PS3 Firmware 3.21 to Remove OtherOS

[KezraPlanes]

I saw this coming when the hack was first announced... So it doesn't surprise me one little bit. Can't say I agree with it, but on the other hand I also can understand the reasoning behind such a decision, and I most likely would have done the same.

 

[Abe Froeman]

I never used it, but I do know a few people who do. So it does suck for them.

 

[KezraPlanes]

I never used it, but I do know a few people who do. So it does suck for them.

I did use it at one point, but the lack of resources for Linux OS' was so painful I gave up.

 

[Dan]

One cool thing can happen

geohot releases the ps3 hack before this update

or

geohot cmmnts that guys update ur ps3,it can be hacked without other os

Geohot released the exploit, yes. But unless somebody makes a patch to bypass the firmware check while signing into PSN, it'll be a lost cause.

Can you link to where Geohot said that?

 

[Spiros]

Can you link to where Geohot said that?

I think he was just speculating what could happen...best case scenario.

I'm definitely not going to update though; wait it out, see how the hack progresses.

 

[Riorio99]

I'm sure that Geohot mentioned that the hack would work on the Slim, way back when he first announced it.

This is a real dick move by Sony. Actually removing features via a mandatory update is not good for business.

 

[Spiros]

I'm sure eventually it will work on all ps3's without otheros, i mean just like the psp 3k, one way or another it'll get hacked. removing otheros will probably make it a bit harder, but im sure another exploit will be found. but anyway thats all speculation.

it is shit that sony is saying that it isnt mandatory; we can choose to update or not they say. but as soon as you want to play a new game or access psn you must update. if this isnt an april fools joke, sony has lost my respect.

 

[NoEffex]

I'm sure eventually it will work on all ps3's without otheros, i mean just like the psp 3k, one way or another it'll get hacked. removing otheros will probably make it a bit harder, but im sure another exploit will be found. but anyway thats all speculation.

it is shit that sony is saying that it isnt mandatory; we can choose to update or not they say. but as soon as you want to play a new game or access psn you must update. if this isnt an april fools joke, sony has lost my respect.

Why? For making a smart business decision? It makes complete sense.

It's happened to them before, and they're covering their tracks with lessons learned from last time. Rather than patch the un-patchable, they're patching the thousands (Exaggeration..maybe) of potential exploits all at once.

If they kept OtherOS people would continue hacking it and, in the long run, potentially get ISO support which does NOT look good on the PS3's resume.

 

[KezraPlanes]

Why? For making a smart business decision? It makes complete sense.

It's happened to them before, and they're covering their tracks with lessons learned from last time. Rather than patch the un-patchable, they're patching the thousands (Exaggeration..maybe) of potential exploits all at once.

If they kept OtherOS people would continue hacking it and, in the long run, potentially get ISO support which does NOT look good on the PS3's resume.

Agreed. That and also the fact that users are not ready for the responsability that ISO loaders bring, Alex made that mistake on the PSP, see how that turned out.

 

[agentnnc]

Why? For making a smart business decision? It makes complete sense.

It's happened to them before, and they're covering their tracks with lessons learned from last time. Rather than patch the un-patchable, they're patching the thousands (Exaggeration..maybe) of potential exploits all at once.

If they kept OtherOS people would continue hacking it and, in the long run, potentially get ISO support which does NOT look good on the PS3's resume.

True. I find that the handheld market has lost interest because of piracy. Many people would just download the games rather than buying them. It would be a disaster if it came to consoles.

 

[Lachrymose]

Check this out.

Got in contact with a lawyer, she's getting me in touch with a couple others. We'll see if I can get something going.

Also, I need links/screengrabs/anything of everywhere where Sony advertises or mentions Other OS as a supported feature of the PS3 OS.

So far I have the on-line manual and their Open Platform website. Any others?

 

[rileysnotz]

If they kept OtherOS people would continue hacking it and, in the long run, potentially get ISO support which does NOT look good on the PS3's resume.

Sony should definitely be worried about this. While I do use the OtherOS feature I can totally understand them. And the PS3 was just beginning to gather some steam!

There are thousands already thinking Hack will lead to Homebrew and will eventually lead to ISO loading. And somewhere some idiot is going to offer just that. It's inevitable. It's sad.

 

[NoEffex]

Check this out.

I would be willing to wage that in Sony's terms it specifically says that Sony is able to enable and disable features at will.

 

[Spiros]

True. I find that the handheld market has lost interest because of piracy. Many people would just download the games rather than buying them.

Absolutely, I agree.

It would be a disaster if it came to consoles.

but thats not necessarily true, it's been stated many times before, but pretty much all the greatest consoles have been open to piracy, the psx was incredibly easy to get pirated games, my understanding is the ps2 also was, though i never chipped mine, i dont think that piracy really had much of an impact, if any, on those consoles. the 360 has been open to piracy for some time now, and most of the games being developed for the ps3 are also made for the 360, it hasnt effected the 360, in terms of the quality of games being released for it, imo.

also, if the ps3 is hacked i think the positives would far outway the negatives, I've had a Manchester united blu ray sitting around for like a year and a half now, it would be great if i could finally play it with my ps3.

 

[Lachrymose]

I would be willing to wage that in Sony's terms it specifically says that Sony is able to enable and disable features at will.

This. I'm not a layer, just thought this was interesting. Found in comments on Geohot's blog.

Just because it's in the ToS doesn't make it legal. They could reserve the right to sacrifice your first born child by adding a clause to the ToS, but it doesn't mean they could actually do it. Consumer protection laws exist for exactly this reason.

 

[NoEffex]

This. I'm not a layer, just thought this was interesting. Found in comments on Geohot's blog.

It pertains to their product. The feature and lack thereof doesn't violate any laws. Killing a baby violates a law. Removing a feature that they explicitly stated can be removed at any time (ie a privilege that got abused) is perfectly legal.

 

[Zero]

It pertains to their product. The feature and lack thereof doesn't violate any laws. Killing a baby violates a law. Removing a feature that they explicitly stated can be removed at any time (ie a privilege that got abused) is perfectly legal.

They could also argue that the update isn't mandatory, seeing as your PS3 and OtherOS mode will continue to work on the current firmware, but PSN access is blocked.

 

[Spiros]

They could also argue that the update isn't mandatory, seeing as your PS3 and OtherOS mode will continue to work on the current firmware, but PSN access is blocked.

that is their argument actually, although i see that as a slap in the face because either way you lose features.

update: lose otheros
dont update: lose psn, online play, ability to play new games, etc.

either way, we get pooped on.

 

[Hellcat]

They could also argue that the update isn't mandatory, seeing as your PS3 and OtherOS mode will continue to work on the current firmware,

Actually, they ARE doing exactely THAT!

 

[eldiablov]

It pertains to their product. The feature and lack thereof doesn't violate any laws. Killing a baby violates a law. Removing a feature that they explicitly stated can be removed at any time (ie a privilege that got abused) is perfectly legal.

It may not violate law but it's a pretty shit move.