• alessandro@lemmy.caOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    You sure? Last I remember the “crazy” quota was paying $999 for a monitor holder branded by a fruit (a bitten fruit, not even a whole one).

    Joke aside, the most amusing thing, is that you have to pay $700 for a device attached to your TV, then if you want to check a website you have to resort on your smartphone or whatever shitty browser is integrated in your “smart” TV… because PS5 don’t have web browser support!

    • h0rnman@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      because PS5 don’t have web browser support!

      That one’s pretty easy though. Browsers are a HUGE attack surface for jailbreaking. It’ll happen eventually anyway, but I can’t say that I’m surprised

      • alessandro@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s not how the enforce security works. You’re either capable to secure the device without removing basic functionality, or don’t.

        Xbox has a browser, as any iphone/ipad out of there. If the only way for Sony to keep security is cripple functionality; it doesn’t mark their device as valuable at all

        (additionally, with proper web browser support you can play web videogames without have to pay Sony: would you say this also apply to Sony’s choice to remove web browser?)

    • sexual_tomato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Weird comparison.

      I already own a computer to do daily work in other areas of my life. Why not add the extra $700 to my PC budget and access 35+ years of gaming history, vs. paying $700 to access ~700 games that I can’t play when the next hardware iteration drops?