Slashdot Mirror
Sony drops Router Functions from PS3
astrokid writes "Well, it has begun. Sony announced that the PlayStation 3 will no longer act as a home network router. How long before more news trickles in about the downgrading of other features?" From the GI.biz article: "Whether that means the bank of network ports on the back of the box has actually been reduced to a single port is not clear, however, as the company has previously hinted that it has other plans in mind for the multiple network ports."
I don't thinkt he announcement of the dropping of one feature, is reason to think there is now going to be a flood of other dropped features.
But, it is disconcerting.
Pretty Pictures!
But MMX is the future of MultiMedia!
This decision is probably not driven by the Bill Of Material cost, but the service cost.
The BOM cost is the cost of the parts to build a gizmo - in this case the cost to have a couple of extra ports is going to be pretty small - on the close order of US$10. While for a device that is targeting US$500 or less that is not trivial, it is not a huge value either.
The service cost is the cost of all the consumers calling in saying "I cain't git this here thimagigitt to work!" Making this thing be a router while it plays games would increase the software complexity (basically, it would have to be running the Linux kernel all the time, and would have to NOT reboot between games - a paradigm shift for game designers).
So they probably decided that the router idea just wasn't worth the hassle.
www.eFax.com are spammers
That said, I'd like it if they kept the thing working as a simple hub. You can never have to many network ports (especially now that every game console will want to connect to one, not to mention future TiVos, TVs, DVD players and what not).
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Sony will drop features until the PS3 specs are identical with those of Windows Codename Longhorn.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Sony has a history of doing this sort of thing.
They promised a lot for PS2 too.
But features got dropped when it was finally released.
Same with PSX.
If you RTFA, you'd find they dropped it because it was too expensive to manufacture, so I would think they are removing at least 1 if not 2 of the gigabit ports, what does your average consumer need 3 gigabit ports for anyway?
I'd much rather see a more affordable PS3 than a do-everything PS3.
Somehow his doesn't really come as much of a surprise and I'd be willing to bet that this isn't the first thing to be dropped...
DxBlog - It's where you want to be
Obviously they're trying to bring the PS3 down from the price range typically reserved for large kitchen appliances and mortgage payments.
(It's been 6 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment --- how would letting me post now rob everyone of "a fair chance at posting a comment"? WTF)
Why did the PS3 function as a router in the first place? Last time I checked, the reason I would buy a PS3 is to play games on my TV, and I really don't want my enterainment center doubling as my switch rack. I've got enough wires behind it as it is, without bringing in a bundle of CAT-5 as well. The best place for a router is in a closet somewhere, so I don't have to see the half dozen or so wires comming into it.
I think that this "feature" is another example of Sony and Microsoft pushing way too hard for the "media center" idea rather than making a good game console. We don't need an all-in-one device that does a bunch of different things, but none of them really well. Just give me a game console, where I can pop a disc/cartridge/whatever in, push a button or two and I am pointlessly slaughtering aliens/demons/humans. I have a DVD player, I will soon have a MythTV box, I have a nice NAT/router box, what the hell do I need these features in my PS3 for?
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
Not that in the end will it save the Dreamcast 360, but at least from an absolute PR perspective, all that MS marketing money for the flood of 360 story plants and editorial spin is starting to pay off here on Slashdot.
In the end it will be no different than last time with a bunch of MS PR/marketing folks high fiving themselves while losing the war, badly.
In other news Linksys announced that their routers will not support playing Doom3 on them.
If I want a router, I will buy a router. If I want a video game system I will buy a video game system. Making something more expensive by adding features that make absolutely no sense is not going to get my to buy your product. Frankly it wouldn't bother me if today's video game systems couldn't play DVDs either (although I understand why they do, it practically costs nothing to add that when you are using DVD media anyway). What I REALLY want to see is backward compatibility with older systems, which Sony seems to understand. Microsoft clearly does not.
Finkployd
Finkployd
I know you're going for a joke, but the PSone is just a rereleased PS, and the PSX wasn't supposed to mean "10", it was more a generic term.
:)
Besides, what naming order is more screwed up than XBOX -> XBOX360?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'd have to go with:
XBOX360 -> XBOX
I mean, that's way more screwed up.
