Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Sony Needs To React to Microsoft 84

Ars Technica's Opposable Thumbs column discusses comments by Ubisoft president Yves Guillemont. Mr. Guillemont's kind words for the 360 prompted thumbs poster Ben Kuchera to think even less well of Ken Kutaragi's recent arrogant windbag statement. Essentially, Mr. Kuchera is of the opinion that at this stage of the game Sony not only should 'care', they should be worried. From the article: "I wonder what the talk is within Sony... are they talking about the increased competition this generation, or do they all share Kuturagi's confidence? This isn't the same fight they had with the Dreamcast and the Xbox: in that case they had Sega's last system that never enjoyed EA's support, and Microsoft's first, unproven piece of hardware. Now they are up against Microsoft's second system, with very strong software support and online support, and the very popular and affordable Wii."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Needs To React to Microsoft

Comments Filter:
  • Audience (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tbannist ( 230135 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @11:43AM (#16292477)
    It often seems that Sony is playing for a the stockholder audience rather than the customer audience. You see if they say they're worried the stock goes down, which is bad for them, and it's unsure whether saying they're worried would have any positive response from customers. I expect them to make a few small concessions on the obviously wrong issues, like they did with the HDMI port without ever really admitting that their competition exists. The stock market loves unbridled optimism and arrogance, as long as nothing goes too obviously wrong.
  • First two links? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Are the first two links supposed to go to the same location? I couldn't find anything about Sony's arrogance in the second link...
  • This isn't the same fight they had with the Dreamcast and the Xbox
    I'm getting sick of people completely forgetting about the Gamecube. About as many Gamecubes were sold as XBoxes, but they bring up the Dreamcast that sputtered and died in a year instead? Despite common attitudes, the Wii is not coming out of a vacuum.
    • by bigman2003 ( 671309 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @12:29PM (#16293165) Homepage
      The article is written mainly about 3rd party software support.

      The Gamecube fell WAY behind in 3rd party support. They did great with first party- but a lot of big games ignored the 'Cube.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        The Gamecube fell WAY behind in 3rd party support. They did great with first party- but a lot of big games ignored the 'Cube.

        This may be how it appeared from the outside, but I can ensure you that this is not how it worked inside of the industry; there were lots of developers who wanted to bring games to the Gamecube but (as I will explain in a moment) were pressured by their publisher to put the games on other platforms.

        When Microsoft entered the Console world they started spending insane ammounts of money
        • by xero314 ( 722674 )

          The Gamecube fell WAY behind in 3rd party support. They did great with first party- but a lot of big games ignored the 'Cube.

          This may be how it appeared from the outside, but I can ensure you that this is not how it worked inside of the industry; there were lots of developers who wanted to bring games to the Gamecube but (as I will explain in a moment) were pressured by their publisher to put the games on other platforms.

          Ok, I'm confused. The parent said that Nintendo had poor 3rd party support on the

      • For my GameCube, I own first-party titles and Sega titles. For my Xbox, I own Sega titles. For my PS2, I own Sega, Konami, and Namco titles. Everything else (EA and other classic 3rd party), they produce mainly crap anyway.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      I was going to make a joke about a Wii in a vaccum, but I decided against it.
  • by tygerstripes ( 832644 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @11:52AM (#16292597)
    "This itches. Ow. Ow! OW! It burns! Goddammit, it's burning me! Geddit OFF ME AAAARGH!!!"

    Well, that's what I imagined, anyway...

  • by Jartan ( 219704 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @11:54AM (#16292621)
    Which consoles win or fail has been all about what a select few game companies decide to do really. Square releases ff13 for sony. Bunch of companies assume fanbois will buy PS3 to play FF13. They have to plan 1.5 years ahead before a RPG game even finishes so they all decide to avoid risks and also release on the PS3.

    Bam a bunch of good console RPG's come out for PS3 and everyone buys the console because said games aren't on the 360.

    It's like a self fufilling prophecy really.

    Compared to all the money MS spends on other stuff you'd think they'd bother to at least spend 20 million on making a few good RPGs at a total loss just to sell the console.
    • But why would Square-Enix neccesarily release all of their products on ps3? For one thing, as much "love" as PS3 gets from gamers, I don't see a lot of hard-core gamers going for the PS3. And with the high price point, I don't see nonhardcores going for a ps3 either.

      And given that SE and any number of other devs need to sell their games, I can't imagine they're going to put their game on a system that has a tiny install base. Even if 10% of their fans would buy ps3 just for FF, that won't be enough for

      • Square-Enix doesn't need to release all their products on the PS3. FF13 isn't going to float the PS3 all by itself.

        But this is about perceptions. Japanese game Dev's "know" FF13 is going to come out for the PS3. They also "know" FF13 is going to be a hit. Since they "know" it's going to be a hit they also "know" a lot of PS3 will have been sold.

        Thus they decided to develop on the PS3 as soon as they had hardware they could start working with. It's already a done deal which is why Sony is acting so arr
        • Well, what I'm suggesting is that even FF13 will probably eventually switch consoles. There simply aren't enough people interested in the ps3 to justify putting Square's flagship title as an exclusive on the ps3. People don't buy consoles for just one game.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by ergo98 ( 9391 )
      Compared to all the money MS spends on other stuff you'd think they'd bother to at least spend 20 million on making a few good RPGs at a total loss just to sell the console.

      With all due respect, while releases of RPGs demonstrate that many players of the genre are fanatics (e.g. long midnight lines, etc), the vast majority of console gamers play sports games, racing games, and fighting games. The 360 will do just fine if zero RPG gamers buy it.
      • OK, where is SoulCalibur for 360? DoA is just not in the same league. The combat mechanics such compatred to SC and at 1080i the graphics are almost as good as the SC III graphics on PS2.
        • Give it time. Namco will eventualy port Soul Calibur to other machines.
        • That's true - DOA4 is actually balanced and not broken by idiotic glitches. It also has online play and a bigger tournament scene than SCIII. Maybe the next Soul Calibur will be a return to form?
      • by Jartan ( 219704 )
        [quote]the vast majority of console gamers play sports games, racing games, and fighting games[/quote]

        I'm not sure I'd agree that the fighting genre is bigger than the RPG genre when you count western and eastern gamers but there's no doubt the sports genre outsells them. You overlooked an important fact though. All the sports games are made for every console.

        The only companies playing favorites in a big genre are the RPG makers. Thus RPG games sell consoles. Therefore as long as FF13 is coming out on t
    • by thebaron2 ( 1008833 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @12:12PM (#16292883)
      Well I think that a difference between the Xbox and the 360 is that this time around Microsoft is getting a lot of 3rd party support for RPGs for their system - they just haven't been released as early as other titles. Although it's a solitary player on the field, Oblivion was a great RPG, although a bit overwhelming. Bioshock, from Irrational Games, will be coming next year (I believe) and was so impressive that it won IGN's Overall Game of the Show award for E3 '06. I don't know how much stock you put in IGN's reviews, but it is an impressive looking game nonetheless. The 360 will also be seeing more Japanese RPGs come over to the system on the American side. Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey are being released in Japan, with Blue Dragon set to hit this side of the Atlantic next year as well. A lot of this information can be found at this IGN article actually, with a preview of the upcoming RPGs for the 360: http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/716/716474p1.html [ign.com] I've got a 360, an XBox, a PS2, and wouldn't be surprised if I own a PS3 down the line, if the games are there, so I don't consider myself too biased one way or the other. I do love RPGs, though, and I can tell you that I'm really excited about some of these upcoming titles for the 360 - much more so than I ever was about an RPG on the Xbox.
      • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
        I think that a difference between the Xbox and the 360 is that this time around Microsoft is getting a lot of 3rd party support for RPGs for their system

        Oblivion? Um yeah, Bethesda totally didn't support the Xbox. And Bioshock is super different from the type of games the Xbox gets already (not really). As for the Japanesse developers making RPGs for the 360, I would not call the support "a lot". Compared to the Xbox, maybe, but not compared to other systems.
        • Huh, seems I've read some different sources about the level of 'support' Japanese RPG devs have for the Xbox 360... From what I hear Square-Enix is serious about coming to Xbox 360 (though they will be slightly behind similiar releases for PS3 because they made the decision barely a year ago), Capcom have a healthy interest in the MS console, Several more 'Indie' developers (run by some awfully big names) have already announced plans for RPG's on Xbox 360.

