I agree that Halo is receiving praise where praise is not due. As for Metroid Prime, to me it was meant more as fan service for those of us who are Metroid fans. In terms of Oblivion, it had more steps forward than graphics (namely in physics), not to mention its one of the few RPGs out there that is truly open world.
Unfortunately, this statement is more true than u think. I have many people who are computer ignorant come into my office with $2000 laptops that they bought because they thought that the more expensive a laptop was, the better its supposed to be.
The point behind getting the Adam is so that you can get more abilities and improve those your already have. It is also the collection of Adam that leads to the endings.
As for the big daddies, all you really need to beat them is armor piercing rounds for any of your guns and shoot them in the head. Once you have the AP rounds, the big daddies and rosies will be easy to kill. And as for the wrench, use that ONLY on the mutants, and save your bullets for big daddies, bosses, and Rosies.
Actually, that is basically just what the members of the RIAA have been doing. In the case of music labels, they make the artist churn out song after song, and in the end they give the artist a VERY tiny portion of what they make. Most artists make just above minimum wage.
On that note, though I would say that it may be a theft of labor, what if it were a very half-assed form of labor. Would you want to pay for a crappy movie that wasted millions? Or would you like to tell the movie studio that the movie sucked by hitting them where it hurts, their wallets. However, if the movie is something really good, then you should show your support for it by buying it.
Actually, in a way, the taxpayers ARE going to pay that bill, one way or the other. Who pays for the tutition for the students? A taxpayer. And as for your "$200 a month ultrahighspeed internet", just where are you getting your info. If you are talking about what is available to home owners, then that number is off a bit. Most universities get discounts anyway on high speed internet. And note, most universities already have a cap in place, its just set to levels like 750-800 kbps. So take your overpriced internet and shove it. O, and BTW, i can get such high speed internet for on $50 a month.
I agree. And besides, even if you limit the bandwidth available to student, there will still be quite a few downloaders and seeders that will use the connection. The only thing you will accomplish by limited the bandwidth is just make the network slower for all and have the hogs take up that bandwidth faster.
Point 1: I am not spoiled, I still have only dialup at home (even though at this point I can get DSL for cheaper). The main issue is that I need to access my univerity e-bill page at home and can't. Why? They connection times out due to the sheer amount of data that needs to be transmitted.
Point 2: In case you haven't checked yet, most universities these days get discounts on high bandwidth T3 lines. In the end, its actually cheaper to have things set up the way they are now than it is to have them limit the bandwidth.
And as for your last point, I should point out that most students are doing that already, most because the university does not have enough housing for them. Thing is, though, is that a university needs to take its students demands seriously. If students start to get really upset with the university on the issue of housing, then they may just get an apartment. However, this would eventually lead to the dorms becoming emptier and emptier, until it gets to the point where it is not cost effective enough to keep running the dorms. So you should be careful about your suggestions.
Ya sure, I COULD do that, but then it would not just be me. If your looking at the standard univerity population, it averages around a few thousand. Granted, the majority won't need much access, but that still leaves you with a couple thousand or more wanting the same exemption. And just who would field this request, Housing or IT? How would they be able to verify that the requestor needs the exemption? In order to set up this idea, it would take up time and resources, both of which can get to be very expensive and time consuming. In the end, most universities would shoot that idea down fast. Though, the main problem is that most universities don't want to change. I am working at a university ATM, and despite some ideas that my coworkers have submitted, including some changes that could save the univerity a bundle, the univerity won't make the changes. Why? Because they don't want to change.
And what of those of us who dont have a prof's lad to work in, hmm. I do large amount of programming and in some cases even remote access. Trying to do remote access for database access, trying to download a Linux distro, and trying to do Internet searches for code ideas can get to be VERY bandwidth-intensive. And I don't HAVE a prof lab to go to, AND none of the school computers can be set up for remote access, no to mention I can't do my programming on them either. Stop trying to compare your college experiences of yesteryear to those of today. Today the environment is very different.
Many profs have turned to online sharing in order to send out their assignments. It saves them time and paper. In addition, many universities these days have turned to paperless systems in order to save on costs, not to mention it is easier for them to send notices through email than to have it displayed in a flyer. As for typewriters, they just are not as portable as a computer, nor do they have the flexability. And in terms of the old days, you should know that universities in those days did not have the level of computer intergration that many universities have today. Though if your mother needs to find a job, if she still remembers Fortran she could make a fortune. Many financial groups are looking for Fortran people to help support their older systems.
