Microsoft disapproves of Sony's mobile gaming strategy

If you’ve ever wondered why Microsoft hasn’t tried to enter the mobile gaming device market, Dennis Durkin, COO of the Xbox division at Microsoft, makes it very clear that the company has very little optimism for that market in general. Commenting on Sony’s upcoming release of the PSP Vita, he said,

"I’m not sure I would want to be launching a dedicated portable device right now into that market. I think the DS - if you look at the 3DS, certainly versus people’s expectation's it’s not been as successful as people would have thought. So that’s a very crowded market and a very, very red ocean right now with a lot of change happening. So I’m not sure it's [a good idea]. You only have a certain number of bets you can make as a company and you have to decide what you want to put your wood behind and I’m just not sure that that’s a place that I would put mine."

His words to Industry Gamers are pointed at Sony’s seeming lack of focus when it comes to gaming. Their wide stabs into the mobile, 3D, motion control, and multimedia technologies are seen as somewhat of a shotgun approach for strategy makers at Microsoft. Instead, the Xbox team would rather focus on the things they have already established dominance in, like Xbox live, and continue to incrementally improve those aspects instead of constantly branching out.

In fact, its entire mobile gaming strategy with Windows Phone 7 pretty much relies on Xbox Live integration for basic functionality. However, Kinect was the first time Xbox really did something genuinely new and unprecedented with the console, and considering the success that brought to the team, don’t be surprised if we see a little more confidence in new concepts for the Xbox 360 console.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Cable boxes and DVRs use more power than refrigerators

Next Story

HBO Go streaming video app close to 3 million downloads

71 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.


Ok, this article is just bad, as it isn't so much a shot at Sony, as a shot at the unpredictable and crowded portable gaming market. The XBox team has had their learning moments as well, with failed products, from the vision camera back to the original XBox and music integration software crap.

As for your comment:

However, Kinect was the first time Xbox really did something genuinely new and unprecedented with the console,

If I take you literally, you have missed a lot things. The XBox 360 did a lot of new things with its media networking and integration with services and Media Center, that just did not exist on the original XBox or the PS2, and the PS3 pulled ideas from the home networking integration of the XBox 360. This was new, right?

The GPU in the XBox 360 was also 'new' as it was the first Unified Shader and DX10/DX11 GPU in the world, as it was designed by Microsoft, and its model is what the DX10/DX11 features are based on. The XENOS inthe XBox 360 took GPU architecture in a new direction, and virtually every computer and devices (with a Unified shader GPU) is based on the Microsoft XENOS GPU design.

Which anti-Microsoft people hate to hear for some reason, when they think the video card in their computer was a concept 'innovation' designed by Microsoft at a very high end technical level of the computer HARDWARE industry. (Especially Mac users or even iPhone/iPad users, that their GPU was based off Microsoft designs, as the XBox GPU they designed back in 1999 was the basis of the previous generation GPUs as well.)

So saying Kinect is the first 'geniunely new' thing is missing a lot of the XBox did bring to the console and technology world in general.

Now I'll give you an out... If you mean it is the first new technology innovation since Launch, this is 'more' true, but still not entirely true.

Sony have experience with mobile devices, since the Walkman devices. Sony have experience with mobile gaming, with the PSP, that is a successful product. Sony have a great line of TV's, sound systems... They're not newcomers in any of these markets. Why not keep the good work, keeping their products updated with the latest technologies?
Instead, Microsoft rather to stick with what theiy're doing. And, imo, they don't have good experience with mobile devices. Windows Mobile devices are awful, the Zune is not a successful device, so they better keep working on one thing a time.

Soulsiphon said,
M$ simply couldn't aquire Sony so they're not interested in mobile gaming. Got it.

They didn't need to aquire it. After Sony became Anon's bitch, and after all those lawsuits will be over, they'll beg MS to throw a few bucks at them.

Soulsiphon said,
M$ simply couldn't aquire Sony so they're not interested in mobile gaming. Got it.

