Apple has succeeded primarily because they have some brilliant marketing folks working for them. While I personally cannot STAND Apple ads (and any ad targeted towards my age group in general, the 18-34s) they obviously have done something right.
In just a few short years, Apple has built a tremendous following of rabid fanboys/girls. While I don't subscribe to the fanboy-ish attitude, and while Apple fanboys seem to be the worst of the kind, there is no denying what the company has achieved. They have created a product line seen as being "on the cutting edge of trends", and doing so means big sales and big money.
The question I wonder about is, how long can Apple keep this up? What will they do to keep adding to their empire? They have been hugely successful with the "trendy" types, but what about people like me, the so called "social outcasts"? What about the folks that choose to be anti-trend not because they want to be different, but because they don't like the stigma that goes along with it? What about those for who advertising like what Apple does makes them want to use the products even LESS?
If Apple wants to truly expand their size and market penetration, they need to figure out how to convince folks like myself to move over to them. I hate the image that goes along with pulling a MacBook Air out of a manila folder...and I hate that being a part of the Apple community means sharing space with people who go apeshit when you make a single observation about the negative aspects that Apple's products sometimes have.
For those that wish to moderate me troll or flamebait, go right ahead. You are the exact reason why I refuse to stand next to you and instead choose to stand with my back to Apple and to it's users.
Newspapers, certain websites, DVD's, streaming video, my own mouth...television isn't the only tool out there you can use to educate your children and keep them up to date on what is happening around the world, you know...while for some people this is a bad choice due to their own bias (and thus skewing what they read and tell their children), I usually try to get news from left-biased, right-biased, and middle of the road news sources. In doing so, you usually can piece together a clearer picture of what happened, because it enables you to see through the slanted opinion of each one. I would teach my child the same thing (once they aren't 4 years old, of course...don't want to confuse them), and would use those three different views to construct a single one when explaining something to them.
I don't like it when parents explain a current event to their child when they get their news all from one source. It projects your bias onto your children, and I'm a firm believer that you should raise your child to make up their own mind about things rather than indoctrinate them with your own opinions (and yes, that includes religion.) Obviously, things like manners and such don't fall into that category, but you get what I'm saying...
Quoted from a post I made further up in the thread:
Now, if the TV companies ever offer truely a la carte viewing and allow you to pick each and every station, PBS, Discovery (and all of it's offspring), TLC (offspring), and The History Channel will certainly be in our house. My girlfriend and I already collect documentaries/TLC/Discovery Channel/History channel shows on DVD, and not having to spend that much money to view those programs would be a welcome change.
I found that since I played Warhammer (not 40k) growing up, I am FANTASTIC at estimating distances...this comes in handy in all sorts of places, be it driving a car or shooting a basketball. I would want something similar for my child (if they were interested in it, of course)
or read
I personally love to read, and I attribute that to something my mom used to do; I was one of those kids that never did their homework. My mom would say to me "ok, if you aren't going to do your homework, the ONLY thing you are allowed to do is to read a book." And so when I didn't want to do my homework, I read...and read...and suddenly, I started to really enjoy reading because I associated the action with doing whatever I watned.
or build something.
Lincoln Logs, Legos, and Erector Sets will certainly be in my child's room:-)
I completely agree with you. Remaining active will certainly be a part of my child's life (and I don't mean being on ten different sports teams, I mean exactly as you said...playing outside) That being said, however, there are going to be rainy days/cold days/etc. Given the choice between watching mind-numbing TV and playing videogames, however, I would much rather that they play videogames.
Now, if the TV companies ever offer truely a la carte viewing and allow you to pick each and every station, PBS, Discovery (and all of it's offspring), TLC (offspring), and The History Channel will certainly be in our house. My girlfriend and I already collect documentaries/TLC/Discovery Channel/History channel shows on DVD, and not having to spend that much money to view those programs would be a welcome change.
And not have any form of TV service, be it cable or otherwise, coming into our house. Granted, my girlfriend and I don't have kids as of yet (we are only 23), but when we do, TV will be something that DVD's and video games are displayed on, not something that MTV will be piped into.
I would much rather have my child playing video games for 20 hours a week than watching TV for 20 hours a week. At least by playing video games, they are learning hand-eye coordination, problem solving, strategic thinking, and awareness of their surroundings. Granted, there is the whole "violent video games" argument, but that's neither here nor there insofar as what I think of TV.
I don't object to TV because it's violent or anything like that...I object to it because you are doing literally nothing while sitting in front of it. Try beating Ninja Gaiden Black on Master Ninja difficulty and tell me you weren't just doing something involved.
if your complaint is valid, then there should be a lot of other people in your area in the same boat. form an action group. complain online, complain to the city, complain to the local news channels. document your complaint. add ever increasing numbers to your group. before you tell me that it will take "too long" to do that, you better look at how long government pseudo intervention takes and corporate litigation. try years. if internet is important to you, more then a luxury, then you need to do something NOW. move.
Who the fuck are you to assume what I have and haven't done? I have personally spent nearly every weekend of the last five years of my life doing exactly this while you made flame posts safely behind the annonimity of the internet. Next time, don't assume things about people you don't know.
We aren't trying to grant the government to be responsible for protecting us...we are trying to get the government to bitch-slap misbehaving monopolies because we as individual citizens don't have the money or the realistic possibility of legal avenues to make the changes ourselves.