There are plenty of reasons for students to work with large amounts of data. Have YOU ever tried to download a 250 page case study in the form of a PDF. It took long enough on a 900Kbps connect, let alone on a 384k line. I know that film and media students have to upload movies and music, which can eat up quite a bit of bandwidth. As for myself, I have to download megs of programming code and associated files, while at the same time as trying to do a webcam conference with my project team members. As for Linux distros, not all colleges have on site mirrors for Linux. Trying to get Linux through a slow connection will take a week at least.
Time can be a major factor when your a college student these days. For instance, when downloading updates, I can't afford to be down for hours on end when I need to do a paper. As for iTunes, what if the student needs a particular song and they need to write a paper on it (heck I had to). Do you think they would like having to wait for 2-3 hours in order to get this song for their paper on the impact of music on civilization, when they also need to do research on the topic at the same time? I don't think so. And as for youtube, I know some professors have actually gotten rid of in class lectures and just use the class time to answer questions. They post a taped lecture on youtube and then expect their student to be able to watch it and then form questions based on it. Kinda hard to do when you have to wait half an hour for the video to come up.
Now, that being said, I do know of one area that colleges can back off on. They should remove telephone service in the dorms. So many people these days have cell phones that I don't know of anyone who actually used the land line connection. Univerisities should also take a look at paperless systems that can save them a bundle in costs.
Umm... What era are you from. Ya, its true that 128k would be enough for just those, EXECPT that many colleges are turning to online classes, online bill payment, testing, paper submission, video lectures for those who miss class for various reasons like being sick and the like, etc., etc. These things can all take up a lot of bandwidth. In addition, what about those who work with media like movies. I had a roommate that was taking film courses that required him to upload movies he made. As for myself, I have tons of downloads in the form of things like various Linux versions and programs for my classes. If you wish for more reasons, you can look to Windows Updates, or any update system for that matter. I used to be that it could run on 128k, but now, with almost 1GB updates you kinda need a connection that is notat the speed of dialup. I also reject that you think that the only thing college students should be doing is studying. I study plenty when I have classes (thx god for CoOps). However, I also find time to play PC games and I still get . I get my games mostly legally. Of those I get normally, I go for digital download versions of the game when I can (aka. Steam, GamersGate, EA Link). Trying to get these via a dialup connection is next to impossible.
So please, don't just assume that all students can live off of what you had to. Besides, at this point you can obtain faster Internet connections for cheaper than you can for that slow speed.
Actually, many people are just unaware of the options they have. Truthfully, people dont care a much about OS as they do hardware. Programs and applications are fine and all, but a average user judges a computer based on its hardware specs. A bigger problem for Macs is that they are not as available as PCs. You can find PC stores in almost every town out there. However Macs are only available in some areas and there are far fewer repair locations that are not places that just ship the Macs back to Apple.
However, if you want to talk about OS and applications, Apple themselves have put up a barrier to that. In order to actually develop programs for Macs, you have to pay them quite a bit of money just to get the basic dev tools, and even more in order to make higher end programs. Windows and Linux on the other hand dont have this problem. In the end, what needs to happen is people should be made aware of what each OS is really ment for. Mac OSs are very good with media manipulation and graphic design, Windows is good with business software, servers, and games, and Linux is just as good at all of these, it just has a problem with many people not knowing about it.
Well, that does it for this rant. So now i go back to my little hovel and custom, self-built triple OS monster.
In my experience, the main problem comes from the fact that most economic decisions are based on a formula or model. The inherent problem with this is that it assumes that the markets of the world can be predicted by this model (or models as the case may be) and that the market will follow this trend. However, this is not always true. Though the model may be good at predicting trends, it is not absolute, and it does not take into account the random chaos that can enter into the market. When problems occur in the market and the model is shown as false, then the investors of the world start pointing fingers and try to cover their own backsides. This in turn leads to the problems that we see now in the american economy.
Because the investors are now trying to cover themselves, instead of restoring the economy, they themselves have become the trend. The models can not predict all human actions and assumes that all people are rational. This, however, is also not the case. This assuption that all are rational is obviously flawed.
Finally, the biggest issue is that all the major investing groups follow the same model and formula in the form of an expert system. The quants may have told them otherwise, but all they do is make slight modifications to the program which are minor and have no real effect on the system in general. In addition, a majority of these groups assume that the expert system is always right and follows the "recommendations" of the system without question. However, this leads to all sorts of problems when the system is wrong. For instance, many groups invested in the housing market, most because the expert system told them that it was a good investment for the long term. However, as we all know now the housing market was bound to deflate eventually, and when it did these expert systems told them to sell. Only, the thing was that many places, including banks, had their investments in the housing market. So when the selling started the house of cards started tumbling, and the expert systems started telling the people to sell off stocks, when people should have been selling housing but buying into other areas to make up for it. Instead people kept their money instead of reinvesting it and now we have the mess that is the market today.
So how do we solve this. For starters, people need to reinvest their money into stocks. Even if it is a loss at the begining, the money invested now should help the market recover. Second, people should start using their heads instead of looking at a model and assuming that the model is always right. Finally, the investing groups should stop using expert systems to try and predict the future, because in the end a model or formula cannot always be right when it comes to the market.
(Srry for the rant there but i need to vent a bit there.)
Someone please mod parent down with flamebait or troll.
Grow up. The adults in this world have to pay MONEY for SERVICES. And the better the service, the more money.
This is the kind of bull the corporations feed you. The amount of money you pay DOES NOT equal the quality of service or product. Its not the quality of the product that sets the price, its how much it costs to make (or perform) + some percent over that cost in order to generate profit. The thing is about Comcast is that they do not operate to serve their customers, they operate to generate a profit. Fact is, though, is that if another group tried to make an ISP like Comcast, they COULD operate it at a cheaper price. The only reason Comcast charges as much as they do is because they want to increase their profit. As for your earlier statements about Comcast and the free market, it should be noted that this is NOT a free market, just like how the US is NOT a democracy. In a truely free market, anyone could start a cable company to challenge Comcast, and they would only have to run the wires and provide the service. These days, you have to go through hoops of fire in order to start any kind of communications company, not to mention that Comcast will most likely try to acquire you (whether thru merger or gov sanctions). And finally, it may be Comcast's network, but that does not mean that they can screw over their customers in that way. In cases such as these, it is up to the carrier (or at least it should be) to notify you of planned changes to service. If they are going to stop your service for one reason or another, they should notify you. If they are going to start to block some types of transmissions, they should tell you. It sounds to me like you are siding with them just because of what they have said. O, and as an FYI, Comcast didn't limit torrents because of capacity problems with their current customers, they did it so that they could try to free up capacity so that they can sell it to new customers.
Thing is, is that its much harder to snipe with a controller than a mouse. In the end, the way I see it, keyboards and mice are better for precision and functionality, but controllers are better for ease of use, immersion (though that takes a back seat for me), and twitch response. In the end, if PC gamers and console gamers were to play the same game online (CoD4 would be nice in this respect), all gamers would have fun if they keep to their roles, with PC gamers making the tactical snipe shots while the console gamers handle the frontline battle. Besides, at this point console controllers can be used on PCs (the 360 guitar can be hooked to the PC and there is a version of GH3 for PC now) and I think you can use at least your keyboard on the 360.
The difference is that mice allow for quicker, twitch movement. While it is possible to change the sensitivity of control sticks, they still only allow you to turn at a certain speed. The mouse, OTOH, can turn at any speed you want at any time you want. If you are tracking a target with a sniper rifle, you want to move slowly, but if someone suddenly tries to get behind you but you see them, then you will want to turn fast without having to go to the menu to change your sensitivity. By that same note, it can also be said that modern mice also allow for additional game functionality buttons (I think I saw one case where 1 had about 4 buttons on one side that can be assigned any function for a game) and that many modern mice at least have 2 buttons on the side that let you adjust the mouse sensitivity on the fly.
RTS is the only type of game I would seriously limit to mouse-keyboard.
I would have to disagree with you a bit on that point. For some reason, I just can't see how some epic RPGs (WoW, NWN 2, Witcher, X3) can be played effectively on consoles. Plain fact is that the PC can handle much for functionality than any console out there. For X3's instance, that game has so many functions that even a keyboard alone cannot play it (a joystick is almost required to play it effectively). In terms of what you say about the easy reach of a controller, it should be noted that there are little 20-30 buck devices that in essence are mini keyboards that have the most used keys for games in a compact area. This device can handle most any game, and it works wonders for saving your keyboard from too much wear (after all, that gaming rig can also be used to write term papers:). However, at this point it should be pointed out that if your playing on a console just because of the controller, the 360 controller can be hooked up to a PC, and let you play the PC ports of 360 games on PC (with the PC's better graphics to boot.) However, I do have to say that a console developed FPS should stay on console, while a PC developed FPS should stay on PC. It has been proven that trying to port one to the other just leads to control problems, or worse lowered graphics (case and point, FEAR.) Besides, if consoles are good for nothing else, they are good for fighting and racing games.
