upnorthsox
Veteran
Yep, had I had the foresight of what was coming all my AV components would've been Bluetooth capable and now everything would be touch controlled by my tablet. Dammit!!
Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
Yep, had I had the foresight of what was coming all my AV components would've been Bluetooth capable and now everything would be touch controlled by my tablet. Dammit!!
I can see the need to offer more than just a console, to offer a better UX of all the features that consoles are expected to provide, especially the Netflix and other popular media features.
But really, a media hub to put between your set top and TV is probably not it -- actually, you're going to have to put it between the set top and the receiver, if you want surround sound decoded and amplified to the surround sound speakers.
Especially if the BOM costs for Kinect and reserving the RAM and CPU for these features compromises the key feature of consoles, which is playing games. I said "if," that is having less RAM, slower RAM and less powerful GPU makes the games suffer in comparison to those on the rival console.
But really, a media hub to put between your set top and TV is probably not it -- actually, you're going to have to put it between the set top and the receiver, if you want surround sound decoded and amplified to the surround sound speakers.
Especially if the BOM costs for Kinect and reserving the RAM and CPU for these features compromises the key feature of consoles, which is playing games. I said "if," that is having less RAM, slower RAM and less powerful GPU makes the games suffer in comparison to those on the rival console.
This I'm not entirely sold on, I work remotely, travel a lot and use video chat a great deal, and I find it awkward on a tablet, or any handset for that matter. You have to hold the device such that the camera gets a decent picture.
I find laptops or conference room cameras far superior for this particular experience and I could imagine something like Kinect providing a better experience.
How much sense that makes for people with families in the living room I don't know.
My issue is that people like to selectively pick and chose what is important to them then extrapolate that to "We All Know" or "We All Want", etc. One box costs less than the other because it has no motion/voice control standard, that's a *huge* difference but good luck convicting some of that because "They All Know" that apparently Kinect is of $0 value and therefore that box is more expensive while offering nothing in return. It would be the same as me saying that wow none of the people here are real gamers because they game on primitive 150 watt toy boxes instead of multi teraflop pc's that get faster every few months. Because after all "We All Know" that graphics and exclusives are everything and pc wins on both regards by a longshot. Both phrases are of course wrong because it depends on your priorities and what is important to you.
So yeah I get that people don't want to game on pc or that they want certain exclusives, but likewise people shouldn't be surprised that some of us don't care about the power difference between xb1 and ps4 because maybe we game on pc anyway if graphics and exclusives are important to us, or maybe our priorities are elsewhere rather than just graphics and games, or maybe because we don't necessarily feel the visual difference will be that dramatic between the new consoles.
I hear this one come up a lot but I don't know if it's true. If you look at the general landscape it seems to me that casuals in general are more used to paying fixed fees for stuff, it's the hardcore gamers that are constantly vocal about not paying for anything on forums.
Most of their main titles were shown behind closed doors, or in booths that you had to wait to get into and I have little patience for waiting nowadays.
You can get HD skype cams to mount on many HDTVs. You see ads for them in Best Buy all the time.
Always though it odd to use Skype through the big screen in the living room. Picture can't be too good.
But if you're immersed in a good movie or even a good show like Game of Thrones, do you really want to get pinged by Skype or other social media messaging?
Or for that matter when you're in the middle of some game?
The TV use case is very rigid and 70s. People are more mobile these days. They may interact and gather in other rooms or backyard too.
Even if I want to take a call, by default, I want to take it privately not on the big screen for everyone to see. The big screen video conferencing is just a very specific use case. It's great for party calls ! With a tablet, we will be able to do both, with AirPlay/Miracast.
WiFi may permeate the livingroom. Besides IR, Bluetooth, we have AirPlay Audio today. Some of these new protocol go beyond a remote's capability. E.g., in AirPlay, you can even control individual speaker. Miracast and DLNA will evolve to subsume these eventually.
See above. And set your tablet on the table. A lot of tablet covers allow that.
When I take a call on the phone or tablet, I can walk into a room or outside the house immediately for some privacy.
Even if I want to take a call, by default, I want to take it privately not on the big screen for everyone to see. The big screen video conferencing is just a very specific use case. It's great for party calls ! With a tablet, we will be able to do both, with AirPlay/Miracast.
WiFi may permeate the livingroom. Besides IR, Bluetooth, we have AirPlay Audio today. Some of these new protocol go beyond a remote's capability. E.g., in AirPlay, you can even control individual speaker. Miracast and DLNA will evolve to subsume these eventually.
See above. And set your tablet on the table. A lot of tablet covers allow that.
When I take a call on the phone or tablet, I can walk into a room or outside the house immediately for some privacy.
For me sure, but generally I want to talk to people who are likely to ping me.
There are perhaps 3 or 4 people I talk to regularly outside of work hours and the communication isn't so frequent that I'd mind the interruption, If I didn't want to be interrupted I'd assume I can turn the notifications off.
Why do you keep trying to insist that a value add convenience must be worth the entire value of the package? Various features add value to a package, I don't know that many people will just buy an xbox one as a harmony replacement, but there are probably some that will see the value in an xbox one over buying 2 devices to achieve the same goals.
Thank you for saying this. People show great concern for being able to have options. Then when they get options they say "its not an option I want" Well it may be an option I want... and I do.
Just like when your phone rings, you have the option of not answering it, or turning it off or just tunring off the notifications (ringer/buzzer). Im sure the option to not be interrupted by the notifications that YOU set when you first fire up a console will be there.
Skype can ring to your phone, tablet, pc, laptop and now your main screen and its not even confined to MS devices. How is that not a mobility option?
Intuitively, the tablet and phone are hard to beat because they have already established a mature ecosystem, and trained behavior. No DRM issues. No subscriptions even for some communication services. They are open. Everyone and I do mean everyone I know is already reachable on some apps on these devices. It is the path of least resistance.
In-game communication is still useful and convenient on the consoles, but not so much for general comms.
MS probably has plans for home security too. In this regard, they have to think carefully whether people trust them to monitor their house. MS do not seem to have very good user rep. They may have to do this in a roundabout way.
IMHO, in Sony's case, the most they should/can do is in-game experiences with some basic apps to avoid criticism. They should really think of ways to interoperable with Android and iOS.
This is one of the reasons I keep challenging their OS memory use. I think they should consider all options carefully. The Vita approach is fine and all, but not a game changer.
In-game communication is still useful and convenient on the consoles, but not so much for general comms.
MS probably has plans for home security too. In this regard, they have to think carefully whether people trust them to monitor their house. MS do not seem to have very good user rep. They may have to do this in a roundabout way.
IMHO, in Sony's case, the most they should/can do is in-game experiences with some basic apps to avoid criticism. They should really think of ways to interoperable with Android and iOS.
This is one of the reasons I keep challenging their OS memory use. I think they should consider all options carefully. The Vita approach is fine and all, but not a game changer.
You can use Skype, but it's only one service. Most of my friends have moved to WhatsApp and/or iOS stack. I don't see them logged in on Skype anymore.
I also don't know if it will be behind a pay wall on Xbox One. And I don't need an Xbox to use Skype. It's already loaded on my tablet.
Some 400 million people use Skype worldwide. If you have the option to take or transfer your call from one device to the next including to your living room screen why is that option not also viable? You seem to be trying to draw a bright line where really there is none.
400 millions but none of them my friends. Now what ?
How many use Android and iDevices ? What services and apps will they use to contact me first ?
I don't control the incoming calls. They do.
you are on my PS3 friends list.
I have tons of friends on whatsapp, Skype and googlechat. If whatsapp puts their app onto the windows 8 ecosystem... the option to do that will be there in the livingroom for you.
If google creates a googlechat app for windows 8... you'll have the option too.
MS owns skype so they that make that available to their customers. Theyd be fools not to right?
MS could make a Skype app to run on PS4 also *shrug*
If ! Google doesn't even want YouTube app on Windows phone. Those guys are out there to kill MS.
From a typical user's perspective, they already have a smartphone and/or tablet. If they have $500, they may choose to upgrade their phones and tablets to include the next new services, instead of waiting for MS to catch up in the app and device space.
This is what I meant by time has changed. It applies to both MS and Sony. They need to take a cold hard look at themselves to figure out their paths.
