• On mySimon: The Double-Daring Book for Girls
October 1, 2009 2:57 PM PDT

Which game console should you buy?

by Jeff Bakalar
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 403 comments

UPDATE: On 11/12/09 we updated this feature with new info on the Xbox 360 dashboard update and Netflix streaming being added to PlayStation 3.

A lot has changed since the Xbox 360 debuted in November of 2005. After what has seemed like dozens of upgrades, improvements, omissions, price drops, and bundles, the dust has settled (for now) and we're left with three competitively priced consoles.

Such an evenly matched trio of hardware makes for the perfect time to reignite the ultimate question for prospective video game console buyers: which home console should you buy?

This question doesn't necessarily have a definitive answer. Quite frankly, the answer could be any of the three. In other words, there is no default "best console." It's about finding the one that's right for you--and what will be the deciding factor in your case will ultimately depend on what you plan to use the console for. That said, in lieu of detailing every last bit of functionality that each console offers, let's discuss the type of person we think would benefit most from each console.

Nintendo Wii ($200)
While the recently discounted Wii isn't regarded as a "hardcore" gamer's console, the system has served up some pretty compelling titles over the past three years, like Super Mario Galaxy, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Metroid Prime Corruption, and Super Smash Bros. Brawl. We are looking forward to games like New Super Mario Bros. Wii and Super Mario Galaxy 2, but big name titles like these are few and far in between.

All things considered, the Wii has become best known for its addictive party games, the occasional fitness game, and shooting titles that emulate light gun arcade games. The amount of first-party Nintendo titles is small and a large amount of third party games are written off as gimmicky cannon fodder.

The Wii's online multiplayer experience isn't anything to write home about, but we definitely recommend playing Mario Kart Wii online. Unfortunately, the Wii's 16-digit friend code system did not catch on with most gamers. The established Virtual Console offers an impressive amount of classic games from various older gaming systems and WiiWare provides a platform for inexpensive titles from independent developers.

Aside from games, the Wii doesn't offer much in terms of additional functionality. It can't play DVDs or CDs, and its only streaming media compatibility comes from PlayOn's third-party PC software.

Accessories for the Nintendo Wii can add up. The console supports up to four Wii remotes and Nunchuks (the system comes with one of each), and now, with the debut of Wii MotionPlus, you'll want to get a few units so that you can play titles that take advantage of the new motion technology. All this, plus extra chargers and batteries can become quite pricey, creating a lot of hidden costs.

The Nintendo Wii is best for: Parents with children who are just beginning to enter the world of gaming, family gaming, and an environment with a lot of people (dorm room or apartment with numerous roommates).

The Wii is not the best choice for: Those who are looking for a game console that doubles as an all-purpose entertainment hub, want state-of-the-art HD graphics, enjoy a robust online community, and/or those who prefer a wide selection of adult-targeted titles.

Key Wii exclusives: All Zelda, Mario, and Metroid games.

Super Mario Galaxy is one of the best games available for the Wii.

(Credit: Gamespot)

Xbox 360 (Elite $300, Arcade $200)
The Xbox 360 still remains the better-selling of the two powerhouse consoles of this generation. This is partly due to the system going on sale an entire year before the PlayStation 3 and because the console did have a much stronger lineup of exclusives early on in its life cycle. Also, at launch, Xbox 360 was considerably more affordable than the expensive PlayStation 3.

With over 20 million members worldwide, Xbox Live is the most complete online console experience available today. The caveat is that the "Gold" Membership tier--required for online gaming and access to the best perks--requires an annual fee of $50. (By comparison, the Sony and Nintendo online networks are free.) Like Sony's PlayStation Network (PSN), Xbox Live offers downloadable games (both casual "Arcade" titles and full games), game add-ons (downloadable content, or "DLC"), and the capability to buy and rent TV shows and movies, many of which are in high-definition video. Some of the purchased videos can also be transferred to Microsoft's Zune portable media player. (Note that you'll need a hard drive to fully enjoy most of these features; the Elite includes a 120GB model, but it's a separate purchase for the Arcade).

In terms of additional functionality, the Xbox 360 is currently the only console to offer streaming Netflix and (soon to be released) Facebook and Twitter applications. You can stream digital media from a networked Windows PC, and the 360 can double as a full-on Windows Media Extender for those running Windows Media Center on their PCs; third-party products such as PlayOn and TwonkyVision can also expand the 360's default streaming capabilities. Xbox 360 will also recognize most music players and hard drives, so you can manually plug these types of devices into an open USB port and play music, photos, and videos right on the console. However, unlike the Blu-ray capable PS3, the Xbox 360 can only play standard DVD movies.

Beyond all of its impressive media capabilities, the Xbox 360 is also an excellent game machine. Most triple-A titles are available on the 360, save for a few PlayStation 3-only games, and the games generally look as good as or better than their PS3 counterparts. The console also has its fair share of exclusives, including the Gears of War, Halo, Forza, and Fable series.

There are plenty of Xbox 360 accessories that can extend the overall cost of owning the system. Additional controllers and rechargeable batteries represent the core add-ons, but you can also spend money on wireless headsets, charging docks, and messaging keypads. We should note that, unlike the Wii and PS3, there is no wireless networking available out the box on the 360. You'll need to purchase a wireless network adapter for that functionality.

Note that the Xbox 360 has a notorious (and deserved) reputation for bad reliability, thanks to the "red ring of death" problem that afflicted far too many early models. However, the current iterations of the 360 now sold on store shelves use updated components that have largely made this problem a thing of the past.

While the $200 Xbox 360 Arcade may appeal to value-minded buyers, we strongly recommend prospective 360 owners spend the extra money for the Elite; the hard drive is really a necessity to enjoy the 360 to its fullest extent.

The Xbox 360 is best for: Those who want an easy-to-use interface; gamers who take online gameplay seriously; gamers who already have friends on Xbox Live; hardcore and casual gamers; anyone who wants a good all-in-one gaming and entertainment system; Netflix fans.

The Xbox 360 is not the best choice for: Those who want the PS3's added value of built-in Blu-ray and Wi-Fi.

Key Xbox 360 exclusives: The Halo, Gears of War, Forza, Fable, and Left4Dead series.

Gears of War 2 is possibly the best-looking game on the Xbox 360.

PlayStation 3 ($300)
There's no doubt about it, the PlayStation 3 did not get off to a great start when it was released in November of 2006. Fast forward almost three years and the console has definitely righted the ship. Now available in just one $300 model (though rumors of a 250GB PS3 abound), the PlayStation 3 Slim offers a solid library of games (including the Uncharted and Resistance series), access to the PlayStation Store, and one of the best Blu-ray players on the market. (It also plays DVD movies and CDs, of course.)

While it may be totally free, the PlayStation Network doesn't necessarily provide you with the best online gaming experience around, but if you don't consider such a thing important, its offering is more than sufficient.

Like Xbox Live, the PlayStation Store is host to tons of movies, TV shows, demos, and downloadable games. PlayStation 3 also offers Home, a "Second Life" sort of experience where you can set up shop in a virtual world. While Sony had been hyping the feature for years, PlayStation Home is now generally regarded as a dud.

Just like the Xbox 360, there are plenty of ways to get digital media streamed over the console via a home network or a third-party product like PlayOn. You can also hook up a device via USB and play media that way as well. In early November 2009, the PlayStation 3 introduced a Netflix streaming solution that requires a BD-Live Blu-ray disc that can be obtained for free from Netflix.

While the Xbox 360 and Wii have various accessories available, you probably will need to purchase only a few with the PS3. Aside from additional controllers, there is not much you'll need. (The biggest annoyance: you'll need an infrared-to-Bluetooth adapter if you choose to use the PS3 with a universal remote.) The console uses Bluetooth technology so you can use almost any headset for chatting purposes. Also, the PS3 allows for user-replaceable hard drives, so you have the option of upgrading yourself.

Sony has marketed the PS3 as an exceptional deal due to its built-in Blu-ray player. While getting a "free" Blu-ray player is one of the console's major selling points, its benefits to the gaming experience remain mixed. It offers game developers much more space to work with than a DVD, but that hasn't translated into a quantum leap in graphics quality--the PS3's graphics are essentially on par with that of the 360. Also, the Blu-ray drive's fixed speed is problematic: it requires many PS3 games to do a preliminary hard drive installation when playing a game for the first time.

The PS3 is best for: Hardcore and casual gamers who aren't concerned with the ultimate online experience, early adopters, do-it-yourselfers, and videophiles who need the latest and greatest in Blu-ray.

The PS3 is not the best choice for: Those who don't care about HD graphics or video.

Key PS3 exclusives: The Uncharted, Gran Turismo, Resistance, and Killzone series; LittleBigPlanet.

Uncharted has quickly become the PS3's staple franchise.

The following products mentioned are available.

On Sale Now: $199.00 - $249.89
View the latest prices for Nintendo Wii

On Sale Now: $379.95 - $440.43
View the latest prices for Microsoft Xbox 360 Elite

On Sale Now: $299.99
View the latest prices for Sony PlayStation 3 Slim (120GB)

Before covering games and gear for CNET Reviews, Jeff Bakalar dabbled in film and video production. An avid writer, reader, and gamer, Jeff is also an obsessive New Jersey Devils hockey fan. Catch him live every day as the co-host of CNET's infamous podcast, The 404.
Recent posts from Crave
One of Google Chrome OS's hardest tasks? Printing
Kid-friendly headphones
Moto Cliq gets software update
A necktie for music-loving commuters
Everything you need to know about buying a laptop this holiday season
Gimmicks are the new megapixels
On Call: All about the Droid
Twitter founder formally unveils 'Square' project
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 9 pages (403 Comments)
by douggdangger October 1, 2009 3:33 PM PDT
XBox 360 Elite

$250 w/Microsoft rebate.
Reply to this comment
by Absolution2009 October 1, 2009 4:37 PM PDT
$100.00 off PS3 Slim if you have the Sony card
by RockaTech October 1, 2009 11:06 PM PDT
anything but the Wii
by Saltiva October 2, 2009 6:12 AM PDT
Upgrade or buy a NEW PC INSTEAD!!! I am a strong believer in multifunctionality and I believe the PC wins hands down. You can incorporate Bluray, faster CPU and GPU, more RAM, and larger Harddrive---plus if you do it right you can later upgrade to prolong its life- my last pc build is reaching its forth birthday (which is ancient in computer years) but it is still effective with modern games due to the upgrades I was able to make; however, already built systems from Dell, HP and so on offer a great value compared to most selfbuilds nowadays. I owned the Xbox, Xbox360 (x2), PS3 and PS2 and seldom use any of them... I use my PC very REGULARLY because it serves a greater purpose and has more functionality. I am getting a new system soon that will incorporate WIN7 and Directx11. Plus with PC games you can play most newer ones free and upgrade items with micor-purchases.
by Rod Roddy October 2, 2009 6:56 AM PDT
I'd even go with the DSi instead of the Wii.
by freemarket--2008 October 2, 2009 10:38 AM PDT
@Saltiva: Apparently, you have a lot of cash to waste. These days most people don't.
by scrubbingbubbles October 2, 2009 3:26 PM PDT
PS2 is still going strong as far as fresh games....what PC could you upgrade for that long? oh....and how much did the PS2 cost at launch as opposed to your PC? Game set and match....CONSOLE
by bennyx8903 October 2, 2009 5:10 PM PDT
halo online kicks balls
by Fil0403 October 4, 2009 3:45 AM PDT
Wii

$200 w/o any rebate.
by drezjohnson October 4, 2009 8:40 AM PDT
Just bought a PS3 (with extra controller) for $215. I took advantage of the Sony credit card deal and although the website says it takes 8 - 12 weeks to get back a $100 credit, it only took about a week for me to get mine back. Final cost -- $299 + $15 tax - $100 Credit = $215 FINAL PRICE. Since then Sony has changed the offer to $50 back rather than $100 but $249 still ain't a bad deal especially when you can get an extra controller with the 80gb model. For those of you who missed the $100 offer...maybe Sony will bring the offer back for the holiday season.
by Nostradumbass October 6, 2009 8:51 AM PDT
I'm a long time PC gamer but the issue that exists is cost. A single decent video card upgrade can run you almost as much as a console. When technologies change (PCI to PCI-e for example), now you have to include cost of motherboard, cpu, and memory, etc. Cost of ownership for PC gaming is crazy. If the console game companies would include keyboard and mouse support (like Unreal tounament for ps/3) there would be less and less reason to game on the PC. I can see why xbox might not want this since they make a great deal of money on the PC market for both os and games. But I don't know why Sony doesn't push this as a more standard feature because it would be a major differentiator for them and xbox. Native keyboard and mouse support as an option in games would start to open up more PC based markets like mmo's as well to make headway in the console market.
See more comment replies
by HMetal68 October 1, 2009 3:43 PM PDT
Great article. Let the fanboy flamewars begin.
Reply to this comment
by Firehazel October 2, 2009 5:15 PM PDT
true. i kinda dont care about video games anymore, i play casual and Emulate.
by justin0725 October 5, 2009 12:59 PM PDT
Well said.
by partoflife December 1, 2009 8:30 AM PST
lol
by kingrah1 October 1, 2009 4:02 PM PDT
PS3 is best!!
Reply to this comment
by edfranco11 October 1, 2009 10:30 PM PDT
ONLY because of blue-ray
by make_or_break October 2, 2009 11:23 AM PDT
Except for the black screen of death on my MGS-80GB 'fatty'. Hate when that happens. Still no RROD on my early 360; one of the very lucky ones, I guess.
by xmaster_dosx October 2, 2009 12:00 PM PDT
@make_or_break
you are very Very lucky my friend
by PhaseDMA October 3, 2009 3:22 AM PDT
Amazing what happens when you don't play it 16 hours straight in the attic with the console stuck between 3 cabinet walls.

