[PS3] $600 console includes no video cables?

[Destructor]

Found this elsewhere - the $600 PS3 at the very least does NOT include the HDMI cable, and at the very worst includes no cables whatsoever.

Via Sony's own website (click on #2 - What is the difference between the $499 and $599 configurations?):

Video output in HD requires cables and an HD-compatible display, both sold separately. Copy-protected Blu-ray video discs can only output at 1080p using an HDMI cable connected to a device that is compatible with the HDCP standard. HDMI cable not included. Additional equipment may be required to use the HDMI connector.

So, worded that way (read my bolded marks), it definitely doesn't include the HDMI cable, and may or may not include component cables as well. While it would be an absolutely stupid move on Sony's part to not include video cables at all, I don't put it past them right now in an attempt to save some cash. Thoughts?

Note - in all honesty, I don't know if Microsoft's site lists the same wording for their 360 or not.

[Andrew Mallon]

The 'HD Era" ships with composite cables? 

[ATB]

The cheapest I've found HDMI cables from a reputable company (Phillips Brand) is 29.99.  So on top of the 600.00 + games I'm going to have to spend at least that to enjoy the capabilities of the PS3?

Interesting.

[Kevin Grey]

Thoughts?

If true, very crappy, though perhaps not surprising considering that a substantial portion of buyers won't have HDMI capable sets so, at the minimum, you would need to include two sets of cables in the package.  It's also sad because most consumers are under the impression that they have to spend an additional $80 for an HDMI cable from a big box retailer when they can be had for well under $15 online. 

[Destructor]

Personally, I'm not surprised that the HDMI cables aren't included, simply due to price (and how few people actually own a TV it'll connect to). The funny wording that may make it not have any high-def video cables at all is that truly worries me.

Of course, it's not like I'll be getting a PS3 at launch either way.

[Andrew Mallon]

In a GAF thread, someone confirmed that there will be no component cables included either. I believe they found something on Sony's web site that stated as much.

[ChaoZ]

Not at all surprised they are excluded. But not including component cables is a travesty. They're cheap as heck to produce.

They will really gouge you on the HDMI cables though. Are they using a standard connector?
If they are, Monoprice offers the best deals on cables.

[Destructor]

In a GAF thread, someone confirmed that there will be no component cables included either. I believe they found something on Sony's web site that stated as much.

As I stated above in my post.   

[Andrew Mallon]

In a GAF thread, someone confirmed that there will be no component cables included either. I believe they found something on Sony's web site that stated as much.

As I stated above in my post.   

You expect me to read what you write?  Sorry, I need to remember to read, instead of skim, posts.

[Tustin1]

So, worded that way (read my bolded marks), it definitely doesn't include the HDMI cable, and may or may not include component cables as well. While it would be an absolutely stupid move on Sony's part to not include video cables at all, I don't put it past them right now in an attempt to save some cash. Thoughts?

Hmmm, reading your bolded comments, I don't see where you get that component cables may not be included.  It says that HD output requires cables (HDMI cable) and an HD-compatible display (HDTV). 

I don't know about you guys but when I pick up my PS3, a couple extra bucks for a HDMI cable isn't going to break the bank, just like buying an optical cable for my PS2 wasn't a big deal....

Saving people that have no use for an HDMI cable a few extra dollars makes a lot more sense than charging everyone for something that they may or may not need....

[Chaz]

You mean, like a blu-ray player? 

[Destructor]

Hmmm, reading your bolded comments, I don't see where you get that component cables may not be included.  It says that HD output requires cables (HDMI cable) and an HD-compatible display (HDTV). 

Ignoring what Sony says (that HD is only 1080p), HD is technically 480p and up, and that only requires component cables. That's where I get my statement of no video cables at all.

To output Blu-Ray in 1080p (at least once the security checks go live), yes, you'll need HDMI. But all other resolutions (480p-1080i) work happily via component.

[Kevin Grey]

Ignoring what Sony says (that HD is only 1080p), HD is technically 480p and up, and that only requires component cables. That's where I get my statement of no video cables at all.

Er, HD is technically 720p and up.

[Destructor]

Ignoring what Sony says (that HD is only 1080p), HD is technically 480p and up, and that only requires component cables. That's where I get my statement of no video cables at all.

Er, HD is technically 720p and up.

Okay, so I got my numbers off. But my point still holds though.

[Turtle]

If I recallm the 360 didn't include an HDMI cable.

"OMG! WTF!!  PS3 SUXXXORS!"

That's the vibe I'm getting with this latest ps3 rumor and overblown news bit, because for children it never gets old to make fun of something.

[Misguided]

The 360 did, however, come with a component cable. It sounds like that may not be included with the PS3, which I would find a bit surprising.

