Xbox 720....

1: Better or equivalent hardware (cpu, gpu) to what's on the market right now with PC's

2: 2gb of ram standard (consoles don't need much ram)

3: Xbox live silver withthe ability to play online

4: Standard Blu-ray

5: Rechargeable controllers right out of the box

6: More customizeation options for avatar

7: Reputation actually meaning something.....not just giving everybody 5 stars on their gamertag

8: Gamerzone actually meaning something

9: Kinect features built into the console or standard with the console

10: Slot instead of disc tray

Bravo. Completly agree on everything. Great topic.

I have one:

It shouldn't be called the Xbox 720.

IndianaPwns39

Dont get your hopes up most of it will be kinect based.You actully think that microsoft will listhen to the hardcore gamers they will listhen to the casuals.

free_milk

Ugh. Reality hurts. This is the awful truth. The people (hardcore gamers) who brought up the industry are now being ignored for the most part.

Anyone who picks up a controller for 5 minutes calls themselves a gamer. It's a tragedy.

If you could have the ear of MS for 15 minutes to tell them what improvements you would want to see over the XBOX 360 for the next XBOX, what would they be? For me.....

1. Obviously have graphics that will compete with the hottest gaming PC's

2. Slot load for discs. Tray loaders are outdated and impractical.

3. Rechargeable controllers. Battery packs have no place in gaming controllers.

4. BluRay is a must!

5. XBOX Live should have more than (2) tiers. I think something like Silver, Gold and Ultimate. Silver basically does what it does now. Gold should be free and allow you to play online. Then the third tier Im proposing would give you Gold features, but maybe you get games on demand at a seriously reduced price, first crack at demo and maybe even exclusive access to potential digital download for new releases. MS can charge for this one.

6. Full M/KB support. I know, I know. PC gamers will say "if you want to play M/KB, then go buy a PC"! Well I say that MS could really put a dent in the PC gaming realm if XBOX 720 players could play FPS's with M/KB plus it opens up alot more avenues for RTS and RPG's.

7. 720p and 60fps minimum for every game!! You will all say that 720p is last gen resolution, but the fact is that most games this generation didnt even hit that and they certainely didnt run at 60fps! 1080p standard is nice to think about, but Im not sure it is a realistic goal for the devs to hit!

8. Many more new IP's!!

9. STEAM/Origin support

10.Last but not least price point. No matter what is under the hood, MS must learn from Sony's mistakes and not overcharge for technology. I think $399 is the sweet spot for a console.

ShoTTyMcNaDeS

1.Agreed

2.Definately agree

3.Agreed again

4.No doubt about this, Blu Ray is awesome! MS really screwed that up this gen, next xbox NEEDS Blu Ray

5.Agreed 100% and it's possible, but your probably going to get flamed for it. Just let Silver have free multiplayer and let Gold be saved for that other stuff like Netflix, party chat ect..

6.I don't see the need of this, but it would be nice. Not likely to happen though..

7.I'm sure the graphic capabilites will be great so no need to worry

8.DEFINATELY this! I need more than Halo from the next xbox

9.Would be nice, but MS is going to have to be more friendly to Devs for this to happen. I hope they do...

10.I think both Sony and MS arn't going to overcharge next gen, I think they learned there lesson.

11(this is mine). Do not rush the next xbox! That's why the RROD happened and it is the highest console failure rate in HISTORY! Don't rush it and make sure all the bugs are worked out first before you ship it. Don't take too long but don't be in such a hurry, take a little time to iron the kinks out.

[QUOTE="gensigns"]

[QUOTE="Johnny_Rock"]

As long as Sony hold several patents regarding Blu-ray technology, you are never going to see a Blu-ray player on a MS console. Unless MS does the unthinkable and pays Sony....Johnny_Rock

/Facepalm

Don't feel bad. The patents will end in another 10 years or so.

Oh, and just in case think I am out of my mind, here is an older cnet article on the 2nd gen XBOX 360. Near the end they talk about having to pay to license the Blu-ray tech from Sony.

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-21539_7-20007826-10391702.html

They don't exactly have to pay Sony a dime for Blu-Ray.

[QUOTE="ShoTTyMcNaDeS"]

If you could have the ear of MS for 15 minutes to tell them what improvements you would want to see over the XBOX 360 for the next XBOX, what would they be? For me.....

1. Obviously have graphics that will compete with the hottest gaming PC's

2. Slot load for discs. Tray loaders are outdated and impractical.

3. Rechargeable controllers. Battery packs have no place in gaming controllers.

4. BluRay is a must!

5. XBOX Live should have more than (2) tiers. I think something like Silver, Gold and Ultimate. Silver basically does what it does now. Gold should be free and allow you to play online. Then the third tier Im proposing would give you Gold features, but maybe you get games on demand at a seriously reduced price, first crack at demo and maybe even exclusive access to potential digital download for new releases. MS can charge for this one.

6. Full M/KB support. I know, I know. PC gamers will say "if you want to play M/KB, then go buy a PC"! Well I say that MS could really put a dent in the PC gaming realm if XBOX 720 players could play FPS's with M/KB plus it opens up alot more avenues for RTS and RPG's.

7. 720p and 60fps minimum for every game!! You will all say that 720p is last gen resolution, but the fact is that most games this generation didnt even hit that and they certainely didnt run at 60fps! 1080p standard is nice to think about, but Im not sure it is a realistic goal for the devs to hit!

8. Many more new IP's!!

9. STEAM/Origin support

10.Last but not least price point. No matter what is under the hood, MS must learn from Sony's mistakes and not overcharge for technology. I think $399 is the sweet spot for a console.

ShadowMoses900

1.Agreed

Wrong , With the fact that the next Xbox will be APU based, its nots even going to be close to todays sub $150 GPU's ie GTX 460, 6850 or better

2.Definately agree

Install's and Blurays will take over and slot loads have more that can go wrong with them, tray's are simple cheap

3.Agreed again

That Option would be nice however if thats the only type thats not good if the battery inside dies you have to get a new controller, or have you use an usb cable all the time.

4.No doubt about this, Blu Ray is awesome! MS really screwed that up this gen, next xbox NEEDS Blu Ray

It will

7.I'm sure the graphic capabilites will be great so no need to worry

Greater then Current sure but not that best

10.I think both Sony and MS arn't going to overcharge next gen, I think they learned there lesson.

This here is true however some believe they will get powerhouse with the next gen competeing with PC's but they wont, Costs are the major point and better hardware= higher costs= higher console price.

11(this is mine). Do not rush the next xbox! That's why the RROD happened and it is the highest console failure rate in HISTORY! Don't rush it and make sure all the bugs are worked out first before you ship it. Don't take too long but don't be in such a hurry, take a little time to iron the kinks out.

MS going with AMD's APU tech with their next console to cut costs, use less power and inturns produces less heat.

10.Last but not least price point. No matter what is under the hood, MS must learn from Sony's mistakes and not overcharge for technology. I think $399 is the sweet spot for a console.

ShoTTyMcNaDeS

If I could say one thing to Microsoft it wouldn't be about hardware. I'd tell them to get some new exclusive IP's next gen.

1: Better or equivalent hardware (cpu, gpu) to what's on the market right now with PC's

2: 2gb of ram standard (consoles don't need much ram)

3: Xbox live silver withthe ability to play online

4: Standard Blu-ray

5: Rechargeable controllers right out of the box

6: More customizeation options for avatar

7: Reputation actually meaning something.....not just giving everybody 5 stars on their gamertag

8: Gamerzone actually meaning something

9: Kinect features built into the console or standard with the console

10: Slot instead of disc tray

XileLord

[QUOTE="Johnny_Rock"]

[QUOTE="gensigns"]

/Facepalm

garland51

Just a pet peeve of mine, Microsoft would be incredibly stupid to Call it the Xbox 720, not only is that a rediculiously stupid sounding name, but it may lead people to think the 720 means 720p as in the resolution the system can output. The Wii-U is already confirmed to be 1080p, the Playstation 4 will likely be 1080p and the Next Xbox will likely be 1080p. The reason they named the second Xbox the Xbox 360 was to have a three in the name opposed to just Xbox 2 in order to avoid sounding inferior to the Playstation 3. For this same very reason I doubt they would name their system with a number that many people associate with a less than optimal but still appreciated high definition resolution in an age where 1080p is already becoming the standard and desired resolution. I personal think they should call it either Xbox Kinect, Xbox-Next or the "NeXt-Box" (it sounds weird but has a nice ring to it) or something else besides 720 or 1080.

heres mine, note: it mind sound negative, but it overall is not, just that consoles in general misjudged thier capabilities across the board this gen.

