05-14-2010 #21laggmaster Guest
05-15-2010 #22geo442 Guest
And that info isn't THAT old, either. Not sure how many his facility is running... But I know it's more than 6 and I'd guess WELL less than ~2500, but still probably more than a few on site.
Wonder if places such as this will get special firmware for their refurbs when they need them. If they're small enough to be looking for low-budget machines of a specific processing power, they won't have the weight to throw around to demand specific firmware from Sony ob their refurbs.
And Sony might see them as being small enough or not under a stringent enough contract that they feel such groups would be likely to leak firmware to the public, so there's a reasonable chance that any concessions the USAF gets wouldn't be extended to them.
Those of us who just like running our personal PS3 with a linux install of choice to have a basic backup machine available can be angry (and I AM!), but institutions like that could REALLY get the worse end of the bargain.
I think it's places like the one I'm describing that might convince Sony that it's really alienated a part of its customer base (and one that it marketed *HARD* to in 2006-7). Class action suits by individual users might force Sony to somehow compensate those of us who have it in out living room, but I think the best bet for making Sony backpedal on their OtherOS stupidity will be if places like this make their case loud, clear, and hopefully through the courts, be it here in the US or elsewhere...
Just my two cents on the situation.
05-16-2010 #23tragedy Guest
Back then, though, Sony had an interest in promoting adoptance of cell more widely than just the PS3 as it was a key member of the STI.
Since IBM have dropped the cell as a focus for future development and Sony have sold all their manufacturing rights to Toshiba, there's no real drive behind this anymore, so to Sony it's now just another chip that they source from an external company.
They have no reason to promote that market as they're *still* losing money on each console sold.
05-16-2010 #24tjay17 Guest
Hopefully they can convince sony to give back other os.
05-16-2010 #25saviour07 Guest
I think it's gotten to the point now that no matter who sues, moans or complains about OtherOS removal, the story of it's removal and the speculation as to WHY it was removed has snowballed into a well-known story that just to save face Sony wont re-enable it.
If Sony caved to the pressure of the (lets face it) small minority of people who actually use linux on their ps3 (for legitimate reasons) and re-enable it, then whenever a future feature is removed or "tweaked" in such a way that the consumers don't like, the public will know that nagging at Sony may well lead to them going back on themselves and undoing their changes.
That's both costly and a waste of time.
The only way OtherOS will be enabled on the ps3 now will be IF someone manages to create a hybrid FW PUP and *NOT* because of Sony's doing.
05-16-2010 #26laggmaster Guest
But sony would never cave to average consumer pressure... if sony dose cave to the USAF then whatever they give them is going to be guarded under high enough security that the public will never get it... but this has already been established previously in the thread now im just being redundant...
If we ever create some sort of "hybrid firmware" chances are that whatever eploit they use will be stopped on the next firmware update...
either everyone can keep wining and bitching about it or you could find a way to fix it...
05-16-2010 #27saviour07 Guest
My reason being, that once the ability to create a hybrid PUP is known/perfected then anything released by Sony therein will only result in a cat-and-mouse style of FW releases.
The method will remain the same regardless of any new OFW, and if any changes are made to the method via a Sony update, it would not take long before that is circumvented as well.
Obviously it would be nice if spoofing/auto hybrid FW update/OFW update blockers could be included inside any hybrid PUP's created (so constant updating ISN'T required!) but they would all be custom code and not signed by sony and obviously not feasable... but its a nice idea *dreams* lol
05-17-2010 #28xUb3rn00dlEx Guest
I agree and support both laggmaster's and saviour07's opinions and views on this issue.
Although I am curious as to filing a request under the "Freedom of Information We Used to Have Act." Probably nothing will come of it, but again, it would be worth a pester.
The one thing that I do believe is that any deal that might come of the USAF-Sony pact would indeed be kept hush hush, because of the fact that the Japanese hate foreign interference in their politics. As mentioned previously it would not only be economically costly but also PR costly. While they might play it off as the "Personal interests on co-operation with (inter)national securities, bla bla, ultimately the people choose to believe that or say that Sony gave in to the demands of the USAF.
This is all speculation of course, but I just stated my opinion based on what I know about the topic.
05-17-2010 #29soultrane Guest
Back to the Airforce:
Given Sony no longer produces OtherOS capable hardware (firmware restricted from 1st run of Slims), I believe the Airforce has had a maintenance issue for some time. If a node fails, they can't just run to Wal-Mart and get a replacement anymore. Although they may have a cache of 100s of backup, unboxed, Fat PS3s in the store-room -- eventually that supply runs out.
Also, given that consoles generally have a limited life-span - the Airforce had to know this going in. I tend to agree that they would be fine sticking with what they have without any need to upgrade. The only reason for an "upgrade" story would be to downgrade old Fat PS3s they buy off of Ebay/Craigslist. And for some reason I can't see the USAF on Craigslist or Ebay.
Although I'm happy to see the publicity, I speculate that the USAF connection will not bring OtherOS back.
Now deviating from USAF and going into useless speculation:
I think the best thing for Sony to do (for itself -- maybe not the customer) is to release a version of OtherOS that runs in the same environment as the games - put it on BlueRay - and generate a revenue stream from it. Then whoever wants OtherOS would have to pay. As new builds of the OS come out, you'd have to decide if it was worth it to pay again for the new version.
05-17-2010 #30saviour07 Guest
Tbh though I've had my PS2 for almost 10 years and so with good care (and a bit of luck) the USAF can be looking at about 5-7 years in terms of a life expiration on the PS3's they currently use.
Which surely would have been in some kind of budget report when comparing 5 years use of PS3's to an investment in a unique supercomputer within the same period of time.
Obviously the PS3's are more cost effective, otherwise the air force wouldn't have chosen them.
By expecting people to PAY for something which can be aquired for free somewhere else would be a wrong move.
The only reason MS can monopolise on people paying for a copy of the Windows OS is because of it's own popularity as almost everything in software is Windows compatible, and very few of the same applications available on Windows is available to Linux users (which is slowly coming undone, as more people are catering to the needs of Linux users)
So if Sony where to release an OS for the PS3 GameOS (which i doubt is possible, but correct me if i'm wrong!) then they would have to make sure it was as compatable with everything as Windows is and as functional as a basic users needs.