On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 00:03:08 -0800, Tim Smith wrote:
> In article <1391050.f8Epc1dAca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I can recognise the nym of the OP and, IIRC, it's a troll. If one wants the
>> official PS3 Linux, there's YDL Linux, which is a free download (since 1.5
>> weeks ago). Resolution and everything is fine 'out of the box'. FC5, Ubuntu
>> and Gentoo on the PS3 are somewhat experimental. They preceded the more
>> 'official' distribution.
>
> So IBM was lying when they said this?
>
> "On the display, there are a few gotchas to watch for. First of all,
> the 20GB PS3 only comes with an analog composite RCA plug for
> attaching to TV-like output devices. You can convert it to VGA
> through a special cable (see Resources for more information).
> Unfortunately, this operates only at 576x384. If you want better
> resolutions, you'll have to use the HDMI port. However, that can
> lead to additional problems. HDMI can be easily converted to DVI
> through a cable. So this should be able to be fed to a
> DVI-compatible monitor, right? Well, no. There is a
> content-protection protocol called HDCP. When outputting data over
> the HDMI port, the PS3 will not output any data to
> non-HDCP-compliant devices. Therefore, unless your monitor is
> HDCP-compliant, you cannot use it to get digital output from the
> PS3, and you're stuck with 576x384 (though some have reported higher
> resolutions using component video output rather than composite)."
>
> Why would IBM lie about the PS3? Did Microsoft get to them?
Roy Schestowitz always has to have the last word, even if it's wrong it is
most of the time.
It's his narcissistic behavior acting up again.
|
|
