Better than that, you can just swap out the internal HD with another HD (or SSD) of your choosing.

It must be a 2.5" drive that is 9.5mm (or less), and 5400rpm to match the built in drive but faster drives will show the speed improvement.

You can then backup your game saves to a USB drive, swap out the internal drive, format the new internal drive, restore your saves from USB, and go about installing games again.

The only annoying part is if you already have a ton of games on the internal drive.
I don't know any way to copy those along, you have to redownload them AFAIK, so hopefully you have a good ISP.

I know a few people that did this using 512gb SSDs for the speed boost.
On my friends SSD'ed PS4 I got to play GTA5 before and after the upgrade, and you could very much tell the difference in speed. Much closer to PC loading times than stock console.

For extra capacity, I think the largest "thin" 9.5mm HDs out there are 2tb, but that too is only a matter of time and I may already be out-of-date wrong with that statement.

BTW the PS3 is just as easily upgraded.
I never owned a PS2 so can't comment there (does it even have an HD?), and the PS1 certainly did not.

This post has no useful content. That said:

I just wanted to say thank you very much for the link FreeUser! It's been slightly frustrating at best trying to keep up with all the partial yet somehow already out of date blogs to get the same information.
It is very much appreciated.

Sorry for the multiple replies.
I was following up on comment replies to me before I saw the update on this article that IMAX Corp has already apologized.

So good on them, it's refreshing to see a human with common sense step up to the plate and put an end to the legal departments nonsense, instead of doubling down with a misunderstood legal threat.

So they ended up answering my previous posts question, and do want people to refer to IMAX theaters as IMAX. Which is good, as "That shitty theater" is too many syllables to roll off the tongue quickly.

Where do you see them using IMAX as a generic large screen?

I only see: It's like saying, 'I have an IMAX theater in my house.'

Sounds like he is referencing an IMAX theater itself and comparing one thing (The VR headset) with one other very specific thing, an actual honest to god IMAX theater.

If I ask my friend very specifically 'Do you wanna go to IMAX?' - I am not going to end up driving to some random movie theater - I really honestly do mean to reference a real IMAX theater.

How can I legally refer to IMAX theaters if not by name?
More so, why should I not reference IMAX theaters specifically by the name the IMAX Corporation has requested via trademark that I use to reference it?

I could see how IMAX Corp may be upset if I always referred to their theaters as say "Those shitty theaters", despite the fact there is no law preventing me from doing that, but that is because A) I am referring to an IMAX theater as something else, and B) that something else happens to be insulting.

Well here is the difference, if IMAX Corp wants to claim I can't call their theaters "IMAX Theaters" - then I will pick my own name.
They do have a trademark on IMAX however, so I couldn't do the reverse and refer to something else as an IMAX theater.
But they have no trademark on "That shitty theater" so they can't prevent me legally from referring to any theaters of my choosing as "That shitty theater"

Which do you think they Really want?
Me calling their theaters by the name they request I use, aka IMAX
or me calling their theaters an insulting name that they have even less (read: no) control over?

Once again, -1 offtopic to you.

Please try to keep the discussion somewhat on topic. Pointing out situations that haven't happened isn't useful to anyone, and in fact is quite harmful to your own reputation.

If they didn't want the world to refer to IMAX as the name "IMAX" then they probably shouldn't have filed a trademark on IMAX, which legally enforces us to refer to IMAX only as IMAX and nothing else, while also not referring to anything else as IMAX.

There was no claim that the VR headset was IMAX, and I see no other references claiming IMAX to be called something else, so all is legal from both directions.
The only reference I see is calling an IMAX theater IMAX.
I see no evidence of your claim that they used IMAX to mean "large screen movie", only specifically the IMAX theaters.

In case you lack understanding (as your posts seem to commonly do) - filing a trademark means you are demanding at legal threat that others only refer to your product/service using that mark.

The fact a trademark was filed is completely on their head, so they can't very well as claim after the fact such a trademark doesn't exist and demand we refer to their product/services in unlawful and confusing ways such as not-IMAX.

