Why limit console functionality?

[jvd]

What???

flash , java support . These things need to be supported and the browser needs to be constantly updated and tweaked to accept new versions of these , new thigns that pop up .

It will also then need virus protection and other things .


As it stands now there is no real net acess . You log on to xbox live or through the game menu and connect . On the pc side with an os and other programs people can start to spread viruses specificly targeted at the console .

No you would need a word processor that can save and read .doc files, not MS word.

I'm pretty sure word has its own rich text extension aside from .doc

And MS never make new operating systems, and Linux is still stuck at version 1.0 right?

Its not all new . Most things aren't changed as they have been designed on x86 extensions . They mostly tweak , fix and add onto the existing o.s . They do make massive updates .

Macs get brand new os's from time to time .

But the os's on the pc side are much more complex than on the console .


Sony and nintendo would need to open up thier own os busniess , they would need to get many many companys to also develop programs for the system or it will never be close to a 300$ pc .

THe more layes of function you add to the os the more problems you have to fix and the bigger the project becomes . The more the os takes away from the processer and ram and the less is there for games .

 

[Tsmit42]

What???

flash , java support . These things need to be supported and the browser needs to be constantly updated and tweaked to accept new versions of these , new thigns that pop up .

It will also then need virus protection and other things .


As it stands now there is no real net acess . You log on to xbox live or through the game menu and connect . On the pc side with an os and other programs people can start to spread viruses specificly targeted at the console .

Okay, but it can be done right? We should abandon the idea, because we might get a virus? We should have stopped using PCs a long time ago then.

No you would need a word processor that can save and read .doc files, not MS word.

I'm pretty sure word has its own rich text extension aside from .doc

Well let me rephrase that.

As long as what you save in Word can be read by the console word processor and vice versa, then there shouldn't be a problem.

And MS never make new operating systems, and Linux is still stuck at version 1.0 right?

Its not all new . Most things aren't changed as they have been designed on x86 extensions . They mostly tweak , fix and add onto the existing o.s . They do make massive updates .

Macs get brand new os's from time to time .

But the os's on the pc side are much more complex than on the console .


Sony and nintendo would need to open up thier own os busniess , they would need to get many many companys to also develop programs for the system or it will never be close to a 300$ pc .

THe more layes of function you add to the os the more problems you have to fix and the bigger the project becomes . The more the os takes away from the processer and ram and the less is there for games .

The hard parts of the OS design would have to be done regardless, and with fixed hardware it should be even easier to do the extra things.

 

[ZoinKs!]

In Microsoft's case, they don't want to kill off the pc. Why sell an xbox at a loss (which won't generate any game sales if it's mainly used for browsing, email, and typing documents) when they could sell another copy of Windows for a nice profit?

Remember: part of the reason MS is in the console business is they feared Sony would make the playstation a pc replacement. So MS wants the xbox to be a games machine and extension of the pc, not a pc replacement.

In Nintendo's case, all they want is to make a games machine. No interest in creating a pc replacement.

Sony would like to make themselves the center of the 21st century digital lifestyle but so far that's been hype without substance. It remains to be seen if they'll go further down that path with the PS3 then they went with the PS2. I have my doubts.

 

[jvd]

Okay, but it can be done right? We should abandon the idea, because we might get a virus? We should have stopped using PCs a long time ago then.

No it can be done , but it will be very very expensive and will continue to be a huge cost . Keeping virus definitions up to date , spam blockers , spy ware tools.

On the pc its an open platform anyone can develop on it for no cost . So there are alot of free programs for virus care and other preventive measures .

Sony and nintendo will either have to make it open source which is the exact oppisite of the console busniess model. Or take all the costs onto itself .

As long as what you save in Word can be read by the console word processor and vice versa, then there shouldn't be a problem.

true but not everything will be compatible , causing some problems down the line .

The hard parts of the OS design would have to be done regardless, and with fixed hardware it should be even easier to do the extra things.

I disagree .

The hard part is making a stable platform when you've added other programs to it . A console os has to handle calls from the input device to the processer and to the rest of the hardware . They are low lvl and very efficent .

To add layer and layer ontop of it with a robust gui the ability to open up a web browser , then a word program , then watch a movie then run a virus program , then run mp3s at the same time , then go to browser again . Will cause a ton of problems which will not creap up in the basic os that are on the consoles today .


There is alot more to it then to say , hey lets make an os that does everything windows does and have it done .

 

[wco81]

One word, cannibalization.

If the Xbox 360 can surf, run Office and get all the most popular PC games, including RTS games, then a lot of people might not bother to upgrade their PCs or buy the 360 instead of a PC.

That would piss off Dell and HP and MS would not get Windows revenues, which is where they make most of their money. Think about it, the $100-200 MS charges for XP is almost pure profit. The R&D has been fully amortized by now.

On the other hand, the 360 costs them money, at least at the beginning.

If they ported AOE3 to the 360 with K/M support, that will get me to buy the system (although I may get carpal tunnel using a K/M in my living room)

So while MS wants to increase their console market share, they don't necessarily want people to stop buying PCs, even for games.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

No it can be done , but it will be very very expensive and will continue to be a huge cost . Keeping virus definitions up to date , spam blockers , spy ware tools.

A lot of spyware/virus etc is holes in the OS. If designed right I think an OS could be extremely tight. I think the biggest problems at the mo' is legacy, companies building on old OS's and inheriting flaws as a result of backwards compatibility etc. Also, because software companies often don't work in ideal situations, not releasing software until it's FINISHED because of economic pressures, generates problems.

As long as what you save in Word can be read by the console word processor and vice versa, then there shouldn't be a problem.

true but not everything will be compatible , causing some problems down the line .

I write. I print. As long as I don't need to share files formats irrelevant. There's a lot of cross-platform file formats so that shouldn't be a problem.

As a user of an Amiga, who then went on to PC, who's worked as an IT support blah blah, I have to say I hate windows PCs. They have so many stupid problems that, from the design aspect of my Comp Sci degree, strike me as totally avoidable and thus are the more frustrating then just taking up a lot of time troubleshooting.

In days of yore of finite hardware that was never upgraded, you never got hardware conflicts, driver conflicts, programs messing each other about. I would very happily have a finite system, XB360 or PS3 or whatever, that allows the productivity stuff I use my PC for without the mind-numbingly stupid problems. I believe it's possible, though even if not, it's still a great dream. I really hate the idea that for the next God knows how many years, we are still going to have the same complicated computers we have now, where to use it you need to know about security, drivers, hardware requirements, and even then encounter programs that won't run on your machine when they do on other people's, for no traceable reason.

 

[Tsmit42]

Okay, but it can be done right? We should abandon the idea, because we might get a virus? We should have stopped using PCs a long time ago then.

No it can be done , but it will be very very expensive and will continue to be a huge cost . Keeping virus definitions up to date , spam blockers , spy ware tools.

If it is that expensive, how can program make these programs for free? I would think the OS would be designed to keep this to a minimum, like not have activeX on by default.

On the pc its an open platform anyone can develop on it for no cost . So there are alot of free programs for virus care and other preventive measures .

Sony and nintendo will either have to make it open source which is the exact oppisite of the console busniess model. Or take all the costs onto itself .

Why would sony have to provide all the software? It could still work like the console model of today. Software developers write software, gets it "PS3 Certified", Sony gets a piece of the profit and everyone is happy. Free software could work the same way, but no profit is made, only cost is the "certification."

As long as what you save in Word can be read by the console word processor and vice versa, then there shouldn't be a problem.

true but not everything will be compatible , causing some problems down the line .

Why wouldn't it be fully compatible? I may be mistaking, but isn't there already Office Suites that can read and save to .doc without problem?

The hard parts of the OS design would have to be done regardless, and with fixed hardware it should be even easier to do the extra things.

I disagree .

The hard part is making a stable platform when you've added other programs to it . A console os has to handle calls from the input device to the processer and to the rest of the hardware . They are low lvl and very efficent .

To add layer and layer ontop of it with a robust gui the ability to open up a web browser , then a word program , then watch a movie then run a virus program , then run mp3s at the same time , then go to browser again . Will cause a ton of problems which will not creap up in the basic os that are on the consoles today .


There is alot more to it then to say , hey lets make an os that does everything windows does and have it done .

Even the Ps2 has a GUI interface. Xbox360 seems to have an even more robust dashboard interface. I am not saying that this is a job for a 15 kid, but a large corp. making a robust GUI is very doable.

