BR/HD-DVD Thread

[PC-Engine]

Well, don't you think that the fact that IBM, Toshiba, Nvidia and god knows who else is working on PS3 now, is proof that your "pride" argument is a bit flawed? Sony obviously has NO problem letting people do jobs for them, i don't see how it should be different over a simple drive.

Well not really, there's a difference. SONY designed the GPU in PS2. Toshiba designed the CPU. Going with IBM for the CPU isn't losing pride since Toshiba designed the CPU in PS2 not SONY. Going with Nvidia after the fact their inhouse design couldn't hang is losing pride because they thought they could pull it off, but had to scrap it in the end.

Half of Hollywood supports HDDVD... The other half supports BDROM...

Well the point is to show SONY's stubborness that often puts their proprietary products in a disadvantageous position. At least they're slowing acknoledging this as evidenced with the adoption of MP3. Had they not extended the olive branch, PS3 would be in deep sh*t with regards to HD DVD movie compatibility.

1) I think you read too much into a business decision. They ran 3 possible solutions and picked the one that suited them best (for all we know). 2) Choosing nVidia shows Sony aren't too proud to change their mind or use non-proprietary formats. Just as they changed their mind with .mp3 playback on PSP. Sony seems to be making more sensible decisions these days.

Read my response to lb above as it addresses the thing you bring up.

Please link to the article that says half of Hollywood won't be releasing to BluRay. Agreeing to publish to one format doesn't instantly mean NOT publishing to another. Also, BluRay's announcement for PS3 came long before any Hollywood announcements of studios publishing to HD-DVD, even if this publishing were HD-DVD exclusive

You're missing the point. They took a BIG risk by putting Blu-ray into PS3 since they were fully aware that WB were unlikely to release movies on BR and WB holds a sizeable chunk of the movie franchises. It doesn't matter that the announcement of BR for PS3 was before any studios signed on to make HD DVD movies. They were arrogant, which put them at a disadvantage. I highly doubt they had a hybrid drive as a backup plan for PS3 which is why I seem them as stubborn. Of course like you said they're slowly changing which is good.

 

[rabidrabbit]

You really have the skill to make everything Sony does sound as they're doing it because of failure.
The word "backpedalling" seems to be one of your most used when Sony's conserned.
x 100000000

Backpedal? How could they've packpedalled to nVidia if their original plan was to use in-house tech. Maybe they were originally prepared to use out-of-house help. Maybe they did have a parallel plan to use Cell on GPU but found the nVidia GPU solution better for various reasons.

I don't see the PS2 Graphics Synthesizer as a failure as you do. It has stood up very well up to today. Not bad for 1997 tech!

True, Sony might have realised they don't have the resources to design a GPU to match the Cell power. The Cell must have taken much of their workforce, and if they're going to release 2006 some help from nVidia must have been welcome.

Sony has in fact not prided that much on in-house tech in PlayStations or other products as you claim.
PSOne had much of the tech from ARM, Toshiba...
PS2 had tech from Toshiba, Rambus, ARM...
PS3 will have tech from STI (Sony Toshiba IBM), Rambus, nVidia...

Really, they're not different from any other company. They've always relied on external help in some areas.

Besides, the nVidia solution will have input from Sony engineers, how much of a collaborative design it'll be, we'll see soon.
It'll not be an off-the-shelf nVidia solution, I think that's almost certain.

You see that as backpedalling, some see it as going forward.

So. PC-E, I really wish you'd stop the use of "backpedalling" everytime you report of changes in Sony's plans. That just makes you sound unnecessarily falming trolly.

 

[London Geezer]

Well not really, there's a difference. SONY designed the GPU in PS2. Toshiba designed the CPU. Going with IBM for the CPU isn't losing pride since Toshiba designed the CPU in PS2 not SONY. Going with Nvidia after the fact their inhouse design couldn't hang is losing pride because they thought they could pull it off, but had to scrap it in the end.

That's one way to see things, of course. We all know that we could interpret thing in different ways though.

Well the point is to show SONY's stubborness that often puts their proprietary products in a disadvantageous position. At least they're slowing acknoledging this as evidenced with the adoption of MP3. Had they not extended the olive branch, PS3 would be in deep sh*t with regards to HD DVD movie compatibility.

You're criticising Sony for "extending the olive branch"? I thought it was better for everyone to have just one format, but well i guess some people will always turn the story around to make some companies look in a bad light.
I'm sure that if Toshiba were the ones "extending their branch", you'd talk about them as if they were the saviours of a next-gen format war, trying to cooperate with Evil Sony.
Also, do we know for sure who "extended the branch"? I mean, from what we know, "they had meetings". Unless i missed the part where one contacted the other first.

 

[PC-Engine]

Sony has in fact not prided that much on in-house tech in PlayStations or other products as you claim.
PSOne had much of the tech from ARM, Toshiba...
PS2 had tech from Toshiba, Rambus, ARM...
PS3 will have tech from STI (Sony Toshiba IBM), Rambus, nVidia...

Using PS1 as an example is pretty flawed because that was their first venture into console gaming. They had ZERO experience so of course they had to partner with somebody. BTW your info is wrong in a few places and it doesn't support your argument either. I've already explained the Toshiba, IBM, factors in my above post so you might want to take a look at it. Also bringing RAM manufacturers into your argument makes no sense whatsoever...

You're criticising Sony for "extending the olive branch"? I thought it was better for everyone to have just one format, but well i guess some people will always turn the story around to make some companies look in a bad light.

