PDA

View Full Version : X-Box Dev kits on.... Apple G5?!



Lamont
03-01-2004, 09:23 PM
Check it out:


March 1, 2004

Next-Gen Xbox Dev Kits Ship

Technology website The Inquirer is reporting that Microsoft have shipped prototype development kits for the next generation Xbox. The kits feature dual-CPU Apple Power Mac G5 systems with ATI Radeon 9800 Pro graphics solutions, which can be later upgraded to ATI R420.

Microsoft have allegedly told developers that the prototype SDKs are only intended for preliminary work and the hardware specification of the final console will be radically different.

The early appearance of these kits suggest that Microsoft are still intent on launching their new format well before either Sony or Nintendo. Although these rival machines may launch in Japan in 2005, it seems likely that the next-generation Xbox will be the only new format to appear in the US next year.

Very interesting I must say. Cheers for Apple!

Beamtracer
03-01-2004, 11:01 PM
I think Microsoft's choice of the IBM970 (or derivative) processor should cause IBM to cheer more than Apple. The Apple G5 is currently the only machine that runs this processor (to my knowledge).

Microsoft is not in there for the love of making great games. MS sees the game console as the stepping stone to other home interactive functions.

MS is currently monopolizing operating systems (according to the US Department Of Justice). MS doesn't yet have a monopoly on hardware. The Xbox will help Microsoft achieve that aim.

Lamont
03-01-2004, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by Beamtracer
Microsoft is not in there for the love of making great games. MS sees the game console as the stepping stone to other home interactive functions. I know. So does Sony. We'll have to wait and see Nintendo's new machine (Not the DS).

Originally posted by Beamtracer
MS is currently monopolizing operating systems (according to the US Department Of Justice). MS doesn't yet have a monopoly on hardware. The Xbox will help Microsoft achieve that aim. Yeah, I'm gonna buy one for sure. Feed the Machine :).

dark_lotus
03-02-2004, 12:13 AM
The harder they grip the industry, the more star systems will slip through their fingers!

That's what I have to say!

Angelo D'Ambros
03-03-2004, 01:22 AM
NINTENDO FOREVER!!!

MS can make the most powerfull game station it wants, but without the spirit of the game the Xbox will remain only another Bill Gates attempt to make money.

Darth Mole
03-03-2004, 01:28 AM
I know this is veering horribly off-topic, but Nintendo have lost it. They lost it with the N64 and they didn't get it back with the GameCube. (Sales of which are unnaturally high because of the bargain-basement prices)

Nintendo is ending up like Disney - creatively bankrupt. It keeps churning out udpates of decade-old franchise, and has now turned to sequels, which it never used to in the past. Also, look how few third-parties are on board; the GameCube has been a disaster for them, no matter how Nintendo juggles the figures.

I wish they would do a Sega - give up the hardware business (with the exception of GBA) and just get back to writing great games... (then at least I'd only have to buy one machine - Xbox 2).

Beamtracer
03-03-2004, 04:34 AM
Originally posted by Darth Mole
then at least I'd only have to buy one machine - Xbox 2 Actually, why don't all other computer companies just shut down. Then at least we'd only have to buy from one manufacturer. Microsoft.

Darth Mole
03-03-2004, 04:45 AM
Hello Beam (sigh). That's not the point I'm making - a lot of Nintendo games are exclusively written for Nintendo's hardware, as are Sony titles, as are Xbox titles. Which means that if you want the best games you probably need to buy all three machines. Four if you include the PC. Five with the GBA. Six with the PSP.

Frankly, I don't care who makes the hardware (after all, most manufacturers lose money on consoles anyway), but I would like to just have one machine. And at the moment, Microsoft - love 'em or loathe 'em - make the best, most technically proficient console, which plays host to some fantastic videogames, and works flawlessly online.

In an ideal world (from the gamer's point of view), there'd be one console 'standard' which all game developers could write for, without having to do ports or SKUs. They could focus on one lot of hardware and write directly to the metal, without having to worry about trying to make it work on a different architecture with different bottlenecks, graphical quirks, etc.

The comment about Xbox 2 was purely personal. I don't much like Microsoft's software, but I do like the Xbox - more than PS2, at least. Though what happens with the next generation, we'll have to see...

Lamont
03-03-2004, 06:10 AM
Originally posted by Darth Mole
In an ideal world (from the gamer's point of view), there'd be one console 'standard' which all game developers could write for, without having to do ports or SKUs. They could focus on one lot of hardware and write directly to the metal, without having to worry about trying to make it work on a different architecture with different bottlenecks, graphical quirks, etc. That sounds lame. I like multiple consoles. I like exclusive titles. And I like the competition.

I can't wait for the next round o hardware from all the companies (Sony, Nintendo, MS). All the LED's they have keep me warm at night :).

Darth Mole
03-03-2004, 06:44 AM
Yeah - I just love having to buy three almost identical machines at $200 a pop.

I also have a Betmax player, a DVD player, a VHS player and a LaserDisc machine too. Oh, and a Philips V2000 for old time's sake...

