PS3 – No Component Cables or Infra Red

Well, no, you're not going to win this. First, it may be cheap, cheap for one single unit. Times this by a few million and you've got your cost.

Also if you think it's overpriced, AND WE ALREADY ALL KNOW WHO THOSE PEOPLE ARE (because they tell us every damn day in a different in a different post about a different Sony news or non Sony news story, on a different webpage), don't buy it. It's not funnier because you've (*ahem) piggybacked off someone's else VERY original observation that they don't have a spare $5-600 lying around in their wallet to blow on a new game system.

Let's boil this down folks: The reason all of you are pissed is because Microsoft included a HD cable in their box (only the PREMIUM might I add) and now since Sony didn't in their system (which might I add includes $1000 worth of Blu-Ray hardware built in to what amounts to $200 more than what it would cost without a BD drive, guestimating of course), you all are causing a stink. Does it also have to do with the fact that Sony has been posturing about 1080p and HD and next-gen graphics and how you need a new HDTV to view it? Because if that's it, just shut up! I broke down the cost to just %5 of your purchase price. Tyrion found cables for $7, SEVEN FRICKEN DOLLARS FOLKS, for an HDMI cable, H..., D..., M..., I! Christ. Are we bitching that our HDTVs, DVD players, Home Theatre systems, and Tivo boxes don't come with proper cables? No? Is that your answer? Then shut up! Stop bashing Sony because it's fashionable. We all know what their doing, we're not idiots. If you don't want, don't buy it. All of this talk in this thread is just sickening.

I will also say that if Sony doesn't have a smooth and profitable launch, I'll be thre first to say it.

Uhm yeah, I think I've pretty much got a slam dunk on this.

You figure the cost per unit, not overall added cost.

I wasn't aware there was any dispute on if the PS3 is overpriced, I thought that was accepted as fact without objection, nor was I complaining directly about its price, my mentioning it was as it relates to the cost of adding component cables, and Sony's lack of justification for failing to do so. And nowhere did I ever express any anger or dissatisfaction with Sony or the PS3, specific to this issue. As it happens I have no plans to buy one. As this forum is for the discussion of news, my comments related more toward the discussion of Sony's recent problems, not any personal plans or bias I may have toward them. Your 5% stuff works both ways, only even moreso, if tyr can find $7 HDMI cables, imagine how cheaply Sony could aquire them, or add component funtionality to the incuded A/V harness. And like it or not the PS3 IS competing directly against the 360, so a comparison of the stadard equipment with each is extremely relevant, even if it does reflect poorly on Sony. Sure, theres been a spike in the number of Sony anti-fanboys of late, but I'm not some Johnny-Come-Lately, I've had my own problems with Sony for quite some time now, long before it was fashionable...in fact, my attitiude toward them has mellowed over time. Theres actually a really good reason why Sony-bashing has become popular, they keep mucking things up. In al honesty, I wish they'd quit, so the bandwagon can go away, the bandwagon brings a less desireable element along with it. It was ever so much more intellectually satsifying with all the idiots over on your side of the fence. You need to grow up, this forum is for the discussion of industry news, not for you to get upset and tell people toabout just because your feeling get hurt when someone talks bad about Sony. You wanna vent against your fellow fanboys go ahead, as far as I'm concerned the Sony fanboys (you included) and anti-fanboys can be chucked into the Thunderdome to settle this one, the winner to be mercifully euthanized afterwards...but don't try coming at ME with that weakass s**t you call kung fu, cuz I'll feed it back to you sideways.

Yeah, I like Sony, it's not like "it's a secret to everyone" (bonus points if you know where that's from), but that has nothing to do with it.

You are admiting that for Sony to include cables is cheap, thus inferring that the quality would be cheap as well. So in turn, we would go out and buy them anyway. Plus component video cables WILL NOT transmit a 1080p signal as per mandate by the FCC. So it wouldn't do jack s**t if they included them, ye who knows little about HD and signal transmission. One would need an HDMI cable included. Not all HDTVs have HDMI. Some have DVI, forcing them to BUY an adapter. Some only have component, forcing the consumer to buy BUY another cable if HDMI were included in the box. it's a lose lose argument with anti-Sony posters. Someone will always find a way to bitch. Tyrion said things very well and concisely before. Read them, they make sense. I will not repeat them.

Also not to mention that cables made on the cheap (read: cost effectively), will look cheap. Refer to my post before about quality cables and s**tty cables. So most of us are going to go buy a better cable anyway. Basically, what comes in the box is utterly pointless and the cost of accessories is minimal in comparison to the price of the system, so it's not that bad. People HAVE to expect to pay a little more to make their electronics preform to the best of their ability. It's just a part of Home Theatre and electronics. Always has been, now more than ever. Is the signal going to magically dance from your PS3 to your TV and create a pretty rainbow of high rez images? Not unless Charlie the Unicorn is involved, and he's not.

Did you bitch when your printer came sans USB cord or when your DVD Player came sans component video? It's the same damn situation! Even more irratating when your printer REQUIRES a USB cable to work period. The PS3 will at least function with supplied cables.

Part of what I am saying is that, I think alot of you don't understand the key/core elements that will make the image you see quality (read: look fricken sweet). HQ (high quality) signal + HQ cables + HQ TV + (optionally) HQ line conditioner/power center = a fricken sweet picture. If you have a TV that cost less than my braces, it is s**t.

I got mine for $20 same as the X-Box ones, it's the MSRP. Also the X-Box HD pack had only the optical port on there. You had to BUY an optical cord EXTRA. Also to note, that Sony had their optical output right on the back of the box. So people with non-component hookups could still enjoy surround sound. More common considering they've been marketing s**t-boxes (read: $100 surround sound systems) since the PS2 dropped and HDTVs haven't been lower than $300 if you're lucky and that's of recent.

You are confusing me with someone who made 1080p a significant part of their argument. You also confuse the subject under discussion. This is not about how the lack of a component cable will affect me, you, tyr, or anyoone specific, this is about how it will affect the (limited) masses of consumer who will be bringing home a PS3 and will want to connect it via the now currently ubiquitous (on HD displays) component cable. Its not about the currently limited number of people who have HDTVs with HDMI, its not about DVI, its about giving the largest possible number of people a connectivity option out of the box.

You're absolutely right, but you're also complely wrong...once again, you miss the point. This isn't about dedicated gamers or Home Theatre enthusiasts as you say they're going to shell out for the quality cables. This is about EVERYONE else, who would rather just have the cheap cable come with it, and later on if they feel the expense is warranted they might upgrade.

I understand better than you think, but I also know that most people just want to hook it up and play Madden or whatever on the HDTV they bought from Wal Mart. I also know that according to Murphy's Law theres gonna be more than a few people trying to hook this bitch up Christmas morning sans an HD cable.

Funny, then how can Sony justify charging $30 for the PS3 version....

Yes, you did need the cable, but the cost of the jack went into the total cost per unit of the adapter itself. Also, the optical out was also availible on the Advanced AV pack, which supported both S-Video and Compsoite. Both packs also had the added bonus of being able to use your own, higher quality cables.

Personally I was a big fan of the AV hookups on the original generation PlayStation, with its standard RCA jacks in the back, rather than a propritary AV cable...too bad they chose to abandon that...

I have noticed the current trend toward cheap surround sound units, but these units rarely (if ever) come with any kind of digital input, only internal sources and simulated surround. Perhaps recently this has changed, but none of the cheaper units I've seen include digital in.

Finally, you realise what it's all about - "its about giving the largest possible number of people a connectivity option out of the box" - that's composite, I'm afraid. The numbers of HD-TVs out there pale into insignificance alongside the numbers of SD-TVs, but even the HD-TVs have a composite connector.

Let's look at it another way, I'm no business major, but I have seen enough episodes of How It's Made on Discovery to get an insight into the way these things are put together.

Apparently 17.2% of TV-owning households in the US had an HD TV at the end of 2005 - let's say that has risen to 22-25% by now, Japan is slightly ahead of that, but Europe is way behind the US, so let's estimate 20% of worldwide TV-owning households have HD TVs. That's pretty generous.

If you can cover 100% of your potential market by shipping a composite cable and make it slightly more convenient for roughly 20% of your market by including a component cable that 80% of your market can not use, what would your decision be? Bear in mind you have had about six months of ridicule for your console being too expensive.

Now factor in the costs of buying the component, not too high? How about packing the component? You have now got an extra station on each of your packing lines, that's probably two staff to pack the cables, plus one to re-supply them, per line. You can easily have 10-20 packing lines per factory and five to 10 factories. That's at least 150 extra staff. You've also just dropped your productivity slightly by extending the packing line. You have also added another point to your quality control check list, which again slows down QA slightly.

None of this covers the increased logistics cost of managing the schedules of the deliveries of components, warehousing the components or the chance that production could stop if the supply dries up or stalls for some reason.

