Skip to Content
I just don't get it....October and still 1.1 player and not 2.0. At least Panasonic, Sony and Samsung will have 2.0 players by then, plus the ps3. Why any company would not go 2.0 that late in the year is beyond me.
Why people are making Blu-ray players that cost more than the PS3 is beyond me.
Because Sony is still losing $130-$260 per PS3? Talk about amazing competition... NOT!
Name
E-mail
E-mail:
Password
Remember Me
E-Mail me when someone replies to this comment
Add your comments:
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments. And yes, comments are moderated.
Other Weblogs Inc. Network blogs you might be interested in:
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
mntwister @ May 27th 2008 4:28PM
I just don't get it....October and still 1.1 player and not 2.0. At least Panasonic, Sony and Samsung will have 2.0 players by then, plus the ps3. Why any company would not go 2.0 that late in the year is beyond me.
StealthMonkey @ May 27th 2008 4:47PM
Why people are making Blu-ray players that cost more than the PS3 is beyond me.
Nfinity @ May 27th 2008 5:00PM
Because Sony is still losing $130-$260 per PS3?
Talk about amazing competition... NOT!