How to avoid Updating to 3.21.

[FoBZY]

Originally Posted by Ragman

Rang Harvey Norman local store on Friday Arvo, asked if they had any obligations to partial refunds due to reduced functionality etc.

Cited Statutory Rights etc, also mentioned the EU directive and how Amazon was refunding 20% of purchase price. Obviously EU they dont have jurisdiction here but similar consumer protection laws still exist in Aus.

I figure if Harvey have to start giving out refunds then they are seriously going to take Sony to task over it.

They told me it was the first they heard of it about losing linux or PSN access. I said I can leave my details or contact them in a week or so while they check at their end about any obligations to the consumer. They said to call back.

Will keep you guys posted.

im am so glad Im not in retail, imagine what that sounds like to a normal person?

some nerd lost his linux thingy on the ps3 and wants money back?

[millsy_c]

I was mad keen on getting a PS3 until I read about the debacle with linux being dropped, to say i'm dissapointed is a major understatement.
I didn't want it so much for being able to use it as a PC, but so I could use it as a BD drive to view/copy data from blu ray discs (that way I get a shiny console and a blu ray player, win!).
Now I'm no longer that keen on one
Hopefully at some point someone clever will work out how to get linux back onto the PS3, until then I might just sit on the fence for a bit.

[$3@N]

Millsy, just get a cheap linux box and but a blu ray burner in it, x100 better at Blu Ray then the PS3 and you have full unrestricted Linux

[Ragman]

Originally Posted by FoBZY

im am so glad Im not in retail, imagine what that sounds like to a normal person?

some nerd lost his linux thingy on the ps3 and wants money back?

Or the flip side how about keeping linux and losing the ability to access games and content legally purchased from the PSN ?

[millsy_c]

Originally Posted by $3@N

Millsy, just get a cheap linux box and but a blu ray burner in it, x100 better at Blu Ray then the PS3 and you have full unrestricted Linux

You're missing the point. I WANT an excuse to buy a PS3
Anyway I'd be using it as a media centre too probably (woo 1080P)

[FalconGT]

Originally Posted by millsy_c

You're missing the point. I WANT an excuse to buy a PS3
Anyway I'd be using it as a media centre too probably (woo 1080P)

You'd need to buy an older model anyway. The slim never had the option to begin with.

[$3@N]

Originally Posted by millsy_c

You're missing the point. I WANT an excuse to buy a PS3
Anyway I'd be using it as a media centre too probably (woo 1080P)

Alrighty then!

+Lots of exclusive games, mostly AAA+ Titles.
+The Exclusive games are AAA titles and run very nice, most are 720, very few are 1080 and hardly any are below 720 mostly.
+Shares a lot of games with the 360 Library, most run better or the same.
+Excellent Blu RAy Player, reliable and loads discs fast, has all the latest features.
+Use pretty much any controller you have, the Xbox controllers dont work, ive tried
+Clean simple interface and regular updates.
+Free Online Gaming.

Now for the -

-Recently removed Other OS, which join the other removed features such as SCAD, PS2 Emulation, 4 USB Port 80GB model.
-Base SKU has not changed, the bad thing about this is that there is only still 2 USB Ports and G Wireless
-PSN Updates are not constant, its weekly like the Wii.

[chokeeweebee]

This article just proved to me that the death of cell B.E. sold by IBM wasn't because GPU's can do the job better for a cheaper price, The PS3 freaking killed it! by being cheap and subsidized! and being powerful for its price,

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2...-air-force.ars

[millsy_c]

Originally Posted by chokeeweebee

This article just proved to me that the death of cell B.E. sold by IBM wasn't because GPU's can do the job better for a cheaper price, The PS3 freaking killed it! by being cheap and subsidized! and being powerful for its price,

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2...-air-force.ars

That's pretty interesting, I never thought of it from the POV of the various people using them for research purposes.
Poo to sony

[SLATYE]

I wonder whether you could demand that Sony don't update the firmware when you send the PS3 in for repairs. I'm pretty sure that the law regarding warranty/repair work is that the customer must get back something equivalent to (or better than) what they sent in. For example, Sony could not replace a 60GB (PS2 compatible) PS3 with an 80GB one, just like ATI could not replace a HD 4850 with a HD 5450. Could the same apply to Linux? I know their EULA says that a firmware update can remove functionality, but this isn't about a firmware update. This is about sending something in for repairs and getting a less capable product back.


Regarding the article posted earlier: IBM is in charge of manufacturing the Cell. With so many PS3s sold, they've probably made a fortune just on the CPUs alone, even though the PS3 may have hurt sales of higher-end Cell-based systems.