That post lost all credibility when you put it as "M$".

Soulsiphon said,
M$ simply couldn't aquire Sony so they're not interested in mobile gaming. Got it.

why buy a failing company.. ps3 sales are dropping while xbox sales rise.. sony computers need windows.. and the cell phones are not selling well

Soulsiphon said,
M$ simply couldn't aquire Sony so they're not interested in mobile gaming. Got it.

Quite possibly the dumbest post of all time. Congrats.

"If you've ever wondered why Microsoft hasn't tried to enter the mobile gaming device market" Im pretty sure that my WP7 has xbox live...

zikalify said,
"If you've ever wondered why Microsoft hasn't tried to enter the mobile gaming device market" Im pretty sure that my WP7 has xbox live...

Mobile phone gaming isn't the same as a device just DEDICATED to portable gaming though.

n_K said,

Mobile phone gaming isn't the same as a device just DEDICATED to portable gaming though.
It may as well be, they've dedicated a whole hub to it and fully integrated it to xbl

zikalify said,
It may as well be, they've dedicated a whole hub to it and fully integrated it to xbl

HAHA, fully integrated to Xbox Live? Are you kidding? There's so little integration as of now. All they have is online leaderboards, which games already had. You have to install a separate app to send messages and add friends. They could have that app on any platform. Xbox Live is far from integrated into WP7. Mango will make it a little better.

andrewbares said,

HAHA, fully integrated to Xbox Live? Are you kidding? There's so little integration as of now. All they have is online leaderboards, which games already had. You have to install a separate app to send messages and add friends. They could have that app on any platform. Xbox Live is far from integrated into WP7. Mango will make it a little better.

Yh but when the app is install (not sure why its not by default) then there is good integration.

n_K said,

Mobile phone gaming isn't the same as a device just DEDICATED to portable gaming though.

Are you sure?

How about if you look at the WP7 architecture, and the fact they can get 5-10 times the performance out of the same hardware as Android.

How about if you consider the WP7 is capable of graphics at a higher resolution and higher quality than the PSP, the DS, and the original XBox itself?

Can you name a handheld device that has more gaming power than a WP7 device? I can't find one.

thenetavenger said,

Are you sure?

How about if you look at the WP7 architecture, and the fact they can get 5-10 times the performance out of the same hardware as Android.

How about if you consider the WP7 is capable of graphics at a higher resolution and higher quality than the PSP, the DS, and the original XBox itself?

Can you name a handheld device that has more gaming power than a WP7 device? I can't find one.


It doesn't matter how much 'power' a device has if it doesn't have proper controls, and if the vast majority of games consist of low/no budget indie games that lack any depth, longevity and replay value.

The dedicated mobile gaming market is going thorugh some stuff... but we need sony and Nintendo to test the waters and still deliver some interesting stuff for the fans. Microsoft's X-box team's jab at Sony has a point, but then again some body has to do it. They are not mentioning Sony's PS Cert mobile gaming initiative. Although being specific to dedicated mobile gaming I guess that gives them a way to not mention that... but Sony is introducting not just gaming product, but new technology at a reasonable price point for media playing and mobile data. In a way it is not just a dedicated gaming device after all. Sony would do best to make sure it does the other functions well in the media department. They even fail to do interesting things on the home console... geez but I will not digress on that here.

Basically, Microsoft... some one's got to do it. Sony has an audience; they don't want to let them down and they do want to make money. There is money to be had - yes. And competition to knock of thier high horse... yes although far fetched for now... the one to watch out for is Apple ridding in on both their flanks devaluing the dedicated moble gaming market with App Stores Oh no!

He has a point. I like portable games as much as the next guy, but that market seems to be going in the direction of smart phones and tablets. I'm going to miss portable gaming with actual buttons and decent controls.

Enron said,
He has a point. I like portable games as much as the next guy, but that market seems to be going in the direction of smart phones and tablets. I'm going to miss portable gaming with actual buttons and decent controls.

