A MS product crashing?!

We\'ll know who to blame in case of global electrical blackout.

Hey Guys what did i miss ?

Oh yeah.... a Microsoft product going Tits up


:rofl: :rofl:

[Living-In-Clip]

You may of missed that, but we didn\'t miss you.
Hope that helps!

By the way, it is a big friggin\' power supply, but that picture posted above is just retarded.

Either way  - shoddy quality.

I missed ooseven

Originally posted by Unicron!
I missed ooseven

Why?

So you would ask

[GmanJoe]

Holy shit. It\'s on BBC now.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4466688.stm

Europeans at least have a heads up about it. Fastson, viking boy and ooseven might wanna hold off for a bit.

Originally posted by §ôµÏG®ïñD
MS, System with Operating system, Crashes...



i don\'t understand the problem?   It\'s normal for ms.

XP Pro, and Windows 2000 have been pretty stable operating systems. The ratio of Blue Screens, system hangups, and other such nuiances compared to the Windows 95, and 98 OS\'s would reveal an improved product.

Most crashes can be attributed to people not knowing what the fuck they are doing. I see all kinds of dumbass computing habits from my fellow co-workers.


I agree that MS did rush the console, and there is going to be problems.

IMO, MS knows it has no shot at beating Sony head to head. MS wanted nothing more but to create a 2 year seperation from Sony and have a significantly more powerful console on the market in that time frame. This gives MS a better chance of gaining some market share. However, MS knows many of its best customers are gamers who are going to run to the PS3 when it launches or soon after. All MS is doing now is crossing its fingers and hoping Sony decides to sit back on the success of the PS2 till 2007 before it enter the race.

That\'s what I would like to see, a bigger gap between the 2 consoles. Instead of having 2, almost equally powerful machines launched 1 year apart, I would like to see a new machine every 2 to 3 .5 years.  I think MS wants this to since it will allow them to gain a foothold. Sony might not mind since they can make quite a bit of money on the PS2 throughout next year, while improving and stablizing the pS3 as well as having more time to produce  a killer launch with a boat load of AAA titles.

[Paul2]

2007 sounds like a nice time for PS3, but do you think hardcore videogame consumers will be that patients?  Spring 2006 is a little early too imo.  Would be cool if PS3 is release in summer of 2006 in Japan and Fall/Winter in North America and other countries.

Regarding glitches, I tried swapping games while the system was on and it told me Kameo was from another territory. Essentially, a fancy disc read error. Reset (rebooted) the system and it worked ok.

Only happened once so far. Ticked me off though.

-Dan

[Paul2]

Originally posted by Eiksirf
Regarding glitches, I tried swapping games while the system was on and it told me Kameo was from another territory. Essentially, a fancy disc read error. Reset (rebooted) the system and it worked ok.

-Dan

LOL.  That\'s quite funny.

http://ghostbusters360.ytmnd.com/

:rofl:

Everyone seems to make fun of the external powersupply, but I think it\'s one of the best features of the 360.  Keep all that heat, and interference away from the more sensitive electronics, and on the floor, behind the home theatre where nobody will see it.  Imagine how much bigger the 360 would be with an integrated PS?  ugh.

I hope the PS3 goes that route.

[Titan]

I think the word "owned" comes to mind about the 360 crashing.

I would actually perfer to have the powersupply inside the console. If the PS3 had it I wuold be pissed. I\'d have to find a place to stick the damn power supply when I set the console up ina  dorm room where I have no room to begin with. I\'d rather have it inside with a fan to cool it and I don\'t have to worry about where to but the damn thing.

Originally posted by ddaryl
XP Pro, and Windows 2000 have been pretty stable operating systems. The ratio of Blue Screens, system hangups, and other such nuiances compared to the Windows 95, and 98 OS\'s would reveal an improved product.

Most crashes can be attributed to people not knowing what the fuck they are doing. I see all kinds of dumbass computing habits from my fellow co-workers.


I agree that MS did rush the console, and there is going to be problems.

IMO, MS knows it has no shot at beating Sony head to head. MS wanted nothing more but to create a 2 year seperation from Sony and have a significantly more powerful console on the market in that time frame. This gives MS a better chance of gaining some market share. However, MS knows many of its best customers are gamers who are going to run to the PS3 when it launches or soon after. All MS is doing now is crossing its fingers and hoping Sony decides to sit back on the success of the PS2 till 2007 before it enter the race.

That\'s what I would like to see, a bigger gap between the 2 consoles. Instead of having 2, almost equally powerful machines launched 1 year apart, I would like to see a new machine every 2 to 3 .5 years.  I think MS wants this to since it will allow them to gain a foothold. Sony might not mind since they can make quite a bit of money on the PS2 throughout next year, while improving and stablizing the pS3 as well as having more time to produce  a killer launch with a boat load of AAA titles.

If sony launched the ps3 in 2007 they would kill MS anyways. I think they would just play up the more powerful console angle. And people would just wait on ps3. Because they would know it would be more powerful than 360. If ps3 launched in march 06 the graphical gap is basicly none. I would like to see that happen.

Just so I could get and even more powerful ps3.