Seriously, two things immediately come to mind when I see this announcement: 1) When was the last time anybody had a Sony router that actually worked, and 2) If you need a router, why not just buy one?
Help us build a better map!
perhaps the developers of the ps3 thought they could control the router functions on a per-game basis, i.e opening and closing ports, and then users wouldnt have as big a problem if people used that for their router. Although who knows if they had that much foresight.
In other news, Westinghouse drops hot & cold running icewater from it's toaster line.
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
This is why it's not always a good idea to throw a list of all the features a gaming console will have too far ahead of its release date. When you make a bunch of claims ahead of time and then are confronted by issues, it's time to eat some crow.
The fact that the PS2 in my old apartment played DVDs prevented me from buying a stand alone dvd player.
Last night, at a friends house, we watched Electric Boogeleboo on an Xbox after they realized hooking the stand alone DVD player would be more effort than plugging in the DVD remote for the Xbox.
That said, I don't really know if either scenarios would have made a difference on the purchasing of an PS2 or an Xbox, but one of the factors I weighed into buying an Xbox over a Gamecube was that it could play DVDs even though I never have even played a DVD on the damn thing since it's purchase. (it was an impulse buy on the way home from work since I had some extra cash to blow and it was either than or $149 worth of alcohol)
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
To me it'd make sense to have two ethernet ports on nextgen consoles so that you could daisy chain them together (at least the same kinds) They have so much processing power it wouldn't matter and you wouldn't need a hub or router. The ethernet cables could be really small too since you can stack them now. Don't know much about networking but I'm sure something like this is possible for lan play.
I think that the router would have been more for the benefit of non-technical households who do not already have a router and wish to be online who own maybe one computer without a router.
This would allow kids to have PS3 online access on Xmas morning without having to bug their parents to run out and buy a router or unplug the computer.
Of course with the increase of routers in the common household it may have been a deciding factor to not include this.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Shut up! And go back to reading CNN. And I don't know of anybody here that "Pays" to read Slashdot... memberships are $free!!!
Ok maybe some people pay to read it, but who cares anyways, your just jelous of the logos! Go sue McDonald's because your bought HOT coffee, and proceeded to spill it on yourself!
Is that you Steve? How's it goin' man???
Could it be that a software deal did not work out between them and another company, or could it be a response to the non pric matching of Micrsoft and Nintendo, cutting out a license fee per box could cut down on cost, along with maybe changing the ports to a switch, which is easier to do. Microsoft did this when they decided to have dvd support built in, but you needed to buy the remote and pay the 10 doller liscence fee applied to all dvd boxes and threw in a cheap remote.
Sony has already established themselves (in the mind of the press and public) as the "most advanced console" for the new generation. Having accomplished this through their littany of features and faked gameplay videos, we will now see Sony move back from their original claims: Less features, lower performance, etc.
I suggest this is brilliant marketing by one of the world's leading electronics companies, and it won't hurt them a bit.
Personally, it ticks me off, but hats off to them for playing *us* so well.
So with the ability nixed to connect PS3s up together (using one as a router), that begs my question from a month ago -- will the bluetooth connectivity (7 device connections) allow one PS3 to communicate with another?
I can see into the future! Sony drops the Nvidia RSX from PS3. "Sony officials announced today that in order to cut costs, the PS3 will not be shipping with the highly touted Nvidia RSX. The RSX was slated to provide uber awesome graphics for the PS3. A spokesman for the company said "Hell, we have seven SPEs. We can let them handle the graphics." In response, the gaming community has rallied around Microsoft and is planning an attack on the Japanese Government."
PSX - PlayStation eXperimental (allegedly the internal codename used as they converted the failed Nintendo CD project into a console. "PSX" has been refuted by Kutaragi.)
PlayStation - The official name, although the PSX code was used in a lot of mags early on.
PlayStation 2 - Successor to the PS. PS2 is the code for obvious reasons.
PSone - Remodeled version of PlayStation. "one" is used to differentiate the chassis from the older PSX-style.
PSX - Japan-only PS2/DVR hybrid. Don't know what "X" is this time, but eXtended works well...
PStwo - See PSone
PlayStation 3 - Successor to the PS2. PS3 is the code for obvious reasons. One can assume at some point there will be a PSthree version around the time of PS4's launch
Damn, do I hate the look of the 3. And the Spiderman 2 font blows...
