@Warfighter_971 @SphinX20061 I never understood why anybody bragged about consoles running any resolution 'natively'.
'Native' generally means it's the resolution that your TV was actually designed for. So if your TV was designed for a different resolution and the console actually down/upsamples it, whether it can actually, if you had a 1280x720 TV, 'natively' run 720p or not, it is not really 'natively' running 1280x720. It's still down/upsampling it for whatever your TV runs at.
Your 8800GT is nowhere near as powerful as any modern card in the same price range (that the 8800GT was in originally).
The only 'oldie(though it's not that old)' that deserves such respect is the GTX 480 which was still an awesome card up until this year. It was actually recommend against the 660 by some as it was a fair bit more powerful for around the same price.
Pretty sure it's been taken out of stores by now but while it was around, it was one of the only old cards that deserved respect enough to be deemed 'among the best'.
@frozenux @vatorus .... you can't see the difference without an immediate comparison. If you can, then there is something terribly wrong with your brain, particularly it's ability to adapt.
However, in terms of input lag, which is affected by framerate, you can sort of notice a difference, even if it's difficult to pinpoint it without actually knowing it exists.
Skype? Yeah, you already released a perfectly good version on Windows, which I'm sure most businesses already use.
For presentations? Wait... I thought you said that was what tablets were for and hey... you were right. A tablet can allow far more control of a presentation than Kinect ever could.
SkyDrive is already being implemented on Windows 8, along with all of the other apps you're advertising for Xbox One.
And lastly, why on earth would anyone, especially a business, want to use Internet Explorer at all? They can get Chrome, Firefox or Opera which are far better, on... oh, those PCs that they've already got.
Seriously, stop trying to throw the Xbox One into markets you've already dominated with Windows. It would basically just be competing... with yourself. What the hell?!
@Master-Shifu If they hadn't implemented DRM, they would have made a loss by implementing family share as people could not only share their games with up to 10 people but they could also pass them around and then let their friends share them with even more people.
I still think they should have stuck with it all. Not only they could they have implemented family share, but also due to the mandatory 24 hour check-in, they could stop constant online requirements and perhaps Day One DLC and at least reduce the evil to a lower level. And a long with that of course, devs would get a bigger share of the pie, rather than GameStop, which isn't exactly run by any better people than those that run MS :/
Overall, they had the right idea in the first place. They just didn't think about it enough and they didn't advertise the positives anywhere near enough. Mostly the latter. Microsoft's PRs are horrendous. Whoever employed them is a fool.
@Cashmoney007 They would have had a much better response if they'd bothered to actually present the family share feature during their E3 conference, rather than just letting it slip during an interview later.
@onixevil I highly doubt it. They're testing the Xbox One extensively this time around.(the controller alone has had over 4 years of serious testing apparently)
@udubdawgz @Mendax2013 @TristanPR77 No, they proved with their complete reversal of policies that they're giving up on the entire concept completely.
One of the requirements for their concept was DRM. Oh, but hey, they've ditched that. Thus wrecking their family share idea, maintaining GameStop's used games monopoly and losing any chance of reducing the amount of pre-order DLC, individual account logins and online requirements.(apart from the 24-hour connection of course which I only just realised actually makes some sense :/)
Garagorn888's comments