 

[Johnny_Physics]

Even the Ps2 has a GUI interface. Xbox360 seems to have an even more robust dashboard interface. I am not saying that this is a job for a 15 kid, but a large corp. making a robust GUI is very doable.

A simple GUI and an fully fledged operating system like Linux, MacOS or Windows is two very different things.


But ok, I'll play along, let's say that a large corporation put a lot of manpower into creating an operating system for a console. Of course they would like to make some money by doing that, right?
So let's set the price at $150, it's a reasonable price because they have to support and update it during the life of the console and by that they need to keep people employed that works on these patches and they also need to pay for QA and the site/download facilities that you get these patches from - this also includes people that updates the site, writes documentation/instructions etc.
So the price right now is 300(or 360 in the case of Xbox360) + 150 dollars.
Then you need a monitor because you wouldn't want it to run on a crummy TV. If you already have a monitor you probably have a PC, and what would the benefit be if you expanded the families home access to computers if you only had one monitor? So you need an extra monitor.
Let's say $150 for the monitor, including shipping and what not.

So the final pricetag would land on 300(360) + 150 + 150 = $600($660), quite a bargain huh?
And then you would have to buy all that extra software you're talking about to be able to properly use it, and... wait a minute, what's the drawback of buying a complete $500 machine from Dell and get something that already IS compatible with most of the software that exists today, especially if you just want to write some word documents and surf the web?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

and... wait a minute, what's the drawback of buying a complete $500 machine from Dell and get something that already IS compatible with most of the software that exists today, especially if you just want to write some word documents and surf the web?

The troubles with PCs. That Dell works fine (my sis bought a Dell on my recommendation), except of course the moment you connect it to the internet, before you've even had chance to install a Firewall (not knowing what a firewall is but buying it from QVC coz they said you need one), you pick up a worm and your machine crashes out 5 minutes from being switched on for the first time. Once you've got your tech savvy brother to install it, it works fine. After a while it starts to slow down. You don't know why ('coz you're a simple user, not a technician) so call in your brother who finally isolates it to a poor firewall and he searches for a quality freeware solution. You then decide you want to play some games but the inbuilt graphics aren't up to it, so buy an improved Graphics card. You've no idea how to install it so call in your tech savvy bro who puts it in, only now one of the games doesn't run. Thankfully your tech savvy brother knows to get the latest drivers and update the software, but that doesn't fix it. It befalls your tech savvy brother to contact support, give the details, and get no advice other than 'update the drivers'. Said tech-savvy brother then spends HOURS trying things out, to isolate it to a particular mix of game+graphics card+firewall+sound driver doesn't work. A one in a ten-thousand chance and you're just unlucky it's you. That same tech savvy brother then returns home to his own PC, which he doesn't install anything unneccesary on 'coz he knows how to take care of his PC, which has a deveoped a broken Explorer for God knows what reason, and reinstalling the OS results in the sound playback glitching, on the same hardware as previous when it didn't, without anything else having changed.

This is a tiny example of the problems people have using current PCs. They are NOT user-friendly!!! They require the most knowledge of anything human beings have ever invented. It's ridiculous in my mind that they haven't been able to produce a system that works on its own without needing a huge amount of computer literacy to be able to keep running stably.

I'd also say that's $600 for a VERY powerful computer, that a $1000+, even $2000+ rig won't touch in processing terms.

Furthermore, who says the OS has to be sold? Say Sony included one for PS3 (which they're writing anyway for the Cell workstations AFAIK) they could do a licensing policy for software. That has pros and cons like all things, but it does mean they needn't charge more for it and could generate more revenues from software. It'll also offer a platform for something like IBM's office suite, where without competition from MS Office the field is wide open, and you'd be looking at a very large user base of 50-80 million PS3s. Not PC user-base size, but plenty good enough to entice developers. And that'd just be PS3 buyers for the console, not those who'd switch, using their existing monitor from their PC, like me, to a more secure and robust OS (assuming a decent job was done).

For just adding PC-like versatility, I don't suppose MS will want to go this route as otherwise everyone will be buying XB360's to run Office et al, with MS losing money on each one sold. They'd rather other companies deal with the hardware issue and just sell the OS and applications.

No idea where Nintendo stand on all this. They have said for a long time they're interested only in the games, but noises regards DS suggests they're more willing to consider non-game uses for their hardware such as internet surfing these days.