Okay there was a issue with the old 360s, but if your new 360 over heats you are doing something wrong.
by bbaxley October 5, 2009 6:40 PM PDT
Sony PS/3 warranty and reliability is horrible. Like many others, the blu-ray drive died after a year and Sony wants $150 to repair since the warranty is up. Check out site petition site of around 1000 owners requesting a Sony recall before buying this poorly engineered & supported console. http://www.petitiononline.com/PS3BRDW3/petition.html Also, if you like Netflix, write off hoping that Sony will ever offer it like other companies (competition). My Sony PS/3 is sitting here unplugged beside me since I refuse to pay to repair something I seldom used.
by izmickey October 5, 2009 10:35 PM PDT
@bbaxley
Only a thousand? Thats not bad at all compared to what xbox360 petition went through. Dude if you dont want to use the system sell it to someone who knows how to fix it. Sony had a better warranty than MS right off the bat. Dude you need to do some research before mouthing off. Not every system is flawless whether it be xbox360 ps3 or wii, some fail, get over it.
by bbaxley October 6, 2009 3:47 AM PDT
@izmickey - Dude, I did my research!! The statement was that 1000 people signed the petition which means there are typically multiples of that number that failed with the blu-ray problem. According to my research & in my own experience, the failure occurred after a recent Sony software update. Others have personally done repairs to their blu-ray drive and others have paid Sony only to see their drive fail again. I am simply waiting for the next software update to see if Sony corrects a potential software glitch. In the interim, since I actually purchased the unit to watch blu-ray movies and access my WHS, I purchased an LG-BD390 which accomplishes both and additionally provides access to my Netflix movies. Finally, it is my understanding that Microsoft expanded their warranty to 3 years and finally admitted the problem. Sony is still stuck at a 1 year warranty and will not acknowledge a common failure with either the software or hardware.
by johnboij October 10, 2009 3:20 PM PDT
Does MS RROD warrties cover disc reading error failure?
by fruitkabob October 12, 2009 4:16 PM PDT
MS will replace games that were published by their own companies but if the game gets scratched badly or u see rings on the bottom of the disk you can usually go to a blockbuster or gamestop and they will use one of their machines to fix it (for a small fee). here is a list of games that Microsoft will replace but there may be more. Banjo Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts
Fable II
Forza Motorsport 2
Gears of War
Gears of War 2
Halo 2
Halo 3
Halo Wars
Lost Odyssey
Ninja Blade
Ninja Gaiden 2
Project Gotham Racing 4
Scene It? Box Office Smash
Viva Pinata
Viva Pinata: Trouble In Paradise
You?re In The Movies
by PBarrette December 1, 2009 8:58 AM PST
I have all three, and was playing the 360 more than the others. BUT, my 360 Elite (purchased the day it came out) RROD'd, so I sent it back for repair/replacement. I have now gone through 3 replacements, and all three dies with an RROD within an hour of use. I am awaiting a fourth and MS has assured me they will expidite things to make me happy. Well, too late. I've had no 360 for 2 months now! And my setup is on an open air shelf next to my PS3 60GB, which is happily chugging away. Please don't question my use of the 360, if I was doing something wrong MS wouldn't be continually sending me new ones. There is one thing I can brag about, I live near several GameStops, and I have tied the record at one for most refurbs (currenlty awaiting number four), but I am still behind at another GameStop, the manager there went through 5, then his 6th was OK. I've heard stories like mine from many people. The MS folks on the phone always act surprised somebody could need more than one refurb, and so quickly. But mention it in any good sized gaming store and you'll hear plenty of folks say they went through the same thing. Bottom line is MS has lost me as a fan here. I have two 60GB PS3's and neither has had a problem.
See more comment replies
by 1bumgarner October 1, 2009 4:07 PM PDT
Article was good, but disagree with some "pros" of the 360. First off you have to PAY for the so called great online experience. I guess if you are willing to pay for something that you can get for free elsewhere then you really do "take online gameplay seriously". The PS3 online experience is every bit as good as the 360's and it is free! Wii's online stuff is free too! Also I find the 360's interface confusing as hell! I agree with all the other pros of the 360. It does have some nice exclusives but so do the other systems. I am extremely jealous about the GTA DLC. But hey PS3 has no RROD and BLU-RAY! PS3 WINNER!
Reply to this comment
by rich12313 October 1, 2009 4:10 PM PDT
wow. i cant tell you how many times ive read comments exactly like yours. real creative there.
by Nakarou October 1, 2009 6:09 PM PDT
Look at it another way, with the xbox subscription, you get the best online experience that never has lag and get rid of most of the laggers,flamers,hackers,spammers would take advantage of online gaming. I've played the wii and ps3 online with a Highspeed connection, and its absolutely horrible, people lagging left and right and screechers(mostly on the ps3). When I play with the xbox 360, lag is no where to be found and I have a chance to play with the pros. 360 wins!
by magicGenesis October 1, 2009 6:38 PM PDT
@ Nakarou

obviously you never have played ps3 online. Xbox Live and PSN don't have anything to do with the lag. The only reason psn would be better for just online gaming is because it has dedicated servers. Otherwise, most games use a p2p network.

do you see 360 games with 256 player online, lagless?
by edfranco11 October 1, 2009 10:38 PM PDT
I like PS3 and it does offer blue-ray but the disks are so expensive plus they don't look all that better then regular DVD's.. the only thing i noticed is the sound quality is superior. Xbox has games games games and live witch happen to be superior of anything out there and you know this.
by dhavleak October 2, 2009 3:41 AM PDT
@ 1bumgamer:

1) If you claim that the online gameplay experience is the same across all three consoles -- then there is no way you have actually used xbox live -- it simply blows the competition away. All the party management features for communicating with your team / friends / party and the way they work consistently across different games, and the flexibility of that functionality is simply not present on the PS3 or Wii

2) Wii's online stuff might be free -- but have you ever added someone to your friends list on a Wii? Good luck trying to charge for that experience!

