![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Done.
Blu-Ray Drive : BDU-X10S : £51
Video Card : Sapphire ATI Radeon HD 4670 Ultimate "Passive" 512MB : £62
Motherboard : Gigabyte GA-G31M-ES2L iG31 : £32
Processor : Intel E5200 : £45
Case : Enlight BLACK/SILVER MATX 350W PSU : £36
HDD : Samsung HD080HJ - 80GB HDD : £26
RAM : 512MB Kingston DDR2 : £7
Bluetooth Adapter : Generic : £3
OS : Windows XP Pro : £20
Remote : PS3 Bluetooth Remote : £12
Fan : Akasa AK-181BK-2B Ultra Quiet 80mm : £5
Total: £299
Ignoring the media centre functionality (which with XBMC would far surpass what the PS3 can do), you'd also be looking at a setup which would get more out of multiplatform games than the PS3 can (at 720p). Not to mention the fact that you'd also have a proper remote... which you don't get with the PS3.
No doubt you'll have some spurious reasoning as to why that's not good enough.
[Edit - Oh, and I could have gone much cheaper... but to do that I'd have needed to have skimped on the brands / quality]
With a bit of meddling, I was able to get the price down to £286. What sort of upgrade can you get for £13?
Yeah, I'm done with you. You really don't have a clue what you're talking about (here's a hint... it doesn't matter what's outputting the signal, as long as it's being output in the right way).
If you don't think drivers can determine video IQ issues - You are wrong. I would not recommend running an HTPC on a big plasma screen...perhaps maybe on your little LCD in your office.
If you are seriously going to argue that building an HTPC, configuring Windows, drivers, etc. is a lot more convenient than going to best buy to buy a ps3, opening a box, and connecting two cables...you are wrong.
If you think a pc is more user friendly than ps3, you are really fooling yourself.
I think you've been fooling yourself from the start of this thread though.
There is a reason why there are millions more ps3s in people's households than there are HTPCs.
/done with thread.
They have always had a non-HD version and simply adding something is fine. I just don't like taking features away.
It may be 1 million additional components.
Quite likely, but the point is the whole article (and as ocellaris writes, most of them recently) was just lazy and didn't get even the slightest attention to detail / fact checking.
I don't know why it would be that surprising. The PS3 is the follow up machine to the 140m selling PS2... the 360 is the follow up machine to the 25m selling xbox.
Anything is better than vgchartz. Hell, give a four year old child a computer with excel on it and tell them to bash the numeric keypad with a hammer and you'll get better numbers. If you want an accurate idea of how they're selling / sold over time, look at the sold to retailer numbers. Start at the bottom of this page: http://forum.pcvsconsole.com/viewthread.php?tid=8498
(These have all been verified against each company's financial reports)
That's aside from your point, which is still probably right. Just vgc are a joke.
There's two schools of thought on that one. One is what you say there, with the 360 being beaten pretty handily. The other is that the PS3 had so much hype prior to release that it actually damaged the 360 far more than if they'd released simultaneously. There was one point where MS PR actually said that they'd much rather it came out as soon as possible so they could fight the reality of the machine, rather than the myth. I can see their point.
But meh, it's all academic anyway. It happened how it happened and nothing we discuss is going to change that.