J. Gonzo

There was a posting a couple of weeks back about how MS was losing tons of cash on the 360. I argued then that it didn't matter because a) MS is huge, and a couple billion is a drop in the bucket and b) the 360 is just a small part of a much larger integration strategy. I would be shocked if the Zune didn't at some point (maybe not right away) have the ability to share the content stored on the 360. With the wifi capability of the Zune, I wouldn't be surprised if they allowed remote content access as well. MS is trying to dominate your livingroom.

This needs to be looked at in the context of the larger MS strategy. Yeah, they're losing $ on the XBOX/XBOX360, but their goal is to take over the livingroom. MS is flush with cash - they can afford to lose some money ($1.26 B in a year is a drop in the bucket for them) on the 360 if it helps them sell media centers, Zune's and whatever else they have up their sleve for the future. The strategy is all about integration, and the 360 is just a small piece of the puzzle.

The only reason he can get away with proposing a tax on games is that gamers typically don't vote, or at least that's the perception (we're thought of as lazy couch potatoes who don't show up at the polls). 2006 is an election year - If you don't want to see crap like this get out and vote in November. Between now and then, write to your elected representatives and tell them you aren't going to stand for legislation like this.

32_footsteps - your conspiracy theory doesn't hold up. A tax on games means higher prices for all of us (or at least gamers in Texas). Higher prices = fewer games sold, so this will hurt the games industry too. In fact, this will probably be the first time gamers and content producers will agree on keeping prices down.