Thinking the total view: Consoles as cheap PC's
- Thread starter sonyps35
- Start date
Indeed. And while the PS3 will likely have greater functionality than any other console released, it is also more expensive than any other console (save the Neo-Geo with one game). And heck, not that much smaller than a mid-range tower (like the Sonata) either.Skrying said:
A significant part of the attraction of consoles is that they hook up to your TV in the living room. That's obviously not the best room to be spending 4 hours hogging the 50" HDTV to finish a book report. So you remove it from the living room, spend the money for an LCD, and now essentially have nullified a point in the consoles favour vs. using a PC for games.
The problem is just as others have stated: The open hardware market. When Windows 3.1 was released the buzzword (in my view at least) was "Hardware Abstraction" - to be able to install different graphics and sound cards and have the OS be the gateway to compatibility instead of each software package required to support the hardware specifically - it was a huge boon compared to the closed boxes that dominated the home at the time. I remember thinking that the Amiga/Atari ST/Mac would just not be able to survive the huge benefits of this approach from a price/performance perspective, even though the technology they had was superior to what the PC had in most spots. It was just a matter of time before fierce competition would hammer this home, and obviously my suspicions turned out to be correct.
So, a 60gb HD PS3 will debut at $600. Extremetch's $800 gaming PC had a 7600GT, A64 3000, 1 GB of ram, 160GB HD, DVD-R, Nforce 4 SLI motherboard, Audigy 2, etc. That's now, and it's extremely similar to my rig, I just have 2 gigs and a 3200 - it handles any game today extremely well at 1280*1024, most with AA.
Come November 07, a year after the PS3's debut (and still very likely at $600)? For the same price, a more powerful dual-core CPU + the next midrange offering from ATI/Nvidia (DX10 based), 250+ GB HD, etc. November 08? Maybe even a quad-core for that price, another generation of midrange GPU likely beating the snot out of a 7900GTX selling for $500 now, etc. No waiting for Sony to support the hardware you want to plug into it, no need to wait for applications to be written for an immature OS, no kids screaming for it to be put back in the living room. Not to mention it runs the vast majority of programs out there filled with branchy code far, far better than the Cell could.
Therein lies the rub. The pace is just too fast. Yes, the PS3 has Blu Ray, but this isn't the jump from VHS to DVD - DVD had many significant advantages over tape besides better image quality (bear in mind as well, the PS3 drive will of course be read-only, vs the dual-layer DVD writers in every PC these days). The market clamoring for Blu Ray is very niche at this point. By the time Cell is "mature" enough to be considered as a CPU for a general purpose machine, Intel will have started on their Cell-like plans; quad X86 cores with multiple specialized cores to handle DSP-like functions. The Window (no pun intended) for Cell/PS3 to be a viable platform outside of games is just ridiculous small.
(Note that I think the PS3 will be a success as a console, after all software is what counts and Sony will have enough first-party titles to attract enough early adopters. It's just that as a PC replacement, now or in the next 5 years, I don't see happening.)
As an aside, in the age of DRM-hysteria (not unwarranted), I question as to exactly why you would want one vendor to have great success supplying the hardware and software for a PC, especially when they're a huge media conglomerate.
Last edited by a moderator:
scooby_dooby
Legend
At the end of the day it's about software and flexibility which no console will ever touch.
Shifty Geezer said:
It's clearly to run the internet faster. Everyone knows the NETburst architecture does wonders for the interNET. It was designed for it!
Marketing genius. At a time when most were on dial-up and people were complaining their "computer was slow", intel introduces NETburst to help give everyone a real speed boost. "2ghz even!"
That's a good question as honestly I felt most people have been "upgrading" their pc more for games than anything else since 1995 or so.
Laptop is the new trend nowadays. After that ... the industry has a tough sell on it's hands for anything outside of "broken computer needs to be replaced" or "gaming computer is too outdated".
With that trend, the console/pc makes sense to me as it has roughly the same guts and I'd much rather not buy a toaster for my bread and another toaster for my bagel so to speak.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dave Glue said:
lol - sad but true
I forgot abou the os driving sales but that too has a limit. How many are still running 2000? and that was an under the radar launch. They will truly have to come up with something impressive to get the majority to switch and they may have found their lure by focusing heavily on games which leads us back to the games upgrade leading many into their purchase decision.
