[Kosh]

3rd party functionality = bad

A controversial update which was seeded by Sony in order to remove the ability to run Linux on the Playstation 3 games console has caused a storm of complaints.

The 3.21 firmware upgrade, which removes the security hole provided by the 'Install Other OS' widget used by lots of educational institutions and hackers alike, also removes the console's ability to play games or connect to the Interweb according to forum posts, turning it into a very expensive doorstop.

Some users are reporting infinite loops where the installation routine never completes, others are complaining about the inability to use a variety of different controllers during the process.

[Nu11u5]

A more closed system is only going to encourage hackers to try to circumvent its limitations and then release the exploits.  It already being done...

http://www.thinq.co.uk/news/2010/4/8/sony-ps3-hack-brings-linux-back/

Hotz also says that there's a possibility that his custom firmware 3.2100 hack will actually install the Other OS ability on the newer slim PS3, which never had it from the get go.

That's my favorite part, a day after I installed the update on my Slim   I suppose the modification could be incorporated into future updates possibly.

[The E]

You are aware that the slim PS3 never had the OtherOS function in the first place?

[Galemp]

From the quote, I would say so.

So, uh, regarding computer gaming... anyone have any thoughts on DRM?

[Enigmatic Entity]

It will get hacked?

[Blue Lion]

I only play PC games and have never had a problem with DRM.

[Flaser]

I only play PC games and have never had a problem with DRM.

...I only ever had problem with DRM on games that I legally bought.
Hence why I rarely buy anything nowadays - except from GOG.

[Blue Lion]

I only play PC games and have never had a problem with DRM.

...I only ever had problem with DRM on games that I legally bought.
Hence why I rarely buy anything nowadays - except from GOG.

Problems like what?

[Mongoose]

So in other words, this thread's title should be, "Why Sony sucks," which is pretty much common knowledge to begin with.

[TESLA]

So in other words, this thread's title should be, "Why Sony sucks," which is pretty much common knowledge to begin with.

Its not simply that.

I legally buy games, i feel like a criminal for buying the game. I was rightly pissed off with Silent Hunter 5 and the constant online connection needed.

Not just for the spying on your gameplay,

but,

after sinking 8 British merchant ships, 3 warships, (something which i am very happy about) ONLY TO LOOSE CONNECTION and my 'save' game, brings me back before i sank all the ships    (oh yeah, i didnt loose connection, the 'server' had a problem

One reason i refused to buy the new C&C game!


I like cake. 

[Angelus]

So in other words, this thread's title should be, "Why Sony sucks," which is pretty much common knowledge to begin with.

Its not simply that.

I legally buy games, i feel like a criminal for buying the game. I was rightly pissed off with Silent Hunter 5 and the constant online connection needed.

Not just for the spying on your gameplay,

but,

after sinking 8 British merchant ships, 3 warships, (something which i am very happy about) ONLY TO LOOSE CONNECTION and my 'save' game, brings me back before i sank all the ships     (oh yeah, i didnt loose connection, the 'server' had a problem

One reason i refused to buy the new C&C game!


I like cake.  

That's why i not gonna buy Assassins Creed 2, or any other game that requires me to stay online while playing Singleplayer.
That's most likely one of the most stupid idea in history of gaming.

Games that refuse to run because the DVD drive can't handle copyprotection ( Starforce - awesome thing[/sarcasm]),
games that refuse to install if i have a burning software and/ or virtual drive tool are seriously awesome.  

Spending 50€ for a game and then not being able to play it, or being forced to un-install half of the other software from the PC or being forced to be online while playing is something i always dreamed of.  

Wait, nope. Not really. Actually, that's the reason i buy rarely any games anymore and if i buy one, it's a older game. Without these "features".


I had once a PS2 for a short time, and it was mostly disappointing.
Even though the number of available games was huge, i had trouble finding a game that was worth buying. I sold it 5 or 6 weeks after i bought it.
Sonys policy sucks, and people have always found a way to crack console stuff, but i don't care much about consoles, and i doubt i will ever buy one again.
I guess that's caused by being spoiled by the advantage of the PC in comparison to the Console in pretty much every aspect.

[Mongoose]

Its not simply that.

You missed my point.  Kosh titled this thread with an overgeneralized negative, when he was directing criticism against a specific action by a specific company.  The actions Sony takes do not automatically extend to Microsoft or Nintendo, nor to console gaming as a whole.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if you've never played a game on a console, you have no true claim to the title of "gamer."  The majority of the most beloved and popular franchises in the history of gaming have never set foot on the PC platform.  Counting handhelds, I have a good ten console systems sitting around, and I don't plan on stopping there.

[General Battuta]

I was a die-hard PC gamer from age 5, starting out with stuff like Mechcommander and Master of Orion and even Elite.

Picked up a 360 shortly after release and loved it.

[TESLA]

Its not simply that.

You missed my point.  Kosh titled this thread with an overgeneralized negative, when he was directing criticism against a specific action by a specific company.  The actions Sony takes do not automatically extend to Microsoft or Nintendo, nor to console gaming as a whole.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if you've never played a game on a console, you have no true claim to the title of "gamer."  The majority of the most beloved and popular franchises in the history of gaming have never set foot on the PC platform.  Counting handhelds, I have a good ten console systems sitting around, and I don't plan on stopping there.

Much to my girlfriends annyoance, i have the xbox360, PS3, Nintendo Wii, all in the sitting room connected to the tv, (next to the dell XPS)

Nothing like having the lads over, few beers, and letting loose on few games!!

