Slashdot Mirror
$600 PS3 Ships Without HDMI Cable
Eurogamer reports that the $600 PS3, which comes available with an HDMI port, will not ship with the necessary cable to actually hook the machine up. From the article: "According to the specs page on the official US PS3 website, which notes: 'HDMI cable not included. Additional equipment may be required to use the HDMI connector.' Sony has long promoted the 60GB PS3's HDMI output as a key feature of the machine. The 20GB model, however, doesn't feature HDMI - and nor does the Xbox 360, as it goes, despite occasional rumours of a hardware revision in the offing." The machine will, of course, come with a composite cable.
I heard they're not even including cables for the controllers on some of the new consoles!
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
It seems a cheap trick, but I understand why they'd choose not to ship with cable. Depending on whose numbers you believe, the sale of peripherals like this may significantly cut the money lost selling the console itself. I'm assuming that the peripherals are not sold at a loss.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
If you've got $600 to drop on a PS3, you've got another $20 for cables. Move along, nothing to see here.
... at least...
Could they charge more for DVI/HDMI cables? I remember looking at DVI's at BB once? Freaking insane...
The cable costs a fifth of the system...
We apologise for the fault in this post. Those responsible have been sacked. -- Signed RICHARD M. NIXON
You get a console.* *Some assembly required; batteries cables and other accessories including a TV, controllers, and in limited situations console not included; By purchasing this console you agree to indenture your first born to work in sony's sweatshops...
This space intentionally left blank
Sony has also announced the 60Gig version comes with the -abytes sold seperately.
IIRC, HDMI cables are necessary if you need to view HDCP encrypted content - or you get a "low-quality" version of the image. Considering that most studios are not using the image constraint token till 2010, it seems that HDMI cable or no, no one's likely to need it for a while. Should it be included in a $600 package and is Sony cheaping out? Perhaps. But do you absolutely need it right now? No.
I would guess they are doing this to please retail stores and cable manufacturers (*ahem* Monster), who sell HDMI cables at insane prices to people who think that paying $80 for a cable that passes a digital signal somehow gives them better picture quality than a $10 cable you can buy online.
The PS3 is $600 for one reason, Sony pushing their Blu-Ray format.
Now they have decided to release this ungodly expensive machine without an HDMI cable, which is required for playing Blu-Ray movies.
So for $600 dollars you are buying something most people don't want or need (Blu-Ray) but still will not even have the ability to use it.
I sure hope you meant it comes with component cables.
ÕÕ
Wasn't the PS3 supposed to be a fantastic movie player which was a $1000 value for a $600 price? Without games. HDMI is being forced on the public because of the Image Constraint Token and Sony wants you to pay extra for the privilege. Maybe someone can post some positive PS3 articles in order to balance out the negative news. In fact, someone can just respond with a number of recent positive developments for the PS3. Oh and re-listing the PS3 stats over and over again doesn't count.
This is what they always do. If they ship with the HDMI cable, then they have to also include the composite, since that's the lowest common denominator. More people would have to buy a downgrade cable if it came with HDMI, than have to buy an upgrade if it ships with comp, so the decision is easy. It may sound like they're being cheap by not shipping with both, but no other console that I'm aware of has ever shipped with > 1 type of interface cable, and since the units already ship at a loss...
Several people have mentioned that you might be able to use a standard HDMI cable to connect the PS3? Is that really true? No console I'm aware of has ever had standard connections on the back.... they've always used a single proprietary connector, and forced you to buy a more expensive cable specific to the conections you wanted. eg. it's not going to be cheap.
Or if you want a digital HD signal going from your console to your display device. Considering that the display will take an analog signal and digitize it, an all-digital path is better.
Still, if you have a home theater setup, would a supplied 6-foot cable be enough? How about 3-foot, or should we push to 8? You can see where you'd be wasting a lot of people's money by including a cable that the vast majority can't use. Even if it would fit your system, you'd be in the minority for having HDMI. Yes, it's a $600 system, but I don't see people beefing when their DVI laptops don't come with DVI cables.
This is just non-story Sony-ragging.
due to the fact that the majority of buyers won't yet own a HDMI-ready TV - and those that do will already have a HDMI lead anyway
If I'm going to have an HDMI cable on hand it will because I'm already using it to connect something else to the TV
This is no longer the case as cheap no-name cable makers have started making HDMI/DVI cables, too. And since actual cable quality is much less of an issue than with analog signals, there's no reason not to get those.
