Sony only did this on portable devices, e.g. UMD discs, memory cards and MemoryStick. Original PlayStation used CD, PS2 DVD and OG PS2 supported a standard 3.5" HDD with the Network Adaptor. PS3 and PS4 both used Blu-ray and supported standard 2.5" HDDs. Not a lot different what what Nintendo did with their bespoke memory/cart technologies - with they clung to a lot longer than Sony.
Think bigger picture, all of Sony. Memory cards on PS and PS2 were proprietary (although understandable as there wasn't a cheap flash standard back then). But then they have MemoryStick on the cameras and tried to leverage PSP to encourage that format. They had their own audio format on higher priced 'MP3' players. DAT and minidisc and UMD. Sony were traditionally the company coming up with something no-one else was using and slapping a premium on it. Now it's MS's turn for whatever reason.
The reason for bespoke memory cards on consoles wasn't because the flash was expensive, it was because it was expensive to licence the interface tech, e.g. compact flash would have been fine, but it would have cost significantly more. Sony let anybody make their own memory cards for the first two home PlayStation consoles.
Thats the thing. Besides Vita's mem cards (Which I am not sure if they had anything to do with piracy measures), Sony's proprietary technologies were mainly designed as solutions to a problem.
I don't understand the point of this post. What are you saying regards my point that Sony used to be the one making expensive formats (that your history lesson confirms) and selling them more expensively than the rival formats but now MS's are doing that? You don't appear to be countering my position, nor agreeing.
He's essentially arguing Sony's position on those decisions was justified by market forces and the scenarios at the time being a hw manufacturer. What your saying is "they did proprietary formats too"I don't understand the point of this post. What are you saying regards my point that Sony used to be the one making expensive formats (that your history lesson confirms) and selling them more expensively than the rival formats but now MS's are doing that? You don't appear to be countering my position, nor agreeing.
It wasnt even proprietary. They took a common HDD and inserted it into a different case which connected via a different port and sold it at a premium.He's essentially arguing Sony's position on those decisions was justified by market forces and the scenarios at the time being a hw manufacturer. What your saying is "they did proprietary formats too"
Which is completely different argument you guys are having back and forth
Somewhere along the line it became about whether or not MSs expansion drive solution is justified
Although I could have sworn the early 360s used proprietary HDD as well, this stupid crap
Perhaps re-read my post because you clearly missed the point. I didn't mention Microsoft at all.I don't understand the point of this post. What are you saying regards my point that Sony used to be the one making expensive formats (that your history lesson confirms) and selling them more expensively than the rival formats but now MS's are doing that? You don't appear to be countering my position, nor agreeing.
Thats even worse
Of course. For me the XBOX360 was a shitshow in terms of indirect costs. I enjoyed it for what it was, but God damn, it started a trend where you had to be paying extra for everything. Paying a subscription to play online was stupid, and because of them it became a standard. I want to remind that with PS3, online was free and Plus came much later and it was giving you free games, and trials. Which thankfully established these play-online subscription services with free monthly games than just vanilla online play.Thats even worse
Then why are you talking to me about what I said about MS?
So you are raising a point about the validity of Sony's choices, but you didn't actually express your point leaving me trying to work out how your words fit in with my words. It'd really help all conversations if people actually made clear their point before their arguments.
Yeah. It'd help if people wouldn't resply to comments/arguments they aren't actually responding to. Write one's point and present one's arguments.He's essentially arguing Sony's position on those decisions was justified by market forces and the scenarios at the time being a hw manufacturer. What your saying is "they did proprietary formats too"
Which is completely different argument you guys are having back and forth
It may have come down to decision compromises for Xbox. They are small, compact devices, and the idea of having a flat laying M.2 Slot probably wouldn't work on the Series X and S if you look at the internals. The drive had to be a specific size to fit in there, and to slide in, and to be cooled.
I can summarise. I chipped in your post where your said "MS aren't even pushing a proprietary format unlike Sony's historical overpriced efforts."So you are raising a point about the validity of Sony's choices, but you didn't actually express your point leaving me trying to work out how your words fit in with my words. It'd really help all conversations if people actually made clear their point before their arguments.
Which is fair enough, but for clarity you should really have expressed that you felt there was no justification for MS's price whereas there was for Sony's. Without that anchor point, I clearly misunderstood where you were coming from.
But it is a generic drive. It's an off-the-shelf component used in a range of devices as opposed to a proprietary drive. The article points out the difference between two WD drives as an example but states according to Tom's Hardware
SSDs, plural. I've read some Seagate drives work also (as you'd expect!).
Having said that, looking at the price of these small form factor NVMe drives, the Expansion Card isn't particularly expensive. So perhaps it's price is fair and it was just a choice of form factor resulting in the lower economy versus Sony's approach.
Yeah, but its very very specific. It basically only works for the 512 GB, 1TB and 2TB exact models that are already used by Seagate Storage Cards. That's what they mean by "SSDs" plural, different capacity sizes.
