Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sony Attacks Microsoft's Publishing Policies

Soulskill posted about 3 years ago | from the ooo-cat-fight dept.

Microsoft 203

winston18 writes "Sony's vice president of publisher relations has gone on record as saying that Microsoft is protecting an inferior technology with their policies regarding content on Xbox Live Arcade and multiplatform titles. The comments stem from Microsoft's admission that they reserve the right to deny titles on Xbox Live if they launch on the PlayStation Network first."

cancel ×

203 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Wait, what did Sony just said (3, Insightful)

ge7 (2194648) | about 3 years ago | (#37298344)

Sony, who is known to pay millions towards Rockstar (with GTA series) and other developers to make PlayStation exclusives and offering them special deals, is saying Microsoft's policies are wrong when they try to fight against this old stupid shit with consoles?

I guess all the old OtherOS, PSN network hacking and other fiasco wasn't enough for Sony.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298378)

Sony, who is known to pay millions towards Rockstar (with GTA series) and other developers to make PlayStation exclusives ....

I'm pretty sure it's the other way around [texyt.com] .

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (-1, Troll)

devleopard (317515) | about 3 years ago | (#37298970)

Let me run to the store and pick up a copy of Gran Turismo for XBox ....

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299002)

Sony owns Polyphony Digital, just like Microsoft owns Turn 10 Studios.

devleopard - idiot of the day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299098)

Polyphony is a first party Sony studio dimwit.

It is no surprise that someone so fucking stupid would be a fan of the biggest piece of shit console in history, the RRoDbox 360.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299308)

As long as I can run to the store and pick up a copy of Halo for PlayStation.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (1)

bonch (38532) | about 3 years ago | (#37298394)

Are you kidding? Until recently, Xbox versions of games were sort of infamous for having exclusives.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (3, Insightful)

Trepidity (597) | about 3 years ago | (#37298396)

Well, this is sort of a reverse exclusive. It's an interesting question whether the same considerations apply.

With an exclusive, the platform/publisher pays a developer $X, or otherwise gives them some special consideration, to only publish on the platform, or at least to publish there first. So e.g. Sony pays Rockstar something to launch first (or perhaps only) on PSX.

But with this, a platform/publisher punishes a developer for publishing first on another platform, so they say that if you launched on PSX, well then you can't also publish here 2nd.

What's particularly interesting is that in the case where a publisher wanted an exclusive, they shouldn't object at all to the 2nd one, because it's just giving them an exclusive for free! They don't even have to pay a dev to publish only on PSX, because Microsoft is exclusive-izing the release for them, by refusing to become a 2nd platform for it.

However the dynamics are a bit different with smaller devs, where this sort of thing can feel like a minefield of blacklists.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (4, Insightful)

myurr (468709) | about 3 years ago | (#37298512)

The dynamics of this are also different in that a publisher can choose whether to accept or refuse an offer of exclusivity and the competing vendors are welcome to offer more money to the publisher. In this case Microsoft are simply acting as a bully and attempting to leverage their platform to enforce desirable behaviours in publishers wishing to target that platform.

If you want your game to appear on the XBox at some point then you have to follow Microsofts rules governing your game on OTHER platforms! That is anti-competitive and morally wrong.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299006)

The whole INDUSTRY is anti-competitive and morally wrong, from the basic locking down of the hardware, to having to have all published works go through Microsoft / Sony / Nintendo in the first place.

If they sell the hardware at a loss that's their problem. Having a monopoly built on top of that should be illegal, legitimate start-up developers are being locked out or forced to pay fees in order to have their games released and have their potential market share and exposure greatly marginalized if they can get a foothold at all (Microsoft have their Indie market albeit with crippled Managed code, Sony have nothing,)

Somebody needs to drag them through the courts over this. It's ironic that many of the big players today started of by producing unlicensed software on consoles. Remember EA, Codemasters and unlicensed Sega carts? Unfortunately the system is so corrupt today they simply need to play the piracy card and they get off scott free.
 

It's fairly normal in retail (3, Informative)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about 3 years ago | (#37299244)

If you go and tell Target that you'll sell them something exclusively for awhile before you sell to other retailers, you may well find that Walmart, Best Buy and so on blacklist you. They don't like you trying to give a competitor an advantage so they'll say "Ok you want to go exclusive with them, you do that, but it is a permanent thing. We aren't going to let you give them a boost, and then give yourself a sales boost by using our store space."

Same shit with pricing. You generally can't give highly preferential pricing to one retailer or the others will retaliate.

Remember: It is 100% your right to determine who you do and do not wish to sell to. However it is 100% the stores' right to determine what they do and do not wish to stock. If you do something that they believe hurts them, they are within their rights to tell you to fuck off.

Similar deal here. If Sony bribes you to release your content first on PSN, ok that is their right, and your right to accept the deal. Nobody is going to say you can't. However MS is not then interested in carrying your product. They don't want you trying to boost Sony's platform by releasing there first, and then to improve your sales by going to MS's market later.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (1)

artor3 (1344997) | about 3 years ago | (#37299298)

What are you talking about, "giving [the publisher] an exclusive for free?" They don't want an exclusive to be free, they want to get paid for it!

Without Microsoft's approach:
Make exclusive deal with Sony, get paid $X
Release on PS, make $Y from sales
(Months later) Release on Xbox, make $Z from sales

With Microsoft's approach:
Either forfeit $X and release on both consoles simultaneously, or forfeit $Z -- if you weren't planning on taking $Z, then none of Microsoft's policies matter.

What MS is doing is good for customers (though that's not why they're doing it). It sucks when you're forced to wait several extra months to get a game just because the developer was handed a big bag of money by some mega-corp hoping to coerce you into buying their console next time around.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299450)

What MS is doing is good for customers (though that's not why they're doing it). It sucks when you're forced to wait several extra months to get a game just because the developer was handed a big bag of money by some mega-corp hoping to coerce you into buying their console next time around.