 

[Tsmit42]

Even the Ps2 has a GUI interface. Xbox360 seems to have an even more robust dashboard interface. I am not saying that this is a job for a 15 kid, but a large corp. making a robust GUI is very doable.

A simple GUI and an fully fledged operating system like Linux, MacOS or Windows is two very different things.


But ok, I'll play along, let's say that a large corporation put a lot of manpower into creating an operating system for a console. Of course they would like to make some money by doing that, right?
So let's set the price at $150, it's a reasonable price because they have to support and update it during the life of the console and by that they need to keep people employed that works on these patches and they also need to pay for QA and the site/download facilities that you get these patches from - this also includes people that updates the site, writes documentation/instructions etc.
So the price right now is 300(or 360 in the case of Xbox360) + 150 dollars.

$150 for an OS? Have you ever heard of linux? I'm not saying that it would cost them nothing, but do you think an OS really cost $150 per copy to make, especailly if you are selling 100 million copies of them? Do you really think that Microsoft makes BILLIONS of dollars a years by selling their OS for what it is worth? Sony could also just outsource the OS and pay the developer per console sold, like $5, thats 500 million over the life of the console. Remember, Sony would not be trying to make billions off the OS.

Then you need a monitor because you wouldn't want it to run on a crummy TV. If you already have a monitor you probably have a PC, and what would the benefit be if you expanded the families home access to computers if you only had one monitor? So you need an extra monitor.
Let's say $150 for the monitor, including shipping and what not.

So the final pricetag would land on 300(360) + 150 + 150 = $600($660), quite a bargain huh?

Yes, if you don't have a monitor, then you would need to buy one. You can get a 15" monitor for around $50, even less on ebay probably. Even new 17" monitors on newegg is sub $100. But your situation is like having to buy a new tv for every new console you buy, which is not the case since you would want to upgrade most likely. If you still want to use your old pc, then you would have to get a new display, but if you only had 1 tv, you would have to do the same to use your old console.

And then you would have to buy all that extra software you're talking about to be able to properly use it, and... wait a minute, what's the drawback of buying a complete $500 machine from Dell and get something that already IS compatible with most of the software that exists today, especially if you just want to write some word documents and surf the web?

And you don't have to buy software for PCs??? Well unless you are a pirate then you do. And as I stated above, there could be free software for the console OS.

Also next gen consoles will be much more powerful than a $300-$500 dell pc, that is why I would want it. If they had the the right software for it, I would recommend it to ALL of my relatives as well. Like you said if you just want to write some documents and surf the web, software compatibility shouldn't be an issue for you anyway.

 

[jvd]

If it is that expensive, how can program make these programs for free? I would think the OS would be designed to keep this to a minimum, like not have activeX on by default.

by limiting the features you have. Most of them will get rid of spyware for free , but many charge for the function of preventing the spyware to get on. Some also have adds that generate money .

Virus programs , few are free. Some ilke avast also limit the things you can do with it .

If you shut things off by default like active x there are alot of websites you will miss out on .

Why would sony have to provide all the software? It could still work like the console model of today. Software developers write software, gets it "PS3 Certified", Sony gets a piece of the profit and everyone is happy. Free software could work the same way, but no profit is made, only cost is the "certification."

Who is going to make a product that sony requires royaltys from when you can make it on the pc for free ?

Why give up a piece of the profit ? You think 100 million sony systems is great. Till you look at the pc installed base and i think its easy to see that any company will target the pc side .

Why wouldn't it be fully compatible? I may be mistaking, but isn't there already Office Suites that can read and save to .doc without problem?

Ms owns certian extensions . Think pdf files. YOu need an adobe product to open these files .


There are so many things on the pc that you take for granted that you don't realise are made from many diffrent companys .

Sony would need a program that would be compatible with all the big poducts .

Even the Ps2 has a GUI interface. Xbox360 seems to have an even more robust dashboard interface. I am not saying that this is a job for a 15 kid, but a large corp. making a robust GUI is very doable.

Your seriously going to compare the ps2 menus with windows or apple osx ? or linux ?

Thats like saying the sandbox at your local preschool is the sahara .

Do you really think that if os was easy to do microsoft would own 90% of the market ? Every tom , dick and harry would be making os product.

The troubles with PCs

The trouble with windows in general is that there are so many users that a person can easily make a name for themselves by making a virus and getting thier names on the news .

You thik that if sony , ms , or nintendo put out a windows type os for thier systems hackers and virus makers wont try to make names for themselves by developing these virus and worm programs for these systems ?

People will flock like a plague of locus to the one with the biggest installed base trying to be the first to have a worm that destroys 10 million xbox 360s or whatever .

You then decide you want to play some games but the inbuilt graphics aren't up to it, so buy an improved Graphics card

Pay compusa to install the card . Windows update offers driver updates every few months and the drivers from both ati and nvidia are vastly improved .

The thing is the pc can actually be upgraded . That is its strength. in 3 years if its to slow you can upgrade it and most likely spend less upgrading than buying a new one . In 3 years your stuck with a ps3 for anotehr 2 years till they put out a new one .

This is a tiny example of the problems people have using current PCs. They are NOT user-friendly!!! They require the most knowledge of anything human beings have ever invented. It's ridiculous in my mind that they haven't been able to produce a system that works on its own without needing a huge amount of computer literacy to be able to keep running stably.

Err they need the most knowledge because nothing else on this planet allows you to do so many things . Games , movies , internet , music , word programs , video editing , picture editing .

That is why . But to just turn a pc on and go on the net is very simple . Windows has become easy to use and the tools to keep it going have become easier also.

And that'd just be PS3 buyers for the console, not those who'd switch, using their existing monitor from their PC, like me, to a more secure and robust OS (assuming a decent job was done).

till you switch over and hackers follow and make it less secure and then make your console system that was bought by so many over a pc for gaming just as bad for playing games as it will be filled with viruses and spyware and all other problems .

 

[Tsmit42]

by limiting the features you have. Most of them will get rid of spyware for free , but many charge for the function of preventing the spyware to get on. Some also have adds that generate money .

Virus programs , few are free. Some ilke avast also limit the things you can do with it .

If you shut things off by default like active x there are alot of websites you will miss out on .

So the question is that why wouldn't this work on PS3? I see no reason whatsoever. Also, firefox lets me browse most websites fine, if ActiveX is required for the page, it asked you if you want to enable it for that page. I don't see any reason why this could not be done on PS3.

Who is going to make a product that sony requires royaltys from when you can make it on the pc for free ?

Why give up a piece of the profit ? You think 100 million sony systems is great. Till you look at the pc installed base and i think its easy to see that any company will target the pc side .

People that want to target an additonal 100 million users. That number may grow to even more if they include PC like functionality, much more maybe. I am not saying "only" program for the ps3, but "also". Yes you will give up a bit of your profit, but you would still make a profit.

Ms owns certian extensions . Think pdf files. YOu need an adobe product to open these files.


There are so many things on the pc that you take for granted that you don't realise are made from many diffrent companys .

Sony would need a program that would be compatible with all the big poducts .

All what big products? The internet and word processing? Firefox does internet browsing very well, but Sony can't make a web browser to do the same? StarOffice does word processing with very good MSOffice compatibility, but Sony can't make the same? Everything you are saying has been done, and most of them are free.

Your seriously going to compare the ps2 menus with windows or apple osx ? or linux ? Thats like saying the sandbox at your local preschool is the sahara .

I am comparing them to a point where it can be draw on the screen. The ps2 GUI is not complex because it does not have to be. But could Sony make a GUI for PS3 that rivals windows or Linux? I would think so. You are sounding like you think it is impossible, but many have done it.

Do you really think that if os was easy to do microsoft would own 90% of the market ? Every tom , dick and harry would be making os product.

And have you never heard of a Monopoly?

 

[Geeforcer]

Tsmit, you asked why someone would want limit console functionality. People, myself included, gave you a number of reasons. You may question validity of these arguments, which is fine; however the fact of the matter is, barring a sudden announcement, it looks like major console makers agree with them.

BTW, the neat and tidy worry free closed system will disintegrate when people try to connect a printer to their console... and a digital camera... and a camcorder...and a scanner... and a webcam, etc. Who will write drivers for all of that? Make sure that everything works fine together? Who is going to provide updates for OS, as well as anti-virus and anti-spyware tools, because once the user base increases, they will undoubtedly come along. Finally, who is going to pay for this? Manufacturer, who is already losing money on hardware, or consumer, who can already get a PC for the same amount?

Here is an imperfect but serviceable analogy. We have cars, and we have boats. Car business is very low-margin, but the companies make up for it, because they also own the gas stations. Then one day a car company decided to make its cars more like boats, and starts making an amphibious car, which naturally costs more to make. To the people who live near the water and don't have a boat, this is a nice bonus - however, everyone else simply has to pay more for a feature they won't use. Additionally, the amphibious car is not quite as robust as a real boat when in the water. Oh and while the car is in the amphibious mode, it can't use its gasoline engine.

 

[Geeforcer]

All what big products? The internet and word processing? Firefox does internet browsing very well, but Sony can't make a web browser to do the same? StarOffice does word processing with very good MSOffice compatibility, but Sony can't make the same? Everything you are saying has been done, and most of them are free.

/bangs head.

And how are you expected to make money of "free" products? A Playstation 3 with build-in browser will be a triple money loser for Sony:

A) Chances are, they will lose money on hardware
B) They have to build and support the browser, and then give it away.
C) PS3s used as internet appliances is not being used for gaming.

Seriously, can you outline a business model which would be superior to the current one from cost benefit standpoint and be a little more comprehensive then "grandmas... household with teenagers...someone will buy PCstations....because they will be cheaper...wait, maybe not...but they will make money on software...most of which will free…and user-friendly…while running Linux". If you can, feel free to forward it Sony or Nintendo and I am sure they will heed your advice.

 

[Tsmit42]

Tsmit, you asked why someone would want limit console functionality. People, myself included, gave you a number of reasons. You may question validity of these arguments, which is fine; however the fact of the matter is, barring a sudden announcement, it looks like major console makers agree with them.

BTW, the neat and tidy worry free closed system will disintegrate when people try to connect a printer to their console... and a digital camera... and a camcorder...and a scanner... and a webcam, etc. Who will write drivers for all of that? Make sure that everything works fine together? Who is going to provide updates for OS, as well as anti-virus and anti-spyware tools, because once the user base increases, they will undoubtedly come along. Finally, who is going to pay for this? Manufacturer, who is already losing money on hardware, or consumer, who can already get a PC for the same amount?

Here is an imperfect but serviceable analogy. We have cars, and we have boats. Car business is very low-margin, but the companies make up for it, because they also own the gas stations. Then one day a car company decided to make its cars more like boats, and starts making an amphibious car, which naturally costs more to make. To the people who live near the water and don't have a boat, this is a nice bonus - however, everyone else simply has to pay more for a feature they won't use. Additionally, the amphibious car is not quite as robust as a real boat when in the water. Oh and while the car is in the amphibious mode, it can't use its gasoline engine.

Every reason you gave have been because it would cost the "Company" more in the short term. It seems like these days consumers are not worried about getting the most out of their products, but they are worried about companies doing more work, but possibly making more money.

Also the the car-boat analogy is somewhat accurate, howevera console with PC like functionality is like a top of the line benz(gaming platform), that can also go in the water(pc functions). Why would you not want it if it cost you the same amount or a fairly low relative price?

You say that it will cost you more, but I gave you alot of reason why it would not cost you much more.

There is no stopping Sony from making perpherials for the console like they do now, so driver issues still would not be a problem. Also, I am not suggestion that we should give up PCs and go with fixed function consoles, because PC will still have uses. I am just saying why limit ourselves to driving on land when for a few extra bucks we could explore the whole world.

 

[Tsmit42]

All what big products? The internet and word processing? Firefox does internet browsing very well, but Sony can't make a web browser to do the same? StarOffice does word processing with very good MSOffice compatibility, but Sony can't make the same? Everything you are saying has been done, and most of them are free.

/bangs head.

And how are you expected to make money of "free" products? A Playstation 3 with build-in browser will be a triple money loser for Sony:

A) Chances are, they will lose money on hardware
B) They have to build and support the browser, and then give it away.
C) PS3s used as internet appliances is not being used for gaming.

Seriously, can you outline a business model which would be superior to the current one from cost benefit standpoint and be a little more comprehensive then "grandmas... household with teenagers...someone will buy PCstations....because they will be cheaper...wait, maybe not...but they will make money on software...most of which will free…and user-friendly…while running Linux". If you can, feel free to forward it Sony or Nintendo and I am sure they will heed your advice.

