Playstation 3, another lost feature.

[TheTim]

yea im getting ready to sell my ps3 back for a 360

 

[Snotnarok]

Important: If you have linux installed you might want to read this:

The PS3 update will not delete the linux install, only shut off the partition so effectively you'll lose the space linux is taking up so you'll have to back up your system and format it so you can erase linux.

To back it up you'll need a FAT32 formatted drive (as NTFS is a Microsoft thing) and if you don't you'll have to figure something else out to do. So if you care about the space it takes up (I forget how much mine even takes up) You'll have to go through the ropes.

Use this if you only want to back up your game saves:
http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/2570/ps3_how_to_backup_ps3_game_save_files/

 

[DracoSuave]

1) I don't get what the hell good Linux is doing on a PS3. Damn linux, most of the time people just install it on random shit cause they can. If you are a linux user ask yourself: Would you install linux on your cat if you could?

You probably would.

Wierdo.

2) Non-executable code on a seperate partition that shouldn't be accessed by the main PS3 OS should not impact security for features such as: Accessing the PSN, running games, or other legitimate PS3 stuff.

Which means that some pirate dick installed some funky pirate haxxor shit on their partition, used that to do some illegal gaming mumbo jumbo, and Sony decided to shut it down, realizing that the only people they'd inconvincience were Linux users who install Linux on everything cause they can.

Jerks.

3) What we can conclude from this, therefore, is that if you install Linux on your cat, Sony will come and kill you, and the pirates still win.

 

[Snotnarok]

1) I don't get what the hell good Linux is doing on a PS3. Damn linux, most of the time people just install it on random shit cause they can. If you are a linux user ask yourself: Would you install linux on your cat if you could?

You probably would.

Wierdo.

2) Non-executable code on a seperate partition that shouldn't be accessed by the main PS3 OS should not impact security for features such as: Accessing the PSN, running games, or other legitimate PS3 stuff.

Which means that some pirate dick installed some funky pirate haxxor shit on their partition, used that to do some illegal gaming mumbo jumbo, and Sony decided to shut it down, realizing that the only people they'd inconvincience were Linux users who install Linux on everything cause they can.

Jerks.

3) What we can conclude from this, therefore, is that if you install Linux on your cat, Sony will come and kill you, and the pirates still win.

You fanboy, you CAT fanboy, why not a bunny? Or a dog? Why you gotta be like that?

Honestly I dunno what people did with linux, my friend installed it on mine (not sure why honestly) and I used it for some various things when I had PC problems. But I have a laptop as a backup now so that's out.

The whole thing is a bit odd but whatever, linux will be missed, by some people. Honestly I'm more angry with the situation because now I gotta back up my PS3 files, and format it so I can get it off and update my PS3. :C

And I agree, whatever measures you take Pirates will be fast behind you. Like the Bluray code when it got cracked.

Edit: ...Or a moose? Or a duck?

 

[goldenheart323]

Would this be a work-around: Buy another hard drive and format it for the PS3. Keep your old drive with Linux enabled and put that in when only when you don't want to sign into the PS3 network. Swapping HDD's is still a bunch of BS, but at least people could keep their Linux.

the .01% that actually use linux will be hurt but come on, who gives a hoot?

I'm surprised so many people are completely missing the point. There's actually a principle involved here. We're not talking a new model PS3 with reduced features. We're talking about current PS3's that get a feature yanked out of them. People bought a product that could do X,Y, & Z. Now, those items can no longer do "z". (Simplified analogy there.) That's the same as someone buying a car & then the company telling all its customers if you want to drive on the street, you have to let us change your transmission from a 5 speed to a 4 speed. Everyone here rarely drives on the highway, so they're saying "Pfft! Who cares? Stop whining."

If you buy a product & a feature stops working, it's generally considered to be broken. Am I wrong? The fact few people use or care about that particular feature does not change the fact it's broken.

 

[goldenheart323]

It's more like a recall to keep with you car analogy.
Hackers or some such were found using linux to do some shit they didn't want them to do so they removed the feature.
If a car company released a car that had a feature that caused danger or something terrible to happen they would recall it to fix it. If there was no fix they'd probably just remove it if it was something entirely optional to the car that had no effect on the performance, they'd probably give a refund if it cost the consumer extra to get that. In this case it didn't cost extra for the linux support, it was found to be used for things they didn't want it to so they removed it.

Close, but not quite. It was a feature Sony said the PS3 had, but it's not an itemized feature with a specified value. Removing Linux does affect the PS3's performance. You, and many others won't notice it, but it can't do as much as it did before. I do agree with your car analogy in that IF it were an optional feature that cost the customer extra, they would get a refund for its removal. If Sony were offering up a partial refund for those who do use Linux,(perhaps verified by Playstation network detecting the Linux partition,) the situation would agree with your car analogy.

Some people are using the PS3 in ways not intended? So what? People use products in ways not intended all the time. That doesn't give Sony the right to significantly alter their product AFTER it's been bought. Again, it's only significant to those who choose to use the feature, but if only 1% of their customers get screwed, does that make it ok? Tell me, Admiral, how many people have to get screwed before it becomes wrong? (Cookie if you get that movie reference. ;-) )If Sony found that pedestrians were getting hit & killed by people driving their car at high speeds, it would be unacceptable for them to do a recall and limit the cars to 35mph.

Note: I'm sure a whole lot of legal mumbo-jumbo in the terms of use for the PSN prevent a class action lawsuit, but just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right.