[el_magnifico]

A controversial update which was seeded by Sony in order to remove the ability to run Linux on the Playstation 3

Hold on! They removed a feature like that from the console even when they advertised it and, as far a I know, have made promises to keep it before? Is that even legal?

The last console I ever bought was a Sega Genesis/Mega Drive, so I guess I have no authority to speak about this, but if I were a Linux user on the Playstation, I would feel a bit angry.

[Klaustrophobia]

i've got to wonder, why would one buy a PS3 to run linux on?  surely running it on a computer would be better.  if it's a "just cuz they can", is this really something to get all that upset about?

[Mongoose]

i've got to wonder, why would one buy a PS3 to run linux on?  surely running it on a computer would be better.  if it's a "just cuz they can", is this really something to get all that upset about?

There were actually a number of educational facilities and universities who purchased groups of PS3s for the sole purpose of running Linux on them.  I know some researchers took advantage of the Cell processor's unique architecture by running them in tandem to solve certain types of computational problems.  Even at the launch price, PS3s were still substantially cheaper than the equivalent hardware that would have been used otherwise.  This isn't to say that people also didn't throw Linux on there "just for the hell of it," but there were certainly more legitimate uses too.  I have no idea why Sony would renege on a capability that was an original draw of the hardware and had garnered them positive publicity...but hey, that's Sony for you.

[el_magnifico]

i've got to wonder, why would one buy a PS3 to run linux on?  surely running it on a computer would be better.  if it's a "just cuz they can", is this really something to get all that upset about?

There were actually a number of educational facilities and universities who purchased groups of PS3s for the sole purpose of running Linux on them.  I know some researchers took advantage of the Cell processor's unique architecture by running them in tandem to solve certain types of computational problems.  Even at the launch price, PS3s were still substantially cheaper than the equivalent hardware that would have been used otherwise.  This isn't to say that people also didn't throw Linux on there "just for the hell of it," but there were certainly more legitimate uses too.  I have no idea why Sony would renege on a capability that was an original draw of the hardware and had garnered them positive publicity...but hey, that's Sony for you.

^ What he said.

Besides, this is not about the particular case of Linux. I've used Linux as a tool and it's good and open source, but I'm not a Linux fanboy. I don't think I've ever ran Linux on anything but a typical PC. And nowadays I don't even have a dedicated partition (I virtualize it in the rare cases when I need it).
What I'm trying to understand is why so many people think it is normal for them to remove functionality they advertised a lot. Don't you guys have any laws about deceiving publicity? Will you think it's fine if I sell you a car, and then I come back three weeks later and remove the stereo from your car because I decided if you want to hear music, you should do it in your home instead? Of course not. If this is the level of compromise Sony has with its clients, I guess I'm not going to buy anything from them again, not because I hate them, but just to be safe.

[headdie]

i've got to wonder, why would one buy a PS3 to run linux on?  surely running it on a computer would be better.  if it's a "just cuz they can", is this really something to get all that upset about?

There were actually a number of educational facilities and universities who purchased groups of PS3s for the sole purpose of running Linux on them.  I know some researchers took advantage of the Cell processor's unique architecture by running them in tandem to solve certain types of computational problems.  Even at the launch price, PS3s were still substantially cheaper than the equivalent hardware that would have been used otherwise.  This isn't to say that people also didn't throw Linux on there "just for the hell of it," but there were certainly more legitimate uses too.  I have no idea why Sony would renege on a capability that was an original draw of the hardware and had garnered them positive publicity...but hey, that's Sony for you.

^ What he said.

Besides, this is not about the particular case of Linux. I've used Linux as a tool and it's good and open source, but I'm not a Linux fanboy. I don't think I've ever ran Linux on anything but a typical PC. And nowadays I don't even have a dedicated partition (I virtualize it in the rare cases when I need it).
What I'm trying to understand is why so many people think it is normal for them to remove functionality they advertised a lot. Don't you guys have any laws about deceiving publicity? Will you think it's fine if I sell you a car, and then I come back three weeks later and remove the stereo from your car because I decided if you want to hear music, you should do it in your home instead? Of course not. If this is the level of compromise Sony has with its clients, I guess I'm not going to buy anything from them again, not because I hate them, but just to be safe.

in the uk at any rate so long as the console is supplied with all advertised features then they are ok (so long as they stop advertising the dissabled feature(s)) and there is probably something writen down somewhere that sony reserves the right to dissable any features at any time for any reason

[Ghostavo]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/PS3-playstation-Linux-Rebate-Amazon,10140.html

A European PS3 owner has claimed a partial refund because of Sony's decision to axe Linux support.

When we reported that Sony would be ditching OtherOS support, killing off the ability to run Linux on your console, a lot of you suggested that this couldn't be legal. What about people who purchased the PS3 with this feature in mind? Wouldn't taking it away mean the console no longer performed as advertised?

Well, that's what one European user said when he complained to Amazon. PlayStation University reports that NeoGAF forum moderator "iapetus" received over $100 in credit from Amazon for his original purchase of his PlayStation 3. Iapetus filed a complaint with the etailer on the grounds that removing Linux support violates European Union consumer laws. Amended in 2002 to affect all EU member states, the law states that all goods "must be fit for the purpose which the consumer requires them and which was made known to the seller at the time of purchase."

I can see Sony being sued very, very quickly if this gets out of hand.