So which is more future proof?

[Atsim]

I just finished reading an interview at www.1up.com about the PS3 and there was some talk about future proofing. Some of the things that were said were kind of poking fun at Microsoft for having a system with current technology that isn't future proofed where as the PS3 is made with all future technology that'll last 10 years, or something outrageous like that.

Is this true? I mean I was under the impression that the two consoles were on the same level, so wouldn't that mean they are both "future proof"?

 

[Guden Oden]

Is this true?

Of course it isn't. It's typical company PR spin at work.

The only real thing that might make PS3 a little bit more "future proof" is if gigabit ethernet takes off in a big way (you have a small switch built-in), and if blu-ray movies become a dominant format on the market, but of course that depends on wether the user actually is interested in collecting movies... Not all will be.

The HDMI outputs versus component isn't really a big deal. Both of these consoles will run at 720P resolutions most of the time, so the quality difference even on a fixed-pixel device such as LCD or plasma screens will be minimal or even nonexistant. It's just neat to attach one single cable to your viewing device versus three/five (two for analog audio).

 

[Pozer]

Future Proof
Pronunciation: füchor 'prüf
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, alteration of futre preove, from Old French futre preuve, from Late Latin fota proba, from Latin probare to prove
1 a : a myth only believed by chubby men who spend $500 on a video card.


Funny thing is there is a picture of me in that entry...........

 

[thatdude90210]

All 3 next gen consoles will the obsolete the minute their company release a new version... "future proofing" is the fool's gold of technology.

 

[Titanio]

If you consider future-proofing to be the inclusion of as many features as possible to protect from obsolescence and to be prepared for as many future outcomes as possible, than I do think it's fair to say PS3 is more future-proof.

The hardware features PS3 has as standard over X360:

Bluray/Next-gen optical disc format (and all that means for future audio standards, alongside video)

3-port Gigabit switch

Wifi

Bluetooth 2.0

Memory Stick, CompactFlash and SD support

HDMI support

Dual display output

Optical Digital Audio Out

SACD support

(It also has "more" of some other features e.g. more USB ports, more players per system)

The things X360 has standard over PS3:

HDD (?)

Let me know if I've left out anything.

You can also quite easily cover yourself with regard to a HDD on PS3, whereas X360 may not be able to match PS3 feature-for-feature even with peripherals. Even if you technically could, the cost of doing so may not make it a valuable proposition. I'm guessing a feature for feature comparison was 1up's approach.

 

[Tap In]

Future Proof
Pronunciation: füchor 'prüf
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, alteration of futre preove, from Old French futre preuve, from Late Latin fota proba, from Latin probare to prove
1 a : a myth only believed by chubby men who spend $500 on a video card.


Funny thing is there is a picture of me in that entry...........

 

[Nite_Hawk]

The idea that the PS3 is future proof probably stems from the idea that Cell is future proof. This may or may not be true depending on how it scales and how it performs. In this sense, the 686 line of intel processors were rather future proof (all way from the 150MHz pentium pro up to the 1.3-1.4GHz PIIIs). And in this way as well, the K6 was rather short lived (from 233MHz up to 450MHz on the K6-IIIs).

Cell is supposed to be future proof given that the design is supposed to be very scalable. The idea is that you can easily scale the number of PPEs and even the number of Cell chips in the system to gain performance without a lot of rework. As manufacturing techniques improve you just scale the number of elements. A 7 PPE cell would still be able to run the code a 128PPE cell could, only much slower. Whether or not this is a big advantage for them is rather questionable. It certainly is useful if you plan on using it across a wide range of potential applications and want to release incrementally faster revisions. This isn't really what we are expecting for the PS3 though.

Microsoft's CPU doesn't seem like it really was designed to scale in the same sense that the Cell processor does, but it doesn't really need to either. It's a custom CPU for a custom device. It probably was cheaper to produce, but at the same time I don't really expect them to use the same basic design again (maybe ideas from the design though).

Really, it's rather tough to judge which was the better route to go until we find out how much each design cost and how much their next generation designs cost.

