2007 - Sony PS3 sells 8.83 million, XBOX 360 sells 7.3 million

McManicMan said:
i eat them for breakfast, lol

two teenager kids - thats what done it - hence why i had the wireless headset - they wasn't having that one
Click to expand...

Yup kids will destroy anything...

We where contracted to do a JCB rock 'game' at the Magna Science Centre, and we used our industrial joysticks that normally take a pounding from big hairy navvies with ease.. 1 month of letting kids loose and they where knackered..
 
Demon said:
I agree with you on everything you've said, that's not what I was getting it, the statement was that WiFi and the HDD are 'essential', backed up by the statement that the vast majority of people connect wirelessly to the internet so therefor have the WiFi and would connect their consoles this way..

Just googling,
http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/trend-wireless-users-do-more-online/2007-02-26


So, the end of 2006, 20% of internet users had wireless at home, lets be generous, and say that 'doubled' in 2007, that's still only 40%.. that's not the 'vast majority' which then means WiFi in consoles is not 'essential'..

So assuming that WiFi costs Sony money to put in the console, and thus ould remove WiFi, and reduce the RRP as a result, then easily well over 50% of the people are paying for something they don't need..

I'm not saying it isn't a good idea to have WiFi, it's just that I think people don't realise that in actual fact it's not as prevalent a 'required' feature as people think..

And I know you can use an external HDD in slightly more capacity on the PS3, but It can't be used for game installation i.e. for caching can it? I think that was the point being made for the HDD to be essential?


[/SIZE]
Click to expand...

Your figures are making a guess at how many internet users are also console users...... you cant possibly know this proporton

the number of console users in that survey could be 5% or 95% (of potential console users if you get me) and it would still be a tiny proportion of over all internet users. Note this was also done before the PS3 came out (feb last year) who says the PS3 hasnt increased that number dramatically with the 5 million (or however many) euro consoles its sold?

I would actually agree with the opinion that wifi is essential, if my parents use it its got down to the "grass roots" :)

I think doubling in 2007 is actually under-estimating with every ISP nearly as default - especially the big ones - giving away wireless routers with new contracts to all and sundry

You are also seemingly implying that just because a pc (the predominant reason for having internet) is near to the router , and therefore "wired", that a console will be in the same place. In my opinion this is completely wrong, and if anything the opposite to real life where most ps3's will be in the living room on a huge tv (not in most cases attached to a usually smaller pc monitor)

Also just because MS charge £20-30 for a wifi add-on, included in the console that will be £5-10 MAX, not really worth taking out if you ask me.....

Hdd's can and are used for general d/l's (movie trailers, music, photo ) these are what are going to fill up even a 40GB hdd (unlikely to have 8 games on the go at once and want to keep them all) - anyone savvy enough to start wanting to put other media on a console will use an ext hdd for these reasons and keep the internal one for game saves - or be capable of inserting a internal one in five minutes or so
 
Demon said:
So, the end of 2006, 20% of internet users had wireless at home, lets be generous, and say that 'doubled' in 2007, that's still only 40%.. that's not the 'vast majority' which then means WiFi in consoles is not 'essential'..

So assuming that WiFi costs Sony money to put in the console, and thus ould remove WiFi, and reduce the RRP as a result, then easily well over 50% of the people are paying for something they don't need..[/SIZE]
Click to expand...
Who says the wifi is expensive? :confused:

Belkin Wifi PCI cards for example, are available from internet at as low as £12 including P&P!

To be honest, it has very little affect on the RRP. Remember the 20GB and 60GB PS3 versions that were launched? Well, 20GB had no wifi yet many people went for 60GB hence why Sony dropped the useless 20GB.

Blu-ray and Cell are the most expensive components in PS3 and it would be silly for Sony to drop the Wifi to save a few more pennies!

DS lite is only £99 yet it has a Wifi! PS3, Wii, PSP and DS Lite all have a Wifi! Xbox 360 is the only console that does not have it!
 
Last edited:
OK so what do you guys want out of this argument,

PS3 to be publicly declared the winner of the next gen consoles because it has wi-fi built in ?

Will that make some of you happy ?, I really don't see what your trying to achieve, are you actually trying to prove that one console is factually better than the other ?

Some one tell me please.
 
FrankJH said:
<snip>
Click to expand...

It's not even worth bothering, your reply was even more unfounded assumption, based on your parents and UK ISP policies with some crazy insinuation that the PS3 may have single handedly converted the whole world to WiFi..

I found the only source I could have what I assume are based on a wider audiendce then just the UK, and it shows that despite your 'feelings' the actual fact is that just over 12 months ago, a study concluded 20% of households on the net had WiFi, thus directly countering the wild claim that, and I quote,
The vast majority of internet users use wifi
Click to expand...
...

At least any 'opinion' I then made about numbers of consoles connected via WiFi was I think a reasonably logical affair.. not based on my parents owning a wireless router in the UK.. :)
 
barnettgs said:
Who says the wifi is expensive? :confused:

Belkin Wifi PCI cards for example, are available from internet at as low as £12 including P&P!

To be honest, it has very little affect on the RRP. Remember the 20GB and 60GB PS3 versions that were launched? Well, 20GB had no wifi yet many people went for 60GB hence why Sony dropped the useless 20GB.

Blu-ray and Cell are the most expensive components in PS3 and it would be silly for Sony to drop the Wifi to save a few more pennies!

DS lite is only £99 yet it has a Wifi! PS3, Wii, PSP and DS Lite all have a Wifi! Xbox 360 is the only console that does not have it!
Click to expand...

Blimey, I think many people are now taking this out of all context..

If WiFi costs £0.01, that's £0.01 more then I needed to have spent if I don't need/want WiFi.. that is all..

I am not in anyway saying that the PS3 is bad for having WiFi built in, I think it's a good idea, it's just that someone tried to say it was 'essential' , to which I found some numbers that 'indicate' that WiFi in homes is no where near the levels you would think, and therefore it's entirely feasible to say that having this feature on a console is not 'essential' but a nicety..

Have you read my post? Wifi has a little or nothing to do with PS3 pricing! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Nice rolleyes, see above, I read your post, but since it's got nothing to do with my posts I just ignored it..

If Sony put 2000 cup holders on the PS3 and charged £600 for the console I assume that because you are getting 2000 cup holders for an extra £300, it is a bargain.. just think 2000 cup holders for £300.. ooooohhhhh.... :D or would you say, "Bugger that, I don't want 2000 cup holders, I'd prefer to pay £300 for a PS3 with no cup holders".. :D, I know this is taking it to silly extremes, but maybe it indicates a small point that I really wasn't even trying to make..


Seriiously, if you want WiFi, in isolation, it IS much more cost effective on the PS3 then the 360, by a huge margin.. I acknowledge that, but if I don't want WiFi on the PS3, no matter how little it 'costs' extra, even if it's £5 on the price, it's £5 more then I really need to pay..
 
Last edited:
Demon said:
Blimey, I think many people are now taking this out of all context..

If WiFi costs £0.01, that's £0.01 more then I needed to have spent if I don't need/want WiFi.. that is all..
Click to expand...
Ok, I don't know how Wifi is bought into this thread but PS3 is clearly a better value for money.

Puzzled?

With PS3 40GB version, you get:

+Free online play
+High-Def movie playback
+Free Wifi

All for £279

With Xbox Arcade version (Basic), you get:

-256mb memory unit
-no Hi-Def movie playback

£200 plus £40 live subscription = £240 plus if you need Wifi, then it will goes up to £300! Minus Hi-Def movie playback and HDD!

For Elite 360 version, you get:

+bigger HDD

-no Hi-Def movie playback

£280 plus £40 live subscription = £320 plus if you need Wifi, then it will goes up to £360! Minus Hi-Def movie playback!

