Talk:Xbox 360

Archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 Peer review 1 2 3

Isn't the main picture too amateur?

I mean, the carpet , the quality... etc It's too amateur for being displayed as the main one... we should get another with more quality.

Agreed.

--189.135.61.213 04:06, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I think the image is perfect. Its very simplicity makes the viewer focus immediately on the console instead of the glare from glass case or some messy kiosk. Most importantly, the image's copyrights are very clear.--Kenn Caesius 19:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

• The picture needs to be photoshoped or something. It needs to be more professional in some way, even though it doesnt match up to the PS3's image. FullMetal Falcon 02:24, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

File:Xbox 360 white background.jpg

There already is one. Image:Xbox 360 white background.jpg Dancter 18:35, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, just remove that carpet so as to have a nice background. --148.241.71.47 18:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

While I don't mind the original, I think Dancter's image is much better. Since the consensus seems to be to change it, I've gone ahead and done so. Koweja 19:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Looks sort of obviously cut out. Let me have a second with it before you put it in. --gatoatigrado 02:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

that took a long time, and it's not that much better. Someone needs to take a better picture. Without the remote control. --gatoatigrado 05:26, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Anyway put that one in while we get another one, it's better than the one with the carpet --189.135.66.229 05:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Below is another version with different shadows. Shawnc 18:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I think we should put the microsoft media remote in instead of a third-party remote. Neodarksaver 03:36, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand you mean. What third-party remote? Dancter 03:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Theres definitely something wrong about the main picture. It does seem amateur-ish.

Wireless controllers as a standard?

I have removed the claim that the Xbox 360 is "the first console to provide wireless controllers as a standard" twice, but 74.33.2.89 (talk • contribs) keeps adding the statement back. Since the Core System comes with a wired controller, I don't think one can claim that wireless controllers are standard. Pagrashtak 04:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

The Xbox 360 includes them as standard, a 1st party bundle designed for people who don't want to pay full rpice doesn't include them. Saying it doesn't include them as standard is a lack of undestanding of Microsoft's retail configurations. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.33.2.89 (talk • contribs) .

By that logic, would it not be equally correct to say that the Xbox 360 provides wired controllers as a standard then? The sentence as it stands is misleading. Pagrashtak 04:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

The core isn't the full console, the Xbox 360 contains wireless controllers as standard.

Wireless is the standard, as all Xbox 360 consoles can use them, and furthermore, the maximum ammount of controllers CANNOT be acheived with the base hardware availible. I'd do research on who you are to deterine fanboyship, but you look good will, and I'm lazy right now. I say follow a simplify philosphy (or however thats spelled), and take it out under the premise that it is unnecissary information, consitering that it doesn't really matter. - 68.228.33.74 06:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree that it needs to make more clear that wireless controllers do not always come with the Xbox 360, and that's when purchasing a Microsoft pack. I've adjusted the wording to give more an impression of wireless controller compatability instead. Mewcenary 08:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I've tweaked it to say the first to provide wireless controller support at launch, which should clear up the confusion. Pagrashtak 14:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

pov statements

this removal has been consistently reverted without discussion. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. Please discuss changes on the talk page before you revert. --gatoatigrado 09:58, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

"The Xbox 360 has an extensive amount of bandwidth in comparison to its competition". [7]

I hate to sound like a fanboy. I have an Xbox 360 "premium", so don't say anything. But on another level technical incorrectness and distortion is just wrong. --gatoatigrado 17:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

1. The article linked to is the "Microsoft Competitive Comparison". Guaranteed to be pov.
2. The cell has good experimental bandwidth (Wikipeida's previous version [8]).
3. this Microsoft propaganda is **** ****. This is the main point in the ref. They are counting the "memory performance" of the eDram on the GPU. This is like counting the 51 GB/s on all of the Cell's Local Stores, and adding them up (the number is 357, equally irrelevant). The eDram is specialized memory, as my article revision more accurately shows.

would someone make a reference out of this article? or find one from a better source? thanks. this is in regard to the antialiasing comments. diff. reference. --24.7.86.143 01:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

It's a relevant factual comment from a reliable source, there is no need to discuss it's inclusion. Your other comment is already in the GPU section. (inserted by gatoatigrado from 70.101.200.243's edit summary)

"Your other comment is already in the GPU section." I'm sorry, you're right. It is from a "reliable" but highly biased source (Microsoft). That is not IGN's words, they are providing a copy of Microsoft's "competitive comparison" document. It is not the purpose of this article to spread Microsoft propaganda. Please reply on the talk page. Your edit summaries are good so I won't complain yet. --gatoatigrado 05:38, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

All specifications are from the company that makes the products, Microsoft releasing it doens't make it POV. All the numbers there are factual. The bandwidth conclusion was drawn by IGN (pg 3) (inserted by gatoatigrado from 70.101.200.243's edit summary)

On page 3, this (below) is Microsoft's. The information below the horizontal line, as I am interpreting it, is IGN's comments. --gatoatigrado 05:56, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

CONCLUSION When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3. Keep in mind that Sony has a track record of over promising and under delivering on technical performance. The truth is that both systems pack a lot of power for high definition games and entertainment.

