Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Possible PS3 OS Information

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the say-that-three-times-fast dept.

Ars Technica has some details they think are fairly reliable about the OS the PS3 will be using. From the article: "In fact, there was some question as to what such an OS would be doing with all that leftover horsepower. I think the answer is probably to be found in the interactive, real-time, user- and network-facing sides of the console's functionality. This includes not only the audio/video chat and IM referenced in the PS3 Portal rumor, but also the aforementioned DRM (for streaming and downloadable online content that might be dynamically integrated into the game experience) and security/privacy-related code. "

53 comments

  1. So, you can crank it up to "eleven"? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3, Funny
    "PS3 games, at least initially, are not going to use all five or six available SPEs (remember, of the eight SPEs, one is disabled for yield purposes, a second is reserved for the system, and a third allegedly can be taken over by the system if it's needed)."

    So, you can crank it up to "eleven"?

  2. Speculation or blatantly obvious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "This includes not only the audio/video chat and IM referenced in the PS3 Portal rumor, but also the aforementioned DRM (for streaming and downloadable online content that might be dynamically integrated into the game experience) and security/privacy-related code"

    So that's pretty much what the Xbox 360 has too right? And pretty much what any next gen online console will have, hmmm? Who wouldn't expect an online gaming machine in 2006 to have AV IM/chat and downloadable online content? Sheesh!

    They'll be telling us that Vista's gonna have menus and a pointer next...

    1. Re:Speculation or blatantly obvious? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Funny

      They'll be telling us that Vista's gonna have menus and a pointer next...

      Not in Vista Basic, you'll need the upgrades for that...

    2. Re:Speculation or blatantly obvious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This feature will be disabled for pirated copies of Vista.

      Please buy Genuine Microsoft products from a Certified Microsoft Partner.

  3. Might As Well Go All out by Nazmun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The PS3 has a lot of expensive and powerful media hardware. They might as well create the software needed to use as much of the hardware as possible to market the beast at the $500-700 dollar pricepoint it will probably come out at.

    It should be capable of:

    1) Live Video Streaming in HD (new hd movie trailers on your big screen vs. PC screen).
    2) All kinds of communications, chat, voice, etc.
    3) Linux networked device.
    4) All the game related stuff like demo downloads, etc.
    5) Release a $50 dollar tv tuner accessory + appropriate software to make this into a pvr (already has massive graphics and parallel processing power along with the output hardware built in).

    Of course this isn't to say that they should put any less resources on games. They should keep their AA third party and in house development teams and release as much variety + quality of games as they can. However, I'd hate to see all this hardware potential go to waste. Then and again since theres a good chance it will be able to run on linux (if thats not the default os) we may have free alternatives made by hobbyists (depending on the strength of the drm).

    --
    Hmmm... Pie...
  4. Sound good... by chrnb · · Score: 0

    Sounds good with all those nifty features: video chat, chat and whatnot...
    I'm still getting a Revolution though.

    --
    MikMik Baby Organics Mikkaworks
    1. Re:Sound good... by richman555 · · Score: 1

      Same here, although it is interesting technically, it doesn't do anything for games. Video on demand in better off remaining separate from console gaming.

  5. Performance Worries by Nazmun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The following quote from TFA worries me a bit. It will use a good chunk of the resources on the OS rather then purely for games. If the PS3 devs can't use a lighter version of the O.S. this could be a bit of an issue should they opt to do so in their games (some games may benefit from the voice/video chat but there are tons of games where this is unnecessary and annoying). Currently in the PS2 the default OS uses an almost negligible amount of resources that are pretty much needed to run the games

    In the case of the PS3 this equates to 12.5% of the available Cores on the CPU always reserved, an additional 12.5% sometimes taken by the OS, 12.5% of the available RSX memory and 25% of XDR Cell memory. Balancing these out, one could argue that Sony has removed up to 25% of the available CPU power and 18.75% of RAM for these features as well as others that are not mentioned here or will be added in future updates to the PS3 Operation System.

    --
    Hmmm... Pie...
    1. Re: Performance Worries by Volante3192 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This would be an issue if PS3 games came out of the box demanding >75% of the processing capacity. I doubt that game programmers will be fluent enough working with all those cells this early in the production cycle to actually make use of all that power.

      It's not the amount of the cells you use, it's how you use em!

    2. Re: Performance Worries by psocccer · · Score: 1

      Well also realize that in the beginning people will be inefficient at programming the PS3 so having as much CPU power as possible will be important to make up for current lack of experience in optimization, so they may need 100% of the processor now to acheive what people will be able to do with 50% of the processor in the future.

