New Xbox 360 $479 In April W/HDMI

[Woochifer]

I don't think the PS2 is hurting the long-term profitability of PS3, if anything, it's helping it. Definitely not encouraging PS3 sales, but it's probably not hurting them. If they're still buying PS2, it's because they aren't the kind of consumer who's willing to shell out for PS3stuff, yet. Best to make some money off them, than none. If you're right, and they're losing money on each unit now, best to keep catering to the loyal PS fans, then wait until they make a bit more money off each sale in the future.

Great to see fewer exclusives, IMO...competition is good.

So where are things at right now...how many PS2's and Xbox's were sold, and how many PS3's and 360's?
Is it even 20% of the previous generation's sales, yet?

Here are a couple of the commonly linked sales charts. As with the chart that I posted in the Blu-ray thread, this is a composite from different sources. The PS3 had actually been keeping pace with the PS2 debut until February when sales took a big nose dive.

At this juncture, none of the next gen consoles have matched the sales rates for the PS2 and the Xbox (though the more recent Xbox 360 console sales have held up better than the original Xbox which persistently had unit sales under 200k in its second year). By the PS2's second holiday season, December console sales reached 1.9 million in North America alone. I don't know if either the Wii or PS3 will reach that sales level by this December, since the Xbox 360 peaked at 1.1 million in its second December.

This link has the most current data for North America dating back to November 2001, while the image below shows the North American sales from the PS2 debut onward.

[powerlord]

I'm so glad I've come to grips with the differences of my consoles,I love both machines and all their differences now,it's what makes them unique,they both have excellent qualities and were worth the money I spent,the kids enjoy them and the grand kids love both,and they brag to their friends all the time that I have BOTH bad ass systems.Alot of the arguments I see are from people that are worried about keeping up with technology which isn't a bad thing(guilty as charged) I just think both companies came out with great machines and I'm glad,I was waiting for the next big break in gaming and movie technology and wow it came double!

[emorphien]

I agree. Apple is releasing a $299 settop unit that will beam video to the TV, but we shall see how that goes. If I'm gonna pay $299, it had better do something better than just beam video....hey the base 360 costs $299 AND plays games....hmmmm

Unless I'm mistaken, I recall reading that requires syncing in order to play media on the TV. If that's the case (and I'm not sure it is or isn't) then that's a step backwards in usability & convenience.

[Groundbeef]

Unless I'm mistaken, I recall reading that requires syncing in order to play media on the TV. If that's the case (and I'm not sure it is or isn't) then that's a step backwards in usability & convenience.

Here's some pictures of the beast!

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/03/22/apple-tv-unboxing/

It looks pretty slick, however it does appear that you need to do the heavy lifting with your computer, then transmit the data to the player that is attached to your TV.

This extra step may cause casual users to pass, as it just complicates the process unless your TV is in your office/computer room.

I don't know if you can remotly utilize Itunes from the unit, but if you could, that would make things easier.

It also appears that Apple is tighter with a penny than Sony. For this DEDICATED HD/SD player, Apple neglected to include ANY video cables. Thats a load of crap. For $299 they ought to include at least 1 cable. So if you buy one, make sure to get cables, or your going back to the store.

I also don't know if this unit stores programming, or simply repeats what is on your computer. Perhaps Wooch can fill in the details as he seems to know a lot about many things.

[emorphien]

As far as I'm concerned this type of unit should be able to browse network shares (perhaps use iTunes on each computer to tell it where to look as I believe MS does with the Xbox).

Not that I want one or am planning to buy it but that's a big design oversight to me. I wouldn't really want one anyway because it would require the use of iTunes which is bad enough on a Mac but a complete mess on Windows.

[Groundbeef]

As far as I'm concerned this type of unit should be able to browse network shares (perhaps use iTunes on each computer to tell it where to look as I believe MS does with the Xbox).

Not that I want one or am planning to buy it but that's a big design oversight to me. I wouldn't really want one anyway because it would require the use of iTunes which is bad enough on a Mac but a complete mess on Windows.

I don't think that it would browse each Itunes, after all, Itunes will only recognize 1 Ipod per computer, and Each IPod is tied to 1 Itunes.

I would imagine that the player is tied to the 'main' computer of the household. One that is always on the network.

It is intriguing, but no where near as handy as the 360. With it you can get new content off the marketplace, or stream video on your computer already. But it is NOT required to use a computer, as it can do video on its own.

[emorphien]

I suppose Apples DRM got in their own way then, although the Xbox doesn't have that issue. Personally I don't think it's the same as loading an iPod with music because then you could bring it to another computer and give that person your music. With the apple TV it doesn't have to keep a copy of what it plays, and I still see no reason it would have to be tied to one computer.

Oh well, it's a product that doesn't make sense.

[Groundbeef]

I suppose Apples DRM got in their own way then, although the Xbox doesn't have that issue. Personally I don't think it's the same as loading an iPod with music because then you could bring it to another computer and give that person your music. With the apple TV it doesn't have to keep a copy of what it plays, and I still see no reason it would have to be tied to one computer.

Oh well, it's a product that doesn't make sense.

Also, I seem to remeber reading that it will NOT play .wmv files (MS format) further hobbeling it, as much of video out there is the of the .wmv style.

I think that they are trying to prop up the whole Itunes video d/l up. The problem is that the video isn't optimized for playback on TV's (although maybe for this it will be). I just see it not catching on.

Frankly, I'm just getting tired of the whole "i" thing. The phone was a strech, but I don't see this device getting major play or working out in the long run.

[emorphien]

http://shop.pcmag.com/shop/product/A.../40833654.aspx

It does stream. Didn't read it all so I'm not sure if it mentioned what formats.

[Groundbeef]

. And for anyone who buys these add-ons at a retail store without that long-expired Circuit City coupon you keep talking about, it brings the cost of that Xbox 360 to $700.

Just wanted you to know that Sams Club has the HD-DVD drive priced @ $181.42 every day. Thats just under 10% off everyday.


http://forums.audioreview.com/newrep...reply&p=184662 BTW this shows it 'ONLINE ONLY' but my local Sams has the same price!


And here:
http://www.pcnation.com/web/details....06&item=L17236

So, it is possible to get it less than retail.

The network adapter (if you need wireless) can be had for about $85 on Amazon.

[emorphien]

After reading a bit on the apple TV, it has relatively thin format support.

[Woochifer]

Its not like the 360 doesn't play back in HD without HDMI. Sure its more convienent, but I can't use it even if it came with the 360. I use my AV setup for audio, and it doesn't have HDMI. I don't want to run it through the TV, you lose the surround aspect. I can't imagine that I am the only one in the US that feels that way. HDMI is NOT the second coming, and as numerous posts on this forum indicate there are multiple issues of 'handshake' incompatiblities with various equipment. So lets not pretend that without HDMI somehow the 360 is a less machine.

And with the Xbox 360, you cannot take advantage of the lossless audio formats because it's missing the HDMI connection. The HD-DVD add-on downconverts everything to Dolby Digital, which is a total joke considering that higher res audio is one of the key features of the HD-DVD format. That's a matter of straight up functionality (as opposed to a missing cable, which the end user can readily remedy), so I'm not "pretending" that without HDMI the "360 is a less machine" because IT IS. The PS3's HDMI connection allows for 7.1 uncompressed audio output through any HDMI connection (most receivers with HDMI 1.1 and higher are setup for multichannel 192/24 PCM audio). Maybe you should stop pretending that analog video and Toslink audio connections are equivalent to HDMI, because they are not.

And there are other issues besides the cable (incidently at all major retailers they don't have the $10 cable next to the PS3, its the $100 Monster cable, and as a 'cheap' alternative a $75 HDMI cable. So please don't tell me the retailers are shoveling off inexpensive cables to the masses....because they are not). The remote issue is another issue. No matter what current universal remote you have, it won't work with the PS3 due to the wonky Blu-Tooth remote.

More strawmen that you've oh so conveniently knocked down...

Is the remote needed for basic playback? No.

Is $75 the least expensive HDMI cable found at retail stores? No.

You just can't admit that the 360 is less expensive, especially for gamers not interested in HD movies, or wireless networking.

And you can't even get my responses straight on THIS THREAD (disregarding the numerous other times you've mischaracterized/distorted my responses on previous theads).

New Xbox 360 $479 In April W/HDMI

As a pure gaming console, the Xbox 360 has a price advantage, but if you consider the HD disc playback and wireless networking, then the PS3 holds the advantage.

Just wanted you to know that Sams Club has the HD-DVD drive priced @ $181.42 every day. Thats just under 10% off everyday.


http://forums.audioreview.com/newrep...reply&p=184662 BTW this shows it 'ONLINE ONLY' but my local Sams has the same price!


And here:
http://www.pcnation.com/web/details....06&item=L17236

So, it is possible to get it less than retail.

The network adapter (if you need wireless) can be had for about $85 on Amazon.

And even after jumping through all those hoops, the price still comes out higher than the PS3, the unit still cannot utilize a HDMI connection, and the HD-DVD add-on still cannot output any of the lossless audio formats. (And we're not even on the subject of Blu-ray's studio support)

[Groundbeef]

And with the Xbox 360, you cannot take advantage of the lossless audio formats because it's missing the HDMI connection. The HD-DVD add-on downconverts everything to Dolby Digital, which is a total joke considering that higher res audio is one of the key features of the HD-DVD format. That's a matter of straight up functionality (as opposed to a missing cable, which the end user can readily remedy), so I'm not "pretending" that without HDMI the "360 is a less machine" because IT IS. The PS3's HDMI connection allows for 7.1 uncompressed audio output through any HDMI connection (most receivers with HDMI 1.1 and higher are setup for multichannel 192/24 PCM audio). Maybe you should stop pretending that analog video and Toslink audio connections are equivalent to HDMI, because they are not.

Well, looks like I touched a nerve here. What does Sony pay you per post? Must be pretty high, as you can't seem to step away for more than 24 hours.

I forgot that I MUST be the ONLY A/V enthusiest, and gamer that DOESNT have HDMI. How stupid of me.

So according to you, if you dont have HDMI you can't enjoy HD gaming, or sound out of my receiver that DOESN'T support HDMI. So, I guess that Sony should REQUIRE all users to upgrade to new A/V equipment, New TV, and everything else to experience "Tru-HD".

Why don't you stop pretending that everyone in the world will be able to fully utilize the PS3, and the HDMI connection, because they cant. So tell me o wise one, why should I pay for features that I can't use? Would it be nice if the 360 had HDMI? Sure.
Would it matter to HD gaming/video playback? I guess if you have equipment that can utilze it. If not, not so much.

I guess in your world, if you don't have a Ferrari, then you really don't own a car. Just because its the most expensive doesn't mean its the best.

More strawmen that you've oh so conveniently knocked down...

Is the remote needed for basic playback? No.

Is $75 the least expensive HDMI cable found at retail stores? No.

I suppose the remote isn't needed, any more than HDMI. Do people have expensive remotes on this board? You bet. As you have pointed out many times before, most people reading this board are enthusiests. So why would Sony market this as a machine for enthusiests, and make them jump through so many hoops. Why not just make the remote work like 99.99% of the IR remotes out there now?

Its not a strawman for lots of people. Its just another example of Sony forcing consumers to use their format regardless of the practical application.

And I can just see the BB sales guy BEGGING consumers to buy the CHEAPEST cables in the store, to go with their most expensive game console in history.

And even after jumping through all those hoops, the price still comes out higher than the PS3, the unit still cannot utilize a HDMI connection, and the HD-DVD add-on still cannot output any of the lossless audio formats. (And we're not even on the subject of Blu-ray's studio support)

The price may be more expenisve, depending upon the cable you settle on for the PS3. And the resolution, and sound from my 360 is awesome. Sorry you are so against anyone else enjoying formats you don't approve of.

Well, I shouldn't keep you here any longer, you probably need to run out to the mailbox to pick up your Sony Shill Check.

