*promote Sony's superior everlasting products available everywhere if you simply open yer eyeballs to what's best-

I heartily concur sir, as the last 2 months in a row have netted me two (count 'em) 2, perfectly functional as the day Sony made 'em, sports walkmanz (in Sony yellow), one with, one without AM/FM radio, both cassette players fully functional as the day they were made to last forever.

Uhhh, the am/fm receivers in those things?? Long and strong, highest quality imaginable.

The goddamn things are indestructible and 2 aa's last longer in one of them than in any device made since that requires em...

Uh....one was 5 dollars new in the box from a garage sale, one form a thrift store for $4.04. Incidentally, when these things were on the top of Xmas lists new...they cost about $125-$150 US back in early 80's dolla-Do the math, bitches.

I wear your grandma's clothes, motherfuckers!

Sorry, DMCA takedown request on behalf of Sony Pictures Television Inc.

*discard

This guys a PR man for Sony?

My thoughts:

* For technology that is 8 years old, this is mighty impressive how small the difference is. It's worth looking back to see the 360/PS3 launch titles to see just how much has come from programming efficiency rather than raw processing power. It will be interesting to see if in 5 years, these new consoles will look equally miles better than they do now.

* Textures are sharper, particle effects like smoke and dust are snazzier and draw distance is greatly improved but ... on the whole, the lighting, most of the doodads in the environment, and the overall 'feel' is the same if you don't look too close.

* Sony's consoles seem to always display darker by default than MS's. I don't understand why for the purposes of comparison they can't pump up the brightness.

* With all the furore about Xbox One being 720p and PS4 being 900p (which doesn't sound too bad but is about 50% more pixels to the PS4), there doesn't seem to be a large diference in detail. If anything the environmental effects seem slightly better on the Xbox One.

Actually the term "4K" seems to have stuck with all the marketing folks. I've seen about 5-6 different models (Sony, LG) of 4K TV in different stores, and not 1 was labeled as "2160p" or marketed as "UHDTV". We'll see what Panasonic, Samsung, Sharp, etc labels theirs as, but I'm going to guess "4K".

It can mean 3840x2160 or 4096x2160 (and apparently others)

Apple's strategy appears to be progressive in releasing new products and conservative in making iterations.

It's particularly obvious on the iPhone. (1) On screen size they've barely budged while competitors have offered options varying widely from 3-7 inches. While some would argue phones larger than 5 inches are ungainly, it's very much a personal preference and where there's clearly demand say for Samsung's Note series, the option should be available. (2) The UI may have also been revamped but compared to the customisability of Android, it's still immensely basic and locked down, (3) File access continues to be restricted through iTunes which keeps transferring files, and sharing them between apps a massive pain. Apple's bandaid solution to this is to stick a 'share' button everywhere, but this is hardly a real solution.

The problem is Apple's slow pace of change means they're losing their competitive advantage. I'd argue the big change that has kept the iPhone successful even as Android was beginning to catch up several years after the first iPhone was the (1) all metal design that came with the iPhone 4 & (2) the smoothness of their UI. Now with phones like the HTC One, the durable/water resistant series from Sony and the rumor that Samsung is going all metal with its next generation, the first advantage is going. The second went with Android Jelly Bean which mostly fixed Android's laginess. I just don't see anything coming along that will significantly differentiate them in the future, both the iPhone 5 and 5S really didn't offer anything as compelling as the build quality of the 4.

The iPhones main remaining advantages are its user friendliness and the relative strength of its app store. I'd argue the first is over-exaggerated, and even if it is such a large factor, the sheer fact that it has already seen sizable portions of the older generation being enticed into smartphones makes the next step of moving to a new UI a relative cinch. Effectively Android phone makers/Google can capitalize on the market Apple helped create. With the build quality gap diminishing and Android device prices coming down, while iPhone prices remain largely unchanged I think the incentive to switch will rise.

The App Store's strength is largely a factor of the revenue that it brings in for app creators. Yes, no doubt iOS apps are generally pricier and it's users more willing to pay. But with the dominance in market share for Android in developing markets, even if their consumers are poorer, it's only a matter of time before at the very least app makers move from the iOS first, Android second model to a simultaneous release. From there I think it will be a steady decline for iOS.

*dead -- "This video contains content from Sony ATV Publishing, UMG and Miramax, one or more of whom have blocked it in your country on copyright grounds..."

Sony-The parent company of the talking Cocoa Krispies box...

The Different decks my 98 honda civic hx has had.
Side note. I have never removed or have had someone else remove the stereos.

1. stock Stereo
2. Alpine
3. Clarion
4. Kenwood
5. Sony
6. Pioneer
7. Kenwood
8. JVC
9. Stock after police found it returned it and the car had no stereo in it. None of the others have ever returned from the place where missing socks go.

Embed's not working on my end; copyright claim by Sony ATV... bloody copyright mafia.

Because the Xbox 360 deal was pretty tolerable for it's time. Except for their ridiculous $50 annual fee to play peer-to-peer games online. . . Oh wait, Sony's doing that too now. Sony's just lucky that their dick move was completely overshadowed by Microsoft's incomparable dickery.

Its not really consoles fault that PCs are harder to develop for and suffer much higher piracy rates. It frustrates me when a console port is lazy on the fairly basic shit, like graphics, control and hud options but I don't really hate on developers for focusing their huge investment on the platform that'll give them the most return either. Some might see games like Skyrim as compromising their PC heritage for the console market, but I think you could also argue that the console market allowed a PC game to be mucher larger in scope than it would have been otherwise.

Personally I think PC gaming is in a pretty good place. My hope is that it won't be long before you can easily hook up the TV in your living room to the PC sitting in your study or bedroom or w/e and the PC can really compete against consoles on their territory. Valve has clearly set their sights on it, I think Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo should be worried.

I can't believe I never see this mentioned in all these stupid discussions, but maybe I'm alone... I *HATE* loading discs. I hate it. Before Steam set me free, I used cracks, and then Gamejackal, just to stop the pain.

I guess PS people don't mind, because I'm pretty sure Sony has not worked out a "sell your used games" method that doesn't require disc loading?

> Sad it has come to this, happy Sony and Nintendo didn't follow.

Is it Sony and Nintendo? Or "The Non American Companies"? Is the unabated overempowering of USA corporate greed ?