You're right about RRoDs being a big downer on the 360. You're right about BluRay being a positive for PS3. However -- the warranty really does go a long way in compensating for RRoD hassles. That coupled with the superior experience makes it totally worth it. I might sell my other consoles when I'm done with them, but you'll have to pry my 360 out of my cold, dead hands. Netflix on the 360 goes a long way in compensating for the lack of BluRay btw. The convenience of the feature and quality of the service is very compelling. And I can't wait for the next dashboard update -- there's always something new and awesome with each successive release.
by TheStairMaster October 2, 2009 4:39 AM PDT
as for a lot of complaints with lag or dropped connections, in my experience much of these issues were related to the game you were playing online with. if its old, it'd typically have a few issues, but on recent releases the problem is almost gone and on the uncharted beta i havent noticed any connection based issues whatsoever.
by roachbrain October 2, 2009 5:36 AM PDT
@ dhavleak

I have yet heard a reason why live is so superior to PSN. All you say is because of party communication. I've had both and there is absolutely no difference in experience but one has private chat and a colorful menu, hardly something I would justify paying for. I always hear the same thing over and over but never the damn answer to that question. CoD has lag issues and drops on both systems. Now play Killzone or warhawk on PS3 with wifi and tell me if it lags. I'm sorry but I had both and I much prefer my PSN over live any day; just my personal choice.
by Absolution2009 October 2, 2009 8:22 AM PDT
1. Who cares about the dashboard or whatever it uses to run different selections. The key is at least it does. It's the games that matters.
2. I have gold live and PS3 free network. Gaming online is gaming online. There is no freaking difference, get it across your heads.
3. Majority of Xbox 360 is P2P, exception might be Halo since it's huge. You blame it on the 3rd party servers for lag etc. PS3, Sony Dedicated servers. You blame Sony for lag. Hence, more complaints against Sony because it's their friggin servers, doesn't mean that it sucks. If Xbox had majority of dedicated servers, you'd have complaints against Microsoft instead of the 3rd party servers.
by dhavleak October 2, 2009 11:53 AM PDT
@ roachbrain

When you call it just "party chat" you're belittling a very powerful feature. You would expecially appreciate the difference (and the flexibitily) of xbox live parties if you were to have a gang of friends who are also gamers. You can have a conversation between a group of people who are playing different games. You can have a conversation between people playing the same game. You can create a party, and then invite them as you move between games. You can switch chat modes so you can only hear people on your team in a game, or you can hear everyone in the game. PS3 doesn't have all these options. It has some of them -- but nowhere close to the same flexibility and UI.

Oh -- and about lag -- it just depends on how the game developer has implemented their multiplayer. For example -- the quality of their networking code, is the host someone in the party or is there a central game server that manages it. If you're using lag as a comparison, you have no leg to stand on. CoD4 games can sometimes be laggy as hell (any platform) -- and sometimes they can be completely lag-free (any platform). Halo rarely ever has lag (it uses centralized game servers). So you see - it's not a differentiator between the two services.
by PhaseDMA October 3, 2009 3:37 AM PDT
The PS3 has better online play if only because the barrier of entry has always been higher for the console. Little kids with attitudes don't have the cash to spend on the console.

I have yet to have issues with online play with PSN. Which isn't saying much because the only game I have played online is Killzone 2, but on the flip side that is one of the more popular online games.

Frankly I have had a better experience with PSN then XBox Live. I just don't get paying a premium for Live. There may every once in a while be a difference, but you would be hard pressed to convince me. I don't have a problem paying for Live, but anyone that tries to tell me that Live is better is going to get a very strange look from me.

You can't convince me that for the money MS puts that much more effort into Live, because they don't.

The person that first said the 360 had a bad interface me me think they were crazy, but I guess once I think about it he has a point, but it's doubtful even with the bad interface it is a deal breaker for anyone unless they have already made a choice long before.

If you like Halo 3 buy a 360. If you have less money to spend buy a 360. If you care about playing online with your friends buy a 360. If you don't care who you play with get a PS3. If you want the same or better graphics (don't give me the story because every once in a while graphics DO matter) get a PS3. Frankly I owned both - But I couldn't justify owning a console for one game. I'll miss out on Crackdown 2, but it is a small price to pay when I can play 99% of the games I want on either system. The other 1% of the time the saved money from not buying the game is not a bad thing.
See more comment replies
by kormiko October 1, 2009 4:10 PM PDT
Get all three.

Wii for family games, Nintendo-only games, exercise games, retro downloadable games.
PS3 for Blu-Ray movies, some first party games.
Xbox 360 for most everything else (easily connects to Windows, Netflix, Natal is coming)
Reply to this comment
by Absolution2009 October 1, 2009 4:38 PM PDT
I agree, a true hardcore gamer owns all of them + PC
by pickles319 October 1, 2009 4:39 PM PDT
Total agreement.
by Shinobi2099 October 1, 2009 5:00 PM PDT
Nah a true hardcore gamer has an allegiance to one maybe two of the four choices (PC, PS3, Crapbox, and Wii) The other s he will play unwillingly at a friends house lol
by Jefferson101 October 2, 2009 7:39 AM PDT
Only a person with no life has all of them
by Absolution2009 October 2, 2009 8:29 AM PDT
@Jefferson101

A person with no life? Are you kidding me lol. Having all 3 doesn't mean you play all of them. It just means you have a larger selection to choose from. I'm a good example of someone who has a life and doesn't game constantly. I'm sure there are a ton of others. I only get a game if it catches my interest (mainly story plot) and beat it, then sell on ebay. Normally there's a huge time frame from when those games come out so those consoles or PC aren't touched.
by Mr_fleabite October 2, 2009 10:26 AM PDT
IMHO, one who owns all three has probably spent too much money, more so if you've spent the extra cash for a decent gaming PC. I want someone to make it possible to play x-box or PS3 games on the computer. Heck even if MS or Sony came out with a drive you could install that would allow you to play the games on the PC. Just list min spec's your PC needed to run the games. I have no idea if this is possible, but it would be very cool.
by make_or_break October 2, 2009 11:27 AM PDT
Forget the Wii. My family has. Makes for a pretty bookend, though.
by vito7272 October 2, 2009 1:22 PM PDT
@ Absolution2009
You're right on. Having all 3 has nothing to do with whether or not you "have a life." I have all 3, and on average I probably spend the same amount of time gaming as anyone who has one console. I just spread my time between 3 instead of spending 100% on a single console.
According to Jefferson's logic, a guy with one console who lives in his parent's basement and spends 80 hours a week playing Halo is fine. But even though I have a job, mortgage, wife, etc., since I have all 3 consoles that means I don't have a life!

