[Eug]

They could sell an optical out cable for $19.99 that plugs into the AV port.

ie. Ships with current optical out/component video out cable. If you want to go to HDMI, you buy your own HDMI cable, or else HDMI cable and optical out cable.

I don't think the current cable would fit, cuz it would block the HDMI out port, but I'm not sure. I suppose they could move the HDMI port a bit further away though.

Hopefully this isn't a hoax, but in truth it's irrelevant for me since my main TV doesn't have HDMI or DVI anyway.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Eug 

They could sell an optical out cable for $19.99 that plugs into the AV port.

I doubt it would be that cheap and it would also kinda suck to have buy a proprietary thing like that.

They should just include a small adapter in the box that plugs into that port but only outputs optical.

Anywho, Bioshock is coming in June and is sure to be a hit and move even more Xbox's:
Confirmed: Bioshock shocks us in June '07 - Joystiq

Normally I don't like computer mods but some of these are pretty good:
Modded Xbox 360's - a photoset on Flickr



Hope these people never have to send their system in for repair!


And how many 360's did MS sell by the end of last year? Did they hit there 10 million goal?

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

However out of the 5 people I know that got a 360, FOUR of them have died out of the box or within a few months. Eug's is the only one I know that hasn't gone belly up.

Yeah. I read the XBox forums and there are a ton of people who have had their systems over a year and then all of a sudden, BAM, 3 red lights and in for repair. Others have had problems from day 1, even on recently purchased 360s.

I'm really beginning to wonder whether there is a known (i.e. MS knows) design flaw causing these 360s to brick. It seems to be too widespread to just be a few faulty systems. Couple this with the fact that MS charges a flat $139 fee (no diagnosis) no matter what you send the unit in for. Seems they KNOW how much it will cost to fix these things. That indicates to me a known issue that they are not admitting.

It is just a matter of time before a respectable law firm files a class action lawsuit on behalf of the THOUSANDS of people having problems with their 360s. What is really frightening is that if you send yours in for repair and they send you back a refurbished, I believe you only get a 30 day warranty and they won't sell you the extended one.

I'm still waiting on my box to send mine in for repair (it's been a week now). Others say they have waited 2-3 weeks to ge the box.

[MaxPower2k3]

Had my 360 for a month now. No problems yet, except for two times when in the middle of the game it came up with a "This disc cannot be read" error and quit to the Dashboard. Both times were on the same Gears of War disc, though, and it's a rental (from Gamefly) so for now i'm chalking it up to it being a shoddy disc. I'm definitely glad i've got some more warranty on it now, though.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa 

What is really frightening is that if you send yours in for repair and they send you back a refurbished, I believe you only get a 30 day warranty and they won't sell you the extended one.

On the same boat because my Wii was busted they sent me a new one. When I tried to register it online to get the extra 90 day warranty it said I didn't qualify because my unit was a replacement one.

So not only was I already inconvenienced by having a broken unit out of the box they punish me further by not giving me an extended warranty that everyone else gets.

[mdc]

I bought a 360 around April last year and I put in the Dead Rising disc when I got it, 3 Red Lights. Turned it off, turned it back on and haven't seen the lights since then.

[Dark Helmet]

Microsoft Rep Says HD-DVD "The Next Betamax" - Kotaku

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Microsoft Rep Says HD-DVD "The Next Betamax" - Kotaku

The actual quote from the article (when asked if the XB360 will come with a built in HD-DVD drive):

We don't want to charge customers $200 extra for something that may be the next Betamax.

[ort888]

Sounds more like a slam on Sony to me.

[icruise]

Sounds like another non-story trumped up by bloggers desperate for something write about.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Sounds more like a slam on Sony to me.

No he is talking about the HD-DVD add on as it is $200.

[starman]

"Is" and "may be" are two different things.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by starman 

"Is" and "may be" are two different things.

As if they would say "HD-DVD is the next betamax"

[ink]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

No he is talking about the HD-DVD add on as it is $200.

Yeah, but he's implying that they don't want to rip off their customers by forcing them to pay for it (a slam on Sony for doing exactly that on the P3 -- you can't buy one without BR).

[Eug]

Yeah, it's a dig at Sony. However, it's poorly worded, and a (minor) public relations faux pas for MS.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by ink 

Yeah, but he's implying that they don't want to rip off their customers by forcing them to pay for it (a slam on Sony for doing exactly that on the P3 -- you can't buy one without BR).

Should have found another way to word it then as he made it sound like it is on its deathbed.

Good thing he didn't mention "not wanting to rip off their customers" by charging them $60 a year to play online.

[Jawbone54]

[EDIT] Stupidity removed.

[icruise]

Are you pointing to the part where they've blacked out the serial number? Of course it's dark...

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Look at the difference in the lighting between the ports on top and the ethernet port. I'm definitely calling fake on this one.

Um the "Dark" is bars that whoever put over the serial numbers with photoshop.

[Jawbone54]

I am filled with shame. I'm not even going to tell you what I thought they were trying to show.

[Jawbone54]

In an attempt to change the subject, I doubt Microsoft was making a dig at HD-DVD. The battle between HD-DVD and BR is not even close to decided. I think he was bragging a bit at their decision to not force consumers to make a choice prematurely by bundling it with the 360. I think that's clear, and it seems a bit of a stretch to make the comment read as "HD-DVD is Betamax all over again!" *despair*

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

I am filled with shame. I'm not even going to tell you what I thought they were trying to show.

Well I for one would love to know what type of ports you thought those black bars were

[icruise]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

I think he was bragging a bit at their decision to not force consumers to make a choice prematurely by bundling it with the 360. I think that's clear, and it seems a bit of a stretch to make the comment read as "HD-DVD is Betamax all over again!" *despair*

I agree, but it was a bad choice of words, since they are in fact charging their customers $200 for the HD-DVD drive. But since it was said in the context of whether they would be making an Xbox 360 with an internal HD-DVD drive, I think it's excusable.

However, technically the amount that Sony is charging for the Blu-ray drive is only $100, since the 20GB PS3 is $100 more than the high-end Xbox 360 and has pretty much the same specs. The 60GB PS3 has a bigger hard disk than the Xbox, internal wi-fi, and internal card reader, and that's what the extra $100 for that model is actually paying for.

[Weezer]

edit: oops already posted

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by icruise 

However, technically the amount that Sony is charging for the Blu-ray drive is only $100, since the 20GB PS3 is $100 more than the high-end Xbox 360 and has pretty much the same specs.

Yup, you're right, the low end XBOX doesn't even come with a hard drive which the low PS3 does.

So in the end if you get an HD-DVD drive you are paying more for the Xbox 360 than the PS3 overall.

Lets not even add in Xbox live for 5 years and a wireless adapter.

[ort888]

The low end PS3 doesn't include wireless. So you shouldn't count that either.

I think the bottom line is that both consoles are too expensive for mass market penetration.

The PS3 is a good value if you want a Blu-ray player, but if you just want to play games, it's a bad value compared to the Xbox 360. You can be up and running on the 360 for $340 (core + mem card) while the cheapest PS3 is $160 more.

Sure, $160 isn't that much, but there is a big mental stumbling block when people see that $499 price tag. It puts the system in a different price bracket in your head.

The 360 might nickel and dime you to death, but people don't think about it that way. It's all in the marketing.

[smacintush]

Jeez DH do you have to twist EVERYTHING? There's NO WAY you believe that a MS rep. would imply that HD-DVD IS the next Betamax.

If you really believe that then you are as dumb as I look.

Besides, that quote was taken totally out of context. In the full Ars article the very next line is

They seem committed to the optional aspect of the HD DVD drive as it keeps the price down for consumers who don't care about HD DVD.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

If you really believe that then you are as dumb as I look.

Did you really mean to say that?

[icruise]

Originally Posted by ort888 

The low end PS3 doesn't include wireless. So you shouldn't count that either.

Neither Xbox includes wireless, so I'm not sure what you're getting at there.

I think the bottom line is that both consoles are too expensive for mass market penetration.

That remains to be seen, but it's certainly true that they're out of reach for a lot of people who could afford systems from the previous generation. That's a problem.

Sure, $160 isn't that much, but there is a big mental stumbling block when people see that $499 price tag. It puts the system in a different price bracket in your head.

The 360 might nickel and dime you to death, but people don't think about it that way. It's all in the marketing.

Yes, and I actually think this is where Sony went wrong (well, one of the biggest places they went wrong). If you actually look at what both companies are offering, you'll see that the PS3 is a pretty competitive offering. It's just that it's packaged wrong.

