Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Sony PlayStation (Games)

Sony Readying for Larger HDD PS3 ? 117

Posted by Zonk from the battle-with-the-elite dept.
Bloomberg reports that Sony may be considering a new SKU for the PS3 with a larger hard drive. This follows closely on the heels of the announcement of the Xbox 360 Elite and the 120 gig Xbox HD. No other details are provided, in a story primarily about news of increased profits as PS3 sales continue to rise. " Chief Executive Officer Howard Stringer targets an operating profit margin of 5 percent by March 2008, about double the current margin. Tokyo-based Sony confirmed today that it will only sell a more expensive version of its PlayStation 3 game console in North America, a strategy it adopted for the European market to bolster margins. 'Profit margin will probably exceed 5 percent if Sony doesn't lower the price of PlayStation 3,' Hitoshi Kuriyama, an analyst at Merrill Lynch & Co. wrote in a report dated yesterday. He rates the stock a buy. Shares of Sony gained 28 percent this year, compared with a 0.8 percent advance in the Nikkei 225 Stock Average."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Readying for Larger HDD PS3 ? More

Sony Readying for Larger HDD PS3 ?

Comments Filter:

  • A more expensive PS3? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @11:30AM (#18783827)
    Are they starting a mortgage division also, so more people can afford them?

  • Enough with the SKU! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @11:32AM (#18783859)
    What's with the need to refer to different models as SKU? Do people think it makes them sound hip and informed?

    Even the original article doesn't refer to this new model as an SKU. I'm not in the industry, I don't do marketing, and I don't run a store so please stop using the damn term.

    • Re:Enough with the SKU! (Score:4, Funny)

      by falsified ( 638041 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @11:40AM (#18784005)
      Duh. Didn't you know insisting on sounding like the shift manager at a Cabela's was the new black?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MobileTatsu-NJG ( 946591 )
      "What's with the need to refer to different models as SKU? Do people think it makes them sound hip and informed?"

      I'd imagine because it's the right term for it. I suppose they could call it "black box ... oooh shiny!!" so they wouldn't lose you.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ivan256 ( 17499 )
        Model? Version?

        SKU isn't a word, thus it cannot be the right word.
        • "SKU isn't a word, thus it cannot be the right word."

          Wow that rationalization gave me a headache. I hope you never use the term laser.

  • Possible downgrade for the rest of the system... (Score:4, Informative)

    by jonnythan ( 79727 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @11:34AM (#18783891)
    "Sony also indicated that additional changes may be on the way, not all of them good. Users may want to gobble up PS3 units now, for fear that Sony actually starts to make some electronics cutbacks to curb their current $1.7 billion (yes, with a 'B') loss currently on the books for PS3. Sony stated that it would not pull back on the Cell processor or BD (Blu-ray Disc) drive or networking ability - but nearly everything else is fair game for either enhancements (plan on premium costs) or removal/downsizing (think memory/cache and possibly secondary chipsets.)"

    Source: http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/sony -adds-larger-drive-to-ps3.html [audioholics.com]
    • It's a done deal (I think) that they'll remove PS2 hardware emulation to cut costs.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by chrish ( 4714 )
        Didn't they already do this with the European version of the PS3? PS2 backwards compatibility is handled in software?

    • Re:Possible downgrade for the rest of the system.. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by amuro98 ( 461673 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @12:11PM (#18784569)
      What's left to pull?

      We know that the PS3 over in Europe already lost its PS2 hardware in favor of a software emulator for PS2 game backwards compatibility. It's only a matter of time before that change shows up in PS3s elsewhere. However, I would think the next things to go would be the useless card reader (really now, does ANYONE plan on using their PS3 as a photo album?) and the WiFi addon. Sony could charge separately for those while still keeping the price of the PS3 the same.