Them extending the olive branch is good for them and us consumers. All I was pointing out was the fact that's what they NEED to do just like they NEEDED to adopt MP3 if they want the product to be successful. They're slowing changing which is good.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Well not really, there's a difference. SONY designed the GPU in PS2. Toshiba designed the CPU. Going with IBM for the CPU isn't losing pride since Toshiba designed the CPU in PS2 not SONY. Going with Nvidia after the fact their inhouse design couldn't hang is losing pride because they thought they could pull it off, but had to scrap it in the end.

That just does not make any sense You're just making these up as you go to try to defend your views.

You're just too much PC-Engine

 

[PC-Engine]

Well not really, there's a difference. SONY designed the GPU in PS2. Toshiba designed the CPU. Going with IBM for the CPU isn't losing pride since Toshiba designed the CPU in PS2 not SONY. Going with Nvidia after the fact their inhouse design couldn't hang is losing pride because they thought they could pull it off, but had to scrap it in the end.

That just does not make any sense You're just making these up as you go to try to defend your views.

You're just too much PC-Engine

Correction, it doesn't make sense to you since you don't get it. SONY designed the GPU in PS2, but they had to resort to Nvidia for the GPU in PS3. SONY didn't design the EE in PS2 so going with IBM's CELL for the CPU makes no difference.


What doesn't make any sense is bringing in RAM manufacturers.

 

[London Geezer]

Correction, it doesn't make sense to you since you don't get it. SONY designed the GPU in PS2, but they had to resort to Nvidia for the GPU in PS3. SONY didn't design the EE in PS2 so going with IBM for CELL makes no difference.

That's just flawed logic. But you're never gonna listen to everyone else on this forum so it doesn't matter PC. You're right, we're all wrong. Good luck with your new job at Nintendo.

Oh and it's "They're slowly changing", not "They're slowing changing". Shame you probably will never change, slowly or not.

 

[rabidrabbit]

You're now singling out one rather irrelevant argument.
Another well known PC-Engine tactic

Why is it so important that Sony would go symmetrical with PSOne, PS2 and PS3.
Is there some unwritten rule that if you previously made a component in-house, you absolutely must do so again if you don't want to loose credibility.

That's just plain silly and I do fail to see the sane reasoning behind that kind of thinking.

But I know, you say it's just me, I don't understand because I'm dumb

 

[PC-Engine]

Wait you first say this:

That's one way to see things, of course. We all know that we could interpret thing in different ways though.

Then you turn around and say this?

That's just flawed logic. But you're never gonna listen to everyone else on this forum so it doesn't matter PC. You're right, we're all wrong. Good luck with your new job at Nintendo.

Make up your damn mind will you?

Instead of chest thumping why don't you explain WHY it's flawed? I've already explained my POV. You keep saying it doesn't make sense, it's flawed, yadda yadda but you don't back it up to evidence.

Let me guess, your next typical lb response will be..."Oh forget it, I give up". Well if you don't have evidence to support your argument then yeah you have no other choice but to give up since you can't admit that I DO have a point.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Half of Hollywood supports HDDVD... The other half supports BDROM...

Please link to the article that says half of Hollywood won't be releasing to BluRay.

You're missing the point. They took a BIG risk by putting Blu-ray into PS3 since they were fully aware that WB were unlikely to release movies on BR

Please link to the announcement that shows WB were never and are never going to release to BluRay. If as you say, Sony knew that WB weren't going to release to BluRay, yet they persisted in using BluRay anyway to try and force the format, this announcement certainly supports your POV.

However, I don't think such an annuncement was ever made. Best I could find with a quick Google was this...

Toshiba's announcement puts Paramount Pictures, Universal PIctures, New Line Cinema and Warner Brothers in support of HD-DVD. This doesn't preclude the studios from subsequently supporting Blu-ray as well. Unsurprisingly, Sony Pictures isn't among these, as it will be an exclusive backer for Blu-ray.

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/buyer/news/news/66514

 

[London Geezer]

Instead of chest thumping why don't you explain WHY it's flawed? I've already explained my POV. You keep saying it doesn't make sense, it's flawed, yadda yadda but you don't back it up to evidence.

Come on, do u think i'm stupid? whatever reason i (or anyone else) give to you to show you how it's flawed, you're just going to reply with more nonsense so let's just leave it. Rabid already tried to explain why it's flawed.

Let me guess, your next typical lb response will be..."Oh forget it, I give up". Well if you don't have evidence to support your argument then yeah you have no other choice but to give up since you can't admit that I DO have a point.

Heh, you see, the thing is that if i don't do that, every discussion we have would be... 43 pages long, full of nonsense. So i thank God for being more sensible than you are. If that to you means "OMG I PWNED LB!!1!" then fine.
It's amazing you have so much time in your hands there at Nintendo.

 

[PC-Engine]

You're now singling out one rather irrelevant argument.
Another well known PC-Engine tactic

Why is it so important that Sony would go symmetrical with PSOne, PS2 and PS3.
Is there some unwritten rule that if you previously made a component in-house, you absolutely must do so again if you don't want to loose credibility.

That's just plain silly and I do fail to see the sane reasoning behind that kind of thinking.

But I know, you say it's just me, I don't understand because I'm dumb

Well if you go look back at the arguments between you and me, the evidence clearly shows that more often than not, you just couldn't grasp the concepts. It's too abstract for your level of comprehension.

Please link to the announcement that shows WB were never and are never going to release to BluRay.

I never said there was an announcement official or not. It's a forgone conclusion that WB are unlikely to release on BR. There are reason that hint at this.

 

[Neeyik]

Threads going nowhere fast thanks to the usual bouts of bickering about manufacturers; original topic has been discussed enough.