      --
      Free Online Woodworking Resources Directory
    3. Re:Performance Worries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm personally not too worried about it for the same reason I'm not too worried about the Revolution's (rumored) lower power compared to the XBox 360 or PS3; the fact is that we're hitting a point where having 2 or 4 times the raw performance doesn't equate to all that much in terms of qualitative improvements in Graphics/AI.

      Consider the PS2, XBox and Gamecube for a moment; in all of the games produced for these systems the polygonal detail is high enough that you (automatically) understand what an object represents (most of the time, even without textures applied). Now, if you double the number of polygons and add normal mapping and BDRFs (bi-directional reflection functions ... fancy shading for those who don't know) you get to a point where the objects are getting to a point where they are apporaching photorealism; much like with Pre-rendered movies once you hit this point you need an exponential improvement in processing power to get a linear benefit in quality of improvement. (If you want to understand what I mean, compare the computer generated graphics produced in 1996 to those produced in 2006; certainly the 2006 ones look a lot nicer but they also require more than 100 times the processing power).

      With Physics that point was passed in the previous generation (as most of the systems could produce reasonable Newtonian physics models), Graphics I would argue are at that point, and AI we have the processing power but require better paradigms to improve the quality of AI.

      I guess you could say that what I'm saying is that it doesn't matter how much of the Processor is dedicated towards gaming because the games will be about the same technical level regardless.

    4. Re:Performance Worries by oGMo · · Score: 1
      t will use a good chunk of the resources on the OS rather then purely for games. If the PS3 devs can't use a lighter version of the O.S. this could be a bit of an issue should they opt to do so in their games

      This is silly, because undoubtedly the OS gives you a number of things that you'd have to do anyway, thus you no longer need to do them in your game. Sony is not stupid. Their developers are not stupid. They have some of the better PS developers under their roof (Naughty Dog with Jak and Daxter, Polyphony Digital with Gran Turismo to name a couple), and know all about squeezing performance from limited resources.

      Additionally, the PSP seems to have an always-running OS, and I haven't heard any developers complaining about it. It seems to take care of a number of things, including starting/stopping games, saving data, and accessing the network. (Probably graphics and other things too... dunno.) I would be curious as to what percentage of resources this takes up compared to the alleged PS3 OS.

      Since both will probably be in ROM, it's probable that the majority of them can be paged out as necessary.

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    5. Re: Performance Worries by The-Bus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's a silly comment. Sure, the launch titles won't effectively use all of the power of the console, but you're still reducing the overall power by a pretty hefty chunk. If you had a PC with 2GB of RAM but Vista used 1GB (instead of 256MB) then if you're browsing the web or emailing it doesn't affect you. But as soon as you want to play a game, do video processing, etc. then it sure becomes a problem.

      IF Sony can give out OS updates over the internet (as Microsoft sort-of does now with the 360), then it's not a problem, if we assume it's only a matter of time before Sony can bring the OS down to only using a smaller percentage of the resources. But that kind of "we'll worry about it later" approach worries me, as companies generally don't have a great track record when they use that as an excuse.

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    6. Re:Performance Worries by frankgod · · Score: 1

      If the resources are used for system calls from the game code then it may be fine.

    7. Re:Performance Worries by blincoln · · Score: 1

      This is silly, because undoubtedly the OS gives you a number of things that you'd have to do anyway, thus you no longer need to do them in your game.

      While this is true to an extent, I think Sony is making a big mistake by effectively forcing online functionality into all games.

      I don't play online. I don't want to chat with friends using my game console. I don't want content streamed in from the internet. I was planning on buying a PS3, but I may not if the offline aspect isn't as solid as on the previous generation of consoles. That's one of the main reasons I haven't picked up a 360 - it's not designed with gamers like me in mind.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    8. Re:Performance Worries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's going to be pretty much standard from here on. XBox 360 also reserves a certain portion of the horsepower of its secondary cores for use by the OS.

    9. Re:Performance Worries by oGMo · · Score: 1
      While this is true to an extent, I think Sony is making a big mistake by effectively forcing online functionality into all games.

      I don't play online. I don't want to chat with friends using my game console. I don't want content streamed in from the internet. I was planning on buying a PS3, but I may not if the offline aspect isn't as solid as on the previous generation of consoles. That's one of the main reasons I haven't picked up a 360 - it's not designed with gamers like me in mind.

