Talk:PlayStation Portable/Archive02

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 False information in the CPU section 2 This section is a lie. 3 The name 4 Hey 5 Region Encoding 6 Unnecessary edits 7 Sales and Compitition 8 External Links 9 Commercials 10 Please Sony's fans, let's be honest with the sales... 11 After a bit of checking 12 POV 13 Mebibyte vs Megabyte 14 Dust in the screen 15 Ds fanboys take over? 16 "Games" section needs references 17 +semiprotect 18 +E3 19 Redundant and mismatched sales comparisons/market share 20 Updated CPU section 21 New Section? Original PSP Content 22 PSP units shipped 23 PocketStation 24 UMD movies not doing as expected 25 New PSP SKU coming out 26 Variations and accessories

[edit] False information in the CPU section

"Overheating concerns have also been cited as a possible reason for the cap, and gaming site Gamesradar has said this is the "most logical reason for the processor capping.""

Gamesradar is not a credible source, and we have been able to run the PSP at 333 mhz on official UMD games with no overheating. Please remove the overheating reference once this article is unprotected. And yes, we all know it's Slithy from gamefaqs who put that reference there

Anecdotal evidence from an anonymous editor is hardly credible, either. Especially since overheating problems wouldn't necessarily manifest themselves simply by decreasing the IC's global clock period. Regardless, you're right that the information isn't credible, so I'll remove it. -- uberpenguin 03:09, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

The part about it being speculated has been up there since August. I think its a little fishy that someone would come and change it now. And it's true that there has been a lot of speculation for the reasons for this cap, yes even overheating. It's not like it lied, saying it was THE reaosn for the cap. I think it should stay.

It doesn't matter how long it has been there. It's speculation so it never really had any business there in the first place. Clock rate "caps" are always artificially imposed to prevent an IC from being used outside spec; if Sony decided that their CPU spec should be at X Hz rather than Y Hz, that's a design choice. Speculation on their reasons for a design choice is trivial, not noteworthy, and doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article. -- uberpenguin 04:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Then should the speculation about it being for power conservation also be removed ("apparently in an attempt to lengthen battery life")? That was presented with no sources whatsoever.

If nobody has any credible source for the info, I would support its removal. -- uberpenguin 05:30, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

It's pure speculation, which is why the alternative theories were added a while back. Nobody outside Sony knows the reasons for the CPU capping.

How about this: "During the GDC, Sony revealed that it has currently capped the PSP's CPU clock at 222 MHz, but nobody outside of Sony knows the reasons for the capping." Otherwise, it's just people posting speculation.

Oh, and FYI, valid is a synonym for "well-grounded," so there is no irony in calling speculation valid. There can be invalid and valid speculation depending on the logic behind it. And since Gamesradar (which is not a bad source, no matter what these Yanks say) explained their logic quite clearly, I called it valid. If you're going to keep up speculation regarding battery life, at least put back the alternative theory. People are going to continue pushing the envelope with these hacks, and it's wrong to give people the idea that it will always be 100% safe.

I say remove all speculative theories period. The text should be left at "During the GDC, Sony revealed that it has currently capped the PSP's CPU clock at 222 MHz." Or possibly "During the GDC, Sony revealed that it has currently capped the PSP's CPU clock at 222 MHz. Its reasons for doing so are unknown, but are the subject of some speculation." -- uberpenguin 14:45, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Gotta agree with Uberpenguin on this. Wiki is for the facts. Daniel Davis 18:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This section is a lie.

Please don't add this image to the article. It's a PR image owned by Sony (and is, as such, not a free image), but that's the least of its problems.

This is an obviously photoshopped image, with the screenshot superimposed over a photo of a PSP. Additionally, this is an airbrushed PR "screenshot," which doesn't accurately represent how the game actually looks.

Please don't use this image. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:54, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The name

Sony calls it PSP, not PlayStation Portable.—thegreentrilby 23:59, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

It could go either way. Doesn't matter. On PSP Firmware 2.x+, it displays the words "Playstation Portable" on the splash screen. --J. Nguyen 17:35, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

PSP - PlayStation Portable in Europe at any rate - the spelt-out text appears below the name in in-store advertising, on the box it comes in, and as stated above, once you upgrade to v2.00 firmware, on the splash screen. (Once place it doesn't appear is on game boxes though) Maybe just a European thing.--Rdd 19:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Since the discovery that the name 'PSP' is shared by a a neurological disorder ('Progressive Supranuclear Palsy') Sony have been in a state of indecision about the branding strategy for the PSP. Before this discovery, 'PSP' was the accepted way to refer to the console, now it's not so clear. --Dazzla 23:00, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Sony has registered both trademarks in Japan, Europe, and the Americas, and uses them interchangably in their press releases, similarly to their use of "PlayStation 2" and the abbreviation "PS2" [1]. -- uberpenguin 15:47, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

Hey i have heard lots of talk about people going on the internet on the psp and surfing the net. How do you do that?Any help Madin10 23:18, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Reply : firmware versions greater than 2.00 ( i think ). come with a internet browser. its a free upgrade from the official site. ( sorry havnt got link handy :-( . ) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.37.156.59 (talk • contribs).

To be more clear, the web browser was first added in firmware v2.0. This information can be found in the article. --Kamasutra 08:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Region Encoding

Please note - despite Sony's announcements that movies will be region-encoded, I have heard reports (and have verified myself with the promo copy of Spiderman) that some supposedly region-encoded movies will play on units from other regions. --Dazzla 22:04, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unnecessary edits

User:Triforce of Power - you edited my contribution to 'correct' the spelling of 'licence' - Wikipedia policy states that differences between US and UK spelling are acceptable as long as consistency within articles is maintained. As this is the first occurence of the word, 'licence' is perfectly acceptable.

Also, you capitalised the initial of the first word within the parentheses after 'WMA' ('requires'). This is incorrect. Please do not vandalise my contributions. --Dazzla 23:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Wow. That couldn't have been handled on the user's talk page or anything. 24.62.27.66 21:47, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sales and Compitition

What about Eurpoe? Please contact me if you have info or write on page.Wikiwo123 05:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Removed sales estimate. Basic maths shows 4 (NA) + 2.6 (Japan) + .8 (UK) + .5 France = 7.9M + the rest of Europe, Australia, Korea etc. is going to be close to 10million, and no link to analysts has been specified. Please don't post analyst estimates without a link 203.194.11.143 07:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, according to many articles, including a link inside of the article itself, the big guys at Sony say 10 million units and counting have been sold. In fact, many articles, inclduing those from CES 2006, state the same thing. The CEO himself said it. I don't know about articles, considering I'm somewhere where I can't necessarily access other websites than those "trusted", but I'm certain that the figures are at 10 million+, not the 7 or 8 million in the info box. --Terraguy 22:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

• doesn't sony only keep track of "shipments" as opposed to "sales"? 219.95.157.102 10:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External Links

I think the people who edit this page seem to be forgetting that Wikipedia is NOT a link repository. It clearly says in the External links section "DO NOT ADD MORE LINKS: THIS SITE IS NOT A LINK REPOSITORY If you have a link that you want added please use the talk page before you post anything." yet the External Links part is getting HUGE. There is no need for about 3/4 of the links. As far as the feature updates it should be a section in the article, that uses those links as references. The link to the "PSP forums" just simply doesn't belong in a wikipedia article, along with basically all of the PSP News site links. This is not the place to put links to fan run websites, only major sites that are NPOV. This is a factual article, if any of the other news sites has facts you want to use as source in the article, add them as a reference.

Also you should start holding people to the rules about adding links. Seraphim 23:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Apparently this page doesn't have a core group of editors. If nobody protests to this, i'm going to start going through and cutting down the external links section using the guidelines on Wikipedia:External_links in 3 days. Seraphim 08:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I was gonna wait till saturday and be kinda slow about it analyzing each link.. but I guess someone took the Be Bold statement to heart :) I agree with it. Seraphim 23:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Well culling out links is one of my normal editing habits, and going by WP:EL I really couldn't see much use here in anything other than the official portal, so... Thanks!wangi 23:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I think there should be a few links to be represented. Links only to major sites such as www.pspupdates.com and www.pspcrazy.com.

I would have included www.psp-hacks.com, but they contain some files that are sort of, well..., not legal.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Holosoth (talk • contribs).

Neither pspupdates or pspcrazy should be in the article. Pspupdates falls under the objectionable amounts of advertising category, and pspcrazy is not the top psp news site, i'd add psp.ign or psp.gamespot before adding pspcrazy, since they strive for neutrality. Also obviously psphacks is a site that is on shaky legal background. (Also remember to sign your posts and indent every paragraph)Seraphim 03:20, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I was using them as an example, since they are mainly psp forums (they're starting to grow into other systems though). I do agree with what you said. Whoops. Forgot my name. I do think that some links should be added. Holosoth

Forums in general for things like this shouldn't be linked to. They are inherently NPOV as usually everyone who goes there loves (in this case) the PSP. Also forum content for the most part doesn't add anything to an encyclopedia article. If they post anything valuable over there it should just be incorporated here. Seraphim 03:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Commercials

The U.S PSP Commercials are interesting, perhaps they deserve a mention. 151.199.43.120 02:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

You mean the borderline racism and stereotyping and the discussion as if it's the only handheld console in existence? Yes, I think it does deserve mentioning. Hydragon 05:10, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please Sony's fans, let's be honest with the sales...

I'm a Sony fan and i'm very angry 'cuz many people edits the total worldwide sales without any test, many say that the PSP and the DS has both the same sales, but that isn't true, this year Sony presented their sales record, and in the 2005 the PSP sold 6.22 millions of units worldwide, in the 2004 around 510.000 units, so add both and the total sales are less than 7 millions, in January the PSP sold in Japan 259.371 and the sales in USA and Europe still are unknown, so these give us around 7 millions of units...

