Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox

[RudeCurve]

Well, I want a gaming box and want MS spend all their money for hardcore AAA games instead of multimedia stuff I'll never use because I've a smartphone. Like all my gaming friends..

I have a smartphone too but my smartphone doesn't control my media box which is connected to my TV. My smartphone is good at what it does but it ends there.

 

[wco81]

Tivo's died off because they don't do enough. I used to be a Tivo owner like many others but my DirecTV box caught up years ago and replaced it easily, Tivo doesn't offer me anything special anymore so why would I pay for it? It's the same logic I apply to game consoles, they offer me nothing anymore that I can't get better elsewhere so I dropped them. The xb1 had the new hook of cloud and digital family sharing that for games almost won me and others back, but once those were killed then poof just like a Tivo box a game console offers us nothing that we can't get elsewhere for games so why would we pay for it? The new stuff they are offering from their ui, hdmi in, kinect, fitness, tv, skype, integration, etc are the hook to get people like us back, and to get new audiences in that normally wouldn't touch a console with a ten foot pole. Whether or not they can pull it off remains to be seen but it's definitely the right direction. It's definitely one of those things that really needs word of mouth to succeed because it's difficult to explain what it does, you just have to see it in action yourself to understand it. Once that gets going it will be interesting to see what people think of it.

I spent $1200 on the new tivo Roamio because I'll be saving $50-60 a month for two years over what I was paying for DirecTV and Internet. I could have gotten DirecTV's new Genie set up but the Tivo is fast and has in and out of home streaming to my iPad and iPhone.

Plus I'll be able to recover part of my investment in a couple of years if I want to sell it.

For TV, I like recording capacity with 6 tuners, streaming, even playing Internet content on my TV.

My remotes are fine and the tivo guide is excellent. So is the iPad app. I can search for programs, even speak the search string if I want, though partial string searches work fine so don't need to input much.

But like I said before, most people won't pay big upfront price for a third party set top box for watching TV.

I'd really be surprised if a lot of people got an X1 primarily for TV control.

 

[Billy Idol]

Yeah for sure, the main point here being is it's not cut and dry. Right now I have others speaking on my behalf all over the internet claiming "gamers" don't want what the xb1 is doing. For you that may be true, for me it's clearly not, which is why the ps4 is roughly as interesting to me as buying a Rio 500 mp3 player. But to others it's a no brainer. We'll have to wait and see how things shake out.

One interesting tidbit I learned from this is how apparently complex tv is in other countries. I always thought it was convoluted here in the USA with the myriad of tv providers, how locals are handled and all that. But I assumed what can you do on such a large land mass. From the sound of it though it's even more complicated in Europe even in relatively tiny countries. Sounds like that will be an interesting problem for them to solve. Still though that the xb1 can integrate Hulu and other internet content providers into one guide should help things.

Yeah, that is a good point. TV is quite different, and every country has its own regulations as well in the worst case...e.g. There is no PSN video service in Austria due to the local TV regulations/rights.

But I guess it is also important to point out that X1 is a mighty fine gaming device with lots of potentially outstanding exclusives on the horizon!

 

[liolio]

Well, I want a gaming box and want MS spend all their money for hardcore AAA games instead of multimedia stuff I'll never use because I've a smartphone. Like all my gaming friends.

I'll guess we have to wait and see how everything turns out for MS, only numbers will give us a hind. Especially how the compare for different countries.

We all wants different things, for example I want "more" than a console but not in the way either Sony or MSFT think of it.
My view is that in this connected world, from phones to TV, consoles and desktops alike are a bit antiquated.
What I want is both the console and the desktop to be replace by some sort of home server, that can stream specific content to any connected devices in the house, so phones, tablets, netbook and TV. Something like Chromecast is a step in the good direction as it allows any of the aforementioned devices (including the home server) to send content to the TV.
I want the home server to handle the task the others devices can't handle, "heavy applications" in out case games and storage providing NAS functionality (the possibly to wire multiple HDD would be great).

