backtop


Print 43 comment(s) - last by epobirs.. on Apr 5 at 6:07 PM

He's heading to Sonos

Microsoft is saying goodbye to yet another executive.

According to Xbox Wire, Chief Product Officer of Xbox Marc Whitten is leaving the company after joining the Xbox team in 2000. He's reportedly moving on to become Chief Product Officer of Sonos.

“I have had the extreme pleasure over the last 14 years to work on the greatest product with the greatest team and for the greatest community,” said Whitten. “Xbox is so special because of the amazing team I’ve had the opportunity to work with and because our fans are the most incredible fans on the planet. It has been the highlight of my career to work on a product so loved. It’s incredibly tough to leave but I am confident the best days are ahead for Xbox fans, in the capable hands of a very talented team.”


Marc Whitten [SOURCE: attackofthefanboy.com]

Whitten's team will now report to Terry Myerson, executive vice president responsible for the teams that build software platforms and experiences for Windows, Windows Phone and Xbox. 
 
Back in January, Corporate VP of Microsoft’s Media and Entertainment Group Blair Westlake resigned after a decade spent with the company. He reportedly left because of the latest restructuring efforts.
 
Many other executives outside of Xbox have resigned or have been reassigned new roles in recent months. Just recently, Tony Bates and Tami Reller left Microsoft. Bates was the former Skype CEO in charge of Microsoft's business development and Reller was the co-head of Microsoft's Windows unit. 

Source: Xbox Wire



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Good!
By TETRONG on 3/18/2014 3:54:34 PM , Rating: 2
Well, it's no secret that MS crashed Sonys party back at the launch of PS3/360. They paid IBM a handsome amount of money to focus on their Xenon processor to the detriment of the PS3's Cell processor, which some would argue directly lead to the PS3 missing the incredibly important holiday season IIRC.
End result is that the Cores in the 360 were directly lifted from the Cells coordinating processor.

It's apparent that Sony took great pains to ensure there would be no similar upset this generation.


RE: Good!
By evo slevven on 3/19/2014 12:38:28 AM , Rating: 2
It was really the exact reversal as gaming for the Holidays were lower than expected. While PS3 did suffer a bit from the lack of launch times the cell processor hurt them more in reviews for cross platform games; developers weren't interested in paying extra in development costs to take advantage of the cell processor's advantages in physics and game play visuals.

It did however lead to Sony reassessing it's need to create and invest in studios that created games for the Sony and to generate interest in the console itself. With the PS4 they learned to at least time everything and take into account perceptions more appropriately. They learned how to make games like Uncharted and invest/assist studios to continue making games for the Sony console. Likewise with PS+, they've at least found a way to compete with Microsoft in online gaming but are more appealing and less expensive rather than simply supporting it freely like in the PS3.

So it was like a bad thing that actually turned out quite well for Sony as far as learning from one's mistakes go.


RE: Good!
By epobirs on 4/5/2014 6:07:18 PM , Rating: 2
No secret? Why would a completely made up story be kept secret?

The CELL project, a collaboration between Sony, IBM, and Toshiba, was underway for years before Microsoft chose IBM as their CPU supplier. This was because IBM, in response to Microsoft's checklist of goals, felt they could achieve this with a multi-core version of the PPC variant created for the CELL. As such, this didn't take any resources away from CELL work. While Microsoft benefited from Sony's investment, it had no bearing on the timing of the PS3 launch. Yes, IBM chose to keep Sony ignorant of their work for Microsoft but it was entirely IBM IP.

Two things delayed the PS3. First was the need to scrap the original design and start over. The original concept was to have multiple CELL chips and no dedicated GPU. If you look back to the first PS3 demos at E3, they showed CELL demos and Nvidia demos but none for the two in combination. This was because there wasn't anything to work with yet. Sony was still working out a more conventional design using a single CELL and an Nvidia GPU. CELL had some very ambitious multiprocessing goals originally and they could never get it to work as intended. Also, the first generation of the chip was far pricier than expected, adding more incentive to abandon the multiple CELL concept.

The second, bigger delay was due to the commitment to Blu-ray. The launch of both HD-DVD and Blu-ray was delayed substantially due to hashing out DRM issues with the studios. This especially hurt HD-DVD, as it was ready to ship well ahead of Blu-ray and had some significant cost advantages on the manufacturing side. Being forced to launch almost simultaneously with Blu-ray pretty much nullified that.

Because the Xbox 360 used existing DVD discs, offering an HD-DVD drive as an add-on, it was unaffected by the content industry wrangling over the DRM for HD distribution formats and so could launch as soon as the chip set with in production. This, of course, bit them in the ass later due to going into production without the testing system that was supposed to be in place, which in turn allowed the RROD problem to be far more extensive than it should have been.


"This week I got an iPhone. This weekend I got four chargers so I can keep it charged everywhere I go and a land line so I can actually make phone calls." -- Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki