AfterDawn: Tech news

Slim PS3 could have been even smaller

Written by Andre Yoskowitz (Google+) @ 15 Dec 2009 13:10 User comments (20)

Slim PS3 could have been even smaller According to Sony Computer Entertainment's Masayuki Chatani, the new slim redesign of the PlayStation 3 could have been even smaller, and could have possibly had its HDD stripped out.
One alternative was the use of flash memory. The advantages of using flash memory are smaller size, decreased running costs, and lower noise levels (although the PS3 runs pretty quietly regardless). Disadvantages are price-per-GB.

Another alternative to an HDD was to completely get rid of physical storage and instead let users save all game data, personal files and settings online, via the PlayStation Network.

Chatani said bothe options were actively considered but the HDD won out. "We felt that the price would be too high for the amount of storage capacity the PS3 needs," he adds.

As for other considered redesigns, Chatani says the power supply was considered being made external, just like in the Slim PS2, however that "would have imposed restrictions on transport and use, making it harder to use freely."

Previous Next  

20 user comments

115.12.2009 16:45

It also could have had BC, Linux, and not suck in comparison to launch units.

215.12.2009 17:00

Originally posted by nintenut:
It also could have had BC, Linux, and not suck in comparison to launch units.
'

Whine...Whine....Whine...

315.12.2009 18:59

Quote:
Originally posted by nintenut:
It also could have had BC, Linux, and not suck in comparison to launch units.
'

Whine...Whine....Whine...
No kidding I have all those things and NEVER use them. I thought after the price cut the cry babies would stop but it has just unleashed the tears even more. The ps3 could be free with a foot massage from a playmate and there would still be a flood of babies crying about something.

415.12.2009 20:12

^^ totally agree

515.12.2009 21:33

I think we're all in agreement here :)

Also, saving all game data online is risky if your internet isn't working or simply don't have internet access. Flash memory obviously costs more (look at solid state disks 80GB SSD is about equal to 500GB HDD).

Also, in sucked in comparison mostly because of it's price or would you rather it lose features like Blu-Ray (probably can take off $200 from it at launch without blu-ray) or HD (prolly another hundred). The price is 'cuz of the hardware in it you know.

615.12.2009 22:19
chris4160
Inactive

Originally posted by KSib:
Also, in sucked in comparison mostly because of it's price or would you rather it lose features like Blu-Ray (probably can take off $200 from it at launch without blu-ray) or HD (prolly another hundred). The price is 'cuz of the hardware in it you know.
Lol, $100 for a hdd... $200 for blu-ray? A 5400 rpm 250gb hard drive bought in bulk would be $50 max, more like $40. Sony probably paid $10 for the 20gb hard drives in the launch date consoles. The blu-ray player only costs $66 right now, more like $100 at launch. If the hdd and odd cost $300 alone then the 250gb slim cost a lot more than $350.

Originally posted by nintenut:
It also could have had BC, Linux, and not suck in comparison to launch units.
I agree, not to mention the hideous case.

715.12.2009 23:40

Quote:
Originally posted by KSib:
Also, in sucked in comparison mostly because of it's price or would you rather it lose features like Blu-Ray (probably can take off $200 from it at launch without blu-ray) or HD (prolly another hundred). The price is 'cuz of the hardware in it you know.
Lol, $100 for a hdd... $200 for blu-ray? A 5400 rpm 250gb hard drive bought in bulk would be $50 max, more like $40. Sony probably paid $10 for the 20gb hard drives in the launch date consoles. The blu-ray player only costs $66 right now, more like $100 at launch. If the hdd and odd cost $300 alone then the 250gb slim cost a lot more than $350.

$125 for the drive, $40 for the HDD
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/11/16/isuppli_prices_up_ps3/

816.12.2009 2:34

Do you really need 120gb for this generation's console games? My PS2 runs on 8mb memory cards.

916.12.2009 3:25

Originally posted by Ragnarok8:
Do you really need 120gb for this generation's console games? My PS2 runs on 8mb memory cards.
NEED for GAMES??? Not for physical media titles so much (if you didn't mind possibly longer load times), but with so much downloadable content (including full games and demos) and other media uses, it would be stupid not to have enough storage available on it for its intended uses.

1016.12.2009 8:19
atomicxl
Inactive

Flash memory seems like the only possible option, but you'd need alot of it. ALOT of games on PS3 have mandatory installs that are anywhere up to like 5gb of data. Almost all of the multiplatform games that I own would require an install. That's like 40gb of data right there. The whole reason it installs them is because it can't read from the disc fast enough so I doubt online storage would be useful for that.

1116.12.2009 18:38
Icanbe
Inactive

No comment

1217.12.2009 6:47

Quote:
Originally posted by nintenut:
It also could have had BC, Linux, and not suck in comparison to launch units.
'

Whine...Whine....Whine...

I am a consumer, whining is what I do when a piece of hardware that I rather like removes two of it's best features.

The limited BC on the 360 is a huge point of contention, and something that has been a point against it since 2007 when they stopped updating it. But when the Playstation just goes and nixes more than half of the available game library I'm a "Whiner"? Sod off.

1317.12.2009 6:56

Quote:
Originally posted by KSib:
Also, in sucked in comparison mostly because of it's price or would you rather it lose features like Blu-Ray (probably can take off $200 from it at launch without blu-ray) or HD (prolly another hundred). The price is 'cuz of the hardware in it you know.
Lol, $100 for a hdd... $200 for blu-ray? A 5400 rpm 250gb hard drive bought in bulk would be $50 max, more like $40. Sony probably paid $10 for the 20gb hard drives in the launch date consoles. The blu-ray player only costs $66 right now, more like $100 at launch. If the hdd and odd cost $300 alone then the 250gb slim cost a lot more than $350.

Originally posted by nintenut:
It also could have had BC, Linux, and not suck in comparison to launch units.
I agree, not to mention the hideous case.
HDD? I never said HDD. You do realize I said HD, as in High Definition for both sound and video. What do you think the Wii would cost if it were capable of high definition images and sound? That's right, probably $300+ or so. Hard drive? really? Come on now. Let's actually think about what I said here. you can get a TB hard drive for about $100 so that obviously doesn't make a lick of sense to conclude.

Also, "can take off $200 from it at launch" I said AT LAUNCH. Yeah, right now Blu Ray is cheap, but you actually have to read my post correctly...
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 17 Dec 2009 @ 6:59

1417.12.2009 11:57

Originally posted by nintenut:
It also could have had BC, Linux, and not suck in comparison to launch units.
BC? Never really use it nor have the desire to use it (playing PS2 games and worn out my PS3? Hell no, i would use my PS2 to do that).

Linux? Why the hell you want to complicate your life with that? No thanks... W/o Linux, i can still play divx files anyway.

Not suck in comparison to launch units? Errr, don't know what you talking about, since the launch units are $600 (the ones with WiFi) comparing to $300 now. I don't know about you, but I rather pay $300, even with a PS2, it's still $400...

On topic, I welcome a slimmer PS3, since i already have a fat one and was considering getting a slim anyway. Of course, the flash hdd is going to cost a lot more... Well, hdd prices are dropping like bricks, so who knows?

1517.12.2009 15:52

Quote:
BC? Never really use it nor have the desire to use it (playing PS2 games and worn out my PS3? Hell no, i would use my PS2 to do that).

How would playing a PS2 game "Worn out" your PS3 any more than a PS3 game?

Quote:
Linux? Why the hell you want to complicate your life with that? No thanks... W/o Linux, i can still play divx files anyway.

DivX? Why the hell would you want to complicate your life with that?

Quote:
Not suck in comparison to launch units? Errr, don't know what you talking about, since the launch units are $600 (the ones with WiFi) comparing to $300 now. I don't know about you, but I rather pay $300, even with a PS2, it's still $400...

Err, don't know what you're talking about, since the cost of manufacturing has gone down in the last three years, and wouldn't cost anywhere near that anymore.

1620.12.2009 0:56

It's really awesome that they can redesign the console as they want. What about coming out with a game that makes it worth to buy it?

1720.12.2009 5:37

Originally posted by salsa36:
It's really awesome that they can redesign the console as they want. What about coming out with a game that makes it worth to buy it?

Were this two years ago, you would have had a point.

Metal Gear Solid 4 (Shame that you can't play games two and three on the Slim)
Uncharted
Uncharted 2
Killzone 2
Demon's Souls
God of War Collection
Arkham Asylum (On technicality, Joker Challenge Rooms)
The Ratchet and Clank games
Resistance
Resistance 2
Valkyria Chronicles
Warhawk
Little Big Planet

1820.12.2009 6:25

I kinda want to get it to play the new Final Fantasy, but 300 is a lot of money..

1921.12.2009 15:55

Quote:
Quote:
BC? Never really use it nor have the desire to use it (playing PS2 games and worn out my PS3? Hell no, i would use my PS2 to do that).

How would playing a PS2 game "Worn out" your PS3 any more than a PS3 game?
Because you can play the PS2 games on the PS2 console? You can't play PS3 games on the PS2 console you know... It's similar to watching dvds in a BD player. If you don't do that very often, then it's not a big deal. But if you watch dvds on a BD player 50% of the time, isn't it a better option if you do it with the dvd player? Anyway, what i'm saying is, i won't be adding wearing and tearing to my PS3 by playing PS2 games, because i can do that with my PS2. If you're a fan of PS2 games, chances are, you have a PS2...

Quote:
Quote:
Linux? Why the hell you want to complicate your life with that? No thanks... W/o Linux, i can still play divx files anyway.

DivX? Why the hell would you want to complicate your life with that?
Okay, so what's the point of installing Linux on the PS3? I thought the whole purpose of installing Linux on the PS3 is to manipulate all kind of media files.


Quote:
[Quote]Not suck in comparison to launch units? Errr, don't know what you talking about, since the launch units are $600 (the ones with WiFi) comparing to $300 now. I don't know about you, but I rather pay $300, even with a PS2, it's still $400...

Err, don't know what you're talking about, since the cost of manufacturing has gone down in the last three years, and wouldn't cost anywhere near that anymore.
Then I don't know what you mean by sucks comparing to the launch units. I think the slim is a much better buy than the launch units or even the fat units...

2021.12.2009 16:15

The fact that people are starting to cry about no longer being able to install their own OS on a GAMING console means that consoles and PCs are very well going to become one in the same if this keeps up. I wish all games just came out on the PC as well as consoles (cept some Wii games). That would be nice. I have a 360 controller for games that are awkward with a keyboard and a mouse.

They're probably worried that the hardware you need for emulation is already in the machine (as compared to having to use the millions of different combinations for PCs), maybe making it easier for people to play downloaded games. I assume that's why they locked that out anyway. I should probably Google the reason... hm.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive