2 ms·
It's placing an artificial barrier on user software choices at the firmware level. There was no reason Linux couldn't run on a PS3, except Sony said so. Secon
by gshulegaard 10y ago
It's placing an artificial barrier on user software choices at the firmware level. There was no reason Linux couldn't run on a PS3, except Sony said so.
Second, it wasn't optional for people, like me, who bought a PS3 after the update. Since I bought a console with the restriction, I don't remember exactly whether people could refuse the update. But your points, about not being able to play future games or playing online are also arbitrary restrictions which, while not outright preventing you from refusing the update, are designed to arbitrarily handicap you to the point that not updating is more of a hindrance than not.
- slavik81 10y agoThe entire console market is built on arbitrary restrictions. Running only signed code is a part of the business model of every console. Even when the PS3 supported Linux, there were arbitrary restrictions on access to the GPU to ensure it could not be a good gaming platform.