Touchscreen controls for games that should have analog controls just don't work. It's clumsy and feels awkward. Lately I've been finding myself wishing the Vita was out now because I'd just like to sit back on the couch or in bed at night and play a game with the functionality and graphics of the PS3, but in the palm of my hand. The touch screen controls + buttons is all I need. And I know I'm not the only one who feels that way

Elessar said,

Touchscreen controls for games that should have analog controls just don't work. It's clumsy and feels awkward. Lately I've been finding myself wishing the Vita was out now because I'd just like to sit back on the couch or in bed at night and play a game with the functionality and graphics of the PS3, but in the palm of my hand. The touch screen controls + buttons is all I need. And I know I'm not the only one who feels that way

Exactly.

Microsoft has no vision. They love to stick with what they currently have working. Just look at their successes, Windows, Office and Xbox. That is it. Microsoft needs to be more on the edge and try to push the boundaries like Google and Apple. Microsoft moves and thinks like a retired old man at the nursing home.

Kingv84 said,
Microsoft has no vision. They love to stick with what they currently have working. Just look at their successes, Windows, Office and Xbox. That is it. Microsoft needs to be more on the edge and try to push the boundaries like Google and Apple. Microsoft moves and thinks like a retired old man at the nursing home.

Indeed. Look at what Microsoft releases: Kinect and Windows Phone. Microsoft has no vision. /s

Kingv84 said,
Microsoft has no vision. They love to stick with what they currently have working. Just look at their successes, Windows, Office and Xbox. That is it. Microsoft needs to be more on the edge and try to push the boundaries like Google and Apple. Microsoft moves and thinks like a retired old man at the nursing home.

What has Google or Apple done in the past few years?

day2die said,

Indeed. Look at what Microsoft releases: Kinect and Windows Phone. Microsoft has no vision. /s

Because WP7 has been sooo successful so far. In other news, the sky is purple with green polka dots.

Tweaky Nippleton said,

Because WP7 has been sooo successful so far :rollseyes:

It's got tons of great reviews and is the only mobile OS which is original nowadays.

Kingv84 said,
Microsoft has no vision. They love to stick with what they currently have working. Just look at their successes, Windows, Office and Xbox. That is it. Microsoft needs to be more on the edge and try to push the boundaries like Google and Apple. Microsoft moves and thinks like a retired old man at the nursing home.

How is Apple pushing the boundaries? They just make good products with technologies that already exists and made it work better for them. Really nothing innovative.
Microsoft created it's own approach into mobile space, developed a complete new way to play games and interact with your devices, and your stating that Microsoft has no vision?

Jan said,

It's got tons of great reviews and is the only mobile OS which is original nowadays.

And it's struggling to compete. How is it original? It has *less* features than it's competitors, let alone it's own predecessors.

Tweaky Nippleton said,

And it's struggling to compete. How is it original? It has *less* features than it's competitors, let alone it's own predecessors.

How does it? Windows Phone has just as many features as iOS and how isn't WP7 original?

Jan said,

How does it? Windows Phone has just as many features as iOS and how isn't WP7 original?

Half the *new* features in NoDo were features that were removed from PPC/WinMo and added back in as an update to wow users. You made the claim that WP7 is original, I asked how. Burden is on you. Redirecting the question shows you have nothing in that argument.

Tweaky Nippleton said,

Half the *new* features in NoDo were features that were removed from PPC/WinMo and added back in as an update to wow users. You made the claim that WP7 is original, I asked how. Burden is on you. Redirecting the question shows you have nothing in that argument.

Sure, the features weren't there, but they're now. WP7 introduced a brand new UI to phones, never before seen, live tiles, Xbox Live and a lot of other things.

MFH said,

Innovative != Commercially successful…

How is it innovative? I really wish people would back up these claims of originality and innovation.

Jan said,

Sure, the features weren't there, but they're now. WP7 introduced a brand new UI to phones, never before seen, live tiles, Xbox Live and a lot of other things.


