Seihyouken said:
slowmo said:
Seihyouken said:
slowmo said:
joeorc said:
thranx said:
emo_parker said:
What a waste of internet space this guy is..
Lets sue Microsoft for removing the old blade interface.
Lets sue Sony for removing the old crappy html PSN store.
|
You must not understand what this is about. It is about consumers getting what is advertised. Using other OS was advertised as someting the ps3 could do, and was touted as an attribute to the ps3. The blade interface was not, neither was the old psn store, both of which you have substitutes for mind you. This about something being taken away from a system that may have been the reason a person bought it. very different from what you said
|
AND IT STILL CAN!
if you choose not to update you can still use linux...yes or No?
if you choose not too do you still have the function of Linux..yes or no?
Has sony informed the Owner's of the Phat PS3 what they would loose access too before they decide to not update ..yes or no?
the point being is Sony is covered. it's still as advertised, with changes's to How OTHER OS FUNCTION WORK'S! it works prior to 3.21
before there was not CON's to using Linux. On the PS3, Now there is due to security concern's which Sony did tell the consumer before they released this update to be used or not used.
the point is how much does Linux mean to you
if its very important, than do not update. and you still get to keep Linux.
so sony is not forcing the consumer to update, you can choose not too therefore it's still work's as advertised.
|
Stop spinning and defending Sony, THEY ARE FORCING people to choose Other OS or potentially kill their PS3 for gaming. This is forcing people to choose, therefor it is a forced decision. Fair enough if you don't think its a big issue but the fact remains this is a mandatory update if you want PSN right now and in the future it will be mandatory for new games. Pros and cons don't matter to a consumer, a feature that was present on their console when bought is being taken away, that is WRONG.
|
I wouldn't say it's not wrong, but it has still yet to be shown that it's illegal which is what this topic is about.
The fact of the matter is, Sony is giving PS3 owners the choice between OtherOS and PSN and future games. Sony has the right to deny PSN to anyone they want. It's their service. There's the matter of "After-Market Modification" on Sony's part with this, but if taken to court, Sony need simply bring up that keeping the feature reduced their ability to run their business due to the threat of piracy and the court will likely take Sony's side.
Some people may cry false advertising, but it's only false advertising if Sony advertises a PS3 using OtherOS and PSN following the update. Any advertising that is done prior to the update is worthless because the circumstances of the device have changed.
|
I've not mentioned anything on legality, I happen to think Sony aren't stupid enough to break any laws with a update, still doesn't make it right from an ethics perspective. I reported this thread as I happen to think the debate is a non issue and should have been in one of the other 2-3 threads already on this subject. I'm merely highlighting that saying this update isn't being forced onto people is ridiculous, once this has been accepted as a fact I'll drop the subject.
|
I agree that the issue isn't one that needs another topic.
Regarding the update being forced, you'll be waiting a long time if you expect people to accept that it's true when it's quite frankly not.
Jack Tretton isn't holding a pistol to my head and ordering me to update. In fact, so far I haven't. Sony can't force me to update if I don't want to. I'll be giving up PSN, but that's a choice that belongs to me. Sony forced that choice on me, but they're not forcing me to choose one or the other, just coercing.
|
