News PS3 update removes Linux support

Trying?

Its been hacked, not completely blown open but hacked. Sony thought that by locking the system down they could prevent piracy, no 3d hardware support, no games. With full system resources Linux would probably run quite well, Sony just came along and killed the party right as it was getting interesting. I'll be keeping my linux support and if I cant run store bought copies of new releases on my PS3 I bet the pirated versions will run fine.

Linux runs fine on the PS3 hardware as is and Ubuntu runs great on mine, everyone who complains about poor performance needs to finish setting it up. Linux is all about being able to tailor it to fit your situation. The PS3 number cruncher clusters are an excellent example of this, if only they could use the RSX processor too.

 

Non Linux works out of the box.

Anyway, I see two options:

1: They tried to take a page out of the Book of failed MSI Jokes
2: Its some new anti piracy measure that hurts honest people more than pirates.

 

Indeed though its no speed demon, its comparable to the my Netbook particularly when you use the GPU RAM as swap.

Shame they are getting rid of it, I think its a bit out of order really, its a feature I use and like, though admittedly I've not used it since I got my netbook.

 

No the hardware in the Wii remote costs peanuts. http://www.coolcomponents.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=95 20.99 for 1 you can get them much much cheaper than that if you buy them in bulk, or in SMD form rather than breakout. Or you could buy a Nunchuck for <£15 and hack it out of it. It's the same ADXL330 chip (the one I linked is a 335 but it's the same chip functionality wise). I use them in my Arduinomes for tilt control. If you want IR these are dead cheap as well, you can find them on the same site for about a tenner I think.

I am completely disappointed in Sony for doing this. I use my PS3 with the Zero Game Project (a little script that takes a default YDL installation, trims the fat, and turns it into a Maximus Arcade style front end for Wahcade and various other PS3 optimised emulators) very often. So now I'm faced with keep linux and lose access to all my PSN games and access to BD films and Games released that require 3.21 firmware or lose linux, and show that Sony can remove features willy nilly without consequence, it's going to be a matter of time that they remove PS2 backwards compatibility from my (very expensive) launch 60GB PS3 for 'security reasons' we need to band together as consumers and show that Sony can't get away with this kind of behaviour otherwise other vendors are going to follow suit and shaft the consumer.

 

You're asking what a linux user with mad 'l33t sklz' might possibly do to another person ('s computer) over the internet? I think someone is lacking somewhat in imagination. I epic failed to do anything at all with linux when I tried it, and I couldn't hack my way out of an open-source calculator, but I'm sure I don't fit the average bit-tech profile in that regard.

 

They would have to quit fapping to anime first. There are too many other things to hack than someone's pc that dissed the all powerful Liunx. Right now at least 90% of the 'l33t sklz' hackers are drooling over the iPad and how they might be able to turn it into something useful. The other 10% are "watching" anime

 

Greetings!

Figures... Cracker screwing all PS3 Linux users.

 

I'd say it's more Sony that's screwing them. Hacker's are like rats: you leave something tempting out there for too long, you can bet they'll come and get it. Surely Sony knew this, and surely they don't think locking down the PS3 / stable door post-horse bolting is going to do much...

 

Greetings!

Sony had already taken steps to close the breach, PS3 Slim.

 

That doesn't really close the breach, though. Regardless of the PS3 Slim, or the BIOS update, some people still have PS3s that are hackable. That some are now 'unhackable' is pretty much irrelevent, IMO.

Now, I'm not in favour of illegal hacking, especially when it's just for the purposes of theft, but you really can't suggest that Sony are blameless, or that what they're doing isn't legally dodgy in itself. They are rendering the product unfit for one of its originally intended purposes, which is a controvention of the Sale of Goods Act.

 

Greetings!

Sue them, then.
See if the EULA holds.
Post back your findings.

 

I can't: I don't own a PS3 or use Linux .

 

flatworm's point is a good one. The provisions of the Sale of Goods Act form implied terms in every consumer contract and these terms cannot be varied by agreement, so the EULA point is specious.

That said, the Courts are highly unlikely to award specific performance in such a case and damages are more likely. As to the amount of those damages, it would be tempting to arrive at the refund of the original purchase cost, however, this is a 'tortious'-type of damages assessment and you could (and should) argue for 'contractual'-type damages: you bought your PS3 because of its ability to run linux (of which Sony explicitly acknowledged) and Sony has removed that ability without your consent, so you should be 'made whole' for this loss. I would think the cost of buying an unpatched/linux-capable PS3 would be a better assessment of the damages amount.

Two PS3s for the price of one? Perhaps. It is unlikely Sony will want the original (patched) machine back (what are they doing to do with it?) so, it is conceivable that you could end up with two PS3s from such a result.

P.S. I hope the above highlights the importance of knowing your Statutory Rights. It is lamentable that all too often people feel themselves bound by what a piece of paper says (be it a EULA, or a sign in a shop saying 'No customer refunds'). Knowing your Statutory Rights is fundamental to making sure you don't get shafted at the checkout.

 

Greetings!

Then, couldnt Sony just ask for some proof that you in fact ran Linux in your PS3?

 

No. Whether you have done that in the past or not, is irrelevant. There was no such term, express or implied, in your original contract of sale (unless you were foolish enough to explicitly agree to such a term in the first place). It is only up to you to prove that you can no longer run Linux on your PS3 should you choose to do so.

I feel that I should also point out at this point, the rule privity of contract. It is highly likely that the contact of sale was between you and the vendor only (shop or e-tailer). Sony was not a party to that contract and, as such, you cannot take them to Court. You must take the shop/e-tailer to Court. They sold you the goods as specified and, in doing so, made themselves liable as such (and don't take any crap from them about "it's what Sony claimed the PS could do, not me"). Should your claim be successful then it is up to the shop/e-tailer to claim against Sony under a separate action, as Sony sold them the goods. Too many times people fall for the "you'll have to take it up with them" excuse which has no validity at law. A contract is a contract and legally binding on the parties privy to that contract. This applies to all your purchases be they clothing, food, washing machine repairs, etc. and not just electronic goods.

 

Greetings!

I really dont like the way BitTech breaks the discussion on something over a lot of threads:
http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=186006
Amazon gives PS3 refunds for Linux removal