          About 8 'RPG companies' have plans to code RPG's for
          • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
            Thanks for all the references and links to back up your assertions. Oh wait.
            • Oh sure, I can really link to paper sources... Want to bother looking up exactly where I read X, Y, or Z over some thirty odd sites and six or seven paper sources I follow... Or even care whether you believe me or not... silly me...
              • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
                Oh sure, I can really link to paper sources

                I hope and pray you've never written a paper with citations.

                Also, I didn't realize that your post referenced so many publications. Sorry about that, I don't expect anyone to load up each article on 30 websites and page through every issue of every one of the magazines/papers you read.

                You know, somebody should invent some tech that would allow a person to type in some keywords and then search through all the text on the Internet. That would be cool! And for paper
        • Oblivion? Um yeah, Bethesda totally didn't support the Xbox. And Bioshock is super different from the type of games the Xbox gets already (not really). As for the Japanesse developers making RPGs for the 360, I would not call the support "a lot". Compared to the Xbox, maybe, but not compared to other systems.

          I have a feeling that you're trolling, but I'll bite.

          Bethesda is supporting MS and the Xbox. Morrowind came out for the Xbox first, and never came to any other console (although it did come out for PC.
          • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
            Bethesda is supporting MS and the Xbox. Morrowind came out for the Xbox

            Um [reference.com].

            As for Japanese developers, the number is certainly growing. Namco, makers of the Xenosaga series, is working on a 360 RPG called Eternal Sonata. From Software (published by Ubisoft), just released Enchanted Arms recently (which I'm playing through, and it's decent so far). And the big news is that Mistwalker Studios is making a number of exclusive titles for the 360, Blue Dragon and Lost Oddysey. And then you've got all your traditio
            • I get the feeling you don't really follow the industry, and just like talking out of your ass. As I suspected, a troll. But I'll still bite anyway. Maybe you or someone else will learn a thing or two. :P

              So you have 4 Japanese RPGs. Congratulations. Also, I like how you sneak some extra companies in at the end to try and strengthen your argument. You almost had me. Except oh wait we're talking about RPGs.

              My original subject was "RPG support on 360 steadily getting better". I was comparing it to the last Xbox

              • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
                I get the feeling you don't really understand logic, and you're assuming that if you claim you're a genius I'll just let you talk out of your ass. As I suspected, an idiot.

                My original subject was "RPG support on 360 steadily getting better". I was comparing it to the last Xbox generation.

                Congratulations. Except you were the one who replied to me. And my original post, while talking about RPGs, was in response to a post that claimed the 360 will "do better" because of the RPG support. So our original topi
                • by jchenx ( 267053 )
                  Apparently you don't know how to read. Here is a quote from your post, which I replied to originally:

                  As for the Japanesse[sic] developers making RPGs for the 360, I would not call the support "a lot".

                  So yes, the original topic WAS about RPGs. Well, at least that's what I thought you were referring to. That's why I started talking about RPG support for the 360 getting better.

                  Anyway, it's apparent that you're nothing but a Sony-fanboi troll (as suspected), who can only throw ad hominem [wikipedia.org] attacks, rather that pa

                  • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
                    Anyway, it's apparent that you're nothing but a Sony-fanboi troll

                    That's weird, I don't remember proclaiming my undying love for some faceless multinational corporation anywhere in this discussion. But hey I don't "follow the industry", so I'll take your word here. The even weirder part is that the only Sony game-stuff I own is a few games for the PS2 (plus the PS2 required to play them), and I don't plan on buying a PS3. Also:

