Quote: "Does anyone have a playstation 3 set-up to run Linux? If so what are your impressions. "
The Playstation 3 unlike the Playstation 2 comes with Linux and all of the software required for a computing platform pre-installed and easily accessible with a button combo on boot.
Something you might find interesting that the Playstation 2, Playstation Portable consoles also run on Linux OS variants. Albeit both of theirs are very cut-down, but it's all Linux under the hood. It's why often it doesn't take very long for distro's to be edited to be used on those platforms.
More interestingly is "Cell" will happily run on any PPC-based OS.
Sony are set to release a Linux Kit similar to the one for the PS2 which was only sold in Europe in order to back up it's ridiculous claim that it was a "Computer" rather than an entertainment console.
Quote: "There is a reason it is trying to keep Linux off the 360 box... its your freedom!"
Or it could be that they had their own OS that they could use on their hardware without hundreds of man-hours redeveloping it for specific hardware given it already ran on the hardware .. and pretty damn well to boot.
While sure Linux runs less overhead than Windows generally speaking, the fact is that the drivers especially for top-end hardware often are very under-developed. Despite having direct hardware access, the performance often ends up being far more disappointing.
Good example of a game on both Linux and Windows is Unreal Tournament 2004. Check out the performance difference if you ever have a chance.. fact Microsoft went with Windows over Linux was nothing to do with "taking away freedom" but simple because a) it's theirs', b) it has a more mature development pipeline, c) development apis' are almost identical to windows, d) it has more mature drivers, e) it is a proven stable system with the given hardware, f) DirectX and XAPI = quicker, easier development, g) cross-platform developments, h) better optimised drivers, etc.
I could go on for quite a while, but put simply right now Windows is a far better platform for not just games development; but also usability, which is essencial for a good OS.
Not to be funny about the PS3, but they could've done better with the menu system given how much there is to use. The menu works on the limited PSP, but on the PS3 it's too limiting.
Personally I found the menu system on the GameCube (also ran on Linux) to be fairly good.
You know why MacOSX and Linux loose out heavily on the desktop, it's because of games and ease of use. Linux' problem is because there is no stable planned version designed specifically for users rather than trying to play catch-up with Windows. MacOSX because it's limited to expensive Macs' and the development APIs don't really hold a candle to DirectX, especially not 10.
Development for the PS2, PSP, and/or PS3 honestly is not something programmers ever will jump out of bed in the morning looking forward too. Don't get me wrong you get more power at you're fingertips, but tbh the APIs or rather lack there-of often means two options to develop something within a timeframe.
"Middleware" or Less Features.
The PS2/PSP just don't have enough there for low-level development to make sense; the dual-thread gpu pipeline could've quite easily have had it wrapped to the OpenGL 1.4/2.0 Shader System.. but no. Given most of what you use the second pipeline for is screen-effects it does seem extremely weird this was never considered an option by Sony. What's worse is for the PS3 you don't even get the template libraries the PS2 got, because developers wanted some more low-level control so rather than providing a balance Sony went from one extreme to another. There is just too much in the PS3 for this to make rational sense to do.
It's annoying when you see key mistakes like these being made but know there isn't a thing you can do about any of it. So oh well.
