Distributed Computing on Next Gen Consoles

anonymous lion writes "Wired has a story on the need for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 to support distributed computing with a non-gaming purpose. The article goes on to discuss SETI@home, distributed.net, and Folding@Home." From the article: "The next generation of console gaming is going to see a huge increase in machine performance and overall computing power. Already planned for both the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 are multiple 3.2-GHz PowerPC processors capable of handling advanced gaming and graphics simulations, along with out-of-the-box internet capabilities such as Xbox Live Silver. With all that horsepower in a machine that is used for only a fraction of a day, we should offer gamers a chance to put these unused resources to good use."

Comments

Re:"Unused resources"?

[sfcat]

How about switching the thing off? Its not that a game console is something like a desktop pc, running the whole day just to be quickly accessable....

The reason you shouldn't switch off your computer is to keep the electronics at a relatively constant temperature. Heating and cooling electronics causes the hardware to expand and contract which can damage the components over time. It doesn't have anything to do with constant access, otherwise people would switch off their computers at night. The same applied for consoles. The tradeoff is the amount of power used to keep the computer running.

Slit Throat syndrome

[mrshowtime]

"Yeah, and I'd like a toilet made out of solid gold." The Author of the article lives in a dreamland. Distributed computing on a gaming platform will never, ever, happen. Why? To create some program that would harness the power of a game system would be an incredible security risk for the manufacturers as any distributed processing program would have to access the core of game system. If such a program were to be made available the games systems would be totally hacked in an extremely short period of time. It makes no sense for the game system manufacturers to open their systems up for distributed processing when almost nobody would use it and it would only invite "dead sales" of their games systems by organizations, or individuals that have no interest in games and only want to set up a makeshift supercomputer. A game system is for playing games, that's it. 99% of the persons buying a game system do not want to cure cancer with their game system, they want to blow things up and that's fine, that's what game systems are made for. All of the game companies are going to lose a lot of money on the hardware for several years and for the game companies to slit their own necks for a function that NOBODY will use, sans hackers, is INSANE. Lasty, is SETI going to reimburse anyone for burning out their brand new PS3 or XBox 360 because the distributed processing software pushed the hardware a little too hard? What about the wear and tear on the components from running at 100% for 8 hours while the owner sleeps? The author of this article should work for spyware company with his comment "A better method of delivery to the consumer would be to build the client as an update to firmware." Translated: "A better method would to be to put the DC software automatically, or part of the EULA." Sounds like spyware to me. Also the whole article seems to be written so the author can sound like a pompass ass, "I would never use my game system to play games, pish, posh! I am curing cancer with my PS3, therefore I am better than you." If the cure to Cancer is reliant on the buyers of videogame systems to burn out their systems "for the greater good" then I'm afraid we are all doomed.