1. If your PC is always crashing, then you should stop going to the pr0n sites. That or stop opening strange e-mails.
2. You DO NOT need to upgrade your hardware every 6 months. That statistic is a lie, or a very narrow truth. Fact is is that I can play Crysis on a very old and outdated rig on mostly medium settings, 1280x1024 res, no AA, and the only slowdown I saw was when I destroyed a town with lots of C4 and 'nades. I have found that the 6 month rule only applies to people who buy retail comps from Gateway or Dell, and then only get a model thats 3 months newer than the one they are replacing. If you are not using Dell, then the only other reason wy you are upgrading vid cards or mem every 6 month is because you are trying to do a bare minimum upgrade (like trying to run Vista on a 512 MB RAM sys and then tossing in a 64 MB stick to try and make it run better).
3. One of the reasons why console games are more expensive than PC games (besides having to make up the cost of the console), is that they don't record the game in the same way. If I recall, on a 360, the data is recorded in the other direction than with a normal DVD. Also, with PC games, the game devs don't have to worry about making a profit for themselves AND the PC, but console game devs have to provide profit for both themselves and the console.
From what I have been seeing, the main problem for this season was not the game companies themselves, but rather the fact that there was a major OS upgrade this year. I have a couple of friends in the game dev world, and they say that they had to change gears due to vista's release.
The other problem is M$ game dept. It should be noted that they have been trying to strong arm all games that are slotted for PC to be released to 360 only, and then release to PC after about 5-6 months. As a case and point, Mass Effect. That game was slotted to be both 360 and PC, but then was changed to 360 only almost overnight and with little explanation. However, now its slotted to be released to PC sometime in May. Another case would be Star Wars: Force Unleashed. That game was slotted to be released to all consoles (PS2 and DS included) and PC. Then, suddenly, its not being released for PC but 360 instead.
However, I do have to agree with you about the performance fanboys. Most games these days (and consoles haven't been spared either) seem to be more like tech demos to show off better and prettier graphics, while sacrificing gameplay. All game devs need to see that these kinds of games we don't need. What we really need is for game devs to see that some games (in particular those on 360) can be ported with little effort to PC for the most part. In terms of the 360, there is no reason why all games for 360 cant be played on the PC. Of course, that will never happen because M$ is too short sighted to see the long term profit from that.
The bigger problem would be that IT admins would start to complain. They would have to start pushing the updates more regularly than now. Besides, wouldn't incremental updates be larger than current hotfixes and updates? The larger and more complex an update is, the longer it takes to download, distribute, and install. Besides, there ARE businesses and organizations out there that still do not have inet access (I'm presently providing support for quite a few of them.) These groups would find it to be impossible to get the updates and would start complaining (and thats the last thing I need, more complaints from comp illits.) To me, what M$ should do is release a SP at the same time as they release a new OS. The SP would add some of the features from the new OS (Improved security and DX10 support type thing), but the new OS would have things that the other OS wouldn't have (example: improved UI, kernel upgrades, the like.) This way, people would get a taste of the new OS (kinda like a game demo) and it may make it so that more people will buy the new OS (and, knowing how noobish some people are with comps, a new computer to go with the new OS.) Course this could also go the other way, but then more people would be happy. Just my 2.5c
[Starts digging foxhole to hide from the artillery known as remarks and flames]
And lastly, who the hell buys a computer with less than at LEAST a gig of ram if not 2? Personally I would never purchase a machine that came with less than 2 gigs of ram these days, laptop or desktop irregardless of what OS I plan on running.
I can think of several people and groups. Non-profits, companies, corporations. They usually make a config sys, image it, and then install it on other comps. They dont need more than 512 MB (my work comp is running XP with 256 MB.) Other people are those who do nothing but do some minor web surfing and e-mail.
Just remember, net everyone buys a computer for the same reasons
The problem with Microsoft is that they push the wrong things at the wrong times. As a "for instance", look at Mass Effect. It was originally slotted to go on both 360 and PC, but then it switched gears in late production to be a "360 Exclusive". This is a obvious attempt at pushing the 360. Thing is, Vista is hurting a lot more in sales, and if Vista doesn't start making money for M$, then M$ is going to have wasted a ton of R&D money. They are also trying to push Silverlight in some of the worst ways (you want to download a hotfix for Vista, you get a dialog box that covers the screen asking if you want to install Silverlight, annoying as hell.) The pure fact is that M$ just plain has a bad marketing dept., if they even have one. At times (such as with the Xbox and Silverlight), it shows that their marketing dept just doesn't realize that those markets just are not the same as the OS markets. In terms of OS, M$ has the largest market share, and most ppl don't know or don't like the other products. But with the console market et al, they don't have the largest market share and as such they need to actually compete with the other products. My point of this ramble is that if M$ actually gets Yahoo, they WILL do as they have done before, and try to use it to push their products. Because their marketing dept can't get it through their skulls that the markets they are trying to break into already have competition who have the majority of the market share, the M$ blockheads will most likely try to push products through Yahoo , regardless of whether or not they lose customers due to it.
