Topic: After cable recall, Xbox's still frying

[Nemesis]

Link to full story

14 million games console owners are still at risk of waking up to find their Xbox has become an ex-box. For when Microsoft issued a safety advisory for Xbox customers last month, it failed to address the underlying problem.

After several reports of consoles catching fire, Microsoft urged 14 million console owners to send in their old power leads for a replacement. But hardware experts point out that the power cable was never at root of the problem: it simply made the existing problem worse. The meltdown, and subsequent fire risk was actually caused by wear and tear on the power supply used in early models of the Xbox. The replacement cable featured a trip, which cut down the risk of your house catching fire, but left unfortunate gamers with a fried console. The cord has an interrupter switch that acts like a conventional fuse, tripping power to the unit.

[Dash Jones]

Well, nothing to worry about there...that's typical MS business according to it's business model now.  OS's and systems are only supported for a 5 year cycle, after that you're on your own...and since they have more control...they prefer you to upgrade to whatever the new system will be...So that's almost right on schedule.  Probably just a tad early, but perhaps more will burn out just in time for Xbox Next.  Afterall, in computers they can't control enough components to force an upgrade...but this...

Seems to be following their business model since 2000 almost perfectly...

[S'Raek]

And people have always given Sony a hard time for some troubles with the Playstation.  Seems this is just the business practices these companies use.  Shame on all of them. 

[Capt. Mike]

Those of us who support military test equipment are finding this 5 year cycle crap a real burden...HP/Agilent, Tektronix, Fluke, Anritsu...will not support thier stuff from the 80's and 90's...so then I get to tell a customer (oh, say ground radiio communications), that I have to condemn thier $80,000 signal generator because I can't get parts (specifically a YIG oscillator) because it's not made anymore.

What burns me with the USAF is by the time they procure a replacement, it will only have 2 to 3 years left on support, and the new philosophy of not stockpiling parts, but ordering on demand, just makes things worse after support is gone.

Mike..off to calibrate some more fiber optics today...

[Iceman]

Well, nothing to worry about there...that's typical MS business according to it's business model now.  OS's and systems are only supported for a 5 year cycle, after that you're on your own...and since they have more control...they prefer you to upgrade to whatever the new system will be...So that's almost right on schedule.  Probably just a tad early, but perhaps more will burn out just in time for Xbox Next.  Afterall, in computers they can't control enough components to force an upgrade...but this...

Seems to be following their business model since 2000 almost perfectly...

It's generally known that a console has about 5 years of life to it before it becomes obselete. Same way with PS2 to PS3 and Gamcecube to Revolution. Its not shody business, its just common practice. The fact that they're breaking I think it just conincidence, since it's not enough to effect MS.

[Commander Maxillius]

Microsoft can do whatever it damn well pleases with the Xbox because it doesn't matter one bit if they lose an Xbox customer because that same buyer is probably using a Windows machine running Microsoft software.

What Microsoft has to worry about is releasing another stinker OS like Windows ME.

[Dash Jones]

Except oddly, PS2's don't have the problem of burning up, neither do gamecubes...heck, they still have the original nintendos around that work great...and the Sega Genesis, hmm, in fact it's MS that has the only system designed to breakdown in five years en masse???

Well, the first and second versions of their console...perhaps they learned after that.

[Nemesis]

What Microsoft has to worry about is releasing another stinker OS like Windows ME.

I disagree.  I think that Microsoft has most to worry about is arrogance.  Such as their subscription plans.

Link to full story:

For Microsoft, the transformation is substantial, and will involve two key changes: subscription pricing, and software that's stored remotely, or "hosted," rather than installed directly on a business' own servers.

Would you trust your software to be running on remote servers where Microsoft at any time can cut your business off?  Whether because you didn't pay your subscription or their software "goofs" or the network connection is down it doesn't matter, your business effectively ceases to exist until Microsoft renews the connection.

It would just be a matter of time beforet they extended such plans to the home.  Do you want to tithe to Microsoft monthly just to run your computer?   I won't. 

[toasty0]

Now, Microsoft is quietly working on the technological innards that will one day let the company offer corporate customers what is known in the industry as "software as a service." Some of Microsoft's competitors in the business software market, such as Salesforce.com and NetSuite, have been offering software as a service products for years.

For Microsoft, the transformation is substantial, and will involve two key changes: subscription pricing, and software that's stored remotely, or "hosted," rather than installed directly on a business' own servers


Nem,

I know you delight in spreading fear and "opinion" about MS. Never the less, if you spent less time being a postulant and more time reading up on those who make the decisions in technology and what they are thinking you'd know that what Gates is suggesting is a model that MS, IBM, Sun Systems and a whole lot of other software developement companies have been evolving toward since at least the mid 90s.

IBM, one of your "heroic" open source companies, is actually the biggest and most active proponent of the software-as-service business model. They begin to switch to this model as early as the late 80s with their mid-sized server packages. ( See: Who Says Elephants Can't Dance? Inside IBM's Historic Turnaround )

What the heck do you think MMORPGs are? They are a S E R V I C E and not a product in the old sense of products and services.