                    it's apparent that you're nothing but a Sony-fanboi troll

                    Thanks for reducing th
    • GTA exclusivity is what sold PS2s. Not RPGs. Sony really really messed up big time when they lost GTA exclusivity!
    • Microsoft blew last generation on the RPG front, but this time around, they've got an exclusive arrangement with Sakaguchi, Uematsu, and Amano [ign.com]; with that particular brain trust, well, I think it's hard to say they're not trying... (Note: No, Amano isn't -- I don't *think* -- directly connected with Mistwalker, but there was an article on this very news-service a few days ago mentioning that he's still in close contact with Sakaguchi. Story by 1up or someone, IIRC.)
  • by non0score ( 890022 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @11:55AM (#16292633)
    or do they all share Kuturagi's confidence? ...yes, they actually do. They think the PS3 is some type of Godsend and all guard it like some state top-secret when the rest of the AAA game development community have used it and rated it as the worst next-gen system to develop for. Figures.
  • Given that Mr Kutaragi can barely get a word in edge ways without his P.R. team sticking their oars in, I would suggest that 'behind closed doors' i.e. in the sony offices, the heat is starting to rise and people are beginning to panic a little.

    Anything that comes out in public is carefully worded, but in the sony HQ they have no fear from the 'outside' so they can think what they want to, and that is likely to mean that they are being true to themselves, which I believe to be a little bit shaky.
  • funny but... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by javilon ( 99157 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @12:00PM (#16292711) Homepage
    Sony is starting to sound like the underdog.
    • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
      Why? Because all the nerds on the Internet are bitching and whining? Well, I have some news for ya: whiny bloggers do not reflect the opinion of the world at large. Unless there are some actual polls that suggest the average* gamer is pissed about the PS3, I refuse to buy into any of the FUD posted on slashdot every other day.

      * By "average", I mean the average opinion of all people who buy video games. I don't mean "people who respond to polls from a video game magazine" or any other BS like that.
      • Yes, I agree...people who surf the net forums / slashdotters etc are only a small percent of what sony is looking to pitch the PS3 to...

        However, if the inner-core of the customer base [i.e. Forum geeks] is beginning to feel disillusioned with the constant PS3 problems...then it is only logical that the annoyance is spreading outwards to the 'casual gamer'.

        Plus, the 'casual gamer' owes no allegiance to any one console...i believe that the core of who sony want to sell to will be easily swayed... or '
        • However, if the inner-core of the customer base [i.e. Forum geeks] is beginning to feel disillusioned with the constant PS3 problems...then it is only logical that the annoyance is spreading outwards to the 'casual gamer'.

          Hardcore geeks are not an inner core. They're not even an outer core. And they're the sort who whine about everything, things that the casual gamer doesn't give a damn about.

          We will see...its really intersting and exciting.

          If you find rumours and hearsay about future consoles interesting a

          • Personally I think that early adopters have the most clout (some of who will be geeks although not all), in the film industry cinema distribution brings in very little money compared to retail/ TV licencing. The only real reason for cinema release is to get a good gross which adds to the word of mouth and people picking up the films latter.

            The same is true with games consoles, if companies can sell all there consoles out in the first night they will get a lot of press attention which will make the seem suc
        • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
          Yeah, sure. Because uber-nerds are looked up to by all casual gamers, and listen to their every word. That's totally logical.
  • by hal2814 ( 725639 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @12:02PM (#16292741)
    Look at what Sony is doing instead of what they're saying. Considering the Sony will have some sort of online system to replicate XBox live and their sixasses controller that sounds an awful like a Wiimote crossed with a Dual Shock, I'd say that Sony is very worried about the competition. If not, then they wouldn't be trying to copy their functionality.
    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      "...their sixasses controller that sounds an awful like a Wiimote crossed with a Dual Shock..."

      Yea, except they had to drop the DualShock technology altogether for legal reasons.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by norminator ( 784674 )
        Yea, except they had to drop the DualShock technology altogether for legal reasons.

        Couldn't they have ponied up for the licensing fees for the rumble? Or possibly developed some type of non-infringing rumble? The whole 6-axis/no rumble thing sounds like a real copout. And even if they really did have to drop the rumble, why did they scurry at the last minute (according to their own admission) to put the motion sensing in? Why wouldn't they have known earlier they wouldn't be able to do the rumble, a
        • Couldn't they have ponied up for the licensing fees for the rumble?

          They could have, but that would mean admitting they were wrong. Japanese culture isn't like ours. They really don't like admitting that something they did was wrong.
          • Actually, I'm not sure that there are that many Americans who like to admit when they're wrong, either....

