The SPUs are far more flexible than stream processors. They have their own DMA engines and can run arbitrary control flow. They also run very fast even compared to a modern CPU. They were never designed to compete with GPUs. A single GPU stream processor is not very powerful, and morphing an algorithm onto a stream processor is a lot of hard work (even compared to SPU coding).
Didn't the Folding@home guys say that while the GPU client was very fast it was limited in the types of work units it could handle compared to the PS3? It was CPU client (generalized), PS3 client (slightly more specialized and faster for most, but not all work unites) GPU client (even more specialized but with limits)
best case there will be an "about" option and after scrolling through several pages of eula, copyright notices and threats to discourage reverse engineering there might be an acknowledgement that code from freebsd was used.
Yep, do that on a PS3 now and you'll see mention of the LGPL, BSD, WebKit, Eric S. Raymond, etc etc. No really, ESR's name is in EVERY PS3.
Don't sit here and tell me you were switching back and forth between linux and the ps3 software, you weren't, you know you never used that feature and probably only heard about it when they "removed" it.
I personally WAS switching back and forth between OtherOS and GameOS as I wanted. Though, as you probably know, the partitioning schemes offered were not optimal at all. Either 10GB to GameOS and the rest to OtherOS, which cripples GameOS. Or 10GB to OtherOS and the rest to GameOS, which restricts Linux and prevents some compiles from finishing unless you decrease the root partition further to add a bit more to swap.
I wasn't happy about the removal, but I understand the why of it and updated my PS3 after about a month or so, after transferring my/home over to an X86 Linux box I had picked up.
I think the PS2 / PS3 originally supported another OS more as a tax ruse than anything else, to sell their consoles as computers and therefore avoid import duties in Europe.
Why oh why does this rumor never die.
It wasn't Linux, it was YaBasic on the EU PS2's that was the attempt to get around the tariff. It failed, but the tariff was abolished shortly thereafter, BEFORE Linux on the PS2 or PS3.
Sony supported Linux because their preferred dev environment was Linux. Those PS2 dev TOOL machines ran Linux. RedHat 5 IIRC. Those GScubes that were basically 16 PS2's in parallel were controlled from a Linux machine. The similar Zego's ran Yellow Dog Linux.
I remember reading some complaint, perhaps on ars technica or gamasutra from a developer that the PS2 dev-machines didn't have good IDE's or documentation... some other guy said, "you've got GCC and vi, what more do you need?"
I think a lot of the complaint about consoles "dumbing down" games has less to do with that and more to do with the horrendous ports we've gotten in the past several years. Just a week more spent on the port to scale the UI properly and remove the pictures of xbox buttons *cough* Skyrim *cough* would do wonders to those perceptions and complaints.
You see I'm of two minds about that.
One is that I think that PC players deserve scaled UI and acceptable controls with mouse and keyboard. Wouldn't mind having a UI scaling option on the PS3 versions myself.
The other is me thinking "The xbox button icons are there in Skyrim because they are suggesting you use the 360 controller even on Windows. It's an RPG so the controller works fine just like it did in Oblivion and Fallout 3."
And yes, I know some PC gamers aren't used to using a controller, might not have one, and really don't want to anyway so they do the "dumbing down" complaints. I understand that, and know it's even worse when the game isn't an RPG.
The situation goes the other way too.. with PC to console ports. I consider the PS3 version of the orange box one of the worst offenders. The PS2 port of Half Life has mouse and keyboard support and I used a hybrid analog stick + mouse setup with it (And with Deus Ex as well) but the Orange box has absolutely no such support, not even in HL2 or Portal.
Or take the PS3 version of FreeRealms which is an SOE game. While it does have keyboard support You have to use the controller to open the chat box.. and it uses the standard PS3 text entry popup which blocks the screen and takes focus.
Interestingly enough the PS3 version of DCUO also by SOE uses a PC style chat interface which doesn't have that issue. Neither does the PS3 Home virtual world thingy which uses a PC style chatbar.
yes, and no. Those games are a niche market, but they could at least try to do one now and then for consoles to try to increase the niche.
But as we both know, the developers of those games tend to staunchly anti console. I can understand it to a certain extent for the flight simmers, those games can be system intensive....but the hex-wargames with 1993 level graphics.
No way. Those are the kind of players who want to play realistic combat flight simulators to begin with. Anyone else would rather play something like Crimson Skies, or at worst, Aces High; realistic physics but you don't have to actually know how to go through all the motions of flying a plane.
That's a valid point, but what happened to the Flight Simulator II/JET market. There was a time when practically every DOS gamer had a copy of one of those. What happened to the games "in between" the arcade-y ones like Ace Combat and those hardcore "you actually have to flip all the virtual cockpit switches in the right order before you can fly" games.
What would be awesome would be if you could use additional consoles to power additional displays
It's been done for displays, though only with Gran Turismo as far as I know. With GT3 you need firewire capable PS2's since GT3 only networks via Firewire. With GT4 you can use Ethernet on the PS2's. GT5 can use ethernet for multi-display the same way.
The problem is, consoles don't embrace arbitrary input devices, so it doesn't actually make any sense, it would just be cool.
Depends on what you mean by embrace and it depends on the game.
I think every flight game on the PS2/PS3 from Ace Combat 4 on supports HOTAS over USB (the official Ace Combat HOTAS is a rebadged x45 I think). Some, not all FPS's do support mouse and/or keyboard. (though I've found a hybrid setup with mouse for aiming and analog stick for movement works well). It's hit or miss, for example the PS2's Half-Life portt\ has keyboard and mouse support but the PS3's orange box doesn't. Dust514 DOES support mouse and/or keyboard which works well (and you can use hybrid controls)... except for vehicles... then you're screwed because the inverted Y will mess that up.
Console MMORPG's always have keyboard support at minimum for chat, sometimes for game control too, though usually not mouse support.
Most online games in general can and do support keyboard chat. Some other games support keyboards for various text entry (naming enchanted items in Oblivion or Skyrim) or more rarely mice. Such support is often not mentioned on the boxes.
Look at what they did to Dragon Age on the console compared to the PC
What did they do? As far as I know it's the exact same game on all platforms. The PC version does have that isometric Baldur's Gate camera view to appease the oldbie grognards who want to play it old-style Bioware and an MMO style UI but that's really the only difference. It plays the same. Having a different UI doesn't mean dumbed down if you do the same stuff in it.
Look at driving games, where console gamers think Forza is a good simulation.
You're confusing Xbox owners with all console owners there buddy.
Even the controllers are dumbed down, compared to a keyboard and mouse.
Look friend, just because you can use EVERY key for a function doesn't mean you should, that's Bad UI. These are games we are talking about, simpler is better. Keyboard controls are a relic from the 80's when Atari/Commodore/Apple game developers couldn't be sure gamers had a joystick. Then it became tradition. It's actually possible to design a UI that doesn't need dozens of keys AND alt and ctrl key combos.
Let me explain... pick up a copy of the PC and PSone versions of diablo.... play both... you'll see. (Make sure to set relative movement and combo buttons on). The console version is actually more intuitive because of the direct control over movement. You lose individual targeting yes, but that's not really necessary in an action game and actually slows down gameplay. Not only that the PSone version has a normal gameplay speed and an option for faster gameplay speed... PC diablo is much slower paced and is easier because of that. The PSone version is also more comfortable to play over long periods. So IMHO Diablo (and it's clones) make much better console games than PC games
Console gamers need auto-aim bots to be even remotely competitive with PC FPS.
Considering there was only one game that had cross-platform play that's not really proof. Besides the term is "aim assist" it "assists" it doesn't aim for you. And you can turn it off (some games are better with it off because it's too strong)
And there's nothing stopping console games from using mice and/or keyboards. I have several console games past and present that do. Or USB HOTAS. I think Ace Combat 4 was the first version that included that on the PS2.
They never have been. Even in the 16 bit days, console games were simpler experiences compared to PC games of the day.
Just don't pretend consoles are for hardcore gamers.
And PC's are? I'm old enough to remember the hex-game and SSI RPG fans lamenting the frat-boy DOOM players as being "not hardcore" for playing a "dumbed down action game" And considering that some of the games have been multi-platform for years... there's no excuse for elitism.
Even in the 16 bit days, console games were simpler experiences compared to PC games of the day.
They were? How can you say that when some of them were ports!
There's nothing wrong with preferring simpler games.
Like FPS's and RTS's? Real men play hex-games with unit icons you have to be a West Point graduate to decipher and fight the battles of Stalingrad and Gettysburg over and over again for 30 years.
I'm old enough to remember that argument used by PC gamers against other PC gamers.
Consoles have always had fairly dumbed down gaming experiences compared to what is available on PCs
Dumbed down?
There are console games with plenty of complexity, you just don't realize they exist because most PC gamers know diddly squat about what's out there. They only see Halo and Madden and don't see anything else.
Oh sure, they don't make crazy ass flight sims that you have to have to be an aeronautical engineer or have an actual fucking rating in the aircraft in the game to actually play for consoles. But how many people actually play stuff like that these days....the market for that grows ever smaller as the obsession of the niche bearded Janes-reading engineers for ever more hardcore detail and complexity drives away new players. There isn't much of an entry level for flight sims or hex wargames anymore....the elitist jerks drove everyone else out.
So tell me, when has Microsoft or Nintendo ever officially supported Linux on their consoles. Sony has done it TWICE, once with the PS2 with the Linux Kit and again with the PS3.
Sure, being paranoid about the GeoHot exploit and removing OtherOS was an overreaction that offended some geeks, many of which didn't own PS3's or use OtherOS, but no other console maker has ever come close to Sony's support of Linux and open source.
It was a Lie. OtherOS was ADVERTISED not only in video but on the box itself.
It was? Pictures/Video or it didn't happen. I still have My CECHE01 MGS bundle model box, it doesn't mention OtherOS. I think people are making this stuff up for "waaah" factor.
And let me state in no uncertain terms that I don't consider some Sony exec mentioning it in an interview with Ars Technica or the feature getting mentioned on Slashdot..."advertising".
It's not advertising unless there were actual ads in OPM, EGM or on TV.
AFAICT, Other OS was an advertised feature right on the front of the box,
No, it wasn't. I still have my box for my CECHE01 MGS bundle model... no mention of OtherOS on the box. Pictures or it didn't happen.
Also the manuals directly say "features may change due to system software updates at any time." IIRC the PSN TOS (which is handled separately) states that one of the "Rules" to access it is having an up to date system software.
In fact it was not an advertised feature at all beyond a small little Yellow Dog Pengiun on the side of the original box.
What YDL penguin? There was no YDL penguin on PS3 boxes. I keep asking people who say it was mentioned on the box for proof and none of them can provide it.
Sony was not up front about removing the Other OS, they lied about it profusely and tried to trick, and ultimately forced, PS3 owners to update.
Considering that there are still people running Linux on their PS3's via OtherOS, there was no "forcing"
but anyone that didn't update is now stuck with an overpriced ($800 when I bought mine), under powered, locked down Linux machine.
yes, but if they've been running Linux on it, they obviously should know the limitations by now. And $800? How did you pay that much? My CECHE MGS bundle cost much less than that.
You can try and spin it anyway you like, but the fact was it was an advertised feature.
No it wasn't. getting mentioned on Ars Technica or Slashdot isn't "advertising". Now if there had been ads in magazines or TV, that would be different.
The PS3 only has 256MB, an inline CPU and was sitting over a hypervisor which blocked access to the 3D GPU.
It also used the 256MB VRAM as VERY fast swap. However one big issue was the partitioning schemes offered which some of the people complaining about the removal don't seem to know about. You either get 10GB to OtherOS and the rest for GameOS, which cripples OtherOS (you need more swap for some compiles), or 10GB for GameOS and the rest to OtherOS... which basically makes the PS3 useless for gaming and media. One game can eat up half of that for Cache easy.
I think in time someone might have been able to put those SPUs to work to accelerate the graphics to some degree (e.g. mesa over SPUs, video decoding).
They did, there was a SPU enabled Mesa build... didn't help much.
Maybe someone would have made a dist that booted into a front end for playing arcade / SNES / Sega / Atari / C64 / PS1 games or MythTV.
Nope, because that's "software". There's a notice in the manuals that says "features may change due to updates at any time, blah blah blah and you can only access PSN if you follow the rules, one of them being having the most current firmware update"
You, are ignorant, do you know why? Because console gaming in the home pre-dates PC gaming. Before PC's of any kind, whether Apple, Atari or Commodore 8-bits or the IBM PC achieved any real household penetration, there were consoles. They were simply much more affordable. and much more common. Sure the more affluent kids may have had a C64, or Atari 8-bit, but everyone else had a 2600. Even then household penetration was much lower...don't the the 2600 ever got above 25 percent, which was considered GOOD and much above that of home computers.
My C-64 had a cartridge port on back AND a keyboard with an OS that you could program.
You did know the C64 was originally designed to be a sort of console/computer hybrid, right? And was released as such in it's original form (less RAM, no serial interface) as the Max in Japan? Commodore decided to turn that thing into a computer later in it's development. In fact it's console roots still exist in the "ultimax" mode.
Let's also not forget the 64GS
Many C64 users only used their machines in a console sort of way, only using them for games and only knowing enough basic to: load "*",8,1
Only parents who hated their kids bought them a dumb device like a console.
Or parents without the money for a full C64 system. Adjusted for inflation the C64 alone, without disk drive or printer or monitor would cost $1400. Which is why though it seems every suburban upper middle class nerd on Slashdot had one...the actual household penetration rate was low...much lower than that of the Atari 2600
Don't know yet....but you can play "some" games from 1993 on a PS3.
Besides, how many games of that vintage do you actually play all that frequently. Lots of gamers on Slashdot claim to play lots of older games but I think their claims more for "geek cred". Now if you were talking 98 or 99 that's a different story.
Slashdot Mirror
probably because they're using UK style spelling where it does have that second g
* as it was advertised.
Where? Give me some proof it was advertised, and no... getting a mention when Ars Technica interviews some Sony Exec is NOT advertising.
The SPUs are far more flexible than stream processors. They have their own DMA engines and can run arbitrary control flow. They also run very fast even compared to a modern CPU. They were never designed to compete with GPUs. A single GPU stream processor is not very powerful, and morphing an algorithm onto a stream processor is a lot of hard work (even compared to SPU coding).
Didn't the Folding@home guys say that while the GPU client was very fast it was limited in the types of work units it could handle compared to the PS3? It was CPU client (generalized), PS3 client (slightly more specialized and faster for most, but not all work unites) GPU client (even more specialized but with limits)
best case there will be an "about" option and after scrolling through several pages of eula, copyright notices and threats to discourage reverse engineering there might be an acknowledgement that code from freebsd was used.
Yep, do that on a PS3 now and you'll see mention of the LGPL, BSD, WebKit, Eric S. Raymond, etc etc. No really, ESR's name is in EVERY PS3.
Don't sit here and tell me you were switching back and forth between linux and the ps3 software, you weren't, you know you never used that feature and probably only heard about it when they "removed" it.
I personally WAS switching back and forth between OtherOS and GameOS as I wanted. Though, as you probably know, the partitioning schemes offered were not optimal at all. Either 10GB to GameOS and the rest to OtherOS, which cripples GameOS. Or 10GB to OtherOS and the rest to GameOS, which restricts Linux and prevents some compiles from finishing unless you decrease the root partition further to add a bit more to swap.
I wasn't happy about the removal, but I understand the why of it and updated my PS3 after about a month or so, after transferring my /home over to an X86 Linux box I had picked up.
I think the PS2 / PS3 originally supported another OS more as a tax ruse than anything else, to sell their consoles as computers and therefore avoid import duties in Europe.
Why oh why does this rumor never die.
It wasn't Linux, it was YaBasic on the EU PS2's that was the attempt to get around the tariff. It failed, but the tariff was abolished shortly thereafter, BEFORE Linux on the PS2 or PS3.
Sony supported Linux because their preferred dev environment was Linux. Those PS2 dev TOOL machines ran Linux. RedHat 5 IIRC. Those GScubes that were basically 16 PS2's in parallel were controlled from a Linux machine. The similar Zego's ran Yellow Dog Linux.
I remember reading some complaint, perhaps on ars technica or gamasutra from a developer that the PS2 dev-machines didn't have good IDE's or documentation... some other guy said, "you've got GCC and vi, what more do you need?"
I think a lot of the complaint about consoles "dumbing down" games has less to do with that and more to do with the horrendous ports we've gotten in the past several years. Just a week more spent on the port to scale the UI properly and remove the pictures of xbox buttons *cough* Skyrim *cough* would do wonders to those perceptions and complaints.
You see I'm of two minds about that.
One is that I think that PC players deserve scaled UI and acceptable controls with mouse and keyboard. Wouldn't mind having a UI scaling option on the PS3 versions myself.
The other is me thinking "The xbox button icons are there in Skyrim because they are suggesting you use the 360 controller even on Windows. It's an RPG so the controller works fine just like it did in Oblivion and Fallout 3."
And yes, I know some PC gamers aren't used to using a controller, might not have one, and really don't want to anyway so they do the "dumbing down" complaints. I understand that, and know it's even worse when the game isn't an RPG.
The situation goes the other way too.. with PC to console ports. I consider the PS3 version of the orange box one of the worst offenders. The PS2 port of Half Life has mouse and keyboard support and I used a hybrid analog stick + mouse setup with it (And with Deus Ex as well) but the Orange box has absolutely no such support, not even in HL2 or Portal.
Or take the PS3 version of FreeRealms which is an SOE game. While it does have keyboard support You have to use the controller to open the chat box.. and it uses the standard PS3 text entry popup which blocks the screen and takes focus.
Interestingly enough the PS3 version of DCUO also by SOE uses a PC style chat interface which doesn't have that issue. Neither does the PS3 Home virtual world thingy which uses a PC style chatbar.
You don't see that as a problem?
yes, and no. Those games are a niche market, but they could at least try to do one now and then for consoles to try to increase the niche.
But as we both know, the developers of those games tend to staunchly anti console. I can understand it to a certain extent for the flight simmers, those games can be system intensive....but the hex-wargames with 1993 level graphics.
No way. Those are the kind of players who want to play realistic combat flight simulators to begin with. Anyone else would rather play something like Crimson Skies, or at worst, Aces High; realistic physics but you don't have to actually know how to go through all the motions of flying a plane.
That's a valid point, but what happened to the Flight Simulator II/JET market. There was a time when practically every DOS gamer had a copy of one of those. What happened to the games "in between" the arcade-y ones like Ace Combat and those hardcore "you actually have to flip all the virtual cockpit switches in the right order before you can fly" games.
What would be awesome would be if you could use additional consoles to power additional displays
It's been done for displays, though only with Gran Turismo as far as I know. With GT3 you need firewire capable PS2's since GT3 only networks via Firewire. With GT4 you can use Ethernet on the PS2's. GT5 can use ethernet for multi-display the same way.
The problem is, consoles don't embrace arbitrary input devices, so it doesn't actually make any sense, it would just be cool.
Depends on what you mean by embrace and it depends on the game.
I think every flight game on the PS2/PS3 from Ace Combat 4 on supports HOTAS over USB (the official Ace Combat HOTAS is a rebadged x45 I think). Some, not all FPS's do support mouse and/or keyboard. (though I've found a hybrid setup with mouse for aiming and analog stick for movement works well). It's hit or miss, for example the PS2's Half-Life portt\ has keyboard and mouse support but the PS3's orange box doesn't. Dust514 DOES support mouse and/or keyboard which works well (and you can use hybrid controls)... except for vehicles... then you're screwed because the inverted Y will mess that up.
Console MMORPG's always have keyboard support at minimum for chat, sometimes for game control too, though usually not mouse support.
Most online games in general can and do support keyboard chat. Some other games support keyboards for various text entry (naming enchanted items in Oblivion or Skyrim) or more rarely mice. Such support is often not mentioned on the boxes.
Look at what they did to Dragon Age on the console compared to the PC
What did they do? As far as I know it's the exact same game on all platforms. The PC version does have that isometric Baldur's Gate camera view to appease the oldbie grognards who want to play it old-style Bioware and an MMO style UI but that's really the only difference. It plays the same. Having a different UI doesn't mean dumbed down if you do the same stuff in it.
Look at driving games, where console gamers think Forza is a good simulation.
You're confusing Xbox owners with all console owners there buddy.
Even the controllers are dumbed down, compared to a keyboard and mouse.
Look friend, just because you can use EVERY key for a function doesn't mean you should, that's Bad UI. These are games we are talking about, simpler is better. Keyboard controls are a relic from the 80's when Atari/Commodore/Apple game developers couldn't be sure gamers had a joystick. Then it became tradition. It's actually possible to design a UI that doesn't need dozens of keys AND alt and ctrl key combos.
Let me explain... pick up a copy of the PC and PSone versions of diablo.... play both... you'll see. (Make sure to set relative movement and combo buttons on). The console version is actually more intuitive because of the direct control over movement. You lose individual targeting yes, but that's not really necessary in an action game and actually slows down gameplay. Not only that the PSone version has a normal gameplay speed and an option for faster gameplay speed... PC diablo is much slower paced and is easier because of that. The PSone version is also more comfortable to play over long periods. So IMHO Diablo (and it's clones) make much better console games than PC games
Console gamers need auto-aim bots to be even remotely competitive with PC FPS.
Considering there was only one game that had cross-platform play that's not really proof. Besides the term is "aim assist" it "assists" it doesn't aim for you. And you can turn it off (some games are better with it off because it's too strong)
And there's nothing stopping console games from using mice and/or keyboards. I have several console games past and present that do. Or USB HOTAS. I think Ace Combat 4 was the first version that included that on the PS2.
They never have been. Even in the 16 bit days, console games were simpler experiences compared to PC games of the day.
Just don't pretend consoles are for hardcore gamers.
And PC's are? I'm old enough to remember the hex-game and SSI RPG fans lamenting the frat-boy DOOM players as being "not hardcore" for playing a "dumbed down action game" And considering that some of the games have been multi-platform for years... there's no excuse for elitism.
Even in the 16 bit days, console games were simpler experiences compared to PC games of the day.
They were? How can you say that when some of them were ports!
There's nothing wrong with preferring simpler games.
Like FPS's and RTS's? Real men play hex-games with unit icons you have to be a West Point graduate to decipher and fight the battles of Stalingrad and Gettysburg over and over again for 30 years.
I'm old enough to remember that argument used by PC gamers against other PC gamers.
Not 10 years..... just under 7 years....the PS3 came out in late 2006 you know.
Consoles have always had fairly dumbed down gaming experiences compared to what is available on PCs
Dumbed down?
There are console games with plenty of complexity, you just don't realize they exist because most PC gamers know diddly squat about what's out there. They only see Halo and Madden and don't see anything else.
Oh sure, they don't make crazy ass flight sims that you have to have to be an aeronautical engineer or have an actual fucking rating in the aircraft in the game to actually play for consoles. But how many people actually play stuff like that these days....the market for that grows ever smaller as the obsession of the niche bearded Janes-reading engineers for ever more hardcore detail and complexity drives away new players. There isn't much of an entry level for flight sims or hex wargames anymore....the elitist jerks drove everyone else out.
A Hat made out of Money!
Obligatory Penny Arcade from 2000:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2000/10/23/
So tell me, when has Microsoft or Nintendo ever officially supported Linux on their consoles. Sony has done it TWICE, once with the PS2 with the Linux Kit and again with the PS3.
Sure, being paranoid about the GeoHot exploit and removing OtherOS was an overreaction that offended some geeks, many of which didn't own PS3's or use OtherOS, but no other console maker has ever come close to Sony's support of Linux and open source.
It was a Lie. OtherOS was ADVERTISED not only in video but on the box itself.
It was? Pictures/Video or it didn't happen. I still have My CECHE01 MGS bundle model box, it doesn't mention OtherOS. I think people are making this stuff up for "waaah" factor.
And let me state in no uncertain terms that I don't consider some Sony exec mentioning it in an interview with Ars Technica or the feature getting mentioned on Slashdot..."advertising".
It's not advertising unless there were actual ads in OPM, EGM or on TV.
AFAICT, Other OS was an advertised feature right on the front of the box,
No, it wasn't. I still have my box for my CECHE01 MGS bundle model... no mention of OtherOS on the box. Pictures or it didn't happen.
Also the manuals directly say "features may change due to system software updates at any time." IIRC the PSN TOS (which is handled separately) states that one of the "Rules" to access it is having an up to date system software.
CECHE01 MGS bundle box here, no mention of OtherOS on the box. I keep asking for pictures too.
In fact it was not an advertised feature at all beyond a small little Yellow Dog Pengiun on the side of the original box.
What YDL penguin? There was no YDL penguin on PS3 boxes. I keep asking people who say it was mentioned on the box for proof and none of them can provide it.
Sony was not up front about removing the Other OS, they lied about it profusely and tried to trick, and ultimately forced, PS3 owners to update.
Considering that there are still people running Linux on their PS3's via OtherOS, there was no "forcing"
but anyone that didn't update is now stuck with an overpriced ($800 when I bought mine), under powered, locked down Linux machine.
yes, but if they've been running Linux on it, they obviously should know the limitations by now. And $800? How did you pay that much? My CECHE MGS bundle cost much less than that.
You can try and spin it anyway you like, but the fact was it was an advertised feature.
No it wasn't. getting mentioned on Ars Technica or Slashdot isn't "advertising". Now if there had been ads in magazines or TV, that would be different.
It wasn't even mentioned on the box!
The PS3 only has 256MB, an inline CPU and was sitting over a hypervisor which blocked access to the 3D GPU.
It also used the 256MB VRAM as VERY fast swap. However one big issue was the partitioning schemes offered which some of the people complaining about the removal don't seem to know about. You either get 10GB to OtherOS and the rest for GameOS, which cripples OtherOS (you need more swap for some compiles), or 10GB for GameOS and the rest to OtherOS... which basically makes the PS3 useless for gaming and media. One game can eat up half of that for Cache easy.
I think in time someone might have been able to put those SPUs to work to accelerate the graphics to some degree (e.g. mesa over SPUs, video decoding).
They did, there was a SPU enabled Mesa build... didn't help much.
Maybe someone would have made a dist that booted into a front end for playing arcade / SNES / Sega / Atari / C64 / PS1 games or MythTV.
Yes, someone did that.
Yep, only in 2011 though. Got a mention here on Slashdot.
Nope, because that's "software". There's a notice in the manuals that says "features may change due to updates at any time, blah blah blah and you can only access PSN if you follow the rules, one of them being having the most current firmware update"
So, not lying.
You, are ignorant, do you know why? Because console gaming in the home pre-dates PC gaming. Before PC's of any kind, whether Apple, Atari or Commodore 8-bits or the IBM PC achieved any real household penetration, there were consoles. They were simply much more affordable. and much more common. Sure the more affluent kids may have had a C64, or Atari 8-bit, but everyone else had a 2600. Even then household penetration was much lower...don't the the 2600 ever got above 25 percent, which was considered GOOD and much above that of home computers.
My C-64 had a cartridge port on back AND a keyboard with an OS that you could program.
You did know the C64 was originally designed to be a sort of console/computer hybrid, right? And was released as such in it's original form (less RAM, no serial interface) as the Max in Japan? Commodore decided to turn that thing into a computer later in it's development. In fact it's console roots still exist in the "ultimax" mode.
Let's also not forget the 64GS
Many C64 users only used their machines in a console sort of way, only using them for games and only knowing enough basic to: load "*",8,1
Only parents who hated their kids bought them a dumb device like a console.
Or parents without the money for a full C64 system. Adjusted for inflation the C64 alone, without disk drive or printer or monitor would cost $1400. Which is why though it seems every suburban upper middle class nerd on Slashdot had one...the actual household penetration rate was low...much lower than that of the Atari 2600
Don't know yet....but you can play "some" games from 1993 on a PS3.
Besides, how many games of that vintage do you actually play all that frequently. Lots of gamers on Slashdot claim to play lots of older games but I think their claims more for "geek cred". Now if you were talking 98 or 99 that's a different story.