Basicly: play games at the fps res that we were promised this gen. Just... make it work next time.

ability to use a wider range of headsets, and controlers. it is not that it is bad as it is now, I would just like a wider range of choices.

A less closed platform, cross platform play would be nice. Would settle lots of SW battles XD

Hardware wise I would generally want them to focus on low failure rate systems, low heat, durable build. Ofcourse this would mean that they would not reach what Pcs are capable of. But this gen both theXbox360 and PS3 had inexcusable high failure rates. So a more duabble build would be nice.

I do not mind if Gold mombership stays, but if it is I would DEMAND the games you play with a gold membership would all utilize Dedicated servers, with the free model using P2P Host. If they are so focused on MP they could atleast make sure its good and not having all those problems.

For me the only things that I really want for the nextbox is more durable hardware to make sure we dont have another rrod like problem, blu ray, andbackward compatible.

If all your points would be fullfilled, then it would basically be a PS3! :)

[QUOTE="GameFan1983"]

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

[QUOTE="ShoTTyMcNaDeS"]

04dcarraher

1. not only it will happen, but it will throw the best gaming PC behind for a good 2-3 years, even at 360's era, it took PC hardware 2 and half years to catch up. still remember playing SC: double agent with GTX7900 SLI with 40 fps and inferior graphic? 1080P is minimum for both next gen consoles, 60 fps is really depend on what kind graphic quality and performance developer pursuit. one thing is for sure, as time pass by as developer learned the hardware of both console, graphic will getting better and game will run faster. hell even 5% ps3 and 360 runs at 1080P.

you have got to be kidding me.... No it did not take Pc two years to catch up with the 360, Pc had the 7800GTX in 2005 and it was stronger overall then the Xenos (360 gpu). Every multiplat game from 2005 to 2008 a single 7800GTX out did the 360 graphically. And when the Geforce 8's came out in 2006 the consoles bit the dust, and even with newer games with a 8600GT which is slower then a 7800GTX still outdoes the 360 to this day. If you were truely playing Double agent with SLI 7900's you over shot the gpu requirements by 2x. Unless you didnt know what you doing, and also the game was known to be very poorly optminized.

The nest xbox will be using an AMD APU based chipset which means no powerhouse even compared to todays high ended Pc's. People have this idea that the next consoles will out class high end Pc hardware wise and they havent done that since 1994/1995. The next consoles will be an improvement over current consoles but cost will be the major factor and Sony and MS have learned their lesson, Both consoles (units themselves) didnt make a dime for ethier company until years after release. And Sony has already stated that they are not pouring a ton of money into the PS4 R&D.

No, are you? console is no PC, it's a overall more flexible and stronger hardware at launch and it was far more powerful and beyond than any 7800GT back then, I was a 7800GT owner so I think I can see things better than one platform fanboy, plus I played SC:DA, Just cause and pretty much all big name titles on both systems. Any way, the point is, before 8800GTX, PC games graphic from 2005 - 2007 were totally massacred by 360. From FPS to action or anything you can name.

and what?? 7800GT still out does 360 in games?? wow!!! insanity beyond reason, I dare you to use a due core system with a 7800GT to run bulletstorm, COD BO or metro2033 at lowest setting with more than 1 fps, let long getting 360 experience. you are crazy to say the least.

DA for example, a game from later 2006 which is a year after 360's release --->

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/splintercell4/review.html?tag=tabs%3Breviews

"Visually, the PC version looks nearly as good as the graphically impressive Xbox 360 version, if you have a powerful PC. However, even on the highest settings, it appears that the PC version is missing some of the bells and whistles of the 360 version,"

Hitman BM: 2006 May

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/hitman4/review.html?tag=tabs%3Breviews&page=2

"Each version of the game is identical in terms of content and structure, so the differences are technical in nature. As such, the Xbox 360 version is most impressive, since it features the best combination of sharp visuals and smooth frame rates."

I switched back to PC gamer since GT4xx gen, but logically is not hard to find that next console from MS and Sony will be far more powerful than what's available on the PC market.

