Best Blu-Ray player

**btf1980** · 26 February 2008, 19:29 Tuesday

Originally posted by Vancouver

PS3...sad, but true.

Why is that sad? I actually think it's brilliant, that an inexpensive videogame console is superior to any player on the market. Maybe it can give both the mainstream and boutique vendors some motivation to release worthy players. Right now, if the PS3 gets the spring update that will enable it to internally decode DTS HD, then it will be not only the cheapest BD player, but the wisest choice in a player amongst the sea of overpriced paperweights, provided you don't need analog outs. Firmware updates are instant and automatic. Companies should not just rest on their laurels and let their name carry them so they can release half baked, shoddy products.

**Hdale85** · 26 February 2008, 19:59 Tuesday

Inexpensive video game console? It's the most expensive console

And it is sad because I'd rather have a stand alone player.

**littlesaint** · 26 February 2008, 20:01 Tuesday

Originally posted by btf1980

Why is that sad? I actually think it's brilliant, that an inexpensive videogame console is superior to any player on the market. Maybe it can give both the mainstream and boutique vendors some motivation to release worthy players. Right now, if the PS3 gets the spring update that will enable it to internally decode DTS HD, then it will be not only the cheapest BD player, but the wisest choice in a player amongst the sea of overpriced paperweights, provided you don't need analog outs. Firmware updates are instant and automatic. Companies should not just rest on their laurels and let their name carry them so they can release half baked, shoddy products.

The problem is it's the cheapest player and is still at least $100 to expensive. Plus, in my eyes (and I currently own one) it's not a Blu-ray player. It's a game console that plays Blu-ray discs. It doesn't scale DVD as well as a standalone player should be capable of with the right scaler. As far as updates, firmware updates should be instant once 2.0 profile players arrive.

**Landspeeder** · 26 February 2008, 23:02 Tuesday

I do not believe Bray is going to die soon/easy... but a HD player with better features than HD-DVD, and nearly as good of features as a blue ray... at less than 1/6 of the average cost for a player... with Movies on the consumer shelf averaging $12.50 USD for a new release....

White Paper
Hard Hat Area
October 2007 • Vol.7 Issue 10 (CPU)
Page(s) 48-51 in print issue

White Paper
Don’t Bury Red Lasers Yet
Jump to first occurrence of: [HD] [RED]

Those convinced that blue-laser, high-definition optical disc technologies will inevitably dominate the HD market might have to take their fingers off the fast-forward button and press pause instead if the British company NME (New Medium Enterprises) has its way.

NME has developed a multilayer optical disc technology—called VMD (Versatile Multilayer Disc)—that makes use of the same red-laser technology found in DVDs. By making use of multiple layers, VMD is able to store data in portions of the optical disc that the DVD standard could not, which allows VMD to greatly increase the storage capacity of the optical disc, enough that VMD can store an entire HD movie on a single disc.

Playing Catch-up

With its VMD technology, NME will compete directly with other types of high-definition, high-capacity optical disc formats, including HD DVD and Blu-ray. VMD differs from the other two major high-definition formats because it uses a red laser, while HD DVD and Blu-ray use blue lasers. Blue lasers involve a smaller wavelength than red lasers, allowing disc makers to create smaller pits and store more data on an optical disc. However, red lasers are less expensive than blue lasers, and NME expects to be able to sell VMD players and discs at a price far less than the blue-laser HD options. VMD can support an HD resolution up to 1080i or 1080p, just like HD DVD and Blu-ray. Keep in mind that NME has designed VMD to be versatile, too; when blue-laser technology is more stable and less expensive to implement, NME plans to incorporate support for blue laser in its VMD players.

......

Even though Blu-ray and HD DVD have a significant head start over VMD in bringing their products to the market, Jayanarayan says NME isn’t concerned. He says NME is aiming its VMD players and discs at a price similar to DVDs . . . a segment that already has proven successful. Consumers have shown they’re willing to pay $10 to $15 for DVDs and $100 to $150 for DVD players, so Jayanarayan foresees success for his company’s HD option.