      Eh? Then don't. I don't think they're "forcing" anything. Almost every PSP game has some network connectivity... but it's not always PvP or chatting with friends. "Exit" has tons of levels you can download. PQ lets you post high scores.

      Nor are the multiplayer games diminished by multiplayer anymore than Super Mario Bros was ever diminished by letting your friends play with you. Assuming such is rather silly at this point. If anything, these days not being able to play with friends is a misfeature.

      Many games benefit from small-scale multiplayer; not having it flattens a game in a dimension you don't realize exists until you've played over the network for a considerable period. I experienced this after playing FFXI for a long time, then tried playing a single-player RPG. A certain aspect seems very flattened.

      Unlike the 360, the PS3 builds on a history of a multitude of every variety of game; these aren't going away or in any way being diminished simply by providing online functionality, especially since that functionality is not always going to be the same thing. And especially if it's easy to add.

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    10. Re:Performance Worries by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 1
      Eh? Then don't. I don't think they're "forcing" anything. Almost every PSP game has some network connectivity... but it's not always PvP or chatting with friends. "Exit" has tons of levels you can download. PQ lets you post high scores.
      Uhh, yes. You're being forced to dedicate processes that are only useful to those who are online. That's the complaint. I don't really mind it so much since I'm quite fond of online gaming and consider home internet connection bandwidth to be a greater constraint than hardware limitations whenever I play an online game.
      Nor are the multiplayer games diminished by multiplayer anymore than Super Mario Bros was ever diminished by letting your friends play with you. Assuming such is rather silly at this point. If anything, these days not being able to play with friends is a misfeature.
      This isn't a silly point. It's silly to fail to realize that time spent on the multiplayer as far as a single player gamer is concerned is just time not spent on the single player, time spent making the game cost more to develop, time spent taking away from the single player, or any combination of the three. Also, claiming that a game lacking multiplayer is unfinished probably isn't the best way to have somebody who only plays single player see your point. You know, I'm just saying.
      Many games benefit from small-scale multiplayer; not having it flattens a game in a dimension you don't realize exists until you've played over the network for a considerable period. I experienced this after playing FFXI for a long time, then tried playing a single-player RPG. A certain aspect seems very flattened.
      Flatness? Or maybe you're just more fond of the experience than of the story? Hey, maybe playing with/against actual people makes the game seem more significant to you, but saying a game is flat because 4,000 people aren't playing in the same world as you is a bit much of a generalization.
      Unlike the 360, the PS3 builds on a history of a multitude of every variety of game; these aren't going away or in any way being diminished simply by providing online functionality, especially since that functionality is not always going to be the same thing. And especially if it's easy to add.
      Uhh, what? The PS3 isn't building on anything, developers might, with their games on the PS3... Anyway, that's just a matter of what kind of fanboy you are.
      --
      "This is considered plagiarism."
    11. Re: Performance Worries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But, the way the Cell architecture is designed, you don't share memory in the same way - Each core reserves a specific bit of memory. So unless you're going to use that processor, the resources will be unavailable anyhow.

      There are quite a few advantages to have the OS run on a separate core as well, but I'm too lazy to bother explaining it...

  6. Not a total cliche, considering the PS2 kit... by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

    Will it run Linux?

    --
    Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
    1. Re:Not a total cliche, considering the PS2 kit... by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, Sony announced that the PS3 can run Linux. But the game OS might not be Linux.

  7. No news! by VincenzoRomano · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Quoting from the article:
    Sony is planning to have an Operating System running constantly in the background.
    I would wonder if Sony did it the other way!
    It would be really hard to write and debug every single game (or application) with all the needed run time support in it.
    I'd say that trivially a (kind of) operating system is to be present into that hardware marvel.
    The real question is: which operating system will Sony choose?
    One already existing or a fresh new one?
    --
    Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
    For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
    1. Re:No news! by TommydCat · · Score: 1

      As long as the OS is powerful enough to allow me to download an item in the background, color me impressed!

      --
      This comment does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the author.
    2. Re:No news! by buysse · · Score: 1

      Traditionally, that's basically how it's done for videogames. What would normally be the operating system is contained in a set of runtime libraries that are stored with the game, and can therefore never be upgraded. That also limits the ability of the system manufacturer to update hardware, if say, a bug is found in the video hardware.

