First off, I want to say that this is not a rant nor is it a complaint. I'd still consider myself to have a neutral opinion on the X1, but I'm surprised that MS actually listened to the complaints and changed their policies. However I can't help but feel they're still doing something wrong. One side liked the X1 and had little to no complaints about it whatsoever, while the other side hated it specifically due to DRM (and a few complaints in regards to the Kinect). After hearing the complaints of one side, they've decided to change their policies to appeal to those that were complaining. Now, is that such a bad thing? No. Not necessarily (if done right). MS however, didn't do it right. By appealing to one side, they turned their backs on another. But I ask, did they really have to? It's common to hear people say; "Well, you can't please everyone." Which for the most part, that's true. However, I feel that in regards to this, both sides could have been pleased. As I said before, the main issue that the complainers had with the X1 was the DRM, so why exactly were the positive, innovative things about the X1 gotten rid of along with DRM? Could those things such as Family sharing and what not just not exist if there is no DRM? Or is MS just trying to show the complainers what happens when you bitch excessively about their policies?