Think about what you just said in the context of DLC... particularly with Bethesda games, for example.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298514)

I guess all the old OtherOS, PSN network hacking and other fiasco wasn't enough for Sony.

The PSN thing pissed people off because service was down for a while. If it had just been a data theft with no downtime, no one would have batted an eye.

The vast majority of their customers didn't care about Other OS at all. Its removal was only a big deal in geek circles.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298586)

The vast uneducated majority saw OtherOS's removal as consumer protection against multiplayer game hacking.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298748)

That was true of the people who follow Playstation news. I remember reading many posts to that effect on the Sony forums.

Overall though, I would be surprised if the average PS3 owner knew anything about Other OS or heard about it being removed.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298678)

Yeah, Microsoft paid for DLC exclusivity that is more than Sony has ever given to Rockstar in its entirety.
Pretty sure they paid something in the numbers of $50 million for 2 DLC packages. D.L.C.
And Microsoft are the ones who were infamous for paying for exclusive content over Playstation releases ever since 360 came about.
It was only after all this blew up that Sony began doing it as well because, well, you have to or people will flock to the competition, right?

Yeah, neither of them are innocent in this at all, but Microsoft DO outright deny access to XBLA if they go PSN first. (unless the game was really popular, probably)
It is a terrible policy. It just screams of "GO WITH US OR YOU'RE ON OUR SHITLIST". It is childish.

-Not so important, skip if you want-
Let's not even get in to the fact that most developers HATE Live and XBLA because of the stupid restrictions that Microsoft have forced on it and them.
They are killing their own network by limiting developers creativity because of their lackluster network infrastructure "standards".
Sony have every right to call them out on it, PSN is a fantastic service compared to XBL, especially when you consider the fact that it is free.
The paid-for content is also mostly worth it, it is an actual example of premium content, besides a couple things.
Microsoft really need to improve things, PSN has already caught up on XBL and considering the free part, technically surpassed.

Every time I hear about XBL, XBLA and 360 in general, it just gets worse and worse. I think the last decent thing I heard out of the 360 side was the new consoles weren't blowing themselves up. After that, it was just KINECT KINECT KINECT KINECT KINECT all the way down.
That E3 conference was embarrassing, worst one they have had. On levels as bad as Enemy Crab RIIIIDGE RACER Sony conference. (At least that one provided some hilarious memes across many communities that still last even till now, that even Sony referred to as well, they went with it)
Eyetoy already showed off how terrible controllerless control-schemes were. Really. Terrible.
And pretty much every game that has been adapted for it has shown that. Lack of depth, stupidly simple control schemes, AUTOMATIC control schemes, seriously, that video with that guy sitting on his bed and a Kinect game literally playing itself, that was the definition of everything that is wrong with the concept.
Yeah, it certainly works for a limited number of games, but the control-schemes are horribly simple and, despite what Microsoft love to claim, not very precise at all, they are blocky simply because developing the systems to work precise is a lot of work. (and considering the "market" that they seem to be going after, most devs don't even want to waste time with making it precise)
Wiimote and Move are the right way to go, a control system that is very precise and natural.
If only they had revived their own wireless wand research for the PC, it would have worked well with Kinect. Oh well, maybe 720.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298736)

Wait what? This isn't Sony trying to have exclusives, it's the exact opposite.

Seriously dude, it's even right in the summary. Learn to fucking read.

Re:Wait, what did Sony just said (1)

ge7 (2194648) | about 3 years ago | (#37298800)

Seriously dude, it's even right in the summary. Learn to fucking read.

It's even in the summary? The summary isn't some hard truth. It's comment part of the article and part from the submitter. This was my comment. Slashdot summaries aren't some exact truth. Sometimes they're actually pretty far from it.

Xbox Live (2, Interesting)

bonch (38532) | about 3 years ago | (#37298390)

A lot of developers have been publicly complaining about Xbox Live, calling it too closed [mcvuk.com] . Even Gabe Newell of Valve--who used to work at Microsoft--criticized Live for being too restrictive because Microsoft wouldn't allow Valve to use Steam. Meanwhile, Sony not only allows Steam but lets Valve offer a free copy of the PC and Mac version to buyers of the PS3 version of Portal 2.

Microsoft has ridden the success of Halo and Gears of War, and the 360 was easier to develop for when people were learning how to work with the PS3, but sales of the PS3 are surpassing the 360 this year, and PS3 developers have caught up. In addition, the poor reception to Microsoft's focus on motion gaming as well as a lack of an answer to mobile gaming signals a diminishing of the their position to third place.

Re:Xbox Live (1, Funny)

Kreigaffe (765218) | about 3 years ago | (#37298446)

On the other hand, PSN hands your CC data over to russian mafioso.

So... do you want to be hanged, or shot?

Re:Xbox Live (1)

bonch (38532) | about 3 years ago | (#37298684)

On the other hand, PSN hands your CC data over to russian mafioso.

No, it doesn't.

Re:Xbox Live (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298754)

Thats true.. they just leave their security wide open for anyone to take it

Re:Xbox Live (1)

Kreigaffe (765218) | about 3 years ago | (#37298866)

Oh HI Mr. Pedant!

You know very fucking well what I meant. Forgive me for expressing it in a brief and humorous sentence referencing an incident the details of which we all are very fucking aware of, rather than providing a detailed blow-by-blow recount of the entire PSN incident complete with sourced quotes and references.

Go blow it out your uptight corporate shill of an asshole.

And that's something you CAN take literally.

Re:Xbox Live (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 3 years ago | (#37298932)

Depends on your jurisdiction. If I leave my car unlocked and it's used for criminal activities, I'm partly liable.

So I'd say... they're partly handing them over. ;)

Xbox Live Indie Games (1)

tepples (727027) | about 3 years ago | (#37298504)

The online multiplayer in Xbox Live may be too closed for some well-known developers, but not all services in the Xbox Live brand are "too closed". Sony still has no counterpart to Xbox Live Indie Games that I know of. I tried to check Sony's TPR web site, but it's been down for over four months.

