PS3 - X-Box 360 - Nintendo Revolution

[Waccoon]

mdma:  Never underestimate the power that a young child has over their parents. Nintendo are THE masters at exploiting this.

You know how many times I've walked into a game store and heard some parent ask a salesperson, "Which machine is best?  I dunno what to get my kid for his/her birthday."

I think most game consoles these days, at least at system launch, are bought by teens with their own money.

mikrucio:  the ps2 IS the most powerfull.

Careful.  It's fair to say the PS2 is the most complex, but power != performance != speed.  PS2 is very, very fast when rendering raw polygons, but is pretty awful once you turn all the effects on.  The PS2 really isn't a very gutsy system compared to the other two.

Sony's tools are more to blame than the messy architecture, too.  Most PS2 developers buy their tools from 3rd party developers.  Sony can afford to shift responsibility that way.

It also depends how you harness power.  Some of my Dreamcast games look better, and some games load in seconds while others take half a minute.  It's kind of pathetic how inconsistent things are on the PS2.

Oh, and what about all those ports they stripped away on later revisions of the console?  A few years from now, I doubt the PS3 is still going to have 6 USB ports and 3 ethernet ports.  What on Earth is Sony thinking?

coldfish:  M$ couldnt be happier that you're pirating Sony property!!! Youre actually helping them weaken Sony revenue!

It's actually debatable whether piracy hurts or helps a platform (and I'm not talking about what the companies think about it).

mikrucio:  the xbox is a peecee. and it is easy to program.  everyone has access to a peecee. thats why xbox is so popular.

Well, at the least x86 is easy to program in assembler, and has more tools available than any other CPU.  I'm not sure how the graphics chip differs from what nVidia has released on the PC.

Darklight:  The Amiga 500 was capable (and still is) of more than most people would give it credit for, hence its popularity during its short lifespan.

Short?  The OCS chipset was hardly changed throughout the lifespan of the Amiga.  I was very, very disappointed with AGA, and knew Commodore was finished at the time I bought my 1200.  Commodore knew damn well they had a good chipset and felt no need to improve it.

LinchpiN:  Didnt we all make a backup copy of WB?

Yeah, but CDs and DVDs don't wear out like floppies do.  :-)

Face it, when was the last time you retired a damaged backup?  Unless you're a klutz, of course.

Holley:  Supporting MS, Sony, Nintendo, EA or Apple is supporting a company that has tried devious methods to crush others, and all work the system to extract money from the public rather than earning their income by providing genuinely worthwile products.

Thank you.  It really ticks me off when people whine about Microsoft.  Apple has a long history of dumping products shortly after launch.  If Microsoft suported their products the way Apple did, the government would have broken them up a long time ago.  Don't get me started about the dreadful MacOS 8.1 "superpatch" before they released 8.5.

Oh yeah, and don't get me started on Sony, either.

fx:  PlayStation 3 looks frickin' awesome

Much of what they showed off left me shaking my head.  The F1 demo really disgusted me as the physics were attrocious.  Killzone is also the ultimate demo -- all staged graphics and no indication that AI is controlling the bad guys.  It's like watching those rediculous Ruby demos released by ATI.  Games are not movies, and never will be.

I buy game machines to play games, and only after I know what games are going to be available.

I also never buy a system at launch (though I did get my Dreamcast after a few months).  There's too many reliability issues.

After a year or so, I might consider a PS3.  The original XBox has nothing that interests me, and I might get a used GameCube to play only three titles.  I've got more than a dozen PS2 games, and about 30 PSX titles.

I'm no fan of Sony, but I can't say Microsoft or Nintendo did very well over the last few years.  I don't see any real changes happening soon.  I'm sorely disappointed with Nintendo.  Everything went sour with N64 and they just haven't improved.

DonnyEMU:  A good game is a masterpiece and should be treated like that.

Have you noticed that despite the invention of memory cards, even the "masterpieces" are too damned short?  I like Sly Cooper, but after you take out the cut-scenes (which you can't skip over), it equates to, like, 5 hours of gameplay the first time through, and maybe a half-hour the second time.

I'm boycotting Half-Life 2 because of Steam, but I hear it's in the same camp.  12 hours of gameplay or so.

