Slashdot Mirror
Sony Pushes Back Release For Blu-Ray Players
Sony has announced that their first model of Blu-Ray player will release in August, not later this month as originally announced. The BDP-SP1, retailing for $1000, will now ship on or about August 15th. Bad news for fans of the new format, and even worse news for the PS3. Since Sony's lackluster E3 showing, a string of bad news has seemed to conspire against the company's next-gen console. From the Gamers with Jobs article: "With the PS3's high-end model coming it at a whopping $400.00 less than a stand-alone Blu-Ray player, Sony needs to release these players as soon as possible. If they wait too long, the PS3 will begin looming on the horizon, causing even devout early adopters to question the intelligence of buying a stand-alone Blu-Ray unit. Sony also needs the largest possible installed base, come launch-time for the PS3. For the Blu-Ray player to be the PS3's version of the PS2's DVD player, casual technophiles need to be able to see the virtues of the Blu-Ray format. If there are few players, and few titles, this might not happen."
My friend bought a first generation DVD player and it's still functioning to this day. I think it even has some of the codecs built into it (MP3, AVIs, etc.). His PS2's DVD functionality went out long ago. And that was after he participated in the first recall.
Buy a game console for its games. Buy a media player for its media playing abilities. Let's stop encouraging the console makers to bloat their consoles. Concentrate on one thing and--for the love of the game--get it right!
My work here is dung.
I love the smell of a corporate implosion in the morning.
What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
With the XBox 360 out and doing well and Nintendo realeasing soon with a great prices... will Sony recover from this? I just don't see any excitement around the next Playstation... all I hear is bad news.
http://religiousfreaks.com/I won't be buying anymore Sony junk, period. I don't care if it is late or not.
Addition by subtraction. A dual-layer DVD drive can hold near 10 gigs - more than enough for 1080i/1080p games. PC games have been at this resolution for years - most still fit on 3 CD's or less.
Do the right thing Sony. If you want the PS3 to thrive, cut the price in half and let the lower-end model use Dual-Layer discs.
Gamers don't care about blu-ray, home theater enthusiasts will buy a professional player. Ditch it. No way I'm buying a PS3 for the price of a 360, a Wii, and games.
Though Sony's stand-alone is being delayed until August, Samsung has a standalone Blu-Ray player coming out on June 25th.
Panasonic has one coming in September. Sony's lateness is not the sole barometer for the standard's success or failure.
So how is the delay of a Blu-Ray player bad for the PS3? It seems to me that the only effect would be to actually help the pS3 by having external Blu-Ray players still very expensive when they launch the PS3.
Now if Blu-Ray drives themselves cause the PS3 delivery date to be pushed back, that would actually be a problem. When we see that news the headlined may apply. Until then, this is just more sensationalist FUD about Sony who has become Zonk's favorite whipping boy.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
What comes around, well, comes around.
Is it just me, or could this be a plausible marketing ploy? Sony wants the biggest install base of the PS3 as possible to make some money, and have better market penetration than the 360 or Wii. What if they're releasing a high priced player closer to the window of the launch of the PS3 on purpose? If you had your choice between a box that did Blu Ray for $1000, or a box that did Blu Ray + lots of other stuff, for $600, a lot of non-elitist consumers are going to go with the cheaper bargain. It's entirely possible that sony is releasing an over priced blu ray player now (btw, $1000? I can get a HD-DVD drive for under $200!), to increase adoption of the ps3 by the "I love HD, but my pocket book hates it" crowd.
Of course, as even the linked article admits, Samsung's blu-ray player is still due out at the end of this month, at the same time the first round of blu-ray discs are.
Since unlike UMDs and other failed "Sony" formats of the past, Blu-Ray is not propreitary, it doesn't matter when Sony gets their player out. The Blu-Ray does not succeed or fall based on Sony alone; Sony delaying their personal player for six months makes no difference. While surely having two blu-ray players out at format launch would have been better than one from a consumer perspective, Sony's delay means effectively nothing except that early adopters interested in blu-ray will be buying a Samsung instead.
But hey, Zonk's never let little things like facts get in the way of his constant proclamations of doom and death for Sony and everything connected to them. So whatever. Rootkit rootkit rootkit $599 lol.
Sony has a hitsory of making up non-standard proprietary formats. These
include the (a) memory stick, (b) the customized (non-standard) firewire port,
(c) the universal
operating system of the AIBO, (d) the minidisc and, of course, (e) betamax. No doubt, there are other I can't think of or don't know about.
In almost every case, they are either failures or (worse) sources of ongoing frustration.
I thought Blu-ray had promise, but not I realize it is another one of these monstrosities. Maybe it had better just die as quickly as possible to spare us being burdeneed with it for ages.
(like the memory stick -- an extra format we never needed).
I think Sony's biggest problem with getting widespread adoption of Blu-Ray is that the vast majority of users are happy with the current DVD format. The improvement from VHS to DVD was obvious. Replacing your DVD collection with an expensive Blu-Ray collection that may never catch on with most people seems ludicrous. People might find Blu-Ray equipment in the closet with their Betamax VCRs and their old minidisc players.
Half of the points you made are irrelevant until the consoles have actually been out for a couple years. Look at the first few titles for the GC, and then at the ones that have been coming out recently. MUCH improvement. Personally, I'm not really seeing that with the PS2. In fact, I'm seeing GC games that look better than PS2 games. And your 8000+ backcatalog points.... you've apparently forgot about the Wii's backcatalog of NES, SNES, N64, GC, Genesis, and TurboGrafx-16 games. I'm betting on them announcing even more before or shortly after release. Also, does anyone really expect the PS3 to be completely, flawlessly backward compatible?
Really, I'm just sick of hearing about any of this. And of people giving Zonk and the other editors crap about being biased. THEY'RE EDITORS. THAT'S WHAT EDITORS DO. Have you ever read a newspaper? Most of them have some sort of bias in the articles. Why do you expect it to be any different here?
Everything I say is a lie. Except that... and that... and that, and that, and that, and that... and that.
Also there are very few titles availabe for HD DVD. Maybe they do this on purpose because people cannot see yet that there are a lot of other 'big releases' missing, not all studios signed up for hd dvd.
"A few" is more than ZERO releases of BD movies, which I guess doesn't matter since there are ZERO BD players available to consumers for another couple of weeks anyways. Even with all the studios signed up for BD the loss of "first-mover" advantage presents a great challenge, and despite the number of studios jumping on the BD wagon, they didn't EXCLUSIVELY jump on that wagon so it means little to nothing.
I think that sony is waiting to have more titles available, so they can make a big release.
And what will motivate those releases, when the captain of the team is late for the game? Perhaps there will be double the releases when the player finally comes out than there was for HD-DVD but two dozen vs. one dozen is still pathetic...and the longer it takes for BD players to filter into the market, the larger the library of HD-DVD releases gets, and once the reace really begins they'll be about equal.
Does the Playstation 3 record BD's? No, so stop comparing it to 1000 dollar players, you noobs
My understanding was that the $1000 standalone unit won't record either (that will cost even more), and I think that early-adopters would be more inclined to use a PVR to record so it would not be a killer feature. Furthermore, Sony could have a bit of a problem with the PS3, not only because it would undercut most of the 1st-gen standalone BD players, but also becasue Sony will lose money on the PS3--it is cheaper not because it costs less to make, but rather becasue Sony has amputated the profit margin because its computer entertainment division (like Microsoft's) sells consoles as a loss leader and tries to make money on the content.
Unfortunately this has the hallmarks of becoming "Beta: The Sequel"--a technically superior technology being out-priced and out-marketed by the more "primitive" yet still adequate and practical competition.
I was offended by Sony's horrible DRM/rootkit situation, not because they tried to install rootkits (although that was bad enough) but because of their response when caught: "So what? Consumers won't even comprehend your techno-babble complaints."
I was offended by Sony's horrible pricing for the PS3, not because the pricing was so high (although that was bad enough) but because of their response when people took issue: "So what? Sony fanboys are going to pay no matter what the price."
I was offended by Sony's blatant plagarism of the Wii controller, not because of the 2nd-rate implementation (although... you get the idea), but because of their flat-out lying about it: "We didn't copy Nintendo. We're the real innovators."
All of these situations have a common thread: arrogance. A cavalier disrespect for the customer. A lack of ethics. There are no laws that say companies must be ethical, or must respect the customer. So I guess we can write off Sony's behavior as "it's just business." But there are also no laws which say I have to buy into it. So I hope that what goes around, comes around.
-Tony
My Greasemonkey scripts for Digg &
Why does anyone want Sony dstroyed? We are going to get some awesome titles out in the next two years simply because many ISVs consider the market in the air which applies pressure to Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo to perform and hunt for the best projects to sponsor. I enjoy the fact that Sony is pushing the technology envelope. Whether or not they are going about it the right way or could have picked a better set of features is a question for historians a couple of years from now. It might all be that Sony was a mere half a year off on their timing to push this stuff but I don't think anyone should stop them from trying.
The writing was on the wall: No matter how 'elite' the PS3 is they were going to lose market position because the competition is strong this time around instead of the limp wristed toss outs Nintendo and Microsoft threw last time. The only thing Sony could do is try to lead which means going out on the limb. They are way out on a thin branch where it might pay off or it might come crashing down.
As many who are going "ha ha!" at Sony's seemingly consistent knack for steping on all of the landmines, no one should relish a gaming world where Microsoft and Sony switch places. Do many of you think Microsoft will treat you better than Sony did if they dominate the space? I guarentee if Microsoft runs away with the market and crushes Sony we'll be back to same quite pace we've seen in the last few years. No thanks...I'll gladly take the three way race.
For $499 you get a PS3 from Sony that:
*Plays 1080p HD BluRay movies over component cables... Until they implement HDCP...