[millsy_c]

Originally Posted by SLATYE

I wonder whether you could demand that Sony don't update the firmware when you send the PS3 in for repairs. I'm pretty sure that the law regarding warranty/repair work is that the customer must get back something equivalent to (or better than) what they sent in. For example, Sony could not replace a 60GB (PS2 compatible) PS3 with an 80GB one, just like ATI could not replace a HD 4850 with a HD 5450. Could the same apply to Linux? I know their EULA says that a firmware update can remove functionality, but this isn't about a firmware update. This is about sending something in for repairs and getting a less capable product back.


Regarding the article posted earlier: IBM is in charge of manufacturing the Cell. With so many PS3s sold, they've probably made a fortune just on the CPUs alone, even though the PS3 may have hurt sales of higher-end Cell-based systems.

Good idea but they'd probably cite various improvements to the software in order to justify it being the same or better (fighting that 'secure') is better.

[Ragman]

Originally Posted by Ragman

Rang Harvey Norman local store on Friday Arvo, asked if they had any obligations to partial refunds due to reduced functionality etc.

Cited Statutory Rights etc, also mentioned the EU directive and how Amazon was refunding 20% of purchase price. Obviously EU they dont have jurisdiction here but similar consumer protection laws still exist in Aus.

I figure if Harvey have to start giving out refunds then they are seriously going to take Sony to task over it.

They told me it was the first they heard of it about losing linux or PSN access. I said I can leave my details or contact them in a week or so while they check at their end about any obligations to the consumer. They said to call back.

Will keep you guys posted.

Update: Harvey Norman (Aussie Retailers) aren't doing anything to compensate for loss of functionality.

Sent an email off to Sony themselves

Really unhappy with being an early adopter of a 60GB Playstation and recently having its functionality reduced by way of removing online access and Other OS. My supposed choice of either one. Is kind of being asked you are going to get kicked either way do you want it in the nuts or the head?
I currently have a large catalogue (35+) of Games that I wish to keep up to date on and cannot as I wish to also keep the function of installing and using Linux on my machine.
I understand that you wish to keep security breaches to a minimum. However by removing functions that the unit was able to do at time of purchase, I believe that I am owed compensation. Amazon.com have recently been partial refunding 20% of purchase price of original FAT PS3 models. This is based on EU consumer law.
ACCC Statutory law states that the product must be like the model on display at time of purchase and that it should be fit for purpose. It is no longer representative as the original display model nor is it 100% fit for purpose.
If you were to follow suit I would be more than happy to spend said money on a new Slim model so that I may continue playing my large catalogue of games online and be able to continue being able to use and learn a Linux operating system.
I originally purchased my 60GB PS3 from Harvey Norman for the princely sum of $998. I believe I have been punished as an early adopter and propping up sales so that you could eventually release a watered down version of PS3 and not received any reward for being a long and loyal customer of Sony, having purchased a number of Playstations and games over the years.
I also run a small reseller business, however I cannot sell in good conscience any of your products now knowing that at anytime you can change your products from when first sold. As without adequate compensation to supply chain or the end user for said changes I could stand to lose alot of money.
I hope to receive an adequate reply and you fight to maintain loyal clients.

Their response

Dear Andrew,

Thank you for your recent mail regarding your PlayStation 3

I understand from your mail that you feel aggrieved at the removal of the “Install Other OS” option from PlayStation 3, following our recent optional system software update.

I appreciate that, as a user of another operating system, you are disappointed by our decision to issue a firmware upgrade which when installed disables this feature. Sony Computer Entertainment Incorporated (SCEI) has made the decision to protect the security of PlayStation 3 and whilst we are mindful of the impact that this decision may have on affected users, we nevertheless felt compelled to do so due to security concerns associated with this function.

As you may be aware, due to the very nature of PlayStation 3, and the invaluable scope that system software updates provide, we have been able to continually enhance both the system functionality and associated features since the launch of PlayStation 3 over three years ago. Indeed, the packaging for PlayStation 3 clearly states that “Design and specifications are subject to change without notice” to provide for these changes. Regrettably, this is a very rare instance where, unfortunately, we have had to disable some functionality in order to maintain PlayStation 3’s unparalleled system security.
This has been a difficult decision for us to make, however, given the very small number of users taking advantage of this option when compared to the overall installed base, we feel that it is a prudent safeguard for the ongoing development of the product which will ultimately benefit all PlayStation 3 users.

Again, whilst I appreciate your frustration in this matter, we believe that we have been proportionate in the action we have taken and as such I regret that we are unable to offer any refund or compensation.

Regards,

PlayStation Support Centre

So I felt compelled to try another email to expand on their reasonings.

Thank you for your reply.

You answer was as expected, and raises a few more questions that I would seek a reply to.

How does it "ultimately benefit all Playstation 3 users" when there are those like me who refuse to give up their Other OS.

In keeping with that now I am to miss out on the future further benefits as I choose to keep my "Other OS". Also I miss out on any future security upgs later firmwares should contain. I now have no access to future games or movies that require the later firmwares. Again I fail to see how I am not entitled to some sort of compensation losing functionality one way or the other. There in no way states anywhere on the box that games and blu-ray playback is subject to firmware revision. On the back of the box it also states that I have broadband connectivity for access to the PSN and a world of online entertainment. Again no mention of being subject to firmware revision. Now that I choose to stay at firmware 3.15 for it to continue to work as a standalone player do I completely unplug this "broadband connectivity" ? Will I be subjected to a "ninja" firmware upgrade with future hiring and purchasing of games and blu-ray movies ?

If there is an exploit made in the future am I now susceptible to malicious attacks? How are you going to continue to look after those who choose to remain at firmware 3.15?

The security issues you are so worried about at this stage still require someone willing to hardware hack their system to be able to exploit anything. The majority of users who laid out the extraordinary amount of money we did for a machine like the PS3 and on top of that in my case purchased a 5 year extended warranty to safeguard my future use of the machine (knowing that the product life of the PS3 from the mouth of Ken Kuturagi at the time had at least a 10 year life as a product) are not about to open up the hardware and go about voiding any warranty.

I am a PC tech, run a small reseller business and do my best to keep abreast all things in the realm of gadgets and technology. So yes I know what it takes to hack a PS3.

If there was an offer of a Slim model at a discounted price direct from you the manufacturer I would be more than happy to take you up on that. Being that I would be able to play my catalogue of games along with future games (considering another of the reasons I bought the PS3 was based on GT5 being named a Launch title at the time) and also use "Other OS" on my original PS3.

Can you explain to me how you will compensate Amazon.com for their refunds to their customers? If this move is not backed by SCEI then do you think that Amazon.com is going to take it on the chin and continue to stock any of your products without some sort of compensation? What if by law Harvey Norman one of the major retailers in this country were forced to make similar refunds. Do you think that they would continue to stock Sony products without any of your co-operation?

I also request to see your proportionate list of extra uses and benefits I have received up to Firmware 3.15 (of which I actually use) to counter-balance this function removal.

I also want to mention receiving news of a disclaimer that I was neither privy to nor pointed out at the time of purchase. You know and I know that any Terms of Service or EULA that by itself is unlawful (as in looks to circumvent localised consumer laws) can not be enforced. Why else would Amazon.com be handing out refunds?

Is this an issue I should be taking up with Harvey Norman Head Office in Australia?

Thanks in advance for your reply

And this was the rather curt reply

Dear Andrew,

Thank you for your recent email.

As stated in our previous correspondence, whilst we appreciate your frustrations in this matter, we believe that we have been proportionate in the action we have taken and as such I regret that we are unable to offer any further comment, refund or compensation.

Regards,

PlayStation Support Centre

They even had the gall to include in the signature details a link to encourage me to check out the latest store updates.


Anyway just thought to let you guys know that we have been shafted and no-one down the chain of supply gives a damn but Amazon.com, however they have done it off their own back as Sony released a statement that they will not be compensating Amazon.com or any other retailer who decides to hand out refunds either.

The ACCC are aware of it and are deliberating on whether to take it further or not. All I can suggest is to either register your own complaint or add it to the growing list at the ACCC by phoning them, and keep an eye out on their site to see if they release a media statement about any future actions.

[jordanp]

Good to see someone has gone through the process to get the offical lines from the companies involved, Ragman.

Can't say it wasn't expected, but still a little disheartening. Who knows, something might come out of the fact the the US Airforce and numerous universities that are using the PS3s for processing purposes, have aired their displeasure in the removal of the Other OS feature. Their issue is more around the fact that repaired systems get automatically updated to the latest firmware, though.

Keeping an eye on the ACCC and the class action lawsuit.

[SLATYE]

Originally Posted by millsy_c

Good idea but they'd probably cite various improvements to the software in order to justify it being the same or better (fighting that 'secure') is better.

I'm not sure that'd pass muster. It's like the example I had, with a HD 4850 being replaced by a HD 5450. Is the HD 5450 better because it supports DX11 instead of DX10.1? Definitely not! Similarly, would a GT240 be a suitable replacement, because it supports PhysX? Again, it would not.

I gather that it's a case of "they can make it better, but they can't make it worse". If you returned a HD 4850, they can't give you a HD 5450 - but they can give you a HD 5850 if they're feeling generous (because that is better in every way than the HD 4850).

If I remember, I'll have a look through the TPA and see if I can find anything good.

[RobV]

I can't believe you are actually emailing sony/going to the accc over the removal of the other os option. How cheap can you be, the PS3 is a gaming unit, it is not made to be a replacement pc, so why don't you use it for the reason it was made?

I hope the ACCC laugh in your face and tell you to buy a PC.