Playstation 3, another lost feature.

[Snotnarok]

incessant whining

So basically you want the company AND the consumer to pay out the ass for features that the vast majority will never even look at just because there's a remote possibility that someone out there might use it one day?
What kind of fantasy world do you live in where everyone is rich upper class kids that have mommy and daddy buy their expensive toys for them all the time?

What is it with you people and being unbelievably rude to me? I know how unreasonable that I a consumer ask for sony to make an option for the many people who enjoyed the backwards compatibility function they used in the PS3 originally. Having two models is unreasonable I know like the PSP3001, PSPGo and the upcoming PSP handheld. How absurd the thought.

Do me a favor, next time you want to insult me, think about being more creative like calling me a doodie head.

And where did this mommy buying my consoles come up? Are you insulting kids now that can't get a job to buy their consoles? I bought all 21 of mine, so if you're going to call me out, at least have your facts straight friend

Oh lawdy, people are being wude to you. You're being a little childish brat but still expect everyone to get on their knees and kiss your feet. Really, what kind of fucking world do you live in? If you want people to be polite to you, be polite yourself first. Nothing you post deserves respect, it's just whining about how you deserve more for no reason. You want a company to make something that would cause them to lose money and cost an insane amount to purchase, the very same thing that very few people originally bought because it was an expensive thing.
As for where mommy buying consoles came up, stop assuming everything is a personal attack on you. You really have a massive persecution complex where you assume everyone is out to get you. It came up because it is absolutely Ab-fucking-surd to expect the average consumer, anyone who isn't rich or insane or perhaps a spoiled brat who has spineless parents, to be able to afford what you want because of how fucking expensive they are and would have to be to prevent sony from losing money on them.

You're an arrogant rude member of gamefaqs the Escapist aren't you?

I'm twenty four buddy, and I'm not the one acting like a four year old and getting all bent out of shape because someone disagrees with me. Sine you're SO instant on this, I bought my all my consoles and games ,I wasn't fortunate enough to have that bought for me nada one so now that's out of the way.

What is unreasonable to you about a company making a economy model and a upgraded model because everyone from Dell(Dell, XPS), to apple(Ipod 8gb,32gb,64gb), to Sony(PSP,PSPGo) does, even nintendo does it, it's called expanding your product/market. I wasn't saying shove the features back in and charge an arm and leg for it, and if you took 5 seconds to read my post and perhaps understand it instead of trying to poorly insult me you'd see that I said two models, one with said features and one without, both with different price tags so sony can make their money.

 

[King Kupofried]

LordNue your posts are incredibly embarrassing to read which is a real shame because somewhere deep down inside them you seem to have a point you are trying to express. If you want to make a point about people feeling they deserve something compared to a company's ability to make a profit then do so by all means. You don't need to resort to tossing petty baseless insults at a man trying to bring up a discussion from the perspective that he sees.

 

[Blanks]

I have a working PS2, a computer and a PS3 slim ... i have no need for the OS or backwards compatibility so it doesn't bother me at all that these aren't available anymore

 

[Snotnarok]

incessant whining

So basically you want the company AND the consumer to pay out the ass for features that the vast majority will never even look at just because there's a remote possibility that someone out there might use it one day?
What kind of fantasy world do you live in where everyone is rich upper class kids that have mommy and daddy buy their expensive toys for them all the time?

What is it with you people and being unbelievably rude to me? I know how unreasonable that I a consumer ask for sony to make an option for the many people who enjoyed the backwards compatibility function they used in the PS3 originally. Having two models is unreasonable I know like the PSP3001, PSPGo and the upcoming PSP handheld. How absurd the thought.

Do me a favor, next time you want to insult me, think about being more creative like calling me a doodie head.

And where did this mommy buying my consoles come up? Are you insulting kids now that can't get a job to buy their consoles? I bought all 21 of mine, so if you're going to call me out, at least have your facts straight friend

Oh lawdy, people are being wude to you. You're being a little childish brat but still expect everyone to get on their knees and kiss your feet. Really, what kind of fucking world do you live in? If you want people to be polite to you, be polite yourself first. Nothing you post deserves respect, it's just whining about how you deserve more for no reason. You want a company to make something that would cause them to lose money and cost an insane amount to purchase, the very same thing that very few people originally bought because it was an expensive thing.
As for where mommy buying consoles came up, stop assuming everything is a personal attack on you. You really have a massive persecution complex where you assume everyone is out to get you. It came up because it is absolutely Ab-fucking-surd to expect the average consumer, anyone who isn't rich or insane or perhaps a spoiled brat who has spineless parents, to be able to afford what you want because of how fucking expensive they are and would have to be to prevent sony from losing money on them.

You're an arrogant rude member of gamefaqs the Escapist aren't you?

I'm twenty four buddy, and I'm not the one acting like a four year old and getting all bent out of shape because someone disagrees with me. Sine you're SO instant on this, I bought my all my consoles and games ,I wasn't fortunate enough to have that bought for me nada one so now that's out of the way.

What is unreasonable to you about a company making a economy model and a upgraded model because everyone from Dell(Dell, XPS), to apple(Ipod 8gb,32gb,64gb), to Sony(PSP,PSPGo) does, even nintendo does it, it's called expanding your product/market. I wasn't saying shove the features back in and charge an arm and leg for it, and if you took 5 seconds to read my post and perhaps understand it instead of trying to poorly insult me you'd see that I said two models, one with said features and one without, both with different price tags so sony can make their money.

Sparky, I believe you're an adult. I didn't say you were a child. I said you were acting like a spoiled brat. You can be an adult and act more immature then a child. Which you are right now, you're acting like the kid throwing a temper tantrum in the mall.
It's not unreasonable for other things. It's unreasonable for the ps3 because sony was losing money on the older models of the ps3. That was why they started trimming them down in the first place. To make profit they would most likely have to make it cost more then it did on release which would be insane which would be insane and even people who like the idea wouldn't buy it because they'd rather buy something feasible with the ridiculous amount of money it would cost.

Oh and just because you say everyone who disagrees with you "Gets bent out of shape" doesn't make it true. You should stop saying it, you've said it to almost everyone who's disagreed with you thus far.

I'm glad for you that you've still yet to read what I posted. It's called a different model, the more expensive version with more features something as I said before MANY companies do. I'm well aware of Sony not making money on their system that's the same story since the PS2 and it's amazing to see a company do such a thing. They don't lose money if they charge more for an alternative model, which is what I'm saying would be a neat idea.

The only thing I've done is post a discussion about something for people to discuss, I posted my opinion which is me being unhappy about that they're doing this. If you or anyone else feels differently then I don't really care, that's YOUR choice. Only I'm not going around mocking everyone for it. Do what you want with your money, I'd like to have a different model to put my coins into and if you think my opinion is stupid then go ahead and think that seriously.

I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, the only people I've responded to are the ones who are mocking me like you, because that's what you're doing, mocking me for my opinion and honestly the only reason I'm responding is because I think it's hilarious how you probably don't even realize you're doing it. I came to the escapist under the assumption that it's not GameFAQs where people mock eachother and do not respect each others opinions.

If someone doesn't care the PS3 is missing these features then it's their opinion and they have their reasons and that's fine it's their house, their money. Much Like I have my opinion and I'd like to see Sony release a PS3 with more features with a bigger price tag, because if my PS3 breaks I cannot use the functions that I use. If they don't because there's not enough demand, then oh well, I'll have suck it up and use my PS2 that I've got in storage. It just becomes cumbersome to have 35 systems on your wall because of a feature they they subtracted.

Because I'm sure someone will over analyze that statement, I mean I have a lot of consoles because I collect them.

 

[Plurralbles]

well, considering that you can write a program for a linux PS3... they REALLY cut off a LOT of potential off the system. FUCK YOU SONY.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I never used it and I don't really give a shit?

You're acting as if they took a vital part of your console away, which they didn't.

this. i hadn't heard about it for the longest time and even then only maybe one in 100000000 people talked about it, so obviously its for the about 20 people who possibly pirate or w/e with linux, so just give it a rest already

this thread was done earlier by an even more annoying person, so i know you didn't know that but just stating people knew about this already (probably or possibly, so search bar not approved)

 

[TheTim]

yea im getting ready to sell my ps3 back for a 360

 

[Snotnarok]

Important: If you have linux installed you might want to read this:

The PS3 update will not delete the linux install, only shut off the partition so effectively you'll lose the space linux is taking up so you'll have to back up your system and format it so you can erase linux.

To back it up you'll need a FAT32 formatted drive (as NTFS is a Microsoft thing) and if you don't you'll have to figure something else out to do. So if you care about the space it takes up (I forget how much mine even takes up) You'll have to go through the ropes.

Use this if you only want to back up your game saves:
http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/2570/ps3_how_to_backup_ps3_game_save_files/

 

[DracoSuave]

1) I don't get what the hell good Linux is doing on a PS3. Damn linux, most of the time people just install it on random shit cause they can. If you are a linux user ask yourself: Would you install linux on your cat if you could?

You probably would.

Wierdo.

2) Non-executable code on a seperate partition that shouldn't be accessed by the main PS3 OS should not impact security for features such as: Accessing the PSN, running games, or other legitimate PS3 stuff.

Which means that some pirate dick installed some funky pirate haxxor shit on their partition, used that to do some illegal gaming mumbo jumbo, and Sony decided to shut it down, realizing that the only people they'd inconvincience were Linux users who install Linux on everything cause they can.

Jerks.

