Im just curious, because if memory serves me correctly the Xbox was one solid machine and you rarely heard reports about the original Xbox ever breaking and I even owned a xbox in the day and it was a very reliable console, Im just wondering why they couldnt have made the 360 as reliable as the Xbox?
they used cheap parts to lower manufactering costs and the console was rushed to market and ms has failed to fix the problems 1 and a half years later.
The Xbox was so strong because everything was coated in 2 inches of steel, which is why it was so big. You could also ask the question "why was the PS1/2 such a POS yet no one hears about problems with the PS3".
Im just curious, because if memory serves me correctly the Playstation was one solid machine and you rarely heard reports about the original Playstation ever breaking and I even owned a Playstation in the day and it was a very reliable console, Im just wondering why they couldnt have made the Playstation 2 as reliable as the Playstation?
*travels back to 2007*
Wow... I just got this strange feeling like I already might have seen this argument sometime before...
Alot of it is luck. Sometimes designs work well, sometimes they don't. Xbox1 has little to nothing in common with 360, so there is really no comparison other than that they are MS products. Another thing is the drastic increase in power. There is alot more strain on parts when you work them harder, and thus, less reliability. For one thing, it creates alot of heat, which is something that is difficult to work around as we can see.
Im just curious, because if memory serves me correctly the Playstation was one solid machine and you rarely heard reports about the original Playstation ever breaking and I even owned a Playstation in the day and it was a very reliable console, Im just wondering why they couldnt have made the Playstation 2 as reliable as the Playstation?
*travels back to 2007*
Wow... I just got this strange feeling like I already might have seen this argument sometime before...foxhound_fox
You obviously never had to run your PS1 upside down. They weren't much better than the PS2.
The Xbox was so strong because everything was coated in 2 inches of steel, which is why it was so big. You could also ask the question "why was the PS1/2 such a POS yet no one hears about problems with the PS3". pundog
your last comment really doesnt make any sense. of course sony would get it right with ps3. plus ps3 wasnt rushed to market like 360. sony was smart in making sure ps3 had no problems it would have cost them even more money if they had to replace $600 consoles that they are already taking huge losses on.
Im just curious, because if memory serves me correctly the Playstation was one solid machine and you rarely heard reports about the original Playstation ever breaking and I even owned a Playstation in the day and it was a very reliable console, Im just wondering why they couldnt have made the Playstation 2 as reliable as the Playstation?
*travels back to 2007*
Wow... I just got this strange feeling like I already might have seen this argument sometime before...foxhound_fox
But DRE's are MUCH easier to fix than GPU/CPU connections popping off on the motherboard due to overheating or disc drives eating up DVD's. These problems show serious design flaws.
The 360 breaks so much becaus of the Internet. You see launch 360s had quite a few problems with them, most if not oll of which have been fixed and now everyone asumes he launch 360 = the Curret 360 meaning it breaks as much.
[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]*travels back in time to 2001*
Im just curious, because if memory serves me correctly the Playstation was one solid machine and you rarely heard reports about the original Playstation ever breaking and I even owned a Playstation in the day and it was a very reliable console, Im just wondering why they couldnt have made the Playstation 2 as reliable as the Playstation?
*travels back to 2007*
Wow... I just got this strange feeling like I already might have seen this argument sometime before...SergeantSnitch
But DRE's are MUCH easier to fix than GPU/CPU connections popping off on the motherboard due to overheating or disc drives eating up DVD's. These problems show serious design flaws. The difference being MS will (more often than not) foot the bill if your 360 breaks, unlike Sony, who did all but laughed at people who got DREs.
they used cheap parts to lower manufactering costs and the console was rushed to market and ms has failed to fix the problems 1 and a half years later.InfamousC
The 65nm chip should fix the problem. If MS didn't have any problems with the 360 the PS3 would be done for. :lol:
[QUOTE="InfamousC"]they used cheap parts to lower manufactering costs and the console was rushed to market and ms has failed to fix the problems 1 and a half years later.PS3_3DO
The 65nm chip should fix the problem. If MS didn't have any problems with the 360 the PS3 would be done for. :lol:
they used cheap parts to lower manufactering costs and the console was rushed to market and ms has failed to fix the problems 1 and a half years later.InfamousC
Â
I do always stress the the notion of the radio shak parts they used to build that thing....
[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]*travels back in time to 2001*
Im just curious, because if memory serves me correctly the Playstation was one solid machine and you rarely heard reports about the original Playstation ever breaking and I even owned a Playstation in the day and it was a very reliable console, Im just wondering why they couldnt have made the Playstation 2 as reliable as the Playstation?
*travels back to 2007*
Wow... I just got this strange feeling like I already might have seen this argument sometime before...SergeantSnitch
But DRE's are MUCH easier to fix than GPU/CPU connections popping off on the motherboard due to overheating or disc drives eating up DVD's. These problems show serious design flaws.
so true, its not ps2 laser was crap along, but that ps2 had half the memory of xbox so the laser had to work twice as hard as xboxes. once a gpu or cpu is fried in a console it dead, all the expecnvie parts have to be replaced. looks like m$ even took out the overheat protection of the chip to save money, there is no pc cpu that you can fry now, the computer turns off before it temps go over about 75-80 c.
[QUOTE="InfamousC"]they used cheap parts to lower manufactering costs and the console was rushed to market and ms has failed to fix the problems 1 and a half years later.PS3_3DO
The 65nm chip should fix the problem. If MS didn't have any problems with the 360 the PS3 would be done for. :lol:
Â
can you tell me why you can't fry a pc chip now but x360 can be? more cost cutting from m$ maybe?
They used cheap parts with the intention of getting out their early on the market, plus MS is not a hardware company, but software whereas Sony's strongest sector is electronics. The ps2 had lots of problems with disk drives and lasers. I am on my third ps2, but the difference is that those broke down after about a year and half of heavy usage whereas 360s are breaking down at a much higher rate much earlier. I've heard a lot of people say they that they are on their 3rd 360 and it has only been about a year and a half. The original Xbox had problems too like disk scratching (happened to several of my friends) or if anyone remembers that MS was so stupid that they forgot to put fans in the first batch. FANS!!! It was a brick though in terms of durability. Anyone ever see the durability tests of last gen systems on X-Play. Man that GC could take a lot of abuse and the Xbox was like a rock.
Even if it is total junk you just buy the extended warrenty like you have to do with every other peice of home electronics you buy. You can get around the reliability problem, you cannot get around the 360 exclusives problem.
I would never have let the unreliability of the PS2 keep me from playing all the great games that came out for it. Why would I let the 360s unreliability keep me from playing its games?
Log in to comment