user1010101

STEC's Promising Future – Part II

I guess we all now know where GARP was getting his borrow from.

Where Is the Gaming Industry Headed?

Eskin,

I agre with you completely. The move to an online distribution platform is still years away for a variety of reasons:

1) carrier networks are already over loaded with data demand coming from smart phones - there is no way they are capable of handling HD game streaming
2) consumer preferences have not changed in such a way that they want to buy/rent a game online. Many games have reply value or, at the very least, resale value.
3) game publishers are not going to turn down a free opportunity to distribute their content but none of them have commited to supporting platforms (like onlive) financially

Online gaming has been around for a long time - mmorpg's have been very popular for years. The fact that we have just seen 1 generation of online gaming (xbox and ps3) shows you how slow the industry is moving.


On Oct 20 10:13 PM Eskin wrote:

> Wow! VERY Cool article. I wonder how accurate that Apple daily revenue
> potential is because seems like a major cash cow right now... esPECIALLY
> as Apple gets deeper and deeper into the remote gaming market.<br/>
>
> Also, as a gamer during my entire life, I would find it VERY surprising
> if the OnLive idea actually succeeded. I'm an avid believer that
> the future generation of gaming is online with other players (much
> related to social media today, and is already here with XBox Live),
> but serious gamers really don't care about having, as you mentioned,
> "real estate" in their living room. If the system is worth it, like
> Ps3 or whatever comes out next, the graphics and speed will justify
> having the tower in their living room. Who cares that it's there?
> A majority of controllers nowadays are wireless anyway. The extent
> of problems (slow, huge controller, always need to be online) with
> an always on-line system will definitely not be worth it compared
> to the benefits (just not having the system there).
>
> Check out my blog at www.youngandinvested.com

GameStop Director Leonard Riggio Shows Us the Future of Gaming

Gaucho420,

I am not sure I agree with you that hardcore gamers download games at mid-night since not all games hit XBL before being released at a retail level - this is up to the distributor. As well, with the size of games getting larger, a 60gb HD is worthless. You cannot simply d/l an unlimited amount of games - at some point you run out of space. The idea behind the HDD was not to convert customers to an online distribution model - it is meant for updates, upgrades and game packs.

Finally, if everyone were to jump on to d/l a game (like you do) you would not have the game d/l by the following morning - servers are not capable of handling those loads. So, for now, be happy your are one of the few taking advantage of online distribution.


On Oct 15 04:41 PM Gaucho420 wrote:

> Dedicated gamers will get their games faster by downloading. I have
> XBL and if a game came out at midnight online, I'd have XBL downloaded
> overnight and have it ready for use in the morning. That's much faster
> than waiting for a retail store to open the next day.
>
> I go to store now, such as this week to pick up NBA2k10, because
> I wanted the anniversay edition. But had it been a normal non-anniversary
> year and had the option been there to download it straight to the
> hard-drive from XBL, I probably would've opted for that.
>
> I think a bigger argument agaisnt downloads is 1) the added cost
> of a hard drive to store them (especially when you get to the full
> sized games), 2) the lack of a manual and 3) no trade in value on
> downloads.
>
> I know quite a few dedicated gamers who don't download that many
> games, because they dont' feel like wasting money on a hard-drive.
> And that's the over-riding reason, plus the trade-in value of discs.
>
>
> For the 360, retailers should thank MSFT for making the hard drives
> propriatery and super expensive, as it keeps a large number of gamers
> hooked to retailers, as nobody wants to pay MSFT ridiculous price
> on its 60 gig or 120 gig drives.
>
> I have paid for the 120 gig drive, because I can afford it, but most
> can and most simply don't even trie demos, movies or anything else,
> as the hard-drive on the 360 is cost-prohibitive.
>
> I know the PS3 can use any drive you choose, but even at bottom barrell
> prices, it still cost money.
>
> So in my humble opinion, online gaming will be restricted (for a
> tiny while) by the cost of extra storage. I have seen this to be
> true across my gaming friends and I know a boatload of all ages,
> sex and income types. Gamers want to play...paying for a hard-drive
> is simply an unwanted hassle at the current prices.

GameStop Director Leonard Riggio Shows Us the Future of Gaming

Bruce,

Could you please provide an outlook for the video game industry over the next year?

Although I agree with your general coments regarding "long term" industry direction, I think that your arguements have little application in the short term. Products such as the PSP GO have not been given raving reviews specifically because it is an all digital product (gamers can't easily move there existing games over).

Also, I don't beleive the nintendo would support (and infact resist) moving to a fully online distribution platform. Children still like going to the store and purchasing games. Similarly, "gamers" prefer to purchase the game as soon as it hits the shelf - who wants to wait for delivery. Gamestop allows preordering which targets a particular customer that will likley never move online for distribution.