In my opinion, they should have only released one PS3 model -- the 20GB model. It's identical to the high-end Xbox in almost every respect, except that it costs $100 more and has a (very expensive) Blu-ray drive in it. Wireless, card reader, etc should have been optional, just as it was with the Xbox. You can't take out Blu-ray since it's important to Sony's overall strategy and the extra storage should also be an advantage for the PS3 later on, so it needs to be standard. But everything else could be optional, and in fact Sony could have charged more for each item sold individually than they would have in a bundle, just like MS is doing. This would have brought the systems a lot closer together and helped to bridge that important psychological gap between them. (Sony was probably reluctant to do this, since they lose more on the 20GB model, but it would have been a better choice.)

I don't see anybody bitching about how the Xbox 360 costs $500 if you want wireless. $700 if you want HD-DVD and wireless, and you've still only got a 20GB hard disk (and no card reader, if that means anything to you). And yet these same people act like Sony is committing war crimes with its pricing strategy.

[ort888]

But then there are people like me, who have no use for the wireless adapter (I have a router in my entertainment center) and have no interest in HD video at this time (I'm waiting for a format to win).

For ME, the Xbox is cheaper.

Xbox live is so much better then what Sony is offering, that I don't mind paying for it.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by ort888 

For ME, the Xbox is cheaper.

Xbox live is so much better then what Sony is offering, that I don't mind paying for it.

I'm in the same boat.

Not to mention that with the XBox they are in a FAR better position to scale DOWN the price whenever they need to.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by ort888 

But then there are people like me, who have no use for the wireless adapter (I have a router in my entertainment center) and have no interest in HD video at this time (I'm waiting for a format to win).

For ME, the Xbox is cheaper.

Xbox live is so much better then what Sony is offering, that I don't mind paying for it.

Fine wireless aside when you DO want that HD-DVD drive when/if it wins you are going to still have to pay $200 for it which is more than the PS3's $100 drive that you can have today. Unless they are free by then like you seem to think they might be.

For me I don't want to wait 2 years and miss out on HD and then still pay $100 more than the PS3 cost.

[icruise]

While I am interested in HD video, having the Blu-ray drive standard also makes sense from the gamer's point of view, since PS3 games will have the ability to use several times the storage space of Xbox 360 games. No, it doesn't automatically mean they will be better, but it does open up a lot of possibilities. Even Hideo Kojima said that they could fill up a Blu-ray disc pretty easily with HD visuals and 5.1 sound. This, along with the supposed technical superiority of the PS3 (this we have yet to see proof of, admittedly) seem to be worth a $100 difference.

But in the end, it's the games that make people buy systems. Obviously this is where Sony is lacking at the moment. For a launch lineup, I guess the PS3 library isn't too bad, but they need to have a steady stream of new stuff and exclusives to draw people to the console.

[ort888]

I'll buy a standalone when a format wins. I don't like the idea of buying an add-on drive. Especially one that doesn't upconvert DVDs. If Blu-ray wins, I might get a PS3 though. Who knows. It depends on the cost of standalones and the current cost of the PS3.

To be fair, I did buy the 360 before the PS3's price was even announced and before either HD player was on the market. If I had to make the choice today, would still go for the 360, because it has a much better games library and looks to have better titles through 2007 as well. A hi-def movie player is something I want, but not at the expense of getting stuck with an inferior (IMO) games library.

Right now, neither hi-def player really appeals to me, because the movies available are not that exciting. The idea of a hi-def player is appealing, but the reality is not.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Fine wireless aside when you DO want that HD-DVD drive when/if it wins you are going to still have to pay $200 for it which is more than the PS3's $100 drive that you can have today. Unless they are free by then like you seem to think they might be.

For me I don't want to wait 2 years and miss out on HD and then still pay $100 more than the PS3 cost.

What makes you think that the HD DVD drive add on will be $200 forever? IF HD DVD wins it won't be this month or anything. By the time that were to happen the drive will be much cheaper.

Meanwhile the PS3 would have a Betama…er…Blue Ray built in that you HAD to pay for.

Of course if it went the other way and Blue Ray won is there any reason that MS couldn't offer a Blue Ray add on? This is a serious question.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by ort888 

I'll buy a standalone when a format wins. I don't like the idea of buying an add-on drive. Especially one that doesn't upconvert DVDs. If Blu-ray wins, I might get a PS3 though. Who knows. It depends on the cost of standalones and the current cost of the PS3.

The 360 upconverts DVD over VGA. It doesn't over component, because that's not allowed, on any (legal) machine. (However, you don't need an HD DVD drive for that.)

[icruise]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

Of course if it went the other way and Blue Ray won is there any reason that MS couldn't offer a Blue Ray add on? This is a serious question.

By the time it's clear that one format has won (if indeed that ever happens) I imagine that players will have come down in price to the point that an Xbox 360 add-on would seem stupid.

Let me just emphasize again, though, that because the PS3 drive is standard, it can be used in games, while the Xbox drive cannot. This makes it more valuable than the Xbox drive, and means that it won't be useless even if Blu-ray as a movie format doesn't take off.

[ort888]

Yeah, my TV doesn't support VGA. I thought it did, but it doesn't.

Even if it did support VGA, the cables would run me $45 bucks, making the total cost of the HD-DVD add-on about $250 bucks.

For $50 more I could get a standalone.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

What makes you think that the HD DVD drive add on will be $200 forever?

Nope. Lets say a good stand alone player is as low as $100 (maybe in 3-4 years at best).

You just missed out on 3-4 years of enjoying high def, you either saved NOTHING or at best $100 by doing so.

To me that is

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Nope. Lets say a good stand alone player is as low as $100 (maybe in 3-4 years at best).

You just missed out on 3-4 years of enjoying high def all to save $100.

To me that is

Only if you lucked out and chose the right HD format.

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Only if you lucked out and chose the right HD format.

How do you figure? Even if you chose the wrong format, you still enjoyed 3-4 years of HD movies and no one is going to come and take your HD-DVD/Blu-Ray discs away from you. You will still be able to watch and enjoy them.

[Dakar²]

Whatever price you payed for your player is now a bit of a loss, and unless you like keeping two pieces of HD hardware connected, thats no fun either.

[icruise]

A lot of people are still stuck in the "Beta/VHS" mindset. Back then, Beta owners really were kind of screwed, since after a while it was very hard to find prerecorded movies on Beta, you couldn't really buy new hardware, and even blank tapes were hard to come by. But I don't think that's going to be as much of an issue with this generation, since combo players are apparently going to be coming out fairly soon. That means that if your format of choice fails, you can just switch over to the winning format but still keep your movie collection. It also means (if the combo players become popular) that HD-DVD and Blu-ray could conceivably co-exist forever without a clear winner emerging.

[Dakar²]

You may be right icruise (it happened to Audio DVDs & SACDs) but I'd def take a wait & see attitude towards those combo players.

[ink]

We'll see if Sony sues LG after their hybrid player comes to market.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Only if you lucked out and chose the right HD format.

Oh oh, does that mean in the future player won't play both? Or all my movies expire and go up in smoke?

I just got back from buying Full metal Jacket on Blu-ray, I've wanted this movie forever but the DVD was only full screen.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Oh oh, does that mean in the future player won't play both? Or all my movies expire and go up in smoke?

I just got back from buying Full metal Jacket on Blu-ray, I've wanted this movie forever but the DVD was only full screen.

How is the quality? It's not supposed to be the greatest on HD DVD, but that may be a problem with the original film print that was used for the transfer.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Eug 

How is the quality? It's not supposed to be the greatest on HD DVD, but that may be a problem with the original film print that was used for the transfer.

Still at work so I haven't checked yet. The film aspect ratio is strange at 1:78:1

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/fullmetaljacket.html

Ok so it doesn't look that great but I get the feeling it is the original films fault. I'm just happy to have it at all and in widescreen.

[ort888]

Uh, actually, Full Metal Jacket is supposed to be 4:3. That's the intended aspect ratio.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Uh, actually, Full Metal Jacket is supposed to be 4:3. That's the intended aspect ratio.

Not really. The original aspect ratio was 1.85:1, which is very similar to 16:9. The 4:3 release on DVD is open matte. Now, that's what Kubrick wanted for VHS/DVD, but it's not the original intent for the theatres

BTW, I'm reading that the quality of FMJ on Blu-ray is OK, but is actually slightly worse than the HD DVD version. It suffers from the same original source being just OK, but it also suffers from the use of MPEG2 on BD25. (The HD DVD is VC-1 on HD30.)