Yes, they were paranoid about OtherOS eventually becoming an attack vector. And lets give them some credit for having it in the first place on both the PS3 and the PS2. Nintendo has never supported Linux.
sigh, OtherOS was never "Advertised" yes, it was mentioned in the users manual, but that's not advertising. Neither is it getting mention on Kotaku or Slashdot.
The majority of people buying PS3's didn't give a damn about OtherOS and never used it...so it makes not one whit of difference for them. The Slim's also never had OtherOS as part of the efford to get the price down. You remember the biggest complaint abou thte PS3 right, the price? So they take out OtherOS that very few people used and people still complain.
Sure, I had YDL on my PS3, but it's not that big of a deal, I understand why they did it, and can live without OtherOS with only a bit of minor grumbling on my part.
Sony's divisions are semi-independent, even within divisions such as SCE. It was SCE's hardware people that wanted OtherOS, and SCE's software people (the ones that sell and market PS3 games) that killed it. Heck, one part of Sony didn't like the fact that the PSP plays MP3's!, but SCE insisted on the feature, though they threw that part of Sony a bone by having it play ATRAC as well. Also SCE made MP3 the default ripping format of the PS3, not ATRAC.
Sony is paranoid about piracy because they also make practically every kind of media content, movies, music, games. So the hardware and media divisions of Sony are constantly feuding. (Sony BMG did NOT like Minidisc and insisted on certain features in SACD)
Course it's usable, I used to run Firefox on my PS3 as well, pre firmware 3.21. The RAM is the real limitation, not the CPU. enabling VRAM swap helped, as did running Fluxbox.
Don't downplay what GPUs can do computationally either. They are the kings of Folding, yes ahead of the PS3.
While the GPU clients are powerful, the Cell is more versatile than the GPU clients are and can handle more types of work units than the GPU clients can.
If memory serves me well, it was all those cycles from the PS3's that put Folding@home over the Petaflop barrier and still to this day, most of the processing power of Folding@home is in the PS3's and GPU clients.
And also, IBM's Cell powered RoadRunner cluster is still #7 in the top 500 clusters.
But, the real killer will be that the PS4 won't play PS3 games (based on the PS3 not playing PS2 games),
Who says the PS3 doesn't play PS2 games, mine certainly does.:-)
Of course, I was one of those people who knew that the CECHE was going to be the last PS3 with such compatibility and picked one up. It also has CF/SD/MS card slots, 4USB ports and can play SACD.
And although current model PS3's can't play PS2 games, Sony DOES do "remastered remakes" of some PS2 games for the PS3. And ALL PS3's can play PSone games, both downloaded from PSN and on the original discs.
They had a guy maintaining the code in the PS3's firmware that supported OtherOS under the hypervisor....but they let him go when the slim's came out. I figure once they heard about GeoHot, the figured the easiest and cheapest solution was just to remove OtherOS entirely rather than hire they guy back to rework the code to make it more secure.
I don't agree with the Gamecube. It blew the PS2 out of the water
While some Gamecube games look a bit better than PS2 games, I wouldn't say it blows the PS2 out of the water. Not even taking into account that the PS2's Vector Units give it an advantage in things like particle effects and physics. Was interesting seeing reviews of cross-platform PS2/Gamecube/Xbox games and seeing "the Gamecube and Xbox versions look better overall but the PS2 has better particle effects and lighting"
It wasn't "marketing" or "hype" that killed the Dreamcast. Sega was murdered by Sega (with help from the DC fanboys that insisted the DC library be too heavy with fanboy games that no one else wanted to play) The PS2 has it all over spec-wise on the DC. I'll say it again:
the PS2 could outperform the Dreamcast any day of the week and twice on Sundays. It's CPU is faster, 294MHz vs 200MHz, it's internal busses are faster, it's main RAM is faster, and it has more of it 32MB vs 16MB in the DC. Go on, read this:
The PS2 has over 4x the Gigaflop performance of the Dreamcast
The PS2 is also capable of doing 1080i and 720p, the DC simply can't do that. The DC cannot play Saturn games, can it, but the PS2 can play PSone games.
And lets not forget that DVD's hold more data than DC GD-ROMS can. 4.7GB single layer vs 1.2GB. Dual-layer PS2 games double that.
The PS2 supports standard USB keyboards and mice with some games, the DC does not. Neither can the DC support a hard drive, which makes running a full Linux distro on a DC problematic.
The PS2 is also a DVD player, all for the same price as the DC...so tell me again how the PS2 is inferior?
There will still some low end machines being sold with 512 in 2008, mostly during the XP/Vista transition debacle. 256 was the standard for many machines in 2003.
Well you could...though it would be faster just to download them yourself.
Simplicity. For example in looking for info on Kodak printers, I figured that since although I knew there were issues in the past, that I should find out the model numbers of some newer printers and check those against the openprinting database....since things change over time. And also, the openprinting database would be far more likely to have more recent information than blog posts, and more information collected in one spot. You'll also learn that distro message boards are more likely to have more recent info than most blog posts. You'll build up a "stable" of useful trusted websites.
You'll also need to learn how to use google properly...too many keywords can actually make things harder to find....simpler is better. As I said, rather than google something like "Linux cheap printer ink" you'd simply find the models that have cheap ink via reviews or articles and then plug those into openprinting.
See, there you go again, getting all convoluted and going about it in an overly complex way.
The simpler solution is to only install applications from trusted sources. I've had plenty of open source software installed on XP, Vista and Win 7 over the years. But I never went all willy nilly at downloads com.
And most "one guy in a garage software" sucks...takes a team to make something worth anything. If that one guy in his garage wants to do something, he can start a project on sourceforge and get some help (and some people with actual UI/graphics experience).
So what's my recourse once I use a live distribution and the test ends up resulting in failure?
Try another one. If Ubuntu doesn't, try Fedora, and vice versa. If those don't work try other ones.
Google linux printer cheap ink pulls up this comment, which claims that Kodak's printers don't work with CUPS on Linux
One of your problems is that you're too literal and your reading comprehension sucks. You go about finding info in an overly baroque way that often gets you outdated info...like that blog post, dated 2009. You could have gone to Kodak's website, checked their current models and then gone to openprinting to check compatibility. There you would have found about
I took Kodak's little quiz and the printers it recommended to me, work with that driver.
So HP works with Linux but has expensive ink, while Kodak has more affordable ink but works only with non-free operating systems.
Well, you could always pick up an older Laserjet, cheap, that's what I did (I have a LaserJet 1200), since I rarely need color output. And if I do, I can print to the the PSC 1315. One can also refill cartridges, either personally or take them to someplace like Walgreens and save money.
Also if a company does support Linux, shouldn't we show our appreciation for that company?
Is this a tradeoff that one must accept just because, cheap ink or Linux support, never both, just like indie or local multiplayer, never both?
There are always tradeoffs, you're never going to get EVERYTHING you want.
At the bottom left of my Fedora Desktop there are 3 buttons, one with the fedora logo that also says applications, the second says "Places" the third says "System" Their hovertext is actually informative.
Or are you referring to users of Windows XP who haven't created a limited user account?
You didn't know there's still a large number of XP users out there?
But not all PCs will survive this conversion, as many have incompatible hardware.
That's what live distros are for, testing.
Case in point: an eight-year-old Microtek ScanMaker 4850 USB flatbed scanner was listed as unsupported when I checked SANE's web site earlier this month.
You should also just try it anyway...sometimes the documentation is not updated often.
I went to an electronics store, and none of the inkjet printers had a penguin logo on the box or had a column in system requirements for Linux. Not even the HP products.
I know you've got Aspergers, but you are WAY too literal minded. Just because something doesn't mention Linux support, doesn't mean it doesn't work.
Case in point, are the HP printers, which work fine, and have done so for years. my first Linux distro back in 2002 worked fine with the HP printers I had, and it was a modified Red Hat 6 on the PS2 no less. HP itself releases software for it's printers for Linux, ever hear of HPLIP?
(Although, some say that the intent was to try to get the PS3 legally considered as a computer for taxation reasons.)
And they would be wrong, because that difference in tariffs between consoles and computers in the EU was removed in the PS2 days....BEFORE Linux was ever released on the PS2 or PS3. If you must know, it was the YaBasic discs that shipped with early EU PS2's that was attempt to get around the tarriff...not Linux.
No, the PS2 could outperform the Dreamcast any day of the week and twice on Sundays. It's CPU is faster, 294MHz vs 200MHz, it's internal busses are faster, it's main RAM is faster, and it has more of it 32MB vs 16MB in the DC. Go on, read this:
The PS2 has over 4x the Gigaflop performance of the Dreamcast
The PS2 is also capable of doing 1080i and 720p, the DC simply can't do that. The DC cannot play Saturn games, can it, but the PS2 can play PSone games.
And lets not forget that DVD's hold more data than DC GD-ROMS can. 4.7GB single layer vs 1.2GB. Dual-layer PS2 games double that.
The PS2 supports standard USB keyboards and mice with some games, the DC does not. Neither can the DC support a hard drive, which makes running a full Linux distro on a DC problematic.
The PS2 is also a DVD player, all for the same price as the DC...so tell me again how the PS2 is inferior?
There's no MMO's on consoles afaik, with the exception of final fantasy (which is turn-based..).
You forgot EQOA, DCUO and FreeRealms. And although they may not look it, most MMORPG's are turn-based under the hood. That includes WoW
Quickly switching between 10 or more skills isn't very easy when you don't even have that many buttons.
Ever play EQOA or FFXI? See there's this thing called a D-pad....you don't use it to move...that's what the analog stick is for, so you can use it for menu/skills. You don't need one button for each of 10 skills just one or two buttons for ALL the skills.
In EQOA you Flick between spells (up to 10) with the d-pad, activate them with circle button. You can do that VERY quickly. Faster than I can use different skills in LOTRO
In FFXI, it's somewhat similar.... haven't played it in a while but IIRC a shoulder button pops up a sort of "quickbar set", that's 20 skills. Flick flick, bang bang. Or you can use skills using a menu style system, which is useful for skills you don't use often, don't need to put em in a slot, just use the menu. And in FFXI you actually have multiple quickbar sets that you can swap in and out. I had one set WHM oriented, another BST oriented, etc. You can also use keyboard combos to use quickbar skills. The quickbar system was slower than EQOA's system so I used the key shortcuts when playing a WHM.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, they were paranoid about OtherOS eventually becoming an attack vector. And lets give them some credit for having it in the first place on both the PS3 and the PS2. Nintendo has never supported Linux.
sigh, OtherOS was never "Advertised" yes, it was mentioned in the users manual, but that's not advertising. Neither is it getting mention on Kotaku or Slashdot.
The majority of people buying PS3's didn't give a damn about OtherOS and never used it...so it makes not one whit of difference for them. The Slim's also never had OtherOS as part of the efford to get the price down. You remember the biggest complaint abou thte PS3 right, the price? So they take out OtherOS that very few people used and people still complain.
Sure, I had YDL on my PS3, but it's not that big of a deal, I understand why they did it, and can live without OtherOS with only a bit of minor grumbling on my part.
Sony's divisions are semi-independent, even within divisions such as SCE. It was SCE's hardware people that wanted OtherOS, and SCE's software people (the ones that sell and market PS3 games) that killed it. Heck, one part of Sony didn't like the fact that the PSP plays MP3's!, but SCE insisted on the feature, though they threw that part of Sony a bone by having it play ATRAC as well. Also SCE made MP3 the default ripping format of the PS3, not ATRAC.
Sony is paranoid about piracy because they also make practically every kind of media content, movies, music, games. So the hardware and media divisions of Sony are constantly feuding. (Sony BMG did NOT like Minidisc and insisted on certain features in SACD)
So lay off of SCE, okay.
Course it's usable, I used to run Firefox on my PS3 as well, pre firmware 3.21. The RAM is the real limitation, not the CPU. enabling VRAM swap helped, as did running Fluxbox.
Don't downplay what GPUs can do computationally either. They are the kings of Folding, yes ahead of the PS3.
While the GPU clients are powerful, the Cell is more versatile than the GPU clients are and can handle more types of work units than the GPU clients can.
I'm reminded of when Apple called Altivec capable CPUs "supercomputers."
The PS3's Cell also has an Altivec unit, no kidding. So if you compile stuff with altivec optimizations on it, like the GIMP, they'll be enabled.
If memory serves me well, it was all those cycles from the PS3's that put Folding@home over the Petaflop barrier and still to this day, most of the processing power of Folding@home is in the PS3's and GPU clients.
And also, IBM's Cell powered RoadRunner cluster is still #7 in the top 500 clusters.
But, the real killer will be that the PS4 won't play PS3 games (based on the PS3 not playing PS2 games),
Who says the PS3 doesn't play PS2 games, mine certainly does. :-)
Of course, I was one of those people who knew that the CECHE was going to be the last PS3 with such compatibility and picked one up. It also has CF/SD/MS card slots, 4USB ports and can play SACD.
And although current model PS3's can't play PS2 games, Sony DOES do "remastered remakes" of some PS2 games for the PS3. And ALL PS3's can play PSone games, both downloaded from PSN and on the original discs.
They had a guy maintaining the code in the PS3's firmware that supported OtherOS under the hypervisor....but they let him go when the slim's came out. I figure once they heard about GeoHot, the figured the easiest and cheapest solution was just to remove OtherOS entirely rather than hire they guy back to rework the code to make it more secure.
I don't agree with the Gamecube. It blew the PS2 out of the water
While some Gamecube games look a bit better than PS2 games, I wouldn't say it blows the PS2 out of the water. Not even taking into account that the PS2's Vector Units give it an advantage in things like particle effects and physics. Was interesting seeing reviews of cross-platform PS2/Gamecube/Xbox games and seeing "the Gamecube and Xbox versions look better overall but the PS2 has better particle effects and lighting"
It wasn't "marketing" or "hype" that killed the Dreamcast. Sega was murdered by Sega (with help from the DC fanboys that insisted the DC library be too heavy with fanboy games that no one else wanted to play) The PS2 has it all over spec-wise on the DC. I'll say it again:
the PS2 could outperform the Dreamcast any day of the week and twice on Sundays. It's CPU is faster, 294MHz vs 200MHz, it's internal busses are faster, it's main RAM is faster, and it has more of it 32MB vs 16MB in the DC. Go on, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2#Technical_specifications [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamcast#Hardware [wikipedia.org]
The PS2 has over 4x the Gigaflop performance of the Dreamcast
The PS2 is also capable of doing 1080i and 720p, the DC simply can't do that. The DC cannot play Saturn games, can it, but the PS2 can play PSone games.
And lets not forget that DVD's hold more data than DC GD-ROMS can. 4.7GB single layer vs 1.2GB. Dual-layer PS2 games double that.
The PS2 supports standard USB keyboards and mice with some games, the DC does not. Neither can the DC support a hard drive, which makes running a full Linux distro on a DC problematic.
The PS2 is also a DVD player, all for the same price as the DC...so tell me again how the PS2 is inferior?
Still better than the 6150SE chipsets in a lot of budget PC's.
You should see the hubbub over the suckyness that is Gnome 3 over on the Fedora boards.
There will still some low end machines being sold with 512 in 2008, mostly during the XP/Vista transition debacle. 256 was the standard for many machines in 2003.
I'm on Mediacom and I have not opted out and I got the 404.
And get the copies from a local LUG, correct?
Well you could...though it would be faster just to download them yourself.
Simplicity. For example in looking for info on Kodak printers, I figured that since although I knew there were issues in the past, that I should find out the model numbers of some newer printers and check those against the openprinting database....since things change over time. And also, the openprinting database would be far more likely to have more recent information than blog posts, and more information collected in one spot. You'll also learn that distro message boards are more likely to have more recent info than most blog posts. You'll build up a "stable" of useful trusted websites.
You'll also need to learn how to use google properly...too many keywords can actually make things harder to find....simpler is better. As I said, rather than google something like "Linux cheap printer ink" you'd simply find the models that have cheap ink via reviews or articles and then plug those into openprinting.
See, there you go again, getting all convoluted and going about it in an overly complex way.
The simpler solution is to only install applications from trusted sources. I've had plenty of open source software installed on XP, Vista and Win 7 over the years. But I never went all willy nilly at downloads com.
And most "one guy in a garage software" sucks...takes a team to make something worth anything. If that one guy in his garage wants to do something, he can start a project on sourceforge and get some help (and some people with actual UI/graphics experience).
So what's my recourse once I use a live distribution and the test ends up resulting in failure?
Try another one. If Ubuntu doesn't, try Fedora, and vice versa. If those don't work try other ones.
Google linux printer cheap ink pulls up this comment, which claims that Kodak's printers don't work with CUPS on Linux
One of your problems is that you're too literal and your reading comprehension sucks. You go about finding info in an overly baroque way that often gets you outdated info...like that blog post, dated 2009. You could have gone to Kodak's website, checked their current models and then gone to openprinting to check compatibility. There you would have found about
http://www.openprinting.org/driver/c2esp
I took Kodak's little quiz and the printers it recommended to me, work with that driver.
So HP works with Linux but has expensive ink, while Kodak has more affordable ink but works only with non-free operating systems.
Well, you could always pick up an older Laserjet, cheap, that's what I did (I have a LaserJet 1200), since I rarely need color output. And if I do, I can print to the the PSC 1315. One can also refill cartridges, either personally or take them to someplace like Walgreens and save money.
Also if a company does support Linux, shouldn't we show our appreciation for that company?
Is this a tradeoff that one must accept just because, cheap ink or Linux support, never both, just like indie or local multiplayer, never both?
There are always tradeoffs, you're never going to get EVERYTHING you want.
At the bottom left of my Fedora Desktop there are 3 buttons, one with the fedora logo that also says applications, the second says "Places" the third says "System" Their hovertext is actually informative.
So are fan-run Windows forums.
The Ubuntu Forums are ran/owned by Canonical
Or are you referring to users of Windows XP who haven't created a limited user account?
You didn't know there's still a large number of XP users out there?
But not all PCs will survive this conversion, as many have incompatible hardware.
That's what live distros are for, testing.
Case in point: an eight-year-old Microtek ScanMaker 4850 USB flatbed scanner was listed as unsupported when I checked SANE's web site earlier this month.
You should also just try it anyway...sometimes the documentation is not updated often.
I went to an electronics store, and none of the inkjet printers had a penguin logo on the box or had a column in system requirements for Linux. Not even the HP products.
I know you've got Aspergers, but you are WAY too literal minded. Just because something doesn't mention Linux support, doesn't mean it doesn't work.
Case in point, are the HP printers, which work fine, and have done so for years. my first Linux distro back in 2002 worked fine with the HP printers I had, and it was a modified Red Hat 6 on the PS2 no less. HP itself releases software for it's printers for Linux, ever hear of HPLIP?
http://hplipopensource.com/hplip-web/index.html
Another example is this Bluetooth dongle, which works just fine in Linux even though the neither the package or documentation mentions LInux:
http://www.walmart.com/ip/IoGear-Bluetooth-2.0-USB-Micro-Adapter/10299060?sourceid=1500000000000003142050&ci_src=14110944&ci_sku=10299060
The issue is the Original, "FAT" PS3's that had this feature advertised on the box.
It's not mentioned on the box, never was. I don't know how that "rumor" got started, because it's not true. Show me a picture.
(Although, some say that the intent was to try to get the PS3 legally considered as a computer for taxation reasons.)
And they would be wrong, because that difference in tariffs between consoles and computers in the EU was removed in the PS2 days....BEFORE Linux was ever released on the PS2 or PS3. If you must know, it was the YaBasic discs that shipped with early EU PS2's that was attempt to get around the tarriff...not Linux.
they could release an inferior product,
No, the PS2 could outperform the Dreamcast any day of the week and twice on Sundays. It's CPU is faster, 294MHz vs 200MHz, it's internal busses are faster, it's main RAM is faster, and it has more of it 32MB vs 16MB in the DC. Go on, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2#Technical_specifications
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamcast#Hardware
The PS2 has over 4x the Gigaflop performance of the Dreamcast
The PS2 is also capable of doing 1080i and 720p, the DC simply can't do that. The DC cannot play Saturn games, can it, but the PS2 can play PSone games.
And lets not forget that DVD's hold more data than DC GD-ROMS can. 4.7GB single layer vs 1.2GB. Dual-layer PS2 games double that.
The PS2 supports standard USB keyboards and mice with some games, the DC does not. Neither can the DC support a hard drive, which makes running a full Linux distro on a DC problematic.
The PS2 is also a DVD player, all for the same price as the DC...so tell me again how the PS2 is inferior?
There's no MMO's on consoles afaik, with the exception of final fantasy (which is turn-based..).
You forgot EQOA, DCUO and FreeRealms. And although they may not look it, most MMORPG's are turn-based under the hood. That includes WoW
Quickly switching between 10 or more skills isn't very easy when you don't even have that many buttons.
Ever play EQOA or FFXI? See there's this thing called a D-pad....you don't use it to move...that's what the analog stick is for, so you can use it for menu/skills. You don't need one button for each of 10 skills just one or two buttons for ALL the skills.
In EQOA you Flick between spells (up to 10) with the d-pad, activate them with circle button. You can do that VERY quickly. Faster than I can use different skills in LOTRO
In FFXI, it's somewhat similar.... haven't played it in a while but IIRC a shoulder button pops up a sort of "quickbar set", that's 20 skills. Flick flick, bang bang. Or you can use skills using a menu style system, which is useful for skills you don't use often, don't need to put em in a slot, just use the menu. And in FFXI you actually have multiple quickbar sets that you can swap in and out. I had one set WHM oriented, another BST oriented, etc. You can also use keyboard combos to use quickbar skills. The quickbar system was slower than EQOA's system so I used the key shortcuts when playing a WHM.
Maybe, but you do realize the 6150SE is no match for the PS3 or Xbox 360.