Minecraft? More like Microcraft! (4, Interesting)

DJHeRobotExVV (2402664) | about 3 years ago | (#37298958)

I'll explain the title of my post towards the end. Regarding the two digital-distribution marketplaces that Microsoft maintain, however, Microsoft are so schizophrenic with regard to how they operate both XBLA and XBLIG that it's rather stomach-churning.

The fact of the matter is that when the Xbox 360 originally came out, you would see maybe 1 to 2 titles every 1 to 2 weeks released on XBLA. XBLA was touted as the way for smaller, more "indie" development houses to develop games on the X360 platform without having to deal with all of the ins and outs of manufacturing, distribution, and more restrictive technical certification requirements that come with a disc-based game. Microsoft were highly selective over the titles that would be released on XBLA, and for good reason - they needed an online marketplace with many "strong" titles and few "weak" ones.

After so many "indie" development houses complained that they were not being allowed to market such obvious smash hits as "Try Not To Fart" or "Controller Vibrator 2000" - note the intended sarcasm - Microsoft created the XBLIG marketplace, touting that as the new place for smaller, more "indie" development houses to put games onto the X360 platform.

This went well for perhaps 6 to 12 months, with a few particularly good indie games making their way to the top of the XBLIG charts, and all of the undeserving fluff and blatant cash grabs fell to the bottom of the pile, at which point the wheels fell off. Microsoft felt the need to take things in a third direction, now choosing to "upgrade" specific XBLIG dev houses to XBLA contracts.

In doing so, they signed the death warrant for both XBLA and XBLIG. Removing the more polished indie dev houses from the XBLIG marketplace ensured that XBLIG continues to play second fiddle to XBLA, but more importantly, it means that the XBLA marketplace is now flooded with "lesser" games that would otherwise have remained on the XBLIG marketplace (and for good reason). Now, it is much more difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff on the XBLA marketplace, and there is no wheat on the XBLIG marketplace.

Despite all of this, Microsoft insist that they are "top dog" regarding their digital marketplaces, to the point of taking blatant advantage over dev houses they perceive as "smaller" when those dev houses come a-knocking to try to get their games released on XBLA. In the case of Minecraft, the sad fact is that the Xbox 360 is the only console (handhelds excluded) on which it will be released, specifically because Microsoft forced Mojang into an exclusive contract. The entire matter is sickening.

Re:Minecraft? More like Microcraft! (2)

ArundelCastle (1581543) | about 3 years ago | (#37299740)

Eh?

specifically because Microsoft forced Mojang into an exclusive contract.

I'm reasonably certain that Mojang is wealthy enough that nobody forces Markus into nuthin'. The man wants to settle legal disputes with Bethesda in a Quake 3 match. What the hell kind of power do you think Microsoft has over him, with their 25 million users that can't even plug in a mouse? He's outsourcing the port, it's not even important enough to handle internally!

From Notch's August 30th blog about why MC is not going to be on Steam:

We are talking to Valve about this, but I definitely understand their reasons for wanting to control their platform. There’s a certain inherent incompatibility between what we want to do and what they want to do.
So there’s no big argument, we just don’t want to limit what we can do with Minecraft. Also, Steam is awesome. Much more awesome than certain other digital distribution platforms that we would NOT want to release Minecraft on.

I have purchased several XBLIG, and I enjoy the little snippets of time I steal away to check out the offerings. But I recognize it for what it truly is to individual developers. A "published" line on a resume, a demo reel, and a big foot in the door to getting on Steam. Minecraft is now too big for Steam (but probably not their future games), so I'm pretty sure Mojang is not being bullied by Microsoft. You're full of crap, but it's probably just bitterness. Go channel that into a new game and it might be interesting.

Pot, meet kettle (2, Insightful)

Omnifarious (11933) | about 3 years ago | (#37298406)

I can't see this as anything other than one giant who uses customer hostile strategies to profit complaining about another giant using customer hostile strategies to accomplish the same goal. Boo hoo, poor Sony.

Customer Hostile...Sony? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298528)

Let's just sum up Sony and the PS3:

* Free online for every gamer instead of forcing gamers to pay online fees every year

* Cheap and easy harddrive upgrades with off the shelf laptop drives

* Have spent their profits on building up a gargantuan first party array of developers instead of using that money to gimp content on other platforms

* Have spent their money on the highest quality engineering and manufacturing instead of rushing out the door shoddy and poorly designed hardware

Yeah, big bad Sony. Really sticking it to console gamers...

Re:Customer Hostile...Sony? (2)

Omnifarious (11933) | about 3 years ago | (#37298642)

Yeah, and then they remove features after they've sold you the hardware, and it's fatally crippled by insane DRM that treats you as if you're a suspect instead of the device's owner.

Re:Customer Hostile...Sony? (1)

bonch (38532) | about 3 years ago | (#37298692)

In what way is any PS3 owner or their content "fatally crippled by insane DRM?"

Re:Customer Hostile...Sony? (2)

devleopard (317515) | about 3 years ago | (#37299042)

Re:Customer Hostile...Sony? (0)

fanningj (942469) | about 3 years ago | (#37299388)

The amount of new features added via the playstation firmware upgrades far outweight losing the OtherOS "feature" which virtually no one in the grand scheme of things actually used.

Re:Customer Hostile...Sony? (1)

MikeBabcock (65886) | about 3 years ago | (#37299726)

You've been drinking the koolaid I see. Give that back to the xbot fanbois and do some research.

Aside from the obviously-secondary-use of the OtherOS feature, what on earth are you talking about?

Re:Customer Hostile...Sony? (1)

devleopard (317515) | about 3 years ago | (#37299030)

Forgot a few points:

* Remove a feature that you marketed to customers via firmware updates

* Have your online network down for a month

* Have a security infrastructure that allows for 77 M customer records to be accessed

* Sue and harass those who modify the device they paid for

Re:Customer Hostile...Sony? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299226)

This may come as a surprise to you but only points 2 and 3 have any relevance outside of slashdot. Out of those point 2 pas already been forgotten by most and 3 may have been a feature for some as it may have required a credit card # change.