Pretty much what I describe is a PC, though like a lot of people (most it seems looking at sales), bulky PC towers are a thing of the past, I would also assert that lots of people are a bit done with Windows which they often use every day at work one way or another.

So for me XO is not a really forward looking product (I've to say the PS4 even less), in the US they have a great offering but I wonder about how it will do even there for the same reasons others are alluding too. Pretty much MSFT try to interlock between the user and a connected device (the TV) another connected device.
Now Kinect does nice things it seems but it is pretty intrusive and costly when you think that the main win when browsing content is voice recognition (I mean my phone have a microphone, most tablets too, my laptop too, etc. aka that functionality could be useful every cone in a while for a lot of others devices including ones MSFT is also powering (/providing the OS for).

Anyway I'm interested in how that will play, MSFT is making a step toward the future (or what they think it is), Sony is more conservative, let see how that plays.

 

[blakjedi]

We all wants different things, for example I want "more" than a console but not in the way either Sony or MSFT think of it.
My view is that in this connected world, from phones to TV, consoles and desktops alike are a bit antiquated.
What I want is both the console and the desktop to be replace by some sort of home server, that can stream specific content to any connected devices in the house, so phones, tablets, netbook and TV. Something like Chromecast is a step in the good direction as it allows any of the aforementioned devices (including the home server) to send content to the TV.
I want the home server to handle the task the others devices can't handle, "heavy applications" in out case games and storage providing NAS functionality (the possibly to wire multiple HDD would be great).

Pretty much what I describe is a PC, though like a lot of people (most it seems looking at sales), bulky PC towers are a thing of the past, I would also assert that lots of people are a bit done with Windows which they often use every day at work one way or another.

So for me XO is not a really forward looking product (I've to say the PS4 even less), in the US they have a great offering but I wonder about how it will do even there for the same reasons others are alluding too. Pretty much MSFT try to interlock between the user and a connected device (the TV) another connected device.
Now Kinect does nice things it seems but it is pretty intrusive and costly when you think that the main win when browsing content is voice recognition (I mean my phone have a microphone, most tablets too, my laptop too, etc. aka that functionality could be useful every cone in a while for a lot of others devices including ones MSFT is also powering (/providing the OS for).

Anyway I'm interested in how that will play, MSFT is making a step toward the future (or what they think it is), Sony is more conservative, let see how that plays.

I think MS is the closest to providing your vision. We dont know everything the Xbox team has in store and im sure the XO and its services will evolve. WHy I think XO is closer than PS4 is because you essentially want enterprise capabilities (servers, attached storage and easy management) on an interface that is easy to control and not like the old windows...

MS has all of those capabilities right now in house... from server product knowledge, virtualized sessions, cloud storage, miracast capability etc all inhouse as significant expertise.

I too wish the XO was also a home server server that can simultaneously serve up gaming and or video and tv to remote in house displays. Its a matter of software and theres no reason if they deem those capabilities as something the public wants they cannot do it through the "new" windows.

To your point about the public not wanting to use "windows" , windows 8 and xbox one interface is as much a "touch windows" as ios is a "touch osx"... its simply a matter of branding.

 

[tuna]

Yeah, that is a good point. TV is quite different, and every country has its own regulations as well in the worst case...e.g. There is no PSN video service in Austria due to the local TV regulations/rights.

There is also language issues.

 

[Billy Idol]

We all wants different things, for example I want "more" than a console but not in the way either Sony or MSFT think of it.
My view is that in this connected world, from phones to TV, consoles and desktops alike are a bit antiquated.
What I want is both the console and the desktop to be replace by some sort of home server, that can stream specific content to any connected devices in the house, so phones, tablets, netbook and TV. Something like Chromecast is a step in the good direction as it allows any of the aforementioned devices (including the home server) to send content to the TV.
I want the home server to handle the task the others devices can't handle, "heavy applications" in out case games and storage providing NAS functionality (the possibly to wire multiple HDD would be great).

Pretty much what I describe is a PC, though like a lot of people (most it seems looking at sales), bulky PC towers are a thing of the past, I would also assert that lots of people are a bit done with Windows which they often use every day at work one way or another.

So for me XO is not a really forward looking product (I've to say the PS4 even less), in the US they have a great offering but I wonder about how it will do even there for the same reasons others are alluding too. Pretty much MSFT try to interlock between the user and a connected device (the TV) another connected device.
Now Kinect does nice things it seems but it is pretty intrusive and costly when you think that the main win when browsing content is voice recognition (I mean my phone have a microphone, most tablets too, my laptop too, etc. aka that functionality could be useful every cone in a while for a lot of others devices including ones MSFT is also powering (/providing the OS for).

Anyway I'm interested in how that will play, MSFT is making a step toward the future (or what they think it is), Sony is more conservative, let see how that plays.

Hey, that is right and I pretty much like the same what you list here. Personally, I was interested in the Ubuntu Phone, which unfortunately did not raised enough funds to get kickstarted...but I am dreaming a bit for such a solution, maybe it gets another chance.

With respect to gaming...it is a bit different for me. Gaming is my main hobby and I like the pure focus. E.g. My PC is solely for gaming. I don't use it for anything else. It is basically a console for me. So, I have these expectation for my 'gaming' consol as well.

I really have hard times thinking about a all in one solution that would fit all my needs including gaming, except maybe if something like Gaikai works in future were you can stream stuff from the cloud. But even then...I won't get a device were I can play exclusive Sony software and MS software at the same time...so I would need again at least two devices, two 'all-in-one' devices

 

[blakjedi]

i just found out about this....http://www.silicondust.com/

I wonder if its just software... if it is....

 

[Deleted member 7537]

http://www.gametrailers.com/full-episodes/087n8z/bonus-round-sony-s-newest-threat

Bonus Round on the future of the gaming market.

 

[joker454]

http://www.gametrailers.com/full-episodes/087n8z/bonus-round-sony-s-newest-threat

Bonus Round on the future of the gaming market.

What Jason says at the 6:55 mark is pretty much what I've been getting at for a while now. In a nutshell, if a device you already own can play games that are good enough, will people continue to spring for a game console? That's what people need to come to grips with I believe, and why xb1's diversification into every possible direction is oh so important for long term survival.

 

[Sonic]

At this point in time I'm still getting both. Pretty excited for the TV features that are coming with Xbox One and hope to see Sony copy and try to innovate in the space as well. Neither box is becoming irrelevant to me because they each have content that I find compelling enough worth to purchase. My assumption is that through the coming years, let's say the next 4 or 5, they will continue to offer compelling content that is worthy of my dollars. PC's still don't have good games of certain genres that consoles have, and the opposite is also true. So my next 3 platforms will be PC, PS4, Xbox One. I'm just glad that we finally have a new generation of hardware to play with so that means PC games can look truly next gen as well! Yay.

I'm glad MS is getting good press, even with it being so late in the game. If the initial rush of people out to buy the machine end up using the TV features like it's second nature then I think the machine has an entirely new leg to stand upon. When MS entered the race we all knew the reason behind it was to get control of your living room, and the Xbox One is finally the machine that gets them there. Sales will ultimately be the tell all. To the gamers outside of NA, I do hope MS is able to cater to all your needs and not consider your markets secondary.

My initial complaint was also due to MS not allowing me to own content I purchase. With that fixed they got me back.

 

[itch]

i just found out about this....http://www.silicondust.com/

I wonder if its just software... if it is....

What do you mean if it is just software? I have an HDHomeRun (not Prime), it is a hardware TV tuner. It tunes digital TV from cable broadcasts or over the air from an antenna and delivers the video over your network. The Prime adds support for cable cards. Not sure what you are trying to imply here.

