Hacking Gateway 3DS working on the New Nintendo 3DS.

[richyawy]

Almost at 1000.....anyone else excited?

 

[leonkennedy]

I'm reading for release update

 

[ShizzleMyDizzle]

I guess i need to show you the real power of Groudon.

Please do it!

 

[frecton]

plz 1000 pages? c:

 

[weatMod]

It's just a limited early release, with a special backplate.

No games or anything. Just a chance to buy early and have the backplate.

so there is a EU release day now? and it is this month?
maybe GW will wait for a release, still no date on US i assume?

 

[Silentsurvivor]

Thread's going to be over soon. Thanks for the fun everyone.

 

[Doran754]

snip

LMFAO, goodluck getting anybody to read that wall of shit you just wrote out, also "you gecko piece of shit" slayed me in that picture. Quality.

 

[Darth Meteos]

Hm, and here I was, hoping that even if the time came when my posts were needed again, there would be a long time afore an event of that nature transpired; again, it seems I was wrong, as I noticed some confusion regarding bits of my latest post that were no-ones fault but my own, most pressingly, that I did not give a definition of the concept of "fanboy"; and as such, I will now make a case-in-point regarding some of the debate by being transparent and communicative, and correcting my mistakes and better defining those things which were ill-defined, as I am no prophet or religious scripture that should need to be "interpreted", but rather, I aim towards making understandable, clear, and direct point(s); having failed in this previously, I will try and remedy that here (and make a bonus sidenote or two).

As to the first sidenote; I commend those who disagree with me, but actually do read what I write and write replies in a rational, civil manner and actually try and counter my points as opposed to using tricks such as Ad Hominem*, or deliberately saying "I didn't actually read everything person X said, but I'm going to argue against it/what little I saw anyway, even without full context or understanding", or simply ignoring half of the points and only replying to a few specific ones, without admitting that "I only reply to X, because Y was actually correct".

Let's start then with the definition of a "fanboy", as there have been a couple of good cases in point since my last post that I can use to give a clearer idea.
Firstly, out of the two interpretations that were made, the latter is the one closest to my definition; that is, that "fanboyism" means blatantly defending all facets - even the shadier ones - of the thing one is a fan of even in the face of said things actions in reality, and using faulty arguments along the lines of "Well Y isn't bad, because X exists, and X is worse"**; and also to give out things that are actually personal opinions as facts and exaggerating things, such as was given an excellent example of earlier by some user, who quite literally said that GW was better than Sky, and listed a number of features that would supposedly make GW the superior choice, while remaining completely ignorant towards two main things;
Firstly, that what features one is actually looking for is subjective, and not everyone wants - or cares for - the exact same features. E.g., in the specific case of one solely wanting to play imports, or at least considering the option to play imports to be of any importance, then GW is factually the better choice, simply by merit of that you can't do that with Sky (at the time of writing, at least) and "that's that"; same thing with if e.g. installing .CIA's (again, at the time of writing, as one cannot do that with Sky at said time) is an important feature for one. However, this is subjective; for someone who simply wants to play ROMs, for legal backup-reasons or otherwise, both of the carts are quite capable of doing that, and then one would have to look at e.g. how you would go about doing that on both carts (if it's equally simple to get started, how much work has to be put in to use them, if you have to do something in particular to be able to do it etcetera), if they can both play the same amount of ROMs etcetera and base it on that, and then GW might actually not be the superior choice; it is subjective (to take an example, it could easily be argued that getting set-up with GW is more work than the Sky, and that some people just "can't be arsed" or "doesn't consider the benefits to be worth the hassle"; and that is not just "them being lazy and stupid", that is them knowing what they want and going with the option that best suit their wants and needs). Additionally, the exaggerating; saying things like "being able to update games for online play" in a context where it's said as if it's a unique feature of the one or the other, when it actually isn't.
Secondly, a clear property of a fanboy is trying to push their particular choice/product upon others, e.g. by
1. Instead of first asking e.g. "Hey, what do you need? Oh, X, Y, and Z?" and then (and only then) replying with something along the lines of "Well, in that case I'd say that you should go with Q, because they will be capable of doing X, Y, and Z for you; but just so you know, P applies to all of that".
2. Saying things along the lines of "Oh, you've made a decision for X? No, don't go with that, hold out and go with my thing instead!" (there was some user posting a case in point for this earlier)
3. Claiming the superiority of their own choice/product by showcasing the Pro's, but little to no (or meaningless) Cons regarding their own choice/product, and doing the exact opposite for the competing choice/product (a case in point here was that some user made a list that supposedly would show that GW was ultimately superior for everyone at the moment, but failed to mention a number of things, including but not limited to that Sky works on the latest firmware, which GW doesn't, and also committing wholly to the "upholding their definition of "best" as a fact based on that product X has features that they themselves might want, but others might ultimately not care for/about).
And thirdly, a common property of fanboys - that it can be argued is not required to be a "fanboy", but that I consider important enough to at least be mentioned - is that they get emotionally vested in their choice. This is a common human trait that has undergone much research, even in the specifics of the psychology of fandom, and I cannot possibly write it all down here, but a few (heavily) shortened points and examples regarding the mechanics of how it works are;
1. One has been raised with X, and as such, self-identifies with X to a very high degree.
2. One has chosen X and cannot (for whatever reason) also choose Y, and as such, get insecure in their choice when faced with the possibility that X wasn't the best choice, and as such assert the superiority of X to restore their own internal mental balance.
3. Out of a general/not inherently fandom-related psychological insecurity, one has to assert oneself as being superior in most (and extreme cases, all) things, and will as such default to considering everyone that do not agree with their specific choice of X to have made an inferior choice.
And this is of course just scratching the surface; for those interested in further reading, I'd recommend starting with something by Freud (as mad as the man was in most respects, he made more than a few points that still hold up to this day) specifically regarding attachment, and the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophys article on emotion, specifically section 8, "Rationality and Emotions" ( http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/emotion/#8 ).

That would be the definition of a fanboy; hope that clears things up a bit, and I apologize for overestimating my original "clearness", so to speak.

Now then, as a second sidenote (hmm, perhaps it would be more accurate of me to describe them as "secondary points" as opposed to "sidenotes"?), allow me to say that the whole "it's peoples own fault for not researching enough" also falls into a fallacy; for then, you have to specify what "enough" research is. If you don't, and it is taken to it's logical conclusion, then that would mean that if I were to e.g. buy a GW-kit, I would first have to find a reseller. Secondly, I'd have to read up on that particular reseller/company, to see what sort of reputation it has. Thirdly, I would have to see who originally owned and operated the reseller, and who is currently doing it, as it might have otherwise been taken over by a shady person. As such, I would fourthly have to find out some personal details regarding the person who currently owns and operates it, to know if that person is trustworthy. Fifthly, I would have to make sure that that person was not part of a larger conspiracy of some sort, directed specifically towards making me buy a false GW-kit, and so on and so forth; already by the fifth step, it has turned ridiculous, and there are many, many other ways of formulating this fallacy without getting so ridiculous (here, I do it to be very clear regarding the point at hand), and also with adding many, many more steps; as such, there has to be a limit to what is reasonable, and a defined one, e.g. "I the company in question seems reputable, and when I contacted them, they gave me answer X which seems satisfactory" or some other example. Further, saying that (as some user previously did) it is always the user buying a clones own fault leads to a fallacy (which will shortly be explained) and also a second rather absurd conclusion. For the fallacy; since most people who did buy a clone were most likely new to it all and didn't even know there was such a thing as "clones" that they had to watch out for, that logic leads to an absurd logical end as that is logically and principally identical to me saying
"Anyone who slips on a banana peel will be shot on sight", and then - waiting around a corner - intently watching a banana peel on the side-walk, and shooting the first person who slips on it, and then explaining myself by saying "Well, it doesn't matter if the person didn't hear me saying that I'd shoot anyone who slipped, he/she/it could've just been watching his/her/its feet even though he/she/it had no particular reason to be doing so; they still could
have been watching their feet, hence, it's their fault for not doing so".
For the second absurd conclusion, it would as such also mean that everyone would have to watch out for everything at all times, i.e. a variant of the earlier fallacy regarding "having to do research".

Yet another sidenote is that the newspost that said "just around the corner" also used the word "soon", not to mention the earlier made point regarding how early they released a teaser video, and I find it is currently most rational to assume that at least a few of the mails - perhaps particularly the ones from our own users - are real. Further, also the fact that they are keeping us completely in the dark as to what's actually going on. Hence, it would still seem - unless I've missed something - that they have actually acted in a rather sleazy/questionable manner.

Regarding what's actually going on, that leads to the third and final (unless I later remember something that I as I'm writing this have forgotten) sidenote, the matter of their supposed "stability-testing".
It is proven not by me, but by GWs actual communications to us, that we have no idea what they're doing, simply because they haven't told us. I made this point in my previous post, and even came up with two other blind guesses as to what might be keeping them and furthermore added an argument as to why those two blind guesses might actually be better guesses than that they're stability-testing, and yet it seems that some people keep talking about being patient because "don't you want a stable release?" as if it was a fact that stability-testing is what they're doing. This baffles me, and could be added to the definition of a fanboy; assuming that the best possible/most probable explanation for any action that the thing they're a fan of is always also the explanation that puts the thing in question in the best possible light. One cannot say that the extra amounts of time it is taking is because they're stability-testing, because we provably have no proof pointing to that or to literally anything at all. Me guessing that they're members of a small and secret cult that forbids releasing software-related updates of a particular byte-size at any other day then the 21st of march is literally just as good a guess as that they're bug-hunting, simply because they are keeping us in the dark and not telling us anything at all. Saying "don't you want a stable release" or "if you got your way people would brick their 3DS's" is simply not fact, it's wild speculation.

Now, that should be it. If I've missed something, made some error or other, or have said something without properly defining it, I would like to be called out on it, that I may improve and better myself.

Stay civil, unemotional and rational.

*Ad Hominem=Attacking the person making a point, as opposed to the point itself; when one cannot actually counter the points being made, and instead opts to attack the person making the points and as such trying to "win" by metaphorically saying "that man is covered in poo! Do you really want to agree with a man covered in poo?" and making people disagree based on that, even though the actual creature making the points - and the make-up of said creature - is entirely irrelevant to the validity of the points, and if the points made by the poo-covered man are actually correct. Put as simply as possible; one tries to avoid the issue(s) at hand and instead try to attack the people, not the arguments, of the opposing side.

** That sort of "argument" is inherently flawed, as the principle and logic it is based upon leads to a fallacy, in the sense that if the people using that sort of argument truly believed in it, they would never try and complain about e.g. being randomly beaten up and put in a wheelchair, because people sometimes get wantonly/senselessly murdered, and getting murdered is certainly worse than "merely" being put in a wheelchair. Put simply, it's flawed because it is a false argument that no-one truly upholds, and also/secondly because the logic upon which it is based leads to that there can literally be only one living person at a time who has a right to complain about anything, and that would be the one single person currently alive that has the worst possible conditions at any given time.

 

[capostef]

almost 1000, keep hyping ;-)

 

[guykild]

I'm reading for release update

Lucky bastard got the 64gb micro sd

 

[serenade.63]

Almost at 1000.....anyone else excited?

WE DON'T DESERVE 1000 IF PEOPLE POST THINGS LIKE THIS!

 

[smilodon]

you mad bro LOL ordering from china takes forever

Not even mad considering GW is still unusable on 9.2, I was more afraid that my parcel was lost somewhere between Singapore and my home.

 

[richyawy]

Gtewy rls now plz

 

[2Hack]

Hm, and here I was, hoping that even if the time came when my posts were needed again, there would be a long time afore an event of that nature transpired

You might want to be careful. You're at risk of starting to sound like you've an inflated ego and think you're better than us, offering your words of wisdom to help us see the errors of our ways with statements like these. I'm sure you mean nothing of the sort, but each time you say something like this and each time you step a bit closer towards that sort of thing...

Firstly, that what features one is actually looking for is subjective, and not everyone wants - or cares for - the exact same features. E.g., in the specific case of one solely wanting to play imports, or at least considering the option to play imports to be of any importance, then GW is factually the better choice, simply by merit of that you can't do that with Sky (at the time of writing, at least) and "that's that"; same thing with if e.g. installing .CIA's (again, at the time of writing, as one cannot do that with Sky at said time) is an important feature for one.

It's not that simple though. Just because someone feels like they don't need or want any extra features doesn't actually mean they don't. Right this minute they might need just the minimum, but what about later? And just because they don't think they want the extras, that doesn't mean it wouldn't be of enormous benefit to them and something they'd be glad of later on... The thing is, people accepting just the minimum also makes the lesser option appear more and more valid as more and more buy into it promoting it and causing more and more to select that option while they would have been happier with the other if they had known better. Unfortunately, I'm not just talking about Gateway versus Sky3DS here. I'm talking about pretty much every product ever. This is just the sort of thing I see in pretty much every market all the time. People go with the big name TV that costs more and has less options, people buy the Toyota simply because it's a Toyota (man my old Saturn would have blown away the comparable Toyotas -- I so miss that car -- both in features and capability as well as just all around quality and comfort.) With headphones and speakers, people go with BOSE and get a worse quality product (at multiple levels -- even the casing is cheap.) With smartphones/tablets, people get Apple when for each thing there is a much better alternative (for instance, my Nexus 7 can pretty much blow away the iPad Mini in every single aspect possible.)