      The Xbox was the first to break that cycle by having a hard drive for patches, but MS has gone back on that idea by shipping the 360 without a standard hard drive. Although, AFAIK, the xbox did not leave an OS running but passed control completely to the code on the game disc.

      --
      -30-
    3. Re:No news! by VincenzoRomano · · Score: 1

      That would mean that any feature (like Internet connectivity) is to be implemented by each game on its own! All of them actually replicating the same code, features and bugs.
      With all that horse power in the box I would spend a mere 0.1% of it for a real operating system.
      I'm lucky I'm not a video game developer or engineer!

      --
      Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
      For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
    4. Re:No news! by pa-ching · · Score: 1

      Considering that the "OS," per se, is really just doing some very specific Cell processor management and tacking on features like voice chat and custom music, I'd say that they'd definitely be building it themselves. They wouldn't need all the scheduling, I/O handling, multitasking, etc. complexities of a modern OS; just simple implementations that don't have to deal with competing processes, the basic run-time support that games need, and the ever-present features. The games get to take care of the rest.

    5. Re:No news! by antime · · Score: 1

      The PS1 already contained a cooperatively multi-tasking OS in its ROM. I don't think that many games used its tasking features, but the developer kit was based on functionality found in the OS (but also replaced many of the routines with faster, more versatile or simply bugfixed versions).

    6. Re:No news! by wolrahnaes · · Score: 1

      It's a matter of efficiency. In a small embedded platform like a game console, it makes sense to have the "OS" as part of the game code to an extent, because it can work more efficiently within the constraints of the hardware. Ever notice how a console tends to blow away an equivalently powerful PC when comparing the level of shiny things it can display? (This comparo's easy with an Xbox...try running Halo PC on a 733MHz Celeron with only 64MB of RAM shared with the video card)

      Only now are consoles getting powerful enough that it's less of an issue. The Dreamcast offered this functionality as well (games could be built for the version of WinCE in ran), but few used it for performance reasons.

      The idea of embedding OS code in to the binaries has it's downsides (or upsides, dependong on who you talk to). For the Xbox, any code compiled with the XDK (all games and most homebrew aside from Linux) contains Microsoft code, and thus can not be legally distributed without Microsoft's permission. This prevents any "issues" of unlicensed third party games like other manufacturers tried to fight in previous generations.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    7. Re:No news! by VincenzoRomano · · Score: 1

      Hey guy! We are talking about the PS3, not the GameBoy!
      I can bet that a mere 0.1% of the total CPU resources can be "wasted" for a real real-time operating system!
      This's my opinion, of course!

      --
      Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
      For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
    8. Re:No news! by wolrahnaes · · Score: 1

      I was discussing why this was done in previous consoles. Note that the only time I mentioned current consoles was saying that they now are powerful enough to run an OS at all times.

      Anyways, how much are you willing to bed on your 0.1% figure? Did you even read the article? It claims that both the PS3 and Xbox 360 OSes take well over that.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
  8. Hardware by the+computer+guy+nex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "I'd hate to see all this hardware potential go to waste"

    When you say "all this potential hardware" you really mean "blu-ray drive." The power difference between a PS3 and a 360 (with 3 3.2ghz processors and a better GPU) is negligable.

    1. Re:Hardware by gabebear · · Score: 1

      "The power difference between a PS3 and a 360 (with 3 3.2ghz processors and a better GPU) is negligable."

      That's simply not true,
      The architechture behind each console is VERY different and just flat out saying which is faster is impossible. The GPU on the 360 has unified shaders, so if you need to use a lot of just one kind of shader it should be faster on the 360, but the overhead of having unified shaders probably means that if you are doing some balance of vector and pixel shading then the PS3 will clean it's clock(it's still unclear whether vector manipulations will even really be done on the RSX).

      The PS3 has memory bandwidth in spades over the 360 with over twice as much, but the 360 has one big chunk of memory with the same latency which makes it easier to use.

      The Cell is different enough that I don't see how to even compare it to anything, although each of the 360's CPU cores are almost identical to the PPE core.

      Honestly, if the PS3 can't make with the pretty better than the 360, then I don't see a reason to buy either.(I haven't seen Oblivion yet though)

    2. Re:Hardware by TommyBear · · Score: 1

      Do some research next time before making comments like this. Because when you don't you look a little silly.

      Basically the PS3 has 8 SPEs on die (1 is reserved) and one is the PPE. All are running at 3.2GHz. The PPE is a general purpose CPU based on the PowerPC arch. and the SPEs are specialized processing units.