How many USB devices do you know of that come with a cable? The problem, as I see it, is that first of all less than 10% of consumers are going to use HDMI anyway. Why make the other 90% pay for a $60 cable they're not going to use.
And for the ones that do use it they probably have some notion that whatever come with the system isn't good enough and will buy a Monster cable anyway. Or the one it came with won't be long enough, or what-have-you.
I have no problem with connecting cables not being included. It's a very customized component. No blame or ridicule here.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
This is OLD OLD news that was discussed many months ago during E3, why is it that this is the 4th or 5th news site that is posting this as if its news?
It's one thing to have no hdmi cable, but why not component video? Isn't there some degradation in the HDTV resolution signal when using composite video?
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
As the old saying goes, a person in a large organization always gets promoted one position past their level of competency. That may have been what has happened to most of the permanent Sony staff within the past half decade. It's been nothing but blunder after blunder after blunder after blunder with them. It's just the sort of behavior you'd expect from a company where enough people have been promoted to position at which they're not competent enough to handle.
In the end, bad decisions are made. The responses to the initial bad decisions often end up being horrible, as well. Soon enough you end up with a project like the PS3, which by all accounts has been a disaster so far. And Sony may not even have the talent at this point to remedy the situation.
$600 for a console, $80 for a cable (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=790 0435&st=hdmi+cable&lp=2&type=product&cp=1&id=11492 06848144), $80 for another controller, $80 for a game and $40 tax? That is $920 just taking it home with a single game!
I am a parent of a household that has approximately $180,000 in annual income and there is no way in heck I am buying this. Any idea of how many books that would buy my child?
Does anyone else think this is insane?
A composite cable will not even support HD. Only putting a composite cbale is a very stupid move. The 360 standard edition offered composite, the premium offered component cables. That made sense. It seems really odd that Sony wouldnt go with that method as well. The richer people ar emore likely to buy the premium and more likely to have a HD TV/
My dad's printer did not come with the required USB cable, though the USB connectivity feature was made well known on the packaging. Sucked that we had to go back to the store again to get one, but this seems to be popular.
Considering how many people have HDMI inputs on their displays compared to how many people have composit inputs, is this really that suprising? I've begun workign toward a front projector setup for my home, and I've found HDMI cables are not dirt-cheap. While a lot of people with composite inputs probably won't get a PS3 until prices drop, a lot, considering how few overall PS3 buyers have HDMI inputs I'm not suprised the cable is seperate to try and save a few dollars on the retail price of the console. How is this causing people such a bad day?
P.S. When I order my projector, will it include the required 15' HDMI cable? Or will I have to buy that seperate?
HDMI simply wraps DVI and audio into a single cable. Many older DVI based HDTVs support HDCP just fine. --M
Whereas most people don't have HDTV's and this would be a waste, the PS3 seems to be a waste to begin with if you DONT have an HDTV.
However, I think in most peoples cases, if they have the means to use HDMI, they probably already have an HDMI cable. Shops like monoprice.com sell HDMI cables for under $10, so that's not so big of a deal. Although, the majority of consumers won't know about this and will be forced to buy $75 ones off the shelf at best buy, probably more when they're conned into buying the Monster Cable version.
It's probably better for the smart consumer that this is left out, worse for the general population. Sony probably just doesn't want to include the cables to cut down on sales of overpriced cables. I mean, come on, these things can only cost a couple bucks to make at most.
Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
VIA BoingBoing:
Update: Dave sez, "Here's a company that sells HDMI cables for $4.49 for 3 foot to $15.49 for 9 foot. Quite affordable, actually, as long as you avoid the overpriced big-box store brands."
And in all actuality, how many people really have screens with HDMI? I don't yet but I don't see a big problem in spending another $10-$20 for an HDMI cable after spending $600 on the console and $1500+ on the screen. Hell, I might even be able to get the cable for cheaper if WallyWorld still has them on the clearance rack.
Sounds like the anti-fanbois just want something else to bitch about with the PS3. It's hilarious to me how the Internet can bring together all those people who just like to whine for the sake of hearing their own moaning.
Buy it now!!
We sell gold plated six foot hdmi cables for $10.
Hmmm... Pie...
*user experience may vary due to lack of DRM-enabled display equipment, lack of DRM-enabled cabling, and/or due to vendor blacklisting of known pirate devices.
**Advanced Analog Hole (TM) technology fully supported out of the box!!!
I know some people are trying to say that this is better for people, but I still think it will be very bad for Sony.
If you drop $600 (or over £400 here) on a PS3 it will be because you really want the most amazing graphics and Blu-ray (which is pretty much all they seem to be marketing on at the moment... because its a blu-ray player). I doubt that many people who don't have a HDTV would get a PS3 because I can't really distinguish its advantages over the 360 other than offering a blu-ray player and maybe slightly better graphics.
But wait! when you get it home you find out it doesn't work like you were told/thought it would... some people might buy the cable - if I bought a PS3 it would be going back the next day
*''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
I'm willing to put money on the fact that next week we'll find out the HDMI connector on the PS3 is non standardized, so you'd have to buy Sony's brand of cable only to use it. Of course that will only cost the consumer 99 dollars, similar to the Xbox's Wireless USB Adapter.
I'd make fun of sony but it's just another in it's long line of "screw the consumer" moves. All I can do now is shake my head and wonder when they will start medicating the designers.
FWIW, the Premium version of the 360 comes with the highest-end cable: it has component out, composite out, and optical out. A really great cable! :)
I'm more shocked that there are actually working models available. A few months back, a friend of mine who worked at EB Games informed me that every model of the PS3 that was tested exploded (or at least burned out in a spectacular fashion.) Perhaps this is just a PS2 with a fancier logo.
If you can read this, it means that I bothered to log in.
Hell, I bought I 21" CRT from Overstock.com that specifically said it came with a DVI cable. Didn't come with one. I called Overstock and got a bunch of excuses, but no cable. Finally went out and bought one myself. Found that DVI only supports 60hz refresh. So here I am with a monitor that will do something outrageous like 130hz refresh with a VGA connection, stuck with a shitty blinking 60hz refresh. That was an annoying piece of education. (Yah, I now use the VGA connection on the 21", and the DVI cable hangs on the wall, unused, as the two 17" LCDs I also have on the machine do not support DVI, so fuck ya all)
Except every major console in history has shipped with a lowest-common-denominator cable.
Does the 360 ship with a component cable? Did the dreamcast ship with a VGA cable?
Will the Wii ship with a component cable, despite the fact that its required to enable progressive-scan mode? The GC didn't...
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I *USED* to not get USB cables with anything, but now I get them with everything. And I buy a lot of stuff - printers, more printers, USB wireless networking setups, USB cameras, USB barcode scanners, label printers, scales, digital cameras, hell, even my MONITOR came with a USB cable.
I think manufacturers caught o that the customer caught on that they had to include the cost of whateve rextra cables they eneded to buy in the price. By including the cable, they give you $20-$60 of value (depending on the cable and where you're buying your device) for a few bucks. Once one printer comapny starts giving you a pritner and a cable for $100, the other printer companies can't sell you a printer and no cable for $95 to force you to pay Best Buy $30 for the cable. You'll buy the printer with the cable included.
paintball
1) HD is one of the big things that the PS3 is being billed for. Sony has been pimping that heavily. If it's such a fundamental part of the console, maybe you include the hookups out of box?
2) For most people, the cable won't be that cheap. They probably won't know about online cable warehouses, and how much cheaper they are. So they'll pick up an HDMI cable at Best Buy or wherever they got the PS3. There, it's more like $60, not $20. Cables are the big money maker for places like that.
I'm just saying at $600, seems a little, well, cheapskate. When I but a $40 DVD player, ok I'm happy if it even has a power cable. However when I buy a $200 DVD player I generally expect to see all the extras like cables (mine came with composite, S-Video and component) and batteries for the remote included. It's expensive so they can afford to include the extras.
Yes, I understand that the PS3 is sold at a loss, whereas my DVD player was sold at a significant profit. However I'm talking about average consumer perception here. If you buy a premium, expensive product, you tend to expect to not get gypped on the extras. Feels real cheapskate to buy a $600 unit and for the sales guy to then say "You want HD support? 'Cause that needs an HDMI cable. We've got this $60 Sony one here but we really recommend the $250 Monster Cable one for best quality." Don't think the Best Buy people won't, either.
The #1 reason cables aren't included in most peripheral devices is because the user most likely already has a cable just like the one needed. You buy a new VCR, you don't need a new cable, you just unhook the old one, and attach the new one. And trust me, nobody is throwing in HDMI cables for free, for any HDMI-ready device.
I see this as more of a case of "letting the consumer figure out their own way to getting things hooked up" than "we're trying to shaft you by making you pay extra for HDMI cables."
And don't worry, there will be a $99 package right next to the PS3 with an extra wireless controller, memory card, and HDMI cable. Maybe a demo disc, too - oo!
And this is especially true because although the component spec is capable of 1080p, the playstation won't do it.
In Soviet Russia, backwards is everything.
many posts have alluded to this, however none pointed it out explicitly. If they ship with a cable that only a small portion of the population wants/needs the price of the unit goes up for all purchasers. never has this been the chosen option for a company looking to generate the most sales (and i think we can safely assume that is what sony wants)
it's like if the jelly people forced their consumers to buy cream cheese bundled with their jelly.. what if you don't like cream cheese and jelly sandwiches? what if you are into pb&j?
"i stand on the edge of destruction" -shai hulud
If you have $600 to drop on a PS3, you have another $20 for cables, true. But if they're advertising this as some sort of luxury sports car of the gaming world, and charging a huge amount for HD and Blu-ray, why assume by default that people won't be able to use them?
Well, what HDMI cable should they put in? They're not all created equal. Throw in the bargain basement one? Middle tier? Videophile quality? They're not assuming that PS3 owners won't use the HDMI cable - they're assuming that the PS3 owner with a HDMI-capable TV will want to get their own HDMI cable at the price point they're comfortable with. Given that, the inclusion of any HDMI cable - all of which are more expensive than composite - increases the price of production needlessly.
I think they take a good approach. Throw in the cheapest cable that will connect the thing successfully to any TV, which is a composite cable. That way we avoid the old Christmas disappointment, the thing is guaranteed to work out of the box, but that cable adds all of $0.10 to the bottom line. However, for optimal viewing, users will want to purchase the HDMI cable of their choice. Seems like everybody wins.
So. They're marketing this as a Blu-ray player. So you should buy it to enjoy the highest possible quality content on your HD set , which of course you have.
But not including the cable needed to actually take advantage of this.
Someone, somewhere, did not think this clever plan all the way through.
I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
Big deal. The dryer that came with my washing machine didn't even come with a POWER CABLE! How freakin' stupid is that??
The component cables for the GameCube are expensive, yes, but the trade off in visual quality is fantastic. Many GameCube games visually surpass the quality of the original Xbox with the brighter color palettes and design choices. F-Zero looks absolutely fantastic on my ancient InFocus projector in progressive scan mode.
only one everything
They're cheap, available anywhere, and any HDTV or home theater owner probably owns one or two already. And I'd guess most owners either won't or can't use HDMI anyway. For example: I won't, even though my projector supports it, because my receiver only does component video switching. Few can upconvert all signals to HDMI. Furthermore, most TV's (mine included) do not have enough HDMI jacks to support a television tuner, a movie player, and a game console. The PS3 may fullfill the latter two roles, but will it do both well enough to replace a dedicated DVD player? So, I think only a small percentage of users would actually be able to take advantage of it, even if HDMI inputs are pretty common nowadays. The inclusion of an HDMI cable thus seems like unnecessary cost. I'd rather see the base price come down a rather petty $5. After all, printers don't come with printer cables, but everyone has printer cables nowadays anyway. I'm glad printers don't come with cables.
Many people do not yet have a need for an HDMI cable, So including one with every machine would only raise costs more on an already very expensive machine.
WHy spend $20 extra for the 20% of customers that will use one?
And then thos ecustomers will complain that they didn't get the 0-gauge, platinum-plated, "archival quality" Monster (TM) cable and that their picture looks back because of that.
Whiners.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
I'm currently enjoying the recent purchase of an HDTV, but I'm pretty ticked off with the price of cables for this thing. Walk into a store and buy a set of Composite (Yellow, Red, White connectors) cables for $8 because composite cables have been around forever. Look at the $25 price tag on the "Component" video cables (Blue, Green, Red connectors) that cost so much because they do "Hi Def" TV. Buy the $8 set of cords, match the connectors up properly and watch your video signal come through exactly as it would have for almost $20 more.
Since purchasing my TV I have spent close to a hundred dollars between cables for my PS2, XBOX, Satellite Receiver and 5.1 surround system. Had I not been an informed consumer I easily could have spent $250. Once companies know you've bought an HDTV, everybody wants to nickel and dime you to death with $50 cables that aren't any nicer than the differently-colored-connectors of a composite cable. So sure it's easy to say "Yeah $30 isn't bad for people who can afford the system" but they don't realize that the PS3 isn't the only thing being plugged into the system. $30 x 3 different boxes seems pretty ludicrous for the same copper wire I've been plugging into TV for years. [/gripe]
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
Any user who is looking to buy the PS3 for it's HD capabilities will already have the HDMI. I don't see the problem with this decision so long as they include a way to use a composite connection.
I will forever be a student.
Component cables work just fine for HD. I'm really not sure what the big deal is with HDMI. Well, other than the fact that a lot of us early HDTV adopters are gonna be screwed somehow shortly, but I don't really know how. All I know is that my er... Sony HDTV, has a DVI input and component inputs. I never messed with the DVI since all the boxes from Time Warner didn't enable the DVI output. Component connectors have worked fine for me so far.
So we have a link to the hearsay but is there any reference in the article to the actual posting on Sony's PS3 website?
Consumer A visits there local Best Buy to pick up a brand new PS3. Sales rep. informs him that he needs to buy an extra cable that does not come with the unit for it to work on his hi-def tv. Consumer A picks up a $60 Sony HDMI cable in another isle. If Sony manufactures these things why don't they supply PS3 buys with one. I'm sure they can make them for very cheap.
Always billed as a wonderful multiplayer system... comes with one controller...
Hell, I remember my Colecovision didn't have the right connector to go from coaxial cable to the two little screws on the back of the TV set.
See, that's the funny thing right ther, it's not "the necessary cable".
An HDMI cable would be useless for over 50% of the people who buy this thing.
A large number of people have no digital video input at all (and will use component).
A large number of people also have a DVI input instead of an HDMI input and will need a HDMI->DVI cable instead of an HDMI cable.
Bundling this cable makes no sense.
Xbox 360 doesn't come with a digital audio cable, despite the much larger number of people who have digital audio (compared to digital video).
This is a stupid article, it's ridiculous to see the haters propagate it all over the web.
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to not like the PS3. There's no need to make up nonsense ones too.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
The next thing you know, they'll be selling printers without cables! Oh, wait...
Except it's not.
Even if you are going to use digital video, many people have a DVI port instead of an HDMI port. So this cable not only isn't required for them, it's useless.
Additionally, you can play BluRay movies over the component out (people who buy the $500 model will have no other choice) until the image constraint token is adopted (which Sony swore off for at least 5 years).
It is astounding not only how poorly people understand HDTV, but the eagerness they show to share their incorrect info and predict gloom and doom based upon it.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
HDMI being included in the PS3 is nothing more than Sony trying to save face from their initial boasting of the inclusion of 2 HDMI ports and now cutting it back to one. (Remember the dual HDMI output touted and now dropped?)
The only thing HDMI really helps for is 1080p vs. 1080i which unless you own an extremely high end system you won't be able to notice the difference. Furthermore how many people actually own a 1080p compatible TV?
Sony isn't including the cord because it isn't necessary for the overwhelming portion of their target market. I wouldn't even be surprised if they dropped HDMI from future hardware revisions (kinda PSthree kind of deal).
Finally, no complaints about Microsoft using proprietary cords, all companys do this. Sony has for years, Nintendo did. Only the NES and 1st revision of the Sega Genesis had standard RCA A/V cables coming out of the console.
It's a combination component/composite cable.
The $300 360 doesn't come with one.
I still don't think Sony should ship an HDMI cable. It's a standard cable, just get one at the store, the one that you need. Because less than 40% of people will have use for an HDMI cable. Many would rather have an HDMI->DVI cable instead.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
This is more for the sibling posters - the parent poster `gets it`.
m )
I've got extra HDMI and DVIHDMI adapters.
I really don't want any more!
The irony is:
I ordered my HDMI cable from one of those "direct cable" sites online (works great). This was for a Sceptre LCD TV ordered online from Costco. The online info clearly listed a bunch of other cables and parts, but did -not- mention HDMI, so I thought I needed one.
Opened up the TV crate, and there was the HDMI cable.
Then the Comcast guy shows up to hookup the HD DVR... another set of HDMI cables.
Bottom line: all the babies crying there's no HDMI cable, don't have HDTV to begin with. Sony is promising a LOT for the PS3... they've overpromised in fact, and there's no going back on the big specs. Sony made a big gamble on the BlueRay player, which to me is more significant than the Cell CPU. EVERY PS3 is going to have a BlueRay drive, so the installed base will be 100% unlike the X-Box360, which will have an "add on" HD-DVD drive.
No one has EVER successfully "added" formats to a gaming console:
For the Atari VCS, failed (Spectra SuperCharger: http://members.cox.net/rcolbert/schookup.htm)
Coleco failed (Coleco Adam expansion kit: http://www.myoldcomputers.com/museum/comp/adam.ht
Sega failed (Genesis Megadrive: http://cgfm2.emuviews.com/gen.php)
To this day, I bet most Windows games ship on CD not DVD (correct me if I am wrong, but if this has changed it is very recent and still no clear market format)
50GB is an amazing platform to write games, and even though the first generation of games will not take advantage of it, eventually they will. This is true even if the extra "bloat" doesn't add to gameplay - not right away anyways. I used to remember all the C64 games were written for 64K, and all the ATARI XL/XE games were written for 48K... even during the twilight of the 8-bit platform.
As far as I'm concerned, game systems should ship with NO AV cable since whatever they include is not going to satisfy everyone:
A lot of people wil be looking for adapter cables to operate the nexgen game systems with:
DVI (plenty of early HD sets have this instead of HDMI)
VGA (ditto)
component
S-Video
I have a draw full of old composite cables, and a ton more in the garage.
The point is, people never upgrade game platforms. Never. It's a stretch I know to factor HDMI cables in here, but every nickel you can save somewhere just makes the rest of the platform more viable. (I understand the Blue-Ray gamble, but the Cell-processor gamble is just stupid "not invented here". I would have chopped the Cell processor - too big of a question mark. What's to be gained??).
Anyways - anyone still not believing this "excusing" of the HDMI cable, please take an moment to window-shop a brand-new car. Then you'll really understand what it means to have to "option" things out.
Do you want some pack in HDMI cable or one that fits your setup? The reality is that you have to cut the cost of goods in the box to meet a cost target, and you cut the things that most people won't use first.
I can't wait to get my PS3 and Blu-Ray movies, but my TV only accepts Coax cable. Please tell me there will at least be a 1st party cable available at launch....
lol
Please someone with points mod this up - I've been wanting such a concise explanation for some time now...
I don't see what the big deal is. How many people actually HAVE HDMI-ready televisions? THREE? I'd actually be more angry that they're not shipping with component cables, because more people have component-ready televisions. But, I can also see why they're only shipping with composite. It's got the highest market penetration. So you can rest assured that if someone buys a PS3, they're going to be able to hook it up because they'll almost definitely have composite jacks. Then, if they have better video inputs, let them make up their own mind to go get the cable. Odds are, if they've had the TV for any length of time, they might already have a cable or two lying about anyway. *shrug* that's just my $0.02.
Uhm, there was never a USB Wireless adaptor for the Xbox.
Linksys did sell an Xbox-branded "gaming adaptor" but it was EXACTLY the same as any other ETHERNET-to-wireless adaptor ever sold.
As others have said, big whoop concerning a cable that a single digit % of users will need isn't included. I'm waiting for the day when the power adaptor isn't included and you have to pay $49.99 extra for the priviledge to be able to plug your game unit in the wall! I believe that day is coming.
Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
Bundling this cable makes no sense.
Yep, I entirely agree; bundling an HDMI cable makes no sense as those with HDMI capable screens either already have the appropriate cable or will have no problem dropping extra cash for it. Your average Joe shouldn't be forced to pay the extra $5 (Sony cost) to include it in the box when they're going to hook it up to their crummy NTSC set.
Take that one step further though... Bundling Blu-ray with the PS3 makes no sense either. This is a game machine that we are talking about. Anyone who wants Blu-ray won't mind dropping extra cash for that either.
Blu-ray certainly isn't going to make the game experience better enough to justify the cost of including it in the system over a standard DVD player. I bet that it's a lot more than a $5. Some people speculate that it's closer to $150 being passed on to the consumer.
Now that makes me not even care about paying extra for a silly HDMI cable.
hd dvd baby.
-makoffee
I'm not certain though.
I don't think $150 is being passed on to the consumer either way.
Obviously Sony is bundling BluRay for their own purposes, not for the customer's advantage.
But honestly, there is one reason I'll be glad to have BluRay. A BluRay drive spinning at 1.5X has a higher transfer rate than a 12X DVD-ROM and will be a lot quieter.
So when I sit here with my 360 DVD-ROM drive making huge amounts of noise, I wish the unit were quieter. It's possible the PS3 will load games more quickly and will be more quiet than the 360 due to this BluRay format games.
I dunno if this is enough reason to pass $100 onto the customer. It'd be worth it to me, but think a company needs to set the bar higher than just pleasing people like me (who bought PS2+ units to replace their early PS2s just because they were quieter and took less power).
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Not 100% accurate, as HDMI (which uses DVI signaling for the video portion) does not have any error correction built into the signaling. (See also the bottom of this page for similar info.)
This means that bit errors can creep in and degrade image quality when using low-quality cables, especially in an electrically noisy environment. I don't know about you, but I have a rat's nest of cables behind my AV rack; even with cable management, some cross-talk is unavoidable because of the sheer number of cables in close proximity.
Poor shielding is only one problem with cheap cables, though; you also have issues with improper termination (i.e., poor impedance matching) at the ends of the cable, something that makes a huge difference at the frequencies that DVI/HDMI operates at.
There are lots of people saying that this is no big deal since every other console hasn't come with a high-end cable either, and that's a good argument. The thing is that people are already outraged that Sony's console is so expensive, that it's just another black eye for them to nickle and dime on the cables as well. It seems like everything that Sony does just increases their image as a company that doesn't care about the consumer.
Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
Just because you're sending bits over an electrical conductor doesn't mean those bits are immune to noise. Those bits can be altered by external noise and can be degraded by reflections in the cable. (More on that in a moment.)
While it's true that HDMI uses DVI signaling for video data, and the signaling is differential (which is intrinsically more immune to noise than other signaling techniques), that doesn't mean that the bits can't get scrambled from point A to point B. More importantly, there's no error correction. So the receiving end has no way to tell if the bits it's getting are the correct bits, and no way to fix them if they're wrong.
Noise can be induced from any cables that run parallel to your HDMI cable. Imagine two conductors, A and B, that are parallel to each other and spaced fairly close together. If a current is run through A, a magnetic field is created around A and induces a current in B. Now, induction is a great thing when it comes to power transformers, but it's a nuisance when you're trying to transmit data over an electrical conductor.
Signal degradation can be caused by a variety of things, but in the case of cheap cables, you can have improper termination at either or both ends of a cable. Improper termination can be caused by bad solder joints between the wires in the cable and the HDMI connectors at the cable ends, for example, or by using cheap hardware for the connectors themselves. The typical result of improper termination is an impedance mismatch. If you've ever studied impedance in a physics class or an EE class, you know that when a signal is transmitted from conductor A with one impedance to conductor B with a different impedance, the signal can be reflected at the point where the mismatch occurs. This reflected signal can then constructively or destructively interfere with the original signal.
Personally, I wouldn't trust a $7 HDMI cable for a cluttered AV rack like mine, but I agree with you that paying $80 and up for an HDMI cable is probably highway robbery. I think a good target price is around $25 or $35 for a 1 to 1.5 meter cable run.
Did the PS2 ship with SVideo? did the XBox ship with Component or SVideo? Did the Gamecube? Sorry but why is this news? Hell did my DVI capable monitor ship with a DVI cable? No... would be nice if it did but did anyone EXPECT this? Looking for an answer above "but it's $600!"
Why not buy a few monster cables, and have them lying around the house 'just in case' ....
That's how they A) get people in the store, and B) make money.
1) HD is one of the big things that the PS3 is being billed for. Sony has been pimping that heavily. If it's such a fundamental part of the console, maybe you include the hookups out of box?
I'm in the alleged '5%'. I don't want the cable included. Why? Because it will be the wrong length. It doesnt matter what length it is, it will be just a bit too short or way to friggin long. Just as a cat is always on the wrong side of the door, the legth of OEM cables are always wrong. I'd end up buying a new cable to fit my needs and wind up paying for a cable I couldn't use (the OEM cable).
And the OEM cable would suck. Same principle. OEM cables are always cheap -- even on "premium" set-ups. I buy rather high end stereo and video equipment. Then I buy cabling for it because any OEM cables have always a) sucked and B) been the wrong size.
So, speaking as a "member of the 5%" I say: "Good move Sony".
If you buy a premium, expensive product, you tend to expect to not get gypped on the extras.
That's just it though. "Extras" are by definition not "standard includes" So if you admit that the cable is an extra it must not be included. Then it would not be an extra would it?
My HD projection TV didn't come with cables and it cost more than the PS3 and it is the display portion. Arguably, if any piece is to include the cables, the display should. Most likely the alleged 5% won't give a damn about the cable not included since they'll already know they need one and will either have it or be ready to buy it to fit their desires/physical requirements; and they'll know where to get it.
Or, the 95% of people who don't have the display for it won't need one.
Expensive and/or premium does not necessarily mean "everything". In this case, the PS3 is "premium" because of the alleged performance, "advanced" features such as Blu-Ray and full HD output, it's backward compatibility, and that it is a "Playstation". Like it or not, that last bit matters. Just as many people used to refer to home video consoles as Nintendos even if they eg. Sega.
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
It doesn't come with a HDMI-capable HDTV to plug it into either - if you want HD you're simply going to have to spend the $25 and buy a quality HDMI cable.
Lately, i hate sony as much as anyone, but shit... my HDMI compliant HDTV didn't come with a HDMI cable either.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
heaven forbid those of you poor, unfortunate souls with HDTVs and a PS3 have to spend an extra $10 on an hdmi cable :(
(or use the extra that came with your TV, and some HDTVs do...)
Virtually every analyst believes that sony will be taking a loss on their shipments of ps2's. It doesn't matter if they are charging $600 or $200, there is no reason to bundle a cable that the vast majority will not use.
I don't know of any console or electronic that doesn't ship with basic cables that work with all devices. I work at an electronics store, whether we are talking about high end dvd players, HD tvs, or any gaming console to day. They will support the lowest common denominator and thats all out of the box.
Hmmm... Pie...
I think many people think of a ps3/xbox cable as a cable. In fact it is not. It is an interface in most cases, or at least a proprietary cable, that has the required entry/ending.
....
I mean the ps2 Component is just an other cable, that connects to the ps2 exit, while xbox has a separate box (HD pack) with the required outputs....
I think all that crap could be cleared, if the ps3/xbox360 had a digital (coax or optical) out, and a VGA (dsub 25) out, that can be switched over to component out.
For my Epson projector for example, you can use a VGA cable (included) or you can buy a $110 dsub25-> component out. You can aswell buy the parts in Radio shack (or your favourite part shop) for $10 and build the same cable with 30 mins labour, and a piece of UTP cable
The problem is, that you cannot buy the xbox or the PS3/2 proprietary plug at these places, so you will need a $40 monster cable.
Hmm damn you gaming companies, put at least a VGA there for us with different outputs. You will save money, we will save money, and you can connect VGA monitors, that a lot of us computer owners would do, especially with sub $300 prices for 1440x900 flat panels woth 8ms response and 500:1 contrast ratios !!!
just my 2c
Whoever modded this informative rather than funny really, really needs to revalidate his geek license. Soon.
Mogami
Wow. Just... Wow.
--- We are not in the 8th dimension. We are over New Jersey.
if you buy a printer you dont get a cable ...
if you buy a set of speakers you dont get a cable
what is the point of posting this ??
OMG the WII wont come with co axeland composite and a scart cable
ANyone else rember the days when consoles came with AV/SCART and RF Modulator (with a switch box) and a free game built in and all the features worked.
why make a HD capable console and not give it a HD output?? will there be special edition games in SD that will use the spare CPU cycles not taken up to run better AI?
I think not
HD Console that can not generate a HD TV signal, worst design flaw ever.
In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.