While the article doesn't mention it, this installation and smaller-scale uses of Linux on a PS3 are the reason behind Sony's current legal messes regarding the PS3: Sony sells the PS3 at a loss, and tries to recoup the cost on software sales, but people buying a PS3 to run Linux never buy enough games to make up for Sony's initial loss.
Sony issued a firmware update to disable the ability to install a different OS, and that led to a class-action suit against them. In the meantime, George Hotz wrote a hack to restore the OtherOS feature, and Sony is now trying to nail him with DMCA and other copyright violations.
Somewhat complicating the legal situation are Sony's attempts to bring piracy in to the equation: they've argued that removing the ability to run Linux was necessary to prevent piracy, and that Hotz's hack facilitates piracy. Neither claim withstands much scrutiny, as piracy did not become feasible until a Sony employee tweeted their root key, well after they removed the OtherOS feature, and not too long after Sony told the court that Hotz's hack had caused irreparable harm, Sony patched the hole Hotz exploited.
It has also been noted that the PS3 is much cheaper than IBM's Cell blades, and that for certain kinds of supercomputing tasks, that more than makes up for the lack of low-latency high-bandwidth interconnects.
Sony selling at a loss was 2 years ago. I can't imagine that Sony is still taking a loss on the hardware considering how long it has been around and with the refresh to the new slimmer version.
I would be curious to know if they are still losing money from them but I highly doubt this is the case anymore. Anyone actually know about this for sure?
The removal of PS2 compatibility, economies of scale on BluRay lasers, and newer fabrication processes for the Cell have helped Sony a lot, but the most recent report I can find is from iSuppli at the end of 2009, saying that the 120GB PS3 was losing just under $40 when sold for $299, so the current $299 160GB is probably profitable by now, and the models with larger hard drives should be making a good amount of profit.
Still, it's hard to say whether the hardware profits from the past year or two would cover Sony's share of the Cell fab upgrade costs (the Cell has been through two process shrinks), let alone make up for the steep losses incurred early in the product cycle. I suspect that the overall long-term profitability of the PS3 platform still depends heavily on their video game sales.
You realize whether or not games are the main source of profit, if the console itself is profitable now they should be thanking the Air Force. Profit is profit, whether or not it's the kind you wanted.
The first 336 PS3s in this installation were bought well before Sony reached the break-even point, and the PS3 Slim model that is now profitable has never officially allowed the use of Linux or other operating systems. (Sony didn't want to update the OtherOS hypervisor to support the new hardware in the Slim.)
If you're the Air Force purchasing around 1700 PS3s, I have to imagine that you're going to have a conversation with Sony at some point. It sucks for Sony that they sell the PS3s at a loss. Do creative accounting and false economies bug anyone else?
"The Air Force is also using the Condor to process ground-based radar images of space objects, again with extraordinary clarity. Barnell shows images of a space shuttle orbiting Earth at 5 miles a second. Without Condor processing, the shuttle image is a blurry black triangle. With Condor processing, it is sharp and distinct. It’s clear that its payload doors are open."
I really had no idea that you could process radar to this clarity with off the shelf 2006 technology.
That depends more on the wavelength of the radar than on the post-processing. As far as I know, radar post-processing is far more important for trajectory tracking than capturing a single clear image.
A Ka band radar, for example, uses centimeter wavelengths, and W band radars are 3mm waves. I've heard that the radars used for tracking objects in orbit can image clearly enough to allow you to estimate the capabilities of an enemy's spy satellite based on the sizes of its antennas and cameras.
> To custom-build a supercomputer without using commercial off-the-shelf PlayStation 3s would likely have cost 10 times as much, Barnell said. In addition, the Condor uses a fraction of the energy that comparably sized supercomputers use. Portions of it — say 300 machines — can be turned on while the rest are off, depending on a job’s needs.
I bet this was true at the time, but today you can buy blade servers with later generations of the same processors[1].
edit: nope. Just look at the per-blade price, yowza.
The factor of 20 price difference between the fat PS3 and the Cell blades has been alleged in the class-action suit against Sony to have caused IBM to exert pressure on Sony to remove the OtherOS support.
This wasn't true at the time, and it is definitely not true today. You could get similar performance at comparable price (then), and much better price/performance ratio today -- you just have to buy reasonably cheap stuff, not IBMs or HPs.
It's possible that by going to Sony, the airforce was able to ditch the tender requirement (no one else is supplying PS3s ...) thus making it possible for them to get things going, rather than waiting for 2 years until all the paperwork is done (and then getting 2 year old technology, because that's what has been bid on and approved).
17 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 49.8 ms ] threadSony issued a firmware update to disable the ability to install a different OS, and that led to a class-action suit against them. In the meantime, George Hotz wrote a hack to restore the OtherOS feature, and Sony is now trying to nail him with DMCA and other copyright violations.
Somewhat complicating the legal situation are Sony's attempts to bring piracy in to the equation: they've argued that removing the ability to run Linux was necessary to prevent piracy, and that Hotz's hack facilitates piracy. Neither claim withstands much scrutiny, as piracy did not become feasible until a Sony employee tweeted their root key, well after they removed the OtherOS feature, and not too long after Sony told the court that Hotz's hack had caused irreparable harm, Sony patched the hole Hotz exploited.
It has also been noted that the PS3 is much cheaper than IBM's Cell blades, and that for certain kinds of supercomputing tasks, that more than makes up for the lack of low-latency high-bandwidth interconnects.
I would be curious to know if they are still losing money from them but I highly doubt this is the case anymore. Anyone actually know about this for sure?
Still, it's hard to say whether the hardware profits from the past year or two would cover Sony's share of the Cell fab upgrade costs (the Cell has been through two process shrinks), let alone make up for the steep losses incurred early in the product cycle. I suspect that the overall long-term profitability of the PS3 platform still depends heavily on their video game sales.
AFAIR the Other OS boot was disabled because of an exploit for ps3-linux that disabled some watchdog mechanism.
"The Air Force is also using the Condor to process ground-based radar images of space objects, again with extraordinary clarity. Barnell shows images of a space shuttle orbiting Earth at 5 miles a second. Without Condor processing, the shuttle image is a blurry black triangle. With Condor processing, it is sharp and distinct. It’s clear that its payload doors are open."
I really had no idea that you could process radar to this clarity with off the shelf 2006 technology.
A Ka band radar, for example, uses centimeter wavelengths, and W band radars are 3mm waves. I've heard that the radars used for tracking objects in orbit can image clearly enough to allow you to estimate the capabilities of an enemy's spy satellite based on the sizes of its antennas and cameras.
I bet this was true at the time, but today you can buy blade servers with later generations of the same processors[1].
edit: nope. Just look at the per-blade price, yowza.
[1] http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/bladecenter/hardware/servers/q...
It's possible that by going to Sony, the airforce was able to ditch the tender requirement (no one else is supplying PS3s ...) thus making it possible for them to get things going, rather than waiting for 2 years until all the paperwork is done (and then getting 2 year old technology, because that's what has been bid on and approved).