If you can show some sources definatly make the changes, and I'll help make sure they stick. I don't think sony has ever discussed sold units, only shipped. Seraphim 06:22, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, Seraphim. Being an angry man is one thing, being an angry man with a stack of evidence is entirely another. Daniel Davis 06:26, 5 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

Sony sold over >4M PSPs in NA (NPD tracked independantly), >2.5M in JPN (media create tracked independantly), >2M in EU (independantly tracked via chart-track), and an unknown number in other regions (SK+AUS+NZ almost certainly is >500k). Whats the point in lying about videogame sales? And don't bother accusing people of being "Sony's fans" because it just makes you look ignorant ElWarri 04:15, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] After a bit of checking

The latest thing I could find was an article where Sony's head guy at CES 2006 stated that 10 Million PSPs had been shipped. [[2]] Now I know SOMEONE out there is going to holler about "shipped isn't sold", but, as far as I know, retailers haven't been howling about low sales to Sony, there aren't massive piles of surplus inventory in backrooms and there hasn't been any news about a slump. This would lead to the conclusion that the shipments are selling, lending the "shipped isn't sold" argument little credence. If Sony started dumping PSPs in a landfill for tax writeoffs, then we could use that argument, but at the moment sales are still brisk. It's been a while since CES 2006, so one would assume that the actual sale tally of PSPs is something above 10 million. I don't think it's as high as 14, certainly, but I don't think it's as low as 7 million. Daniel Davis 06:38, 5 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

[edit] POV

It must be our goal to remain neutral in regards to points of view. Inserting words like "is regarded to be the victor", "far wider variety of innovative games"- That's POV; it's completely different than merely stating that the DS has sold more. Heck, the whole paragraph smacks of POV, and considering that there are already parts of this article that talk about the sales of the PSP, it's completely unneeded. Don't revert this again please, Seraphim. Daniel Davis 22:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

Ok so lets re-write the section right here and then re-add it. It currently says:

"Overall however, by January 2006, the DS is generally regarded to be the victor with the DS having sold more than 13 million worldwide in comparison to the PSP's earlier shipping of the same number. This is generally attributed to the DS's lower price, as well as a far wider variety of innovative games available."

Lets change it to "According to the most recent sales/shipment numbers avaliable, 10 million units of the PSP have been shipped, sales figures are unknown, while 13 million units of the Nintendo DS have been sold. According to research done by About.com using the data provided by Gamerankings.com the reasons for the Nintendo DS outselling the PSP are it's low price point and the quality and quantity of the Games avaliable for the Nintendo DS." how's that?

Sounds great! Put it in. Daniel Davis 22:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

I'd also like to point out, for the people that will problary be claiming that this information is not needed to be in the article, that it should be included because it is standard for all video game console/system articles to include this type of information. It is included in the Xbox/PS2/Gamecube articles, N64/Playstation articles, Gameboy/Game Gear, SNES/Genesis, and it's included in the Nintendo DS article. This would be the only article that breaks the standard. If you feel it is extranious please post your argument for keeping market share comments out of gameconsole articles at the discussion page of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games thanks :) Seraphim 22:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mebibyte vs Megabyte

This pointless and silly argument regarding minutia about a two/three letter term took up almost 100k of space and well over half a talk page in and of itself. Thus, in order to preserve the peace here, I've archived it here. If anyone wishes to view the argument, or add to/continue it, feel free to do so there. Daniel Davis 09:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

The name you chose for the archive is very inappropriate. Seraphim 09:12, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

It's pointless bickering over a two/three letter term comparison. What would you call it? Daniel Davis 09:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

I would call it discussion over an editor deciding to ignore the Manual of Style, and revert changes that were made with the backing of the MOS, when the MOS tells specifically tells us to accept those changes. Seraphim 09:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Except, of course, that it wasn't any of that- and in fact you're now trying to extend the pointless bickering by creating yet ANOTHER pointless bickering argument, and attempting to draw me into it. The archive is aptly titled- pointless bickering. And so I bid you good day. Daniel Davis 09:32, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

We must have been participating in a different argument then. Since I created that section to discuss why we were required to leave the changes that Bbatsell (an admin) made to the page alone. Seraphim 09:45, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

This is a personal argment betweeen you two it looks like. Why dont you two take it off this page and talk about it on IM or email cuz I dont want to see another six hours of you people going back and forth and back and forth- its annoying and nobody CARES. 4.243.63.133 09:51, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

It's not a personal argument. I'm sorry you see it that way. In a few days when someone comes around and makes the changes again, you will understand why this discussion needed to take place. Seraphim 09:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I think you both need to quit taking these war-and-peace length discussions over here- its distracting. Shards of Glass 10:05, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

