A very interesting article about Sony...

EXreaction · April 8th, 2006, 02:28 PM

http://www.bonafidereviews.com/article.php?id=148

I never really thought about it...but what will these losses on each PS3 do to Sony? I am afraid that they might have to keep delaying it until they can shave off a hundred or more $ from the price of it...otherwise they will lose a lot of money really fast.

This line sticks out pretty well:

Quote:

Blu-ray, Cell and a self-destructive obsession with one upping Microsoft, might have possibly put this king to rest... for good.

JimRune · April 8th, 2006, 02:46 PM

I question a number of things in this article:

Quote:

If the PS3 is delivered at $599.99 what does this mean for Sony?

Notice, if, meaning it's just pure speculation. I highly doubt Sony would sell the thing at $600 because if anyone recalls Sony's failed attempt called the PSX, it sold at $600 and nobody bought the thing (it was just basically a PS2 remake with a ton of added features). The most anyone would be willing to pay is $499.99.

Quote:

The true death blow at this point would really point to the HDCP compliance required for Blu-ray movie playback (as well as HD-DVD), making the PS3 no more then a video game system with a capacity of 50 gig games for anyone who purchased a HDTV in the past 6 years. So were does the PS3's $600.00 price tag come into play for us non-HDCP HDTV owners? The answer is nowhere.

Evangelionn · April 8th, 2006, 02:46 PM

http://www.bonafidereviews.com/smf/i...opic,79.0.html

tony_j15 · April 8th, 2006, 02:52 PM

why did you link to a thread that links to the same article in the original post?

this is the same sort of wild speculation that was floating around when MS announced the Xbox. I think Sony's been in the game long enough to know what they're doing, although I do agree they are taking a big risk with Blu-ray, but thats offset by the risk everyone else is taking with HD-dvd.

Evangelionn · April 8th, 2006, 02:57 PM

because you should read what the crazy writer said on the thread for the article

JimRune · April 8th, 2006, 05:22 PM

I wouldn't say he's crazy(unless he truly believes what he writes), just that his readers tend to be the atypical, "Well the media said it so it must be true!" and he can write and strew whatever he wants to make it fit his personal opinion and call it an article.

EXreaction · April 8th, 2006, 05:31 PM

I think you guys missed the main point behind the article.

originel · April 8th, 2006, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimRune

Um, no. First all, HDCP is a system that allows the content providers to set a flag that turns on HDCP. What HDCP does, if it's on, is that when it's connected to a non-HDCP enabled TV, it downsamples to 540p. Most high-def TV's have this HDCP and the TV's that don't are usually the 480p ones, so either way it doesn't matter.

Where did you get that information? It's kinda hard to find high def TV's that currently support HDCP, including most 1080i sets. In other words, very few high-defs have HDCP at the moment. This is why so many people are upset with HDCP is that must current-gen high def tv's won't work with it.

JimRune · April 8th, 2006, 07:54 PM

There have to be Hi-Def TV's available that support HDCP because it was made standard in January of last year. There would be no reason, in this case, for there not to be any Hi-Def's without it.

If it is flagged (for whatever reason), it's not like you'll completely lose use of your TV, just a downgrade in signal. While I'm not advocating the use of HDCP or that the idea or use of this signal loss is 'good' (though inherently better than a complete inability to use your TV), I find it hard to believe that Hi-Def sets made after January of last year don't have HDCP.

originel · April 8th, 2006, 08:29 PM

Quote:

There have to be Hi-Def TV's available that support HDCP because it was made standard in January of last year. There would be no reason, in this case, for there not to be any Hi-Def's without it.

Not exactly. it was made standard...but lot's of standards come and go. Companies never rush into new technology, they always wait to see if it will catch on. There's an old engineer's saying that goes "No standard to fit your application? just wait a month for a new one to come out". Not only this: it takes time to implement a new standard. Hardware isn't like software, it usually takes 1-2 years to come out with a new product, depending on complexity. It's not like you can just plop in the HDCP chip into a pre-existing design and have it work. Thus we are currently in the transition period right now.