            But, more to the point, this seems like a somewhat contradictory argument. Sony's been taking a lot of criticism from the gaming community regarding the PS3's price point, as it is. Having to fork over a license fee for the rumble technology is only going to make the PS3 more expensive to produce, and, in all likelihood, more expensive for the consumer. There's really no easy way out for them on this on
    • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
      Yeah, right. Next you'll be saying that Microsoft "copied" other console makers with the Xbox because it outputs to a TV. Oh, and everybody is copying Ralph Baer because their game machines need electricity. Shit, he should sue somebody.

      You have taught me a great lesson, sir. Anyone who uses an idea that has been thought of before is simply "copying". There's no possible way they could be inventive or smart, and they are obviously "worried" about their "competition". They never ever ever would add som
      • by hal2814 ( 725639 )
        "Next you'll be saying that Microsoft "copied" other console makers with the Xbox because it outputs to a TV."

        If consoles historically had their own intergrated monitor and company X made a killing off of selling a console that output to TV instead and then in response, Company Y also made a console outputting to the TV, then I would most certainly accuse Company Y of copying.

        Online gaming services for consoles have been around for at least a decade. In the US, XBox managed to have the first successful one
        • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
          If consoles historically had their own intergrated monitor and company X made a killing off of selling a console that output to TV instead and then in response, Company Y also made a console outputting to the TV, then I would most certainly accuse Company Y of copying.

          This makes sense, because your entire argument is fucking stupid. Human beings, like many other animals, imitate behaviors. Nature itself makes "copies" of stuff through reproduction. Pointing out how some corporation is doing something sim
          • by hal2814 ( 725639 )
            "you just sound like a 7-year-old."

            I'm not the one throwing out proanity and comparing a ripped off controller design to biological reproduction because I can come up with no better defense. There is someone here sounding like a 7 year old and I'm pretty sure it's not me.

            "Pointing out how some corporation is doing something similar to another corporation by saying ZOMG COPYING is unnecessary and stupid."

            And that's not what I'm doing. I'm pointing out that the way Sony is copying Microsoft and Nintendo lea
            • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
              comparing a ripped off controller design to biological reproduction ... [makes you sound like a 7-year-old]

              Once again, your grasp of logic slips further and further away from reality. It's pretty hilarious that you think analogies make one look like a child. The truth of the matter here is that you are the child for attacking the use of analogy rather than the content of the analogy itself. Disliking the manner in which an argument is made does not make it wrong. If you wish to actually address what I s
              • by hal2814 ( 725639 )
                "Bullshit. Neither in your original post nor your replies to me have you stated any sort of reasoning that in any way resembles this statement."

                I can see why you don't think I have a lick of logical reasoning if you're reading comprehension is so bad that you can't piece a very obvious summary from it's source elements so I'll break it down for you here. First let's look at the title of the original post: "Don't look at what they say..." Then I go right on to say "Look at what Sony is doing instead of wha
                • by ClamIAm ( 926466 )
                  First let's look at the title of the original post: "Don't look at what they say..." Then I go right on to say "Look at what Sony is doing instead of what they're saying." Then (and here's the kicker) I go on to say "I'd say that Sony is very worried about the competition. If not, then they wouldn't be trying to copy their functionality."

                  Nowhere in your posts do you explain your reasoning as to "how Sony is copying" and why this shows that "they are worried about the competition". All you do is say "they'r
  • Reaction (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @12:03PM (#16292761)
    They should react and produce Sonium Microsate.
  • by Gerocrack ( 979018 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @12:10PM (#16292853)
    ... it required a change of pants
  • A year from now after the dust has settled it will be interesting to see how it all plays out. Sony is banking on the future and looking down the road past launch. What it is really going to come down to is the titles available for each console. Price is a factor, but great games are what make most gamers take notice (I hope) of what console to invest in. Sony should be worried about the competition, those are interesting points, but the competition should be worried about the PS3 as well. Sony shouldn't be
  • I wasn't aware the Wii was for sale yet.

