Has Sony got plans to morph the PS3 technology into a full-blown multi-media PC ?

See:-

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06...s_6127219.html

What is to really stop Sony taking just one more step beyond the
article and morphing the PS3 hardware architecture and silicon into
something we know and love, a full-blown desktop Personal Computer,
(with expansion-slots, SATA ports etc ) but with powerful multimedia
capability, and an immediate target port for PS3 games ? Putting
Lindows on it, and then encouraging a few of the key multimedia Mac
(and PC) developers to climb on board ? The powerful multi-threading
capability is a huge benefit for real-time multimedia applications
such as music programs, video animation and real-time video editors. I
can visualize some Mac developers chomping at the bit should Sony
suggest making a full-blown multi-media PC. nVidia would have no
trouble extending the PS3 peripheral hardware to provide the customary
I/O and expansion-slots expected of a PC.

The above article hints at the bigger ideas under Sony's hat. The
Commodore-Amiga of the early 21st century, but with the hardware
power needed for today's applications. Anybody intimately familiar
with the C-A and its applications will relate immediately to the
parallels between the C-A and Sony's hinted vision of the PS3. Might
even break the OS hammer-locks of M$$ and Apple in a key growth
area (multi-media) while fusing PCs and entertainment hardware. The
suggested use of Linux may already be sending shivers up and
down certain corporate spines.

One might expect similar suggestions for the Xbox360. However,
unlike Sony, M$$ has its vast current PC software base to protect.

In the late 1980's, I did not see M$$ hurrying to embrace the
Commodore-Amiga windowed- UI, multitasking OS, and A/V multi-media
capability, when the PC was DOS with home-made UIs, 16-color
and pip-squeak audio -- so why should M$ get off its rich backside
now ?? Just make a game-console to bring in some bucks
while pretending you competing are in the home entertainment
business and then get back to the pee-cee's where all the gravy is...

John Lewis

I'd buy it in a second ... for $300 you get a full PC with that much
power? Can't beat that.

On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 02:20:52 GMT, (John Lewis)
wrote:

>http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06...s_6127219.html
>
>What is to really stop Sony taking just one more step beyond the
>article and morphing the PS3 hardware architecture and silicon into
>something we know and love, a full-blown desktop Personal Computer,

One question: why do you think it would fly, when Commodore Amiga
didn't? Not to mention that the software base of Windows PC is today
even more transcendent that what the DOS PC software base was in Amiga
days.

Simply put: what would a PS3-PC have to offer over a x86-PC? Really?
You can already run Linux on PCs, and someday the multimedia
capabilities of x86-PC will outpace PS3-PC once again, just like it
did for Amiga after a few years.

Moreover, I bet a PS3-PC would also cost much more than a similar
x86-PC due to more HW manufacturers, more competition, higher volumes
etc.

>(with expansion-slots, SATA ports etc ) but with powerful multimedia
>capability, and an immediate target port for PS3 games ? Putting

I hope you are not suggesting people would buy an expensive PS3-PC for
playing PS3 games, when they can play them on a cheap PS3.

I think Creative Labs or someone else tried to make a "console on a PC
card" for PCs (a 3DO card), but it failed miserably.

>Lindows on it, and then encouraging a few of the key multimedia Mac
>(and PC) developers to climb on board ? The powerful multi-threading
>capability is a huge benefit for real-time multimedia applications
>such as music programs, video animation and real-time video editors. I

Niche markets. They didn't keep Amiga nor AtariST afloat, and after
awhile even PC surpassed both in those areas. Catch-22: there won't be
many music/animation programs for PS3-PC because people are not yet
buying it for that purpose, which means even less people would buy it
for that purpose, etc.

>The above article hints at the bigger ideas under Sony's hat. The
>Commodore-Amiga of the early 21st century, but with the hardware
>power needed for today's applications. Anybody intimately familiar
>with the C-A and its applications will relate immediately to the
>parallels between the C-A and Sony's hinted vision of the PS3. Might

Me too. And as you might recall, Amiga failed after awhile. And today
a new PS3-Amiga would have even less chance against the mammoth that
Intel-Windows has become.

On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:44:04 -0700, Joe62
<> wrote:

>I'd buy it in a second ... for $300 you get a full PC with that much
>power? Can't beat that.

LOL! I think it would probably cost more than $6000. Since it is not
really a viable market for PS3 games because people play them on real
PS3 instead, Sony would not subsidize its price by the game sales.

On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 19:19:52 GMT, jussi <> wrote:

>On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:44:04 -0700, Joe62
><> wrote:
>
>>I'd buy it in a second ... for $300 you get a full PC with that much
>>power? Can't beat that.
>
>LOL! I think it would probably cost more than $6000.

More like $600 plus peripherals and apps software.

Consider again the Commodore Amiga 1200, Find a picture of one.
Google it. $500 for a full-fledged computer including hard-disk,
windowed UI, multi-tasking OS, full-stereo audio, 256 color,
circa 1992.....

Dead easy to add memory and PC-style peripherals including. PCIe
expansion slots to the PS3, considering that nVidia is Sony's key
hardware partner. Run under Linux with open-architecture like
the Commodore-Amiga and a vast sea of multimedia developers
would be flocking. The Commodore-Amiga and its OS were fully
documented for third-party applications. 3 ROM-Kernel
manuals ( Includes, Libraries, Devices ) 1 Hardware Manual.

John Lewis


>Since it is not
>really a viable market for PS3 games because people play them on real
>PS3 instead, Sony would not subsidize its price by the game sales.
>

On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 18:57:46 GMT, jussi <> wrote:

>>
>Me too. And as you might recall, Amiga failed after awhile.

Commodore made the fatal mistake of not going after the Mac instead
of the PC. They hired a failed IBM exec as CEO who then executed
the fatal mistake, in spite of the shouts from the using Amiga
community. Did you know that NewTek's Video Toaster was the
highest selling desktop video editor/effects-unit of the 1990's? It
sold somewhere around 60,000 units at ~ $1500 a pop.
Target computer-- Commodore-Amiga.

>a new PS3-Amiga would have even less chance against the mammoth that
>Intel-Windows has become.

Nope - not in multimedia. M$$ has been revising its multimedia
(er) "strategy" every few weeks.... And Intel's architectures are
optimized for massive data-handling, not multimedia. There are big
chinks in the armor....... And a freely-available, very suitable,
highly-reliable OS.

John Lewis
>

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 05:43:24 GMT, (John Lewis)
wrote:

>>LOL! I think it would probably cost more than $6000.
>
>More like $600 plus peripherals and apps software.
>
>Consider again the Commodore Amiga 1200, Find a picture of one.
>Google it. $500 for a full-fledged computer including hard-disk,
>windowed UI, multi-tasking OS, full-stereo audio, 256 color,
>circa 1992.....

Amiga was already dying in 1992. See how much the desktop Amigas
comparable to PCs of the time cost. New A4000 with fast CPUs etc.

I don't know where you get the wrong idea that a full-fledged desktop
PS3-PC would cost mere $600, when similar desktop PCs with much more
competition and much higher volumes cost more than that. Sony would
still need to get profit from their PS3-PC sales.

Now, if you made the PS3-PC a fully integrated system like Amiga 500
or A1200 (which would be cheaper), then it certainly would die off in
a few years when PCs overshadow their capabilities. Just like Amigas
died off when PCs overshadowed them with newer video cards, faster
CPUs etc. Smaller Amigas could not keep up with their non-upgradeable/
non-interchangeable and rigid architecture, nor the bigger Amigas with
their ultra-expensive video cards etc., which you could get for PC for
half the price, or less.

>Dead easy to add memory and PC-style peripherals including. PCIe
>expansion slots to the PS3, considering that nVidia is Sony's key
>hardware partner. Run under Linux with open-architecture like
>the Commodore-Amiga and a vast sea of multimedia developers
>would be flocking.

Why would they be flocking to it? The users are still on other
platforms. They make software for the platforms where the paying
customers are. Look at the PC vs console gaming argument, for example.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 05:58:15 GMT, (John Lewis)
wrote:

>>Me too. And as you might recall, Amiga failed after awhile.
>
>Commodore made the fatal mistake of not going after the Mac instead
>of the PC.

Hindsight.

Maybe they went after PC because they already foresaw Mac was becoming
a niche machine, and there was not enough money in the "Mac pie" to
live on?

How about AtariST, why did it fail? It went after the Mac pie with its
MIDI sequencer and desktop publishing software, yet it died off even
faster than Amiga?

>Did you know that NewTek's Video Toaster was the
>highest selling desktop video editor/effects-unit of the 1990's? It
>sold somewhere around 60,000 units at ~ $1500 a pop.
>Target computer-- Commodore-Amiga.

Did it make Amiga a successful and viable desktop PC? No. It had a few
years as low-cost video animation machine, that's all.

>>a new PS3-Amiga would have even less chance against the mammoth that
>>Intel-Windows has become.
>
>Nope - not in multimedia. M$$ has been revising its multimedia
>(er) "strategy" every few weeks.... And Intel's architectures are
>optimized for massive data-handling, not multimedia.

This discussion already took place with Nintendo64 and PS2. Yeah,
their architecture is so much better suited for "multimedia" than the
archaic PC with its ancient 8-bit ISA slots and CGA graphics cards...
yet it didn't take long for this "archaic" PC architecture to stomp
them completely.

I bet this same discussion will take place also with PS4, and PS5...
("But this time it will be different!")

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 06:58:39 GMT, jussi <> wrote:

>On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 05:58:15 GMT, (John Lewis)
>wrote:
>
>>>Me too. And as you might recall, Amiga failed after awhile.
>>
>>Commodore made the fatal mistake of not going after the Mac instead
>>of the PC.
>
>Hindsight.
>

Foresight, actually. You did not witness the outcry from the Amiga
user groups when the chase-IBM strategy was anounced...

>Maybe they went after PC because they already foresaw Mac was becoming
>a niche machine,

Niche machine. Sure but it has survived and prospered in that niche.

> and there was not enough money in the "Mac pie" to
>live on?
>

There was, but short-sighted management with greedy eyes and no
knowledge of the underlying technology grabbed for more, like the
monkey with his hand stuck in the cookie-jar. Remember,
C-A was headed up by a failed executive from IBM.

>How about AtariST, why did it fail? It went after the Mac pie with its
>MIDI sequencer and desktop publishing software, yet it died off even
>faster than Amiga?
>
No hardware or software advantage over the Mac. The Amiga had
the custom A/V hardware and the genuine multi-tasking OS.

>>Did you know that NewTek's Video Toaster was the
>>highest selling desktop video editor/effects-unit of the 1990's? It
>>sold somewhere around 60,000 units at ~ $1500 a pop.
>>Target computer-- Commodore-Amiga.
>
>Did it make Amiga a successful and viable desktop PC? No. It had a few
>years as low-cost video animation machine, that's all.
>
>>>a new PS3-Amiga would have even less chance against the mammoth that
>>>Intel-Windows has become.
>>
>>Nope - not in multimedia. M$$ has been revising its multimedia
>>(er) "strategy" every few weeks.... And Intel's architectures are
>>optimized for massive data-handling, not multimedia.
>
>This discussion already took place with Nintendo64 and PS2. Yeah,
>their architecture is so much better suited for "multimedia" than the
>archaic PC with its ancient 8-bit ISA slots and CGA graphics cards...
>yet it didn't take long for this "archaic" PC architecture to stomp
>them completely.
>
>I bet this same discussion will take place also with PS4, and PS5...
>("But this time it will be different!")
>

Time will tell...... Sony will not give up as easily as you...
they will endeavor to maximize their return on the PS3 silicon
investment and that endeavor will not stop with the PS3. The PS3
hardware will be a loss-leader for at least the first year. Sony is
betting on making PS3 pay its way with $$ return on the software,
not the hardware.

If I were Sony, I sure would be looking elsewhere for opportunity for
positive returns on the hardware technology, as was strongly hinted
in that news article. Remember that the PS3 hardware when available
will be a more powerful processor of multimedia applications than
a dual-core desktop PC. It does need storage peripherals, I/O
interfaces and extra memory, to support these apps., plus some
future-expansion space. Trivially easy for nVidia to provide the
required silicon to support these functions.

John Lewis

jussi <> wrote:
>
> I don't know where you get the wrong idea that a full-fledged desktop
> PS3-PC would cost mere $600, when similar desktop PCs with much more
> competition and much higher volumes cost more than that. Sony would
> still need to get profit from their PS3-PC sales.

Name me a single desktop PC model with "much higher volumes", please.

5000 OEMs each buying 5000 units of something can't push the prices down
as far as a single OEM buying 25 million units. The Sony PS3 business
is lucrative even if the HW manufacturer only makes a tiny tiny amount
per unit, and similar for Sony itself -- they can work with smaller
margins due to the sheer number of sales.

Compare that to a PC manufacturer who may hope for a sale of 5000 units,
but has no guarantees. He might have to stop production after a
thousand machines, while there's still a couple of thousand machines in
the pipeline, and sell the rest cheap. This potential loss has to be
factored in in the original price. With Sony, there's little chance of
premature market saturation happening, but even if it does, the number
of completed sales on which to distribute the losses will still be
really high, to the point that it's a negligible factor in the price.

--
*Art