How's this for an idea?

[Carl B]

Secondly, why would STI want to use PS3 as a computer/workstation? They already have plans for a Cell based workstation...and more importantly a real viable business model. Let's see now how many web/email/etc appliance companies out there are really successful? Very few. There are some in Europe, and its succes has nothing to do with technical power. It's a lot of wheeling and dealing with the public sector.

I don't think that the PS3/Amiga concept would infringe on the 'real' workstation market they are planning to target whatsoever. It simply gives you an option for basic apps functionality for free. It's not going to cost them much (basically nothing) to bundle the OS with the HDD's they sell, and as others have mentioned I'm sure you'll only be able to buy/install what they allow you to download off of their marketplace. Anyway I don't think people will be buying PS3's for this functionality exclusively, but it gives Sony some different angles to play should it catch on.

Certainly some are viewing PSP currently as anything but a games console at the moment.

Anyway I've already expressed my own interest in it, but I understand I might be in a minority. Still, I'm attracted to the notion.

 

[TrungGap]

Turning a PS3, designed for play, media, games, music, hobbies like digital photography, into a machine for work, doing spreadsheets, finances, etc., is contradictory.

LOL

The whole world should boycott all these companies until they decide to behave

Gasp! Don't tell me you're going to boycott the PS3? OMG I hope you're only boycotting their ill-behaved DRM CDs.

 

[one]

Totally different business model. They don't sell the hardware at a loss. Eh, I take that back...most of the time they don't sell the hardware at a loss.

Well that's not at all related. PS2 might be sold at a loss in its first year, but in the second year it was most likely profitable in the hardware only as the financial data indicates. If they were indeed selling game consoles at a loss throught the entire lifecycle, then just slap an appropriate price tag on PS3 HDD or Cell PC as Apple does with its "overpriced" premium products.

 

[TrungGap]

Well that's not at all related. PS2 might be sold at a loss in its first year, but in the second year it was most likely profitable in the hardware only as the financial data indicates. If they were indeed selling game consoles at a loss throught the entire lifecycle, then just slap an appropriate price tag on PS3 HDD or Cell PC as Apple does with its "overpriced" premium products.

STI already have plans for Cell based workstation. They got their bases covered.

 

[nelg]

Well that's not at all related. PS2 might be sold at a loss in its first year, but in the second year it was most likely profitable in the hardware only as the financial data indicates. If they were indeed selling game consoles at a loss throught the entire lifecycle, then just slap an appropriate price tag on PS3 HDD or Cell PC as Apple does with its "overpriced" premium products.

IIRC that early break even point was related to the cost of manufacturing only. It did not take into account R&D etc. The whole computer business is an extremely low margin one. The disparity in price and components between a console and a PC is at minimum 3x at launch. Are you suggesting that Dell et. all have large gross margins? Sony would be foolish to pursue the idea of selling console hardware, without relying on software sales to generate income, as a viable business strategy. There are far better uses of capital.

 

[one]

IIRC that early break even point was related to the cost of manufacturing only. It did not take into account R&D etc. The whole computer business is an extremely low margin one. The disparity in price and components between a console and a PC is at minimum 3x at launch. Are you suggesting that Dell et. all have large gross margins? Sony would be foolish to pursue the idea of selling console hardware, without relying on software sales to generate income, as a viable business strategy. There are far better uses of capital.

That's because x86 PCs are commodity hardware interchangeable with other IBM PC/AT machines, even parts by parts. Again, look at Apple and then the Cell processor which is not yet broadly available outside of PS3. For those who have no capital to talk with IBM E&TS or Toshiba for their custom Cell solutions, it's a nice idea to tinker with PS3 Linux after trying the Cell simulator on x86/Power.

Also it has a bigger appeal point as some in this thread already suggest - it can play PS3 games after all. Think it like this, no other PC/computer can play PS3 games. If they release real Cell PC with commodity interfaces such as DDR RAM and SATA with which you cannot play PS3 games, then your point may be valid but WRT PS3 + HDD it's not like that. Actually, some of those who have PS3 + HDD and use Linux will buy PS3 games or Sony music and contribute to the royalty business of SCE too, hence the premise of this discussion is already flawed.

 

[nelg]

That's because x86 PCs are commodity hardware interchangeable with other IBM PC/AT machines, even parts by parts. Again, look at Apple and then the Cell processor which is not yet broadly available outside of PS3. For those who have no capital to talk with IBM E&TS or Toshiba for their custom Cell solutions, it's a nice idea to tinker with PS3 Linux after trying the Cell simulator on x86/Power.

Also it has a bigger appeal point as some in this thread already suggest - it can play PS3 games after all. Think it like this, no other PC/computer can play PS3 games. If they release real Cell PC with commodity interfaces such as DDR RAM and SATA with which you cannot play PS3 games, then your point may be valid but WRT PS3 + HDD it's not like that. Actually, some of those who have PS3 + HDD and use Linux will buy PS3 games or Sony music and contribute to the royalty business of SCE too, hence the premise of this discussion is already flawed.