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="ShoTTyMcNaDeS"]

1.Wrong , With the fact that the next Xbox will be APU based, its nots even going to be close to todays sub $150 GPU's ie GTX 460, 6850 or better

Absurd, 360's chip was soly developed by ATI's indepent team, at time it was far more powerful than anything PC has to offer, now both AMD Fushion and Navidia has a their eiliet teams developing chips for the next gen conosle, and plus consoles are far more than just a chip, the whole structure is built to last, and graphic evalute as time goes on.

2. Install's and Blurays will take over and slot loads have more that can go wrong with them, tray's are simple cheap

as explained.

3. That Option would be nice however if thats the only type thats not good if the battery inside dies you have to get a new controller, or have you use an usb cable all the time.

Also explained.

4.No doubt about this, Blu Ray is awesome! MS really screwed that up this gen, next xbox NEEDS Blu Ray

It will

7. Greater then Current sure but not that best

like you even have a clue.

10. This here is true however some believe they will get powerhouse with the next gen competeing with PC's but they wont, Costs are the major point and better hardware= higher costs= higher console price.

I don't know why you bother to use cost on PC vs console to determate powerness, 360 was $399 back then and a on PC a single video card 7900GTX along was $599 and 360 got better visual capability. it's no secert that both MS and Sony losing $100 on every console their sold back then. .Like stated in pervious post, according to 360 and ps3's capability at launch, next gen console will without question throwing the best PC hardware back for some times. The question is how stable their want their console to be vs their cost? 360 was extremely powerful back then but with a sucky heat sinker. and 50% cost on ps3 was soley on the CPU cell along.

04dcarraher

$400 is def NOT the sweet point for a console, $300-350 is def a lot sweeter.

5. XBOX Live should have more than (2) tiers. I think something like Silver, Gold and Ultimate. Silver basically does what it does now. Gold should be free and allow you to play online. Then the third tier Im proposing would give you Gold features, but maybe you get games on demand at a seriously reduced price, first crack at demo and maybe even exclusive access to potential digital download for new releases. MS can charge for this one.

ShoTTyMcNaDeS

If Siler does what it does now and Gold is free, why the hell would anyone be on Silver :?

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="ShoTTyMcNaDeS"]

Absurd, 360's chip was soly developed by ATI's indepent team, at time it was far more powerful than anything PC has to offer, now both AMD Fushion and Navidia has a their eiliet teams developing chips for the next gen conosle, and plus consoles are far more than just a chip, the whole structure is built to last, and graphic evalute as time goes on.

No it was not the fastest thing tech had to offer.. its memory bandwidth was half of what a 7800GTX had let alone not having 512mb of dedicated memory. And No again those chips are from AMD not Nvidia this round and ITS confirmed that AMD APU will be in the next Xbox Which limits what they and put inside an APU die.

as explained.

7. Greater then Current sure but not that best

like you even have a clue.

Its the other way around

I don't know why you bother to use cost on PC vs console to determate powerness, 360 was $399 back then and a on PC a single video card 7900GTX along was $599 and 360 got better visual capability. it's no secert that both MS and Sony losing $100 on every console their sold back then. .Like stated in pervious post, according to 360 and ps3's capability at launch, next gen console will without question throwing the best PC hardware back for some times. The question is how stable their want their console to be vs their cost? 360 was extremely powerful back then but with a sucky heat sinker. and 50% cost on ps3 was soley on the CPU cell along.

MS and Sony sold their consoles at a lost from the begining so for them to have a $400 and $600console they lost money per unit until 2008/2009. And the 360 having bettervisual capability thats funny because a 7800GTX out did the 360 all the way in 2008 with multiplat games and even with the Geforce 8600gt which is slower then 7800gtx still does multiplats better then ethier console

MS and Sony didnt make a dime on their consoles (units themselves) until year after the fact. Between MS's poor quality and design of the 360 costing them billions to repair and replace and Sony's major design cost with Bluray and other odd's and ends, and the major shift with audience and motion controls they have learned their lesson and they are not going to be craeting high ended consoles....

GameFan1983

As long as Sony hold several patents regarding Blu-ray technology, you are never going to see a Blu-ray player on a MS console. Unless MS does the unthinkable and pays Sony....

