Print 80 comment(s) - last by cmdrdredd.. on Jan 18 at 9:37 PM

Bill Gates says Xbox 360 reliability will go from zero to hero

For the current generation of gaming consoles, the Xbox 360 has several reputations. On the positive side, the Xbox 360 is the undisputed leader of online service and multiplayer, but on the negative side, it also holds a track record of being fairly unreliable.

At one point, up to one-third of all Xbox 360 consoles experienced the hardware failure popularly known as the Red Ring of Death, which rendered the console unusable.

In response to the apparent hardware design flaw, Microsoft in June 2007 introduced a revised cooling design with heatpipe and heatsink to cool the GPU. New “Falcon” hardware that would include 65nm chip technology, which was later found to apply only to the CPU, landed in stores last Fall. Hardware to integrate a 65nm GPU, codenamed “Jasper,” isn’t due until this August.

While many from Microsoft’s entertainment and devices division have spoken on the Xbox 360’s reliability record, Bill Gates was mostly removed from commenting on the issue – until now. Speaking in a BBC Video interview, Gates revealed that it’s now Microsoft’s goal to make the Xbox 360 “the most reliable” console on the market.

“Well, we certainly had to apologize to our uses about a number of boxes that had to be replaced,” said Gates. “We did that for free for all of those people, we've gotten a lot of positive feedback about the way we handled it.”

“We've got incredible reliability on the new work we've done,” he continued. “Our commitment is that it will be the most reliable video game box out there. People really love the Xbox because of the content, but we've got to make sure that the hardware never stands in the way of that.”

To cover owners of older Xbox 360 hardware that may still be vulnerable to the Red Ring of Death, Microsoft in July 2007 extended its warranty to cover the specific hardware failure for three years from purchase.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By boogle on 1/14/2008 7:49:16 AM , Rating: 3
because it's half the image delivered twice as quickly, so there is no quality loss if your tv displays everything properly.

No, no it's not. Both 1080i and 1080p run at a constant 50 or 60fps. This means the [b]effective[/b] framerate of 1080i is half, ie. 25fps or 30fps. Since you only get half the information each frame. It doesn't suddenly jump into over-drive and hammer out twice the frames, otherwise it would use the same bandwidth as progressive and therefore lose the primary advantage of interlacing.

If you have a fast moving object interlacing can throw up artefacts. Basically between the two frames an object has moved - but you only have HALF of the information each frame. A Deinterlacer has to line everything up between the two frames which isn't an easy task. You can see various potential interlacing artefacts here:

In essence even if the deinterlacer is pretty much perfect, there will always be the odd artefact here and there. It's a lot like 100hz motion on modern tellies, the motion is nice and smooth, but it isn't 100% perfect.

Interlacing is simply a way of conserving bandwidth by chucking information away. Its useful if you have limited bandwidth - but ultimately progressive is the ideal.

By Shoal07 on 1/14/2008 1:29:48 PM , Rating: 2
There are no 1080p 50/60hz (fps) signals - the highest hz 1080p signal is 30hz (fps). 1080i, however, can be 60hz, giving you a final 1080p/30 after deinterlacing. Yes, you can have motion blur/artifacts on any "i" signal, however, the type of TV is also going to determine how easy they are to see. It is almost impossible to see any motion artifacts on a DLP where as they're very easy to see on an LCD, IMHO.

While 1080p/60 is theoretically possible, no 1080p/60 standard exists. Also, the insane bandwidth this would require is part of the reason you're unlikely to ever see it.

By overzealot on 1/15/2008 1:23:07 AM , Rating: 2
Awesome. Now, what's the framerate of movies? 24fps.
Now, consider that progressive will, for for all extents and purposes, just show the same frame twice as long as the interlaced equivalent.
So you might get a slightly better framerate conversion on 1080p, but that's about it. With the natural motion blur of LCD's / Plasmas most wouldn't even notice that.
Those who actually care about these sort of video issues want native 1080p/24hz support.

If you're talking about games, then I'll agree there could be a difference, but we're talking about movies here.

"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki