Support NeoGAF

[rjinaz]

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/09/xbl-why-paying-for-netflix/

It's not that bad PR spin I guess

Wow that article was written like five years ago. I'm sure how Neflix does things today is different than how it was done then. Even if not, Judging what somebody said five years ago seems a bit harsh. We all make mistakes.

I enjoy reading Albert's posts and hope he sticks around, but I take them for what they are, messages from Microsoft.

 

[Klocker]

Well, he brought up trust, and that word is echoed over and over in the DRM poll, so I am just seeing if he would comment. They removed all those restrictions for launch, is it hard to say they won't bring them back? Really that's a big deal to say? Lol

I don’t want to open up an entirely new issue here, but here’s my shot. I don’t see that ever happening with content you’re buying today either on disc and digitally. All of that DRM stuff was in place because there was no physical security on the disc itself, so all the licensing was done digitally. When you build that type of model, then you need to make sure people can’t install games on a bunch of machines, then unplug them. That would have made us an awesome Pirating machine, and that can’t happen for obvious reasons.

When we went back to disc security, those DRM policies weren't necessary. So no reason to turn it on later.

If there’s ambiguity, it’s because it’s possible that, in the future, IF WE ADDED BACK some of those family sharing ideas we had in the beginning, we’d have reintroduce similar types of policies. So IF you wanted to have a game and have that family sharing, always-in-the-cloud, and digital loaning – then we might add those requirements back. You can imagine a world where we have both types of models at the same time.

Again, big IF, but the bottom line is I wouldn’t worry about us making those policies “retroactive” which seems to be the issue I hear people worry about.

haha so he answered anyway 3rdamention ....

YES please make them available together.... give us the option to have the proposed digital future and allow the disc-dwellers to remain in their world.

 

[lastflowers]

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/09/xbl-why-paying-for-netflix/

It's not that bad PR spin I guess

I'm pretty sure they do route Netflix through their servers. I remember someone telling me this--could be made up from some figment of my imagination though.

 

[ypo]

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/09/xbl-why-paying-for-netflix/

"I think it's about adding value to the gold membership," said Xbox director of marketing Albert Penello. "I mean, obviously, the partnership there -- it's a lot of bandwidth.

Heh.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

I don’t want to open up an entirely new issue here, but here’s my shot. I don’t see that ever happening with content you’re buying today either on disc and digitally. All of that DRM stuff was in place because there was no physical security on the disc itself, so all the licensing was done digitally. When you build that type of model, then you need to make sure people can’t install games on a bunch of machines, then unplug them. That would have made us an awesome Pirating machine, and that can’t happen for obvious reasons.

When we went back to disc security, those DRM policies weren't necessary. So no reason to turn it on later.

If there’s ambiguity, it’s because it’s possible that, in the future, IF WE ADDED BACK some of those family sharing ideas we had in the beginning, we’d have reintroduce similar types of policies. So IF you wanted to have a game and have that family sharing, always-in-the-cloud, and digital loaning – then we might add those requirements back. You can imagine a world where we have both types of models at the same time.

Again, big IF, but the bottom line is I wouldn’t worry about us making those policies “retroactive” which seems to be the issue I hear people worry about.

If possible MS might want to get something out publicly that they will never force it retroactively, to put peoples minds at ease.

 

[inpHilltr8r]

I wish Albert had given the FCC ID number for the xbox one the closest I can find is https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/repo...mFrame=N&application_id=333860&fcc_id=C3K1537 and funny enough its confidentiality only lasts until November 21. Anyway that would prove the date.

That's the controller.

https://apps.fcc.gov/eas/GetApplicationAttachment.html?id=2022355

 

[sangreal]

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/09/xbl-why-paying-for-netflix/

It's not that bad PR spin I guess

this is back when Microsoft had an exclusive deal with Netflix (and MS made the app I believe)

 

[garrickk]

I think ALBOAT is giving some great responses. Sure, there are answers in the form of a question here and there, but I don't know how he could be more forthcoming in the face of a product they MAY evolve in various ways. Good points and questions on all sides.

Why can't all MS PR be this personal and direct. Doesn't take much.

 

[SwiftDeath]

I don’t want to open up an entirely new issue here, but here’s my shot. I don’t see that ever happening with content you’re buying today either on disc and digitally. All of that DRM stuff was in place because there was no physical security on the disc itself, so all the licensing was done digitally. When you build that type of model, then you need to make sure people can’t install games on a bunch of machines, then unplug them. That would have made us an awesome Pirating machine, and that can’t happen for obvious reasons.

When we went back to disc security, those DRM policies weren't necessary. So no reason to turn it on later.

If there’s ambiguity, it’s because it’s possible that, in the future, IF WE ADDED BACK some of those family sharing ideas we had in the beginning, we’d have reintroduce similar types of policies. So IF you wanted to have a game and have that family sharing, always-in-the-cloud, and digital loaning – then we might add those requirements back. You can imagine a world where we have both types of models at the same time.

Again, big IF, but the bottom line is I wouldn’t worry about us making those policies “retroactive” which seems to be the issue I hear people worry about.

See now this (hypothetical I know) sounds like a great way to try and introduce that xbox one ecosystem

Make it optional

Have people sign up (choose) to be a part of it etc.

I'm sure they'll be some growing pains but I think you could offer both solutions and let people choose which one better serves them

Of course think family-sharing on digital purchases is likely possible under the current system but that's just my opinion

Wow that article was written like five years ago. I'm sure how Neflix does things today is different than how it was done then. Even if not, Judging what somebody said five years ago seems a bit harsh. We all make mistakes.

I enjoy reading Albert's posts and hope he sticks around, but I take them for what they are, messages from Microsoft.

I'm pretty sure they do route Netflix through their servers. I remember someone telling me this--could be made up from some figment of my imagination though.

this is back when Microsoft had an exclusive deal with Netflix (and MS made the app I believe)

Honestly I didn't really mean anything by posting that

Someone asked for the article I provided it

If MS was providing it through their servers it kind of makes sense but still not sure how you explain it now if even nintendo does it for free

It's a sticking point for me on why I'll never pay for live again but that's really not the point of this thread and I apologize if I derailed it at all

 

[Arkham]

Every time I read Microsoft PR, I get flashbacks

"This is an EX-Xbox."

 

[rjinaz]

Honestly I didn't really mean anything by posting that

Someone asked for the article I provided it

If MS was providing it through their servers it kind of makes sense but still not sure how you explain it now if even nintendo does it for free

It's a sticking point for me on why I'll never pay for live again but that's really not the point of this thread and I apologize if I derailed it at all

Oh I figured as much, I figured you were just posting it because somebody brought it up previously. I just quoted you because you were the one that posted the actual article link.

 

[Hockeymac18]

I don’t want to open up an entirely new issue here, but here’s my shot. I don’t see that ever happening with content you’re buying today either on disc and digitally. All of that DRM stuff was in place because there was no physical security on the disc itself, so all the licensing was done digitally. When you build that type of model, then you need to make sure people can’t install games on a bunch of machines, then unplug them. That would have made us an awesome Pirating machine, and that can’t happen for obvious reasons.

When we went back to disc security, those DRM policies weren't necessary. So no reason to turn it on later.

If there’s ambiguity, it’s because it’s possible that, in the future, IF WE ADDED BACK some of those family sharing ideas we had in the beginning, we’d have reintroduce similar types of policies. So IF you wanted to have a game and have that family sharing, always-in-the-cloud, and digital loaning – then we might add those requirements back. You can imagine a world where we have both types of models at the same time.

Again, big IF, but the bottom line is I wouldn’t worry about us making those policies “retroactive” which seems to be the issue I hear people worry about.

Thanks for taking the time to respond, Albert. It would be nice if this response could be placed somewhere else so it doesn't get buried in this (completely unrelated) thread. I had my doubts that MS would implement the full system retroactively (for obvious reasons), but it is nice to see some semi-official response on the topic.

I think, like most everyone else, the optional path is the best one. Let both ecosystems exist. Use various incentives (such as family sharing, cheaper prices, etc.) to drive people towards the digital model. I'm hesitant to go digital, but if the incentives are good, I would certainly consider it. STEAM has mainly proven to be successful because of all of the incentives they offer.

 

[Albert Penello]

I think, like most everyone else, the optional path is the best one. Let both ecosystems exist. Use various incentives (such as family sharing, cheaper prices, etc.) to drive people towards the digital model. I'm hesitant to go digital, but if the incentives are good, I would certainly consider it. STEAM has proven successful because of all of the incentives they offer.

I like this path as well.

 

[EvB]

If possible MS might want to get something out publicly that they will never force it retroactively, to put peoples minds at ease.

