PS3 online delaying the console??

[patsu]

Ha ha ! These guys are indeed linking PS3 together... just like Microsoft is linking XB360 together (via peer-to-peer and client-server models).

To have the network work on something, you'll need to solve the data availability and locality problem first. That's where you see Sony pushing "Location Free". I don't know how they solve the NAT problem for layman (Have not tried Location Free yet).

After that, you'll need to solve security and (distributed) accounting issues for scheduling and load balancing.

Then the vision of cell networks can be considered.

 

[Sis]

The engineering part is the "easiest" challenge.

You then go on to list challenges that all directly impact the engineering effort. The challenge is not in "figuring it out", the challenge is in the implementation. Titanio says in another post "Think more generally. " Well, of course at an abstract level it's all been done or is easily doable. But the system taken as a whole, completely integrated, from consumer to producer and all the pieces in-between, is a significant challenge.

Of course, Sony has experience in all the pieces of that puzzle. Again, that's the easy-been-done-before part. Whether they can bring it all together is another question.

 

[patsu]

You then go on to list challenges that all directly impact the engineering effort. The challenge is not in "figuring it out", the challenge is in the implementation. Titanio says in another post "Think more generally. " Well, of course at an abstract level it's all been done or is easily doable. But the system taken as a whole, completely integrated, from consumer to producer and all the pieces in-between, is a significant challenge.

Of course, Sony has experience in all the pieces of that puzzle. Again, that's the easy-been-done-before part. Whether they can bring it all together is another question.

In the original post, I essentially enumerated the layers in a bottom-up fashion. At the implementation/engineering stage, issues can be addressed or sped up by aquiring software, expertise and/or partnership.

Is XBL forums and media directory revolutionary in any way ? They still have basic functions such as view, edit, delete, list, search posts/items, moderation, social status and loyalty point accumulations right ?

Internet community, communications, directory and eCommerce services have been done by many companies since the dot com days. They have evolved over the last few years to address more and more sophisticated needs. You can indeed buy off-the-shelf components and customize them if you want to. Some of them have UI templates and even come with source code too.

As I mentioned... much of the technical effort is in system integration itself. The linch-pin is in the conceptualization and design stage (user lifecycle, content and content providers, communication channels, security, and UI). Once that's decided, it is not rocket science to bring such a service up.

Granted, the initial Sony offerings may lack depth and optimization (e.g., player matching may not be accurate due to insufficient player data points, partners don't have enough time to bring up their part of the services, part of the services are slow). But it should not stop Sony from "putting it together" or "making it happen".

 

[Sis]

As I mentioned... much of the technical effort is in system integration itself. The linch-pin is in the conceptualization and design stage (user lifecycle, content and content providers, communication channels, security, and UI). Once that's decided, it is not rocket science to bring such a service up.

I don't think we're in disagreement, but I do want to belabor the point: I would argue that rarely is a consumer product's success dependant on the resolution of a difficult engineering challenge. Many have proposed that Xbox Live does not require difficult engineering. This is probably correct. However, I believe that anyone who suggests this is underestimating the daunting task of systems integration which you call out as a seperate point but which I suggest IS the engineering challenge. Putting all the pieces together and running this system is feasible only if the engineering was done such that it is feasible.

For an example, I would point you to the iPod. There is nothing about the iPod that is difficult to do or that wasn't done before. Yet only one company has managed to do it successfully. So we can continue to debate whether something is challenging from an engineering perspective--whatever that means--or admit that all the pieces of a system must come together in one cohesive system in order to attempt to be successful. And to do this, you must dedicate many development hours and make many right decisions, especially from an engineering perspective.

 

[patsu]

For an example, I would point you to the iPod. There is nothing about the iPod that is difficult to do or that wasn't done before. Yet only one company has managed to do it successfully.

Actually, iPod is _very_ difficult to do and compete against, that's why only 1 company has done it well.

iPod is successful because of its end-to-end vertical integration, (DRM) usage model, mixed business model, plus savvy product, pricing and mass marketing. However implementationwise, it is "just" based on a reference design like any other MP3 player at that time. But Apple put in its own DRM, turned off Windows media support, make it louder, added scroll wheel, ...

XBLive while successful within the Xbox user community is far from "industry leading".
At this point, I think it is not as difficult as Microsoft made it to be, for Sony to catch up with XBL because:

(i) Unlike iPod, XBL has no mass adoption and is in fact constrainted by XB shipments

(ii) Unlike iPod, XBL has little lock-in and barrier of entry against Sony

(iii) Unlike iPod+iTunes Music Store, XB's usage, pricing and business model are not revolutionary. Even XBLA's recent success is based on well-known casual game dynamics on the Internet. It can be copied or improved by Sony due to its larger installed base.

(iv) XBL's smoothness, while bathed in blood, sweat and tears of its developers, is purely technical and product-based. I think it has very little leverage from marketing and business side for defence.

Which is why I commented that Sony "just" need to put a decent system together to match XBL. At this level, their challenges are mainly:
* UI simplicity, extensibility and consistency
* Optimization and depth in operations and feature sets
* Project management (time constrants, scope management)
The system integration part is not extraordinarily difficult to make Sony stumble.

I don't think we're in disagreement, but I do want to belabor the point: I would argue that rarely is a consumer product's success dependant on the resolution of a difficult engineering challenge. Many have proposed that Xbox Live does not require difficult engineering. This is probably correct. However, I believe that anyone who suggests this is underestimating the daunting task of systems integration which you call out as a seperate point but which I suggest IS the engineering challenge. Putting all the pieces together and running this system is feasible only if the engineering was done such that it is feasible.

Right. I'm not arguing that it's not difficult to develope XBL => it's easy to catch up with XBL.
I'm saying XBL as a business unit is not well-positioned yet. So Sony can implement something good enough and it can triumph XBL due to its other soft advantages.

Sorry for not being clear.

 

[booomups]

hmm... but it would be possible for sony or micro to sell the distributed computer power of the connected consoles, a comercial version of something seti like.

thanks to that they could make the console cheaper --> more consoles more power--> more earnings--> cheaper consoles..


i like that thought.

xcept that maybe they would make the games less cpu demanding--> more power for distributed computing ,-)

ya know.. stupid rant.



but generally, for me, as long as sony make online gaming free, they win.

 

[inefficient]

hmm... but it would be possible for sony or micro to sell the distributed computer power of the connected consoles, a comercial version of something seti like.

thanks to that they could make the console cheaper --> more consoles more power--> more earnings--> cheaper consoles..

The problem with those kinds of distributed systems or grid systems is getting the data set to the clients. In an application like SETI the dataset is extremely tiny. You do a LOT of processing over a tiny bit of data. Most computing problems are not like this. Imagine the case of rendering a CGI movie where each distributed node needs access to hundreds of MB to GBs of data just to render 1 frame. It will take longer just to transfer the dataset of the network than it will to process the data.