Posted on 04/05/2006 7:02:22 AM PDT by ladyshealth
Have to ask the only man who knows for sure.
Ummmm - the original announced date for release was indeed a Christmas date....last Christmas.
And Lexus is WAAAAAY more expensive than Ford. Both will get you where you want to go, but it's those long Saturday afternoons wasted hanging around the Ford dealership waiting for yet another repair to be made that get expensive over time. ;)
Everything you needed, and with a crappy, power-hungry Pentium 4.
Probably for the same reason Mac owners see the need to insult and belittle Windows. I bet if you looked really hard, you could find comments like than on this very thread.
Me, I'm a right-tool-for-the-right-job kind of guy - use whatever makes you happy, I say.
I just had a power supply burn up (I could smell it) on one of my two WinTel home computers. When was the last time someone here had a Mac power supply fail? How about burn up and fail?
>>How is it late? We're getting it on time: the thing was always going to launch for the Christmas shopping season here. Europe is getting it sooner, Japan is getting it later.
Sony promised it by spring 2006. Of course this was BS and just an attempt to convince people not to buy an xbox 360 during the 2005 Christmas season. I'm not sure how well this tactic worked...
It still remains to be seen if they will deliver it for Christmas 2006.
If you ask me, the PS3 is overpriced and in some ways ahead of its time. The average joe won't be able to afford a 1080p television for a few more years, so they will be stuck watching 1080i or 720p images -- both of which the XBOX 360 is capable of handling.
My two cents is that at Christmas you'll be able to pick up an xbox 360 for about $225 vs. $400-$500 for a PS3. And considering the 360 will have a second generation of games, it will be hard for Sony to take the lead.
It's silly to spend $400 - $500 on a ps3 unless you have a 1080i or 1080p television -- something a majority of people do not have. But an increasing number of people do have 720p televisions, so the 360 is a better value for them.
IMO, Sony will lose market share with the PS3. Then again, the 360 could be the next ill fated dream cast. But considering how development for Windows games and 360 games can be developed with the same tools (Visual Studio), it's highly unlikely that the 360 will fail...
I can't wait to buy my next Mac with dual-boot Vista! I prefer OSX, but can't ignore the fact that many applications are Windows-only.
To those who say Macs are too expensive, you are not figuring in the fact that Dell, et.al. heavily advertise stripped-down boxes that set the low-price figure in the consumer mind. When you actually configure a Dell box with what a Mac has standard, the price is about the same.
I do wish Apple would beef up their graphics card selection; it seems the PC world has eclipsed them for some time despite Apple's reputation as a "graphics" computer.
>>For Japan. The US release date is unchanged.
No.. Sony was all over the press saying spring 2006 for the US. Now they *may* have been speaking out of the both sides of their mouth and actually talking about Japan, but the impression here in the media was spring 2006 for the US.
>>Given that we don't know what the final price will be (I don't care what Sony Europe is charging), that's a presumptious statement on your part.
True, but it's based on industry estimates on how much the units are going to cost Sony just to produce the PS3. Even taking a loss the PS3 is going to be highly priced. My guess is $400...
>>No, it isn't, given that most of the games will be on the PS3. Regardless of whether or not you can output in HD or not, the fact of the matter remains that the PS3 will have the games most people care about: Gran Turismo,...that will be PS3-exclusive: Wild ARMs 5, Dragon Quest IX, Suikoden VI, etc.
You have a point that people will want the new versions of old games, but they aren't going to be any better than 360 games from a technical viewpoint. The Sony really can't outclass the 360 at 720p.. The PS3 shines at 1080p, where the 360 can't go.
And compared to a PS2 or Xbox -- at best you'll get a game with bigger and more characters, but you really won't see what the ps3 can do with 720p. At 1080p, the PS3 rocks -- no doubt about it. But people are not gonna be happy when they take it home after seeing what it can do on a 1080p and then watching it on an analog or 720p TV. It won't look near the same as the store.
Here is an example. Play Doom 3 (or whatever game) at 1920x1024 and then at 1300x700. A noticible diffence in image quality. Most people will see PS3 screens at 1300x700, and it won't look the same as the 1900x1024 screen..(forgive the resolution inaccuracies here)
The reason the 360 games don't look as good as the PS3 games has everything to do with the difference in resolution between 720p and 1080p. Display a ps3 image in 720p, and it will look like a 360 game.
The PS3 is too early -- not enough It's like buying a lamborghini but being forced to drive it in school zones at 35mph. It doesn't make sense.
Were 1080p everywhere, then you could see what the sony can do. But right now, it's just going to look like an expensive xbox 360.
>>My money is on $399.
I'm at $400 -- we are essentially in agreement here.
>>It's interesting that you can make these statements, given that we don't have any PS3s to compare to Xbox360s.
