Sony PS3 Q+A (Leaked)

[SPM]

What is so great about that news? If it's Linux, you're in the world of free source and complete development systems. If programs do need recompilation to work on Cell, you can simply recompile them. You'll have compilers, assemblers, linkers, system libraries, ...

The great think is that an existing distro can be used - which will mean better quality and update support than Sony would be able to provide on it's own. It will still probably be necessary to recompile to produce a PS3 edition for in-order optimisation and to make use of Cell for media acceleration, and to include non-free codecs for media.

 

[SPM]

A negative rep because of telling people to watch before they leap? Brilliant. I should have known B3D has a history of infallible Sony optimism. This is the place that basically spread the whole teraflop ps3 FUD. I am long done with discussions and wishful thinking stemming from pieces of inconceivable truths!

Note to self: Will wait for take #12, Act 4. Will not expect people to have memories of bad faith and will again simmer down from their first stance.

Actually, what I find refreshing about B3D is the lack of ****** rants.

You are basing your perceptions on current technology entirely on past PR, presumably because of ignorance of that technology. However that is not the case for everyone on this forum. Some of us know what Linux is - I am running Linux on the PC I am using to type this post - and yes it is a complete computer OS which will let you do pretty much everything Windows does. We know the configuration of the PS3, including exactly what you can plug in to expand it. We know what Cell is. We know Sony is reserving quite a bit of RAM space and an SPE for DRM. We know that because of Cell's hardware based security it is possible to lock down the PS3 to prevent access to key things like encryption/decryption, and the BD or ROM/Flash based bootloader. We know that unlike other consoles, Cell's security mechanism will allow a full OS (Linux, Mac OSX were mentioned) to run without restriction but still protecting the underlying firmware and bootloaders within the DRM layer. Even the pricing is known.

All we are arguing about now is the marketing, pricing and the appeal of the PS3's computer features.

It is I suppose very remotely possible that Sony will at the last moment change it's mind and remove the Linux feature on the PS3 - heck anything is possible, but the Linux OS, Cell, standard USB ports, standard wireless LAN communications, standard IDE interfaces, and Cell's capabilities are 100% hard reality, not even remotely vapourware as you are suggesting.

 

[Titanio]

He replied with shareware RPM's that can be downloaded and installed. That's not what I'm talking about

As I said earlier, I'm not engaging in the argument about PS3 as a PC replacement, but just wanted to mention that would not be unlike any other distro of linux. And generally they're not "shareware", most apps on Linux are freeware (i.e. just free).

The only caveat would be what you hint at here..

It will be interesting to see what RPM's sony does allow, how easy they are to aquire, and how they deal with the security holes that will crop up.

..whether Sony would do anything to limit what could be run on the system. But with PS2 Linux the only limit was what could software be compiled and feasibly run on the system (and that this software doesn't require the DVD drive, which PS2 Linux does not provide access to). That brought challenges with regard to some software, because PS2 was mips-based, and generally speaking developers don't usually provide mips versions, so someone had to go in and change code if necessary. The difference with PS3 is that Cell support is part of the main linux kernel, and to it it's just another PowerPC - and PPC is well supported (as that IBM doc notes, existing PPC apps should run without recompilation). I doubt Sony will interfere there.

Security holes would be managed as with any Linux distribution - the community reports them, and the developers patch it, or so the theory goes. Other people's software is not Sony's responsibility. If there is a hole in the distro itself, if it's a Sony component, then that's their responsibility to fix. If it's a flaw in the kernel, then that's up to the kernel maintainers, and so on.

The debate of whether PS3, as a Linux/PPC machine could replace the desktop in the home of joe casual is a subtly different one from that which we were engaged in before, and perhaps more in tune with a general debate over whether Linux could ever be mainstream. I think perhaps we're all crossing wires with our arguments, because I think there's at least 3 distinct threads of debate going on here that are being mixed together.

The great think is that an existing distro can be used

Theoretically, but I'd await confirmation on that with regard to PS3.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

What is so great about that news? If it's Linux, you're in the world of free source and complete development systems. If programs do need recompilation to work on Cell, you can simply recompile them. You'll have compilers, assemblers, linkers, system libraries, ...

Because you won't have to! Let's say there's 100 apps for PPC Linux. On day 1 when PS3 launches, it'll be able to run them all. Now if it couldn't and they had to be recompiled, how long would it take for all of them to be processed? I expect bigger names like Firefox or GIMP might get compiled quickly, but not every developer will have the time or resources to compile and test. Whereas if PS3 runs PPC varieties, you won't need to own a PS3 to write your Mac Linux code as normal and still serve the PS3 userbase. It simplifies the development process.

 

[Titanio]

Because you won't have to! Let's say there's 100 apps for PPC Linux. On day 1 when PS3 launches, it'll be able to run them all. Now if it couldn't and they had to be recompiled, how long would it take for all of them to be processed? I expect bigger names like Firefox or GIMP might get compiled quickly, but not every developer will have the time or resources to compile and test. Whereas if PS3 runs PPC varieties, you won't need to own a PS3 to write your Mac Linux code as normal and still serve the PS3 userbase. It simplifies the development process.

True, but I think he's saying that PS3 owners would be able to take the code and build it themselves.

The problem with that is when you're not running on a more widely supported family of processors, that process may involve having to modify the code rather than simply building it in cases where an application depends specifically on one family of processors (not yours). As was the case with Firefox, for example, on PS2 AFAIK - a third party (in this case the guy maintaining this page) took on the responsibility of building new versions of Firefox for PS2 Linux, making the changes as appropriate, because Mozilla themselves don't support mips.

I presume PPC is in a better position than mips wrt support, but in a ways, PS3 may be Linux/PPC's best hope for continuing explicit support now that Apple has switched to X86. Otherwise the situation going forward may be little different from PS2 Linux (whereby 'official' support for Linux/PPC apps is more scarce, requiring others to roll their own and/or make them available seperately).

 

[Npl]

True, but I think he's saying that PS3 owners would be able to take the code and build it themselves.

That doesnt hold true as soon as you want to use free-but-not-open-source Programs. Say for example Opera - its available as compiled Binary for Linux PPC and should run on the PS3. Macromedia Flash, Suns Java Runtime would be other examples.

 

[Titanio]

True, that only applies to open source apps - of which there are lots and lots..

It's good to hear Opera supports Linux PPC directly, because as far as I can tell, Firefox does not, which would leave it to a third party to build for PS3 Linux in not so different a way as was done with PS2. Hopefully Mozilla will revise that..I can see why to date they have viewed Linux PPC as less of a priority, especially with Apple's switch, but via PS3 it'll be in millions of homes in the not too distant future.

 

[TheChefO]

We know the configuration of the PS3, including exactly what you can plug in to expand it. We know what Cell is.

We know Sony is reserving quite a bit of RAM space and an SPE for DRM.

We know that because of Cell's hardware based security it is possible to lock down the PS3 to prevent access to key things like encryption/decryption, and the BD or ROM/Flash based bootloader.

We know that unlike other consoles, Cell's security mechanism will allow a full OS (Linux, Mac OSX were mentioned) to run without restriction but still protecting the underlying firmware and bootloaders within the DRM layer.

Even the pricing is known.

All we are arguing about now is the marketing, pricing and the appeal of the PS3's computer features.

It is also known that Sony was saying the same thing before ps2 launched about linux capabilities and bla bla bla. I think the point is, don't count your chickens before they hatch.

Not to say it is impossible that this ps3 = computer will not become a reality this gen.
Not to say it is a bad thing to discuss the potential of ps3 to become a suitable pc or ways to accomplish such.

But one should view this at this time as simply a possibility until Sony shows us exactly what they have in store. Sony has shown in the past a tendancy to not do what they say, and this is yet another example of a potential letdown.

 

[ihamoitc2005]

Linux

It is also known that Sony was saying the same thing before ps2 launched about linux capabilities and bla bla bla. I think the point is, don't count your chickens before they hatch.

Sony did release hard drive, linux and network adapter like they said no? Only some people bought this feature but that is consumer choice my friend. Biggest problem for PS2 Linux is 32MB RAM. I feel this is not so much RAM for full OS operation.


But for PS3 consumer does not have to buy anything and also RAM is enough for full OS like Linux, OSX, etc. but I will like 512MB.

 

[TheChefO]

Sony did release hard drive, linux and network adapter like they said no? Only some people bought this feature but that is consumer choice my friend. Biggest problem for PS2 Linux is 32MB RAM. I feel this is not so much RAM for full OS operation.


But for PS3 consumer does not have to buy anything and also RAM is enough for full OS like Linux, OSX, etc.

I don't think the end result in computer functionality with ps2 is quite what people were expecting but then maybe I had my hopes too high. Were you satisfied with ps2 computer functionality? Aside from the ram limitations, what was "hinted at" or "sold" by Sony to the masses on the subject was clearly short of what was delivered. That could change here with ps3 but I'm not holding my breath in anticipation.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Security holes would be managed as with any Linux distribution - the community reports them, and the developers patch it, or so the theory goes. Other people's software is not Sony's responsibility. If there is a hole in the distro itself, if it's a Sony component, then that's their responsibility to fix. If it's a flaw in the kernel, then that's up to the kernel maintainers, and so on.

See this doesn't seem adequate to me, especially for something coming installed on 100% of the machines. I think they'll have to make it more secure than your standard Linux distro, vet the RPM's very carefully.

I can imagine a scenario where a large exploit is discovered in one of the software packages and hundreds of thousands of PS3 get hacked. Linux distro's get hacled all teh time online, and the system admin has to continually be updating packages to make sure the latest holes are being fixed. That seems a little much for a games console.

Maybe Im missing something...

 

[Titanio]

Well, you have to ask yourself what the consequences of PS3 Linux being compromised are. The damage, so to speak, would be limited to PS3 Linux - you'd still be able to restart the machine and go into the "normal" PS3 OS which operates independently. If restrictions are in place to prevent access to game data on the disc (as in PS2 Linux) or other partitions on the HDD, then content ought to be secure too.

The relationship between Linux and the machine is such that it is effectively an application, a client of the Hypervisor. It'll be interesting to see what the relationship between them is. (In fact, many more answers and issues may lie there generally with regard to this issue, and running OSes on the system - I really don't understand much about the Hypervisor, but I'll try to read up on it).

BTW, I don't think Linux is very prone to issues with viruses and security holes. People often hack Linux to find security holes and report them rather than toward malicious ends..certainly, as operating systems go, it doesn't bear the same security concerns of some others. PS2 Linux, actually, had more concerns on this end that PS3 probably will, since it was a number of steps behind the current up-to-date distributions of software (because most things required explicit porting).

 

[compres]

Sony did release hard drive, linux and network adapter like they said no? Only some people bought this feature but that is consumer choice my friend. Biggest problem for PS2 Linux is 32MB RAM. I feel this is not so much RAM for full OS operation.


But for PS3 consumer does not have to buy anything and also RAM is enough for full OS like Linux, OSX, etc. but I will like 512MB.

I think you have to look at the 256 mb of system ram, not the other 256 of video ram, when you are talking about linux for the ps3. It's not 512 uma like the x360.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Well, you have to ask yourself what the consequences of PS3 Linux being compromised are. The damage, so to speak, would be limited to PS3 Linux - you'd still be able to restart the machine and go into the "normal" PS3 OS which operates independently.

If you use it like a PC with internet banking and online shopping, it's a concern. If Sony were to limit internet access to only their web portal/browser for those things, that could be kept 'secure' (like PSP ), and leave Linux just for offline applications, say. There's options to create a more secure platform, but then you're limiting what people can do with it. For online, I'd love a simpler soultion that many PCs, with per application checks, warning notifications, and general botherness with keeping the system safe. For the technically illiterate, actually keeping a PC safe is a bit much to ask. Yet another computer that works in the same way defeats much of the point IMO. I'm wanting a new computer designed for the modern era, rather than the same computing models in place for the past decade or more just with a different set of icons. It's another point full of questions that needs another Sony showing. When's the next likely even that Sony would showcase non-gaming functions of PS3?

 

[scooby_dooby]

BTW, I don't think Linux is very prone to issues with viruses and security holes. People often hack Linux to find security holes and report them rather than toward malicious ends..certainly, as operating systems go, it doesn't bear the same security concerns of some others. PS2 Linux, actually, had more concerns on this end that PS3 probably will, since it was a number of steps behind the current up-to-date distributions of software (because most things required explicit porting).

Actually there are many many exploits reported almost on a daily basis, if you're on a mailing list for exploit notifications you get them all the time. At my own work our server was comprimised through a hole with PostGres and they took control of the machine.

See if you notice how many websites crash, or get hacked on April fools day, I think you'd be surprised.

 

[Titanio]

If you use it like a PC with internet banking and online shopping, it's a concern. If Sony were to limit internet access to only their web portal/browser for those things, that could be kept 'secure' (like PSP ), and leave Linux just for offline applications, say. There's options to create a more secure platform, but then you're limiting what people can do with it. For online, I'd love a simpler soultion that many PCs, with per application checks, warning notifications, and general botherness with keeping the system safe. For the technically illiterate, actually keeping a PC safe is a bit much to ask. Yet another computer that works in the same way defeats much of the point IMO.

Perhaps, but as long as updates are made available for a distro, it's no different than using a distro on any other system. As a comment on computing generally, it's valid, but as I say, as long as you can keep your software up to date, this isn't an issue specific to a console, or specifically bigger on a console.

This is why I'm hoping that you'll be able to use whatever Linux/PPC distro you want, though. Kutaragi actually seem to say as much some time ago, but it didn't all make as much sense then (he said in an interview something along the lines of being able to put Lindows/Linspire or whatever on it). But that's where I have questions about the Hypervisor - depending on how it works, it might allow unmodified distros to run on top of it, or it may required modified distros. Hopefully the former would be the case (AFAIK, there isn't support for hypervisors in the linux kernel yet).

I'm wanting a new computer designed for the modern era, rather than the same computing models in place for the past decade or more just with a different set of icons.

It's probably not something you'll see an answer to in PS3 Linux. But it does hark back to the more general argument about computing in the home, what people commonly do with a PC in the home, and whether a PC is overkill, and overly complicated for that task, and if there's room for other devices to steal time from them. The answer is yes, and this has already happened - but the rise of the internet has seen the PC regain attention. But if people want to argue about something like PS3 "replacing" or usurping PCs in the home, or sucking time and attention from them, they shouldn't look to Linux - afterall, you can't replace a PC with a PC (you're still left with a PC! ). I mean, whatever capacity is there for PS3 to do that is via the "normal" friendly face of PS3 computing (the XMB etc.), not Linux, IMO.

I'm not sure when we'll see more about Linux on PS3, though. I'm hoping they might say or demo something that the Playstation Meeting, which should happen at the end of the month, but I don't know how suited that would be to it.

Actually there are many many exploits reported almost on a daily basis, if you're on a mailing list for exploit notifications you get them all the time. At my own work our server was comprimised through a hole with PostGres and they took control of the machine.

See if you notice how many websites crash, or get hacked on April fools day, I think you'd be surprised.

I'm not saying there are not vulnerabilities, and not many of them, but I think the risk of something happening to a home user as a consequence of those vulnerabilities is pretty low, and certainly no higher than on any other OS. I mean as a user at home I've never ever had a problem with viruses on Linux, but I can't say the same for other OSes.

Again, though, the damage would be no more than on any other system if something were exploited. I think the presence of a hypervisor here is probably relevant too..

 

[Black Dragon37]

I think you have to look at the 256 mb of system ram, not the other 256 of video ram, when you are talking about linux for the ps3. It's not 512 uma like the x360.

I could've sworn that the PS3's RAM is like the UMA, just split at default....

 

[Titanio]

I could've sworn that the PS3's RAM is like the UMA, just split at default....

The CPU has very slow access to GDDR3. It doesn't matter for a specific application - like a game - that can use either chip to shift things around in memory as suits, but for an OS that's primarily using the CPU only, it's not typically going to be dipping into GDDR3.

 

[Black Dragon37]

The CPU has very slow access to GDDR3. It doesn't matter for a specific application - like a game - that can use either chip to shift things around in memory as suits, but for an OS that's primarily using the CPU only, it's not typically going to be dipping into GDDR3.

Ah, OK.

 

[SPM]

The CPU has very slow access to GDDR3. It doesn't matter for a specific application - like a game - that can use either chip to shift things around in memory as suits, but for an OS that's primarily using the CPU only, it's not typically going to be dipping into GDDR3.

Is this a feature of the production PS3 or just the dev kits? The arrangement of the busses connecting the components together is different in the dev kits.