How could anyone consider the name 'pointless bickering' to be anything other than inciting? It is not an apt title. It is an insulting title. Not very encyclopediacal of you, Daniel Davis. Adolf Hitler was a complete douchebag, but we don't stick his entry under that title, do we? 24.62.27.66 22:09, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I consider it an accurate, if someone inflammatory, description. If you must debate style issues (and you refers to both of you, Seraphim and Davis), please do so on your user talk pages, since the debate has ceased to have any relevance to this article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I disagree, it was a discussion of a style issue in this article specifically, it belonged on this article's talk page. The discussion was needed due to the revert war that took place yesterday [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Seraphim 22:19, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Hm. This has been fun. Okay, let's ignore the crap and get to the core issues here. My position is as follows:

• If the term "MB" in the context of RAM capacity means 2²⁰ bytes, then it is more appropriate to use the unambiguous "MiB" since the SI definition for the prefix "Mega" is 10⁶. I remind you that this is a terse description of what WP:MOSNUM already states on this subject. If you disagree that quantities in multiples of 2²⁰ bytes should be labeled "MiB", then your discussion should be on WP:MOSNUM to try and get the policy changed, not here.
• Where the article talks about RAM, the term "MB" certainly does refer to 2²⁰ bytes since the CPU uses a binary addressing system (hopefully nobody here would be silly enough to contest this), and any non-binary multiple of bytes would be nonsensical from a design perspective. Experience and the design and configuration of the overwhelming majority of other IC-based binary computers also supports this. I believe this point is where the actual disagreement is, so please add some constructive dialogue as to why you disagree with this. Any examples or counterexamples you can come up with are invited and appreciated.
• The argument "Sony said MB so we should use MB" is moot because it is custom for even hardware manufacturers and software designers to use the ambiguous "MB" to refer to 2²⁰ bytes. The term they use is irrelevant because the WP:MOSNUM instructs us to use the IEC binary prefixes where appropriate. Therefore, please only discuss why you either agree or disagree that the quantities in question are binary exponents or decimal exponents, not what we all know is in Sony's press releases.

Please respond to the point(s) here that you take issue with so we can avoid pointless rhetoric and get down to the actual disagreement at hand. I'd also appreciate if nobody revert the article until this is settled (and that is agreed upon by all parties here). -- uberpenguin 23:42, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I defer to the WP:MOS. Since the term in the context means 2²⁰ bytes the MOS clearly states we should allow the change to stay if another editor decides to change it. I won't make the change since it is optional to make the change, however I won't revert it if someone does change it. I'd like to point out however, that changing the "MB" to "MiB" when talking about memory sticks, is incorrect, since sandisk's support page clearly shows that they use MB = 1,000,000 bytes when calculating their memory stick sizes. Seraphim 23:50, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Correct; I had changed one of the MiB references back to MB for this reason... You then changed it back, but I think you have the issue straight in your mind now. To make it absolutely clear, the RAM references should rightly use MiB (2²⁰ bytes), the mass storage (hard disk and memory stick) references should use MB (10⁶ bytes). -- uberpenguin 23:52, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Yup, I made the revert first in error, I did not realize that it was covered in the MOS and felt that it should remain MB since that is the term sony uses. Once it was re-added I decided to review the facts before edit warring and noticed that I was in the wrong. Then when you fixed it to go from MiB to MB I didn't look at the whole diff, and only saw the revert on the top part and read the "marketing" comment in the edit summary and thought you reverted the whole thing :p My bad :p Seraphim 23:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

So... Is there going to be any further dialogue on this or can I safely change the appropriate references to IEC prefixes without a revert? -- uberpenguin 00:53, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

There isn't any reason to change it to anything except what it currently is at. Daniel Davis 03:09, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I've already explained my reasons well, and Wikipedia policy has no problems with an editor changing storage capacities to IEC binary prefixes where appropriate. I again ask you to explain which of the above points you take issue with and why. If you have no real issues other than personal preference, I'll quote WP:MOSNUM: "If a contributor changes an article's usage from kilo- etc. to kibi- etc. where the units are in fact binary, that change should be accepted." Do you take issue with the units being, in fact, binary? If so, please address one of the reasons above so we can see where the misunderstanding lies. -- uberpenguin 01:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

As an encyclopedia we need to strive to be as accurate as possible. MB is not accurate in this context as it can mean two different things. MiB, however, is accurate. The course of action to be taken is obvious. --Cyde Weys 02:03, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

As an encyclopedia, we must also strive for CLARITY in our definitions as well as being accurate. MB is perfectly accurate in this context- which is why Sony uses the term in all of its literature. MiB, on the other hand, is in itself a vague term with which the vast majority of the public is unaware of and which hasn't found its way into the general discourse, despite what some would try to foster upon us. It's fine the way it is. Daniel Davis 02:24, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

My two cents

I've been mulling this over for a while, and its quite an interesting argument. But at the root of the matter, we have to ask ourselves this- hat does Sony mean when they put their prefixes down? I have seen some lovely data put down by Seraphim that show Maxtor and Sandisk use the term as Mebi. But Maxtor and Sandisk aren't Sony, Sony has never used the term Mebi. We are talking about Sonys Playstation Portable, it seems, correct? Then what we should do, if we want to resolve this, is simple-

Sony currently uses teh MB standard. They have used it in all their literature and all their specification. So, we have to assume that when Sony talks about MB, they are referring to MB.

