News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Thoughts on OnLive. Parent comment

Re:Thoughts on OnLive by liuliu on Friday June 18, 2010 @07:41PM (#1443806)
The reason why OnLive is economical than your game console is not that one OnLive server can power several game instances. Maybe the most powerful server (expensive ones but still x86 arch) can serve 3 or 5 game instances simultaneously. However, in per dollar perspective, it is not cheaper than your game console.

The way OnLive is cheaper is that it smoothes the usage curve by allowing people in different places, different time-zones to play on the same server. Once the utilization rate up, it is a scalable business.

In your "dorm room" scenario, I fail to see any advantages in server utilization perspective.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Thoughts on OnLive by crystalis on Friday June 18, 2010 @09:18PM (#1443936)
How do multiple time zones jive with local cdns serving at 14 ms...?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Thoughts on OnLive by houseabsolute on Friday June 18, 2010 @09:30PM (#1443949)
> In your "dorm room" scenario, I fail to see any advantages in server utilization perspective.

Well, look a little harder, bub. I'm talking about installing one to share amongst an entire highrise. :) A mini-datacenter if you will. Each city could have one out in the burbs.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Thoughts on OnLive by teaspoon on Saturday June 19, 2010 @12:12AM (#1444134)
Given that OnLive is in many senses a monopoly for the time being, I think they're plenty economical without that benefit. The cost of a wasted instance-hour will probably be negligible next to their weekly revenue per user.
[ Parent | on HN ]