Microsoft considering licensing Xbox to other companies

Looks like Microsoft's still a software company at heart after all. Despite the success of the Xbox and its aggressive pre-launch campaign for the upcoming Xbox 360, the company has begun hinting that it might license the Xbox's basic software to other companies, which could incorporate Xbox functionality in devices such as cable boxes and TVs. The move could bolster the Xbox in its battle against Sony's Playstation, and could establish it as a Windows-like platform, rather than a hardware console. It could also get Microsoft out of the low-margin hardware business, letting it focus on the more lucrative software market.

[Pip @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

yeah, good luck with that. 3DO went down that road. Heh.

[Topmounter @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

I see a DELL-BOX in our future!!!

[jg @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

wow this would be interesting to see if it happens, it would change the video game industry. seems like thinks are coming to the point where you will just configure a cable box like you configure a dell. pick a base model and add video game features, dvr features, internet features, and the type of os of course will be ms media center. just a guess, but its this kind of thinking that makes microsoft dominate its competititon.

[retro @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Dumb idea. If MS chooses this path for all of their future consoles, consumers will stop considering them actually gaming platforms. Not a great plan.

[pj @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

I wish people would stop relating Xbox to past failed systems. They have 40 billion dollars in cash, CASH! They are not failing at this and will not go away (3DO did not have the same kind of resources). I dont know if they can top Sony but we will see but they will around for a long time, whether thats good for us all or not.

[Jeff @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

"wow this would be interesting to see if it happens, it would change the video game industry."

Been tried before, always ends in massive failure. Most of the companies that have tried it (Sega, 3DO, Atari, NEC) have ended up either out of the video game business or out of business altogether. It is not a new road nor is it a road most video game manufacturers these days seem keen to follow. Bottom line is once you turn a console into a commodity platform rather than a product, it loses its iconic status, loses its identity and loses its support in the development community and among consumers. Imagine if Apple, for example, "licensed" the iPod. It would be the death of it, almost immediately. It's much the same thing.

MS seems to revel in repeating the mistakes of their forebearers. I don't think it's coincidental that Peter Moore is making many of these decisions.

[Cem @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

If this is true, wow. It would be a spectacular move.

[Chicago Joe @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Jeff - Apple DID license the iPod. Ever heard of an "HP iPod?"

[Joseph @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Funny. Just because MS has 40billion in cash doesn't stop people from expecting quality. Will HP produce a system that will play exactly how it is supposed to?

And what company would take a loss on a machine when they won't see the game licensing revenue? Graphic cards and cell processors cost money. Although if we see a better designed box it may make some happy. Because the 360 is Uhuugly!

[swarmster @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

This seems more like some accountant's wet dream. Who wouldn't want to get rid of the part of Microsoft's gaming business that loses millions of dollars - the hardware?

The flipside to that question, of course, is who in their right mind would license a product designed to take a loss, when Microsoft's still the one licensing the games?

[jg @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

#6 Apple's resistance to license things out is one of the reasons why they make 2% of the market.

[Fredi @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Low-margin hardware business? More like negative-margin business as most game systems are sold below their production costs at the beginning, some even through their whole lifespan (hint: xbox). There's only one way this could work, with comparable cheap (and slow) hardware.

Fredi

[Alex C @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

wouldn't this just confuse consumers? Not to mention the headaches developers will have trying to optimize code to run on multiple hardware configurations instead of just one. In my opinion, not a good idea, but then again microsoft seemed to do it correctly with their windows OS.

[Wonderflex @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

To comment #5. Fanboys are lame. Just realize that yes, there are many great games...er...um...okay, two great games, and one okay game, on the X-box. With that level of playability for a system it sadly does mean we're all going to have to go back to 8th grade algebra for this one.

A≤B, B=C, C(A*B*C*D*E)

A = Xbox
B = Atari Jaguar
C = Phillips CDI
D = Sega Nomad
E = Banda?onderSwan
F = Good games no matter the system their on.