You don't need games to make such a statement. The limitations of 720p are what set's the criteria. There is a limited amount of screen space, pixels, etc. Both the 360 and the PS3 can outperform the limitations imposed by 720p. My point is that the PS3 isn't going to display more colors or more "bosses" or scenery than a 360 can at 720p. I'm not talking about how fun a game is, just that from a technical perspective, neither system can outdo each other. Anything you can do on one, you can do on the other. This isn't the case with 1080p-- the 360 can't do 1080p.
>>The few realtime PS3 demos we have--Metal Gear Solid 4, the Final Fantasy 7 tech demo--look noticably better than Xbox360 games.
Exactly my point -- they look awesome at 1080p! But at 720 p they are the same quality as the 360.
>>Why not? If a developer ships a PS3 game that works at 720p, then we'll see what the PS3 can do at 720p.
It will do great, I'm not disputing that. It just won't be able to do anything the 360 can't.
>>Again: HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS? I doubt even nvidia knows at this point what can be done with the PS3 at 1080p, and nvidia is making the graphics chipsets for the thing!
Well, if nothing else, the scenery will be awesome. Blades of grass will be sharp, distant hills will have awesome texture, etc. The increase in resolution will allow for fantastic scenery! Images will be photorealistic. This is not easy to achieve at 720p (it can be done, but pixellation is noticable even with anti-aliasing).
I'm not saying I know exactly what the PS3 can do, I'm saying In know what the technical limitations of 720p are.
>>Wait, wait. First you called it the LateStation 3, now it's too early?
It's late based upon Sony's Statement. It's too early since 1080p is essentially a rich man's television (or someone who likes to rack up high debt with credit cards). The average Joes are out buying 480p and 720p tvs at the moment. In about 2-3 years 1080p will be reasonable...
So very few will see the PS3 work in it's best glory. They'll see a PS3 with games comparable (from a technical perspective, not from a fun perspective) to the 360.
I had a family member's Mac power supply fry about 6 months ago, and another one had the Mac's hard drive die about a year ago. I don't see this as being anything pro or con, it just happens sometimes. This is particularly true with hard drives. This person had not done any backups and told me they thought Macs were reliable. Of course they are, but it drives me bonkers when any computer user doesn't back up their data. A backup or image of the whole drive is a good idea too once it is setup with all your essential software and has had updates or patches...that saves a ton of time in reinstalling software.
Hard drives are the same in Mac and Intel computers. Though Apple can try to buy the best to cut down on failures, to reinforce the Mac image as being no hassle machines. From a google search it seems that Apples use proprietary power supplies. This means Apple has the ability to exert lots of pressure for excellence on the supplier
http://www.welovemacs.com/g3powersupplys.html
Check out the wild prices on Mac power supplies
FYI,
Denied by Sony, but probably close. I'm still betting $400 though -- Sony is just going to shoulder the losses to get market share.
--
Chicago (IL) - George Fornay, president of Sony computer Entertainment Europe, provided the first credible information on a possible price of Sony's next-generation game console. According to media reports, Fornay predicted a price range of 500 to 600 Euro, which could mean a price of at least $500 and as much as $750 for US consumers.
If you thought Microsoft's Xbox 360 was expensive, think again. Sony apparently believes that the excitement of high-definition gaming on the Playstation 3 (PS3) is worth much more of your savings than a previous generation PS2, which initially sold for $299 or even Microsoft's Xbox 360, which is offered in two versions for $299 and $399.
Several media reports today quoted an interview of European radio station Europe 1 with George Fornay, in which the executive apparently mentioned that the new console may landing in a price range between 500 and 600 Euro, which would make the PS3 by far the most expensive console on the market.
Pricing for the US console remains a mystery and we only can guess what Sony is planning. What we know, however, is that Europe pricing rarely translates 1:1 into US Dollar pricing. On this side of the Atlantic, retail prices are often lower as (1) sales taxes are already included in Europe pricing and (2) higher market volumes in the US can compensate high price tags. Of course, currency exchange rates are an unknown variable in this game.
The current Euro-Dollar exchange rate would indicate a minimum price of $610 and about $750 on the high-end for the PS3; taxes and volume benefits are subtracted, and a US retail price between $500 and $600 appears to be more realistic.
But even a $600 price tag may be considered a bargain, if Sony's production cost of the console is considered. According to a Merrill Lynch analyst and a report published in the Financial Times in February of this year, Sony's total material cost per unit could approach $900: The company could be spending as much as $230 per unit just for the 3.2 GHz Cell processor that IBM plans to produce for PS3, plus $350 for the Blu-ray drive and $70 for the Nvidia RSX 550 MHz 1080p graphics processor.
Microsoft sells the Xbox 360 well below the production cost as well. Market research firm iSuppli said in November of last year that Microsoft may be spending as much as $550 to get a $400 console out the door.
Update 1:16 pm EST: In an official response, SCEE corporate communications did not confirm reports that the PS3 will cost up to 600 Euro. Instead, the company told gamesindustry.biz that the indication of a price point has been "a mistranslation or misunderstanding of the discussion, which was actually focused on the relative value of PS3 as a Blu-ray Disc player."
This is faster than I predicted. I thought it might take until summer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.