Johnny_Rock

I could never play on a console called the 720, they could call it the Xbox 2 or something

No it was not the fastest thing tech had to offer.. its memory bandwidth was half of what a 7800GTX had let alone not having 512mb of dedicated memory. And No again those chips are from AMD not Nvidia this round and ITS confirmed that AMD APU will be in the next Xbox Which limits what they and put inside an APU die.

Now you just keep rewriting the same stuff like a programmed robot which i already proved you have no ground to stand, Care to provide some evidence to your claim? pull me some game review from 2006-2007 says PC has better graphic? or how a 7800GT out perform 360 by show me how it even support games with SM4.0 like bulletstorm? You certain don't have 7800GT and 360 back then.

your bandwidth logic is pretty absurd too, the performance of a chip is soly depend on bandwidth? GT570 has less bandwidth than a GTX480 and yet it's 10% faster, core speed, steam pxiel line, texture/pixel filter, shader size, everything matters and yet we are talking about a console, which structure is nothing like PCs. Consoles are built to last, the best technology at release, and has plenty of rooms to be optimized in later life, that's why console graphic getting better and better as time goes by, look at games like COD2 and COD BO now, all running at 60fps and graphic upgrade is day and night difference, and both consoles support 3D as tech become available, can 7800GT do that? BTW, son Nivida never did 360's graphic chip(they made PS3's chip) ATI did and the fastest PC video card when 360 released was 6800GT.

7. like you have a clue

Its the other way around

I don't, nor I think anyone else does excpet the team MS hired form AMD fushion, but you tried to make it sound like you have a clue.

MS and Sony sold their consoles at a lost from the begining so for them to have a $400 and $600console they lost money per unit until 2008/2009. And the 360 having bettervisual capability thats funny because a 7800GTX out did the 360 all the way in 2008 with multiplat games and even with the Geforce 8600gt which is slower then 7800gtx still does multiplats better then ethier console.MS and Sony didnt make a dime on their consoles (units themselves) until year after the fact. Between MS's poor quality and design of the 360 costing them billions to repair and replace and Sony's major design cost with Bluray and other odd's and ends, and the major shift with audience and motion controls they have learned their lesson and they are not going to be craeting high ended consoles....

Now you just start trolling, 7900GT SLI never stood a chance to compete with 360, again, console is about maxmium hardware optimzing plus 7900GT doesn't even support most games from 2010-2011, let along having the same experience and your "out does".

04dcarraher

It should have blu ray and rechargeable controllers instead of having to use batteries.

My practical advice:

• One standard SKU;
• Standard HDD in every model--preferably 500GB or larger;
• Blu-ray is preferable (12X drive)

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

Now you just keep rewriting the same stuff like a programmed robot which i already proved you have no ground to stand, Care to provide some evidence to your claim? pull me some game review from 2006-2007 says PC has better graphic? or how a 7800GT out perform 360 by show me how it even support games with SM4.0 like bulletstorm? You certain don't have 7800GT and 360 back then.

your bandwidth logic is pretty absurd too, the performance of a chip is soly depend on bandwidth? GT570 has less bandwidth than a GTX480 and yet it's 10% faster, core speed, steam pxiel line, texture/pixel filter, shader size, everything matters and yet we are talking about a console, which structure is nothing like PCs. Consoles are built to last, the best technology at release, and has plenty of rooms to be optimized in later life, that's why console graphic getting better and better as time goes by, look at games like COD2 and COD BO now, all running at 60fps and graphic upgrade is day and night difference, and both consoles support 3D as tech become available, can 7800GT do that? BTW, son Nivida never did 360's graphic chip(they made PS3's chip) ATI did and the fastest PC video card when 360 released was 6800GT.

I don't, nor I think anyone else does excpet the team MS hired form AMD fushion, but you tried to make it sound like you have a clue.

Now you just start trolling, 7900GT SLI never stood a chance to compete with 360, again, console is about maxmium hardware optimzing plus 7900GT doesn't even support most games from 2010-2011, let along having the same experience and your "out does".

