JP Morgan report on Xbox 2

[Fox5]

2.0) GAME GEAR specs
---------------------

Main Processor: Z-80 (8-bit)
Processor Speed: 3.58 MHz
Resolution: 160 x 146
Colors Available: 4,096
Colors On-Screen: 32
Maximum Sprites: 64
Sprite Size: 8 x 8
Screen Size: 3.2 Inches
Audio: 4-lyr
RAM: 24K

Nintendo GameBoy Color Technical Specifications

CPU: 4/8-bit Sharp Z80 work-alike at 8 MHz, 2 modes: Single (4 MHz) and Double (8 MHz)
RAM: 32 Kb
Cartridge RAM: 128 Kb
ROM: 64-MBit max
VRAM: 16 Kb
Sound: 4 Channels FM stereo, single mono speakers, Stereo headphones jack
Video: Display 160x144 pixels, highly reflective, Thin-Film Transistor (TFT) colour liquid crystal display made by Sharp
Colour Palette: 32,768 colours; Supports 10,32, or 56 simultaneous colours on-screen
Sprites: 40 sprites of either 8 x 8 or 8 x 16 (changeable); 10 Sprites per line; Sprites are 4 colours with one always transparent (3 diff colours max on 1 sprite); larger sprites possible
Tiles: 512 on screen
Serial: 512 Kbps; up to 4-up at a time
Power: 2 AA batteries provide 30+ hours, AC Adapter (DC 3V), Indicator LED
Input: 8 way D-Pad, 4 buttons, volume dial, power switch, Serial I/O, Infrared I/O, Cart I/O
IR: Less than 2 metres at 45 degrees
Size: Slightly larger than Game Boy Pocket


Nintendo GameBoy/GameBoy Pocket Technical Specifications

CPU: 8-bit Z80 work-alike at 4.194304MHz
RAM: 8kB internal
ROM: 256kBit, 512kBit, 1MBit, 2MBit and 4MBit and 8MBit cartridges are known (32kB, 64kB, 128kB, 256kB and 512kB 1024kB).
VRAM: 8kB internal
Sound: 4 channel stereo sound, can be mapped to left, right or both speakers
Display: Reflective LCD 160 x 144 pixels
Colour Pallette: 4 shades of gray
Sprites: 40 sprites of either 8 x 8 or 8 x 16 pixels [switchable]
Communication: Up to 4 Gameboys can be linked together via serial ports
Power: 6 Volts, 0.7 Watts (4 AA Batteries - 35 hours (GameBoy)/2 AAA batteries - 10 hours (GameBoy Pocket))


Hmm, looks like all 3 systems are rather similar, but yeah it does look like gameboy color is 2x the speed of the gameboy + color, and the game gear almost looks like the gameboy + color.(and since I think the game gear hardware was slightly less advanced than the master system, the master system may be almost a perfect match for the gameboy) Now, is a gameboy a portable nes without color?

Edit: Ah, didn't see the previous post.

 

[I.S.T.]

Master System didn't have as good of a color pallete as the GG, but it had more res. This presented a problem with the adapter Sega made for the GG to play SMS games, lol.

 

[Megadrive1988]

and since I think the game gear hardware was slightly less advanced than the master system

not true.

GameGear is based on the Master System. GameGear can play Master System cartridges with the MasterGear Converter.

Aside from *perhaps* resolution differences (i am unsure without looking both up) the GameGear is the same as the Master System, with the major exception being the GameGear's much larger color pallete, which is even larger than that of the Genesis. GameGear's color pallete is 4096 compared to the 256 (i think) of the Master System and 512 of the Genesis.

 

[I.S.T.]

and since I think the game gear hardware was slightly less advanced than the master system

not true.

GameGear is based on the Master System. GameGear can play Master System cartridges with the MasterGear Converter.

Aside from *perhaps* resolution differences (i am unsure without looking both up) the GameGear is the same as the Master System, with the major exception being the GameGear's much larger color pallete, which is even larger than that of the Genesis. GameGear's color pallete is 4096 compared to the 256 (i think) of the Master System and 512 of the Genesis.

Master System didn't have as good of a color pallete as the GG, but it had more res. This presented a problem with the adapter Sega made for the GG to play SMS games, lol.

Ahem.

 

[Lazy8s]

cthellis42:

...ultimately they're all empty words...

What you're saying is that the only projections which can be made are linear extrapolations. That if a problem contains multiple variables, you can only solve for one while all others must be held constant. That when considering what kind of system Microsoft could've launched head-to-head against the PS2, the only applicable projection is the one where Xbox's technology suppliers are exactly the same and the performance of the parts scale back regularly.

If you wanted to speculate how the PS2 might've turned out in an Xbox-launch timeframe, I'd be disappointed if you didn't account for the multiple applicable factors that are relevant to any such consideration - how their current tech would scale AND what new technologies they'd likely have pursued and which new approaches/directions they'd have likely incorporated.

