Microsoft Refused to Sell Xbox 360s to Military

I had a thought a few days ago that Sony should stop selling PS3's to the gov. The gov sold ~8000 PS3's to the gov (the gov was buying them to save money on computing expenses) but Sony is loosing money cause they will make $0 profit from game sales from those sales. I think Sony may be still selling PS3's at a loss. Smart move on the goverments part. I think it was the department of Defense.

I laughed a bit at the reasons. Reason one is a joke, just charge more. This is the US gov, charge what you want. The second reason is possible, but a shortage can drive up hype so not a huge deal. Besides, your in the business to sell consoles, so sell them already. The third is also a joke. How many times have you been at a store and see clueless mom/dad buying a Teen/Mature game for their 12yo? Do you think these parents would have any clue what the US military uses to train their soldiers? Do you think they would even care? Sell them a console for whatever it costs plus X profit and offer it to them at that price. I bet they would have bit on that.

"We wanted to get on to the Microsoft Xbox because it only costs $300, when a PC may cost $1,000"

Then you're doing it wrong.

Agreed. A PC that could play most recent games (with a 5670/4670) can be built for $500. Also, assuming they will buy in bulk, the cost would be further decreased.

And just what is wrong with knowing that your child is using the device of choice for some of the country's finest men and women? They have no problem selling games based on martial combat, but the real military can't buy their consoles to hone their skills? typical nonsensical liberal drivel.

The first reason, as well as the response from Microsoft, contain the real motive behind the decision; that is, Microsoft wants to make some money from this transaction. The key word is RETAIL Xbox consoles, as well as membership. With MS being the owner of the platform, I can not blame them for seeking a profit. The other two reasons invoked by the Army - and not confirmed by Microsoft - are just dust in the wind; they do not matter and I believe they don't exist (although, on second thought, there was a shortage of consoles when they first came out). Corporations live to make a profit (otherwise they would make no sense) and if you want to do business with them you have to give them at least a chance to do that. Even the Army spokesperson admitted that with their proposal there was a great chance that Microsoft would have lost on their bottom line.
Moreover, nowadays a PC with specs similar to an Xbox would probably be as expensive, if not even less so, than a console. Everybody knows bureaucracy is slow, but c'mon! This is 4 years later!

[citation][nom]4745454b[/nom] Reason one is a joke, just charge more. This is the US gov, charge what you want.

Well, MS mentioned the RETAIL consoles would be acceptable, which makes me believe that the avenue was explored. Probably the Army offered to bay in bulk at low price/unit, which is OK if the seller makes a decent profit from each unit but not so when the retail cost barely covers the expense of manufacturing, not to mention an even lower bulk price. On top of that, the prospect of subsequently buying more retail games was almost zero, hence the huge negative balance on MS bottom line. It is not charity, after all...

Troll...
Besides, MS never mentioned that as a reason. MS is a corporation, all they should care is their bottom line. They have to make a profit, and they were getting stiffed by the deal. The Army did not accept the options offered by MS, so deal was off.
Maybe Mr. Smith was a little disgruntled when the real deal was revealed and it did not turn out the way he was hoping. Even if the third reason existed (which i don't believe), what's wrong in having a different point of view? This is America and everybody is entitled to opinions.

I guess they buy their gaming pc's from dell. They should just let some guys with skil33zz build them pc's for cheap.

MS's real concern was pissing off seals and rangers with RROD

Soo.... the US Military buys a Japanese company brand game console...

Because SONY and Microsoft are international corporations, can we really think of them as "American" or "Japanese" companies?

Of course I would like a proved - and tested - killing machine that my child could play with.
It would be so cool to buy "approved killing machine by the military" and it comes with 3 snazzy camouflage colors, green, sand and ice.

I also look forward to pc-keyboards approved by the military, especially if it comes with a feature I've missed, namely that someone/something actually disappears in real life when I hit the DELETE button
:-)

First off, you don't build PC's. You assemble them.

The army isn't going to be custom assembling hundreds or thousands of desktops. Even if you want to assume they could or would the price you quoted was $200 more than the price of an Xbox 360. Why in the world would they pay $200 more so they can get the privilege of assembling them all themselves? Illogical.

Anyways, Sony has shown a liking to losing money on their consoles so maybe the Military should give them a call.

They should buy Computers anyway, they don't get the Three Rings of Death Syndrome like a Crashbox 360 does and they run quiter and their also upgradeabe.

how many people buy 17 games a year? If that's the case MS will never get xbox to break even.

Either way MS makes money from the 360 or Windows on a PC. They can make more money from their OS then they can from actual hardware. Whats a disc cost to make? like $.05? Looks like a better bottom dollar to me.

Um, what?

Build: "1 : to form by ordering and uniting materials by gradual means into a composite whole"

Assemble: "1 : to bring together"

Know what you're talking about before you slam someone else. They mean the same thing in context 99% of the time.

The RROD (Red Ring Of Death) is -NOT- a weapon.

Factor in the cost of operating systems and someone to build and maintain all those systems and the price goes up. 360 is a bad example, but usually consoles have fewer hardware and software problems than PC's. Having previously done IT in the Army I can tell you soldiers really like to abuse the heck out of issued PC's.

I'm glad MS refused to sell them to the militery. It would have been used by one party or other to "prove" the incompetence of contracting projects when they all RRoD. Before anyone says "warranty" you must realize the military can not send them in until doing so was funded (re-boxing them still cost man hours.) Isn't the government awesome?

sell the computers for $300 and the 360's for $1,000 to the military, then the greedy idiots wont loose $$$

The US Military (DoD) purchase large orders of PC's on a contractual basis. These systems come with an all inclusive 3 yr warranty, meaning if anything happens to them the company replaces the part or the system in its entirety. The DoD's IT guys have more important things to do then building / maintaining desktop PC's. This results in PC's have a price tag of about 50% higher then what a home user would pay, but they come with full support and gold support status.

If a system has a problem, we call Dell put in the system tag and our organization's code and the Dell technician comes out the next business day to replace the part and determine the cause of the problem. Its basically enterprise server level support for all the desktop systems. That being said, not all units are knowledgeable enough to actually know how to put in those work orders. Also the warranty is only good for 3yr's, afterwords the systems are supposed to be life cycled out (donated to schools / used in extremely low priority missions) for newer systems.

First up to the people claiming you can get a more powerful PC for $500, we are talking about back in 2006, that certainly wasn't the case then.
Secondly, the army isn't 'kids in their bedrooms'. If they are going to assemble PCs from parts, someone has to do that. If they have to assemble thousands of them, then lots of people have to be paid to do that. That bumps the price up considerably, as does requisitioning all of the components instead of ordering a single item.
And yeah that is what the military needs, "some guys with skil33zz build them pc's for cheap".

and in other news Sony came out and said "well don't mind if I do!"

ahh...xbox 360...fail

That's funny, I've been building PCs for over 15 years, and yes dumb-ass, it's build. When you build a house, do you make the bricks, plywood, and nails on site? Build, construct, and assemble are all correct. By the way, it's PCs not PC's. Why would you also assume he meant custom built? The Army could easily purchase Xbox 360 comparable OEM BUILT PCs for $500 if the PC manufacturers weren't trying to milk a fat government contract. Of course, that's the real reason Microsoft refused the sale also.

ok, when it comes to processing power xbox is more powerful, they just have crappy graphics and no ram. i'll stick with a pc for now

they could buy bulk pc parts build nice systems for about 450 to 500 to train on.. Not a 1000..

Soldier: This childs entertainment must be turned into a weapon before the japs do it.

Scientist: Yeah, that seems like the best thing to do.

... South Park