From a typical user's perspective, they already have a smartphone and/or tablet. If they have $500, they may choose to upgrade their phones and tablets to include the next new services, instead of waiting for MS to catch up in the app and device space.
This is what I meant by time has changed. It applies to both MS and Sony. They need to take a cold hard look at themselves to figure out their paths.
I had a post earlier highlighting MS' approach to their business. I actually think they are on the right path by connecting all of their devices through their cloud service. No other organization has that breadth of service delivery or capability.
In fact it takes Google, Apple and Sony combined to match MS across all user and business device categories.
The only categories where MS is lacking is phones and tablets but innovation in those spaces is lacking in both the overall android and Apple spaces with Samsung seeming to be the only innovator left. Just because some group is very vocal about not liking MS' choices and the digerati echo chamber it, doesnt make those choices wrong. Tech sites are wrong all the time. MS is doing just fine in face of constant gloom, doom, manufactured outrage, backlash and ridicule from those "experts."
In the places where MS is weak, over time and through iteration, they are innovating. Xbox one is an exmaple of that innovation. I like where they are going with it... from using VMs to fast switching of active display planes to voice and motion controls, which dont require an additional waggle stick or light-bar-mashed-with-a-controller, to connecting it to an overall ecosystem I think they made the right choices in innovating for the living room.
Now if they would just eliminate/change/re-think that 24hr check in thing I'd actually be happy.
All that said i'll be picking up a PS4 too because I want to play uncharted and god of war.
Last edited by a moderator:
Receivers can do what the XB1 does. And?
Laptops allow you read email, play cheap games and watch movies all on the go.
So whats the point of tabs?
PCs allow you to game, watch movies, listen to music and have form factors that will easily accommodate an entertainment center.
So whats the point of consoles?
The point of tabs and consoles is that general consumers find value in the way they present and offer functionality.
General consumers have a lower expectation on performance and a greater expectation for wider utility while having a greater desire for ease of use.
And if you are judging a business's plan to offer a device to millions of people based solely on your own personal desires and biases, then you are doing it wrong. If you are on B3D, pour thousands of dollars into your gaming hobby, know that a GTX 680 or a HD 7850 is a gpu, knows what DRM or NAS means, know the difference between GBs and Gbps then for the most part you are not a general consumer when it comes to gaming.
If we as a forum can't separate our personal desires and needs from the discussion then our general ability as a group to correctly surmise the future of these two products will based more on happenstance than analytical analysis.
Laptops allow you read email, play cheap games and watch movies all on the go.
So whats the point of tabs?
PCs allow you to game, watch movies, listen to music and have form factors that will easily accommodate an entertainment center.
So whats the point of consoles?
The point of tabs and consoles is that general consumers find value in the way they present and offer functionality.
General consumers have a lower expectation on performance and a greater expectation for wider utility while having a greater desire for ease of use.
And if you are judging a business's plan to offer a device to millions of people based solely on your own personal desires and biases, then you are doing it wrong. If you are on B3D, pour thousands of dollars into your gaming hobby, know that a GTX 680 or a HD 7850 is a gpu, knows what DRM or NAS means, know the difference between GBs and Gbps then for the most part you are not a general consumer when it comes to gaming.
If we as a forum can't separate our personal desires and needs from the discussion then our general ability as a group to correctly surmise the future of these two products will based more on happenstance than analytical analysis.
Last edited by a moderator:
We use it all the time. Tablet or laptop is fine if its just one-to-one face on, but using it on the HDTV is great when you're calling the family and they want to see the grandkids etc. You point it at the sofa and get a number people in the frame. Video quality is fine.
More TV's are getting the webcam functionality built in now as well. I've seen some SmartTV's also have basic Kinect like functionality which has some level of gesture based control.
We have used the PS3 for this for the past 3 years. We actually purchased PS3s for both my wife's parents and my parents when we moved from the West coast to the East coast, because it is far easier for us to explain how to chat on it then to explain how they can get a PC, connect it to their television, attach a camera, and use skype.
I see adding video chat as a definite positive for the XBox. This type of communication is becoming more and more important as families become more mobile. Having an easy to use interface for people who might be a little less technically savy is a good thing.
Similar threads