Having done a bit of digging, and perhaps some soul searching, it seems that Poettering, and others, think that a tightly coupled system is the only way to build a OS.

This because they see generic distros, like Debian and Gentoo, have in effect dug themselves a hole thanks to the number of permutations involved in packaging (though with Gentoo being compiled by user/admin rather than distro maintainer it may not be fully correct to include them).

But to go from saying distros may have bitten over more than they can chew, to saying that everything between kernel and desktop needs to be a tightly coupled whole is quite the leap.

Yes, distros can be built to be highly specialized, and has been so since the early days. But that is not an excuse for making the software that goes into making a distro tightly coupled.

Also, way to much of what is happening above the kernel is happening from the desktop environment (Gnome in particular) down.

Take dbus for instance, it balks at talking across user accounts. But if it was amended to do so, user accounts become sandboxes.

But instead we get the whole rigmarole of cgroups and namespaces, managed by systemd.

But divide by zero isn't covered by either of those two rules of algebra.

Asking what is X divided by zero is no different than asking what is Y plus red, or what is Z times pineapple.

I say focus on a proper mathematical answer for multiplying by blue first, and then apply it to the equally nonsensical divide by zero question.

And that is when we sit back, grab some popcorn, and watch the fireworks.

After having some adjustments done to fit alongside code that was already in there doing similar things.

Torvalds do maintain some ground rules for accepting patches though.

One of them is that they do not break userspace.

This involves making sure that any interfaces exposed to userspace processes behave the same across versions.

When a patch(-set) violates this, the developer(s) behind it will be at the receiving end of some nasty language. In particular if they refuse to acknowledge the breakage, and/or claim it is userspace that should be corrected.

There was point in time when Alan Cox stepped away from kernel development because Torvalds was having issues coping with the patch traffic and Cox's staging tree was bordering on turning into a de-facto release tree.

Yeah i have been wondering about GregKH lately.

He may have produced some excellent code over the years and done a nice job maintaining stable kernel releases. but as of late he seems to have gotten very "one true way"-ish.

Not only the snark regarding maintaining a independent udev, but also the pushing of kdbus into the kernel when the gains are at best questionable.

As best i can tell the forces in the background pushing to get kdbus accepted are the car manufacturers and others wanting to use Linux in commercial embedded hardware.

This because they are coming from other platforms where using a RPC for everything (including the likes of moving massive amounts of raw streaming media data around) was norm, and they latched onto dbus as being the same thing on Linux.

But dbus performance sucks compared to what they used to use, and rather than locate alternatives (like say netlink) they are pushing to get a dbus derivative into the kernel so they can continue their old ways in a new "land".

Frankly i am starting to regret my support for Nokia's Maemo project from years back, as more and more it seems like everything that is, well, crapifying Linux these days seems to have originated from that project.

More and more it feels like very heavy corporate and government interests wants to turn Linux into Windows, with little regard to the potency of *nix concepts.

Meh, he already have GregKH on a leash and Sievers in the wing.

Sticking his neck out directly would be silly, even for him.

and

The other day I went to portableapps.com to rebuild a new toolstick when I remembered they sell pre-loaded flash drives also. Seeing as part of that purchase would support portable apps I figured I would check out the prices in their shop.

It was then I saw they have a new (to me) encrypted flash drive that looks and reads to be pretty impressive.

Flash drive #2, the Carbide:
http://portableapps.com/shop/h...

Or if you just want the drive from the source without the portable apps involvement:
http://worldsbestflashdrive.co...

I only just purchased one for myself last Friday so it hasn't arrived yet, but now I intend to do similar to what you had in mind - my portable keepass app and database, and important documents like taxes and medical records.

May be worth looking into for those occasions LastPass isn't suitable, primarily for me being document files.

Also for what it's worth I fully agree with your comparison of keepass and lastpass strengths, and am saying that as an avid keepass user. I'm not here to convert you, just wanted to share a third option that I'm still a bit excited for finding.