[Panajev2001a]

No flames please.

The CELL project might be fully completed after the first CELL chips appear: we might see Sony paper launching or showing or even launching small scale CELL devices in 2005: they would not work as the Home Server ( which PlayStation 3 and PSX 2 will have to: they are clients ).

If we think about the Broadband Engine we think about something fairly complex and we should be careful when we predict the time this chip will be mass-manufactured at high volumes.

The big problem would have been if Xbox 2 launched in Q4 2004, but that does not seem likely any longer.

If they can manage a simultaneous Japanese and North American launch by mid 2006 it would not be bad for their business.

Sony will take losses on the Hardware, but they will also try to make sure these losses are minimized if they can do something about it.

They had an initial time-frame for the launch of the machine and probably quite a while ago they did push it back due to the speed of progress in the CELL OS and in the massive task that will be the final PlayStation 3 SDK ( I would say that they might not go as far as they did with PSP, but they should do quite a bit more compared to what they did for developers before PlayStation 2's launch in Japan ), due to the events of the upcoming Transformation 60 and seeing that their rivals were not going to release that much earlier ( it is to be seen if Microsoft wants to launch more than a few months in advance compared to what Sony and Nintendo choose ), etc...

Thinking about an early-mid 2006 release date we have about 2+ years ( 3 if we count the time the new launch date was probably choosen ).

There is plenty of time to revision the chips ( specs or the projection of them would be locked for the most part ) and to devise cheaper, but still of good quality componets to make sure things such as Blu-Ray ( Read-Only ) can be integrated without breaking the bank.

Yes, they would loose some competitive advantage in terms of RAW specs ( btw, since the 45 nm node will not be available till at least 1 year later it is not like if they targeted early-mid 2006 from the beginning instead of mid-late 2005 they would have been able to push in a massive jump of performance ), but they would be able to be more feature rich ( PlayStation 3 would look like adding more value for your money ) and cost less to Sony to manufacture.

PlayStation 3 will not be a pure gaming machine ( neither was PlayStation 2 ) so there is also more to it than the Broadband Engine and the Visualizer: it is better to delay the launch a little bit and make PlayStation 3 a more complete machine ( programming wise, extra-features wise, etc... ).

PlayStation 3's role in the living room will be a key of Sony's future business so they do want to make sure it goes well: they will spend a lot on the PlayStation strategy as a whole and lose money on its Hardware at launch ( because it is important to them in the long run ), but this will not be senseless spending ( like "hey, if we would lose $800 on each console we could make it SOOOOOOOO powerful" ).

The Saturn's 4 Months jump-start on PSOne did not help Sega in the long run.

The money they would lose launching PlayStation 3 and selling it with higher manufacturing costs is the money they could add to their marketing budget or the money they can use to finance more exclusive games.

They can also be more competitive with Microsoft and Nintendo being able to drop the price quite fast ( they are launching closer to the completion of Sony+Toshiba's CMOS6 manufacturing process with 45 nm SOI technology [with capacitor-less e-DRAM] ) while still racing very nicely towards profitability of the Hardware itself ( you start from a lower loss margin ).

Sony is the leader of this current generation and lead the past generation, but they are also in a moment in which as a whole they need to recover: we need to take all these informations we have and see how they can work together in scheduling a proper launch for PlayStation 3 in 2006.

PlayStation 3 needs Sony as much as Sony needs PlayStation 3: it is not a sound business strategy to send Sony corp. in almost chapter 11 conditions because you want an easier battle on the console front.

If Sony corp. were in the current condition and SCE came out of the current generation third and very weakened ( in image as well ) or if this were Sony's first entrance in the console business that someone else dominated, I would be very depressed as too many negatives would be working against each other and the strategy I have talked about so far would neither make sense nor make them money.

Ken Kutaragi, is staff and the rest of the high management will have to make the most of the positives ( the PlayStation brand is very powerful and popular [their competitors will have to follow their moves to a certain extent], they have very good relationships with 3rd parties and they have better and better first party quality software to enhance their line-ups, Blu-Ray hype, PlayStation 3 hype [the next-generation PlayStation], etc... ) to mitigate/counter the negatives ( launching in 2006, not being able to take incredibly high losses, Microsoft launching Xbox 2, Nintendo launching GCN 2/NES 5, etc... ) and being able to fight their competitors off in the next-generation.