GameFan1983

The 360 gpu Xenos is not Direct x 10 hardware nor does it use Shader Model 4" "Xbox360 cannot run DX10," an ATI spokesperson told 1up. Microsoft's console runs an advanced version of DirectX 9, which, according to ATI, features "memory export that can enable DX10-type functionality such as stream-out", the Xenos is only 230 million transistors(without the sistor die doing AA work) While only being able to do 240 GFLOPS of performance with only around 256mb of video memory with a memory bandwidth of 22 GB/s. The Geforce 7800GTX is over 300 million transistors, able to do around 200 GFLOPS with 512mb of video memory with 54 GB/s memory badwidth. A 7900GTX is over 255 GFLOPS which is faster then a 360 gpu. Memory bandwidth alone can determine how a gpu will perform overall with more items being rendered. A 7800GTX with the faster memory and more of it can render more things on screen and with higher detail then the 360 ever could. You can take any multiplat game within the life span of a Geforce 7800 and every multiplat game looked and ran better then console versions. You can take Call of Duty 2, 4, MW2 etc all the same on consoles with a slew of graphical settings low medium and high with no AA and no AF running between 30-60 fps at a low resolution of 1024x600, while a 7800GTX ran CoD 4 1280x1024, with all high settings with 2x AA with 16 AF staying above 60 fps. the 360 gpu is not 2x faster then the Geforce 7800's... if anything the 360 gpu hardware is slightly faster on processing but lacking memory amount and speed gimps as a whole. Also note the PS3 is using a gimped Geforce 7800 chipset...

Your example of GTX 570 vs GTX 480 isnt even even in the same universe your taking about a revised Fermi chip vs an older fermi version.... then your only talking about 20 GB/s difference( a 23% difference) where with GDDR 5 anything over 120GB/s you not going to see much difference. But when you compare 22GB/s vs 54GB/s with DDR2/3 your going to see a much bigger difference, the difference is like 120%. Much bigger gap... The consoles are not made to last this long their lack of memory and bandwidth limit them in everything they do if they had the best tech at release how come when the PS3 was released both consoles were outdone by a factor of 3 on the gpu front with the release of of the Geforce 8's in 2006 . I know PS3 gpu was made by nvidia and 360 was ATI I was talking about the upcoming consoles which seem will be all AMD based gpu's. Optminzation does not fix the the limiting and aging hardware. Again your wrong with all that PR talk with half truths and false info. The Geforce 7800GTX was released months before the 360 released... Also it seems that you know hardly know the truth and rehash what MS ans Sony with fanboys have been spewing for years.The purpose of an APU not meant to be ground breaking performance. it made to reduce costs, use less power inturns produces less heat and smaller in size. The next xbox will most likely be using 2012 based AMD APU tech which is supose to be 50% faster then current APU offerings and even if they do a custom APU and get 100% performance over 50% the amount of transistors and power required for the die with limit what they can put inside. Needless to say it wont be beating todays $150 ranged gpu's.

Now with them improving graphics? CoD BO was actually downgraded in areas, 3D support isnt that good on consoles those games that do 3D are only ones that run 60 fps and graphic quality is lowered to allow the console run 3D at 30 FPS, Console graphics havent improved overall since 2008. They have been cutting more and more making compermises it get games to run ok while gives ever so slightly better graphics. many games anymore barely get 30 fps as is... The consoles are not getting better as they age they are staying the same with slightly different ways to hide the flaws. You can take RAGE a newly released Console game and can be argued to be one best looking console gamea out now, but because of both console's lack of memory The game looks like garbage on PC with using console based low resolution textures running high resolutions it brings out the blurrness and lack of detail. They had to use prebaked lighting and shadows, low detailed textures to get the game to run around 60 fps on console.

Below is an example of PREY from 2006 that was on 360 and PC and the older yet slower Geforce 6 was to produce better looking graphics then the 360 because it was not lacking resources.

360

Pc on medium texture setting running on a Geforce 6600gt....

5. XBOX Live should have more than (2) tiers. I think something like Silver, Gold and Ultimate. Silver basically does what it does now. Gold should be free and allow you to play online. Then the third tier Im proposing would give you Gold features, but maybe you get games on demand at a seriously reduced price, first crack at demo and maybe even exclusive access to potential digital download for new releases. MS can charge for this one.

ShoTTyMcNaDeS

Agree with everything, except the controller part. I welcome AA batteries because they can be easily replaceable without sending it to the manufacturer or unscrewing to place a new one. There's no harm in having the option of both like we have now.