Recommended Posts

Wait a sec, are you saying that there is research data on how many people actually replaced their ps3 hard drive or are interested in the feature?

 

I'm not sure why I'm attacked for giving anecdotal evidence when this whole debate revolves around anecdotal evidence from you and everyone else. I shared my experiences, that's all, not claiming it was a universal opinion. My point was that such people exist and I feel they represent a lot of general users.

 

Excuse me for not validating the popular theme. However, if there is some kind of research that points one way or another, I'd be interested in seeing it.

 

 

 

No, I am asking for someone to provide evidence that people aren't interested in swapping an internal HDD. Everyone just keeps saying "Oh, no one is interested in that" or "most people aren't tech-savvy enough to do it" without providing any evidence that's the case. Your personal experience is minute when you consider the tens of millions of (potential) console owners. Even if only 10% of users weren't interested in that feature that would be millions of customers, but the fact is we don't know what percentage would like that feature.

The Xbox fanboys (won't mention names - you know who you are) invaded the thread because the Xbox's internal cannot be changed and they're jealous, therefore they are attempting to justify the move by saying external is better than changing the internal.

 

How somebody could write that not being able to change a hard drive is better than being able to change it is beyond me.

 

 

Yeah, that stuff is ridiculous. So many threads get killed by 'pro ms' and 'anti ms'  arguments.

 

No one should justify this stuff. It isn't even that big of a deal.  MS and Sony didn't make their choices to spite us or out of some emotion. Regarding internal vs external, the advantages for both are clear. The rest is your choice.

 

You guys argue and it makes it impossible to talk about these things. I'd like to know more about the ps4's external support for instance. While I can see myself replacing my ps4 hdd like I did the ps3, if I can use say a 4tb external as well in the same way as the X1 can, then all the better.

No, I am asking for someone to provide evidence that people aren't interested in swapping an internal HDD. Everyone just keeps saying "Oh, no one is interested in that" or "most people aren't tech-savvy enough to do it" without providing any evidence that's the case. Your personal experience is minute when you consider the tens of millions of (potential) console owners. Even if only 10% of users weren't interested in that feature that would be millions of customers, but the fact is we don't know what percentage would like that feature.

 

Fair enough, but that means we don't know in general. It doesn't mean the opposite is true either. I have seen people argue that is a feature in high demand.

 

Since we have no real info, I don't think anyone should be arguing the point.

We don't know either way. I can only speak for myself and say that I personally like the feature.

 

The only point I would make in favour of upgradable HDDs is that both current-gen systems allow it (although I think only one allows it properly) so it is entirely doable with seemingly no inconvenience to the manufacturers. I cannot imagine that it would take to much effort from MS/Sony engineers to allow upgradable HDDs.

 

This comes down to Sony offering a feature MS isn't so people have to defend MS's position to the death.

 

I also find it amusing that people using the "some users aren't tech-savvy enough to upgrade their internal HDDs" don't seem to be applying that logic to the fact the same people who can't upgrade mightn't know the difference between USB 2.0 and 3.0. If you connect a USB 2.0 drive to your X1 you're only going to get 2.0 speeds which undoubtedly will affect gameplay.

 

I can see a lot of user connecting some old ext. HDD to their system and then whining about slow loading times. Probably not straight after launch, but as time goes on and that internal HDD fills up because of mandatory game installs and such I can see it happening.

  • Like 1

We don't know either way. I can only speak for myself and say that I personally like the feature.

 

The only point I would make in favour of upgradable HDDs is that both current-gen systems allow it (although I think only one allows it properly) so it is entirely doable with seemingly no inconvenience to the manufacturers. I cannot imagine that it would take to much effort from MS/Sony engineers to allow upgradable HDDs.

 

 

 

Exactly, your giving your opinion based on your own experience, that's all I was doing. I happen to like and want the feature. Its too bad MS doesn't follow suit. Its funny how people blow up such a small feature.

 

Why do you think MS doesn't offer that? Like you said they did it this gen. It can't be about getting money from us since they allow us to use any external, not something proprietary. I don't think anyone considers it a deal breaker feature, but it would have been nice for those of us wanting it.

 

 

 

This comes down to Sony offering a feature MS isn't so people have to defend MS's position to the death.

 

I also find it amusing that people using the "some users aren't tech-savvy enough to upgrade their internal HDDs" don't seem to be applying that logic to the fact the same people who can't upgrade mightn't know the difference between USB 2.0 and 3.0. If you connect a USB 2.0 drive to your X1 you're only going to get 2.0 speeds which undoubtedly will affect gameplay.

 

I can see a lot of user connecting some old ext. HDD to their system and then whining about slow loading times. Probably not straight after launch, but as time goes on and that internal HDD fills up because of mandatory game installs and such I can see it happening.

 

 

Regarding the question of external usage, I would like to know if using usb 3.0 results in a poorer performance vs sata 3. It seems like everyone is dancing around that for some reason. I don't care what 'stupid' people do, this is about what I will do.

 

The reason I care is that I'd like the option to use a 4tb drive with my ps4, but that means I must use an external. Since there is no info from Sony on how externals work, I have no idea if I can use it just like an internal drive.

Exactly, your giving your opinion based on your own experience, that's all I was doing. 

 

Correct. But people on here are saying the reason why MS wouldn't bother with allowing upgrading internal HDDs is because so few people want it. How do they know so few people don't want it? I thought maybe there was some survey or data which was done which asked consumers about things like this which could corroborate this assertion.

 

 

Regarding the question of external usage, I would like to know if using usb 3.0 results in a poorer performance vs sata 3. It seems like everyone is dancing around that for some reason. I don't care what 'stupid' people do, this is about what I will do.

 

The reason I care is that I'd like the option to use a 4tb drive with my ps4, but that means I must use an external. Since there is no info from Sony on how externals work, I have no idea if I can use it just like an internal drive.

 

The speeds are 5 GB/s USB 3.0 and 6 GB/s SATA III (theoretical) but that mightn't be the only factor which would impact on performance. Maybe the controller in the ext. HDD would impact if it is poor quality (I know some cheaper enclosures have cheap controllers)? Or the drive speed? If you use those WD Green drives which alternate the RPM based on load it might affect performance. If you use a VelociRaptor @ 10,00 RPM it would be fine, but they aren't cheap drives. Even the WD blacks are pretty expensive (for 4TBs). Plus I would want to use an AC powered ext. HDD if I was connecting it to a console to store and run games from. I wouldn't want it powered from the USB port.

 

 

As far as I know, unless new info has come out, external drives for the PS4 won't allow game installs. You can put all of your multimedia content on it but no game installs. 

Correct. But people on here are saying the reason why MS wouldn't bother with allowing upgrading internal HDDs is because so few people want it. How do they know so few people don't want it? I thought maybe there was some survey or data which was done which asked consumers about things like this which could corroborate this assertion.

Market research, attachment rate for X360, stats for X360 users. I am sure they went over those numbers. The reason they removed it might be something else though.

Can we see the research? If not, it is purely speculation. Speculation is fine, as long as you admit it is speculation, not passing it off as fact or self-evident.

 

It would be interesting to know just how many people upgraded their HDDs or would like the feature.

Can we see the research? If not, it is purely speculation. Speculation is fine, as long as you admit it is speculation, not passing it off as fact or self-evident.

 

It would be interesting to know just how many people upgraded their HDDs or would like the feature.

It's not speculation, whatever I post on these forums - consider it as official MIcrosoft version.

 

 

seriously? Do you really want every forum post here come with a disclaimer! My post made it pretty clear that I was guessing like most people around here.

 

No, we can't see the research but at least I have participated in many Xbox surveys over the years and besides those are standard tools. It's possible that Microsoft used one or all of them.

 

I kind of upgraded my Xbox 360 HDD once when I moved from Elite (120GB) to S(250GB) but that change was mostly for noise not space.

Can we see the research? If not, it is purely speculation. Speculation is fine, as long as you admit it is speculation, not passing it off as fact or self-evident.

It would be interesting to know just how many people upgraded their HDDs or would like the feature.

To actually believe any significant part of the market cares about this is to completely ignore the last generation. This was made a big deal 8 years ago, and then nobody talked about it the rest of the lifecycle. It clearly didn't affect the 360's market performance.

I may not have discrete numbers but you can be rest assured if this had been a selling point last gen, MS would be allowing it this time around. They have more data than you can imagine.

