Realistic Expectations

[Shifty Geezer]

Of course Games are important. The importance of games ahs gone right up in the last few years, and that's why MS entered the console market.

No it isn't! Why the hell do MS care for console games? It makes Sony some $80 million a year. MS makes many billions a year on software. Games are but a drop in the ocean.

MS's interests in gaming comes as a platform for home dominance. If it weren't for Sony talking of making PS2 into an entertainment hub I doubt MS would have bothered.

I'd say the reason MS own the computing industry is because people used Works at work, then when they bought their own computer went with what they knew. Word sold more PCs than any game ever did.

If Sony and Apple combine to produce an uber-computer, sub $500 with 17 gigatrogs of memory and 48 complicaflops of processing, with whizzly-fizzly graphics, it still won't displace MS+Word+IE as people already know MS+Word+IE and don't want to relearn a whole new way of doing things, especially when learning how to use a computer is such an uphill struggle for so many people already.

 

[Alejux]

I'm not talking about a PS3 with a HD kit, I'm talking about a CELL based PC.

Cheers
Gubbi

I'm talking about an overdressed PS3, that can be used as an overall home entertainment PC.

 

[Phil]

If Sony and Apple combine to produce an uber-computer, sub $500 with 17 gigatrogs of memory and 48 complicaflops of processing, with whizzly-fizzly graphics, it still won't displace MS+Word+IE as people already know MS+Word+IE and don't want to relearn a whole new way of doing things, especially when learning how to use a computer is such an uphill struggle for so many people already.

While I do agree with most parts of your post, I do doubt that MS + Word + IE are the reason MS is still afloat and ontop of the PC business TODAY. In fact, what is going to keep consumers upgrading their outdated PCs that *still* have enough performance to run basic word + IE applications? To buy the next x.x iteration of Word? I doubt it. Already the trend is obvious...

 

[London Geezer]

Of course Games are important. The importance of games ahs gone right up in the last few years, and that's why MS entered the console market.

No it isn't! Why the hell do MS care for console games? It makes Sony some $80 million a year. MS makes many billions a year on software. Games are but a drop in the ocean.

MS's interests in gaming comes as a platform for home dominance. If it weren't for Sony talking of making PS2 into an entertainment hub I doubt MS would have bothered.

I'd say the reason MS own the computing industry is because people used Works at work, then when they bought their own computer went with what they knew. Word sold more PCs than any game ever did.

Not sure about the 80M figure, but either way,
No, Games importance has gone through the roof because certain players like Sony and MS see them as a way to get into people's living rooms. They are willing to take losses or make small profits becasue they know that in the long run, who gets the livingroom gets the big names and the big bucks.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

And I'm still talking about the potential of my hypothetical $500 Mac Mini with a PS3 inside, and still can't see what you found wrong with it (as in - wishful thinking; financial suicide), after accepting a PS3 would be priced at $300.

Well how come the MiniMac doesn't have 2.5ghz G5 inside, if you can just put any processor in there and still sell it for 500$.

Maybe after few years that would be possible, and even if that was possible today or in the near future, would Apple want to release such a product?, if it would be faster than their more expensive products, who would buy those expensive models, which makes a lot more money to Apple.

 

[London Geezer]

Kalin, consoles are sold at a loss, at least initially. PCs are not.
PS3 will be sold at a 300 quid price point, but it will cost more to manufacture, at least initially.

It will take a lot to take a significant share of MS/Intel/AMD market share. It could happen, but it will be a slow and painful process for the companies involved, especially seen how MS always somehow kills its competitors in the PC market. Or buys them.

 

[Gubbi]

I'm not talking about a PS3 with a HD kit, I'm talking about a CELL based PC.

Cheers
Gubbi

I'm talking about an overdressed PS3, that can be used as an overall home entertainment PC.

Home entertainment PC, what does that do ? Play DVDs and play MP3s ?

Well, I'm talking about a PC replacement. That means I need to connect my scanner, printer etc. to it. I need to be able to hook up my DV camera.

I need to be able to throw more RAM into it, because 256 or 512 is not going to cut it once I start editing my homemade pr0n.

Cheers
Gubbi

 

[Kalin]

Dr. Evil

The Mac Mini is, as usual, somewhat overpriced, solely because it's an Apple product.

Fine, remove the "Mac" out of it. You're left with a decent home PC (perfectly capable of running the usual productivity software), and an exceptional multimedia device, e.g. music, movies and games : BR dvd + PS3. I think that would be enough to get a lot of the attention of both resellers and customers. And it's much better for the average Joe than what he can get at the same price in the form of x86+MS.


LB

I'm discussing a PS3 bundled with an OS and productivity software (and whatever it needs to do it, e.g. HDD). A larger user-base is what they're fighting for, by selling hardware at a loss. Including home PC capabilities could be just another tool to get into people's rooms.


Edit: This is all relevant only if we believe Sony is willing to push CELL, and MS is not on board, of course.

Edit edit edit: learn to spell

 

[London Geezer]

I need to be able to throw more RAM into it, because 256 or 512 is not going to cut it once I start editing my homemade pr0n.

Cheers
Gubbi

Interesting!!!

 

[Alejux]

I'm not talking about a PS3 with a HD kit, I'm talking about a CELL based PC.

Cheers
Gubbi

I'm talking about an overdressed PS3, that can be used as an overall home entertainment PC.

Home entertainment PC, what does that do ? Play DVDs and play MP3s ?

Besides that, they browse the internet, run office type applications, P2P programs, graphics applications and last but not least....play games.

Well, I'm talking about a PC replacement. That means I need to connect my scanner, printer etc. to it. I need to be able to hook up my DV camera.

USB2.0

I need to be able to throw more RAM into it, because 256 or 512 is not going to cut it once I start editing my homemade pr0n.

Well, if you edit your own porn, then you could just sell it to make enough money to buy a 1GB memory expasion.

Seriously though, if this PS3 desktop had 512MB, it would be able to run pretty much anything well. While video editing is just one of the most memory demanding type of application known (coincidence you picked that example), 512MB does meet most editing software's requirements. I had a friend who edited great looking videos with his 512MB Mac.

 

[nelg]

I'm discussing a PS3 bundled with an OS and productivity software (and whatever it needs to do it, e.g. HDD). A larger user-base is what they're fighting for, by selling hardware at a loss. Including home PC capabilities could be just another tool to get into people's rooms

It would not be in Sonys interest to have people buy a PS3 to use without buying the games who's purchase subsidizes the cost of the hardware.

 

[a688]

If Sony and Apple combine to produce an uber-computer, sub $500 with 17 gigatrogs of memory and 48 complicaflops of processing, with whizzly-fizzly graphics, it still won't displace MS+Word+IE as people already know MS+Word+IE and don't want to relearn a whole new way of doing things, especially when learning how to use a computer is such an uphill struggle for so many people already.

While I do agree with most parts of your post, I do doubt that MS + Word + IE are the reason MS is still afloat and ontop of the PC business TODAY. In fact, what is going to keep consumers upgrading their outdated PCs that *still* have enough performance to run basic word + IE applications? To buy the next x.x iteration of Word? I doubt it. Already the trend is obvious...

So Phil, if people arn't upgrading their computer to run the newest version of word why would the buy a completely different system that runs different software? The trend is buying less, not buying different. PS most computers are sold to businesses that perform either basic functions for office people or interface with equipment. There is 0 reason for most companies to ditch their computers in favor of a cell workstation.

 

[j^aws]

I'm staying out of this one...let's just say I have both PC's and Macs and the only time I use my PC is to play games. For me, Mac + Consoles = Great.

Btw, this might be pertinent for this thread,

PC manufacturers want OS X?

 

[Alejux]

So Phil, if people arn't upgrading their computer to run the newest version of word why would the buy a completely different system that runs different software? The trend is buying less, not buying different. PS most computers are sold to businesses that perform either basic functions for office people or interface with equipment. There is 0 reason for most companies to ditch their computers in favor of a cell workstation.

I'm really not thinking of a cell desktop as a work computer, but more like a home entertaiment computer. A PS3 with the right software/acessories package to run both games and the user's every day applications.

The reason most companies upgrade their computers, is because the old ones start to break, and they are forced to buy new ones. And of course, the new ones are better. They have to be, since Microsoft keeps making all software run slower and slower, consuming more and more memory. Up to the point that we have a word-processor, that does the same things word processors did 8 years ago, but 10x slower and with a 10x greater memory requirements.

 

[Phil]

So Phil, if people arn't upgrading their computer to run the newest version of word why would the buy a completely different system that runs different software? The trend is buying less, not buying different. PS most computers are sold to businesses that perform either basic functions for office people or interface with equipment. There is 0 reason for most companies to ditch their computers in favor of a cell workstation.

The thing is, we have various people talking about various different possibilities of where CELL based computers could be used. While I agree with some of the possibilities, I'm not all that sure about all of them.

You may also want to note that I used the keyword Apple computers and the term people - obviously refering to the possibility of CELL cutting some way or the other into MS's domain --> in other words, I wasn't talking at all on behalf of companies that use workstations. Getting back to the points I was raised, it should be clear in what direction the market is slowly shifting: media hubs. Computers aren't driving this industry anymore because the software that sold those computers in the first place are being run perfectly on older machines. Maybe Microsoft can revive the interest somewhat with longhorn, but until that happens, Sony and a hugely flexible CELL might get a headstart...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm discussing a PS3 bundled with an OS and productivity software (and whatever it needs to do it, e.g. HDD). A larger user-base is what they're fighting for, by selling hardware at a loss. Including home PC capabilities could be just another tool to get into people's rooms

It would not be in Sonys interest to have people buy a PS3 to use without buying the games who's purchase subsidizes the cost of the hardware.

If MS can make shed-loads of money out of selling software, I'm sure other companies could too

If Sony get a license fee for software written for the Cell based computers it'd be no different to making money selling games.

As for why people upgrade, one is system 'looks'. I wouldn'y want to still be running Win3.1 even if I only use the current functionality that was available back then. Another is speed, as Flash and other media programs run poorly on old hardware. As the software is more demanding the desire to upgrade increases. A third is price, as computers are so cheap these days a dramatic improvement in performance can be obtained for a few hundred quid. And finally, why do people buy new cars? 'Coz they like new stuff! They want a black or silver PC instead of the old beige one, a flat screen 'coz they look cool, and so forth.

I know people with old PS2's that gave them away so they could buy a new slimline model. And people are impulse buying PSPs, not to satisfy a need but because after seeing it, they want it. If Sony/Apple could come up with a decently priced and spec'ed system (something Apple have never done...) and package it right, with a slick UI, decent productivity, PS gaming etc. I reckon it could take market share.

 

[nelg]

If MS can make shed-loads of money out of selling software, I'm sure other companies could too

If Sony get a license fee for software written for the Cell based computers it'd be no different to making money selling games.

When MS makes shed-loads of money from selling software they do not share that with Intel, AMD, ATI or nVidia (much to their dismay) so they can in turn sell us cheaper computers components. Furthermore would anyone who would be interested in a Cell based computer be willing to pay a $15 premium for every program they buy, including open source?

 

[Inane_Dork]

This is the original post. I'd kinda like discussion about it, not another religious war over Windows/Mac/Linux.

Apologies if all of the following has been posted/discussed before.

Regarding all of the PS3 and Xbox2 hubub I have observed a number of people run around with a number of predictions/assumptions, without ever stating how they came to these conclusions.

1) Xbox2s tri-core CPU will run at 3.5Ghz+ :
Currently dual core Power5s operate at about 2Ghz on a 130nm process, I believe it is a given the first Xbox2s will ship on the 90nm process. Is it realistic to add a third core and shrink to 90nm and it will still be able to run at 3.5Ghz ? Admittedly the Power5 has 1.9MB of L2 cache but if even AMD which has a single core Athlon64 which is on 90nm is yet to release chips past 2.6Ghz without a new core stepping and most likely will not release 3Ghz+ part till the end of the year/ next year can we really expect a tri-core Power5 derivative to run at 3.5Ghz+ ?

2)Cell architecture chips may/will eventually end up in personal computers:
Why on earth would Sony even bother to undertake the aforementioned project ? I really do not see PC users jumping all over such a product. I mean zero compatibility with market dominating Microsoft products and a completely new OS, not to mention very little in the way of speed gains for web browsing or document editing anyway. The only way to push it on the desktop would be to use Linux and even then there is no incentive to stop buying a conventional PC.

3) PS3s final implementation details:
Now I am no expert on chips but a cursory glance at www.sandpile.org reveals that Athlon64s and P4s are just less than a third the size of 1 PE (?) so I expect the cell to be a big chip is it still within the realms of reality that Sony will launch such a chip with a fully fledged BR drive and NV50 ? People are also bandying about 24 pipe configurations for GPUs in both the Microsoft and Sony consoles, is a 24 pipe card really necessary at 720p. I did a few calculations and peak pixel out put is quite high for a 24 pipe card at 500 - 600 MHz.

Is it possible that Sony will simply remove vertex shaders from Nvidias "next generation GPU" and use the PE to do the vertex shading or remove some of the vertex shaders. Is it worthwhile, how much will be saved or is it just plain stupid from a developer point of view. Could any of the resident developers give a ballpark figure on the percentage performance drop from the lack of out of order execution on the PU.

Thanks.

 

[Alejux]

If MS can make shed-loads of money out of selling software, I'm sure other companies could too

If Sony get a license fee for software written for the Cell based computers it'd be no different to making money selling games.

When MS makes shed-loads of money from selling software they do not share that with Intel, AMD, ATI or nVidia (much to their dismay) so they can in turn sell us cheaper computers components. Furthermore would anyone who would be interested in a Cell based computer be willing to pay a $15 premium for every program they buy, including open source?

If the system runs Linux, then it runs open source linux programs. If SONY wanted to make a machine and earn money in every single software sold for it, then I agree it would NEVER work.

No. This machine would have to run any Linux software. Even without the $15 premium for software, Sony would still gain from the inevitable increase in their market share, machine and accessories sales, not to mention that it would take them a step closer to the holy grail of home computing: The so called "living room general purpose computer".

 

[Mythos]

Computers aren't driving this industry anymore because the software that sold those computers in the first place are being run perfectly on older machines. Maybe Microsoft can revive the interest somewhat with longhorn, but until that happens, Sony and a hugely flexible CELL might get a headstart...

Yup. We're seeing a change in dynamics in the PC market.

IF we can get excellent perfomance out of Cell in running most software applications. Lets not forget that Cell can run multiple OS.. Add, Apple jumping on board. It could gain some momentum!