[Calvin]

Wow, thats just obscene. Are they kidding us, or pulling a fast one on those of us that will buy it...

[kathode]

The cheapest I've found HDMI cables from a reputable company (Phillips Brand) is 29.99.  So on top of the 600.00 + games I'm going to have to spend at least that to enjoy the capabilities of the PS3?

Interesting.

You'd be paying around a 300% markup for that brand name and nothing else.  Wasting your money.  Monoprice.com - Get an unbranded HDMI cable for as cheap as $3.80. The one I got was about $10 with shipping.  Works fantastic for me and my plasma tv. 

Unfortunately a lot of consumers don't know jack shit about HDMI cables and when looking for one for their PS3, they'll choke up the pure insanity $100+ prices that the big chains charge for Monster Cable rip-offs in a box.  I nearly bought one myself but jblank pointed out my error in time for me to fix it.

If I recallm the 360 didn't include an HDMI cable.

"OMG! WTF!!  PS3 SUXXXORS!"

You might also want to recall that the 360 doesn't have an HDMI port 

[jblank]

The cheapest I've found HDMI cables from a reputable company (Phillips Brand) is 29.99.  So on top of the 600.00 + games I'm going to have to spend at least that to enjoy the capabilities of the PS3?

Interesting.

Bah, just go to Monoprice.com and buy theres. You get top quality cables for under 10 bucks, depending on the length you need.

[Tustin1]

Ignoring what Sony says (that HD is only 1080p), HD is technically 480p and up, and that only requires component cables. That's where I get my statement of no video cables at all.

Er, HD is technically 720p and up.

Okay, so I got my numbers off. But my point still holds though.

Sorry, but that's too much of an extrapolation for me - next you'll be trying to tell me that I'll have to buy my own power cord.  The component cable will be included and the HDMI won't for the reason stated above - namely not everyone needs one....

[stuntgibbon]

None of the consoles come with optical cables either, so this shouldn't at all be surprising.    Sony surely doesn't want to pay for a cable in every console box that a very small percentage up front will even use.  Expect it to come with the standard component cables in the upper version.  (PS2, Xbox and 360 didn't come with optical cables either...  i fail to see how this is some horror show that PS3 doesn't come with its high end cables)

[Thin_J]

Leave it to sony to find yet another way to give their potential customers the finger.

[Tustin1]

Leave it to sony to find yet another way to give their potential customers the finger.

Yeah, damn those bastards for saving those who don't need an HDMI cable a couple of bucks, those sick sons of....

[stuntgibbon]

The cables are priced anywhere from $30 to $200+.   Even if the cables only cost Sony $10 or $20 to include, over a million units that's a lot of cost they don't need to incur on top of hardware that's probably more expensive to make at this point than even that horrible consumer price.

[Destructor]

The cables are priced anywhere from $30 to $200+.   Even if the cables only cost Sony $10 or $20 to include, over a million units that's a lot of cost they don't need to incur on top of hardware that's probably more expensive to make at this point than even that horrible consumer price.

HDMI Male to Male cables for $3.80 (and as low as $3.04 if you buy in bulk of 50 or more).

And if 1.5ft is too short for you, they also have it available in 3ft for $5.80 to $3.32.

[only1]

well, my HD monitor included a free HDMI cable, so I'm already set.

I can understand the cost argument.  But they should at least include composite cables.

[Turtle]

Leave it to the internet to go crying bloody murder over nothing.

That's right.  This means NOTHING.

First off, cables are CHEAP if you know where to buy from.  HDMI is digital if I recall and isn't prone to as much degredatation as analog signals.  I doubt they'll forget to ship with component cables, but then again, how many people really have HDTVs?  Admittedly with a price of $600 for the full feature version it's likely that the people who pay for that will have HDTVs by now, they're still not as common as people want you to think, and yes that's true, even if you have one.

Secondly, all of this is rumor.  Quite a few rumors about the 360 were false, I suspect it'll be the same for the PS3.  Remember the one about the $100 games?  Official announce prices are $59.99, same as the 360 and just like the 360 some games will drop in price pretty quickly.  Boomerang controller uncomfortable?  I'd have liked to get one in my hands and test it before crying foul.

There's a big tendency for the console media and forums to overstate anything related to the PS3's development since it's the current fad to poke fun at the PS3.  Honestly, when it comes down to it, it's all about what games you get on the system and the value you find in it.

[Purge]

Leave it to sony to find yet another way to give their potential customers the finger.

Yeah, damn those bastards for saving those who don't need an HDMI cable a couple of bucks, those sick sons of....

*they* are the ones putting HDMI front-and-centre.

