 |
Quote: |
 |
|
|
 |
Originally Posted by macnbc |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The reason why Sony is considering (note CONSIDERING) dropping the hard drive at this point is cost.
The Xbox 360 is being manufactured with parts straight off the shelf, while the PS3 is being developed with state-of-the art custom-built components. This of course, comes with a price.
The end result is, Sony is already going to be taking a financial loss with the PS3, much like Microsoft is, and analysts say that the company will be absorbing a loss of about $75 a unit. Now, add a $100 hard drive to the price and Sony's left with three options:
1. Take an additional $100 hit per unit, which is unacceptable from a business standpoint, because then Sony will lose so much money on it that they will lose all hope of EVER making it back.
2. Raise the price of the PS3 another $100, when its already expected to be $100 than the XBox360, this is also unacceptable, because then people like everyone in these forums will be talking about how greedy Sony's being, without knowing the facts.
3. Make the hard drive optional.
Between those three options, the only one that Sony can take without kissing their market dominance goodbye is the third. It is still highly likely that even if Sony makes the HD optional, that there will be both a "Value pack" with HD, and a "bare bones" pack without HD available on the marketplace when it comes out.
This is simply giving the consumers a choice in the matter, which is always preferable to a mandatory price increase. The PS3 is a far far FAR superior system to the XBox360 as far as horsepower goes, but that power comes with a price.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
You've bought every single bit of hype that Kutaragi has thrown at you. Where to start? The 3 core Power PC cpu the Xbox uses is not 'striaght off the shelf', neither is the custom built ATI gpu otherwise known as Xenon. Part of Sony's problem is that they spent a billion dollars developing the cell, which they did'nt do for the sake of video games, not to mention Blue-Ray which is nothing but overkill, Bluetooth, etc. You're going to be paying $400 for a system that does'nt even have a HDD, which in this day and age should be included standard. As far as power goes, it's a wash. The PS3 can do more floating point calculations per second, but the Xbox 360 has much more general computing power that the PS3 not to mention other advantages such as ATI's unified shading built into the Xenon. They have vastly different designs, and go about things in totally different ways...to say that one is "far, far, FAR superior in horsepower" is nothing but rubbish. Sony said the same thing about Dreamcast, and as it turns out the Dreamcast was a better system than the PS2. Don't fall for the Sony hype. I see you also give them the benefit of the doubt as far as future HDD inclusion. I've seen direct quotes from Kutaragi that say the HDD is not necessary....they are'nt merely 'considering' not including a hard drive. It's a done deal. Either way, they'll be splitting their installed base which as far as game developers are concerned...there may as well not be any PS3's with an HDD because they won't develop for it. Just admit that Sony's making a huge mistake. But then according to Kutaragi, the PS3 is "not a game machine".