  • by skorch ( 906936 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @12:46PM (#16293405)
    Well, in spite of what they may say, I'd say Sony is very much aware and very much reactionary to the competition. They've tried to mimic the Wii's functionality as quickly as they could after they learned of it, and they're trying to replicate Xbox Live's services.

    If I had to guess, they're just playing right out of the Art of War rulebook: When strong, appear weak, and when weak, appear strong. They have to exhibit an air of confidence because they know they're vulnerable and taking a big risk this round. If they don't show confidence in their own product at this stage in the game (and they are very much behind) then they're not going to rally the support they need from consumers or third parties. At this point, they've been dealt all the cards they have to play, and it's poker face time, except it's up to consumers to place their bets for them from here on.

    Personally, I'm going to be betting on the Wii this hand, and wait till the stakes are a bit lower before I throw any more money down on something more expensive.
  • by ConfusedSelfHating ( 1000521 ) on Tuesday October 03, 2006 @12:58PM (#16293577)
    As a general principle, every company should worry about its competitors. Microsoft has massive corporate lockin with Windows, most corporations have software developed for Windows that would cost a huge amount of money to switch to Apple's OS or Linux. But do you think that Microsoft doesn't spend time thinking about how to retain marketshare?

    In the game console business alone we've seen leaders being bent over and abused. Nintendo comes to mind. It's a very fluid business. There isn't much customer loyalty.

    Microsoft has been manufacturing the Xbox 360 for about a year, its part costs have probably come down 15 to 25 %, it is about to move to a 65 nm process for certain components (which will reduce power consumption and save money) and Microsoft has a huge amount of money. Microsoft can rape Sony on price. Nintendo is currently making money on each console sold and is using low cost components which will only get cheaper over time. Nintendo is in a position to rape Sony on price. The reason the Xbox 360 is selling as many consoles as expected is that $399 is too much to pay for a console. Microsoft has it in their power to correct that.

    Sony's exclusivity deals with game developers are far more limited than they were before. The PS2 had a 100 million consoles sold (probably about 80 million are working), it made sense for developers only to develop for the PS2. With an uncertain install base, no developer in their right mind will develop exclusively for the PS3 without a sack full of money from Sony. This is compounded by high development costs for next gen games. If a developer makes a game for two or three consoles, the failure of one console will not ruin game sales.

    1080p graphics don't matter at the moment. Look at bestbuy.com. Look at the televisions costing over a thousand dollars. How many of them support 1080p? There are quite a few televisions under a thousand dollars which support 720p. Sony is relying on the PS3 purchases 3 or 4 years from now. By that time this particular generation will be over.

    I think that both the Xbox 360 and the Wii will do well. After the Xbox 360 drops its price by about $100 and includes a game with the system. Third-party developers will show a preference for the Xbox 360 over the Wii until it is clear that third-party games can sell well on the Wii. There were many people who bought a Gamecube and only played Nintendo games on it. Months would go by and there would be no Gamecube games on the top 20 games sold in the United States. The Wii is also a different sort of console, which will cause a degree of hesitation. Despite a small install base for the Xbox 360, a number of third-party Xbox 360 games have become number one sellers in the United States and Europe. Saint's Row, Dead Rising and Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter come to mind. When a developer is looking for investment, being able to say that other companies have been successful in the same field is a big selling point. Development of third-party Wii games will pick up once third-party sales pick up.

    I think that the game console market is extremely price sensitive. If the game console market was not price sensitive, why did Sony drop the price of the all-powerful PS2? Why not keep it at $299 and rake in the cash? If Sony executives face a $299 Premium Xbox 360 and a $199 Wii, I think they'll start to worry or be replaced by their shareholders.
  • This is starting to remind me of Intel, circa 1990 or early 2000, i.e. an industry leader with impressive marketshare caught off guard by an innovative, nimble competitor. Back then, when the O.G. Athalon was released and broke the Ghz barrier first, it became a case of Intel resorting to a chronic (and until recently, long running) case of me-too-ism where the former leader was forced to watch that competitor announce new breakthroughs, and come up with some response. Sony has made many of the same mistak

You know, Callahan's is a peaceable bar, but if you ask that dog what his favorite formatter is, and he says "roff! roff!", well, I'll just have to...

Working...