In defense of Sony's HDMI.O.U. [update 1]

by Ross Miller { Sep 4th 2006 at 11:45AM }

When too much snark exists for just one perspective, Joystiq throws in a second opinion, just to confuse the flamers.

Yesterday, we reported that Sony would be shipping its PlayStation 3 sans HDMI cable ... so what?

A recent study by NPD suggests that sales of HDTV sets are on the rise, but it has an uphill battle if it expects to overthrow the dominant, standard definition units. The NPD study, released in June, found that 41 percent of all TVs sold in the U.S. were HDTV. A DisplaySearch survey (both featured in this interesting Washington Post piece) discovered that only 63 percent of those planning to buy a TV wanted HDTV sets.

While these numbers indicate an increase in popularity, it does not equate to a majority of the market share, nor to one that needs / wants to experience "true" high-definition gaming. Not all those who purchase HDTVs are planning on buying a PS3, making those affected by this exclusion a minority of a minority, statistically.

In the same article, a study by the Cable & Telecommuncations Association for Marketing revealed that at least 48 percent of HDTV owners who responded were receiving HDTV service. Extrapolating, the studies suggest that only 20 percent of those who recently bought HDTV will be using it to its fullest potential. With composite component cables, gamers can still experience high-definition visuals up to 1080i (although technologically possible, most TVs don't accept 1080p over component). HDMI cables are really for those looking to make the added "jump" from 1080i to 1080p.

Sony's own Kaz Hirai, CEO of SCEA, was quoted by Ars Technica as opining that, "to [his] eyes anyway, there's not a discernible difference between what you g et between HDMI and other forms of high definition." With such an stance, should we be surprised that the US PS3 package would lack an HDMI cable?

For those of you worried that you will not be able to enjoy Blu-ray movies without the cable have no concerns until 2010 or 2012. Hollywood has agreed to hold off on implementing Image Constraint tokens that would downgrade Blu-ray quality to 960x540, or 540p, for those not using HDMI cables (for reference, the typical NTSC DVD resolution is 720x480) -- for another four to six years. Therefore, the HDMI cable would not even be necessary until then -- that's plenty of time for the price of the cable to diminish. For those who are impatient, a quick search on Froogle can net you an HDMI to HDMI cable for under $10. As the PS3 is using a standard HDMI port (as opposed to the proprietary AV ports found in almost every game console before it), any cable should suffice.

At $600, we expect Sony to provide a system that can do everything out of the box, but an HDMI cable is unnecessary to the vast majority of PS3 gamers (other than for bragging rights). Historically, no game system has launched with the highest end cables -- PS2 didn't come with S-video, Xbox didn't come with component, 360 didn't come with VGA. Why, then, should we expect the PlayStation 3 to be any different?

[update 1: fixed a giant error in composite / component in the 1st paragraph after the break. Also, clarified that although 1080p is theoretically possible with component cables, it's not often you find a TV that lets you run 1080p over component.]

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Tim @ Sep 4th 2006 11:49AM

I'm hooking my PS3 up to my monitor when I get it anyway, I'm waiting for a huge price cut on HDTVs before I think about getting one.

raging_evil @ Sep 4th 2006 11:50AM

Exactly, a missing cable is no big deal.

DECEMBER @ Sep 4th 2006 11:56AM

I am so sick of Joystiq's anti- HDTV bias.

socrates @ Sep 4th 2006 11:57AM

Same discussion - much funnier picture! =)

I hope LaughingTarget rebuts Mr. Miller with his "I'm certain Sony will magically transform the cable into proprietary at the last possible instant" argument from the other thread. That one was goooooooooooooooooooood.

DsDude @ Sep 4th 2006 11:58AM

So, basically you're saying what Nintendo has been saying all along, right?

I mean, I'm not trying to be mean, but that's what I'm getting from this article. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks.

ElChibo @ Sep 4th 2006 11:59AM

I by no means expect the $500 system to include it, but a $600 system should have everything ready to go, whether you are now or wont be for a year or two. However I forgot that PS3 does not use a propiatery cable and uses hdmi to hdmi, which can cut the cost A LOT. thank god for use of any cable. Now I'm not so upset about it.

vidGuy @ Sep 4th 2006 11:59AM

I agree that the lack of the cable isn't a big deal. After all, it's not a requirement but an option. The 360 didn't come with a battery pack and play-and-charge cords; you have to pay more for that option. The Wii isn't playing DVD out-of-the-box so that the cost doesn't get passed on to those that don't want it. The HDMI cable is no different.

The problem I and many others have is that Sony is doing two things to set itself apart in this situation: releasing a premium-priced console, and going on and on about HDMI output. The $600 entry price is outrageous, and for those spending that kind of cash, the box should contain everything one might expect in a retail box, including all the cables to get the most from the console. And we have been led to believe that Sony would include it since they've been talking so much about it. That would be like if MS listed "rechargable controllers" as one of the main features of the console, yet still required you buy the play-and-charge kits.

Sony is already losing several hundred on every console sold. If they bought bulk, a decent HDMI cable would run them another $5 to $10. Sony could afford it. They've lost a lot more than $10 worth of loyalty from a lot of gamers for this stingy act.

brandon_r87 @ Sep 4th 2006 12:01PM

This is true, I did pay forty bucks for the VGA cable. But since I don't have a HDTV, playing it on my computer monitor is a much cheaper alternative and just as good as far as I'm concerned. Just don't expect to play tons of multiplayer games on a 19" screen.

shirizaki @ Sep 4th 2006 12:14PM

Of course you forgot the main reason for HDMI cables-

It unlocks a special feature where every main character in every game is replaced by Kaz Hirai that attacks with 2 PS3's chained to his arms with HDMI cables. They shoot out blue rays and steal people's money.

You don't have the inside sources that I do Joystiq.

Ross Miller @ Sep 4th 2006 12:04PM

shirizaki --

Can we attack their weak points for massive damage? Please respond.

-- Curious Party

Jigen @ Sep 4th 2006 12:07PM

I personally have seen the difference between HDMI output and other forums of HD, besides resolution, the picture is clearer, sharper, and has less (none because of the cable) static.

Also, you did your statistics incorrectly. You can't compare things the way you did. People who own a HDTV or are planning to buy one are more likley to buy a PS3 than those who don't own one or are less likley to buy one in the near future. People who own a HDTV are closer to being early adopters, the same people who would buy a Playstation 3. So a lot of people who buy a PS3 at launch probably would LIKE to get a free HDMI cable with their $600 purchase.

HDMI cables can be bought for fairly cheaply (and manufactured for less), so Sony is really cheaping out on this one...

Ben Hobbs @ Sep 4th 2006 12:58PM

"With composite cables, gamers can still experience high-definition visuals up to 1080i."

Completely untrue, perhaps component cables - But I can't see them bundling those in either.

Sony's biggest bragging rights were all about the 1080P, now you can't do that out of the box.

Besides HDMI is significantly higher quality than component (which are analogue) especially for digital sources such as computer games. Component cable doesn't supply correct colour information, softens the picture etc... So its not just about 1080P set owners, its about anyone with a digital fixed panel display (LCD, Plasma, Projector etc..).

Finally, this also means that you won't be able to get HD sound quality, which was supposedly one of the benefits of the new HDMI interface and Blu-Ray.

If a $99 standard DVD player can come with a HDMI cable, why not a $600 console which needs the HDMI more?

Jake @ Sep 4th 2006 12:17PM

"If a $99 standard DVD player can come with a HDMI cable, why not a $600 console which needs the HDMI more?"

Because the company that is manufacturing that $99 standard DVD player isn't losing any money at all on each unit sold. Let alone $200 or more...

Jeremy @ Sep 4th 2006 12:18PM

it'll most likely come with component cables so people can stil enjoy HD gaming in 720p or 1080i.

as for hdmi being of higher quality than component, that's not necessarily true (except for the fact you can achieve 1080p through hdmi and only 1080i through component). Some have experienced that component looks better on their set. It really depends on the equipment you are using. for audio, i don't have anything to say

El Hajjish @ Sep 4th 2006 12:20PM

"I am so sick of Joystiq's anti- HDTV bias."

Are you serious? Reporting some facts about the installed base of HDTV users isn't biased, it's a comment on how many people will actually be affected by the lack of this cable,

Maybe your comment was a sarcastic swipe at people who, when they read something they don't like about something, conclude that Joystiq must be biased.

By my count, Joystiq is biased against Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, story-based games, wireless controllers, puppies, and now HDTV. They have so much hate for HDTV.

Chris @ Sep 4th 2006 12:24PM

@3
_____________________ _______
_____________________((((((_______( )
^Do you know what that is? It's a bendy straw.

Suck it up.

Jigen @ Sep 4th 2006 12:25PM

RE : #14.

The people who say analog video cables are better are the same people who prefer vinyls.

It could be argued that the noise on video/sound adds to a product, but in the most pure sense it doesn't.

Jeremy @ Sep 4th 2006 12:30PM

theoretically, hdmi should produce a higher quality image because of what you said about analog and noise, BUT that is not necassarilly always true in the real world as some people have experienced better picture through component than hdmi because of their display set. I'm not trying to downplay hdmi at all, but for some people component can produce a better picture for them.

DECEMBER @ Sep 4th 2006 12:31PM

@ #16.

You've got to be kidding me.

@ #15- yes, since I can't imagine that anyone would carry a "bias" against HDTV, my comment was meant as a swipe at those who scream "bias!" everytime Joystiq posts anything.

Jigen @ Sep 4th 2006 12:34PM

#18
People say a lot of things. Is there any real reason a TV would be worse at scaling/processing a HDMI signal than analog?

Jeremy @ Sep 4th 2006 12:41PM

#20
i don't know. maybe something could've happened during manufacturing or something else. i just know that for some people hdmi isn't always better for them. i'm just saying sometimes it depends on your source and display equipment. for example, some people on avsforum say that they get better color through component rather than hdmi on their samsung bdp1000 bluray players.

there's also many articles on this and here's one:
http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/dvihdmicomponent.htm

GTgamer @ Sep 4th 2006 12:41PM

That could have been much shorter...

In summmary : "It may seem that Sony is being cheap when considering that most 'cheap' $100 upscaling DVD players and other HDMI hardware comes with an HDMI cable. However, component offers pretty much the same video quality until they enable HDCP and it's a precedent to not include the nicest output cables with a system (unfortunately). They've got to slow the bleeding wherever possible."

Stranger @ Sep 4th 2006 12:53PM

Who was it at Sony that said 1080p was the true HD standard? Wasn't that the big cornerstone of their "the next generation doesn't start until we say it does" defense?

I've read story after story singing the praises of 1080p by Sony execs and how the PS3 would be that much better than the competition because their console would be the only one capable of outputting such a signal.

Now you're telling me I need to buy something extra to access this feature?

One more reson I'm happy to be indifferent towards the PS3. Maybe if there was a game coming out for the system I'm interested in playing...

B33 @ Sep 4th 2006 1:00PM

360 forces you pay a extra $100 for the High-definition cable... Yet I don't hear anyone complaining about that..

DECEMBER @ Sep 4th 2006 12:48PM

#20/ #21:

For what it's worth, I have a Sony SXRD set, and while the image through HDMI is noticeably "crisper" than it is through component, it also seems to be just a little less vibrant.

The color saturation seems a hair better through analog, essentially- at least at default settings.

shirizaki @ Sep 4th 2006 12:49PM

@ Ross Miller.

Using blu ray discs you can mark target's weak points for massive damage. Also, Hirai's special attack includes controlling opponets by using a rootkit spell that steals their abilities and slows them down.

Playing any Sony exclusive game also turns all enemies to Bill Gates wearing 360 armor, Master Chief's wearing bikinis, and a chibi Peter Moore that tries to violate you with xbox accessories.

Jeremy @ Sep 4th 2006 12:49PM

#23
with the core you'd need to buy the vga cable or the component cable for HD gaming, but those run at around $40.

with the premium you get the hd component cables included

i'm not really sure where you got your $100 hd cables for 360?

Jigen @ Sep 4th 2006 12:50PM

#23, no it doesn't. You get one with the $400 pack (plus a HDD and some other stuff).

Stranger @ Sep 4th 2006 12:53PM

Another thought- I thought that piracy protection for next gen disc formats relied on an HDMI interface to be effective. If so how does this affect Sony's Blu-Ray drive's playback and copy protection performance?

Wasn't rampant piracy the big reason Hollywood has been pushing technology manufactureres to embrace a new disc standard?

If what's easily going to be the most widely distributed blu-ray player for at least the next five years doesn't support the format's much lauded copy protection measures out of the box, how does that bode for the Bu-Ray's future with movie playback?

Chris @ Sep 4th 2006 12:53PM

@11

There really isn't anything wrong with the lower resolution HDs and component... digital to digital conversion can have problems just the same as digital to analog. With the 1080p, I'm not going to even try and argue (mostly since that scale is still above me, and I never play with it =P)

The biggest concern is basically how much cable people are going to be using. In either case, if you put your PS3 right next to your TV, it isn't going to matter (below 1080p) which cable you use. There should be any noticible degredation at such short distances for analog. I'm not sure why you're assuming there will be... The longer the cable gets, the more favorable HDMI would be, until it gets too long and you lose too much data in the transfer, in which case the slightly degraded component feed will be more favorable again.

Component should be just fine for the less hardcore anyway. If it ships with that, it's a non-issue for anything less than 1080p output.

Jigen @ Sep 4th 2006 12:54PM

#21, that article is a bittle BS'sy, I've seen component signals degrade over as little as 6 feet (in a home, not even in a testing environment with magnets or such). A professional level component might be a lot better, however.

Basically, at consumer level, digital cords would be much better because the analog ones are usually made too cheaply.

Fan @ Sep 4th 2006 12:57PM

"360 forces you pay a extra $100 for the High-definition cable... Yet I don't hear anyone complaining about that.."

Its because Microsoft can do anything it wants without getting bad press. Just throw logic out the door it has no place here. Microsoft can directly lie about exclusives, misinform the consumers, have propitary ONLY solutions for their console, sell HDDs at redicilous prices, lie cheat steal whatever as long as you remember that Sony is the bad guy.

