PS3 – No Component Cables or Infra Red

But it doesn't does it?

I mean really, and honestly. It doesn't. For purely enabling the greatest number of people to use the system out of the box, composite is best. All TVs can accept composite. Only Flat Panels, Projectors and RPTVs can accept component.

Actually they have CRTs that accept component AND HDMI too. But composite is forever.

You know what was cool? When Nintendo had composite outputs on their NES and also gave you the cables for it. 1985 sweetness. Although no one could use them till 1995.

Doc, a combo cable (at least the one included with the 360 and the one currently under discussion) connects via composite OR component...both...

I'm a knob who didn't read properly. You point is quite correct.

Though, of course, a Combo cable is really giving away two cables (OK, 1.75 cables) and no one likes to do that from a purely econoic point of view....

Leaving aside any financial issues for the moment, I'm not 100% convinced that such a cable is even possible with the Playstation A/V connector, at least not if you want decent picture quality.

This pinout shows only one Video ground on the PS A/V connector. This would have to be shared by the composite signal and the RGB signals. Theoretically this should not cause any issues, but I'm sure you would have interference from both circuits being connected at once.

In which case you would have to have either circuitry that detects which system is being used and switch off the other or a manual switch like the 360's cable has. Firstly, the circuitry solution may not be possible without a communication channel, although you may be able to have circuitry that detects a line drop. Secondly, the switch method is clunky and may confuse people, I know it took us a few moments to notice the switch the first time we set up our 360.

For comparison, the PS A/V connector has 12 pins and the outer shield, the 360's has 30 pins and the shield. The 360 has enough pins to have a separate ground for each of R, G and B and composite and yet it still needs a switch.

So Sony have to invest in some auto-detecting circuitry, increasing the complexity and cost of the output stage of the PS3. Or they have to have a switchable cable, increasing the cost of the cable sightly and possibly increasing the number of support calls they receive about PS3's not giving a picture. Or they have to design a whole new connector and throw away the backwards compatibility with the PS2's cables.

Again, all of this is to save less than 20% (much less according to Rod) of their market a few dollars for a separate cable. Also, lets not forget that all of this is in order to support a connection format that Sony and all the other A/V manufacturers wish to drop in favour of HDMI.

Oh I dont deny that Sony might have another axe to grind by not including a component option, I'm sure they love HDMI. But its not nealy ubiquitous enough to consider for a bundle. But you are right about the switch.

Too much talk for nothing, if there's no need to put components in the PS3 box because few people have the TV sets that matches it, then there is no need of HDTV compatible console & vice-versa...

Ding ding ding. Tyrion wins yet another round.

Also to mention the R & D that goes into a combo cable could be easily spent on more important issues like backward compatibility, or a better interface, or more features, or a more stable OS enviroment, etc.

So let's end it, me and Tyrion win! Where's my belt?!

That's why my original comment said "at the moment, most people don't have an HD-TV". That will change in the future and Sony claim to be aiming for a 10 year lifespan with the PS3. In 10 years, the PS3 may still be going and, if it is, it will still be kicking out 1080p into the TVs of the future without any hardware upgrades.

Based on the lifespan of the Xbox, we may be onto the fourth Xbox in 10 years time.