      Furthermore, I'm confused by the article's insinuation that Sony could actually *change* the PS3's core specs by removing memory or cache. This isn't a generic PC we're talking about here. Games developed for consoles are very tightly tied to the underlying hardware. This allows them to get better performance because you don't have a full blown OS doing hardware abstraction. At best, such a change to the hardware like this would result in an unacceptable loss of performance in a game, and at worst, might prevent the game from working at all

      This isn't even addressing the issue that the PS3 is already arguably starved for RAM, AND has a slower media drive on top of that.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by ivan256 ( 17499 )

        We know that the PS3 over in Europe already lost its PS2 hardware in favor of a software emulator for PS2 game backwards compatibility. It's only a matter of time before that change shows up in PS3s elsewhere.

        You say that like it's a negative thing. I wish they'd announce whether the older units were going to support the newer software emulation. It actually *adds features*, and when the compatibility improves it will probably become the preferred emulation. I won't buy a PS3 right now, since there's a ch

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by amuro98 ( 461673 )
          Does the software emulator actually upscale the graphics? I know that originally, Sony wanted to use a software emulator, and that it was planned to upscale the PS2 game graphics.

          When they couldn't get adequate performance from the emulator in time for the launch, they switched to the hardware solution. With the European launch they switched back to the emulator but I haven't heard it does anything for the games.

          Even if this were true, you're still looking at a trade off: Better compatibility (hardware s

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ivan256 ( 17499 )
            For me it's not a tradeoff. I already own a hardware PS2 (Same one since release day), and I don't see any reason to buy another one. The only incentive for me to "upgrade" is if it adds features. Otherwise "PS2 support" is just text on the packaging.

            You'd have to show me some numbers to convince me it's "worse than the Xbox 360's emulator". The only numbers I've seen that could suggest that compared the European support list against the US release list to create a meaningless statistic. The official number
          • While it does not upscale to 1080, it does upconvert all PSX and PS2 games to 480p. REALLY nice feature. The question should not be if its going to upscale the resolution, but rerender 3D models at a higher resolution. If you are rendering graphics at 480i and upconverting them to 1080, its not going to look that well. You can see this now if you try putting in a PSX Final Fantasy game into the PS3, you get 480p resolution, with jagged edges on the 3D models. You do emulation on the PC with the same game, e

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Sancho ( 17056 )

        Games developed for consoles are very tightly tied to the underlying hardware. This allows them to get better performance because you don't have a full blown OS doing hardware abstraction. At best, such a change to the hardware like this would result in an unacceptable loss of performance in a game, and at worst, might prevent the game from working at all

        This would be true if there were any games which pushed the console to its limits right now. I doubt there are any--you normally don't see these types of games early in the console's life. Sony could /probably/ get away with slight reductions without too much backlash.

        Another issue to consider is that with so few games currently available, the number of affected games will be relatively small in a few years. Publishers won't target the original console, because they need to get maximum exposure for the

        • What about what's in development right now?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Sancho ( 17056 )
            If Sony has plans like this, they've probably notified the major development houses already.

            Besides, it's still pretty early in this console's lifetime. We won't see many games that stretch the console's limits for a few years, yet.
        • Current games are truly not using the full capability of the system, but it's probably not because they are failing to use enough memory, etc. It's probably because they consume the resources inefficiently and exhaust them needlessly. That means any move to reduce resources will only exacerbate any performance issues they may see today.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by LKM ( 227954 )
          That argument is nonsensical. The fact that games don't use 100% of the PS3's capabilities does not mean that they still run after Sony removes caches or RAM. They won't remove anything connected to playing PS3 games.
      • Umm, a few points need to be made here:

        I would think the next things to go would be the useless card reader (really now, does ANYONE plan on using their PS3 as a photo album?)

        The card reader is actually quite helpful for transferring files to and from your PSP and PC. When you download the PS1 games from PSN, how are you supposed to get htem to your PSP? Via the card reader, of course. You can also move movies and music this way as well, unless you want to sit down and design a website that both consoles

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by DrXym ( 126579 )
          Arguably being the key word here. I haven't seen any developer familiar with the PS3 actually complain about the amount of memory available to them. Obviously, Linux performance suffers a bit under the hypervisor, but that's because Sony is hiding the graphics chip, not because there isn't enough RAM available. The claims of lack of memory came out of the revelation that Oblivion was caching to the hard drive to improve load times, I believe, but Bethesda said that the same thing was done on the 360 as well

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by LKM ( 227954 )

          Bethesda said that the same thing was done on the 360 as well

          And that would be because the 360 is starved for RAm as well :-)

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by amuro98 ( 461673 )
          I hadn't thought about the PSP... However, the card reader for the PS3 does not cover PS1/PS2 memory cards - that's a separate product that isn't even included with the $600 model. The card reader only supports things like Sony Memory sticks, SD cards, etc. - not Playstation Memory Cards (TM)

          (yes, I realize the term "memory card" is severly overused here.)

          As for memory in the system, my understanding is that the 360 has twice the memory of the PS3, although the PS3's memory is faster. However when you co
          • The PSP uses memory stick Duo's. The "playstation memory card" is pretty much dead. This is kind of a moot point as the PSP doesn't need to use the card to transfer files. It will act as a USB storage device OR link to the PS3 via Wi-Fi. Also: the PS3 and the 360 both have the same amount of RAM at 512Megs each.
          • Both have 512 megs of memory. The PS3's memory is split ahead of time into system memory and GPU memory. The memory on the 360 must be used for both system and GPU purposes, but isn't split ahead of time. Microsoft claims this is an advantage, while Sony claims their method is better.
        • You can use any USB storgage device with a PS3 - and that includes attaching CF cards via a USB CF reader (or other kinds of media cards). The media reader truly is a vegistal part of the console.

          The USB port was included on all models of the PS3. After all, it's how you charge the controllers...
          • True, but I have a couple memory cards and use the card reader to transfer files between the two systems. I guess I just don't trust my cats around the wires or something. YMMV.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by DrXym ( 126579 )
        We know that the PS3 over in Europe already lost its PS2 hardware in favor of a software emulator for PS2 game backwards compatibility. It's only a matter of time before that change shows up in PS3s elsewhere.

        It works quite well so I wouldn't sweat the change. I agree you should pick up the hardware BC model if you have an obscure and large collection of titles that you still play. Otherwise software BC works very well. I've seen some minor texture glitches in some of the games I've tried for the most par

      • really now, does ANYONE plan on using their PS3 as a photo album

        It's really all I use the PS3 for at the moment. Quite often, friends come over to play Wii. I usually take pictures of them jumping and flailing around, and we then watch them using the PS3.

      • However, I would think the next things to go would be the useless card reader (really now, does ANYONE plan on using their PS3 as a photo album?) and the WiFi addon.

        Congratulations, you just described the 20GB version of the PS3. The model they just pulled? It would seem to make the changes you suggest rather unlikely.

        The media readers may go at some point (you can still attach any USB mass storage device for transfers) but the WiFi will most likley stay to make it easier for customers to hook into netwo
    • The Big Ploy, Read as: "In 6 months, what you'll be able to buy will be inferior to what you can buy today. Run out and buy one now if you are considering getting one in the future, because you won't want to be stuck with one of our downgraded models."

      It sounds like Sony is getting more and more desperate to get units out the door, that now they're threatening to stick their customers with inferior hardware if they don't buy soon. That's practically blackmail.

  • How about spending R&D time/money on games? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by coug_ ( 63333 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @11:36AM (#18783927) Homepage
    I'm sorry, but I don't see why Sony is wasting their time on this. The hardware on the PS3 has *never* been the problem. Every complaint about the PS3 has been related to the games themselves and how there isn't really a single "killer app" for the system.
    • Well there are complaints about the hardware but they are usually not about how limited the hardware is but are about how expensive the hardware is.

      Back in the day, people bought the PS2 without any game that was nearly as good as Resistance and continued to buy the PS2 until games actually started to become available (roughly 6 to 9 months after the release of the PS2). Gamers are not buying the PS3 because at $600 most gamers realize that they can buy 10 to 20 games for a platform they already own, upgrad

      • Back in the day, people bought the PS2 without any game that was nearly as good as Resistance and continued to buy the PS2 until games actually started to become available (roughly 6 to 9 months after the release of the PS2).