“The blue-laser devices will survive if rich people want to buy the players,” Jayanarayan says. “The red-laser market is already huge because of DVDs. We are targeting a market in the mid-income group where other, similar technologies have survived. The penetration of Blu-ray and HD DVD is very small worldwide. . . . I believe their players will not come close to the affordability that we can.”

...

wikepedia
The two initial players to be released are the ML622S and the ML777S. The ML622S will cost approximately $150 USD. The ML777S costs currently (2008-01) USD 200 and includes USB ports (for connection to external storage devices) and a media-card reader.[1]

http://nmeinc.com/

In the WORLD marketplace, this product has a much greater success of living than the relatively low rate BR seller. I know that BR should take off in the US strongly now that Toshiba is out of the way... but this may overtake it within a few years. The biggest hurdle is the content (non-existent)... but that will not be for long.

edit note: do not use spell check when you are tired... and when you desire Blu Ray... as you may notice, you get Blue Ray... oops

**Hdale85** · 26 February 2008, 23:30 Tuesday

If they can get supporters it would work great...but problem is is that all this flipping and flopping everyone is now on blu ray I don't see them all switching to a new format again.

**Landspeeder** · 27 February 2008, 00:00 Wednesday

For the us market I fear that may be true... elsewhere is a different story... but the price may be a big deciding factor... can blu ray (sony driven) lower their prices before VMD goes to actual market aka 'big box stores'
We shall see.

**btf1980** · 27 February 2008, 00:22 Wednesday

Originally posted by Dougie085

Inexpensive video game console? It's the most expensive console

And it is sad because I'd rather have a stand alone player.

I wasn't clear. I meant inexpensive compared to standalone players, and let's be serious. Most of us here have gear that runs well into the thousands, so a player at $399.99 for an enthusiast is chump change. For the average consumer, maybe not, but if we were the average consumer, we would all be satisfied with an ipod dock and upconverted dvds.

I don't get it though. On some forums, people will spend thousands on a CDP, but will balk at $399.99 for a PS3. I've played around with quite a few players, and one thing I noticed was how fast the discs started up on the PS3 compared to stand alones. I would get a PS3 if I wanted a BD player right now. Nothing else compares. The latest Panny is a great player, but it has that LFE issue, but I heard they issued an update to address that. I would not get the Panny over a PS3. If a person can't lower themselves to have a <gasp> game console that will play BD's just as efficiently as any BD player on the market, then I guess they can go on ahead and wait for the Marantz or Denon flagship BD players that will retail for around 2K. So far, I haven't seen anything yet that will make me replace my PS3, including the future offerings from Marantz or Denon. Oppo has said they will release a BD player, and knowing them, if it will also play SACD, DVD-A as well, then consider me sold. Until then, it's all a wishlist and the PS3 still reigns supreme. I know some of the snobs won't like to hear that, and many have convinced themselves that it has to be inferior since it plays those "games" and does not have the "look" of hifi gear. Whatever, their loss. They are free to spend a small fortune on inferior gear. Goldmund has a $17K player, maybe that's up their alley. :lol:

**btf1980** · 27 February 2008, 00:28 Wednesday

Originally posted by littlesaint

The problem is it's the cheapest player and is still at least $100 to expensive. Plus, in my eyes (and I currently own one) it's not a Blu-ray player. It's a game console that plays Blu-ray discs. It doesn't scale DVD as well as a standalone player should be capable of with the right scaler. As far as updates, firmware updates should be instant once 2.0 profile players arrive.

You think the PS3 should be $299? Just for frame of reference, the nintendo wii is $250. I don't think the PS3 will be that cheap for at least another 2 years. It's still cheaper than the Xbox 360 Elite. Get a cheap Oppo player if you need to upscale dvds.

**RebelMan** · 27 February 2008, 01:19 Wednesday

The PS3 is the best Blu-ray player for now and the foreseeable future. It's not perfect just the best.

**Hdale85** · 27 February 2008, 02:44 Wednesday

The Xbox 360 elite is not needed. All the Xbox 360's now have HDMI the only thing the elite offers is its all black and it has a 120gig hard drive. Also I do not have a piece of gear in my system worth thousands and I know there are a lot of people on these forums that don't as well. Secondly the PS3 is not really aimed at big buck market its aimed at middle and lower class as thats the majority of people. The PS3 should be around 299-350 because its a game console. I would much rather have a standalone player then the PS3 and thats why I've waited. I have not purchased a PS3 because there are no big games on it and I won't purchase it just to play Blu-Ray movies.

**Nolan B** · 27 February 2008, 02:53 Wednesday

Originally posted by btf1980

Why is that sad? I actually think it's brilliant, that an inexpensive videogame console is superior to any player on the market. Maybe it can give both the mainstream and boutique vendors some motivation to release worthy players. Right now, if the PS3 gets the spring update that will enable it to internally decode DTS HD, then it will be not only the cheapest BD player, but the wisest choice in a player amongst the sea of overpriced paperweights, provided you don't need analog outs. Firmware updates are instant and automatic. Companies should not just rest on their laurels and let their name carry them so they can release half baked, shoddy products.

Why is it sad? Because I dont want a videio game console as my main movie player in my HT rack. In my opinion there is no reason qulity stand alone player should not be able to equal or surpas the quality of a game console...besides...the PS3 is the worste game console (for games I have ever bought) and I have owned...colico vision, nintendo, super nintendo, sega, sega genesis, PS2, Xbox and Xbox 360.

Its very sad that out of all the BD players on the market if i want the best I have to buy a video game console. I am really looking forward to quality stand alone BD players.

Before this format war I would never of had sony or toshiba in my HT rack let alone a game console as my primary movie player. Sorry if that sounds snobby its not meant to be, but its true.

**Alloroc** · 27 February 2008, 06:04 Wednesday

My tuppenceworth.....

The PS3 does so much for so little. It's my only BRP and and will remain so for the time being. The PS3 is much more than a games console and the speed and ease of its upgradability for me makes it a great buy for the masses. Right now and these are the features I use regularly - I play games, I watch Bluray, I watch DVD, I browse the web, I stream HD video and lossless audio from my PC - sounds OK. I also store all my lower res MP3s on it for parties etc. It also does not sound like a hairdryer.

For the same price as a PS3 you can get BRPs from Samsun, Philips and LG.

Is it the best bluray player? Not quite. But, and in the context of where we are with the development of this format - it's a bloody good one.

What is the best one?, well I'll wait till we see what Denon and Marantz present when their new players are launched.

**littlesaint** · 27 February 2008, 07:52 Wednesday

Again though, it is not a Blu-player. It's a game console that plays Blu-ray discs and much more. Many people don't want a game console, and don't need the "much more". They just want a Blu-ray player.

**littlesaint** · 27 February 2008, 07:58 Wednesday

Originally posted by btf1980

You think the PS3 should be $299? Just for frame of reference, the nintendo wii is $250. I don't think the PS3 will be that cheap for at least another 2 years. It's still cheaper than the Xbox 360 Elite. Get a cheap Oppo player if you need to upscale dvds.

If the PS3 is to be considered strictly a Blu-ray player, it needs to be cheaper. As a game console I guess it's priced OK, but if you remove Blu-ray from that equation, I think it is way overpriced. For those who need everything, it's a great deal. Problem is most people don't want, let alone need, everything.

Add in Oppo? So now I need to spend another $200? BTW, Oppos are good scalers, but not that good...yet.

**btf1980** · 27 February 2008, 08:37 Wednesday

Originally posted by Vancouver

In my opinion there is no reason qulity stand alone player should not be able to equal or surpas the quality of a game console...

