Microsoft's Xbox 360 strategy: buy now before you realize the problems

Yeah, you see the problem with going into a debate with an unpopular, and perhaps, aggressive stance is you have to work hard in order to keep your ideas in the open. You can't simply watch someone attempt to prove you wrong, and then walk away, espically if you don't agree with them. But even if you do, you have to take into account that people like to bathe in their pride, often at the expense of others. People only seem to be satisfied with an "I WIN!" outcome, which really should never happen. If you go into a debate with the sole purpose of "victory", then you are wasting you're time. The idea is you are meant to learn and to teach at the same time, sometimes you might be influenced by someone elses stance, and other times you may influence others, even if at first they refuse to admit it. The point is that people will not walk away from a debate if they feel the need to express their points to others, and should not be intimidated into doing otherwise.

(This in relation to the people who think it's wrong for someone to defend their own stance)

WasntAvailable

Let it be known I have no problem with people defending stances that I do not agree with. It is the method in which they defend their stance that most often grinds my gears.

Still. You have to take into account that this debate is rather one sided. It's hard to see how it's fair to attack someones method when thier are about 20 diffrent people acting agaisnt one. Sometimes agressivly reiterating statements is as good a method as any, espically when the odds are agaisnt you.WasntAvailable

Not when those statements have been refuted and/or countered. :? Hell, we're at the point where statements are being said to have made that never were made to begin with.

Depends on what you consider a counter actually is. It's near impossible to say something is completely incorrect unless it can be backed up with non-fictional evidence that is 100% solid, and if that were the case then the debate would have no purpose, and should never have exsisted in the first place. Obviously it is not. For that reason unless all of his points are completely objectivly incorrect, theres no way they can be wrong. But I will leave it at that, there is no point going in to a sub-debate, because it will essentially become off topic.WasntAvailable

I did not say that they were completely proven wrong though. I said that they were either countered or refuted. Also, you do not need pure, unadulterated evidence to prove someone wrong. But, you are right, this debate within a debate would be OT.

DRE has only been extrapolated by Microsoft faithful as a way of combating the Sony crowd when they bring up Microsoft's blunder.

Pariah_001

I guess everyone here called them POS2's for no reason at all last gen then right?

[QUOTE="Pariah_001"]

DRE has only been extrapolated by Microsoft faithful as a way of combating the Sony crowd when they bring up Microsoft's blunder.

Blackbond

I guess everyone here called them POS2's for no reason at all last gen then right?

They were just jealous xbots ofc ...

[spoiler] yes i'm being sarcastic [/spoiler]

Heres what the entire RROD situation says to me in a nutshell.

I'm young and have not been beaten down by the world enough to realize junk consumer products are everywhere, I've never had to replace a crappy fridge for $2000 or a crappy transmission for $1200 or a crappy water heater for $1500 and am still gullible enough to think that the world is fair and that things are going to work out in my favor.

I got bad news folks, the crappy 360 is a drop in the bucket compared to what you have in store for you. My advice is to learn to live with it and mellow out or be indignant and ticked off all the time it's your choice.

The Lemming General was banned yet you're still here...

Mongo-Boss

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]Anyway are you basing the 360's average life expectency on the 3 year warranty that MS gave its customers?, if so do you really think all 360's are expected to die within 3 years?Pariah_001

No. But that's what Microsoft expects the consumers to think because of the defect they left in the product (and they probably will because most of them will buy anything they say). The warranty should be, at least, ten years in my opinion. And even then, it shouldn't be needed in the first place. To say that 3 year coverage is adequate recompense for a product that's inherently defective is ridiculous.

I'm sure your anecdote is trying to suggest a few things about a console's lifespan being usually short--Or perhaps you're trying to be ironic by just bringing up Sony consoles you allegedly owned. Either way, the problem with anecdotes is they're not credible sources when applied as primary support to someone's argument.

do you have some kind of inside proof of this "conspiracy?" do you honestly think that MS wants to sink such a loss in defective hardware?

so then the PS2 warranty should be 10 years, right?