Quote Originally Posted by djo2
Sorry guys. Can't just hang on the forums all day. Gotta pay the mortgage.
Didn't you get the memo? Intel/MS pays us $419 for each response on the board. You just have to forward this forum to 7 of your closest friends, and have them forward to 7 more. Look in your mail in 3 weeks, and I swear you'll have a check too. This is no lie, try it!!

Quote Originally Posted by djo2
Looks like your assumptions mean you'll probably be surprised to learn that I don't own a PS3. The upcoming Rock Band has me leaning toward picking up a new gaming system because of how much I've loved playing Guitar Hero at friends' places. Overall, not much of a gamer. No games installed on my computers, and as mentioned, the PS2 collects a lot of dust.

Also, back to Sony/PS3, I don't think that arrogance from the marketing department (of which there has been plenty) should be extrapolated to indicate arrogance from the rest of company. Their engineers are pretty amazing, and regarding the "just a consolation line from Sony players" about the platform having legs, well... First, since I don't own a PS3, can't really apply that to me. And second, the PS1 and 2 demonstrated this, the original Xbox really didn't have a lot of people saying how much the programming improved over the lifespan of the platform. Microsoft deliberately chooses to use current and previous generation hardware to make it easier to program and cheaper to buy. Neither approach is right or wrong, and obviously the MSFT approach gets a lot of hardware and software out into the market in a hurry, while the PS 1 and 2 had much longer lifespans than the original Xbox in part because there was enough power in them to keep them viable against the competition over a longer period of time.

(I'm coming at this from an engineering perspective, not a gamer perspective. Again, neither being the "right" one, just different ones.).
Thats ok, secretly I have been putting my eye on a PS3. Not for the games, but as a cheap BR player. But my wife would kill me as we have gifts for the kiddies to get in December.

And not to belabor the point, but the original XBOX had MUCH more power than the PS2. Graphically it was far superior (consider GTA3 on both platforms...XBOX killed the PS2). And the online environment? Forget Sony, MS had that nailed. And an installed storage? Again the nod goes to MS. Sony had the token HD, but it was never to be used again after Final Fantasy (7 i belive). However, as far as installed base goes, Sony was heads and shoulders above MS in sales. It was MUCH easier for MS to kill the program because the base was so small. For Sony the base is HUGE, so why kill the golden goose? But that brings us back to the original question. At what point does continuing to support/develop for the PS2 cut into PS3 installation?

I can't disagree between engineering and marketing. I own several Sony products, 37" plasma, and a DVD camcorder, portable DVD player... But engineering isn't making public statements. Marketing is, and they have in the past been plenty arrogant.

Quote Originally Posted by djo2
------------

I guess I skipped the customary introduction:

IT Guy
2001 Subaru Imprezza Outback Sport
Marin FPS Mountain Bike
37" Westinghouse 1080p LCD
Oppo 970HD 1080i DVD player
DIrecTV H20-100
Anthem AVM-30 Pre-pro
Mac Mini (G4 now, Intel by this weekend) Media Center
Gefen HDMI/DVI Switch
Mackie HR824 / HR624 / HR626 monitors
Hey, do you have the new HD channels by DirecTV yet? Mine just began rolling in a couple of weeks ago. I'm up to about 40 HD channels, and its SWEET.

And thanks for responding. Now, I'm going out to the mailbox to collect my check.