        For one thing, people remembered the Dreamcast-era FUD that Sony slung against Sega Dreamcast; the PS2 wasn't as much of a graphical leap over the DC as Sony had claimed. By the time Microsoft's Dreamcast 360 [slashdot.org] came out, people became wise to Sony's reputation for alleged false advertising.

        But perhaps more importantly, people bought PS2 because the PS2 was priced such that one could buy a DVD-Video player ($200) and a replacement for your worn-out original PlayStation system ($100) and get compatibility

    • I'm sorry, but I don't see why Sony is wasting their time on this. The hardware on the PS3 has *never* been the problem. Every complaint about the PS3 has been related to the games themselves and how there isn't really a single "killer app" for the system.

      AMEN! I've got my $660 ready to go for a PS3 and a full release of Gran Turismo. Where's my game? Same as every other GT title, still being worked on.

      When there are ten PS3 titles I want to play I'll buy a PS3. But frankly there are zero currently. Either I've changed or the game industry has - either way I have no reason to buy a PS3. I don't have much of a reason to buy an XBox 360 right now either. And I'm told the Wii games aren't overwhelming either - somewhat gimmicky.

      I want good party games like Fuz

      • Either I've changed or the game industry has - either way I have no reason to buy a PS3. I don't have much of a reason to buy an XBox 360 right now either. And I'm told the Wii games aren't overwhelming either - somewhat gimmicky. I want good party games like Fuzion Frenzy, good racing games like Gran Turismo, great story games like Ico and Prince of Persia, and a few shooters like Halo and Ghost Recon. First to provide gets my money.

        You want a Wii thats all it is (a party system.) I got a Wii and I am going to get a PS3 as soon as 1.The price drops or 2. they have 10 games that I want to play or 3. Someone gives me one... anyone?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Sancho ( 17056 )
        Many Wii games aren't gimmicky. Warioware is quite fun, and Super Paper Mario is a blast (though it barely uses the Wii's features, and could easily have been a Gamecube game). Zelda is fun, too, but has the same issue (could be--and in fact, is, a GC game, but the added aiming features of the Wii remote are a nice touch). Sonic and the Secret Rings initially feels gimmicky, but with time, the controls seem fairly natural to me.

        More games will come. Same for the PS3. Eventually, there will be many game

      • (Obligatory disclaimer: I own both a PS3 and a Wii)

        Yes, there are Wii games that are "gimmicky" (in that they don't offer much depth, but rely on the novelty of the controller). Kororinpa would be one of these. But most games aren't gimmicky at all. Games like "Godfather: Blackhand Edition" show that the controller isn't a gimmick. It's a legitimate successor to the "old" gamepad. In fact, it ads so much to the game if used correctly that it can turn a mediocre game (such as the "traditional" version of Go

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by nuzak ( 959558 )
      Every complaint about the PS3 has been related to the games themselves and how there isn't really a single "killer app" for the system.

      They're in the pipe -- GTA4 would sell one for me.

      Most of the complaints I've heard from actual owners of the PS3 have to do with its lack of scaling. Playing a 720p game on a 1080-only screen? Tough luck bitch, it's 480i for you. Playing a 1080 blu-ray movie on a 720-only screen? You're back to 480i.

      They can find time to update the firmware for a goddam folding@home cli

      • Most of the complaints I've heard from actual owners of the PS3 have to do with its lack of scaling. Playing a 720p game on a 1080-only screen? Tough luck bitch, it's 480i for you. Playing a 1080 blu-ray movie on a 720-only screen? You're back to 480i.

        This is only a problem for 1080i screens that don't support 720p (all 12 of them), and likewise 720p screens that don't support 1080i/p (are there even any of these?).

        Yes, I'm exaggerating slightly, and this is certainly an issue that affects only the most ble

        • This is only a problem for 1080i screens that don't support 720p (all 12 of them), and likewise 720p screens that don't support 1080i/p (are there even any of these?).

          For first and second generation HDTVs this is 99% of them. In fact dual mode support only became common in the last year with sub $2000 systems. The reason is that ALL output devices except playstation 3 support proper scaling, thats just the way the standards work, the TVs are fixed sizes and the devices scale accordingly.

          And for this reason I cannot even contemplate buying a ps3 as I have a nice 54" screen that would be unusable for half of the games, and I am not about to buy another one just 2 years l

          • I'm assuming your only talking about the 1080i HDTVs that don't support 720p (since I don't know of any 720p sets that were made without 1080i support).

            The reason is that ALL output devices except playstation 3 support proper scaling, thats just the way the standards work, the TVs are fixed sizes and the devices scale accordingly.

            Actually the reason is because 1080i was the ONLY standard for HDTV when the initial models came out. Once 720p was finally standardized, that started showing up in sets with 1080

      • "They're in the pipe -- GTA4 would sell one for me."
        Buy a 360 then. They're a better value and will still be around in 5 years.

      • But why buy a PS3 when you can play GTA4 on a box that cost $100 to $200 less and has exclusive extra content?

        Plus, given the comparisons between the same games released on the PS3 and XBox360, so far the 360 games look better. Yes, this is probably an issue with the developers not taking full advantage of the PS3 hardware, but the fact remains.

        So I guess my point is, to be a "killer PS3 app" its got to be better on, or exclusively for, the PS3.

    • I'm sure Sony 'has a reason' for this if it's true.

      I *can* see this happening if they're planning on releasing an MMORPG like an exclusive PS3 version of Everquest or something. The only reason I bought my original PS2 was Everquest Online Adventures.
    • The hardware in the PS3 is the reason the price tag is so high.

      The price tag being so high is the reason so few people are buying them.

      So few people buying them is the reason so few companies are developing for the platform.

      So few companies developing for the platform is the reason why there hasn't been a "killer app" for the PS3 yet.
  • a new SKU for the PS3

    This just goes to show you, kids. If you believe in yourself, drink your SKU, stay in drugs, and don't do milk, you can get work!
    • Kids these days are too familiar with marketing terms and it allows consumers to actually understand and question, and therefore sort out the bullshit from, the product marketing. Throwing terms like "SKU" out there will hopefully once again baffle consumers and get them to buy crap they don't want for reasons that aren't true.
  • If you want to download games large enough to fit onto CDs, and if they still want that thing to be an entertainment center to download television shows and movies, then yeah, I'd consider having a hard drive a bit larger than 60 Gigs.

  • Why? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by FunkyELF ( 609131 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @11:43AM (#18784073)
    I thought that the 8 and 10 gig drives in the original xboxes were big.

    The fact is that the game studios have had the ability to extend their games add new maps, allow users to create their own race tracks and all that stuff with the xbox but it never happened.

    Other than game saves and music for in-game listening, what were these hard drives used for?

    I understand people running Linux on their PS3 to do things like web browsing or other casual use. The only people who would really want a bigger hard drive are will figure out how to upgrade their hard drive anyway just like they did on the xbox.

    Personally, I think it is kind of a bad idea for Sony to put a hard drive bigger than a Blu Ray disc in their system for pirating reasons. Not that you couldn't mount a network drive and store the movie on another computer anyway.

    • Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Volante3192 ( 953645 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @11:58AM (#18784339)
      The XBox and PS3 hard drives aren't just for saves or new material. You can download demos, videos, even games (Castlevania: SotN takes up a decent chunk of space I believe...) and who knows what else to them.

      Thing is, the XBox and PS3 are being marketed not just as video game consoles, but as media centers and as media centers they need to be able to store large amounts of media content. Once you start pulling off HD video content, need for space starts rising.

      • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

        by ivan256 ( 17499 )
        Translation of the parent post out of brainwashed consumer lemming speak:

        The hard drives are a means of selling you content that you can't resell as used. It adds absolutetly no other functionality that you wouldn't have if said media was on an optical disk.
        • More like marketing lemming speak. Frankly, if I wanted to download an HD movie trailer I'd use my PC and not just because I don't have a PS360.

          Given what Sony and MS are trying to accomplish with this console iteration, I can understand putting larger drives in. On the level above that one though, I think the whole plan they've set out with is off base, hard drive or not.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ivan256 ( 17499 )
            Well clearly Microsoft's sole care this generation is positioning DirectX and Windows Media as essential technologies for downloadable and interactive content, thus maintaining the Windows monopoly for another decade.