3) What we can conclude from this, therefore, is that if you install Linux on your cat, Sony will come and kill you, and the pirates still win.

 

[Snotnarok]

1) I don't get what the hell good Linux is doing on a PS3. Damn linux, most of the time people just install it on random shit cause they can. If you are a linux user ask yourself: Would you install linux on your cat if you could?

You probably would.

Wierdo.

2) Non-executable code on a seperate partition that shouldn't be accessed by the main PS3 OS should not impact security for features such as: Accessing the PSN, running games, or other legitimate PS3 stuff.

Which means that some pirate dick installed some funky pirate haxxor shit on their partition, used that to do some illegal gaming mumbo jumbo, and Sony decided to shut it down, realizing that the only people they'd inconvincience were Linux users who install Linux on everything cause they can.

Jerks.

3) What we can conclude from this, therefore, is that if you install Linux on your cat, Sony will come and kill you, and the pirates still win.

You fanboy, you CAT fanboy, why not a bunny? Or a dog? Why you gotta be like that?

Honestly I dunno what people did with linux, my friend installed it on mine (not sure why honestly) and I used it for some various things when I had PC problems. But I have a laptop as a backup now so that's out.

The whole thing is a bit odd but whatever, linux will be missed, by some people. Honestly I'm more angry with the situation because now I gotta back up my PS3 files, and format it so I can get it off and update my PS3. :C

And I agree, whatever measures you take Pirates will be fast behind you. Like the Bluray code when it got cracked.

Edit: ...Or a moose? Or a duck?

 

[goldenheart323]

Would this be a work-around: Buy another hard drive and format it for the PS3. Keep your old drive with Linux enabled and put that in when only when you don't want to sign into the PS3 network. Swapping HDD's is still a bunch of BS, but at least people could keep their Linux.

the .01% that actually use linux will be hurt but come on, who gives a hoot?

I'm surprised so many people are completely missing the point. There's actually a principle involved here. We're not talking a new model PS3 with reduced features. We're talking about current PS3's that get a feature yanked out of them. People bought a product that could do X,Y, & Z. Now, those items can no longer do "z". (Simplified analogy there.) That's the same as someone buying a car & then the company telling all its customers if you want to drive on the street, you have to let us change your transmission from a 5 speed to a 4 speed. Everyone here rarely drives on the highway, so they're saying "Pfft! Who cares? Stop whining."

If you buy a product & a feature stops working, it's generally considered to be broken. Am I wrong? The fact few people use or care about that particular feature does not change the fact it's broken.

 

[goldenheart323]

It's more like a recall to keep with you car analogy.
Hackers or some such were found using linux to do some shit they didn't want them to do so they removed the feature.
If a car company released a car that had a feature that caused danger or something terrible to happen they would recall it to fix it. If there was no fix they'd probably just remove it if it was something entirely optional to the car that had no effect on the performance, they'd probably give a refund if it cost the consumer extra to get that. In this case it didn't cost extra for the linux support, it was found to be used for things they didn't want it to so they removed it.

Close, but not quite. It was a feature Sony said the PS3 had, but it's not an itemized feature with a specified value. Removing Linux does affect the PS3's performance. You, and many others won't notice it, but it can't do as much as it did before. I do agree with your car analogy in that IF it were an optional feature that cost the customer extra, they would get a refund for its removal. If Sony were offering up a partial refund for those who do use Linux,(perhaps verified by Playstation network detecting the Linux partition,) the situation would agree with your car analogy.

Some people are using the PS3 in ways not intended? So what? People use products in ways not intended all the time. That doesn't give Sony the right to significantly alter their product AFTER it's been bought. Again, it's only significant to those who choose to use the feature, but if only 1% of their customers get screwed, does that make it ok? Tell me, Admiral, how many people have to get screwed before it becomes wrong? (Cookie if you get that movie reference. ;-) )If Sony found that pedestrians were getting hit & killed by people driving their car at high speeds, it would be unacceptable for them to do a recall and limit the cars to 35mph.

Note: I'm sure a whole lot of legal mumbo-jumbo in the terms of use for the PSN prevent a class action lawsuit, but just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right.

Oh, and IMO, it's one thing to say "We've changed the terms of use for PSN. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it." It's another thing to say "If you don't like it, you don't have to use it, and you can't enjoy those other things you paid for either." That's just an additional kick in the gut. On 2nd thought, maybe there is some grounds for a class action lawsuit.

 

[SNIPERFOX ft. Harry P.Ness]

oh noes! now i have something to tease PS3 fanboys with!

 

[Ironboot]

Eeh, I'm a Linux user but I've never used Linux on my PS3. I just don't see the point.