Where's all this revolutionary AI we hear so much about?

[Waccoon]

Now here they are claiming there PROFITS (not losses) are down because console sales are down and the release of 'less profitable' hardware - the Nintendo DS. Less profitable means it still makes a profit as does their other harware sales.

DO
YOU
UNDERSTAND?

I understand that people buy games WITH the console, so if console sales go down, so do the sale of games, which is where they make their money.  People don't make a habit of buying a game machine, then waiting a few months to get some games.

The excerpt you reprinted talks about profits from sales, which includes all associated royalties.  Nowhere does it say that the hardware is profitable.

But I'm sure you're so-called 'reputable information' is better than Nintendo's own quarterly report.

I read that quarterly report.  It shows sales numbers, but not a breakdown of profits.

[Waccoon]

In late 2003/early 2004, they got rid of the progressive scan component and the gc went to profitability again from losing about $7-$8 for a couple of months.

Source?

So you are all ass-clowns as the GC has been profitable for 95+% of it's existence. And that's the real point - isn't it?

The point is you still haven't provided a source, and probably never will when you can just call everyone ass-clowns, instead.

And if you really do the numbers...

Based on what?

I.A.C.'s - idiot ass clowns

who double as trolls...

Enough with the name calling.  If you're so damn smart, tell me how much money Nintendo spends manufacturing each Gamecube.

When you tell me your manufacturing quote, don't forget to include packaging and shipping costs.  Obviously, Gamecubes don't jump into pretty boxes or swim across the ocean from China all by themselves.

Also, note that Nintendo doesn't sell Gamecubes for $100.  The stores do.  Tell me how much money the stores pay, and use that value to determine Nintendo's profit per hardware unit.

You, ah, DO have that information, don't you?

[Waccoon]

Are you ignorant?

Will you show proof if I say yes?

I can email you pictures of the both, one with the ports and one without

Change the subject all you want, but you know very well I asked for actual costs, not changes that affect cost.

BTW, I own a Rev C. Gamecube, so I don't need photos.

funny how I'm the only one that has to provide sources.

Er, yes.  During any debate, people who make claims bear the burden of showing proof.  :-)

I just told you there is going to be no MSRP in Japan so you may see the units sell ~$80 to spur sales. Why would a store sell it for less than they paid for it?

So, this means US stores make a profit, right?

OK, so only answer what I actually asked:  what's the store profit?

Oh, and while you're at it, tell us the manufacturing cost.  You kinda forgot about that.  :-)

Stop being so trollish.

Stop calling us ass-clowns because we're asking questions you don't know how to answer.

What is so hard to understand about economics?

Your economics are based on information you are pulling out of your navel, such as the hardware profits extracted from Nintendo's quarterly report which doesn't actually show hardware profits.

PPC cpu's have been in millions of Macs, Gamecubes and embedded devices.PPC cpu's have been in millions of Macs, Gamecubes and embedded devices.

Correction for systems other than Mac:  PPC cores.

Oh yeah, and Macs won't be using PPC anymore.  Somehow, I suspect you'll insist that's a good thing.  :-)

[Waccoon]

You have given me nothing that provides me with proof that selling GC hardware makes Nintendo lose money.

Again, the burdon of proof is yours.  Note that I never said you were right or wrong.

Adolescent provided an article blantantly telling you the system was costing Nintendo $100-108 just before the move to $99 which was just before they lowered their manufacturing costs again by going to rev C.

I asked you to back up your claim before he even got involved.  You still haven't confirmed that Nintendo makes a profit on hardware.

If you need more proof than that, start by proving you aren't an ignorant troll because all you are doing is choosing to ignore facts.

First, you need to actually post some facts.  So far, the only thing you've posted is Nintendo's quarterly report, which does not show hardware profit.

That's the sad logic of you and them. That's why the Amiga will stay DEAD.

The Amiga is dead because the company's ideas suck and so does their execution.  No level of price fixing will resolve that -- including a switch to Nintendo hardware.

Now I've also stated that Sony is making a profit selling the slimline PS2. Would you care for me to provide links?

Go for it -- so long as you post links for Gamecube, too.

You are saying by eliminating components from a manufacturing process, Nintendo actually increased their manufacturing costs?

I asked how much the console costs to manufacture, not how much Rev A is different from Rev C.  If you don't know, just say so.  :-)

In the end - what does anyone care what it costs to manufacture product X from company Y as long as they are happy paying pice Z?

You do.

I told you - get your head out of the Amiga waste bucket.

I see you're as desperate as ever to change the subject.  I'd expect you to be all too willing to spill the beans on Nintendo's manufacturing costs -- unless you don't know, of course.  :-)

[Waccoon]

So just because adolescent posted a like that says the gamecube was profitable through Sept 2003 and cost UNDER $109 to manufacture and I didn't, then I didn't prove it to you. He did. The fact that you insist on me doing it is what makes you a troll as you keep repeating your statements without and obvious comprehension of my replies or the facts presented to you.

You still haven't figured out that I never agreed or disagreed with Adolescent?  I asked for some proof for your claim, not what you thought about everyone else's comments.

I've specifically outlined to you the differences in the Rev C board and given you an accurate timescale of when it was produced.

You did, but that's not what I asked.

You are just a troll as your last couple of posts are mirror images and I'm sure you will again state I've proven nothing to you. You take comments I make as an excuse to change the subject.

See above.

Yes, I do care how much I pay for ANY product, the less I pay the better and it better be worth the money.

Having lots of fun upgrading your Gamecube so you can run Linux?  Didn't you say in your PPC thread that you have no interest in Linux?

Where are the hard facts that Nintendo loses money selling consoles? 2 link from established news sites have shown that Ninendo makes money selling consoles.

Congradulations.  You've finally made a breakthrough.

In a previous post, I said, "Note that I never said you were right or wrong".  Instead, I asked you to back up your argument with a source.

It took, what...  several days, dozens of posts, a huge number of sub-topics, and plenty of name-calling for you to deliver?

Whether I like your sources is irrelevant.  All I did was ask for some.

Koaftder:  Nintendo probably cant make a gamecube for 57 bucks.

We still don't know the actual store cost, so that's a whole new can of worms.

When I was working in a camera store, we made most of our profit on film and accessories.  Our markup on the actual cameras was less than 10%.  I assume game stores operate on similar terms.  They REALLY don't like it if you get the system in one place and buy your games elsewhere.  I bought my memory card before I got the console, and the salesman was shocked that I didn't want a memory card to go with my Cube.

To make him feel better, I told him I bought everything at that store, just on different days.  ;-)

Looks like a net loss on the device.

My personal belief is that Nintendo makes a gross profit on the hardware, but makes a net loss.  There's a lot of ways to interpret profit, which is why I'm curious about the manufacturing cost and store cost.  Of course, manufacturing cost is something only Nintendo knows.

Lou:  Also an MSRP is not always ~ twice the actual costs. It varies across different industries.

Correct.  I learned the hard way that selling cameras is a lousy business.

Our markup on film processing, however, was quite remarkable.  I think it was 60%.  Gotta pay for that $100,000 Kodak processor and $10,000-a-year service contract, somehow.  (Hint:  the machines don't come with warantees, they require "service contracts").

Yes, exactly why I started the "potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP" thread. To move the platform forward as a whole. Instead of support, my idea was picked about for trolling's sake.

That's because your behavior over there is much the same as over here.  Getting you to post proof is like pulling teeth.  Plus, your persistent use of all caps and name-calling gets on everyone's nerves, which is why so few people comment on that thread, even though so many people have read it.

Quite a read for anyone here who wonders where the hostility toward adolescent and Waccoon comes from.

From you, mostly.  Seriously, who in this thread has made the most hostile comments, Mr. Calls Everyone an I.A.C.

Unlike you, I don't respond to everything I don't like with, "You're just a trolling idiot."

Koaftder:  AROS seems to strive towards compatability with 3.1. I dont think this is a good direction.

That's my big problem with it, too.  Of course, it crashes like crazy on all of my computers every time I try to read a CD-ROM.  Obviously, there's a long way to go, and it's still not trying to be better than OS3.x at its core.

ive been thinking of forking aros, but am concerned that it might end up fragmenting things and generally causing problems.

