Latest PS3 Firmware Update Requires Hard Disk Wipe to Fix

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Latest PS3 Firmware Update Requires Hard Disk Wipe to Fix

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Wednesday July 2, 2008 @09:54AM from the entire-qa-department-is-fired dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Earlier today Sony launched firmware V2.40 for the PS3 which is mandatory for online play. To my horror after installing the update my console wouldn't boot, and this appears to be a not uncommon problem affecting all ages and models of PS3s. Although there is rampant fanboy denial over at the official Playstation forums, the Kotaku article details the issue and has a suggested solution if you don't mind yanking your PS3's hard drive."

153 of 193 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Which is why... by Darkness404 · 2008-07-02 09:58 · Score: 4, Interesting

Which is why firmware upgrades like how MS/Nintendo/Sony have them are a bad idea. Rather then just small patches, a lot of them overwrite a lot of the base code. It would be like rather then just patching Windows, you formatted your HD and started over from backups, now the firmware upgrades aren't exactly like that, but it is similar to the risks that it takes. And most firmware updates don't *need* to be done in the first place, and the makers certainly shouldn't prevent you from online play if you don't upgrade unless it would be a natural by-product of the upgrade (like the online play server was moved or something). But really, upgradable firmware in game consoles is just a bad idea to use.

--
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
1. Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-02 10:04 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  Yeah, things like the server code need to be abstracted to a layer above the firmware and stored on the Hard disk. We could call it something like Operating System. Someone should get to work on designing something like that...
2. Re:Which is why... by Darkness404 · 2008-07-02 10:08 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Well, in the game console world firmware == operating system. So it is basically the PS3's OS. And running games in an OS above the firmware would be too slow to run most of them at top speed and then we get back into the horrible world of upgrades etc. That has made many computer gamers switch back to consoles.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
3. Re:Which is why... by Secret+Rabbit · 2008-07-02 10:47 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  """
  Rather then just small patches, a lot of them overwrite a lot of the base code
  """
  Actually, Sony does do small patches. Check the history for the frequency of these updates if you don't believe me. Or do you honestly believe that small changes to the system can't have disastrous effects?
  """
  a natural by-product of the upgrade (like the online play server was moved or something
  """
  Or say a protocol was change. Do you know exactly was changed? Because, I'm calling bullshit on what you're saying. That is unless you can show your insider knowledge and prove to me that this change is unnecessarily preventing on-line play.
  """
  But really, upgradable firmware in game consoles is just a bad idea to use.
  """
  Yah, because fixing errors in the OS is a bad idea. Get a clue. We're *far* beyond the 8-bit NES that didn't have an OS. We're in an age where consoles are basically specialised computers. Computers that have an OS which is software, which will have bugs that need to be fixed from time to time. Computers that will have features added.
  But, that's ok. We don't need an evolving set of features or improvements on features or increased stability or... We'll just go back to the old model of a static stagnant system reducing the systems lifespan increasing costs for everyone.
4. Re:Which is why... by bipbop · 2008-07-02 10:52 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  However, it wouldn't be so bad to have a bootloader with an option to fall back to the last working version, even if this option is normally bypassed. I'm not familiar with the internals of the PS3, so I don't know how difficult this would be, but it wouldn't have been hard to design a console in which this was simple to do, so I can't see why they wouldn't have.
5. Re:Which is why... by somersault · 2008-07-02 10:52 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Since this problem can be fixed by simply reformatting the HD, obviously the actual firmware is fine, it's what has been installed on the HD that's borked..
  My system was fine with the update btw *shrug*
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
6. Re:Which is why... by secolactico · 2008-07-02 10:55 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  What is needed (I don't know if there is) is a "failsafe" boot image stored in ROM that does not get flashed. If a firmware upgrade screws the OS, the system will boot from this image and be able to get online and retrieve a fix. Or maybe revert to the old one.
  Or maybe even read the fix from a disk and apply it.
  
  --
  No sig
7. Re:Which is why... by Darkness404 · 2008-07-02 10:58 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Or say a protocol was change. Do you know exactly was changed? Because, I'm calling bullshit on what you're saying. That is unless you can show your insider knowledge and prove to me that this change is unnecessarily preventing on-line play.
  
  What I was saying, is that unless something major was changed to naturally prevent online play like a server address change or a protocol change or whatever, Sony shouldn't prevent people from going online. I'm not saying anything of what Sony did.
  
  Yah, because fixing errors in the OS is a bad idea. Get a clue. We're *far* beyond the 8-bit NES that didn't have an OS. We're in an age where consoles are basically specialised computers. Computers that have an OS which is software, which will have bugs that need to be fixed from time to time. Computers that will have features added.
  
  But, prove to me that what Sony fixed was some major bug or a major feature. From my experience with my Wii (I don't have a PS3 though I have played one), they release patches for completely trivial things. Things that shouldn't have to risk bricking your console to update.
  
  But, that's ok. We don't need an evolving set of features or improvements on features or increased stability or... We'll just go back to the old model of a static stagnant system reducing the systems lifespan increasing costs for everyone.
  
  But like you said the consoles were becoming more like computers, so how long before I have to upgrade my RAM in a PS3 to play a new game? How long before they come out with different CPU models? This is killing what made console gaming popular in the first place the fact that you didn't need to upgrade the RAM to play a new game, the fact that everyone was equal whether you bought your console on launch or bought it near the end of the console's lifetime you could all play the same games, with the same performance. One of the reasons I don't play many computer games (aside from a few games of Wesnoth here and there and OpenArena) is that you have to upgrade your system every few months to play the newest games. With consoles the big point was you could play every game within the console's lifetime and that being about 5-7 years that was a lot of games. Now tell me, will a stock PC from 2001 play a game released in 2007? No, but a PS2 bought in 2000 will play the games made in 2006 the exact same as a PS2 bought in 2006 will play a game made in 2006. That is why console gaming has increased so much and computer gaming has declines.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
8. Re:Which is why... by Beardo+the+Bearded · 2008-07-02 11:25 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  This is why I stopped playing games on the PC. I just didn't want to spend the $400 a year keeping my system up to the point it could play the latest game. I plan on never buying a video card again, and I'm happy about it.
  BTW, The N64 did have a RAM cartridge that you had to buy if you wanted to play a few of the games.
  
  --
  
  ---
  ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
9. Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-02 11:28 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  As you guessed, you can't use the PS3 until you've upgraded, if you've got a network connection. When you start it, it sees that there's a new update and refuses to allow you to play games until you've updated.
  Sure, you can fix it by wiping the hard drive and reupgrading. Great. There are only a few problems with that:
  1. You lose all your save games.
  2. You lose all your installed games. Games like DMC4 require a 20+ minute install before you can play them, and repeating that is NOT fun.
  3. You lose all your downloaded content. I'm told you can redownload content without rebuying it, PROVIDED IT'S STILL BEING SOLD, but I really don't want to test that.
  So, obviously you should back up first, right? Well, guess what:
  1. While MOST save games can be copied off the console, some CANNOT.
  2. Installed game data CANNOT be copied off the console.
  3. Downloaded content CANNOT be copied off the console.
  In short, you can backup CERTAIN save games, but not ALL save games.
  
  And most firmware updates don't *need* to be done in the first place, and the makers certainly shouldn't prevent you from online play if you don't upgrade unless it would be a natural by-product of the upgrade (like the online play server was moved or something).
  To be fair on this front, they did rip off Xbox Live's Achievement system in this update, so presumably some aspect of online play has changed.
  'Course, I'd imagine that would only affect servers and NOT clients, so there SHOULD be no reason for clients to update, but...
10. Re:Which is why... by jfim · 2008-07-02 11:46 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  And running games in an OS above the firmware would be too slow to run most of them at top speed[...]
  Wrong. The Xbox ran a modified version of Windows 2000, for example. They're just not general purpose operating systems and contain only what's needed to make games. Otherwise, every single game would need to write filesystem access code and drivers to access the harddrive and whatnot.
  
  --
  Jean-Francois Im's blog
11. Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-02 12:03 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  such as starfox(?) and one of the star wars games
  Not Starfox. Starfox was before the expansion. Starcraft needed it, and Donkey Kong, but I don't remember any others.
12. Re:Which is why... by Darkness404 · 2008-07-02 12:04 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Ok, well there were tons of random expansions released by various companies to boost RAM/etc. But the games that required them were rather few and if I remember correctly the official Nintendo expansion pack cost like $30 and you could get third-party ones for $15. Today though, computer RAM costs you $40+ for a GB of extra RAM and isn't in a nice cartage like for the N64.
  
  Required to play * Donkey Kong 64[1] * The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask [edit] Required for major features * Perfect Dark[2] * StarCraft 64[3]
  
  From Wikipedia. Sure there were others that made the game look nicer, but that is more like using component cables or HDMI cables rather then normal ones. Rather then, the game is unplayable or is slower without it, as in the case with a computer game that needs more RAM. Oh and Donkey Kong 64 came with the pack.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
13. Re:Which is why... by Darkness404 · 2008-07-02 12:07 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  But again, that was the firmware. Wikipedia defines firmware as
  As its name suggests, firmware is somewhere between hardware and software. Like software, it is a computer program which is executed by a microprocessor or a microcontroller. But it is also tightly linked to a piece of hardware, and has little meaning outside of it.
  So would the Xbox OS be considered firmware, yes as I can't just fire that up onto a non Xbox platform and have it work. Same with the Wii's OS, and the PS3's OS. They are all OSes but they are firmware just the same.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
14. Re:Which is why... by JebusIsLord · 2008-07-02 12:21 · Score: 1
  
  I was thinking about this a few days ago... basically the best solution (to me) would be a ROM-based bootloader (not upgradable) which attempts to load the latest firmware, and if the system doesn't boot with a success code within a certain timeframe, it automatically restores the previous firmware with a warning message saying that the upgrade failed. If it boots successfully, the previous firmware would then be purged.
  This allows for full OS upgrades (except for the low-level bootloader), without bricked systems.
  
  --
  Jeremy
15. Re:Which is why... by quanticle · 2008-07-02 12:49 · Score: 1
  
  We're *far* beyond the 8-bit NES that didn't have an OS. We're in an age where consoles are basically specialised computers. Computers that have an OS which is software, which will have bugs that need to be fixed from time to time. Computers that will have features added.
  Why? Why should consoles be "specialized computers"? Why should their feature set change over time? If I wanted a gaming box, I'd go to Newegg and build myself one. I want a console because its guaranteed to just work. By introducing things like upgradeable firmware, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are destroying the only advantage that consoles hold over PC games.
  
  --
  We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
16. Re:Which is why... by revengebomber · 2008-07-02 12:49 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The PS3 actually stores the last 2 firmwares in its internal memory. When installing an update, it writes over the older one. On bootup, the PS3 (booting from a OTP ROM) will verify each firmware and boot the newer one. If one's corrupted, it boots the other.
  
  --
  09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
17. Re:Which is why... by mattack2 · 2008-07-02 13:05 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  It's not really the same as what you describe, but from what I've read, Tivos have a separate partition that they load the software upgrades onto. Only after the update is fully done, that partition is set to be the current boot partition.
  While it doesn't allow you to fall back to the last version, it at least does hopefully prevent a partially updated and unbootable system.
18. Re:Which is why... by snowraver1 · 2008-07-02 13:20 · Score: 1
  
  I, personally, like the fact that the fall 2007 update to the xbox360 added mpeg4 support. Updates deliver free stuff to the consumer, and add value to the product. The spring 2008 update now allows users to transfer downloaded content licences from console to console, something that people have been complaining about day one.
  
  The Xbox does just work. All I do is power it on, it says update available, then downloads, and reboots. A retard couldn't fuck that up.
  
  Oh, and nothing is guaranteed, explicit or implied with regards to the workability of the xbox, it is warrantied.
  
  --
  Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
19. Re:Which is why... by Stewie241 · 2008-07-02 13:24 · Score: 1
  
  But the problem is that we are no longer in the world of 8-bit NES... prior to Windows 95 (Windows 98 even), patches were very few. Why is that? Well, many patches have to do with security. Who cares about security if you have a single NES hooked up to a television? No big deal. With online consoles we now require patches because bugs in software aren't just glitches that game developers have to work around, they are potential security holes that can have serious impact. Once things become connected, we are in a whole different world.
20. Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-02 13:51 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  Mine updated fine as well. I don't see the problem.
21. Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-02 14:23 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Mine too. Most of the people here don't even own a PS3.
22. Re:Which is why... by Entropius · 2008-07-02 14:26 · Score: 1
  
  Perfect Dark, I think?
23. Re:Which is why... by Annymouse+Cowherd · 2008-07-02 14:57 · Score: 1
  
  >> Today though, computer RAM costs you $40+ for a GB of extra RAM
  DDR2 is like $20 a GB.
24. Re:Which is why... by afidel · 2008-07-02 15:03 · Score: 1
  
  My HTPC is 3.5 years old and plays games at 1080p better than any console released at the time =) Oh, and for another $100 it will play them better than any console available today too. The upfront cost was a bit more, but for that money I get to use bittorrent, connect to work, edit photos, print, etc.
  
  --
  There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
25. Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-02 15:38 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  It ran a modified (scaled down, stripped of unneeded features) kernel, not the whole OS.
26. Re:Which is why... by Kopiok · 2008-07-02 15:45 · Score: 1
  
  But those few were really, really good games...
27. Re:Which is why... by Harlockjds · 2008-07-02 16:22 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  >But, prove to me that what Sony fixed was some major bug or a major feature
  you could actually look for yourself and see what was in this upgrade. It was a pretty big one
28. Re:Which is why... by vbraga · 2008-07-02 16:34 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  From Xbox team blog:
  
  One of the first questions I get when someone hears I work on Xbox is "So, what operating system do you guys use? Windows 2000, right?" I am honestly not sure where the Win2K misperception comes from, but Xbox runs a custom operating system built from the ground up.
  
  --
  English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
29. Re:Which is why... by Dutch+Gun · 2008-07-02 19:59 · Score: 1
  
  What I was saying, is that unless something major was changed to naturally prevent online play like a server address change or a protocol change or whatever, Sony shouldn't prevent people from going online. I'm not saying anything of what Sony did.
  Do you remember how crappy Sony's initial online store offering was? What they've been doing is moving more and more of the functionality to the client-side. While this drastically improves the user experience (see Xbox Live / Marketplace), it requires careful coordination between the client and server software. In general, it's simply far fewer headaches for Sony in order to ensure there's only one current PS3 operating system to deal with online.
  Note: I'm not trying to excuse this f!-up, just trying to explain Sony's reasoning for trying to ensure someone going online is always up to date.
  
  --
  Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
30. Re:Which is why... by Dutch+Gun · 2008-07-02 20:02 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The Xbox does just work. All I do is power it on...
  Pot, meet kettle.
  
  --
  Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
31. Re:Which is why... by Burpmaster · 2008-07-02 22:17 · Score: 1
  
  As usual, it's on Wikipedia.
  Only Majora's Mask and Donkey Kong absolutely require it. Beyond that, StarCraft 64 required it for Brood War content, and Perfect Dark could function without it, but most of the game wasn't available.
  Finally, there were a lot of games that could take advantage of it, but I think most of them just used it to support high-res mode, which you'd often turn off anyway because the framerate was too low.
32. Re:Which is why... by Macthorpe · 2008-07-02 22:21 · Score: 1
  
  I think it was optional for Perfect Dark - you could play without it, but only single player and it looked a lot worse.
  
  --
  "It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
33. Re:Which is why... by Lord_Frederick · 2008-07-03 00:16 · Score: 1
  
  The XBox ran a custom OS, not a modified version of Windows. People thought it was a tweaked Windows because the APIs were similar to DirectX.
34. Re:Which is why... by Lumpy · 2008-07-03 00:36 · Score: 1
  
  HUH???
  the N64 REQUIRED you to upgrade your RAM or video Ram specifically to play some games.
  I have the module in my N64 sitting in the basement. This is not new.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
35. Re:Which is why... by flitty · 2008-07-03 01:28 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  by simply reformatting the HD, obviously the actual firmware is fine
  Your definition of "fine" is one i'm not familiar with.
  
  --
  Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
36. Re:Which is why... by elrous0 · 2008-07-03 01:34 · Score: 1
  
  The intentions are good (curbing online gaming cheats, offering new services and features, etc.). But good intentions often lead to terrible consequences.
  
  --
  SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
37. Re:Which is why... by geminidomino · 2008-07-03 01:42 · Score: 1
  
  Yep. And Zelda-Majora's Mask could (or had to) use it as well
38. Re:Which is why... by somersault · 2008-07-03 01:47 · Score: 1
  
  The system update is not a 'firmware' update, otherwise you wouldn't have to download the system updates again after reformatting the drive. I know from experience that you do indeed have to do this. That's all I'm trying to point out.
  If putting in a fresh formatted drive fixes the system, then the problem is with the code that was on the HD, not in the firmware. Saying that the firmware is broken is like saying your BIOS is broken because a Windows startup file has been corrupted.
  Seems a lot of people here need to look up the definition of firmware.
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
39. Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-03 02:25 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  That's odd, because the Xbox and Xbox 360 SDK documentation mention that the kernels are based upon the Windows 2000 kernel.
40. Re:Which is why... by NotNormal23224 · 2008-07-03 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  They added trophy support, in game XMB which allows for sending of chat messages to others online without leaving the game, and selecting new soundtracks and a bunch of things, so there was a reason for this update. You shouldn't base your opinion on what the Wii (which I also own) does for their updates, since the PS3 and 360 (both of which I also own) do updates that do add major functionality, without these updates we wouldn't have had Divx support and a whole host of features that weren't there when any of the consoles shipped as well as bug fixes.
41. Re:Which is why... by CougMerrik · 2008-07-03 03:34 · Score: 1
  
  But like you said the consoles were becoming more like computers, so how long before I have to upgrade my RAM in a PS3 to play a new game? How long before they come out with different CPU models? This is killing what made console gaming popular in the first place the fact that you didn't need to upgrade the RAM to play a new game, the fact that everyone was equal whether you bought your console on launch or bought it near the end of the console's lifetime you could all play the same games, with the same performance. One of the reasons I don't play many computer games (aside from a few games of Wesnoth here and there and OpenArena) is that you have to upgrade your system every few months to play the newest games. With consoles the big point was you could play every game within the console's lifetime and that being about 5-7 years that was a lot of games. Now tell me, will a stock PC from 2001 play a game released in 2007? No, but a PS2 bought in 2000 will play the games made in 2006 the exact same as a PS2 bought in 2006 will play a game made in 2006. That is why console gaming has increased so much and computer gaming has declines.
  We had a console with a required memory upgrade already, it was called the Nintendo 64.
42. Re:Which is why... by Guppy06 · 2008-07-03 04:13 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  "but Xbox runs a custom operating system built from the ground up"
  Microsoft hasn't written anything "custom" "from the ground up" since the 1970's or so.
43. Re:Which is why... by Guppy06 · 2008-07-03 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  "Since this problem can be fixed by simply reformatting the HD"
  "Simply?" Spoken like a man who has no idea how long it takes to fully update a fresh Final Fantasy XI install.
44. Re:Which is why... by somersault · 2008-07-03 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  Nor will I ever know. System updates, GT5 Prologue, GTA4 and MGS takes ages to install too, but I can go eat, go out, go to bed, watch TV, whatever, while that's happening. If your system is that badly fscked up then what do you expect? Is a restore of your data on an already working system going to be any quicker than installing Final Fantasy whatevertheheckversionitisnow? It's not like you have to do it every day too. Wow people are impatient these days..
  Of course this isn't great on Sony's part, I can't excuse the fact that they have broken a lot of PS3 installs with this mess, but at the end of the day, it's just a console and the problem is relatively easy to fix compared to for example the whole RROD fiasco. Most people will know someone who could fix it for them.
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
45. Re:Which is why... by Sir+Toby · 2008-07-03 04:50 · Score: 1
  
  As you guessed, you can't use the PS3 until you've upgraded, if you've got a network connection. When you start it, it sees that there's a new update and refuses to allow you to play games until you've updated.
  While I've had my PS3 prevent me from accessing the PlayStation network when there is a new update available, I don't remember it preventing me from playing games. Although I usually install new firmware for my PS3 right away, so I normally don't get to test what I'm allowed to do before updating. I'm almost certain you are still allowed to play games...
  
  3. You lose all your downloaded content. I'm told you can redownload content without rebuying it, PROVIDED IT'S STILL BEING SOLD, but I really don't want to test that.
  A recent incident forced me to re-download all of my downloaded content for my PS3. There is a feature under account management and a feature of the PlayStation store that lets you view all items you have downloaded (except for videos for some reason) and download them again. All the things I ever downloaded (a signifigant number) were available. This list even includes items that are no longer available in the store, such as the LocoRoco Holiday demo that came out around Christmas 2006.
  
  So, obviously you should back up first, right? Well, guess what:
  1. While MOST save games can be copied off the console, some CANNOT.
  2. Installed game data CANNOT be copied off the console.
  3. Downloaded content CANNOT be copied off the console.
  In short, you can backup CERTAIN save games, but not ALL save games.
  I have performed numerous backups and restores on my PS3. Except for one incident (which I will detail below), all data was always restored. This includes all game save data (including save data that was marked as 'copy prohibited'), all installed game data, and all downloaded content. All of this data was restored even when I swapped out the 60 GB hard drive for a 250 GB hard drive.
  The incident I referred to above is when my PS3 had to be replaced since I was one of the lucky few with a launch 60 GB PS3 that had problems with GTA4. Sony's solution to the problem was to exchange my PS3 with another. Before shipping my PS3 out, I performed a backup of my data. When I received the replacement PS3, I restored the data to it. At this point, all of the restrictions you mentioned were enforced. Some saved data (the data marked 'copy prohibited') was not restored, all game data was not restored, and all downloaded content was not restored. While I can understand not restoring the game data and the downloaded content, I was bothered by not having all of my save data get restored. Fortunately the save data that was not restored was limited to games where saved progress doesn't equate to many hours of gameplay, such as an RPG.
  
  --
  Slashdot Required Reading
46. Re:Which is why... by naibas · 2008-07-03 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  Which is why firmware upgrades like how MS/Nintendo/Sony have them are a bad idea.
  Actually, especially with the incredible security found on the Xbox 360, it's the only way to secure online gaming from cheaters. Software (and even hardware) can never be 100% bug free, and when problems are found, you need to be able to fix them.
  For an example of cheating on an insecure platform, just look at the history of first person shooters on the PC. In the heydays of pre-1.0 counter-strike cheaters, it could get down-right obnoxious, with both actual cheaters polluting servers, as well as witch hunts that end up banning non-cheaters, and the inevitable forum flame war that results. Most users don't want to deal with that crap, they just want to blow off some steam playing a fun game.
  And online gaming is definitely a big draw for console gamers these days, and cheaters ruin it for everyone. Sony/Microsoft/etc have to assume that this will translate into less customer satisfaction for the system as a whole. So they have a financial interest in keeping the system secure. Thus they all built in firmware patching systems.
  So I would say it is actually the only commercially viable way to make a console these days. And, if as a by product, it allows you to roll out new features for the platform, that's just more value added, and another way to increase user satisfaction.
  
  Rather then just small patches, a lot of them overwrite a lot of the base code.
  That's not true. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_System_Software and you'll find that the 360, at least, has a separate file system for system updates, and the firmware that ships with the console is rarely, if ever, touched.
  
  the makers certainly shouldn't prevent you from online play if you don't upgrade
  I disagree with this for two reasons:
  1. Security - you specifically want to prevent insecure clients from connecting to your servers. It seems to me that, from the end user's perspective, the most consistent way to enforce this is by simply requiring the latest version of the firmware to connect online.
  2. Maintenance, performance, and overall stability - if your servers have to support multiple versions of clients, you will have a much more difficult, time consuming, and expensive quality assurance process. Plus, the combinatorial nature of thousands of players, each with potentially different client versions, means there would be a much higher chance of missed bugs, both in client and in the servers themselves. Basically, it is cheaper and easier to force everyone to a single version of the client. And because it's a closed system, it's trivial to enforce it.
  
  And most firmware updates don't *need* to be done in the first place
  
  But really, upgradable firmware in game consoles is just a bad idea to use.
  To sum up my arguments: online multiplayer games make system updates necessary. And if you have the functionality to update, using it for feature upgrades doesn't seem like such a bad idea. It keeps the users interested, plus it can help you stay ahead of new competition without forcing the users to go out and buy a new piece of hardware, so it's actually more cost effective for everyone involved.
  If your post is really just venting that Sony's QA missed this issue with 2.40, then go ahead and be mad. I just disagree with your argument that allowing system updates in a modern gaming console is a poor design decision.
47. Re:Which is why... by Guppy06 · 2008-07-03 06:16 · Score: 1
  
  "but I can go eat, go out, go to bed, watch TV, whatever, while that's happening"
  If that's so fun and exciting to do, why not do it while the PS3 is working? After parting with the currency I dropped on the console, I'd like to actually use it from time to time.
  "Is a restore of your data on an already working system going to be any quicker than installing Final Fantasy whatevertheheckversionitisnow?"
  Going through a PlayStation Store download, 5 disks, and 6 hours to download 6 years worth of patches is just a bit slower than, say, not having the console crash to begin with.
  "It's not like you have to do it every day too."
  The prospect of playing Russian roulette with the biweekly system updates, with the chance to spend 8 hours of my life doing something I'd rather not do, doesn't exactly entice me to happily go along with Sony's continuing efforts to stop the homebrew crowd.
  "it's just a console and the problem is relatively easy to fix compared to for example the whole RROD fiasco."
  Ship off the console, hang on to the hard drive and its data. And on top of that, Microsoft doesn't insist that you have the original receipt in spite of going through the hardware registration process (putting up with these buggy USB ports on my 60 GB is cheaper than paying Sony to fix a brand new console).
48. Re:Which is why... by powerlord · 2008-07-03 07:34 · Score: 1
  
  Having a "personal PC" attached to the main TV only works if there is one person in the house, or if there is another TV that other people can use.
  Add a wife, kids, and guests, and appliances like Consoles and TiVos take a more center stage, and a PC with its own monitor becomes more standard.
  
  --
  This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
49. Re:Which is why... by Wolfrider · 2008-07-03 12:06 · Score: 1
  
  Nice link, but you apparently didn't read the article very well:
  [[
  The Xbox is based on commodity PC hardware and runs a custom operating system which exposes APIs based largely on DirectX 8.1; the API commonality led to a common confusion that the OS was, in fact, a stripped-down version of the Windows 2000 kernel.[8]
  ]]
  
  --
  .
  == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
50. Re:Which is why... by mxs · 2008-07-03 15:36 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Actually, Sony does do small patches. Check the history for the frequency of these updates if you don't believe me. Or do you honestly believe that small changes to the system can't have disastrous effects?
  First of all, do you /KNOW/ that Sony is /just/ changing the parts it says it is changing ? No, you do not.
  
  Or say a protocol was change. Do you know exactly was changed? Because, I'm calling bullshit on what you're saying. That is unless you can show your insider knowledge and prove to me that this change is unnecessarily preventing on-line play.
  Ah, but it works the other way around too. Show me why that particular protocol change was necessary and no backward compatibility was possible. Hint : DRM updates do not count, I don't give a rats ass about it on my legally bought, legally used console with legally owned games that suddenly refuses to boot without a harddrive wipe.
  
  Yah, because fixing errors in the OS is a bad idea. Get a clue.
  You both have a point. Your opponent is not clueless.
  
  We're *far* beyond the 8-bit NES that didn't have an OS. We're in an age where consoles are basically specialised computers. Computers that have an OS which is software, which will have bugs that need to be fixed from time to time. Computers that will have features added.
  This depends ENTIRELY on your development model. You can do software updates without flashing the firmware. You can design the firmware with a lot more stringent test procedures, and possibly less to do, moving the patchables onto the harddisk.
  
  But, that's ok. We don't need an evolving set of features or improvements on features or increased stability or... We'll just go back to the old model of a static stagnant system reducing the systems lifespan increasing costs for everyone.
  Uhm. My NES still works fine. You sometimes need to clean the contacts, but that's a mechanical necessity. My SNES also works fine, as do my GameGear, my Master System, my Genesis, my Jaguar, my 32X, my C64, my Amiga 500, my Amiga 2000, my Amiga CD32, my Sony Playstation, my Dreamcast, and countless others of my consoles. Your "lifespan" argument is complete and utter bullshit.
  The primary reason for non-optional firmware upgrades required for online play is updates to the various DRM and copy protection schemes. Of course Sony knows this is a futile battle, and of course the ones being harmed by this policy are primarily paying customers who do not use pirated software -- see the case in point.
51. Re:Which is why... by somersault · 2008-07-03 22:10 · Score: 1
  
  If that's so fun and exciting to do, why not do it while the PS3 is working? After parting with the currency I dropped on the console, I'd like to actually use it from time to time.
  Wow, does FF really take something like a year to install, and you have to spend 20 more hours every day updating? It's a disaster recovery situation, not a daily occurence.. you can't have your instant gratification here.
  I don't think system update and game patches are incremental, they just download the latest one and you're done with it. I know it's a PITA, but like I said it's not a common occurence. I've certainly had no issues so far with any system or game updates, and neither have millions of others. Hopefully Sony will figure out what the issue is, and learn from it.
  I'm usually quite a cynical person but people are just going too far with the flamebait in this thread..
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
52. Re:Which is why... by NotNormal23224 · 2008-07-04 07:27 · Score: 1
  
  I noticed in what I assume is your defense of systems that did not need firmware updates (correct me if I inferred incorrectly) you listed the Amiga 500 and Amiga 2000, did you buy the later models that already had the Kickstart 1.3 firmware and didn't know that a large portion of them were sold with Kickstart 1.2? I've had the PS3 since launch (as well as the 360, Wii, and going back in time 2600, Bally Astrocade, Coleco-Vision, Genesis, NES, SNES, Atari 400, Atari 800, Amiga 1000/2000/3000 and the list goes on) and I for one am all for the updates that have come from both Sony and Microsoft because the vast majority added features to the systems I have. Yes there is the fact that they do go in and root out security holes, but without updates there would be many crappy things that wouldn't be corrected that actually affected usability, background downloading for example wasn't in either system when they shipped, so if you downloaded a game from the store you had to wait until it was done or cancel it, that now is fixed on both units, numerous multimedia features added to both consoles which I like and use often, updates to the stores to make them easier to use, updates to network code to fix or prevent issues with multi-player games, a lot of stuff that we would miss out on. Sony's 2.4 update contained things that customers were asking for like the in game XMB access, I could see the wrath of folks if this was just a silly security patch with no payoff but in this case it's not.
53. Re:Which is why... by mxs · 2008-07-04 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  I noticed in what I assume is your defense of systems that did not need firmware updates (correct me if I inferred incorrectly) you listed the Amiga 500 and Amiga 2000, did you buy the later models that already had the Kickstart 1.3 firmware and didn't know that a large portion of them were sold with Kickstart 1.2?
  My current ones actually have 1.3, you are correct. However, the "update" was not mandatory (both of these are second-hand, I stupidly sold my first Amiga way back).
  
  I've had the PS3 since launch (as well as the 360, Wii,
  I've taken a break with "next gen consoles" for a while (since the xbox, actually). I might catch up in a few years :)
  
  and going back in time 2600, Bally Astrocade, Coleco-Vision, Genesis, NES, SNES, Atari 400, Atari 800, Amiga 1000/2000/3000 and the list goes on) and I for one am all for the updates that have come from both Sony and Microsoft because the vast majority added features to the systems I have.
  Yes, you can do decent things with firmware updates. You can, quite probably, achieve the same effect with a leaner firmware/bios and a fatter OS. But that would require them to give up some control over the OS code, since code on the harddisk/on a memory stick is a lot easier to crack, generally.
  
  Yes there is the fact that they do go in and root out security holes, but without updates there would be many crappy things that wouldn't be corrected that actually affected usability, background downloading for example wasn't in either system when they shipped, so if you downloaded a game from the store you had to wait until it was done or cancel it, that now is fixed on both units, numerous multimedia features added to both consoles which I like and use often, updates to the stores to make them easier to use, updates to network code to fix or prevent issues with multi-player games, a lot of stuff that we would miss out on.
  Where there is a cane, sugar is never far away.
  
  Sony's 2.4 update contained things that customers were asking for like the in game XMB access, I could see the wrath of folks if this was just a silly security patch with no payoff but in this case it's not.
  Let's pretend they went with a lean BIOS method instead and put the majority of their OS and features on the harddrive. Let's further assume that they are decent system designers and know how to do system snapshots, backup strategies, modular design, etc. In that case you'd be updating a few files on an update, you'd be able to reverse updates via backup recovery (this could be one of those few functions the firmware has), and you'd have a more flexible system. You'd possibly lose some cracker security measures -- but let's face it, the machines all got cracked in short order anyway.
  (One of the reasons I stopped at the PSX with consoles was, quite frankly, that I could not play backups on the system without altering it substantially. I have no desire to pirate games, but I have no desire to losing access to a game due to scratches caused either by a slip or by friends; With cart-based games it was pretty damn hard to destroy the cartdridge, with disc-based games it's pretty damn easy. This is also the reason I'll be looking to get a modded version of whatever console I'll be getting next. I buy the games, but damn if I am going to break them).
  The copy protection systems on consoles are quite something though. I am still in awe of the Playstation 1 one; The simple stuff you can see on any drive (libcrypt xored into subchannel data, some program checks), the "unique" color of the discs (black), and the not-so-simple stuff that takes a while to figure out properly (they encoded the symbols SCUS, SCEA, etc. encoded in slight changes in the frequency of the wobble of the disc, as read by track tracking coils in the playstation, for instance. It's a simple design, but VERY effective -- to this day you can't just "burn" a playstation CD that'll work in non-modded playstations (since the act of burning will, basically, destroy the wobble :)
54. Re:Which is why... by NotNormal23224 · 2008-07-04 19:47 · Score: 1
  
  Well with the Amiga it's obvious you weren't around for things like Kickstart 1.0, mandatory means in my book means you need the update to run newer titles for the same system and with the Amiga if you didn't have the newest OS software would either not run or would be missing features. Could they go with a fatter OS sure they could, but the point is not to be booting an OS and saving as much memory as possible by combining the OS and firmware, for example the PSP boots up just fine without having a memory stick in it to boot an OS, because all the functionality is in the firmware. As for copy protection and protection against non authorized corporate code that has been around for ages even before the CD generation, the Colecovision, NES, SNES, and Genesis all had it in some form or another in very simplistic forms and maybe even earlier as well, all to prevent any Joe Shmoe from creating their own unauthorized content for their cash cows (not that it stopped very many folks) or duplicating their software (also worked around). The whole wobble thing wasn't just to protect Sony's discs but also from stopping basement coders from writing games for the precious system, just like the custom byte strings/circuits in cart based systems. Also of note you talked about being able to reverse updates well, while wiping the hard drive is completely inexcusable, the PS3 still would work if that was done effectively undoing the damage and not leaving one with an expensive shiny brick. The bottom line is even if they shifted where the load burden was it still wouldn't have mattered since then there would have been a bad OS and folks would have been whining about that. I for one would like to know what went wrong, all the folks talking about testing and stuff is moot when the fact is a lot of the PS3s actually worked when this update went out and had no issues at all, mine for example has been working just fine with 2.4 downloaded and installed it in the wee hours of the morning on it's release day. There was a similar issue awhile back on the 360 where people were cursing MS for a firmware update that they claimed bricked the console, and again that was one that was pulled but there were still folks who had installed that update too with no ill effects (me again). So there is no way the company could have realistically foreseen the issue if all there test boxes updated just fine, since I've heard folks chime in with successful upgrade across the board form the 20GB/60GB PS3 (me) up to the latest 40GB/80GB.
55. Re:Which is why... by NotNormal23224 · 2008-07-04 19:51 · Score: 1
  
  Sure I can, it DIDN'T, or did you miss the whole "hey if you erase the hard disk the system works just fine", a crappy and generally unacceptable solution but a solution none the less thing? They aren't bricks they just no longer like what they see on the hard drive. Wipe or replace the hard disk and the systems work.
56. Re:Which is why... by mxs · 2008-07-05 18:01 · Score: 1
  
  Friendly hint : your comments could be a whole lot more readable if you learned to use paragraphs :)
  
  Well with the Amiga it's obvious you weren't around for things like Kickstart 1.0,
  I wonder why that would strike you as obvious. I was around when the Amiga was introduced, but I really did not care too much back then :)
  
  mandatory means in my book means you need the update to run newer titles for the same system and with the Amiga if you didn't have the newest OS software would either not run or would be missing features.
  Well, it was a personal computer after all, not so much a game console. AmigaOS had many versions as well.
  
  Could they go with a fatter OS sure they could, but the point is not to be booting an OS and saving as much memory as possible by combining the OS and firmware, for example the PSP boots up just fine without having a memory stick in it to boot an OS, because all the functionality is in the firmware.
  I used Memory Stick as a general term for "secondary storage".
  
  As for copy protection and protection against non authorized corporate code that has been around for ages even before the CD generation, the Colecovision, NES, SNES, and Genesis all had it in some form or another in very simplistic forms and maybe even earlier as well, all to prevent any Joe Shmoe from creating their own unauthorized content for their cash cows (not that it stopped very many folks) or duplicating their software (also worked around).
  There is a sizable difference between what you saw then and what you see now (excepting the Amiga and such :) on consoles. It was never a big hurdle to overcome, other than you needing actual hardware or hardware knowledge to pull it off. Unauthorized content wasn't really a problem, product piracy was (i.e. manufacturing clones, copied cartdridges, and selling those); that's not just unauthorized content.
  
  The whole wobble thing wasn't just to protect Sony's discs but also from stopping basement coders from writing games for the precious system, just like the custom byte strings/circuits in cart based systems.
  I'll contend that they didn't care much about the homebrew market one way or another (other than maybe the Net Yaroze thing); people interested in tinkering with their systems could rather easily get the tools required to do so (all you really needed was a third-party bootdisc and a parallel connector); manufacturing discs with their code on it that would work on regular consoles was not really a concern for those folks (it was for pirates selling their wares, and those were able to emulate the wobble at some point, anyway. It's funny how inventive and inquisitive folks get when there is cold, hard cash on the line :)
  "Basement coders'" games and demos were not, as a whole, commercial-grade quality. They were/are a hobby.
  
  Also of note you talked about being able to reverse updates well, while wiping the hard drive is completely inexcusable, the PS3 still would work if that was done effectively undoing the damage and not leaving one with an expensive shiny brick.
  Which, in all likelihood, would only lead to a lot of cost for the customer service department having to replace all those bricks :)
  
  The bottom line is even if they shifted where the load burden was it still wouldn't have mattered since then there would have been a bad OS and folks would have been whining about that.
  Correct, if Sony had not been good engineers and built in back-up and restore into the unit. This is simple stuff. Of course, those development-hours are much-better spent on stuff that doesn't benefit the customer :)
  
  I for one would like to know what went wrong, all the folks talking about testing and stuff is moot when the f
57. Re:Which is why... by Tony6785 · 2008-07-09 05:26 · Score: 1
  
  But, prove to me that what Sony fixed was some major bug or a major feature. From my experience with my Wii (I don't have a PS3 though I have played one), they release patches for completely trivial things. Things that shouldn't have to risk bricking your console to update.
  They were pretty major updates. The system has been changed so that the XMB (user interface outside of games) is completely accessible in game now. This is far from trivial in implementation. They also implemented a "Trophy" system, similar to Microsoft's Achievements. Other edits include the ability to create custom sound tracks in game using MP3s stored on the system hard drive.
Backup early, Backup often by maniac/dev/null · 2008-07-02 10:00 · Score: 5, Insightful

Yikes. With consoles becoming more complex and more like computers with each generation, it looks like issues like this will become all too common. How long before someone brings a PS3 backup utility to market?
1. Re:Backup early, Backup often by Darkness404 · 2008-07-02 10:02 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The bad part is, so much of the things fall under copyrighted code and so it would be like that Atari flash cart thing, it would be illegal to make your own backups. That, is scary. Game console makers constantly forcing you with useless firmware upgrades that can destroy your machine and not only do you have to buy a new one, you don't have your data.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
2. Re:Backup early, Backup often by Gat0r30y · 2008-07-02 10:14 · Score: 1
  
  dd
  I don't see why that wouldn't work for a PS3 HDD. Though I have not tested - anyone actually know?
  
  --
  Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
3. Re:Backup early, Backup often by Darkness404 · 2008-07-02 10:16 · Score: 1
  
  Probably the game code is DRM-ed to your PS3 console. So if you buy a new PS3 the data isn't readable on that console. That is the same way with the Wii's SD cards.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
4. Re:Backup early, Backup often by sanosuke76 · 2008-07-02 10:19 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Err, the PS3 ships with one built into its system. You can, at any point, have it do a backup to a memory card (assuming you have a large enough one) or a USB-connected external hard drive.
  
  --
  My 229 is all the Sig I need http://thegunwiki.com/
5. Re:Backup early, Backup often by machxor · 2008-07-02 10:45 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Err, the PS3 ships with one built into its system. You can, at any point, have it do a backup to a memory card (assuming you have a large enough one) or a USB-connected external hard drive.
  Would mod you up if I could. It's true the PS3 has a backup/restore function build right into it. I've used this function to backup while trying to upgrade my hard drive. However I've never gotten the restore to work even though I've backed up to several external hard drives. Thinking about it now the hard drive I'm upgrading to came from a laptop and has a 4GB "recovery" partition that I wasn't able to remove in Windows. I assumed the PS3 would remove this partition and create one for the entire drive when I formatted it but honestly never checked. I'll have to plug it in when I get home and see how many/what size partitions it has on it.
6. Re:Backup early, Backup often by somersault · 2008-07-02 10:57 · Score: 1
  
  You can back up your saved games easily to a USB flash drive from the main menu. You don't really need to back up anything else really, you can reinstall games from the original disc, and you don't actually need to have any media on the PS3 since you can stream it. I might consider backing up my save data next time I do an upgrade though :s This particular one was fine on my PS3, as were all the ones beforehand. The only time I've reformatted my HDD so far was to create a Linux partition.
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
7. Re:Backup early, Backup often by sanosuke76 · 2008-07-02 10:57 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  That's because the "Restore" option is deceptively named. When I upgraded a friend's PS3 to 250GB a while back, I used 'restore', but all that was for was restoring the system defaults. If I recall correctly, in order to restore your backup you first go to the backup menu like you're going to take a backup, then there's a 'restore' option buried down in there. It wasn't exactly obvious on the first go, but we did get all his system settings migrated gracefully once we figured out which restore option to use. :)
  
  --
  My 229 is all the Sig I need http://thegunwiki.com/
8. Re:Backup early, Backup often by somersault · 2008-07-02 10:58 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  PS3s have USB ports and the built in OS lets you back up your saved data easily to them. You're just spreading unecessary FUD without knowing what you are talking about.. I don't want to be overly critical because I end up doing similar things from time to time, but you just end up looking silly if you make baseless accusations like that.
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
9. Re:Backup early, Backup often by DigiShaman · 2008-07-02 11:07 · Score: 1
  
  PS3s have USB ports and the built in OS lets you back up your saved data easily to them.
  Which is a good thing.
  The user doesn't need to worry about the OS, console settings, or other such stuff. All that is important is having the ability to backup *user* data. Everything else can be a wipe/reload on the console as far as I'm concerned. It wouldn't bother me in the least.
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
10. Re:Backup early, Backup often by sexconker · 2008-07-02 11:26 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  A bunch of your saves/downloaded content will be tied to your console in various ways.
  Sometimes your save file is locked down so you can't even move it off of the system.
  All thee platforms have this problem to various degrees.
  Welcome to the next generation.
11. Re:Backup early, Backup often by somersault · 2008-07-02 11:41 · Score: 1
  
  Well I haven't had that problem with the games I own so far. I transferred my guitar hero save over to a friend's console, and also transferred all of my saved data when reformatting the HDD. I certainly wouldn't place all the blame on Sony if a game developer has asked that save data be non-transferable for some weird reason..
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
12. Re:Backup early, Backup often by machxor · 2008-07-02 11:49 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah the restore option under the backup menu is the one I'm using. It formats the drive, reboots and begins to restore from my external hard drive which fails at ~20%. I just checked the target drive and the PS3 did remove all partitions when it formatted it so my only thought is that my larger drive probably has an issue (there is a reason it's no longer in the laptop it came from heh). I'm sure if I wasn't cheap and used a new drive it would work fine.
13. Re:Backup early, Backup often by bonehead · 2008-07-02 12:09 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  If you're having trouble with a stubborn partition that nothing seems to be able to remove for you, install it in a computer, boot up a Linux live cd, and try this from the command prompt:
  dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hdX bs=1M count=5
  hdX in the above refers to the hard drive. You may have to watch the boot messages to find out which value to use depending on how you connected it. It could also end up being sdX instead.
  That command will write 16 megs of zeros directly to the beginning of the hard drive, which will nuke the boot sector and partition table. After that, any partitioning tool will see it as a brand new, unpartitioned drive, and shouldn't give you any more grief.
14. Re:Backup early, Backup often by donaldm · 2008-07-02 21:57 · Score: 1
  
  Yikes. With consoles becoming more complex and more like computers with each generation, it looks like issues like this will become all too common. How long before someone brings a PS3 backup utility to market?
  Why? All you do is plug in your usb disk or Flash card (if you have the model that supports this) and backup (selected from the XMB). Recovery is no issue as well (also selected from the XMB).
  
  Like anything with storage you should back it up regularly.
  
  --
  There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
15. Re:Backup early, Backup often by somersault · 2008-07-02 23:26 · Score: 1
  
  I was only talking about backing up the saves, all of which have been fine for me so far, and basically I don't even need the saves either.
  Even my saved game data isn't that important to me at the moment: I can complete all the guitar hero songs apart from the battle against the devil and Through the Fire and Flames on Expert, and my Battlefield Bad Company profile data is just held on the EA/DICE servers. I was thinking about restarting MGS from the start anyway now that my skills and confidence have improved somewhat, and as for my other games, I've either completed them, or it wouldn't take much time to get to the same place (apart from maybe GTA, I've spent a lot of time doing other stuff than just the main missions).
  As for downloaded content, I don't see it disappearing anytime soon. Maybe in a couple of years yeah, but by then I'll have Guitar Hero IV, etc etc.
  Downloading and reinstalling system updates would take a long time, sure. It's maybe better to start off from a fresh system if you don't play some games anymore anyway, to avoid defragmentation if you've installed and deleted a lot of games..
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
16. Re:Backup early, Backup often by somersault · 2008-07-03 00:26 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah I know, I was just pointing out that that's the OS, not the firmware. I take 'firmware' to mean the actual code that is held on the mobo somewhere and nothing to do with what is on the HD. I'd say this is the equivalent of messing up your Windows installation and not having a CD to restore/repair from.
  I'm aware that the thing is essentially bricked unless you take it apart, but for most slashdotters that's quite an easy fix and certainly doesn't require you to send the machine away or buy a new one like some people here are on about.
  Yep, a reset option should definitely be available. There is a hard reset option on the PS3 by holding down the power button for 10 seconds, but apparently that doesn't do anything in this case.. lame.
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
17. Re:Backup early, Backup often by mkraft · 2008-07-03 01:18 · Score: 1
  
  Turns out backing up doesn't help since whatever causes the problem is saved in the backup data. Someone had the problem, formatted and got things working only to have the problem again when he restored the back up data.
  See the persons's post in the Playstation blog comments (#261)
18. Re:Backup early, Backup often by mkraft · 2008-07-03 01:22 · Score: 1
  
  Oops, not sure what happened to the link, but here's here's the correct one.
19. Re:Backup early, Backup often by NotNormal23224 · 2008-07-03 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  But Sony does support backing this stuff up and restoring it to the console so the point is moot. (it's a built in option on the XMB check it out if you have a PS3 and aren't just blowing an opinion out of an orifice)
20. Re:Backup early, Backup often by bonehead · 2008-07-03 03:49 · Score: 1
  
  You're right, it will. I generally do 16 meg for no other reason than habit. When I typed the command above, I originally had 16 there, then lowered it to 5 since 16 is overkill (but, so is 5 for that matter....). Apparently I neglected to edit the corresponding number in the paragraph below. In truth, 1 meg would do the job for you.
  Basically, rather than having to memorize exactly how many bytes the boot sector and partition table take up, just blast a few megs of zeros onto the beginning of the drive and you'll be golden.
  In any case, that command will achieve the desired result, even if I did get sloppy and careless in my explanation of what it does.
21. Re:Backup early, Backup often by halcyon1234 · 2008-07-03 05:28 · Score: 1
  
  By this point, "backing up" saved games should be a non-issue. There should be a partition on the PS3 hdd that ALL saved games get saved to. And those files should be saved twice, in case one fails. And there should be the option (on by default) to save the saved games to a online "userspace". And all of this should be automatic
  I should also have the option of manually backing up the game data to anywhere at anytime of my choosing. To a network share. To a USB key. To a myps3backups.sony.com site. Anywhere.
  I mean, it's 2008, and this is a game console. It shouldn't require an A+ certification and knowledge of an incremental backup scheme just to keep my Guitar Hero scores safe.
  
  --
  UTF-8: There and Back Again
22. Re:Backup early, Backup often by sexconker · 2008-07-03 09:15 · Score: 1
  
  I know they do - but certain saves are locked and can't be transferred even via the backup method.
  I don't own a PS3 (yet), so I can't give you the details. I do know that there are issues, though.
  I believe the issue was that it's tied to that particular console. You can back it up and then restore it if you upgrade the hard drive or wipe the drive because of a firmware issue (2.4 apparently has issues...), but you can't back it up and restore it if you move to a different console. If you back up and then get your PS3 repaired or replaced, you can be shit out of luck in some cases.
23. Re:Backup early, Backup often by Elrond,+Duke+of+URL · 2008-07-03 16:53 · Score: 1
  
  dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hdX bs=1M count=5
  Just a small correction... that command only writes 5MB, not 16. Also, if all you want to do is zap the boot sector and partition table, 16MB is definitely overkill. The MBR (which contains the partition table) occupies only the first 512 bytes, so it is sufficient to use "bs=512 count=1" to start fresh.
  
  --
  Elrond, Duke of URL
  "This is the most fun I've had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"-Sam&Max
24. Re:Backup early, Backup often by somersault · 2008-07-03 21:49 · Score: 1
  
  Sounds like something they should implement when they finally get round to releasing 'Home'. To be honest I'm happy that consoles even have games that can patch themselves, and downloadable content. That was one of the major failings before. I like your ideas as well though, but such a level of service would probably require a subscription (unless someone came up with a crack to just backup everything automatically to GMail or Hotmail, that would be pretty cool)
  I don't really get why any game maker would try to restrict the copying of saved games. Even if it does mean that someone can just propagate a 'fully unlocked' save, so what? If gamers have bought the game and want to skip most of the content, that's their own fault..
  
  --
  which is totally what she said
25. Re:Backup early, Backup often by bonehead · 2008-07-04 07:08 · Score: 1
  
  Yep, it is sufficient. But, as I explained in my post above, in which I acknowledged my error a full 13 hours before you felt it necessary to point it out again, it's much easier to just remember "a few megs" instead of "exactly 512 bytes" for something that you'll probably only need to do every couple of years.
26. Re:Backup early, Backup often by Elrond,+Duke+of+URL · 2008-07-04 15:34 · Score: 1
  
  My intent was not to call you out as an uninformed liar. I was merely stating how much really needs to be cleared if all you want is the partition table. Sometimes, such as when your filesystem is good but you've managed to bork your partition table (guilty), you can save yourself a lot of pain by fixing it without nuking the filesystems too.
  
  --
  Elrond, Duke of URL
  "This is the most fun I've had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"-Sam&Max
27. Re:Backup early, Backup often by NotNormal23224 · 2008-07-04 20:06 · Score: 1
  
  Looks like "Sir Toby (660923)" shot you down on that one too, using the Backup function restores EVERYTHING to the console as long as it's the same console. he's done it a number of time even with copy restricted items, check his post out, the only time it didn't work was when he got a new console.
28. Re:Backup early, Backup often by geminidomino · 2008-07-07 02:18 · Score: 1
  
  Looks like "Sir Toby (660923)" shot you down on that one too, using the Backup function restores EVERYTHING to the console as long as it's the same console. he's done it a number of time even with copy restricted items, check his post out, the only time it didn't work was when he got a new console.
  So then it's only useful when sony does something like this and bodges an update... but there's no point backing up data in case your console dies.
  Yep, that's a great backup scheme.
29. Re:Backup early, Backup often by sexconker · 2008-07-07 03:18 · Score: 1
  
  Please READ my post
  "I know they do - but certain saves are locked and can't be transferred even via the backup method.
  I don't own a PS3 (yet), so I can't give you the details. I do know that there are issues, though.
  I believe the issue was that it's tied to that particular console. You can back it up and then restore it if you upgrade the hard drive or wipe the drive because of a firmware issue (2.4 apparently has issues...), but you can't back it up and restore it if you move to a different console. If you back up and then get your PS3 repaired or replaced, you can be shit out of luck in some cases."
  I said that all consoles this generation have some sort of "haha, you're data is gone" problem that can only (officially) be remedied by contacting Sony/Nintendo/MS and hoping for the best.
  Whether it's the issue on the PS3 that I mentioned (I don't know of any specific issues with PS2 saves on the PS3, aside from random reports shortly after launch), having your Wii repaired (mine has been sent in 3 times!) and having your Miis no longer registered to "you" (The Wii hardware ID) as their owner, not being allowed to backup (at all) any game with online play, and having a completely ridonkulous process for backing up any games for which you've bought DLC (I don't know of any issues with GC saves on the Wii), or the 360, where you can be locked out of playing something on your console because you purchased it with your account at a friend's house, or purchased it with one of your other accounts, etc. (They just released a consolidator tool for the 360, but you can only run it once per year and if something is no longer available for download you can't re-download the license for it).
  So shut the fuck up because I know what I'm talking about. I'm not going to dig up specific examples because you can go to any gaming forum and hear the wailing cries from all camps.
30. Re:Backup early, Backup often by Chris+Mattern · 2008-07-07 04:13 · Score: 1
  
  There are those who say the consoles will replace the PCs. Then there are those who say that the consoles will do that by turning themselves into PCs.
Re:Thank GOD I didn't use my PS3 today! by compro01 · 2008-07-02 10:13 · Score: 2, Insightful

PS3 sucks.
Xbox 360 sucks.
Wii sucks slightly less, but sucks in several other ways, so it still sucks.

--
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Re:DRM, Rootkits and PS3. by Darkness404 · 2008-07-02 10:13 · Score: 1

Really though, all the current-gen consoles suffer from the flaw of upgradable firmwares. Now, they are a great idea in principle but all of them upgrade the thing for trivial features (really, who needs to upgrade the entire firmware to upgrade an internet application?!?!). To put this in perspective, as a GP2x owner (they are a handheld game system running Linux and are made in Korea) you can upgrade your firmware to do whatever, however I and most other users don't because of the possibility of bricking it. Even with a stable open-source OS it is possible to brick it with firmware upgrades, who knows what all these firmware upgrades are doing to a (no doubt) quickly written, proprietary OS.

--
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
Here's a bit of advice by dannycim · 2008-07-02 10:14 · Score: 3, Interesting

Next update, do a backup, then accept the update. Worse comes to worst, wipe the disk and restore the backup. The snag is that you _can't_ format the drive inside of the PS3 as the XMB menu doesn't come up.
Still, I'm pretty surprised that Sony doesn't have better QA on something like firmware updates. One mis-step and they can end up with millions of bricks in the wild. They should have a "restore previous firmware version" at a very low-level in the firmware. Something triggered by holding a button or two during power-up.
1. Re:Here's a bit of advice by NuclearError · 2008-07-02 10:22 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Not all save games can be backed up - Rock Band, for instance. The PS3 just won't let you copy it. It used to be with consoles that if your hardware crapped out, you'd have your save games on a memory card or something. Now, you have to remember to back games up to a flash, if you're allowed to, so the fate of your data is not tied to the hardware. Just like PC games, huh?
  
  --
  Nuclear engineers build weapons. Civil engineers build targets.
2. Re:Here's a bit of advice by Barny · 2008-07-02 22:32 · Score: 1
  
  Check a prev post, they revealed that the PS3 does indeed keep the latest and the last 2 bios updates, it first tries to post one, then if it fails goes back through them till it starts.
  At a guess this is something they fubared further up the tree than just bricking the post.
  
  --
  ...
  /me sighs
3. Re:Here's a bit of advice by mkraft · 2008-07-03 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  In this case it turns out backing up doesn't help since whatever causes the problem is saved in the backup data.
  Someone had the problem, formatted and got things working only to have the problem again when he restored his backup data.
  See comment #261 at the playstation blog entry on 2.40's delay.
4. Re:Here's a bit of advice by Skaarg · 2008-07-03 05:52 · Score: 1
  
  If they did that I guarantee it'd get exploited to no end by the homebrew scene.
No problems here by beoba · 2008-07-02 10:16 · Score: 3, Informative

Did the 2.4 update on my 80GB (MGS bundle) this morning. No problems whatsoever.

--
I am not a number - I am a free man!
1. Re:No problems here by MozeeToby · 2008-07-02 10:53 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Same here, updated with no problems and all the new features work as advertised. I also have Linux on a separate partition, so that at least is not causing the problem.
2. Re:No problems here by CronoCloud · 2008-07-02 17:53 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Ditto, 80GB MSG bundle with a Linux install, 2.40 is working fine.
3. Re:No problems here by donaldm · 2008-07-02 22:16 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  I did the 2.4 update on my PAL 60GB PS2 backwards compatible model yesterday and did not have any issues. My son played GTA4 for a few hours today and again no problems. We even tested in-game XMB and it works fine.
  
  I found that in-game XMB does not work with PS1 and PS2 games. You can only stop the game and if you want you can change the virtual memory card or even select a different controller then get back to the game, however you have been able to do this for PS1 and PS2 games for quite some time now. Personally I don't have any problems with this.
  
  It would be interesting to look at the stats on what PS3 models actually had issues and in what numbers.
  
  --
  There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
PS3 Firmware Update by Vskye · 2008-07-02 10:16 · Score: 2, Informative

I updated our PS3 last night and it works just fine. The kids like the new features also.

--
Life was hell, then I discovered Linux...
ScuttleMonkey channels Zonk by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-02 10:26 · Score: 1

Wow, just wow.
It's like a flashback to 2007 and the daily Zonk Sony/PS3/BluRay tirades.
Re:DRM, Rootkits and PS3. by Aphoxema · 2008-07-02 10:26 · Score: 2, Insightful

For a number of reasons, these operating systems are treated like firmware because they're embedded into a single image onto an IC. It's not (safely) possible to reflash portions of the image on the fly so the whole thing is written over for each change.
Some UMPC's and handheld media players and stuff, usually working off GNU/Linux, do this too, then save configuration and stuff on hard drives or other storage.
This is generally cheaper, faster, and less vulnerable to user error.

--
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
Breaking: The update's been pulled by Admodieus · 2008-07-02 10:27 · Score: 5, Informative

http://kotaku.com/5021575/sony-pulls-ps3-240-firmware-after-reported-problems Looks like it needs a bit more QA.

--
"It's a reverse vampire...they....they crave the sun!"
1. Re:Breaking: The update's been pulled by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-02 13:56 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  Breaking: You are not on digg anymore.
2. Re:Breaking: The update's been pulled by donaldm · 2008-07-02 22:36 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  http://kotaku.com/5021575/sony-pulls-ps3-240-firmware-after-reported-problems Looks like it needs a bit more QA.
  In the comments I could not find anyone who had a problem. There are plenty who are upset and nervous about upgrading or just waiting on a so called "fix", but I could not find anyone who's PS3 had been bricked.
  
  --
  There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
Re:First by neokushan · 2008-07-02 10:27 · Score: 1, Offtopic

You still got modded offtopic.
ULTRA FAIL1!!!!!!!!!!
Oh wait, so did I. Fuck.

--
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
The 2.40 firmware has been pulled by mkraft · 2008-07-02 10:28 · Score: 5, Informative

The firmware has been officially pulled by Sony for review. Even though it affected a minority of users, it must be pretty bad for Sony to do that.
See the KB link.
1. Re:The 2.40 firmware has been pulled by DigiShaman · 2008-07-02 11:18 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  it must be pretty bad for Sony to do that.
  No, not really. In fact, they should be praised for making this wise decision.
  Hey, no one or orginization is perfect. Shit happens due to human error. But at least their owning up to the problem. But if I were Sony, I would also send out a letter of apology to every PS3 user inbox. Also, I would ensure those effected would be taken care of at no cost to them and even have credit to download a game or two free for their troubles. That would be the proper PR move to make IMHO.
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
2. Re:The 2.40 firmware has been pulled by Aussenseiter · 2008-07-02 12:21 · Score: 1
  
  I believe he meant "pretty bad" as in the error itself, not Sony's decision to pull it.
3. Re:The 2.40 firmware has been pulled by Tragedy4u · 2008-07-02 23:29 · Score: 1
  
  "But if I were Sony, I would also send out a letter of apology to every PS3 user inbox."
  That would be a kind sentiment, and when those dead PS3's come back from the shop in 2 months I'm sure those users will be glad to read that apology email.
4. Re:The 2.40 firmware has been pulled by mkraft · 2008-07-03 01:26 · Score: 1
  
  I believe he meant "pretty bad" as in the error itself, not Sony's decision to pull it.
  Yes that's what I meant.
Re:Thank GOD I didn't use my PS3 today! by Aphoxema · 2008-07-02 10:28 · Score: 1

As if anything can be so bi-polar.
PS3 sucks and is cool.
Xbox 2 sucks and is cool.
Wii sucks less but sucks in other ways, and it's cool less but it's cool in other ways so it sucks and it's cool.
There, all fixed. Now you're ready for show business.

--
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
Any reason to update? by strider2k · 2008-07-02 10:33 · Score: 1

Is there any reason to update if you use your system strictly as a game system? I'm only using it to enjoy Metal Gear Solid 4 and a few other key games, but I can imagine people like me in the majority.

--
Every geek has some sort of website, programming or computer project. Here's mine: www.youtasteit.com . What's yours?
1. Re:Any reason to update? by Squozen · 2008-07-02 10:41 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  You need to update to use the PSN network (for multiplayer gaming and the PSN Store), so it's almost mandatory unless you're not networked.
2. Re:Any reason to update? by Admodieus · 2008-07-02 11:30 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Also, this update is particularly noteworthy because it introduces in-game cross media bar (a feature many PS3 users have wanted for a while), as well as trophies (think achievements, but with a lamer name).
  
  --
  "It's a reverse vampire...they....they crave the sun!"
Rampant..? by Squozen · 2008-07-02 10:39 · Score: 4, Interesting

'Rampant denial'? I updated last night and had no problems. I don't know that any of my PS3-owning friends had problems. I guess that makes us 'fanboys'.
Point #1 - Any firmware update has the potential to go wrong, especially when it's as large as the PS3 firmware is (130Mb) and can be downloaded over flaky links and installed from potentially faulty hard drives.
Point #2 - Wiping the drive shouldn't be an issue if people are running backups like they should be. Sony *do* provide a backup utility for this. Don't read this as an excuse for Sony - if the firmware is flawed, they should have done more testing, but EVERYBODY should be backing up their data if they care about it!
1. Re:Rampant..? by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-02 13:16 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  'Rampant denial'? I updated last night and had no problems. I don't know that any of my PS3-owning friends had problems. I guess that makes us 'fanboys'.
  Are you intentionally being so dense?
  Saying you haven't had a problem does not make you a fanboy. Calling someone a liar because they say they have had a problem - and doing so vehemently - quite possibly does. Plenty of people do this in the linked forum thread.
2. Re:Rampant..? by fawzma · 2008-07-02 13:17 · Score: 1
  
  This is a game system, not a computer. Users shouldn't have to go though this in the first place.
3. Re:Rampant..? by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-02 13:29 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  'Rampant denial'? I updated last night and had no problems. I don't know that any of my PS3-owning friends had problems. I guess that makes us 'fanboys'.
  Nope that makes you and your friends part of the lucky majority that had no problems.
  HOWEVER
  
  Point #1 - Any firmware update has the potential to go wrong, especially when it's as large as the PS3 firmware is (130Mb) and can be downloaded over flaky links and installed from potentially faulty hard drives.
  Point #2 - Wiping the drive shouldn't be an issue if people are running backups like they should be. Sony *do* provide a backup utility for this. Don't read this as an excuse for Sony - if the firmware is flawed, they should have done more testing, but EVERYBODY should be backing up their data if they care about it!
  This is fanboyism at its finest, you blame the victims of sony for not backing up and then try to pass it off as a minor flaw that can happen to anyone so really we shouldn't be ragging on sony for this. This is a game console not a computer system, many users would barely be able to turn there machine on let alone understand the consequences of a firmware upgrade or why it is important to do a backup before it.
  If sony brick only .1% of consoles each firmware upgrade that is going to be in excess of 10,000 bricks an update, this is not even remotely acceptable especailly as these updates are expected a few times a year.
4. Re:Rampant..? by SuiteSisterMary · 2008-07-02 14:01 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Any firmware update has the potential to go wrong, especially when it's as large as the PS3 firmware is (130Mb) and can be downloaded over flaky links and installed from potentially faulty hard drives.
  Sorry, that doesn't fly. Checksums have been a known quantity for decades.
  
  Wiping the drive shouldn't be an issue if people are running backups like they should be. Sony *do* provide a backup utility for this. Don't read this as an excuse for Sony - if the firmware is flawed, they should have done more testing, but EVERYBODY should be backing up their data if they care about it!
  Again, doesn't fly. Rollbacks and non-destructive upgrades have been a known quantity for decades. And you have zero excuse when your update is less than one percent of your smallest target harddrive.
  
  --
  Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
5. Re:Rampant..? by Tweaker_Phreaker · 2008-07-02 14:53 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Point #1 - Ever heard of hash trees? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_tree
  A .torrent file is mostly filled with such hash trees which allow your BT client to check the integrity of the files. Flaky links and faulty hard drives shouldn't be excuses after nearly 3 decades of hash trees' existence and a decade of them being used in mainstream p2p applications.
  
  Point #2 - The firmware should automatically make a backup of settings when doing an upgrade and user space data should NEVER be wiped.
6. Re:Rampant..? by Furry+Ice · 2008-07-02 15:14 · Score: 1
  
  Talk about overkill...the PS3 doesn't use a P2P system, does it? It probably just downloads from a single TCP connection, so a simple hash or even a signed hash is all that would be needed. They probably already use one anyway, so the flaky download/disk drive argument is likely a red herring.
7. Re:Rampant..? by onecheapgeek · 2008-07-02 15:20 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  No, the fact that there are 70+ pages of fanbois claiming the problem doesn't exist and it's all 360 kids trying to slander Sony makes it "rampant denial."
8. Re:Rampant..? by loraksus · 2008-07-02 15:50 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Point #1 - Any firmware update has the potential to go wrong, especially when it's as large as the PS3 firmware is (130Mb) and can be downloaded over flaky links and installed from potentially faulty hard drives.
  Point #2 - Wiping the drive shouldn't be an issue if people are running backups like they should be. Sony *do* provide a backup utility for this. Don't read this as an excuse for Sony - if the firmware is flawed, they should have done more testing, but EVERYBODY should be backing up their data if they care about it!
  1. If you're saying Sony doesn't run an integrity check of the firmware before the upgrade process... That's just plain fucking retarded.
  2. Given the fact that people aren't given a choice whether to upgrade or not - and really have no clue as to when the next firmware will be pushed, I'm guessing it will be difficult to plan backups before firmware upgrades. Unless, of course, you're suggesting a daily backup for a console, in which case... That's just plain fucking retarded.
  
  --
  1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
9. Re:Rampant..? by Tweaker_Phreaker · 2008-07-02 16:10 · Score: 1
  
  The purpose of the hash tree is to find what portion is actually corrupted so that you don't have to redownload the whole file. There's little reason not to have it incorporated into the process somehow for such large files.
  
  The beauty of hash trees is that you don't need the whole tree to verify the file, you only need the root hash and then if it turns out they don't match (meaning the file or the hash itself somehow got corrupted) then you can request the rest of the tree.
  
  Torrent files were just one example but Gnutella(2) clients can request a Tiger Tree at will from their networks.
10. Re:Rampant..? by CronoCloud · 2008-07-02 17:41 · Score: 1
  
  Strangely enough, at least one game, MGS4, has a built in bittorrent client for updates.
11. Re:Rampant..? by Squozen · 2008-07-02 19:05 · Score: 1
  
  Regarding point #1, I would expect they probably are, but hey, this is Sony, and Sony are bad and evil, right? :)
  On point #2, you don't HAVE to update when Sony tells you to - you can back up before installing the new firmware, or just ignore the firmware update altogether (although by doing so you'll lose PSN access). So it's not impossible to plan at all.
  I'm not suggesting a daily backup - only backup when you don't want to lose whatever's been stored since the last time, same as a computer. In my case, I backup every 7-10 days. The argument 'you shouldn't have to do this with a console' doesn't hold any weight when both the 360 and PS3 have built-in hard drives and we KNOW that hard drives can fail at any point.
12. Re:Rampant..? by Squozen · 2008-07-02 19:08 · Score: 1
  
  Fair enough, I should have read the thread to confirm. The fact that I didn't should be read as a self-preservation instinct rather than laziness - I loathe console forums.
13. Re:Rampant..? by Squozen · 2008-07-02 19:22 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, that doesn't fly. Checksums have been a known quantity for decades.
  And yet firmware updates routinely brick a small percentage of every device - be they consoles, video cards, routers, you name it. There are update precautions in every hardware manual I've ever seen.
  All I was trying to say was 'it's dangerous, and before you do something dangerous you should back up your data'. Obviously I didn't make that clear enough, it was buried in my second point.
14. Re:Rampant..? by SuiteSisterMary · 2008-07-04 01:46 · Score: 1
  
  Granted; 'back up your data because shit happens' is a perfectly fine sentiment. 'Back up your data because the company can't be bothered to do simple things like checksumming and non-destructive updates' isn't.
  
  --
  Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
15. Re:Rampant..? by Chris+Mattern · 2008-07-07 04:27 · Score: 1
  
  Point #1 - Ever heard of hash trees?
  Yeah, but if you grow 'em in the US, the DEA will come get ya.
Re:DRM, Rootkits and PS3. by Spades_ · 2008-07-02 10:56 · Score: 2, Insightful

The PS3 for the most part is a fine machine. To say they don't give a rat's ass about the consumers is a huge generalization. The whole 2.4 patch was due to feedback from PS3 users. Most large companies have problems with keeping high standards throughout. While Sony is not the same as they used to be, they still have good products out there.
PS: I updated with no problems.
Anonymous FUD? The hell you say!?! by LoudMusic · 2008-07-02 10:58 · Score: 2, Funny

Who would have thought an anonymous submission would be not entirely accurate.

--
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
Re:DRM, Rootkits and PS3. by bluefoxlucid · 2008-07-02 11:09 · Score: 1

Yeah, because Caucasians are too damn tall.

--
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Re:Thank GOD I didn't use my PS3 today! by Goobermunch · 2008-07-02 11:17 · Score: 1

I have all of the above.
The PS3 makes a fine blu-ray player. But most of my gaming takes place on the Xbox 360 or Wii.
None of them suck. They just feed different interests.
--AC
Re:DRM, Rootkits and PS3. by UncleTogie · 2008-07-02 11:19 · Score: 1

For a number of reasons, these operating systems are treated like firmware because they're embedded into a single image onto an IC. It's not (safely) possible to reflash portions of the image on the fly so the whole thing is written over for each change.
So who on the Sony team failed to foresee a failed flash? Motherboards have been out f'r a while with the "Dual BIOS" feature; other than cost, why couldn't this have been implemented in the PS3?

--
Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
One reason by anti-human+1 · 2008-07-02 11:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

Piracy. You can boot linux on the PS3, but the kernel will not get full hardware access. Allowing users to fall back to old firmware/OSes would probably lead to some people running legit to play online, then having a fallback disk image or whatever to play cracked ROMs. Not that linux relates to that ability; I really don't know.
1. Re:One reason by FLEB · 2008-07-02 13:05 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Given the range of consumer devices you can perma-brick with a botched firmware update, I'd say it's more likely that it's just more expensive to make a fallback bootloader.
  One place I've been pleasantly surprised (a bit of a veer, but...)-- I got myself a Sandisk MP3 player (Sansa e300 series) recently, and I was surprised at how brick-resistant the thing is. If you botch the firmware, you can oftentimes still see it as a flash drive, and just drop in a different firmware file. If that fails, you can fall back to a "Recovery Mode" partition and put the new file there, and even if you screw THAT up, there's still a way (using some program that talks more directly to the USB device, I believe) to unbrick THAT.
  Now THAT's how software-upgradable consumer electronics should be made.
  
  --
  Information wants to be free.
  Entertainment wants to be paid.
  You just want to be cheap.
2. Re:One reason by onecheapgeek · 2008-07-02 14:40 · Score: 1
  
  My Gigabyte motherboard has two BIOS flash chips. If an upgrade borks, I change a jumper and use the old. Included in there is the functionality to overwrite the borked flash with a working one. How hard would this be for some of these consoles?
3. Re:One reason by afidel · 2008-07-02 14:58 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Yeah, HP does this with their BIOS's as well. There's is a tad more convenient in that the normal upgrade procedure is to flash one bank, attempt to boot from it, and if successful upgrade the other automatically. A failed boot normally results in a reset and failback to the other firmware. You can also tell it not to upgrade the second firmware automatically so that you could do say an OS check before committing both flash areas to the new version. It's very nice when upgrading a server halfway around the world. Of course even if you bork the firmware you can still boot to a floppy with a working firmware image while either holding a key (F12 I think) or on newer servers simply letting them boot and it will flash the firmware for you. I haven't tried the emergency recovery using the Integrated Lights Out processors virtual floppy, but I bet it would work =)
  
  --
  There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
4. Re:One reason by Zebedeu · 2008-07-02 21:28 · Score: 1
  
  I heard that old motherboards (ASUS?) had a ROM chip with the BIOS that came originally with the motherboard.
  If you flashed your BIOS and anything went wrong, the system would boot automatically from the ROM, and you'd be able to boot your computer to try the flash again. Since it was read-only memory, you'd know you always have a suitable fallback in case of disaster.
5. Re:One reason by Lumpy · 2008-07-03 00:34 · Score: 1
  
  Actualy no. several low cost motherboard companies have "dual bios" chips and have a failover to the old firmware when the new one fails on boot.
  the ps3 certianly could have had this as well as all other items other there that do the update dance.
  Problem is an additional $1.95 per machine = lower bonus for the CEO and therefore is usually left out.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
6. Re:One reason by IntergalacticWalrus · 2008-07-03 04:34 · Score: 1
  
  Same thing with the iPod. There's an hardcoded emergency disk mode in ROM, so no matter how fucked up the upgradable firmware is, you can still fix it. Which is very fun for all those iPod hackers out there (like the Rockbox project), because that means you can mess up the thing to your heart's content, without the fear that you might brick it.
  I still can't believe how many consumer electronics don't follow that simple rule.
Re:I prefer by sexconker · 2008-07-02 11:23 · Score: 1

What about this Sorny?
Or that Panaphonics over there?
Re:Pay because they screwed up? by JorDan+Clock · 2008-07-02 11:38 · Score: 2, Informative

Void your warranty? Not on your life. You can wipe the hard drive (or just install a completely different one) all you want. The PS3 has a lot of modification options that don't void your warranty. You can run Linux, even!
Re:DRM, Rootkits and PS3. by Aphoxema · 2008-07-02 12:10 · Score: 1

It could have been anything between the team responsible for the software and the server that distributes it.
Dual bios surely could have been implemented and for all the things I can appreciate about the PS3 regardless of my limited exposure to it, in retrospect it's kind of stupid of Sony to not take this step to safeguard consumers.

--
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
Compatibility by rourin_bushi · 2008-07-02 22:44 · Score: 1

What I'm waiting for is the patch that causes some games to not run (or exhibit glitches). Or has this already happened on a console I just don't own?
1. Re:Compatibility by wilgibson · 2008-07-03 04:11 · Score: 1
  
  A change in the PS2 code libraries cause Star Ocean 3 to not be able to work at all with SCPH-10000 models. Enix, having used the updated libraries, blamed Sony and said they were unaware that they were not backwards compatible.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Ocean_3#Reception_and_criticism
Confused.. by Anonymous Coward · 2008-07-03 00:12 · Score: 1, Informative

Slashdot used to be a credible tech news site, what happened?
You ignored Opera 9.50 release, and jumped all over the next weeks Firefox record breaking news..
You ignored 2.40 release itself, but clambered all over it whena few people had problems with it..
Your credability just went down the pan, you lot really are gutter journilists..
I know who can help! by elrous0 · 2008-07-03 01:38 · Score: 2, Funny

He's called the mighty Wizard of Woz. We can get to him by following the bricked console road. Along the way we'll pick up a cowardly Democrat, a dumb Republican, and a RIAA lawyer with no heart.

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Re:Thank GOD I didn't use my PS3 today! by NotNormal23224 · 2008-07-03 03:25 · Score: 1

Amen, from another triple console owner (just counting this gen).
Confirmed by CougMerrik · 2008-07-03 03:38 · Score: 1

I personally had this problem after an update about a year ago. If it does happen to you, and you don't want to wipe your HD to fix it, just give the PS3 support line a call. They'll make you do all the really stupid things you already did within the first 5 minutes of noticing the problem (is your PS3 plugged in?), but in the end they took the old PS3 back and gave me a new one at no cost. The whole process took maybe two weeks.