*Plays 1080p games (which has been possible on PC for years)
*All the same exclusive games that 103+ million people bought Playstation 2s for (so why not just play them on that)
*Complate backwards compatibility with 8000+ Playstation games (when it decideds to work properly)
*Complete backwards compatibility with 8000+ Playstation 2 games (see above)
*Free online play for all non-MMORPG games. Nothing new here
*Linux. To what end? I'm sure it will be just as huge a success as Linux on PS2 was.......
*Webbrowsing in 1080p on your HD TV monitor and other desktop apps that you run in 1600x1200+ (higher than 1080p) on your PC
*Tilt controller that they copied from Nintendo
Compared to the 200-250 Wii which looks to be fun at parties and can produce graphics that are more than adequate, all the while maintaining an aura of FUN vs just being eye-candy.
Or the XBox 360 which will end up costing you over 700 bucks for the non-worthless version over four to five years, vs a system that will cost you well over $2000 up front to use it to its full potential ($600 for a non-crippled PS3, $200 for a few games, $1200+ on the low end for a TV that supports HDMI so you don't lose 1080p playback when HDCP is implemented). And that doesn't include a keyboard or mouse to actually USE the "other desktop apps" properly. Or the overpriced accessories.
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
This is causing me to lose even more respect for Sony (rootkit anyone). I was a loyal PS2 user but if its not one things its another and Sony is really going downhill in my book. Continued delays. Backing losing mediums (I'd rather go with HD-DVD). etc, etc. If I can no longer support Sony and god forbid I buy an Xbox where can I console-game? I guess I should just dig out the old-school Nintendo. I can't use Xbox or Sony anymore on principle.
after all, in addition to a new disk format noone sees a need for, and a price way too high for not enough games, you also get wonderful DRM and region-coding to make your life even more meaningful.
I'll be using my inexpensive, less than $250 USD Wii, in the meantime, playing all the really cool games that knock my socks off.
But, on a good note, PS2 sales are still beating the xBox and xBox360 combined, after E3.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Whenever I've seen it used, "Schadenfreude" has implied pleasure in the suffering (or just difficulties) of others -- independent of whether those others deserved to suffer.
Wanting a company to fail because its actions are objectionable is far less amoral -- uh, more moral? -- than that. We're not rooting against Sony because it'll make us feel better about our own failings if they belly flop. We want them to fail because they're behaving in a way that actually offends our sense of how companies should act. Maybe that "moral" thing was real after all: we think they way Sony's acting is wrong. Not illegal, no -- just wrong.
This isn't just a case of wanting to see the bully stumble, either. If Sony had taken Nintendo's approach this time around, I'd be lining up to buy.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
* All the same exclusive games that 103+ million people bought Playstation 2s for
* Complete backwards compatibility with 8000+ Playstation games
* Complete backwards compatibility with 8000+ Playstation 2 games
I fail to see why people tout this as a reason to buy a PS3. Yes, I love my exclusive PS2 games...and I can continue to play them on my PS2, as I do now. That's not going to convince me to buy a PS3. I'm gonna buy a PS3 when there are games out that I want to play enough to justify the price of said games + the console. Not a moment sooner.
This kills 2 birds with 1 stone; it get's people buying the PS3 for games and for the Blu-ray capabilities. Either way, they win.
People buying the PS3 for games see a $500-600 system that's the most expensive "new console" out there. By a lot. Heck, there'll still be PS2 systems sitting on shelves this Christmas, and so now they've got to compare a $129 (if it doesn't drop to $99) system to a $500-600 system? Yah. So it's fair to say that the only section of this market they'll get are the ones that have loads of money to throw away, or Sony fanboys. By any measure, that's a niche portion of the market.
People buying the system for Blu-ray capabilities are going to start off as a small market anyway, as it's a $500-600 movie player. But at that point, you're getting someone who wants a top-end home theatre system, and is willing to throw money at it. Now there'll be $1000 standalone players, and a $500-600 PS3. Does Sony really think that those kind of people are going to be swayed by the "ooh, it's $400 cheaper" argument? Of course not - they spent $1500 on an HDTV with marginal amounts of programming available for it. They'll go after the $1000 Blu-ray player, which will be advertised as a "better player" than the PS3. Hint for any Circuit City employees, it's easy enough to just reference the PS2's disc read error issues as well as the poor quality of the DVD output and the compatibility issues it had with certain DVDs, and you'll get people looking at the Blu-ray player instead. So here, again, they're targeting a niche portion of a small market.
I think describing the PS3 as a "cheap" Blu-ray player is the easiest way to keep videophiles from buying them. They'd be better off with standalone Blu-ray players being $500-600. At $400 less, now they just look like there's something wrong with them.
The flaw in your reasoning is the assumption that the PS3 will fall in price, but its competition won't. All consoles decline in price during their life cycle. The PS3 is more expensive now, and it will still be more expensive after price cuts.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.