Bottom line is this:

 

Being able to swap out internal HDD... Well of course that's awesome feature to have. Games are getting BIGGER & BIGGER

 

External HDD being equal to the internal hdd... That's awesome as well.  I've already got it planned out to, install all my games on the external hdd first.  and if my Xbox One does happen to crap out.  I lose nothing.

 

Sounds like a win win for both consoles.

To actually believe any significant part of the market cares about this is to completely ignore the last generation. This was made a big deal 8 years ago, and then nobody talked about it the rest of the lifecycle. It clearly didn't affect the 360's market performance.

I may not have discrete numbers but you can be rest assured if this had been a selling point last gen, MS would be allowing it this time around. They have more data than you can imagine.

 

I don't think people here care if a significant market share thinks upgradable hard drive is important, they care if they themselves think its useful.

 

Microsoft had a proprietary hard drive for the X360 which means people are less likely to buy and upgrade the hard drive because the sizes were limited and it wasn't a faster SSD drive.. It was also more pricey.

There was ways around it, but it voided your warranty.

I don't think people here care if a significant market share thinks upgradable hard drive is important, they care if they themselves think its useful.

 

Microsoft had a proprietary hard drive for the X360 which means people are less likely to buy and upgrade the hard drive because the sizes were limited and it wasn't a faster SSD drive.. It was also more pricey.

There was ways around it, but it voided your warranty.

As warwagon said, it's a good feature to have for those who care. /thread.

 

About SSD, will that make any significant difference to loading? (Ignoring the pricing for a 500+ GB SSD, which hopefully will get cheaper as the generation ages).

The warranty concern is only for the covered period. You can always open the box after 1st year provided HDDs can still be flashed and used in there.

 

The speeds are 5 GB/s USB 3.0 and 6 GB/s SATA III (theoretical) but that mightn't be the only factor which would impact on performance. Maybe the controller in the ext. HDD would impact if it is poor quality (I know some cheaper enclosures have cheap controllers)? Or the drive speed? If you use those WD Green drives which alternate the RPM based on load it might affect performance. If you use a VelociRaptor @ 10,00 RPM it would be fine, but they aren't cheap drives. Even the WD blacks are pretty expensive (for 4TBs). Plus I would want to use an AC powered ext. HDD if I was connecting it to a console to store and run games from. I wouldn't want it powered from the USB port.

 

 

As far as I know, unless new info has come out, external drives for the PS4 won't allow game installs. You can put all of your multimedia content on it but no game installs. 

 

I've seen comparisons between usb 3 and sata 3 regarding ssds and there was little or no performance difference. I could dig some up and post here, but i dont know if anyone is interested in that.  Your right that things like the usb controller affect those numbers.  Based on the reviews I've seen I didnt think performance would be an issue, but I was looking for more info on it. 

 

I happen to have an external usb 3.0 case.  It was an empty 3.5" case, so I can plug in any drive I want.  I currently have a 4tb drive in it and so that spurred me on to investigate how I could use it with the ps4.  The X1 info was easier to find since they made a specific statement on it. 

 

Lets remember though that the hard drives built into both consoles are 5400rpm models, which means even a 7200rpm 2.5 or 3.5" drive could outperform it.  Not only that, larger capacity drives have the potential to outperform smaller capacity drives.  So if you had a 4TB 3.5" 7200rpm drive, it could outperform a 500GB 2.5" drive.  Heck, even a 5400/5900 rpm 4TB drive could outperform 500GB 5400rpm drive. 

 

 

When one of the merry band of MS apologists comes skipping into a topic telling us why MS made a decision without any evidence, it's kind of frustrating.

 

 

I agree, its silly for anyone come in and claim to be the expert on such knowledge.  The truth is none of us know why Sony or MS make many of the choices they make.  They aren't going to tell us everything.  Its all speculation.  I dont mind people giving their theory, thats the point of debates, but those that push speculation as the final word are going too far.

To actually believe any significant part of the market cares about this is to completely ignore the last generation. This was made a big deal 8 years ago, and then nobody talked about it the rest of the lifecycle. It clearly didn't affect the 360's market performance.

I may not have discrete numbers but you can be rest assured if this had been a selling point last gen, MS would be allowing it this time around. They have more data than you can imagine.

