Console Maker's OS

[MrSpiggott]

Your theory is understandable, but hardly definitive. Given Sony's openness with their hardware and implementation, and they public spelling out devs wanting lots of unified RAM, and gamer talk about the reservation, I would expect Sony to have said, "at the moment, because we're using cutting edge memory, we have to reserve a substantial amount of RAM from the console to give our developers the best platform to work with. When higher memory capacities become available, we can upgrade the development kits and free up much of this reserved RAM from the PS4. So you'll get great looking games at launch, and then, as devs grow to fit the system and require more RAM, we'll be able to provide that."

That's a clear, honest message that does Sony no harm. Whereas, "it's reserved for future stuff we can't really think of," tells us it's sitting idle. I suppose there's a chance that the RAM is reserved for development purposes but Sony don't want to promise that it'll be returned to devs in case they find a different use for the RAM later (not that there will be one, because several GBs of RAM is only good for massive content like digital editing...).

I can understand Sony not admitting to reserving memory for software development reasons, if true.
They would let themselves be open to accusations of conning the public. " I've paid for an 8GB console and you knew I could never use 3.5GB of it, why should I subsidise Sony and their software developers, I want my money back!" Etc etc etc. The fact this might be a short term issue wouldn't enter into it.
The next thing you know and it's consumer rights TV programs and newspaper articles.

Whereas if they say the memory is being reserved to allow future improvements and features for our valued customers, then I don't think there would be too many complaints.
Honesty is not always the best policy when the customer base can be so partisan.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I can understand Sony not admitting to reserving memory for software development reasons, if true.
They would let themselves be open to accusations of conning the public. " I've paid for an 8GB console and you knew I could never use 3.5GB of it, why should I subsidise Sony and their software developers, I want my money back!" Etc etc etc. The fact this might be a short term issue wouldn't enter into it.
The next thing you know and it's consumer rights TV programs and newspaper articles.

Whereas if they say the memory is being reserved to allow future improvements and features for our valued customers, then I don't think there would be too many complaints.
Honesty is not always the best policy when the customer base can be so partisan.

Maybe, but IMO there's no different in message. We already have many devices sold as 'xxxx' RAM/capacity which don't actually allow that much in use due to system reservations. Whether the RAM is reserved for developers or future upgrades makes no difference to the consumer. For the people who care, the gamers, who are scratching their heads over the reservation (but not up in arms, protesting, or contacting consumer rights TV AFAIK), a promise that it was a technical limit because Sony were at the cutting edge of RAM tech would go down a helluva lot better than the current message of, "it's sitting there idle because one day we may find a use for it."

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Whereas, "it's reserved for future stuff we can't really think of," tells us it's sitting idle. I suppose there's a chance that the RAM is reserved for development purposes but Sony don't want to promise that it'll be returned to devs in case they find a different use for the RAM later (not that there will be one, because several GBs of RAM is only good for massive content like digital editing...).

I would imagine there are a multitude of things that Sony have definitely or hopefully planned for PlayStation 4 but they are trying to work out the realistic RAM reservation. For example, we don't know what (if any) the GPU reservation is for OrbisOS but it may well be entirely viable for the PS4 to run both a game and an app (Netflix, DVD/Blu-ray player etc) with one output to the TV and one going to a remote device.

Sony also said at their February 2013 reveal that they want PS4 to be social and they've partnered with Facebook and Twitter. This means supporting what those networks are doing now, and in 5 years time. There are lots of unknowns because the path they've chosen isn't entirely within their control.

3.5Gb is nuts but they got burnt on having too little RAM reserved for PS3's OS and being unable to provide parity with the 360, like cross-game chat.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Future proofing. You can say its a waste right now, but if they never did it, they would never have the opportunity to take it back.

That's the answer to your question.

I disagree, surely some game/devs could potentially choose to 'opt-out' of using the full OS functions while in a game, using only a small subset like those on the 360. Any future updates to the OS wouldn't affect them because the OS is essentially dropped from memory until the game reverts back to the system.

You could have some that choose to use the full OS system (indies?), whereas the big boys that could really make use for several more GBs and CPUs can do so if they so choose (Crytek ).

 

[Deleted member 86764]

And besides, surely Sony could choose to have a 512MB reservation for the OS subset. I’d imagine that >50% would go unused even now, but to be perfectly frank I’m happier with 256MB going unused, compared to 3.5GB.

It’s just insane to me.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

And aaaanyway, people seem to be more concerned with the lack of power of the Xbox One rather than the lack of TV functionality of the PS4. Sony could easily widen that gap if they wanted to.

"But the PS4 doesn't allow you to snap TV to your game!" said nobody ever.

 

[DrJay24]

"But the PS4 doesn't allow you to snap TV to your game!" said nobody ever.

:smile:

I'm always wondering why I can have a thin vertical small-text app smooshed next to my game screen. I guess I'll continue to go old school and use a tablet if I need to look something up (or sitch over to a full screen web page).

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm always wondering why I can have a thin vertical small-text app smooshed next to my game screen.

What's the very most one would need to have a webpage inside a game? A gig? I have trouble believing even that much is needed, but the OS front is HTML5 IIRC, so let's give 1 gig to the OS and frontend and backend and enabling a hefty page inside the game. Can it multitask 50 tabs? No, but no-one would want to. Text within a game would serve the purpose of either being a chart client or feed or reference for the game being played. The number of people who'd shun a console because it can't support embedded HTML5 games inside their COD game is small enough to be completely ignored.

As for missing out on features last time around due to insufficient RAM: firstly, Sony reduced the RAM from original reservations so they were plain stupid to reduce it beyond the point where they could add in this feature people were asking for from the earliest days; secondly, it shouldn't take that much. We've been through likely RAM requirements for features before. Look what XB360 did in 32 MBs RAM or whatever it was. Look what a phone can do in 512 MBs, say.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

As for missing out on features last time around due to insufficient RAM: firstly, Sony reduced the RAM from original reservations so they were plain stupid to reduce it beyond the point where they could add in this feature people were asking for from the earliest days; secondly, it shouldn't take that much. We've been through likely RAM requirements for features before. Look what XB360 did in 32 MBs RAM or whatever it was. Look what a phone can do in 512 MBs, say.

But expecting Sony to be as experienced in OS and application design as Microsoft is as unrealistic as expecting Microsoft to be as experienced in hardware design and manufacture as Sony.

Microsoft developed DOS from CP/M, Windows 2-3 (WIN16), Windows 95-98-XP-Vista-7-8 (WIN32), Windows NT (on x86, Solaris, DEC Alpha), PocketPC / HandheldPC (x86, MIPS, SH-3, ARM architectures) and developed applications on their own operating systems and other peoples. They are, without argument, the single most experienced operating system company in the world.

 

[pMax]

I would expect Sony to have said, "at the moment, because we're using cutting edge memory, we have to reserve a substantial amount of RAM from the console to give our developers the best platform to work with [...]

...nah.
Japanese wouldn't ever do that, unless they were forced to. At least, I have some jap friend, and that's imho how they would act.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

run both a game and an app (Netflix, DVD/Blu-ray player etc) with one output to the TV and one going to a remote device.

I don't know about that, you can't stream video to the Vita as it is. 1GB max reservation is all they'd need.

The devkit guess is probably true, the extra 512MB could very well be the current full OS.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I don't know about that, you can't stream video to the Vita as it is. 1GB max reservation is all they'd need.

I imagine this is a software limitation but it could be HDCP related. However even if HDCP encryption can't be overcome to stream video (I would be astonished if this were the case), there is still the usage case of gaming on the Vita and watching video on the TV.

 

[babybumb]

The core OS and services loaded dosent take 3,5GB. That is the limit for OS + apps. You can run Windows 7 with 512MB. You can also run it with 4GB. Try loading the same programs on both and see how differently it runs. The 512MB PC will barely run a web browser and anything else. At 512MB it will start swapping to HDD for slow virtual memory and reaally slow down if you try to multitask between programs giving warning about full ram memory

I think the memory reservation is because games currently dont need more than 4-5GB if you look at the usage on PC. There is no need to give devs more

If PS4 would only have 4GB memory like originally the OS would be very similar to Xbox360 with only ~3-3,5GB to games instead of 4GB+. The background tasks and multitasking would be impossible and they are still not fully implemented

 

[Deleted member 86764]

The core OS and services loaded dosent take 3,5GB. That is the limit for OS + apps. You can run Windows 7 with 512MB.

I'm well aware of that. My point being, it's not helpful being able to run apps and games at the same time.

I'm fairly sure there are plenty of devs that could use 7GB for games if they knew everyone playing had 7GB available to them.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

I imagine this is a software limitation but it could be HDCP related. However even if HDCP encryption can't be overcome to stream video (I would be astonished if this were the case), there is still the usage case of gaming on the Vita and watching video on the TV.

Oh I'm certain it's a software limitation. Without a doubt.

I can watch video on my TV without the need of a PS4 already. Nice to have, of course, but certainly not at the expense of game resource. Netflix runs on my Tivo box and my PS4. Definitely quicker on the PS4, but if I'm able to Netflix and game simultaneously anyway, what's the point in adding that functionality to the Playstation?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I'm well aware of that. My point being, it's not helpful being able to run apps and games at the same time.

Debatable on the user and the apps. Digital downloads generally come with HTML manuals that require the web browser, which eats RAM like Homer Simpson in a doughnut shop - bear in mind you're not dealing with a highly optimised mobile browser that ships with Android or iOS.

But I'm not clear what constitutes a PS4 'apps' and what is part of the core OS. Is 'Trophy' an app or part of the OS? How about the video editing function of sharing? Video editing is something that benefits from more RAM.

I think folks are looking at PS4 now and, rightly, querying the 3.5Gb reservation. Obviously we don't know what Sony have in R&D, nor how they envisage it working and whether it would benefit running in parallel with games or other apps or not. Ditto Microsoft.

User's perception of their devices will change over the years. Things that feel fresh and speedy now may not later on, as other technology that the user also own rapidly advances on yearly cycles, like computers and smartphones and tablets.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Netflix runs on my Tivo box and my PS4. Definitely quicker on the PS4, but if I'm able to Netflix and game simultaneously anyway, what's the point in adding that functionality to the Playstation?

Not everybody has/needs/wants multiple boxes. I don't have a Tivo, I watch Netflix on the PlayStation principally, and occasionally on the iPad.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Worst case scenario of releasing 3GB now is that games using that additional resource won't be able to tombstone those unknown apps in the future. By which time you're onto the next thing anyway.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Bringing racism into it is kinda pathetic.

There's literally no other reason to have ram allocated in this manner besides future proofing. Do people think Sony just went stupid in terms of optimization in 3 seconds?

There's obviously a reason for this allocation and its going to be reduced.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Worst case scenario of releasing 3GB now is that games using that additional resource won't be able to tombstone those unknown apps in the future. By which time you're onto the next thing anyway.

Ok, "tombstoning" is Microsoft parlance for saving certain states of an application's runtime condition. I've not read anything (or observed anything in the PS4's actual behaviour) that suggests OrbisOS does this so why worry about something that may not exist. Even if it does, the states preserved are tiny compared the entire RAM footprint of the app that was running.

We're descending into lunacy and nonsense territory.