Oh, and 1080p requires 2 HDMI connections, FWIW. When they say no HD cables, they mean no HD cables. That would mean no analog monitor cable, component, DVI or HD cables (or BnC). Saves you money, right? I could see them pulling this, there aren't THAT MANY HD sets compared to low-def TVs. This means they're giving you what everyone else has, and makes you pay more for the HD stuff (which WILL have markup).

But the two HDMI ports, AND the multi card reader built in? That's shit EVERYONE needs. (multi-card readers run ~15USD for the no-name ones; adding HDMI ports for people who have a 1080p capable set is catering to less than 1% of the current market base; MAYBE 2-3% by the end of the PS3 lifecycle). Oh, and as it has already been mentioned, there's the BR player which has questionable worth ...

Yeah, they're just savin' you money, bud.

Go-Go-Gadget-Wallet-Grabber!

[jblank]

Leave it to sony to find yet another way to give their potential customers the finger.

Yeah, damn those bastards for saving those who don't need an HDMI cable a couple of bucks, those sick sons of....

Tustin, with all due respect, considering how they are touting the BR playback on this thing, and the fact that almost all HDTV's for sale today have HDMI ports, including a 6 dollar HDMI cable (and thats what it costs us, they would pay far less for it in bulk) is not asking too much.

[Kevin Grey]

Oh, and 1080p requires 2 HDMI connections,

?  First I've read of that.  Where did you see that at? 

[jblank]

Leave it to sony to find yet another way to give their potential customers the finger.

Yeah, damn those bastards for saving those who don't need an HDMI cable a couple of bucks, those sick sons of....

*they* are the ones putting HDMI front-and-centre.

Oh, and 1080p requires 2 HDMI connections, FWIW. When they say no HD cables, they mean no HD cables. That would mean no analog monitor cable, component, DVI or HD cables (or BnC). Saves you money, right? I could see them pulling this, there aren't THAT MANY HD sets compared to low-def TVs. This means they're giving you what everyone else has, and makes you pay more for the HD stuff (which WILL have markup).

But the two HDMI ports, AND the multi card reader built in? That's shit EVERYONE needs. (multi-card readers run ~15USD for the no-name ones; adding HDMI ports for people who have a 1080p capable set is catering to less than 1% of the current market base; MAYBE 2-3% by the end of the PS3 lifecycle). Oh, and as it has already been mentioned, there's the BR player which has questionable worth ...

Yeah, they're just savin' you money, bud.

Go-Go-Gadget-Wallet-Grabber!

1080p does not require 2 connections. 1 HDMI cable will easily pass 1080p material.

[jblank]

Oh, and 1080p requires 2 HDMI connections,

?  First I've read of that.  Where did you see that at? 

It's not true, ignore that.

Some facts:

Q. What version of HDMI does a consumer need to view 1080p content?

HDMI has always supported 1080p resolution, starting from version 1.0 in 2002. However, as with many functions that HDMI enables (such as DVD-Audio and SACD), it is up to the manufacturer to choose whether to implement 1080p in the device. Some TV and device manufacturers have chosen not to implement 1080p in their products because 1080p content has not been widely available, and because changing the internal electronics of the device to support 1080p would increase cost.

Viewing 1080p resolution requires at minimum that the HDTV have a display supporting the 1080p pixel resolution. Today, many HDTVs use display technologies (such as PDP, LCD, and microdisplay screens) designed for 720p pixel resolution.

In addition, many of today’s 1080p HDTVs support only 720p or 1080i on the HDMI input, then perform video processing to up-convert the 720p/1080i signal to 1080p. This is now changing, as 1080p content is becoming increasingly available, and HDTVs fully supporting 1080p in the display and HDMI electronics have begun to reach the market in early 2006.

All versions of HDMI are backward compatible. Consumers should not look for a particular version of HDMI, but rather for the functionality that they want the device to support (SACD, 1080p, etc.).

http://www.hdmi.org/about/faq.asp

[CeeKay]

Secondly, all of this is rumor.

If you're referring to the HDMI cable deal, why would Sony be spreading rumors about themselves? _{(click on #6 'What is HDMI?')}  did someone haxx0r their site?

[Purge]

Oh, and 1080p requires 2 HDMI connections,

?  First I've read of that.  Where did you see that at? 

It's not true, ignore that.

Some facts:

Q. What version of HDMI does a consumer need to view 1080p content?
....
In addition, many of today’s 1080p HDTVs support only 720p or 1080i on the HDMI input, then perform video processing to up-convert the 720p/1080i signal to 1080p. This is now changing, as 1080p content is becoming increasingly available, and HDTVs fully supporting 1080p in the display and HDMI electronics have begun to reach the market in early 2006.

All versions of HDMI are backward compatible. Consumers should not look for a particular version of HDMI, but rather for the functionality that they want the device to support (SACD, 1080p, etc.).

http://www.hdmi.org/about/faq.asp

My bad; I was mixxed up with the Type B connector (29pin vs the Type A which is 19pin) which is for higher-than-1080p I missread the > to mean => and thusly jumped to the false conclusion that Dual-HDMI's was to overcome the bandwidth limitation.

That FAQ is wacked though, it doesn't REALLY answer the question, and they degrade their answer by using "upconvert". When I went looking to find where I had mistaken the dual-HDMI requirement for bandwidth, I found some info that indicates most 1080i content is capable of displaying at 1080p using the correct 3:2 pulldown. That's where the "upconvert" they mention comes into play.

??? this makes me wonder, as that is a degraded image, right? I mean, 1080p is 2x the bandwidth of 1080i (interlacing drops half a frame); saying that 1080p using a 1080i signal run through 3:2 means you're getting 75% of the picture that a true 1080p signal is pushing into the set. (3:2 pulldown means you're using 2 full frames of data to display 3 frames) Right?

Also, how does the PS3 still support 1080p video on the base model (use the Sony FAQ link above, select #2) and NOT have HDMI??

[Kevin Grey]

Also, how does the PS3 still support 1080p video on the base model (use the Sony FAQ link above, select #2) and NOT have HDMI??

No, 1080p over HDMI is an issue with the ICT flag and possibly AACS spec, both of which are movie specfic.  For gaming in 1080p, component output should be possible though you have to have a TV that supports 1080p via component which seem to be about as rare as unicorns.  So while the PS3 should be able to output games in 1080p over component, good luck finding a display to accept it. 

[jblank]

Also, how does the PS3 still support 1080p video on the base model (use the Sony FAQ link above, select #2) and NOT have HDMI??

No, 1080p over HDMI is an issue with the ICT flag and possibly AACS spec, both of which are movie specfic.  For gaming in 1080p, component output should be possible though you have to have a TV that supports 1080p via component which seem to be about as rare as unicorns.  So while the PS3 should be able to output games in 1080p over component, good luck finding a display to accept it. 

Exactly. Component can handle 1080p but odds are it's not supported by your display.

Honestly, I wouldn't sweat the 1080p part much as I am not convinced, at this point and time, that it's going to be a huge difference for gaming.

[Kevin Grey]

??? this makes me wonder, as that is a degraded image, right? I mean, 1080p is 2x the bandwidth of 1080i (interlacing drops half a frame); saying that 1080p using a 1080i signal run through 3:2 means you're getting 75% of the picture that a true 1080p signal is pushing into the set. (3:2 pulldown means you're using 2 full frames of data to display 3 frames) Right?

Not sure I understand your question, but it's my understanding that most of the content on both HD-DVD and Bluray is stored progressively (viced interlaced like normal DVD), so there should be issues of upconverting with a display that properly supports 1080p. 

[jblank]

??? this makes me wonder, as that is a degraded image, right? I mean, 1080p is 2x the bandwidth of 1080i (interlacing drops half a frame); saying that 1080p using a 1080i signal run through 3:2 means you're getting 75% of the picture that a true 1080p signal is pushing into the set. (3:2 pulldown means you're using 2 full frames of data to display 3 frames) Right?

Not sure I understand your question, but it's my understanding that most of the content on both HD-DVD and Bluray is stored progressively (viced interlaced like normal DVD), so there should be issues of upconverting with a display that properly supports 1080p. 

Current BR discs are encoded in 1080p, MPEG-2. I'm "guessing" PS3 games will be encoded in 1080p also.

[gellar]

None of the consoles come with optical cables either, so this shouldn't at all be surprising.    Sony surely doesn't want to pay for a cable in every console box that a very small percentage up front will even use.  Expect it to come with the standard component cables in the upper version.  (PS2, Xbox and 360 didn't come with optical cables either...  i fail to see how this is some horror show that PS3 doesn't come with its high end cables)

What he said.

* gellar still needs to find a place that will let him preorder a PS3.

[jblank]

None of the consoles come with optical cables either, so this shouldn't at all be surprising.    Sony surely doesn't want to pay for a cable in every console box that a very small percentage up front will even use.  Expect it to come with the standard component cables in the upper version.  (PS2, Xbox and 360 didn't come with optical cables either...  i fail to see how this is some horror show that PS3 doesn't come with its high end cables)

What he said.

* gellar still needs to find a place that will let him preorder a PS3.

Again, it is hypocritical of them to an extent to make you pay top dollar for simply the OPTION of BR playback in HD, yet not include the means to take advantage of that. We've already proven that cost cannot be an issue, and that HDMI is nearly universally sold on all new HDTV's (and included on any decent HDTV made in the last year or two), so it's only going to have more market prescence as more and more HDTV's are sold.

I think you guys are underestimating just how many sets are out there with HDMI inputs that potentially could be plugged up to PS3's.