I would find it very usefull to hear your critisism - since I am bullish on gamestop due to valuation as well as environment. Many major titles are coming out, gamestop is running at depressed sales/sq. ft. and continues to expand their store base. At 9x earnings, >10% FCF yeild - i believe this thing could be a home run.

Thanks

Ryan

On the Future of Networks and Moving Data Centers

By the way Mark - Your datacenterpulse website is great - love the information you make available here. Thankyou for opening that up to those interested in learning/keep up to date with data center technology!

On the Future of Networks and Moving Data Centers

Thanks Mark, that was helpful.

My understanding of the SSD argument is that $/IOPS is very favorable and the in Tier0 of the array, this is more important than $/Gb. I agree with you that you wont see SSD technology replacing SATA drivers in the 3rd Teir of a storage array but I do believe areas that require high IOPS will need to move to SSD technology.
My logic is that you can't simply run RAID 0 devices and short stroke 15,000 rmp drives any longer. This technology simply doesn't keep up with demand. Given that an SSD can replace multiple HDD's in this part of the array, I believe that we will see further enhancements to EMC's "FAST" (fully automated storage tiering) software.

The drives that are used in these arrays are not your typical MLC NAND memory but instead the SLC (more expensive) NAND. I know intel and I believe micron are close to coming out with a SSD that is 3bits per cell (MLC is 2 bits and SLC is 1) that will drive down cost even further.

Ryan


On Sep 29 08:12 PM mthiele wrote:

> Ryan,
>
> You're absolutely correct, it was a generic answer and don't worry
> you're not rude.
>
> So, I'll attempt to take up the challenge and offer something meaningful.
>
>
> As much as I like SSD there are several things that will keep it
> out of mainstream for the next 3-5 years.
> - Price per GB (while they don't have to be as cheap as regular disk
> they have to be a lot closer. Currently they are about 4X.
> - SSDs tend to deteriorate and lose cells, like other flash media.
> So for traditional environments this would be an unacceptable overhead.
>
> - Best option is for high volume environments where maintaining the
> data isn't the issue, but rather speed is the benefit.
> - I believe that SSD has a place in most storage environments, but
> you should be careful about defining the hierarchy.
> - Lastly, I hope they continue to make progress on MTBF and on price,
> because I really like the potential for power savings. However, right
> now power savings won't be the driver for a purchase.
>
> Regards,
> Mark

On the Future of Networks and Moving Data Centers

Not to be rude to Mark, but that was a very generic response that many are claiming. The SSD technology is already being used in the first Teir IBM and EMC storage arrays. I was curious if people are actually seeing the performance that is expected out of these devices and if the extra $$$ are worth it.

Do you know anyone that what have direct insight into the use of SSD technology in 2009/2010 storage arrays?

Thanks for the fast response!


On Sep 29 03:03 PM Gregory Ness wrote:

> User:
>
> Thanks for the question. I didn't know the answer so I forwarded
> it to Mark Thiele wo did. Here is his answer:
>
> "If we look at available disk technology today we'll see that spinning
> disk is reaching a plateau of capability. Size is great, but performance
> can't keep up. The impact of this trend in disk is that we will have
> enormous capacity, but potentially reduced performance with higher
> overhead. While in the SSD market the technology is still fairly
> new, and we can expect to see continued rapid improvements in size,
> performance and cost. I believe we can expect to see the application
> of Moore's Law to this new branch of technology in the storage family
> of products. Lastly SSD is generally more efficient from a power
> perspective, so we can expect to see a strong drive in this direction
> going forward."
>
> Thanks!
> Greg

On the Future of Networks and Moving Data Centers

Greg:

I was curious if you had any insight into the use of SSD's in the data center - your insight into their application.

Thanks,

Ryan

Is There a Need for Game Publishers Any More?

I have read many poeple make these bearish comments on the video game industry and think you guys have it wrong. Your lost in games from the new mellinium rather than looking at the blockbusters that have come out in the last few years. Games such as rockband, guitar hero, all the wii games are clear examples of how consumers demands for games have changed. People and especially kids no longer want to sit in front of there TV with a "controller" and hit a couple of buttons - there is more to games. The whole iPod game thing is simply an expansion - no one makes the decision to by an iPod for its gaming flare over a wii/PS3/Xbox/DS etc.

There is definately a trend towards online distribution but this is way into the future. Companies are simply realizing that a subscription based revenue model ensures profitability and prevents pirating - but this has been going on in the software space for a long time now (they are just late to the game).

The fact remains, it will be a long time before any of these bearish thesis come out. By that time, the next big blockbuster will be out and the market will pick up all over again.