You could easily add $10 to your costs per unit, which will have to either be added to the cost of the unit in store, or come off your, already in the red, bottom line per unit. You've just cost the company $5,000,000 for launch day alone.

All to save 20% of your market $7 and stop some whiners on the Internet, who will be replaced by the whiners who think Sony is bumping up the cost by including stuff that 80% of people won't use.

It's a business decision, pure and simple, and Nintendo have made the same one and come to the same conclusion. But then, Nintendo can do no wrong!

INCREDIBLY generous. It may be a reasonable percentage for the USA, EU and Japan combined. But it's WAY high when you are talking about worldwide (and you were). In China, India and South America, HD penetration is at approximately 0%

There are over 400,000,000 (SD) TV households in China alone.
There are only 111,000,000 (SD and/or HD) TV households in the USA. Global Flat Panel TV sales have yet to exceed 70,000,000, and a great many of those were ED.

Whatever Sony ships will piss someone off. If they ship component, there will be those of us who would prefer HDMI. If they ship HDMI there will be those who prefer DVI. Or component.

Speakers ship without cables. Guitars shipp without leads. It's the way it SHOULD be. The choice on the kind and quality of the connector should be left up to the consumer.

But the fact is, those people who are whinging about it are Sony haters who wouldn't buy the PS3 under any circumstances... so really their opinions do not count.

And before they all have a cow about my arrogance. I acknowledge their entitlement to have those opinions, and to express them here and elsewhere. But they make no difference to Sony's bottom line... they do not count in that respect.

I don't accept it.

I don't think it's over-priced. In "real terms" it's no more than the Atari VCS was at launch. It's less than the Sega Saturn was (again, in real terms). I'm pretty sure that in 1987 we paid £399 for our first video recorder - probably about £1000 in real terms.

I can afford it. It costs less then my snowboard or my wakeboard did, both of which I'll use far less than a PS3.

The price won't put me off it. The way it looks and the on-line features (or lack of them) might do, but the price won't.

That is... I think, dispute.

Once again you try to confuse the issue by attmpting to paint me as a rabidly anti-Sony fanboy, you keep making the same argument over and over and over again...its tiresome. Bottom Line, Sony failed to provide the same connectivity options as the 360. I think thats a mistake on thier part. Bitching about how some people would have a problem no matter what Sony did has absolutely no bearing on the discussion beyond your need to change the subject from the fact that Sony made an error.

Finally?!? Thats what I've been saying this entire time, with the exception of the fact that you're completly ignoring the FACT that a combo cable trumps the composite. Your whole "How It's Made" trip...an ill-considered effort wasted...a combo cable would replace the composite, so there'd be no extra packing station, and all your other costs are suspect. $10 dollars a unit?!? Thats ludicrous. Regardless, the responsibility for any pricing criticism rest squarely on their own shoulders. As for your aside about Nintendo...Nintendo is Nintendo, they aren't competeing AS directly in the HD arena, and they do stuff that don't make sense as a matter of course...but anyone who said they can do no wrong wasn't me.

Wow, someone actually making sense and with a point that isn't leaking Sony jizz from all orifices...I'll go along with it not being overpriced, IF you are looking to be an early Blu Ray adopter. Otherwise...I dunno someone said something about increasing the price to include some junk most people don't need or want...

as has been said, the ps3 is overpriced for those not wanting a next generation film player but a next generation console. thats a lot of people, but it does depend on perspective. i personally think its quite reasonably priced for whats under the bonnet, but not for the functionality contained within that i would actually use

sony have dropped the ball on the cable thing, and yeah, nintendo have done similar things too just so you know im speaking as just an interested party.

HD is the main reason for the big ps3 price tag, and the feature that sony seem to be betting the farm on. not having this functionality out of the box is a bad thing and thusly a mistake

I'm going to say this again, component will do jack s**t for 1080p resolutions. It means nothing to include a component cable. It means nothing, to me, that people have a tv with some red, blue, green hookups and don't want to pay for a $20 cable. Market penetration HDTV is low. Not everyone who has one has an HDMI port, let alone a free one (Cable Box and DVD Player may or are probably there right now). So as Tyrion so verbosely pointed out, I think it would of cost Sony alot more to include them. I STILL don't know why it's even an issue here. Is it principle, it's it ease of hookup on Christmas day, is it because Sony is touting HD as the wave of the future for the past two years (Microsoft made just as big a push you know)??? If Microsoft didn't include a component/composite monstrosity, would we still be arguing as such?