Show me where Sony advertised it. Thus far all anyone has done is link to BLOGS not controlled by sony, and the MANUAL for the other os feature. So please, show me something where they were courting the scientific community.

Everytime this comes up, I ask to see where sony advertised it. Not once has anyone ever done anything but link to 3rd party blogs, and the online manual for the other os feature.

That is a link to a manual telling people about a feature of the ps3, its not something aimed at getting people to buy a PS3.

None of that is advertising. One is a blog, btw, which just points to your second link. The second link is nothing more than a manual, aimed at discussing a feature to an end user who already purchased the PS3... not an advertisment. An ad would be something you see on TV or in print, hear on the radio, or on the marketing for the PS3 online.

Here's what advertising is, since you don't seem to understand the difference between an ad and a manual: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising

This is well established in common law. Go ask a lawyer.

Correct would be functional, secure, and easily maintained.

Its nothing to do with "holy standards." You just aren't capable of doing the job you were assigned. Someone that IS knowledge could have done it without security holes and without needlessly tying your company to a particular browser.

Just because you can hit a nail with a hammer does not mean I'd trust you to build a house.

Like I said, you were put in a bad spot. But don't sit here and say you did a good job of it.

Boy, you're right. I guess only [insert job title] are 'qualified' to insist other [insert same job title] stop playing video games while on company time and while 100's of lives depend on their being ready for anything.

Maybe you should talk to a pilot, because you just sound ignorant. Try this, sit down a computer, and set your screen saver. Then stare at it for five hours. Do nothing else. Tell me how alert you are.

I'll remember that the next time I see a news report of an on-duty cop surfing porn in his patrol car. Who am I tell him how to do his job anyway?

Well since you're such the expert, you also should tell that cop how to handle a hostigate situation, what to do during a bank robbery, how to gather evidence after a woman has been raped. I mean, you know it all, right dipshit?

You think that because you fly on a plane, you have something meaningful to add? Do you think that knowing how to install a light bulb means you're qualified to tell an EE how to do their job?

And that's my point, you're not qualified to offer any advice to either profession.

Show me a single advertisement which included the other os feature. Otherwise, no bait and switch.

Firing them is one thing. Keeping them operational, reloading during battle, etc, is quite another.

If that's your assertion, then surely you can point to an ad that touts the other os feature, right?

A manual is not an advertisement.

An ad is something you see to intice you to buy a product. A manual explains the product AFTER you've purchased it. The fact that they documented it is irrelevent; it was a bonus feature that they never cared to tell anyone about.

No one has ever shown me one advertisement where sony included the "other os" as a feature. At most, its in the manual which you see after you open the box (and indeed was the first time i'd ever heard of it). So please, provide a citation to an ad from sony that touted the other os feature.

Notice that they DO advertise you can watch BD movies on it.

push back at Sony for their illegal actions

What law did they break removing the feature? The case is a class action, civil in nature so this is more along the lines of a contract dispute, but if you think they broke a law, please tell me which one.

I would simply order from Amazon then. See, the reason the stores keep selling sony is because people want to buy sony products. If you really want to affect change, customers would have to stop buying sony. Personally, I see no reason to do so and have been happy with the sony stuff I have.

If your viewpoint I guess I should have just rolled-over and let myself be screwed.

Actually ya. You have a duty to make sure you PROMPTLY examine what you bought. Your own post says you waited longer than 60 days to do so, so I personally would have no sympathy for you. That your card issuer agrees with you means they want to keep you happy, not that you were right.