Sony had 'no choice' but to include Blu-ray in PS3

[joeorc]

moondeep said:
I agree with 'joeorc' that the decision to use the cell processor was probably a poor one due to the excessive cost of the processor versus the minimal gain. If Sony had gone with off-the-shelf options like MS, they would've had a much better chance this generation. That being said, the BR player was still a huge expense, especially when it launched in 2006. What were they going for back then, a few hundred $US ? Compare that with about $20 for a DVD9 player. Hard to make the math work....

i do see the cost of the Cell as the main reason but as for your take on :

"the excessive cost of the processor versus the minimal gain."

Sony has never been about "off the shelf part's"

with the example the playstation 2 design back in 2001

on the Rambus white paper on the bus design of the PS2 Both Sony and Rambus both decided on the direction of how the next evolution of the PS3's bus design would be, Sony along with Toshiba and IBM along with other's viewed how processor's would be advanced in embeded systems in the future. the Cell processor is a hybrid CPU/GPU chip. has many gain's over off the shelf parts for the task's the chip is meant to do. and Since SONY along with Toshiba and IBM viewed that the direction Cell would take would indeed coinside with other companies direction with Embeded system's. One would only have to look at the NETBOOK's and Cell phone's to see how that's very true of enbeded systems.

now this pertain's to enbeded system designs more so than socket design's but you get the drift.

and the Blu-Ray launched  in APR 10th 2003 if you mean in the US than yes 2006 but not when the Format was first released.