[KraftSLU]

Originally posted by Harry


Krafts, nothing to laugh here. People are not speaking of peripherals, but of architecture of the system. It's not what you see, but what is inside.

Everybody knows that the Xbox has an architecture like the one of a PC; Bill Gates was proud of this solution because PC developers would have had no problems developing for this system.

The Ps2, on the other hand, is based on a completely different concept; there is an EXCELLENT article on the unique Ps2 architecture at Arstechnica.com. Great stuff.

Half true and half not. While, yes, the xbox uses computer parts, it does not make it any more of a computer than the ps2 is. Is a Macintosh more of a computer than the PC? No, its just a different Kind. All systems have a CPU (like a computer), A GPU (like a computer), a system bus that connects the cpu, gpu and ram (like a computer), a data input medium, usually dvd (like a computer) and various other parts. It just so happens that the PS2 is a lot more like the Macintosh computer in the way it's graphics engine is set up than the XBox (ouch... the ps2 is like a mac... sorry for saying that). But it is no less a pc than the xbox.

Regardless, none of these systems will ever be considered computers for the main reason of them being "consoles" that sit in your living room and primarily use controllers. Whys this? For the same reason you won't see me hooking up a controller to my PC and trying to call it a 'console'.