I forked a project called Oekaki Poteto, and now I'm the official developer.  Of course, I'm the only one working on it -- nobody else wanted to fix the bugs and critical security problems that were, like, a year old.  :lol:

[Waccoon]

Lou:  and yes, I have no interest in Linux, you are correct but if all I had to do to run an alternate OS on the GC was install a $50 mod chip that takes 10 minutes to install, I think the Amiga community has gone through alot more hassel to upgrade their machines and still be nowhere near the power of a Gamecube

Yeah, we all know what's possible with all that memory.

Don't forgot to add in your ethernet adapter, mouse, keyboard, new case, card reader, memory card, other easily overlooked stuff, etc.  Have fun voiding your Gamecube warranty, everyone, and don't run into the problem Lou had when his Gamecube didn't turn on.

Oh yeah, don't forget all those deals on eBay, because only Idiot Ass Clowns pay MSRP.

I got my Mac mini on eBay for $335, and it's a full computer with 256MB or RAM and a real PPC that blows away Gamecube in every possible respect.  Obviously, this is unacceptable for the Amiga community.  We need Nintendo.

Lou:  I predicted that a game for the GC would run enhanced on Revolution...if you read cube.ign.com/mail the editor there says this is a possibility with Zelda.

Possibility?  Editors making hopeful predictions?  Say it isn't so!

Lou:  As for the GC, since it's escentially an upgraded Gamecube

Proof?  Nobody knows at this point how Revolution runs Gamecube games.  You have no trouble passing off your speculations as proof, of course.

Lou:  As for 360, it just won't have the muscle to "emulate" all the regular XBOX titles.

This comes from hands-on experience, I take it?

I'm still holding to my theory that certain future Gamecube titles will be "aware" of the fact that they are running on Revolution hardware and run "enhanced".

That can be done easily with seperate compiles.  I think Revolution's Gamecube mode will work like the Commodore 128 did when you went into "go 64."

That's not to say old games won't run better on new hardware.  But, the game will obviously have to be fooled into thining it's running on a Gamecube.  Post-Revolution Gamecube titles can very easily have ways of detecting the new hardware.  How the old games behave is questionable.

koafder:  And why bother making it backwards compatable, when you can sell your retro versions all over again after they have been ported?

Not having to unplug everything repeatedly and have yet another box lying around?

I play all my old console games on my PC for this very reason.  Plus, they all tend to run better on emulators than on the original systems, and I can remap controls so I can play them much better using PC controllers.  A keyboard is just soooooo much better than a crappy Genesis controller or digital joystick.

koafder:  Cmon, you know you;d pay 20 bucks to play mario 3 on your new nintendo.

This is my big beef with Nintendo's claim of being able to run your old games.  You're not getting backwards compatibiltiy with your existing games.  You have to relicense everything into a "native" format for the new systems, even if it is running on a software emulator.

Paying an Internet subscription service is even worse.  You don't own anything, and you pay even if you don't download anything.  Pretty soon, you won't even have game discs, anymore, when you can just pay a monthly fee.

Oh, wait... that's innovation at work.  That's always a good thing, isn't it?

Lou:  interesting and useless "prediction" since not one console of any system has been sold yet.

Words to live by, unless you're explaining exactly how Revolution works when Nintendo hasn't even finalized the hardware, and that the new systems will only be twice as fast as XBox becuase Microsoft and Sony programmers don't know how to code for multiple cores.

I remember these same kinds of arguments when Playstation and Saturn were set for release.

Lou:  I keep telling people the 1st generation of 360/PS3 titles are only going to be twice as powerful as the current XBox. Multi-core programming is not in it's prime yet.

Especially since PCs have been using lots of mutithreaded software for years.  Yup.  Nobody knows a damn thing about multiple CPUs, especially since XBox 360 runs a Windows core, which has supported similar hardware on servers since its NT days.

Of course, Nintendo will have multiple cores, too, but Nintendo developers are immune to such performance problems because they're much smarter than those poor, drooling apes developing games for Microsoft and Sony.

