Nah, you were just grossly misinformed and promptly corrected.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sony and Microsoft to explore strategic partnership
- Thread starter DanielsM
- Start date
Texas Pride
Banned
You've said a lot of things in this thread none of which were educating or enlightening. I'm not responsible for what others say. Contradicting statements happen when people contribute to the topic. Gaikai isn't dead. If it is I haven't heard it and I implore you or anyone with the information that it has to present it. I believe you to be the fanboy and I'm apparently not alone. I like you am giving opinions and if you think they're bullshit so be it. I don't need validation from someone on a forum to make my day but you do you. I don't care who you claim to be I judge you on the things you say bcs at the end of the day that's all i have to really go on and you're clearly unaware you've come across as a fanboy. I don't get Into fanboy shit I buy and play what I like I don't care about the companies or the logo on the plastic box I've been a customer of all 3 at one point or another. Emotional responses to consoles will never not be fucking weird bcs it isn't normal. You won't agree with me and that's fine I certainly don't fucking care and honestly you shouldn't either.
Bolivar687
Banned
Please no!
JustP_Gaming
Banned
Hey I was just showing you there were other streaming companies out there when you said none existed, and even though Gforce now may have less subscribers some might say it's still offers a better service then PSNow.
Last edited:
Mochilador
Member
An uneasy alliance. 
kevin_trinh
Member
I’d like to know wat weed do you smoke lul. So you are telling me that because Sony rent MS service so their cloud division will do something to kill Sony service and boost their stream service? BriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiliantThe answer is pretty clear, both MS & Google had (even before they launch) the upper hand on Sony with being able to provide much higher quality game streaming on the broadest of scale long-term due to it's massive global cloud infrastructure. Sony knew this & they sure as hell wasn't going go all in with the inferior AWS for this after the "hack" years back.
Any notion suggesting otherwise is simply ignorance & denial from said people. Sony is now paying MS to use Azure specifically for better streaming w/ it's gaming platform/services when it comes to fruition. This was a good move on Sony's part & the fact they didn't let their pride get in the way show's a lot. Nevertheless, If any other sufficient competitor out there could match Azure, you can sure as hell bet Sony wouldn't of done this.
I say this because It's kinda funny looking back at some of the responses in the threads on Google vs Sony vs MS streaming potential when Stadia was announced.
How about you come back with an intelligent response that makes sense out of why Sony is paying MS to use Azure specifically for streaming games & services then? Instead of presenting yourself like a jack ass.
Facepalm.jpg
Again, functional on a smaller scale? Yes. Good? Debatable even on the fastest connection.
Considering how the OP originally framed the thread & additional posts, it's the least I could do.
Streaming a movie at 1-8mb encoded bit rate vs having to stream up to 4K real-time gameplay (w/ multiplayer too) while mitigating huge latency issues at massively higher bit rates all over the world @ different DL speeds is a completely different beast.
There's a reason why Nvidia's own streaming service is still in beta after 2+ years. High quality streaming but on a much much smaller scale still requires a lot of disposable money & time. PSNow is average at best & just bad on average in comparison to Nvidia's service. Gaiki was never great when Sony bought them & they still haven't made any ground on it's service aka PSNow with further acquisitions. At least not enough to even sniff what Google & MS would be capable of, or even Nvidia for that matter, hence this deal.
This goes hand in hand with why there are so many movie streaming services/subscriptions popping up. Many with less cash than Sony. It's simply a much easier task to accomplish. Needing less resources so you can actually outsource it vs cloud gaming.
Bottom line, Sony doesn't have the cash to risk investing billions into a full on global cloud infrastructure that only offers a still to be determined unknown future in gaming etc. It's why PSNow is only available in 19 countries w/ varying results. Azure brings MS truck loads of cash flow from all facets either way.
Odd statement when it's Sony who is paying MS for the eventual streaming platforms via Azure (OS tech wut.jpg) on top of giving MS access to their image sensors, semiconductors etc.
I'll let it slide though with your 15 posts in 4 years.
But you're right in that sense, if you can't beat them, pay them & give them free stuff.
Um, because it brings in profits & is the symbol of the Xbox brand. No one said you have to be #1 in every industry to be successful, but you sure as hell can take money from the #1 & cram it straight into your pocket when your #1 elsewhere. Win-win either way for MS.
Because Google wasn't going to do business with them & they don't trust AWS for such an under taking. In fact, they have minimized most AWS involvement since the 2012 hack. Regarding OpenStack, it's just software to manage your own data center/s, and Sony clearly didn't want to invest in more infrastructure at such a large risk/cost. MS was their best chance at expanding & improving the quality so they can essentially keep pace & survive the onslaught of cloud gaming services.