[ShockOpera]

To anyone who can help:

I'm setting up 3 movie theaters in the house. One is an actual screening room, the other two will be projector systems, as well. I'll post more on the screening room and basement one shortly. However, for my "mancave" I'm using an Optoma HD70 projector against a wall with special paint for movie projectors and for sound, I'm using an NHT (now hear this) system of 2 Absolute Zero bookshelf speakers, one of NHT center channel speakers and NHT iw3 side fills and an SVS 10" sub. This will be the identical set up, actually, for the basement as well. For an amp, I'm using any one of several that are available through Best Buy. There seem to be a lot less costly Pioneer amps than Best Buy's top of the line Pioneer for $1000 that appear to do the same thing in terms of plugging in a microphone and having it calibrate to the room. The total harmonic distortion is different, sure, but for the sake of .03%, I think my ear can live with it, right?

I'm more affluent in terms of the video side of things than the audio, so I'm looking for some help from anyone out there that really has an idea of what they are doing in this world of audio/video. Since I am buying all my components through Best Buy, can anyone help?

The last part of my question is: I bought an Xbox 360 through Best Buy, as well. I haven't taken it out of the box yet, so, since it's nearly April 1st, should I just take it back and buy the one that comes with a bigger hard drive and the HDMI cable? Keep in mind, the projector that I'm using supports everything up to 1080i. The T.V. on the opposite side of the movie wall will have a 1080p T.V. on it (bedroom).

So, talk to me like I'm a 4 year old when explaining things to me, people. I want the best value for my buck. Just because I'm putting in several theater systems, doesn't mean I want to be raped on the cost of components, as well.

Thanks,

Shock
ShockOpera@aol.com

[Groundbeef]

It depends.

If your audio inputs in your reciever support HDMI it may pay to wait. If not, then the HD size may or may not be important.

If you want to rip alot of music, and d/l movies, then you might wait.

[Woochifer]

Well, looks like I touched a nerve here. What does Sony pay you per post? Must be pretty high, as you can't seem to step away for more than 24 hours.

I forgot that I MUST be the ONLY A/V enthusiest, and gamer that DOESNT have HDMI. How stupid of me.

So according to you, if you dont have HDMI you can't enjoy HD gaming, or sound out of my receiver that DOESN'T support HDMI. So, I guess that Sony should REQUIRE all users to upgrade to new A/V equipment, New TV, and everything else to experience "Tru-HD".

Why don't you stop pretending that everyone in the world will be able to fully utilize the PS3, and the HDMI connection, because they cant. So tell me o wise one, why should I pay for features that I can't use? Would it be nice if the 360 had HDMI? Sure.
Would it matter to HD gaming/video playback? I guess if you have equipment that can utilze it. If not, not so much.

I guess in your world, if you don't have a Ferrari, then you really don't own a car. Just because its the most expensive doesn't mean its the best.

Talk about touching a nerve, being on someone's payroll and on call 24/7! You ought to read your own posts (and check on how quickly your responses come flying off your keyboard) sometime!

I'm simply responding to your absurdly false statement that a component limited to 1080i analog video (unless you go the VGA route, which severely limits the ability to use your receiver for video switching), and Toslink audio connections that downconvert all of the audio to 448k Dolby Digital is no different than going with HDMI 1.3. The HD-DVD add-on with the Xbox 360 doesn't even allow for the higher res audio to be output via analog audio, so going that route means that you won't ever take full advantage of the Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD tracks. My understanding (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that the HD-DVD add-on even downconverts the DTS tracks on HD-DVDs to 448k Dolby Digital. If that's true, then this add-on not only fails to deliver on one of the key features of HD-DVD, but it takes a step backwards by not even outputing the DTS bitstream.

And I'm not "pretending" that everyone in the world can utilize the PS3's the AV features. Uh, ever heard of upgrading? The PS3 was the first HDMI 1.3 device to hit the market, and it certainly won't be the last. It has nothing to do with buying a "Ferrari," it has to do with complying with standards that basically the entire home theater industry has adopted. By this time next year, HDMI will be commonplace across the board, from entry level components to high end separates.