GTRacer
- zzz
Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
Another thing they might consider getting rid of are all those gosh darn flash memory inputs. I mean they have slots for SD, CF, and memory sticks. Last thing you want to do is confuse joe casual. Stick with one format, and you won't get thousands of tech support calls asking which format is the best for Final Fantasy 13. I know why they have all those inputs, it's because they want people to plug in their flash memory from their digital cameras and see a slideshow on their televisions. Too bad nobody will really want or care about that feature.
Which reminds me, Sony is focusing too much on multimedia capabilities. Ken Kutaragi commented on not including a hard drive, saying something like "whatever we put in there won't be enough". Enough for what? A meager hard drive should be enough for for gamesaves, downloadable game content, and game cache. What he's probably concerned with is that a builtin hard drive won't be enough for ripping dvd's and music cd's, and the bluerays of the future. How about including a hard drive for, you know games you jerk. Microsoft even has the foresight to include one on their machine.
There had better be, because that thing is HUGE!
Nintendo is ultimatley the most honest of the remaining console manufacturers; they don't hype, they don't lie, they just deliver.
I think that this is most evident when you look at how the companies talk about their system's power. Both Sony and Microsoft talk about how their system's have amazing theoritical power, while they both know that few distributed systems ever even approach their theoritical performance; the main reasons for this are (1)Additional overhead in the algorithm in order to 'distribute it' (2)Idle threads and processes because of deadlock prevention systems (3)Under-utilized processors due to poor thread scheduling. Now Nintendo (not to mislead anyone) hasn't released any specifications and the only system performance that comes up is unconfirmed; even unconfirmed at 4 times as powerful as the Gamecube is (depending on how you're measuring) potentially equal to or greater than anything that Sony or Microsoft will be producing.
The thing I don't understand is how the overall gaming press has become so anti-Nintendo that they will defend anything either Sony or Microsoft will do and attack anything that Nintendo does. The odd thing is that I see the complete opposite from most 'Hard-Core' gamers; even if they don't understand, or desire to own, a game (like Electroplanktin or Nintendogs) they still support Nintendo's attempt to produce something original.
Apparently "Dreamcast 360" is some new kind of troll, up there with "Ninendo employee Samir Gupta."
I was hoping for some good multiplayer applications -- 16 players on 4 screens and 4 consoles, say. With the dual TV output, maybe even on 8 screens...
I have this feeling of dread that when the PS3 comes out it's just going to be a plastic box with a jelly sandwich in it.
And the jelly will be missing.
And we'll still buy the damn thing.
--------
Nothing can be done before the tremendous power!
RabidComics
I'm going to have to disagree with you here. While the "average" gamer may not have an HDTV nor care about HDTV support, there are two factors that make HDTV support critical to this generation, unlike having three gigabit network ports:
- The current generation of consoles have already maxed out the graphical potential of SDTV. Xbox was ahead of its time with HD support from the beginning, and the PS2 was able to hack it in with some software tricks (hint: GT4 running in 1080i really isn't being rendered at that resolution). Only Nintendo chickened out. They started with 480p support (that was actually pretty good, especially compared to their non-progressive scan support -- maybe it was my TV or my Gamecube, but in 480i mode Mario's hat was a big blocky mess of red; in 480p it was nice and smooth), but pulled it in later hardware revisions. I can't help but think they're now in a self-fulfilling prophecy:
- The early adopters have HDTVs, dolby digital 5.1 surround sound systems, and the disposable income to make or break a console in its early life. They may only be 5% of your total market, but they're nearly 100% of your launch day/week/month/quarter market. Without them, you're dead in the water before you even got off your first shot.
The early adopters don't care that they could use their PS3 as a gigabit router. Chances are, being early adopters, they've completely moved to wi-fi and would rather see built-in 802.11g (I know I would, and I just barely fit into the "early adopter" category). They do care about things like HDTV support or 5.1 DD audio, and it's in the best interest of the console manufacturers to give it to them, lest they buy someone else's product (I didn't buy a GC or even a PS2 until they'd gone through at least one price drop, because the Xbox catered to my wants -- HDTV, DD, and a stack of enjoyable games).- The Gamecube ships with 480p support but the cables are only available direct from Ninteno (a $20 cable is an impulse buy for the target market, if only they were available at Best Buy or Gamestop; buying them online requires thought, and most people will just not bother);
- Nobody buys the cables because they don't know where to get them, or it's inconvenient to order from Nintendo
- Nintendo pulls 480p support from later hardware revisions
- Nintendo claims they're not going to support HD in the Revolution because the "average" gamer doesn't care.