However, hardware performance, while important, is only a third of the puzzle. Xbox 360 is a fusion of hardware, software and services. Without the software and services to power it, even the most powerful hardware becomes inconsequential. Xbox 360 games—by leveraging cutting-edge hardware, software, and services—will outperform the PlayStation 3.

This is what appears to be IGN's comments, below the horizontal line. --gatoatigrado 05:58, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Lastly, we were sent updated spec numbers on the Xbox's numbers, and we spoke with Microsoft's Vice President of hardware, Todd Holmdahl, about the Xbox 360's final transistor count.

Another bit of information sent our way is the final transistor count for Xbox 360's graphics subset. The GPU totals 332 million transistors, which is spit between the two separate dies that make up the part. The parent die is the "main" piece of the GPU, handling the large bulk of the graphics rendering, and is comprised of 232 million transistors. The daughter die contains the system's 10MB of embedded DRAM and its logic chip, which is capable of some additional 3D math. The daughter die totals an even 100 million transistors, bringing the total transistor count for the GPU to 232 million.

So, that's Microsoft's analysis. What do you make of it? Tell us what you think on the boards.

Information coming from a reliable source does not remove it from discussion. I would argue that articles such as http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,25689-2371220,00.html, which are obviously from reliable sources, are biased and conflict with other opinions. The criticism for lack of surface level innovation is one thing, but the "lack of wow factor" because many games are extensions to series started on the PlayStation 2 has been criticized by other users. Indeed, this link is still in the PlayStation 3 article, but it demonstrates how this can be controversial. --gatoatigrado 06:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I am removing this again. I do not want to get into a revert war. The person who made this edit was undoubtedly aware of the conflict, because it has of the exact same wording as before. [9]. --gatoatigrado 09:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

100GB HDD Announced

A 100GB HDD was announced at X06 in Korea and was reported first onEngadget. How are we going to incorporate this into the article? I don't want to make any changes right now, as I want some sort of consensus about what to do about the announcement. --CanesOL79 16:18, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Eventually it should be listed in Xbox 360 components and accessories, but I wouldn't bother just yet. We may as well wait until their is more information - at least a release time frame and/or price. Koweja 16:28, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds good to me. I didn't want to bother adding it into the article because it's unnecessary right now, as nothing is set in stone or finalized. --CanesOL79 18:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, just mention that it was announced, it's somewhat important. No extra details are necessary' --189.135.69.96 03:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Microsoft has denied all claims of a 100GB Hard Drive. 71.163.110.222

Clock speed for Xbox 360

There seems to be some confusion of CS on the page concerning the 360 and its processors. Its 3.2GHz for each core,not total.

The PowerPc products page for example state "Microsoft's Xbox 360 console, available now, includes a 3.2 GHz custom IBM PowerPC chip with three symmetrical cores..." when it should have been 9.6GHz...same as with Intel's adverts stating "Pentium D processer at 3GHz".The 3 Ghz was the combined speed of the 2 cores.

uh, maybe you should read the hertz and dual core articles. you can't add clock cycles. it means multiple operations are being done per clock. --24.7.86.143 02:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

A clock speed is a clock speed. Memory will go at a specified clock speed, cores at another, other I/O at another. To say "You have two cores going at 3 GHz, so it's really 6 GHz," doesn't work. You may as well say, "We have around 2 million latches each operating at 3 GHz, so it's really going 6 million GHz." Obviously, this is not correct. It's like you clapping your hands once every second, then having a friend do the same. You aren't both clapping your hands twice a second each; you're still just clapping your hands once a second. Hope this has cleared some things up. Zebov ^{(talk|contribs)} 06:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

GA on hold

The article, while good, doesn't meet a few points of WP:WIAGA:

• 1b - I feel the lead, for such an indepth article, could be longer. It could perhaps include the games launched with Xbox 360 and initial consumer reaction. I should be able to gather the key information about the console from reading the lead, and at the moment it mostly tells me about the launch.

Slightly expanded, by a sentence or two.70.101.196.236 04:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

• 2 - Development is fairly unreferenced (along with some other sections). For example, the development names should be cited, and how do I know that this happened?:

In February of 2003 planning for the Xenon software platform began.

