Irony is comedy, this thread is hilarious. Rewind to 2013 and all of these cows said cloud was nothing and would never be a reality and even so far as to criticize MS for investing in the cloud.
Fast forward to today and all of a sudden Sony is the leader in cloud computing and has the best cloud infrastructure because they bought not one but two failing game streaming services that didn’t even own the servers they where using, Gaikai and on live where using Amazon and Rackspace servers. There are no dedicated Sony data centers they have to rent servers from companies that will soon be their competition in cloud services. Sony using Amazon servers going forward would be the same as them using MS servers to power PSN, paying your competition to power a service that you guys are actively competing with each other for the top spot. The former owner of onlive said in the source that MS is the only company that has everything needed to make this happen yet fanboys want to disagree and deny this. The price Sony paid for both of those services together is nowhere near 1/4 of the amount the big 3 have invested in their cloud infrastructures over the past decade. Until Sony actually has their own cloud infrastructure they can’t compete with MS, Google, or Amazon. Do you guys really think Amazon would abandon their pursuit of game streaming to fully support Sony while Google and MS keep moving forward? Sony needs global, scalable data centers and currently MS has the most of those and keeps investing billions into Azure.
But I could be wrong but I have to wonder if Sony is so far ahead and already have everything in place where is their equivalent to xcloud? MS is talking about doing this this year with current gen games not Xbox 360 or OG Xbox games. When will Sony announce PSnow game streaming to all devices besides just PS and Pc? Do they even have the resources to do it?
^This guy gets it!!!
We can debate the finer tech points. Some of us can learn a few things, and the points brought up are interesting.
The overall bigger picture presented here by some is absurd though. We can discuss the hurdles MS has when it comes to streaming, and criticize some of their methods used. That's fine, but to argue that Sony has all this infrastructure in place, and is a leader in cloud computing is beyond me. It's like trying to debate which car manufacturer is better Ford or Enterprise. Then explaining how Enterprise is better because of all their infrastructure and such is better. It's honestly LOL worthy.
No nothing is being understood by these posts. This shows a lack of understanding of cloud infrastructure. A better analogy is who is better equipped to make a rental service for cars? Ford because they own the car manufacturing or Enterprise because they have years of experience in the business and can pull from other car manufacturers. In this scenario, Ford has tons of years of experience making cars and selling to rental services. That doesn't mean that because they make the cars, and they don't mark them up, that they immediately have the infrastructure and knowledge to do so. Otherwise Ford would, you know already be renting the cars out themselves...……..
Anyway we can roll all the way back to 2013 if we want to. In 2013, MS promised that Xbox One, despite being less powerful than Sony, had the power of the cloud that made it like having 5x the power of an Xbox One. It's 2019 and anyone who knew anything about what an actual "cloud" consisted of called MS's BS marketing. In 2013 there simply didn't exist Cloud GPU resources for them to even begin to make that claim. As far as Amazon I've already explained how Sony subsidizes their infrastructure investments. Amazon's game service will likely run on the same servers as Sony's. Even the video the OP posted has the guy making the same conclusions about Azure. If you know anything about cloud services then you understand how it works.
But I could be wrong but I have to wonder if Sony is so far ahead and already have everything in place where is their equivalent to xcloud? MS is talking about doing this this year with current gen games not Xbox 360 or OG Xbox games. When will Sony announce PSnow game streaming to all devices besides just PS and Pc? Do they even have the resources to do it?
What are you talking about???? PS3 blades put in data centers in 2014!!!! MS is doing the same exact thing Sony did but 5 years later!!! PSNow plays PS4 games.
PSNow has OVER 275 PS4 games!!! Sony has more than 2x the number of PS4 titles than Microsoft has on its entire Game Pass library right!!! Over 700 games total!!!
PSNow originally ran on everything from Android, Vita, Bravia TVs, etc. YES they obviously had the resources!!! If you actually read the posts you will understand why the change was made, and they were able to reduce the number of supported devices because they literally have had ZERO competition in the market for the past 5 years.
As a matter of fact, seems like Sony is doing fine: https://www.vg247.com/2018/11/10/playstation-now-143-million-lead-earner/
Sony is literally making more money on PSNow than all of the other services combined and that's just 1 yearly quarter or estimated to be over half a Billion dollars from PS now annually. Estimates are that PSnow has between 5-10 million paying subscribers.
According to the SuperData report, game subscription services brought in $273 million during 2018’s third quarter, 52% of which was attributed to PlayStation Now.
Revenue from PS Now totaled $143 million, and EA’s Access services contributed $90 million or 33%.
The differences in percentage for EA services were as follows: EA Access (Xbox One) 16%, Origin Access Premier 9%, Origin Access (PC) 8%.
Xbox Game Pass contributed 15%,or $41 million, to overall subscription revenues during Q3 2018.
Amazon-owns their cloud infrastructure
Google-owns their cloud infrastructure
Microsoft-owns their cloud infrastructure
Sony-rents servers from Amazon/Rackspace
This is not about cloud infrastructure, it's about competition. Your Ford/Enterprise analogy is not a good one because Ford is not in competition with Enterprise, they are in competition with companies like Nissan, Honda, Chevy, etc. Enterprise rents cars and Ford sells them(to Enterprise), two completely different markets, most people don't go to a rental place looking to buy a Ford they go to a Ford dealership because they want to own the car. Rental cars are used for when you don't want to or cant use the car you already own. Going by your analogy Sony does not own a car so they would be renting from Enterprise. Sony is gonna be in direct competition with Amazon, Google, and Microsoft in cloud game streaming, this is part of the reason I feel like PsNow has regressed. They have to pay Amazon and Rackspace for these servers and the more servers they want the more they have to pay, not to mention because they don't own the servers they have limitations to what they can and cannot do. Why do you think PSnow is $20 a month while Gamepass is only $10. Who in their right mind would want to be in a scenario where your competition can dictate the services you provide to your customers? Why do you think Apple stopped using Azure servers? This is why the article is saying that MS has a head start because Azure is their service and it's one of the best out there, they already have over 80% of the fortune 500 companies in their back pocket and they are the biggest cloud infrastructure out of the big 3, although Amazon is the best for computing. Eventually Sony will have to leave Amazon, because as this thing plays out and becomes a reality Amazon will have complete control over the scope of PsNow. You know why? Because they own the servers and they are not about to help their competition gain ground, that's not good business. And again you can throw all of the numbers around about how much money Sony made on video games and game subscriptions, but those numbers are pennies to the big 3, they probably look at Sony's revenue and say "AWW that's cute Sony made $200 million dollars this quarter". These companies make billions of their cloud, last I looked MS was over $4 billion in one quarter, and that's just for Azure not counting the rest of the company.
So if Sony is using it's competitions servers to power PSnow and have no cloud presence of their own all of the blades and the PsNow library they have built up will have to go right back to ground zero when they do decide to start building their own data centers. This is not about who did it first, it's about who has the resources to actually make it happen on a global scale available on all devices, and Microsoft is ready right now. Imagine how much money Sony would have to pony up to get Amazon to build more data centers to power PsNow. PsNow will have to go backwards before it can go forward, maybe not a complete reset, but they will have to dial it back a little to get things off the ground if they decided to start building data centers, but then again building regional data centers just to power PsNow is a tall order for a company just now getting back on their feet. They don't make enough money to actually compete with the big 3 cloud services outside of gaming, so all of the money for their cloud is gonna have to come from PS profits, and PS profits just wont cut it when your competitions monthly revenue is your yearly revenue. The worst thing that can happen to Sony is to have the big 3 competing for the gaming, do you think they really care about PsNow, maybe only Amazon because they get paid from it, but in the grand scheme of things do you really think they are threatened by the presence of PsNow, Amazon or Rackspace could axe the service at any point and Sony would be cloudless. So basically Sony has no cloud presence, their cloud presence is dictated by whoever they rent servers from, meanwhile Microsofts cloud presence is strong and dictated by Microsoft.
I really don't want to belabor the analogy but you do know Enterprise sells cars too while simultaneously purchasing fleet cars from Ford. Just because they compete in some markets does not mean they don't partner in other. Real Big Boy companies don't consist of diehard fanboys.
PSnow is $20 a month because it is a streaming service and has over 700 games. So about 3 cents per game. Versus Gamepass which has 100 games and 10 bucks a month for about 10 cents a game......
But ignoring that you have no idea who datacenters work. I actually started reading the rest and realized this is pointless. I'll just break it done. Sony can run on any datacenter in the world that have V340 hardware. Microsoft doesn't even own most of its Azure network, much of it is leased, from datacenters themselves. Microsoft isn't actually managing 1000s of data farms around the world, it has local providers who house, host, and lease space to MS. You entire assumption is that Microsoft literally own everything with Azure on it. LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!! I'm literally crying about this right now...
Look, I'm not even going to do this right now but I'll give you some hints. I'm a sys admin who recently moved 2 10000+ plus users to MS cloud services and O365. I absolutely LOVE LOVE LOVE MS Azure services. I built an entire SaaS model medical software ordering system using 3 different data farms for performance, redundancy, and data recovery. As such I have a good idea of MS's limitations in the space and its strengths. You have ZERO idea what you are talking about. If AWS upped the price, Sony just finds datafarms running the specs they need and spin up VMs on them. That's the point! Sony isn't stuck with AWS by any means at all. The reason it works is because AWS is the single biggest provider for AMD cloud services that Sony needs and the amount Sony spends helps subsidize AWS growth. It's exactly how Netflix works. They just snatch up the local server farm providers that meet their specifications. That's all. They don't need to own their own server farms because it limits your physical location and your reach while increasing you startup capital, cost and maintenance.
Example, if your services are built around SaaS products you can get away with paying a set price based on process cycles and actual resources consumed rather than having idle processors. Good example, Netflix has peak times of day and year, because they scale Netflix pays only for the time users are using the servers so if they have 1 million concurrent users they pay the cost for 1 million concurrent users in server time. If they have 1000 users they only pay for 1000 users concurrently in server time. If you house your own servers you have to buy enough to reach your peak times while they idle during your low user times. That's how cloud services and SaaS works. Basically the ideal situation is if there is a large disparity between peak and off peak hours you would ideally pay for the server time you are actually using and scale/spin up VMs as load demands.
Just to cap this off. Microsoft doesn't seem to be going this route because they "want" to, rather it looks like they feel this is the best route to take in the immediate term while they are launching the service.
Irony is comedy, this thread is hilarious. Rewind to 2013 and all of these cows said cloud was nothing and would never be a reality and even so far as to criticize MS for investing in the cloud.
Fast forward to today and all of a sudden Sony is the leader in cloud computing and has the best cloud infrastructure because they bought not one but two failing game streaming services that didn’t even own the servers they where using, Gaikai and on live where using Amazon and Rackspace servers. There are no dedicated Sony data centers they have to rent servers from companies that will soon be their competition in cloud services. Sony using Amazon servers going forward would be the same as them using MS servers to power PSN, paying your competition to power a service that you guys are actively competing with each other for the top spot. The former owner of onlive said in the source that MS is the only company that has everything needed to make this happen yet fanboys want to disagree and deny this. The price Sony paid for both of those services together is nowhere near 1/4 of the amount the big 3 have invested in their cloud infrastructures over the past decade. Until Sony actually has their own cloud infrastructure they can’t compete with MS, Google, or Amazon. Do you guys really think Amazon would abandon their pursuit of game streaming to fully support Sony while Google and MS keep moving forward? Sony needs global, scalable data centers and currently MS has the most of those and keeps investing billions into Azure.
But I could be wrong but I have to wonder if Sony is so far ahead and already have everything in place where is their equivalent to xcloud? MS is talking about doing this this year with current gen games not Xbox 360 or OG Xbox games. When will Sony announce PSnow game streaming to all devices besides just PS and Pc? Do they even have the resources to do it?
^This guy gets it!!!
We can debate the finer tech points. Some of us can learn a few things, and the points brought up are interesting.
The overall bigger picture presented here by some is absurd though. We can discuss the hurdles MS has when it comes to streaming, and criticize some of their methods used. That's fine, but to argue that Sony has all this infrastructure in place, and is a leader in cloud computing is beyond me. It's like trying to debate which car manufacturer is better Ford or Enterprise. Then explaining how Enterprise is better because of all their infrastructure and such is better. It's honestly LOL worthy.
No nothing is being understood by these posts. This shows a lack of understanding of cloud infrastructure. A better analogy is who is better equipped to make a rental service for cars? Ford because they own the car manufacturing or Enterprise because they have years of experience in the business and can pull from other car manufacturers. In this scenario, Ford has tons of years of experience making cars and selling to rental services. That doesn't mean that because they make the cars, and they don't mark them up, that they immediately have the infrastructure and knowledge to do so. Otherwise Ford would, you know already be renting the cars out themselves...……..
Anyway we can roll all the way back to 2013 if we want to. In 2013, MS promised that Xbox One, despite being less powerful than Sony, had the power of the cloud that made it like having 5x the power of an Xbox One. It's 2019 and anyone who knew anything about what an actual "cloud" consisted of called MS's BS marketing. In 2013 there simply didn't exist Cloud GPU resources for them to even begin to make that claim. As far as Amazon I've already explained how Sony subsidizes their infrastructure investments. Amazon's game service will likely run on the same servers as Sony's. Even the video the OP posted has the guy making the same conclusions about Azure. If you know anything about cloud services then you understand how it works.
But I could be wrong but I have to wonder if Sony is so far ahead and already have everything in place where is their equivalent to xcloud? MS is talking about doing this this year with current gen games not Xbox 360 or OG Xbox games. When will Sony announce PSnow game streaming to all devices besides just PS and Pc? Do they even have the resources to do it?
What are you talking about???? PS3 blades put in data centers in 2014!!!! MS is doing the same exact thing Sony did but 5 years later!!! PSNow plays PS4 games.
PSNow has OVER 275 PS4 games!!! Sony has more than 2x the number of PS4 titles than Microsoft has on its entire Game Pass library right!!! Over 700 games total!!!
PSNow originally ran on everything from Android, Vita, Bravia TVs, etc. YES they obviously had the resources!!! If you actually read the posts you will understand why the change was made, and they were able to reduce the number of supported devices because they literally have had ZERO competition in the market for the past 5 years.
As a matter of fact, seems like Sony is doing fine: https://www.vg247.com/2018/11/10/playstation-now-143-million-lead-earner/
Sony is literally making more money on PSNow than all of the other services combined and that's just 1 yearly quarter or estimated to be over half a Billion dollars from PS now annually. Estimates are that PSnow has between 5-10 million paying subscribers.
According to the SuperData report, game subscription services brought in $273 million during 2018’s third quarter, 52% of which was attributed to PlayStation Now.
Revenue from PS Now totaled $143 million, and EA’s Access services contributed $90 million or 33%.
The differences in percentage for EA services were as follows: EA Access (Xbox One) 16%, Origin Access Premier 9%, Origin Access (PC) 8%.
Xbox Game Pass contributed 15%,or $41 million, to overall subscription revenues during Q3 2018.
Log in to comment