So, they pulled an Apple. Took existing tech, dropped a pretty veneer on it and *boom* innovation? That's the best anyone can do? Really? No wonder real innovative ideas are few and far between. As long as customers are wowed by smoke and mirrors, they don't need to.

Jan said,

What has Google or Apple done in the past few years?


Microsoft (execs.) claimed the iPod would never become a success only to find out they were wrong, tried to enter the market and failed miserably. iPhone? Exact same story. iPad? Similar story. Apple pushed the boundaries with those three products the past ten years constantly catching the competition off-guard which is rather impressive. Furthermore and even more importantly they managed to make those products insanely popular. When was the last time you saw people waiting in line for a Microsoft product?

Jan said,

It's got tons of great reviews and is the only mobile OS which is original nowadays.

Yet sales around the globe are disappointing.

Tweaky Nippleton said,

As long as customers are wowed by smoke and mirrors, they don't need to.

Like Apple customers?

Tweaky Nippleton said,

So, they pulled an Apple. Took existing tech, dropped a pretty veneer on it and *boom* innovation.

Well.. based on what you said before.. apple pushes boundries... but MS Doesn't. There you claim MS == Apple, so therefore MS Must push boundries. Either they both do, or neither does, eitherway your statement is invalid.

Jan said,

What has Google or Apple done in the past few years?

Don't pretend you haven't heard of Gamecenter. It's the biggest thing in gaming. /s

.Neo said,

Microsoft (execs.) claimed the iPod would never become a success only to find out they were wrong, tried to enter the market and failed miserably. iPhone? Exact same story. iPad? Similar story. Apple pushed the boundaries with those three products the past ten years constantly catching the competition off-guard which is rather impressive. Furthermore and even more importantly they managed to make those products insanely popular. When was the last time you saw people waiting in line for a Microsoft product?

That is just commercial success, none of that pushed "boundaries" in a way the OP claimed.

firey said,

Well.. based on what you said before.. apple pushes boundries... but MS Doesn't. There you claim MS == Apple, so therefore MS Must push boundries. Either they both do, or neither does, eitherway your statement is invalid.


I didn't say anything about Apple pushing boundaries, that was someone else. Apple is the master of smoke and mirrors.

Tweaky Nippleton said,

Because WP7 has been sooo successful so far. In other news, the sky is purple with green polka dots.

Don't kill WP7 just yet, I know a bunch of people (myself included) who are just waiting for that mango update to jump ship !

MFH said,

Innovative != Commercially successful…

space ships are innovative but do not sell well... pogs were not innovative bu t they sold millions...

MFH said,

Innovative != Commercially successful…

space ships are innovative but do not sell well... pogs were not innovative bu t they sold millions...

.Neo said,

Microsoft (execs.) claimed the iPod would never become a success only to find out they were wrong, tried to enter the market and failed miserably. iPhone? Exact same story. iPad? Similar story. Apple pushed the boundaries with those three products the past ten years constantly catching the competition off-guard which is rather impressive. Furthermore and even more importantly they managed to make those products insanely popular. When was the last time you saw people waiting in line for a Microsoft product?


Yet sales around the globe are disappointing.

Ballmer said a stupid thing in 2007 about the iPhone. He hasn't made a wrong move since unless you talk about the Kin non-issue.

KingCrimson said,

Ballmer said a stupid thing in 2007 about the iPhone. He hasn't made a wrong move since unless you talk about the Kin non-issue.

Who said I'm talking about Ballmer alone? People high up at Microsoft took a jab at the iPod, iPhone and iPad showing how much the company lost touch with the home market. I think in general Microsoft needs to take a hard look at themselves instead of judging others.

dhan said,

That is just commercial success, none of that pushed "boundaries" in a way the OP claimed.

When the iPhone was released it basically sparked a multi-touch screen revolution. And before you start: I know Apple didn't invent touch screens in general, however they did bring multi-touch capacitive touch screens to the mainstream and changed the way we interact with our phones and other handheld devices.