The book were the entire section was referanced from was removed because someone though it unneeded, readding a ref version of it to cite everything in there. Care to point out what other than that needs cited?74.33.13.26 00:19, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Cited now.74.33.13.26 03:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

• 6a - there's no fair use rationale for most of the images! This is quite crucial.

All images that contain rational are deleted, the only way to get an image on this page is to have in not tagged on rationaled. :-/74.33.13.26 00:19, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Added rational that I saw on other similar images to the one that were fair-use.70.101.196.236 04:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Other than those points, I feel it's a good article (I learnt a lot reading it). Leave me a note on my talk page when you feel you've acted suffuciently on these points :) CloudNine 18:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Is "die" meant to be in it?

Is the word die meant to be in the caption for the picture in the "Graphics processing unit" section?58.106.37.243 08:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. "Die" is a term used to refer to Integrated circuit chips. Koweja 18:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

xbox 360 watts

should we change the 360 watts of up to 600 watts since 120 volts*5 amps=600watts? or is it different because the brick changes the current to D/C?

It simply doesn't use the entire amount of power that the power supply is able to supply. The same flawed argument (no offense) was put against the PlayStation 3, claiming it consumed 380 watts. People have measured the Xbox 360 at 160 watts. --gatoatigrado 11:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

how do they measure it?

Remember this is AC so 120 Volts * 5 Amps = 600 VoltAmps. On DC volts*amps=watts, but on AC volts*amps*power factor=watts or voltamps*power factor=watts.

Note: Original Post had a + instead of * this was fixed Rmcferren 21:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)Rmcferren 14 November 2006

Xbox Live Video

I'm sure everyone's on top of it, but Engadget's reporting that the TV/movie download service for Xbox 360 through Xbox Live is a go, and Ryan Block is even providing some details. I would add it myself, but my connection is pretty poor. http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/06/microsofts-xbox-live-video-hdtv-and-hd-movie-downloads-for-you/ Dancter 03:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Quick writeup, would go into more detail in main article, heres a summary that can be used in this one.123wiki123 05:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Main article: Xbox Live Video

On November 22, 2006 Microsoft launched Xbox Live Video, an exclusive video store accesable through the console. Both standard and high definition videos are avalible. At launch the service offered 800 hours of standard footage, and 200 hours of high definition. Both TV shows and movies are able for download, as are short streamable clips. Movies are rentable only, with an unlimited number of views in the first 24 hours after download. Television episodes are fully purchasable and are transferable to an unlimited number of consoles. Downloaded files use 5.1 surround audio and are encoded using VC-1 for video at 720p, with a bitrate of 6.8Mbps. Content is offered from MTV, VH1, Comedy Central, Turner, CBS for television; and Warner Bros, Paramount for movies along others.

Don't want to add it until an official announcment, rumors look terrible in articles and it would be best to add the section once official information is released.123wiki123 05:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I've added the section above into the main article, in hidden comment form, to show users this is known of, but until things are official, it would be nice to keep it out of the visible article.123wiki123 05:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

You can uncomment it now. This should be official enough. http://www.xbox.com/en-US/community/news/2006/20061106-moviestv.htm Dancter 06:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

That was faster than expected. o.O70.101.196.236 12:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Is there a montly / yearly price added to Gold for these television services ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.48.33.98 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Live is still the same cost, the service itself adds nothing to price. The content on the service will cost though.123wiki123 00:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

vandals

Please add tag to the top.

Because of recent vandalism or other disruption, editing of this article by unregistered or newly registered users is currently disabled. Such users may discuss changes, request unprotection, or create an account.

Thank You —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.48.33.98 (talk • contribs) 16:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

• should this article page have a locked status (like the playstation 3)?

MHz and GHz

I changed Mhz and Ghz to MHz and GHz and they were changed back? Isn't Hz the proper format?--Darin-0 13:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Hz is correct. Koweja 13:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, remember Hz, kHz, MHz, GHz. And remember that kilo is lowercase. Rmcferren 17:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Vote for removal of game library

I feel that the game section should be cleaned up like the ps3 (playstation 3) It's adding alot to the article, sure but ps3 has a seperate wiki for launch titles. This should be mainly about the hardware, not the software being played on it, ofcourse aside from xbox live. Remember this is an article, like an encylopedia, it shouldn't be used for promotional purposes or viral marketing. --64.231.255.85 10:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

GA passed

Sorry for the delay in rereviewing the article! I've passed it - my only tips are to split the lead into two paragraphs and make it more concise, and align the table to the right in the Retail Configurations section (change the notes to footnotes). Otherwise, it's good work! CloudNine 21:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Edit request

{{Editprotected}}

Could an administrator add a Czech interwiki link [[cs:Xbox 360]] to the article? Thanks. --Radek Bartoš 20:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. — TKD::Talk 20:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Further Edit Requests

A user uploaded a higher resolution logo of the original, but didn't change it here, so due to size constraints it was replaced with the current. Requesting it be changed back.

