D
Deleted User
Guest
OP
The goal of this post is to stop responses that are flawed. So everyone can get past these flame wars. My goal is not to say what is the superior cfw. Custom firmware elitism is retarded. And every opinion is open to criticism. And I'm going to call it out. But there is a lot of TX elitists out there within this comminuty. I wish to bring some actual reasoning. And actual discussion, instead of SX OS IS BETTER THAN ATMOSPHERE BOOOOOIIIIIIIIIIS
And turn it into more of SX os is better than atmosphere because xxx reason
And by showing counter points, hopefully we will never have to argue the same crap over and over with multiple different people.
"Why do you care about them stealing code? It's open sourced it doesn't matter"
Counter point: atmosphere and a lot of these open sourced projects follow GPL2.0 which is in a way, a license. One of the rules of GPL is that you must credit the creator. TX didn't do that.
"Well Team Xecutor was first to release and first complete cfw, so atmosphere babies lose. Tx is superior in every way."
I've heard a lot these responses. Let me break it down.
SX os has one advantage over every other cfw, a small advantage I might add. (maybe it's a big advantage to some of you)
And that's xci loading. To get xci loading to work, they already needed to have signpatches working.
Now let's break down the first bit. And this is fact and well known at this point. But Sx os has stolen code from atmosphere. Which in turn, breaks the idea SX OS is complete.
To briefly explain, because atmosphere is incomplete, and SX OS is based on atmosphere, it is therefore incomplete, being it's base, it's infrastructure is from a project that is still in beta.
Also let's talk about "releases."
I'm getting really tired of this. Release does not mean complete. It just means it's own in some form. So no, SX OS isn't "complete" however completeness can be subjective. Just know there is evidence that leans towards it being incomplete. Which kind of ruins the idea that SX OS is THE COMPLETE CFW.
And finally the fact that SX OS came out first. Which is true, except, a release is just everything packed into a nice bow tie. So really you could argue that atmosphere was out, first or (put any cfw here)
"You pirate games but when you see someone steal someones work, that crosses the line? Hypocrite much"
Now this is more of a more personal moral question. However I can see a lot of people having the same moral feeling about this.
To explain, I personally try to avoid piracy. (all though still do sometimes)
However, what makes the difference. Is the fact I acknowledge that it's not my work, and the person proving the Backup knows it's not their own work either. But what cannot be stood for is when that person providing the backup claims it's their own work. That they made that game. I think that's where many of us draw the line.
"SX OS is worth every dollar. And is far easier than the other cfws"
This is argument is painfully flawed. First of, worth is subjective. However something does has less value when it is able be obtained free. And even more less value when it is easily usable. Which leads to my next point, Setting up sx os, and atmosphere, hekate, (put cfw here)
None of them are all that different. Infact, I would say they are as easy to set up as SX OS.
SX OS requires you (non pro version, no dongle. BASE ONLY.) to put a switch into rcm mode. And use a payload and it's launcher to inject said payload. And have some files on the sd card.
All the community driven cfw's are the same and follow nearly identical procedures. Drag and drop files to micro sd card. Have a switch in rcm mode. And use Tegrarcmsmashgui (Gui is user friendly.)
"NSPs suck, they take extra double the amount of storage in my sd card. When using xci's are just far superior because it takes less storage and is safer than NSP. TX wins baby"
First point is easily countered with the network installer.
Second point, we don't know enough about the switch still. XCI's could be just as dangerous as NSPs. Especially since XCI's have a cert. A cert is essentially a ticket to go online, a ticket unique to that game cart. If Nintendo, (perhaps in 6.0 update) began checking carts while being online, (switch being online, not joining a game online) and saw multiple certs being used at the same time. They would likely ban you. Safest option for both is to not go online. And with what I have seen. Often or not the digital format wins, given 3ds and wiiu scenes.
I'll be making a switch atmosphere/community counter points soon as well. But here is the SX OS edition.
Play nice, and if you got a opinion, state your reasoning behind it. And I mean thoughtful reasoning. Don't go attacking the person directly, attack the opinion, not them.
Follow up thread. https://gbatemp.net/threads/switch-community-cfw-counter-points.517041/
And turn it into more of SX os is better than atmosphere because xxx reason
And by showing counter points, hopefully we will never have to argue the same crap over and over with multiple different people.
"Why do you care about them stealing code? It's open sourced it doesn't matter"
Counter point: atmosphere and a lot of these open sourced projects follow GPL2.0 which is in a way, a license. One of the rules of GPL is that you must credit the creator. TX didn't do that.
"Well Team Xecutor was first to release and first complete cfw, so atmosphere babies lose. Tx is superior in every way."
I've heard a lot these responses. Let me break it down.
SX os has one advantage over every other cfw, a small advantage I might add. (maybe it's a big advantage to some of you)
And that's xci loading. To get xci loading to work, they already needed to have signpatches working.
Now let's break down the first bit. And this is fact and well known at this point. But Sx os has stolen code from atmosphere. Which in turn, breaks the idea SX OS is complete.
To briefly explain, because atmosphere is incomplete, and SX OS is based on atmosphere, it is therefore incomplete, being it's base, it's infrastructure is from a project that is still in beta.
Also let's talk about "releases."
I'm getting really tired of this. Release does not mean complete. It just means it's own in some form. So no, SX OS isn't "complete" however completeness can be subjective. Just know there is evidence that leans towards it being incomplete. Which kind of ruins the idea that SX OS is THE COMPLETE CFW.
And finally the fact that SX OS came out first. Which is true, except, a release is just everything packed into a nice bow tie. So really you could argue that atmosphere was out, first or (put any cfw here)
"You pirate games but when you see someone steal someones work, that crosses the line? Hypocrite much"
Now this is more of a more personal moral question. However I can see a lot of people having the same moral feeling about this.
To explain, I personally try to avoid piracy. (all though still do sometimes)
However, what makes the difference. Is the fact I acknowledge that it's not my work, and the person proving the Backup knows it's not their own work either. But what cannot be stood for is when that person providing the backup claims it's their own work. That they made that game. I think that's where many of us draw the line.
"SX OS is worth every dollar. And is far easier than the other cfws"
This is argument is painfully flawed. First of, worth is subjective. However something does has less value when it is able be obtained free. And even more less value when it is easily usable. Which leads to my next point, Setting up sx os, and atmosphere, hekate, (put cfw here)
None of them are all that different. Infact, I would say they are as easy to set up as SX OS.
SX OS requires you (non pro version, no dongle. BASE ONLY.) to put a switch into rcm mode. And use a payload and it's launcher to inject said payload. And have some files on the sd card.
All the community driven cfw's are the same and follow nearly identical procedures. Drag and drop files to micro sd card. Have a switch in rcm mode. And use Tegrarcmsmashgui (Gui is user friendly.)
"NSPs suck, they take extra double the amount of storage in my sd card. When using xci's are just far superior because it takes less storage and is safer than NSP. TX wins baby"
First point is easily countered with the network installer.
Second point, we don't know enough about the switch still. XCI's could be just as dangerous as NSPs. Especially since XCI's have a cert. A cert is essentially a ticket to go online, a ticket unique to that game cart. If Nintendo, (perhaps in 6.0 update) began checking carts while being online, (switch being online, not joining a game online) and saw multiple certs being used at the same time. They would likely ban you. Safest option for both is to not go online. And with what I have seen. Often or not the digital format wins, given 3ds and wiiu scenes.
I'll be making a switch atmosphere/community counter points soon as well. But here is the SX OS edition.
Play nice, and if you got a opinion, state your reasoning behind it. And I mean thoughtful reasoning. Don't go attacking the person directly, attack the opinion, not them.
Follow up thread. https://gbatemp.net/threads/switch-community-cfw-counter-points.517041/
Last edited by ,