The battle would be tough, but restoring Sony corp.'s health would allow them to work as hard on PlayStation 4 as they did on PlayStation 3 ( Microsoft will likely be still in the playing field with Xbox 3, you can at least assume that quite safely: PlayStation 3 making enormous losses [Microsoft this time is able to work harder on price reduction as they control chips' manufacturing more closely] might jeopardize the R&D efforts for PlayStation 4 which Microsoft would not find hard to capitalize with Xbox 3 and Xbox 4 ).

It would also allow PlayStation 3 to make a big come-back in the console arena if the competitors seemed tougher than what was foreseen by playing with the stronger collaboration between the various sub-divisions inside Sony.

If with a $299 PlayStation 3 launching in 2006 they do not have very low sales compared to what they would have had with a $299 PlayStation 3 launched in 2005 and making terrible losses ( which would push farther down the line the moment in which the platform would start to be profitable even considering the Software sales and the profits from royaltes from 3rd party games ), then their bet will have been a rather good one.

Sony and SCE would still be aggressive and technologically advanced, but they would keep in mind the big picture and not only the console industry.

A 2006 launch allows Sony to push PlayStation 3 very strongly, but not put the rest of Sony in too much danger by allowing also the other sub0divisons to receive a healthy amount of R&D money: this is something I think Sony and SCE can manage thanks to the really hard work they have done with PSOne and PlayStation 2 so far ).

[Megadrive1988]

no flames from me.


the thing is, i do not understand why some people think PS3 in 2006 is at all late, or a delay. its not. Sony has said all along (since fall 1999) that PS3 would come in 2005 or 2006.


nice post btw.

[Dio]

It's hard to argue against the view in the post without it being a flame - given that the same risk applies to any other potential contenders .

Anyone can be late to the party and miss all the fun. And being early isn't necessarily right either.

[cthellis42]

Why would it be a tragedy? It's already been rather accepted for everyone, with the off-chance that anyone might push hard for some kind of end-of-2005 launch. In the long run, I'd rather everyone just make sure to launch WELL then launch as soon as possible.

[Heretic]

As far as timing goes, I believe PS3 launching in 05 has the only real potentail to be a tragedy. The only heartbreak I can see from launching in 06 is for those wanting or expecting it sooner.

Seriously, the party won't start until Sony shows up

[Megadrive1988]

As far as timing goes, I believe PS3 launching in 05 has the only real potentail to be a tragedy. The only heartbreak I can see from launching in 06 is for those wanting or expecting it sooner.

agreed.

[hey69]

before criticizing everything, lets wait for the official specs please .
we already know for 90% the specs for PSP so ok.
btw, anybody has read the news about EA developing 12 games for it, they mention a probable pricepoint of 199 -249 euro.
that seems an ok price to me.


Regarding release dates: microsoft mentioned alot that they won't give sony an edge about their release date and that they want to release before Sony does.

You never know, Sony knowing this is sending rumours about releaseing 2006 and surprise the industry with a 2005(LATE) release?

we all can speculate offcourse but i still believe Xboxnext is gonna push real hard to launch well before PS3 (i'm not going to talk about whispers and rumours here, my posts get deleted anyway ......... )

[zidane1strife]

Yeah, a 2006 launch would be ok. But I think a 2005 would be significantly better. If they throw it out with nice spec MS might have to 1-up them(nice h/w advantage) which could make them delay till 2007 or launch with a massive loss in 2006. Not only that but they can effectively kill both xbox and cube early while keeping ps2 afloat(psone*cough cough).

[Panajev2001a]

Originally Posted by Dio

It's hard to argue against the view in the post without it being a flame - given that the same risk applies to any other potential contenders .

Anyone can be late to the party and miss all the fun. And being early isn't necessarily right either.

Dio, I am talking about Sony in particular because it is the company I have followed the most and so far I have always been a happy customer and I have enjoyed what in particular was brought to the console world by SCE, a sub-division who started a needed ( IMHO ) revolution inside Sony itself.

You know what I mean by "flames" ( one line attacks with not even one bit of logic behind them ): you are more than welcomed to disagree with me and "bring me to school"... you cannot hurt me by doing that you see... you would only make me wiser hence stronger

The same risk does not apply to other companies as they are not in the same situations: Nintendo is only focused on the gaming sector and Microsoft does not really have to deal with "money contraints" every day ( with over $40 Billions in the bank, they are pretty safe ).

Deadmeat, yes... I am indeed concerned, but I do see that work has been done so far to improove the situation and that there is a way ( which they seem to be following ) to make sure that the future can be as bright as they can make it to be.

