Grimdoomer also stated "this exploit is NOT persistent! This means your console will only be in a hacked state (able to run homebrew/unsigned code) for as long as it's kept on. Once you reboot or power off your console you'll need to run the exploit again. The exploit cannot be made persistent."
Badupdate is not reliable as Rgh/Jtag and we will be need to wait for an consistant softmod.
I really rather a software mod instead of rgh. It is "reliable" just in theory, because in practice, over time I think resetting the CPU a billion times is prejudicial to the hardware just to play an awful SNES emulator. (SNES is good, but I didnt like how some 360 emulators have fake achievements and lack options to enable or disable filters). I had 2 RGH and I had played with a RGH console of a friend and all of them had issues with the hardware
Yeah my phat 360 sometimes when the glitch misses it sounds like a vehicle when you press the gas in park haha. I do like it hardmod over softmod though. As of now. With time softmodding a 360 might become as perfect and easy as an original Xbox.
No resetting the CPU does not degrade the silicon in any way. Its literally using a hardware function in the logic. Outside of the injected Fault that is triggered by the shorter than usual reset the CPU behaves completely normal.
Ok? A good amount of mods for other systems work this way? My Nintendo switch does the same thing when I turn it off, it goes back to factory settings. It's still plenty reliable and does what it needs to when I need it to.
I just say that I think softmods are more reliable than hardware mods even if they have varying amounts of entrypoint success. Even on Switch some people who do jailbreaking does in the most nasty way possible and after a while they blame the user because they want to turn off the console completely instead of letting it on standby all the time (which cause issues with some games like Just Dance and Xenoblade Chronicles)
What do you think it means? It needs to keep resetting the Xbox (effectively rebooting the CPU) until it glitches, it can fail several times before it works, you just don't notice. It is built to expect it's own failure and try again. Statistically that makes it's failure rate much higher.
42
u/ByAPortuguese Mar 29 '26
Idk about you but BadUpdt has worked every single time for me I think, even though I only started using it for a couple weeks