Lol who's talking about leting go?

Anything can be called a PR bullshit if we listen to you and your ridiculous arguments... Also when you are putting "Google" in the market of virtual CPU/VM it shows a lot of how low is your knowledge about what Microsoft is offering... Google is NOT yet there (Google Computing is in preview and far from being where MS/Amazon are). You are just proving again my point about people just comparing "cloud" something with anything else with "cloud" in their name...

Now does it matter if Sony is actually working with Amazon or Microsoft for it? No, not at all actually... And if you took the time to read my previous in this thread posts you would see that it was exactly what I was saying instead of just come in this thread again to bash again Microsoft and calling their vision of the future just PR bullshit.

Could you provide a link because I have followed this closely and I do not remember Sony saying anything like that.  The reason Sony cannot say "The power of the cloud" because they do not have a means of hosting every 3rd party developer dedicated servers.  Also Sony does not have a platform for creating hosted distributed applications which would be the cloud compute part.  Sony CEO was asked a question where he stated they could provide what MS is doing as far as cloud compute but then again its the doing thats the difference.  The reason people do not understand what MS is providing is because they do not understand the technology.  They believe its just a bunch of servers running in a datacenter but its much more complex then that especially the software that makes it all happen.

So what MS is stating that currently Sony cannot provide is a platform for developers to create distributed cloud based applications which can leverage thousands of servers to process the calls made from that App and send that data locally to a client machine.  The application is hosted in MS Azure server cloud and the client machine can basically just send a simple request for data just like your regular web page do today.  The reason this is not something Sony can just turn on a switch to do is because it first takes the development platform.  Next it takes the servers to serve up the content locally to the client machines around the world.  Sony can buy their way into both but it will be expensive and might not be a cost they are willing to make since they are on a recovery.

MS is one of he few companys that actually provide a complete Cloud solution which I already posted about.  

I wasn’t the one complaining about it now was I?

I included Google because they are more likely to get a better deal from them down the line than they would say amazon. Considering Sony and Google have a little bit of history working together, And I would also imagine they would be the main partner when Sony try to bring PS4 Internet deals to the US like they are doing over sea's. Although Google fiber is just kicking off. So that might be awhile out.

Everything they are spouting about their cloud is pr bullshit. Except the size.

not only that is plain false... the azure/orlean is not PR BS it steam roles anything out there beside maybe AWS S3 from amazon and even that has not all the possibilities that the MS solution has....

and once again in that field size does matter... it is one of the most important component of that service.... and beside that QoS from MS cloud accros everything SaaS PaaS etc is around 99% of up time and they are working on a 99.99% QoS

even google cloud doesn't match MS cloud size and even less solution.... once again in that business size does matter...

and yes end user will see the difference because limitation and or possibilities won't be the same.... no matter what.... so as much PR BS MS is spinning you are doing an even bigger PR BS spin... because to keep the metaphore.. Sony will never be able to spin the same level of PR BS than MS no matter with whome they strike a deal.... 

Gaikia is kind of a different solution, but very similar (lol just to confuse matters :)

Gaikia is basically sending screen data and controller movements down the pipe. It's not particularly efficient yet for displaying games, as unfortunately games are updating many times a second. I used to be involved in Citrix/Terminal services which is a similar concept... biggest problem is these services were never great at displaying apps not alone games. I think for the idea that Sony might have, being able to see what others are playing and then joining in, will be quite cool, and i also think you will be able to pay PS1/PS2 games with no problem (cause resolution is low anyway).

Cloud, is all about data processing, which is similar to Citrix/Terminal services could also do in where you have a server somewhere which you are connected to and that server is doing the heavy lifting. So you might have a crappy invoicing app - the actual screen stuff would be sent back to your machine. But when you do a report it does all processing at the server and just displays the result, or in this case sends the data back to the machine. The question is how relevant this is to games.. thats a question that is unanswered yet. For me, I think cloud will help with Multiplayer games and MMO's but i personally am not convinced by the need to move things to servers to do data processing for anything but MMO's and MP.. which is already being done. Issues with internet speed, what if the data doesnt get there (the machine has to do something in response). There are still too many unanswered questions.

As for the Drivertar stuff... ah... there is a question if all this data is actually useful to begin with. Is it better to program a better AI locally, than to take 1 million (random number pick sorry) and then generate an AI. What if most of the data is useless (people can be crap players). It could be better to just collate the data from say the top 100 users, and I don't think you would have needed a datacenter of this magnatude to do it.

Still its all fascinating stuff.

Don't know if any of that makes sense, its really late and i should sleep :)

You another falling for it hook line and sinker, Just keep beilieving what you want, you'll be proven wrong soon enough.

I feel like the cloud computing aspect of the X1 will really start to kick in about 2-3 years after its launch when both ps4 and x1 starts to feel dated... Cloud has endless potential but MS has shown virtually nothing impressive so far... All they are talking about it potential which will probably take into affect a while away from now

Yoshida talking on the subject:
http://www.polygon.com/2013/6/12/4424022/sony-shuhei-yoshida-says-ps4-cloud-computing-calculations

Cerny also talking on the subject:

http://gamingbolt.com/mark-cerny-on-cloud-becoming-a-larger-part-of-ps4-admits-there-are-implementation-difficulties

Cerny also brings up a MAJOR point that I'm surprised more people aren't talking about, the cloud's actual usefulness is extremely shaky, especially when you are expecting it to do calculations for important game mechanics... it's only as good as your internet speed at the time.

Also, in terms of Microsofts already established Azure... why does it even matter? Sony could simply, as it does now with it's dedicated first party titles, expand it's avaiable dedicated server's on a game to game basis. Sure, Microsoft has the established size, but that's going to be completlely pointless at launch, as it won't all be utilized. This is all nothing short of compelte and utter spin, it's pointless. 

challenge accepted :D
every dedicated server by third party today is pale in comparaison to azure/orlean infrastructure already... so I hardly see how the gap couldn't get bigger over time looking at what galactic level they are in every other field except a few competitors that can be counted on the fingers of the hands of an amputee....
but yeah PR BS lol... call me when sony can afford a 14 billion investment

MS never made statments that the cloud would negate any difference between the X1 and PS4 because they never made any comparisions between the 2 consoles.  Instead MS stated the cloud is like having 4 X1 units in one.  This statement can be considered BS because MS cannot at this time prove it but in the years to come, this statement could very well come true.

As for latency its really a numbers game.  Latency is the result of hops between the client machine and the server performing a specific task.  The more servers you have the less hops a client machine will have to go through to be served by a specific server.  So in order for Gaikai to be successfull, Sony will need to invest and a lot of servers so that there is a server to serve data locally to clients.  This is an area that MS has an advantage because the scope of Gaikai cannot be compared to Azure and the amount of servers MS can bring to the table.

To be honest, the reason people thought it was a bunch of hype is for lack of understanding and knowledge.  People are quick to mock something they cannot understand, and it continue  to be the case today as people continue to compare Gaikai to Azure as if the 2 platforms are even remotely the same in structure, functionality and scope.  Another issue is that people understanding of what a true cloud services is very limited.  People are quick to say Hey, Sony has Gaikai so they must be on the same level as a service like Azure.  You tell these people that Gaikai when they were bought is a 80 man team that was purchase for 500 million dollar while Azure is a platform MS has invested in the last 5 years 14 billion dollars.  This year alone MS spent 1 billion dollars on their Virgina datacenter and another 700 million on their Iowa datacenter.

When I tell people this part, the usually dismiss it saying so what.  MS spent all this money but it means nothing.  Most of these people have no concept of the scope of Azure compared to Gaikai.  Next people do not understand that Azure is a complete cloud service in that it performs everything.  Its a SaaS, IaaS and Paas.  Currently Gaikai is just a SaaS and its very limited in scope as it can only perform one functionality.  There is a lot of people that believe that Sony can just changed Gaikai to perform cloud computing like MS is touting.  This is something Sony cannot do.  They would first need to build the software platform.  They would need something like Orleans.  Openstack can fill this role but its not specific enough thus a lot of development will be required to make this happen.  Also Sony would need the infrastucture to turn the Gaikai servers into a PaaS which is no small task and would cost plenty of cash.  Even so, dividing what Gaikai does and making it do other services might not be the best fit as this will then reduce the amount of resources Gaikai can put to bear on it's main function.  

When all it said and do, money still comes up as an issue because all of this stuff cost.  MS has the advantage because Azure brings in profit and dose not show up as a cost to their business.  If Sony wanted to replicated the dedicated server part, then that would show up as a cost.  dedicated servers do not produce profit for a business and trying to run 100,00 or more of them might not be something any company would invest in unless they can make money from it.  Purchasing from companies like Rackspace or Amazon incurs more cost as those companies will be seeking a profit.

The reason MS can do this is they already paid the money, have the infrastructure, platform in Orleans and the servers.  Those services do not run at 100% utilization so they have plenty of room to do things that are a cost like dedicated servers or even price it at cost or below.