Why you should support the "Other OS" Lawsuits.

[Danpascooch]

And how do you know nobody uses it?

I care because of legal precedent, it's important.

... I am glad I took the time to type all that out.

I have read many forums and things and I have not seen one person admit to using it, do you? Also if a shed load of people used Linux, I think they would have fixed it rather than scrapping it.

I would be more concerned with bigger things than a small bit of false advertising to be honest.

Atleast people who wanted to use Linux had a small window in which to do so, unlike the 360.

It's not about the Linux, it's about the legal precedent, which I will say for the thousandth time (this time try to REMEMBER it so I don't have to repeat it), and I personally know more than one person who uses it.

They didn't want to fix it because it didn't bring in any revenue, but they advertised the console as having it, so they can't just legally rip it away.

You're acting as though Sony did us a FAVOR by having it, that's a load of shit, people PAYED for a system that has Linux, and thus are entitled to it.

Sure the 360 didn't have it, but then again, the base 360 didn't cost $600 at launch! And a comparison of the consoles is hardly the issue here, try to stay on topic, which is the importance of the legal precedent.

 

[Danpascooch]

I see it more of along the lines of the principal of the thing. If they remove Other OS whats stopping them from pulling the rug from underneath you on a another feature? The idea for removing a feature for a security hole is pretty laughable.

Removing the feature entirely is a pretty lazy way of addressing the problems anyway.

Oh it's worse than that, my whole point is that if they win this lawsuit, it will prove that it's legal for ANY company to pull the rug from underneath you on ANY feature, that's why it's such an important lawsuit.

 

[oktalist]

This is the danger of "frivilous lawsuits" as they are called. And if any one of these lawsuits wins, I intend to nominate them for a stella award.

Those awards are such a reckless institution, promoting the idea that the legal system can't figure out for itself which lawsuits are frivolous and which are not, as if it's run by a bunch of children who need to have their hands held by opinion columnists.

Should I be surprised that the banner ad at the top of this page is now from the National Accident Helpline telling me that I could be entitled to compensation if I have been in an accident that wasn't my fault? Talk about irony.

 

[Danpascooch]

This is the danger of "frivilous lawsuits" as they are called. And if any one of these lawsuits wins, I intend to nominate them for a stella award.

Those awards are such a reckless institution, promoting the idea that the legal system can't figure out for itself which lawsuits are frivolous and which are not, as if it's run by a bunch of children who need to have their hands held by opinion columnists.

Should I be surprised that the banner ad at the top of this page is now from the National Accident Helpline telling me that I could be entitled to compensation if I have been in an accident that wasn't my fault? Talk about irony.

...did you just quote and respond to yourself? lol

 

[Danpascooch]

Removing software support from a piece of hardware after it has been sold is a dangerous precedent to set. Hardware should be usable however you want, unlike software it's something you bought and physically possess. Removing the ability to fit a new OS in to a computer (as opposed to not having the option there in the first place) essentially removes a use from the product that you sold. Companies don't get to dictate how their products are used, even if it rankles with them.

My point exactly

 

[Danpascooch]

Where is Furburt? I am dying to see his take on this.

 

[omega 616]

It's not about the Linux, it's about the legal precedent, which I will say for the thousandth time (this time try to REMEMBER it so I don't have to repeat it), and I personally know more than one person who uses it.

They didn't want to fix it because it didn't bring in any revenue, but they advertised the console as having it, so they can't just legally rip it away.

You're acting as though Sony did us a FAVOR by having it, that's a load of shit, people PAYED for a system that has Linux, and thus are entitled to it.

Sure the 360 didn't have it, but then again, the base 360 didn't cost $600 at launch! And a comparison of the consoles is hardly the issue here, try to stay on topic, which is the importance of the legal precedent.

Your loving that phrase aren't you, legal president.