      Now, the PPE has two hardware threads each with 128 x 128bit wide hardware registers. Each SPE has two hardware threads each containing the same number of registers with the same width. Soooo. Game developers have a lot of hardware to play with. The SPEs aren't really general use but you can get very close and 16 128 bit hardware threads to play with with a total of 2048 hardware registers is nothing to sneeze at really. That's a lot of processing headroom if your code is efficient enough.

  9. Grids? by mr-mafoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember a while back when all the buzz about the new PS console was starting. There were numerous reports that the PS3 would form a distributed Grid computer for things like running the game servers or providing Mhz for rent (over broadband).
    I'm wondering if this is still the plan? Was it the press confusing Cell and Grid? The other question it poses is what is the legality of using a client's box and bandwidth for sony's network

    1. Re:Grids? by Jerf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There were numerous reports that the PS3 would form a distributed Grid computer for things like running the game servers or providing Mhz for rent (over broadband).I'm wondering if this is still the plan?

      No, it was just a way of trying to demonstrate the phenomenal cosmic powers the PS3 will possess. I truly doubt that was ever anything other than talk.

      See also the "Emotion Engine" (translation: "CPU"), "real-time Toy Story graphics" (something the new generation is getting close to if you fudge the resolution issue, but the only way the PS/2 was getting Toy Story-quality graphics was by playing the Toy Story DVD), and the nations that were polite enough to classify the PS2 as a "supercomputer" worthy of import/export controls, which made for wonderful, if meaningless, news stories for Sony.

      'Course, at the time they were babbling about grids and stuff the PS3 sounded amazingly more powerful than anything available at the time. Now it mere seems kinda powerful for the price. In another year it'll be underpowered at best, and soon after that, the idea of network PS3s together for any sort of computation will be about as silly as the idea of networking PS2s together now.

      That may be conservative, too; with the latest multi-core processors from Intel and AMD not being all that much more expensive than single cores, and the ever dropping price of 3D graphics, the point at which a computer costing the same as a PS3 will best the PS3 in most ways may come very quickly. (You can probably blame the Blu-Ray drive for that, since I wouldn't put one in the PC, and that's a lot of margin for the PC to play with.)

      (However, the real final killer is that if they expect me to leave my PS3 on for any extra period of time, they're going to have to pay me for the electricity, which can be ~$10 a month or more, or restrict the grid to things I don't mind donating that sort of money to, which wouldn't make Sony any money.)

    2. Re:Grids? by Kamalot · · Score: 1

      "Cell will create a new extensible computing platform. A set-top box containing a Cell chip could, for example, combine to share processing power with a Cell-powered high-definition television to render the graphics of an animated movie."

      http://news.com.com/2100-1001-948493.html

    3. Re:Grids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um. Just a point of interest, but the PS2 was supposed to do "Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within" level graphics, not "Toy Story 2". That claim was made by Bill Gates about the XBox.

    4. Re:Grids? by Jerf · · Score: 1

      Just a point of interest, but the PS2 was supposed to do "Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within" level graphics, not "Toy Story 2". That claim was made by Bill Gates about the XBox.

      No.

      In the first page of those results (that I see), there are three reasonably-official confirmations that connect the PS2 and "Toy Story", and two more that aren't what I'd consider official, but reference it.

      Claiming FF: TSW-level graphics for the PS2 would have been absurd, as the PS2 came out before FF: TSW, so all FF: TSW would have had to do to exceed the PS2 in graphics would be to use two of them in realtime, hardly a high standard for a movie that was supposed to revolutionize the movie industry forever. FF: TSW was released July 11, 2001, and the PS2 was released March, 2000.

    5. Re:Grids? by antime · · Score: 1
      Sony and Square demonstrated real-time rendering of FF:TSW footage at SIGGRAPH 2000 using a GSCube system, which basically consisted of 16 PS2s bolted together. The GSCube was designed as a high-end visualisation system, and Sony planned an even bigger version with 64 PS2 boards, but I don't think anything ever really came of the whole system and I haven't heard anything about it since then.

      Funny how everything gets mixed up after a while, isn't it?

    6. Re:Grids? by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      i read yoru link and there is no official announcement there that ties sony to toy story. i see bloggers and hearsay. no executive was quoted as stating the claim, and no journalist gave an approximate time or place when the quote was made regarding toy story.

      this here is a direct link to the microsoft toy story claim, however:

      http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282, 40970,00.html?tw=wn_story_related

  10. I am part of the Gamer Advisory Pannel for Sony... by Wingfat · · Score: 0, Troll

    Sony has told us that the internal 2.5'' 60gig drive would come with a pre installed Lunix OS. The PS3 will be out in November, becase of the Blue Ray drive delay that they had. :)

  11. Where is the Devastator Cell? by Kamalot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the dawn of the PS3, the system specs were all powerful. The almighty Cell processor has 8 SPEs and would take advantage of other Cell processors on the network, such as those in your TV. It was kind of like Devastator, the processors combining to become even more powerful.

    Then we find out that Sony is having trouble making Cell chips with 8 working SPEs. So the PS3 is promised to only have 7 working SPEs for each system.

    Today we find out that the OS will always consume an SPE and has the right to abduct another when necessary. This reduces the potential number of SPEs that a developer can reliably count on for a game to use at all times is reduced to 5.

    The true power of the PS3 keeps being reduced the closer to launch it becomes. Additional features have already been dropped. How many more will evaporate before the PS3 becomes a real device you can go to the store and buy?

    "Cell will create a new extensible computing platform. A set-top box containing a Cell chip could, for example, combine to share processing power with a Cell-powered high-definition television to render the graphics of an animated movie."

    "A game console might use a chip with 16 cores, while a less complicated device like a set-top box would have a processor with fewer"

    "It will have the ability to do north of 1 trillion mathematical calculations per second, roughly 100 times more than a single Pentium 4 chip running at 2.5GHz."

    http://news.com.com/2100-1001-948493.html

    What went wrong on the way? Why do we now have a processor that isn't half what we were promised but is still a total bitch to program for?

    Don't you think someone should be asking these questions?

    1. Re:Where is the Devastator Cell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Don't you think someone should be asking these questions?"

      Yes, I nominate you. Let me know how that goes.

  12. Finally by thesnarky1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just what I always wanted! The ability to talk on AIM using two thumbsticks while fragging my way through a room full of badass monsters!

    --
    Want to find other gamers to play board and role playing game
  13. Homer Simpson's Car by Kamalot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Think of a car manufacturer telling you about an upcoming sports car. The automobile will have 8 cylinders in a brand-new type of engine and will be faster than anything else on the road.

    A year goes by and the manufacturer is having trouble producing the brand-new engine with 8 working cylinders. Instead, they decide the sports car will only use 7.

    Now we find out that the fancy computer controlled car needs power to run the fuel-injectors, radio, On-Star and GPS system. As a result, the car will always occupy one cylinder of power and will have the option to abscond with another cylinder when it deems necessary.

    Your 8-cylinder powerhouse is now a 5-cylinder go-kart. Sure, it has a really fancy GPS system and radio, but what about those that wanted the super-car they were promised? The machine isn't focused on delivering the best driving experience possible, it has turned into a Homermobile, with a bluray player, the ability to download music and shows, 7 wireless controllers, cup holders, a coffee machine, and three horns that play "La Cucaracha".

    How about a company that focuses on doing something well, instead of trying to be everything to everyone?

    1. Re:Homer Simpson's Car by yammosk · · Score: 1

      They get a Segue instead? Sure it doesn't go as fast but it is a lot of fun...

    2. Re:Homer Simpson's Car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you play video games? To watch movies, download music and buy add-ons with microtransactions?

      I play to have fun. I'll buy whatever system is the most fun.

    3. Re:Homer Simpson's Car by theJamAbides · · Score: 1

      You mean Nintendo...

      --
      James Taylor
      (No, I'm not related. However, I am on the no-fly list)
  14. The original PS3Portal article by genedefect · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can get to the original article here

    http://www.ps3portal.com/ps3/article/352.html
    http://www.ps3portal.com/ps3/article/352/2

  15. Sony Operating System by frankmu · · Score: 1

    Sony Operating System (SOS)... doesn't Woz have dibs on this name this name?

    --
    Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
  16. Typical Modern Day Bloat by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    About 25% off the top just for the OS. Sounds pretty typical in todays computing world. Gone are the days where programmers actually cared enough ( or know how ) to make their code efficient.

    Besides why should they? Next years model wil be bigge, faster, better anyway, right? ( that was sarcasm, for the slow ones among us )

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  17. Theft by DreadSpoon · · Score: 1

    Sony using a customer's box for processing, at least without direct permission, would be theft. That box requires electricity to run, and if I'm not using the box, I damn well don't expect to be paying the electricity bill for it running at 100% capacity 24/7.