I agree with you wholeheartedly there. However, don't you think the PS3 will help CE companies step their game up? It won't hurt us as consumers. When a videogame console is a bigger threat to you that standard players, then maybe these CE companies should get on the ball and stop releasing substandard, buggy, inferior players. The PS3 is kicking their ass. They needed a swift kick imo.

Originally posted by Vancouver

Before this format war I would never of had sony or toshiba in my HT rack let alone a game console as my primary movie player. Sorry if that sounds snobby its not meant to be, but its true.

I understand. To each is own. That's your preference, and to some extent I used to think like that, but if something is just as effective as a boutique vendor, or in many instances is superior, I just can't in good conscience buy the inferior product because the name of the company is heralded and is regarded by many as "elite", it makes no difference if the product they are releasing is not up to snuff. I think many products that are on the higher end are just resting on their laurels and relying on their name to sell units. They keep releasing old, antiquated gear yet they charge an arm and a leg. Maybe the PS3 can jumpstart their creative juices and give them the energy they need to release something worthwhile. The Denon and Marantz units look interesting, but they are 5 times the price of the PS3, but will it be 5 times better, not likely. The Marantz doesn't even have an ethernet port. No sir, i'll pass on them both. Some people might feel these offerings are worth it, I certainly don't. If they want my money, then they are going to have to step up and offer something superior. Add in SACD, DVD-A, profile 2.0, internal decoding of dolby true hd and dts hd. Until then, i'm not spending more or less the same amount of money of what it cost me to pay for my pre-amp (Rotel rsp-1069) on a blu-ray player that doesn't do anything the PS3 won't, except look pretty in a rack. That makes no sense to me personally.

**Alloroc** · 27 February 2008, 08:41 Wednesday

Originally posted by littlesaint

Many people don't want a game console, and don't need the "much more". They just want a Blu-ray player.

Well then they can buy a cheap one from Philips, Samsung, Sharp, Sony or LG! All for the same price as a PS3. Everyone's happy.

Your point is ultimatly moot though as it is a games console as well as a media player that plays BRDs. For what it is it's amazing value.

For me I want all the cake and the PS3 is perfect for that. When the right standalone player hits the streets, then I'll get one.

**btf1980** · 27 February 2008, 08:46 Wednesday

Originally posted by Dougie085

The Xbox 360 elite is not needed. All the Xbox 360's now have HDMI the only thing the elite offers is its all black and it has a 120gig hard drive. Also I do not have a piece of gear in my system worth thousands and I know there are a lot of people on these forums that don't as well. Secondly the PS3 is not really aimed at big buck market its aimed at middle and lower class as thats the majority of people. The PS3 should be around 299-350 because its a game console. I would much rather have a standalone player then the PS3 and thats why I've waited. I have not purchased a PS3 because there are no big games on it and I won't purchase it just to play Blu-Ray movies.

Is $50 that much of a deciding factor for you? C'mon, that's not even a night out on the town.

**btf1980** · 27 February 2008, 08:55 Wednesday

Originally posted by littlesaint

If the PS3 is to be considered strictly a Blu-ray player, it needs to be cheaper. As a game console I guess it's priced OK, but if you remove Blu-ray from that equation, I think it is way overpriced. For those who need everything, it's a great deal. Problem is most people don't want, let alone need, everything.

Add in Oppo? So now I need to spend another $200? BTW, Oppos are good scalers, but not that good...yet.

I'm not really following, all the other vendors have players that are more expensive than the PS3, yet the PS3 needs to be cheaper? It's the cheapest girl in town. Why would you remove blu-ray from the equation? It's in the equation. Some offerings from Sharp, Samsung or Phillips are inexpensive (compared to the average prices of players) but then you have to contend with buggy players, players that don't decode hi-res audio etc. For what you paid for those paperweights, you could have purchased a bug free, dolby tru hd decoding PS3, and hopefully soon dts hd as well. :E

I guess some people can't get over the fact that it plays games as well. Oh well. You'll be waiting a very long time for that superb player that does everything yet is $199.99.