Slashdot Mirror
According to Microsoft's own IE8 site, the current version of IE8 is RC1, not a final release. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/Internet-explorer/beta/default.aspx
I agree that Halo is receiving praise where praise is not due. As for Metroid Prime, to me it was meant more as fan service for those of us who are Metroid fans. In terms of Oblivion, it had more steps forward than graphics (namely in physics), not to mention its one of the few RPGs out there that is truly open world.
Unfortunately, this statement is more true than u think. I have many people who are computer ignorant come into my office with $2000 laptops that they bought because they thought that the more expensive a laptop was, the better its supposed to be.
The point behind getting the Adam is so that you can get more abilities and improve those your already have. It is also the collection of Adam that leads to the endings.
As for the big daddies, all you really need to beat them is armor piercing rounds for any of your guns and shoot them in the head. Once you have the AP rounds, the big daddies and rosies will be easy to kill. And as for the wrench, use that ONLY on the mutants, and save your bullets for big daddies, bosses, and Rosies.
Actually, that is basically just what the members of the RIAA have been doing. In the case of music labels, they make the artist churn out song after song, and in the end they give the artist a VERY tiny portion of what they make. Most artists make just above minimum wage.
On that note, though I would say that it may be a theft of labor, what if it were a very half-assed form of labor. Would you want to pay for a crappy movie that wasted millions? Or would you like to tell the movie studio that the movie sucked by hitting them where it hurts, their wallets. However, if the movie is something really good, then you should show your support for it by buying it.
Actually, in a way, the taxpayers ARE going to pay that bill, one way or the other. Who pays for the tutition for the students? A taxpayer. And as for your "$200 a month ultrahighspeed internet", just where are you getting your info. If you are talking about what is available to home owners, then that number is off a bit. Most universities get discounts anyway on high speed internet. And note, most universities already have a cap in place, its just set to levels like 750-800 kbps. So take your overpriced internet and shove it. O, and BTW, i can get such high speed internet for on $50 a month.
I agree. And besides, even if you limit the bandwidth available to student, there will still be quite a few downloaders and seeders that will use the connection. The only thing you will accomplish by limited the bandwidth is just make the network slower for all and have the hogs take up that bandwidth faster.
Point 1: I am not spoiled, I still have only dialup at home (even though at this point I can get DSL for cheaper). The main issue is that I need to access my univerity e-bill page at home and can't. Why? They connection times out due to the sheer amount of data that needs to be transmitted.
Point 2: In case you haven't checked yet, most universities these days get discounts on high bandwidth T3 lines. In the end, its actually cheaper to have things set up the way they are now than it is to have them limit the bandwidth.
And as for your last point, I should point out that most students are doing that already, most because the university does not have enough housing for them. Thing is, though, is that a university needs to take its students demands seriously. If students start to get really upset with the university on the issue of housing, then they may just get an apartment. However, this would eventually lead to the dorms becoming emptier and emptier, until it gets to the point where it is not cost effective enough to keep running the dorms. So you should be careful about your suggestions.
Ya sure, I COULD do that, but then it would not just be me. If your looking at the standard univerity population, it averages around a few thousand. Granted, the majority won't need much access, but that still leaves you with a couple thousand or more wanting the same exemption. And just who would field this request, Housing or IT? How would they be able to verify that the requestor needs the exemption? In order to set up this idea, it would take up time and resources, both of which can get to be very expensive and time consuming. In the end, most universities would shoot that idea down fast. Though, the main problem is that most universities don't want to change. I am working at a university ATM, and despite some ideas that my coworkers have submitted, including some changes that could save the univerity a bundle, the univerity won't make the changes. Why? Because they don't want to change.
And what of those of us who dont have a prof's lad to work in, hmm. I do large amount of programming and in some cases even remote access. Trying to do remote access for database access, trying to download a Linux distro, and trying to do Internet searches for code ideas can get to be VERY bandwidth-intensive. And I don't HAVE a prof lab to go to, AND none of the school computers can be set up for remote access, no to mention I can't do my programming on them either. Stop trying to compare your college experiences of yesteryear to those of today. Today the environment is very different.
Actually, I can.
Many profs have turned to online sharing in order to send out their assignments. It saves them time and paper. In addition, many universities these days have turned to paperless systems in order to save on costs, not to mention it is easier for them to send notices through email than to have it displayed in a flyer. As for typewriters, they just are not as portable as a computer, nor do they have the flexability. And in terms of the old days, you should know that universities in those days did not have the level of computer intergration that many universities have today. Though if your mother needs to find a job, if she still remembers Fortran she could make a fortune. Many financial groups are looking for Fortran people to help support their older systems.
Umm.. try again.
There are plenty of reasons for students to work with large amounts of data. Have YOU ever tried to download a 250 page case study in the form of a PDF. It took long enough on a 900Kbps connect, let alone on a 384k line. I know that film and media students have to upload movies and music, which can eat up quite a bit of bandwidth. As for myself, I have to download megs of programming code and associated files, while at the same time as trying to do a webcam conference with my project team members. As for Linux distros, not all colleges have on site mirrors for Linux. Trying to get Linux through a slow connection will take a week at least.
Time can be a major factor when your a college student these days. For instance, when downloading updates, I can't afford to be down for hours on end when I need to do a paper. As for iTunes, what if the student needs a particular song and they need to write a paper on it (heck I had to). Do you think they would like having to wait for 2-3 hours in order to get this song for their paper on the impact of music on civilization, when they also need to do research on the topic at the same time? I don't think so. And as for youtube, I know some professors have actually gotten rid of in class lectures and just use the class time to answer questions. They post a taped lecture on youtube and then expect their student to be able to watch it and then form questions based on it. Kinda hard to do when you have to wait half an hour for the video to come up.
Now, that being said, I do know of one area that colleges can back off on. They should remove telephone service in the dorms. So many people these days have cell phones that I don't know of anyone who actually used the land line connection. Univerisities should also take a look at paperless systems that can save them a bundle in costs.
Umm... What era are you from. Ya, its true that 128k would be enough for just those, EXECPT that many colleges are turning to online classes, online bill payment, testing, paper submission, video lectures for those who miss class for various reasons like being sick and the like, etc., etc. These things can all take up a lot of bandwidth. In addition, what about those who work with media like movies. I had a roommate that was taking film courses that required him to upload movies he made. As for myself, I have tons of downloads in the form of things like various Linux versions and programs for my classes. If you wish for more reasons, you can look to Windows Updates, or any update system for that matter. I used to be that it could run on 128k, but now, with almost 1GB updates you kinda need a connection that is notat the speed of dialup. I also reject that you think that the only thing college students should be doing is studying. I study plenty when I have classes (thx god for CoOps). However, I also find time to play PC games and I still get . I get my games mostly legally. Of those I get normally, I go for digital download versions of the game when I can (aka. Steam, GamersGate, EA Link). Trying to get these via a dialup connection is next to impossible.
So please, don't just assume that all students can live off of what you had to. Besides, at this point you can obtain faster Internet connections for cheaper than you can for that slow speed.
Actually, many people are just unaware of the options they have. Truthfully, people dont care a much about OS as they do hardware. Programs and applications are fine and all, but a average user judges a computer based on its hardware specs. A bigger problem for Macs is that they are not as available as PCs. You can find PC stores in almost every town out there. However Macs are only available in some areas and there are far fewer repair locations that are not places that just ship the Macs back to Apple.
However, if you want to talk about OS and applications, Apple themselves have put up a barrier to that. In order to actually develop programs for Macs, you have to pay them quite a bit of money just to get the basic dev tools, and even more in order to make higher end programs. Windows and Linux on the other hand dont have this problem. In the end, what needs to happen is people should be made aware of what each OS is really ment for. Mac OSs are very good with media manipulation and graphic design, Windows is good with business software, servers, and games, and Linux is just as good at all of these, it just has a problem with many people not knowing about it.
Well, that does it for this rant. So now i go back to my little hovel and custom, self-built triple OS monster.
Actually, in a way the mathematics IS at fault.
In my experience, the main problem comes from the fact that most economic decisions are based on a formula or model. The inherent problem with this is that it assumes that the markets of the world can be predicted by this model (or models as the case may be) and that the market will follow this trend. However, this is not always true. Though the model may be good at predicting trends, it is not absolute, and it does not take into account the random chaos that can enter into the market. When problems occur in the market and the model is shown as false, then the investors of the world start pointing fingers and try to cover their own backsides. This in turn leads to the problems that we see now in the american economy.
Because the investors are now trying to cover themselves, instead of restoring the economy, they themselves have become the trend. The models can not predict all human actions and assumes that all people are rational. This, however, is also not the case. This assuption that all are rational is obviously flawed.
Finally, the biggest issue is that all the major investing groups follow the same model and formula in the form of an expert system. The quants may have told them otherwise, but all they do is make slight modifications to the program which are minor and have no real effect on the system in general. In addition, a majority of these groups assume that the expert system is always right and follows the "recommendations" of the system without question. However, this leads to all sorts of problems when the system is wrong. For instance, many groups invested in the housing market, most because the expert system told them that it was a good investment for the long term. However, as we all know now the housing market was bound to deflate eventually, and when it did these expert systems told them to sell. Only, the thing was that many places, including banks, had their investments in the housing market. So when the selling started the house of cards started tumbling, and the expert systems started telling the people to sell off stocks, when people should have been selling housing but buying into other areas to make up for it. Instead people kept their money instead of reinvesting it and now we have the mess that is the market today.