---------------------------

I will list ways for non-gaming profits for a fantasy ps3.

Beginning of console life when consoles are losing money:

1st Party Software Sells.
3rd Party Software sells pays sony a % for every copy sold.
PS3 Software Certification(even for free software).
Blu-ray software sells as well.
Other microtransactions.

When console start making money on hardware:
Every system sold + what is above.

-----------------------------------

Getting hardware cost down as fast as possible would be what they would focus on. And like shifty pointed out, they are making a OS to work with Cell workstations, so an OS might not be that much of a investment.

The business model they have now, also have the same problems. With the inclusion of Blu-ray, many people will just buy it for that. And some people only buy 1 or 2 games a year. Sony knows this, that is why they will try to make the hardware profitable as soon as possible regardless if an fully fledged OS is included or not.

Also, they can sell the system for a higher price for a long period of time generating more revenue because of the addtional value that the console would have. So that is money right there.

 

[Geeforcer]

Basically, the additional revenue would come primarily from First and Third party software sales. However, this does have costs associated with it, such as ensuring hardware and software compatibility, updaters, added hardware functionality, etc.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree then. In my opinion, the revenue from the software sales will be offset by two factors: increased costs to provide and maintain additional capabilities and the fact that the said software will at least in part compete with games for user time. Considering how cheap and ubiquitous PCs are, it is possible that the upfront costs of expending functionality will not justify the demand for them.

Now, this is just my opinion. I think that there is not enough demand to justify the costs, while you think there is. Who knows, I might be greatly underestimating the market for non-gaming console software. However, judging from the direction the market is (not) headed, it seems that console manufactures agree with my line of thinking, at least at this point it time

 

[jvd]

So the question is that why wouldn't this work on PS3? I see no reason whatsoever. Also, firefox lets me browse most websites fine, if ActiveX is required for the page, it asked you if you want to enable it for that page. I don't see any reason why this could not be done on PS3.

wtf cares about active x and if you can see a page and turn it on and off . The point is sony has to make a browser and continue to update it so when new versions of active x , java or whatever are made the browser can support it .

There is a reason why ms is on version 6 of its browser and why there are thousands of patches for it .

People that want to target an additonal 100 million users. That number may grow to even more if they include PC like functionality, much more maybe. I am not saying "only" program for the ps3, but "also". Yes you will give up a bit of your profit, but you would still make a profit.

The profit made may not recoup the loss that will incur for creating a new program for a new operating system and creating new defintions and adding a whole nother support group to service it .

All what big products? The internet and word processing? Firefox does internet browsing very well, but Sony can't make a web browser to do the same? StarOffice does word processing with very good MSOffice compatibility, but Sony can't make the same? Everything you are saying has been done, and most of them are free.

Video viewer for divix , mpeg , avi , quicktime and other various programs that support all the audio codecs .

Programs for video editing , software for editing and printing photos . Programs for talking to friends online like icq , yahoo messanger , aim .

I am comparing them to a point where it can be draw on the screen. The ps2 GUI is not complex because it does not have to be. But could Sony make a GUI for PS3 that rivals windows or Linux? I would think so. You are sounding like you think it is impossible, but many have done it.

Many ? No , there is osx and linux that are even remotely close to the complexity and easy of use and compatibility of the market leader windows .

Not only that but whlie i'm sure sony can do it , it will take many many years and it will be project that never ends and the longer it goes on the more bloated and inefficent it becomes (like windows ).

You don't just go out and make windows in a few weeks . It takes years to go from the first windows to what we currently have and linux has taken many years to become what it has become .

And have you never heard of a Monopoly?

yea its what sony is making in the console industry .



Look its pointless to continue this convo . Go on thinking what you want and go on being disapionted when it doesn't happen .

 

[Tsmit42]

Yes, I think it is pointless to continue the conversation, because people like you guys settle for "enough." This is the same line of thinking from people that support Hd-dvd. If we don't push manufacturers into doing it, they will settle for "enough" as well.

 

[jvd]

Yes, I think it is pointless to continue the conversation, because people like you guys settle for "enough." This is the same line of thinking from people that support Hd-dvd. If we don't push manufacturers into doing it, they will settle for "enough" as well.

Well i wish sony would give me a 15000 $ system for 300$ . But i don't think that is going to happen .