Jerry

[Iceman]

Except oddly, PS2's don't have the problem of burning up, neither do gamecubes...heck, they still have the original nintendos around that work great...and the Sega Genesis, hmm, in fact it's MS that has the only system designed to breakdown in five years en masse???

Well, the first and second versions of their console...perhaps they learned after that.

Actually, they did. The first run of PS2's got EXCEEDINGLY hot, hotter than most laptops do now, and we deemed a hazard.
Oh, and remember the original Playstations? The ones whos tracks for the lasers wore down so bad you had to flip the system over to get it to read correctly?


The XBox, (even though I'm not a huge fan) is a great system. They just don't have the games that I want. I have a few, but not many.


Every system has its problems. The PS2's are famous for collecting dust in all the wrong places and doing all kinds of bad things.


Oh, and also, the XBox fire hazard thing has been happening since day 1.

[Nemesis]

Nem,

I know you delight in spreading fear and "opinion" about MS. Never the less, if you spent less time being a postulant and more time reading up on those who make the decisions in technology and what they are thinking you'd know that what Gates is suggesting is a model that MS, IBM, Sun Systems and a whole lot of other software developement companies have been evolving toward since at least the mid 90s.

IBM, one of your "heroic" open source companies, is actually the biggest and most active proponent of the software-as-service business model. They begin to switch to this model as early as the late 80s with their mid-sized server packages. ( See: Who Says Elephants Can't Dance? Inside IBM's Historic Turnaround )

What the heck do you think MMORPGs are? They are a S E R V I C E and not a product in the old sense of products and services.

Jerry

Toasty we are not speaking of services only.  We are speaking of an OS Monopoly and Office software monopoly which is working towards the point where your only choice is to pay them a monthly fee to run the basic programs required to run you computer and your business.   A service where they are in absolute control and can change things arbitrarily without your permission.  A service where they can cut off your access to your data.  A service where they can change the rules giving themselves the rights to use your data and you have NO recourse.  The companies you are objecting to do not have that monopoly power to force use of the service.

An MMORPG is a different thing in that it requires that central server because of its very concept and you can use your computer even if they foul up and you lose access to the game.   A much different circumstance from a business losing access to the programs and data to run their systems.

You might like to look at your own mirror about the way anytime someone says something good about Linux, Firefox or open source software in general you jump in to attack.  Look at the example below from yesterday. 

Firefox 1.02 and Thunderbird 1.02 are out.

Fixed in Firefox 1.0.2
MFSA 2005-32 Drag and drop loading of privileged XUL
MFSA 2005-31 Arbitrary code execution from Firefox sidebar panel
MFSA 2005-30 GIF heap overflow parsing Netscape extension 2
Link to Firefox Download

Fixed in Thunderbird 1.0.2
MFSA 2005-30 GIF heap overflow parsing Netscape extension 2
MFSA 2005-25 Image drag and drop executable spoofing
MFSA 2005-21 Overwrite arbitrary files downloading .lnk twice
MFSA 2005-18 Memory overwrite in string library
MFSA 2005-17 Install source spoofing with user:pass@host
MFSA 2005-15 Heap overflow possible in UTF8 to Unicode conversion
Link to Thunderbird Download

*Gulp* What were those considered before? Features?

Jerry

I posted about an update to two programs that are used by forum members and listed the bug fixes.  You immediately started with an insult to that software.   I didn't reference Microsoft.  I didn't harp on about how great these programs were  I merely provided a post of information without commentary for those who might find it useful.  You as always attacked it.  Then when I pointed out he defect list in the software you promote you called me rabid. 

The ways in which I am against Microsoft are based on two things:

1/  The ILLEGAL activities that they have engaged in to destroy other companies.   Unlike yourself I don't think that Microsoft should get away with that.

2/ My computer is MY F...ing computer not MICROSOFTS.  As it is mine I have the rights to do with it as I wish.  The copies of programs that I BOUGHT I have the right to do with as the law allows, not the right to do with as Microsofts most recent unilateral EULA changes allow me.

The first Microsoft product I used was IBM-DOS 1.0.  The first I owned was DOS 2.x.  It was not until Microsoft set out to destroy inconvenient companies like Stac Electronics, Netscape, Digital Research and Borland that I began to oppose them.  So if I am an enemy of Microsoft it is because of their own actions earning it. 

Why are  you so loyal to them that you feel you must alway attack open source software?

Here are several links to recent threads of yours attacking non Microsoft software.  Maybe you should review them and ask yourself why you keep posting attacks this way.  Maybe you should be wondering if you are a little bit rabid yourself.

Linux fan concedes Microsoft is more secure Note this "Linux fan" was paid by Microsoft to do this "study".  This fact came out earlier this week.  Notice that I didn't post it to make Microsoft look bad when it did.

The 11 step Linux program I have not seen this animation but when someone who did points out the errors you make fun of him.

