How the PS3 Hit $600

Joystiq has up an interesting article today, gathering together information from a couple of places to discuss why the PlayStation 3 is so expensive. From the article: "Kutaragi was demoted after being passed over for the role of CEO and, when former Sony Pictures head Howard Stringer assumed the position, the relationship between the content and technology divisions of Sony became even more intimate. Stringer "quickly dubbed the PlayStation 3 as one of the company's 'champion' products." Kutaragi's desire to stratify the console market with Cell technology in effect wed Sony to the unpalatable prospect of charging an unprecedented price. Coupled with Sony's desire to not only push their own content on HD discs, but to control that medium with their proprietary Blu-ray format, the final price was escalated by two very advanced (and very expensive) pieces of Sony technology."

Comments

Re:#1 reason

[tpemble]

Oh. You're right, my mistake. Come on guys, time to pack up and go. I guess Sony won't let us have an oppinion.

Microsoft spends $6.2 billion on R&D.

[reporter]

Microsoft is spending $6.2 billion on research and development in 2006. In 2007, Microsoft will spend $7.8 billion on research and development.

The research division at Microsoft is the #1 industrial laboratory in the United States. To understand the magnitude of the largesse, note that Microsoft succeeded in convincing several tenured/tenure-tracked professors at top-notch private universities (e.g. Stanford University) to quit the university and to join Microsoft.

Google understands the formidable threat posed by Microsoft's research division. Google's management rushed to IPO, fearing that Microsoft would crush Google and would prevent the management from cashing in a multi-billion-dollar IPO.

Re:MOD PARENT UP

[gary chund]

How can this be flamebait? Welcome to the slashdot reality distortion field!

Re:#1 reason

[highwindarea]

In the parent post you claimed you work for Sony. Yet only have a dozen stories ago you claimed you work for NASA. You must be either very busy, or very good at getting fired and hired.

Re:#1 reason

[PakProtector]

1) People don't buy windows, it comes with their system.
2) It comes with their system because businesses buy it and people want to take work home.
3) Businesses buy it because it is the only OS that runs their software.
4) For an increasing number of businesses (3) is no longer valid.
Yes the foundations of the windows monopoly is cracking. MS knows this too which is why they are so intent on diversifying as fast as they can and buying companies left and right.

<advocatvs diaboli> The foundations of the Windows Monopoly are not cracking. They are just as strong as they ever have been. Windows is the De Facto Standard for around ninety per cent of people who use computers for the following reasons:

• They want to use their computer like they use a hammer.
  Very few people will actually take the time to learn how a computer functions beyond the bare minimum of what they need to get whatever it is they want to do, done. Windows does this extremely well. They point, they click. When is the last time you had to use the CLI on a Modern Windows Box?
• Tying in with the first and the fact that Windows is the De Facto Standard: It just works(tm, please god don't sue me -ed)
  If you goto the store, and you know nothing about computers, but you know that your kid wants "KILL'EM'ALL'07" or you need PhotoShop CS (n+1) for your business, you don't have to pause and think, "Now, is this the version for OS/2 Warp, or are these binaries that will only run on Red Hat Linux 7pointsomething with Pthreads, or is this a NetBSD app that requires native thread support, etc..." Ninety Nine Per cent of all software (And yes, I did pull that figure out of my ass -ed) that you will see in a store will be for Windows, and Windows only, because it costs time and money having to develop the same thing for more than one platform, particularly when you're not even sure it's going to sell enough copies for platform XyxOS to recoup the spent capital. The biggest thing that Open Source Software has going against it are Standards -- there are too many of them. The day that Linux, the various *BSDs, et al, will have a snowball's chance in hell of converting your average computer user, and read that word 'user,' not 'programmer,' not 'software engineer,' not 'computer scientist,' but 'user,' is when they can run whatever Flavour of Linux they Love and I can write code on my NetBSD box and that person doesn't even have to compile from source, because the binaries just work. That is the great strength of Windows that everything else (excepting possibly Mac OS X, but it's a bit too early yet in the PPC/x86 game to call that one,) lacks.
• Oh, and did I mention Hardware support? Let's face it. Even if Linux, or NetBSD, or BeOS did every little office trick you could possibly want, and even those you hated (PaperClip included,) it would still never catch on as heavily as Windows, because Windows can do all those things, and more! -- Gaming. People develop for the biggest market, and that's Windows, because Windows has the biggest Market. Sure, you have a few companies here and there that release Binaries for Linux (I'm still waiting for NetBSD/ALPHA binaries for NWN), but until you get a Killer App on some Open Source OS, say, Sims 3, or Spore, or God Forbid, an exclusive release of, say, Quake 5 Or Unreal Tournament Two Thousand and Man This Francise is Older than Your Mother, and have it publicised as being, say, due to the reliability of (LINUX||BSD||OTHER) being needed to create the perfect way to kill your friends and see them at school the next day, until you get that, you're never going to have the same user base as Windows.

Error Checking...

<advocatvs diaboli

Re:#1 reason

[TheKidWho]

Is it that hard to make the logical leap that 1+1 = 2?

Re:#1 reason

[kamapuaa]

Well, $600 will buy you a fair amount of fish and will feed a bunch of people once. However, you could also buy a PS3 and SimFishing then invite all the starving over to have a competitive game and, in the process, teach them how to fish which is infinitely more valuable.

I think I see a logical whole in your argument. You also have to consider the price of the "Simfishing" game, which will bring the price up to $660 - plus tax.

Also, having all the starving people in the apartment isn't as great as it sounds. They always raid the refrigerator, plus they leave a smell for a week or two. So in addition to the $660, plus tax, I also recommend you budget a few dollar for floral Lysol.