If that isn't pushing boundaries I don't know what you people expect short of inventing faster-than-light traveling.

Kingv84 said,
Microsoft has no vision. They love to stick with what they currently have working. Just look at their successes, Windows, Office and Xbox. That is it. Microsoft needs to be more on the edge and try to push the boundaries like Google and Apple. Microsoft moves and thinks like a retired old man at the nursing home.

Ya, Microsoft is clueless... Remember back in 2005 when they designed a new GPU architecture based on a Unified Shader model and put it in the XBox 360? Then this GPU architecture became the basis of EVERY GPU in EVERY COMPUTER sold in the last 5 years? Just like the computer/device you are using now is using a GPU that is based on Microsoft hardware technology.

Ya, that silly Microsoft, they can design something that impacts 1/2 a billion computers and people don't realize that the technology even comes from Microsoft.

Do you realize how insane you sound when you are sitting at computer with GPU in it that is based on Microsoft hardware engineering technology, and type crap like: Microosft has no vision, they don't innovation, blah blah blah...

How about you rip the video card/GPU out of the computer are using, as it doesn't exist, cause you are so sure Microsoft has no vision and doesn't innovate...


GEESH.

.Neo said,

Yet sales around the globe are disappointing.

And the first year on the market for both the iPhone and Android was also disappointing. WP7 is eight months on the market. Time will tell!

Kingv84 said,
Microsoft has no vision. They love to stick with what they currently have working. Microsoft needs to be more on the edge and try to push the boundaries like Google and Apple.

Wait a minute. Every company sticks to what works for them. Yes even Apple the "magical" and "revolutionary" company has sat stale on iOS for the longest time now (their only serious product). Seriously, thats all iPad was, iOS in a bigger form. And Google? Please. I could understand Apple, but not Google. All Google has managed to do other then search, is release a wannabe Outlook, release a browser which copied firefox completely, and then release Android, a complete ripoff of iPhone, only fragmented and ugly.

Meanwhile, Microsoft went ahead and released a completely new and unique design language for their products, differentiating themselves from the "me too" UI that Google adores. They also released the Kinect, one of the coolest and useful products in a long time, which has also made a massive splash in industries at large. They released IE9, and absolutely smoked the competition on html5 performance, etc. There are tons of things they do.

The only reason someone would say Microsoft is not innovative these days, is either because they are not tech enthusiasts, or they are smoking something powerful.

Boxster17 said,
ATI designed the Xenos GPU inside the Xbox 360, so not quite sure what you're trying to get at.

Um, you might want to talk to ATI about that, as they give the architecture and design specification credit to Microsoft.

Just like NVidia did for the PS/VS architecture of the previous generation of GPUs, and like NVidia did for the HLSL, the current father of all shader code used by everyone, that Nvidia talked about how great the language and design was and ported it for their own use and also helped in releasing and making it available to OpenGL with Microsoft's permission.

Seriously, do a bit of research on the GPUs. NVidia and ATI 'worked' with Microsoft, but both were concepts and architectures that Microsoft created, and yes you are using a computer right now with a GPU in it that was 'innovated' by Microsoft.

If you want to test your 'theory' that XENOS was an ATI design, then ask this simple question... If ATI designed the Unified Shader Xenos GPU, why was NVidia and Intel able to use the same architectural design in their GPUs?


There are several interviews if you do a search where ATI's CEO and Engineers talk about what Microsoft did with regard to the Xenos.

At the time Xenos was created, even ATI internally didn't think the unified shader concept was a viable model, and NVidia definately thought it was the wrong direction.

ATI went on to produce the R500 GPUs, that were NOT Unified Shader technology, and finally adopted the Xenos architecture and Unified Shader in the R600 GPUs after seeing the XBox 360's optimized video subsystem and the new DirectX subset that used the Xenos features.

