dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
545
share rss forum feed

pfsmith

join:2006-11-16
Lafayette, IN
Reviews:
·Comcast

What's to debate?

WHY *wouldn't* you add this service to the XBOX if you could?

What could possibly be the thinking here? What is to be afraid of? I don't understand?

I've been wondering for years (since the original XBOX) WHY they haven't made it the all-in-one cable TV/game/theater appliance. They could have had DVR functionality years before the cable cos.

I just don't get it.


Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:42
Hollywood content licensing is an obnoxious minefield, and I'd assume some at Microsoft wonder why get into that business when you can layer someone else's Internet video services on top (Hulu, Netflix).

pfsmith

join:2006-11-16
Lafayette, IN
Reviews:
·Comcast
said by Karl Bode:

Hollywood content licensing is an obnoxious minefield, and I'd assume some at Microsoft wonder why get into that business when you can layer someone else's Internet video services on top (Hulu, Netflix).

Sure, every business model has it's cost... but surely there's profit in it... even if it's a slight loss-leader the extra marketing leverage from such a feature would be HUGE, right?

I just don't understand why the debate... MS has obscene amounts of cash just laying around - it's not like they had to pick and chose where to put their scarce capital... they could have EASILY owned the cable cos and the entire TV space if they'd just used the full potential of the _original_ XBOX. Somebody REALLY dropped the ball at MS on this, IMO.


Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:42
Having watched Hollywood act like anti-innovation boobs for so long, I'm simply saying why there's probably hesitation by some.

I agree with you. I've always thought the game console vendors were in the best position to take over the Internet video market since the appliances are already in the home -- and are clearly evolving into "do it all" devices.

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
Isn't the fierce debate obvious? Per the article they already make IPTV solutions for carriers. If they do their own TV thing, aren't they now competing with them?

If I was using an IPTV solution in my plant and suddenly all my XBox user's cut the video cord, I'd be pissed when I discovered my bed partner had a concubine in an apartment that I funded.

From a consumer perspective they should absolutely do it but the conflict within seems obvious. However, this wouldn't have stopped Microsoft in the past. Perhaps years in the FTC/DOJ woodshed has finally taken its toll.

firedrakes

join:2009-01-29
Arcadia, FL
reply to pfsmith
i dont see why not? just like ps3 and wii


Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:42
reply to rradina

they already make IPTV solutions for carriers. If they do their own TV thing, aren't they now competing with them?

Right -- that too..


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
reply to pfsmith
It is probably the same reason Nintendo chose to not put a dvd movie player in the wii.
It costs them a lot in licensing fees.
--
Your behavior is inconsistent with your desire to be treated like everyone else.


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
reply to pfsmith
.