By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - 250gb HD on sale on Amazon.com

greenmedic88 said:
Vetteman94 said:
I dont see how is it that expensive? it comes with a data transfer kit, which makes transfering data easy. Its not easy to do this on a PS3, I know, I've done it 3 times already. The small addtional cost for, the hassle free experience of the data transfer, alone makes it worth it. Plus it literally takes 5 seconds to uninstall the old one and install the new one. Again hassle free.

Stop making a big deal out of nothing. Microsoft made it easy on the everyday consumer to swap out HDs, and for that convienence you will pay a little more for it. I for one see no problem with that

And there you have it: a logical reason for paying a premium for a proprietary HDD.

Personally, I'd rather pay a lot less for twice the storage space, even at the cost of a chunk of idle time required to back up and restore data, but the MS method is the least painless for its premium cost.

Maybe the only complaint should be why MS didn't just skip selling the same size drive available in bundles and just sell 500GB drives instead. Of course that would only reduce the perceived value of 250GB SKU bundles and a lot more consumers would likely do the "build your own" $199 Arcade + $129 500GB HDD.


Exactly,  plus there is a hidden cost for the PS3 way of doing it.   The cost of the backup source.  My 8GB flash drive was not big enough for my back file the last 2 times I swapped out a PS3 HDD.  I had to go buy an external HDD,  that cost me about $80.  Otherwise I would have had to delete everything on my hard drive and re download everything. 



Around the Network
Reasonable said:
Squilliam said:
Reasonable said:
still too expensive for me - in principle, if you see what I mean. Compared to general cost of HDD today that's too much still.

Which principle is that? I thought that everyone was gangster with the idea that console prices are cheap, console accessories are relatively expensive. The value here is more than the sum of its parts. As a business consultant how much is your time worth if you compare migrating a 40GB PS3 to a new HDD (generally after its full) to using the bundled transfer cable to upgade a 20/60GB Xbox 360?

The principle that I don't accept consoles or other electronic devices should have more expensive proprietary devices.

Man, you should have seen me when I bought DS and discovered you couldn't use GBA accessories you already had with it!

I just hate this whole business model.

The time doesn't matter - with PS3 you just dump it to an external HDD then back again.  Besides, who actually sits watching while this stuff is going on?

To conclude, I want to see fairly consistent prices for something like and HDD not a specialized one that costs more.

But to show I'm fair in this, I'll point out that nothing made my blood boil more than the cost of 8MB or whatever they were memory cards for the PS2.  My foray into consoles almost ended right there!

 

Im glad that you're consistant. I remember working in retail at the time and seeing some people get quite angry when they found out they needed an accessory which jacked the price up by 20-30% (can't remember exactly). The business model is monopolistic within each consoles eco-system. Theres no such thing as an open console unfortunately and they all have their share of proprietary hardware.

I can't blame Microsoft for the bed they made with the HDDs. They already use it as a means for distinguishing the different console SKUs so they cannot offer them cheaper until the price difference between the Elite/Arcade becomes smaller. I simply judge it based upon the value of the size + easy transfer cable and the saleability of the old HDD. The proprietary nature of Microsoft makes the 60GB HDD I possess worth more than the PS3 HDD of the same size I have in my launch unit and this more than offsets any additional cost I might face. Furthermore, given the ability to stream media onto either system why would I need more space than that? Both options in my mind are fair alternatives of each other and I wouldn't really say that one option would be partcularly better.

I play most of my games on the PC due to its open nature, but I suspect open also suffers from the pitfall of human nature as seen by the > # of PS3 hacks in games as well as the even greater problem on the PC of the same between piracy and cheating.



Tease.

Reasonable said:
greenmedic88 said:
Reasonable said:
Squilliam said:
Reasonable said:
still too expensive for me - in principle, if you see what I mean. Compared to general cost of HDD today that's too much still.

Which principle is that? I thought that everyone was gangster with the idea that console prices are cheap, console accessories are relatively expensive. The value here is more than the sum of its parts. As a business consultant how much is your time worth if you compare migrating a 40GB PS3 to a new HDD (generally after its full) to using the bundled transfer cable to upgade a 20/60GB Xbox 360?

The principle that I don't accept consoles or other electronic devices should have more expensive proprietary devices.

Man, you should have seen me when I bought DS and discovered you couldn't use GBA accessories you already had with it!

I just hate this whole business model.

The time doesn't matter - with PS3 you just dump it to an external HDD then back again.  Besides, who actually sits watching while this stuff is going on?

To conclude, I want to see fairly consistent prices for something like and HDD not a specialized one that costs more.

But to show I'm fair in this, I'll point out that nothing made my blood boil more than the cost of 8MB or whatever they were memory cards for the PS2.  My foray into consoles almost ended right there!

 

But peripheral pricing has always been a part of the console business model.

Generally, until costs can be brought down on hardware and they aren't sold at a loss, the peripheral market is the sweetest plum for console manufacturers (take Nintendo and the $40 remote + $20 nunchuck + $20 motion plus per player = good business model).

MS basically painted themselves into a corner with their peripheral drives in that they HAVE to charge X amount for these drives or else it makes more sense for consumers to buy a base $199 Arcade (which is less profitable) and then add on a drive. If the cost to build your own bundle is ever less than the price of the MS bundles, they lose money.

 

Who says you have to like or agree with it as the consumer though?  Business models change all the time, particularly if driven by consumer demand and response.

I think having a proprietary HDD is just a step too far.  Controllers, etc. I can stomach more readily (and of course you get alternatives to offer some competition) but paying pretty much double (in terms of per GB cost vs a standard HDD) for an 360 HDD is just a bit much for me.

 

The response is pretty simple: if you don't agree with the pricing, then you don't buy the product.

Manufacturers can only charge the most consumers are willing to pay, assuming there is no shortage or limited supply of product.

And the price of HDD space has dropped considerably, even if it hasn't dropped to match current market prices. It wasn't that many years ago that MS was charging $99 for a 20GB HDD as an index. 

Personally, I never liked the proprietary HDD idea from MS, but it is what allowed them to have a rock bottom priced SKU, making it an affordable option for those who don't spend more on video games.

In the case of the Xbox 360, the HDD size is considered a "premium" feature and is largely responsible for what little profit they make on each hardware unit sold.



disolitude said:
heywoodjablome said:
its too expensive. 360 owners know that. but they don't want to lose the argument that it's too expensive so they keep arguing...RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!!!! still too expensive. RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!!!!


if 360 owners are willing to pay why are PS3 owners saying its too expensive?

I mean, if one bought a PS3 tobegin with...saying something else is "too expensive" is kind of ironic no?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!!!!  I'm not saying that $130 is an expensive price in general. I'm saying that $130 is an expensive price for a 250 gig hard drive. microsoft could have easily made a 500gig or 1TB hard drive for the same price.  the ps3 has nothing to do with this.  but go ahead and keep on with the RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!!!!

 



Vetteman94 said:
greenmedic88 said:
Vetteman94 said:
I dont see how is it that expensive? it comes with a data transfer kit, which makes transfering data easy. Its not easy to do this on a PS3, I know, I've done it 3 times already. The small addtional cost for, the hassle free experience of the data transfer, alone makes it worth it. Plus it literally takes 5 seconds to uninstall the old one and install the new one. Again hassle free.

Stop making a big deal out of nothing. Microsoft made it easy on the everyday consumer to swap out HDs, and for that convienence you will pay a little more for it. I for one see no problem with that

And there you have it: a logical reason for paying a premium for a proprietary HDD.

Personally, I'd rather pay a lot less for twice the storage space, even at the cost of a chunk of idle time required to back up and restore data, but the MS method is the least painless for its premium cost.

Maybe the only complaint should be why MS didn't just skip selling the same size drive available in bundles and just sell 500GB drives instead. Of course that would only reduce the perceived value of 250GB SKU bundles and a lot more consumers would likely do the "build your own" $199 Arcade + $129 500GB HDD.


Exactly,  plus there is a hidden cost for the PS3 way of doing it.   The cost of the backup source.  My 8GB flash drive was not big enough for my back file the last 2 times I swapped out a PS3 HDD.  I had to go buy an external HDD,  that cost me about $80.  Otherwise I would have had to delete everything on my hard drive and re download everything. 

The PS3 option is for those who can use a screwdriver and have an external HDD, assuming they want to back up their entire drive, which isn't necessary.

If you go off the minimum, game saves are the only thing you'd need to back up. PSN games would be the second thing, which can always be downloaded again. Backing up demos seems a bit anal, and as for media; you'd generally have to do that for any media stored on any computer if you didn't want to risk losing it. Beyond that, the only real headache you save yourself with a full back up is the process of reinstalling any of your games.

But the external HDD can be used for other things when you're done transferring. The only value left in an Xbox 360 HDD after it's been upgraded is whatever you can sell it for on Ebay.



Around the Network
greenmedic88 said:
Vetteman94 said:
greenmedic88 said:
Vetteman94 said:
I dont see how is it that expensive? it comes with a data transfer kit, which makes transfering data easy. Its not easy to do this on a PS3, I know, I've done it 3 times already. The small addtional cost for, the hassle free experience of the data transfer, alone makes it worth it. Plus it literally takes 5 seconds to uninstall the old one and install the new one. Again hassle free.

Stop making a big deal out of nothing. Microsoft made it easy on the everyday consumer to swap out HDs, and for that convienence you will pay a little more for it. I for one see no problem with that

And there you have it: a logical reason for paying a premium for a proprietary HDD.

Personally, I'd rather pay a lot less for twice the storage space, even at the cost of a chunk of idle time required to back up and restore data, but the MS method is the least painless for its premium cost.

Maybe the only complaint should be why MS didn't just skip selling the same size drive available in bundles and just sell 500GB drives instead. Of course that would only reduce the perceived value of 250GB SKU bundles and a lot more consumers would likely do the "build your own" $199 Arcade + $129 500GB HDD.


Exactly,  plus there is a hidden cost for the PS3 way of doing it.   The cost of the backup source.  My 8GB flash drive was not big enough for my back file the last 2 times I swapped out a PS3 HDD.  I had to go buy an external HDD,  that cost me about $80.  Otherwise I would have had to delete everything on my hard drive and re download everything. 

The PS3 option is for those who can use a screwdriver and have an external HDD, assuming they want to back up their entire drive, which isn't necessary.

If you go off the minimum, game saves are the only thing you'd need to back up. PSN games would be the second thing, which can always be downloaded again. Backing up demos seems a bit anal, and as for media; you'd generally have to do that for any media stored on any computer if you didn't want to risk losing it. Beyond that, the only real headache you save yourself with a full back up is the process of reinstalling any of your games.

But the external HDD can be used for other things when you're done transferring. The only value left in an Xbox 360 HDD after it's been upgraded is whatever you can sell it for on Ebay.

Its not necessary, that is true, but for someone like myself that has bought about 40 PSN games and all 20+ episodes of Qore, plus all of the DLC I have bought for each of my 75+ bluray games. Being able to transfer everything easily can be bliss. Because it saves the hassle of spending the next 3-5 days re downloading and reinstalling everything again. 

And just having an external HDD isnt good enough,  it needs to be the correct format, the PS3 wont read it otherwise.  So if you have been using it for other things, and its not in the correct format, you will either have to reformat the external HDD or setup a partition.  The latter is pretty easy but probably not that easy to do for the average consumer who "knows how to use a screwdriver".  

 



It's a definite improvement over the outrageous 360 HDD prices.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

greenmedic88 said:
Reasonable said:
greenmedic88 said:
Reasonable said:
Squilliam said:
Reasonable said:
still too expensive for me - in principle, if you see what I mean. Compared to general cost of HDD today that's too much still.

Which principle is that? I thought that everyone was gangster with the idea that console prices are cheap, console accessories are relatively expensive. The value here is more than the sum of its parts. As a business consultant how much is your time worth if you compare migrating a 40GB PS3 to a new HDD (generally after its full) to using the bundled transfer cable to upgade a 20/60GB Xbox 360?

The principle that I don't accept consoles or other electronic devices should have more expensive proprietary devices.

Man, you should have seen me when I bought DS and discovered you couldn't use GBA accessories you already had with it!

I just hate this whole business model.

The time doesn't matter - with PS3 you just dump it to an external HDD then back again.  Besides, who actually sits watching while this stuff is going on?

To conclude, I want to see fairly consistent prices for something like and HDD not a specialized one that costs more.

But to show I'm fair in this, I'll point out that nothing made my blood boil more than the cost of 8MB or whatever they were memory cards for the PS2.  My foray into consoles almost ended right there!

 

But peripheral pricing has always been a part of the console business model.

Generally, until costs can be brought down on hardware and they aren't sold at a loss, the peripheral market is the sweetest plum for console manufacturers (take Nintendo and the $40 remote + $20 nunchuck + $20 motion plus per player = good business model).

MS basically painted themselves into a corner with their peripheral drives in that they HAVE to charge X amount for these drives or else it makes more sense for consumers to buy a base $199 Arcade (which is less profitable) and then add on a drive. If the cost to build your own bundle is ever less than the price of the MS bundles, they lose money.

 

Who says you have to like or agree with it as the consumer though?  Business models change all the time, particularly if driven by consumer demand and response.

I think having a proprietary HDD is just a step too far.  Controllers, etc. I can stomach more readily (and of course you get alternatives to offer some competition) but paying pretty much double (in terms of per GB cost vs a standard HDD) for an 360 HDD is just a bit much for me.

 

The response is pretty simple: if you don't agree with the pricing, then you don't buy the product.

Manufacturers can only charge the most consumers are willing to pay, assuming there is no shortage or limited supply of product.

And the price of HDD space has dropped considerably, even if it hasn't dropped to match current market prices. It wasn't that many years ago that MS was charging $99 for a 20GB HDD as an index. 

Personally, I never liked the proprietary HDD idea from MS, but it is what allowed them to have a rock bottom priced SKU, making it an affordable option for those who don't spend more on video games.

In the case of the Xbox 360, the HDD size is considered a "premium" feature and is largely responsible for what little profit they make on each hardware unit sold.

Generally I don't, obviously.  I consider my purchse (or lack thereof) of as a vote either for or against a product.  The majority wins, of course, which is fair enough - but that won't stop me pitching my vote based on what I believe.

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Squilliam said:
M.U.G.E.N said:
That's still ridiculously expensive

Compared to this I think its actually quite cheap.

Of course that HDD is cheap compared to a state of the art Graphics card... but aren't you comparing Apples with oranges? if the graphics module of your x360 dies, can you exchange it for another anyway? Wouldn't that likely cost you much more?

On another note, The DX11 enabled Radeon card that you just showed would probably be able to run games at a graphics level that would probably make the x360 melt. Stop making a fuss and accept the inevitable.

 

 



I am a Gamer... I play games and not consoles. I have a PC and Console on which I game... I like games. End of Story!

Misleading title. Its FOR SALE, not ON SALE