The point your missing is, it is about Linux. Say the feature they took away was bluray, which is a major thing and huge plus point for the PS3, people would be livid, lawsuits would flood in and Sony wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Linux is some tiny, mostly unused feature that was a problem, it was insignificant so they yanked it.

I don't know how else to explain it, think like a busniess man. A small, unused featre bleeding money shouldn't have more money spent on it to fix it, it makes poor finicial sense. Instead you remove the problem saving money.

If the problem was a big, imporant part of the product then you spend the cash to sort it 'cos it's used and needed to keep the product being used.

Thats the difference, thats also why Sony won't lose this case 'cos most PS3 users don't care about it.

 

[Danpascooch]

It's not about the Linux, it's about the legal precedent, which I will say for the thousandth time (this time try to REMEMBER it so I don't have to repeat it), and I personally know more than one person who uses it.

They didn't want to fix it because it didn't bring in any revenue, but they advertised the console as having it, so they can't just legally rip it away.

You're acting as though Sony did us a FAVOR by having it, that's a load of shit, people PAYED for a system that has Linux, and thus are entitled to it.

Sure the 360 didn't have it, but then again, the base 360 didn't cost $600 at launch! And a comparison of the consoles is hardly the issue here, try to stay on topic, which is the importance of the legal precedent.

Your loving that phrase aren't you, legal president.

The point your missing is, it is about Linux. Say the feature they took away was bluray, which is a major thing and huge plus point for the PS3, people would be livid, lawsuits would flood in and Sony wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Linux is some tiny, mostly unused feature that was a problem, it was insignificant so they yanked it.

I don't know how else to explain it, think like a busniess man. A small, unused featre bleeding money shouldn't have more money spent on it to fix it, it makes poor finicial sense. Instead you remove the problem saving money.

If the problem was a big, imporant part of the product then you spend the cash to sort it 'cos it's used and needed to keep the product being used.

Thats the difference, thats also why Sony won't lose this case 'cos most PS3 users don't care about it.

Illegal is illegal it's not the scope of what was removed, it's the idea that they can legally remove ANYTHING that requires no upkeep from them post purchase, and legal precedent (not president) IS important, it's the entire point of the entire thread, and people (you) seem to forget it, so excuse me if I have to repeat the phrase a few thousand times.

allowing this to go happen unopposed sets the precedent that it is legal for companies to remove features post purchase, that's very dangerous.

 

[LordZ]

As for the air force thing, that's irrelevant to this discussion, there's no reason to update the firmware on those PS3s as they're being used solely for the processing power that linking thousands of them together can give at a ridiculously reduced cost to using normal computers for it. They aren't going to be updated. Sure the air force is upset about there no longer being an "Other OS" option, but that's because they can't replace broken parts the PS3 cluster they set up.

When you send in a PS3 to get it repaired, they update the firmware. They do not give you the option to leave the firmware the way it is. This makes it quite a big problem since you can't really fix a PS3 without sending it to Sony.

... I am glad I took the time to type all that out.

I have read many forums and things and I have not seen one person admit to using it, do you? Also if a shed load of people used Linux, I think they would have fixed it rather than scrapping it.

I would be more concerned with bigger things than a small bit of false advertising to be honest.

Atleast people who wanted to use Linux had a small window in which to do so, unlike the 360.

You may not care about Other OS support but what about the following. Suppose that Sony released a silent update(installs without even asking you first) that disabled your Bluray drive, hard drive, memory cards and everything else aside from the ability to use Sony name brand controllers and PSN. Suppose that PSN became nothing more than a streaming service for video games. You'd have to not only pay a monthly fee to play games but buy each game individually and, if there was so much as a single lost packet in the connection, you'd have to go through a complicated reconnection process to verify your identity. The current EULA for PSN says they could do this. So, would you finally care about it then?

 

[Danpascooch]

As for the air force thing, that's irrelevant to this discussion, there's no reason to update the firmware on those PS3s as they're being used solely for the processing power that linking thousands of them together can give at a ridiculously reduced cost to using normal computers for it. They aren't going to be updated. Sure the air force is upset about there no longer being an "Other OS" option, but that's because they can't replace broken parts the PS3 cluster they set up.

When you send in a PS3 to get it repaired, they update the firmware. They do not give you the option to leave the firmware the way it is. This makes it quite a big problem since you can't really fix a PS3 without sending it to Sony.

... I am glad I took the time to type all that out.

I have read many forums and things and I have not seen one person admit to using it, do you? Also if a shed load of people used Linux, I think they would have fixed it rather than scrapping it.

I would be more concerned with bigger things than a small bit of false advertising to be honest.

Atleast people who wanted to use Linux had a small window in which to do so, unlike the 360.

You may not care about Other OS support but what about the following. Suppose that Sony released a silent update(installs without even asking you first) that disabled your Bluray drive, hard drive, memory cards and everything else aside from the ability to use Sony name brand controllers and PSN. Suppose that PSN became nothing more than a streaming service for video games. You'd have to not only pay a monthly fee to play games but buy each game individually and, if there was so much as a single lost packet in the connection, you'd have to go through a complicated reconnection process to verify your identity. The current EULA for PSN says they could do this. So, would you finally care about it then?

Don't bother, he only cares if it's a feature he uses, frankly, his arguments portray him in the same light his avatar does.

 

[RelexCryo]

Well, it is worth noting that McDonalds didn't really "lose" the coffee lawsuit, they had that ruling overturned on appeal. The amount payed was reduced to just enough to cover the woman's lawyer fees. So the woman didn't get anything, and McDonalds still had to pay up *some* money, but the only one who got paid was the lawyer, and that was for a very small amount in comparison to the original sum.

So McDonalds lost the first case, won the appeal, and reduced the amount paid to just enough to cover the woman's legal fees, so she didn't get anything. As usual, only the lawyer won anything.

 

[Danpascooch]

Well, it is worth noting that McDonalds didn't really "lose" the coffee lawsuit, they had that ruling overturned on appeal. The amount payed was reduced to just enough to cover the woman's lawyer fees. So the woman didn't get anything, and McDonalds still had to pay up *some* money, but the only one who got paid was the lawyer, and that was for a very small amount in comparison to the original sum.

So McDonalds lost the first case, won the appeal, and reduced the amount paid to just enough to cover the woman's legal fees, so she didn't get anything. As usual, only the lawyer won anything.

Think about the what McDonalds had to pay in lawyer fees? It may not have been a win for her, but it sure as hell was a loss for them.

The important thing is that it CHANGED SOMETHING, now they don't make their coffee that dangerously hot.

 

[LordZ]

Your loving that phrase aren't you, legal president.

The point your missing is, it is about Linux. Say the feature they took away was bluray, which is a major thing and huge plus point for the PS3, people would be livid, lawsuits would flood in and Sony wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Linux is some tiny, mostly unused feature that was a problem, it was insignificant so they yanked it.

I don't know how else to explain it, think like a busniess man. A small, unused featre bleeding money shouldn't have more money spent on it to fix it, it makes poor finicial sense. Instead you remove the problem saving money.

If the problem was a big, imporant part of the product then you spend the cash to sort it 'cos it's used and needed to keep the product being used.

Thats the difference, thats also why Sony won't lose this case 'cos most PS3 users don't care about it.

Just because it's a feature you don't care about, doesn't mean no one uses it and that no one else has a reason to care. Why do you think so many people are even pissed about this? Sony is depriving customers of product features they paid for already. This is a very bad thing.

 

[Tharwen]

Hmm... I'm convinced. Well done.

Game companies seem to be making a lot of bad decisions recently.

 

[omega 616]

... I am glad I took the time to type all that out.

I have read many forums and things and I have not seen one person admit to using it, do you? Also if a shed load of people used Linux, I think they would have fixed it rather than scrapping it.

I would be more concerned with bigger things than a small bit of false advertising to be honest.