 

Maybe not in your social circle or you're conveniently blanking out memories even from Neowin, but it was brought up time and time again. I've answered many topics on NW over the years telling people there is no option to expand memory on the 360 like there was on PS3 (until MS added USB support of course).

 

Even now there is a lot of people either modding together their own hard drives or disassembling the official Slim HDDs to put into the phat 360 enclosures.

 

Microsoft heard the cries for more storage options. Unfortunately all they did was release highly priced official HDDs and weak USB support. Why not let any size USB HDD? Oh right cause then no one would buy the accessories!

Both options are good. Internal and external...

The fact that internal and external HDD are on equal ground ISP's a jackpot for me. I will NOT install any games to the internal HDD initially. I will have a 2TB or so HDD hooked up to my X1 and that will be my storage and then I will go internal... If my system craps out, I can send it I. And lose nothing. Not even install the game again...

 

 

Microsoft heard the cries for more storage options. Unfortunately all they did was release highly priced official HDDs and weak USB support. Why not let any size USB HDD? Oh right cause then no one would buy the accessories!

 

Thankfully the X1 fixes all of those issues.  MS finally just opened it up for everyone to use what the want via usb.

Thankfully the X1 fixes all of those issues.  MS finally just opened it up for everyone to use what the want via usb.

 

I know. I was replying to Spenser and about the 360 specifically.

 

Who knows, maybe when the eventual redesigned "slim" X1 is released they may allow us to switch internal drives.

I know. I was replying to Spenser and about the 360 specifically.

 

Who knows, maybe when the eventual redesigned "slim" X1 is released they may allow us to switch internal drives.

 

 

That would be nice. 

 

My guess is that MS didn't want to get into supporting the users that attempted to replace drives or setup the software system to streamline setup of a new drive like Sony does. I'm not sure what would convince them to do it though.  A few of us talking on a forum probably doesn't move the needle.  But MS has shown that they are willing to listen to feedback, so who knows.

 

Still though, I want both options supported as much as possible.  While I will take advantage of replacing an internal drive, I know for a fact that I will need to use a larger external drive as my game collection grows.  If MS allowed the internal drive to be replaced and Sony allowed an external to act as an internal drive like on the X1, that would be great.

This is not really an issue for me, since you can add an external drive, however does anyone know with the PS4 being replaceable would the original 500GB drive be usable as a normal hd drive for PC (Crap got a bug, i cant use question mark it comes out as ?) If not would it be able to plug into one of the usb ports for the ps4 and used as the 2nd drive. 500GB is alot of space to just throw away and not use the drive, even if you have an upgraded drive in the device.

This is not really an issue for me, since you can add an external drive, however does anyone know with the PS4 being replaceable would the original 500GB drive be usable as a normal hd drive for PC (Crap got a bug, i cant use question mark it comes out as ?) If not would it be able to plug into one of the usb ports for the ps4 and used as the 2nd drive. 500GB is alot of space to just throw away and not use the drive, even if you have an upgraded drive in the device.

 

Yes there is no reason why not. I repurposed my original PS3/360 HDDs for something when I upgraded them.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Indeed. But note that this has Wifi7, HDMI 2.1, BlueTooth 5.4, and 5G Ethernet, so even in the additional features list this bundle blows the Steam Machine away. And, with the money saved, one could improve this dramatically.
    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
    • For me, the fundamental problems with these "smartglasses" is that they really don't work well for people with significant prescriptions and massively up the price if you use attached lenses if they have displays, and if they don't, then they're not actually "smart" anything, rather just connecting to your phone and relaying voice to an AI. In a few cases like this, they throw in small cameras to feed video to the AI. All around, these feel like both a solution looking for a problem, and the problems it tries to solve seem more easily solved by different approaches and designs. Oddly, if the rumours are true, Apple may actually have invented something for once and it kind of does this right: put cameras in ear buds and manage the interface to AI exactly as most of us do: tapping on an ear bud and saying "Hey Google" or "Hey Siri." That makes them compatible with almost everyone, can double up as a hearing assist device, an impaired vision assist device, a "smart" device... and answer your phone and play music. That just seems like a better solution all around.
    • Usually the bigger ones with many fixes/changes take a few, theyre an exception to the rule most likely
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      452
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      84
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!