I think you are missing my point. Indeed look at Apple. They sell their computers with the intent of making money from the actual sale of hardware. It is not sold as a loss to encourage software sales which would produce further revenue. To do this they must charge a price that reflects the true cost of designing and producing it. Add to that other expenses like marketing and profit margins and it is easy to see why the cost of an PC (Apple or otherwise) is generally a multiple of the cost of a console.

Pulling numbers out of thin air lets say for example that STI has spent 2 billion dollars in developing Cell. If they make one hundred million Cells that fixed cost will be $20 per chip. That does not include the cost of fabricating the chip, testing packaging etc. Add in in other cost of making the PS3 like the fees to nV, materials, assembly, shipping, marketing etc. the true cost of manufacturing the PS3 would be , IMHO, over $800. So until Sony could recuperate their initial investment and then produce the hardware for a profit they have no incentive to encourage the use of PS3s for anything other than its intended purpose.

 

[fireshot]

just a reminder, XMB is not PS3 Linux PC. Sony will market the XMB interface. They are not stupid to put their foot in a PC to PS3 replacement drive for the masses.

out of the box internet is a good thing, and remains a_good_thing. not the Death of PC crap with every new console launch.

will you throw away your PalmPC for a psp?

i thought so.

 

[Squeak]

Why are you so sure?

Because they already have the basic OS. Dozens of UIs has already been made for Linux, replacing the graphics and tweaking one of them would not be very costly.
Having a big name like Sony behind a UI, would benefit it immensely, making it feel more acceptable to non-savvy users.

It is quite more than that. You seem to have missed customer support in my list for a start.

Customer support would of course be pay per use, as with all other open source/free software.

I'm sorry but I can't take that as an answer.

Well, I’m sorry but I don’t feel like typing up the whole story of microcomputers every time the subject of microsofts monopoly comes up.
Read the posts I referred to on that subject in this thread, they say pretty much all there is to say in this context.

I still haven't seen anyone running Linux on his home PC except for one person, and I personally haven't used it in my entire life. And I'm both a hardcore gamer, an engineer with a degree in computer science, and a 3D artist for a living, so I do know a few people with PCs... Thus I dare say that Linux has totally failed to conquer the home user market. Please list arguments if you disagree.

For applications where security and reliability is at a premium, Linux seems to be the first choice for many. The largest example of that being Google of course.
I have a dualboot machine and I know four people who use Linux only, for moral and technical reasons.
Linux not having had success as a layman OS yet, does not mean that it’s impossible. After all people really don’t care about the OS, as long as the computer behaves and they can learn to use it without too much grief.

Neither would your PS3 play PC games

Most PC games will be released on console at some point anyway.

And please don't think that games and only games have driven the PC's growth - out of hundreds of millions of PCs, less than 10% is DX9 compliant today... but there are many industries that still hunger for more computing and graphics power.

I didn’t talk about the growth of PCs but the power of them (although I admit that wasn’t clear). The vast majority of tasks being performed on PCs today, both in offices and at home, does not require 256Mb GPUs with vertex and pixelshaders or even the features in a humble Intel integrated graphics chip. Neither is 3Ghz CPUs needed for spreadsheets, home video editing, or web browsing.

This is not good for the hardware manufacturers, for the software developers, and for all the workstation/server users of the world. The home PC market is too small to set directions for the entire industry.

You have to start somewhere.
You seem to be suggesting the I’m saying that SCE should take down microsoft in one fell swoop with a PS3 PC.
Not so; getting a good foothold with a new platform today, will take time and ingenuity, two things Sony has lot’s of.

I play different games on the PC, than I would want to on a console...

Because of keyboard and mouse no doubt?

Signal quality isn't an issue for you then? Long cables tend to have a bad effect on it.

Not so with HDMI, being digital.

I'm sorry but you're arguing with small details and fail to convince me about the bigger issues here. Trying to turn the PS3 into a personal computer has no gains for Sony at
all, while it would take a lot of money and other resources to do so, and it wouldn't gain any interest from the vast majority of their market. I can totally understand why some people would like to see it happen, but I don't think that we'll see it...

Again, I’m not suggesting the Sony should really push this hard with all their might, only as an optional extra for people who want it, as a starting point.

 

[BlueTsunami]

See, heres the thing. As Squeak stated, and I also agree with, Sony isn't pushing with all their might. This is, I believe, a "Why not" type of measure. The Linux OS itself is being made for Developers that need a tangible OS for CELL Workstation and Servers. The OS itself is being tweaked by IBM (So it isn't Sony undertaking the advancment of a Linux/CELL OS).

So if a HDD is being released for the PS3 then why not load a OS being made for Cell workstation that could be loaded on a PS3? It was done with the PS2 (on a more obscure level) and now its being given to the market (emphasis on given). To have a sort of terminal to the internet in my living room where I can do basic functions that involve the internet is what I would love to see. Web TV tried it (I hated the Interface) and it didn't work. Now you have an actual OS to work with and a choice of browsers (and customization).

It also seem like some people commenting on the hardships of Linux have never really sat down and tried to work and learn the OS. The only learning curve required for Linux WAS installing programs but the more user friendly Linux's being released is relieving this by using a package management system. Things should also be much easier given the fact that the PS3 is a closed system so drivers should be a non issue.

I'm very interested to see how the general public reacts to a Linux OS, because honestly...this will be the first time that Linux is given to the general public in this way. It kinda excites me actually.

 

[one]

So until Sony could recuperate their initial investment and then produce the hardware for a profit they have no incentive to encourage the use of PS3s for anything other than its intended purpose.

Then you agree they'd encourage other usage after they could recuperate their investment, that's fine. But think again, do Sony think people are stupid sheeps who have no desire except for gaming? PS3 has abundant computing power, which is a different situation from PS2 which was sluggish to run PS2 Linux with its 32MB RAM. Also the display technology sucked back then, it's a pain in the ass to browse internet on non-fixed-pixel TV. Even then, they talked about the plan of using PS2 for non-gaming usage which failed eventually as you know. You shouldn't waste this computing resource in PS3. Ken Kutaragi sticks to the 'computer' concept and actually says they'll put Linux in HDD as a bonus and popularize PS3 as a serious computer.

Also, how about PSP? They advertise its non-gaming features for months. Check out the other thread about Sony and PS3,
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25163
Loading Linux in HDD is no different from loading movies and TV programs. It's about added values.

 

[Platon]

Then you agree they'd encourage other usage after they could recuperate their investment, that's fine. But think again, do Sony think people are stupid sheeps who have no desire except for gaming? PS3 has abundant computing power, which is a different situation from PS2 which was sluggish to run PS2 Linux with its 32MB RAM. Also the display technology sucked back then, it's a pain in the ass to browse internet on non-fixed-pixel TV. Even then, they talked about the plan of using PS2 for non-gaming usage which failed eventually as you know. You shouldn't waste this computing resource in PS3. Ken Kutaragi sticks to the 'computer' concept and actually says they'll put Linux in HDD as a bonus and popularize PS3 as a serious computer.

Also, how about PSP? They advertise its non-gaming features for months. Check out the other thread about Sony and PS3,
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25163
Loading Linux in HDD is no different from loading movies and TV programs. It's about added values.

What would be the benefit for Sony if people use the PS3 with Linux as a serious computer for serious work?...

 

[BlueTsunami]

What would be the benefit for Sony if people use the PS3 with Linux as a serious computer for serious work?...

You could say that its another incentive for the consumer to get a PS3 but there really doesn't seem to be a blaring benefit from it. Maybe some type of royalty or licensing blah blah system gets implimented so they can make some money off it.

 

[one]

What would be the benefit for Sony if people use the PS3 with Linux as a serious computer for serious work?...

It's about install base and side opportunities. Microsoft spreads IE (IE-only webpages) and WMP (WMV). Why not spread PS3 as broadly as possible?

 

[Platon]

It's about install base and side opportunities. Microsoft spreads IE (IE-only webpages) and WMP (WMV). Why not spread PS3 as broadly as possible?

Well, if people buy the PS3 for serious work and install Linux+programs I see that as something bad for Sony as they might not use it for playing games, which is what earns Sony money. On the contrary this could cost Sony money if they still sell the hardware at a loss...

 

[London Geezer]

True but there would be more PS3's out there.

I think their real target is to get as many units out there to the public as possible, even more than PS2 if they can. They will make money on the hardware eventually, and they always make money from games and movie sales. Plus Sony as a group makes profits from all sorts of products...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Well, if people buy the PS3 for serious work and install Linux+programs I see that as something bad for Sony as they might not use it for playing games, which is what earns Sony money. On the contrary this could cost Sony money if they still sell the hardware at a loss...

Hmmm, perhaps Sony had better stop producing DVD players that let people watch non-Sony DVDs, as otherwise they buy non-Sony DVDs instead. And they might watch DVDs instead of buying PS2s and playing PS2 games.

If people are going to work, they're going to work. If Sony don't provide a product to enable that, they'll buy someone else's product that does. May as well make money selling profitable hardware (which PS3 will be after a while) to these people, plus fit in a lot of other options that these people will spend money on, like BluRay disc player, downloadable content, and games. You never know, supplying a powerful workstation PS3 might get people buying it as such to use it to play games instead!

 

[Phil]

You're right Shifty. I think Microsoft should stop allowing 3rd party software to be used on Windows as well...

 

[London Geezer]

Some people....

 

[Tim]

Hmmm, perhaps Sony had better stop producing DVD players that let people watch non-Sony DVDs, as otherwise they buy non-Sony DVDs instead. And they might watch DVDs instead of buying PS2s and playing PS2 games.

Sony earns money on each DVD-player they sell that will not be the case with the PS3 (atleast not initially) - they need people to buy games. But I really don´t see a point in bying a PS3 for someone that don't play games a Celeron or Sempron based system will in most cases do better.