Sony 'Looking Into' PS3 Firmware 3.00 Issues

[SinisterDeath]

actually no you don't, all you need to do is visit any website that uses activex. it has known issues where it will ignore the "do not install software flags" and run in silent install mode without you even knowing what is going on.

Pretty much true, but that can be avoided by looking where you surf the net. And being sure to not make a type when you type a link in. Or actually reading the address when you google something.
Course, little known thing. Google ads is very well known for having ads with having built in malware in the ads. I can't tell you how many times a different forum I was on got hit by google ads malware/virus. And guess how much of the internet is hosted by google ads?

also PC are more attractive cause they are that much easier. os's like OSX and linux just don't have the security holes that Windows has nor will they. you can't have drive by installs of software on linux unless you're idiotic enough to run as root all the time

Somewhat true somewhat not. Windows is easier, because its much more open. But being open has just as many flaws as it does advantages. If its easier for a hacker to make an exploit, is easier for a game maker or software publisher to make software/game.

The actual reason for there not being as many holes in those operating systems is that not many people are trying to find them. Since the number of people with those two operating systems is minimal compared to those who have Windows, hackers focus on making Windows viruses. It's the curse of popularity.

Part true and part not. right now Windows has the lead, but mac is starting to close the gap. We are going to see far more mac virus's coming in the near future then we will see linux. The reason we don't see any linux virus's?
Cause those guys making the virus's on windows, are dual-booting linux/windows and making them! They are the kinda people who are against 'corporate greed', and try to be as destructive as possible, and then go work on something free like linux, cause they think that justifies what they are doing. And since linux is so much harder to code for, and the windows guys have it so much easier, its going to be harder for a windows guy to crack a linux system then vice versa. EVeryone knows windows, only the linux guys know linux.

And once again, all you need to do is avoid sites you don't trust. Simple as that

True dat.
Heres what I do.
All the main trusted sites.
Internet Explorer.
Sites I don't trust? Porn? Stream online Movies/tv? Firefox.

once again you are wrong, there are actually more people working on linux, both the kernel and various projects than people working on stuff for windows. a lot of those people who are working on linux are finding holes in it

Lawl, thats why linux has 1 Computer Game that works on it directly with out having to emulate Windows?!

as for CRACKERS, not hackers a hacker is a programmer, focusing more on windows, it's because it's easier, most of the people who are doing this are known as script kiddies and can't actually do a lot of stuff, however they can run a script and get access that way. they target windows simply because the security is so lax, the ability to break into the systems is so easy and a lot of people that use it don't have proper security on their system

Its lax because the system is fairly open, it gives developers room to.. develop. Were as mac/linux doesn't. Thats why they are more 'secure'. But nothing is Hack proof. There is always a back door, a sideways entrance, whatever you want to call em. Hell people were saying macs were impossible to hack. News post on escapist. Guy hacks Mac in 6 seconds. People could do the same for linux but.
1) the majority use Windows.
2) the majority of hackers are linux/unix users.
3) the hackers don't give a crap about mac
4) the hackers have hacked mac just to prove it can be done.
5) Windows is the standard OS becuase it is the most widely used. Thus its 'easier' because everyone knows it. If it was something like say, Amiga, know one knows wtf it, or how to crack it, cause its not well known. But windows is VERY well known. Meaning hackers are more prone to hack windows cause they know it better, thus its eaiser. If people get to 'know' linux it may very well become the 'easiest' target to hack. But its not going to get that way, unless Linux hits the majority. When game/software developers ACTIVELY produce games/software for mac/linux, people will buy them more. But right now, every game is made for windows. Almost every software is made for Windows. Some may work on mac/linux but they were designed on Windows.

How can linux/mac own the market?
Develop a game so freaking awesome, so graphically batshit insane, and make it ONLY on mac/linux. making it impossible to run on a Windows. (Course I'll just dual boot when that happens.

now as for visiting a site you don't trust, that's not fully true, you can visit any site you want and all it takes is a bad advertiser that spreads a bad ad and voila you are infected

True. Like Google Ads.
Course if you got any anti-viral programs or anti-malware programs they'll catch em before they do any damage. Most of the virus/adware/malware/trojans either
A) collect information
B) slow your pc down.
or both.
And most of those ad ones are A).

 

[cleverlymadeup]

actually no you don't, all you need to do is visit any website that uses activex. it has known issues where it will ignore the "do not install software flags" and run in silent install mode without you even knowing what is going on.

Pretty much true, but that can be avoided by looking where you surf the net. And being sure to not make a type when you type a link in. Or actually reading the address when you google something.
Course, little known thing. Google ads is very well known for having ads with having built in malware in the ads. I can't tell you how many times a different forum I was on got hit by google ads malware/virus. And guess how much of the internet is hosted by google ads?

wrong on both accounts

first off google ads are all texted based, so you have to CLICK on the ad to get infected.

secondly you don't have to click or do anything, you can just visit a rather trustworthy site, such as this one and a bad ad could infect you machine

Part true and part not. right now Windows has the lead, but mac is starting to close the gap. We are going to see far more mac virus's coming in the near future then we will see linux. The reason we don't see any linux virus's?
Cause those guys making the virus's on windows, are dual-booting linux/windows and making them! They are the kinda people who are against 'corporate greed', and try to be as destructive as possible, and then go work on something free like linux, cause they think that justifies what they are doing. And since linux is so much harder to code for, and the windows guys have it so much easier, its going to be harder for a windows guy to crack a linux system then vice versa. EVeryone knows windows, only the linux guys know linux.

WRONG

there are no unix/linux virii because they can't exist in a unix/linux system because of the security on the system and the way they work

also most of the people who make the virii are criminals and are out to make money, the image of the lonely guy in his parents basement hasn't been a model for a cracker in many years. they are mostly russian or chinese gangs doing it now

once again you are wrong, there are actually more people working on linux, both the kernel and various projects than people working on stuff for windows. a lot of those people who are working on linux are finding holes in it

Lawl, thats why linux has 1 Computer Game that works on it directly with out having to emulate Windows?!

really? 1 game and only 1 game?

Doom
Doom 2
Doom 3
Quake 1
Quake 2
Quake 3
Quake 4
Tribes 2
Kohan
Alpha Centauri
Unreal Tournament
Unreal Tournament 2
Unreal Tournament 3
Neverwinter Nights
Return to Castle Wolfenstein

and many more that don't need emulation and run natively. you should really do your research before you say what it can and can't do

as for CRACKERS, not hackers a hacker is a programmer, focusing more on windows, it's because it's easier, most of the people who are doing this are known as script kiddies and can't actually do a lot of stuff, however they can run a script and get access that way. they target windows simply because the security is so lax, the ability to break into the systems is so easy and a lot of people that use it don't have proper security on their system

Its lax because the system is fairly open, it gives developers room to.. develop. Were as mac/linux doesn't. Thats why they are more 'secure'. But nothing is Hack proof. There is always a back door, a sideways entrance, whatever you want to call em. Hell people were saying macs were impossible to hack. News post on escapist. Guy hacks Mac in 6 seconds. People could do the same for linux but.
1) the majority use Windows.
2) the majority of hackers are linux/unix users.
3) the hackers don't give a crap about mac
4) the hackers have hacked mac just to prove it can be done.
5) Windows is the standard OS becuase it is the most widely used. Thus its 'easier' because everyone knows it. If it was something like say, Amiga, know one knows wtf it, or how to crack it, cause its not well known. But windows is VERY well known. Meaning hackers are more prone to hack windows cause they know it better, thus its eaiser. If people get to 'know' linux it may very well become the 'easiest' target to hack. But its not going to get that way, unless Linux hits the majority. When game/software developers ACTIVELY produce games/software for mac/linux, people will buy them more. But right now, every game is made for windows. Almost every software is made for Windows. Some may work on mac/linux but they were designed on Windows.

How can linux/mac own the market?
Develop a game so freaking awesome, so graphically batshit insane, and make it ONLY on mac/linux. making it impossible to run on a Windows. (Course I'll just dual boot when that happens.

actually no, windows is a rather closed system, the majority of it's protocols are closed off. linux and unix on the other hand are open and frankly more secure. even when it becomes more popular it will become more secure

also most of the guys that actually know what they are doing happen to know linux very well and have studied it and tend to exploit it more cause it's more financially viable as both unix and linux systems are used by the banks and other financial institutions because it is more secure

now as for visiting a site you don't trust, that's not fully true, you can visit any site you want and all it takes is a bad advertiser that spreads a bad ad and voila you are infected

True. Like Google Ads.
Course if you got any anti-viral programs or anti-malware programs they'll catch em before they do any damage. Most of the virus/adware/malware/trojans either
A) collect information
B) slow your pc down.
or both.
And most of those ad ones are A).

actually this is wrong again

most anti-virus companies don't catch everything and most of them won't classify trojans as a virus and therefore won't detect them. both Symantec and Mcafee have strict definitions of will and won't go into their anti-virus products and most of the time they don't add stuff that they consider trojans to their definition files.

 

[can't-think]

I've had no problems with 3.0, and my PS3 is on like 8 hours a day the silver portrait around my friends is ugly though.

 

[AndresCL]

Firefox 3.5 w/ Adblock Plus + NoScript + Avast 4.8 Pro + Spyboy S&D should do the trick

And for god sakes, dont use Internet Explorer

If beyond that, you get infected, switch to Ubuntu

 

[typhoon17]

Yep, downloaded update and now have intermittent problems with controllers. Thanks Sony

Fortunately I have built a killer gaming PC to actually game on and only use the PS3 to play FIFA 2009 on the big screen and as a media extender. Otherwise, as its been said before - console games are for bitches.

 

[scotth266]

actually he was, you just don't think he was

Considering that I got a 720 on my English SATs, I'm PRETTY sure that I know what I'm talking about. He didn't say anything that you thought he said: you've jumped the gun here.

Besides, like I said before, you're either both opinionated or trolls. Pick one.

Snip.

What WhiteTiger was trying to say initially was that it's rather hypocritical of the PS3 supporters that rag on the 360 to go "WE'RE BEING ATTACKED!" when the pendulum swings their way. I don't blame him for thinking that, though in reality the flaming, and the defensive, reactionary flaming to it goes both ways. It's an endless cycle of people slapping each other and going "HE STARTED IT!"

On a side note, I fail to understand your statement about pricing. If something is more expensive than another product in the same category, it should definitely be better than the other product: otherwise, what's the point in buying it?

 

[SinisterDeath]

wrong on both accounts

first off google ads are all texted based, so you have to CLICK on the ad to get infected.

secondly you don't have to click or do anything, you can just visit a rather trustworthy site, such as this one and a bad ad could infect you machine

Actually no, you are wrong. I know for a FACT that google Ads has been responsible for causing a virus to be distributed on several forums.

how? Everyone who got infected saw the same pop up ad. pop-up ads never happen on said site.
Its possible someone hacked or a program hacked into the forum via security hole and inserted some code into the google.ad, but that doesn't stop the fact that they USED google ads to distribute it. And you didn't even have to click on it. It just happened.

WRONG

there are no unix/linux virii because they can't exist in a unix/linux system because of the security on the system and the way they work

also most of the people who make the virii are criminals and are out to make money, the image of the lonely guy in his parents basement hasn't been a model for a cracker in many years. they are mostly russian or chinese gangs doing it now

WRONG.
read much propaganda? Linux/Unix/Ubunto/Mac are not virus free. They DO exist. IT CAN be done. They are no more secure then Windows. Thats just propaganda brought to you by hackers, who LOVE the concept of Linux/Ubunto/Unix, and tell you this so the newbie hackers say 'screw it'.
But the proffesional hackers?
Oh they love a challange.
They create a virus.
Then they fix the hole in the security.

Its very useful when all the best hackers in the world, are helping with an open source OS to fix all the security holes by finding them, then fixing them.

really? 1 game and only 1 game?

Doom
Doom 2
Doom 3
Quake 1
Quake 2
Quake 3
Quake 4
Tribes 2
Kohan
Alpha Centauri
Unreal Tournament
Unreal Tournament 2
Unreal Tournament 3
Neverwinter Nights
Return to Castle Wolfenstein

and many more that don't need emulation and run natively. you should really do your research before you say what it can and can't do[/qoute]

Never heard of sarcasm?
Must be something lost to people who have no concept of what propaganda is!
The list of Windows games compared to linux is like comparing harry potter fans to R. A. Salvatore fans. And even thats not an accurate metaphore.

actually no, windows is a rather closed system, the majority of it's protocols are closed off. linux and unix on the other hand are open and frankly more secure. even when it becomes more popular it will become more secure

That kind of 'open' is completely different then the open I was reffering to with windows.
Can you download an .exe on linux and run it as soon as it hits your desktop? Or do you have to do about 30 things before you can even open the thing? Let alone use the software?

Developers have enough trouble explaining to consumers how to
Insert Disk
Click instal
Enter information
Enter CD key
Click ok
Wait 3 seconds
Click finish
go to desktop, click the game icon.
PLAY.

IMagine trying to explain to a consumer how to do that on linux?

also most of the guys that actually know what they are doing happen to know linux very well and have studied it and tend to exploit it more cause it's more financially viable as both unix and linux systems are used by the banks and other financial institutions because it is more secure

The only real programers who know linux, are the server guys. And the guys who maker the games, know windows. Thats there target consumer. They don't need to know linux. Kinda like valves avversion to Ps3. They KNOW the PC, but anything 'new' scares them.

actually this is wrong again

most anti-virus companies don't catch everything and most of them won't classify trojans as a virus and therefore won't detect them. both Symantec and Mcafee have strict definitions of will and won't go into their anti-virus products and most of the time they don't add stuff that they consider trojans to their definition files.

Who uses mccaffe or norton? Those suck, and are practically virus themselves.
no anti-virus is 100% going to catch everything, never said it did. But your convinced the only way you can get a virus is to click on an ad.
If you go to a trusted site, never click an ad. thus you won't get any malware.

I'm simply saying that there ARE trusted sites out there, that you don't HAVE to click an ad or get assaulted by pop-ups to get a virus or malware. Sometimes the forums themselves or the website gets hacked with a trojan, or malware because of there own security flaws. But in most cases, the malware programs they have out there, will catch programs trying to run on your pc from a website, regardless if its known or not.

It all just depends on how HIGH you set your security settings.

I garuntee you, if you set your security setting as high as they go on internet explorer, the only virus/malware that will get through on a trusted site, is becuase you hit 'allow' without reading.


Should be noted.
While most PC's are windows, the majority of all servers are using Linux/unix or some other variant.
If its true that linux is free from virus/malware, then why is there so much virus/malware out there? Shouldn't those servers be... immune from hackers/malware/virus?!

Most virus on windows, specially the really harmful ones, are run by the user allowing it to happen, clicking a link, downloading something, runing a program, ect.

These can all happen on linux. The harder ones for linux are the ones that can't be run without the users permision.
to me, the way to do this would be fairly easy, tell the user they are changing something for the purpose of another, and do something else.
It won't trick the experienced guy, but the newb? Definately.
And guess what? Those make up the majority of the PC base.
The guys who know whats what are going to be less likely to get 'infected' then the ones who don't know jack.

No Virus/Malware on Linux?

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Linux-hacked-more-often-than-Windows/0,130061733,139116229,00.htm
http://www.linuxhaxor.net/2008/11/26/linux-virus-a-false-sense-of-security/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/24/1930207
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3601946


Ironic how the major complaint and suckiness of Vista is the selling point of linux.

 

[SinisterDeath]

Considering that I got a 720 on my English SATs, I'm PRETTY sure that I know what I'm talking about. He didn't say anything that you thought he said: you've jumped the gun here.

Besides, like I said before, you're either both opinionated or trolls. Pick one.

720 is bragging rights? Thought that was a 1000 area?
I didn't have to do the SAT, only the ACT and if http://www.eguidancecounselor.com/act_sat_comparison.htm
is anything to go by, I did faaaar better. (didn't study a day at all)

What WhiteTiger was trying to say initially was that it's rather hypocritical of the PS3 supporters that rag on the 360 to go "WE'RE BEING ATTACKED!" when the pendulum swings their way. I don't blame him for thinking that, though in reality the flaming, and the defensive, reactionary flaming to it goes both ways. It's an endless cycle of people slapping each other and going "HE STARTED IT!"

I blame the article myself.
Compared to all the PS3/360 threads out there, this one was just... uggh. I mean, going so far as to insinuate that a tiny crashing issue like this is going to cause a class action lawsuit? which is purely SPECULATION at this point is just irresponsible journalism imo. (no different hten fox or cnn though...)

Not that I disagrree with your assesment that everyoens always going to complain about something.