I agree that competition is good (well, unless you're Sega - a US company, by the way), but you still have to buy games from different companies, which spend too much of their time writing for the lowest common denominator (currently the PS2).

Anyway, this is just my personal opinion; I've been playing videogames since Pong and spent 15 years working on videogames magazines, so I think I'm allowed one...

:)

IgnusFast
03-03-2004, 07:36 AM
The problem is not that the PS2 is the lowest common denominator-- it's that many game companies would rather just get quick and (relatively) cheap ports up and running rather than re-code the game to take advantage of a given platform's strengths.

eblu
03-03-2004, 07:44 AM
darth,
more power to ya. Opinions are great things.

I myself feel that Nintendo is the strongest game platform. not because of any third party whatever, or sales numbers, but because of the games I have played on all three platforms.

the GameCube consistently has better games. I even have the original zelda on my GC and its more fun than halo. Nintendo knows how to Craft a solid game, and they are still the best, with sega a close second, and not many others in the running.

and as for the xbox having the best hardware.... um, so? It has the best stats of any platform, but most of those beefy figures still only power some sad ***** games. GC arguably the weakest 3-d platform, seems to have the most beautiful titles, and thats simply because there is some QC over at nintendo. Just check out soul calibur II, it looks fantastic on the GC, and lukewarm on the other two.

and as for which console is "winning" in sales... its PS2 hands down. MS and GC are actually fighting to be "the second platform". PS2 has already taken first place and won't lose it in any conceivable future.

but hey competition is good. I miss sega, they had something special in their hardware that won't ever be duplicated.
I blame MS for that loss, and if Nintendo goes the same way, I'll be severely disappointed.

Lamont
03-03-2004, 07:53 AM
Originally posted by eblu
and as for the xbox having the best hardware.... um, so? It has the best stats of any platform, but most of those beefy figures still only power some sad ***** games. GC arguably the weakest 3-d platform, seems to have the most beautiful titles, and thats simply because there is some QC over at nintendo. Just check out soul calibur II, it looks fantastic on the GC, and lukewarm on the other two. POP (Prince of Persia), Splinter Cell, Soul Calibur II actually look/sound better on the X-Box. I got Soul Calibur 2 for the GCN because of Link :). POP because of the type of game and the demanding controls for the GCN as well. Splinter Cell I have for X-Box because light and shadow are very important elements in the game and the X-Box version does it nice.

Tell you what. Metal Gear: Twin Snakes is coming out on the 9th of March. I'm bringing the Cube to work that day, and takin' off to pick it up!! Oh, and Splinter Cell 2... so many games...

mlinde
03-03-2004, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by Darth Mole
Hello Beam (sigh). That's not the point I'm making - a lot of Nintendo games are exclusively written for Nintendo's hardware, as are Sony titles, as are Xbox titles. Which means that if you want the best games you probably need to buy all three machines. Four if you include the PC. Five with the GBA. Six with the PSP.

Frankly, I don't care who makes the hardware (after all, most manufacturers lose money on consoles anyway), but I would like to just have one machine. And at the moment, Microsoft - love 'em or loathe 'em - make the best, most technically proficient console, which plays host to some fantastic videogames, and works flawlessly online.

In an ideal world (from the gamer's point of view), there'd be one console 'standard' which all game developers could write for, without having to do ports or SKUs. They could focus on one lot of hardware and write directly to the metal, without having to worry about trying to make it work on a different architecture with different bottlenecks, graphical quirks, etc.

The comment about Xbox 2 was purely personal. I don't much like Microsoft's software, but I do like the Xbox - more than PS2, at least. Though what happens with the next generation, we'll have to see... Yeah, the expanded console wars are the reason I dropped out of console games. At one point a friend had a PS/1, PS/2, Dreamcast, Saturn, GameCube, and two XBoxes, just to be able to play the games he wanted the way he wanted to. From a gamer standpoint competition is bad, but from a gaming standpoint the competition makes the developers work at better systems, leading to better games. If there were just an XBox, do you think anyone would consider making an XBox2? The competition, as annoying as it is, does improve gaming for everyone involved, by forcing console manufacturers to "keep up with the jones'"

Lamont
03-03-2004, 08:21 AM
Remember when it was just Atari for a while. It was Tripe-Fest up till 85 when the Nes came out. Competition pushes the hardware to become better like you said.

I like console games a lot. Nothing like drinking, yelling, eating, punching and throwing things with a bunch of friends.

I never done a LAN party before outside of work... but I think we are planning one soon for UT2K4.

mlinde
03-03-2004, 08:33 AM
Originally posted by Lamont
I never done a LAN party before outside of work... but I think we are planning one soon for UT2K4. I have a group I play UT2K3 and Neverwinter Nights with. We exist all across the country, with one guy (a UNIX sysadmin) running servers on the fat pipe out of his condo. 8 guys from 4 time zones fragging each other is a good time, I gotta say, especially on a private network game!