why microsoft dose enot suport hd dvd

[jorg]

i know micro soft say there 100% behind hd dvd but yet they did not put one in the xbox 360 so was it realy just to fight with sony or>

[Blue]

Because the XBox 360 was released before HD-DVD was. As for why they didn't wait etc etc, well that's only something a few people inside Microsoft know.

[jorg]

no i mean insted of an add on drive why not have like an xbox360 with a built hd dvd drive instend of the add on

[partridge]

As the previous reply said - when the 360 was released HD-DVD hadn't been released, so they weren't able to.

Why didn't they wait? Because they wanted as a big a head start on Sony as they could get.

It'll bite them in the end, because eventually games will need more space than a DVD can hold. You only have to look at the history of gaming to see how games evolve and require more storage space.

[HD4me]

Originally Posted by partridge

As the previous reply said - when the 360 was released HD-DVD hadn't been released, so they weren't able to.

Why didn't they wait? Because they wanted as a big a head start on Sony as they could get.

It'll bite them in the end, because eventually games will need more space than a DVD can hold. You only have to look at the history of gaming to see how games evolve and require more storage space.

Before that's the case, both systems will need more RAM.

Unless Sony plans on realeasing some LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG game that's like 40 hours long, it won't really matter because the PS3 has less system RAM than the 360, and even with the 360 512 ram is still more limited than PCs.

The things that take up the most room on game disks is textures and non in-game videos.

[BluManta]

Originally Posted by HD4me

Before that's the case, both systems will need more RAM.

Unless Sony plans on realeasing some LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG game that's like 40 hours long, it won't really matter because the PS3 has less system RAM than the 360, and even with the 360 512 ram is still more limited than PCs.

The things that take up the most room on game disks is textures and non in-game videos.

Yeah, the ram part of a ps3 really pi**s me off. Why didn't they just put in a Gigabite of ram? Or at least 512mb! It would have done much better!

[JTK]

I knew this thread was probably a goner when I saw who put it up, but remind me of something:

How much RAM does the PS3 actually have? And what kind?

You all do realize that game machines don't need as much as RAM as PC's because they're not running a bunch of applications, an OS, and all that other stuff that PC's run, so I think folks need to calm down a little bit here.

If you're on your PC and you hit CTRL-ALT-DEL and look at the processes running and applications running? Game systems have none of that to worry about (for the most part.)

The sky isn't falling.

[theknub]

ok, lets be fair. what is ram really used for? it's for the storage of data that hasn't been used (not entirely true, but will suffice). when something is stored in ram, it is loaded and pushed to the gpu or the cpu for computation or analysis. given the bus speeds and processing power in the ps3, ram can be limited because of how fast the system can use and process the information. while this isn't completely true and that other aspects do exist, it is a basic assesment. so that being said, the amount of ram in the system prob has little impact, at least for now. long term, this may be a different situation, but we certainly can't complain until we start to hit limits.

[BluManta]

Originally Posted by JTK

I knew this thread was probably a goner when I saw who put it up, but remind me of something:

How much RAM does the PS3 actually have? And what kind?

You all do realize that game machines don't need as much as RAM as PC's because they're not running a bunch of applications, an OS, and all that other stuff that PC's run, so I think folks need to calm down a little bit here.

If you're on your PC and you hit CTRL-ALT-DEL and look at the processes running and applications running? Game systems have none of that to worry about (for the most part.)

The sky isn't falling.

You are an absolute diamond! thanx for that, it really makes sence now. Well thats off my chest. I should always think before posting.
So the ps3 is an ultimate machine. Cool. Oh yes, I see the sky is still there. Thats a bit of luck.

Thanx alot

[JTK]

Originally Posted by BluManta

You are an absolute diamond! thanx for that, it really makes sence now. Well thats off my chest. I should always think before posting.
So the ps3 is an ultimate machine. Cool. Oh yes, I see the sky is still there. Thats a bit of luck.

Thanx alot

See how easy life can be?

[BluManta]

Originally Posted by theknub

ok, lets be fair. what is ram really used for? it's for the storage of data that hasn't been used (not entirely true, but will suffice). when something is stored in ram, it is loaded and pushed to the gpu or the cpu for computation or analysis. given the bus speeds and processing power in the ps3, ram can be limited because of how fast the system can use and process the information. while this isn't completely true and that other aspects do exist, it is a basic assesment. so that being said, the amount of ram in the system prob has little impact, at least for now. long term, this may be a different situation, but we certainly can't complain until we start to hit limits.

Yeah, see this s what I was worried about. Limits. The playstation3 is almost unlimited with everything except ram. Lead Developers such as Hideo Kojima said that the ps3 will never be maxed out. So that takes away some worry. Also it is true that the ps3's processing speed is extreamly fast, that takes away worry too. There dosn't need to be alot of ram because it will never fill up due to the speed of the processing. I never actually thought about this before. Thank you for the help.

[theknub]

no problem. like i said, until we start to hit them, we can't complain. i don't see it happening for a long time so lets not worry till then

[vick vega]

Originally Posted by jorg

i know micro soft say there 100% behind hd dvd but yet they did not put one in the xbox 360 so was it realy just to fight with sony or>

Well sadly they have now put one into the new 360 to be released w/hdmi also.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=6860

[jorg]

sorry u have your facts wroung the xbox 360 elite dose not have a built in hd dvd drive

http://keznews.com/2593_XBox_360_ELITE

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38536

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/x...em/default.htm

[phranctoast]

I still find it funny that MS is charging 179 for a 120 gig HDD.

Thank you Sony, for letting customers buy whatever laptop HDD they want. You could get a 120gig HDD for under $80.

[Shu76]

Originally Posted by BluManta

Yeah, the ram part of a ps3 really pi**s me off. Why didn't they just put in a Gigabite of ram? Or at least 512mb! It would have done much better!

The PS3 does have 512MB of RAM, last time I checked my calculator 256+256=512. PS3 just uses it differantly but has access to 512. PS3 having 1GB of RAM would make the price of the system cost even more. Next,next gen should probably have it.

[darkpoet25]

What I can't figure out is why Microsoft putting an HDMI on the 360 Elite. For one the company itself has stated that it won't support HD-DVD because it has yet to prove itself. Secondly the games are still on DVD Rom. If you already own the 360 and the HD add on player, getting the extra 120 GB add on would average out to a little over $800. Sounds to me like they are screwing over early supporters.

[nhaase]

Originally Posted by darkpoet25

What I can't figure out is why Microsoft putting an HDMI on the 360 Elite. For one the company itself has stated that it won't support HD-DVD because it has yet to prove itself. Secondly the games are still on DVD Rom. If you already own the 360 and the HD add on player, getting the extra 120 GB add on would average out to a little over $800. Sounds to me like they are screwing over early supporters.

Well, HDMI was too young when it first came out, another reason they should have waited a little bit before the debut. W/ the HD-DVD add-on, you can watch that format at 1080p w/ this. Back before BD started outselling HD-DVD by 2:1, I told a friend that if the Zephyr was true I would sell him my 360 and get that, since it was rumored to have a built-in HD-DVD drive. When I heard that was not the case, I said I'd think about getting it and the add-on, but now BD is killing HD-DVD so I told him I won't be doing it.

The big question about the HDMI is why it's only 1.2 on the Elite.

[HDViewer]

Originally Posted by BluManta

Yeah, see this s what I was worried about. Limits. The playstation3 is almost unlimited with everything except ram. Lead Developers such as Hideo Kojima said that the ps3 will never be maxed out. So that takes away some worry. Also it is true that the ps3's processing speed is extreamly fast, that takes away worry too. There dosn't need to be alot of ram because it will never fill up due to the speed of the processing. I never actually thought about this before. Thank you for the help.

Yeah, it also helps to know that the PS3 has a distributed memory architecture while the 360 has a superscalar memory architecture. This results in the PS3 having a lower latency memory wall and dramatically improves overall performance.

So basically 512mb in the 360 does not equal 512mb in the PS3.

To put it in perspective the 360 could have 2 gigs of RAM and still won't outperform the PS3.

Now run out and tell everyone!

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by nhaase

Well, HDMI was too young when it first came out, another reason they should have waited a little bit before the debut. W/ the HD-DVD add-on, you can watch that format at 1080p w/ this. Back before BD started outselling HD-DVD by 2:1, I told a friend that if the Zephyr was true I would sell him my 360 and get that, since it was rumored to have a built-in HD-DVD drive. When I heard that was not the case, I said I'd think about getting it and the add-on, but now BD is killing HD-DVD so I told him I won't be doing it.

The big question about the HDMI is why it's only 1.2 on the Elite.

Actually, HDMI 1.1 spec was around in 2002. Xbox 360 could have included it in their unit. They just didn't do it. When the 360 launched HDMI 1.2 was just coming out. That is why they couldn't put HDMI 1.2 in it, but HDMI 1.1 was always an option to MS.