By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Sony's Blatant Lie (About Other OS)

Vetteman94 on 09 April 2010
Damnyouall said:
Good news. Please read the update of the first post: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=105559&page=1


I still dont see where it says Sony offered the refund, maybe I am blind.  



Around the Network
bowspearer on 09 April 2010
Nomad Blue said:
bowspearer said:

Thanks for that Thranx. The other issue is that when we made the decision, there wasn't alot of startup capital there for additional equipment and so it was also a budgetary issue, not to mention that I live in Australia, not the EU, and I don't even know if the tax issue even applied here. Besides section 71 of the Australian Trade Practices Act states:

-The goods must be fit for their purpose. That is, they should do what they are supposed to do and be suitable for any purpose that you might have made known to the supplier.Can you still use linux on it?  Can you still play games on it?
-The goods must match the description you were given or the sample you chose from.
Furthermore theses conditions must not change within a reasonable amount of time. As per the statutory warranty.Second hand goods would be under the warranty of the seller rather than manufacturer wouldn't they?

 

Clearly the lesson here is to stear clear of Sony just as you would any other disreputable company.  If you mean any company that withdraws a service or features of a product, then you'll be doing a lot of stearing...

 

 

Actually that's just it, you either have to choose between not running Linux or not only losing online features but the ability to play any future released games and Blu-Ray movies which you'd have noticed if you'd read the official Sony release thoroughly. As for the issue of warranty, I'm chasing this up with both Sony and the retailer as the retailer sold it to me but it was Sony who are guilty of misrepresentation here. Finally, it's against Australian consumer laws to remove advertised features within the warranty period.



bowspearer on 09 April 2010
Nomad Blue said:
thranx said:

Did you even read his post? It explains why he bought it in there. He did not get tax breaks for it, sony got less taxes on each machine by saying it was a computer in the EU (i'm not from the eu, but I assume it has to do with the VAT, which is similar to sales tax in the us i believe). Reread maybe?

Yes, I did read it.  He said he bought it with the intention that it's primary purpose would be as a business computer.  I can't remember ever seeing Sony advertising the PS3 as a business machine, or even implying it.  And yes, he will get tax breaks for it as it'll be claimed on accounts as an asset, so deducting it's depreciation from the profits in the current or following year.

In regards to Sony getting the PS3 classified as a computer in the EU (like a lot of companies do (thus saving them on taxes and lowering the cost to the consumer)), it doesn't make it so.

Clearly you didn't as it was intended for both business and personal use as both a media centre pc and a gaming console. There was no one or the other. A high def gaming console was always a possible consideration for us- it was the fact that it would do both things at half the price of a media pc which is the reason why we chose the PS3. Now are you going to approach this intelligently or are you going to continue cherry picking like a blind little Sony apologist.