Claims 'promise' of Ultra HD support. http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2015/02/03/netflix-console-redesigns/1
Gareth, need some dates fixing. The original PS3 launched on November 11, 2006. The Slim launched in September 2009. By my maths, that's a hair short of three years, not two. As an aside, the super slim followed exactly three years after that. So yeah, not sure where this two-year refresh stuff is coming from? The PS4 launched in November 2013, which means if they follow exactly previous refreshes, we'll be seeing a revised PS4 in September 2016.
Not in Europe it didn't: 23rd March 2007. The Slim was announced 18th of August 2009 - just shy of two years and five months after the European launch of the PS3. Netflix. I quote: "Following up comments made by chief product officer Neil Hunt at a Consumer Electronics Show press conference next month, Forbes has received confirmation that Netflix is expecting a 'traditional two-year refresh' for both consoles to bring support for Ultra HD video output." Two years is Netflix's official phrasing, not mine, hence the reason it's quoted in the article - but works for the PS3/PS3-Slim release cycle if you use European launch dates and round down from two years and five months.
Europe schmeurope. Go off the original launch date (not announcement dates either). The hardware from Japan to EU is the same, ignoring the loss of the backwards compatibility, so by using the Europe date you're artificially shortening the distance between launches. Plus Europe and the US got the PS4 first this time, so if we use your logic, we should be saying the PS4 launched in February 2014 (Japan date) and has hence been out less than a year, so shouldn't be seeing replacement until February 2016 at the earliest (exactly two years). November 2006 to September 2009. That's two years, ten months. Call that three years, or if you use the exact time, we're still looking at September 2016. As for Netflix? Not sure they're a good example of console knowledge. "Two years" works if you fudge the numbers and round down by a whole five months. EDIT: Lets do the 360 as well! Launched November 2005. The S came out a whole four and a half years later in June 2010. The E came in June 2013, three years afterwards. Admittedly Microsoft did fiddle with the cooling and chips in the Falcon revision of the original designs in September 2007 to deal with the RRoD problem. Two year console cycle, whatever!
Well, not necessarily. Remember, Netflix is taking about a hardware refresh - not necessarily an entire hardware redesign. Wikipedia has a handy-dandy list of motherboard revisions for the Xbox 360, which I'll summarise here: Xenon launched in November 2005. Zephyr launched in April 2007, one year and five months after Xenon. Falcon launched in September 2007, five months after Zephyr. Opus launched in June 2008, nine months after Falcon. Jasper launched in September 2008, three months after Opus. Trinity launched in June 2010, one year and nine months after Jasper. Corona launched in August 2011, one year and two months after Trinity. Winchester launched in September 2014, three years and one month after Corona. An important thing to note about that list: between Xenon and Jasper the console's power draw dropped from 198W to 142.5W, its CPU and GPU went from being 90nm parts to 65nm parts, it gained an HDMI port and went through three different GPU heatsink designs with no appreciable change to its external design. (Well, aside from the HDMI port appearing at the back, of course.) It wasn't until Trinity that the external design was modified as well. So, can you average out the above to get a two-year cycle? I have no idea; ask Netflix. EDIT: There's a similar list for the PS3, if you wanted to calculate the timescales on those refreshes too.
I shall email Netflix posthaste and ask for proof of their dodgy claims! The 360 list is interesting though. Zephyr and Falcon were steps to try and solve the RRoD problem of Xenon - it's really bizarre they used the altered cooling of Zephyr as a standalone before going straight for the die shrunk Falcon. Opus looks like a fixed Xenon board (ie: same design, just die shrunk). Jasper completes the 65nm die shrink for the GPU. Trinity then is the actual redesign for the S, using the 65nm die shrunk components. Corona and Winchester then seem to be pointless updates bar some tiny cost saving? tl;dr Microsoft are weird with hardware updates
You can remove "with hardware updates" from that sentence and it'd still stand, if you ask me. As an anecdotal aside, I remember picking up a Jasper from Woolworth's - using the wattage visible below the serial barcode as an indicator it was the model I was looking for - as a replacement for my perfectly-fine launch model 'cos I was sick of the noise of the fans. It did me well, but RRoD a while back and got replaced with a Slim which is still going strong.
I actually still have a FF XIII limited edition 360 (a "Super Elite") from 2010. I believe it is a Jasper as well. Funnily enough, Amazon are offering me a whole £32.50 to trade it in. No RRoD thankfully, but it has been in storage a good few years now. Anyway, 2016 for a revision. Mark my words
