Microsoft Refused to Sell Xbox 360s to Military

[synth0]

Uhmm.. dumb question... but can't "The Army" just go to the local store and buy the X-BOX there just like you and me?

 

[synth0]

Uhmm.. dumb question... but can't "The Army" just go to the local store and buy the X-BOX there just like you and me?

 

[saint19]

Well, if they want save money,so, Why don't stop the war in another countries?, this can save much money.

Now, $1,000?, obviously the don't build the rigs

 

[Regulas]

As a retired Master Sergeant I say, "Screw you MS, you unpatriotic bastards."

 

[armchair_allstar]

For all the people quoting prices for Powerful PCs that you can make with parts off Newegg right now, I didn't realize in 2006 they had an option to "Buy parts from the future for cheaper!"

 

[tayb]

[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]Build: "1 : to form by ordering and uniting materials by gradual means into a composite whole"Assemble: "1 : to bring together" Know what you're talking about before you slam someone else. They mean the same thing in context 99% of the time.[/citation]

I would take your own advice. And thanks for proving me right with the definitions.

Assemble: To fit together the parts of.

You aren't ordering materials and forming them into a composite whole, you are ordering parts. The materials you ordered are pre-built and you assemble them into a computer. It's okay if you don't understand. I'm sure even a local community college could correct this misunderstanding for you. See below for more explanation.

When you assemble something, the parts remain unchanged. When you build something, they do not.

[citation][nom]Porksmuggler[/nom]That's funny, I've been building PCs for over 15 years, and yes dumb-ass, it's build. When you build a house, do you make the bricks, plywood, and nails on site? Build, construct, and assemble are all correct. [/citation]

No, you haven't been building anything for 15 years. You've been ordering pre-built parts from manufacturers and assembling them into a computer. You certainly have been using the wrong terminology for 15 years though, I'll give you that.

The house analogy is interesting and provides the chief difference between assembling a computer a building a house. On a computer you buy a case, on a house you construct a case (frame) from materials (wood). On a computer you buy a motherboard, on a house you order the parts and construct the plumbing yourself.

Understand the difference? You are ordering parts and simply putting them together. When you build a house you are ordering MATERIALS, building the parts, and then putting them together. You aren't ordering silicon and a soldering iron to make your motherboard.

 

[beergoggles]

For those saying the mil could do better buy building their own PCs (or even outsourcing it) you need to understand the mil mindset. By necessity they like to buy units that are excuriatingly defined, spec'd and tested. Thus a unit like the 360 fits that need well (aside from the obvious RROD issue of course ;-). They don't want odd or on- off units going to the field where a "grunt" under the stress of fire could not get coordinates dialed in correctly or data streams out. True the training systems are not field use, but the mind set carries through all aspects of military. As an aside, last time I was involved in this quite some time back, many might be surprised how "primative" a lot of the mil equipment is, particularly space based equipment. They don't take the newest and greatest stuff and throw it into stressful or non-retrievable environments without knowing damn well how it will perform. Last you think want to do is launch off a cruise missile and have a heretofore unknown bug in your i7 show up as you watch the missile arc around and head for home :-O

 

[Yuka]

So no "USMC Desert Camouflage" theme'd X-Box 360 this XMas... Sad.

Cheers! XD

 

[waikano]

[citation][nom]tacoslave[/nom]I guess they buy their gaming pc's from dell. They should just let some guys with skil33zz build them pc's for cheap.[/citation]

Not end cost effective since these machines are probably networked as well as maintained from a security stand point. Actually the money the Army would save just from those costs alone are fairly large.

 

[stromm]

Total Cost of Ownership is why a PC costs more than the 360. Aside from RRoD's
Sure, the hardware behind the 360 doesn't cost $1000.00 in PC form. But, to get the same performace (1920x1080p, 60fps, 5.1 surround, etc.) you can't do that with a $300 PC, let alone $500.00.

Then, there's software and it's overhead. Then they'd have to pay higher development costs for PC then 360/PS3.

Add to the fact that most military gamers are console players (excepting the many WoW players) and the compactness and portability of a 360 vs. a PC, well, as much as I hate to agree, it just makes more sense to use a 360 over a PC.

 

[wild9]

Oh I am sorry, at first I thought MS's refusal was based on morality.

Hmm. Who is MS working with these days..

Do we want Mom and Dad knowing that their kid is buying the same game console as the military trains the SEALs and Rangers on?

Oh, we mustn't have that. No, it's far better for Mom and Dad to put their trust in Bill Gates, the NSA, the FBI and of course, Obama. They know best.

 

[ch1ckench0wme1n]

I wouldve given the government as many 300$ refurbished pos as they could ever want.

Clearly MS wasn't making enough money(Don't kid yourself if you don't think they gave the US government a price) and decided to pass. Sony took the deal probably because it gets their foot in the door(MS has their shaq sized foot already cemented in the door with windows) for other contracts such as tvs/laptops/batteries/etc.

 

[cookoy]

Lame reasons. Yes, develop your simulation with a 3rd party game developer and then they sell it to the world. "We train you and your enemies too!" to even the odds.

 

[JohnnyLucky]

Has this article been posted here before? I seem to rememeber it.

 

[Nossy]

Well, if the US government are smart about it, they'd figure out that having red ring of death would eventually cost them more.

Second of all, cant they just write these off for tax purposes.


I think they just don't want to buy the XBOX, but they want to buy the development kit as well so they can develop games that will eventually won't get "officially" published and sold to the public - at least not right away.

And lastly, video games train SEALS? Then I guess my 10 yr old nephew who can snipe every time I respawn in MW2 can be a certified sniper by now. I thought on-the-field training was best for infantry?

Now for Flight Simulator...that is a whole different story. You dont want the new guy flying a 30 million dollars jet and crash it.

 

[Maxor127]

Sigh... the military is f'ing retarded. I can't believe I just read "We wanted to get on to the Microsoft Xbox because it only costs $300, when a PC may cost $1,000." Reasons 1 and 2 are valid, or at least may have been valid 3 years ago. I highly doubt it's the case now. Reason 3 is just stupid. Microsoft did them a favor by refusing.

 

[gto127]

As much money as Microsoft makes it should have been glad to help out the military. It's biggest money making games have a military theme.

 

[maestintaolius]

[citation][nom]beergoggles[/nom]For those saying the mil could do better buy building their own PCs (or even outsourcing it) you need to understand the mil mindset. By necessity they like to buy units that are excuriatingly defined, spec'd and tested. Thus a unit like the 360 fits that need well (aside from the obvious RROD issue of course ;-). They don't want odd or on- off units going to the field where a "grunt" under the stress of fire could not get coordinates dialed in correctly or data streams out. True the training systems are not field use, but the mind set carries through all aspects of military. As an aside, last time I was involved in this quite some time back, many might be surprised how "primative" a lot of the mil equipment is, particularly space based equipment. They don't take the newest and greatest stuff and throw it into stressful or non-retrievable environments without knowing damn well how it will perform. Last you think want to do is launch off a cruise missile and have a heretofore unknown bug in your i7 show up as you watch the missile arc around and head for home :-O[/citation]

+1

Anyone who works for a company that sells to the military knows all the MIL paperwork, testing, certification you have to go through. Yes, you can get the parts for cheap, but you still have to assemble them, stress test them, certify that the parts themselves meet MIL standards, guarantee supply... and so on. In the end, it's not cheap and the military simply can't just go and order parts from -insert online vendor here- without a lot of other rigmarole.

 

[roagie]

What the military needs to focus on is the different controller schemes they tend to use for their unmanned arsenal. Have you guys seen some of the controlling briefcases they use? Most importantly every controller set up is completely different. Predator drones have controls that are wildly different from the unmanned explosives robot... Typical example of too many cooks in the kitchen. ONE controller type mimicking todays modern controllers would be easy to use for the average soldier. It would cut down on training time, and most importantly not require 5 guys from MIT to come up with an overly complicated setup that breaks when it gets a grain of sand in it. Seriously fellas, some common sense would be a good thing every once in awhile

 

[meradz]

[citation][nom]maestintaolius[/nom]Anyone who works for a company that sells to the military knows all the MIL paperwork, testing, certification you have to go through.citation]

I completely agree with you on this one. In addition, Microsoft may be obliged to divulge certain information since you can't have hidden code when the government is involved.

I also think Microsoft may have missed an important oportunity here. Not only would the military be purchasing the units, they will more than likely be purchasing Xbox Live memberships so they can compete against other people over the net. Microsoft could have made a sales pitch for dedicated military only servers and network.