They couldn't apply them retroactively because they would have a class action lawsuit on their hands, just like when Sony removed the Linux functionality from PS3.
Also, the surrounding infrastructure that would allow certain policies to exist wouldn't be there for older products that are already purchased.

But as Albert says, systems could work side by side.
Perhaps in future we could see the return of resellable discs that you can install/trade in, alongside the standard disc versions or the entirely digital version.

 

[Mrbob]

I don’t want to open up an entirely new issue here, but here’s my shot. I don’t see that ever happening with content you’re buying today either on disc and digitally. All of that DRM stuff was in place because there was no physical security on the disc itself, so all the licensing was done digitally. When you build that type of model, then you need to make sure people can’t install games on a bunch of machines, then unplug them. That would have made us an awesome Pirating machine, and that can’t happen for obvious reasons.

When we went back to disc security, those DRM policies weren't necessary. So no reason to turn it on later.

If there’s ambiguity, it’s because it’s possible that, in the future, IF WE ADDED BACK some of those family sharing ideas we had in the beginning, we’d have reintroduce similar types of policies. So IF you wanted to have a game and have that family sharing, always-in-the-cloud, and digital loaning – then we might add those requirements back. You can imagine a world where we have both types of models at the same time.

Again, big IF, but the bottom line is I wouldn’t worry about us making those policies “retroactive” which seems to be the issue I hear people worry about.

Personally, I don't care about family sharing if it requires a 24 hour check in on all digital purchases. Axe it and just let users lock game purchases to their account.

Please, please, please, give us real incentive to buy digitally and not some stupid costumes you can unlock with pre order.

 

[Roland1979]

If that were true, then why delay any markets and just ship lower volumes everywhere?

Because if you're loosing ground fast you prioritize. You reason which markets you simply cannot afford to loose, that way even if you loose money you minimize it. Damage control. Of course a launch is crucial but MS is also very aware that you sell over a consoles lifespan and the PS3 showed you can get back from a less then ideal start. Not saying you lie (though anything a corporate mouth or politician says i cannot take for granted) but it's a logical strategy. Holding the ford, make sure you don't suffer where it would really hurt.

Let me ask you this, will the Belgium's get a fully Flemish console or will it use the Dutch language for the Flemish territories of Belgium. So with all this talk about accents, will it actually use local accents AND differ from the language it came forth from OR will it use those languages and simply offer a French and a Dutch version to the Belgians?

 

[PairOfFilthySocks]

https://twitter.com/aegies/status/372210356703072256



Is this guy for real?

Holy fuck I hate Arthur Gies. I hate him so goddamn much. Yes, accept whatever they say at face value, heavens forbid you do any actual work as a member of the enthusiast media. Can a human being be any more of a corporate apologist fuckwad than this?

 

[soul creator]

I'm pretty sure they do route Netflix through their servers. I remember someone telling me this--could be made up from some figment of my imagination though.

Hell, back then they had the Netflix party watch feature (you and your friends could all watch the same movie while in a party). So something like that could have involved Live infrastructure to some extent.

edit: also, I kinda miss that feature, lol

 

[Pound_lb003]

Like I said. The truth of launch will put this to rest. There would be no benefit to me entering this thread unless I was confident it could be proven beyond my own word.

The continuous propagation of the same rumor does not make it a new rumor. The China news thing is wrong, of course, like the other rumors are wrong. They have no source. It’s just the same rumor making the rounds.

My source = me. That’s all I can rely on, my knowledge of what’s going on internally.

Now, you could call me a BIASED source, but short of me showing documents or email strings or other evidence that of course I could never disclose, it’s basically my word against the rumors. And even if I did show something, it would be dismissed.

At any rate, I will continue to post as long as I’m welcome.

I'll be honest, your word (your source= you) is kinda useless. Which is to say it's equally as valid as cboat or this rumour. The only bit of useful wording in your post that 95% of this community doesn't get is, none of this is even fucking important until the numbers come out.

So it was kinda redundant to come here.

 

[Mugatu]

Like I said. The truth of launch will put this to rest. There would be no benefit to me entering this thread unless I was confident it could be proven beyond my own word.

The continuous propagation of the same rumor does not make it a new rumor. The China news thing is wrong, of course, like the other rumors are wrong. They have no source. It’s just the same rumor making the rounds.

My source = me. That’s all I can rely on, my knowledge of what’s going on internally.

Now, you could call me a BIASED source, but short of me showing documents or email strings or other evidence that of course I could never disclose, it’s basically my word against the rumors. And even if I did show something, it would be dismissed.