Red Hat recommends Windows for consumers Why other than to attack Linux did you a Microsoft booster post this?

[Dash Jones]

2/ My computer is MY F...ing computer not MICROSOFTS.  As it is mine I have the rights to do with it as I wish.  The copies of programs that I BOUGHT I have the right to do with as the law allows, not the right to do with as Microsofts most recent unilateral EULA changes allow me.

The first Microsoft product I used was IBM-DOS 1.0.  The first I owned was DOS 2.x.  It was not until Microsoft set out to destroy inconvenient companies like Stac Electronics, Netscape, Digital Research and Borland that I began to oppose them.  So if I am an enemy of Microsoft it is because of their own actions earning it. 

Well said and ditto for me.  You should know that I don't blame Bill however much notoriety he gets, and actually hold him quite a bit in high esteem, most of the those managers around him however....I think something the sewer dragged in...but they are good managers, even if they are more evil than some of the most foul crooks.

I was actually quite supportive of MS, in fact super supportive until XP...I never had any unauthorized OS's from MS, or anything else...however, the first time I got locked out of my computer simply because I hadn't registered because I didn't have an internet account at the time, and the lines weren't answering for the Key when I did call...

Locked out for 2 days...At that point I switched back to WinMe (which is an MS product) and other OS's (that were not supported by them such as Linux). (I now use XP after the graciousness of MS so that I don't have to use the authentication system as much...but have a legal copy from MS, but it still burns me...that authentication thing...so I use it for my games which require Windows OS's to run)

Then their autoupdate items in XP, which I have had to disable...and myriads of other turn offs that I think give me less control over my own system, and enable them to possibly gain more control than I have.

It's their own decisions about "protecting" their interests and "our interests" that have made me, a legal owner (or should I say renter) of their software have a similiar opinion as expressed in the quote above.

Oddly enough, the Pirates are thriving...

[toasty0]

Why are  you so loyal to them that you feel you must alway attack open source software?

I don't "always" attack open source software. Take this to the bank, Nem: If you spent less time telling us how much MS sucks I wouldn't spend any time in response. I mean it. In fact, I completely support open source. Not out of some self-agrandizing hate for a faceless corporation, but through a sincere concern for the community in which I lend my labor and knowledge (much like Pesty does and Bonk too). I do not make misleading accuasation about products and services. I don't see bogey men or mosters under the bed. And I'm not so caught up in my technological dogma that I have to do a point by point rebuttal of a freaking joke. How pathetic is that fer gawds sake?

Here are several links to recent threads of yours attacking non Microsoft software.  Maybe you should review them and ask yourself why you keep posting attacks this way.  Maybe you should be wondering if you are a little bit rabid yourself.

Like I said, I'm giving you as good as you give.

Linux fan concedes Microsoft is more secure Note this "Linux fan" was paid by Microsoft to do this "study".  This fact came out earlier this week.  Notice that I didn't post it to make Microsoft look bad when it did.

Sure sure, Nem. Whatever helps you convince those who don't know. Whatever helps you exploit the fear of those who don't understand. The ends justify the means, right Nem?

The 11 step Linux program I have not seen this animation but when someone who did points out the errors you make fun of him.

Clearly another case of commenting on what you know nothing about.

Red Hat recommends Windows for consumers Why other than to attack Linux did you a Microsoft booster post this?

Hey, unlike you I am not ashamed to say I like Microsoft products. I like the folks I kow that work for Microsoft. Part of the reason I like them is in all the time I've known them I've never heard a one of them stoop to belittling other products, programmers, or users in an attempt to bolster their point. All to often the opposite has been true of the open source advocates--you being a perfect case in point. Firefox is just one small example--each time someone, myself or other, have mentioned a possible problem with Firefox you haven't said how unfortunate that is, but instead have made sure to post about an equally compelling flaw in IE. I can't figure out the reason for doing something like that, or how it contributes to exposing the problem that everyone who uses Firefox should be waware of, but it sure is annoying.

And it is that annoying habit that I have responded to and acted upon.

Am I a Microsoft fan? Hell yes, I unashamedly admit to it. But, unlike your posts seem to indicate, I am not myopic or one-deminsional in my outlook. I am a fan of open source too. I just don't have to hate to be motivated in my support of open source. It is not attracts me to open source I support the open sourcing of the game code. I support the open sourcing of the ladder league code once there is something worth open sourcing. For me Microsoft, or IBM, or Sun System's Java, and open source are not mutually exclusive.

Jerry

[Ferretlxix_XC]

I'm one of the owners of the older model X-boxes with the new 'large' power cord.  I have had no problems yet and nothing dealing with the heat issue that other ones have had.  I have a few modder buddies who sent MS on the source of the problem a while back (bad soldering points on the board dealing with the powersupply) and from what I read, there were a few roports of this issue sent up to MS.
  Well, my box is covred under thier warrenty and service contract program.  Everytime I had a problem, they had me send it to them and my problems were fixed so, right now.  I have no real complaints.  If my box goes up in smoke, by my contract, they have to replace it.