Older cfw's worked by writing a 1.50 subset, then the (ie. 3.03 oe-c) the 3.03 firmware, minus the prx's from used in the 1.50 subset. You are thinking of Devhook, which booted off the memory stick. The person boots into 1.50, runs the DevHook program, and boots to their firmware. Not a true multi-boot.
If you truly beleive the extra internal memory is for flash0, then, again, I say: Why did M33 have such trouble with the file sizing, so much so that they had to delay the release?
Sigh. You don't seem to realize that both flash0 AND RAM size were increased. No one knows why the flash size was doubled, but RAM was doubled for the UMD cache.
And you're wrong about the earlier CFW's. Do you know what's the only reason DAX was able to chainload firmwares on boot without having to rely on booting to 1.50 VSH and then making the user run a program to boot to the secondary kernel (which wouldn't have been possible with the 32 meg flash anyway)? The 1.50 loadcore was bugged, it did the signature check only on PRX's, thus you could run plaintext ELF's on boot. It was fixed in 1.52 already so there was no way DAX coulda made a non-1.50-bootstrapped CFW before the custom IPL was possible.
The 1.50 is booted first, but it's just a minimal subset (yeah, you were right on that), i.e. includes only the kernel and the required VSH modules. The 2.71+ kernel is a full one, and includes the full VSH except for locationfree and korean fonts. This is why 3.71 M33 is the first of it's kind. It does NOT rely on 1.50 on boot at all because it has a custom IPL which allows it to load whatever it wants on boot.
Also, there was no file size problem with 3.71 M33 which woulda caused a delay (where did you get that one anyway?). It was the NIDs, which get randomized nowadays because SCE now knows what functions get patched by the M33 core because of the Wildcard source leak (thanks to some people at a certain site). That was what delayed 3.71 M33 release, they had to find the correct nids again.
Do some research before you start being a party-pooper.
BTW mods: If this a bit-more-technical-than-average post does break any of your technical discussion rules (http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_jump.cfm/2487/533726), please tell me so I can edit the post. As far as I know I haven't provided any information on circumventing copy protections in this post I believe that there is no need to edit this post.