We are not out to use our heads here! Thinking is for idiots. We are out the get the Japanese and ensure that the evil behemoth company that is Sony is tainted in every single way possible. So that it can be replaced with the much much nicer Microsoft. Microsoft is so much nicer than Sony.

One day I hope that Microsoft monopolizes the console buisness as well. Look how great that worked out on the PC! DirectX should be mandatory and Open GL should be executed for thinking differently, we dont take kindly to different thinkers around here.

Chris @ Sep 4th 2006 1:04PM

Eh, disregard 29 #11

I misread.

El Hajjish @ Sep 4th 2006 1:05PM

DECEMBER

Ah, then we are in agreement.

Zeichrat @ Sep 4th 2006 1:05PM

So, do you think Sony will bundle a composite cable???... I mean those sets are very common, aren´t they???. Anything else for the 600dls tag is a joke. BTW the Sony 10 ft (3 mts) HDMI cables carry a 60dls tag.

Daniel M. @ Sep 4th 2006 1:15PM

the amount of misinformation regarding HDTV is truly astounding.

you can, indeed, do 1080p over component cables. I guess people are confusing the HDCP flag (which Sony claims WILL NOT kick in until at elast 5 years, what then?) with the ability to do 1080p.

summary: COMPONENT CABLES ARE ABLE TO TRANSMIT A 1080P SIGNAL!!!

Jeremy @ Sep 4th 2006 1:09PM

Jigen, sorry if that article isn't very good, and you are probably right about many component cables being made cheaply, but to be on-topic about the post, the ps3 should include some good quality component cables. this would make an hdmi cable useless to some future ps3 owners with hdtv's since their sets are probably not capable of 1080p. but then again, for those people planning to use this as a bluray player for many years will need the hdmi cable once the ICT flag kicks in, if it ever does.

Ben Hobbs @ Sep 4th 2006 1:09PM

Chris #29,

There's more to the difference between Component Cables and Analogue cables/signals than that.

The component image has to be first converted to analogue, then sent to the TV which has to take that analogue data and turn it back into a digital signal to display it (For HD Displays). With a digital signal each pixel can be mapped and precise colour information presented without any distortion. The pictures are generally sharper, cleaner and if the software is good, have a better colour rendition.

peyote @ Sep 4th 2006 1:11PM

3rd paragraph correction:

"With composite cables, gamers can still experience high-definition visuals up to 1080i."

uh....... i think you meant component cables. composite will look really bad on an HD set in 1080i.

Jeremy @ Sep 4th 2006 1:13PM

#36
that is correct, that the signal must be converted to analog, run through component, and then converted back to digital which would naturally mean the picture would be degraded and with digital connection, that problem is removed. So picture should be sharper and everything you said, but sometimes it doesn't end up like that. i used the bdp1000 as an example, as some people have said they experience better picture through component and maybe this is a problem in the software like you mentioned.

Intangible 360 @ Sep 4th 2006 1:19PM

Why should we expect them to give the high end cable? Because they've been preaching to us about how high definition doen't start until 1080p, that's why.

Contrlkaos @ Sep 4th 2006 8:07PM

#27, I totally agree with you. The PS3's 1080p capabilities have been bragging rights for so long. It actually is the primary bragging right, taking into account that without 1080p, there would be no blu-ray capabilities.

Sony has the opportunity to market the heck out of the performance and quality of the PS3 engine. Just by using commercial advertising, they can teach people about what 1080p is and why it rocks. (Sell some TVs too). But they don't do that because of the same reason they're not throwing in the cable; they're just not too bright when it comes to marketing. Spending money to make money is the way it works, and they don't want to spend a few bucks per $600. :(

Who knows? Maybe all of us here are missing something.

the pensieve @ Sep 4th 2006 1:25PM

@ 31

Hey calm down dude, eveybody knows sony is worse than microsoft so dont bother. maybe if you could write a non-fanboy comment people would care a bit more. hey did you forget about the 2 HDMI ports, 7 wirelles controlers, when they called BS on microsoft for releasing 2 versions for their consoles and confusing the consumers huh?

Jigen @ Sep 4th 2006 1:23PM

#40, but not at 60fps right? I know normally 1080p is 30fps, and since 1080i is 60fps what you said makes sense.

But Sony has been talking about 1080p at 60fps.

Jeremy @ Sep 4th 2006 1:25PM

yeah, i don't think 1080p can transmit through component

Kamalot @ Sep 4th 2006 1:25PM

This whole article seems to support the notion that this generation of consoles shouldn't support HDTV since it won't be widely adopted for a number of years. Perhaps it makes sense to worry about HDTV, especially 1080p, 5 years from now with the next generation of consoles when HDTV is on the verge of becoming the new dominant format.