Ken Kutaragi Interview by Hiro****ge Goto - pt.1 : "We Change Computing by
PLAYSTATION 3"
The Reason Why PLAYSTATION Is In Capitals
Goto: PS3 is, if you look at just the spec, a full-spec computer. Why did
you make it so rich?
Kutaragi: Since the beginning, we've been trying not to do a game console
for children, but to do a computer for entertainment that grownups around
the world can enjoy. We've been thinking about doing a computer
thoroughly.
Meanwhile, finally, PC has come to the dead end. So, this time, we want to
do the next computer with partners such as IBM in an ensured way.
What we are thinking about this time is to change computing itself
thoroughly. We want to change the paradigm. We want to set PS3 as the
benchmark of everything.
G: Though its goal is a general computer, you took a game console as its
form in the beginning.
K: A game console... maybe. At E3, it's a game console, and its
applications
are games. We really want to do computer entertainment. Other companies
may
call theirs game consoles, but we've been calling it as computer
entertainment in press releases all along. It's entertainment and computer
as well. It's im****tant.
At this '3', for the first time we made the word PlayStation all capital
"PLAYSTATION". We named it "PlayStation" at first, as workstations were
our
dream computers. We added the "PS" logo to it as PlayStation is a
trademark
and starts with P and S. But this time we use "PLAYSTATION" in capitals.
It's because, basically, with PC and all going to the dead end, it leads
to
nowhere if you ask whether it's a PC or a game console. I think we've
entered the era in which you ask what is the next playstation. So
PLAYSTATION is "The playstation". We do it for a bit of pride too.
Until now, it's said "let's take functions in arcade boards or
workstations", or in the case of Microsoft, they said they'd use a
cutting-edge PC as a game console. But it's no more. PLAYSTATION will
develop as PLAYSTATION.
Calculations by A Cell Processor Will Produce Difference
G: So PS3 is a computer and its purpose is entertainment.
K: Of cource, in the beginning, it's about what's interesting as a game
console, and as computer entertainment.
In PS1, making 3D or not was the biggest differentiation factor. In
PlayStation 2, it was the mission to bring 3D in the complete
single-standard format - complete NTSC and PAL - in full color. This time,
it'll be the crucial difference from other platforms that we make it all
computing. In the background of graphics, it does vast calculations, and
it
produces difference.
G: It does various simulations such as physics simulations, and operations
such as AI, synthesis, in its background.
K: You can't see by just a glance if it's calculated by a Cell Processor
or
not even though it can show a beautiful HD video. But, if you look at it
carefully, calculated things and only converted things are clearly
different. You can feel it as an awesome thing when you see it, as it's
calculated. You can do thing you've never seen, you can enjoy contents
themselves.
In the case of other companies, the inside is the same even though its
graphics becomes HD. They hardly calculate things. Like hardly doing
physics
and just adding a motion by a motion capture. Even though you can't tell
by
just a glance, such differences can be seen quickly.
G: Do software developers understand that point?
K: I think developers have an undestanding of it. At E3 demo, they tried
to
do it in real time on the spot rather than prerendering and
precalculation.
At E3, many demos do various calulations in the background. Also in
graphics, how it moves is all done by calculations. Things that couldn't
be
calculated without huge time until now, they can be done on Cell (in
realtime). They'll try to create games that take advantage of it.
Also for audio, it's natural that it doesn't have an audio chip. It's
because we calculate it (with Cell). The audio is not like how many voices
you have - the audio itself becomes an object.
Between our demo and their demo, such contriving is the difference. They
are
different more than just the look. I think most people who attended the E3
press conference understood it. A certain famous journalist let slip a
word
that XBOX is 1.5 while PS is 3.5 as it was above the expectation, they are
different like that.
The Difference Between PS3 and XBOX 360 You Can't See From The Specs
G: The messages are clearly different between XBOX 360 and PS3. XBOX 360
pushed the image that they could prepare a solid game console as a
platform.
PS3 emphasized the possibility of the technologies.
K: This time, Microsoft clearly profess that they are chasing PlayStation.
However, what they are chasing are not PLAYSTATION 3 but PlayStation 2.
Because they don't know PS3 we are just making now. They become like that
as
they look at PS2. The goals are different. However, most people can't tell
the difference just by looking at the specs. We got mistaken in a similar
way in the time of PS1. We'd been evaluated that the both were 3D, along
with 3DO. Even though we argued that PS1 calculated 3D while 3DO didn't,
we
were said that the both were 3D and had CD-ROM, it's terrible like that.
This time, either, they may not be able to see the difference between PS3
and XBOX 360 if the spec sheets are shown side by side. But, at E3, many
people said it was good to be able to come and see it, not by the spec.
It'll be more infected and understood when it's released.
G: By PC getting to the dead end, do you mean with PC dragged by legacies
innovation is difficult and you can't go nowhere?
K: (Current computers) can't make the most of it as a total even though
individual devices have their performances. Various bottlenecks are found
when you assemble them. If you can make the most of it, you ought to be do
decent things if you combine 3.X Ghz Pentium 4 and boards by NVIDIA or
ATI,
but you can't.
What I call total is the buses, the loads, and other factors when they
work
together. You can't know it unless you do games (that have a high load).
We
made the architecture considering all those things. For instance, each SPE
works indepedently, and SRAM is attached there, also large GPR (general
purpose registers) are attached too. Because of that it can do huge
calculations in realtime. Such an architecture is im****tant.
(the excerpt of Goto's comment:
This time, Playstation aims, with a will, at the post-PC, next-generation
computer. In PlayStation 2 it was not enough by various factors such as
flexibility of the hardware, but in PS3 it seems he thinks he could get an
innovative architecture as a computer, with IBM. The "playstation" as a
general noun suggests various form factors in the category of playstation.
SCE's message for games is that games can be innovative on a computer that
pursues computer entertainment.)
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2005/0609/kaigai187.htm
Ken Kutaragi Interview by Hiro****ge Goto - pt.2 : "Put a full-blown Linux
on
PS3 HDD"
The Age of Network Drive
G: PLAYSTATION 3 doesn't have a local HDD even though it boasts that much
spec. Why?
K: We don't put an HDD in default. It's because it runs short no matter
how
much you add it. The next thing that will come is, without a doubt, a
network drive. (A storage is) on a Cell server, you can access it via the
network from anywhere. In your home, in your friend's home, from anywhere,
you can see logically (the same network drive). Such a world.
However, the console itself requires HDD sometimes. So this time you can
put
a 2.5 inch HDD in there, 80GB and 120GB. It's very short, but it's for
running an OS in a single console. Even though you have a tera-byte
storage
somewhere with a network drive, you have to have a drive in which an OS
can
run when you get an authentication as a single computer.
Put an OS To Be Seen As A Computer
G: Is it that you run an OS to use it as a computer?
K: What I find strange is that while we've been calling it as a computer
all
the time, in the same business world Nintendo affirms it's a toy, it's a
toy, to the outside world. So, even though we make supercomputer-class
things that require an ex****t control, the offices regard it as a toy.
Even PlayStation 2 is seen as a game console though we made an awesome
chip
such as EE and run Linux on it. I'd thought it might become a bit better
as
Microsoft came from the IT world. But the awkward thing is that they don't
say that as they don't want to break their own business. As they are
thinking that it becomes a trouble for them if Xbox runs Windows, they are
insisting that XBOX is a game console. What a troublesome thing.
This time, we position it as a supercomputer. However, as there are people
who don't see it as a computer if it's not filed as a computer, we make it
run an OS. Cell can run multiple OSes simultaneously. So, to run an OS as
it
is and to say it's a computer, it needs an HDD.
So, I think we'll put Linux (on an HDD) from the beginning... as a bonus.
To
file it as a computer.
G: For an OS to be run on Cell, Linux comes to mind.
K: Though Linux is also a legacy, it can be a initial lead. For Cell, an
OS
is merely an application (laugh). The kernel runs on Cell (Cell OS
hypervisor) and it takes the style in which multiple OSes as applications
run on top of that (virtual machine). Linux will be put of course. If
Linux
can be put, Lindows or anything can be put.
Also other PC OSs, if the vendors think they want, Windows or Tiger (Mac
OS
X 10.4), can be put on it. Perhaps even a different OS may emerge.
Drive The Ecosystem By PLAYSTATION 3
G: With an OS, people who write programs on it will appear. To make Cell
succeed as a computer, an ecosystem must be run on Cell. It needs the
establishment of an ecosystem where many people spontaneously write
programs
to impel further permeation of Cell.
K: Just like Apple Computer was open back then, if PLAYSTATION 3 is
released
and becomes open, an ecosystem will be driven. When it became Macintosh,
even though Apple didn't do everything, Adobe came and someone came, the
ecosystem took off. PC was like that originally. But they absorbed
everything (into MS Windows)... Well, it may be their aesthetic, but it's
become uncomprehensible even what an OS is.
Until now, we'd provided libraries and game makers had made things
in-house,
it's not possible anymore though. To do anything, you need a larger
expansion. But it'll turn out like that I think. For example, what
surprised
us is that an iTunes-syncronization software for PSP was released quickly.
If it's evaluated as interesting, various things that run on it appear.
G: Non-game softwares that take advantage of Cell will be released in a
stream.
K: It'll be about what kind of software on what. For instance an HD video
authoring software is basically the same as a non-linear authoring system
in
TV stations. What we want to do on PS3 is a software of that level. A
non-linear authoring system is amazing, but it'll be more amazing if you
bring it on Cell. You can manage to do it on a PC, but on PS3 it can be
done
with ease, you'll see the difference like that. Also, various applications
that have been on PC, for example, a photo retouching software. Such
softwares will be released rapidly. User interfaces will be interesting
too.
On PC, you have to wait for years from the XP UI to the next Longhorn.
But,
ours develop faster. For example, with an interface controlled by gestures
and speech like Eye-toy, it becomes Minority Re****t. Of course such
development will be reflected in games too.
G: Will the Cell computer of that time retain the PS3 form factor?
K: This form will prevail first. A keyboard can be connected, it has all
of
the interfaces required. You can do anything media and network. A thing as
much general as this is open.
For instance, you can use everything openly with Linux, so everything is
possible (for programmers). Also for graphics, it's the same as it has
Shader (with its programmability).
(The excerpt of Goto's comment:
Executives at Intel and Microsoft criticized Cell with its lack of
software
ecosystem, and it seems SCE understands this point and is taking concrete
measures.)
|