At any rate, I will continue to post as long as I’m welcome.

Your willingness to stand by your word is good enough for me. You are right, I wouldn't expect you to comment on here if the rumors were true since we'd find out in the not too distant future anyway.

 

[Moral Panic]

I'll be honest, your word (your source= you) is kinda useless. Which is to say it's equally as valid as cboat or this rumour. The only bit of useful wording in your post that 95% of this community doesn't get is, none of this is even fucking important until the numbers come out.

So it was kinda redundant to come here.

That's not true at all. Albert has an actual name and a reputation to uphold, whereas noone knows who cboat is and if he's wrong no one cares anyway. Albert is the only person (of the three) in the position to know the actual truth, so if he's lying he takes real damage to his credibility. Furthermore, it would require him to be a purposeful lier. On the other hand, I highly doubt cboat is a lier, he may have untrue information - but I think he really believes that everything he posts is true. Same with Digitimes, except that they seem to ave a lower hit rate than coat, and seem to fluff things up with the word "report" to make it seem more truthful.

 

[Garrett 2U]

Like I said. The truth of launch will put this to rest. There would be no benefit to me entering this thread unless I was confident it could be proven beyond my own word.

The continuous propagation of the same rumor does not make it a new rumor. The China news thing is wrong, of course, like the other rumors are wrong. They have no source. It’s just the same rumor making the rounds.

My source = me. That’s all I can rely on, my knowledge of what’s going on internally.

Now, you could call me a BIASED source, but short of me showing documents or email strings or other evidence that of course I could never disclose, it’s basically my word against the rumors. And even if I did show something, it would be dismissed.

At any rate, I will continue to post as long as I’m welcome.

Thanks for the clarification Albert!
I can't even imagine how much work is going into localizing Kinect.
It's definitely better to delay until it is fully functioning than to release a half baked product.

This isn't an infallible source.

It is probably safe to assume he wouldn't even comment if he wasn't sure of his statement, especially on such a meaningless rumor.

 

[statham]

Like I said. The truth of launch will put this to rest. There would be no benefit to me entering this thread unless I was confident it could be proven beyond my own word.

The continuous propagation of the same rumor does not make it a new rumor. The China news thing is wrong, of course, like the other rumors are wrong. They have no source. It’s just the same rumor making the rounds.

My source = me. That’s all I can rely on, my knowledge of what’s going on internally.

Now, you could call me a BIASED source, but short of me showing documents or email strings or other evidence that of course I could never disclose, it’s basically my word against the rumors. And even if I did show something, it would be dismissed.

At any rate, I will continue to post as long as I’m welcome.

Thanks for this, and please continue posting.

 

[Mindwipe]

I’m going to state it again, just like I said here and to OXM: The delay was localization related. Besides needing local language support, we also need to prop-up local Live, Apps, a Marketplace, and a variety of other services. We bundle that together as “localization” in messaging, but there is more to shipping in a region then text and voice translation.

It's weird, in an attempt to go out of your way to deny the yield rumours, you're pushing a line that makes you seem much more incompetent.

Modern transistor designs are so complex that yield issues could happen to anyone. It's just one of those things that can't really be predicted.

But localisation? That's a known issue, that Microsoft has done twice before, and has countless staff resources to throw at. And certainly, for a market like Switzerland, the idea that there is significant work to do given the languages are translated, when the 360 has an existing store and payment infrastructure and the launch few months are not going to bump the numbers of machines connected to Live up by any statistically valid amount (and no launch month for any machine ever could), the idea that you've not managed to get it done in time... well, it speaks very loudly of exceptionally bad organisation and project management.

It's weird, if I were you I'd be pretending that Microsoft had yield issues. That's much less embarrassing.

 

[lastflowers]

Hell, back then they had the Netflix party watch feature (you and your friends could all watch the same movie while in a party). So something like that could have involved Live infrastructure to some extent.

edit: also, I kinda miss that feature, lol

ah man, I was jealous of that. Never had a 360 till my internship at MS.

 

[Garrett 2U]

Hell, back then they had the Netflix party watch feature (you and your friends could all watch the same movie while in a party). So something like that could have involved Live infrastructure to some extent.

edit: also, I kinda miss that feature, lol

I want that feature back so much..

 

[BruiserBear]

Why do any of you even give a shit if the actual reason for the XB1 delay in parts of the world is hardware related? Stop and ask yourselves that question.

For whatever reasons, and you can be sure Microsoft wishes it didn't happen, the delay was necessary. That's really all that matters.

 

[Jomjom]

Who cares why anyway? You are launching in only 13 countries, whether that's because of aliens or because the Xbox one uses kryptonite which is suddenly in short supply, it changes nothing. Excuses are pointless.

I honestly think MS would have been better off not responding at all.

 

[Pound_lb003]

That's not true at all. Albert has an actual name and a reputation to uphold, whereas noone knows who cboat is and if he's wrong no one cares anyway. Albert is the only person (of the three) in the position to know the actual truth, so if he's lying he takes real damage to his credibility. Furthermore, it would require him to be a purposeful lier. On the other hand, I highly doubt cboat is a lier, he may have untrue information - but I think he really believes that everything he posts is true. Same with Digitimes, except that they seem to ave a lower hit rate than coat, and seem to fluff things up with the word "report" to make it seem more truthful.

Oh yeah?

What does Albert Penello actually put on the line by saying this? When post-launch (even when they hypothetically ship less than Sony) will there be a watchdog inquiry into whether this marketing guy was lying on an internet forum? No, the only way you'd hear stuff like this is through leaks.

The fact a marketing dude is here offering some form of damage control is (entirely in my opinion) more telling.

Basically this, for you and me, while we sit at our computers, carries as much weight as Cboat's rumours. If you want to read into it, it will be an opinion. The only thing that'll matter is the numbers that come out.

 

[The Flash]

Why do any of you even give a shit if the actual reason for the XB1 delay in parts of the world is hardware related? Stop and ask yourselves that question.

For whatever reasons, and you can be sure Microsoft wishes it didn't happen, the delay was necessary. That's really all that matters.

My man

 

[PG2G]

And NeoGAF continues to ruin good things by attacking someone who has been a fairly valuable asset to the forum.

 

[RedAssedApe]

If I were Albert I would have stopped posting a long time ago. He's a good sport. lol

 

[PG2G]

If I were Albert I would have stopped posting a long time ago. He's a good sport. lol

Pretty much. People can disagree all they want but calling the dude incompetent and a liar is too much.

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

And NeoGAF continues to ruin good things by attacking someone who has been a fairly valuable asset to the forum.

He questioned Gaf Jeebus!

 

[operon]

Thanks Albert for taking the time to post here, normally people have manners in GAF but lately they've gone completely ignorant and are more interested in console wars than rational conversations.

 

[BruiserBear]

Pretty much. People can disagree all they want but calling the dude incompetent and a liar is too much.

Peoples gots console warz to fight bro. They know this delay in parts of the world has to have a super dirty secret explanation for it.

Also, Cboat, who made a completely inaccurate claim about the PS4 release date just a week ago, is never wrong about anything, and he said the XB1 was having manufacturing problems.

 

[Wizman23]

I like this path as well.

So pre loading ala Steam and incentives to buy digital confirmed? I would hate to not be able to play Titanfall or Halo 5 at midnight on launch because I did not attend the midnight launch and have to wait for the game to download.

 

[The Flash]

Peoples gots console warz to fight bro.

Meanwhile at PC Gaf

 

[Klocker]

cant wait for November/December shipped/sales numbers...


Alboat vindication

 

[3rdamention]

I don’t want to open up an entirely new issue here, but here’s my shot. I don’t see that ever happening with content you’re buying today either on disc and digitally. All of that DRM stuff was in place because there was no physical security on the disc itself, so all the licensing was done digitally. When you build that type of model, then you need to make sure people can’t install games on a bunch of machines, then unplug them. That would have made us an awesome Pirating machine, and that can’t happen for obvious reasons.

When we went back to disc security, those DRM policies weren't necessary. So no reason to turn it on later.

If there’s ambiguity, it’s because it’s possible that, in the future, IF WE ADDED BACK some of those family sharing ideas we had in the beginning, we’d have reintroduce similar types of policies. So IF you wanted to have a game and have that family sharing, always-in-the-cloud, and digital loaning – then we might add those requirements back. You can imagine a world where we have both types of models at the same time.

Again, big IF, but the bottom line is I wouldn’t worry about us making those policies “retroactive” which seems to be the issue I hear people worry about.

Thanks Albert. Very stand up of you to be open and honest. I ask tough questions and you came right out to answer the best you could. I know you can't see the future. This was pretty awesome..


Sooogood.gif

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

"That report is incorrect. We have not lowered shipping volumes, and are actually seeing better than expected yields from our silicon," Albert Penello, a Microsoft senior director of product management and planning, said in a statement sent to PCMag.