Unfortunately, this sort of thing -- in each of these markets -- is ultimately bad for us all. The Apple example is the easiest as it's the most rampant lately, but it applies to each of those (for instance, how many average joes have even heard of Sennheiser? They're the biggest, most obvious brand to at least start from in the headphone world when looking for something better -- they even go so far as to make the lower end products, many of which can even end up in retail stores. Nevermind brands like AKG or a host of others that I doubt any average joe has ever even heard of, but which make products of a quality level that would make BOSE weep in a truly fair market if their business wasn't built entirely out of tricking people. On TVs, my Magnavox had a higher resolution than the SONYs of the time (it's getting on in years now, but still running strong all the same. I can't compare it to the latest TVs presumably though, but it has aged better than many of its competitors by far.) The image resize seems to be of a slightly better quality (perhaps a particularly great example of those things people don't realize they need/want. Most don't realize a quality image resize matters, but then they hook up their console and a game goes down to 720p or even worse and suddenly that resize quality matters doesn't it? Especially since it's low latency, fast processing. In games I notice no delay between the sound/video and my button presses. Another thing they don't even advertise that one must research which matters and people don't ever think about but which is actually quite incredibly important... Most TVs of the time added a quite considerable delay for processing and few of the time seemed to have a "game mode" with the processing disabled.) The more people buy the expensive big name though, the more the expensive big name becomes well known among households, the more they tell others to buy the same brand (people have a tendency towards giving a thing all praises if it does the minimums they require -- nothing more needed -- and doesn't break right off. Companies know this and utilize it, using various methods to encourage this like putting more of the money from the costs of their products towards making the product seem better than it is) and the more said big brand will continue to offer no more than strictly required. In that example, the SONY product had fewer features (less resolution, more latency, etc etc) but it looked prettier on the outside (VERY shiny and flashy exterior) but it cost more and more people were buying it because they didn't know any better (and with a little help from all the various marketing tricks I mentioned.)

Thus it goes from being 100% subjective as you believe to being much less so than most people even realize. The problem with what I've mentioned above and why it affects us all ultimately is that more and more of the worse product will flood the market as people buy it more, tell their friends how great they have been lead to believe that it is and soon the competition starts to become less and less a quality oriented competition and more and more one that is focusing more on just competing on the same ground as their competitor. (Actually, I should have brought up smartphones here because we have the most obvious example ever there: Samsung. Things like TVs have changed in a slow and subtle manner, but Samsung is being blatant to the point of getting lawsuits over it. Samsung used to offer the products that had all around more capabilities and quality as well as support. But now they've decided to compete more directly head-to-head with Apple in every aspect, including those things that actually ultimately reduce quality. The result? A bloatware filled mess with locked down bootloaders that took forever to try to crack and so on.)

Now then, as a second sidenote (hmm, perhaps it would be more accurate of me to describe them as "secondary points" as opposed to "sidenotes"?), allow me to say that the whole "it's peoples own fault for not researching enough" also falls into a fallacy; for then, you have to specify what "enough" research is.

Eh, generally speaking if someone says this, they primarily mean just google it a bit, look at the actual features and what people are saying about each, and comparing them with an open mind. We're not talking about stuff to a level of, say, learning precisely what chipset each uses, what frequency it runs at, reverse engineering the software, and etc. Just a quick google and clicking on a few links and reading simply put. Basically just learn the basic gist of the products at hand and their features, nothing more. That is the beauty of the Internet for those willing to take advantage of its actual information capabilities though. These days you can do this level of research within a few minutes at the most once you get the hang of it. Of course, I guess this means they have to not be distracted by pictures of cats or whatever.

Regarding what's actually going on, that leads to the third and final (unless I later remember something that I as I'm writing this have forgotten) sidenote, the matter of their supposed "stability-testing".
It is proven not by me, but by GWs actual communications to us, that we have no idea what they're doing, simply because they haven't told us. I made this point in my previous post, and even came up with two other blind guesses as to what might be keeping them and furthermore added an argument as to why those two blind guesses might actually be better guesses than that they're stability-testing, and yet it seems that some people keep talking about being patient because "don't you want a stable release?" as if it was a fact that stability-testing is what they're doing. This baffles me, and could be added to the definition of a fanboy; assuming that the best possible/most probable explanation for any action that the thing they're a fan of is always also the explanation that puts the thing in question in the best possible light. One cannot say that the extra amounts of time it is taking is because they're stability-testing, because we provably have no proof pointing to that or to literally anything at all. Me guessing that they're members of a small and secret cult that forbids releasing software-related updates of a particular byte-size at any other day then the 21st of march is literally just as good a guess as that they're bug-hunting, simply because they are keeping us in the dark and not telling us anything at all. Saying "don't you want a stable release" or "if you got your way people would brick their 3DS's" is simply not fact, it's wild speculation.

