheaper to make but very costly to develop. SO MS would invest some coin into development but then reap rewards of creating a more cost effective box. In the long run they would actually be saving money because the cost of production of each box would go down for many reasons: 1) smaller chip which costs less to make, 2) less fans, 3) not as large a heat sync, 4) less thermal compound.....the list goes on

What I see MS doing is implementing this hardware change but for a period of time keeping the 360 at a fixed price until they make their investment money back. One there level, they would implement a price cut on all 360's with the 65nm chip. This price cut wouldnt be drastic, but it would still be a price cut.

And to the person that said MS losses money on each console......come on man this isnt sony. MS has there sh*t down to the tee. And even if they are losing money on production, which i believe they are not, they are making it back with live and all there over priced accessories.

From what I have heard they lose about $100 a console. But they definetly make up for it with all the games, accessories, ect.

 

[wii_cammy]

can i straighten out all this is microsoft nasty/nice
well to put it simply microsoft is just a company not good not bad but certain people say a spokesperson says something bad you automatically assume he is saying what the company thinks.
well you are wrong so stop saying o microsoft this nintendo that and sony blah blah blah

 

[blogman54]

Not to hijack this thread, but Macs are not overpriced. They don't sell bottom feeder machines, but when comparing like for like in the mid to high range they are very competitive.

Not sure what "freedom" you mean? When I was doing PC repair, few upgraded (upgrading was buying a new box) beyond a hard drive or RAM. Few ran anything other than Windows and the canned apps that came with the machine. So no real "freedom" there.

It all depends what you want the machine to do. If your into gaming your gonna get the high end video card and lots of RAM good sound card huge HDD, but if you just have it for email and documents why buy a Mac if you don't want to spend the money? I am on my computer all the time so when I buy a computer I need something that will last 3 or 4 years that is Always on except when I have to restart cuz of windows "update" than I buy another 1. My dell is 2 years old so in about 2009 I will purchase a Mac :smilewinkgrin:

 

[123eman]

o wow thats a lot compared to how much the console is. i thought it was more around 30-50 ish.

 

[itguy07]

It all depends what you want the machine to do. If your into gaming your gonna get the high end video card and lots of RAM good sound card huge HDD, but if you just have it for email and documents why buy a Mac if you don't want to spend the money? I am on my computer all the time so when I buy a computer I need something that will last 3 or 4 years that is Always on except when I have to restart cuz of windows "update" than I buy another 1. My dell is 2 years old so in about 2009 I will purchase a Mac :smilewinkgrin:

The gamers I know are mainly either console or PC and pump their $$ into one or the other. A few are both, but mainly they pick a platform.

I still have a 2002 iMac that is in use by my Dad and it was my main computer (photo, video editing, Internet stuff, everything but games) up until I got my Powerbook 2 years ago. It runs the latest OS perfectly and has been an all around great computer. It just keeps on chugging along.

 

[blogman54]

The gamers I know are mainly either console or PC and pump their $$ into one or the other. A few are both, but mainly they pick a platform.

I still have a 2002 iMac that is in use by my Dad and it was my main computer (photo, video editing, Internet stuff, everything but games) up until I got my Powerbook 2 years ago. It runs the latest OS perfectly and has been an all around great computer. It just keeps on chugging along.

My friend has an iMac from 2000 and it still runs distant for having dial up modem. That is the exact reason I am buying a Mac they last long

 

[dds]

Mitch wheres that proof buddy? www.teamxbox.com has posted an article saying 65nm chips went into production March of this year so it should be a few weeks before we see 360's (at least elites) with the updated chip.

I think your 2008 estimate was just that

 

[dds]

by the way heres that link:

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/12991/IBM-Starts-Manufacturing-65nm-Cell/

 

[blogman54]

plans to start manufacturing a 65-nm version of the Xbox 360 CPU this year.

Thats what it says in the article above. but for the 360 at least its not going to be in a couple weeks I predict more like late summer early fall. Maybe this will help prevent the over heating and red ring of death :thumbsup:

 

[dds]

To quote the article: "IBM announced today it has started production of a 65-nanometer version of the Cell Broadband Engine, an improvement on the current 90-nanometer manufacturing process."

And the day the article was posted was March 13th, so that would mean just under a month of production. I wouldnt be surprised if the 2nd batch of elites had this chip in there

 

[BrandonMcAuslan]

Of course microsoft is arrogant..! Not quite as arrogant as Sony in terms of the games/entertainment side.

But its probably one of the most arrogant (in terms of PR) companies ever to exist.