[Wonderflex @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Bah, the stupid equation didn't show up for some stupid reason. Meh. I guess you can't use greater than and less than signs in posting - lame. Here it is.

A≤B, B=C, C(lessthan)D, D(lessthan)E, F(greaterthan)(A*B*C*D*E)

A = Xbox
B = Atari Jaguar
C = Phillips CDI
D = Sega Nomad
E = Banda?onderSwan
F = Good games no matter the system their on.

[matt @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Ok if this happens us PSP Hackers got to get goin :)

[jd @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

This is very interesting. I think the nay sayers are missing the point.

This is about world domination for ms. The xbox is just another front in the battle to control the home. This is really big for ms. And they have a very good track record for such crusades. Licensing may or may not make it a better gaming consol - but that doesn�t mean that it won�t sell more.

Although ms lacks creative in their products they aren�t lacking in ways to sell those products and control the market. I�m sure that they can find ways that manufacturers will be happy. And once there are a number of other co�s pushing xbox�s there is a very good chance of broad market adoption� and that�s what ms is really after.

[Greg Raiz @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Why do game developers like consoles? Consoles have a platform that is predictable. You know the specs, the performance and the hardware. As soon as you open up the platform you increase the likelihood that there will be some compatibility issue. You also increase the likelihood that one platform will give a player an edge in certain games because the processor, memory, etc isn't exactly the same.

Game developers don't want to test cable boxes, TV's and other things for compatibility. The only way I could see this working is if the xbox hardware is placed inside these new devices unmodified.

[rotten_fruit_fan @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Can't wait to see the Alienware-BOX retailing for US$3,000.

For some reason it brings the Apextreme to mind.

[Tupper @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Acer XBox306 with gator software running in the background... sweet. What a great friggen day to be a MS fan.

On the plus side, MS won't be responsible for the cords catching fire and burning the spyware-Box.

What's next... MS making people program their own games???? wtf

[jeremy @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

I think this is MS's way of saying "yeah, we are going to take over the world, okay!!"

[Chicago Joe @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

To the criers with the "developer's not liking to test on variances of hardware" argument - Couldn't MS just stipulate a base-line of hardware features required to run their software? Like they do with Windows, and in a way with their current(Xbox) and future(Xbox 360) requirements for developers? Yeah, that argument doesn't seem to hold water.

I'm not a fanboy, but I can recognize a whiner/hater.

[DannyMac @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Where 3DO and the Apple Pippin failed, the XBox 360 will succeed. Firstly, the XBox is already an established brand and many gamers are eagerly anticipating the release of the 360. 3DO and Apple's Pippin came from nowhere and were attempting to thrive in a market dominated by Nintendo, Sony, and Sega. One can argue MS was a no-name brand that tried to compete in a saturated market, but MS had the brilliant idea to just buy game developers and force them to make games exclusively for their console and pack in superior technology all to sell at a loss for the sake of market share. Another way in which licensing the 360 is different from the 3DO and the Pippin, Microsoft will still make their hardware; they will not rely exclusively on other companies to make their version of the console. If a company's version of the XBox integrated into a digital cable receiver fails, it'll cause little to no harm to MS. The same can be said about MS�s whole licensing endeavor.

[Jules @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

No!!! If MS wins (again) then we can will have to look at the specifications just like in PC games. And we would have to upgrade the system every year for the new graphics cards. DAMN U MS :D

[Rey @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

Roll out the army of Korean clone boxes.

[Radu Dutzan Valdivia @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

This is just lie the war of the computers back in the 80's, starring Microsoft as itself, Nintendo as Apple in the post/pre Steve Jobs era, and a special guest, Sony.

[Trejkaz @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

#24: If users had to do that, they would probably buy an *actual* gaming console. Maybe they would get a console with good games as a side-effect. :-)

[Bryan @ Dec 19th 2005 1:36AM]

At this rate it might not be far off in the future that Nintendo really ends up becoming the only Games console, which I kind of find funny after all these years of gaming wars...