Re:Pot, meet kettle (1)

dintech (998802) | about 3 years ago | (#37298920)

Inferior technology? As far as I know, xbox live has never been down for a month... [wikipedia.org]

Infamous Xbox 360 December 2007 Outage (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298978)

The Xbox 360's online was down for all of December 2007...

Way to make a complete fool out of yourself fanboy.

Microsoft forcing people to pay 60 dollars a year for laggy P2P based online gaming is a sad joke. No wonder Microsoft is in last place this gen.

Re:Infamous Xbox 360 December 2007 Outage (1)

dintech (998802) | about 3 years ago | (#37299144)

Whatever you say, scrotum.

Re:Infamous Xbox 360 December 2007 Outage (1)

jo_ham (604554) | about 3 years ago | (#37299338)

I'm not the AC, but my goodness this is funniest thing I've seen all week.

You made yourself look like a total fool.

Sonyfail (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298416)

Xbox 360 is the system that changing the videogaming for ever. Brought people together fro m all over the world with "XBox Live" technology, It is to videogames what the Lybian Revolution is to Lybia. Sony cannot hope to match Xbox supremacy/ Go away Sony,

Re:Sonyfail (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298798)

Wow, this guy's reply wins the Internet. He's comparing the Libyan's (yes that's how you spell Libya) fighting and dying for their country against a foul dictator to a Console where you get called a fag within 5 minutes of joining any game of COD... oh, and you pay for the right to be made fun of by a bunch of prepubescent children.

So, make Linux the next OS for PS4! (1)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | about 3 years ago | (#37298452)

So, make Linux the next OS for PS4!

That would help discussions with Microsoft.

Re:So, make Linux the next OS for PS4! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298610)

Yeah, sure, let's play only Quake clones (to be fair, that's not much different from now).

Microsoft Has No One To Blame But Themselves (3, Insightful)

VisibleSchlong (2422274) | about 3 years ago | (#37298454)

They have been in the console market for ten years now and they still think they can buy/bribe/threaten their way to beating Sony and Nintendo.

Sony has some 21 first party studios.
Nintendo has about 10.

Microsoft has only 3 or so first party studios.

So Microsoft is forced to play the bribe and threaten crap with publishers since they have almost nothing in the way of exclusive games to compete with Sony and Nintendo's huge first party lineups.

No wonder they went from distant 2nd place last gen to last place this gen.

Re:Microsoft Has No One To Blame But Themselves (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 3 years ago | (#37298626)

They have been in the console market for ten years now and they still think they can buy/bribe/threaten their way to beating Sony and Nintendo.

Why? It worked on the PC didn't it?

Thats how the inferior Windows won and how Office beat the better Lotus 123 and Wordperfect. It is why the green screen ugly, slow, 640 k ram limited, pc speaker beeping, single tasking, CLI OS DOS won over the supperior Amiga and Macintosh at the time to dismay over people who had multimedia 10 years earlier.

The only reason IE still doesn't have 90% marketshare in the US is because other browsers are free. In Asia no SSL is why IE still has 90% marketshare.

Bribing your way is how to win and what made Microsoft a monopoly by strong arming OEMs and software developers. I think the only reason MS is not so powerful today compared to 10 years ago is because Balmer is much nicer than Gates and they do not strong arm and corrupt things to get their way anymore.

The Xbox 360 Is In Last Place (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298646)

So no, it isn't working.

Re:Microsoft Has No One To Blame But Themselves (1)

Pop69 (700500) | about 3 years ago | (#37298674)

I think the only reason MS is not so powerful today compared to 10 years ago is because Balmer is much nicer than Gates

I always thought it was because Ballmer was a fucking idiot ?

Re:Microsoft Has No One To Blame But Themselves (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298874)

Total BS.

The Mac was an inferior platform to develop games on, and only shrugged this off when STEAM came to it. Until then, the Mac was a a steaming pile of API layers. With the removal of Rosetta and "Classic" mode, kiss goodbye the ability to play ALL old Mac games.

The Amiga was a decent platform for games, but suffered from the same problem Windows 3.x and Pre OSX MacOS's did, steaming piles of API BS in the way. The Amiga pretty much ran things like DOS did, but without the memory management issue.

It's only become worse. The Xbox360, Wii and Playstation 3 all have the same CPU's, but run without all the API BS in the way. Meanwhile we still have to program against two sloppy API's on the PC and one on the Mac/Linux with so much inefficient API.

So this is where things break down, Games don't need and don't want all the "common user interface", hell even Adobe doesn't use it for their software.
 

Re:Microsoft Has No One To Blame But Themselves (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 3 years ago | (#37299204)

In Asia no SSL is why IE still has 90% marketshare.

I've re-read this bit several times, and it makes less sense with every try. Care to explain?

Re:Microsoft Has No One To Blame But Themselves (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 3 years ago | (#37299470)

Since SSL was banned to foreign countries, Japan, China, and South Korea standardized on ActiveX controls for banking and any e-commerce.

It is no longer banned but if you go to sites that measure browswer marketshare you get a marketshare that heavily favors Microsoft [statcounter.com] . It is why Apple left the Korean market a decade ago with Macs as they were useless for anything internet related in Asia. IE 6 and XP marketshare are much lower than what you hear on slashdot because China and much of Asia skew the results.

I do admit this was a bad decision on government encryption export controls more than it was on MS being abusive forcing itself on others with OEMs as Netscape/Firefox did not have an answer to ActiveX and encrption other than relying on SSL.

Re:Microsoft Has No One To Blame But Themselves (2)

westlake (615356) | about 3 years ago | (#37299492)

Thats how the inferior Windows won and how Office beat the better Lotus 123 and Wordperfect. It is why the green screen ugly, slow, 640 k ram limited, pc speaker beeping, single tasking, CLI OS DOS won over the supperior Amiga and Macintosh at the time to dismay over people who had multimedia 10 years earlier.

WordPerfect was a DOS era product ported to every platform known to man - each with its own little fiefdom within the company. It was late to see Windows as a threat - it was late to get credible product on the market for Win 3.1 and Win 95.

The MS-DOS PC was positioned as an office workhorse. The natural upgrade path from the eight-bit world of CP/M. Sold with an industrial strength keyboard and a large - readable - 80 column display. It would prove equally at home on the shop room floor .

The modular design of the PC meant that audio and video upgrades could be easily installed and competitively priced.

No single vendor.

No wonder xbox 360 is in last place (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298636)

It really is amazing just how badly microsoft has failed in the console market.

> They blew 4 billion for what was effectively a tie for distant last place with on their first attempt

> They had to pull the first xbox from the market because it was nothing but a bunch of overpriced desktop pc parts thrown in a big ugly black box

> They rushed out the door the poorly designed and defective xbox 360 a year early

> The xbox 360's graphics hardware was so weak that it was called the xbox 1.5

> They piss off their only major first party developer bungie so bad they leave the company

> They are left with just rare(a basketcase), lionhead(and their constant unfulfiled hype), and turn 10(microsoft's failed attempt at creating a gran turismo killer)

> Even with millions of duplicate xbox 360 sold from the rrod fiasco, they still end up in last place in worldwide sales this gen

> And now in 2011 the only thing microsoft has to hype is some piece of crap sony eye toy ripoff

No wonder microsoft is so desperate.

Re:No wonder xbox 360 is in last place (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299022)

> Even with millions of duplicate xbox 360 sold from the rrod fiasco, they still end up in last place in worldwide sales this gen

...except... they're not in last place. The PS3 is... by several million.

Re:Microsoft Has No One To Blame But Themselves (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298720)

Spoken as someone who wasn't there. Word, Excel, even Multiplan where a joy to use compared to 123, wordstar, aand their ilk.

Where did you get those numbers? (2)

supersloshy (1273442) | about 3 years ago | (#37298962)

They have been in the console market for ten years now and they still think they can buy/bribe/threaten their way to beating Sony and Nintendo.

Sony has some 21 first party studios.
Nintendo has about 10.

Microsoft has only 3 or so first party studios.

Woah, wait a second. Where the crap did you get that? Wikipedia says that Sony has sixteen first-party studios [wikimedia.org] , Nintendo has eighteen [wikimedia.org] , and Microsoft has eleven [wikimedia.org] . Some of the games that are made by studios like Level-5, Next Level Games or Insomniac are actually second-party studios that are not directly owned by the companies they collaborate with (especially Level-5, who releases games pretty much everywhere).

I don't know where you did your research, but that's REALLY misleading (and a little biased towards Sony, there). Microsoft publishes quite a bit of first-party content, even though it's not as much as Sony or Nintendo (especially Nintendo, even more so if you count their HUGE list of second-party studios).

Re:Where did you get those numbers? (1)

InsaneLampshade (890845) | about 3 years ago | (#37298992)

Not to mention "No wonder they went from distant 2nd place last gen to last place this gen." is incorrect too!

The PS3 is in fact in last place in terms of sales figures: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Console_wars#Worldwide_sales_figures_6 [wikimedia.org]

gp obviously pulled some numbers from magical fairy land. :D

LOL - Fanboy Sales Numbers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299072)

A fanboy quoting wikipedia edited by other fanboys posting fake sales numbers!

Hilarious!

Re:LOL - Fanboy Sales Numbers (1)

supersloshy (1273442) | about 3 years ago | (#37299106)

I would love to see the other statistics you reference.

How About Fake vgchartz.com Numbers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299176)

Hey, while you're at it, how about some fake vgchartz.com numbers made up by the 20 year old Xbox fanboy who runs the site?

Rushing the piece of shit Xbox 360 out the door a year early.

200 dollars cheaper than the PS3.

Millions and millions of duplicate Xbox 360 sold from the RRoD fiasco and other hardware failures.

And the Xbox 360 still ends up in last place.

Epic Fail Microsoft.

Re:Where did you get those numbers? (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 3 years ago | (#37299120)

To be fair to the OP, only about 3 of those MS studies produce something I would call AAA titles. Those three are Lionhead (fable etc), 343 (Halo), and Turn 10 (Forza Motorsports). The others make games like Kinect Adventures or South Park Let's Go Tower Defense Play! (I wish I made that last one up). Most of the Sony ones, on the other hand, produce games like Gran Turismo, SOCOM, Killzone, Shadow of the Colossus, God of War... I could go on, but you get the idea. Not all of them, mind, but many many more than Microsoft's. Microsoft's first-party studios are lacking in good quality IP and games. Nintendo is so focused on casual gaming I won't even mention them.

Xbox Fanboys On Wikipedia Have Been Busy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299214)

Microsoft's first party console developers are:

Rare - basketcase
Lionhead - unfulfilled hype
Turn 10 - failed Polyphony wannabes

and I guess the people who have taken over the Halo crap after Bungie bailed on Microsoft.

Everything else is just padding to try to hide Microsoft's joke of a first party lineup.

Re:Where did you get those numbers? (1)

Nemyst (1383049) | about 3 years ago | (#37299430)

Actually, 343 has done nothing so far. They're a dev that formed up when Microsoft lost Bungie to keep milking out Halo, but they've yet to release a game and have only announced Halo Anniversary, a 360 upgrade of Halo CE.

Lionhead and Turn 10 are the sole good first party developers (and even that is open to interpretation, with Lionhead mostly looking like they're not sure what they want to do) that Microsoft has specifically because they've been shutting down all the others. ACES, Digital Anvil, Ensemble and FASA were all first party devs that got shut down for no apparent reason despite all making exceptional releases.

Microsoft tends more to publish third party games like they've done with Epic and Bungie.

Re:Microsoft Has No One To Blame But Themselves (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298964)

No wonder they went from distant 2nd place last gen to last place this gen.