I perosnally just think the article could have been worded far better. I can't think of any 'speculation' on any prior ps3 or 360 (negative wise) thats as bad as this one. I mean, at least when they reported people trying to sue MS for Xboxlive downtime it wasn't speculation. And MS repsonded by giving everyone free-time. (not like PS3 fans can sue sony for not providing a free service. )

 

[Woodsey]

yes because lord knows when an article stating (Through a poorly done survey) that xbox 360 is at 54.2% failure rate (the survey is poorly done because they failed to ask if the person owned a falcon model, or jasper model console, so it's like me going and asking the people who play on PSN how reliable PSN has been without asking if their issue was with firmware 3.00 or if there happened to be an error when it claimed to be working) PS3 fanboys don't line up comments posting "LUL UR CONSUL EPAC PHAILZ LULUL (ICANHAZCHEEZEBURGER TALK INSERTED HERE)" or "XBOX360 SUX!"

But now you guys experience failures in one of PS3s biggest selling points (It's free online capabilities) and it's suddenly "OMG TEH FANBOYZ! THEY IZ ATTAKING UZ!"

Uhh............wat? I have no idea what you just said.

From what I can barely deduce from your post, you're thinking that I'm being a fanboy and going everywhere saying "LOLZORZ, TEH 360 SUXZORZ!@#!" when in fact I made no such comment. Are there Ps3 fanboys who go crazy like this? Of course, where the hell did you get the notion of me ever denying that? You're just drawing broad conclusions out of absolutely nothing. I was merely pointing out the hilarious irony of;

Well, you get what you pay for, chaps.

Now stop whining about your awful console, Ps3 owners, and just get a PC or an xbox...

Another nail in the coffin for those guys.

I've never owned a Sony console, and am primarily a PC gamer although I own a 360 as well. I can appreciate that whilst I didn't have an interest in it at all, that the PS2 was a major hit, and yet they get this so wrong. It seems ridiculous.

Cue PS3 fanboys ram-raiding down my throat but there you go.

from this minor inconvenience barely affecting any PS3 owners (that we know of) and countering it with an already unreliable console (and don't say I'm a fanboy from that, the more "accepted" 30% is still atrocious).

And if we get what we pay for, wouldn't that mean that the Ps3 is automatically the "best" console out there? I just absolutely hate that logic, price does not mean anything in the quality of a product, all it means is that it's priced higher, and people inherently want cheaper things already! But that's a personal gripe not related to much of this anyway.

Alright I thought it was clear what I meant, but obviously not.

I never said the PS3 was a worse console or the 360 was a better console; I really couldn't give a shit because it's down to what games the individual wants to play. I only stated the point that Sony seem to be getting the PS3 so wrong in terms of marketing, etc. When the PS2 was an outstanding success and viewed as one of the greatest consoles of all time.

 

[Woodsey]

Another nail in the coffin for those guys.

I've never owned a Sony console, and am primarily a PC gamer although I own a 360 as well. I can appreciate that whilst I didn't have an interest in it at all, that the PS2 was a major hit, and yet they get this so wrong. It seems ridiculous.

Cue PS3 fanboys ram-raiding down my throat but there you go.

right cause the 360 has such a great quality track record of not crashing and failing .... oh wait my bad. you really shouldn't really throw stones when you live in a glass house

i haven't had an issue with the new firmware, it's worked like a charm for me. if uncharted isn't working properly, i'm glad i finished it for the second time just before the upgrade

Haha, see what I mean?

I'm not going to get into an argument about it, but if you read with your eyes, you may notice that all I said was that I own a 360. I never said it was better, that MS kicks Sony's arse or that I'd like to suck Bill Gates dick now did I?

My final comment was made because I knew (as it has) that someone would get up the arse and mention the 360 when all I did was acknowledge that I own one. I'm well aware of the stupidly high 360 failure rate, but I was also commenting on the general way Sony have treated the PS3.

let's see you are saying it's better, you are implying you should not get a PS3 and stick with your choice of PC (which has security holes beyond belief) and a 360 (which i won't even start on how many ways it's been an utter failure)

then there's the fact that you made a comment about this all in a thread about the PS3, sorry Trolly McFanboy, you really should learn what you are saying and what you are actually implying before you go off saying how you aren't saying something. while you aren't saying it outright, you are implying it

I said I own a f*cking 360?! Jesus fucking christ. I give up - why everyone is so defensive about fucking companies and a bloody games console is ridulous.

Let's look at what I did fucking say: that this is just another problem (even if it is minor) that will inevitably be marked against the PS3 - I've even said the PS2 was brill so how can I be a MS fanboy?

Fucking hell. And yes I made the comment in a PS3 thread because err... I had a comment to make about the PS3/Sony. Then I said I'd get PS3 Fanboys attacking me (which I have).

I couldn't give a shit whether you prefer the 360 or PS3 or the SNES or the Gamecube - I was simply saying that I think Sony have made a cock up. Saying 'well the 360 has a shit failure rate' doesn't cancel out something that goes wrong with the PS3 and vice versa.

 

[Jumplion]

On a side note, I fail to understand your statement about pricing. If something is more expensive than another product in the same category, it should definitely be better than the other product: otherwise, what's the point in buying it?

It's called "buying the brand" or something.

FIVE HUNDRED N' NIETY NIEN YOU ESS DOLLARZ!! syndrome.

Because people believe that "you get what you pay for" applies to everything, people buy the most expensive thing even when it's not really that great. In short, people can be so determined to save up for that, I dunno, Corvette that's $50,000 that they overlook the perfectly fine Volkswagon for $20,000 (I know nothing of cars, so it's probably a poor analogy). People are so determined to get the expensive item rather than the good item that they're happy with a bad purchase. Car dealers do this all the time, trying to gouge money out of you, and Activision is doing the same with European customers. More expensive =/= Better.

