PS3 Update Kills Linux

[Sosa]

news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20100329/bs_nf/72456

With the release of FFXIII and a lot of other stuff going on, I hadn't gotten around to updating my PS3 to the latest version until today.

It's a god-damned good thing I read the agreement first.

With the 3.21 version update, players are forced to make a choice:

• Update to the new version and permanantly lose the ability to install or boot to another OS on the system, losing access to any data you have installed on that partition and the space on the partition itself (unless you do a complete reformat and lose everything.)
  
  
• Don't update and lose access to the Playstation Network, games that require access to the Playstation Network, your friends list, synchronized trophies, the ability to watch content with certain DRM restrictions, and all future features and updates.

The official reason Sony is making this change is due to a claim that installing another OS on the PS3 facilitates piracy. Considering the fact that there are physical limitations in place that prevent most of the system's resources (most of the cell processor, access to GPU and all but ~128mb of RAM) from being accessed outside of the PS3 OS, this statement is complete bullshit. Having a third party OS installed on your PS3 no more facilitates piracy than does having a second computer and using it to move files onto your PS3 with a flash drive or USB cable.

I doubt anyone else on this board was affected by the update, but given the huge precedent this sets, I figured I'd alert people.

[Nauren]

Its far from complete bullshit.

Geohot (the well know IPHONE hacker aka blackrain) has claimed and shown he has cracked the PS3's hyperviser. This is the key to allow him custom firmware which can eventually allow him SPU access, RSX access and ultimately, blu-ray encryption access.

The only way this is possible....Linux.

Now Geohot has a long ways to go before any of this is possible....but he has swore to succeeding. Sony took the only option they could. In fact he said he will have custom firmware out that will allow linux to stay and even turn the option OS on the PS3 Slims within a few weeks.

Not only that....linux is subpar compared to even your average pc due to no RSX or Cell access. It was nearly pointless on many levels.

Yes yes....we can be butthurt from a bait and switch or simply losing a feature we would never use just because we had it......or we can be thankful that there will be PS3 games in our future....

sorry...touchy subject for me that I've already went back and forth on.




it was a neat feature...one that will not be replicated in the future by any manufacturer because a few bad eggs messed it up for us all.

[Sosa]

Geohot (the well know IPHONE hacker aka blackrain) has claimed and shown he has cracked the PS3's hyperviser. This is the key to allow him custom firmware which can eventually allow him SPU access, RSX access and ultimately, blu-ray encryption access.

The only way this is possible....Linux.

Fair enough. I haven't exactly kept a finger to the pulse of the PS3 underground scene, so I can't really comment on this... but I acknowledge it's at least possible, and the problems that could come as a result if it were true.

Not only that....linux is subpar compared to even your average pc due to no RSX or Cell access. It was nearly pointless on many levels.

That statement isn't really fair, as it makes a lot of assumptions about what the end user's intended use of the system is. I read a response to the original Sony post by a maligned "businessman" claiming intent to sue Sony for damages due to using PS3 systems as multifunction business computers in his network, and laughed at it. That's asinine.

However, there are a number of practical, perfectly legitimate reasons a person would want to have Linux on their PS3 other than as a novelty. I have more users than computers right now, and they mostly perform simple tasks like web browsing. The default web browser integrated into the PS3 OS is terrible, it doesn't even have functional support for flash, and pretty much useless for this purpose. Being able to use Firefox is a huge boon. Running it all in a Linux shell gives me user profiles, the ability to let them store personal data, and run other basic services like text processing or whatever else the need.

Yes yes....we can be butthurt from a bait and switch or simply losing a feature we would never use just because we had it......or we can be thankful that there will be PS3 games in our future....

I do use it. Extensively. Many users don't, but using that as the basis of an argument to support the change is disingenuous at best, and insinuating it will somehow yield tangible results in "saving the future of PS3 gaming" is a logical fallacy.

---

Nauren, you're not the kind of person to hold an opinion without having something to back it up with, so I respect the position you hold on this... but I see no evidence to logically justify what Sony has done here and I feel like I have a pretty justifiable reason to be pissed at them.

[Nauren]

Apr 13, 2010 17:28:21 GMT -5 Sosa said:

Many users don't

"Most" users don't is a more true statement.

And you are right....many opinions of mine are based on assumptions.

Like knowing you electronically as I do, I assume you probably have other options (probably better) to do everything you listed that you use Linux on your PS3 for. Maybe not as convenient or as satisfying. But in the end...it is a "video game system"

I agree the browser on the PS3 is garbage. So very horrible.


And as far as it being a logical fallacy that it will "save the PS3" I'm not saying it will save or destroy it, but it will undoubtely assist in protecting it and for that reason, I'm all for it.


here read up on geohot and his progress he is making leaps that no other hacker has yet done. Its because of him that Sony took the steps they did.

Here is how I see it. It sucks...it royally sucks. But I'd rather not have another dreamcast on my hands (yea thats stretching it a bit far). But we all know that Sony isn't the strongest selling software....ANY amount they lose will hurt them more then it would the other 2 consoles and that is a fact.

to put it bluntly...Games more important then Linux to me.

[Sosa]

"Most" users don't is a more true statement.

I'll concede that. Without statistics on hand, I think we can both agree the total number of PS3 owners that actively use Linux on their systems is under 1-2%.

And you are right....many opinions of mine are based on assumptions.

Assumptions are all we have in the absence of hard evidence, and we both tend to base our assumptions on the facts at hand, but I'm pretty sure I understand what you were getting at.

Here is how I see it. It sucks...it royally sucks. But I'd rather not have another dreamcast on my hands (yea thats stretching it a bit far). But we all know that Sony isn't the strongest selling software....ANY amount they lose will hurt them more then it would the other 2 consoles and that is a fact.

to put it bluntly...Games more important then Linux to me.

...This is more what I was referring to, when I said you "have something to back up your opinions." There's nothing inherently wrong with the conclusion you've drawn or the logical path you took to get there. The reason we can't see eye to eye is that from your point of view, Sony dropping the Linux demographic to protect its interests is justifiable and from my point of view, it isn't.

It's a feature on the box that people took under consideration when purchasing it. Sony is not simply removing the option to use Other OS from future systems, they are retroactively taking the feature off the box of every unit they've ever sold and effectively holding other features on the box at ransom unless the owner complies. That's an incredibly dishonest business practice.

It's like selling someone a car, and then 12 months down the road, telling them the cigarette lighter feature is being discontinued and they have to choose between removing the cigarette lighter, or not using the radio, CD player, or any of the CDs they've purchased to play in the CD player anymore. The car still fulfills its primary purpose, but it's not what you paid for.

[Nauren]

And as in most debates...people who use X project vs someone who doesn't use X product will never see eye to eye despite the outcome.

You obviously will be more salty then me because you are actually losing something and that doesn't make you wrong at all.

But I personally feel that saltiness detracts from the bigger picture....assumption or no...proof or no....that it could lead to a devistating piracy campaign against the PS3 that could potentially hurt it...even send it to an early grave and just being "potential" makes it reason enough to consider justifiably.

And your analogy misses what I consider the main point. Your analogy completely eliminates the third party involved. Now if they had to eliminate the lighter due to it being the sole reason for increased car theft, that would make a little more sense (not really but you get it...small thing to lose for the bigger picture).

Also being a multiplatform owner makes you a little less concerned with the PS3 software sales as you have an equally awesome system to fall back on.

[Markus]

The PS3 browser is garbage. But guess what, if your PC breaks and all you have left is the PS3... You're going to be super happy to have that browser. I was.

The 360 menus and interface make me want to hurl. >< Thought I'd throw that in there lol

Fapping while looking at a giant screen is always a plus imo.

[Sosa]

Fapping while looking at a giant screen is always a plus imo.

And so the real reason for my adamant defense of PS3 Linux finally is finally exposed... or is it?

On the other hand, I did imply that I'm letting family members use it, so I suppose you can make of that what you will...

And as in most debates...people who use X project vs someone who doesn't use X product will never see eye to eye despite the outcome.

Yeah, so I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree... although in the end, I don't really disagree with your point of view, I just disagree with the methods that Sony took to achieve them.

[Nauren]

What would be an alternative for Sony?

[Xaero]

Honestly the war on piracy is fucking stupid. Pirates win. That's all there is to it. Every time these businesses put something into a product to "protect it from piracy" it usually ends up causing some problem for the end user, and then the pirates defeat it within days or weeks. Honestly they need to just stop wasting money on the bullshit, and lower their prices. yes I understand that lower prices won't cure piracy, but for some people price is a major factor on if they pirate or not.

[Nauren]

price is never a factor....free is a factor.

and the PS3 as it stands now...is 100% hack proof....providing Linux is not involved. 4 years unhacked so far.

[Xaero]

Not true at all, price is a factor at times. Not to mention hardships caused to the user via anti-piracy crap also comes into play as well. A small check on google an a products security before you buy can change your mind damn quick as to whether your pirate or not.

[Sosa]

Nothing is hack-proof, but we're talking about semantics here. It's not going to be hacked within any significant window of time without using a third party OS to get there.

Apr 13, 2010 19:39:47 GMT -5 Nauren said:

What would be an alternative for Sony?

Pretty much anything that doesn't involve turning paying, law-abiding customers into scapegoats and giving them the royal shaft. I'm a gamer. I have been for 20 years. I understand how the industry works, and I want Sony to succeed because it means I'll have more games to play. I understand that to do that, they have to protect their interests.

The problem is that they decided to do this through incredibly dishonest means. Again, they didn't stop future systems from supporting it, they retroactively removed selling-point features that people have already paid for. Worse yet, users don't really have a choice in the matter. If you have investments in the Playstation Store or games that require PSN to function, you are SOL. This was a terrible decision on their part, because it feels like I'm not only being ripped off - but I'm being blackmailed into going through with it anyway.

You want to know what they could have done differently?

Incentivize legal game purchases. Pirates are pirates for two basic reasons: they can get something for free, and they can get away with it. Anything else is rationalization. Lowering prices won't really influence most pirates into purchasing the product, so I agree that any different there would be insignificant. You can scare some of them away with legal threats or scaremongering (like the RIAA,) but technically savvy pirates aren't going to bat an eye.

Worse yet, even if they succeed in deterring 100% of piracy, they're not necessarily making money. A publisher does not make money from a non-paying customer. Some pirates will choose to buy the product rather than not have it at all, but honestly I have a hard time believing that enough of them fall into that trap for a publisher to recoup their investment in anti-piracy measures to begin with.

...Which brings us back to the only remaining option: make people want to buy your game. In some cases, this just requires making a fantastic product. Stardock is a decent example of this: their games have no form of practical DRM or anti-piracy measures of any kind, but this has proven to be a feature that so many fans enjoy, they've come to rally around it. Other companies, like Electronic Arts, have begun to give player rewards or incentives for buying games: buy game A and unlock shiny object for game B. As much as I hate EA on general principal, I feel like they're doing right by this decision.

At the end of the day, what has Sony accomplished? They've done absolutely nothing to prevent piracy today: people that want to pirate games will simply choose not to update their systems. The only thing they have to show for it is a bunch of really pissed off Linux users.

[Nauren]

One word ...err acronym. "PSP"

Sony is already a target and threats are already bountiful. The PSP is dying a slow and agonizing death due to this very same topic.

If Sony has ANYTHING to learn from hacking attempts, it is to cut them off before they start.

Perhaps next time they should save money on R&D, manufacturing, programmers and leave these options out since people abuse them and we can go back to liking a system for what its meant for.

This is a lose/lose situation for Sony. Leave optional OS there....possibly get pirated. Take it out...bad public reaction, possible loss of sales. Lets face it...that is really the only two options to weigh. If I were a business man..that would be the route I go as well.

And I'll touch briefly on the "then sell your game" remark. Marketing only goes so far and the cost eventually exceeds its worth. Developers and publishers alike are finding it more difficult to make a profit off of any game. Not to mention every game...even the best sellers are niche' compared to the possible install base.

Increasing marketing would be a sinkhole for the majority of dev/publishers so that is not a viable option.

[Sosa]

One word ...err acronym. "PSP"

Sony is already a target and threats are already bountiful. The PSP is dying a slow and agonizing death due to this very same topic.

Going to agree to disagree here. I could contest the point, but it's based largely on my own perception of what is and isn't worth playing on the system.

If Sony has ANYTHING to learn from hacking attempts, it is to cut them off before they start.

Perhaps next time they should save money on R&D, manufacturing, programmers and leave these options out since people abuse them and we can go back to liking a system for what its meant for.

Sorry, I have a hard time buying that. Removing features from the box makes the end product less attractive: the original PS3 model was already considered pricey; if hadn't included features like backwards compatibility, multi-OS support and SACD support, reception could have been even worse. It's impossible to go back in time and accurately predict how it may have been different, but Sony marketed the system heavily as an all-in-one computer and multimedia device, and still does so to this day.

Remarkably, all three of the features I listed above are software dependent and all three were disabled. Neither backwards compatibility, nor SACD support contributed to the piracy problem in any way or add to production cost, and yet they were disabled anyway. I remember being pretty irritated about those removals too, but the difference was that they were not taking away a feature I had already paid for, they were simply choosing not to support it going forward.

This is a lose/lose situation for Sony. Leave optional OS there....possibly get pirated. Take it out...bad public reaction, possible loss of sales. Lets face it...that is really the only two options to weigh. If I were a business man..that would be the route I go as well.

I agree here that it's a lose/lose situation... but one outcome was bad for Sony, and the other outcome was bad for Sony and Sony's customers. They chose the second one. ~33.5 million units have been sold as of Jan 1, 2010. If we take an average from above and assume 1.5% of units have Linux installed, that's a little over half a million customers Sony just chose to drag down with them.

I'm not so sure I'd agree with that business decision.

And I'll touch briefly on the "then sell your game" remark. Marketing only goes so far and the cost eventually exceeds its worth. Developers and publishers alike are finding it more difficult to make a profit off of any game. Not to mention every game...even the best sellers are niche' compared to the possible install base.

Increasing marketing would be a sinkhole for the majority of dev/publishers so that is not a viable option.

What you said is true, but has nothing to do with either of my two suggestions, as they cost absolutely nothing to implement.

Adding an additional shiny object to the game and making the unlock conditionally based on the purchase of another game has negligible cost to development. If they market it heavily, it could potentially be a money sink... but that's more a retailer's marketing ploy than a publishers (Buy X at Gamestop instead of Walmart, get a free shiny!)

The other method, eliminating DRM/Anti-piracy measures entirely actually saves on development costs. Again, Stardock is a perfect poster-child for this. Sins of a Solar Empire has had an incredibly successful commercial release given its budget, had virtually no mass media coverage, and has no form of DRM in place. By choosing not to put DRM in their game, they neither lost nor gained a significant number of customers (the pirate/consumer outliers affected by lack of DRM basically canceled each other out,) and saved money and development time. In addition, they gained a tremendous amount of respect from their playerbase, instead of alienating and driving them away like Sony and Ubisoft have done recently.

Edit: God, I wish this board supported spoiler tags... lol
I'm pretty sure the postlength:postcount ratio qualifies this to be its own separate board at this point.