By the same token, you can't argue that they aren't stability checking. However, what I most want to be clear on is what I'm saying is they're developing. Product development tends to go into something of a cycle -- one which can easily go too far in fact -- of developing something, testing it, going back and fixing this and that while adding something else, testing again, and so on over and over. If one isn't careful it's easy to go too far in fact, getting stuck in a loop until everything is absolutely "perfect" as far as you can tell so far (well, there's always something more to be fixed somewhere or added, but if you can't find it then it goes into the next cycle.) The thing is, this is pretty much the norm in software development and such. Normally a publisher or boss or whatever is dictating when something will be released, giving them a hard schedule to meet, but Gateway probably doesn't have any such dictation, so they're pretty much going all the way (case in point, I've already stated that I don't think they should have continued focusing on backward support. They should have started right off with just the 9.0-9.2 support, telling people to go ahead and update to 9.2 before 9.3 came out and focused on getting it to work perfectly in that range, released the update, and then gone back and added in support for 8.x, 7.x, and so on. At the very minimum, they should have been satisfied to get it working on 8.1 or whatever it was that Smash Brothers could update to.) So yeah, it's not all stability testing. There's probably a lot of just stuff like them trying to make minor features people may not even be worried about right this moment perfect.

But there's something I think you're not quite getting here. We're not all saying "hey, don't you want a stable release" as if that's just the all of it. What we're saying is that if such a group were being rushed by a boss/publisher/etc to have a hard release date, the results could potentially be very bad. As an easy example, just look at the game market where publishers have been slowly but surely taking more and more control over the dev process (to the point now that they outright dictate direction of games even, not just when they come out.) Almost every single game today is released chock full of bugs because they rush them out (I think everyone's favorite example right now is Assassin's Creed Unity which has even brought about a class action lawsuit.) The thinking is: they can just fix the bugs later, no big deal (the reality is that the end result is a game that's rushed with many things not nearly as developed as they should be, not all bugs even ever get fixed, and the devs eventually drop the game and stop bothering to support it with any bug fixes after a while.) What I'm trying to point out here is that if Gateway were to rush too much, the end result would be something that could potentially cause serious damage. In the software world, you basically are accepting that risk when you buy a game right off, but then most games can't actually break a system (with some exceptions! I've heard of some recent consoles actually being bricked by really bad game bugs.) In this case, it could. So while I do argue that they could have sped things up if they hadn't spent some time focusing on bonus stuff like previous firmware support (but then, it's likely that it doesn't really take much time to add previous firmwares as it's likely just a minor adaptation of the exact same thing and some quick testing to ensure that on said firmware an obvious bug doesn't crop up) I also argue that we don't want them to feel so rushed that they get something out which might well cause serious harm.


Now, all that said, I do think they've been focusing on the wrong model. They seem to have a policy of basically doing all or nothing. So they seem to be focusing on releasing this update with more or less absolutely everything all at once. If they had focused solely on just getting the minimums out there and then added as they went they could have released an update for us with just the basic stuff like ROMs and then given us updates every couple of weeks or so adding another feature or two. On the other hand, it is true that this is the very model that in so many other things results in code that's an absolute mess. Doing it the way they are doing it will probably result in a higher quality of code overall at the expense of making a lot of people unhappy in the meantime and most won't know the difference (but then better code means ultimately it's easier and quicker to actually add more features, things run better, and it's less likely major bugs will crop up later on.)

 

[Shanester]

Page 999

Spoiler

 

[prototech]

Do it for the pages.

 

[Armadillo]

so there is a EU release day now? and it is this month?
maybe GW will wait for a release, still no date on US i assume?

Only for those who got the email. There is still no general EU release date.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-01-06-new-nintendo-3ds-ambassador-edition-goes-on-sale

Certain club Nintendo members got an email with the offer to buy early, only lasts until Jan 12th. No general release date.

 

[leonkennedy]

Lucky bastard got the 64gb micro sd

And I have another 64 Go MicroSD in my New 3DS (for .CIA Games) :o)

 

[Potato99]

Just woke up dreamed about gateway been released on Wednesday probably a nightmare xD

 

[spookyboogie]

are we there yet