It's safe to say developers won't be using the hardware to its full potential until after a few years (which is always the case with console hardware), but "twice as powerful as XBox" is really pushing it, Lou.

Lou:  The stills look great but unless it's running a video, having 3x the screen space to fill with only 2x the power makes the animation look choppy.

Yeah, we all know the GPUs are only twice as fast, too, and choppy frame rates are always the fault of the hardware, never the fault of developers making demos for unreleased hardware.

Oh yeah, isn't Revolution going to be less powerful than XBox 360 and PS3?  I suppose that means Nintendo games will be slideshows.  Everyone knows these new CPUs are incapable of anything useful, especially since all three next-gen consoles are basicly the same architecture designed by the same supplier.

Lou:  You do know that you can add on to the controller right?

Ever notice how add-ons don't sell very well?  People prefer all-in-one solutions when it comes to consoles, even if they cost a fortune.  Otherwise, why even call them consoles?

Lou:  Reloading can be like the arcade gun games where you "fire" off-screen to reload.

Yeah, but arcade games have plastic guns with triggers and kick-back, not rectangular remote controls with badly placed buttons.  :-)

Lou:  yeah real small - for Microsoft

What's so surprising?  With XBox 360 around the corner, nobody is going to buy an XBox now.

Hmmm... I wonder how many Gamecubes will sell right before the launch of Revolution.

MskoDestny:  Even with the silly analog stick dongle you've got fewer buttons than the Gamecube controller and I found it inadequate for FPS games.

People who adore FPS'ers are not Nintendo's target audience.

MskoDestny:  Even with the silly analog stick dongle you've got fewer buttons than the Gamecube controller and I found it inadequate for FPS games.

Fewer buttons isn't always a bad thing.  What bugs me is that people are probably going to drop it constantly, and the fact that it's just so ergonomicly incorrect.  I'm also not too impressed that the analog controller is connected to the remote with a wire, despite all this glorification over wireless technology.  It's fun to have a 2-foot cord in your lap while you're waving your remote in the air.  I also wonder what this will do to the Carpel Tunnel Generation.

As an interface designer, I think the controller is a classic example of bad execution, approved by a manager instead of a game designer.  If I had designed it, I would have made it a discus with a thumb handle.

How much you wanna bet this controller was the direct result of some stuffy exec raging over the success of the EyeToy?  I'm sure with Nintendo's emphasis on affordable hardware, people will have a blast playing it on their 2000" plasma TVs.

MskoDestny:  I don't really see how it's more instinctive.

The typical buzzword is to say that it is "natural."

If you want natural, go for a walk, get some friends together, and go to the park and play a game of tennis.  Entertainment technology is supposed to overcome natural limitations that prevents us from experiencing very atypical things, like the dangerous sport of car racing, space exploration, randomly killing people, etc.  You don't need lots of buttons to do that, but you need more than a fat, rectangular magic wand.

Seriously, think about it.  If this controller had been available seperately for the Gamecube, would it sell?  Would people just think it's a gimmick and a passing fad?

MskoDestny:  Off screen reloading really only works well for games on rails like traditional light-gun games.

That's what bugs me most.  The N64 had a lot of issues with its early 3D platform games because you couldn't adjust the camera.  Dreamcast did not improve this very much, as Sonic Adventure proved quite well.  Once Sony introduced controllers two analog sticks, it became painfully obvious that people could control cameras much, much better than any AI routine can, and since you can look around only when you expect it to happen, it feels more "natural" than when the game does everything for you.

Revolution will likely have a lot of games that play "on rails," and that's not a good thing.

MskoDestny:  The whole add-on concept seems to be a big compromise between the different needs the controller tries to fit.

Yeah.  Most games that could really benefit from a unique controller are best with a purpose-built controller, like, as you suggested, Sega's fishing pole.

Revolution's controller seems more like, "PowerGlove, Part Deux: we'll get it right this time.  Honest!"

MskoDestny:  Simplicity and approachability for the casual and non-gamer crowd

Nintendo's audience is the younger group of gamers.  I think the real reason why Nintendo is going so cheap with their new console (low performance, no HDTV), is because they feel their core audience is too young and inexperienced to care about power, visual quality, lots of features, and so on.  This may make Revolution profitable for that core audience if they keep their costs under control, but if Nintendo isn't careful, they'll wind up like Sega -- having to drop out of the hardware race altogether, and make their games for much more powerful machines.

Nintendo is one of the world's leading and most powerful software developers.  They really don't belong in the hardware market if this is all they can deliver.  Personally, I think Revolution will hold them back.

[Waccoon]

Lou:  typical stuff you buy with any PC purchase. Your point?

Don't Amigas use keyboards and mice?  Doesn't every Amigan want ethernet?  Computers don't boot from air, so you need to spend more money on a boot device...

...plus other costs you don't include in your REEL CHEEP machine price projections.

Lou:  but I have spare PS/2 keyboard laying around from small "upgrades". If you want to pay $70 for a brand new wireless keyboard, that's you issue, not mine.

Can you use your PS/2 keyboard on a Gamecube?

Lou:  By the way, when was the last time anyone bought "new" Amiga hardware? Doesn't most of it around here come from ebay? And isn't it 12-20 years old too boot?

I suppose if you're still living in the 90's and are used to running AGA games all day, Gamecube begins to look like a miracle.

As for your Mac-mini, should I go quote the thread where you complain about how slow it is?

MacOS X is slow.  Are you going to go into another discussion blaming the Mac hardware for it's lack of performance when the software is actually at fault, as you do when you complain that XBox 360 games look "choppy?"

I never said the GC is the perfect OS4 platform, just a potential one to help grow the market.

Funny, when I brought up other "potential" solutions in that other thread of yours, you immediately shot all of them down saying they were off topic.  Ineffective, I can understand.  But, off topic?

koafter:  Damn, why post about the immaturity of multiproc programming?

Indeed.  Lou, don't you have a rebuttal for this, or your rediculous performance projections for XBox 360 and PS3 games?  Are you still telling everyone all the next gen non-Nintendo systems will have only twice the performance of the original XBox?

MskoDestny:  I do think fewer buttons can be better. My point was that current FPS games have too many functions to stuff on the Revolution controller well and I don't think that will change soon since most FPS games start out on the PC (which of course has plenty of buttons).

Well, most of the FPS I've seen can be driven almost entirely with the mouse, scrollwheel, and space bar.  It's the wargame FPS that need millions of buttons, like the flight simulators.  But, those kinds of really complex games aren't Nintendo's typical fare, and as far as I know, aren't all that mainstream.

Lou:  So on revolution, code will always take advantage of multiple cores...having a larger cache (and branch predicters) is also what makes this possible and why I (in another thread...possibly earlier in this one) said a 2.5Ghz G5-based Revolution cpu will initially outperform first the 3.2GHz 360 and PS3 cpus.

OK, so once again you're suggesting that Revolution will outperform the competition becuase Sony and MS developers are crap?

Don't you think the dev tools and compilers they have account for this?  Do you think all these guys still write their software in assembly?

Lou:  It's like comparing my 2.2GHz Athlon 3400+ to a Pentium 3.4GHz.

Yeah, but the performance of these processors isn't going to fluctuate, Lou.  Your beef is with the dev tools and the intelligence of the programmers, not the hardware.

Suggesting that Revolution will initially outperform PS3 and XBox 360, before Revolution's specs are final, is rediculous.  This kind of fanboy banter happens every time new consoles are released.

AMD has had multi-core processors for years, no one had to worry about it because their branch-prediction took care of all that stuff.

Nobody had to worry because the OS takes care of all that stuff.  Don't these new consoles have operating systems and gobs of dev tools these days?  Oh, but you already know that Nintendo's tools are way better than PS3 and XBox 360 tools, right?

Also, branch prediction is a technique to guess what a particular thread is going to do next, so it applies to each core individually.  Games generally don't have as many branches as application software, either.

Lou:  ah-toldyouso-chu

{Link)

Told us what?  Here's an excerpt from that article:

"So Nintendo took a different and far riskier path. First, it chose the codename "Revolution" for its new game console. Then the company set a big goal -- to dramatically improve the interface for video games. With this strategy, Nintendo built an amazing amount of hype around its innovative controller for the Revolution."