So how do we solve this. For starters, people need to reinvest their money into stocks. Even if it is a loss at the begining, the money invested now should help the market recover. Second, people should start using their heads instead of looking at a model and assuming that the model is always right. Finally, the investing groups should stop using expert systems to try and predict the future, because in the end a model or formula cannot always be right when it comes to the market.
(Srry for the rant there but i need to vent a bit there.)
Grow up. The adults in this world have to pay MONEY for SERVICES. And the better the service, the more money.
This is the kind of bull the corporations feed you. The amount of money you pay DOES NOT equal the quality of service or product. Its not the quality of the product that sets the price, its how much it costs to make (or perform) + some percent over that cost in order to generate profit. The thing is about Comcast is that they do not operate to serve their customers, they operate to generate a profit. Fact is, though, is that if another group tried to make an ISP like Comcast, they COULD operate it at a cheaper price. The only reason Comcast charges as much as they do is because they want to increase their profit. As for your earlier statements about Comcast and the free market, it should be noted that this is NOT a free market, just like how the US is NOT a democracy. In a truely free market, anyone could start a cable company to challenge Comcast, and they would only have to run the wires and provide the service. These days, you have to go through hoops of fire in order to start any kind of communications company, not to mention that Comcast will most likely try to acquire you (whether thru merger or gov sanctions). And finally, it may be Comcast's network, but that does not mean that they can screw over their customers in that way. In cases such as these, it is up to the carrier (or at least it should be) to notify you of planned changes to service. If they are going to stop your service for one reason or another, they should notify you. If they are going to start to block some types of transmissions, they should tell you. It sounds to me like you are siding with them just because of what they have said. O, and as an FYI, Comcast didn't limit torrents because of capacity problems with their current customers, they did it so that they could try to free up capacity so that they can sell it to new customers.
Thing is, is that its much harder to snipe with a controller than a mouse. In the end, the way I see it, keyboards and mice are better for precision and functionality, but controllers are better for ease of use, immersion (though that takes a back seat for me), and twitch response. In the end, if PC gamers and console gamers were to play the same game online (CoD4 would be nice in this respect), all gamers would have fun if they keep to their roles, with PC gamers making the tactical snipe shots while the console gamers handle the frontline battle. Besides, at this point console controllers can be used on PCs (the 360 guitar can be hooked to the PC and there is a version of GH3 for PC now) and I think you can use at least your keyboard on the 360.
The difference is that mice allow for quicker, twitch movement. While it is possible to change the sensitivity of control sticks, they still only allow you to turn at a certain speed. The mouse, OTOH, can turn at any speed you want at any time you want. If you are tracking a target with a sniper rifle, you want to move slowly, but if someone suddenly tries to get behind you but you see them, then you will want to turn fast without having to go to the menu to change your sensitivity. By that same note, it can also be said that modern mice also allow for additional game functionality buttons (I think I saw one case where 1 had about 4 buttons on one side that can be assigned any function for a game) and that many modern mice at least have 2 buttons on the side that let you adjust the mouse sensitivity on the fly.
I would have to disagree with you a bit on that point. For some reason, I just can't see how some epic RPGs (WoW, NWN 2, Witcher, X3) can be played effectively on consoles. Plain fact is that the PC can handle much for functionality than any console out there. For X3's instance, that game has so many functions that even a keyboard alone cannot play it (a joystick is almost required to play it effectively). In terms of what you say about the easy reach of a controller, it should be noted that there are little 20-30 buck devices that in essence are mini keyboards that have the most used keys for games in a compact area. This device can handle most any game, and it works wonders for saving your keyboard from too much wear (after all, that gaming rig can also be used to write term papers:). However, at this point it should be pointed out that if your playing on a console just because of the controller, the 360 controller can be hooked up to a PC, and let you play the PC ports of 360 games on PC (with the PC's better graphics to boot.) However, I do have to say that a console developed FPS should stay on console, while a PC developed FPS should stay on PC. It has been proven that trying to port one to the other just leads to control problems, or worse lowered graphics (case and point, FEAR.) Besides, if consoles are good for nothing else, they are good for fighting and racing games.
Hear, hear.
1. If your PC is always crashing, then you should stop going to the pr0n sites. That or stop opening strange e-mails.
2. You DO NOT need to upgrade your hardware every 6 months. That statistic is a lie, or a very narrow truth. Fact is is that I can play Crysis on a very old and outdated rig on mostly medium settings, 1280x1024 res, no AA, and the only slowdown I saw was when I destroyed a town with lots of C4 and 'nades. I have found that the 6 month rule only applies to people who buy retail comps from Gateway or Dell, and then only get a model thats 3 months newer than the one they are replacing. If you are not using Dell, then the only other reason wy you are upgrading vid cards or mem every 6 month is because you are trying to do a bare minimum upgrade (like trying to run Vista on a 512 MB RAM sys and then tossing in a 64 MB stick to try and make it run better).
3. One of the reasons why console games are more expensive than PC games (besides having to make up the cost of the console), is that they don't record the game in the same way. If I recall, on a 360, the data is recorded in the other direction than with a normal DVD. Also, with PC games, the game devs don't have to worry about making a profit for themselves AND the PC, but console game devs have to provide profit for both themselves and the console.
From what I have been seeing, the main problem for this season was not the game companies themselves, but rather the fact that there was a major OS upgrade this year. I have a couple of friends in the game dev world, and they say that they had to change gears due to vista's release.
The other problem is M$ game dept. It should be noted that they have been trying to strong arm all games that are slotted for PC to be released to 360 only, and then release to PC after about 5-6 months. As a case and point, Mass Effect. That game was slotted to be both 360 and PC, but then was changed to 360 only almost overnight and with little explanation. However, now its slotted to be released to PC sometime in May. Another case would be Star Wars: Force Unleashed. That game was slotted to be released to all consoles (PS2 and DS included) and PC. Then, suddenly, its not being released for PC but 360 instead.
However, I do have to agree with you about the performance fanboys. Most games these days (and consoles haven't been spared either) seem to be more like tech demos to show off better and prettier graphics, while sacrificing gameplay. All game devs need to see that these kinds of games we don't need. What we really need is for game devs to see that some games (in particular those on 360) can be ported with little effort to PC for the most part. In terms of the 360, there is no reason why all games for 360 cant be played on the PC. Of course, that will never happen because M$ is too short sighted to see the long term profit from that.
The bigger problem would be that IT admins would start to complain. They would have to start pushing the updates more regularly than now. Besides, wouldn't incremental updates be larger than current hotfixes and updates? The larger and more complex an update is, the longer it takes to download, distribute, and install. Besides, there ARE businesses and organizations out there that still do not have inet access (I'm presently providing support for quite a few of them.) These groups would find it to be impossible to get the updates and would start complaining (and thats the last thing I need, more complaints from comp illits.) To me, what M$ should do is release a SP at the same time as they release a new OS. The SP would add some of the features from the new OS (Improved security and DX10 support type thing), but the new OS would have things that the other OS wouldn't have (example: improved UI, kernel upgrades, the like.) This way, people would get a taste of the new OS (kinda like a game demo) and it may make it so that more people will buy the new OS (and, knowing how noobish some people are with comps, a new computer to go with the new OS.) Course this could also go the other way, but then more people would be happy. Just my 2.5c
[Starts digging foxhole to hide from the artillery known as remarks and flames]
I can think of several people and groups. Non-profits, companies, corporations. They usually make a config sys, image it, and then install it on other comps. They dont need more than 512 MB (my work comp is running XP with 256 MB.) Other people are those who do nothing but do some minor web surfing and e-mail.
Just remember, net everyone buys a computer for the same reasons
The problem with Microsoft is that they push the wrong things at the wrong times. As a "for instance", look at Mass Effect. It was originally slotted to go on both 360 and PC, but then it switched gears in late production to be a "360 Exclusive". This is a obvious attempt at pushing the 360. Thing is, Vista is hurting a lot more in sales, and if Vista doesn't start making money for M$, then M$ is going to have wasted a ton of R&D money. They are also trying to push Silverlight in some of the worst ways (you want to download a hotfix for Vista, you get a dialog box that covers the screen asking if you want to install Silverlight, annoying as hell.) The pure fact is that M$ just plain has a bad marketing dept., if they even have one. At times (such as with the Xbox and Silverlight), it shows that their marketing dept just doesn't realize that those markets just are not the same as the OS markets. In terms of OS, M$ has the largest market share, and most ppl don't know or don't like the other products. But with the console market et al, they don't have the largest market share and as such they need to actually compete with the other products. My point of this ramble is that if M$ actually gets Yahoo, they WILL do as they have done before, and try to use it to push their products. Because their marketing dept can't get it through their skulls that the markets they are trying to break into already have competition who have the majority of the market share, the M$ blockheads will most likely try to push products through Yahoo , regardless of whether or not they lose customers due to it.