Around this time the initial WDM/WDDM designs for Windows was revealed that matched the technology used in the XBox 360, and both ATI and NVidia had a 'wake up moment' when they saw what could be accomplished with the new architecture when running on an OS that used the features at both a scheduler/virtualization level and the DirectX framework concepts.

Sadly most of the features of DX10, DX10.1, DX11 video cards are wasted on Linux and OS X, as they do not have the ability to virturalize the GPU, use bus level RAM sharing, or handle kernel level GPU thread scheduling in the OS itself to make all GPU bound application pre-emptively multi-task on the GPU when running on Windows 7. (Even with people seeing Windows 7 and Windows 8 doing amazing things graphically, they don't seem to get it is because it is handling the GPU far different than Linux or OS X does.)


Anyway, back to the story of the adoption of the XENOs GPU architecture...

NVidia was allowed to use the architectural model, because it was Microsoft's, and thus they started hacking together the 8xxx GPU series, but failed to implement tensellation and scheduling features that the Xenos provided.

This is why they talked Microsoft out of the original DX10 specifications, so that the Geforce 8xxx GPUs would be DX10 certified. Which is why all the features of Xenos were not realized or implemented until Windows 7 and DX11 and WDM 1.1 - and Microsoft gave NVidia a timeline and required them to retrofit their driver model as much as possible to provide the WDM 1.1 features, which was still ongoing after the release of Windows 7.


So, seriously, you think ATI created the GPU and Microsoft was just sitting around waiting for ATI to reveal the technology so they could start designing their DirectX framework and compilers for the XBox 360 and other technologies that work very close to the hardware? Really?

I think you missed a memo somewhere, and truly don't have a clue what Microsoft does in the technology world you live in.

Shiranui said,

Who are you calling a "javen"!?

Sorry. Opera Mini. A Mobile. Problems in commenting.
It was a mistake. It posted before I had even type. I made two posts. In the second post you can see what I was trying to say.
And as far as I know, Javen isn't even a word. And I certainly don't call anyone names.
I was trying to spell "haven't".

Tweaky Nippleton said,

Because WP7 has been sooo successful so far.

Well considering it was only on GSM until last month, I would expect it to gain more ground now. Myself and many people like me will never switch to ATT, so we had to wait until it was released on CDMA networks. WP7 is awesome, love mine.

thenetavenger said,

text...

Links? Everything I've ever read/seen in the past states Microsoft owns the Xenos GPU, but ATI still has the IP.

"Earlier this week we got to speak candidly with Bob Feldstein, VP of Engineering at ATI, and lead sled dog on the Xbox 360 GPU development team. While Microsoft owns the technology that powers the graphics of the Xbox 360, ATI very much engineered the GPU internally codenamed XENOS."

The 3DS wasn't selling to well because there really wasn't much worth paying on it. Vita seemingly won't have that problem at launch?

~Johnny said,
The 3DS wasn't selling to well because there really wasn't much worth paying on it. Vita seemingly won't have that problem at launch?

Not to mention their XBL structure is laughable. They charge people to play online, and then bombard them with ads. I dropped XBL back in Feb. and haven't looked back since. That said, I buy ALL of my games on the PS3 now. Last 360 game I bought was Mass Effect 2.

That said, I'd rather a shotgun approach considering *most* of what Sony does works out well enough. The MOVE is doing well, as is the PS3. The PSP sold 50m+, nothing to scoff at. If anything, now is all the more reason to launch the PS Vita this year to capitalize on the weak launch of the 3DS.

Elessar said,

Not to mention their XBL structure is laughable. They charge people to play online, and then bombard them with ads.

I don't own an Xbox and even I know that the ads are optional.

Navan said,

I don't own an Xbox and even I know that the ads are optional.

Clearly you don't know anything. Ads are not optional, and if they are, Microsoft has never shown or expressed any instructions on how to hide them.

Navan said,

I don't own an Xbox and even I know that the ads are optional.
Sure, if you don't feel like ever using the dashboard.