Oh, and IMO, it's one thing to say "We've changed the terms of use for PSN. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it." It's another thing to say "If you don't like it, you don't have to use it, and you can't enjoy those other things you paid for either." That's just an additional kick in the gut. On 2nd thought, maybe there is some grounds for a class action lawsuit.

 

[SNIPERFOX ft. Harry P.Ness]

oh noes! now i have something to tease PS3 fanboys with!

 

[Ironboot]

Eeh, I'm a Linux user but I've never used Linux on my PS3. I just don't see the point.

 

[shadow skill]

It's more like a recall to keep with you car analogy.
Hackers or some such were found using linux to do some shit they didn't want them to do so they removed the feature.
If a car company released a car that had a feature that caused danger or something terrible to happen they would recall it to fix it. If there was no fix they'd probably just remove it if it was something entirely optional to the car that had no effect on the performance, they'd probably give a refund if it cost the consumer extra to get that. In this case it didn't cost extra for the linux support, it was found to be used for things they didn't want it to so they removed it.

Close, but not quite. It was a feature Sony said the PS3 had, but it's not an itemized feature with a specified value. Removing Linux does affect the PS3's performance. You, and many others won't notice it, but it can't do as much as it did before. I do agree with your car analogy in that IF it were an optional feature that cost the customer extra, they would get a refund for its removal. If Sony were offering up a partial refund for those who do use Linux,(perhaps verified by Playstation network detecting the Linux partition,) the situation would agree with your car analogy.

Some people are using the PS3 in ways not intended? So what? People use products in ways not intended all the time. That doesn't give Sony the right to significantly alter their product AFTER it's been bought. Again, it's only significant to those who choose to use the feature, but if only 1% of their customers get screwed, does that make it ok? Tell me, Admiral, how many people have to get screwed before it becomes wrong? (Cookie if you get that movie reference. ;-) )If Sony found that pedestrians were getting hit & killed by people driving their car at high speeds, it would be unacceptable for them to do a recall and limit the cars to 35mph.

Note: I'm sure a whole lot of legal mumbo-jumbo in the terms of use for the PSN prevent a class action lawsuit, but just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right.

Oh, and IMO, it's one thing to say "We've changed the terms of use for PSN. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it." It's another thing to say "If you don't like it, you don't have to use it, and you can't enjoy those other things you paid for either." That's just an additional kick in the gut. On 2nd thought, maybe there is some grounds for a class action lawsuit.

It would be an interesting case, though I would expect Sony to end up winning. I can't think of any electronic device that has had functionality removed retroactively because some people might use it in a way that was unintended by the creator, when said unintended way has to be executed with the knowledge and/or consent of a user.

 

[Snotnarok]

It's more like a recall to keep with you car analogy.
Hackers or some such were found using linux to do some shit they didn't want them to do so they removed the feature.
If a car company released a car that had a feature that caused danger or something terrible to happen they would recall it to fix it. If there was no fix they'd probably just remove it if it was something entirely optional to the car that had no effect on the performance, they'd probably give a refund if it cost the consumer extra to get that. In this case it didn't cost extra for the linux support, it was found to be used for things they didn't want it to so they removed it.

Close, but not quite. It was a feature Sony said the PS3 had, but it's not an itemized feature with a specified value. Removing Linux does affect the PS3's performance. You, and many others won't notice it, but it can't do as much as it did before. I do agree with your car analogy in that IF it were an optional feature that cost the customer extra, they would get a refund for its removal. If Sony were offering up a partial refund for those who do use Linux,(perhaps verified by Playstation network detecting the Linux partition,) the situation would agree with your car analogy.

Some people are using the PS3 in ways not intended? So what? People use products in ways not intended all the time. That doesn't give Sony the right to significantly alter their product AFTER it's been bought. Again, it's only significant to those who choose to use the feature, but if only 1% of their customers get screwed, does that make it ok? Tell me, Admiral, how many people have to get screwed before it becomes wrong? (Cookie if you get that movie reference. ;-) )If Sony found that pedestrians were getting hit & killed by people driving their car at high speeds, it would be unacceptable for them to do a recall and limit the cars to 35mph.

Note: I'm sure a whole lot of legal mumbo-jumbo in the terms of use for the PSN prevent a class action lawsuit, but just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right.

Oh, and IMO, it's one thing to say "We've changed the terms of use for PSN. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it." It's another thing to say "If you don't like it, you don't have to use it, and you can't enjoy those other things you paid for either." That's just an additional kick in the gut. On 2nd thought, maybe there is some grounds for a class action lawsuit.

It would be an interesting case, though I would expect Sony to end up winning. I can't think of any electronic device that has had functionality removed retroactively because some people might use it in a way that was unintended by the creator, when said unintended way has to be executed with the knowledge and/or consent of a user.

I can't see anyone winning that case, I think it would come down to something in Sonys TOS that brickwalls whatever arguments. If they remove the ability to play booribbion then maybe there's a case.

I hope they're done clipping off features in any case.

 

[Pendragon9]

Well, I never was a fan of Linux.

Unlike the backwards compat, it didn't really do anything for gaming. :/

So I could do without it.

 

[goldenheart323]

I can't see anyone winning that case, I think it would come down to something in Sonys TOS that brickwalls whatever arguments. If they remove the ability to play booribbion then maybe there's a case.

I hope they're done clipping off features in any case.

TOS would only be for PSN. I don't recall there being any TOS for using a console. Am I wrong? If there were, I'd imagine MS would go on a legal rampage suing 360 gamers who've modded their console instead of just banning them from Live.