            I haven't quite figured out what Sony's motivation is... Presumably to make money from hardware sales and software license fees just like last generation... But maybe just to have BluRay win? They're clearly not fighting the same battle as Microsoft though. They're just fighting on the same bat
            • Microsoft's long term goal in this is to have a microsoft box at the core of a home's media center. Their first attempt was, aptly, 'XP Media Center.' Basically, they want in the living room, and they want in badly.

              Sony is just trying to keep MS from accomplishing this goal, to make their own 'media center' box using the Playstation brand.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by ivan256 ( 17499 )

                Microsoft's long term goal in this is to have a microsoft box at the core of a home's media center. Their first attempt was, aptly, 'XP Media Center.' Basically, they want in the living room, and they want in badly.

                Sorry, don't buy it. I don't buy it because it doesn't make any sense.

                That's too much work. They don't want to sell "boxes". They've never wanted to sell boxes. They want cash for nothing. They can't maintain their high margins with your theoretical plan, and their stock price would tank.

                All th

        • I guess you missed the part about the new consoles being positioned as media centers. That doesn't just mean downloading HD content (currently not that practical for most people). It means TiVo like DVR functionality. On HD that takes a huge piece of disk space. If their aim is convergence around their respective platforms then they need to provide DVR in HD.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ivan256 ( 17499 )

            It means TiVo like DVR functionality.


            On a device with no video input...

            How do you propose they do that without downloading content?
            • Comment removed based on user account deletion

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by ivan256 ( 17499 )
                Two things:

                First, no such add-on is being sold by Microsoft... If their goal was to go in that direction, don't you think they would sell the add on?

                Second, The hard drive sizes are pathetic, even in the "Elite". They would make for a poor DVR.

                Additionally, there is no business case for such support beyond internet rumor and analyst speculation.
            • Both Sony and Microsoft not only are pushing to sell music downloads, but TV and movie downloads.

              If your console is a media center, a larger HDD really makes sense.

              Microsoft says, take ages to download a movie to your 360, delete it to make room on your HDD, and download it again later if you need it later.

              Sony could trim some hardware fat to make room for eventual price cuts and that is fine. Or they can look for a cheap product that creates artificial value.

              Microsoft already set the stage with the Elite
      • Castlevania: SotN takes up a decent chunk of space I believe...

        Actually it doesn't (well depends on your perspective I suppose). It's around 100 megs. The original PS1 version was larger due to uncompressed audio filling the disk. There are much better codecs available now that allowed Konami to provide equal or better sound utilizing much less space.

    • "Other than game saves and music for in-game listening, what were these hard drives used for?"

      XBMC

  • Is this really news? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @12:05PM (#18784467)
    Sony are rumoured to be going to an 80Gb model which is hardly a great leap. Who knows why they have a new model but probably because they're getting the 80Gb drives at the same prices as they used to get the 60Gb models for so they're switching. Perhaps some other OEM is providing the drives. How is that bad for the consumer if you get an extra 20Gb for the same price?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by amuro98 ( 461673 )
      I doubt the PS3 with the larger HDD will be the same price as the 60GB one. Although maybe Sony will drop the price of the 60GB model to $550 or something, and price the proposed 80GB model at $600?

      Hah. Right. I'm sure the 80GB model will come with a few other items and cost $700 or something outrageous like that.
    • I'm inclined to agree with the parent post here - given that the hard disk in the PS3 is easily upgradeable, it would just be sensible for them to always put the most common sized hard disk in it, and I'd assume that we're getting to the point where it's cheaper for them to buy 80Gb drives instead of the probably-now-less-commonly-produced 60Gb drives. I mean, that would just be sensible. And given that the FCC filing that spawned all this speculation didn't mention any other enhancements to the 80Gb model,

  • Upgrade that HD (Score:3, Informative)

    by king-manic ( 409855 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @12:08PM (#18784533)
    You are all aware that you can drop any SATA HD into the system right? So making a new unit with nothing but a bigger HD would be counter productive. They'd have to add something like a sony memcard reader and maybe include 3 controllers to make it worth while.

  • Price.. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Mockylock ( 1087585 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @12:12PM (#18784601) Homepage
    It'll probably cost $300.

    They're getting a little lame with the updates and upgrades lately, aren't they?

    This just in: Sony is releasing an official PS3 Trademarked CHROME sticker available as an add-on. This attachment retails for $50 and SHOULD be available by mid-fall at select retail outlets.
    • They'd just be following in MS's footsteps (take a look at the expected price for the proprietary HD upgrade for the XBox360 vs. the user swappable one for the PS3).

      Heck ... the PS3 even uses standard USB drives for external storage, just like the XBox 360 ... what? you mean the 360 uses some proprietary storage? Shocker. :/

      Face it, Sony as a company may have done some things that have people angry, but the PS3, between its use of Bluetooth for headsets, keyboards and mice, USB for external storage, and u
      • I'd definitely expect a console to HOPEFULLY have more features than a competitor that released a year before it. It's not too tough to look at an existing console and say, "This is what they did, so we'll do this." especially when you're not at all concerned that it's going to sell, regardless of it's features.

        Honestly.. let's face it. What Sony fan wouldn't buy a PS3 even if it didn't have any of the features you listed? They're going to buy it, even if it's a brick with a PS3 sticker on it.

        Don't get

        • I know the flames are going to fly after this. But honestly... you know they're going to buy anything that Sony throws at them.

          I'd like to think sans-flame discussion is possible. :)

          If people were really that Gung-Ho over Sony (in general), then you would have seen a greater adaption rate of all those proprietary media formats that they tried to push.

          People only really bought into them though, when they liked the product they were paired with.

          Heck, most people I know with a PS3 (most of whom got it within t

          • I agree with you, I was just looking at the PS3 side of it.. rather than Just Sony products in general. I really don't think that Blu-Ray would even be a huge ordeal if Sony wasn't pushing it with the PS3. It's time for some type of HD media, and I guess it's got to start somewhere though.

            I just can't see paying that amount when I can stream any HD movie, HDTV show, DivX or whatever media directly to the 360 for half the price and still have excellent gameplay.

            I'll eventually get a PS3, I'm sure... but,

      • "Heck ... the PS3 even uses standard USB drives for external storage, just like the XBox 360 ... what? you mean the 360 uses some proprietary storage? Shocker. :/"
        Plugging a USB hard drive into the 360 works fine. Have you tried it?
        • No, I hadn't. From friends comments, I understood that you needed to purchase the proprietary memory cards to download games, saves, content, etc. onto.
          • The 360 can use USB drives for external storage. You stated that the PS3 does this and implied that the 360 cannot. You spread false information.
            • Yes/No. I stated something to the best of knowledge and responded when someone pointed out an incorrect fact. There are lots of people who seem to spread false information on a regular basis, and yet they seem unable to admit they are wrong. Someone pointed that out to me already, and I merely said where I had gotten my information, I was NOT trying to imply they were wrong.

              I'm glad to hear the 360 can use the extra storage, I was surprised when I had heard it couldn't, and I'm glad that information was

  • SKU? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Lisandro ( 799651 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @02:58PM (#18787155)
    If you are baffled by this acronym, as i was just moments ago, take a second to read this fantastic post [slashdot.org].

    Can we cut this shit already?

  • hmm (Score:3, Informative)

    by Pojut ( 1027544 ) on Wednesday April 18, 2007 @03:46PM (#18787843) Homepage
    Hey sony, how about instead of making a system with a larger hard drive as an option you try to find ways to cut down on the manufacturing costs so you can lower the price of the current 60 gig model? Who knows, mabye you will get more people like me who aren't buying the PS3 primarily because of the price...

    It's not that I can't afford it, it's that I can't justify it.
  • Which means that Sony is turning a profit off of the units now? Good thing I can keep on waiting, as if they've turned a profit after losing money hand-over-fist on these things, I'm guessing that a price cut is foreseeable in the notsodistant future for the existing models.

Slashdot Top Deals

No spitting on the Bus! Thank you, The Mgt.

Close