Google Tablet as low as $149?

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

They yanked out backwards compatibility for PS1 titles after the initial run, which meant that I ended up buying my PS3 from *eBay* rather than from Sony, just to be sure what model I was getting.

Not exactly true. They yanked out backwards compatibility for PS2 titles (they had actual PS2 hardware on the thing) as a cost-cutting measure. PS1 emulation is working just fine on all hardware iterations as it's something the PS3 can easily do via software.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

Not exactly true. They yanked out backwards compatibility for PS2 titles (they had actual PS2 hardware on the thing) as a cost-cutting measure. PS1 emulation is working just fine on all hardware iterations as it's something the PS3 can easily do via software.

Thank you. I knew they pulled one of the two previous models. PS2 is even worse, considering how the used sales were so popular in the early days of the PS3.

ETA: Happily, my first run works with both. But it should never have been yanked.

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

ETA: Happily, my first run works with both. But it should never have been yanked.

Sony had to. They were getting left behind by the Wii and Xbox 360. Sony needed a way to reduce cost quickly and unfortunately, backwards compatibility suffered (as well as SACD support which few people cared about).

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

Sony had to. They were getting left behind by the Wii and Xbox 360. Sony needed a way to reduce cost quickly and unfortunately, backwards compatibility suffered (as well as SACD support which few people cared about).

Which is why I'm a fangirl of their Expensive But Superior eReader, but not of their Cheap And Inferior (To What I Wanted To Buy) PS3.

Sony didn't *have* to yank backwards-compatibility off all models. I spent MORE to buy a PS3 off of eBay just to get backwards-compatibility. That money could have gone to Sony rather than some third-party hoarder. Sony's loss.

Husband turned to me yesterday after setting up the PS3 (we're moving) and said, "We're buying a Ps4 if it has backwards-compatibility." I said, "Sure, but you know it won't -- playing your old games is just like stealing from game developers!"

Husband nodded sagely. This isn't our first rodeo. *sigh*

[Kumabjorn]

I'm confused. is this thread about a $149 Google Nexus tablet or is it about PS3?

[Dylrob]

Originally Posted by wizwor

Don't kid yourself. Microsoft was willing to sell their console at prices Sony could not match. They did a great job acquiring and developing content at the top of the market while filling the low end with inexpensive fun. They also had a year to carve out a niche before the PS3 arrived, but that didn't help Sega.

The point is that Microsoft has a long and broad vision. When they choose to enter a market, Microsoft maked an impact.

The only reason they couldn't match it was because even a $600 retail Sony was already taking a substantial loss; At launch each system cost them about $900! The 360 only cost Microsoft somewhere around $500-600. Repeated price cuts meant that Sony would continue to take a loss for the first several years of the PS3's life. In all SCE lost ~$2 billion before finally breaking even on the production costs.

So in fact Sony was just as willing to pour money in. If they hadn't opted for the ridiculously expensive Blu-Ray drive AND Cell processor they could easily have matched, or even undercut, the 360.

[=X=]

Originally Posted by VaporPunk

http://androidandme.com/2012/03/opin...as-low-as-149/

According to the article, the rumor of a low cost Google/Asus tablet is real but no quad-core CPU. It also appears that Google will copy Amazon and sell it for little or no profit on the hardware and hope to make money via its eco-system.

Could be a really smart move in the long run, creating more public awareness of Android and its viability as a true Ipad alternative. At 7 inches, it would make a pretty good e-reader alternative as well, albeit with an LCD screen.

This is indeed a nice move and something that will get generate a lot of sales with Android tablet platform.

Personally I would still rather ASUS deliver on their promise and produce a T3 7" tablet for $250.

[wizwor]

Originally Posted by Dylrob

The only reason they couldn't match it was because even a $600 retail Sony was already taking a substantial loss; At launch each system cost them about $900! The 360 only cost Microsoft somewhere around $500-600. Repeated price cuts meant that Sony would continue to take a loss for the first several years of the PS3's life. In all SCE lost ~$2 billion before finally breaking even on the production costs.

So in fact Sony was just as willing to pour money in. If they hadn't opted for the ridiculously expensive Blu-Ray drive AND Cell processor they could easily have matched, or even undercut, the 360.

Sony won the optical media battle on the way to losing the entertainment center war and lost the vcr war after losing the video tape format battle. It could be argued that they lost the PC war to Dell and Apple. I think their problem is that they have difficulty understanding the world's biggest market.

It really doesn't matter why Sony could not compete, the fact is that they could not. We're not talking about Sony, we're talking about Microsoft. Microsoft has competed successfully in every market they have entered.

Here are some facts...

• Windows 8 will be out this year. It will sell a lot of copies -- just about every new computer and a lot of phones and tablets will run windows 8. Microsoft will make a lot of money.
  
• Microsoft has already spent a lot of money making sure all these devices work well together and with the Xbox (which got Metro last year).
  
• Microsoft will spend a lot or money making sure people who own all of these devices have an excellent experience.

We've all watched Microsoft operate for a generation. It's a mistake to discount that company.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by wizwor

• Windows 8 will be out this year. It will sell a lot of copies -- just about every new computer and a lot of phones and tablets will run windows 8. Microsoft will make a lot of money.

Not much of a point when you get shovelled MS down your throat when you buy a new PC. Pretty much unless you are an enthusiast and build your own PC, you have no saying on the OS it comes with. Some people have managed to get a refund on the pre-installed MS OS on their hardware, but it is a lot of hassle.

[obsessed2]

Originally Posted by afv011

Not much of a point when you get shovelled MS down your throat when you buy a new PC. Pretty much unless you are an enthusiast and build your own PC, you have no saying on the OS it comes with. Some people have managed to get a refund on the pre-installed MS OS on their hardware, but it is a lot of hassle.

To this day I still prefer XP to all versions of Windows including Windows 7. As a computer tech I have PCs with 9x, XP, Vista, and Windows 7.


I haven't looked at Windows 8 yet or downloaded the beta but the reviews are less than stellar from ZDNet:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-sourc...-arrival/10275

[sbroome]

I like 7 although they CLEARLY have not worked out all the problems with Nvidia drivers from Vista.

[sbroome]

Originally Posted by afv011

Not much of a point when you get shovelled MS down your throat when you buy a new PC. Pretty much unless you are an enthusiast and build your own PC, you have no saying on the OS it comes with. Some people have managed to get a refund on the pre-installed MS OS on their hardware, but it is a lot of hassle.

I build my own rigs and it's very easy, it's also pretty inexpensive. I'm an illustrator and web designer and keep a top of the line (or relatively close) system for my needs by keeping sales alerts at various sites online. I jumped up to i7 950 last year for less than 350 bucks total and memory at the time was dirt cheap so I have 16gb of DDR3 that I got for what.. 80 bucks total? I love it.

[obsessed2]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

I'm confused. is this thread about a $149 Google Nexus tablet or is it about PS3?

Yes ...

[VaporPunk]

Originally Posted by =X=

Personally I would still rather ASUS deliver on their promise and produce a T3 7" tablet for $250.

So would I. Tho I always felt that it was too good to be true. Then again, I'm often wrong. Which is a good thing, being a pessimist and all.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by obsessed2

To this day I still prefer XP to all versions of Windows including Windows 7. As a computer tech I have PCs with 9x, XP, Vista, and Windows 7.


I haven't looked at Windows 8 yet or downloaded the beta but the reviews are less than stellar from ZDNet:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-sourc...-arrival/10275

beware xp security structure not too modern -- modern ui in windows 7 less than xp but security is very very good.