As for the cost, if you can afford it, it's the way to go. Nobody is saying you have to skip out on rent to get them.
by Jefferson101 October 3, 2009 8:18 AM PDT
No, according to me, one who plays Halo for 80 hours a week is a loser.
by Jefferson101 October 3, 2009 8:29 AM PDT
It is funny how your comments apply that I cannot afford all 3 as well. Why would I waste my money on 4 video game systems? I decide to spend my money on things that please me. Like Hi-Fi stereo. At least my components are a better investment. I make money in the long run off of my electronics. Making money and spending it wisely is how people make a fortune. Which is why you will live in your cookie cutter house with your plain wife. I too own a house, which I don't owe anything on because I am wealthy. Its not a large house mind you, but a modest mid French century home.
Don't miss your mortgage payments because you bought all 4.
See more comment replies
by paulimusmaximus October 1, 2009 4:13 PM PDT
I had the wii, which I sold, and the xbox 360. I bought the xbox, because at the time it was more affordable, plus the added value of netflix streaming, and my cable modem is by my tv, so I didn't need wifi. I think if I had to do it again right now, since they're finally the same price, I would get the ps3, because blu ray beats netflix streaming in my opinion, and I can find more than enough games I like on either system.
Reply to this comment
by ddiddy415 October 1, 2009 4:16 PM PDT
"The PS3's graphics are essentially on par with that of the 360"

hahahaha.....what have you been smoking Jeff. The only reason we haven't seen that leap is because developers are too cheap and rather port crap that they make on the 360 first and then move it over to the PS3. GAMES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE FOR THE PS3 completely blow anything out of the water that xbox has to offer
Reply to this comment
by Shinobi2099 October 1, 2009 4:30 PM PDT
OMG great minds think alike. I swear I just come here to right CNET's wrongs and to check their articles b/c they don;t speak truth at all...
by Gold_Storm_Mac October 1, 2009 4:59 PM PDT
PS3 has better specs.
by Zoobie October 1, 2009 5:33 PM PDT
PS3 is capable of better graphics, but I believe it's a true statement that current games graphics are about the same on the HD systems. However, as developers continue to push the system capabilities as the lifecycle continues then the PS3 should start to shine a little more.
by smrterthnu October 1, 2009 6:09 PM PDT
Who cares which system has better specs on paper or if developers are too cheap, the fact of the matter is the Xbox typically has better graphics on every multi-platform game. Everyone I know that has both the 360 and PS3 (including myself) purchase all their muti-platform titles on the 360 and only use the PS3 for exclusives and for playing blu-ray. Whether that's because the graphics are better, or the online play is better, I'm not sure...it's just fact.
by sims5677 October 1, 2009 7:47 PM PDT
Gran Turismo 5 is one of the exclusive games for the PS3 and you can see that its graphics quality really shines when all effort is put into the one console. Forza 3, a 360 exclusive, isnt as good. But I also built a kick@$$ PC and if you save your pennies for good hardware, its lifecycle will be just as long as a PS3 or 360. The 8800GTX was nvidias first DX10 card that premiered in November 06 (5 days before the PS3) and it can still play every new game. Also, the PS3 and 360 are derived from DX9 chipsets, so there is no way they could be better than a PC.
by TheStairMaster October 2, 2009 4:42 AM PDT
and as for anyone who disputes the graphics superiority of the PS3, have you even seen Uncharted 2? Or even the first uncharted, for that matter?
by Absolution2009 October 2, 2009 8:33 AM PDT
Graphics on PS3 should be better than Xbox 360 but it doesn't mean it is. The reason being is NVIDIA = PS3, ATI = XBOX360.

On those years that the console came out, the drivers for ATI sucked up the wazoo. NVIDIA was the dominant one. Even now, ATI's driver sucks for the video card they use on the Xbox 360, although I am aware that Microsoft had to step in to tweak it a bit. Stil however, I have read that even with the tweaks ATI didn't do a great job on the video card. Actually I still think that's one of the reasons on the RROD but reality, probably not.

Regardless, 256 MB VIdeo card is a piece of junk.
by make_or_break October 2, 2009 11:31 AM PDT
Exclusives look fantastic on the PS3, but ports are only equal at best. Could it be developers still detest coding for Sony devices? (seem to recall that was one of the biggest gripes about the PS2, and Sony proclaiming that the PS3 and Cell would be way more friendly to gaming developers and the resultant development costs would be less as a result)
by flipicaneze October 5, 2009 1:39 AM PDT
You also forgot to mention that the XBox 360's power is maxed out. PS3 has a long way to go. I vote for the longer lasting system.
by bear740 October 6, 2009 10:39 PM PDT
Wrong, the as I said to someone else on here, the PS3 engine is just more Sony hype that is as usual a lie. There is nothing in the PS3 that gives it any more graphic power than the XBOX 360, in fact the XBOX is faster and moves multiple objects at a much quicker rate. If a game company ports a XBOX 360 Game over to the PS3, believe me it would look the same, only if the PS3 had the same or better capabilities, but it does not and therefore the game do not look as good. Oh, you can tweak a game specifically made for the PS3 and make it look good, but it will Never look any better than what you see on the XBOX 360. When you see Microsoft games that are made exclusively for the XBOX 360 they actually look as good as anything you will find on a much more powerful gaming PC, not so with the PS3. You need to quit getting reeled into the Sony hype, they have been giving out misinformation for years and it is people like you that seem to have some attraction to Japanese junk and you keep believing it. You and people lke you are the only thing that is keeping Sony gaming afloat.
See more comment replies
by Shinobi2099 October 1, 2009 4:18 PM PDT
I haven't read the article yet but I bet they say 360...
Reply to this comment
by atomD21 October 1, 2009 6:21 PM PDT
Wow, I can tell you didn't read the article. He doesn't say one is better than the other at all. He weighs the pros and cons of all three as a way of letting the reader decide. Though admittedly the people who would be best served by this type of article probably don't peruse cnet all that much...
by douggdangger October 1, 2009 4:20 PM PDT
"by 1bumgarner October 1, 2009 4:07 PM PDT
Article was good, but disagree with some "pros" of the 360. First off you have to PAY for the so called great online experience. I guess if you are willing to pay for something that you can get for free"

You have to pay for great delicous freshly made food.
Food from the garbage can is free.
Reply to this comment
by Absolution2009 October 1, 2009 4:43 PM PDT
Agreed, but why pay for P2P networking? If Sony had the same userfriendly interface it would probably be different. Honestly though, PS3 is a user friendly interface. I don't know what's so hard about it o.O
by Gold_Storm_Mac October 1, 2009 5:03 PM PDT
I play on the PS3 and believe it is the best console. However, i have played on the 360 and admit its online network is far more stabler than the PS3's. that is the only thing i wish the PS3 had. i would pay for it.
by atomD21 October 1, 2009 6:25 PM PDT
XBox Live is well worth the $40-$50 you pay for it ($40 at newegg). PSN is good, but as Sony has done for a while, the large majority of the online servers are managed by the game devs and thus your mileage will vary.
by magicGenesis October 1, 2009 6:47 PM PDT
thats an inaccurate comparison. Fact of the matter is that online gaming on ANY other platform is free.(PC, ps3, wii, psp) Why pay for xbl?

An good analogy would be:
if mozilla charged you for firefox, would you pay for it?
why pay for it when you have chrome, IE, Safari, opera, etc
by slaykill October 1, 2009 8:12 PM PDT
On the PS3 people can cheat and make themselves look like your team mate when playing online, like on COD4. That is common, along with lag switches, forced host, on and on. For the 360, you can not cheat like that and change the color of your name. Lag switches are a lot less common and once reported, the people are banned. And the forced host is nearly obsolete because once used, you will be found and banned. That means all your gamer achievments are null and you have to start all over again. I think that is worth 8 bucks a month. Or 50 bucks a year. Plus, it keeps the bums out.
by roachbrain October 2, 2009 5:50 AM PDT
Are you forgetting the hack party Halo has? Or how buggy and the glitch exploted on Gears. Also can you tell both of the games my the examples are xbox exclusives? Hacks threw live for crackdown and GTA. Come dude your just asking for it.
by Absolution2009 October 4, 2009 1:52 PM PDT
@slaykill
ANYTHING electronic that goes through the internet can be subject to hacking. The PS3 and Xbox 360 is no exception.
by pepsicola1216 October 5, 2009 2:57 PM PDT
Once again Roach shows his ignorance. Hacking in Halo is almost obsolete and as for Gears can you name any major glitches that help people cheat? Dam you are ignorant
by Shinobi2099 October 1, 2009 4:24 PM PDT
Home is a dud? When was the last time you were on it? It's actually attracting way more users now than ever. Your reviews would be better if you ACTUALLY played one. sigh...
Reply to this comment
by Nakarou October 1, 2009 6:10 PM PDT
ooo boy a sims ripoff
by roachbrain October 2, 2009 5:51 AM PDT
Then the same could be said about Halo as a Doom rip off.
by pepsicola1216 October 5, 2009 2:57 PM PDT
You can make the case that any game is based off another.
by douggdangger October 1, 2009 4:24 PM PDT
"by ddiddy415 October 1, 2009 4:16 PM PDT

because developers are too cheap"


Yeah, how dare developers get so cheap. Just because it takes more than double to develop and code for the PS3 and get inferior results for a machine that's the minority on home console, and programmers are EXPENSIVE TO EMPLOY specially on the verge of a depression, doesn't mean developers should be cheap.

Developers should just make games for the PS3 even if they go broke. How dare they go in the business TO MAKE MONEY.
Reply to this comment
by Absolution2009 October 1, 2009 4:47 PM PDT
You forget R&D expenses are always high. However, once done, R&D for future gaming development will be cheap and who knows, you may find there are way more programming you can do on the PS3 than the other console due to the cores. I mean hell, they haven't even utilized all the cores in PC gaming yet because not everyone has embraced cores or video cards supporting DirectX10 or 11 (requires Windows Vista which everyone hates or Windows 7, which not out yet).

It requires sacrifice to make a great product, regardless PS3 or Xbox or any other future console. The problem is, PS3 is ahead of its time and nobody has the funds now for R&D. It's the same issue with PCs. I own an i7 975 exterme core and my old computer Pentium D (who remembers that lol) and all the games run on both. I can notice smooth and better antialiasing shadowing etc. but hell, all the games out both computers can handle well.
by atomD21 October 1, 2009 6:32 PM PDT
It's not so much that PS3 is ahead of its time, but that the difficulty in developing top tier games wasn't worth the devs' time and money while PS3 was so far behind in numbers. It's all about money, and if you won't get the biggest return on your work, you won't make as big an investment. So long as the PS3 keeps selling well with the price drop, I think we'll start seeing some more time spent on ports and exclusives.
by kewell82 October 2, 2009 9:03 AM PDT
In my opinion I like that it is difficult to develop for PS3 because that only means that games will get better and better. Developers for the xbox have already used the hardware to its full protential so there is no improvement in game quality. Where as for the PS3 the developers haven't yet used the hardware to its fullest. So as the programmers become better at understanding the PS3 the better the games look and the more impressed the consumer is year after year.

