As for them being called Sony Computer Entertainment, what's your point? I can name off all the different branches for SONY aswell, but is doesn't prove anything...
Sent from my hTC Intruder using Tapatalk.
I know what you mean about the different hardware version released that was designed to do so, but I wasn't referring to that model. I didn't have oneof those. Lol
I will say, It was much simpler to do on the PS2 then it was the PS1. :-)
Sent from my hTC Intruder using Tapatalk.
Sorry to interrupt you guys from your regularly scheduled roundabout argument, but what I'm more curious about is what will happen should Sony lose. Will they simply be forced to pay a renumeration to owners of the "Phat" PS3, or will they be court-ordered to re-enabled the OtherOS feature? At least if they are given the latter option, they can hopefully plug-up any potential OtherOS-based exploit (Yes, I'm well aware of the out-in-the-wild USB-based exploit). This will be win-win for both parties as owners of the Phat PS3 can use the OtherOS again, and Sony won't have to worry too much about a potential OtherOS-based exploit.
I think for most people that care about the OtherOS feature... well, I suppose they don't care so much now.
I think they'll be expecting a better functioning Linux via Jailbreak.
It would probably boil down to $56 per person or something stupid like that. As a financial incentive, the only winners in that sense would be the attorneys who would gobble up some bank.
$56 dollars or a free game of your choice :D
Don't confuse the USB-based exploit (which only works on "unpatched" PS3's) with "Jailbreak", or otherwise known as rooting. Rooting means you have complete control over the machine including write access to the firmware; the USB-based exploit doesn't, you merely have the ability to run unsigned code on a machine without being able to change the firmware.
Possibly. The PS2 class action lawsuit they lost entitled consumers that were affected by the Disc Read Error to one free game, but it was constrained from within a pre-selected list.Quote:
Originally Posted by F34R
All those people that cared about OtherOS enough not to update now have the perfect opportunity to run Linux properly through it, as soon as someone makes a working one that is.
No it doesn't. The main value for most with linux on the PS3 was the fact that you get to use the Cell. That's what I think most people (including myself) want(ed). I'm still on FW 3.15 because Linux on the PS3 matters more to me than PSN ever did. I also don't like having things taken away, but since they made me choose one, it was an easy choice. PSN will go away at some point in time (they can't be expected to support it forever), but as long as I don't update my FW and my hardware stays working, my ability to run Linux on it stays indefinitely.
For instance if the court took the stance that all PS3 'fat' owners (which must be circa 20mn+) are due to a partial-refund, Sony would have to source something in the region of $100-200mn. If it gets FUBAR (ie a full monetary refund which is a possibility) then you're looking at a similar $1bn that Microsoft had to shell out on for the RROD. Considering that it is a non-gaming feature I doubt Sony could offer games as compensation to soften the blow; but that is the worse case scenario.
Sony could however argue that only a small percentage of PS3 users ever used the feature and that the onus would be on the consumer to provide evidence that they had or were going to use the feature.
I'm not sure what law firms Sony refers to, but they've not had too successful a history; the DRE and Immersion cases are two examples involving either another corporate or consumers.
Because sony didn't support anything besides the feature itself, means that they hold no responsibility for what you used otherOS for and they did not offer the user any reassurances that they would.
This is simply a discussion about what was offered to you as a consumer vs personal use intentions. You could have used otherOS to install windows95 and run the security of your house for all that anyone cares, it is still not Sony's responsibility. They clearly informed everyone of that 4 years ago during launch and 40+ times since then.
In my honest opinion, I hope they get punished to the maximum extent of the law. I want them to pay in full what they owe to all the owners of the "fat" PS3s.
IF Sony never created the PS3 with another OS option in mind, then why did they included it? Why was the option on the menu system?
Weasly words it all.
Point is, we are going to see the argument of "licensing" coming up more and more.
This is the real scary aspect of all this, where you will OWN nothing, just RENT. Your software, your hardware, everything will be theirs to charge again and again and again and again for over and over again.
The new DLC and pay for each episode of tv such as Apple TV is gonna cost a helluva lot for what it available now free.