 

[PC-Engine]

Anyhow this is MS here. They're not exactly a stupid company. Sure they make mistakes but by and large, they are extremely good at what they do (global domination ). So I'm sure they had their reasons NOT to go PVR.

I don't know where this notion comes from.

MS is remarkably bad at anything outside of desktop and office software contract negotions with OEMs. Almost every product that hasn't been able to leverage their core monopoly products has been anywhere from a wash to a massive failure.

Just go back and read some of the interviews and talks MS execs have given about the console market over the past two to three years to get a good indication of just how stupid many of the key execs at MS are.

MS didn't know too much about console hardware that's why Xbox is basically a stripped down PC. That's all they knew about hardware.

 

[cthellis42]

What you're saying is that the only projections which can be made are linear extrapolations. That if a problem contains multiple variables, you can only solve for one while all others must be held constant. That when considering what kind of system Microsoft could've launched head-to-head against the PS2, the only applicable projection is the one where Xbox's technology suppliers are exactly the same and the performance of the parts scale back regularly.

No, I'm saying the arguement was pointless, and that if one is going to wind up going to utter conjecture, it hardly matters which way you conjecture--you're going to wind up with what is "imaginable" but not what is "likely" to have happened from a business perspective, and something that in the end has no basis in anything but whimsy.

If you wanted to speculate how the PS2 might've turned out in an Xbox-launch timeframe, I'd be disappointed if you didn't account for the multiple applicable factors that are relevant to any such consideration - how their current tech would scale AND what new technologies they'd likely have pursued and which new approaches/directions they'd have likely incorporated.

...and yet there's a reason why I don't. I wasn't opening anything up to serious analysis, because nothing remotely "serious" would have connected to the idea I was replying to. My own guesses were simplistic as well--not really cared-about--and could certainly be wrong. I said from the beginning "who knows?" as to what either system would actually resemble. You have been advocate rather a complete restructuring of design and ethic behind the console, though, so it takes the matter apart to even more irrelevance than it was already at.

The market does ultimately care about hardware. The market is not ruled by launch windows. The market is not ruled by word-of-mouth, marketing campaigns, recommendations-by-game-store-employees, discussions on a message board, or any of the myriad of factors we think of. The market seems to not be affected to an unbalancing degree by anything we can recognize short of complete whimsy, much of the time. Certainly there are trends we can follow, and guesses that have grounding... There are parts of everything in the complete picture, but it is ruled by none. Sadly, single factors get used primarily as excuses or in "if only" situations, where complete restructurings would happen at the touch of a button...

The market may be simple-minded in many ways, but that also means it notices very little--unless said detail kicks them in the crotch. The most notable failures happen from within. (And we can "if only" about them too, but just note how far THOSE conversations go! )

 

[wazoo]

Wazoo

10M to 60M to 10 to 10

DC, PS2, GC and XBox sales are more like 10M, 60M, 16M, 13M

I agree with that, but I talked only on past announced financial results to avoid the backlash of "you stupid nintendo fanboys" (I think xbox is higher than 13M btw)

As for ps1 and ps2 sales, I'm not very far from the truth, most likely lower I agree.

 

[Lazy8s]

cthellis42:

No, I'm saying the arguement was pointless, and that if one is going to wind up going to utter conjecture, it hardly matters which way you conjecture--you're going to wind up with what is "imaginable" but not what is "likely" to have happened from a business perspective, and something that in the end has no basis in anything but whimsy.

If you're not arguing the impossibility nor validity of the scenario I mentioned, and you're conceding that it was an "imaginable" outcome, then you've had no grounds to argue. All I've done is reason out, from the particulars of the specified context, a licensing scenario as applicable as any to MS's strategy where your assumption doesn't hold... the claim that a March 2000 launch would certainly force the Xbox to lower its overall performance and RAM space.

You have been advocate rather a complete restructuring of design and ethic behind the console, though, so it takes the matter apart to even more irrelevance than it was already at.

How would selecting a Direct-X compatible solution like Series 2 from a PC graphics provider like PowerVR, as I've been offering up as a possibility, be "a complete restructuring of design and ethic behind the console"? You know, the console designed around the ideologies of and named after the Direct X platform, the one which used an NV2A graphics solution from a PC provider.

 

[Teasy]

Wazoo

(I think xbox is higher than 13M btw)

Hmm, now that I look at some numbers I think its actually a bit lower then I said earlier. More like 12.5M for XBox and 15M for GC. Not that its important..

 

[Tuttle]

Wazoo
(I think xbox is higher than 13M btw)

The 'xbox is higher' theme is the most bizzare part of the current console cycle. I've never seen anything like it before. There is an almost religious zeal to the dellusion.

It will be nice when console sales reporting gets as complete and public as ticket sales for the movie biz.

 

[Qroach]

where are you guys quoting these numbers? Last I checked Xbox was still ahead of gamecube in europe and North america. Is this additional 2.5 million + whatever the lead is in north america and europe, coming from japan?

 

[cthellis42]

If you're not arguing the impossibility nor validity of the scenario I mentioned, and you're conceding that it was an "imaginable" outcome, then you've had no grounds to argue. All I've done is reason out, from the particulars of the specified context, a licensing scenario as applicable as any to MS's strategy where your assumption doesn't hold... the claim that a March 2000 launch would certainly force the Xbox to lower its overall performance and RAM space.

As I have already stated, it was not my remote intention to start anything resembling an arguement on that point; it's an entirely different discussion altogether. My guess was that the Xbox's RAM would have been lower, considering the prices and tech for the time (and that it is but one of many parts of the machine that would have to be kept in line), and assuming little alteration in their design philosophy (as the moment you touch that you throw just about everything to the wind), but as I also said--who knows? As to the core point--that the Xbox would not have the performance the current one does--is is really your contention that it would? Or is this simply a "with what we have seen and know now, it would have been possible for Microsoft to build a machine that performed similarly if they had pursued Plan A with Partners B and C (and omitting overall cost analysis)"...? Heck, even just the hard drive would have been a costly leap, since the largest they got at the time was 25-28GB. (And that's not even including the construction and shipping time necessary.)

We can similarly see what Sony should have done to improve performance and quality even keeping their original timetables, so I guess if we're in mass conjecture mode already... We can similarly see what steps Sega should have taken in marketing their platform and encouraging better results from their 3rd parties... Or what Nintendo...!

Basically, it gets pointless. It can be back-and-forthed to no effect, and is fun in a "conjecture-only" situation, but really has no bearing or relevance.

How would selecting a Direct-X compatible solution like Series 2 from a PC graphics provider like PowerVR, as I've been offering up as a possibility, be "a complete restructuring of design and ethic behind the console"? You know, the console designed around the ideologies of and named after the Direct X platform, the one which used an NV2A graphics solution from a PC provider.

Would PowerVR have similarly been able to develop the motherboard and other chipwear that ended up all under nVidia's ultimate purvue? For the same cost-to-performance? Were they even on the radar at the time, since they were still hand-in-hand with Sega's own console and arcade plans, and Microsoft was known to be courting numerous other vendors, despite PowerVR possibly being the best option for them to follow in the console arena at the time?

 

[wazoo]

Wazoo
(I think xbox is higher than 13M btw)

The 'xbox is higher' theme is the most bizzare part of the current console cycle. I've never seen anything like it before. There is an almost religious zeal to the dellusion.

I do not even understand your point ?? What do you mean exactly ??

 

[wazoo]

where are you guys quoting these numbers? Last I checked Xbox was still ahead of gamecube in europe and North america. Is this additional 2.5 million + whatever the lead is in north america and europe, coming from japan?

I never claimed that the GC has a 2.5M lead, did I ??

the xbox is ahead for about 1M in the US and a couple hundreds in Europe (maybe a bit more, maybe less). In Japan, the GC has more than 2M lead, so in the end, we should have somewhere between 1M and 2M worldwide for the GC.

 

[Teasy]

Wazoo

Yeah I agree on those U.S/EU estimates from the last numbers I saw (although for Europe that was before Christmas). In Japan I think its more like a 3 million lead for GC, maybe slightly more. So around a 2 million lead for GC worldwide seems about right.

 

[wazoo]

March 23, 2004

by: Matt Saunderson

The GameCube is currently leading the Xbox in U.S. sales, but a soon to come price cut could have an impact on console sales.
While U.S. retailers are seeing a shortage of the Nintendo GameCube, to-date sales of the GCN have exceeded 15 million units, which is 1.3 million units higher than to-date sales of the Microsoft Xbox, which total 13.7 million.

However, Microsoft and Nintendo?s sales combined are still less than half the to-date sales of the Sony PlayStation 2, which has sold over 70 million units to-date.

As a result of the Xbox being in third place, Microsoft has announced that it plans to cut the U.S. price of the Xbox prices by US$30 so that it will sell for US$149. Microsoft believes that public perception that their hardware is cool and leading edge will result in a success in the gaming industry.

source: Dow Jones News

 

[cthellis42]

For people wanting more assurance on PS numbers, Sony themselves seem to have the best method for tracking. (This was posted by a kindly soul in another thread who I don't remember, but thanks! ^_^ )

Anyone know of Nintendo or Microsoft or any of the others previously or currently provided something similar? One usually had to pluck the info from various analyses or press reports and piece them together... This page gets updated at least quarterly, and is filled with a bunch of relevant and useful information to keep track of.

 

[wazoo]

March 23, 2004

While U.S. retailers are seeing a shortage of the Nintendo GameCube, to-date sales of the GCN have exceeded 15 million units, which is 1.3 million units higher than to-date sales of the Microsoft Xbox, which total 13.7 million.

It seems the original article is 15M sold for GC against 13.7 shipped for xbox

 

[Qroach]

Where are you getting "shipped" from??