We have some people who want to change it to MiB, saying Sony meant MiB instead of MB.

So the rational course of action it seems is to find a Sony-made source (Not Maxtor or Sandisk, but Sony themselves) that gives definite proof that Sony meant MiB. Then this argument can be resolved.

In the meantime, since Sony has never uised MiB in any of their stuff, we have to assume that they mean what they say- and that they mean MB. It is only fair. Shards of Glass 02:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I see the confusion is obviously that some folks think it's possible, even likely, that IC-based RAM in this console is a non-binary quantity. There is no argument here, just some confusion and unfamiliarity with general microcomputer architecture and industry norm. Consider:

I looked up the PSP's memory map on a trusted Playstation developer site, PS2DEV. Here it is, verbatim: [11]

+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Base Address  Length                 Description            |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0×00010000    0×00004000 (16 KiB)    Allegrex Scratchpad    |
| 0×04000000    0×00200000 (2 MiB)     Ge VRAM                |
| 0×08000000    0×00800000 (8 MiB)     Allegrex Kernel memory |
| 0×08800000    0×01800000 (24 MiB)    Allegrex User memory   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+

Okay, so let's do some basic arithmetic... First, keep in mind that Allegrex memory refers to that which is directly addressable by the CPU (named Allegrex). Here that is the scratchpad RAM (fast directly addressable on-die SRAM common in Sony's late console CPUs) and main memory (here labeled kernel and user memory). Kernel memory is obviously just main memory that is reserved for software purposes (surprise, the kernel). Now, notice that the highest addressable location in this map is 0x0A000000 (0x08800000 + 0x01800000). Subtract from 0x0A000000 the base address of the main memory (the start of kernel memory), 0x08000000 and you get 0x02000000 addressable locations in main memory. Since the PSP is byte-addressable (or do you have any reason whatsoever to claim otherwise), that corresponds to 0x02000000 bytes of main memory. 0x02000000 / 0x00100000 (or 33554432 / 2^20 or, if you prefer, 33554432 / (1024*1024)) = 0x00000020 or 32 in decimal. In a nutshell, the PSP's 0x02000000 or 33554432 addressable bytes of memory corresponds to 32 × 2²⁰ bytes of memory, or 32 MiB.

MiB is the correct and unambiguous term to use for this quantity. Your unfamiliarity with the IEC binary prefixes is not sufficient reason to revert the article. Sony's choice to use the ambiguous SI prefix mega- is also irrelevant. Wikipedia policy states that accurate changes to IEC binary prefixes should be kept. Unless you have any issues whatsoever with the accuracy of the above arithmetic, please stop reverting this change. -- uberpenguin 02:56, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Trusted developer site? That's a wiki! It's no more trusted than over here is- it looks like just anyone can edit this thing. I'll restate- do we have anything from Sony themselves, not Sandisk, not a wiki, but SONY, that states it? Shards of Glass 03:04, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I think uberpenguin has definitively resolved this issue. It's pretty simple, really ... flash memory is pretty much always measured in binary magnitudes of 1024, and he just found specific architectural information confirming that. --Cyde Weys 03:07, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

No, all he did was show a wiki that anyone can edit. Nobody seems to care about me, because I keep getting ignored. :( What I am looking for is definitive proof that Sony meant MIB. That can only come from a link that explicitly says that Sony means MIB- not from Maxtor or Sandisk or a Wiki. You can pat yourself on the back all you want you guys, but you haven't answered my question at all Shards of Glass 03:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

It's trusted because the persons that wrote that information on the wiki are prolific PlayStation software developers. You seem to be totally ignoring the fact that in this context MB and MiB refer to the exact same quantity, we simply want to remove the ambiguity of the prefix "mega". -- uberpenguin 03:19, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