Blazkowicz
Legend
There probably will be a market for a new amiga (a comparatively inflexible, but more integrated and simple computer). for typical desktop use the performance evolution is a bit pointless, and the single threaded performance has even only seen incremental gains since the P4 3.06 due to the frequency barrier.
but if such a platform takes off it will not be a power hungry, DRM'ed console priced as much as a good PC and single vendor by definition. I think it will rather be the new MIPS, linux based chinese microcomputers
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS6301677114.html
a tiny, low power box that's like microcomputers of the 80's : only solid state components inside, should thus be very reliable and get cheaper as it gets more integrated. sold at $150 with an external USB HDD, includes linux, firefox, gaim, openoffice.org. it has a radeon 7000 16MB on the PCI bus.. even already enough to do some 3D gaming (such as running the quake 2 engine at 60fps).
the computer without the HDD could also make a good thin client by itself and I expect it to get as cheap as a DVD player.
but if such a platform takes off it will not be a power hungry, DRM'ed console priced as much as a good PC and single vendor by definition. I think it will rather be the new MIPS, linux based chinese microcomputers
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS6301677114.html
a tiny, low power box that's like microcomputers of the 80's : only solid state components inside, should thus be very reliable and get cheaper as it gets more integrated. sold at $150 with an external USB HDD, includes linux, firefox, gaim, openoffice.org. it has a radeon 7000 16MB on the PCI bus.. even already enough to do some 3D gaming (such as running the quake 2 engine at 60fps).
the computer without the HDD could also make a good thin client by itself and I expect it to get as cheap as a DVD player.
Blazkowicz_ said:
The minimum price for such a machine is $200. The problem is that unless it is produced in large numbers unit costs are higher than they should be. Current gen PCs are actually damn cheap for what you get, as are games consoles, simply because of the economies of scale.
I don't think people will buy the PS3 because they want a PC. They will buy it because they want a games/media machine, and the PC features are a bonus. However I do think a lot of people who just want a PC to do email, digital photo management, and web browsing will not bother to get a PC once they get a PS3 because the PS3 does all they want. Also I think the PS3 will be a more successful media PC than Microsoft's offerings, because it is a better media machine.
One other point is that the computer features are an important selling point for persuading parents to buy it, especially for a high priced machine like the PS3. $600 for a games machine for the kids to mis-spend their time on - no way! But $600 for a computer that they can also do their homework on and mom and dad can watch HD movies and browse the web on, well maybe.
quest55720
Regular
SPM said:
A all in one machine might be great if you are single and living alone. When you start adding family members it just causes problems because everyone wants to use it but only 1 can. If dad wants to watch a movie, mom wants to check her e-mail and the kid wants to play games it becomes a giant head ace. That is why I keep my game machines gaming only. PCs that surf the net and check e-mail are dirt cheap dell sells them a few times a year at 299. Atleast once a month best buy and circuit city have PCs for 399 or less. The price of a ps3 and a good size hdtv is what 1500 dollars or more? I don't think anyone who has used a pc or mac to surf the net would have an enjoyable experience on a sdtv which the vast majority of people have. I might be the only one but typing with the keyboard on my lap on the couch well sucks even worse is finding something decent to put a mouse on. I much prefer to type and use a mouse at a computer desk. Also lets not forget the 10s of millions of people on dial up I did not see a modem built in to the ps3.
I would also venture to guess that 95 out of a 100 people who buy a ps3 at 299 or more have 1 or more PCs or Macs in the house.
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with your points, but it won't be this way forever. In 3 years time a PS3 will what, $300, needing only a cheap monitor. In 5 years time it'll be cheaper than the cheapest PC I imagine, because PC hardware won't scale down any more price and only can go up in spec (I think - could be wrong on that and maybe $150 PCs will appear?). Enabling features in the currentyl pricey PS3 now end up contributing to the platform's overall appeal including years down the line. Plus how many people buy new PCs and why? Is it to get a second computer for little Jonny to play games and do his homework while Mum's surfing the 'net? If so PS3 could offer good value too, not just 3+ years down the line but even at launch it'll be price comparative with an XB360+cheap PC where a cheap PC won't game as well the consoles. What situations could there be where a second computer is wanted and PS3 wouldn't be suitable (assuming the software is all there for home use)?quest55720 said:
We're not likely to be seeing PS3+HDTV being used to displace any PCs in the short term, but it's the long-term functions of the machine where we'll see whether it takes off or not. If we look at a speculated 10 year plan for it, in 6 years time maybe PS3 will be $150 and sold as a dirt cheap media gateway cum home computer, extending a period of profitable sales on the hardware by maintaining popularity. Even if PS3's tech is severely dated then next to a $300 PC, it can still do the required tasks well enough and would be cheaper. For all those people buying entry level Dells, if they had a choice between a $300 Dell of the current spec, or a $150 computer of lower spec that would work just as well for most tasks, which would they pick? I'd go with the cheaper one myself if it's not my main work machine and is only wanted for email, surfing and word-processing. I like the idea of a full workstation class PC in the home for high-end activities, and then small cheap computers on a network for more mundane and less taxing tasks.
quest55720
Regular
I might be wrong but has sony anounced a series or printers or support from printer makers? If you can't print it makes it hard for little johny to do his reports. Also many people use those photo printers to print out pictures from thier digital cameras. Also is there going to be a cd or dvd burner on the market for the PS3? People love to put their pictures on cd or dvd I get discs every christmass the last few years. There are still people out there who like to put thier mp3s on disc to play in thier cars.