Uhhh... what?

You must be seriously, rabidly anti-Microsoft to believe that. A quick glance at Wikipedia shows that the Xbox 360 has sold 55 million units through June 31st of this year, while the PS3 has sold 51 million units. Also, the Xbox 360 currently the fastest selling console [seattlepi.com] , which means its lead is growing compared to the PS3 (and is currently outselling the Wii by a margin of two-to-one).

Re:Microsoft Has No One To Blame But Themselves (2)

bakarocket (844390) | about 3 years ago | (#37299678)

That's a bit misleading. You say that the PS3 is in last place worldwide, and then you say that the 360 is the fastest selling console right now. Then you make the conclusion that the 360 is increasing its lead on the PS3.

However, you left out the part from TFA that mentions that it's the fastest selling console in the US. You can make no conclusion about worldwide sales figures based upon the sales figures in the US. You can't just mix data samples like that.

I don't care about the whole console war or anything, I just like my statistics to be honest ones.

"Exclusive" Titles should be illegal (2)

msobkow (48369) | about 3 years ago | (#37298464)

Personally I think "Exclusive" title arrangements should be illegal. But as long as developers can get a premium fee for making their work platform-exclusive, we'll have to put up with the practice.

Then again, given the shitty quality of some ports, maybe it'd be better if all developer's focused on one platform first and got it right before they tried tacking other development environments.

Re:"Exclusive" Titles should be illegal (2, Insightful)

Pharmboy (216950) | about 3 years ago | (#37298568)

Personally I think "Exclusive" title arrangements should be illegal.

On what grounds? If I develop software, and some company offers me an extra sweet deal if they get an exclusive, you want to tell me that I shouldn't legally be able to accept the offer?

Why stop with software? Should all companies that have exclusive deals be banned from continuing with those exclusive deals? Apple must sell phones through all carriers? Selena Gomez must ditch her exclusive clothing line at Kmart? Same with Kathy Ireland? Why would clothing or phones be any different than software?

Dig a little deeper into this, and you find that the suggestion is pretty absurd, even if your heart is in the right place.

Re:"Exclusive" Titles should be illegal (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 3 years ago | (#37298656)

The idea to ban exclusives deal with anti trust laws.

Sure you might get a sweet deal, but the point is it hurts consumers who want to play the games and are stuck without buying 3 different consoles because of agreements by the makers to limit compeition. The other argument if one console starts winning like Nintendo did earlier than you no longer get such sweet deals and if anything you have to pay them for the privledge to develop. It serves your best interest as a developer to have heavy competition too as all three companies would fight over you and your product.

Re:"Exclusive" Titles should be illegal (1)

PaladinAlpha (645879) | about 3 years ago | (#37298734)

Are you seriously suggesting forcing developers to develop for multiple, independent platforms? You'd kill all but the largest studios, since a guy eating ramen isn't going to live long enough to get his game done for PS3 and XBox360 and Wii.

For that matter, if you're going to legally force people to not just make one version of a game, how do you decide what counts as a platform, and how many they must develop for? If I make a PS3 game, can I port it to a different model of PS3? Do I have to make a 3DS version?

It's nonsense. Regulation is always inefficiency, and only necessary when pre-awareness threats to health are concerned. All your idea would do is kill every independent developer and triple the price of games -- and completely homogenize hardware, killing innovation. No thanks.

Re:"Exclusive" Titles should be illegal (2)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 3 years ago | (#37299228)

Are you seriously suggesting forcing developers to develop for multiple, independent platforms?

No, he's not. He's suggesting to force developers to not take money for developing for a single platform only. If a developer targets a single platform for reasons other than someone paying them, that's okay.

Re:"Exclusive" Titles should be illegal (2, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | about 3 years ago | (#37299246)

Are you seriously suggesting forcing developers to develop for multiple, independent platforms?

No he didn't suggest that at all. So the rest of your argument is irrelevant.

All he said was the console manufacturer shouldn't be allowed to pay a developer to prevent them from releasing on another console.

If the console developer doesn't wish to release on a particular platform that's entirely up to the developer. He just can't accept a bribe from the console manufacturer to help him to come to that decision.

Re:"Exclusive" Titles should be illegal (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | about 3 years ago | (#37298746)

not must sell or must publish, it should be illegal for the platform controller to offer or accept such deals as they are inherently anti competitive.

Re:"Exclusive" Titles should be illegal (1)

Pharmboy (216950) | about 3 years ago | (#37298894)

Anti-competitive isn't illegal, per se, in the USA. We already have anti-trust laws, which wouldn't apply here since there isn't a monopoly in consoles, oh yea, AND ITS A GAME. You don't have to buy it. Your law would open the door so that no store could ever have an exclusive deal with anyone. See my examples above. No exclusive clothing lines, etc. Absurd and anti-American/Capitalist as anything I've heard in a while.

Re:"Exclusive" Titles should be illegal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299520)

You are short-sighted. If it should be illegal for platform controllers to secure exclusives, we might as well outlaw advertising and promotional sales. Then while we're at it, let's force all game makers to sell their product at the same price point and set a cap on production budgets. After all, it wouldn't be "fair" for anyone to have greater resources or sell at a different price or sign an exclusive...

At some point you have to grow up and realize that no playing field is ever truly level. Just because you don't like something doesn't make it "anti competitive" or even unfair. Securing platform exclusives is very much a competitive angle, so preventing it would actually be the anti-competitive move. Instead of thinking that you know The One True Way that platforms should compete and promoting artificial constraints to make it so, why not let the free market decide?

Videogames are a luxury item. Nobody is harmed if a particular game is not available to them. There is no downside to platform exclusives other than the fact that it is more expensive to play them if you do not already have access to that platform - and a marginal cost increase for a luxury item is a terrible motivation for creating legal constraints on business.

Re:"Exclusive" Titles should be illegal (1)

artor3 (1344997) | about 3 years ago | (#37299312)

Clothing is different because you don't need to pay $300 up front before you can shop at K-mart.

