A problem with PS3's 2 SKUs
- Thread starter Shifty Geezer
- Start date
Acert93 said:
Read my post again, until then I won't respond seriously. The price difference in MANUFACTURING IS MINIMAL. My point does not ignore anything. The cost of the Blu-Ray drive is not a factor in the price difference between the 2 SKU's. Same blu-ray drive is in both. READ MY POST AGAIN. THE PREMIUM SKU IS USED TO OFFSET THE BOM OF THE PS3, WHICH IS NEARLY THE SAME FOR BOTH SKU'S. READ THE DAMN POST I SPENT 15 MINUTES TYPING.
JarrodKing
Newcomer
Has Sony officially said whether Blu-Ray movies will be released in 1080p? Also, is it set in stone in the specs of Blu-Ray or can they release at 720p or 1080i now and later release BR discs at 1080p? Will movies released at 1080p suffer degradation being downrezzed to the HD capabilities that consumers enjoy now? Is a native 720p or 1080i disc going to look better than a 1080p disc that is being downrezzed?
Assuming the component outs aren't crippled by low res limits (it seems they aren't), I don't see any problems with the cheaper version of the PS3 for me UNLESS studios do ever use ICT on the component outs. That seems to be the heart of the matter concerning buying the cheaper PS3 version.
Assuming the component outs aren't crippled by low res limits (it seems they aren't), I don't see any problems with the cheaper version of the PS3 for me UNLESS studios do ever use ICT on the component outs. That seems to be the heart of the matter concerning buying the cheaper PS3 version.
Last edited by a moderator:
JarrodKing said:
Here is the crux of the issue. Will Sony change their policy of ICT because of the lower priced PS3 SKU and the desire for market penetration? And how will this effect the rest of the movie industry, and their stance on HDCP. I am hopeful that HDCP will only be implemented on HD broadcasts, and that makes some, limited sense (ok I'm stretching here, I think HDCP is bullshit no matter where it is implemented). HDCP on Blue-Ray/HD-DVD is one of the most asenine decisions that the MPAA has ever come up with, but this sort of madness is in line with industry trends. Why would they cut off 98% of the only market they have. Doesn't make sense.
Implementation by 2010 makes more sense, however in this case it is the trend of restriction that worries me, not our access to the content (by then, most early adopters will probably find justification to upgrade based on new feature sets). I don't much buy the argument that file-sharing is curtailing sales, because those figures are based on projections of absolute market penetration. Nobody seemed to notice when I was borrowing my friend's diablo II cd and using it on my system 6 years ago, or when I let my friends copy my Dookie album in 7th grade.
Filesharing, in one form or another has existed as long information tech has been around. Making projections of sales, based on each person in the target market buying a unique copy is completely senseless. They may as well subpoena America, because everyone is guilty. While I'm ranting, I'll mention that I recently played FN3 for x360 @ best buy, WITHOUT purchasing a copy. I think that store should go under for this heinous treason, but for my own safety, I will use a fake name when I come under supboena for the information. In fact, I watched a video of Cliffy B. playing Gears of War recently...that's like stealing the game IN THE FUTURE :O! Death penalty anyone?
As a side note, the RIAA subpoenas, the file-sharing allegations by the MPAA, and the industry trend toward restriction of product usability harkens back to 1) Salem withc trials 2)McCarthy trials, though only in allegory, and in somewhat lesser severity (esp. with reagrds to Salem). However, the panic/irrationality that the national/state governments made then resemble the decisions that are being made by the RIAA/MPAA in their respective fields. IMO of course.
archie4oz said:
True, I read up on it a bit just now. Seems that Sony has explicitly denied ICT on its upcoming releases, same as Universal, but it could still mean ICT on other studios releases, such as Warner, as ICT is built into the Blu-Ray standard (same as HD DVD btw)
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=2&article_id=1324
pakotlar said:
1. Stop yelling.
2. Stop insinuating/namecalling.
3. Price (consumer) and BOM cost (company). Mixing 2 concepts into the above quote, discussing both consumer options and BOM, is confusing at best.
I have no doubt Sony is setting up a premium SKU, the problem is, as I mentioned (and you refuse to engage) is the cost on their end is minimal and it castrates a jey PR sales point from last year and which Sony fans have been harping on for a year.
There will still be 2 SKU confusion and demand issue (see: 360). And most importantly there is still the issue of Blu Ray disks pissibly not playing in HD in the future.
So to repeat, you are paying $100 more for the cheapest PS3 SKU compared to the most expensive 360 SKU. Both have HDDs, fast processors, fast GPUs, 512MB, etc. You are paying $100 extra basically for Blu Ray.
And now you are telling me Sony is too cheap to include a $4 chip and a $0.50 port to ensure I can get full use of the "HD Advantage" in the future? Unless Sony makes it clear, before launch, that Blu Ray will always be HD on the PS3 through component you are paying $100 more for... more storage.
I don't discount your theory on the "BMW" model. I actually agree--and that is the problem. I mentioned in the first thread where pricing was announced that it was pretty clear the 60GB model was covering costs and Sony probably would not ship many 20GB to start with. But that still does not alleviate the issue.
Acert93 said:
Acert, read the damn post. You are arguing against nothing. As I outlined in my post:
1) The BOM (do you know what this means?) is nearly the same for the Premium and Regular SKU's
2) Sony is selling the Premium at a much higher cost differential to the consumer than the difference in BOM would suggest, in order to lower the money bleed that follows selling a $499 model.
3) Expect that Sony is banking that they will gain popularity because of the Luxery brand appeal it is setting up.
As for the first thing you said. I will type in caps if I want, and I've never heard of yelling on a message board, unless one has implemented VOIP that I don't know about (are bolded words or italics fair game for you?). 2) I did not call you anything. 3) I did not mix up BOM and consumer cost. You did, which is why you the points you are outlining in your argument are exactly the same ones that I outlined in my original post. It is actually a bit funny how you are restating the same thing I wrote originally, while insinuating that I'm a bit of an idiot for not getting my own point. Lol, guess who looks funny ?
edit: Of course you agree with my BMW example; because it is one of the examples of a current implementation in a different industry of the ideas I set up in the first half of that post. Which, btw, is the same thing you are trying to argue, except you don't verbalize it quite as well.
edit2: In the 2nd post you made against me you still didn't get what I was talking about. I'm looking forward to see if in your 3rd response you understand it. Please, please re-read my original post, taking into account what I wrote here. Maybe it will make more sense. This isn't a personal attack btw, just incase you were gearing to say that.
edit3: I see what you mean about the namecalling. You seem to think that I'm always sarcastic or something. It wasn't intentional, the posters @ b3d are some of the, imo of course, smartest around. That's off-topic to this thread, but thought it was worth a mention. If stuff like this insults you, grow a thicker hide.
Last edited by a moderator:
archie4oz said:
http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/analog-hole.ars/2
Good article on the issue. That is the last page; the first explains the [then] current progress of DRM issues.
Acert93 said:
Nowhere in any of my posts did I adress the price difference between the $500 PS3 sku and the $400 X360 SKU, and how that relates to Blu-Ray. While that is a valid point, it has nothing to do with the posts you are responding to. Yes, both have HDD's, fast processors, fast gpu's, 512MB, etc, and yes PS3 has blu-ray, which is more than enough justification for a $100 price hike (did I EVER contest this?
). Never mind that the CELL BOM is way more than the X360 CPU, that the X360 GPU most likely has higher yields because of the 2 die, low-transistor design (same process), or that the XDR ram carries with it not only a higher price tag, but appropriately high royalties. But yeah, good point
Last edited by a moderator:
koldfuzion
Newcomer
Well if I had any doubts about the $600 version, that seals the deal. Of all the things to take out they take out, HDMI. While apparently you CAN do 1080p with component out, the issue isn't the component out it's the HDCP DRM issues via HDMI, which may result in downconverted signals, and cripple the utility of the BRD. Yes it will *play* but in some cases it may also be pointless because it will downvert to low res output. If they want to do the BMW/Ford version they could have just done a 20GB-60GB difference and ditched the card slots and wireless (frankly I could give a crap about SD/MemStick/CF) and called it a day. The marginal savings in BOM for HDMI is negligible to Sony, and the marketing hit on the tard version is disproportionately large (considering in the short run most consumers won't need the functionality but the absence of "future proofing" on a $500 box is a real hindrance/consumer annoyance once they figure out how they are getting screwed).
I really don't get how they can delay PS3 largely due to issues with HDMI, and then ditch it in the tard version making the ability to use True HD BD content questionable for mass-consumers, undermining the trojan horse strategy. DUMB. For me this is not a percieved value issue, there more than $100 value differential here, in my view the tard version is crippled--I have every intention of using BRD a) to play 1080p movie content, and I've deliberately delayed an HDTV purchase until 1080p comes out at reasonable price points b) to play HD audio (and have not bothered picking up an SACD player etc. for that reason).
All of that value destruction is attributable to the HDMI. I attribute some but not much value to the extra 40gigs of space, which is nice, but frankly I would have preferred to buy the 20GB tard version with HDMI and upgrade the HDD later when I can put in a 250gb or 500gb drive that could do HD DVR (and then I could ditch my DVR subscription with Time Warner, thank you very much--a $120/year value). Ditching the wi-fi is fine too, I prefer a wired connection anyway.
What sucks about what they did with HDMI, is the tard version is permanently and irretrievably crippled. Maybe not in a way that most consumers would notice, but in 2 years when Joe Blow goes to Best Buy and they say "hey can I hook up my PS3 to my new HDTV" and the guy says "well, sorta". That just sucks. Consumers don't want to here "well sorta" they just want their shit to JUST WORK. Ask APPLE!
Winning the BRD war is far more important in the long run than the marginal revenue of the $100 price differential over the first 6 million units. (Yes it's 6 billion bucks, but it's not all going to Sony).
Anyway I don't care THAT much, I'm not buying the tard version after all (even if they DID include HDMI in tard, I'd probably still pay the 600, if only because, yes I admit, I'm a sucker for the BMW/Ford factor discussed above, and will happily pay 100 bucks for the marginal features I may only theoretically need like a CF slot), but I just get miffed when I see a company I like shoot itself in the foot. For no good reason. I know KK is under a lot of pressure to save a few bucks, but HDMI was the wrong place to do it. It puts a cloud over the whole BRD strategy and makes the BRD decision that much more confusing. The beauty of HDMI is that it's so damn simple!
In other news, Heavenly Sword rules. I feel better now.
High resolution playback over component will work in the vast majority of cases until movie studios switch on the ICT token, which they are not likely to do as long as legacy HDTV is predoinantly component-only. Studios know they would instantly alienate the majority of their customers.
ICT downrezzing is a "trojan horse" they won't be sprung until component HDTV becomes a smaller percentage of the market.
Besides, you don't know if the "tard" version has the ability to have a HDMI dongle or not. They may just provide an AV multiport which in the future can take an external dongle, as long as they provide digital signals to the rear port.
ICT downrezzing is a "trojan horse" they won't be sprung until component HDTV becomes a smaller percentage of the market.
Besides, you don't know if the "tard" version has the ability to have a HDMI dongle or not. They may just provide an AV multiport which in the future can take an external dongle, as long as they provide digital signals to the rear port.
koldfuzion
Newcomer
Thanks Demo. Still that seems sneaky, with HDMI no worries, right? My point is HDMI is the only thing that provides near certainty that you will get the HD content you paid for every time. I take your point though that the concern is probably overblown. My point is simply that from a marketing/perception standpoint, HDMI is superior since there are no real clouds around it. (Even if the reality is that 99.9 percent of the time component is just fine for most people).
Black Dragon37
Newcomer
SKU-wise, Sony bumped us a lot worse than Microsoft.
Similar threads
