[cryptoz]

"It’s not about who makes them first, but who [spies on you the most].”

I love Android and I'm so happy for its success. But I cannot recommend these tablets to anyone due to my boycott of Sony. Their lack of moral values and the way they treat their customers has led me to not just boycott but to actively campaign against them.

Say no to Sony.

[iacvlvs]

It's so good to know I'm not the only one still boycotting them! I was actually starting to reconsider it when the GeoHot thing happened and renewed my resolve. In this case, I don't think we're missing out on anything: if their Android tablets are anything like their Android phones they're going to be locked down to the point of uselessness and crammed to the rafters with proprietary rubbish.

[pavel_lishin]

Can you cite some examples, aside from the somewhat recent chain of security flaws that leaked customer information all over the intertubes?

[dman]

Here are a couple 1) Removing ability to run linux on ps3's after they had already been sold to customers. 2) Rootkit on cd's 3) How they handled the geohotz case was not ideal in my opinion.

[chrischen]

1) It was an optional removal. You had to voluntarily update your PS3 system and they no longer wanted to maintain linux support in future updates.

[dman]

This was arstechnica's summary of the 'voluntariness' - """It's pointed out that this update is strictly voluntary, although if you don't download the new firmware you won't be able to connect to the PlayStation Network, play any games online, play any games or Blu-ray movies that "require" the new firmware, play any files kept on a media server, or download any future updates. To put it simply, if you don't grab the update, the system will become useless to you as a gaming or media machine."""

[chrischen]

Not useless, you can still play games on it and play blu-ray movies. I don't think there are many blu-ray movies that "require" new firmware. Playstation Network is a free bonus service which isn't necessarily unconditionally guaranteed to you based on the purchase price of a PS3.

> "To put it simply, if you don't grab the update, the system will become useless to you as a gaming or media machine."

Not true. I didn't update my PS3 for for over half a year and during that period i encountered no problems playing my existing games or new games, or any of my blu-ray discs.

Most PS3 users do not care about the OtherOS feature. I installed linux on my PS3 and frankly it was quite useless. I'm glad Sony did not keep diverting resources into maintaining that feature for a minority of people at possibly the expense of other features.

I don't understand why people expect Sony to keep supporting legacy features for a small minority of people who purchased one of the first models of the PS3? Updates as well as the PSN are NOT obligated by Sony after you purchase the PS3. Otherwise, 20 years from now, do we all have to right to complain to Sony that their system has stopped being updated? No. That would be absurd.

If you want their free software updates and free online features, then you would obviously have to accept the separate terms for those features. If not, your PS3 is still perfectly as functional as the day you bought it.

[cryptoz]

I was specifically referring to their installation of rootkits on consumer PCs through the Sony BMG CD channel. Also, their attitude about it. From Wikipedia:

> Thomas Hesse, Sony BMG's Global Digital Business President, told reporter Neda Ulaby, "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"

[mortenjorck]

The rootkit debacle was six years ago, and was perpetrated by a business unit that is effectively siloed from the one that manufactures consumer electronics.

I'm not saying your apparently indefinite boycott is unjustified; what happened under the Sony name in 2005 happened on the same watch that everything else in all its myriad corporate structures happens. What I am saying is that corporately, Sony is a complex beast, and one business unit's missteps are not necessarily representative of another.

[hrktb]

I think the heart of the problem is that Sony is a complex beast and there is no real control over who does what is which business unit.

This is recipe for corporate debacle in itself, and the bigger the company gets the more morally chalenged people try to climb the ladders, and the more a corporate culture of not screwing the consumer becomes important. A lack of unified values in the business units should in itself justify a "don't trust, avoid if alternatives are viable" attitude.

Now Sony headphones for ex. are really good quality, but you don't need to trust their privacy policies to use them.

[sliverstorm]

Yeah, but it's easier to just hate the whole thing. Similar to McDonalds- the Ronald McDonald Charity is associated with the fast-food giant, so obviously it is deserving of our disgust. [/mockery]

[pavel_lishin]

> the Ronald McDonald Charity is associated with the fast-food giant, so obviously it is deserving of our disgust.

And why not? Just like with tablets, there are other charities you can contribute to.

[CamperBob]

If Sony's not accountable for defects in products shipped under their brand name, then why do they bother to maintain a single global brand? Gee, it's almost like they want the benefits of a unified corporate identity without the drawbacks.

[billybob]

Exactly.

"This tablet made by Sony! You know it's great, because look at all the other great things Sony makes! It's the same Sony!"

"Didn't Sony do that rootkit thing and have lots of security problems?"

"Oh... well we're really a different Sony. Not the same at all!"

[CamperBob]

Sony is a complex beast, and one business unit's missteps are not necessarily representative of another.

Then they should be broken up, with the respective divisions required to maintain their own corporate identities, balance sheets, and whatever goodwill may be left.

Bottom line, the CDs said "Sony", and no amount of spin is going to deflect blame from where it belongs: Sony.

[rayiner]

Cool story bro.

[CamperBob]

But remember, he was fired for that, and was lucky to dodge a lawsuit from his own employer.

[pavel_lishin]

Was he? I can't find any news story about it.

[CamperBob]

Oh, that must be because nothing even remotely like that happened.

Lesson for the customer: Buy stuff from somebody else.

[wardrox]

Are there any alternatives? I can't think of any companies off hand who aren't morally bankrupt in at least one regard.

[CamperBob]

There's holding your nose to deal with flawed companies with questionable policies... and then there's battered-spouse syndrome. At this point, anyone who expects a square deal from Sony falls into the latter category.