Swiper

I have to ask, are you're OK with one company controlling over 80% of all online advertising?

And it isn't even by beating competitor's in the marketplace (like MS did in the 80s). It's by purchasing another company. Can anyone really be surprised that MS (and several other companies as well) are asking the U.S. government to review this?

I'm confused. Is the filtering system a good thing or not?

If it's NOT a good thing, why are you taking shots at Microsoft and not Google?

And if it IS a good thing, doesn't that make Microsoft's concerns legitimate?

There are currently 297 titles on the backwards compatibility list.

"OH AND WHY WOULD THEY PREFER SONY TO MS, BECAUSE SONY HAS A FREE SERVICE, MEANING THERE ARE MORE POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS AVAILABLE THAN THE XBOX360 HAS. PLUS ITS NICE TO SIDE WITH A COMPANY THAT IS MAKING THE BLURAY INSTEAD OF MS THATS NOT REALLY DOING ANYTHING FOR THE STUDIO IN THE LONG RUN."

Actually, MS has a free service too. It's called Xbox Live Silver.

Also, there are currently more potential customers on Microsoft's service. 6 million more at last count (and growing).

Lastly, I'm not sure I understand your point about Blu-Ray. Are you saying that Blu-Ray is good for movie studios? I suppose that might be true, but a movie download service also seems like it might be good for movie studios as well.

"Maybe you should leave the thinking to people who can actually know."

Ah, good idea. I *can* actually know, afterall.

Oh, perhaps you meant to say, "you should leave the thinking to people who know," to which I ask: do *you* know?

Really? I have my doubts.

Afterall, my post was about whether competitors to Sony Pictures would want to post their content on Sony's service. I didn't say that Sony Pictures didn't have a lot of holdings (they do), but that is beside the point. My post also didn't say anything about studios that have pledged support for Blu-Ray (many have), as that is also beside the point. I fail to see how Blu-Ray (or HD-DVD) has anything to do with a movie download service.

In fact, I believe you're actually in agreement with my original thought when you posted the following:

"List of MS movie holdings:

*cue crickets chirping plz*"

That was precisely my point. MS doesn't have any movie holdings, which means it isn't competing with any movie studios, and hence might have an easier time getting content on their service.

Now as Jeff points out, there's a lot more involved, but I still don't see how Sony has an advantage over MS in getting content from, say, Paramount.

Perhaps, you, my friend, should leave the thinking to people who think things through.

Let's think this through.

Suppose I'm Paramount, one of Sony's biggest competitors in the movie biz. Why would I want to release movies on their service instead of Microsoft's?

Really, why would any movie studio (beside Sony Pictures) prefer Sony's service over Microsoft's?

Just because Sony has Sony Pictures doesn't mean they'll have more content. In fact, I think just the opposite.