If you mean both sides in terms of what they can offer gamers in the future, everybody wins. In terms of the actual deal, it's a pretty one sided deal. Sony will now have dependency on MS.
You've been spouting the same doom & gloom for awhile now going by your post history. I think it's time you start your own fanboy blog.
Except they aren't scaling up AWS (Amazon) involvement. In fact they eliminated most of their involvement since the 2012 hack & moved to OpenStack to create their own infrastructure.
OpenStack offers software tools, that's it. It allows Sony to control their own cloud infrastructure with their own hardware on OpenStack software, meaning they still have to make data centers. Which was what AWS previously provided, billion dollar data centers. Think of it as Linux, opened sourced, you still need the expensive parts to use it AKA data centers.
They still don't have the cash or resources to compete with Azure, or Google in building one on a global scale. They couldn't risk further deployment on a scale that large. All in all, they no longer have to keep pushing an obsene amount of cash to try & compete with Google or MS's impending services. As I said in above comments, there's a reason why PSNow is average at best & only in 19 countries as they've been struggling to expand & improve it. Thus, we have the Azure deal.
Differences between OpenStack and AWS
Differences between OpenStack and AWS - Download as a PDF or view online for freewww.slideshare.net
This guy gets it.
Orenji Neko
Member
Resistance is futile......
I love this gif.
down 2 orth
Member
This stinks of data collection and anti-consumer policies. I want nothing to do with it,
Chairman Tickles
Banned
Console wars sort of died when both sony and microsoft shoved the exact same hardware by the same manufacturer into their device. Now even the operating systems and backend graphics apis are going to coalesce into one. It will come down to 'which controller do I prefer to use' and 'can my current PC run it better?'.
Shared apis, shared hardware, shared libraries.
Shared apis, shared hardware, shared libraries.
Last edited:
This move shows just how uninformed some of the Sony faithful really are when it comes to how the industry really works.
Posts like "How can Sony lack a cloud presence when they're the only ones to have a working streaming service", looked bad when they were posted. They look outright ridiculous now.
It's obvious that Sony realized that their infrastructure wasn't up to snuff, and totally unprepared if streaming does indeed take off. With only 700k total subscribers, it's not like Sony was really supporting all that many users. I would've thought the adaption rate would've been much higher previously, but less than 1% is pretty bad.
The good news is that Sony realized this, and decided to do something about it. With Azure, PSNow and PSN can only get better. For MS, they get money, image sensors, semiconductors, and the position that Sony's gaming division will be run and dependant upon them.
I find it amusing that almost every person who ridiculed MS and the "Powah of the cloud", will now be paying money that will go to MS.... For the power of the cloud.
Posts like "How can Sony lack a cloud presence when they're the only ones to have a working streaming service", looked bad when they were posted. They look outright ridiculous now.
It's obvious that Sony realized that their infrastructure wasn't up to snuff, and totally unprepared if streaming does indeed take off. With only 700k total subscribers, it's not like Sony was really supporting all that many users. I would've thought the adaption rate would've been much higher previously, but less than 1% is pretty bad.
The good news is that Sony realized this, and decided to do something about it. With Azure, PSNow and PSN can only get better. For MS, they get money, image sensors, semiconductors, and the position that Sony's gaming division will be run and dependant upon them.
I find it amusing that almost every person who ridiculed MS and the "Powah of the cloud", will now be paying money that will go to MS.... For the power of the cloud.
Not only are you completely wrong you sound equally, if not more so, as bad. People made fun of the "power of the cloud" based on Crackdown 3's initial reveal and how Microsoft can harness that power to create a superior product... look how that turned out. Yikes.This move shows just how uninformed some of the Sony faithful really are when it comes to how the industry really works.
Posts like "How can Sony lack a cloud presence when they're the only ones to have a working streaming service", looked bad when they were posted. They look outright ridiculous now.
It's obvious that Sony realized that their infrastructure wasn't up to snuff, and totally unprepared if streaming does indeed take off. With only 700k total subscribers, it's not like Sony was really supporting all that many users. I would've thought the adaption rate would've been much higher previously, but less than 1% is pretty bad.
The good news is that Sony realized this, and decided to do something about it. With Azure, PSNow and PSN can only get better. For MS, they get money, image sensors, semiconductors, and the position that Sony's gaming division will be run and dependant upon them.
I find it amusing that almost every person who ridiculed MS and the "Powah of the cloud", will now be paying money that will go to MS.... For the power of the cloud.
