Nintendo Uses Colored Beads to Explain Wii U Storage

 Pages PREV 1 2 3
 

DVS BSTrD:

Kross:
4.2 GIGS FOR PROFILE/SYSTEM DATA?! What the hell?

I can install Operating Systems (with useful programs) that use half as much space. I really hope there was a misunderstanding somewhere. Wow.

No offense but, but you seem a little anal when it comes to beads. :P
see what I did there?

I didn't so I googled to figure it out.

After a few hours of research.

I now see what you did there.

WhiteTigerShiro:

Scrythe:
"You should probably invest in external memory, because we can't be arsed to include it ourselves."

Cheap for them, but not for you!

Because the price of a bigger hard-drive totally wouldn't have been factored into the cost of the system. But then, Heaven forbid that I should expect someone to look at the big picture of things.

Literally. It literally forbids it.

One of the lesser known commandments.

A Smooth Criminal:

Baresark:

A Smooth Criminal:

snip

You quoted me why exactly? I don't actually have any problem with Nintendo, but I am critical of stupid and poor decisions. I'm fine with them encouraging people to buy external storage. And their inability to see their user base consist of adults and kids who already speak in terms that pretty much everyone knows, is idiotic.

Not everyone speak those terms though. You think that they do, but they don't. You're definitely not critical of stupid and poor decisions, you're critical of decisions which don't make sense to you.

That is part of the human condition, you should get used to it. Two people see the same thing happen but see two very different outcomes. Dan Ariely, Danial Kahneman, Michael Gazzaniga have all written extensively about it. You don't agree with me, so you think I'm wrong. I can safely say this: If someone doesn't know the difference between a kilobyte and a megabyte, then speaking in terms of blocks also reveals little or no information to them.

Edit: Really what I'm saying is, it's ok if we don't agree. I don't hate Nintendo, but even if I did, it's ok for us to have two different opinions on the matter.

Baresark:
That is part of the human condition, you should get used to it. Two people see the same thing happen but see two very different outcomes. Dan Ariely, Danial Kahneman, Michael Gazzaniga have all written extensively about it. You don't agree with me, so you think I'm wrong. I can safely say this: If someone doesn't know the difference between a kilobyte and a megabyte, then speaking in terms of blocks also reveals little or no information to them.

Edit: Really what I'm saying is, it's ok if we don't agree. I don't hate Nintendo, but even if I did, it's ok for us to have two different opinions on the matter.

Except it's not opinion. It's fact.

It's a FACT that more people will understand the storage of the Wii U with a simple video like this. It's not my opinion that I think that they might, I know that it helps some people as a FACT. You are FACTUALLY WRONG if you think that this video will help no one who wants to buy a Wii U.

A Smooth Criminal:

Baresark:
That is part of the human condition, you should get used to it. Two people see the same thing happen but see two very different outcomes. Dan Ariely, Danial Kahneman, Michael Gazzaniga have all written extensively about it. You don't agree with me, so you think I'm wrong. I can safely say this: If someone doesn't know the difference between a kilobyte and a megabyte, then speaking in terms of blocks also reveals little or no information to them.

Edit: Really what I'm saying is, it's ok if we don't agree. I don't hate Nintendo, but even if I did, it's ok for us to have two different opinions on the matter.

Except it's not opinion. It's fact.

It's a FACT that more people will understand the storage of the Wii U with a simple video like this. It's not my opinion that I think that they might, I know that it helps some people as a FACT. You are FACTUALLY WRONG if you think that this video will help no one who wants to buy a Wii U.

I never said that people wouldn't understand better with the video. I never said anything of the sort. I said they need to drop the whole "block" talk and start using terms that everyone else uses. You need to chill. Because you seem like you are getting worked up over nothing.

Baresark:

I never said that people wouldn't understand better with the video. I never said anything of the sort. I said they need to drop the whole "block" talk and start using terms that everyone else uses. You need to chill. Because you seem like you are getting worked up over nothing.

I put words in bold because they're prominent words in the sentence and they shouldn't be missed. Bold text does not signify anger, If that's not what you're referring to with the 'getting worked up' part then I'm honestly not sure what else you're pointing at.

And they use the block talk so people who don't understand megabytes/kilobytes/gigabytes can understand how the memory works, and it DOES help them, a fact which you just agreed with.

The video isn't aimed at our demographic. Mike Wehner just used the video in the article so he could attack Nintendo for it, so saying that they need to drop the video and the block talk is the same as saying that they need to completely alienate that demographic.

DrOswald:

Scrythe:

A Smooth Criminal:

Actually it is cheap for you.

A hard drive will cost you about $50 if you just get a mediocre one, giving you about 500gb of storage. If they made it so you could buy a 32gb model or 64gb model, then you would be paying $100 for about 1/10th of the storage.

And all of this would cost me absolutely nothing on the side if it was internal!

Parts used for consoles, including the hard drive, are special made for the console. They are not mass produced in the same way as other parts. Because of this they are much more expensive to produce. That cost is passed on to the consumer in one form or another. If they included larger more expensive hard drives the price would be that much higher. By including cheap to produce parts and allowing you to use standard mass produced parts in conjunction with their hardware they keep their costs and our costs lower. We get more for our money this way.

I read this, walked over to my old PS3 (fat 40GB model) and yanked out it's HDD just to take a look at it. I then did the same thing to my newer PS3 (slim 120GB model).

Upon analysis, I can confirm what you say is correct in that they are specially made and not in any way mass produced from any major company. The 40GB was made by some obscure brand called "Hitachi", and I have yet to find out any information on the people who made the 120GB. Perhaps you'd have better luck than I did finding out who this "Toshiba" is?

A Smooth Criminal:

Baresark:

snip

I put words in bold because they're prominent words in the sentence and they shouldn't be missed. Bold text does not signify anger, If that's not what you're referring to with the 'getting worked up' part then I'm honestly not sure what else you're pointing at.

And they use the block talk so people who don't understand megabytes/kilobytes/gigabytes can understand how the memory works, and it DOES help them, a fact which you just agreed with.

The video isn't aimed at our demographic. Mike Wehner just used the video in the article so he could attack Nintendo for it, so saying that they need to drop the video and the block talk is the same as saying that they need to completely alienate that demographic.

You are just messing with me right? I just said that I didn't have a problem with the video explaining it to people. I think they should use big boy talk when they talk about their memory, which is my opinion (this fact I have never disputed with you). I also made a crack about Nintendo not understanding big boy talk about memory, but that was just a crack at which point you then called me out on all my hate. And at some point I said it's cool, we don't need to fight as us having two opinions is just fine.

MrHide-Patten:

shintakie10:
I absolutely am 100% for the ability to use external hard drives for my consoles. Why hasn't anyone thought of this before? Though this does basically tell me that when I get a WiiU I might as well get the elite package anyway just so I don't have to buy a hard drive right away.

My PS3 can do that easily and yet it still has 111 GB of internal memory to use.

Funny, I just looked it up on the internet and it didn't seem as easy as "plus USB into hard drive and other USB into system."

Perhaps you and I have different ideas of what easy is?

That 111 GB of internal memory is also on a HDD instead of Flash memory. The Flash memory is much better.

Scrythe:

DrOswald:

Scrythe:

And all of this would cost me absolutely nothing on the side if it was internal!

Parts used for consoles, including the hard drive, are special made for the console. They are not mass produced in the same way as other parts. Because of this they are much more expensive to produce. That cost is passed on to the consumer in one form or another. If they included larger more expensive hard drives the price would be that much higher. By including cheap to produce parts and allowing you to use standard mass produced parts in conjunction with their hardware they keep their costs and our costs lower. We get more for our money this way.

I read this, walked over to my old PS3 (fat 40GB model) and yanked out it's HDD just to take a look at it. I then did the same thing to my newer PS3 (slim 120GB model).

Upon analysis, I can confirm what you say is correct in that they are specially made and not in any way mass produced from any major company. The 40GB was made by some obscure brand called "Hitachi", and I have yet to find out any information on the people who made the 120GB. Perhaps you'd have better luck than I did finding out who this "Toshiba" is?

I should have been clearer. I should have said "generally". So you are right, the PS3 uses mass produced hard drives. It is perhaps the most visible exception to the rule. But my overall point still stands. That was a design decision that came at significant cost to the end user.

There are 2 main points you need to understand: How a console is designed and how a hard drive is chosen when designing a console. Here is a quick vastly under simplified overview of both:

Consoles are precision built machines. They have only a fraction of the power of a standard PC but can run similar programs. This is because the console is specifically designed for a certain job. All its parts are designed specifically to work together and with the software the machine will be running. There are exceptions to the rule, such as the PS3 hard drive.

There are three main considerations when choosing internal storage: Performance, cost, and storage size. Any gain in one area must come as a cost in another area. You want a cheap solution? The you either need to take a hit in storage size, performance, or both. You want size? Then be prepared to either have a slow or expensive drive.

The PS3 uses a standard hard drive. Cheap, mass produced storage. However, the drive is not precision made for use with the PS3. This means we have cheap storage at the cost of performance. I personally think this was the correct choice and the PS3 is better for it.

The Wii U, on the other hand, uses a custom flash drive specifically designed to work with the Wii U hardware in place of a traditional hard drive. Nintendo went with performance and price at the cost of size. As Nintendo has made explicitly clear, it is not meant to be the primary storage solution for the Wii. The cost to the consumer in this case is that we will need to provide our own storage solution when we want to start using the full potential of the Wii.

If Nintendo went with a larger internal drive that cost would be passed on to us in one way or another. Perhaps the Wii U would have worse performance if they changed the technology, perhaps it would cost an extra hundred. I don't know. Only time will tell if this was a good call on Nintendo's part.

In summary, there's no such thing as a free lunch. There is a cost to every design decision that goes into a console and we will pay that cost in one way or another.

Anyway, if you want to bitch about something, bitch about the lack of USB 3.0. That is the real problem here and currently my biggest reservation about the Wii U. Will the practically required external storage option be prohibitively slow in coming years because it runs on USB 2.0?

DrOswald:
want to bitch about something, bitch about the lack of USB 3.0. That is the real problem here and currently my biggest reservation about the Wii U. Will the practically required external storage option be prohibitively slow in coming years because it runs on USB 2.0?

This, right here, is the biggest reason why I'm railing so hard against this. I wholeheartedly agree that this wouldn't be as much of a problem if the hardware supported USB 3.0.

Hell, I wouldn't have come to that big bottlenecking issue I mentioned elsewhere in this very topic. Granted, 3.0 wasn't really a thing when I made that experiment, but considering all I've read on 3.0, running a game off an external drive seems less like science fiction now.

shintakie10:
I absolutely am 100% for the ability to use external hard drives for my consoles. Why hasn't anyone thought of this before? Though this does basically tell me that when I get a WiiU I might as well get the elite package anyway just so I don't have to buy a hard drive right away.

Xbox did that back in the day I believe. The external hard drive went on the top.

Scrythe:

DrOswald:
want to bitch about something, bitch about the lack of USB 3.0. That is the real problem here and currently my biggest reservation about the Wii U. Will the practically required external storage option be prohibitively slow in coming years because it runs on USB 2.0?

This, right here, is the biggest reason why I'm railing so hard against this. I wholeheartedly agree that this wouldn't be as much of a problem if the hardware supported USB 3.0.

Hell, I wouldn't have come to that big bottlenecking issue I mentioned elsewhere in this very topic. Granted, 3.0 wasn't really a thing when I made that experiment, but considering all I've read on 3.0, running a game off an external drive seems less like science fiction now.

Running a game off of an external drive using usb 2.0 isn't unrealistic, at least not now. Especially if it is running on a separate power source or using a y cable (as is strongly recommended with the Wii U.) I have experimented with this a lot, and most games run just fine on my computer. Load times can be a real problem depending on the game, but if the game was specifically designed with the assumption that it will be running off of an external usb 2.0 drive I don't see why it could not be done with clever use of hidden loading.

My concern is that as games become ever larger over the next 5 years that the USB 2.0 will become an insurmountable problem, thus greatly shortening the life of the console.

I am actually wondering about the 4.2 gb install. Flash memory is very fast. So fast that some hardware manufactures are looking into replacing conventional DRAM with Flash memory for certain devices. I am wondering if Nintendo might be getting really clever here, with a portion of that 4.2 GB (lets say 2 gb) reserved as a kind of half way between RAM and the Hard drive. Data that is accessed frequently could be stored here so the Wii U only has to access that data on the external drive once. That could mitigate the USB 2.0 problem, though I doubt it would solve it completely. This is all, of course, pure speculation.

By the way, I have a 3 TB USB 3.0 drive that I use for all non steam game installs. It runs games with no noticeable difference from an internal drive.

Edit: Ok, I went and looked up a few things.

The average read speed of a typical USB 2.0 device is 30-42 MB/second. This is actually pretty good when it comes to streaming games. For comparison, the PS3 slim optical drive uses a 2x Blue ray player that reads at 9 MB/second. So, theoretically, any game that would properly stream from a blue ray disc would easily work off of a USB 2.0 drive. Interesting.

DrOswald:

Scrythe:

DrOswald:
want to bitch about something, bitch about the lack of USB 3.0. That is the real problem here and currently my biggest reservation about the Wii U. Will the practically required external storage option be prohibitively slow in coming years because it runs on USB 2.0?

This, right here, is the biggest reason why I'm railing so hard against this. I wholeheartedly agree that this wouldn't be as much of a problem if the hardware supported USB 3.0.

Hell, I wouldn't have come to that big bottlenecking issue I mentioned elsewhere in this very topic. Granted, 3.0 wasn't really a thing when I made that experiment, but considering all I've read on 3.0, running a game off an external drive seems less like science fiction now.

Running a game off of an external drive using usb 2.0 isn't unrealistic, at least not now. Especially if it is running on a separate power source or using a y cable (as is strongly recommended with the Wii U.) I have experimented with this a lot, and most games run just fine on my computer. Load times can be a real problem depending on the game, but if the game was specifically designed with the assumption that it will be running off of an external usb 2.0 drive I don't see why it could not be done with clever use of hidden loading.

My concern is that as games become ever larger over the next 5 years that the USB 2.0 will become an insurmountable problem, thus greatly shortening the life of the console.

I am actually wondering about the 4.2 gb install. Flash memory is very fast. So fast that some hardware manufactures are looking into replacing conventional DRAM with Flash memory for certain devices. I am wondering if Nintendo might be getting really clever here, with a portion of that 4.2 GB (lets say 2 gb) reserved as a kind of half way between RAM and the Hard drive. Data that is accessed frequently could be stored here so the Wii U only has to access that data on the external drive once. That could mitigate the USB 2.0 problem, though I doubt it would solve it completely. This is all, of course, pure speculation.

By the way, I have a 3 TB USB 3.0 drive that I use for all non steam game installs. It runs games with no noticeable difference from an internal drive.

Wait wait, are you suggesting that this decision on Nintendo's part could possibly provoke a push for gaming hardware to run it's main component software with flash memory?

Let me rephrase that: Do you think solid state is just on the horizon?

Because I would be the happiest little girl if that was the case.

Scrythe:

DrOswald:
Blah blah blah

Wait wait, are you suggesting that this decision on Nintendo's part could possibly provoke a push for gaming hardware to run it's main component software with flash memory?

Let me rephrase that: Do you think solid state is just on the horizon?

Because I would be the happiest little girl if that was the case.

I really hope so. The Wii U technically has a solid state drive, but it is so small that we really can't count it. If current trends hold the next Sony and Microsoft console will be significantly more powerful than the Wii U. I don't think it is unreasonable to expect flash memory to be used in the successors to the PS3 and 360.

Other interesting info (I put this in an edit of my earlier post, but I wanted to make sure you saw it)

The average read speed of a typical USB 2.0 device is 30-42 MB/second. This is actually pretty good when it comes to streaming games. For comparison, the PS3 slim optical drive uses a 2x Blue ray player that reads at 9 MB/second. So, theoretically, any game that would properly stream from a blue ray disc would easily work off of a USB 2.0 drive.

I really don't know what to think about all this. It certainly is exciting.

shintakie10:

MrHide-Patten:

shintakie10:
I absolutely am 100% for the ability to use external hard drives for my consoles. Why hasn't anyone thought of this before? Though this does basically tell me that when I get a WiiU I might as well get the elite package anyway just so I don't have to buy a hard drive right away.

My PS3 can do that easily and yet it still has 111 GB of internal memory to use.

Funny, I just looked it up on the internet and it didn't seem as easy as "plus USB into hard drive and other USB into system."

Perhaps you and I have different ideas of what easy is?

That 111 GB of internal memory is also on a HDD instead of Flash memory. The Flash memory is much better.

Yet I can plug an external hard drive into my PS3 and use it. My point is either Nintendo has found a way to compress files a whole damn much or they're making people go out any buy more storage. They're trying to promote the third party titles and then they just shot themselves in the foot.

DrOswald:

Scrythe:

DrOswald:
Blah blah blah

Solid State what??.

MB per second and all that

You guys haave a very very interesting discussion going on which I read through... and understood a very small amount of so I am very proub of myself...
Can you answer my question below, please?

Is it just to buy any simple/normal USB devoce like a memory stick as an "external harddrive" or must it be a special brand or type of harddrive?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here