Of course that does mean that we have to wait longer for those franchises to get those games developed but when they finally release those games it is worth it.
by Shinobi2099 October 1, 2009 4:28 PM PDT
Graphics on par???? Thats only due to lazt developers... Did you SEE killzone 2??? That blows everything on 360 away... no comparison... I hate CNET lol why do I come here?
Reply to this comment
by Nakarou October 1, 2009 6:12 PM PDT
Gears of War is so much better than kill zone
by atomD21 October 1, 2009 6:34 PM PDT
It boggles the mind why so many people who claim to hate Cnet keep posting comments here...
by pepsicola1216 October 1, 2009 7:11 PM PDT
Actually I do have Killzone 2 and you're crazy. I have it hooked up to a 52 inch Samsung LCD and the game doesn't even play at 1080p. The graphics on GoW look just as good if not better than Killzones.
by roachbrain October 2, 2009 5:56 AM PDT
pepsicola1216

Taken your meds? Killzone by far looks better than Gears and guess what more inportantly had better story, play, and online. You fail, you fail big.
by kknights October 2, 2009 7:51 AM PDT
Killzone 2 looks better the GoW 2. I have both games. Critics also agree with this...
by Absolution2009 October 2, 2009 8:36 AM PDT
You have got to be kidding me if you think Gears of War is better than Killzone, almost every gaming website says the opposite. And as with the TV setting, the blu ray disc packs more audio video uncompressed than the Xbox disc so I'm surprised you would say that the GoW has better looks on your TV when more data and files are stored on the PS3 to make it look better.
by Shinobi2099 October 2, 2009 11:42 AM PDT
@GoW Supporters

When Killzone 2 screenshoots first came out you all said it couldn't possibly be gameplay bc it looked SO good... Now that it's out and it turned out to be real time gameplay you are like meh GoW looks better even though it's pretty impossible according to the specs. And for the record you can upscale Killzone 2 to 1080

www.gametrailers.com/user-movie/how...killzone-2/310126

Have fun with you're new 1080 Killzone 2 pepsicola1216
by make_or_break October 2, 2009 11:43 AM PDT
Grading of games (average of critics reviews from Gamestop statistics):

Gears of War: 9.4/10 average
Gears of War 2: 9.3/10 average
Killzone 2: 9.0/10 average

Seems to say that the critics slightly prefer both GoW games over KZ2 to me...
by Absolution2009 October 4, 2009 1:54 PM PDT
Gamestop is a retailer, not a company who excels in having the equipment to test.
by pepsicola1216 October 5, 2009 9:35 AM PDT
LMAO I love how everybody disagrees when most of you don't actually have a 360 with GoW2 to compare, but sorry rather trust my eyes considering I do have both and I also have 2 of the same TVs so i can compare them side by side. As for all us GoW supporters saying that, can you name a few of us?
See more comment replies
by douggdangger October 1, 2009 4:39 PM PDT
I actually play more on my PC than I do with a console.

PC games blows away anything consoles have to offer.


Crysis is over 2 years old and consoles have nothing even close to it.

Oh, not even the PS3 can run Crysis. ;-)
Reply to this comment
by bigjon94 October 1, 2009 5:33 PM PDT
Agree. 100% PC beats EVERYone
by Nakarou October 1, 2009 6:14 PM PDT
if you have the money to constantly keep your cpu updated to even play those games, you also have to pray to the pc gods that the game can actually work with your graphic card. if it doesn't, you can't get a refund so your stuck with it
by Nighteye19 October 1, 2009 8:24 PM PDT
Most games aren't that cpu intensive, unless they are some POS port like GTA IV. I'm still using an old dual core Opteron 180. Games aren't really picky about graphics cards unless you are using an old one or integrated one, which any PC gamer wouldn't use anyway. So, there really is no praying that your graphics card will work with a game unless it's just extremely out of date, or integrated. I prefer to upgrade here and there over time to keep playing PC games at Max settings rather than buy an entire new console every 4 years that usually doesn't even compare to PC games.
by kknights October 2, 2009 8:01 AM PDT
If you want to play games as they're meant to be played, then yes you do need a high-end PC for that... I've spent thousands of dollars on my PC, playing games in 1920x1200 @ 60fps with 8x AA... you just can't beat that with any Console... Console has it's pros over PCs, fighting, arcade, racing, rpgs, sports games works better on a console. RTS, FPS, MMORPH, adventure games work better on PC.
by make_or_break October 2, 2009 11:51 AM PDT
I preferred the PC gaming experience over consoles for the longest time. But I got sick of the cost of hardware updates even if cross-platform titles were generally cheaper. Ironically Crysis was the last straw, when my supposedly then uber vid card couldn't come close to handling that game. Now that box is consigned to run iTunes and other media apps and not much of anything else; deserves that task considering the heartache that stupid 'super box' caused me and my wallet.
by Absolution2009 October 1, 2009 4:42 PM PDT
PS3 is not for those who want HD graphics or video. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard, it goes the same route as the xbox 360. If you don't want HD graphics or video. You can come up with a better excuse than that!
Reply to this comment
by YOUR_HOVA October 1, 2009 5:21 PM PDT
I also dont agree with this statement. To say that this console is not for those looking for HD graphics or video is misleading and just false. As a matter of fact PS3 is the only one of the 3 consoles with the option to download video in full 1080p via PS store.
by SalisburySteak October 1, 2009 6:05 PM PDT
360 has 1080p too. its called netflix
by Nakarou October 1, 2009 6:15 PM PDT
My friends family memberbought an 80GB ps3 for blue ray only
by Absolution2009 October 2, 2009 8:38 AM PDT
Netflix doesn't give you full uncompressed data so it's not really high def. The resolution might be 1080P but it's not complete.
by kewell82 October 2, 2009 9:10 AM PDT
Netflix on the xbox does not play in 1080p. It's not even HD, it is standard DVD quality. Get your facts straight SalisburySteak, hmmm why am I all of a sudden hungry for some meat.
by Ray180 October 2, 2009 9:13 AM PDT
Uh, you may want to read that again. Jeff said the PS3 is not for those who don't care about HD graphics. That means it is for those that do.
by Gold_Storm_Mac October 1, 2009 4:48 PM PDT
PS3 or XBOX 360 for hardcore gamers. wii for family games. My pref is PS3 cause of blu-ray.
Reply to this comment
by shellcodes_coder October 2, 2009 8:15 AM PDT
What about Blu-ray for your Mac? LOL
BTW my DELL XPS H2C PC has one :)
by Absolution2009 October 4, 2009 1:55 PM PDT
I think Apple is getting blu ray drives but for those who already bought one, just get an external one.
by the_iceman October 1, 2009 4:53 PM PDT
i'll wait until the 360 pro & ps3 are 199, the wii is too kiddie for my taste
Reply to this comment
by SamsNite October 1, 2009 5:48 PM PDT
Wow... I can't tell you enough how horrible this "Wii is too kiddie" stuff is. Has the world gone to such garbage that if it's not a mindless shooter or rated "M" that it sucks? I don't agree with Nintendo on some stuff either but this is such a primitive comment it's not even funny. That's like saying all Pixar movies are too kiddie to enjoy. If you have to be so shallow-minded about great quality, then I do feel bad you are missing out on Mario Galaxy, Fire Emblem, Mario Kart, Metroid Trilogy, Smash Bros, and other great titles. Most play video games to escape reality and why do we want something so "realistic" then? Honestly, you forget how good a game looks after 15 seconds of playing it. Gears of War 2 is great, but I don't care how it looks, it's how it plays that stands out. But yeah, after Madworld and Dead Space Extraction, Wii is WAY too kiddie.
by Ray180 October 2, 2009 9:15 AM PDT
don't forget House of the Dead: Overkill
by jkyak16 October 1, 2009 4:57 PM PDT
I have all three, so far Xbox is the one i use the most, ps3 it's ok, i just use it for the blu-ray, the games they have for some reason I get bored quickly(I'm guessing it's the controller) and Xbox's controller is like perfect, but i like that i bought the ps3 with the backwards compatibility cause i like ps2 better and the wii has zelda tp, but all three is just awesome cause i can't see my self without any one of them
Reply to this comment
by Renegade Knight December 1, 2009 7:33 AM PST
Like you I have all 3. I prefer the PS3 because of Microsoft issues (RROD, and Dropping support of Xbox when I still had a shelf of games to play meaning I couldn't find controllers etc. unless I wanted used).

For gaming they are pretty much the same in my world. Wii is different when it comes to gavming, and doesn't get used much.
by 1363nd0f1337 October 1, 2009 4:59 PM PDT
None. Build a PC.
Reply to this comment
by jakemochas October 1, 2009 7:51 PM PDT
intel i7 all the way!
by shellcodes_coder October 2, 2009 8:16 AM PDT
@jakemochas: Got Intel Core i7 Extreme here :) Now waiting for NVIDIA to release a DX11 compatible graphics card
by Absolution2009 October 4, 2009 1:56 PM PDT
@shellcodes

Same! Using ATI's until nvidia comes out, I'm not a fan of ATI but it came out first. Will probably sell the ATI one if anyone is interested or just ebaying it.
by t8 October 1, 2009 5:15 PM PDT
I don't own a console yet, but am tending toward PS3 for Blue ray capability.
Reply to this comment
by ArsFragica October 1, 2009 5:17 PM PDT
absolute BS article. u r a serious 360 fanboy.

"Beyond all of its impressive media capabilities, the Xbox 360 is also an excellent game machine. Most triple-A titles are available on the 360, save for a few PlayStation 3-only games, and the games generally look as good as or better than their PS3 counterparts. The console also has its fair share of exclusives, including the Gears of War, Halo, Forza, and Fable series."

r u serious? can u name me ANY good games that were released for the 360 this year?
the ps3 has killzone 2, uncharted 2, god of war 3, + bunch of good exclusives while the 360 continues to rip customers off with rehashed halo content

netflix capabilities? lol ps3 had blu-ray who needs netflix with all those subs. fees, plus i could just use the ps3's internet browser and watch free shows + movies on hulu, youtube, freemovies.net

ps3 also has home, u failed to mention that.

but go ahead, u dam* xbot, go play ur piece of sh*t console and let it RRoD in 3 days.
Reply to this comment
by bigjon94 October 1, 2009 5:35 PM PDT
RROD is FIZED. New parts and it doesnt happen anymore. NOt in 3 DAYS.

Ps3 Home is the dumbest idea Sony has other than its "vibrator" motion control thing. What can you do with home? wait for people to be done with bowling so you can have a turn? thats kinda dumb especially cause people play videogames to not wait like in real life.
by SalisburySteak October 1, 2009 6:06 PM PDT
good game that comes out this year. ODST, FORZA
by SalisburySteak October 1, 2009 6:08 PM PDT
I"M sorry. how much is it for a blu-ray disc? In the long run, how many times will that movie be watched?
by atomD21 October 1, 2009 6:42 PM PDT
Let's see, $9/month for netflix with unlimited streaming vs $20-$30 a pop for a Blu-Ray... last I heard, hulu is blocked on the PS3 browser. It's always hilarious to me when a blatant fanboy calls others fanboys...Hey pot, this is Kettle...you're black!
by pepsicola1216 October 1, 2009 7:22 PM PDT
"r u serious? can u name me ANY good games that were released for the 360 this year?
the ps3 has killzone 2, uncharted 2, god of war 3" - ArsFragica
I love how all the Sony fanboys make this argument. They all say that the 360 only has like 5 exclusives and brag about all the PS3 exclusives yet they always list the same games. KZ2, Uncharted, God of War 3(by the way God of War hasn't come out) and Gran Turismo. By the way do any of those games sell nearly as well as Halo? So you guys can keep listing those same great exclusives that are better than the 360 ones but 360 exclusives outsell PS3 ones and thats all that matters. Now all you sony fanboys can go cry, especially Roachbrain if he reads this.
by solicitehere October 1, 2009 8:04 PM PDT
pepsi guy, hey, you, get out of your box. There is something else out there called "preferences". BFBC mini game occupied my entire summer, or at least the few minutes I got to play. I didn't buy a single game for the ps3 this summer as they were all too massive to get into for the short run. Megalomaniac.
by Absolution2009 October 2, 2009 8:39 AM PDT
@bigjon94

My jasper elite broke after 4 weeks with E74. It still has problems but I did hear it was better.
by Ray180 October 2, 2009 9:24 AM PDT
you forgot to put Mass Effect and Left 4 Dead on the list of sweet 360 exclusives :)

both of which have sequels coming out soon
by Shinobi2099 October 2, 2009 11:46 AM PDT
mass effect was lame but left 4 dead was pretty good. And I watch movies for free through my PS3 browser or I port them throuh my network lol and halo is only popular bc anyone can play it bc it's at such a n00b level lol
by kalel33 October 4, 2009 8:56 AM PDT
@ Absolution2009

Don't make up things about owning a Jasper system. I read your previous posts and you never owned one, but nice try.
See more comment replies
Showing 1 of 9 pages (403 Comments)
advertisement
advertisement

About Crave

The name says it all. Crave is our blog about gorgeous gadgets and other crushworthy stuff. If you would like to contact Crave with a tip or comment, please write to: crave@cnet.com

Add this feed to your online news reader

Crave topics

Inside the Apple, er, Microsoft Store

Although Redmond's foray into retail bears a big resemblance to Apple's approach, Microsoft has added some distinctive features to draw casual PC buyers and techies alike.

Big marketing budget drives Moto Droid sales

Verizon and Motorola are spending big bucks--$100 million--on marketing the new smartphone, and it looks like it will pay off with 1 million devices sold by year's end.