Saying "You get what you pay for!" automatically means that the PS3 is the best console out there, and we all know that it isn't the "best" for everything. Just because it's "FIEV HUNDREN N' NIETY NIEN YOO ESS DOLLRZ!!" doesn't mean it's better, and most likely you were probably paying for the brand at the time.

As for me/the PS3 owners acting like the victims here, you have to admit a lot of the "X-bots" are overreacting here. This firmware problem is hardly affecting anyone, remember when that one Muslim poster dude made a complaint about the Kor'an being sung about in LittleBigPlanet that the entire game was recalled just days before release? Same deal, only Sony isn't being complete douchbags as overreact-y as they did then. Besides, the freezing controllers are said to be 3rd party peripherals. Why would Sony be responsible for 3rd party accessories at all?

Alright I thought it was clear what I meant, but obviously not.

I never said the PS3 was a worse console or the 360 was a better console; I really couldn't give a shit because it's down to what games the individual wants to play. I only stated the point that Sony seem to be getting the PS3 so wrong in terms of marketing, etc. When the PS2 was an outstanding success and viewed as one of the greatest consoles of all time.

Alright then, sorry for jumping the gun a bit, but "another nail in the coffin for those guys" can easily be interpreted as "lolzerz, Sony is dieing! Suck it!". Not saying you did say it or meant to, it just came off that way.

 

[Woodsey]

On a side note, I fail to understand your statement about pricing. If something is more expensive than another product in the same category, it should definitely be better than the other product: otherwise, what's the point in buying it?

It's called "buying the brand" or something.

FIVE HUNDRED N' NIETY NIEN YOU ESS DOLLARZ!! syndrome.

Because people believe that "you get what you pay for" applies to everything, people buy the most expensive thing even when it's not really that great. In short, people can be so determined to save up for that, I dunno, Corvette that's $50,000 that they overlook the perfectly fine Volkswagon for $20,000 (I know nothing of cars, so it's probably a poor analogy). People are so determined to get the expensive item rather than the good item that they're happy with a bad purchase. Car dealers do this all the time, trying to gouge money out of you, and Activision is doing the same with European customers. More expensive =/= Better.

Saying "You get what you pay for!" automatically means that the PS3 is the best console out there, and we all know that it isn't the "best" for everything. Just because it's "FIEV HUNDREN N' NIETY NIEN YOO ESS DOLLRZ!!" doesn't mean it's better, and most likely you were probably paying for the brand at the time.

As for me/the PS3 owners acting like the victims here, you have to admit a lot of the "X-bots" are overreacting here. This firmware problem is hardly affecting anyone, remember when that one Muslim poster dude made a complaint about the Kor'an being sung about in LittleBigPlanet that the entire game was recalled just days before release? Same deal, only Sony isn't being complete douchbags as overreact-y as they did then. Besides, the freezing controllers are said to be 3rd party peripherals. Why would Sony be responsible for 3rd party accessories at all?

Alright I thought it was clear what I meant, but obviously not.

I never said the PS3 was a worse console or the 360 was a better console; I really couldn't give a shit because it's down to what games the individual wants to play. I only stated the point that Sony seem to be getting the PS3 so wrong in terms of marketing, etc. When the PS2 was an outstanding success and viewed as one of the greatest consoles of all time.

Alright then, sorry for jumping the gun a bit, but "another nail in the coffin for those guys" can easily be interpreted as "lolzerz, Sony is dieing! Suck it!". Not saying you did say it or meant to, it just came off that way.

Fair enough.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

Considering that I got a 720 on my English SATs, I'm PRETTY sure that I know what I'm talking about. He didn't say anything that you thought he said: you've jumped the gun here.

Besides, like I said before, you're either both opinionated or trolls. Pick one.

what's an SAT and how does it make you smart?

Actually no, you are wrong. I know for a FACT that google Ads has been responsible for causing a virus to be distributed on several forums.

how? Everyone who got infected saw the same pop up ad. pop-up ads never happen on said site.
Its possible someone hacked or a program hacked into the forum via security hole and inserted some code into the google.ad, but that doesn't stop the fact that they USED google ads to distribute it. And you didn't even have to click on it. It just happened.

nope i'm willing to bet it wasn't a google ad and everyone blamed that, since to you have to CLICK a google ad, since they are only text based

WRONG.
read much propaganda? Linux/Unix/Ubunto/Mac are not virus free. They DO exist. IT CAN be done. They are no more secure then Windows. Thats just propaganda brought to you by hackers, who LOVE the concept of Linux/Ubunto/Unix, and tell you this so the newbie hackers say 'screw it'.
But the proffesional hackers?
Oh they love a challange.
They create a virus.
Then they fix the hole in the security.

Its very useful when all the best hackers in the world, are helping with an open source OS to fix all the security holes by finding them, then fixing them.

ok first off it's CRACKER and NOT hacker, a hacker is a programmer and nothing more, secondly it's UBUNTU

thirdly i have said there is a linux virus. note i used the singular not the plural. most of the other stuff is used to infect windows machines or are exploits to backdoor the system and are not virii

Who uses mccaffe or norton? Those suck, and are practically virus themselves.
no anti-virus is 100% going to catch everything, never said it did. But your convinced the only way you can get a virus is to click on an ad.
If you go to a trusted site, never click an ad. thus you won't get any malware.

millions of people use either Norton or Mcafee, including most large corporations. so there goes your little theory of knowing who uses what

I'm simply saying that there ARE trusted sites out there, that you don't HAVE to click an ad or get assaulted by pop-ups to get a virus or malware. Sometimes the forums themselves or the website gets hacked with a trojan, or malware because of there own security flaws. But in most cases, the malware programs they have out there, will catch programs trying to run on your pc from a website, regardless if its known or not.

It all just depends on how HIGH you set your security settings.

I garuntee you, if you set your security setting as high as they go on internet explorer, the only virus/malware that will get through on a trusted site, is becuase you hit 'allow' without reading.

actually the whole security setting is only a suggestion, they've found out that activex has many a security flaw in it that allows you to bypass any setting you want with little difficulty

Should be noted.
While most PC's are windows, the majority of all servers are using Linux/unix or some other variant.
If its true that linux is free from virus/malware, then why is there so much virus/malware out there? Shouldn't those servers be... immune from hackers/malware/virus?!

you obiviously don't know what a virus or malware is nor how they work. they are on the servers cause they are sending them to a windows computer, they aren't being spread on the linux box.

No Virus/Malware on Linux?

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Linux-hacked-more-often-than-Windows/0,130061733,139116229,00.htm
http://www.linuxhaxor.net/2008/11/26/linux-virus-a-false-sense-of-security/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/24/1930207
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3601946


Ironic how the major complaint and suckiness of Vista is the selling point of linux.

ummm you didn't read those articles did you? most of them don't even mention any specific virii for linux or unix and just mention it's possible or they mention things called exploits, which are NOT virii and there's a huge difference between the two

 

[WhiteTiger225]

LOL troll sucks at twisting mah words!

Really now? You're calling me a troll? Can't a guys just have no idea what you said? Seriously, you were saying something about how Ps3 owners apparently do something or 'nother with the "360 SUXZORZZ" or something? I honestly had no idea what you were talking about, but it was something about how apparently I was trying to make PS3 owners seem innocent of something that I never said at all.

I was pointing out YOU act like the 360 fans flamming PS3 users over this is unprecedented, despite the fact it's just a bit of revenge flaming

You're confusing me, what exactly am I doing wrong? Again, I was just pointing out the hilarious irony with a few posters who said that the PS3 is unreliable and then pointing to the 360 as a form of "reliablness-ess". I don't care anyone's stance on the whole "consul warz", the 360 is kind of "famous" (more infamous really) of the notorious RRoD with it's failure rates ranging from 10% to 50%, and that's only counting RRoDs.

Do PS3s fail? Of course they do. Is this 3.00 update causing some problems with a few people? Maybe, it wouldn't surprise me, there's always a problem or two. But you're claiming that we're experiencing a "failure" of a free system when hardly anyone is truly having these problems at all. Hell, from what I understand, and correct me if I'm wrong, but the "controllers freezing up" are 3rd party controllers. Why the hell is Sony responsible for how a 3rd party accessory reacts to their console?

also if you took note of what the article is about, "You get what you paid for" is obviously a line comparing XBL's monthly fee online service to PSN's freeness. And actually, price DOES mean a lot. remember, if a product is too good to be true for the price, it probally is, so you should always research a product that is suspiciously cheap. For example. A store near my home sells Apple Ipods for 20-40 bucks... well upon closer inspection I noticed the fineprint trademark logos were suspiciously low rendered (Blurry). Come to find out... with a little research, said Ipod WAS too good to be true. Why? Because it was a fake. I asked the store manager to show me a sample, and, lo' and behold!? It's selection wheel didn't click when I turned it (It also came stocked with a bunch of asian pop songs, another factor one youtuber pointed out in the fake models) and guess what? This wouldn't be so bad if said reports of these fakes didn't ALSO include that the batteries had a tendancy to explode (A decently high tendancy)

If you say "you get what you pay for", that applies to everything. Not "oh, I only meant the online stuff", it relates to everything. With the logic of "I payed more for it, it's better!" that means that the PS3 is automatically the "best" console out there and that's a huge flaw. Are there some nuances to the saying? Yeah, sure, sometimes the more expensive stuff is good or "better". But if one laptop from "Brand A" has 2USB ports and costs $2000 and another laptop has 4USB ports costing $1000 from "Brand-y", the cheaper one will win out usually. Most likely you're paying for the brand name with "Brand A", and that's true with many electronics and items in general. Sometimes less is more, and more is less, blah de blah blah, boogaloo.

Probably because people are used to updates that don't have a wide variety of odd problems which will of course crop up when you have about 8 different versions of the same console. Not saying it's a right or wrong reaction either.

Well, if it's 3rd party controllers that are causing the problem, I don't see how Sony is responsible in any way for how they react to their updates. That's if they're 3rd party controllers, though, [small]don't hurt me![/small]

2 problems with what you just said.
1. An ACTUAL STUDY (Not random survey that asks only 1-2 meaningless questions and claims that as a correct fact) showed that the current intake of RRoD victims has gone down to 16%. They pointed out that the falcon models were still stocked by, and sold by retailers who refused to throw the faulty product away and would rather sell it alongside the newer, far more reliable jasper models. This company is going by rate of intake of warranty claims (People wanting the 360 fixed) meaning it's current, NOT asking a person who happened to own a Xbox360 first line model back in 2003 and had it RRoD in 2004 about if his console failed and then claim that's a current statistic.

2. Console online networking works just like any other product, it works on comparison shopping. XboxLive is a seperate product in itself, as the system does not technically come pre connected to the interwebz (you can run the PS3 it's whole life without using that free toss in product called PSN) So, seeing as XBL costs money, in turn we compare that price to the FREE thrown in deal of PSN when making the comparison. See how that works now? We are talking about the INTERNET SERVICE which is a SEPERATE product from the PS3, and add in, if you will.

Since you will probally claim logic error or 403 forbidden or some nonsense, let me give you an example. I bought a webcam recently, it came with a free headset, My friend goes "Well it comes with a free headset, so you don't need to bother buying one" well, me being smart, I bought a new 20 dollar logitech headset anyways. I get home, I open said webcam, and guess what? That FREE ADD IN? It was a piece of junk. So what did I get? C'mon boys and girls! Say it with me now! "You got what you paid for" YAAAAAY *Claps*

 

[WhiteTiger225]

-snip-

Despite his inability to argue, I will point out the main reason why Linux and Mac etc have so few to no viruses.

How many people on earth own a Mac? How many own a Linux OS? How many now in comparison own a PC? Think of a virus as a Nuke. You don't drop the nuke on the little tribal village with only 1000 people, you aim it for the target where yuo can have more victims, say, the big city with over 100,000 people to make the best use of your resources. Remember, people make viruses mostly for self gain of some form. Why would you both hacking or cracking a Mac or Linux which make up around 9-10% of the worlds computer use, when you can target a PC, which makes up AT LEAST 80% of the worlds computer use?

 

[SinisterDeath]

millions of people use either Norton or Mcafee, including most large corporations. so there goes your little theory of knowing who uses what

Dude, Norton and Mcafee suck ass. Just cause they have the highest market share doesn't mean they are the best anti-virus program out there. and norton its self is more invasive then a virus.

actually the whole security setting is only a suggestion, they've found out that activex has many a security flaw in it that allows you to bypass any setting you want with little difficulty
actually the whole security setting is only a suggestion, they've found out that activex has many a security flaw in it that allows you to bypass any setting you want with little difficulty

You can set the security so tight on Internet Explorer you have to click 'allow' on everything. EVERYTHING, including any active x, even those pesky ones you say can be exploited to run without your persmission. You can disable active x in its entirity. So they can't run period.
The issue with those is that not everyone has there security cranked up that high.

you obiviously don't know what a virus or malware is nor how they work. they are on the servers cause they are sending them to a windows computer, they aren't being spread on the linux box.

Do you listen to yourself?

Okay, then how do the virus/malware get on the linux servers in the first place? And I'm not talking about the ones on the hackers websites, but legit sites.

ummm you didn't read those articles did you? most of them don't even mention any specific virii for linux or unix and just mention it's possible or they mention things called exploits, which are NOT virii and there's a huge difference between the two

Actually I did.
Most of them say its possible, they couldn't name specifics cause most of the known virus so far have been caught.

And name me one virus that doesn't use an Exploit?
The point is, there are Virus, they ARE possible on linux.
Linux has exploits.
Exploits are holes.

So what if the user has to knowingly down the file, turn it into an executable and give it access to root? Its no different then some newb on Windows downloading an exectuable file running it thinking it'll give them Codecs. Its called misdirection and its the easiest way to put a harmful virus on someones pc. The biggest danger to any PC, Linux or Windows is the User. This is always been true.

I like how you totally skipped this part of my post.

Developers have enough trouble explaining to consumers how to
Insert Disk
Click instal
Enter information
Enter CD key
Click ok
Wait 3 seconds
Click finish
go to desktop, click the game icon.
PLAY.

IMagine trying to explain to a consumer how to do that on linux?

and

nic how the major complaint and suckiness of Vista is the selling point of linux.

(in terms of having to click shit to do anything)

 

[SinisterDeath]

-snip-

Despite his inability to argue, I will point out the main reason why Linux and Mac etc have so few to no viruses.

How many people on earth own a Mac? How many own a Linux OS? How many now in comparison own a PC? Think of a virus as a Nuke. You don't drop the nuke on the little tribal village with only 1000 people, you aim it for the target where yuo can have more victims, say, the big city with over 100,000 people to make the best use of your resources. Remember, people make viruses mostly for self gain of some form. Why would you both hacking or cracking a Mac or Linux which make up around 9-10% of the worlds computer use, when you can target a PC, which makes up AT LEAST 80% of the worlds computer use?

According to cleverlymadeup, they do it for money.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

-snip-

Despite his inability to argue, I will point out the main reason why Linux and Mac etc have so few to no viruses.

How many people on earth own a Mac? How many own a Linux OS? How many now in comparison own a PC? Think of a virus as a Nuke. You don't drop the nuke on the little tribal village with only 1000 people, you aim it for the target where yuo can have more victims, say, the big city with over 100,000 people to make the best use of your resources. Remember, people make viruses mostly for self gain of some form. Why would you both hacking or cracking a Mac or Linux which make up around 9-10% of the worlds computer use, when you can target a PC, which makes up AT LEAST 80% of the worlds computer use?

actually they can't exist for one very good reason SECURITY

for a virus to spread on a computer it needs to be able to write to files and directories. for the most part on a *nix box you can only write to YOUR home directory. you are denied from writing to /usr, /bin, /etc, /var or any other directory being ~/

this stops a virus from propagating because it can't replicate itself and spread. this also stop malware from installing as most systems don't have a user owned directory for executing programs, so it can't install nor can it be run. even if you do have a user binary directory, that program will only run as the person who installed it

it's nice that everyone keeps saying "oh there's not enough people using it" but that's simply a horribly misinformed argument. it's just simply not true and can easily be defeated by knowing what you're talking about. i've used linux for over 10 years as my primary desktop system and i've probly forgotten more than most users of it will ever know

 

[cleverlymadeup]

millions of people use either Norton or Mcafee, including most large corporations. so there goes your little theory of knowing who uses what

Dude, Norton and Mcafee suck ass. Just cause they have the highest market share doesn't mean they are the best anti-virus program out there. and norton its self is more invasive then a virus.

your question was who uses them? i proved you wrong and now you try to twist it around, you were proven wrong deal with it

You can set the security so tight on Internet Explorer you have to click 'allow' on everything. EVERYTHING, including any active x, even those pesky ones you say can be exploited to run without your persmission. You can disable active x in its entirity. So they can't run period.
The issue with those is that not everyone has there security cranked up that high.

actually the ONLY way to stop activex from working is to disable it and then internet explorer is useless. even if you have the "ask every time" option, it can still be bypassed pretty easily. it's a security flaw in activex and m$ has admitted it is there and that they can't fix it

you obiviously don't know what a virus or malware is nor how they work. they are on the servers cause they are sending them to a windows computer, they aren't being spread on the linux box.

Do you listen to yourself?

Okay, then how do the virus/malware get on the linux servers in the first place? And I'm not talking about the ones on the hackers websites, but legit sites.

ok for a virus to be considered a virus, it must infect the system and then write itself to various files on the system. if does not execute, then it's not a virus and the server itself is being used as a delivery system

Actually I did.
Most of them say its possible, they couldn't name specifics cause most of the known virus so far have been caught.

funny they can't name one cause there is actually only one, most of them are rather theoretical and won't happen due to inherent security found on the systems

And name me one virus that doesn't use an Exploit?
The point is, there are Virus, they ARE possible on linux.
Linux has exploits.
Exploits are holes.

exploits are NOT virii
virii are NOT exploits

as for a virus that doesn't use an exploit, well all of them don't. there is not a virus that uses an exploit to infect.

So what if the user has to knowingly down the file, turn it into an executable and give it access to root? Its no different then some newb on Windows downloading an exectuable file running it thinking it'll give them Codecs. Its called misdirection and its the easiest way to put a harmful virus on someones pc. The biggest danger to any PC, Linux or Windows is the User. This is always been true.

still that's not a virus, that's a trojan or something else and frankly is a LOT harder on a linux box

I like how you totally skipped this part of my post.

Developers have enough trouble explaining to consumers how to
Insert Disk
Click instal
Enter information
Enter CD key
Click ok
Wait 3 seconds
Click finish
go to desktop, click the game icon.
PLAY.

IMagine trying to explain to a consumer how to do that on linux?

actually it's done in the exact same way in linux and has been for a very long time, glad you know anything at all about linux or unix

and

nic how the major complaint and suckiness of Vista is the selling point of linux.

(in terms of having to click shit to do anything)

actually the major complaint about vista isn't that it gives you security, it doesn't. the version of "security" vista gives you is more of a security blanket. the version that linux gives you is actually real.

on my various shell accounts i can install what i want in my own directory as a user, for vista you NEED to be admin to install anything as it writes to things such as "system32". on a *nix box as long as you have the directory in your PATH, you can run it, same goes for any libraries you want to install for your own personal use

 

[WhiteTiger225]

-snip-

Despite his inability to argue, I will point out the main reason why Linux and Mac etc have so few to no viruses.

How many people on earth own a Mac? How many own a Linux OS? How many now in comparison own a PC? Think of a virus as a Nuke. You don't drop the nuke on the little tribal village with only 1000 people, you aim it for the target where yuo can have more victims, say, the big city with over 100,000 people to make the best use of your resources. Remember, people make viruses mostly for self gain of some form. Why would you both hacking or cracking a Mac or Linux which make up around 9-10% of the worlds computer use, when you can target a PC, which makes up AT LEAST 80% of the worlds computer use?

According to cleverlymadeup, they do it for money.

Hence, self gain

-snip-

Despite his inability to argue, I will point out the main reason why Linux and Mac etc have so few to no viruses.

How many people on earth own a Mac? How many own a Linux OS? How many now in comparison own a PC? Think of a virus as a Nuke. You don't drop the nuke on the little tribal village with only 1000 people, you aim it for the target where yuo can have more victims, say, the big city with over 100,000 people to make the best use of your resources. Remember, people make viruses mostly for self gain of some form. Why would you both hacking or cracking a Mac or Linux which make up around 9-10% of the worlds computer use, when you can target a PC, which makes up AT LEAST 80% of the worlds computer use?

actually they can't exist for one very good reason SECURITY

for a virus to spread on a computer it needs to be able to write to files and directories. for the most part on a *nix box you can only write to YOUR home directory. you are denied from writing to /usr, /bin, /etc, /var or any other directory being ~/

this stops a virus from propagating because it can't replicate itself and spread. this also stop malware from installing as most systems don't have a user owned directory for executing programs, so it can't install nor can it be run. even if you do have a user binary directory, that program will only run as the person who installed it

it's nice that everyone keeps saying "oh there's not enough people using it" but that's simply a horribly misinformed argument. it's just simply not true and can easily be defeated by knowing what you're talking about. i've used linux for over 10 years as my primary desktop system and i've probly forgotten more than most users of it will ever know

You DO happen to realize the security line is bullshit? There is NO SUCH THING as impenetrable security to hackers and crackers. From what you are saying, if you happened to ifnd a linux compatible game to play, you couldn't save it as it would create a new save file. but if it does create a new save file, then that also spells there is a way for a virus to pop into your system through simply foolish downloads. So unless linux stops the writing of EVERY non-OS function, there is still PLENTY of ways to get viruses onto a linux. Linux only owns what? 4% of the market? What person is going to take the time to program a virus, malware, etc for linux, when he/she could simply go to PC, who is being bombarded by hackers and crackers because PC owns nearly a monopoly on the home computer market, and infect more people on PC and in turn, get a much better turnout for their work?