I can see people surfing the net checking e-mail or chating with the ps3 but that is about it. I went online with my dreamcast a few times to get a hint on a game I was stuck on.
I also see many parents not letting the kids ps3 touch the internet because of all the reports of online preditors recently.
I think it is great that sony will add some extra features aslong as I don't have to pay for them if I don't want to use them. One feature I would pay for is streaming of many many video types from my windows xp pc to the ps3.
I would look at the ps3 as a compliment or extension of my home entertainment not the hub or heart of it.
I can see people surfing the net checking e-mail or chating with the ps3 but that is about it. I went online with my dreamcast a few times to get a hint on a game I was stuck on.
I also see many parents not letting the kids ps3 touch the internet because of all the reports of online preditors recently.
I think it is great that sony will add some extra features aslong as I don't have to pay for them if I don't want to use them. One feature I would pay for is streaming of many many video types from my windows xp pc to the ps3.
I would look at the ps3 as a compliment or extension of my home entertainment not the hub or heart of it.
quest55720 said:
Sony doesn't have to make printers or get support for printers on Linux - the vast majority of printers already support Linux. The main problem is not getting a printer that works with, but avoiding the few lemons that don't. The problem is that most peripheral manufacturers don't advertise Linux driver support even if they provide Linux drivers. For example, go to an HP peripheral website, and you will find Windows and Mac drivers, but no mention of Linux drivers. To find HP Linux drivers, you need to go to an obscure website that only geeks know about. According to someone I spoke to, this is due to Microsoft's ongoing anti-trust activities. The guy said that this is because Microsoft offers an advertising rebate if Windows is mentioned but if Linux or Linux driver support is advertised, they will lose the rebate. This makes it difficult for the newbie to figure out Linux compatibility for various products. However if Sony provides a list of supported printers, then the problem is solved. For people who have difficulty matching the printer model number with the model in the shop, Sony could also sell rebadged printers as Dell does.
No problem, but with Linux on the PS3 , you can also view the photos on the HDTV and manipulate them with image editing software. These can be saved onto flash media via a USB flash reader plugged into the PS3 to print on the photo printer.
As far as I know, the PS3 internal Bluray drive is read-only, but a cheap USB CD/DVD-RW drive will solve that problem. Linux has excellent support for USB storage devices.
I think that VOIP phones will be a very important reason for having a computer at home in future. Plug in a USB headset, and the PS3 is an Internet phone.
No problem. With DRM lock down, the PS3 can have secure Internet content filtering. Linux is a server OS primarily, and it is widely used as a web cashing proxy to filter content accessible to school and library computers in the US. As such it has some of the best content filtering applications already running on it.
Why should you pay for that if your content is already on your own PC? Sony is a music and film company, I am sure Sony will provide a top notch media download site for those willing to pay for it, and all you should have to do to access the videos on your PC is to share the files over a LAN or wireless network on your Windows machine. These can then be browsed on the PS3.
Gaming, HDTV Bluray movie player, music/video/movie download, storage and playback, web browsing, Internet phone and video conferencing, possible Tivo style video recorder, add a musical keyboard via USB to give a MIDI synthesizer - there isn't a lot home entertainment left after this. If Sony decides, all of these can be done straight away, because they already exist on Linux.
quest55720
Regular
SPM said:
Outside blue ray playback I can do all that for a fraction of the price on a PC vs a ps3 and hdtv. Even if you already have an hdtv the prices are still about equal and you don't have to tie up the expensive HDTV doing word processing or picture/video editing. The title of the thread is consoles as cheap pcs and untill the PS3 price drops in half it is not cheap compared to cheap PCs.
quest55720 said:
You can't get an equivalent PC (high end media PC) for anywhere near the price of a PS3. Even buying just the Bluray HD movie player functions would put you outside the $600 price. Are you really suggesting that you can get a PC suitable for gaming for $300?
Last edited by a moderator:
scooby_dooby
Legend
quest55720 said:
BINGO. /thread