Current |logo = [[Image:360logo.jpg|250px|center|Xbox 360 logo]]

Original/Proper |logo =[[Image:X360_Logo.png|250px|Xbox 360 logo]]

67.138.78.50 21:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• 360Zine Free downloadable magazine

Site added without discussion, requesting removal. 67.138.78.50 21:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

What is wrong with that site addition? I would have thought the first, free XBox 360 magazine, created by actual journalists would warrant a place on the external links page for the XBox 360. OK, maybe I am naive, but I think that's pretty relevant. CranberryPub 00:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

7 GB changed to 9.4 GB

Referance for original number. {{cite web |url=http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microsoft-xbox/594331p1.html |title=We Got Next - Part One (Xbox) |accessdate=2006-11-13 |last=Padilla |first=Raymond |authorlink= |coauthors= |date=2005-03-08 |year= |month= |format= |work= |publisher=GameSpy |pages= |language= |archiveurl= |archivedate= |quote= }}

67.138.78.50 21:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Xbox games on Xbox 360

• You are able to play normal Xbox games on Xbox 360 right?

You can play games that have backwards compatibility profiles if you have a hard drive.DeathSeeker 23:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Energy consumption??

This Topic should be included. It directly relates to environmental issues and the costs of operation.--Nemissimo II 20:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Added what I think you want.70.101.196.236 00:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Amazon $100 sale on core system.

Anyone hear about it? It's true.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/holiday/cv/homepage

Apathy 05:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Article lead

I've removed the following text from the article lead as presenting too much detail for an introduction to the topic:

The system contains a 3.2 GHz tri-core PowerPC based CPU and a 500 MHz GPU. 
Its Xbox Live service allows gamers to compete online, download games and additional 
content. Microsoft believes that its push towards high-definition gaming, year-early 
head start and its Xbox Live online gaming service will help the console be successful.

Deathseeker/76.210.226.142/123wiki123 disagrees with that removal, and we are currently going back and forth over it. I'd like to ask for input from other uninvolved editors as to whether they think this material belongs in the introductory paragraph, or is more appropriate further down in the article. Thanks, Nandesuka 06:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC) Unrelated note, you copied the URL of the wrong user, it's User:70.101.196.236 not User:76.210.226.142.

Wikipedia:Lead section

The lead section or introduction paragraph (colloquially, "intro 'graf") of a Wikipedia article is the section before the first headline. The table of contents, if displayed, appears between the lead section and the first headline.

The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, explaining why the subject is interesting or notable, and describing its notable controversies, if there are any. It should be between one and four paragraphs long, should be carefully sourced as appropriate, and should be written in a clear and accessible style so that the reader is encouraged to read the rest of the article.

Is it that hard to follow wiki guidelines?123wiki123 07:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

< 15,000 characters	medium size	> 30,000 characters
one or two paragraphs	two or three paragraphs	three or four paragraphs

The lead is already a third the size it should be.123wiki123 07:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

"In the lead try to have a sentence, clause, or at least a word devoted to each of the main headlines in the article. "

1 Overview

• 1.1 Development
• 1.2 Launch
• 1.3 Retail configurations

Lead gets this section down pretty good, no mention of configurations though.

The Xbox 360 is the successor to Microsoft's Xbox video game console, developed in cooperation with IBM, ATI, Samsung and SiS. Information on the console first came through viral marketing campaigns and it was officially unveiled on MTV on May 12, 2005, with detailed launch and game information divulged later that month at the prominent Electronic Entertainment Expo. The Xbox 360 is the first console to have a simultaneous launch across the three major regions, and the first to provide wireless controller support at launch.

2 Xbox Live

• 2.1 Marketplace
• 2.2 Arcade
• 2.3 Video

Large enough section that it would merit an entire paragraph in the lead, current contains a single sentence.

Its Xbox Live service allows gamers to compete online, download games and additional content.

3 Software

• 3.1 Dashboard
• 3.2 Microsoft XNA
• 3.3 Backward compatibility
• 3.4 Game library

Not mentioned at all in the lead.

4 Hardware

• 4.1 Central processing unit
• 4.2 Graphics processing unit
• 4.3 Memory and system bandwidth
• 4.4 Audio and video
• 4.5 Storage
• 4.6 Components and accessories
• 4.7 Form factor

Large enough section that it would merit an entire paragraph in the lead, current contains a single sentence.