Atleast people who wanted to use Linux had a small window in which to do so, unlike the 360.

You may not care about Other OS support but what about the following. Suppose that Sony released a silent update(installs without even asking you first) that disabled your Bluray drive, hard drive, memory cards and everything else aside from the ability to use Sony name brand controllers and PSN. Suppose that PSN became nothing more than a streaming service for video games. You'd have to not only pay a monthly fee to play games but buy each game individually and, if there was so much as a single lost packet in the connection, you'd have to go through a complicated reconnection process to verify your identity. The current EULA for PSN says they could do this. So, would you finally care about it then?

You do realize thats what I am saying don't you?

Minor feature nobody uses, get rid of it. Major thing 99% (if not 100%) people care for fix it.

Illegal is illegal it's not the scope of what was removed, it's the idea that they can legally remove ANYTHING that requires no upkeep from them post purchase, and legal precedent (not president) IS important, it's the entire point of the entire thread, and people (you) seem to forget it, so excuse me if I have to repeat the phrase a few thousand times.

allowing this to go happen unopposed sets the precedent that it is legal for companies to remove features post purchase, that's very dangerous.

I can't spell for crap, so I use Opera and when you spell a word wrongly it acts like word, I simply mis-clicked.

You don't get it, it wont change any precedent, M$ won't suddenly yank XBL 'cos Sony removed Linux. It's so insignificant and minor that other corporations wont even notice Sony did it.

It's obvious we won't agree, so lets agree to disagree.

Your loving that phrase aren't you, legal president.

The point your missing is, it is about Linux. Say the feature they took away was bluray, which is a major thing and huge plus point for the PS3, people would be livid, lawsuits would flood in and Sony wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Linux is some tiny, mostly unused feature that was a problem, it was insignificant so they yanked it.

I don't know how else to explain it, think like a busniess man. A small, unused featre bleeding money shouldn't have more money spent on it to fix it, it makes poor finicial sense. Instead you remove the problem saving money.

If the problem was a big, imporant part of the product then you spend the cash to sort it 'cos it's used and needed to keep the product being used.

Thats the difference, thats also why Sony won't lose this case 'cos most PS3 users don't care about it.

Just because it's a feature you don't care about, doesn't mean no one uses it and that no one else has a reason to care. Why do you think so many people are even pissed about this? Sony is depriving customers of product features they paid for already. This is a very bad thing.

I very highly doubt any PS3 owner bought one on the sole basis of Linux, you can buy a PC for that price.

If a serious amount of people actually used this feature Sony would have fixed it, they didn't so it's obvious only a tiny amount of people made use of it.

I will now continue to watch bleach.

 

[Danpascooch]

... I am glad I took the time to type all that out.

I have read many forums and things and I have not seen one person admit to using it, do you? Also if a shed load of people used Linux, I think they would have fixed it rather than scrapping it.

I would be more concerned with bigger things than a small bit of false advertising to be honest.

Atleast people who wanted to use Linux had a small window in which to do so, unlike the 360.

You may not care about Other OS support but what about the following. Suppose that Sony released a silent update(installs without even asking you first) that disabled your Bluray drive, hard drive, memory cards and everything else aside from the ability to use Sony name brand controllers and PSN. Suppose that PSN became nothing more than a streaming service for video games. You'd have to not only pay a monthly fee to play games but buy each game individually and, if there was so much as a single lost packet in the connection, you'd have to go through a complicated reconnection process to verify your identity. The current EULA for PSN says they could do this. So, would you finally care about it then?

You do realize thats what I am saying don't you?

Minor feature nobody uses, get rid of it. Major thing 99% (if not 100%) people care for fix it.

Illegal is illegal it's not the scope of what was removed, it's the idea that they can legally remove ANYTHING that requires no upkeep from them post purchase, and legal precedent (not president) IS important, it's the entire point of the entire thread, and people (you) seem to forget it, so excuse me if I have to repeat the phrase a few thousand times.

allowing this to go happen unopposed sets the precedent that it is legal for companies to remove features post purchase, that's very dangerous.

I can't spell for crap, so I use Opera and when you spell a word wrongly it acts like word, I simply mis-clicked.

You don't get it, it wont change any precedent, M$ won't suddenly yank XBL 'cos Sony removed Linux. It's so insignificant and minor that other corporations wont even notice Sony did it.

It's obvious we won't agree, so lets agree to disagree.

Your loving that phrase aren't you, legal president.

The point your missing is, it is about Linux. Say the feature they took away was bluray, which is a major thing and huge plus point for the PS3, people would be livid, lawsuits would flood in and Sony wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Linux is some tiny, mostly unused feature that was a problem, it was insignificant so they yanked it.

I don't know how else to explain it, think like a busniess man. A small, unused featre bleeding money shouldn't have more money spent on it to fix it, it makes poor finicial sense. Instead you remove the problem saving money.

If the problem was a big, imporant part of the product then you spend the cash to sort it 'cos it's used and needed to keep the product being used.

Thats the difference, thats also why Sony won't lose this case 'cos most PS3 users don't care about it.

Just because it's a feature you don't care about, doesn't mean no one uses it and that no one else has a reason to care. Why do you think so many people are even pissed about this? Sony is depriving customers of product features they paid for already. This is a very bad thing.

I very highly doubt any PS3 owner bought one on the sole basis of Linux, you can buy a PC for that price.

If a serious amount of people actually used this feature Sony would have fixed it, they didn't so it's obvious only a tiny amount of people made use of it.

I will now continue to watch bleach.

Funny, sounds like the United States Air Force uses thousands of them, I think that counts as "any PS3 owner"

Your argument is "it's illegal, but it doesn't affect me so I don't care"

My argument is "That's incredibly selfish and narrow minded of you, the world doesn't revolve around you and just because you don't care doesn't mean nobody cares, and it sets a very dangerous legal precedent"

 

[ClunkiestTurtle]

I disagree with the lawsuit and while you make a good argument remember the fact the they didn't have to include the support other OS option in the first place and there was very little in it for them by doing so and it was the only console of this generation or the last to support such an option.

As a Consumer you're probably right and i should be concerned at this but as a gamer i'm just saddened it will be yet another reason for console manufactures to just play things safe and be less inclined to experiment with different options and features.

You don't bite the hand that feeds you

They didn't have to include it?

Well they did, and some people bought it under that pretense and then it was taken away, that's illegal, and sets a dangerous precedent.

I'm sick of people acting as though a company is doing you a FAVOR by including a feature when you PURCHASED something. People PAYED for that feature, and you act like it was Sony doing them some sort of favor.

You've just got to love soap box threads!

My point that you so gleefully interpreted into something you could write another little rebuttal about was that while you are probably right this is not a good thing for gaming or the industry and discourages experimentation which is also pretty bad for the consumer.....

Actually you know what judging from many of you're replies to people no matter what they say or how they say it you are always just so eager for conflict, i won't bother telling you what i actually thought because while i have stated i essentially agree with you it does deviate a little from the planned criteria of what has any merit in this thread ie your exact opinion.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

You know quite a lot on the legal side of this, are you a lawyer/are you going to law school?

 

[nipsen]

oh, I have no doubt it would cause support problems, not to mention how many companies would honestly go along with it? would you really want to support a company refusing to let people have a game as long as they buy it new, but not let them play it anywhere but the original system? the sheer number of sales would drop SO fast, and SO far that there would be no reversal.

Sadly, as they say, no. Folks buy Apple products, Sony Ps3s, buy games on Steam, and so on, even though they are closed platforms - trusting that it is in the interest of the company to provide as much use of the product to the customer as possible, for as little money as possible.

That's just not the case. Unless Sony finds out it harms their image to screw with their customers, they will do it. Even if they just think it's going to earn them more money in the long run..