Water is Wet? (1)

Bob9113 (14996) | about 3 years ago | (#37298498)

A giant corporation with huge market power is pointing out that another giant corporation with huge market power is creating a barrier to entry that, gasp, favors inferior technology?

Does Sony not know what barriers to entry are? Do they think barriers to entry are used to protect superior goods and services? (hint: superior goods and services do not need protection) What -- if not such barriers -- do they think is the cost of entrenched incumbency?

Let me present the rough outline of the economic cost of entrenched incumbency: The problem with entrenched incumbents is that they use their market biasing power to create barriers to entry that favor their inferior-value goods and services over superior-value competition (eg: disruptive competition). That is what an entrenched incumbent is. It is the definition. Water is wet. Vacuums suck. Entrenched incumbency implies protection of inferior-value goods and services.

OK, perhaps I am being too hard on them. Well done, Sony: Typically entrenched incumbents avoid pointing out the fundamental problem with entrenched incumbents for fear that their own entrenched incumbency will be threatened. Bravo, Sony, for pointing out that the kettle is black. Would that it were truly self-sacrifice; I suspect they simply believe the public and/or government will not grasp that Sony is a pot.

Since 1985 (1)

tepples (727027) | about 3 years ago | (#37298552)

Barriers to protect entrenched incumbency have been the rule in TV gaming since 1985, when Nintendo introduced the NES with a lockout chip. The biggest theoretical hope to fight it is probably the home theater PC, but none of the major PC makers appears to want to launch its HTPC brand with the kind of promotion with which a console maker launches a new console.

What The Hell Are You Babbling About? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298554)

Fanboy, you're trying to hard.

Ahh (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about 3 years ago | (#37298500)

This reminds me of the late 70's and the Cola/Burger wars. I guess a lot of it has to do with the current economic climate and declining(?) revenue, just like back in the Carter days.

Sony Hypocritical conduct at its finest. (1, Insightful)

hinesbrad (1923872) | about 3 years ago | (#37298550)

Wow. The kings of closed-source hardware that have done everything possible to attack home-brew development and hacking efforts have the audacity to attack another closed platform for closed platform behavior. This is the same company that has the nerve to consider a 250GB hard drive system a premium product. The same company that used Nintendo R&D to come up with a 32bit platform and weaseled the development away from Nintendo with legal maneuvers leaving Nintendo without an up-to-date console for nearly 5 years. (S)ome (O)ld (N)intendo s(Y)stem. This company's conduct makes me want to puke.

Fanboy Meltdowns (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298716)

always hilarious...and sad.

Re:Fanboy Meltdowns (1)

hinesbrad (1923872) | about 3 years ago | (#37298836)

I don't know who you are. But I find you to be hilarious and witty. Thank you.

Fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298862)

Fucking amateur.

Re:Sony Hypocritical conduct at its finest. (1)

Nemyst (1383049) | about 3 years ago | (#37299478)

Wait, what? At least Sony's hard drives are user-replaceable out of the box, whereas Microsoft's are housed in special cases and arguably much more expensive. Sony also includes a wireless adapter within the console that Microsoft charges you 100 bucks for as a dongle.

Also, Sony might've made the headlines for removing Other OS functionality, but comparing that to other consoles is disingenuous considering they all never offered the option at all. Sony's console might still be the most open of the lot, all things considered (not saying they're a shining beacon of openness, but they're sure better than the other two).

As for your last point, it is well known that Nintendo broke the partnership, not Sony. They couldn't agree on profit distribution and just dropped Sony for Philips instead. Sony did the only logical thing and used all the effort they'd put in the partnership into a console of their own. If there had been any doubts about intellectual property or patents within this joint R&D, you can be sure Nintendo would've sued Sony and the legal battle would've made the headlines.

But nice try anyways.

Inferior, like Sony's customer protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298566)

Cuz when it comes to inferior, few know it like Sony.

Bad name? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298574)

Microsoft needs to hire some real whiz engineering geeks, like gates himself was back in the days and need to follow that. Its too damn busy protecting the assets it has with dirty business practice. Its a win-lose situation I guess: Be nice and loose some market segments and have a good name... OR loose some segments and bring the reputation up.

Microsoft has been preying on other markets and segments that *others* are targeting while having no regard for the market they control. It has the most powerfull weapon in the world: the most commonly used operating system in the world and STILL it tries to take other markets in a completely stupid way (lawsuits, patents, buyout and destroy,...).

Even the main product: Windows, its development model is completely flawed. Where in the software-world do you see developers chucking out all their code ever 3 -4 years and starting over? If they had kept the main code of xp and kept improving it they would have reached a stage with the OS by now that I'd be glad to switch back from linux... But heck, lets make something visually more appealing, throw out all our old stuff and reinvent the wheel every 3 years because you can sell it off AGAIN as completely innovative... meanwhile lose the people that kept(keep) this windows community alive: the hardcore geeks who are TIRED of random bsod, hangs, unresponsiveness, hardware issue, driver issues, security flaws, ....

Guess its time for new, real, geek leadership at microsoft. Someone who inherently understands this market... not some faker MBA :)

Re:Bad name? (1)

cyber-vandal (148830) | about 3 years ago | (#37298910)

the hardcore geeks who are TIRED of random bsod, hangs, unresponsiveness, hardware issue, driver issues, security flaws

Only the last one still applies, and that applies to all OSes with the possible exception of OpenBSD. Windows has many flaws in UI design but its core is pretty solid these days and yes I am amazed to be writing these words.

Re:Bad name? (1)

Shoe Puppet (1557239) | about 3 years ago | (#37299174)

Where in the software-world do you see developers chucking out all their code ever 3 -4 years and starting over?

It's not true that Microsoft would be doing this. Wordpad in Windows 7 still offers you to insert a Paintbrush image.

