That is one of the best executed hoaxes ever. The only giveaway is a small detail in the URL which is easy to overlook. Kudos to whoever came up with that one.
That is one of the best executed hoaxes ever. The only giveaway is a small detail in the URL which is easy to overlook. Kudos to whoever came up with that one.
Dude, no it's not. There are a bunch of giveaways here. No video, one mocked up "screenshot," (and when you click on the screenshot's thumbnail it displays a Left 4 Dead screenshot) and it plays that music without any video controls, the whole right side of the box is empty, no price or add to cart button, that logo on the right side is the wrong aspect ratio. It's in the uncanny valley where it's mostly right but the subtlest differences jump right out.
And what makes you say that? There are lots of other commercial users of FreeBSD. I can't think of anyone other than hobbyists and OS researchers who use Plan 9. :P
And what makes you say that? There are lots of other commercial users of FreeBSD. I can't think of anyone other than hobbyists and OS researchers who use Plan 9. :P
PS3 ran Linux, right? It's just getting nerdier every generation.
Ok, for a person who barely knows about these sorts of OS type things, can you explain what this means to the lay person?
Basically, the PS4 runs a variation of a variation of what eventually became Linux. That means PS4s could be web servers, desktop computers, etc., if messed with properly.
PS3 ran Linux, right? It's just getting nerdier every generation.
Not exactly. The PS3 could dual-boot Linux, but its native OS was some Sony proprietary thing. They eventually took away the ability to dual-boot Linux. More on whether it's also FreeBSD later...
The PS4's native OS is a FreeBSD derivative.
Ok, for a person who barely knows about these sorts of OS type things, can you explain what this means to the lay person?
Basically, the PS4 runs a variation of a variation of what eventually became Linux. That means PS4s could be web servers, desktop computers, etc., if messed with properly.
Not exactly. FreeBSD and Linux are completely unrelated, at least as far as commonality of code, etc. However, they look alike at the higher levels to both programmers and users. It's kind of like the differences between whales and fish -- both live in the sea, have similar streamlined body shapes, etc., but are otherwise completely unrelated.
This is a bit of an oversimplification, of course, as Linux was engineered from scratch to be a look/work-alike of FreeBSD's ancestors whereas FreeBSD has a direct lineage from those self-same ancestors.
As far as what this means to the layperson, probably nothing. It's mostly an interesting bit of trivia for the computer geek. However, like Neito said, you probably could hack the PS4 to do all sorts of funky stuff that you can do with a stock installation of FreeBSD.
Hard to know for certain as most of the evidence for this appears to be via TCP fingerprinting. It's possible that the PS3 used FreeBSD networking code only whereas the rest of the OS was completely proprietary. FreeBSD networking code is in just about everything out there since it's both rock solid and completely free to use for anyone who wants to use it. Even earlier versions of Windows used FreeBSD networking code until Microsoft decided to rewrite it from scratch around the XP era or so.
That said, given how Sony isn't exactly known for being an OS development shop, it would make sense for them to use something like FreeBSD as the basis for any of their operating systems.
Ok, for a person who barely knows about these sorts of OS type things, can you explain what this means to the lay person?
Basically, the PS4 runs a variation of a variation of what eventually became Linux. That means PS4s could be web servers, desktop computers, etc., if messed with properly.
Not exactly. FreeBSD and Linux are completely unrelated, at least as far as commonality of code, etc. However, they look alike at the higher levels to both programmers and users. It's kind of like the differences between whales and fish -- both live in the sea, have similar streamlined body shapes, etc., but are otherwise completely unrelated.
This is a bit of an oversimplification, of course, as Linux was engineered from scratch to be a look/work-alike of FreeBSD's ancestors whereas FreeBSD has a direct lineage from those self-same ancestors.
That's basically what I meant. Linux is a "variation" on Unix, and BSD was a Unix back in the day when you needed to say something was "A" unix rather than simply being Unix. BSD and Linux are kinda like cousins, really. I guess.
That's basically what I meant. Linux is a "variation" on Unix, and BSD was a Unix back in the day when you needed to say something was "A" unix rather than simply being Unix. BSD and Linux are kinda like cousins, really. I guess.
BSD is also the direct ancestor to Mac OS X.
Okay, I'm putting my propeller beanie on here just because...
Whether you consider Linux a "variation" of Unix depends on how picky we are about what constitutes a "variation." All the non-Linux Unixes share a code ancestry dating back to Bell Labs in the early 1970's. I'm not sure how much of the old 1970's code still exists in modern BSD, OS X, Solaris, AIX, etc., but if you decided to trace through every step of their development over the past 40 years or so you can trace it all back to that version of Unix running on the Bell Labs PDP-11 way back when. Even if none of the old 1970's code still exists in any of them, if you go back in time one version at a time, you'll eventually come across more and more of that 1970's code.
Linux, on the other hand, has none of that original Unix code in it (okay, I think for a while it used BSD's networking code, but as I said, everyone has used BSD's networking code at one point or another -- it's kind of like the town bicycle of programming. Besides, that networking code didn't exist in early versions of Unix anyway). It was completely written from scratch to look and work just like Unix, but doesn't have any code in common, now or in the past. If you go back to the beginning of Linux back in the early 90's, you won't ever find a single line of 1970's Unix code in there.
To me, a "variation" implies some sort of common ancestry. Labradors and beagles are variations of dogs, but they're still part of the same species and are all descendants of some prehistoric Asian wolves. Linux doesn't have that common ancestry with BSD. To go back to the biological example, if BSD and other Unixes are dogs/wolves, then Linux would be the hyena: it looks a lot like a wolf, it hunts a lot like a wolf, but it's not a wolf or even part of the dog family (hyenas are actually more closely related to cats). In Linux's case, it's more along the lines of convergent evolution.
However, I fully admit I'm being very pedantic here.
Looks like a combination of Half-Life 2, System Shock 2, and Doom 3.
Add Amnesia to the list. Maybe remove some of the other games in it. It pretty clearly seems to have more focus on avoiding or running away from enemies and threats, than on shooty shooting.
Looks like a combination of Half-Life 2, System Shock 2, and Doom 3.
Add Amnesia to the list. Maybe remove some of the other games in it. It pretty clearly seems to have more focus on avoiding or running away from enemies and threats, than on shooty shooting.
I said HL2 because of the way the environments are structured and textured. Doom 3 because of the user interfaces within the game. Doom 3 was the first time I saw those. May have invented it. System Shock 2 because of the way the bad guys are. Few and dangerous. You have to manage them rather than hose them down.
I said HL2 because of the way the environments are structured and textured. Doom 3 because of the user interfaces within the game. Doom 3 was the first time I saw those. May have invented it. System Shock 2 because of the way the bad guys are. Few and dangerous. You have to manage them rather than hose them down.
I said HL2 because of the way the environments are structured and textured. Doom 3 because of the user interfaces within the game. Doom 3 was the first time I saw those. May have invented it. System Shock 2 because of the way the bad guys are. Few and dangerous. You have to manage them rather than hose them down.
You and me played very different System Shock 2.
I went around very carefully bashing monkeys on the head, mostly avoiding them.
Ok, question, guys. I am introducing an SO to Advance Wars. I can go with either Dual Strike or Days of Ruin as their first real foray into the series. The characters of DS are probably more appealing, but I can recognize DoR as a better (and more balanced) game.
Ok, question, guys. I am introducing an SO to Advance Wars. I can go with either Dual Strike or Days of Ruin as their first real foray into the series. The characters of DS are probably more appealing, but I can recognize DoR as a better (and more balanced) game.
Ok, question, guys. I am introducing an SO to Advance Wars. I can go with either Dual Strike or Days of Ruin as their first real foray into the series. The characters of DS are probably more appealing, but I can recognize DoR as a better (and more balanced) game.
Which one should I show them?
GBA Micro or SP with Advance Wars 1.
Edit: If you MUST get a DS one, don't, and get AW2 instead.
Edit 2: Ok, ok, DoR is probably better. I preferred it.
It doesn't have the charm of Dual Strike, or the wacky characters and wide array of CO's to choose from, right? Is DoR a better introduction to the series?
Edit: I intend to show them Days of Ruin at some point, but I'm not sure if I should hop to it directly or introduce them to Dual Strike first.
It doesn't have the charm of Dual Strike, or the wacky characters and wide array of CO's to choose from, right? Is DoR a better introduction to the series?
Edit: I intend to show them Days of Ruin at some point, but I'm not sure if I should hop to it directly or introduce them to Dual Strike first.
AW1 is super cute, charming and has awesome music. It was how I was introduced and looking back, I think AW1 is still the best in the series.
I got my brother an SP with AW1 for a trip away with the army. He said the multi player was a massive hit, pass and play. He even had people asking him to borrow it when he was done.
It doesn't have the charm of Dual Strike, or the wacky characters and wide array of CO's to choose from, right? Is DoR a better introduction to the series?
I dunno if anyone here knows your significant other better than you do. You seem to be leaning towards Dual Strike. Maybe just go with your gut?
Comments
The PS4's native OS is a FreeBSD derivative. Not exactly. FreeBSD and Linux are completely unrelated, at least as far as commonality of code, etc. However, they look alike at the higher levels to both programmers and users. It's kind of like the differences between whales and fish -- both live in the sea, have similar streamlined body shapes, etc., but are otherwise completely unrelated.
This is a bit of an oversimplification, of course, as Linux was engineered from scratch to be a look/work-alike of FreeBSD's ancestors whereas FreeBSD has a direct lineage from those self-same ancestors.
As far as what this means to the layperson, probably nothing. It's mostly an interesting bit of trivia for the computer geek. However, like Neito said, you probably could hack the PS4 to do all sorts of funky stuff that you can do with a stock installation of FreeBSD. Hard to know for certain as most of the evidence for this appears to be via TCP fingerprinting. It's possible that the PS3 used FreeBSD networking code only whereas the rest of the OS was completely proprietary. FreeBSD networking code is in just about everything out there since it's both rock solid and completely free to use for anyone who wants to use it. Even earlier versions of Windows used FreeBSD networking code until Microsoft decided to rewrite it from scratch around the XP era or so.
That said, given how Sony isn't exactly known for being an OS development shop, it would make sense for them to use something like FreeBSD as the basis for any of their operating systems.
BSD is also the direct ancestor to Mac OS X.
Whether you consider Linux a "variation" of Unix depends on how picky we are about what constitutes a "variation." All the non-Linux Unixes share a code ancestry dating back to Bell Labs in the early 1970's. I'm not sure how much of the old 1970's code still exists in modern BSD, OS X, Solaris, AIX, etc., but if you decided to trace through every step of their development over the past 40 years or so you can trace it all back to that version of Unix running on the Bell Labs PDP-11 way back when. Even if none of the old 1970's code still exists in any of them, if you go back in time one version at a time, you'll eventually come across more and more of that 1970's code.
Linux, on the other hand, has none of that original Unix code in it (okay, I think for a while it used BSD's networking code, but as I said, everyone has used BSD's networking code at one point or another -- it's kind of like the town bicycle of programming. Besides, that networking code didn't exist in early versions of Unix anyway). It was completely written from scratch to look and work just like Unix, but doesn't have any code in common, now or in the past. If you go back to the beginning of Linux back in the early 90's, you won't ever find a single line of 1970's Unix code in there.
To me, a "variation" implies some sort of common ancestry. Labradors and beagles are variations of dogs, but they're still part of the same species and are all descendants of some prehistoric Asian wolves. Linux doesn't have that common ancestry with BSD. To go back to the biological example, if BSD and other Unixes are dogs/wolves, then Linux would be the hyena: it looks a lot like a wolf, it hunts a lot like a wolf, but it's not a wolf or even part of the dog family (hyenas are actually more closely related to cats). In Linux's case, it's more along the lines of convergent evolution.
However, I fully admit I'm being very pedantic here.
It pretty clearly seems to have more focus on avoiding or running away from enemies and threats, than on shooty shooting.
Which one should I show them?
Edit: If you MUST get a DS one, don't, and get AW2 instead.
Edit 2: Ok, ok, DoR is probably better. I preferred it.
Edit: I intend to show them Days of Ruin at some point, but I'm not sure if I should hop to it directly or introduce them to Dual Strike first.
I got my brother an SP with AW1 for a trip away with the army. He said the multi player was a massive hit, pass and play. He even had people asking him to borrow it when he was done.
EDIT: It's been settled.