 

[temesgen]

What Jason says at the 6:55 mark is pretty much what I've been getting at for a while now. In a nutshell, if a device you already own can play games that are good enough, will people continue to spring for a game console? That's what people need to come to grips with I believe, and why xb1's diversification into every possible direction is oh so important for long term survival.

The ability to run apps is equal on both platforms, the XB1 has an HDMI input which allows it to piggy back off your cable/satellite box but by no means is it going to replace it. Out of the box XB1 has motion controls but both will have VR even if the PS4 implementation is weaker. Having said that I'm not seeing what is possible on the XB1 can't be replicated on PS4, if you want to talk about IPTV both platforms have services and are looking to sign up networks to increase the variety of what is available on their box. Both have browsers, both run apps, same amount of memory and processing power is close enough that whatever you release on one you could do on the other.

At E3 Sony talked about TV and we've seen articles in major business publications talking about Sony's attempts to break into IPTV so again I think some of this diversification talk is overstated. Could XB1 turn out to be the more family friendly console? Perhaps but at this point it's early days and even Nintendo who boldly started this current gen with motion controls took a more traditional approach this time.

I'd love to see MS use the power of Kinect to launch a early reading and math program for kids. Let them earn credit towards minutes of core gaming by reading and doing math exercises and even use the power of the camera to make sure they are getting enough physical activity by having them do jumping jacks or sit ups after 20 minutes or so. Parents could log on and check progress and even compare where their kid is relative to other kids their age. That sort of comprehensive approach would truly be impressive but we don't see it. Imagine what Rare, Pixar, Disney and MS could do if they decided they wanted to use the power of XB1 to impact learning in America.

 

[joker454]

The ability to run apps is equal on both platforms,

Not really. Think of it from a developer perspective like the video above suggests, Microsoft can offer a write once run anywhere situation, with anywhere being every device they make be it desktop pc, tablet, laptop, phone, console, etc. They aren't quite there yet but getting closer everyday. This is a developer situation of great value and unique to them, Sony can't offer that.

the XB1 has an HDMI input which allows it to piggy back off your cable/satellite box but by no means is it going to replace it.

Likewise with hdmi in, Sony can't replicate that out of the box and personally I think the importance of it is being downplayed by forums more concerned with 900p. They are missing the elephant in the room in my opinion.

Out of the box XB1 has motion controls but both will have VR even if the PS4 implementation is weaker. Having said that I'm not seeing what is possible on the XB1 can't be replicated on PS4,

I don't agree here either. They don't have any Kinect equivalent both from a hardware standpoint and software standpoint. They are possibly years behind on the motion control front in software r&d, api's, 3rd party support, functionality, etc and showing little interest in catching up. They didn't even include their motion controller standard. It's clearly low priority to them, they consider it an "add-on" and not a key feature that is responsible for core functionality.

if you want to talk about IPTV both platforms have services and are looking to sign up networks to increase the variety of what is available on their box. Both have browsers, both run apps, same amount of memory and processing power is close enough that whatever you release on one you could do on the other.

Again I don't agree. You are heavily dependent on what's underneath, the core os api's and functionality. For example we've seen how xb1 integrates all iptv/video services into one guide for simplicity and convenience, all backed with voice control out of the box. Nothing of the sort has been shown on the other platform. It's a question of priorities, to Microsoft this aspect of the new machine is considered core functionality and supported from the ground up at all levels of os and api. Yeah it's all software and in theory what is implemented on one machine can be implemented on the other. Then again without planning and priorities that isn't always the case. Look at cross game chat on ps3 for example.

At E3 Sony talked about TV and we've seen articles in major business publications talking about Sony's attempts to break into IPTV so again I think some of this diversification talk is overstated.