The system contains a 3.2 GHz tri-core PowerPC based CPU and a 500 MHz GPU.

5 Sales

Initial and total sales should cover this.

The console sold out completely at release and has since sold 6 million consoles worldwide.

Following the 3-4 paragraph policy for an article this size the lead should be expanded to something like this.

• Paragraph 1 - Overview/Sales summary.
• Paragraph 2 - Live in relation to the 360 summary.
• Paragraph 3 - Software summary.
• Paragraph 4 - Hardware summary.

Also note, the GA review stated lead expansion was needed.123wiki123 07:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Agree with Nandesuka ... although now I've "involved" myself by editing. The lead para may or may not need expansion, but it's no reason to stick stuff in there that doesn't belong. I left the XBox Live mention, but left out the bit about MS "believing" yadda-yadda. - (Nuggetboy) (talk) (contribs) 17:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

123, what policy states to include that piece of information? You keep claiming "policy", but all you're quoting is this WP:LEAD thing, which is a guideline. Let me repeat, it's a style GUIDELINE; it's not a violation of anything if there is not exactly X words in the intro. While the GA review may have stated that lead expansion was needed, you've got two editors here who feel that this piece of information does not belong. If you insist on a fatter intro, find something wotrthy of the intro, something with which a layman could be drawn into the article. "The system contains a 3.2 GHz tri-core PowerPC based CPU and a 500 MHz GPU" is not it. To respond to your arrogant edit summary, "There is no argument to be made, policy states to include it, it's included", if other editors disagree with your edits, there IS argument to be made. Stop thinking you WP:OWN this article and play nice with others. - (Nuggetboy) (talk) (contribs) 04:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Best-selling game?

The article still lists Call of Duty 2 as the best-selling Xbox 360 game to date. Surely that's changed by now. The source listed is from 2005, and the Oblivion article claims that Oblivion is the best-selling 360 game so far (at 1.7 million copies). Can we get some up-to-date information on this?TheWarlock 19:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

COD2 has sold 1.4 million for the 360. Oblivion has sold 1.7 million copies for both PC and 360. The Oblivion article is misquoting things.123wiki123 23:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Nonetheless, we need up-to-date sources on such things. VGCharts was last updated in March, and the market progresses more rapidly than that. I would not be surprised if Oblivion, GRAW, or Gears of War were currently the best-selling title. It's been a long time since launch. We don't want Wikipedia to be out of date, do we?TheWarlock 20:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Modifications

Some Fans converted the 360 into a topnotch watercooled laptop with highres display -> Totalconversion to laptop.

The German Hacking Group Chaos Computer Club puplished 17 Mistakes Microsoft Made in the Xbox Security System & Xbox 360 Hacking showing a possible future roadmap to Linux on the 360 during its 22nd Chaos Communication Congress. --Nemissimo II 21:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

split to Xbox 360 Hardware article?

This article is getting too long, and per WP:SIZE should be split soon in order to increase readability and relevance to readers. I feel that the best section to split would be Xbox 360 Hardware, as it is very specific and could be confusing to some readers anyway. Splitting that out would significantly decrease the size problem while making the topic easier to follow. - Mamyles 22:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Two things. First, if a user finds something confusing, don't remove it. Briefly explain it to them and be sure to wikilink anything the average user may not understand.. Second, read what's counted in size

"Readable prose" is the main body of the text, excluding sections such as:

• Footnotes and reference sections ("see also", "external links", footnotes, bibliography, etc) Bulk of the article size
• Diagrams and images
• Tables and lists
• Wikilinks and external URLs
• Formatting and mark-up.

Excluding those the article is ~4,500 words. 75% the beginning of an article to long warning. As articles up to 10,000 words are considered acceptable. This page if less than half the length needed for major splits.123wiki123 23:24, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I think a split would be reasonable, although not strictly necessary. Alternatively, I've long supported trimming down the hardware section: we're an encyclopedia, not a spec shet. Nandesuka 23:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't just basing the suggestion on how many KB there were, or only on that the hardware section is confusing. As Nandesuka said, the hardware section is a bit too much. Splitting would trim it down, and there would be a link to the xbox hardware article for interested users. Also, I wouldn't consider it a major split. If the hardware section constitutes as major, then it really must be a problem. - Mamyles 03:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

If a user here doesn't want to read it they won't. If a user wanted to read it, they would. There's no reason to content fork for the sake of the section being "a bit to much". The majority of that section is already split into four other seperate article. Additional splits would just be a headache.123wiki123 03:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)