Spontaneous Monotony

Microsoft have announced the pricing structure for the launch of the Xbox 360 (expected sometime before Christmas). The Xbox 360 Core System (the basic set) will cost £209 ($299 in the US) which is a welcome break from the habit of charging the same pound price as in dollars.

Both packs have the console itself, a controller, a faceplate, Xbox Live Silver (which doesn’t let you play games), and AV cables.

If you pay the extra £70/$100 (not so good on the exchange rate front) for the full pack, you get a wireless controller (instead of the wired one), high-definition AV cables, a wireless headset, an ethernet cable , and (for a limited time) a remote control (for DVDs etc.).

The expanded pack is actually surprisingly good value. Yes, 20Gb is not a wonderful hard disc size, but for all the stuff you’re getting in that pack (wireless controller, headset etc.) it’s probably worthwhile even if (like most of the UK) you don’t have a high-definition TV to get the benefit of the better AV cables. Especially when you look at the prices MS will be charging to buy the items separately (see Gamespot article I’ve linked to).

Oh, and one more thing: all you eurozone folks are getting well and truly shafted. The price in dollars and euros is the same!

[EDIT 1] It turns out that the ‘core system’ will not be backwards compatible out of the box, because the removable hard drive is required for backwards compatibility (presumably because the Xbox had one, and the games are therefore designed to rely on it)[/EDIT 1]

See Also

• Gamespot: Xbox 360 pricing revealed

Due to a few problems, I’ve reverted to the latest ‘stable’ version of Movable Type (3.17). Unfortunately it means that the posts I made in the past week or so have been lost in the process.

There was a serious security breach earlier today (the reason for the ‘account suspended’ notices some of you might have seen). I’m still not entirely sure what caused it, so don’t be surprised if the blog disappears at some point (the site shouldn’t get suspended, but I might nix Wordpress until I can find out what’s wrong).

Today saw the funeral of Robin Cook, one of the few genuinely likeable and trustworthy politicians around, since, whether you agreed with his politics or not (generally I did), he was always articulate, good at his job, and above all stood up for what he believed in, as Duncan Stephen wrote so well in his blog.

I think for a lot of people my age who were against the war in Iraq, Robin Cook’s resignation speech in the House of Commons just before the war began will have been one of the greatest political moments that they have seen so far. The anti-war movement was massive, and Cook became a sort of unofficial figurehead of it. He was far more reasonable, and likeable, than George Galloway. Clare Short, meanwhile, was seen as spineless, in contrast to what was perceived to be the much more principled stance of Cook. Robin Cook was a genuinely powerful voice from the backbenches.

So I am annoyed as most people that Tony Blair preferred to work on his tan today [given that I despise him to begin with], but for John McCrick to use his funeral speech to criticise him is out of order. One thing that Robin Cook definitely was not is a hypocrite, and McCrick has made one of himself by attacking Blair for politicising Robin Cook’s funeral, by doing the same thing himself. Such things should have been done in television interviews afterwards, or in a newspaper column, but definitely not during the funeral itself.

Outgoing Tory leader Michael Howard has told judges to obey parliamentary diktat without question, according to the BBC:

Parliament must be supreme. Aggressive judicial activism will not only undermine the public’s confidence in the impartiality of our judiciary

I do not pretend to be an expert in legal procedure, but I always thought that judges were supposed to make their decisions based on the law. If forthcoming anti-terror measures do not comply with other laws (such as the Human Rights Act) then they are just as illegal as the acts they seek to prevent.

If Parliament wants to avoid ‘activism’ from judges then it should pass laws which do not violate UK and European statutes, not try to browbeat judges with newspaper columns.