The problem is Sony talks about lots of stuff, and unfortunately often that's all that comes of it, talk. In my opinion they aren't forward thinking enough and are doing the same thing again this gen, not looking 5 years ahead which will leave them in catch up mode on the software end, and stuck in a bad position on the hardware end from their decision to leave motion/voice control optional and lacking hdmi in. Just my humble opinion of course.

 

[temesgen]

Not really. Think of it from a developer perspective like the video above suggests, Microsoft can offer a write once run anywhere situation, with anywhere being every device they make be it desktop pc, tablet, laptop, phone, console, etc. They aren't quite there yet but getting closer everyday. This is a developer situation of great value and unique to them, Sony can't offer that.

I theory that makes sense but what apps from the PC/smart phone are actually relevant to the console? Besides how hard will it be for a developer to port an app from XB1 to PS4 anyway?

Likewise with hdmi in, Sony can't replicate that out of the box and personally I think the importance of it is being downplayed by forums more concerned with 900p. They are missing the elephant in the room in my opinion.

Again neither device can function in a vacuum, you need a cable box either way so until Sony or MS announces an IPTV deal that isn't going to change and even if we do get an IPTV deal there is still the issue of storing the content locally.

I don't agree here either. They don't have any Kinect equivalent both from a hardware standpoint and software standpoint. They are possibly years behind on the motion control front in software r&d, api's, 3rd party support, functionality, etc and showing little interest in catching up. They didn't even include their motion controller standard. It's clearly low priority to them, they consider it an "add-on" and not a key feature that is responsible for core functionality.

This is speculation on your part as much as on mine, the latest rumors are Sony took their camera out of the PS4 bundle to get the cost down. The OS in PS4 includes demos which require a camera afterall, how and why that could happen without APIs and tools is beyond me....

Unless you've seen their API and SDK how do you know what is present there or how mature the tools are? Besides Sony has been working at motion controls for a long time, the VR stuff I tend to agree with you but the camera tech in PS4 should be very evolved at this point. And even WRT the VR how far along can MS be if they had to pull so many countries out at launch? And while we're on that point how much of a slow down will VR integration cause moving forward for MS?

Again I don't agree. You are heavily dependent on what's underneath, the core os api's and functionality. For example we've seen how xb1 integrates all iptv/video services into one guide for simplicity and convenience, all backed with voice control out of the box. Nothing of the sort has been shown on the other platform. It's a question of priorities, to Microsoft this aspect of the new machine is considered core functionality and supported from the ground up at all levels of os and api. Yeah it's all software and in theory what is implemented on one machine can be implemented on the other. Then again without planning and priorities that isn't always the case. Look at cross game chat on ps3 for example.

Sony hasn't shown much of their UI yet, personally I think its a bit strange that one of the members of DLNA is launching a new platform for the living room that isn't DLNA compliant out of the box but seeing what they did with PS3 and VITA I'm confident it comes to down to resource allocation. I would shocked if we don't see a DLNA update to the OS sometime in the next year or so along with some additional IPTV services. HBO GO will likely launch on XB1 and be on PS4 and WiiU late next year for example.

The problem is Sony talks about lots of stuff, and unfortunately often that's all that comes of it, talk. In my opinion they aren't forward thinking enough and are doing the same thing again this gen, not looking 5 years ahead which will leave them in catch up mode on the software end, and stuck in a bad position on the hardware end from their decision to leave motion/voice control optional and lacking hdmi in. Just my humble opinion of course.

I agree that MS is better at developing ecosystems and their vision is likely to more thought out than Sony atleast that was the case for this current gen but I think Sony is changing as a company. Their goal right now is to focus on games and reach a critical mass and as that evolves and PS+ subscriptions increase we'll see resources start to focus on peripheral services and features which meet the needs of consumers that lie outside of gaming.

 

[Phil]

Ironically their 180 is what cost them me and my "core gamer" buddies, as we have all switched to pc for games, with things like skype, tv, etc being the only chance they have of getting us back. Go figure how the same situation can be viewed so differently by various people. So who is right?

I think we should apply a bit of common-sense here. You may be one of the few who did a 180° - but then again, judging from your past posts on the subject, you don't exactly strike as the most loyal Xbox consumer who has invested thousands of dollars into their platform.

The people that were raging about Microsofts decisions were their own Xbox customers - and when their existing fanbase is not happy and thinking of either jumping ship or leaving to the PC or the competing platform all together, I think there is a point to be made that maybe, something went wrong. Or do you think the 'new audience' Microsoft is now suddenly targeting will make up for it on the grounds of exciting new TV features?

I wonder how many Joker454s there are outthere and how they stack up against the majority of current Xbox consumers who bought a Xbox because of its dedicated gaming abilty.

Disclaimer: I'm not saying Microsoft shouldn't expand, but they should have focused first and foremost on their market. Their 180° might have cost you as a customer, but they certainly regained some traction with their existing market. If they hadn't done that, IMO they would have been doomed, even if Kinect and their TV features are the next coming. It's be a bit if Sony when demonstrating the PS3 would have focused on bluray, DLNA and movies and then hearing from the one or two AVSforum members how cool that is, while pretty much every existing PS2 owner outthere would be wondering what happened to their gaming device. Microsoft wasn't exactly smart in how they presented their box and them learning from their mistake and perhaps correcting their PR a bit means that *now* some of the highly critics are now "getting it".

 

[-tkf-]

Likewise with hdmi in, Sony can't replicate that out of the box and personally I think the importance of it is being downplayed by forums more concerned with 900p. They are missing the elephant in the room in my opinion..

HDMI IN is only useful if you have a HDMI out signal with whatever it is you want to overlay with a XB1 interface. I am sure that there will be people that will buy whatever is needed so that they can get their TV into the XB1.But you do understand that it's not a world standard to have a TV signal as a HDMI out signal?

And lets play with the idea that it is going to take over the living room. So you turn on you XB1 when you want to watch TV, but of course. And the WII, PS4, WDTV is still connected to my TV, the XB1 might be able to switch to them but the interface is gone when Skype is calling and so is the sound.

It just seems so old fashioned and stale that they really think everything starts and stops with a ordinary tv today. And on top of that they have a one way of how it's going to work, ignoring millions of potential customers.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

HDMI IN is only useful if you have a HDMI out signal with whatever it is you want to overlay with a XB1 interface.

I don't understand your point. Whatever your HDMI signal has, it's what you want to see on your TV, and XB1 overlays onto that.

And lets play with the idea that it is going to take over the living room. So you turn on you XB1 when you want to watch TV, but of course. And the WII, PS4, WDTV is still connected to my TV, the XB1 might be able to switch to them but the interface is gone when Skype is calling and so is the sound.

Ideally you don't have those other devices. You just have XB1. And if you have got a PS4 as well, MS hope you'll buy the XB1 version of games because they let you indulge in the TV++ experience and you'd rather have that convenience and functionality over the better resolution of the PS4 game.

Spoiler

If you've got a Wii, that's in the cupboard gathering dust so is a non-issue

 

[mrcorbo]

I don't understand your point. Whatever your HDMI signal has, it's what you want to see on your TV, and XB1 overlays onto that.

I assume he's talking about cases where the TV itself receives the content (DVB, etc.) and therefore there is no separate device upstream of the TV generating an HDMI feed for the XBOne to intercept before it gets to the TV. This and the inability to insert the XBOne past the point of an A/V receiver in a signal chain (because how then would you get XBOne audio?) are the two main flaws I see with the implementation.

 

[Blazkowicz]

So, is XB1 a receiver? No, you should use it with the output of a receiver. So It's a receiver receiver.
But all along we assumed the TV was "dumb", and that's an outdated way of seeing things, TVs are getting smart so they can overlay and squish stuff, too. I.e. you will plug your receiver receiver into a receiver receiver receiver.