So, they're saying Nintendo can't compete at the hardware level and are making up for it by trying new interface directions.  How does this help your argument about the power and performance of the CPUs?

Lou:  (Link:  http://www.joystiq.com/entry/1234000320065895/)

One of the comments below the article said this:

"But he actually didn't say that. He said that gamers will see not a big difference in terms od graffics in neather the trhee consoles."

This I can understand, as it is typically vague marketting talk.  Smart salesmen don't say things like, "there is no difference."

Come one, IBM is making both CPUs for XBox 360 and Revolution.  ATI is making both GPUs for XBox 360 and Revolution.  Surely these companies aren't charging Nintendo less money and making faster, cooler chips just "because."

[Waccoon]

MskoDestny:  I can't say I have a lot of respect for that article when it claims the 360 has 6 processor cores when it only has 3.

I've heard worse.  Now is hardly the time to post lots of specs on the next-gen consoles.

Lou:  People tout the PS3's SPU's for physics (and sound as there is no dedicated sound chip). It's process is in charge of managing those SPU's in addition to running PPC code.

Which is largely handled by the OS and dev tools.

Interesting how you suggested that Revolution could have a physics processor with 32MB of RAM, unaware that this would give you the same programming challenges as the PS3.  Of course, Nintendo is smart enough to handle these challenges, and Sony and Microsoft are not.

Lou:  You are going off topic. If you want to talk about a Gamecube as an OS4 platform, go to my thread or the Hyperion news post.

Oh, this is hillarious.  Remember when, in the middle of your PPC Amiga Real Cheap thread, you started arguing about whether the Game Boy Player was an emulator or not?  Yeah, let's diversify the thread even more by bringing other Nintendo products into play (based on ARM processors, no less).

Lou:  These specs come from developers...and I've seen similar specs in a printed magazine.

Which one?  What were their sources?

Lou:  I don't see them coming out with a slower GPU than the Xbox because it's coming out almost 9 moths later.

Even though the price points are different?

Didn't Nintendo already conceed that Revolution will be less powerful than XBox 360?

Lou:  Deny, deny, deny is always the best defense when you have nothing meaningful to say.

Or in your case, ignore, ignore, ignore.  You seem to be giving fewer and fewer rebuttals when people point out problems in your technical explanations, such as with the branch prediction issue.  Oh, you'd like to forget that altogether and start up a new argument about how memory is handled in Revolution, which is more difficult to prove, in either direction, at this point in time.

Lou:  Yes he can buy a Mac-Mini on ebay and that's OK but buying a Gamecube on eBay for 1/10 that price isn't.

If Gamecube is to be used as an officialy licensed platform for OS4, as you pointed out in that other thread, you wouldn't be able to make a system yourself from eBay parts.  Also, if you remember, some of the prices you listed were for the cost a used hardware, such as your build price that included a $60 Gamecube.

Lou:  Oh and when my 'Cube didn't turn on when I didn't solder my mod chip's power cable correctly. I soldered it to a more convenient location and - shock! horror! - it worked fine.

You're lucky.  Amigans have been working with frankenstein solutions for so long, I'd think they would be looking for a platform where modding isn't required.

I found it amusing when you said you would return the Gamecube to Wal-Mart to get a replacement if you couldn't get it working again.  So much for worrying about the warranty.  :-)

But, hey, if you break your Gamecube, it's cheap to replace, isn't it?

coldfish:  With the 'mini, why bother with OS4 when you have OSX?

Curiosity.  OS X has been a mixed bag so far.  I won't get into any more detail, lest Lou yells at me for getting off topic.

coldfish:  I understand the fun aspect of using the 'cube as a hobby box, and hats-off for being inquisitive and exploring, but it really isn't the solution to next-gen Amiga computing.

My biggest problem with Lou in that "other" thread, is that he was touting the machine as a next-gen system to run OS4.  As the bad comments began to roll in, he changed his argument to suggest that it would be an improvement over the classic line of Amigas, and could run AROS, which already runs on very cheap and diverse PC hardware.  However, he still compares the price of a modded Gamecube you have to build yourself to a brand new AmigaOne.  Obviously, not a very fair technical or functional comparrison by any means.