Since all of the new midlevel receivers (and some entry level models) on the market this year will incorporate HDMI functionality, basically anyone who's in the market for new home theater components will be able to take advantage of the PS3's AV capability. The PS3 has the same Toslink optical audio connections that have been standard equipment in the home theater world for the past decade. The difference is that a HDMI connection can take advantage of features on the newer HDMI-enabled components coming onto the market, whereas the Xbox's HD-DVD add-on is stuck with analog vid and 448k Dolby Digital. If that's the same thing in your view, then why bother posting such nonsense on an audio board?

I suppose the remote isn't needed, any more than HDMI. Do people have expensive remotes on this board? You bet. As you have pointed out many times before, most people reading this board are enthusiests. So why would Sony market this as a machine for enthusiests, and make them jump through so many hoops. Why not just make the remote work like 99.99% of the IR remotes out there now?

Its not a strawman for lots of people. Its just another example of Sony forcing consumers to use their format regardless of the practical application.

The issue with the remote I regard as a definite inconvenience for those who do use IR universal remotes. But, one of the new features with HDMI 1.3 is the ability for connected components to control one another. Depending on how/if the HDMI 1.3 receivers and the PS3 implement this feature, the receiver remote (or other universal remote) can potentially be used to control the Blu-ray playback on the PS3. I don't use a universal remote, so you're barking up the wrong tree with this issue.

But, since one of the primary reasons I'd want to upgrade to HD-DVD or Blu-ray is for the higher audio quality, not having either HDMI or backwards compatible multichannel analog audio connections (which I will point out that the PS3 does not have either) is a far more significant issue than the remote. This pretty much eliminates the Xbox 360 for my HD disc viewing, regardless of how the HD-DVD format fares in the market. I'd be curious to see if this Xbox 360 Elite fixes this issue with the audio format downconversion.

And I can just see the BB sales guy BEGGING consumers to buy the CHEAPEST cables in the store, to go with their most expensive game console in history.

In other words, HDMI cables cheaper than $75 ARE available at retail, despite your diversionary protestations to the contrary. Thanks for admitting that!

The price may be more expenisve, depending upon the cable you settle on for the PS3. And the resolution, and sound from my 360 is awesome. Sorry you are so against anyone else enjoying formats you don't approve of.

Glad that you're enjoying yourself. No need for me to rain on your parade if you think that Xbox 360 is providing you with the full audio benefits of the HD-DVD format (or even delivering audio quality on par with what DVDs give you)!

Well, I shouldn't keep you here any longer, you probably need to run out to the mailbox to pick up your Sony Shill Check.

No such check at my end, but I would presume that Bill's been dishing out the favors for you in bunches! I mean you gotta get something for all the debunked info and questionable claims that you've passed on this board!

[Groundbeef]

Ok, I was a bit cranky on my last post.

The PS3 is a FINE machine. Not my cup o tea, but if you want it, go for it.

To enjoy it fully however, you are required to have a HDMI capable reciever/or TV. If you run into your TV, bypassing your reciever, I dont think you will get 7.1 or lossless audio from your TV audio output.

So in short, IF you have all of the required HDMI capable A/V equipment, out of the box it MAY be less expensive than a similarly equipped XBOX 360.

However, all things being equal, FOR THE TIME BEING, in reality there is going to only be a small percentage of enthusiests that have all the required equipment to fully enjoy the benefits.

The 360 out of the box IS capable of playing games in HD. The audio tracks wont be lossless, but it won't be on the PS3 either unless you can use the HDMI. If you CANT you will be forced to use plain ole audio cables, as I don't belive it has a TOSLINK output like the 360.

The WIFI is a red herring. Most gamers don't use it as it is too laggy. And it's not required for video playback.

The new 360 'Elite' should address some of these issues, as it will include HDMI, and a larger HD for movies and such. Yes, you will need to purchase HD-DVD drive, but it will be output on the HDMI cable.

There is also information floating around that MS will also be releasing a HDMI 'converter' for retrofitting current 360's but nothing final at this point.

Now, I gotta go and cash my MS check

[Woochifer]

Ok, I was a bit cranky on my last post.

No prob, I probably could've done a better job at tempering my last response as well.