And I DO own an Xbox.

Elessar said,

Clearly you don't know anything. Ads are not optional, and if they are, Microsoft has never shown or expressed any instructions on how to hide them.

There are ads but you click on them to watch them. I see maybe one or two. that is it.

Elessar said,

Not to mention their XBL structure is laughable. They charge people to play online, and then bombard them with ads. I dropped XBL back in Feb. and haven't looked back since. That said, I buy ALL of my games on the PS3 now. Last 360 game I bought was Mass Effect 2.
PSN has ads. Haven't you seen the Stride(tm) Gum ads plastered all over the PSN store?

PotatoJ said,
PSN has ads. Haven't you seen the Stride(tm) Gum ads plastered all over the PSN store?

Isn't it sort of an assumption you would see ads in a store? Sony's hoping you buy stuff there.

PotatoJ said,
PSN has ads. Haven't you seen the Stride(tm) Gum ads plastered all over the PSN store?

There are absolutely no ads on my XBM unless I go to the PS Store. The 360 dashboard is littered with ads as soon as you start the console up.

ozzy76 said,

Isn't it sort of an assumption you would see ads in a store? Sony's hoping you buy stuff there.
What? Can I download gum now?

There are absolutely no ads on my XBM unless I go to the PS Store. The 360 dashboard is littered with ads as soon as you start the console up.
That's because the store is in the dashboard. Whereas on the PS3, the XMB =/= Store. Unless the ad is placed in the tile preview ofc.

ozzy76 said,

Isn't it sort of an assumption you would see ads in a store? Sony's hoping you buy stuff there.

When you write something like this do you not seriously think about how stupid it sounds? The Xbox dashboard is one BIG marketplace for game DLC, movies and media in whatever form it takes. It is their "store", so one would assume they would like to advertise new products.

And they're hardly intrusive. They are there whether you are a silver or gold member. Implying buying live means you are interrupted with adverts is wrong and dumbfounded.

Elessar said,

There are absolutely no ads on my XBM unless I go to the PS Store. The 360 dashboard is littered with ads as soon as you start the console up.

Let's boot up my xbox here...

Well look at that, there is one ad that I can see in my transition between the first tab and starting my game. Sasquatch, huh. I don't have to click on it, I don't have to pay attention to it. It's not even the main feature of the tab. I start to question what you consider an 'ad'. The xbox dashboard tabs are mainly easy-access marketplaces that show you what's available, new, and relevant. They're HELPFUL. Spotlight and Community are the only places you might see conventional 'ads', and even then, they're both unobtrusive, and mostly relevant to things gamers are interested in. One Jack Link commercial that I don't even notice unless I go out of my way to look at it? >I'm< not bothered.

EDIT: Oh, and doesn't Jack Link have to do with the recent availability of Hulu on xbox? So I can even understand that. And from what I hear, these Sasquatch commercials are considered amusing by people, so even then, relevant entertainment. Still haven't clicked on it, because hey, I don't have to =D

The POINT is that ads in the PS store or even in the XMB[which there is none of] is acceptable because the service is FREE. It is the same with Google; their services are free but in turn you are subjected to ads which fund the services you get for free.

On XBL however you are forced pay to be able to play online and on top of that you are subjected to ads. I DO NOT want to see ads if i am paying for the service.

MindTrickz said,
The POINT is that ads in the PS store or even in the XMB[which there is none of] is acceptable because the service is FREE. It is the same with Google; their services are free but in turn you are subjected to ads which fund the services you get for free.

On XBL however you are forced pay to be able to play online and on top of that you are subjected to ads. I DO NOT want to see ads if i am paying for the service.

Go to the XMB, and check out "what's new". Yo, a Ford ad!

You are not forced to pay to USE the Xbox Dashboard, which are where the ads are presented in the first place. Online play is simply a red herring in this discussion.

By the same token, the ads in the XMB and the PS Store do not disappear once PS Plus is acquired!