 

[shadow skill]

It's more like a recall to keep with you car analogy.
Hackers or some such were found using linux to do some shit they didn't want them to do so they removed the feature.
If a car company released a car that had a feature that caused danger or something terrible to happen they would recall it to fix it. If there was no fix they'd probably just remove it if it was something entirely optional to the car that had no effect on the performance, they'd probably give a refund if it cost the consumer extra to get that. In this case it didn't cost extra for the linux support, it was found to be used for things they didn't want it to so they removed it.

Close, but not quite. It was a feature Sony said the PS3 had, but it's not an itemized feature with a specified value. Removing Linux does affect the PS3's performance. You, and many others won't notice it, but it can't do as much as it did before. I do agree with your car analogy in that IF it were an optional feature that cost the customer extra, they would get a refund for its removal. If Sony were offering up a partial refund for those who do use Linux,(perhaps verified by Playstation network detecting the Linux partition,) the situation would agree with your car analogy.

Some people are using the PS3 in ways not intended? So what? People use products in ways not intended all the time. That doesn't give Sony the right to significantly alter their product AFTER it's been bought. Again, it's only significant to those who choose to use the feature, but if only 1% of their customers get screwed, does that make it ok? Tell me, Admiral, how many people have to get screwed before it becomes wrong? (Cookie if you get that movie reference. ;-) )If Sony found that pedestrians were getting hit & killed by people driving their car at high speeds, it would be unacceptable for them to do a recall and limit the cars to 35mph.

Note: I'm sure a whole lot of legal mumbo-jumbo in the terms of use for the PSN prevent a class action lawsuit, but just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right.

Oh, and IMO, it's one thing to say "We've changed the terms of use for PSN. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it." It's another thing to say "If you don't like it, you don't have to use it, and you can't enjoy those other things you paid for either." That's just an additional kick in the gut. On 2nd thought, maybe there is some grounds for a class action lawsuit.

It would be an interesting case, though I would expect Sony to end up winning. I can't think of any electronic device that has had functionality removed retroactively because some people might use it in a way that was unintended by the creator, when said unintended way has to be executed with the knowledge and/or consent of a user.

 

[Snotnarok]

It's more like a recall to keep with you car analogy.
Hackers or some such were found using linux to do some shit they didn't want them to do so they removed the feature.
If a car company released a car that had a feature that caused danger or something terrible to happen they would recall it to fix it. If there was no fix they'd probably just remove it if it was something entirely optional to the car that had no effect on the performance, they'd probably give a refund if it cost the consumer extra to get that. In this case it didn't cost extra for the linux support, it was found to be used for things they didn't want it to so they removed it.

Close, but not quite. It was a feature Sony said the PS3 had, but it's not an itemized feature with a specified value. Removing Linux does affect the PS3's performance. You, and many others won't notice it, but it can't do as much as it did before. I do agree with your car analogy in that IF it were an optional feature that cost the customer extra, they would get a refund for its removal. If Sony were offering up a partial refund for those who do use Linux,(perhaps verified by Playstation network detecting the Linux partition,) the situation would agree with your car analogy.

Some people are using the PS3 in ways not intended? So what? People use products in ways not intended all the time. That doesn't give Sony the right to significantly alter their product AFTER it's been bought. Again, it's only significant to those who choose to use the feature, but if only 1% of their customers get screwed, does that make it ok? Tell me, Admiral, how many people have to get screwed before it becomes wrong? (Cookie if you get that movie reference. ;-) )If Sony found that pedestrians were getting hit & killed by people driving their car at high speeds, it would be unacceptable for them to do a recall and limit the cars to 35mph.

Note: I'm sure a whole lot of legal mumbo-jumbo in the terms of use for the PSN prevent a class action lawsuit, but just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right.

Oh, and IMO, it's one thing to say "We've changed the terms of use for PSN. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it." It's another thing to say "If you don't like it, you don't have to use it, and you can't enjoy those other things you paid for either." That's just an additional kick in the gut. On 2nd thought, maybe there is some grounds for a class action lawsuit.

It would be an interesting case, though I would expect Sony to end up winning. I can't think of any electronic device that has had functionality removed retroactively because some people might use it in a way that was unintended by the creator, when said unintended way has to be executed with the knowledge and/or consent of a user.

I can't see anyone winning that case, I think it would come down to something in Sonys TOS that brickwalls whatever arguments. If they remove the ability to play booribbion then maybe there's a case.

I hope they're done clipping off features in any case.

 

[Pendragon9]

Well, I never was a fan of Linux.

Unlike the backwards compat, it didn't really do anything for gaming. :/

So I could do without it.

 

[goldenheart323]

I can't see anyone winning that case, I think it would come down to something in Sonys TOS that brickwalls whatever arguments. If they remove the ability to play booribbion then maybe there's a case.

I hope they're done clipping off features in any case.

TOS would only be for PSN. I don't recall there being any TOS for using a console. Am I wrong? If there were, I'd imagine MS would go on a legal rampage suing 360 gamers who've modded their console instead of just banning them from Live.