When you look at the recent sale figures for the rest of World and Japan (minus USA) - PS3 sells more! The only place 360 outsells PS3 by a narrow margin is the USA, Microsoft's homeplace.

Clearly, people go for the features that are convenience to them: e.g. Don't need to fork out any more £££ for online play and Wifi.

To won more customers, Microsoft needs aggressive pricing/features for their consoles. After paying big money for Microsoft console, poor reliability is the last thing on customers' mind and it shows.

Demon said:
If Sony put 2000 cup holders on the PS3 and charged £600 for the console I assume that because you are getting 2000 cup holders for an extra £300, it is a bargain.. just think 2000 cup holders for £300.. ooooohhhhh....
Click to expand...
You kidding right? Wifi only cost a few pounds in one digit!

You have to understand that there are many living rooms with no access to ethernet so Wifi is a simple solution without the need to tear up the floor and skirts! Microsoft charges a laughable £60 for a Wifi adaptor which made the 360 the most expensive console out of all three if customers need (note the difference between want and need) Wifi!

Yes, 360 has more games but that not for long as 2008 is PS3's year and also having more 360 games doesn't translate well into the overall worldwide sale.

By the way, sorry for the rolleyes. :)
 
I would hazard there will be AS many releases for Xbox360 as there will be for PS3, so saying the PS3 will have more games is confusing.

As for having more games, didn't hurt PS2 did it? That console had a ridiculous amount of games and the vast majority were utter cack.
 
NokkonWud said:
I would hazard there will be AS many releases for Xbox360 as there will be for PS3, so saying the PS3 will have more games is confusing.

As for having more games, didn't hurt PS2 did it? That console had a ridiculous amount of games and the vast majority were utter cack.
Click to expand...

Truth! Look at the DS.
 
Is it me or is this thread going round in circles with the same arguments only differently worded ?

PS3 sold more in its first year than the xbox hardcore wanted, sony fanboys are happy they didn't back a dead horse, built in wifi and hd media drive are better than add ons, psn is free, 360 has ingame messaging, the sky is blue and water is wet.
 
Needles said:
Is it me or is this thread going round in circles with the same arguments only differently worded ?
Click to expand...

You mean like every fanboy battle?

Each side is entirely convinced that their argument is strongest and won't be convinced by anything anyone has to say, hence its just pointless.
 
NokkonWud said:
It's £60, not £20-£30.
Click to expand...


Fair enough - how much do you reckon the module itself would cost as an internal option, 1/10th of that? Most would be seperate production line, manufacturing, packaging , advertising, VAT and retail commision - a tiny fraction would be the actual cost if it was built into something already :)
 
Console Wars on here are nuts, sometimes you can't help but get dragged into them and they are without a doubt the worst part of the current gen, even worse than the SNES v's Megadrive days of old. (MegaDrive ***! :p)
 
Demon said:
It's not even worth bothering, your reply was even more unfounded assumption, based on your parents and UK ISP policies with some crazy insinuation that the PS3 may have single handedly converted the whole world to WiFi..

I found the only source I could have what I assume are based on a wider audiendce then just the UK, and it shows that despite your 'feelings' the actual fact is that just over 12 months ago, a study concluded 20% of households on the net had WiFi, thus directly countering the wild claim that, and I quote,
...

At least any 'opinion' I then made about numbers of consoles connected via WiFi was I think a reasonably logical affair.. not based on my parents owning a wireless router in the UK.. :)
Click to expand...


I still think the data is suspect, not only from the fact that wifi is a much more readily understood service now than it was over 12 months ago - not to mention the FACT that any opinion poll is only as good as those that take part

Yes you can say that only 20% of those taken part have wifi, but only something as meaningless as that - what proportion of net users actually took part in the survey? I think it said out of 2500 users in the USofA 14 months ago .......hmmmmm ok
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom