Slashdot Mirror


US Air Force To Suffer From PS3 Update

tlhIngan writes "The US Air Force, having purchased PS3s for supercomputing research, is now the latest victim of Sony's removal of the Install Other OS feature. It turns out that while their PS3s don't need the firmware update, it will be impossible to replace PS3s that fail. PS3s with the Other OS feature are no longer produced since the Slim was introduced, so replacements will have to come from the existing stock of used PS3s. However, as most gamers have probably updated their PS3s, that used stock is no longer suitable for the USAF's research. In addition, smaller educational clusters using PS3s will share the same fate — unable to replace machines that die in their clusters." In related news, Sony has been hit with two more lawsuits over this issue.

349 comments

  1. Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bomb them to hell if they don't bring back this feature, vital for national security.

    1. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Benjamin Franklin said it best. "Anyone who would trade money for something produced by Sony deserves neither, and will lose both."

    2. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

      Bomb them to hell if they don't bring back this feature, vital for national security.

      This was their plan all along.

      It's payback for Hiroshima.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by JamesP · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How about this:

      Ban them forever from selling to the US Gov.

      You know, the whole "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me"

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    4. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but you had a president who changed that and you're not "with us" if you don't know the new version.

      -"Fool me once, shame on ... shame on you. Fool me ... you can't get fooled again."

    5. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this going to be like how "normalcy" is apparently a word now?

    6. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Funny

      You know, the whole "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me"

      No, no. You have it all wrong. Here's the actual quote:

      There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- [pauses] - shame on you. Fool me -- You can't get fooled again. - George Bush, September 17, 2002.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    7. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by strayant · · Score: 1, Interesting

      As an engineer, I tend to find solid definitions to be quite agreeable. As a scientist, I know that everything could be all wrong and we should do more research... Actually, while words are often misused/misspoken (especially with Bush), it is also important to understand that language is not static. Language is as organic as our culture (for better or worse). New words are coined all the time. Some words are made and forgotten. Other words are only used in certain industries. Marketing terms are made up on an almost daily basis, and the ones that stick seem to find themselves in our everyday language. So, as for "normalcy", this predated W's word juggle: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=normalcy http://www.cjr.org/resources/lc/normalcy.php http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creeping_normalcy I too find many words very annoying... like, "a whole nother". What is this word "nother"? Logic takes over and says quite clearly what a person means. While I don't like it, it's akin to riding over linguistic pot-holes. I'm not going to fix every little thing. Given time it won't need fixing, because it will be "proper". ...and this ends another rant of "things that bother the hell out of me".

    8. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't think the government buys anything from Sony, other than a few consumer electronics for conference room. Most of the time the government purchases from dedicated contractors like Lockheed, Northrop, Raytheon, et cetera.

      BTW:

      A number of those contractors have discovered that dicking with the U.S. Military (example: employees mischarging time) leads to serious consequences. Like millions of dollars in fines. I hope the USAF makes an example of Sony and drags them through the court system, for their false advertising scheme.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    9. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Wasn't "Normalcy" what the "N" in "P.A.G.A.N." stood for in Dragnet (Akryod/Hanks, 1987)?

    10. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by The+Hatchet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To sell a product with a promise of certain features, and then to act as if it is your own and disable everything you don't want the real owner to have. Disabling the otherOS feature was totally unnecessary. It was just some kind of cruel bullshit, limiting your freedoms on a device that belongs to you. That is the modern way.

      Buy a kindle? Have YOUR PAID FOR books removed at amazons will.

      Buy a PS3 for clustering? Have your PAID FOR CLUSTER disabled, unrepairable, and suddenly worth its weight in crap as soon as the machines start to die off.

      Buy an apple product? well, might as well put your head in a plaster garbage bag and die, they own everything that touches the screen of that device, hell, likely they even own the device, just 'licence' it out to you in some peculiar way.

      If sony's terms of service said something about taking away features at their own will, it is not a valid part of the contract. Here in america, we have laws that prevent mega-corporations from making insanely complicated contracts and inserting clauses about how they own your soul and can harvest your body parts whenever they please. This modern pattern of bullshit is why I avoid buying anything that follows that pattern. Unfortunately every day there are fewer options. And soon enough they will all be gone.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    11. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by tekrat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Here in america, we have laws that prevent mega-corporations from making insanely complicated contracts and inserting clauses about how they own your soul and can harvest your body parts whenever they please. This modern pattern of bullshit is why I avoid buying anything that follows that pattern."
      --- === ---

      So,... you have no credit cards, don't own a house or a car either, as far as I can tell, because all these things have insanely complicated contracts that the banks can change willy-nilly if they please.

        I'd also have to say that you don't own a cell-phone either, as most phone contracts are bigger than the phone book. And I'll bet you don't have cable-TV either. Or Health Insurance.

      In fact, here in America, almost everything comes with an insanely complicated contract that grants all kinds of rights to the giant-mega-corp, and almost nothing to you. And you're paying them for that priviledge. Ain't capitalism grand?

      --
      If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    12. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 2, Funny

      Bomb them to hell if they don't bring back this feature, vital for national security.

      This was their plan all along.

      It's payback for Hiroshima.

      Someone better tell them that it was Cow and Chicken that's been responsible for Hiroshima all along.

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    13. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by EvilBudMan · · Score: 1

      Meet the new boss same as the old boss. Yeah, don't get fooled again.

    14. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      What does Apple have to do with this? In what way is the licensing for an Apple Computer different than a Windows PC? If your talking APPLIANCES, like Game machines or phone devices, such as iPhone, the Apps offered with iPhone don't 'come with the unit'. They weren't sold with it and certainly weren't guaranteed from Apple to be allowed on the device.

      In regards to Game consoles, Sony is on a limb here all by their lonesome, as Apple doesn't have a game console (although arguably the iPhone, but they haven't crippled some game that came with it), and there is no similar situation on the XBox either that I know of.

      Try to keep your rants in line with the topic at hand?

    15. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by eth1 · · Score: 1

      FInally! They've pissed off someone who can actually nuke them from orbit and be sure!

    16. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Gizzmonic · · Score: 0, Troll

      A number of those contractors have discovered that dicking with the U.S. Military (example: employees mischarging time) leads to serious consequences. Like millions of dollars in fines.

      Yeah, millions of dollars in fines vs. billions of dollars in profit really dissuades those naughty contractors. Like Halliburton's amazing electrocuting showers...they killed US soldiers through negligence, and what an awesome punishment they got! Oh wait, they weren't punished at all. The military/industrial complex is alive and well, folks.

      --
      (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
    17. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by safetyinnumbers · · Score: 1

      I'd also have to say that you don't own a cell-phone either, as most phone contracts are bigger than the phone book.

      Maybe he just bought a phone, bought a SIM and never signed anything.

    18. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by ajlitt · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's one boss...

      (puts on sunglasses)

      ...that won't fool us again.

      YEAAAAAAAAHHHHH!

    19. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Buy a PS3 for clustering? Have your PAID FOR CLUSTER disabled, unrepairable, and suddenly worth its weight in crap as soon as the machines start to die off"
      Well, if the machines you paid for die off, it doesn't matter much if Sony disabled the feature, or just stopped selling them altogether. The machines they have, if left unupdated, work 100%. This is only an issue when they buy another, which is like any new purchase; its as the maker sells it at that time. If you are relying on buying more of the EXACT SAME item to "repair" your cluster, then you should have bought more in the first place.

      If your "repair" for your car dying is to buy another car, are you going to expect the auto maker to sell a model with the exact same features forever?
      I know it stinks, but any item that has manufacturer "updates" stands the risk of losing features, if the maker deems it as unworthy of supporting those features.

    20. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by dissy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So,... you have no credit cards, don't own a house or a car either, as far as I can tell, because all these things have insanely complicated contracts that the banks can change willy-nilly if they please.

          I'd also have to say that you don't own a cell-phone either, as most phone contracts are bigger than the phone book. And I'll bet you don't have cable-TV either. Or Health Insurance.

      In fact, here in America, almost everything comes with an insanely complicated contract that grants all kinds of rights to the giant-mega-corp, and almost nothing to you. And you're paying them for that priviledge. Ain't capitalism grand?

      To be fair it isn't ALL that bad. I'm not the GP, but I live a similar life style (or try to)

      Credit cards: nope (Debit though, through a checking account used just for that purpose)
      Own a house: nope, though that one is a downside IMHO. I rent a house now.
      Own a car: Yes, I've owned all my cars. Never had a bank loan to do so however thankfully.
      Cell Phone: Only lately did I go with an at&t contract (I was prepaid prior to that, which has a 30 day contract, so any evil changes can not possibly last past 30 days) so I fail at this one.
      Cable TV: Actually at least in my city, those are month to month contracts too.
      Now I should admit I only have 'basic cable' enough to have cable modem data services, which is all I actually use. So there may very well be TV programming related changes being made that I would not like... But not watching TV that way, I guess we should just say I'm a bad example for this one personally.

      So really the only two I see as a downside I have are the expense of a place to live ($rent > $own), and my new smart phone being on a 2 year contract (Thankfully it is up in June!), I've managed to live quite easily and well, usually without even trying too hard, avoiding unfair contracts.

      Of course I won't claim to be the average person, so your argument still stands when qualified as 'most people in America'. My only point being, even in America, the "U$ofA", it's still not that hard to avoid if you care about that, and other than having gotten used to spending cash (or rather preparing ahead of time by bringing the needed cash with me, and thus setting a limit to my spending - again Personally i think this is a better way) nothing else needed adjustment

    21. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by NonSenseAgency · · Score: 3, Informative

      I spent many years first as Fedral Sales Manager and then Vice President of Sales dealing almost exclusively with the US Government and its affiliated agencies and contractors. Your statement "I don't think the government buys anything from Sony, other than a few consumer electronics for conference room. Most of the time the government purchases from dedicated contractors like Lockheed, Northrop, Raytheon, et cetera." is simply untrue. The US Government purchases a great deal from Sony, see http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/mkt-government/resource.latest.bbsccms-assets-mkt-gov-latest-gsacontracts.shtml and http://www.ivci.com/international_videoconferencing_news_gsa_contract_gs-35f-4259d.html and https://pro.sony.com/bbsccms/assets/files/mkt/gov/downloads/gsa_catalog.pdf. This does not even touch upon the COTS (Commercial Off the Shelf) purchases where the government agency simply buys what it needs from a local vendor right off of the shelf. There are already procedures in place for prohibiting purchases from vendors that do not meet the terms of their contracts with the US Government. In the case of GSA contracts, they are subject to losing the GSA contract and being prohibited from applying for a new one.

    22. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Here in America we have laws that protect mega-corporations enabling them to make insanely complicated contracts and inserting clauses about how they own your soul and can harvest your body parts whenever they please.

      There fixed that for ya...

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    23. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 1

      I live a similar lifestyle. I don't own a car (although I was previously in a position to buy one outright, but chose not to since I was moving countries). I don't own a house, but rent. I pay my phone bill month to month - ironically, they wouldn't let me put it on a contract even if I wanted to, because I'm a dirty foreigner. I don't pay for TV (or even own a TV). My employer pays my health insurance. I don't have a credit card, but I have a debit card tied to my bank account so I only ever spend money I actually have.

      The only 'debt' I have is the Oz Higher Education Contribution Scheme, which paid for my university schooling, which I don't have to start paying back until I earn over a certain amount. The government scheme was craftily pronounced "HECS" but that made it sound like some sort of curse. Now they've changed it to Higher Education Loan Plan or somesuch, which has the much more digestible acronym of "HELP".

      When my folks die, I hope to inherit a third of the family home and buy out my siblings. It is my ambition to never take a loan.

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    24. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      So phones are in the same category as game consoles now? "Appliances"? Great. I guess PCs are next...

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    25. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Buy a kindle? Have YOUR PAID FOR books removed at amazons will."

      Paid for, illegal, book sold mistakenly by Amazon without right to copyright. They overreacted. They were wrong, but so are you in neglecting to point this out. The functionality generally is to be able to refund people if they make a mistaken purchase (which happens a lot); the issue is how they implement it which is over the top.

      And it's book. One book was removed, and Amazon, unlike Sony, apologized and took appropriate action both publicly and monetarily. Very unlike Sony.

      Also, Kindle's DRM is quite broken. Sony's, so far, is not. The Kindle DRM is more like DVDs--not an issue if you care to bypass it.

    26. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is why I have no qualms about stealing from corporations..... they have no qualms about stealing from us. They do it daily - it's part of their business plan. They even lobby Congress for the right to steal from the People's Treasury.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    27. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>Yeah, millions of dollars in fines vs. billions of dollars in profit really dissuades those naughty contractors

      It does actually. My company was fined ~700 million about three years ago, and now they come down hard on the employees to charge time precisely. Even if we take a barthroom break, we're supposed to subtract that 0.1 or 0.2 from the government project and put it in an overhead account. My company doesn't want to be fined again.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    28. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by commodore64_love · · Score: 0

      1 or 2 million spent on Sony's "AV, IT, and media equipment" is nothing compared to the billions directed at Lockheed, Northrop, et cetera to build military planes, ships, and so on. I stick with my original statement.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    29. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by nschubach · · Score: 1

      WTH... we go over 200 years under Capitalism, grow to be the world superpower and all of the sudden, everyone hates Capitalism now?

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    30. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Blueray trojan horse has served it's purpose but it's costing too much to feed now that the war is over.

      Time to recoup all the unnecessary incurred cost of including the Blueray by removing other "unnecessary" features..

      Makes sense to me.

    31. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad is putting serious hurt on Nintendo due to it's gaming capabilities, yes.

      http://www.mobile-ent.biz/news/37063/Nintendo-preparing-for-iPhone-battle

    32. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by NonSenseAgency · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I am afraid you did not understand my statement at all. If the federal government posts an injunction against Sony for failing to meet the terms of their contracts, and selling items that do not meet or continue to meet their advertised purposes most assuredly violates their contract, then ALL vendors are affected. If Lockheed or Northrop or any Prime or Subcontractor includes items manufactured by Sony after such an injunction has been issued, the bid is VOID. No contractor will risk losing a contract if such an action is even remotely likely. They will specify some other supplier's equipment instead. Depending upon precisely how the injunction was worded, this could mean that computers bought by the government could not contain CD or DVD drives manufactured by Sony or even something as small as a power supply or cable. Even if the items were purchased COTS rather than off of a GSA schedule or as part of a prime contract, the government still has to right to forbid the purchase of any Sony products from any source for violation of warranty of implied merchantability by any government agency and by extension, from any contractor. Will the government take such action? Probably not. But it is in their power to do so.

    33. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by RobDude · · Score: 1

      Can't PS3 owners simply choose not to install the upgrade?

    34. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a "plaster garbage bag", interesting...

    35. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      Sure, until something goes wrong and you need to repair or replace it. Then you're either going to have the repair shop install the upgrade, or the replacement come with the upgrade.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    36. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by RobDude · · Score: 1

      I guess I don't understand why people have their panties in a wad over this.

      When you buy a PS3, it is 'yours'. Sony isn't going to break in and change it against your will.

      But if you want continued support and certain functionality that is subject to change; you need to patch your PS3 occasionally.

      I thought this was par for the course? If you buy World of Warcraft and then, six months later, put out a patch that makes your Hunter less fun to play...that's kinda what happens, right?

      I guess I just don't get it.

      Was installing Linux on the PS3 ever officially supported by Sony? Did they market that as a feature you get with a PS3?

    37. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Kagato · · Score: 1

      I think it depends on if the PS3s were under a GSA contract or not. Though, if there is that much demand you would think Sony could do a 100,000 unit run of purpose made PS3s. Heck, they don't need the Blu-Ray drive, they don't need hypervisor. Really, they just need a board with a bunch of cell processors, a NIC adapter and a small hard drive.

    38. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anarki2004 · · Score: 1

      Was installing Linux on the PS3 ever officially supported by Sony? Did they market that as a feature you get with a PS3?

      yes, and yes

      --
      The teachers will crack any minute, purple monkey dishwasher.
    39. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Minwee · · Score: 1

      There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- [pauses] - shame on you. Fool me -- You can't get fooled again.

      I appear to have misunderestimated you.

    40. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by kaen · · Score: 1

      Did they market that as a feature you get with a PS3?

      Yes.

      http://playedstation.blogspot.com/p/sony-ps3-promotion.html

    41. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Smauler · · Score: 1

      In fact, here in America, almost everything comes with an insanely complicated contract that grants all kinds of rights to the giant-mega-corp, and almost nothing to you. And you're paying them for that priviledge. Ain't capitalism grand?

      Those clauses are not valid. If Sony for some reason decided to brick all PS3 units, the clauses in the contracts used when bought would count for squat, at least in the UK. There's things called "fit for purpose", and "advertised features" which hit pretty high in consumer trading laws. The contract can say what it wants, literally, and it means absolutely nothing if the contract is unfair or goes against explicit or even implicit claims associated with the product.

      I know that the US has less rigorous consumer protection laws, but there are some, and the PS3 is an international product anyway. It'll be difficult to effect changes in different regions without affecting others.

    42. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by RobDude · · Score: 1

      Ahhh - okay, that makes sense then. Thank you

    43. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by GasparGMSwordsman · · Score: 1

      Benjamin Franklin said it best. "Anyone who would trade money for something produced by Sony deserves neither, and will lose both."

      It is also good to remember that he was sitting naked in his living room, getting stoned and playing on XBox live while he said that.

      =)

    44. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by uglyduckling · · Score: 1

      Installing another OS on the PS3 was officially supported and advertised as a feature. Access to Sony's servers for multiplayer online gaming was officially supported and advertised as a feature. By releasing this patch, they've made the two things mutually exclusive, which is a breach of contract either way.

    45. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "because all these things have insanely complicated contracts that the banks can change willy-nilly if they please."

      I see someone's never heard of the cash-in-hand transaction. Banks can't change shit if you've paid them in full upfront.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    46. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly those millions of dollars in fines are outweighed by the billions of dollars in profits.

    47. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 1

      you are right that unfair contracts could allow Sony to be hit (though I'm not sure what for), but 'fit for purpose' and 'advertised features' wouldn't - they could be used to hit retailers though, and dependent on the clout of the retailer, that could be useful (e.g. if DSG got fed up of having to refund bricked PS3's, they could twist Sony's arm to refund them, or face DSG not selling anything else which Sony makes).

      --
      FGD 135
    48. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Xeno+man · · Score: 2, Funny

      You mean it wasn't whale and dolphin? I need to make some apologies...

    49. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      Buy a PS3 for clustering? Have your PAID FOR CLUSTER disabled, unrepairable, and suddenly worth its weight in crap as soon as the machines start to die off.

      It's funny that the Air Force didn't raise a fuss when the PS3 Slim was announced... without support for the very feature Sony later pulled from its older consoles.

      So, to clarify this: No new PS3s sold in North America in the last 8 months had this feature in the first place.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    50. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Richy_T · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You know, this is often trotted out as an indictment of Bush but I think he actually made a very narrow escape from something much worse. Can you imagine what people would have done with a clip of Bush saying "Shame on me"?

      Whenever I see him saying what he did say, I kind of imagine a smart adviser's voice screaming through his earpiece "DONT SAY 'SHAME ON ME'. DO NOT SAY 'SHAME ON ME'!".

    51. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Informative

      So,... you have no credit cards, don't own a house or a car either, as far as I can tell, because all these things have insanely complicated contracts that the banks can change willy-nilly if they please.

      To be fair, not all credit card companies do that. The account agreement I got from my credit union with their credit card was a single page. It contained no arbitration clause and no provision for them to unilaterally change the contract. Go find yourself a local community bank or credit union. Odds are that they will treat you better than the big boys. Added bonus: Most of them didn't steal any of your tax dollars from you either.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    52. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Xeno+man · · Score: 1

      Ahh, so that's where the term came from. Now I know when I need to go to the washroom and someone asks me, "number 1 or number 2?" they want to know for accounting reasons.

      "I'm going number 2!"
      "Okay, I'll make a record in the log."

    53. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by westlake · · Score: 1

      Buy a PS3 for clustering? Have your PAID FOR CLUSTER disabled, unrepairable, and suddenly worth its weight in crap as soon as the machines start to die off.

      The Windows OS and software used aboard the supper carrier USS George H.W. Bush was sold and customized through Microsoft Federal Systems in an IT partnership with Lockheed Martin.

      It is not the mass market consumer product.

      The Fat was sold without a guarantee that replacement product and parts would remain in stock forever. The Fat video game console in your mission critical HPC cluster was sold without a warranty of fitness for that particular purpose.

      Chances are good that you made hardware or software changes that voided the consumer warranty. That you were stressing the system in ways home use never would.

      Sony owes you nothing.

    54. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      But if you want continued support and certain functionality that is subject to change; you need to patch your PS3 occasionally.

      Even that isn't the issue. The issue is that the patch is effectively non-optional. Sony doesn't have to lift a finger -- your PS3 is going to break eventually, and you will need to either repair it or purchase a new one. What's more, if you're working in supercomputing, presumably you'd want to add nodes to your cluster at some point.

      I thought this was par for the course? If you buy World of Warcraft and then, six months later, put out a patch that makes your Hunter less fun to play...that's kinda what happens, right?

      Well, except that WoW never was "yours" to begin with, while there's a reasonable expectation that a PS3 is. Also, this is more akin to removing the hunter class entirely, after an extensive ad campaign promoting hunters. Even that would be more tolerable, as WoW is more a rental -- Sony already has your money, so they have very little monetary incentive to keep these people happy.

      Was installing Linux on the PS3 ever officially supported by Sony? Did they market that as a feature you get with a PS3?

      Yes and yes. And not just Linux -- remember, "Other OS."

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    55. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      Using this, the U.S. government should already be in the 'shame on me' phase right now. Everyone knows how highly proprietary Sony is. This is the company that put root kits on their audio CDs to own user's computers. This is the company who introduced revolutionary products like the BETA video reorders and mini disk audio recorders, and then crippled their use or adoption because of their intense focus on "intellectual property". Anyone who buys from Sony, for whatever reason, deserves no sympathy for what they get. In fact, we should be asking what the rule is for 'fool me four or five or (approaches infinity) times'. I bought an XBox not long ago. I don't think it has the best games or features either. I looked at the PS3 for about one second (because the games it plays looked better), but turned away because of the way they shaft their customers similar to what is happening now. I learned from past mistakes. People, if you don't like what Sony did to you with your PS3s, it is your own fault for buying one. Just because Sony shouldn't do something, doesn't mean they won't. And based on track record you can guarantee they will. This is called wisdom. Wise up.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    56. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

      Buy an apple product? well, might as well put your head in a plaster garbage bag and die, they own everything that touches the screen of that device, hell, likely they even own the device, just 'licence' it out to you in some peculiar way.

      This is for their ipod type of devices only... they have no access to my MacBook that I don't explicitly allow.

      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
    57. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

      Buy a kindle? Have YOUR PAID FOR books removed at amazons will.

      At least Amazon restored those purchases to affected users in short order, and it didn't even take a lawsuit to get them to do it. Sony has shown no intention of compensating their users in any way for the feature removal, despite millions of nerd-voices crying out in despair, several lawsuits being filed against them, and the US military getting annoyed.

      I guess what I'm saying is, given their respective track records, I'd rather trust Amazon to not take away my $10 eBook than trust Sony to not disable my $400 console.

    58. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

      Sure, unless I also want to watch new Blu-ray movies which require the update, or play $NEW_GAME, or continue playing my existing games online.

    59. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Smauler · · Score: 1

      Me :

      Credit cards actually offer loads more of consumer protection in the UK for purchases over £100 than debit cards, so they are definitely valid reasons for holding and using one if you can. I own one and use it sparingly.
      Rent.
      Car is now a hand me down from my parents - Citroen XM, worth basically nothing, but is reliable and is big and fast enough for now.
      Phone is mobile 2 year contract - £15 a month, which is less than I was paying with PAYG
      Internet is mobile broadband 2 year contract - £15 a month again, 15gb monthly allowance
      No landline
      TV - Don't pay BBC license fee, because I don't have a TV. I use BBC iPlayer and other internet TV which does not require it. I watch little TV anyway.
      I don't need health insurance because I live in the UK :).... but I haven't used the health service for over 2 years (last time was a freak washing up accident - dangerous occupation, washing up..)

      I pay £30 a month for my mobile, internet, and TV combined - I do this because I'm not rich at the moment. You can get by on very little, but loads of people seem to think sattelite TV is compulsory and spend crap loads on that. Up to them, I guess.

    60. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by spinkham · · Score: 1

      I buy predominantly non-DRMed books to read on my kindle DX. The fact that DRMed books are also available isn't a restriction on my freedoms if I don't choose to buy them, and if I do choose to buy them Amazon's policies have been good so far with only on very public misstep they later corrected.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    61. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

      The difference now is that they can't even get refurbished OtherOS-capable units to replace their dying ones, because the refurbished units will probably have updated firmware.

    62. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by The+Hatchet · · Score: 1

      You have a point. But that is fucked up. However you missed my point. My point was that I don't pay for things that I afford to not pay for. Like if my debit card has a clause about being allowed to charge me for nothing whenever they pleased, and it only worked as a debit card a locations that censorship loving bastards wholeheartedly approved of, I would not have it. If my lease on my apartment said that they are allowed to take things from my apartment and kick me out if I didn't comply with their morality standards, and could install cameras in in to make sure I did, then I would sure as hell not live hear. I have a pay-as you go phone, but only because I am not comfortable having non-necessary bills until I have a stable source of income aka after college. Health insurance is still under parents, but I do have cable/internet, and the contract on that does not say that If I look at porn on my connection it will be terminated. That is the kind of bullshit I am talking about.

      If a women buys a dildo, but it comes with a contract saying that she can only stick it in her vagina, not in her mouth or but, it would be the unreasonable contracts from a couple of decades ago. If it not only said that, but that if she tried to do a prohibited behavior with it, it would grow legs and walk back to the manufacturer, and have you arrested for sodomy, then it would be these modern bullshit contracts. I do, most certainly, agree that this problem needs to be fixed. And we need to work towards fixing it soon.

      However, as xkcd says (http://blacksunreview.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/xkcd11.png), acting like you are intelligent and pointed out a flaw in what someone said by misunderstanding or misconstruing their point, is fucking retarded. Yes, those corporations are raping us, and we are paying them to do it. But they are raping us with human or horse penis. Apple, Amazon, and now Sony, are not just raping us with barbed elephant penises, or blue whale penises. There is a DAMN BIG difference. The average mega-corp just makes us feel violated, sick, embarrassed, and sore. The evil tech-mega-corp that owns your fucking soul the second you give them even one cent, you walk away from the relationship having given up your money, the clothes off your back, the ability to ever use your lower extremities again, shame, anger, and an extremely painful, visible, and terrible injury. It is the difference between slapping you wife after she cheats on you, and tying her to a chair and beating her for the next year, then killing her and throwing her out the window of a 100 story tall hotel. When an iPad competitor comes out, I will likely buy it (assuming a free, non-censoring nature, and the ability to use it to my free will without monitoring, constant licensing, or monthly payments (besides optional 3g or whatever), but why would I pay a shitload of money for something about as useful as clog in your toilet.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    63. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by The+Hatchet · · Score: 1

      There is one hell of a big difference between capitalism. Capitalism is a free system of trade, where everyone has the right to make money, and spend it freely, and businesses are means of doing so. We do not have capitalism. We have bullshit. Let me explain. A bullshit system, is a system in which the vast majority of the cost of everything that you can spend money on goes to the financial sector, spread out among those with enough extra income to 'invest' or the few filthy rich that own the companies that do the investing. However, when you force at least 10,000,000,000% of the actually cost of something into a financial system, and sell it at that price to consumers, problems arise. See, every single step of production of something you buy generates massive wealth for commodity, stock traders, and top brass of involved corporations. unfortunately, when the workers are paid just enough to get by, and the cost of things constantly increases, this creates an inflation loop and minimum wage increases. On the side however, massive wealth is had to the select upper echlons of society. The cost to live comfortably would be something like 90% lower than it is now, if we didn't have all that bullshit. Plus, every corporation looks for every possible way that they can to pull money out of consumers, whether the consumer can afford it or not. The bullshit system cherishes evil, instead of goodness, and forces people into poverty, pretending to be capitalism. Someday, people will be paid fairly for the work they do, and the things that are so cheap and easy to make will be widely available.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    64. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by The+Hatchet · · Score: 1

      Of course not, but that is not what I said. What I said would be if your car was entirely proprietary, and your car maker was the only company allowed to make these parts. Then you would either have to buy used parts and hope they work, or be screwed. If an item that has manufacturer "updates" that make a product worth less, then it should come with an automatic full refund to all who previously used that feature. Now if Sony bought the USAF a worthy Cray supercomputer replacement, whatever, but they did not. That is bullshit, and should be fixed, not just bitched about and have others say 'just deal with it'.

      Also, I am getting really fucking tired of all the people on the internet that make shitty comparisons, and pretending that they shed light on a situation. If you are going to make a fucking comparison, do it right, especially if you are using it to criticize the accuracy of someone else's statement. That would be the pot calling the kettle black. And that was a good comparison. If I had said that would be like a shrimp calling a whale tiny, it would not be accurate. Seriously, this may be more intelligable than the general community, but as slashdot expands, I see more idiots falling into the same intellectual traps as morons, just using fancier tools to pretend that they aren't.

      Sony sold hundreds, if not thousands, of computers to people whose sole intention was to cluster them, or use them as a PC, and for all those that purchased them, they can either get bug fixes and updates and lose their computer, or deal with something that keeps bugging out like some kind of piece of shit, and eventually parts of it will become defunct and die, with no possibility of quality replacement. If a company is going to sell something, they had sure as hell better make it better over time, or not touch it. If they instead make it worse? That would be like if people added a gene to their sequence that took away our ability to see, or hear, or taste, or breath, or in this case, it would make part of the brain die. A big part. See what I did there? how I used a quality comparison? Learn to do the same.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    65. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by The+Hatchet · · Score: 1

      And what happens when books that you want to read do not have non-DRM versions? You have been censored of knowledge in a way. What happens when there is no DRM-free option? try finding a DRM free legal version of a video game, movie or book that was published with DRM. There was a time when it was easy to buy only made in america. Not so easy anymore. Saying "taking the moral highground in a situation is optimal, instead of protesting the fact that it is happening" is like if you had said "I have no slaves, therefore I am not infringing on anyones freedoms" while your neighbor is beating his slave, and laughing about it, and you are doing nothing. Just because it doesn't affect you directly doesn't mean that it won't eventually, or that it is not wrong. And your personal quiet protest via actions makes no difference to big mega-corp who can prey on unsuspecting people who have money and pay for things without understanding the technical implications of them.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    66. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by WNight · · Score: 1

      Paid for, illegal, book sold mistakenly by Amazon without right to copyright.

      So? No, really - so?

      Not my mistake, why should I lose my book? Had I bought it in paper form I'd still have it. If I bought it as a direct download I'd still have it.

      Bought for the Kindle(/iPhone/XBox), gone long kindling.

    67. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by spinkham · · Score: 1

      I was not arguing for or against DRM at all. My point was simply this: I bought a Kindle, and cannot "Have YOUR(my) PAID FOR books removed at amazons will." You're overgeneralizing. The Kindle the device and the Kindle bookstore are convenient to use together, but my non-DRMed books from O'Reilly, Manning Publications, and other publishers work just fine with no threat from Amazon's DRM.

      As to your argument, I assume the DRM fight cannot include buying non-DRMed ebooks to show the business model is valid? Business only understands two languages: Laws and Money. Outlawing DRM isn't likely, so only economics works. That's not really the reason I buy what I do however: I buy them because it's convenient for me. Given a choice I buy the non-DRM option, from the vendor that provides the largest number of ebook formats.
      This is not the equivalent of ignoring abuse, it's the equivalent of strongly preferring to buy goods from non-abusers. I educate my family on friends on the perils of DRM and buy DRM free goods when possible, thus maximizing the economic conditions that foster the downfall of DRM. Business hears only money, so education and purchasing decisions are much more effective then simply making noise in protest.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    68. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      Stating the truth (megacorps like AIG, Exxon-Mobile, Sony steal from citizens) doesn't make me a troll. It makes me insightful. The fact that you've not observed the obvious is your own dumb fault.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    69. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by commodore64_love · · Score: 0

      >>>manufactured by Sony after such an injunction has been issued, the bid is V

      False. What you describe is a "ex post facto" law and unconstitutional. If the U.S. Government forbids use of Sony products effective today, then it only affects contracts from May 13 onward. It does not affect contracts or designs that Lockheed, Northrop, etc created prior to that date. They may continue using Sony for those existing/older projects. They would not be voided.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    70. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      Our toilets are labeled "1" and "2" on the handle. Why? "1" uses less water while "2" uses more.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    71. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by nataflux · · Score: 1

      Oh, and don't forget Sony is planning to bring PSN into a tiered payment system soon. It seems being able to play online games online these days is quickly deteriorating into a privilege, not a right.

    72. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by lpq · · Score: 1

      It would make sense.

      I mean Sony could say that they are implementing an update in their DVD's CD's and Blue-ray drives to disable playing of 3rd-party (other) - content. Only official Sony content will play on their drives in the future. Why not? If the can do it for their PS3's, why not other products at their whim?

    73. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      I always knew Benjamin Franklin was ahead of his time, but I never realized the extent!

    74. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by The+Hatchet · · Score: 1

      Actually, there is not a chance in the world economic forces will lead to the downfall of DRM. You see, monopolistic practices aren't just present in a business itself anymore, but in today's age they often drift across many corporations in the form of standards. As such, something like DRM may be evil, but corporations find it useful, and if all of them across an industry decide it is useful (which it undeniably appears to be (at least to all the morons that look only to profit in the next quarter, not the next year or decade)). If all of the corporations decide to only offer DRM laden goods, you either buy with DRM or don't by. And there is no legal reason this is not possible, and it is very economically likely, because us who only buy non-drm are in such a slim minority, and will likely end up buying DRM stuff eventually if they made it the only way. Economically killing DRM would require a world-wide boycott, and even then they would likely keep it, and just issue some BS press release and get people to go with it, one way or another. Most of these businesses would maintain enough income to last, or have enough in their credit lines.

      No, economic destruction of DRM is not even imaginable. Not in an environment in which corporations can easily horizontally spread tools which are bad for consumers, that don't appear to harm the consumer enough for people to make a fuss. There are also far too many people to educate, and people will generally not listen and buy anyways.

      And although Amazon isn't 'allowed' to remove your content, their contract specifies times when it is ok, and they have the ability to do so, whether or not they use it. I would say that makes it at the least unreliable. Especially if anything on it is internet-on DRM, if you happen to be away from internet, then fuck you. Just like cloud computing, you pay for access to something, not something. You pay over and over for something to which a one time fee would be sufficient if it were not based in the cloud. Cloud computing has been touted as a 'miracle' but in reality it is only a miracle for the stock holders of company using it, the workers will never see a pay increase.

      Any type of monopoly, be it of standards or a corporation, or a style of product, ignores both law and economics. It follows one rule: profit in the next quarter. Find a way to get higher stock prices. That is all that matters. Even if it means plunging the world into recession, if the 50-100 major stockholders/financial guru's behind all the money get a couple mill.

      You might make noise, but it is no more than meaningless background to these companies with enormous target markets, of which all of us are a tiny part of. As long as there are millions of ignorant people that will pay for software and get all confused when it doesn't work, and then pay for it again, then nothing you say will ever matter.

      The only way DRM will die is if a powerful company kills it, and promotes publically their hate of DRM. Otherwise, it will live till long after we are gone, and get much worse. I have heard small talk of making a DRM in which everything is license charged by the hour. you get charged whenever you log into an application. And to be honest, with the ease of microtransactions, I doubt DRM types of things will do anything other than rape consumers of more money every year, until consumers run out, and some market suffers, causing another financial sector blow-out and another mini-recession.

      This isn't the days before the optimization of business. Now everything is super-efficient. And super-efficient means more for stock holders, less for everyone else alive. Now companies have discovered that 1 popular culture is slightly more profitable than 50 amazing, mildly popular cultural sub-groups. Every company stands to make slightly more money by employing nasty tactics, such as DRM. If it succeeds here, other areas will learn to do the same. Like cloud smart housing. Imagine, it costing money constantly just to live in your own home. Sur

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    75. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by spinkham · · Score: 1

      I also bought an iPod when iTunes was DRM restricted, and put on it non-drmed material. Guess what, all major music stores are DRM free now, because people found out DRM was a pain in the butt and it was easier to steal.

      The competition for many DRMed works are stolen works. With music, businesses eventually saw that people would go for the easiest solution available, legal or illegal, and they dropped DRM to make their goods for sale more convenient.

      Change does happen. It has happened before, and it will happen again.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    76. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't own a house or a car either, as far as I can tell, because all these things have insanely complicated contracts that the banks can change willy-nilly if they please.

      What are you talking about? I own a house, and paid for it with a mortgage. Yes, it was a long contract, and it is somewhat complicated, although I wouldn't say insane (and yes, I did read the entire thing before signing any of it). But once signed, those terms are fixed, and the bank can *not* change them. And before signing it, I found a clause that I felt was vague and therefore possibly open to abuse, and I got the bank to write a clarifying letter that is now part of the legal document.

      Car? Just buy your car in cash, and there's certainly no way a bank is going to have anything to say about it. There's no reason to go into debt to buy a car. (I'd prefer not to go into debt period, but for the vast majority of people, owning a house without doing so is impossible.)

    77. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So,... you have no credit cards, don't own a house or a car either, as far as I can tell, because all these things have insanely complicated contracts that the banks can change willy-nilly if they please.

      I'd also have to say that you don't own a cell-phone either, as most phone contracts are bigger than the phone book. And I'll bet you don't have cable-TV either. Or Health Insurance.

      The situation you describes is not unthinkable. These apply to me:

      I don't have credit cards
      I don't own a car
      I don't own a house
      I don't own a cell-phone
      I don't have cable-TV

      I only just got health insurance because it became mandatory.

      Other things that my coworkers/friends find unthinkable:
      I don't own a refrigerator
      I don't own a microwave
      I don't own a TV

      When someone tells me that they don't put up with modern bullshit and avoid consumerism of such I can believe them since I already practice much the same.

    78. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by The+Hatchet · · Score: 1

      And at that time so much music was pirated it was insane. but what about the things still pirated. As companies begin to demonize the pirate, more and more, more and more people fall into that mindset. Not everything is as easy to transfer as music. Most people don't install 1 game on several mediums, or 1 e-book onto several things. There is no viable reason for DRM to be a problem for the average person with this stuff, so the same stick will not be made. If it only bothers 1 in 50 or 1 in 100 people, I doubt it will matter. But everyone listened to music, and pirating it was easy enough for anyone to do.

      Change happens for reasons, and every situation is different. DRM was dead for something transfered to half a dozen devices for a typical user, but for something typically left on one medium for its life? What reasons are there here, and with people becoming more fond of micro-transactions and crap, from intense pay licensing fee's per use or whatever to become likely? It is not nearly as hard to avoid, and not nearly as simple to pirate, and with the companies making pirates look bad, and making an example of them? I don't see it happening.

      A comparison is not a valid reason. A valid reason is a valid reason. No comparison is perfect, because no comparison A to A, or else it would be a restatement, not a comparison. You have made a very invalid comparison and assumed it a valid reason. That is called accidental complacency.

      Things tend to follow a direction, moving towards an equilibrium, or at least to a point where forces are so unbalanced that a dampening effect is in order. Here we have a direction, more DRM on DRMable stuff. There is too little to stop it to have an effect. The tipping point of damping forces won't happen until some major event involving DRM and the economy happens, and people realize it is a problem. Even then, I doubt it will be realized. Healthcare costs practically caused the inability to pay the mortgages was the spark of the financial meltdown (although directly caused by morons putting all their golden eggs in one basket, and then strangling the goose).

      Change does happen. It has happened before, and CAN happen again. But nothing happens without a reason (on any scale larger than a few atoms), and this is a case without sufficient reason.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    79. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      ""They can take our PS3, but they can never take our Freedom

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    80. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by f3rret · · Score: 1

      I just wonder why the USAF just couldn't go directly to IBM and get a hold of a cell processor directly and then not have to worry about all the crap wrapped around it by the likes of Sony.

      --
      Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
    81. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      EXAMPLE: My previous manager refused to sign my last day. It was only 8 hours but still I'm entitled to get paid for it. That corporation, Rockwell Collins, stole ~$320 from me. This is how megacorps operate. They don't care. They have no soul..... no morals. They steal from the citizens with impunity and without fear of consequences.

      And no I can't sue them. Being a contractor I had no legal recourse.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    82. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by NonSenseAgency · · Score: 1

      It would make sense.

      I mean Sony could say that they are implementing an update in their DVD's CD's and Blue-ray drives to disable playing of 3rd-party (other) - content. Only official Sony content will play on their drives in the future. Why not? If the can do it for their PS3's, why not other products at their whim?

      Strange that you should mention that. You wouldn't have been prompted by the coincidence that Sony owns MGM, Columbia and Tri-Star pictures would you?

    83. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Captain+Centropyge · · Score: 1

      If installing "Other OS" is supported, clustering for research is of no consequence. If Linux clusters, it's supported because it's an "Other OS". It was marketed as a computer that could run Linux. What you chose to do with several of them (e.g. cluster them together) should have no effect on the warranty because Linux is supported.

      And what of kids gaming that leave the PS3 on for days at a time? Sure, I'd suggest turning it off, but that doesn't mean they're stressing the system in an outrageous way.

      I'd argue that Sony DOES owe us something. We paid for the "Other OS" feature as part of the package. By simply removing the ability to use that feature, you're being a giant douche. And if it's illegal enough that we can return the PS3 to the store for a refund from the retailer, it's illegal enough that Sony should just pay the consumers for their asshattery directly. Why should Best Buy (or any other retailer) have to pay for something Sony does and is totally out of their control?

      --
      Bite my shiny metal ass!
    84. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by lpq · · Score: 1

      But of course, it would only be done to reduce piracy...

    85. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by spinkham · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I'm lost in this thread now. Why exactly do you think the kindle hardware with non-DRMed content is immoral(the original question)? What exactly do you think will enact change better then educating my friends and family and voting with my money?

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    86. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by JustABlitheringIdiot · · Score: 1

      So,... you have no credit cards, don't own a house or a car either, as far as I can tell, because all these things have insanely complicated contracts that the banks can change willy-nilly if they please.

      I'd also have to say that you don't own a cell-phone either, as most phone contracts are bigger than the phone book. And I'll bet you don't have cable-TV either. Or Health Insurance.

      - Credit Cards -- No need Parents do all the shopping and allowance covers the rest
      - House or car -- No need to own when living in Parents basement (can use their car)
      - Cell Phone -- Parents phone
      - Cable -- Parents again
      - Health Insurance -- Independently employed in IT, so no.

    87. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by The+Hatchet · · Score: 1

      The kindle hardware is fine, great even, but the physical ability of amazon to remove content, regardless of whether or not they do, is bad. There should not exist the power of a large company to willfully remove content from a costumers device without their consent. This means they can also look at it, and do as they please. It is a sickening prospect, to not have privacy on your own device, which you own and payed for. Even recently they took a bunch of highlights and comments that kindle owners had made in their own books. That is like them coming into my home and stealing the notes from my books! THAT IS SICK! Whether or not they continue, whether or not they do something else, they should not, for any reason, under any circumstance, have that ability.

      I actually have not put forth a solution to the problem of DRM, however if you read anything I posted it should be very clear that voting with your money and educating your friends will never make a slightest difference, no matter how many friends you have or how big your family is.

      The thing is, the only solution I can imagine to the DRM problem is a massive company that stands against it, offers great content as an alternative to what is out there and covered in DRM bullshit, and sells at reasonable prices. Giving a good, mainstream, popular alternative that is in direct competition with all DRM and proprietary bullshit, but is just as versatile and expansive. Sadly that is unlikely, but the other alternative is finding a way to get ourselves heard by various governments and acting against DRM with the long arm of the law, which is also incredibly hard. But like I said, DRM cannot and will not be killed by any minor sale loss. 5% sale loss from people like us is nothing compared to the 10-25% extra sales from second purchases due to DRM.

      I don't mean to sound like an ass, but just saying that you are doing something, no matter how ineffective, will make a difference, will not. DRM will grow until someone can stop it, and the economy of the situation means you are not doing anything at all that is effective.

      Literally, if you want all the content out there that has DRM on it, you either pay a shitload of money for something that isn't worth 1/10 its asking price, or you steal it. With things like music, stealing it was mainstream, and companies began to realize there was money to be made changing their business model. The same does not hold true for movies, video games, e-books, software, and so on.

      Your sig praises pessimism, but you are overly optimistic about the situation, in an irrational and useless way. I am not a pessimist or an optimist, but a realist, and the reality is that no economic force we can produce as a minority will be able at any point to overwhelm the economic profit of DRM. DRM does not stop pirates, its only true purpose is to make good customers pay again and again for the same thing. They know it, we know it, but that doesn't stop them.

      My question is why you ask me what I think is wrong with your plan of action by asking me what mine is. Yours is wrong, regardless of whether or not mine is strange, charmed, backwards, ludacris, or snoop dog. Mine may not be right either, but I have backed it up with decent logic, and i don't think that is much a concern, as such non-activism as yours is widespread, and DRM will take over and get worse, especially with micro-transactions. I imagine that by 2015 there will be DRM re-embedded in music, not for copy protection, but so that it phones home and charges the user a tenth of a cent per listen. Where there is money, there are records, where there are records, there is the ability to violate privacy. Not to mention it would be like your cd player phoning a company and charging you whenever you play a CD that you bought.

      Welcome to 2010 and beyond, a world where consumers own nothing that they pay for.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    88. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by spinkham · · Score: 1

      I'm not overly optimistic: I'm mostly selfish. I hope my actions evoke change, but I predominately do what benefits me now.

      I buy non-DRM ebook content from O'Reilly and Manning, who are major players in the tech books I spend most of my reading dollars on. I do it somewhat in the hope that their success will spill over into other publishers, but mostly because it's the content I want, at reasonable prices, in all the formats I care about. Both companies have also made new formats available to previous ebook owners as new formats come out, and allow you to redownload content if you no longer have the original copies.

      I still fail to understand how my predominately selfish support of major publishers who sell non-DRM content with reasonable policies is worse then your complete lack of a plan to evoke any change, but I guess we just have to disagree on that one.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    89. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by The+Hatchet · · Score: 1

      Agreeing to disagree is retarded. Unless it is on basic difference. This is not a case of basic difference, this is a big thing.

      I am not saying what you paint me to say. I am not saying that supporting non-DRM content is bad, I am saying that the ability of a company (Amazon) to have any kind of control over a device a consumer owns is terrible. Sorry if you misunderstood me. And I don't have a plan necessarily, but I do know that legal change could fix this, and although not likely it is certainly possible. I stand by the fact that getting rid of DRM via economy in all areas, and preventing its spread is not possible via. your tactics. I will note that you are not doing anything wrong, but to believe that you are making a difference when you are not is not a good thing, whereas know what would make a difference, and doing what you can to that end is on the other hand a good thing

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
    90. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by Yfrwlf · · Score: 1

      Yay, car analogies. Lets make it a correct one at least, shall we:

      You buy a car which was advertised as having A/C. Suddenly one day after you took your car in to the dealer to have it repaired and cleaned, it comes back with the entire A/C system removed.

      Yes, they removed it from the PS3 Slims, but that's no justification for doing so on the existing fatties, and I would complain too if I gave a damn about that feature, which I would if I had no other computers to use for a normal desktop and relied upon Linux on the PS3.

      --
      Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
    91. Re:Sony is a terrorist organization by westlake · · Score: 1

      Ban them forever from selling to the US Gov.

      The Windows OS used aboard the super carrier USS George H.W.Bush is sold and customized through Microsoft Federal Systems in an IT partnership with Lockheed Martin.

      It is not the mass market consumer product.

      It is not priced or supported in the same way as the mass market consumer product.

      Purchase 1,000 off-the-shelf video game consoles through ordinary consumer wholesale and retail distribution channels for your HPC cluster and you take your lumps as they come.

      You void the consumer warranty when you use the product in a different environment.

      When you crack open the box to make unauthorized hardware and software changes.

      Warranty and service contracts expire.

      Production ends. Replacement parts become hard to find.

      The Slim incorporates many economies in manufacture. It may not be a drop-in replacement for the Fat even if the OtherOS is supported.

  2. COTS = COST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's been a big push in recent years to move to "COTS" (Commercial Off The Shelf) solutions in the government - the military in particular. And while this may be find for things like holsters, backpacks, and office chairs, I think this highlights for EVERYONE, not just bright young aquisitions officers, that sometimes taking COTS technology and using it for your highly specific and critical application is not the best choice. Unfortunately, sometimes (sometimes!) big, expensive, and proprietary in-house solutions really are the best.

    (heh. captcha is 'acquire')

    1. Re:COTS = COST by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 2, Funny

      Levenshtein disagrees.

      --
      Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    2. Re:COTS = COST by Brad+Eleven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Meh. Big, expensive, proprietary in-house solutions are rarely the best IMHO. The USAF could have made a deal with Sony.

      --
      "Press to test."
      (click)
      "Release to detonate."
    3. Re:COTS = COST by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or just bought a PS3 commercial developers kit and bypassed all of this.

    4. Re:COTS = COST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There was no need to assume Sony would pull a stunt like this. After all, you can't buy a PS3 with otherOS support. Why? Selling at a loss? Hardly. Sont were more than happy to sell the PS3 as a blu-ray player and there are a hell of a lot more of them as players only than there are research clusters. Piracy? There is no piracy, Geohot got a memory dump, or so he claimed. He's failed to deliver an exploit, data, code, examples, he's only shown a very fake looking video. Sony dropped otherOS from the slim, so this has been on the cards for a while.

      There's a reason Sony is the #1 hated tech company. And that takes some doing considering Apple and MS.

    5. Re:COTS = COST by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not really. It should highlight the fact that you should always require a second source for any off the shelf products that you're buying. If you go for a single-vendor solution, you are totally at the mercy of their whims, when it comes to pricing and availability. A big in-house proprietary system would have cost more, in this case, than simply buying twice as many PS/3s as they required. The Cell is now starting to look dated, and by the time they actually need to replace this system they could just throw it away and build a new one based on whatever the latest GPGPU design is at the time.

      Do you really think that replacement nodes in a big SGI machine cost less than a couple of PS/3s? Or that the price doesn't shoot up rapidly once SGI moves on to the next design? Or that there's a large second-hand market for them?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:COTS = COST by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Proprietary in-house solutions aren't even always the more expensive choice. It's too bad these decisions are often made poorly.

      Outsourcing is good, focus on core business, buy-not-build, standardise, 80-20 solutions... all of these make sense, but I am dealing too often with the mess made by people turning these good pieces of advise into thoughtless mantras and moronic MBA one-liners, as a replacement for thoughtful and informed decision making. A lot of todays leadership doesn't want to make decisions; they look for rules to make their decisions for them.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    7. Re:COTS = COST by teg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Systems like these have a very limited lifespan. The military saved a lot of money upfront. The consequence of this is that the number of active nodes in the cluster might go down slightly during the system's remaining lifespan (a couple of years, not more). Negative impact? Yes. But enough so that spending many times the amount on getting custom built hardware would be worth it? Very unlikely. And if you go a couple of levels up the hierarchy, risks like this - and cost savings - are averaged out over many acquisitions and projects. I think your conclusion is extremely unlikely.

    8. Re:COTS = COST by Sockatume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And a lesson for the consumer: no matter what you're told about super-computer nonsense, the product is just a games console, and will always just be a games console in Sony's eyes.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    9. Re:COTS = COST by JamesP · · Score: 1

      Or they could have gone with nVidia/ATI or something similar

      Or Cell PCI-X boards for PC (IIRC there are some)

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    10. Re:COTS = COST by MadnessASAP · · Score: 2, Informative

      But those are expensive, defeating the purpose of using PS3s in the first place. They could have gone to IBM and bulk ordered a pile of CELL equipped blade servers but its cheaper to buy the PS3 which Sony, like every other console manufacturer, sells below cost and make up the difference with game sales.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    11. Re:COTS = COST by Arakageeta · · Score: 1

      Not sure that the GameOS would support the necessary software stack, such as MPI.

    12. Re:COTS = COST by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You only need a small number of them, to compile and package for the other units.

    13. Re:COTS = COST by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      You are not limited to the Sony supplied OS with the dev kit.

    14. Re:COTS = COST by tophermeyer · · Score: 1

      I think you are absolutely correct. That "sometimes" is something that people miss out on. Program keep in mind that each application requires its own careful consideration. I work on a program that uses a lot of different hardware, which is a mix of COTS and in-house tech. It is a BIG selling point that our program makes use of COTS hardware. It can make the initial design and development a bear, but once you have software and systems in place to integrate the various pieces of hardware it offers some cost savings during production. It all depends on what you are trying to build.

      Is there COTS hardware that is built to do exactly/close to exactly what you want it to do? And does its manufacturer offer decent support and help troubleshoot systems integration issues? If the answer to both is Yes then you might be in a good place to use COTS. Or, if the equipment is simple enough that internal staff can reasonably be expected to be able to tear it apart and divine its inner workings without breaking the bank.

      Some of the biggest headaches come when programs try to blend the two; trying to contract out developing or re-purposing someone else's in-house technology. Support and feedback during development can be a nightmare. But of course, if nothing currently exists for the application you need what other choice do you have?

    15. Re:COTS = COST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except Nintendo.

    16. Re:COTS = COST by Aradiel · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but it will always be their games console which you have paid to borrow.

    17. Re:COTS = COST by Reemi · · Score: 1

      COTS != EOL != availability.

      Going to COTS is in general a good thing, but any respectable company will focus on End of Life, Availability and MTBF when going for COTS. Those are not mutual exclusive.

      Seems management approving the PS3 solution without having a solid contract with Sony should be fired on the spot.

    18. Re:COTS = COST by commodore64_love · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't agree. On my project it was a lot cheaper to use the existing Windows NT 4 OS than to develop our own from scratch. It was also cheaper to buy mass-produced parts for a few pennies, rather than build our own for around $1000 each. It also saved space - instead of a giant box we used the latest tech to shrink the unit down to a small cube.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    19. Re:COTS = COST by quacking+duck · · Score: 5, Informative

      [...] but its cheaper to buy the PS3 which Sony, like every other console manufacturer, sells below cost and make up the difference with game sales.

      USAF buys literally tons of loss-leading PS3s but no games? I think you just hit on why Sony doesn't care about the problem the Air Force faces now.

    20. Re:COTS = COST by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      "A small number", at 10 grand each, is still a hefty chunk of change.
      The 2,500 PS3s that they currently have, even at $300 each, is already 3/4 million, but at that price the USAF can have any number of coders working with no additional cost-per-seat licensing.
      That additional 10k-per-head wasn't factored into the original RFP which was authorized by the PHBs.

    21. Re:COTS = COST by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      You do realise that they could have used a small number of developer kits to port a custom Linux install to the PS3, sign it and deploy it and then be in the same position?

    22. Re:COTS = COST by bemenaker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For some reason, I don't think it SONY would have a problem of selling directly to USAF slim's with an older ROM on them specifically for this purpose.

    23. Re:COTS = COST by Civaus · · Score: 1

      I would disagree that this is a COTS solution. The idea behind COTS is not to be tied to one vendor, e.g. use a general PC. All you have done is replace a specific purpose proprietary system with a slightly more general purpose proprietary system.

    24. Re:COTS = COST by Fulg · · Score: 1

      Devkits can run unsigned code - retail PS3s cannot (except in Other OS mode). Having just a few won't help you.

      --
      gcc: no input sig
    25. Re:COTS = COST by drolli · · Score: 1

      Well. The point is simpler, no matter who you are and for what purpose you buy:

      Either you have a contract which include the option to buy identical replacement parts with your supplier or not. Either you have a support contract for a certain feature guaranteeing this feature to you for some time or not. Either your feature is important enough for you supplier to make it a problem for his reputation or not (And honestly: in my view this does not damage Sony reputation significantly. In the main-stream all Linux articles together still would be outnumbered by every singe iFart Steve Jobs releases). Either your supplier expects a significant earning from keeping this feature - or not.

      Moreover if they did it right it should be no problem to upgrade the Nodes to IBM QS20, probably anyway the better form factor. And IBM will no start selling these soon i guess.

    26. Re:COTS = COST by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      That's beside the point. It's certainly not ILLEGAL (or even unethical IMHO) to buy a product the manufacturer is selling at a loss. If it doesn't work out for them then that's their short sightedness.

      The question is whether or not they can legally pull back that functionality. Maybe, maybe not, but I can guarantee you, if a pissed off USAF researcher presents his case then the standard "Only pirates use it anyways." defense simply isn't going to work this time.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    27. Re:COTS = COST by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You do realise that they could have used a small number of developer kits to port a custom Linux install to the PS3, sign it and deploy it and then be in the same position?

      Uh, no. Sony signs titles. Sony would never sign a Linux install. They'd have to use all developer's units, and that brings you up closer to the cost of doing it with PC add-in boards. Titles produced with the dev system can only be run on the dev system until blessed by Sony. This was true in the PS1 and PS2, too, so I don't know where you got this wild-ass idea.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    28. Re:COTS = COST by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've used a developer box, you can self sign and deploy to other PS3's, you just don't have a license to deploy commercially.

    29. Re:COTS = COST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could have used standard servers to accomplish the same task. The choice to use PS3s seems stupid. Really stupid.

    30. Re:COTS = COST by Yvan256 · · Score: 0

      Sony, like every other console manufacturer, sells below cost

      Nintendo doesn't do that, because they're not brain-dead like Sony and Microsoft. They also don't have other company branches to pay for their losses and mistakes like Sony and Microsoft.

      In many countries predatory pricing is considered anti-competitive and is illegal under antitrust laws. I wonder why Sony and Microsoft didn't get hit with lawsuits about that.

    31. Re:COTS = COST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nintendo does not, and as far as I know has never sold any of their consoles/handhelds below cost.
      They make money from day one. They made $144,000,000 in profit from the WII console alone in the first year or so of sales.

    32. Re:COTS = COST by magarity · · Score: 1

      Sony, like every other console manufacturer, sells below cost and make up the difference with game sales.
       
      Which is why it shouldn't be too hard to see the solution.
      Version 1: gaming only console subject to mysterious and unspecified updates pushed from Sony, price subsidized.
      Version 2: Do whatever you want with it, price at normal hardware profit levels.
      All the institution users can either buy version 1 and take their chances, version 2 and be happy, or some other manufacturer's product. Units already sold under the install any os feature should be grandfathered in to version 2; it's Sony's fault for not seeing this demand ahead of time.

    33. Re:COTS = COST by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Sony would never sign a Linux install.

      I propose the US Air Force and Sony draft up some kind of agreement whereby they agree to sell directly to USAF the hardware and software they need to continue supporting their supercomputing cluster, thereby bypassing the standard channels (and its restrictions) entirely, and all in exchange for an agreed price which is likely far less than the Air Force would pay otherwise. We could call this a....hmm I dunno, how about.."contract"? I like that. That's a good one. Say, I believe this is my carriage. Good day gentleman, I'm off to the patent office.

    34. Re:COTS = COST by ZekoMal · · Score: 1

      ...PS3 which Sony, like every other console manufacturer, sells below cost and make up the difference with game sales.

      Except the Wii, which despite all complaints about how it "sucks" makes a profit on each system sold, makes more money than the other systems (I'm not too sure post-MW2, but it was that way pre-MW2), and has yet to have any features randomly stripped away. With my 360, I've had a few surprises ("Oh, you though you could play an AVI on here? Well, you need to get internet access to your 360 to get the update. Oh, you bought it used and don't have the wifi adapter, and your router is in the basement so running a wire down is a pain in the ass? Too bad!"), with my Wii, it still works the exact same as the day I bought it, without anything crippling it.

      I didn't even bother with the PS3. It may have prettier graphics and a sleeker system, but I've already sworn myself off Sony for their consistent "shit on the customer base" attitude.

    35. Re:COTS = COST by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that it will still be cheaper to change to some other COTS solution than to develop something different.

      But on the other hand - they are part of the defense and can probably work out a deal with Sony about getting a version where the expected features exists. And if they can't then they will have some weight to throw at Sony.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    36. Re:COTS = COST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasn't non-sense. It was true. You could build a supercomputer with PS3s and it was also the most cost-effective and energy efficient solution available.
      It's just that Ken Kutaragi is not in charge anymore and Howard Stringer and co. are desperately trying to "undo" what he's achieved.

    37. Re:COTS = COST by murpium · · Score: 1

      THANK YOU. I am not a big fan of Sony. I do not own a PS3. But I can't figure out why everyone is in such an uproar over this. Sony loses money on every PS3 they sell. When people start buying tons of PS3s just for the ability to put Linux on it instead of buying games, Sony loses more money. I'm sorry, but I cannot blame Sony for removing the feature. The USAF will have to actually buy super computers from companies that do it for profit.

    38. Re:COTS = COST by Arakageeta · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I misinterpreted the original COTS post. I took the intent to mean that the USAF would develop "games" to run on a cluster of stock PS3s (like folding@home), not a cluster of dev kits. My point was that the stock PS3 OS might not have all the features necessary to operate in an MPI-based cluster. I suppose your "game" might be able to provide this environment, but that could get quite expensive.

      As for building a cluster of dev kits, it is not price competitive against IBM's QS22. I believe a QS22 blade is (was?) somewhere around $8-10k a piece (excluding chassis costs). However, the blade has TWO higher-end Cell processors with all 8 SPUs functional in each and the blade can be configured with up to 32GB of memory (compare that to the PS3s 256MB). I'm not sure how many SPUs are functional on the dev kit. Still, it has only a single lower-end Cell, right?

      Thus, the only price competitive solution for a dev kit is to use it to develop software for a cluster of stock PS3s. Which again, might not be able to do all the things it must in an MPI-based cluster.

    39. Re:COTS = COST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is Sonys problem not USAF. When the fuck did people start thinking that businesses deserved to make a profit. The sooner the disposable razor model dies the happier I will be.

    40. Re:COTS = COST by couchslug · · Score: 1

      The problem isn't a COTS problem, it's a fucking SONY problem.

      Buy _standard_ hardware with available competitive equivalent, and use an operating system that doesn't come with shackles!

      BTW, one reason to use standard processors is the availability of standard MOTHERBOARDS. Buying Sony to get the proc in a cheap package backfired because the "motherboard" and its supporting systems are vendor-locked.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    41. Re:COTS = COST by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "Sony would never sign a Linux install."

      Yellow Dog Linux for the PS3? How about the official Linux Kit Sony had for the PS2?

      They'll never sign a Linux install, yea, right.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    42. Re:COTS = COST by dave562 · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but I cannot blame Sony for removing the feature.

      You may not. Everyone else who understands consumer protection laws will, and when it goes to court, they will win.

      I own a PS3. I bought a PS3 because I was tired of playing against hackers on the PC. I support Sony's logic about limiting access to their console in order to preserve the end user experience (sounds a lot like Apple, doesn't it?). However, despite the fact that their decision potentially benefits me, I can see how they are wrong. You simply can't sell a product with a feature and then remove the feature whenever you feel like it.

      Car Analogy: General Motors sells you a car with a navigation system. You never use the navigation system because you have an uber refined direction sense. General Motors decides that terrorists are using their navigation system to drive on the freeway and that is a Bad Thing(tm). General Motors sends a repo man to your place and rips the navigation system (that you paid for) out of your car.

      Would you be okay with GM doing that?

    43. Re:COTS = COST by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      For some reason, I don't think it SONY would have a problem of selling directly to USAF slim's with an older ROM on them specifically for this purpose.

      at a much higher price

    44. Re:COTS = COST by harl · · Score: 1

      Buying a loss leader does not obligate you to buy anything else.

      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
    45. Re:COTS = COST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or bought the IBM Cell blades (which were cancelled) for a lot cheaper than the developers kit per seat. Didn't it cost something of the order of 20k plus the approval of Sony? Luckily parts of the cache in some general purpose processors today can be configured as a streaming stores so the military could consider partially automatic code transformation to such a type of scalar system.

    46. Re:COTS = COST by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Exactly, they're in roughly the same position now as if Sony had gone belly-up or stopped production of the PS3, both of which scenarios should have been taken into account.

    47. Re:COTS = COST by boxxertrumps · · Score: 1

      A better car analogy is that they refused to do an advertised free oil change (that only they have the ability to do) unless you consented to the removal of the navigation system.

    48. Re:COTS = COST by jwietelmann · · Score: 1
      I'm not the GP. I assure you from experience that big, expensive, proprietary in-house solutions are far better than the big, proprietary, pseudo-COTS that the government gets tricked into. Here's how it goes:
      1. Put an RFI out to COTS vendors.
      2. Find out that none of their products meet even 50% of your requirements.
      3. Ignore the previous fact. You'll be off to your next gov't. project, looking like a hero, before the shit hits the fan.
      4. Push for your favorite COTS vendor, possibly the one for whom you used to work. (Hmm...) Fudge all the numbers to make it look good. No one ever got promoted by telling the boss that what he wants to do will be a long and expensive process no matter what.
      5. Gov't pays COTS vendor to modify the product to the point where it is only usable for the government. Congratulations, you've defeated the purpose of COTS and will now shoulder 100% of the cost for any maintenance or new features.
      6. End up with what amounts to a big, expensive in-house solution, only gov't doesn't own the source code, has to pay licensing fees every year, all changes have to go through the "COTS" vendor, and they've got a fat contract for life.
      7. It's cool, like I said, by the time everyone figures this out you, Mr. Bigshot PM, are not even directing that project anymore. You, being the genius who replaced big, expensive in-house stuff with fancy new COTS product, got promoted and moved to the next big thing as soon as everyone signed on the dotted line.

      COTS is great in theory, but it's usually a total lie.

    49. Re:COTS = COST by BikeHelmet · · Score: 1

      But those are expensive, defeating the purpose of using PS3s in the first place. They could have gone to IBM and bulk ordered a pile of CELL equipped blade servers but its cheaper to buy the PS3 which Sony, like every other console manufacturer, sells below cost and make up the difference with game sales.

      USAF buys literally tons of loss-leading PS3s but no games? I think you just hit on why Sony doesn't care about the problem the Air Force faces now.

      They don't sell it "below cost". They easily make a hundred percent profit on the hardware. It's possible that they need three hundred percent profit to pay off the Cell R&D, but whose fault is that?

      They're willing to sell it to millions of gamers for that low. Scientific research probably accounts for less than 1% of the PS3's sold, and is for a good cause. They should've just written it off as charity (not the tax deductible kind) or investment in the future.

      And how do I know this? From all the original articles quoting the dropping price to manufacture the PS3, which claimed that Sony was losing several hundred dollars on each unit. The parts costs were skewed, though. At the time those articles came out, I was able to get parts like HDDs an average of 40% cheaper than the quoted amounts, and I'm a nobody. I'd imagine a company manufacturing millions of units would be able to get far better prices than I could. They manufacture many of the components themselves, too, so that reduces parts costs even further. (Unless they want to make a profit, moving parts from one devision to another)

      There are distribution costs, but I'm sure they've got that down to an art. If I can get a single console shipped from China for ~$50, I'm betting it costs closer to ~$20 for them, imported by the thousands.

      Do they have a right to lots of profit? Absolutely. Any company or companies that plop down tens of billions before getting a return shouldn't be criticized for wanting 100%+ profit. There's a lot of fields where profit margins are 1000%+, so this isn't at all extreme.

      But I'm tired of hearing that they're selling below cost. They aren't. They still make money on every PS3 sold to a scientist - it's just that they lose the chance to sell expensive Cell supercomputers, and there's no further licensing revenue from purchased games.

    50. Re:COTS = COST by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

      Not saying they were, merely saying that Sony is even less inclined to care about the USAF's issues than they would a consumer who bought a PS3 and ten games at full retail price; in the latter's case Sony has at least made up some of the loss with each game sale.

    51. Re:COTS = COST by harl · · Score: 1

      I fail to see how to the loss leader aspect is even relevant.

      Either it's a crime to remove an advertised feature or it's not.

      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
    52. Re:COTS = COST by 2Paranoid · · Score: 1

      Wow! You just described "a major telecommunications company" at which I may have worked . It's like you were going down their checklist. Oh yeah, you left off "Faster-Cheaper-Better"... (we modified this one to say "Faster-Cheaper-Better. Pick two.").

    53. Re:COTS = COST by mjwx · · Score: 1

      USAF buys literally tons of loss-leading PS3s but no games? I think you just hit on why Sony doesn't care about the problem the Air Force faces now.

      Yeah, they should have bought Wii's.

      Base Computer:"Waggle the XM745 motion command device in an arching motion in order to launch ordinance".
      / a general facepalms in the background.
      General: "Colonel, you're doing it wrong, give me the wiimote. Now try it like this."
      Base Computer: "Self destruct sequence activated, countdown set to 90 seconds. Waggle the XM745 motion command device in a circular motion followed by your authorisation code to disarm".

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    54. Re:COTS = COST by kitgerrits · · Score: 1

      Even the proprietary stuff relies on parts that have no guarantee that they will still be manufactured in 3 years' time.
      Just ask NASA about the processors in their Shuttles.

      --
      "I was in love with a beautiful blonde once, dear. She drove me to drink. It's the one thing I am indebted to her for."
    55. Re:COTS = COST by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      They'll never sign a Linux install, yea, right.

      Those aren't signed installs. They require the 'Other OS' feature, which didn't require signature. You can't install YDL without the 'Other OS' feature, which is gone.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    56. Re:COTS = COST by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Umm, the PS2 didn't have 'OtherOS' you just had a plain signed Linux Kit.

      I still have it PLUS the keyboard and mouse that went to the PS2.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  3. Sounds good to me by Mathness · · Score: 1

    This is a good data point for the research, assuming they are interested in results other than performance, as it will show that a dependency on non replaceable hardware or hardware beyond their control isn't that great in the long run.

    --
    Carbon based humanoid in training.
    1. Re:Sounds good to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We tried this in the Space Station program years ago. Spent millions adapting from COTS, only to see that when you were done, it was neither COTS, nor specialty. If the manufacturer changed the hardware, updated, reworked the product line, all your efforts had to be repeated. Did Congress listen? What do you think?

  4. And suddenly PS3 sales drop by 80%? by mysidia · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What, the USAF was the only buyer of PS3s, and now suddenly that they can't use them, nobody wants them... the market will be flooded with $0.10 used PS3s nobody can actually use for anything useful.

    1. Re:And suddenly PS3 sales drop by 80%? by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      What, the USAF was the only buyer of PS3s, and now suddenly that they can't use them, nobody wants them... the market will be flooded with $0.10 used PS3s nobody can actually use for anything useful.

      At the current point in time, used 60GB PS3s sell for around the same price as a new 120GB PS3. This is because Sony has removed features from hardware over time, not just removed features from the software. Mostly notably, PS2 support was removed from hardware.

      Besides which, if you don't use your machine to play games, you'll never get prompted to update it, thus it doesn't become useless just because said support was removed in an update.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  5. not necessarily impossible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It turns out that while their PS3s don't need the firmware update, it will be impossible to replace PS3s that fail.

    Unless they, y'know, get directly in touch with Sony and tell them what they're trying to do. I'm sure in a case like this that something can be worked out. Instead of actual reporting and checking up on the situation, we instead get people using words like "impossible". There are many things that happen every single day that fall into this same category of "impossible", and yet they happen...

    1. Re:not necessarily impossible by gsmalleus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Agreed. There are many companies out there that do business with the government. Just because Sony discontinued a feature, doesn't mean they won't let a large customer, such as the Army, not have access to a way of configuring their hardware the way they need it configured.

    2. Re:not necessarily impossible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Show up with a bag of money and companies start to do things....

      Hell they could contract it out to a 'game' house. Who already has the dev kits...

      Then it will work again on 100% of the units. Instead of just the 'older ones'. Hell they could sell the older units on ebay at 6-7 dollars a pop. Then buy up newer slim units at a 50% cost savings on power.

    3. Re:not necessarily impossible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I believe six impossible things before breakfast!

    4. Re:not necessarily impossible by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      If you've done six impossible things this morning, why not round it off with breakfast at Milliways—the Restaurant at the End of the Universe!

    5. Re:not necessarily impossible by PolyDwarf · · Score: 1

      ...I'm sure in a case like this that something can be worked out. Instead of actual reporting and checking up on the situation, we instead get people using words like "impossible"...

      So... They reported what the situation *is*.. And that's not actual reporting? The fact of the matter, it *is* impossible to go buy a new PS3 with OtherOS. It *may* not be impossible in the future, however that's conjecture, not reporting.

    6. Re:not necessarily impossible by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      Your assumption is, this option exists but the USAF research lab simply didn't think to ask? Given that they had to buy retail boxes en masse and throw away the controllers in the first place, I doubt that Sony is going to give them any special consideration. It'd hardly be out of the ordinary considering that Microsoft wouldn't even give the military a bulk rate on Xbox 360s for rec rooms.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    7. Re:not necessarily impossible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... They reported what the situation *is*.. And that's not actual reporting? The fact of the matter, it *is* impossible to go buy a new PS3 with OtherOS. It *may* not be impossible in the future, however that's conjecture, not reporting.

      No, "reporting" is getting in touch with both parties to get a balanced take on the story. Did anyone from Ars actually contact Sony and get a representative to unequivocally state that they will NEVER let the USAF get their hands on PS3s that have the Other OS option on them? If not, then the Ars story is nothing but assumptions and conjecture. And that, my friend, is why many in the field of journalism take issue with bloggers (even fairly reputable ones like Ars) calling themselves 'journalists'.

    8. Re:not necessarily impossible by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      No Bid

      I HAVE shown up to companies with a ready to go multi million dollar contract and have been turned away because sometimes it is outside the scope of the company's business. Some don't want to deal with the government or Lockheed's rules. Others are simply as busy as they want to be at that moment.

      Sony couldeasily have no interest in maintaining yet another build of their ps3 hw/sw.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    9. Re:not necessarily impossible by IorDMUX · · Score: 1

      Though I am sure that Sony is just thrilled that the Air Force has purchased bundles upon bundles of their loss leader PS3 (likely without a single game to soften the blow), and now wants to special order devices and continue doing so.

      I still see Sony being less than thrilled.

      --
      >> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
    10. Re:not necessarily impossible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then move onto the next game house... Nothing saying *ONLY* sony makes PS3 programs.

      Hell its an 'easy' too. They already have a program mostly written. Trust me there are TONS of 'mom and pop' shops out there that would do the work. If the stacks of shit games out there are any indication...

  6. Well they have the bargaining power by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well they have the bargaining power. Like, if you don't supply us with an OS install feature you better get nervous when you see an aircraft flying towards your headquarters. Or maybe you won't see a thing. Accidents happen you know

    1. Re:Well they have the bargaining power by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      the problem is that area of japan has a rather large number of embassies in the same area

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    2. Re:Well they have the bargaining power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not a problem. US missiles have a highly accurate targeting system. Its calculations are powered by a cluster of PS3s.

    3. Re:Well they have the bargaining power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That worked out well when Clinton wanted to send the Chinese a memo in the Yugo War, didn't it?

    4. Re:Well they have the bargaining power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not a problem. ask China if you don't believe me.

    5. Re:Well they have the bargaining power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a problem, as long as the closest embassies are Iran, China or some Unpronouncibliztan country

  7. Obvious outcome by iYk6 · · Score: 0

    Using PS3s for anything, especially non-gaming research applications seemed like a really bad idea in the first place. A game console is nothing but an overpriced, crippled computer. Sure, the multi-core cell processor might be great for some things, but I doubt that they couldn't have found something better for the same price. Plus there is the issue of control. You can only get so far hacking PS3s. And doing so takes a lot of time that could have been spent elsewhere. There is only one vendor who sells PS3s; if they had gone with general purpose x86 computers, they could still get their parts from other manufacturers.

    On the side of the USAF, though, Sony's crippling devices after the fact took a lot of people by surprise. Everybody knew that they gave themselves that ability in the TOS (along with everything else), but few would have predicted that they would actually use it.

    1. Re:Obvious outcome by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Apparently, for the particular bit of number-crunching that they were doing, Cell curb-stomped x86. They then concluded that, if you want Cell, your only options are a few absurdly expensive specialist compute servers(IBM makes one, Sony at least has a model number, I think that there are one or two others) or cheap PS3s. Since, when the started, OtherOS was a standard, supported, option, the only "hacking" involved was the inconvenience of having to touch each machine to kick off the install.

      Had their algorithm not suited Cell, the PS3 would have been an absurd choice. Since it did, though, it was actually pretty sensible(barring Sony's hard-to-predict action).

    2. Re:Obvious outcome by sourcerror · · Score: 1

      Well, PS3s were marketed with Other Os feature. And they offered the same computing power cheaper than PCs. When PS3 came out you could barely buy dual-core processors PCs for the same price. (The PS3 has 7 cores running on 3.2 GHz.)

    3. Re:Obvious outcome by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Not exactly. The Cell has one PPE core, that's hyperthreaded with Altivec, and 7 SPE's, one of which is reserved, so you get access to 6 under Linux. Still, it's a number crunching beastie. Untill quite recently most of the processing power of Folding@home was in all those PS3's running it, and they're still about one third of it.

    4. Re:Obvious outcome by bmajik · · Score: 1

      (barring Sony's hard-to-predict action).

      If the USAF couldn't have predicted Sony deciding to fuck its customers, I'm a bit concerned about its ability to predict much of anything.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    5. Re:Obvious outcome by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Using PS3s for anything, especially non-gaming research applications seemed like a really bad idea in the first place. A game console is nothing but an overpriced, crippled computer. Sure, the multi-core cell processor might be great for some things, but I doubt that they couldn't have found something better for the same price.

      You need to follow Mr. Peabody into the way-back machine to understand why they used PS3s. At the time it offered dramatically more flops per dollar than anything else. Flops are what you really need for all serious simulation, and the more precision, the better. It's only recently that you could get halfway decent double-precision flop rates with GPGPU computing. And even today, you'll need at least a $100 video card to push any significant number of them, plus a PC with a PCIEx16 slot. There has probably never been a cheaper source of flops than a used PS3 until recently, where used PCs with high-end video cards capable of delivering them began to become available. And I suspect that if you run the numbers, a typically-priced (say, gamestop price?) used PS3 will provide more DP FLOPS than a typically-priced used PC. Again, this is in the process of changing; it might be here already. And in any case, Sony has just eliminated the value of the used PS3 for scientific computing. (Those who say it had none previously are ignoring the many benefits of clustering; if a node dies, who cares, aside from the financial impact of its replacement? You can buy used consoles in bulk.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Obvious outcome by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      Had their algorithm not suited Cell, the PS3 would have been an absurd choice.

      Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most of the features of the Cell disabled under the OtherOS option?

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    7. Re:Obvious outcome by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My understanding is that the GPU is neutered to hell and back, you basically just get a dumb framebuffer; but that the GPU is completely separate from the Cell, its basically just near-stock Nvidia silicon from a few generations back. The Cell, though, is more or less as functional as it ever is(which is to say that you only get 7 SPEs rather than the full 8 in the expensive compute gear).

      Unless you program your application specifically to use the SPEs, PS3 Linux is basically just not-especially-fast PPC Linux with not much RAM; but the SPEs are available.

    8. Re:Obvious outcome by vbraga · · Score: 1

      Is a IBM BladeCenter that expensive for an enterprise (well, Air Force) grade cluster? A QS21 is about 7k (2 CPUs/2GB RAM). How it specs compare to a PS3? How much does a PS3 cost?

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
    9. Re:Obvious outcome by MostAwesomeDude · · Score: 1

      This. There are also two things to keep in mind:

      1) There is a Cell Gallium driver which operates on the CPU, which can provide decently fast 3D if you need it.

      2) The GPU's beefier functions are only disabled because when it's fully init'd it can DMA to anywhere in main memory, ignoring memory protection and ownership. It could completely bypass the hypervisor if unlocked.

      --
      ~ C.
    10. Re:Obvious outcome by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      The PS3 launched at $500, if I recall accurately, and may have drifted down a little after that, so the price depends on exactly when they were buying; but that is a decent ballpark figure.

      Specs are 1 CPU, 256MB of XDR RAM(another 256 of video RAM; but I believe that that is largely useless for the OtherOS). 1 GigE port.

      The QS21 is 7k for 2CPUs and 2 GB of DDR, along with 2 GigE and optional infiniband. For every 14 of those, you'll need a Bladecenter H(6K, plus options) or put 12 in a Bladecenter HT(14K plus options).

      If your application requires more RAM, or tighter coupling than 1xGigE, you don't really have much of a choice. If you can get away with it, though, the price difference is nontrivial.

    11. Re:Obvious outcome by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      The PS3 launched at $500, if I recall accurately, and may have drifted down a little after that, so the price depends on exactly when they were buying; but that is a decent ballpark figure.

      $500 for the 20GB model, $600 for the 60GB model.

      As I recall, the 20GB model also was missing card readers and 802.11b/g networking.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    12. Re:Obvious outcome by kramerd · · Score: 1

      It depends on the country.

      In Japan, the original (silver console) launch, the 20 GB was 20% cheaper than the 60 GB but it did not include the chrome trim, flash card readers, silver logo, and Wi-F, coming in at 60,000 yen. Back then, this was only 270 Euros (at the time, about $375). In the US it launched in two models, one at 499 and one at 599 (the extra C-note brought you from 20 GB to 60GB and got you one HDMI port, one Ethernet port and four USB ports instead of 2 HDMI ports, three Ethernet ports and six USB ports as promised prior to the delay from November to March). In Europe the launch was the same, only euros instead of dollars, which back in 2006 was around $1.4 USD per Euro (so much more expensive). In Singapore, it started at 799 with an 80 GB model including IPTV.

      I am going to jump a little off the topic of your post but stay relevant to the article here:

      The models that dropped to $400 and below did not include backwards compatability which got many people upset because the launch PS3s are the only way to get upconverted PS2 games. I suppose if anyone wants to prove they really bought a PS3 for the Other OS feature, they had the opportunity to register their PS3 with Sony, which includes space on the registration form that came with the PS3 for comments, including a specific question asking what influenced their decision to purchase. If anyone filled one out and wrote down Linux and PS3 games, they might have a real lawsuit. If they just wrote down linux, there was no need to update the firmware.

      Meanwhile, Sony has always been selling the PS3 as an entertainment system. If you have been using it to wash your car, your expectations regarding continuing use are not valid. There is nothing to stop you from using your PS3 to wash your car, but when Sony stops making the same size PS3 and the new PS3 slim doesn't work as well, you can't get mad that one day you might not be able to wash your car anymore. You might have to go to a car wash.

      Now, if you replace wash your car with supercomputing research, you have the situation the air force is in (the car wash here is an expensive government contract devoted to air force needs).

      The lawsuits noted in the summary are not related to this complaint.

  8. All this backlash will mean one thing by Phyrexicaid · · Score: 1

    The Sony PS4 will not come with a Linux option *at all*

    --
    The meme is dead, long live the meme!
    1. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by erroneus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't care about that and I doubt many others do either. What I do care about is that Sony is getting the recognition it deserves on this matter. You simply cannot do this to consumers and expect to get away with it. Sony is building a history of such behaviors including lobbying for law that excludes them from prosecution when accessing computers across the internet searching for infringing copyrighted content, the installation of their rootkits and this removal of features debacle. While people continue to chant "well, don't buy from Sony!" I have to say I am glad to see that more and more people are taking notice and are saying the same thing -- Don't buy from Sony!

      Law suits and criminal charges aren't enough to stop Sony. People have to stop buying from Sony to make Sony care. I'm just one guy... I won't buy another VAIO, another Walkman, another Clie', another camcorder, another TV, a PS(X), another DVD or CD with Sony/BMG on the label. Nothing. Not another penny. And the more attention this draws, during a time when people are still a bit more cautious and thoughtful where they spend their pennies than ever before, more people will be joining me in my boycott of anything Sony.

      And this message isn't just for Sony. It is a message for any other company out there who would try the same thing.

    2. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by Znork · · Score: 1

      I won't buy another VAIO

      Personally I recently refrained from buying a $2k+ Sony projector due to their behaviour. It probably performed a bit better than my second choice, but buy from Sony and you get screwed one way or another. The company is not getting another cent from me.

    3. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like it was going to come with that option before the backlash.

    4. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by Jer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You think the backlash is going to cause Sony to not put the capability of using Linux on the next gen of Playstations?

      News flash - once Sony decided to remove the option from devices that already had it installed, they committed themselves to not having Linux boot as an option on any of their future PS models. There's no way in hell you can use that as a marketing point when everyone knows that Sony can revoke it any time they feel like it and there's not a damn thing you as a customer can do about it.

      If they'd just said "not supported on the new slim models" then the OtherOS option might have still shown up on the PS4. But by actively screwing with the models people had already purchased and removing the functionality, they pretty much ended any ability they have to market a PS* model as "capable of running Linux". Which means the whole point of offering it is killed dead - if you can't use it as a selling point for the device, what purpose does it have?

    5. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      But by actively screwing with the models people had already purchased and removing the functionality, they pretty much ended any ability they have to market a PS* model as "capable of running Linux". Which means the whole point of offering it is killed dead - if you can't use it as a selling point for the device, what purpose does it have?

      I never saw mention of OtherOS in SCEfoo marketing materials, other than the manual, and webpage that mentions it. It's not a marketing point, but there to encourage people to learn the ins and outs of programming for the Cell. Hobbyist development. Being able to run a real web browser like Firefox (or Opera) or OpenOffice because of that is secondary.

      Don't blame Sony, blame Geohot. If he hadn't found that hole, they'd have left it in. And yes, I did have Linux on my PS3.

    6. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, we don't blame some random kid. Sony removed OtherOS on the slim before he even turned on his PS3. He's a convenient scapegoat but Sony isn't patching any "hole" here; they just want to get rid of OtherOS. In fact, the so-called "hole" is still present in all (including slim) consoles, although it will take a bit more sophistication than short-circuit to exploit. But I'm never buying anymore Sony gear. And I used to be a Sony fanboy...

    7. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering Sony even makes the ECU in your car I really doubt you can 100% boycott them.

    8. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I think it's difficult to avoid all things not Sony, even a partial but significant boycott moves can help too. More importantly, use the money to buy some competitor's product instead; you'll usually find you get better value anyways.

      I was in the market bigtime for some major upgrades and first time product buys. I'd been drooling over getting a VAIO. Sony pulled their stunt just in time, I now own a nice Acer (and saved $300 dollars and got a better spec'd machine). $800-900 not to Sony.

      My first HDTV, was going to be a 46" Bravia. I now have a nice 6 series Samsung in front. Nicer picture too and cheaper.

      Parent's 2nd HDTV? Not Sony. Went with another Samsung.

      The Sony Dash? Not buying it.

      Sony BluRay's? Stopped buying them. That's $50 a month.

      PS3 games? Not sure what I'm going to do. Since the update, I haven't bought a PS3 game. Or updated the firmware on my 2 fats (a 60gb and an 80gb with software emulation). The funny thing, I was going to buy a Slim for the office I have since I already have a computer there, and scrapped that plan. Probably would have bought another Slim down the line too but that certainly isn't going to happen. I'm certainly not buying any downloadable content from Sony anymore. They pissed that money away.

      Sony phones and stereo stuff were always 2nd in my mind on the consumer level. That spot is now with the Android phones and probably Onkyo or Yamaha. I still like Nokia but they haven't delivered on the screen resolution, having gone backwards. And I prefer NAD for stereo stuff.

      Ebook stuff I had went with Kindle; didn't like the 1984 move but Amazon's made good so far.

      Music and movies, that's harder if you like the artist or the movie. I admit I let that slide.

      So in the past 2 months alone, that's $3,000 (2 HDTVs, laptop, Dash) in product revenue, and about $200 at least so far in downloadable content, games, and bluray. By the end of the year, the overall number will easily hit $3,000 for me alone. Thanks for waking me up Sony for the 2nd time (first being the rootkit); not only are you getting me to see that your products are really overpriced (knew that) but the competitor's have passed your sorry asses (other products are significantly better and cheaper than your overpriced gear).

    9. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do what to customers? Release a new product that doesn't do exactly what you want it to do? Jesus - buy a computer if you want to run Linux - buy a PS3 if you want to play PS3 games. Sorry the government went out a bought a video game machine to do something entirely different - it's their own damn fault.

      I'm sure Sony is really scared about the 4 people that put linux on their PS3 as opposed to the millions of others than haven't. Whoop-e-doo - they don't give a crap about you or your message and neither does the rest of the majority.

    10. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by Douglas+Goodall · · Score: 1

      A while back trhere was a debacle about the labeling of machines as regards Vista compatibility. I bought three HP Desktops and two Sony VAIOs, all of which could only run the basic versions of Vista because of limitations in the graphics capabilities. Then I watched for years as Microsoft and Balmer dodged the courts about this, even though evidence makes it obvious that collusion occurred between Intel and Microsoft that negatively impacted consumers and businesses alike. Apparently unlimited amounts of cash can keep a company like Microsoft from having to pay even moderate fines for blatant illegal behavior. This is two strikes for Sony with me, the VAIO that wouldn't run Aero, and the PS3s that no longer run Linux. My only difficulty now is making sure before I rent a movie that it didn't come from Sony.

    11. Re:All this backlash will mean one thing by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Considering Sony even makes the ECU in your car I really doubt you can 100% boycott them.

      Most of mine have been made by Hitachi. What cars have Sony parts in the PCM?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  9. Opportunity? by vodevil · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This will be a good opportunity for the government to see how good hacking/jailbreaking/etc. is, and they can install geohot's fix so they don't lose linux support.

    1. Re:Opportunity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      This will be a good opportunity for the government to see how good hacking/jailbreaking/etc. is ...

      If the fix would void the hardware warranty/support warranty that USAF has with Sony, there is no way the USAF would jailbreak those PS3s. In the end, this is not a decision one man is making about the PS3 cluster he owns.

    2. Re:Opportunity? by hedwards · · Score: 2, Insightful

      O really? It's actually cost effective to do so when you're stuck with no replacement parts at all. And the Feds have a nifty thing they do where lawsuits just magically get dismissed for national security purposes. If they want to haxxor the thing so that they have guaranteed replacements, they can do it. And it will likely be the most cost effective and least damaging choice.

    3. Re:Opportunity? by ConfusedVorlon · · Score: 1

      really?

      if the options are

      1) buy PS3 for $500 each and completely void the warantee
      2) buy some other cell computer for $5000 with support

      then - in the context that they know this system works already, I don't see how they could do anything other than buy the PS3s and get some extra ones for backup.

      [numbers for illustrative purposes only, I can't be bothered to check what a ps3 costs]

    4. Re:Opportunity? by Halo1 · · Score: 1

      We also checked out both options for our lab at the university. At that time (3 years back), a PS3 was EUR 600. The only way to get a "cell computer" was via IBM blades. The cheapest blade chassis *without any blade* cost $17,000. I don't remember the price of the individual blades. At that price point, I'm not sure whether using the Cell architecture is still price-efficient (which is presumably the reason why they went with it in the first place; at least it won't be because of how easy it is to program).

      --
      Donate free food here
    5. Re:Opportunity? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We also checked out both options for our lab at the university. At that time (3 years back), a PS3 was EUR 600. The only way to get a "cell computer" was via IBM blades.

      That's odd. Mercury Computer has had a "cell accelerator board" for $8K since the last quarter of 2006. Basically its a cell processor in a PCIe slot.
      Second generation is here: http://www.mc.com/products/boards/accelerator_board2.aspx

      Maybe they had export problems with it, although they announced it at a singapore trade show.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    6. Re:Opportunity? by Trisha-Beth · · Score: 1

      The Sony warranty is worth nothing to them. It may even have negative value. Anything sent back for warranty repair/replacement would be updated to the useless version of the firmware.

    7. Re:Opportunity? by VMaN · · Score: 1

      The problem isn't that the ps3s are getting upgraded, they're not connected. The problem is that any node that needs replacement will end up with a newer unusable FW when bought or repaired.

    8. Re:Opportunity? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Those boards tend to cost about a grand (they're not the only ones who say they have 'em) for a single cell and you don't even get all the PS3 hardware. Then again, you don't get access to all the PS3 hardware with Linux on PS3, either; the GPU, which contains about half of the system's power, is not accessible to you. Still, that's a ridiculous price by any standard. I can see paying no more than twice what a PS3 costs. You can now buy IBM blades with a pair of second-generation cell processors, the prices are almost certainly high, yet also almost certainly provide superior price:performance than buying a bunch of two-slot cell processors that you can install perhaps four of in a PC, tops. Hmm, okay, maybe not, this is IBM: It's ten thousand dollars for one box with two blades, that's four cells. They do have twice the double-precision performance, but that's still only four times the performance (in this context) as a pair of PS3s. So unless your job is less than embarrassingly parallel (i.e. you need access to the full data set, or no more than 32GB-overhead of it anyway, where this IBM box maxes out) you'll get better price-performance out of PS3s, even for double-precision fp math. But the federal government has never been shy about giving our money to IBM in the past...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. Oops! by number17 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    According to those news article dates, they aren't even half way thought the hardware refresh schedule. Looks like this little oversight by project planners is going to cost them. If they don't get sued, the cheapest way coulde be the manpower to break the DMCA and hack the things. Not sure if Sony's license allows you to flash the firmware with an older version. Otherwise, ebay for old models or start looking for replacement hardware. Although, perhaps doing nothing and letting them die out, its a cluster remember, won't have much of an impact beyond RAM and HD problems.

    1. Re:Oops! by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure the USAF is exempt from the DMCA for purposes of interoperability.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    2. Re:Oops! by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      The USAF's issue has nothing to do with the firmware update - its to do with the fact that the new PS3's do not support the Other OS feature at all, and the older PS3's that do support it (before the firmware update) are becoming hard to get hold of. The only link between the two issues (firmware and new hardware versions) are the lawsuit links at the bottom of the summary.

    3. Re:Oops! by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure the USAF is exempt from the DMCA for purposes of interoperability.

      Oh, I see: "When the President^W USAF does it, that means it is not illegal", right?

      [citation needed]

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    4. Re:Oops! by Jaysyn · · Score: 3, Informative

      [Citation]

      17 U.S.C. 1201(e) (1998)

      Exception for Law Enforcement and Intelligence Activities. The DMCA permits circumvention for any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence activity by or at the direction of a federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, or of an intelligence agency of the United States.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    5. Re:Oops! by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      17 U.S.C. 1201(e) (1998)
      Exception for Law Enforcement and Intelligence Activities. The DMCA permits circumvention for any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence activity by or at the direction of a federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, or of an intelligence agency of the United States.

      Oh, facts? You can use them to prove anything that's even remotely true.

      (e) LAW ENFORCEMENT, INTELLIGENCE, AND OTHER GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES- This section does not prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, information security, or intelligence activity of an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State, or a person acting pursuant to a contract with the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State. For purposes of this subsection, the term `information security' means activities carried out in order to identify and address the vulnerabilities of a government computer, computer system, or computer network.

      Congratulations, sir, you win the Internets.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    6. Re:Oops! by PhilHibbs · · Score: 1

      The USAF's issue has nothing to do with the firmware update - its to do with the fact that the new PS3's do not support the Other OS feature at all, and the older PS3's that do support it (before the firmware update) are becoming hard to get hold of.

      It is a firmware issue, because, as you just said, second-hand PS3's will likely have the new firmware.

  11. This would be a great time for Microsoft by MikeRT · · Score: 2, Funny

    The XBox 360 has already been successfully used for scientific computing. Microsoft should move in for the kill with a modified 360 that includes a complete tool chain and a new clustering API.

    1. Re:This would be a great time for Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Except that they make a loss on every console sold and these guys aren't making up for it by buying games.

    2. Re:This would be a great time for Microsoft by sourcerror · · Score: 1

      Well, the same is true for PS3.

    3. Re:This would be a great time for Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The XBox 360 has already been successfully used for scientific computing.

      According to the article, he's using the 360's GPU.

      Not that there's anything wrong with that, but the 360's GPU must be at least 2 or 3 generations out of date by now and more easily replaced by a generic PC, high-end Nvidia video card and a software package like CUDA. An easier programming environment too, I imagine.

    4. Re:This would be a great time for Microsoft by jank1887 · · Score: 1

      xbox 360 is x86 based right? cell processor rips x86 a new one for the types of computations being performed by the AF. They could make the API as nice as they want, it'll still underperform.

    5. Re:This would be a great time for Microsoft by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Xbox360 is PowerPC based, and uses modified versions of the PPE used in the Cell.

    6. Re:This would be a great time for Microsoft by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      No as someone already posted it is not. It uses Power. I believe three cores each supporting two threads but I could be wrong on that.
      Odds are that they are only using the Power cores to feed the GPU and using the GPU to do the heavy lifting.
      Honestly that would be a benifit of using the dev kit for the PS3 as well. They would have access to not just the cores but also the GPU.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    7. Re:This would be a great time for Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.tomsguide.com/us/microsoft-xbox-360-military-army,news-5786.html

      If only Microsoft didn't want any part of this in the first place. They don't want to be involved with the military. See link.

    8. Re:This would be a great time for Microsoft by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      a software package like CUDA.

      Or OpenCL, which isn't Nvidia-specific proprietary tech.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  12. This was already an issue by Jizato · · Score: 4, Informative

    The slim PS3s didn't support the Other OS feature from launch, and when they started making the slim models they stopped producing the older ones that did support it. This has been an issue since Sept 2009.

    1. Re:This was already an issue by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Previously you had a choice as to whether or not to update the firmware and they weren't doing it to previous models that shipped with the ability. Now they aren't giving you a meaningful choice and their patching the older machines to remove functionality. Hence why people are just now being so upset about it. Personally I think it was a dick move to not include it on the slim models without putting it very clearly on the packaging that it was a crippled machine, and not a real PS3.

    2. Re:This was already an issue by tophermeyer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Personally I think it was a dick move to not include it on the slim models without putting it very clearly on the packaging that it was a crippled machine, and not a real PS3.

      I don't mean to be rude, but I think you might need to adjust your definition of crippled. It is still a 'real' PS3, still plays Blu-Rays, PS3 games, connects to PSN, etc. They removed a theoretically popular feature that very few people actually took advantage, and that posed a mild security/piracy risk to Sony. They didn't send killbots out to peoples homes to force the update. They simply stopped offering this completely extraneous feature, and stopped supporting it.

      For what its worth, I agree that it was inconsiderate on Sony's part to go about it the way they did.

    3. Re:This was already an issue by deek · · Score: 1

      It was not as much an issue before, because the Air Force could buy used PS3s to replace any units. Now, they can't even do that.

  13. Re:Not really a surprise... by Procasinator · · Score: 1

    Why no spaces?

  14. My Sony Rip van Winkle story by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In the 90's, when I needed any electronic stuff, I used to look at Sony first. I bought most of my stuff from them, never had any problems, and was always satisfied with the product. Call it the highest level of brand loyalty and customer satisfaction.

    Then I fell asleep. I woke up about ten years later.

    The Sony I knew then, was suddenly very, very different. Now, Sony will be the last on my list, when I need to make another electronic purchase. I really feel that Sony doesn't give a damn anymore about product quality and customer satisfaction.

    Sony rootkiting your PC? Maybe I am still asleep, and having a nightmare . . .

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:My Sony Rip van Winkle story by outsider007 · · Score: 1

      Agreed, root kiting is a nightmare. I expect superusers to have the balls to engage me in melee directly.

      --
      If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
    2. Re:My Sony Rip van Winkle story by MemoryDragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The product quality from Sony still is top notch, it is their dreaded, we know better than you attitude. Example, buy a Sony car radio, excellent built quality, top notch production, but then you pull the key, it makes three annoying beeps loud as hell, to remind you to take off the front plate.
      No there is no way to turn that off unless you build a bypass circuit to the speakers or let an amplifier do that.
      Number one complaint about Sony card radios for the last 10 years, Sony knows this, are they going to change anything? No!
      Same goes for Vayo notebooks, you have to get the drivers from sony, if the driver is faulty and the manufacturer has offered a different driver, which fixes it
      you are not allowed to use it (there are hacks though), and Sony often does not deliver the driver anymore because that line of notebooks is discontinued.

      It is their we know better than you attitude why I personally have Sony at the bottom of my hardware purchase list nowadays.
      Others have shoddier hardware but the support and attided is what influences me to 80% on my purchases. For the same reason HTC has become
      bottom provider, my next phone will be an official Google supported one, instead of going for the hardwarewise better HTC model.

    3. Re:My Sony Rip van Winkle story by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      Maybe you are, since the rootkit issue happened in 2005 and was born of the Sony BMG division, and the subsequent litigation sorted that out then too. The electronics division, the computer entertainment division and the computing devices divisions are in many ways entirely separate in how they go about their business.

      I'm not saying Sony are angels or that there's no cross-divisional chatter by any means, but to tar the whole company with that broad a brush is hardly considering present circumstances. I'll at least credit the fact that they're starting to move away from their own proprietary formats, such as the adoption of SD over Memory Sticks. Sony's still driving technological innovation with the Cell chip, optical technology in Blu-ray and with OLED TVs, though it's sad to see the inventors of the Walkman fall so far by the wayside in the portable music player market.

      Yeah they screwed up, but companies do that. It doesn't make them forever "evil".

      Note: only Sony device I own is a Handycam, a tape Walkman and a previous Sony Ericsson phone, so I'm not an apologist by any means. I would like to see them driving innovation though.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    4. Re:My Sony Rip van Winkle story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it happened when Sony became a software/content provider as well as a hardware provider. Having the best hardware might allow you to do something with their software/content that they don't want you to. So their hardware division went down the tubes due to internal conflict of interest. I stopped buying their stuff.

    5. Re:My Sony Rip van Winkle story by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying Sony are angels or that there's no cross-divisional chatter by any means, but to tar the whole company with that broad a brush is hardly considering present circumstances.

      That is purely bullshit. Sony presents their bottom line as one fat number, so clearly all of those companies are part of the same corporation, and thus controlled by the same group of assholes. Or in other words, Sony is one big corporation and deserves to be treated as such. If they don't want that, they can break up.

      Sony's still driving technological innovation with the Cell chip,

      Well, they paid for it, I guess. As it has turned out, though, the Cell is going to be an evolutionary dead end. Sony has just killed it for low-cost scientific computing, and low-cost is what drives today's market, especially with a return to clustering. You can spend $10,000 to get four second-generation Cell processors (you get to use all eight SPEs, and they're twice as fast at dp-fp math) in a box from IBM. You can spend $1,000 to get one first-generation Cell processor on a PCI-E board, then you need a PC with n*2 PCI-E slots, since each board takes up two slots' worth of space. Meanwhile, nVidia GPUs just keep getting cheaper and keep providing more and more stream processors. They have the same problem; you need an SLI board and can only mount two in such a configuration. But you can build the whole system under $1000. So that means the only reason to use the Cell is where it would save you electricity. Meanwhile AMD and intel are both pushing towards a future with dozens if not hundreds of cores (intel said "thousands" not so long ago.) And this massive parallelism works best when you have a symmetric architecture, i.e. not the design of the cell, where your PPC core can either do processing or shove enough data to the SPEs to keep them busy, but can't do both at once. Programmers almost universally despise programming for the PS3 because it is far harder than the Xbox 360, which has just as much power but which is far easier to keep busy. Instead of having to manage data flow through a PowerPC and to and from six vector coprocessors which you have to stuff with their own code AND data and which have altogether too little memory directly connected, you get three symmetric CPUs and a graphics processor. And the hilarious part is that it has about as much power as the PS3, but it's vastly easier to use, not least because they utilize a unified memory space, unlike the PS3.

      Yeah they screwed up, but companies do that. It doesn't make them forever "evil".

      Uh, Sony is evil. They attempted to control morality with Betamax even though the vast majority of video porn was shot in Betacam SP. They tried to give us draconian music DRM with MiniDisc. They pushed their own locked-down, proprietarily-licensed format of memory storage device (memory stick) with zero advantages over SD, and keep prices artificially high. They installed rootkits on the PCs of paying customers, treating them like criminals. They killed Lik-Sang for distributing titles out-of-region and providing modchips which enable you to exercise your right to make backups of computer software. They advertised a horrendously expensive console as being able to run Linux, and took the feature away later to retard movie piracy, while lying to users and telling them it was about piracy and cheating in games. This isn't to say that Microsoft isn't evil, but claiming Sony is not evil is just lame.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:My Sony Rip van Winkle story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You remember Lik-Sang.

      Nothing compares to what they once were.

    7. Re:My Sony Rip van Winkle story by MostAwesomeDude · · Score: 1

      Huh, my Sony boycott is based on faulty product design.

      ~ Got a Walkman way back when. Stopped using it after it developed an unhealthy appetite for cassettes.

      ~ Remember Sony's first MP3 players? The little cylindrical ones that hooked up through USB? They don't use the standard USB file storage API. I bought this thing second-hand without a driver CD, and so far, I've been unable to dredge up drivers for the damn thing.

      ~ Rootkit CDs. Enough said.

      ~ VAIOs. My dad got one of the little mobile ones, thinking it would help him stay connected on the go. Haha, no. It runs Vista and takes 20m to boot. 20 fucking minutes of watching this tiny little cute adorable black Computer That Could attempt to boot Vista into a gigabyte of RAM. I have yet to convince him that it could run any OS better, but once I do, I'm definitely seeing if it can run even XP faster. Oh, right, and there are no drivers for the builtin webcam.

      ~ That car radio you mention? I've got one. YOU CANNOT SET THE FUCKING CLOCK. Check the manual, there's no way to do it. I had a girlfriend once that managed to do it by hitting five buttons at once, but I never got the trick from her.

      Seriously. Why would I put myself through more Sony pain?

      --
      ~ C.
    8. Re:My Sony Rip van Winkle story by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      Sony presents their bottom line as one fat number, so clearly all of those companies are part of the same corporation, and thus controlled by the same group of assholes.

      If you've ever worked for a mildly large company, you'll realise those assholes at the top frequently have little to no idea about what is being done at the coalface to implement their "vision". I'd be surprised if the management had heard of rootkits before it blew up in their face.

      Well, they paid for it, I guess.

      Sony, Toshiba and IBM co-developed the chip.

      As it has turned out, though, the Cell is going to be an evolutionary dead end. Sony has just killed it for low-cost scientific computing, and low-cost is what drives today's market, especially with a return to clustering.

      Hardly; the Cell processor wasn't initially targeted at the low-cost scientific computing market, and I don't find it wrong that Sony doesn't want to participate in a low-margin market.

      Instead of having to manage data flow through a PowerPC and to and from six vector coprocessors which you have to stuff with their own code AND data and which have altogether too little memory directly connected, you get three symmetric CPUs and a graphics processor.

      Given the design of the Xenon core in the Xbox 360, developed by IBM, a Cell partner, is based on the PPE from the Cell, I'd hardly call it an evolutionary dead end or a significant failure; furthermore, this, and the growth of ARM at the other end of the market, would suggest that the "thousand" cores of x86-64 is hardly the only way to go.

      Uh, Sony is evil.

      Get a sense of fucking perspective. You could claim tobacco companies are evil for selling products that they know kill their customers, or claim Union Carbide was evil. Sony sells consumer electronics that, through bumbling or a misguided strategy of protecting IP, have occasionally been hostile to their own customers' economic interests. No-one died or was otherwise harmed by them.

      To claim Sony (or Microsoft) is evil is pure hyperbole.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    9. Re:My Sony Rip van Winkle story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The product quality from Sony still is top notch,

      What? Sony has been cranking out low quality gear for at least 10 if not 15 years now. Their consumer electronics are terrible, and even if they were any good they tend to have horrible compatibility problems (e.g. memorystick), their computer division is a joke -- literally a quarter of all failed laptops I've ever seen in my life were Sony products -- and their audio gear is cheaply made and sounds bad.

      Apart from headphones, which they tend to make pretty well, I don't think Sony has made a decent quality product since 1988 or so.

      Even if they weren't anti-customer, they're anti-quality, so screw those guys.

  15. What Suffering? by mc+moss · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Sony's decision had no immediate impact on the cluster; for obvious reasons, the PS3s are not hooked into the PlayStation Network and don't need Sony's firmware updates. But what happens when a PS3 dies or needs repair? Tough luck."

    The PS3 stopped supporting linux installations when they introduced the PS3 slim and stopped making the original one. Why is this even news?

    1. Re:What Suffering? by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      Exactly! Cripes. When Sony stopped making consoles that had this feature, THEN it was an issue for the Air Force. The recent update doesn't change anything at all for them, unless they also want to play games on those consoles. (They don't.)

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    2. Re:What Suffering? by Pteraspidomorphi · · Score: 1

      RTFS... They were expecting to replace dead units with *used* units bought from the pool of current "fat PS3" owners, but with this update, most owners will cripple their own PS3s, making it incredibly harder for them to find suitable units.

    3. Re:What Suffering? by g4sy · · Score: 1

      Why is this even news?

      It's news because it's illegal to remove features from a product AFTER the owner has purchased it. Not in the US of course, but other places: dailytech article

      --
      somewhere, on a Big Red Sign:
      if(color==blue){speed--;}
    4. Re:What Suffering? by codegen · · Score: 1

      Because fat ones with linux will no longer be available on the used marked because of the firmware update.

      --
      Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
    5. Re:What Suffering? by deek · · Score: 1

      The Slashdot summary article explains why this is news. The Air Force now cannot buy used PS3s to replace units, since the used consoles will likely have their firmware updated. They can't even send the console to Sony to repair, since they come back with updated firmware. That point was from the actual article, not the Slashdot one.

    6. Re:What Suffering? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      My fat one with Other OS still available as an option may be available on the used market, for the right price. In fact, by not applying the 3.21 update, I may have just increased its aftermarket value. How much would the USAF be willing to requisition for a replacement?

      Of course, if I want to continue to use the platform, I'll have to forgo even more features: SACD support and backwards compatibility. I'd need to buy two consoles to replace that (I already have another device that plays SACDs).

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  16. Re:Sony's angle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    You are a 360 fanboiy and don't even know it sir.

    Here are this weeks game sales numbers on a newer games just out on both platforms.

    Super Street Fighter IV
    PS3 sales: 280,049
    X360 sales: 189,897

    2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa
    PS3 sales:157,589
    x360 sales: 112,275

    It looks to me like the PS3 is now .destroying. the xbox 360 in terms of game sales. The WII is really a different market and I don't think the xbox or ps3 'lost' to them, the WII just opened up a new untouched market that everyone else wish they had a part of :}

    Source http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly.php?date=40307&boxartz=1#
    (The first hit on a google search for game sales)

  17. uhm, just repair it? by plonk420 · · Score: 1

    it's not cheap, nor is it THAT expensive, but they can just send it in to Sony for repair. Sony didn't flash my 60gb when i had repair work done on it...

    1. Re:uhm, just repair it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I read the article correctly, Sony now does reflash repaired units

    2. Re:uhm, just repair it? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Somehow I think the Air Force may have information security concerns.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  18. Re:Sony's angle by ma11achy · · Score: 1

    Interesting....I hadn't seen this.

    I'll make sure to do more research in future before opening my mouth ;-)

    --
    Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines
  19. They bought PS/3s to save money? by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 0

    If they want the Cell processor they can always buy IBM BladeCenter servers. You can run Linux on those too.

    The IBM iron will cost more, but I'd wager getting Sony to sell them PS/3s that will run Linux will also cost more -- a lot more.

    I'd guess that originally they figured they could stretch their budget $$ by using PS/3s, and no doubt they did. But that was then and this is now.

    Heck, I can't even get parts for my 1&1/2 year old mountain bike. Fortunately I bought it at REI and they'll let me return it for a full refund and then I can buy a new bike. REI FTW.

  20. Serves them right. by unity100 · · Score: 1, Troll

    anyone who trusts microsoft, sony, apple dig their own grave.

    1. Re:Serves them right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      anyone who trusts microsoft, sony, apple dig their own grave.

      Interesting take, considering that your latest journal entry is about Mass Effect 2 (available only on XBox and Windows).

    2. Re:Serves them right. by mace9984 · · Score: 1

      Sadly I have to agree w/ you. It pains me though, I used to brag to all my friends that I bought the ps3 because sony was cool enough to let me install linux on it. Not cool Sony, Not cool. Def a dick move.

  21. Not a problem by tokul · · Score: 1

    I think they are the only Sony's clients with tactical nuclear weapons.

    1. Re:Not a problem by mitgib · · Score: 1

      Who have used them previously on Japan

      --
      Being a spelling & grammar Nazi is a sign you do not poses the intelligence to contribute to the conversation
  22. what about folding? by MoFoQ · · Score: 2, Informative

    makes ya wonder what will happen to the Folding@Home client stats as PS3s die off and aren't replaced.

    And who suffers in the end? Sick kids.
    Oh, will someone think of the children!

    1. Re:what about folding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I thought even the Slims could fold?

      Besides, GPUs knock the socks off the PS3 for folding. Just at the time the GPU client wasn't out so the PS3 was better than x86

    2. Re:what about folding? by Verunks · · Score: 3, Informative

      folding@home has nothing to do with this, it's a gameos application you can run it on any model, you don't need to install linux or anything else

    3. Re:what about folding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big whoop. None of the "X@home" projects have ever produced any results, except maybe causing a helluva lot of extraneous pollution from a bunch of dopes running their inefficient home CPUs at full tilt.

    4. Re:what about folding? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      The F@H application doesn't need OtherOS, it's been part of the main OS from day one.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    5. Re:what about folding? by colinnwn · · Score: 1

      Citation?

      I have one. http://folding.stanford.edu/English/Papers

      Regarding running home processors at full tilt, I agree it is sub-prime. But it is also probably their best available option for high performance computing resources. If a home user was going to leave their computer on anyway, the difference between no CPU load and full load is probably 20 watts. That greatly increases the effective efficiency. Even if people are leaving their computer on when they otherwise wouldn't for F@H, Stanford doesn't have to go out and drop tens of millions of dollars in capital and hundreds of thousands a year for compute resources. They get resources donated from people with sunk capital costs, and individually a small increase in their electric bill. Regarding pollution, a lot of them probably would have been off at night and on anyway during the day. In that case, they are absorbing nuclear base load, and the extra pollution is negligible.

      Personally I have a MythTV box on all the time. I run F@H on it as part of the charitable giving I do each year.

    6. Re:what about folding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Folding@Home uses the PS3s native, proprietary software, and afaik turning off Other OS does not affect that particular feature.

    7. Re:what about folding? by Inda · · Score: 1

      Yeah but, facts aside, think of the children!

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
  23. All sales are negotiable by lena_10326 · · Score: 1

    If a branch of the US military wanted updatable PS3's they will be able to get them by paying extra for a large lot. All corporate salesman negotiate. To think otherwise is naive.

    --
    Camping on quad since 1996.
  24. OT: what parts? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

    Heck, I can't even get parts for my 1&1/2 year old mountain bike. Fortunately I bought it at REI and they'll let me return it for a full refund and then I can buy a new bike. REI FTW.

    Just curious. I have had problems sourcing pads for Hayes Sole brakes. Apart from that I am okay so far.

    1. Re:OT: what parts? by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 1

      They can't get the rear suspension bushings.

      The center pivot bushings have -- or had -- ball bearings in them. Totally destroyed. I'd say they were way under spec'ed. Actually I'm not sure why they ever had ball bearings to begin with. I suspect solid brass or bronze would have worked just fine and held up a lot better. I could get a set machined I suppose, but if REI will give me full refund for their inability to get $50 worth of replacement parts, who am I to argue.

      And that's not the only thing that failed. The SRAM rear hub grenaded too, but I had a Mavic wheel/hub/rim that seems bulletproof. I'll have to swap the busted SRAM wheel back on before I return it.

    2. Re:OT: what parts? by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      If you can get the old ball bearings out, then they can be replaced. Ball bearings are standard parts; just get the number on it.

      --

      I am still waiting for Xbox 361 for Workgroups to show up.

    3. Re:OT: what parts? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The center pivot bushings have -- or had -- ball bearings in them. Totally destroyed. I'd say they were way under spec'ed. Actually I'm not sure why they ever had ball bearings to begin with. I suspect solid brass or bronze would have worked just fine and held up a lot better.

      Nah, in a dirty environment, a greased bushing dies in a second. And a non-greased bushing will wear the surrounding components too much. Bearings have races which are sacrificial. Contact the manufacturer for a replacement, or specifications for same. And if you can't do that, buy a better brand next time. You can get this kind of information from ever major manufacturer, even on bikes that they haven't sold for years. I am planning to build a 2WD full-frame electric MTB and have a ~MY2000 K2 frame, which I gather they bought from proflex or somebody, it has a massive welded rear swing arm so it's my choice for this job. Now I just need to find some floating forks that can take some abuse. And what a coincidence, it needs swing arm bearings... but I have the specs already, and I can get 'em.

      As a last resort, take the frame to a machine shop and have them measure the relevant components, then order a bearing on spec. Try to get it from someone reliable.

      Consider buying a motorcycle-sized can (not the size of a motorcycle, you know what I mean) of chain/sprocket cleaner and using it on everything moving and dirty after each ride. Your kit will last longer. But maybe you did this already, I dunno. From what I can see, every brand makes crap, so maybe your components were just the low-end. A brand name doesn't help...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:OT: what parts? by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 1

      You can get this kind of information from ever major manufacturer, even on bikes that they haven't sold for years.

      Well, it would appear that this "manufacturer" can't actually supply the information.

      I could spend hours tracking down the bearing specs, or getting someone to pull the bushings (they're press fit) and measure the bearings. Probably take 10 minutes to find the bearings on the web, a week to order them, then get them pressed in. I'd lose all that time riding. The bearings are pretty small, so I'd wager they'd be trashed again in a few weeks.

      But if REI is willing to take the lazy way out and just give me a refund, why should I argue? And I get to try something else that might work better for me. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

  25. Ebay listing for my non-updated Phat PS3 is .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ebay listing for my non-updated Phat PS3 is forthcoming. Further to the law suits, did Sony steal my online credit? How do I get a refund on my online credit when I can't log in.

  26. sony rootkit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/sony_rootkit

    never forget, never forgive

  27. Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by FreeUser · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's been a big push in recent years to move to "COTS" (Commercial Off The Shelf) solutions in the government - the military in particular. And while this may be find for things like holsters, backpacks, and office chairs, I think this highlights for EVERYONE, not just bright young aquisitions officers, that sometimes taking COTS technology and using it for your highly specific and critical application is not the best choice. Unfortunately, sometimes (sometimes!) big, expensive, and proprietary in-house solutions really are the best.

    No, what it drives home is that, when you purchase a piece of hardware, it belongs to you, and no vendor should have the legal right to modify what you have purchased without your consent, nor to coerce consent for modifications that reduce or cripple the capabilities of something you have purchased.

    Maybe now that military and commercial interests are being impacted, we can get the barest modicum of consumer protection to outlaw this shit (and similar, retroactive software modifications as well, such as Steve Jobs foists upon his hapless iPhone slaves ... it all eventually amounts to the same thing, and puts a lot more than the military at risk).

    I know for our trading platforms we would never tolerate this kind of thing from a vendor (and Apple has lost out on this on more than one occasion for exactly this reason). I'm amazed the military hasn't come down on Sony like a ton of bricks -- a large investment bank certainly would have.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    1. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, what it drives home is that, when you purchase a piece of hardware, it belongs to you, and no vendor should have the legal right to modify what you have purchased without your consent, nor to coerce consent for modifications that reduce or cripple the capabilities of something you have purchased.

      Sony aren't modifying the USAFs PS3's - they have removed the OS from new versions of the PS3, which means the USAF cannot buy replacements for dead units. Sony hasn't actually done anything 'evil' in this case, its a non-story.

    2. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by jonwil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They HAVE done something evil.

      They produced a product (the fat PS3) and included (and advertised) the OtherOS feature and its ability to run Linux.

      They then removed that function.

      If a car maker sold you a car with a satnav built into the in-car entertainment system and advertised that the car came with a satnav and then proceeded to remove the satnav function when you took it into the dealer for a service, you would have every right to be angry at the car maker for removing this feature.

    3. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In *this* case they have not done anything like you are suggesting - in *this* case the equivalent car analogy would be if you bought a car with satnav, drove it around for a while and then went back to the dealer and bought another car, but between the two purchases the dealer had removed the option from sale.

      The firmware update issue does not apply here - the USAF's issues are not related to a firmware update, they are related to Sony no longer selling new PS3's with the feature advertised on older models.

      So in *this* case they have not done anything 'evil'. Sony's promise of a feature to you with regard to your old purchase does not stand with regard to a new purchase. Now, I agree that they have completely fucked up with regard to teh firmware update killing already purchased features, but thats not at issue here.

    4. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by tophermeyer · · Score: 1

      I'm amazed the military hasn't come down on Sony like a ton of bricks -- a large investment bank certainly would have.

      What recourse does the Air force have? Sony didn't reach into their data center and push the update to their cluster. From the Air Forces perspective, all Sony has done is modify their product so that future purchases will not fill their needs. All the Air Force can do is to not make future purchases of PS3's, which is something that they probably have no plans of doing in bulk anyway (except of course as the TFA states to replace dead units).

      Sony is probably burning a bridge with the USAF, it was probably a really good marketing tool for them to be able to say the USAF uses a cluster of PS3's. I don't think Sony really cares.

      If the USAF has a problem they are perfectly free to replace this system with something else, or can start manufacturing their own solution.

    5. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Apparently, you can't send a unit in for service, even if under warranty or a pay-for-service deal, and not get a complementary upgrade to the latest firmware. How much of this is sinister, and how much is just because "service" probably often means "throw away/send for rework the one they sent, grab another from the pile-o-refurbs", and the service drones simply can't downgrade the firmware on the one from the pile-o-refurbs, is unclear.

    6. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What recourse does the Air force have?

      Well, if there's an all-out fight between SONY and the USAF, I know who my money is on.

    7. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's only a problem because they removed it in the first place, if they didn't fuck us all over then it wouldn't be a problem.

    8. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      No, it is directly related to the firmware update.

      Granted, noone is forcing the USAF to upgrade the firmware and remove OtherOS support from their currently running PS3s. Should the existing hardware, the fat PS3s, that the USAF already has fail, then they need to be repaired. Sending them in to Sony would have the unit repaired, and the firmware updated to the latest GameOS-only.
      As such, they're not so concerned over not being able to buy new parts (many places cannot buy new parts for their existing systems), but maintaining existing ones.

    9. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As such, they're not so concerned over not being able to buy new parts (many places cannot buy new parts for their existing systems), but maintaining existing ones.

      Actually, you're right and wrong. Prior to this problem there was a ready supply of spare parts: Used fat PS3s. Now Sony has changed the functionality of those systems; the majority will have been updated. Now the used consoles are not workable spare parts. To return to the car analogy, it's like you bought a car which was advertised as being the best off-road vehicle on the market, if you just upgraded to monster truck wheels and tires. The dealer then finds out that people are using 4x4 vehicles to get to a magical land where vehicle accessories are cheaper than those sold by the dealer; in fact, they have accessories that make the vehicle useful for more purposes, so that the users are less compelled to buy another vehicle. So the dealer institutes a policy that whenever a vehicle is brought in to the dealer, they remove the front axle and the transfer case, and it becomes a 2WD vehicle; the user is simply lied to, and told that this change is necessary to make the vehicle safe, or perhaps to improve road safety. Now you're stuck with these gigantic wheels on a 2WD vehicle, and you look like an idiot driving down the road with 'em. They can be removed, but it's going to take additional labor, and you're going to have to put the original wheels back on. Unfortunately, in this car, you have to rebuild the entire car and replace all the fluids when you replace the wheels so now you have to do the oil, coolant, trans fluid...

      The analogy is clear: At least some people purchased the PS3 specifically because of the promise of being able to run Linux. Sony claims that Linux enables game piracy, but this is false; it enables movie piracy. So for an unrelated reason, Sony is disabling this functionality; all the while lying to the users. Users with a Linux partition still have the partition but cannot boot it. In order to reclaim the space (which is now simply an impediment) users must format the entire disk and redownload content, reinstall games, et cetera. And finally, if you are complaining about it, people will think you're an idiot, because you should have known better.

      Sony is evil, and must be destroyed. Stop buying their shit! And especially, stop making excuses for them. They don't deserve it.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Military vs Giant Corporation. The corporation wins every time.

      It's not as if the USAF can actually bomb Sony, if it could, things would be a little different. At this point they can't even boycott Sony legally.

    11. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by Maarx · · Score: 1

      To return to the car analogy, it's like you bought a car which was advertised as being the best off-road vehicle on the market, if you just upgraded to monster truck wheels and tires. The dealer then finds out that people are using 4x4 vehicles to get to a magical land where vehicle accessories are cheaper than those sold by the dealer; in fact, they have accessories that make the vehicle useful for more purposes, so that the users are less compelled to buy another vehicle. So the dealer institutes a policy that whenever a vehicle is brought in to the dealer, they remove the front axle and the transfer case, and it becomes a 2WD vehicle; the user is simply lied to, and told that this change is necessary to make the vehicle safe, or perhaps to improve road safety. Now you're stuck with these gigantic wheels on a 2WD vehicle, and you look like an idiot driving down the road with 'em. They can be removed, but it's going to take additional labor, and you're going to have to put the original wheels back on. Unfortunately, in this car, you have to rebuild the entire car and replace all the fluids when you replace the wheels so now you have to do the oil, coolant, trans fluid...

      I'm updating the slashdot firmware to remove the bad analogy option.

    12. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      We don't need new laws.

      It is already illegal advertise features that you later remove.

    13. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure that they can find a way to shitlist Sony.
      No POs to be paid to Sony and their subsidiaries until the end of the world, etc.

      Can also apply additional pressure to other OEMs ("Hey, Dell. Any computer you sell to us may NOT use Sony components. If a Sony component is shipped for any reason, we'll add you to the shitlist. Make sure you put a note on all our systems to show this.", and with a couple of flicks of the magic wand, they're Sony-proofed on that front), so that more pressure is applied to Sony from more directions.

      But that's just a thought.

    14. Re:Retroactive crippling of hw should be illegal by batura · · Score: 1

      Your consent IS required to install updates to firmware and system software. Buying something once does not give you the right to buy a replacement in the future with the exact capabilities.

  28. Idea by kurtis25 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have an idea... Let's make the PS3 useless, then sell a PS4 with the other OS option, when it's time to sell PS5 (to be nicknamed the piss) we will turn off the other OS option in the PS4. We can do this for 50 years before anyone catches on.

    1. Re:Idea by andrea.sartori · · Score: 1

      Looks like somebody had exactly the same idea. Just skipping the part where they call it PS4.

      --
      Mostly harmless.
    2. Re:Idea by gblackwo · · Score: 1

      This sounds almost how apple works- except apple would have told you in advance the ps3 wouldn't have the other os feature, because it is useless and you don't need it. Then they would have added it on the ps4 and everyone would cheer like it was the second coming.

  29. Re:Not really a surprise... by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2, Funny

    The original post had spaces, but they were removed by Sony in a firmware update.

  30. Is removing Linux really about security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux users don't suffer from viruses, I'm using Linux for 3 years without an anti-virus and never had a virus, so whose security is Sony concerned about by removing Linux? Or is it just an excuse to cover up some other reason?
    Is there a bigger picture Sony's trying to hide?

    1. Re:Is removing Linux really about security? by ledow · · Score: 1

      First, your argument is crap. Case in point: I've been using Windows desktop since Windows 3.1 and I've never had a virus on my personal Windows machines. That means *nothing*. It's like saying "I haven't died yet, so I must be immortal". Please don't spread bollocks about viruses and operating systems - I'm a Linux nut but that's just a way to lie to people about Linux's real security - the design. You can still get Linux or MacOS viruses the same as anyone else if you do the same stupid things on any OS (execute unknown programs, use programs with known security flaws, etc.).

      Next - security does *not* imply anti-virus... by definition an anti-virus program can only do its job *after* security has already been breached and requires full administrator-level access to the machine in order to do so (and so becomes its own security problem).

      Sony aren't concerned about "security"... it's a dumb line to use. They are concerned about piracy and people hacking their systems to run games that they have or have not paid for. Although that's "security" in one sense, it's not the type of computer security that you're discussing. Sony think they are combating game piracy, theoretical or actual, and thus there's no reason why their corporate/government/education customers should suffer. But they didn't bother to think about that and just "switched it off" without any real choice (not updating to the latest firmware isn't a "choice" - it's enforced obsolescence).

      I don't really care whether the US military can do things using PS3 or not - it's a niche use, outside the scope of the product, unwarrantied and unsupported, by an organisation more than capable of working around such problems. And they *wouldn't* (or at least *shouldn't*) be shouting in the press if this was actually a real issue... US military supercomputing efforts hampered / hacked / controlled / dictated to by a Japanese company? Then you really deserve everything that you get. However, I do care (despite never owning one and never intending to own one) about the PS3's that were already sold not being "broken" or having functionality removed outside of the scope of various trade acts. That's just stupid, illegal and harming to the company. But then, I don't think I've ever bought anything from Sony in my life, and I've never even played on a PS3. If you were reliant on Sony to continue to "co-operate" in terms of support, then you should have had a contract with them. If they failed to abide by any contract you have with them (including implied contracts under trade laws), and they continue to fail to abide by them, then you sue them.

      And next time you buy *anything*, briefly research the historical behaviour of the companies involved. If they act like a company you don't want to support, don't buy their products.

    2. Re:Is removing Linux really about security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      omg you're actually arguing that there's not a big difference between users running windows and Linux when it comes to viruses. Now that's that crappiest idea I've read in months (Oh yeah, to fend it off tell me that's not what you said/implied, sure).
      Linux users with viruses is a extremely seldom case, while windows users with viruses is typical and btw. I don't believe your story with using windows since 3.1 and never having a virus unless you lived in a bunker or so, and even if this was true your case is one in like a million, while mine is typical and if you're a serious person you'd give in, but judging by your bullying comments you had a bad day to say the least.
      Next - I didn't say nor mean security implies anti-virus.
      And so on, asininity doesn't speak well for you. If you had a bad day take a hike.

    3. Re:Is removing Linux really about security? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Please don't spread bollocks about viruses and operating systems - I'm a Linux nut but that's just a way to lie to people about Linux's real security - the design. You can still get Linux or MacOS viruses the same as anyone else if you do the same stupid things on any OS (execute unknown programs, use programs with known security flaws, etc.).

      You are being [deliberately?] obtuse. The very nature of the Linux software ecosystem makes such malware more difficult to distribute, because most Linux users expect to get all software directly from their provider's repository.

      Sony aren't concerned about "security"... it's a dumb line to use. They are concerned about piracy and people hacking their systems to run games that they have or have not paid for.

      False. This is not about game piracy. This is about Blu-Ray piracy. The PS3 running Linux is by far the most convenient Blu-Ray copying platform. This is why people who say that you shouldn't treat Sony as a single entity are complete (or for Sony's purposes, compleat) idiots. One division will take actions to protect another division, and that is exactly what is happening here. It doesn't happen automatically; the higher-ups running the whole show are the ones who make decisions like this, because one division doesn't control another division.

      And next time you buy *anything*, briefly research the historical behaviour of the companies involved. If they act like a company you don't want to support, don't buy their products.

      Amen to that. Unfortunately fanboyism is real. I have a friend whose brother-in-law works for Sony. IIRC he's involved with scores or something. This friend is impaled so far onto Sony's cock that he'll never breathe through his mouth again. Every time Sony does something evil, he has just enough grace to look embarrassed, and then he goes on trying to tell me about how great some game he's been playing is. He was considering using his PS3 as a computer, possibly preventing him from needing to buy one; he's got fast internet, so using his machine as a web browser was a reasonable strategy. Sony just took that right away from him, preventing him from getting value for which he's paid. He even noticed the option missing from the menu! His response was classic sour grapes. "Well, it probably wouldn't have worked that well anyway." Meanwhile he currently has a borrowed PC hooked up to the same TV he uses for his PS3, and all he does with it? Netflix and web browsing, two things you can do with the PC. I'm about to sell him a Dual Athlon 64 box for the same purpose, I have it lying around (right now I'm using it to play Mechwarrior IV.)

      Sony would be entirely gone long before now, but advertising works. They've built immense brand loyalty, mostly among the young, who haven't had the life experience to teach them that being loyal to a public corporation is stupid. I've owned a lot of brands of car, a lot of brands of computer, a lot of brands of car stereo, and numerous examples of each, and what I've learned is that everybody makes mistakes, and most everybody also makes shit, just about everybody rebrands other makers' kit, and what all this means is that you must approach every purchase critically. Further, you can't even purchase what you think is the same product without doing research; Taco Works used to be my favorite tortilla chip, for some reason they added MSG to it, now I can't eat it. It appeared in a local store (probably due to post-buyout changes in distribution, I haven't checked) and I bought 'em home, then got that sick feeling in my mouth and finally looked at the ingredients. Fuckers stole my childhood, I will forever think of the taste of MSG when I think about eating those chips now, they've inserted MSG into my fucking memories. But it's my fault; I should have read the label. I should have known better than to trust a brand. And so should everyone else.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Is removing Linux really about security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were reliant on Sony to continue to "co-operate" in terms of support, then you should have had a contract with them. If they failed to abide by any contract you have with them (including implied contracts under trade laws), and they continue to fail to abide by them, then you sue them.

      This is EXACTLY why lawsuits are being brought. They advertised and sold a device as being able to run Linux, thus making them contractually obligated to allow it. Wether or not a given sample of users actually took advantage of the option is completely irrelevant. It is still their contractual right to have that option. What Sony has done is remove an advertised feature from a device already in the hands of the end user by means of coercion. First, it was "update and lose Linux or you can't use PSN." Now, they're looking into forcing updates, or "update and lose Linux, or we do it for you the next time you load the default OS while connected to the internet."

    5. Re:Is removing Linux really about security? by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      If Sony is impaled that far up his ass, why doesn't he have a Sony Vaoi laptop?

      Or is this just Story Time?

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    6. Re:Is removing Linux really about security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because not all Sony fanboys are rich fucks, you're thinking of Mac fanboys.

    7. Re:Is removing Linux really about security? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If Sony is impaled that far up his ass, why doesn't he have a Sony Vaoi laptop?

      Because his job is trash guy for a local hot springs and he doesn't have money coming out of his ass, just Sony stuck up it. He doesn't want a laptop anyway. He wants a tolerable games machine, because if he's going to have a computer, it should be able to play games. Makes sense to me.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  31. Put the old firmware back by Skapare · · Score: 1

    You'd have to do this at the hardware level. Are there any JTAG pads on the board? If not, clipping onto the firmware flash chip with the appropriate tool may be necessary. That, or some means to prevent the existing firmware from loading while loading a substitute into RAM, which will then reload the firmware flash.

    First to figure this out might get a little military contract :-)

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    1. Re:Put the old firmware back by geirnord · · Score: 1

      It would need to be a Black Ops then, with regard to the DMCA...

  32. I dont get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    theyve got access to the best and the brightest and they cant figure out how to put linux on a ps3 without a specific option to do so.....people have put it on watches for crying out loud

    the only issue is the legal one.....get sony to agree to wave the issue but the warranty will be void and voila done

  33. Pay no attention to that bearded man in Tehran by idiotnot · · Score: 1

    In the grand scheme of things, I have to wonder if the US government and EU are pretty happy with Sony's decision here. While, yes, they'll be force to spend more money on systems to replicate what they were doing with their PS3 clusters, the PS3 clusters in Iran and North Korea will degrade, too.

  34. Research. by andrea.sartori · · Score: 1

    "Purchased PS3s for supercomputing research". I definitely have to remember this one.

    --
    Mostly harmless.
  35. They are not going to suffer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US Taxpayer will suffer as they use more Mercury and/or IBM systems with Cell BE.

  36. I'm luaghing at you bitches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's so funny to see little bitch freetards crying about this. Y'all claimed that you were going to boycott Sony over this and that and another thing but here you all sit, crying about losing the PS3 to your OS.

    You're liars. All of you liars. If you didn't lie you wouldn't care about Sony giving up on Linux.

    CRY BITCHES CRY!!!!!!!!

    And fuck Linux. Fuck it.

  37. Unsympathetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To a military that buys video game systems for supercomputing rather than spending a bit more talent doing the same work with cheap PC's and nVidia video cards (CUDA, OpenCL or other). Buying a playstation for computing tasks? That's laughably low-rent. And no, I don't care if the Cell processor rocks Folding@Home's socks. It's not a military application.

  38. USAF to Sony: by damien_kane · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Really? You want to play this game? We've already nuked Japan once, did you like it that much?"

    1. Re:USAF to Sony: by geminidomino · · Score: 0

      Technically, that was the Army (USAF wasn't formed as a separate branch until '47) ;)

    2. Re:USAF to Sony: by Russ1642 · · Score: 1

      And technically they were nuked twice.

    3. Re:USAF to Sony: by balbus000 · · Score: 1

      err, twice

    4. Re:USAF to Sony: by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      While technically, you're correct; I was speaking more in terms of campaigns than specific events.
      To clarify, USA nuked Japan in only one war.

  39. It's a frigging video game console... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well maybe this will teach the Air Force or whoever else that did something similar not to use a frigging video game console for serious research and scientific work.

  40. Re: Way OT: what brand? by supermank17 · · Score: 1

    Out of curiosity, which brand of bike was this? Was it from their in-house Novara line, or one of their other brands they carry? (I know they carry Scott and Raleigh as well...). And yeah, REI's got some of the best customer service I've ever seen. I buy most of my outdoor gear from them even when they don't have the absolute best price just for the service.

  41. The only conclusion is by KiwiCanuck · · Score: 1

    that Sony doesn't like profit. Why else would they remove th second OS. They obviously don't want people using PS3 for non-game use. Therefore they'll stop people from buying them, thereby reducing their profit. Apple of course does the same thing, but ra ra ra Apple.

    1. Re:The only conclusion is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well yeah, except that they LOSE money on every console sold. So if people stop buying them for non-game use their profit goes UP.

  42. The air forece can MacGyver around this so it's by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    The air force can MacGyver around this so it's not that bad and what can Sony do I don't trying court / the DMCA will work when it's the air force.

  43. HAHAHAHAAA! by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

    Serves Sony completely right to get sued over and over again, and angry military forces is going to be nice!

    Companies doing the shit like Sony just did deserves this happening, all too rarely anyone does anything about it, as a single unit is so worthless but it's about damn time at least one company is ending up paying for this kind of bullshit.

  44. Re: Way OT: what brand? by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 1

    Yes, it's a Novara.

  45. Lawsuit? by warGod3 · · Score: 1

    So if the old adage that it takes forever to sue the government holds true, would the government threatening to sue Sony work? Or worse, some kind of import ban, regulation banning the purchase of Sony products for government use, or tariffs on electronics made outside of the US may do something to wake them up.

    However it plays out, in something like "The United States Government vs. Sony" could wind up to be bad news for Sony. They don't have B-2 bombers or the kind of people (politicians and celebrities) that can come out and say stuff like "Buying Sony products cripples America's Defense. Do you support companies that cripple the U.S. Military? Here is a list of companies who have attempted to cripple our national defense with their products..." show that with images of US soldiers around the world...

    Yeah, Sony would bleed money.

    --
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet." General James Mattis
    1. Re:Lawsuit? by Jeian · · Score: 1

      Here is a list of companies who have attempted to cripple our national defense with their products..." show that with images of US soldiers around the world...

      At least once a day, I see a commercial on CNN showing IED attacks in Iraq, and warning that our gas money eventually ends up (by way of Iran) paying for EFPs (Explosively Formed Penetrators) and other such things, but I haven't seen all that many people switching to bikes.

  46. Easy to manage.. by h.ross.perot · · Score: 1

    and there is money to be made in repair of these systems..

    --
    ... I'll have a Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster with a side of Plutonium Nyborg ...
  47. Re:Not really a surprise... by mace9984 · · Score: 1

    OMG........Please mod parent up!

  48. Re: Way OT: what brand? by supermank17 · · Score: 1

    Thanks - makes me feel a little better, I have a Scott Genius dual suspension from around the same era. Its kind of odd though - Novara bikes generally have a good reputation.

  49. Research version? by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1

    You'd think the geniuses at Sony would offer an alternative version of the PS3 specifically for research applications. They're delivered as a blank slate for whatever OS the user wants to install. It seems to me like Sony is just throwing money away here.

  50. Summary says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Summary says they were using preowned fat ps3 systems as replacements. Now almost all preowned fat ps3s have their fw updated. See the problem?

  51. Re:Not really a surprise... by sheph · · Score: 1

    You know they do sell replacement keyboards. Some of them even come with a space key.

    --
    I don't believe in karma, I just call it like I see it.
  52. Hey, Sony: THERE IS A MARKET FOR A Cell COMPUTER by PinchDuck · · Score: 1

    Ship the thing so it can't play games, but has a decent amount of memory. Sell it at full retail, with a nice margin built in. You should be able to sell them for $500 a pop and make money. Don't be stupid (yeah, I know, it's Sony), take advantage of the market you helped to create.

    Who am I kidding? You'll go back to breaking shit people bought in good faith. What a bunch of morons.

  53. Air force will rely on circumvention by Dalzhim · · Score: 1

    We can bet that the air force will rely on circumventing this forced upgrade and will hack their consoles into processing machines once again. The only downside to this approach is that they will become suable by Sony once the ACTA is pushed through. Maybe we can look forward to the Air Force fighting against the ACTA?

  54. They can have mine by Rivalz · · Score: 1

    Seriously after the latest final fantasy I gave up on the PS3.

  55. It's a game machine by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

    Let me state that again. It's a game machine. It's not a mature server platform. When you buy game machines you cannot expect server level support. I really don't see what the issue is. If people really thought that a secondary feature of a game machine, that is, the ability to install and run your own OS, makes the PS3 a server platform, then they are delusional.

    --
    The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
  56. Failure to comprehend by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Insightful

    that is, I fail to comprehend. Sony could turn around and sell unlocked machines as "specialized platforms" for many times the price, while imposing restrictive usage conditions, and *still* have it be a bargain. Considering how much the PS3 sales cost them, you'd think they would jump on the opportunity.

  57. It's worse than that. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

    Buy a kindle? Have YOUR PAID FOR books removed at amazons will.

    Not Amazon's will, the publisher's will. And they at least refunded your money.

    Sony hasn't returned a dime.

    Buy an apple product?

    Again, to be fair, Apple never promised more than people are getting. Also, as far as I know, they haven't actually killed any purchased applications -- they'll remove it from the store, but not from your device. (Though, point against Apple: If I recall, the "I Am Rich" guy was never paid.)

    Sony not only sold the PS3 with this feature enabled, they advertised it. "You're not just buying a game console, you're buying a powerful computer system!"

    If sony's terms of service said something about taking away features at their own will, it is not a valid part of the contract. Here in america, we have laws that prevent mega-corporations from making insanely complicated contracts and inserting clauses about how they own your soul and can harvest your body parts whenever they please.

    Do we really? Because it seems more like we have the opposite. Just look at the tax code -- seems almost deliberately designed to force the average person to have to hire someone to understand it. If it wasn't insanely complicated, H&R block wouldn't have to exist.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    1. Re:It's worse than that. by The+Hatchet · · Score: 1

      I am not standing up for sony, I am just saying they are not the only ones guilty of being terrible.

      If amazon advertises the ability to read books on the kindle, and you purchase a book to read, and it is removed, regardless of who removed it, it is a piece of property, a physical set of information contained on your device, and for them to take it from you under any circumstance is horrible, whether they refund you or not.

      I am not talking about what apple advertised, and I don't mean they killed applications. I mean they get up and say 'here is a powerful device that can run applications'. It may be a powerful, beautiful device, but making it proprietary and pretty much constantly hooked to an apple IV with no chance to develop applications for yourself or for use only within a small or large corporation, and making everything pass through the damn appstore and censoring it? They are doing the job of the 'censorship' loving bastards that constantly speak up against knowledge in this country.

      The tax code is complicated because features are added haphazardly and piled on. I agree it should be simpler, but that is aside from the point. There is actually a section of a law called the 'fair contract clause' in which it stops contracts from being insane. Like they can't just put at the bottom of a 200 page lease agreement "and you must turn over your identity, your children and your organs to our company after exactly 3 days", or a more mild "by the way, you don't own this device, we do, and have the right to do whatever we want whenever we want. Because we didn't sell it to you, we licensed it to you." Which is really the purpose of an EULA on anything really. It is a terrible thing. and should be fixed.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
  58. USAF is NOT Joe American! by BigSes · · Score: 1

    I think this might be overly hyped, at least in the USAF's case, too much. I seriously have my doubts that Sony PHYSICALLY could not supply them with units to replace their broken machines (meaning fat PS3s). It would be amazing to me that Sony does not have the equipment to, and would not agree to, simply "revert" the OS for replacing and units that are to be supplied as replacements for the military cluster. This isn't Joe Smith from Anytown, USA, that we are talking about here. A major buyer, such as the US government, would surely get special treatment. Granted, I have no proof to back this up, but it seems highly logical.

  59. and Sony cares about this for what reason again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when does Sony give a rats ass about any user? Hopefully the government might think and buy from an american company next time. If one doesn't exist to suit, then make one

  60. Missed the Point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not that the USAF can't buy new PS3's to repair systems that have failed. The new problem is that if they send failed units to Sony to get repaired, the repaired units will have the latest firmware installed when they're shipped back, i.e. Sony will "repair" PS3s by removing the "Other OS" feature (to the tune of about $150).

    TFA (emphasis mine):

    We checked in with the Air Force Research Laboratory, which noted its disappointment with the Sony decision. "We will have to continue to use the systems we already have in hand," the lab told Ars, but "this will make it difficult to replace systems that break or fail. The refurbished PS3s also have the problem that when they come back from Sony, they have the firmware (gameOS) and it will not allow Other OS, which seems wrong. We are aware of class-action lawsuits against Sony for taking away this option on systems that use to have it.

  61. Quite interesting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A supercomputer research lab that doesn't have any decent geek employed.

  62. Overreaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do people overreact so often to stuff like this? Seriously, it's made pretty clear that the Other OS functionality will be gone when you run the update. They even have a separate notice from the usual EULA, just to make sure you know! I wouldn't know for certain, but I think it's also made clear when buying a new PS3 that there will be no Other OS option. As for the military problem, they can probably still buy up used PS3s and flash them with older firmware, so it's mostly a non-issue.

    Sony found out that the Other OS feature was being used for illegal purposes, so they got rid of it. I see nothing wrong with that. Besides, how many of you actually USED the Other OS? I doubt many people have ever considered it their primary reason for buying the PS3, except (obviously) the military, who I bet could solve the problem relatively easily (and legally too!). I'd never even heard of it until they removed it. Everyone keeps getting so angry about the removal of a feature that I bet most of them never used. And, once again, it's not like it was removed without your knowledge.

  63. The tail is wagging the dog by mollog · · Score: 1

    Are you defending capitalism, or corporatism? In the U.S., consumers are 70% of the economy. Yet the politicians are accommodating the 30% who have the money to buy elections. Short answer to your question - yes, more and more people are hating the excessive intrusion that capitalists are imposing on their lives.

    When that 30% is restored to its proper role, the complaining will surely die down. Capitalism will replace corporatism and everybody will prosper.

    --
    Best regards.
  64. This one is easy: Hire Geohot! by Qubit · · Score: 1

    According to Engadget,

    Geohot promised a workaround for Sony's removal of the "install other OS" feature in PS3 firmware 3.21 and now Geohot has delivered...Geohot even says that the custom firmware might actually enable the other OS feature on the PS3 Slim, but he hasn't yet had a chance to try it out.

    Okay, Airforce, here's your strategy:

    1) Hire Hotz (Geohot), have him make the OtherOS feature work on PS3 slim hardware, and then
    2) buy a few extra units to safeguard against Sony throwing another firmware/hardware update into the mix.

    As a bonus prize you make a bunch of geeky hardware/software -hacker-types pleased with what you're funding, and goodness knows that you're always looking to recruit geeks for your cyber warfare divisions.

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
  65. BBB in the US by KillaGouge · · Score: 0

    NAME:
    Sony Computer Entertainment America, Inc.
    BBB MEMBER:
    NO
    CONTACT:
    Ms. Cynthia Woodman
    ADDRESS:
    919 E Hillsdale Blvd 2nd Floor
    Foster City, CA 94404-4247
    PHONE:
    800 345-7669
    FAX:
    650 655-7350


    Complaint - The Playstation 3 console was advertised and is continued to advertise it ability to install Linux and an "Other O/S". In a recent firmware update to the Playstation 3, this feature was removed from consoles after purchase, if the update is applied. If a user decided to not apply the update, they are forbidden from logging into the "Playstation Network". In the "Playstation Network", users can spend money on games, if the player does not log into the "Playstation Network" they cannot access content they have paid for.

    This leaves users with the choice of using an advertised feature they paid for, or using content they paid for. There is no option to do both.

    Response - We understand that this complaint concerns the PlayStation®3 ("PS3") System Software Update Version 3.21 released on April 1, 2010. Among other things, Update Version 3.21, if downloaded by a user, would delete the "install Other OS" option previously available on some PS3 systems. To protect the intellectual property of the content offered on the PS3 system, as well as to provide a more secure system for those users who are enjoying games and other entertainment content on the PS3 system, the "install Other OS" feature was deleted to address security vulnerability. The update is optional and users can continue to use the "install Other OS" feature, but if a user chooses not to upgrade the system, some other features will no longer be available, including online access to the PlayStation® Network and the ability to play PS3 format software or Blu-Ray Disc videos that require System Software Version 3.21 or later. Update Version 3.21 is authorized by and consistent with the Terms of Service and User Agreement for the PlayStation® Network, as well as the System Software License Agreement for the PS3 System. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.

    My response to their response - They are using a non-enforceable End User License Agreement, also known as a Contracts of Adhesion, to assert they have the right to dictate how I use a piece of electronics that I legally purchased. Said License Agreement is only made known after purchase. They also assert the right to do anything they wish to said electronics.

    http://www.scei.co.jp/ps3-eula/ps3_eula_en.html

    Waiting for their counter-response

    --
    GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
  66. Re:Sony's angle by Frac+O+Mac · · Score: 1

    You're misrepresenting the trend, while PS3 has caught up with the 360 in the sale of some games, it has in no was surpassed the xbox 360 in all areas.
    Examples Include (using the same site as you, vgcharts.com):

    CoD:MW2
    PS3 sales:7.82m
    x360 sales: 10.69m

    BF:BC2
    PS3 sales:1.40m
    x360 sales: 2.05m

    NBA 2K10
    PS3 sales:0.64m
    x360 sales: 0.75m

    Major League Baseball 2K10
    PS3 sales:0.64m
    x360 sales:0.06m

    Just Cause 2
    PS3 sales:0.40m
    x360 sales:0.42m

    As you can see, PS3 is in no way "destroying" the xbox 360 in terms of game sales.

  67. More fool Sony by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, but I cannot blame Sony for removing the feature.

    Then blame them for putting it in there in the first place.

    Any vendor that sells loss-leading goods like that has to be careful not to make their products too useful in ways that don't earn them back their loss (see: CueCat, among others). Free OtherOS support is fundamentally a feature that undermined their own business model and was obviously going to bite them, all the more so when they lost so much on each unit.

    They crippled it somewhat (e.g. no access to GPU) to reduce the attractiveness, but they should have simply charged a little extra to unlock the feature (to cover the loss plus a modest profit), like they did with the PS2's Linux HDD add-on. Less security concerns, and less money lost inadvertently subsidising universities and the military.

    Doubtless the whole thing was one of Krazy Ken Kutaragi's brilliant ideas; engineering for engineering's sake.

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  68. Cry me a river by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you buy consumer electronics and shoehorn it into doing something like this you can't exactly complain when the supply of spare parts dries up.

    This is what happens when you go for the cheapest option. IBM sell blades with dual Cell chips on them. Yes, they're more expensive than a bunch of PS3's, but then they're designed for these sorts of applications and the Cell chips on them are actually better than the version in the PS3 - two extra SPU's available, more memory available and double-precision floating point.

  69. are you telling me by shnull · · Score: 1

    the mighty US warmachine does not have a way to work this out with Sony for the specific consoles involved ? seems very unlikely (if this madness continues they might end up sony's only customer so Sony might do well to take care of them)

    --
    beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
  70. Buy ONLY hardware that gives you options! by cboslin · · Score: 1
    When will people learn....most never...

    Buy a hardware from Linux Vendors ONLY. You can always install Windows, Mac OSX, whatever, however if you lock your self into hardware that is planned to be obsolete, well you get what you pay for, not...you actually paid more, fools.

    I remember when they use to say, no one ever got fired for buying IBM.

    I also remember when they use to say, no one ever got fired for buying Microsoft.

    The fact is, if the hardware will run Linux, it will run Windows and probably Mac OS/X (technically just another Linux/Unix distro). However the opposite can not be stated as fact.

    If you buy a Windows Computer or a MacIntosh computer, there very will may be components (BIOS, Graphics Processing Unit, chips that control sound, ...) that will NOT run in Linux.

    So now this is true for the Sony PS3 now...why is anyone surprised.

    Embrace, Extend, Extinguish...over and over and over and over again.

    If your hardware runs Linux on day 1, it will run Linux 10 years from that day.

    Be smart buy from either ZaReason or System 76. and ugh if you must, install Windows, at least down the road the hardware can be used for something constructive...say a DVD recorder on steroids, specialized firewall/router, home file server or a Home Controller or a game station.

    Its ALWAYS smart to have options. Remember if you do NOT have at least THREE choices, you have no choice!