Nope. The "Power of the cloud" will soon be powering PSN and PSNow. That's a simple fact weather you like it or not.
Have you paid your PS PLUS bill lately? MS gonna need some of that to provide you with a reliable service.
Look at the bright side. Maybe this will lead to a better experience for PS4 users. Less down time and LOL 'stability updates' is a good thing. It'll just be stable.
Nothing defines the "power of the cloud" joke more than Crackdown 3.
Right now Sony is doing just fine without Microsoft so I'm not sure what you're getting at here? Last time I looked PlayStation Network's MAUs trounced Xbox Live's MAUs all without the need of Azure or Microsoft in general, and it's all completely stable. Interesting how that works.
Last edited:
1. If Sony was doing fine, they wouldn't make their network dependant on Azure.
2. Again, Sony's network even with all its "stability updates" still isn't as robust as XBL. So yeah, they kinda do need them. The simple proof for this is in the fact that SONY WILL NOW USE AZURE FOR PSN AND PSNOW.
I really can't spell it out any better than that for you. I guess we can just agree to disagree.... On facts.
1.) Sony's current production network isn't reliant on Azure nor will it be anytime soon if at all. What are you going on about?
2.) Yawn. Not as robust yet caters to millions of more users. So based on what you're saying Sony flipped a switch and PSN/PSNow are now utilizing Azure? I'd ask to elaborate, but you've already provided enough laughs in this thread.
Get out of here.
kevin_trinh
Member
Another fortune teller i guess? Or the true insider? Are you telling me Sony will just throw the current PSN server to trash and switch to ur Azure holy ground?
Last edited:
Snake29
RSI Employee of the Year
It’s Microsoft and Sony, not Microsoft and PlayStation. Those companies are more then only PS an Xbox.
1.) Sony's current production network isn't reliant on Azure nor will it be anytime soon if at all. What are you going on about?
2.) Yawn. Not as robust yet caters to millions of more users. So based on what you're saying Sony flipped a switch and PSN/PSNow are now utilizing Azure? I'd ask to elaborate, but you've already provided enough laughs in this thread.
Get out of here.
What are still going on about? Did I upset you or something?
Sony is going to pay MS in order to use it's Azure servers for PSNow, and more than likely PSN.
I posted my opinion as to why that is the case. You've offered nothing to counter that. You're not proving anything except that you're adept at posting gifs.
So congrats for that I guess.
FranXico
Member
It has been quite stable for quite a while. I don't expect that to change.
The "stability updates" are firmware, and those hardly ever have anything to do with the network infrastucture. Changes to PSN usually happen without changes to the firmware.
It's almost as if you have zero understanding of technology, or reality, for that matter.
Just go enjoy your Xbox and let the rest of us discuss this.
Last edited:
FranXico
Member
That has already been the case for quite some time, unfortunately...
You should really go back to read the EULA of both networks...
Last edited:
That comment was made more in jest than anything else.
But seeing as you're the big dick here... I'll let the "rest of you" discuss this, which amounts to little more than some form of damage control.
Last edited:
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
FranXico
Member
Yes, tell yourself whatever makes you happy and proud of Microsoft. Thank you.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
First, they do Stream at a slightly higher scale than that (and at a better quality than Amazon Prime or iTunes) and have been streaming at 4K HDR for a while (bitrate over 16 Mbps). Very low threshold latency mitigation’s aside, all the other all-over-the-world-at-different-DL-speeds etc... concerns are similar if not the same.
Their experiments with interactive movie are an expansion in a more latency critical land, but yes they have not been having to attack that particular problem.
My point was not if they were delivering a game streaming solution or not, it was about services over common backend (how PSNow not having built its own super mega cloud solution and backend was not an indication the service was shit... the service and PSN in general have a worldwide customer base and are raking in a huge amount of money, hitting their target) and as the market gets more and more competitive those cloud providers and CDN’s will grow and the existing ones will need to attract more and more third parties to make their investment bear the fruit they expect: this is why it was hilarious to have the Xbox division desires against the competition be more important than the much more powerful internally Azure division and their desire to get all of the money and clients
.I remember plenty of responses that thought it was insane thinking MS was going to bet the Azure farm on XCloud over the third parties running on Azure and offering similar services now and in the future and said that if Sony or the like wanted to scale their services further and decided Azure was one way to do so they would... and look at that
.Also, those threads were putting AWS in the same league talking about streaming services while here apparently they are the “inferior” platform
.I also think that the AWS usage and the Sony hack are unrelated, if anything their own cloudstack / openstack solution (for which they would still need to find a hosting partner like Rackspace) would be more likely to get hacked than a well run ship on top of an AWS run solution, but I have not seen or read a mass exodus from AWS services powering up their current online setup and all of the devices they run on it.
I think we will see Sony expanding beyond Azure for game streaming as the cloud space gets hyper competitive with GCP putting Google’s billions at work, Amazon hell bent on growing AWS more and more each year, and God knows who will enter the fray there and start growing marketshare/bringing disruption.
Last edited:
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Aintitcool
Banned
I am just here wondering if I'll be able to stream Halo Infinity on my playstation and xbox fans stream Uncharted. That would be an insane partnership good for gamers. You don't have to buy two consoles for all the best AAA games .
Klayzer
Member
If PSN is already more popular and capable of supporting millions of users, just imagine what the power of the mythical Azure cloud will do for it. Xbox fans have been saying for years how impressive the cloud is, I guess we will see next gen. Why are Xbox fans on this board taking a victory lap over this news? How will this partnership benefit the Xbox ecosystem? Seems like Microsoft itself is benefiting more.Well... anything Sony does is cause for concern and needs damage control.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
The idea seems to be that Xbox business matter to MS more than the Azure business (which relies heavily on signing and keeping third party companies on it)... that is where the fanboy card drops if any...
Fitzchiv
Member
Businesses routinely review their unique competitive strengths and match them against the landscape for the short, medium and long term. This is just a response to that.
Sony recognised it needed access to the digital infrastructure MS can offer, and MS capitalising on that infrastructure whilst strengthening the status quo Vs new, disruptive entrants.
These businesses aren't looking backwards when making their decisions, who "won" the last or current generation is just additional context for metrics about what they think makes the future tick, which will be around subscribers, digital services and content management.
I don't think any of us can genuinely call where this will all end up in five years time. My guess however is MS and Sony will still be top of the pile (and Nintendo will have gone the way of Sega and moved to purely software focus) and one of Amazon, Apple and Google will have canned their plans and gone after something else. Who knows though?!
Sony recognised it needed access to the digital infrastructure MS can offer, and MS capitalising on that infrastructure whilst strengthening the status quo Vs new, disruptive entrants.
These businesses aren't looking backwards when making their decisions, who "won" the last or current generation is just additional context for metrics about what they think makes the future tick, which will be around subscribers, digital services and content management.
I don't think any of us can genuinely call where this will all end up in five years time. My guess however is MS and Sony will still be top of the pile (and Nintendo will have gone the way of Sega and moved to purely software focus) and one of Amazon, Apple and Google will have canned their plans and gone after something else. Who knows though?!
Ar¢tos
Member
For it to be perfect the one with a white jacket should be Nintendo (or Sega, but that reference might be lost on younger crowds).
Chittagong
Gold Member
I mean, cloud is a great start for a partnership but what I really need is one console, not having to buy two nearly identical boxes to split my library. I guess it’s too late for the next gen but one day, I hope.
CyberPanda
Banned
I understand that, but competition is still neeeded. Otherwise we’ll have a monopoly, but in the future(many many years into the future), I think all these companies are gonna rely on subscription services like Netflix that will work on multiple devices.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
It is a win for both PlayStation and MS the same way it is a win for MS and Intel or AMD when they buy processors from them. iPhone built their huge empire without initially manufacturing much (even now they rely on TSMC).
You are right it is a win for MS Azure vs other cloud providers (as it is more business going their way), but MS Azure never stepped in the console gaming business (it would more likely to push to sign Sony and Nintendo on as partners than spend billions to prop up XCloud and use it as a club against them...) and it would be wrong to see the Azure business and Xbox as one and the same as is the reality in such large corporations.
It's because the next xbox will benefit from image sensors
/s
It's because they have a love for the company and them making money, as evidenced by the use of 'cha-ching' , and not their products actually being any better
There needs to be a reduction (or consolidation) of hardware just like there was with smart phones and watches, the market has shaken that out on its own. All that's happening now is the realization of that outcome or more like people don't want to accept the market shakeout. Microsoft will most probably release a new Xbox Next but that is just to keep the current users on board until all the cloud services are complete. Windows/Xbox cloud services are still being completed although Microsoft did release Virtual Windows Desktop in preview in the Fall.
Eventually, Windows/Xbox will be processed from the cloud exclusively, you'll pay a monthly or annual fee for the virtual machine but that is probably a decade out. Of course, Microsoft knows this might not work out on the consumer side of the house because who (consumer wise) wants to pay a monthly subscription fee that's much more expensive to access a virtual machine? (not many) Of course, exactly where are all those win32 customers going to go?
As to your statement, only they know what they will do with their current exclusives, if I were to guess some individual titles might start making native appearances on other devices - its no different than putting Office applications on iOS/Android/Mac or putting Halo on Steam.
Last edited:
FranXico
Member
Refer to what they are doing with Office... They hiked up the price of the full product, in order to make the Office365 subscription "more appealing".
Fitzchiv
Member
Fundamentally agree that they will operate with their own interests at the forefront when it comes to divisional activity, but there will be a significant net impact assessment when getting into bed with a corporate rival for collaboration that will impact multiple divisions. Sure, Azure will see more direct benefit than Xbox from what we can see of the partnership right now, but this doesn't just involve the Azure network. I'd be very surprised if MS made a decision like this without some kind of net benefit across multiple divisions - that's what Nadella's job is.
That said, I work for a business with similar structure (multiple business units spread globally) and roughly half the revenue and it has form for making stupid decisions that cost one unit Vs another, simply by virtue of not considering impact. We don't have someone like Nadella though in fairness, who seems a genuinely involved and dynamic fella.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
True, but I do not think it is either hurting or benefiting the Xbox division and it does help MS in their relentless pursuit of Services Services Services.
This may have impacted XCloud insofar as their competition now has found a new competent partner to scale with, but the net gain for MS is greater than it would be had they acted in a way that would drive Sony to other suppliers even if it would have protected XCloud more. As a corporation with shareholders you are rewarded for following corporate strategy and minimising opportunity cost.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Klayzer
Member
Another interesting issue comes to my mind: If Sony starts using the Azure cloud for PSN, will the narrative change that PSN was inferior to Xbox live if they're both using the same cloud based technology for their services.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
They will just say that Sony is using it wrong lol...
JustP_Gaming
Banned
Think about this. If MS didn't infuse Apple with major funding many years ago there would be no Apple today. Plus it keeps the competition around which although it doesn't seem like it, its good for a company to have at least one competitor to keep them agile.
Tumle
Member
Ftfy
I would comment further.. but the sheer amount of fanboying going on in this thread tells me to not bother.. I’m not that, masochistic.. but good job to all the others trying to straighten out the convo
Last edited:
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Now, we are just posting random MS-feel-good things...
Btw... funny you post a historical example of a company that was abusing its monopoly power, found guilty of it, and trying to make itself appear as having healthy competition
.
Last edited:
JustP_Gaming
Banned
Were you born with negative energy or did you learn it by hanging around the internet too long?Now, we are just posting random MS-feel-good things...
Btw... funny you post a historical example of a company that was abusing its monopoly power, found guilty of it, and trying to make itself appear as having healthy competition
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Not sure, but since we are on such an intimate basis and I feel I can talk things with you: how do you manage to keep posting random things that have almost nothing to do with whatever people are saying and not distract you from turning positive news about a company you do not like into another whatever-they-do-is-dumb drive by trolls series?
Seriously though, did you really compare Sony of today and their handling of PlayStation to ‘90s Apple
? In a way it is flattering, considering the next 20 years and MS efforts in the fields they directly competed in (MS portable computing).You could also comment about exactly what I said (MS legal troubles in the 90’s are a matter of public record hence why you gaslighted the thread again with a “banter, yah, banter” drive by), but it would be naive for me to expect that at this point
.
Last edited:
PharaoTutAnchAmun
Member
NO,, not gonna happen, it is only about a streaming cooperation. Sony will stream PSnow on azure servers, thats it. You will not see Playstationgames on an Xbox.
Last edited:
You really don't "game" on either XBL or PSN. XBL/PSN are just services that the developer has access to, the game traffic really has very little to do with either XBL/PSN. If you are having issues with messaging, authentication, access to the store, etc. than that would a XBL/PSN issue or area which its responsible for. Developers/publishers are responsible for the game traffic, generally speaking. I use or have used both XBL/PSN they are both very similar as it comes to the services that the users have access to. Technically you really don't need either XBL/PSN to game, its just under the licensing agreements developers must implement the services into their games on those platforms for online usage. Of course, you also lose central authentication and everything that comes with that.
Generally speaking, if a game is horrible to play online... that's on the developers/publishers to implement better networking code, server infrastructure, location detection with matchmaking.... not Sony or Microsoft. With that said, if MS/Sony are having issues with certain services it could impact online games, but generally neither PSN/XBL are better or worse as they really aren't even in the process.
Last edited:
Silent Viper
Banned
Lol someone explain this kid in simple English.
Sony using cloud tech for their services only.