People, stop the madness! Look, there shouldn't be any reason that any of you have to get into an edit war over this. If the accurate term is Mebi, but the common term is MB, then all that's needed is to put the Mebi in there, and after the first Mebi reference, we just put in a tiny sentence that states that Sony uses MB in its documentation. There, everyone can be happy- we can retain accuracy and nobody ends up getting confused. Daniel Davis 03:25, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Not a bad idea, but that goes beyond the scope of this article and can be quickly found out by reading the already-linked MiB article. I won't change anything just yet, but I see no reason to add a parenthetical explanation everywhere we use IEC prefixes. This is a wiki; the links are there for the precise reason of providing further reading. Thanks for at least conceding on the accuracy of the term, though. -- uberpenguin 03:30, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that a simple blurb goes beyond the scope, especially when it will create such added benefits as- not having to undo a thousand and one edits from people changing MiB to MB thinking they are spelling errors, plus giving visitors to the site something beyond just having to visit the link. Remember, we're not just on a computer page here, we're on a page that deals with consumer electronics. Sometimes a little blurb here or there can go a long way. As for the accuracy of the term, while I've never agreed with the IEC's conventions, I (unlike Shards there) do note that they are utilized on the official Sony developer sheet. That's all the proof one needs. Daniel Davis 03:37, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Fine. If your blurb is all it takes to end this discussion, by all means add it. -- uberpenguin 03:40, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I think personally that you're a wimp, doom127. They never showed proof, they never did anything that said they were right at all! And you just roll over like a little lap dog that you are. That is what Wikipedia is now? A place where whoever can persuade with lies gets his way? doom127, seraphim, uberpenguin, you're fools and I want no part of your wikipedia lies. Shards of Glass 03:42, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually I showed plenty of proof, some people just decided to remove it from this page. If you want proof go look at the "pointless bickering" page that doom127 moved it all to. When talking about RAM MiB is the correct word, when talking about storage space MB is the correct word. Seraphim 03:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry you have so little good faith in humanity... Bye now. -- uberpenguin 03:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, that's why I already had conceded a while ago that the term of MiB was accurate, even if I happen to disagree with its usage on this page. I think you need to calm down, Shards. Come on, it's a computer term, not a life. And for the record, I am not a wimp. Daniel Davis 03:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dust in the screen

When the PSP was first released, there were a lot of complaints about pieces of dust and such underneath the screen, along with "air bubbles". The article makes no mention of them, but I think they were a major factor in a lot of people passing up the PSP. Does anyone want to add it to the article? Shards of Glass 09:57, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Also the dead mice they found in a few consoles didnt help. Is anyone willing to add this to the article???

If you can find a reference i'll write it up. Seraphim 10:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Here is a link from IGN about the issues (it doesn't just talk about dust, but mention of the dust and bubble problems are in there). http://psp.ign.com/articles/574/574098p1.html Shards of Glass 10:05, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a better one? One that actually discusses the problem so I can write a small section on it. That one it's just included in a list Seraphim 10:10, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Here is something that discusses the bubble in detail http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-45535.html Shards of Glass 10:18, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Forum posts cannot be used as sources, since the forum goers don't have to verify the contents of their posts. Since Wikipedia cannot go out and check every fact, we rely on outside resources that do their own fact checking, it's kinda like we piggy back on their fact checkers. Seraphim 10:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ds fanboys take over?

It seems as if the whole article has been written from a ds fanboys perspective trying to look slighlty unbiased. The whole article has a lot of reference to ds and comparison of the two such as in sales and battery life. This is unfair and unnecessary. Why always comapare the two, sony has stated they are not targeting the same audience as nintendo ds, so why make so much metion of the ds. someone's pov has been made a part of this subject. The article needs a cleanup.

I have metioned this because of things such as the emphasis on the fact that shipped does not mean sold, where there is a sentence telling people about what it means and the fact that the word not is put in bold. There is no need to tell people what it does or does not mean, and most sensible people reliase that if something is shipped it means it WILL be sold. Also the word shipped is put in italix because someone wants people to be very ,very aware of this. completely unnecessary.

There is even an explanantion of why the nds is outselling it. Un-neded, where here to talk about the psp, not the ds sales superiorty.

Every single game console article, going all the way back to the NES has a section on Market Share. Just because the PSP is in 2nd place does not mean it is POV and unnecessary information. Infact that information and wording was already discussed on this page. Seraphim 20:23, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. I'll see what I can do about un-POVing it, but I would suggest that when you see POV problems you Be Bold and remove any pov comments (without edit warring, natch). --DDG 19:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing it aswell. Here are other points abot this article

There is an explanantion of why the nds is outselling the psp. A figure is given of how many ds are sold selling at 15 million,WHY?. its Un-needed, where here to talk about the psp, not the ds sales superiorty.

If you read the whole article everywhere there is something contradicting the psp, like anolugue stick is not practical. Who says its not practical? clearly someones POV. Someone said the psp graphics are near along the middle of a ps1 and ps2. no they are VERY close to ps2/current generation gaming. Alot better than in the middle, they are close to ps2 so that scale is improper and misguiding.

Again someone says the umd is not truly 'universal'. What? thats like saying the ds is not truelly a portable machine because its too big for my pockets.

And finally look at the crtiscims section!!!

Wow that is mighty. And if you go to the ds section??? no criticms.

If you can find a verifiable DS criticism go ahead and add it with a referenced link. Seraphim 20:23, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

People read the whole article. You will notice this ditinct air of critisizing the psp in every oppurtunity. I really think it needs clean-up from people/s point of view. Thanks.

I have tried to move all criticism to the criticism section to avoid the subversive criticism that you claimed. I also moved criticism of the UMD format to the UMD article. Also, please sign your posts in the future. --DDG 20:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

OK I've decided to be bold and get rid of the info regarding nintendo.about.com's comparison of the psp and the DS. It just isn't necessary as the only factual information it gives (regarding the 10 million shipment figure) is aleady mentioned a few paragraphs earlier. The relevant linked article comes across as fairly biased. The info regarding the DS apparant superiority in game quantity and quality can only be classed as opinion and therefore is not warranted.

It isn't opinion. They datamined on the gamerankings.com results. Seraphim 19:49, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

It is opinion and it's not necessary. To say that a system has more 'quality' games than another is an opinion, plain and simple. It doesn't matter if you try to back this up with supposed evidence (which I might add is based solely on game reviews - more opinion). Also if you continue to include the 'evidence' than at least correctly label the about.com website as nintendo.about.com.

If you want to remove the reasoning that's fine. However the facts about the DS outselling the PSP need to stay, since marketshare information is included in every single console related article. Also the correct lable is about.com, nintendo.about.com is just a subpage. Seraphim 07:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes you are right the marketshare info should stay. Not denying that.

Actually not every video games console section refers to sales. If you look at both the gamecube and nintendo 64 sections there is no reference to sales which involve showing the ps1 and ps2 sales, and the fact that it was badly outsold and lost both wars. Once again nintendo fanboys get there way. Yet on ps2 and psp sections there is extra emphasize. Again no critiscims in either the gamecube section or nintendo 64 section. Why is that?

"No reference" to sales which involve the PS1 or PS2? That's incorrect. The N64 article specifically refers to it, stating "With 32 million Nintendo 64 units sold worldwide, Nintendo was unsuccessful in recapturing the preceding SNES's market share and the fifth generation was taken over by the PlayStation which had sold over 100 million units worldwide." And in the GameCube article it says the exact same thing!

You need to actually READ the articles before you make accusations of bias on the part of Wikipedia- and stop using proxy anonymizers too. Daniel Davis 17:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

---

An anonymous user made this edit, adding a criticism from EGM, but did not provide a source. I searched for the phrase mentioned "a rare enough find as it is", and I only found this on EGM: [12]. This is a User-submitted review, and is not notable enough to be mentioned in the article. Unless you have a citation from a reputable source, please don't re-add it. --DDG 15:49, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Games" section needs references

The current contents of the section has no references, yet makes alot of claims that should be cited. It should also be pointed out that the section barely discusses the games on the PSP it is mainly a feature overview, i'm not sure how to address that so comments are welcome. Here's a list of claims that need to be cited:

The PSP is geared for gaming rather than multimedia

The UMD disks are small enough to fit comfortably in a pocket, and superficially similar to Sony's earlier product, the MiniDisc, but for the lack of a protective shutter and slightly different cartridge shape.

While it is used in the same way as the analog thumb stick of a modern console, the resistance springs are calibrated differently: They are softer, making quick, coarse adjustments a bit easier, but fine-grained ones a bit more difficult.

The graphics and audio capabilities of the PSP lie somewhere between those of the original PlayStation and the PlayStation 2.

While most of the available games are less complex than games available on PS2, the graphics nonetheless tend to be much closer in quality to the PS2 than the PS1.

This is probably in large part due to the small size of the screen, combined with the fact that unlike the PS1, the PSP's graphics chip performs texture filtering.

I'm not saying any of these are false statements, merely that they need references. Seraphim 21:27, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Well... there ARE blatantly false statements in there. For example, the blurb comparing the UMD to the MiniDisk states that the only differences between the two media are "a lack of a shutter and the cartridge shape". This is horribly false- MiniDisk technology is based on magnetic principles (like a floppy disk), while a UMD operates off optical technology like a DVD does. The two are completely seperate. The thing about the analog nub is also false- the differences between the stick and the nub go far beyond "spring resistance calibration". The other items- the "complexity" and "capabilities", seem to be very subjective to me so I won't comment on them. Daniel Davis 14:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] +semiprotect

I have just semiprotected this page to deal with a vandal. I intend to lift the block in 2 days,but if I forget, please remind me. --Improv 04:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] +E3

Hello. I was wondering if there is any real reason for replacing "E3" with "E³". I mean...isn't an extra small "3" pointlessly different and pontenielly harmful to the article? This should really be consistant. not only with itself but the E3 article as well. no need to push for a exponent that won't even be used by most viewers of the site, anyway.

[edit] Redundant and mismatched sales comparisons/market share

There is alot of old redundant data with one-sided focus in this section. We have 5-month old PSP shipment data (with special care made to mention its shipped) being compared with 'un-sourced', certainly more up-to-date, presumably from Nintendo (shipment, sold, credibility is all negated without a source). Its obvious that strong bias has influenced this section.