Nite_Hawk

 

[slider]

Future proofing consoles? The very idea.
Being a Sony fan I'd say that in terms of future proofing the PS3 is ahead. If I was MS what would I do when the 360 is on its last legs? Reveal the next Xbox. It's the way it's always been in these closed boxes.

 

[London Geezer]

I agree consoles should be made as future proof as possible, but in the end it never really is a determining factor in buyers' minds. No one goes out buying a console thinking "which one is more future proof?!". They hardly buy anything with "future proofing" in mind, when they really should (see TVs and PCs), consoles are bought on the basis of games.

Having said that, it's clear that feature to feature, PS3 is ahead. All that stuff crammed into one single box... I'm not even sure most of it is actually needed in fact. But i guess that awards it the accolade for "being future proof".

 

[Nite_Hawk]

Thinking a little more about this, I think another aspect of this comes down to Sony and Microsoft's development strategies.

Microsoft seems to be taking the approach of trying to hide the hardware behind software abstraction layers with the idea that it doesn't matter what the underlying hardware is so long as the APIs are standard. This approach is nice in that they can use whatever hardware is the current craze without having to invest a lot of money or time in a specific architecture, but they have to rebuild thier APIs everytime they move to something new.

Sony on the other hand seems to be a lot more open and even seems to encourage developers to write very low level code. From this perspective it makes a lot more sense for them to worry about hardware remaining similar over multiple generations so that developers don't have to constantly relearn how to do things.

I think from a developer perspective, Microsoft is much more worried about making sure their API is future proof, where Sony seems to be more concerned with making sure the hardware implementation is future proof.

Nite_Hawk

 

[Pozer]

If you consider future-proofing to be the inclusion of as many features as possible to protect from obsolescence and to be prepared for as many future outcomes as possible, than I do think it's fair to say PS3 is more future-proof.

The hardware features PS3 has as standard over X360:

Bluray/Next-gen optical disc format (and all that means for future audio standards, alongside video)

3-port Gigabit switch

Wifi

Bluetooth 2.0

Memory Stick, CompactFlash and SD support

HDMI support

Dual display output

Optical Digital Audio Out

SACD support

(It also has "more" of some other features e.g. more USB ports, more players per system)

The things X360 has standard over PS3:

HDD (?)

Let me know if I've left out anything.

You can also quite easily cover yourself with regard to a HDD on PS3, whereas X360 may not be able to match PS3 feature-for-feature even with peripherals. Even if you technically could, the cost of doing so may not make it a valuable proposition. I'm guessing a feature for feature comparison was 1up's approach.

I'll bite..

xbox360 is more fututre proof because...

- more RAM - 522MG compared to 512 (about as pointless as 3 port giga switch and dual HDMI)

- possibly a higher shader model (wgf2.0)

- Hard Drive confirmed in base unit.

- more usable memory bandwidth.

- Flexible GPU

- ability to do HDR + FSAA at the same time

... it's really a pointless argument

 

[Tap In]

I say bring out a new console every 4 years.

 

[Titanio]

I'll bite..

xbox360 is more fututre proof because...

- more RAM - 522MG compared to 512 (about as pointless as 3 port giga switch and dual HDMI)

- possibly a higher shader model (wgf2.0)

- Hard Drive confirmed in base unit.

- more usable memory bandwidth.

- Flexible GPU

- ability to do HDR + FSAA at the same time

... it's really a pointless argument

Most of your post focusses on processing power/computational capacity etc. whereas mine was more orientated toward "features", which is where I thought the thread lay. But your post is fair enough, except to say..

"- possibly a higher shader model (wgf2.0)" - it's not wgf 2.0, and adherence to certain shader models does not matter in a console as much as it does in a PC regardless

"- more usable memory bandwidth." - how do you figure? It very much depends on the situation.

"- Flexible GPU" vs dedicated

I think most agree PS3 has an edge in terms of technical capacity too, even if the degree by which that is the case if oft a subject of debate. There's as many or more things people could point at in PS3 to "demonstrate" processing/computational superiority.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Tatiano...you must be kidding.

the only thing in your entire list that had anyting to do with futureproofing is the gigabit port, hdmi and blu-ray drive. but truthfully only the blu-ray drive can have a meaningful impact on the lifespan of the console.

future-proof: protected from consequences in the future, esp. pertaining to a technology that protect it from early obsolescence

both are wifi compatible, both have wireless technolgoy for peripherals, both have optical audio out, both have high-def output, memory stcks and SD have nothing to do with futureproofing, neither does dual displays, or sacd support. what do these things do that will protect the conole from obselescence?

when does a console become obselete? REalistically, it's when the CPU or GPU power has become insifficient, and has been greatly surpassed by modern technologies. In the 360's case, there is a chance the storage media could lead to it becoming obselete quicker, so that's where I see blu-ray as a small advantage.

Even that, though, is a non-issue, as MS will most definately release a new console in 2009, capturing the then-blooming HD market, and putting Sony in a real bind with their only 3 year old PS3.

 

[scooby_dooby]

btw, i think MOST agree that neither GPU has been benchmarked yet so it's hard to say which will have the greatest performance in the real world.

 

[Titanio]

Tatiano...you must be kidding.

the only thing in your entire list that had anyting to do with futureproofing is the gigabit port, hdmi and blu-ray drive. but truthfully only the blu-ray drive can have a meaningful impact on the lifespan of the console.

future-proof: protected from consequences in the future, esp. pertaining to a technology that protect it from early obsolescence

both are wifi compatible, both have wireless technolgoy for peripherals, both have optical audio out

Sorry, didn't know it had optical out as standard. I was looking at standard features btw.

both have high-def output, memory stcks and SD have nothing to do with futureproofing, neither does dual displays, or sacd support. what do these things do that will protect the conole from obselescence?

I'd disagree, it's more comprehensive coverage of possible usage and future usage.

Even that, though, is a non-issue, as MS will most definately release a new console in 2009, capturing the then-blooming HD market, and putting Sony in a real bind with their only 3 year old PS3.

We're not talking about future consoles. But I most certainly hope we get a decent, uninterrupted lifecycle out of Xbox this time around. If I had thought it'd be another 4 year affair, I'd be quite disappointed. But I'm quite confident MS will be seeing a fuller 5/6 year cycle with 360. It'd be disastrous if they felt compelled to release another system so soon.

 

[Guden Oden]

- possibly a higher shader model (wgf2.0)

Xenos doesn't support this.
*edit: wgf2.0 (which isn't even called wgf2.0 any more) isn't finalized yet btw, so it's impossible for anything to support it right now.

 

[Powderkeg]

If you consider future-proofing to be the inclusion of as many features as possible to protect from obsolescence and to be prepared for as many future outcomes as possible, than I do think it's fair to say PS3 is more future-proof.

Consoles become obsolete when the next generation of consoles is released. Not before, and not after.

The things X360 has standard over PS3:

HDD (?)

Let me know if I've left out anything.

Headset

Ethernet Cable

You can also quite easily cover yourself with regard to a HDD on PS3, whereas X360 may not be able to match PS3 feature-for-feature even with peripherals. Even if you technically could, the cost of doing so may not make it a valuable proposition. I'm guessing a feature for feature comparison was 1up's approach.

What peripherals do you actually think the PS3 supports that the 360 will not? Also, how much do you think that hard drive will actually cost for the PS3?

And how does this fit into your "It's a console, not a PC" comment you made earlier?

 

[BlueTsunami]

Another console in 3-4 years? I really hope thats not the new life cycle of consoles. In that amount of time, devs probably would only be utilizing a certain percentage of the conosles power...just to drop it and go to a completley new console.

I would like a consoles life to be 5-6 years. That would leave enough time for console makers to develop games comfortably and would allow them to develop certain games for longer periods of time. Also, I believe future proofing was in comparison of the PS3 vs. XB360 and what will it be able to do and handle in their own "life cycle". If Microsoft "future-proofing" itself is them releasing a newer console down the line..that would be a waste of money.

 

[Atsim]

If Microsoft "future-proofing" itself is them releasing a newer console down the line..that would be a waste of money.

Well it's also a waste of money to buy a box full of features no one will ever use... Come on, six usb ports? Two HDMI ports? Who even has two HDTVs!?