Might the average gamer have cared more if Nintendo had sold its component cable in stores, with proper advertising behind it?You missed the most important reason for the PSOne -- it was integral in redesigning the PlayStation architecture into a much smaller package (a single chip) for inclusion in the PS2 for backwards compatibility. Given that history, it's my belief that the PSTwo is to the PS3 as the PSOne was to the PS2 -- a design excercise to reduce the internals of the PS2 down to a handful of chips (or even a single chip?) for inclusion in the PS3 for backwards compatibility.
as the company has previously hinted that it has other plans in mind for the multiple network ports.
What other use could they have? Well, as I have used several PlayStation products in the past, these "additional" network ports will be used to replace the main one once it mysteriously stops working.
No word on wether or not the PS3 will include other such amenities such as multiple drive motors or multiple laser head assemblies.
The PSone was a great move. Original PlayStation numbers took off for a short time when the PSone came out, helping to extend the original's life and keep the market for PlayStation titles viable that much longer.
I do regret that my "South Park" edition PSX died when my kids left it on all night. Dead motor...
GTRacer
- OMG, TKK! YB!
Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
The installation base of Gigabit switches and routers is very low right now. Since they want he highspeed networking, they'd also need the consumer to have highspeed networking equipment for it to take advantage of.
Also, if it's a router, it will have the cable/dsl modem plugged directly into it, rather than being NAT'd behind some other device. This would take care of the port forwarding issue (or, if the router was basically a seperate unit entirely, at least the PS3 would be able to communicate to it using a standard--uPnP--or propriatary protocol to tell it's internal router what ports to open to the PS3)
But you are right--having a wiring closet in the entertainment center is teh suck. I'm sure that was taken into consideration when they decided to drop the feature ("It costs $10 and will only be used by these 5 consumers. Do we really want to spend $10 per unit for Ryoji Chubach and his family?")
XBOX360->XBOX()
Sounds like they've worked out that backwards compatibility thing.
The other thing to consider here is this: does having routing capabilities really distinguish the PS3? Are people going to buy a PS3 because of routing capabilities? No. Routers are a commodity item now and Windows can do it's own routing if need be. It exposes them to support costs, yes, but also risk. I mean what if somebody hacks those millions of PS3 routers?
So it seems an obvious business decision to drop it. I think it's one of those pie in the sky ideas that sounded good at the time, but now that they need to put their money where their mouth is, they realize it doesn't add any real value.
Frankly I think both consoles still have a lot of needless gadget wizardry that won't really sell them. A good example is the wireless controller. It's neat and all, but I can imagine it's going to be a hassle with controllers running out of batteries, getting interference, etc. We've had wired controllers for decades now and I don't think anybody out there is going to decide what to buy based on that.
Where they need to put their money is in the rendering and overall processor performance and the tools to make them easy to take advantage of. Nintendo does have some wisdom on this that, ultimately, games sell the consoles. I think it's fair to say that if we all had an ugly lump of plastic with wired controllers and no router, we'd be thrilled to own it if the games on it were really good.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Dual HDTV outputs? I assumed that one was a DVI input and the other was an output so the PS3 could act as a passthrough. DVI ports are awfully scarce and HDCP-compliant switchboxes cost a mint. After all, lots of people's DVI ports will already be occupied by a cable or satellite box.
. We've got computers, we're tapping phone lines, you know that ain't allowed - Talking Heads, "Life During Wartime"
"PlayStation - The official name, although the PSX code was used in a lot of mags early on."
PSX was used by gamers, mags, and everyone else (outside of Sony) for years until the PSOne was released, even a bit after that. The only thing that can cause any lack of clarity about the PSX is the stupidity of Sony releasing a product in Japan called PSX. I think they did it in the hopes of attaching some brand loyalty or something.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.