Contestable, unsourced information is being removed as is redundant data talking about x month old sales. ElWarri 04:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

There is a very good reason to point out that it refers to "shipped" units. Look at sony's listing of shipped numbers here. It says "2005/10/21 10 million units (Japan: 3.00 million/ USA: 4.47 million/ Europe: 2.53 million) " which means on october 21st it shipped enough units to bring the total amount of avaliable PSP's to 10 million worldwide. Their next shipment went out on December 31st. "2005/12/31 15.03 million units (Japan: 4.20 million/ USA: 5.81 million/ Europe: 5.02 million)" What this means is that at the end of 2005 the maximium amount of possible PSP sales was 10million since there were only 10m psp's avaliable for purchase. Also this does not mean that 10m were infact sold by year-end 2005, if that were the case every single store would have been sold out, which was also not the case, psp's were easy to find during the holiday season. This link shows alot of what i'm talking about. A company called media-create keeps track of sales for games and consoles in japan. They get exact numbers due to the way the japanese game stores are set up (this doesn't happen in the us). According to media create as of feburary 12th the total PSP sales in japan since it's release are at 2,993,215 which is alittle under 3 million. To date, sony has shipped 4.2 million PSP's to japan, which means that alittle over 1.2 million are sitting on store shelves or more likely warehouses. If we take out the mention that it is "shipped" numbers, it would give the false impression that the PSP has outsold the DS globally, however simply by looking at the japanese sales alone we can tell that 1.2million psp's that have been shipped are not yet sold, therefore the maximum amount of possible sold PSP's is 13.83 million (15.03m - 1.2m)when the actual number is going to be quite lower. We must make sure that we do not allow the reader to get false impressions when reading the article, that is why there is special care made to mention that it is shipped figures. Seraphim 06:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Updated CPU section

Updated the section on CPU speed-changing not working on 2.6, as the latest version of GTA Cheat Device can use 333mhz on 2.6.

-- Gary13579

Have a reliable source for that? (personally I think all the specifics of these homebrew hacks should be removed from the article... it's just pointless aside) Incidentally, proper unit convention would be "333 MHz"; space between quantity and unit, "M" is the SI abbreviation for "mega", and "Hz" is the abbreviation for hertz... Just FYI. -- uberpenguin 20:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have. http://pspupdates.qj.net/GTA-Cheat-Device-v0-9-Released/pg/49/aid/9852 I know that it isn't an official licensed game, but if homebrew can do it in user mode, surely it is possible that Sony licensed developers can do it (even if Sony won't let them). -- Gary13579

[edit] New Section? Original PSP Content

There is a small but growing number of people creating original content that can be veiwed on a PSP. In the interest of full disclosure, I have a flash cartoon that is available for PSP. Would it be appropriate to add a list of original PSP content? Or perhaps to start a new article about downloading and watching original content on a PSP? Wikifun! 16:37, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PSP units shipped

Can someone provide a link proving that it is 15 mil. because I'm starting to think it is inflating like the Nintendo DS's sales did. Jedi6-(need help?) 22:13, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

The "15 Million Shipped" statement is already sourced in the article itself, referencing Sony corporation's own statements [[13]]. We have to used shipped as opposed to sold because Sony doesn't keep track of sell data, only shipments. This is also why it is explicitely stated in the article (several times) that the unit lists are shipped and not sold. Daniel Davis 23:07, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok I was worried it was an anon increasing it falsly. I wish Sony would give out numbers like Nintendo. It would simplify everything. Jedi6-(need help?) 23:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I've talked about this on this talk page elsewhere. The 15m shipped would be equal to total units sold if the PSP was sold out globally, which is obviously not the case. Seraphim 23:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

That's not exactly true either. The 15 million tally is from December of this last year, meaning that there's been plenty of time for Sony to sell those 15 million and put a few more shipments on the shelves. But, of course, we don't KNOW for certain anything except that Sony shipped 15 million units as of December 31 2005. Daniel Davis 23:36, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Sony has always updated their bizdata page the day they make the shipment. We do know that at this time there are 15.03 million psp's out there. They update when they make the shipments (note these shipments aren't to the stores themselves, they are to sony's distribution centers) they don't wait for a quarter or so, as is obvious by the fact that they posted some shipment numbers 22 days apart gearing up for the christmas season. Seraphim 01:15, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Regrettably for the PSP it isn't near 15 million sold. Jedi6-(need help?) 02:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PocketStation

Maybe a note should be made of the PocketStation, as many people seem to think that the PSP is Sony's first foray into handheld gaming... --Wulf 03:23, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UMD movies not doing as expected

The story has been published by GameCloud and picked by Wired blog. According them, Universal Studios and Paramount Pictures have already dropped support from the format, and others are considering dropping it as well. -- ReyBrujo 12:57, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the story has been first published by Hollywood Reporter. -- ReyBrujo 12:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree that companies should drop support for UMD movies since the PSP is the only device in production that plays UMDs Sony is reluctant to make other devices and license other companies to make UMD players for movies. --Nintendude 01:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Add is to critisicms if you want, but I think it's better suited for the UMD page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thaddius (talk • contribs) .

[edit] New PSP SKU coming out

I don't have any reference I can cite other than what my manager said at my Best Buy, but a new PSP box is coming out, with just a PSP in the box (no accessories) for $199 in the very near future. Should such a thing be mentioned? Robert 19:24, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Damn, it's in there already. Disregard. Robert 19:28, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Variations and accessories

In all territories? which territories? G Clark 22:45, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

What is in the 'base unit package'? Lmnt 15:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC)