• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Could the Ps5 do quick resume if Sony desired it to?

Razvedka

Member
And from the FreeBSD website:

2. What, a real UNIX®?​

The BSD operating systems are not clones, but open source derivatives of AT&T’s Research UNIX® operating system, which is also the ancestor of the modern UNIX® System V. This may surprise you. How could that happen when AT&T has never released its code as open source?

It is true that AT&T UNIX® is not open source, and in a copyright sense BSD is very definitely not UNIX®, but on the other hand, AT&T has imported sources from other projects, noticeably the Computer Sciences Research Group (CSRG) of the University of California in Berkeley, CA. Starting in 1976, the CSRG started releasing tapes of their software, calling them Berkeley Software Distribution or BSD.

Initial BSD releases consisted mainly of user programs, but that changed dramatically when the CSRG landed a contract with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to upgrade the communications protocols on their network, ARPANET. The new protocols were known as the Internet Protocols, later TCP/IP after the most important protocols. The first widely distributed implementation was part of 4.2BSD, in 1982.

In the course of the 1980s, a number of new workstation companies sprang up. Many preferred to license UNIX® rather than developing operating systems for themselves. In particular, Sun Microsystems licensed UNIX® and implemented a version of 4.2BSD, which they called SunOS™. When AT&T themselves were allowed to sell UNIX® commercially, they started with a somewhat bare-bones implementation called System III, to be quickly followed by System V. The System V code base did not include networking, so all implementations included additional software from the BSD, including the TCP/IP software, but also utilities such as the csh shell and the vi editor. Collectively, these enhancements were known as the Berkeley Extensions.
The BSD tapes contained AT&T source code and thus required a UNIX® source license. By 1990, the CSRG’s funding was running out, and it faced closure. Some members of the group decided to release the BSD code, which was Open Source, without the AT&T proprietary code. This finally happened with the Networking Tape 2, usually known as Net/2. Net/2 was not a complete operating system: about 20% of the kernel code was missing. One of the CSRG members, William F. Jolitz, wrote the remaining code and released it in early 1992 as 386BSD. At the same time, another group of ex-CSRG members formed a commercial company called Berkeley Software Design Inc. and released a beta version of an operating system called BSD/386, which was based on the same sources. The name of the operating system was later changed to BSD/OS.

386BSD never became a stable operating system. Instead, two other projects split off from it in 1993: NetBSD and FreeBSD. The two projects originally diverged due to differences in patience waiting for improvements to 386BSD: the NetBSD people started early in the year, and the first version of FreeBSD was not ready until the end of the year. In the meantime, the code base had diverged sufficiently to make it difficult to merge. In addition, the projects had different aims, as we will see below. In 1996, OpenBSD split off from NetBSD, and in 2003, DragonFlyBSD split off from FreeBSD.

3. Why is BSD not better known?​

For a number of reasons, BSD is relatively unknown:
  1. The BSD developers are often more interested in polishing their code than marketing it.

  2. Much of Linux’s popularity is due to factors external to the Linux projects, such as the press, and to companies formed to provide Linux services. Until recently, the open source BSDs had no such proponents.

  3. In 1992, AT&T sued BSDI, the vendor of BSD/386, alleging that the product contained AT&T-copyrighted code. The case was settled out of court in 1994, but the spectre of the litigation continues to haunt people. In March 2000 an article published on the web claimed that the court case had been "recently settled".
    One detail that the lawsuit did clarify is the naming: in the 1980s, BSD was known as "BSD UNIX®". With the elimination of the last vestige of AT&T code from BSD, it also lost the right to the name UNIX®. Thus you will see references in book titles to "the 4.3BSD UNIX® operating system" and "the 4.4BSD operating system".


    ....

    This arrangement differs from Linux in a number of ways:
    1. No one person controls the content of the system. In practice, this difference is overrated, since the Principal Architect can require that code be backed out, and even in the Linux project several people are permitted to make changes.
    2. On the other hand, there is a central repository, a single place where you can find the entire operating system sources, including all older versions.
    3. BSD projects maintain the entire "Operating System", not only the kernel. This distinction is only marginally useful: neither BSD nor Linux is useful without applications. The applications used under BSD are frequently the same as the applications used under Linux.
    4. As a result of the formalized maintenance of a single SVN source tree, BSD development is clear, and it is possible to access any version of the system by release number or by date. SVN also allows incremental updates to the system: for example, the FreeBSD repository is updated about 100 times a day. Most of these changes are small.

This stack discussion also offers further insight.
 
Last edited:
I thought you guys would be happy to have it as an exclusive feature, not angry at other people for not seeing an immediate need for it.
You forgot who you are dealing with.

ANYWAY,
Read part 2. Exactly what I said. Both clones on Unix but are not licensed. Yes it does say they are different OS’s.
Yup, different licenses to (both have open source licenses).

Over simplification of the differences:
Linux is GPL = if you must distribute the sources and share the modifications you make to the project
BSD/FreeBSD = MIT license I believe, basically you can use it without sharing the sources for what you did, this is why Apple uses that, or something akin to this for their OS kernel as well

But I thought about it, the question is not weather or not it was easy, the question is about the possibility of it... well the answer is yes for sure, I don't even know why people act like MS invented hypervisors and VMs.

Here are some links to hypervisor tech that works in freebsd
I'm not sure how complex it would be to move apps in a model like this one, either the existing ones or have a breaking points where apps run in hypervisor mode... given that games already have a level of quick re-launch it would probably be possible to use a less disruptive method.
 
As several already pointed out, PS5 could do it but it could be slower as PS5 internal SSD is quite slow at writing. I think for Sony it would maybe not be good for the lifespan of the internal SSD. Remember than Sony intend to sell ~120 millions of those so they think in big numbers about the reliability and stability of their system.

I think as PS5 already can suspend any game at will and put the full state in ram (like when you open an app like netflix, the whole game is suspended and stored into ram which is also a clever way to force pause in some games...), I don't see what could prevent doing the same and put it on SSD, they could even compress it.

But Sony strategy is that eventually all developers will use their custom I/O where loading are sometimes faster (or similar) than MS solution without using precious SSD storage. Finally I read that some games actually don't support quick resume on Xbox so it must not be so easy to implement from a dev perspective.
 
Last edited:
Well this site seems to agree with you.

PlayStation 5's SSD may revolutionize save states with instant launch
A recently published Sony patent could hint at a new era of save states, customization, and overall user control on the PlayStation 5. The new feature is kind of like the Xbox Series X's Quick Resume functionality with a twist: Instead of the OS automatically bookmarking the segment you last played, you can actually set the save states yourself.

The patent, which is titled Dynamic Interfaces For Launching Direct Gameplay, refers to the save states as "templates" and basically outlines a new kind of save that's not just limited to gameplay. Users can set the console to boot to a multiplayer menu, for example, or directly into the last-played game segment that's been marked. Imagine being able to boot up right into a boss fight without having to run through the entire level again, or get another try at a tough puzzle.

The patent covers a lot of bases and the idea has a wide variety of potential. The most interesting one, though, is being able to automatically store a save of a specific game segment on your SSD that can be accessed for later use. The spectrum of potential use cases also includes PlayStation Network and PlayStation Now, and isn't just limited to offline play.


This might be implemented in a future update. For right now, I don't know.

People tend to think there's only one way to achieve something and it has to be Microsoft's way.
PlayStation already has that feature, It's called Activities. It's not Quick Resume like feature
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Gold Member
If a dev doesn't know how to suspend a VM in a Windows environment, they have much bigger problems to deal with.

Yeah. Pretty sure most of the non-supported software is the result of the software calling home to a server in some way or another.

The quicker loading is just one aspect of quick resume, probably the least important. The bigger feature is the ability to save a game session regardless of whether or not you are at a save point in the software. Need to step away in the middle of a boss fight, etc.? QR has you covered. Great feature, wouldn't want to use a current gen machine without it.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Yeah. Pretty sure most of the non-supported software is the result of the software calling home to a server in some way or another.

The quicker loading is just one aspect of quick resume, probably the least important. The bigger feature is the ability to save a game session regardless of whether or not you are at a save point in the software. Need to step away in the middle of a boss fight, etc.? QR has you covered. Great feature, wouldn't want to use a current gen machine without it.
Correct, but the only difference with standard sleep mode / suspend mode consoles have is that you want to be able to switch games AND keep the save state… suspend / rest mode and QR are doing a very similar if not the same thing if you are not switching to and loading other games (network connection with the server continues to present issues to some
players like this kind of features always has been).
 

DaGwaphics

Gold Member
Correct, but the only difference with standard sleep mode / suspend mode consoles have is that you want to be able to switch games AND keep the save state… suspend / rest mode and QR are doing a very similar if not the same thing if you are not switching to and loading other games (network connection with the server continues to present issues to some
players like this kind of features always has been).

I turn my console off completely between each session, as do a lot of Floridians I'm sure (micro blips in power are a real thing here due to electrical storms). Plus being able to jump into a session of something else without losing the previous save state is huge. Especially, for players that play online a lot and may want to respond to an invite, etc. QR is the suspend mode perfected as best it can be.
 
Last edited:

DrAspirino

Banned
Yeah. Pretty sure most of the non-supported software is the result of the software calling home to a server in some way or another.

The quicker loading is just one aspect of quick resume, probably the least important. The bigger feature is the ability to save a game session regardless of whether or not you are at a save point in the software. Need to step away in the middle of a boss fight, etc.? QR has you covered. Great feature, wouldn't want to use a current gen machine without it.
Yesterday I did exactly that. :messenger_grinning_sweat:
Slow compared to what? It is still faster than what you have for QR on MS side.
Oh boy...it isn't faster at all. Yesterday I was playing Scarlet Nexus (next-gen version) on my Series S and a friend of mine invited me to play GTA V online. I switched the game without even thinking if it was saved or if it wasn't and began playing GTA with him. When he said goodbye, I went back to Scarlet Nexus and the game was EXACTLY where I left it, no need for save-points or anything of sorts. I still save at designated savepoints though. You can't do that on a PS5.
I turn my console off completely between each session, as do a lot of Floridians I'm sure (micro blips in power are a real thing here due to electrical storms). Plus being able to jump into a session of something else without losing the previous save state is huge. Especially, for players that play online a lot and may want to respond to an invite, etc. QR is the suspend mode perfected as best it can be.
Man... you read my mind. I live in Chile and we also have sometimes unstable electricity supply (you know...some minor voltage variations) and Quick Resume is just a life-saver (pun intended) with games that support it.
 

ethomaz

Banned
Oh boy...it isn't faster at all. Yesterday I was playing Scarlet Nexus (next-gen version) on my Series S and a friend of mine invited me to play GTA V online. I switched the game without even thinking if it was saved or if it wasn't and began playing GTA with him. When he said goodbye, I went back to Scarlet Nexus and the game was EXACTLY where I left it, no need for save-points or anything of sorts. I still save at designated savepoints though. You can't do that on a PS5.
I'm not even sure where you are coming from.
Because that is totally unrelated to what you quoted.
 
Last edited:

DrAspirino

Banned
I'm not even sure where you are coming from.
Because that is totally unrelated to what you quoted.
It IS related.

For example, PS5 has the "Activity cards", which take you to specific points within the game that the developer deems appropriate. If not, then you have to start the game, open the save file, wait for the game to load and then go to where you were before turning off your console or switching to another game.

With Quick Resume, you simply "land" exactly where you left the game, regardless of save points or places the developer may want you to be at. Sure, loading speeds may be similar, but the time you take going from save point to where you actually left the game, is time you have to waste, no matter how fast an SSD or a system can be. That's what is slow in Sony's approach.
 

ethomaz

Banned
It IS related.

For example, PS5 has the "Activity cards", which take you to specific points within the game that the developer deems appropriate. If not, then you have to start the game, open the save file, wait for the game to load and then go to where you were before turning off your console or switching to another game.

With Quick Resume, you simply "land" exactly where you left the game, regardless of save points or places the developer may want you to be at. Sure, loading speeds may be similar, but the time you take going from save point to where you actually left the game, is time you have to waste, no matter how fast an SSD or a system can be. That's what is slow in Sony's approach.
Related?
My reply was about to somebody saying the write speed of PS5 SSD not being enough to have a QR similar feature.

What are you even talking about? Did you even read what you quoted or you just hit reply because it is me? :pie_thinking:
 
Last edited:

DrAspirino

Banned
Related?
My reply was about to somebody saying the write speed of PS5 SSD not being enough to have a QR similar feature.

What are you even talking about?
Sorry, I misunderstood you.

The SSD write speed isn't relevant for virtual machine pausing, as it would take a little longer to load the game in order to have enough cache to start writing to the SSD the moment the game is launched.

Heck, the PS5 SSD is the least of the problems when it's about implementing something like Quick Resume: It's the entire OS and system software structure that's awful (to say the least).
 
Top Bottom