This does not mean that they will succeed, but I will be happy if the whole Sony goes back to the ideals of their founders ( engineers ) and the fight well helping the whole console world to improove.

/*Potentionally cheesy line, you have been warned... do not read if you do not care or feel distant from the events*/ The Virtuous one is not necessarily the one who wins, but the one who fights with all his/her heart and soul.

Of course I hope that Sony can keep fighting hard in the console business: having Sony, Microsoft and Nintyendo fight for dominance for the next console generations will make us the consumer happy at the end.

I am not criticizing the other companies or convince you how they can dominate the market again: that would include assuming that their competitors have already a doomed fate and Sony has sure victory if the do that.

I am saying that over-all launching in 2006 is not a tragedy like some people I arguyed with sustained and I gave my thoughts regarding why 2006 might be sub-optimal in certain points of view, but over-all the best thing for what concerns Sony as a whole.

Will do the best they can be enough ? You will have to think about that on your own.

I have my reasons to think that at least they can manage and survive to fight another generation ( assuming more would mean to assume they will win ) and one more after that.

I have my reasons to believe that a series of different causes is putting to the test people like Ken Kutaragi and his staff once more as there are things beyond their control which have brought Sony to the point they are now ( the PlayStation business is not what caused the razor thin profit margins for the past few years that the shareholders are so pissed about ).

The difference between you and me Deadmeat is that I do trust the competence of certain people and you do not.

This sits behind some of my expectations and some of yours.

The truth sits somewhere in the middle, again skewed a little bit to the right or to the left depending on your personal beliefs and your knowledge regarding the state of things.

If I thought to be 100% right all the time, I would be playing the lottery and become iommensely rich, but I am not doing that and I am not going to say that they will dominate for sure, but neither I will say that they are doomed.

I am trying to look at the current market, look at what I see Sony getting ready and trying to figure out how their over-all startegy will look.

Wether this strategy will bring them again to victory or not, I do not know, but what I know is that they do not seem moving in the wrong direction.

[cthellis42]

Originally Posted by Panajev2001a

The Virtuous one is not necessarily the one who wins, but the one who fights with all his/her heart and soul.

No offense Pana, but that statement is almost unbelievably cheesy. :P

[Panajev2001a]

Originally Posted by cthellis42

No offense Pana, but that statement is almost unbelievably cheesy. :P

Oh well, I love milky stuff, what can I say ?

A lot of thoughts were going through my mind and to me that did not sound cheesy in the state of mind I was in ( I am not insane, thank you ).

It stands to what you believe.

Yes, you might laugh at what I said and think it is an exageration, well it would not be news to me as I do go overboard sometimes, but looking in the future the situation is serious.

I was trying to get a point through and I tried in several ways: with logic, with examples and with a comparison.

As long as the message was received by someone, I am happy

[jvd]

The Virtuous one is not necessarily the one who wins, but the one who fights with all his/her heart and soul.

Well to bad sega doesn't have hardware this gen huh .



But anyway . 2006 would be fine. I beleive thats about when all the new systems will come out .

Only problem is if it comes out any later than 2006 ms will have a huge advantage .

But hey i think nintendo is going to have the most to gain from launching early .

They are never ones to take a loss on a system. So if they come out in 2005 by themselves they can price at 300$ and still sell and make money and drop to 200$ when other systems come out .

I just want to see a more even split of the market .

Mabye sony 40% and then 30% to the other two .

[Psychogenics]

I think that it is better that they come out in 2006....Sony's 60th anniversary is in 2006.

[Panajev2001a]

Originally Posted by Psychogenics

I think that it is better that they come out in 2006....Sony's 60th anniversary is in 2006.

Very interesting

[zurich]

Originally Posted by Heretic

Seriously, the party won't start until Sony shows up

That sums the entire issue up perfectly.

[ChryZ]

"Tragedy" ? Oh my ... we do speak about consoles, right? Freekin consoles for crying out loud! You guys take this whole affair way too seriously.

If it's 2006, no problem: I am more than happy to see, what's possible within 1 or 2 more gen(s) of software on current platforms.

If it's before 2006, great ... bring it on. New hardware is always cool.

[speng]

2006 is way better than 2005 atm.

PS2 is still selling well to ok.

Developers will have more time to work on the new system.

There isn't a huge need for new hardware atm.

I'm not looking for PS3 in 2005, if it came out then I'd be shocked.

2006 yea, 2007 I'd be surprised.

Speng.

[nobie]

Who cares what Sonys balance sheet says. As long as PS3 comes out and I can play cool video games on it, it's all I care about. Some of you guys cheer Sony like it was your local football team or something.

[Deepak]

From GamePro

PS3 Precursor Chip Close to Sample Production

Toshiba and Sony are about begin trial production of semiconductor chips that will be the precursor to the Cell chip that is expected to be used in the PlayStation 3. The manufacturing process is more advanced than any in commercial use today, requiring the construction of a new production facility.

Junichi Nagaki, a spokesman for Toshiba, has stated that the trial production of sample chips using the 65-nanomter (one nanometer is a billionth of a meter) technology will begin in 2004. The company will produce system LSI (large scale integrated circuit) chips on a trial line at its Yokohama, Japan, factory and distribute them to customers for evaluation purposes. Commercial production is not expected to begin until the first half of Toshiba's 2005 fiscal year, which is from April to 2005, said the spokesman.

The chips will be manufactured in a new factory currently under construction at Toshiba's plant in Oita prefecture, Japan. The factory, which will process 300-milimeter wafers, is expected to be completed in January 2004, with production on a 90-nanometer process beginning in mid-2004. Production will then be upgraded to handle the 65-nanometer process.

"This is the fundamental technology for 65-nanometer chips," said Shinji Obana, a spokesman for Sony in Tokyo. He said the two companies have already succeeded in producing a sample system LSI that also contains 32M bits of embedded memory. "We tested the device and it works correctly."

The system LSI chips, while falling short of a prototype Cell processor, will be one of the first steps that Sony needs to take towards mass production of the chip, he said.

Other companies have just begun to switch from 130-nanometer generation technology to 90-nanometer technology, with NEC Electronics announcing in November plans to invest 60 billion yen (US$545 million) on building a 90-nanometer line at its factory in Yamagata prefecture to begin production in late 2004.

The smaller nanometer measure is significant because as the resolution gets finer, more components can be crammed onto a chip's surface, leading to more powerful chips that consume less power.

Given that Toshiba expects commercial production of the chip to start on April 2005 at the earliest, we can expect production of the PS3 to start no earlier than mid-2005.

[MrSingh]

I hope they launch it when it's ready and don't rush it out.

Good post Pana.

+1 PanaStation.

[Panajev2001a]

Originally Posted by MrSingh

I hope they launch it when it's ready and don't rush it out.

Good post Pana.

+1 PanaStation.

Thank you [insert Nickname for Singh ], I do hope too that the console is not rushed out: it did not work for the Saturn and it would not work for PlayStation 3.

If they rush it out they will pay through the nose for it ( ultra expensive for them to manufacture, low volumes ) and if this impacts negatively the resources they would have given to PlayStation 4's R&D that will be a quite long term damage to the company.

I think that the R&D needed behind future consoles, with their aim to become much more than just advanced gaming machines ( even there they have to increase performance a lot to show a credible increase in the quality of the produced Visuals ), is increasing quite considerably.

I would not be surprised if the console industry were to re-align to a 6 years product cycle ( time to advance the technology [spreading the R&D over 6 years], work more toward also making it a little bit less expensive to manufacture and more time making high profits with the then current generation of consoles ).

It would help developers as they would have more time to make the money they have invested on the various platforms back and it would allow the manufacturers to receive more profits from their consoles ( it is easier to make back the invested money and then some over a course of 6 years compared to a 5 years period ).

It would also fight against Transformation 60's goal of higher profit margins and of healing the parts of Sony corp. which were faltering somewhat.

I completely forgot that 2006 is the 60th birthday of Sony corp.: PlayStation 3 will be released at that time in Japan ( Fall 2006 or a bit earlier in the North American territory as well ), I just feel it

[Deadmeat]

Edited by moderator

Stop flaming. Your posts were deleted because you flamed. The other posts were deleted because the discussion was about your posts being deleted. If you have a problem with your posts being deleted then take it up with a moderator. Flaming will not be tolerated. No more warnings.

[Deadmeat]

And exactly which moderator should I talk to???

And would you(You didn't leave your name) care to clarify which part of my responses did you find offensive??? I found absoluely nothing wrong with my replies and considering the lack of an "objective" flames standard on this board, it is impossible for me to figure out why and who keeps deleting my replies for what reason.(No one ever told me what was specifically wrong with my replies, he just keeps deleting to intimidate me).

What is acceptable to one mod is considered a flame by another mod. It all depends on the system loyalty of mods. The funny thing is, I don't even have a system loyalty; I just critize certain things based on flaws and deficiencies I see. Compare me to certain system advocates who do post biased opinions everyday and go unnoticed, while I am constantly harassed for even posting news. Is it safe for me to assume that this board technically is a Sony-oriented board and Sony critics are not welcome here because of moderator biase??? If so, just say so, and I will understand. Mods are humans and can be biased, I understand this much and there is no shame in admitting one's biase.

The present moderation policy is flawed and lacks objectivity. Somebody must come up with a moderation policy that is considered objective and acceptable by all.

Here is my case. I PMed Sonic after he locked my Yomiuri CELL article thread and Sony getting booted out of government research program thread. His replies...

I really don't see the signifigance of the article. What I see is someone having a constnt personal attack on Sony and will do anything to prove that they have no chance of survival.

What you can observe from his response;

1. Sonic considers that Yomiuri article has nothing to do with Sony's console biz.
2. Sonic considers Sony an individual and that I am launching a personal attack on Sony.

Be the judge for yourself.

[Panajev2001a]

I found absoluely nothing wrong with my replies

Maybe this is part of the problem: just a suggestion.

Deadmeat, why don't you and I bring this stuff on PM or on any IM service ( I will PM you my AOL or MSN nickname if you agree ) and leave the non-technical Sony: Hero or Menace kind of posting outta here ?

[Panajev2001a]

Originally Posted by Deadmeat

And exactly which moderator should I talk to???

And would you(You didn't leave your name) care to clarify which part of my responses did you find offensive??? I found absoluely nothing wrong with my replies and considering the lack of an "objective" flames standard on this board, it is impossible for me to figure out why and who keeps deleting my replies for what reason.(No one ever told me what was specifically wrong with my replies, he just keeps deleting to intimidate me).

What is acceptable to one mod is considered a flame by another mod. It all depends on the system loyalty of mods. The funny thing is, I don't even have a system loyalty; I just critize certain things based on flaws and deficiencies I see. Compare me to certain system advocates who do post biased opinions everyday and go unnoticed, while I am constantly harassed for even posting news. Is it safe for me to assume that this board technically is a Sony-oriented board and Sony critics are not welcome here because of moderator biase??? If so, just say so, and I will understand. Mods are humans and can be biased, I understand this much and there is no shame in admitting one's biase.

The present moderation policy is flawed and lacks objectivity. Somebody must come up with a moderation policy that is considered objective and acceptable by all.

Here is my case. I PMed Sonic after he locked my Yomiuri CELL article thread and Sony getting booted out of government research program thread. His replies...

What you can observe from his response;

1. Sonic considers that Yomiuri article has nothing to do with Sony's console biz.
2. Sonic considers Sony an individual and that I am launching a personal attack on Sony.

Be the judge for yourself.

Deadmeat, your track record on the Next Generation Online boards, various revisions of the Gaming-Age forums and here at Beyond 3D show that often you have been a bit different from this "Knight of Logic and Truth in Shiny Armour" (TM) that you have portrayed yourself to be.

A lot of times you went on great lengths bending truth, selective quoting, etc... just to push a point.

I remember when you arrived on these boards at the beginning: a LOT of people gave you a chance as you were after-all new to this board.

By the looks of things a good number of those people does not feel exactly the same way anymore.

Do you really think it is an Internet conspiracy that you got yourself banned from tons of online forums ?

Did that happen by chance ? All because of Sony fanboys ?

I have a love-hate relationship with your posting: you are not dumb, you do have some sense of logic and intuition, but sometimes I feel like talking to a wall... there is never a situation in which you seem to even consider what I or anyone else is saying if it contraddicts your theories.

I do not mind people criticizing Sony and their approach ( neither Singh nor DCharlie are Sony fans, but BOY do I like talking with them... guess why ? ) and I do like people challenging even a bit aggressively what I think and believe in.

I keep going from "darn, someone ban him already" to "darn, it was not so bad sometimes arguing with him, he was tenacious".

:?

I am confused

Face it: anyone here can be wrong including you ( try to focus more on presenting what you say as just your opinion, not the Holy Gospel, but just the opinion of a normal guy ).

Face it: admitting publically that you are wrong and seeking clarification will not hurt your credibility, but instead will enhance it by several orders of magnitude.

:? :? :?