"We just returned from Gamescom where we showed the overwhelming majority of content on Xbox One near-final hardware. We also just rolled out a widespread employee beta and remain on track for a November launch this year," Penello added.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2423677,00.asp?kc=PCRSS03069TX1K0001121

 

[3rdamention]

haha so he answered anyway 3rdamention ....

YES please make them available together.... give us the option to have the proposed digital future and allow the disc-dwellers to remain in their world.

Lol. He did. And I got mad respect for him for doing it. Didn't hurt to ask and you can tell he answered what he could. It appeared to be a loaded question, I know. But he tackled it.

Since he was being so candid, I thought why not ask it? Everyone gave Whitten a tough time earlier for dodging it, Mr. Penello tackled it. Bravo good sir...

 

[jond76]

Hi Albert!

One question I had was will there ever be a way to make it where the retail disc work as a download vector? I really liked the idea of not having to download 30gb per game.

 

[miDnIghtEr20C]

Wow. My grip on truthfulness was that tenuous?

Perhaps, it could be taken at face value that we are telling the truth. I haven’t been up here posting spin or BS. I’ve been pushing hard to be transparent in how we talk about what’s going on with the platform. And I’m clear when I can’t comment on things.

Yet, somehow since this truth doesn’t jibe with the popular belief online, we are being dishonest. I get that we’ve had a rough few months, but at some point I’d like to think we get the benefit of the doubt, at least on things that make sense logically. You know, Occam’s Razor and such.

Here’s truth:

There never has been any sort of yield or performance issues with our GPU/ESRAM/KINECT/ETC. It’s simply not true, and I’ve heard the rumors online so often I actually went to the silicon engineers to ask them again. Our HW program (knock-on-wood) has been on schedule and again, we’ve had the opportunity to increase performance even later in the program. You don’t have yield issues then upgrade the clock speed by 6%. Again, simple logic here.

Second, if we were having yield issues – why did our country delay not include markets like the US, Canada, or UK? Those represent the vast majority of our volumes. Anyone can look at GFK Chart-Track and see the volumes in the regions that slipped. Here’s an assignment for the GAF Detectives: go look at historical sell-thru rates of consoles by region, then tell me what percentage of global consoles sales were represented by those affected markets. (hint: it’s a small percentage). Each and every region is important to us, don’t get me wrong, but anyone can look at those numbers and deduce it has nothing to do with volume.

I’m going to state it again, just like I said here and to OXM: The delay was localization related. Besides needing local language support, we also need to prop-up local Live, Apps, a Marketplace, and a variety of other services. We bundle that together as “localization” in messaging, but there is more to shipping in a region then text and voice translation. The offset to that, like we’ve said, X1 is region free and while that’s slightly more inconvenient, it will still allow people in the local countries to enjoy launch. Again, not something we’d be promoting if we were having issues with volume.

I’m certainly not going to change everyone’s mind, I get that. And I know there is tendency to believe there are many more diabolical things going on behind the scenes. In this case, we are being fully transparent. And FYI – we passed FCC certification back in early summer, before PS4.

Lastly – anything that was shown on a box, was shown on near-final retail HW. Our Dev Kits and Retail Units are the same.

Albert “spoonful of sugar” Penello

Cue song... "Welcome to the new age.." Albert. :/


Your post on this site have been great. Thanks for always getting involved in threads here.

 

[Computer]

Was this a hint at the mystery port on the back of the Xbox One? Everyone thought it was there because it might be a dev kit.

 

[SnakeEyes]

No, it's really real™ science.

Spoiler

Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson-approved.

 

[Mindwipe]

Pretty much. People can disagree all they want but calling the dude incompetent and a liar is too much.

I didn't call him incompetent. I called Microsoft incompetent.

Something which is, at this point in the Xbox One story, surely past debate?

 

[OrbitScant]

Not true this is the real reason
http://www.vg247.com/2013/08/28/xbo...to-poor-component-yield-claims-chinese-paper/

 

[HocusPocus]

Thank you for posting here Albert. I'm sorry you have to deal with these folks who route for these consoles like a football team. It's a terrible mentality with technology. Looking forward to launch day and my day one edition. Hopefully you all have a successful launch.

 

[freefornow]

Not true this is the real reason
http://www.vg247.com/2013/08/28/xbo...to-poor-component-yield-claims-chinese-paper/

Did you even read AP's post?