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.

63 of 349 comments (clear)

  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 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
    5. 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
    6. 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, ...
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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!

    10. 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

    11. 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.

    12. 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
    13. 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.

    14. 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...

    15. 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'!".

    16. 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.
  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 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.
    10. 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.

    11. 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.

    12. 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.

    13. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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 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.

  6. 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 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.

    2. 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.
  7. 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: 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.
  8. 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.

  9. 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).

  10. 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 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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 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.

  13. 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?

  14. 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 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

  15. 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 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.

    2. 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.

    3. 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.'"
  16. 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.

  17. 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.

  18. 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?

  19. 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?"

  20. 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.'"
  21. 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.

  22. 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.