Dicks, but superior dicks. (1)

Sarusa (104047) | about 3 years ago | (#37298598)

Microsoft are being dicks here, but XBL is head and shoulders above PSN precisely because it is a fully walled and controlled garden.

Or perhaps PSN is just overwhelmed by all those mandatory system update downloads to remove more PS3 features?

Re:Dicks, but superior dicks. (1)

Tonyd0311 (2287226) | about 3 years ago | (#37298886)

Agreed- Microsoft knows its software, just as Sony knows its hardware. What it comes down to is that Microsoft while having slightly less powerful hardware delivered an amazing environment for gaming (Xbox Live) years before Sony could provide even a close to similar experience, and they are still playing catch up. Microsoft made a bet, by not including HD-DVD or Blu-Ray in the console and having slightly lesser specs, the software developers would be required to develop for the common denominator... meaning that all of the fancy hardware and storage space that Sony was relying on meant next to nothing on top of this Sony introduced a completely new architecture (the Cell processor) that simply couldn't just be ported between consoles, and was definitely not the norm in game development. People calling Kinect a ripoff of the EyeToy are simply ignorant, it not only includes far better hardware, but Microsoft did what it does best in the software department and made its API work and work well. They made it easy for developers to get into it and get going fast, and to push out high quality titles that just work. I don't know of any person who has tried both that is able to say that the EyeToy provides an easier or more fun experience.

mod 0P (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298822)

Creek, abysmal BSD addi3ts, flame

Console Gaming will decline anyway. (2)

Salvo (8037) | about 3 years ago | (#37298858)

Console Gaming is on the decline anyway.
While the PS3, XBox360 and Wii are great systems on their own, Sony, Nintendo and even Microsoft are still dinosaurs of the Gaming industry.

PS3 sales have been inflated by the fact that it was the best value BluRay Player on the market for years. Now, sub-$200 BluRay Players are making the $400 PS3 look more like the niche product that it is.

While the Kinect has boosted XBox sales almost as much as the Red-Ring-Of-Death did, it is still a fad. People are using their Kinect for niche tasks like 3D-imaging rather than gaming. The Kinect was one of Make:Magazines most Hackable Gadgets, and that could a major factor in driving sales of what is still a niche product.

Wii Fit has made the Wii the "housewife's second-best-friend" of gaming consoles and has inflated sales as well. Once again, it is turning out to be just a fad. It is the most consumer-friendly gaming console of the big three, which explains it's much higher sales figures, but it is still of limited appeal to the average consumer.

While their always will be Dead-beat stoners who spend their profits from their hydroponic operation to continue buying XBox's and PS3, as well as high-pressure professionals who want some mindless downtime when they get home from work, Console gaming is not where it's at at the moment. I doubt their will be much of a Console Gaming comeback in the future either.

Re:Console Gaming will decline anyway. (1)

Ant P. (974313) | about 3 years ago | (#37299090)

Wow, after reading that I'm just pissing myself in anticipation to run out and buy a $1000 vacuum cleaner that can run console game ports and Norton at the same time!

Re:Console Gaming will decline anyway. (1)

Nemyst (1383049) | about 3 years ago | (#37299504)

Selling games and peripherals on which you turn a profit is not what I'd call inflating. It's just business sense. The music game fad is dying out, but there was still mad profit made in there. Is that inflation or just taking advantage of a popular product?

Also, the PS3 is actually 250 now, not 400, and Microsoft's sales disregard RRODs because they were all covered by the extended warranty. In fact, the RROD affair hindered Microsoft by giving them huge losses for replacing faulty hardware, it didn't boost their sales numbers or install base.

Is posting an article about Sony trolling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298870)

I am glad that on Slashdot people can talk rationally about anything that relates to Sony and Microsoft.

Little fucking late (2)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 3 years ago | (#37298898)

Sounds like sony is just sucking sour grapes. its perfectly fine when they do under the table deals to keep publishers from releasing multiplatform games sometimes up to a year later but no one else.

You lost this race sony, quit making excuses for your own doing. You have a white elephant that was more expensive than a neo-geo, took years to get your cost down, bet on blu-ray that most people dont give a shit about, took fucking forever to get games out, other OS, and the psn CC leak

yea its Microsoft's fault, and that had a what 90% failure ratio?

Re:Little fucking late (1)

Shados (741919) | about 3 years ago | (#37298974)

It would be interesting to see a parallel world where the 360's early runs didnt have such high failure rates, if Sony would still be in the race at all.... That microsoft was able to stay in the race themselves with such an insane failure rate says something...

Holy Crapping Crap!!! (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37299230)

As a former console developer I would like to know what that Sony asshat is smoking.

The SPUs, which have considerable processing power, do not make up for the rest of the crappy architecture of the PS3.
The OS is crap, the GPU is crap, the APIs are crap (except for gcm) and the security is crap. I was the guy who wrote the graphics engines and a lot of the SPU code (for the devloper I worked for) and I can tell you that the PS3 is a boat anchor for cross platform developers.

Here's an example; The SPUs seem very fast at 3.2GHz compared to the VUs from the PS2 at 300MHz. That is until you actually try to do anything like multiply a vector by a matrix. PS2 could do it in 4 cycles dispatch, and 3 additional cycles latency. So you could do vector times matrix every 4 cycles in a tight loop. PS3 needs at least 10 cycles dispatch with a total latency over 50 cycles. If you really bust your ass interleaving loops you can get down to 15 cycles or so per vertex because Sony forgot both masked writes and broadcast math in the SPU architecture. Idiots, it was there in the PS2! Where you high when you signed off on the SPU design?
I could spend hours ragging on the design of the PS3 but I'll just say Sony really dropped the ball on the PS3 design as a whole. While it stomps the 360 on total CPU power it's much easier getting the games where you want them on the 360.Why should anyone develop for the PS3 when it costs at least double for the same finished quality?

I'm glad I don't have to deal with their shit any more.

Corporations in glass houses, Sony... (2)

Trilkin (2042026) | about 3 years ago | (#37299498)

Just saying.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>