**H.T.C** · 27 February 2008, 10:36 Wednesday

Lets just go back to using CED now that was a format. :B

**littlesaint** · 27 February 2008, 10:39 Wednesday

Originally posted by btf1980

I'm not really following, all the other vendors have players that are more expensive than the PS3, yet the PS3 needs to be cheaper? It's the cheapest girl in town. Why would you remove blu-ray from the equation? It's in the equation. Some offerings from Sharp, Samsung or Phillips are inexpensive (compared to the average prices of players) but then you have to contend with buggy players, players that don't decode hi-res audio etc. For what you paid for those paperweights, you could have purchased a bug free, dolby tru hd decoding PS3, and hopefully soon dts hd as well. :E

I guess some people can't get over the fact that it plays games as well. Oh well. You'll be waiting a very long time for that superb player that does everything yet is $199.99.

They all need to be cheaper. The reason the PS3 is unappealing is it is a game console. People don't want a game console. They want a Blu-ray player. If you insist that the PS3 is a Blu-ray player that also plays games, I contend that it, just like all the other players, needs to be cheaper. By this summer, the PS3 will no longer be the "best" player out there feature-wise. Profiles have finalized, so the advantage the PS3 had as far as being future-proof is disappearing, and as a game console, there isn't enough margin to drop the price when other CEs start to drop theirs. So, while the PS3 may be the best option today, it will only be a few months before it has significant competition from real Blu-ray players.

**Ovation** · 27 February 2008, 10:49 Wednesday

With the announcement of the new Sony S550, along with a further examination of the the Panny BD50 AND the fact my wife (who bought me my first HD DVD player for Christmas) said she will buy me a Blu-ray for next Christmas, I think I will be getting one of these two (barring some disastrous flaws with both of them). Internal decoding of ALL audio codecs AND 5.1/7.1 analogue MCH outputs make these the cream of the crop for me.

**Nolan B** · 27 February 2008, 13:02 Wednesday

Originally posted by btf1980

I agree with you wholeheartedly there. However, don't you think the PS3 will help CE companies step their game up? It won't hurt us as consumers. When a videogame console is a bigger threat to you that standard players, then maybe these CE companies should get on the ball and stop releasing substandard, buggy, inferior players. The PS3 is kicking their ass. They needed a swift kick imo.

I understand. To each is own. That's your preference, and to some extent I used to think like that, but if something is just as effective as a boutique vendor, or in many instances is superior, I just can't in good conscience buy the inferior product because the name of the company is heralded and is regarded by many as "elite", it makes no difference if the product they are releasing is not up to snuff. I think many products that are on the higher end are just resting on their laurels and relying on their name to sell units. They keep releasing old, antiquated gear yet they charge an arm and a leg. Maybe the PS3 can jumpstart their creative juices and give them the energy they need to release something worthwhile. The Denon and Marantz units look interesting, but they are 5 times the price of the PS3, but will it be 5 times better, not likely. The Marantz doesn't even have an ethernet port. No sir, i'll pass on them both. Some people might feel these offerings are worth it, I certainly don't. If they want my money, then they are going to have to step up and offer something superior. Add in SACD, DVD-A, profile 2.0, internal decoding of dolby true hd and dts hd. Until then, i'm not spending more or less the same amount of money of what it cost me to pay for my pre-amp (Rotel rsp-1069) on a blu-ray player that doesn't do anything the PS3 won't, except look pretty in a rack. That makes no sense to me personally.

I totally agree that the PS3 is the best player out there and may be the best out there for a while. I also agree many CEs are diluting their brand by releasing crappy BD players. Why cant a CE release a player that is exactly like the PS3 without the gaming components?

The only reason CEs are releasing crappy players is because they know it creates an upgrade path and re-purchases.

**impala454** · 27 February 2008, 14:47 Wednesday

If I developed a blender that was also a blu-ray player, would that make it better than the standalone blu-ray players too?

**Ovation** · 27 February 2008, 15:28 Wednesday

Depends on the quality of the daquiris one could get from it.

**H.T.C** · 27 February 2008, 15:29 Wednesday

The format war between hd-dvd and blu-ray had just came to a conclusion and a new one starts within the last remaining one (subdivison) and is beginning to become very sad like with its constant argumentative approach and not one thing leading to rectify or improving the situation at this moment,one person wont use a console because they say its not a blu-ray player (infact it is) and plays cds/sacd/dvds with blu-ray,can also store fotos,themes,wallpaper,linux and if you or relatives are on vacation (paris at the tower) and have a psp with them can take snapshots,turn the ps3 on from where they are standing and download to its hardrive,the ps3 is a sleek (ultra modern) and capable unit and not one person should feel embarrassed by having it in their av cabinets and then another is waiting for a more expensive unit (better build qualities) but the price may be too high?

This may be an old expression but holds true,lets all enjoy what we have now because it all can be taken away,today, tomorrow or whenever.

**Hdale85** · 27 February 2008, 17:29 Wednesday

It's not a matter of being embarrassed. It's the fact that if I want a PS3 its not going to be for Blu-Ray at least not solely for it as in I would want to have good games on it... the only thing thats coming out that I remotely want on that console is GT5.

**Race Car Driver** · 27 February 2008, 18:52 Wednesday

Saying the PS3 is not considered a Blu-Ray player because of the price is silly IMO.

Why? Because for the longest time it was the CHEAPEST Blu-Ray playing device on the market, cheaper, and better.
(on a side note I am willing to bet its the ONLY BR player that is being sold at a loss...)
Checking on www.bestbuy.com its still the cheapest.
So what makes it not a blu-ray player again?

**btf1980** · 27 February 2008, 19:06 Wednesday

Originally posted by Race Car Driver

Saying the PS3 is not considered a Blu-Ray player because of the price is silly IMO.

So what makes it not a blu-ray player again?

It has the audacity to have the ability to not only play movies flawlessly, but it can play games as well. So much for multi-tasking. :B

On a serious note, I know quite a few people who abandoned their stand alone players for the PS3 and they couldn't be happier. They are not gamers at all, their PS3's are solely for blu-ray playback. It doesn't have to be a game machine if you don't want it to be.

**Nolan B** · 28 February 2008, 00:58 Thursday

There is no doubt the PS3 is the best BD player...but its not a good player. I can garauntee you when the CEs catch up we will see just how crappy the PS3 is. We praise it becuase it offers basic things that that other lack. i.e. it can update to a non obsolete player; it has an internet connection and can decode most audio formats.

Here is the problem...I want a BD player which offers as much as todays (even yesterdays) good DVD players offer. Here are some basic things missing.

1.) A good BD player will decode ALL audio formats. ALL of them.

2.) A good BD player will allow you to choose PCM or Bitstream individually for each audio codec.

3.) A good player will decode other formats i.e. SACD, DVD A. The fact that the Denon doesnt offer the ability to decode these other formats is an insult. You know they can have player which will decode it all and you know they will. Adding DVD A or SACD to a BD player doesnt cost anymore then adding it to a DVD player. So I wonder why they arent adding it to their first one :roll: mmmm i wonder.

4.) A good BD player doesnt get hot and require lots of breathing room.

5.) A good BD player isnt exclusive to blue tooth. The fact you have to do a work around (which I do) or use another controller is primative.

Conclusion. Is the PS3 the best BD player on the market today? Yes. Is it a good BD player? Not in my opinion.

**RebelMan** · 28 February 2008, 01:43 Thursday

Vancouver, I think you are being unnecessarily harsh on the PS3.

1.) The PS3 WILL be 2.0 compliant.

2.) The PS3 WILL decode all of the advanced audio encodes.

3.) The PS3 CAN and MAY bitstream all of the advanced audio codecs but this is not a requirement to enjoy ALL the benefits of the new codecs.

4.) The PS3 supports SACD but the masses could careless. Its a nitch market anyway and I suspect in time you will careless too. Many of the high end companies are dropping further support of the obsolete format. The conditions are worse for DVD-A.

5.) The PS3 can get warm but not hot unless the environment you live in is hot and you are playing games, not watching Blu-ray discs. It can, however, get noisy but not nearly as bad as the Xbox 360. If conditions are cool like it is during the winter months then it's hardly noticeable provided that its not standing out in wide open spaces.

6.) Bluetooth rocks! I hate line of site IR. UHF and Bluetooth all the way baby! Apparently, you don't own any MAC equipment either.

7.) It's got built in WiFi. Will your standalones? I doubt it. Are you still living in the dark tethered ages my friend?

8.) It's black and black is beautiful.

9.) It's not purely intended for HT applications but it works and it was the cheapest thing going and still the fastest player BY A MILE. It's support of DVD is significantly better and good enough. But come now people who really cares about DVD. People want the PS3 for Blu-ray not DVD. If you want a top DVD player then get one. The PS3 is meant for people looking forward to real hires content. It's not intended for the Quasimodo types.

10.) The question that should be asked is "What can't it do?" (that matters!).

**Hdale85** · 28 February 2008, 01:57 Thursday

Can't upscale dvd's that well

**RebelMan** · 28 February 2008, 02:08 Thursday

It does it "well enough". Again what does it matter how well when what really matters is Blu-ray? This is no paradox!

**Hdale85** · 28 February 2008, 02:54 Thursday

Well a standalone player can upconvert very well. And when every DVD is not on Blu-Ray its important. I'd rather not have a different player for every format I use like DVD, BD, SACD, DVD-A the only thing I'd really consider a different player for is Redbook CD's and I'll be building a dac for that so thats really going to be the same player too most likely. Just because you don't want those things in a player doesn't mean other people won't. And just because other people don't want a PS3 doesn't make you right either there should be a standalone player at least equal in quality to the PS3 and the fact that there isn't is sad and going to change very soon I'm willing to bet.

**bigburner** · 28 February 2008, 04:04 Thursday

I'm pretty sure that the PS3 is sold at a loss because (a) Sony is at war with Microsoft for the gamer share-of-wallet, and (b) the primary objective is to sell games where the margins are substantially higher - hence the need to have as many PS3 players out there as possible.

The PS3 is therefore probably a bargain for hi-fi enthusiasts who have no intention of paying the full price by purchasing games. I wouldn't be surprised if the people at Sony refer to hi-fi enthusiasts as "freeloaders", which is the term that credit card companies use to describe customers who pay the full amount owing by the due date.

Nigel.

Edit: the Japanese for freeloader is たかり in case you were wondering.

**Hdale85** · 28 February 2008, 04:20 Thursday

Actually I'm pretty sure this time around Sony nor Microsoft are taking a loss on their consoles. They don't really make anything on them either though.

**Race Car Driver** · 28 February 2008, 08:34 Thursday

Originally posted by Dougie085

Actually I'm pretty sure this time around Sony nor Microsoft are taking a loss on their consoles. They don't really make anything on them either though.

I know for a fact Sony was losing money on the PS3, and I believe it to still be that way? Maybe they started making money, I dunno, but I do know every one that went out the door was a loss for them.

**H.T.C** · 28 February 2008, 11:25 Thursday

It always happens,the audio video enthusiast buy first so the price can come down to a non-hobbiest or general consumer and then the format is able to make leaps and bounds and grow into something bigger but it also has this obsolete factor thats annoying and can leave a bitter taste. Whats great about audio is that a ten or twenty year old receiver or amp can still play or work even if its behind in tech as long as broadcasting formats remain the same.vhs was priced high then became more reasonable but everyone had to upgrade from monophonic if they wanted stereo and then there were too differant stereo formats within vhs itself (dolby stereo vs hi-fi) and Its not anyone heres fault,the manufacturers or companies should iron out the kinks first before releasing a incomplete product.

**Nolan B** · 28 February 2008, 12:28 Thursday