Talk:Xbox system software

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Webpage[edit]

http://support.xbox.com/en-us/xbox-one/console/system-update-operating-system is the official page for the system software, xbox.com is the link to the product. Please stop changing this out and please stop throwing insults around. CaptainPedge | Talk 15:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox wants a link to the official website not the information webpage. My link is right. Your is wrong.
Also, you started insulting first. FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 07:53, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Editing wikipedia is not an insult CaptainPedge | Talk 17:19, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on content, not on the contributor.. Best to move on. -- ferret (talk) 17:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can a third party please sort this shit out CaptainPedge | Talk 17:07, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Read the documentation at Template:Infobox OS. It states Official Website. However, the link may be appropriate in the External Links section. -- ferret (talk) 17:10, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But the page I am linking to is the information page FOR THE OS. The xbox.com home page contains no actual reference to the system software. It would be like linking to the Ford website when you are talking about a Ford engine CaptainPedge | Talk 17:37, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Xbox.com provides:
  • Games
  • Accessories
  • Help
  • Technical support
  • Accounting
  • A place to provide feedback
...for this OS. That's what all official websites do. And it provides information too. The disputed link is the proof of that. Take a look other official websites too: The official website for Windows is windows.com not support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4000825/windows-10-update-history. The official website for iOS is also apple.com/ios even though Apple has no version history web page at all. FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 04:55, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You know what? I'm out. You win. I just don't care anymore. But I STRONGLY suggest you step away and think about the way you have been acting here. CaptainPedge | Talk 16:34, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do see your point, logically it should be http://support.xbox.com/en-us/xbox-one/console/system-update-operating-system, however the guidelines are a bit in the grey area. I did put it into the External links section when we were cleaning the article up last year. Wagnerp16 (talk) 18:50, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! The famous "logically"! When someone says "Logically, it should be so", he or she is saying "I think it should be so an don't care what others think".
I am a little anxious to see who is the next winning bully. CaptainPedge bullied me and got his way. FleetCommand bullied CaptainPedge and got his way. Who will be the next to bully FleetCommand and get his own way? And most importantly, what will be the next fallacious URL? Of course, part of me prefers this to remain like one those movie sequels that are announce but never made.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:15, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You do have a point, after reading the comments made by CaptainPedge on here... well lets just say I'm staying way out of it. Maybe they didn't read the note saying be respectable to others? I'm not even sure that the InfoBox needs a website URL? In response to your comment about who will be the next bully, I say grab some popcorn sit back and watch the next argument unfold. Wagnerp16 (talk) 08:46, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. Honestly, when I grab some popcorn and sit back, I expect nothing less than Pixar. But thanks for cheering me up. :) —Codename Lisa (talk) 11:09, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Same old problem[edit]

Anyone up for removing that table in Version History? Wagnerp16 (talk) 09:33, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a COPYVIO issue, or just that it's unsourced? If the former, please let me know where the information was copied from. If the latter, feel free to WP:BOLDly remove it. -- ferret (talk) 13:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's kind of both, as you may know we had a large debate last year about it. Not everyone has read it I assume. Wagnerp16 (talk) 17:43, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just remove it, you've got consensus on your side it looks like. WP:BRD. It was boldly added, now you revert, then we can discuss if needed. -- ferret (talk) 17:46, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Gone, thanks for the Beam edit, it was my mistake. Wagnerp16 (talk) 17:53, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

uh why was that table removed? I spent a good time working on that and not copying and pasting info from xbox so that it wasn't copy right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gh0sti100 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Same arrogant users, I added the version history back with my old account and spent several days looking for and adding third party sources and made sure that nothing was written down like it was in any of the sources but a bot still claimed that it was "a copyright © violation" and it was removed, people here just seem obsessed with removing the version history table, I say add it back in and make sure that nothing copyrighted is in, but for some reason people just want to delete all content rather than just the one or two bug fixes relates sentences that are copyrighted, welcome to the Microsoft-sphere of Wikipedia where editors spend more time deleting content than adding, and only rarely is progress ever made. Just look at any Apple, Google, or even Jolla related page and you'll find way more detailed version histories than here. 😒 --1.55.183.244 (talk) 14:18, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In my personal opinion, I feel that the version history list should exist. If any copyright violations do exist, remove the offending content, but leave the list intact. Personally, I used the list as a quick and easy reference of changes in current and former versions of the Xbox One system software, and I often referred to it after a new update, as it is the most consolidated list of Xbox One updates that I have found on the Internet, and I am somewhat disappointed that the list has again been removed. I am of the same opinion regarding the Xbox 360 system software article, which also formerly had a similar list.
114.75.106.153 (talk) 19:40, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Your personal opinion comes into play when you create your own website. In Wikipedia, the policy is WP:NOCHANGELOG. FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 10:47, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Software Changelogs, a 2018 Perspective[edit]

In continuing the conversion and replaying to @User:FleetCommand I think the editors over at Windows 10 Version History handled the situation really well. It, too, had the copyright and other issues that this place faced. However, it has been dealt with without the nuke everything approach, and the result is a much better article. And I looked at the Wikipedia policy about "nochangelog", and it seems to have been revised. It now simply states not to use first party as the source for detailed software updates. If something is notable enough, many third party sources will cover it, and those should be used. This covers the relevancy argument. If, after all, a small app by Joe Schmoe has a bunch of version updates that he details but few other sources cover it, it a full version history wouldn't be fit for Wikipedia. However, with Windows 10 based releases, including those for the Xbox One, changelogs are becoming the de facto standard.

There is something I want to mention before I end. We, as people, get to decide what policy Wikipedia has. The policy does not decide how and were we take Wikipedia. And the people have spoken. We have iOS version history and Android version history. Windows 10, and perhaps, soon, Windows Server. And all of a sudden, the Wikipedia policy changes its stance on change logs. Would you look at that? Make no mistake. It doesn't matter what a policy or an admin thinks or wants. If enough people speak up a consensus, it is very likely to overrule an authority. This is is seen is history over and over again. And remember, even admins themselves are eventually replaced by the next generation, who are mostly in line with where the current voice of the people stand. I don't know what will happen in regards to the xbox one software version history, but if things trend the way it appears to for other major software, I am more willing to say that the version history will very likely return to Wikipedia. But if people reverse their stance as a whole, then so be it.

Best

NazmusLabs (A small part of a bigger movement to better the world!) (talk) 21:55, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Xbox One Update Image Needed[edit]

The look has changed (again). The infobox photo needs to be updated. Bang. (talk) 16:48, 25 October 2017 (UTC) Bang. (talk) 16:48, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get it on it when I get home tonight. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 16:54, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 May 2018[edit]

I would like to change the March 2017 picture to the latest May 2018 update picture. 220.240.168.115 (talk) 08:17, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: Please supply the file name. Sam Sailor 10:47, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ERA is the name of the XboxOne os. Not Windows 10.[edit]

 It is a managed core much like Windows.  But it does not run windows.  It does not run windows 10.  And the fact that all my code is full of #if XBOXONE to delineate the difference between windows apps and the XBoxOne app is clear enough to know they are not the same.

It is a facade, to make the xbox look like a windows box. IT IS NOT. Maybe Windows phone? Maybe Windows 10 2-in-1s?

This page really should just be taken down and thrown away. IT is over 60% made up bull shit. Not helping anyone on earth.

Title Change[edit]

Hi,

Given the fact that the next generation of consoles is around the corner, it appears that Xbox Series X will likely use the same system software as Xbox One albeit with some slight differences. Would it make more sense if the title is changed from Xbox One system software to Xbox system software, or would this conflict with OG Xbox? Wagnerp16 (talk) 17:09, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Tried to cite https://twitter.com/tomwarren/status/1271722167680610304 in History of Updates but it fails to insert it. Does anyone know why? Wagnerp16 (talk) 16:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now there is yet another new Xbox console that will be using the same OS. Definitely not a good idea to keep the title as it is. The original Xbox OS doesn't have it's own page and it can easily be referred to as the "original Xbox system software". ShadowCyclone talk 18:03, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Without knowing the "name" of the new OS or system software, we've no idea how to rename it. -- ferret (talk) 18:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think they're calling it the 'NXE', which doesn't help. Wagnerp16 (talk) 11:38, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Windows 11[edit]

Given that the Xbox One/Series software now has a build number of 22000, should this page be updated? Wagnerp16 (talk) 08:12, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We should have sources confirming that it is based on a W11 build, we can't presume from the build number (even though this is a logical conclusion). --Masem (t) 12:38, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
True, as I think the software is a customised Windows version (or it has been since 2013 with Windows 8) Wagnerp16 (talk) 16:22, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Latest Version[edit]

The latest version needs to be corrected from 10.0.22000.4558 to 10.2.22000.4558

If you want proof, then check the system updates page on the Xbox Support page. GabrielBloom28 (talk) 12:26, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Xbox_system_software&oldid=1201052970"