I'm all for keeping the government out of our daily lives, but there are instances where government intervention is necessary. Or do you have millions of dollars, top-notch lawyers, and the legal ability at your disposal to slap the likes of Comcast in the face hard enough that they stop bullying everyone else on the playground?
EA has already been acting like a bitch by buying out exclusive licensing deals with the NFL. They seem to be attempting to get their only remaining competition in the sports market out of the way by simply buying them.
I understand that the video game industry is like any other industry in that most companies exist solely for earning as much money as possible...but you know what? There are still some people that take pride in their work, and many of the folks that work under Take Two fall into that category. If they wanted to be owned by a big publisher like EA, they would have accepted the offer. They obviously don't want it, and EA is an even bigger asshole for trying to muscle their way in after they had the door slammed in their face.
As a person with high respect for those that create not just for profit but to make their creative vision a reality, I find EA's deal to be a slap in the face to gamers all over the world. EA has pissed off a LOT of people, and they seem to be content with adding to that number. Fuck EA, fuck their underhanded business practices, and lastly fuck you for supporting and defending them.
...that this means Google can fix some of the horrible code/server issues DoubleClick seems to bring with it. A toast, in hopes that soon I won't have to wait thirty seconds while my Firefox window says "Waiting for doubleclick.com" at the bottom.::salud::
I would venture to guess because the market share of folks who have HTPC's (much less HTPC's that are capable of gaming) are few and far between compared to the number of folks that have consoles hooked up to their TVs...it makes more sense to make those kinds of games for consoles. I'm not saying I agree with it (especially since I myself have a PC hooked up in my home theater), I'm just saying I think that's why it is the way that it is.::shrug::
Rio presented two of the absolute best non-video MP3 players so far...the Rio Carbon and the Rio Karma.
I still have a Carbon that I bought at launch that works perfectly after repeated drops, getting stepped on, and even getting run over once. My Karma still works, although I did end up having to replace the hard drive in it a year ago (everything else works perfectly though...screen, scroll wheel, etc.)
To this day I have yet to find an MP3 player that had a better interface or that was easier to use with one hand than those two players. I personally think that if it weren't for iTunes, the iPod by itself would have never been as big as it is (try using a Carbon or a Karma's scroll wheel, and then sit there and tell me that you prefer Apple's mutilated nipple...it doesn't even compare)
Of course, all this is moot considering Rio went under and the last product they released was a hulking piece of crap...but for a time, they were the best on the block. In my eyes (since I don't care about video or any of that, just music) they still are top of the game.
You appear not to have friends or family members who are children. I can't even get my little cousins to bring their own gamepads, let alone a console and a TV, to family parties.
And you would be right. The youngest in my family is 18...youngest person I game with on any kind of regular basis is 19 (oldest is 36...I'm 23)
Not all multiplayer video game designs need to split the screen. There is no need to split the screen for Bomberman nor for Nintendo's Super Smash Bros, nor arguably for games based on American football such as Midway's Blitz or EA's Madden NFL.
I know that...hence why I said "when you play split-screen mode" and not "multiplayer" in my post.
I agree, it is definitely harder to be precise with a thumbstick.
That being said, while I personally prefer a mouse for aiming purposes, in nearly all other aspects of an FPS I prefer a controller. Having all the buttons grouped closely together makes it much faster to do other things and reduces the risk of pressing the wrong key in an intense moment... using a "trigger" style button instead of a mouse button makes it easier (again, in my opinion) to squeeze off shots faster while remaining accurate, and physically moving with an analogue stick is definitely easier than using WASD.
If I absolutely had to choose between one or the other to use and never use the other one again, I think I would go with a mouse/keyboard combo. That being said, I find that I seem to rank right around the same (4-7th place) using a mouse/keyboard as I do using a controller for an online FPS. I also actually trained for a month or so with a controller (used a notebook to keep track of my progress, did hand exercises, etc.) so that I could become profecient at using one. The reason was very much akin to the reason that I give people when I say that EVERYONE should know how to drive a manual transmission car. You may always buy an automatic, but you never know when you may be in a situation that requires you to drive a stick-shift (I personally drive a manual...never owned an automatic transmission car, and until I am physically unable to drive a manual I won't ever own an automatic.)
If that's the case, you are just using the trackball wrong.
Case in point, the big ones that I mentioned. You rest your palm on top of the ball, set the sensitivity to being super high, and you needn't move more than a half-inch and any direction to move the cursor from one corner of your monitor to the other...same goes for gaming, it allows for super-fast movement of your aim while moving very little. The less you have to move your hand, the faster you can aim.
I would venture to say that using a trackball (especially for an FPS) takes more practice than using a dual-analog controller...once mastered, however, it is far superior to a normal mouse or a controller (again, this also assumes that you bought a good trackball...good ones are expensive, and cheap ones are horrible for gaming as they don't have enough sensitivity in relation to their sensors)
Well, considering I'm not going to be buying my friend's PC's and their monitors for them, I would have to say the PC.
Not to mention that when you play split-screen on a console, your viewing area is VASTLY diminished.
I'm not saying PC's are better than consoles or vice versa...like I said in another post, I don't care what system a game is on, I just want to play it. They both have their advantages and disadvantages, but in the end they are pretty much equal at this point.
You know...I'm not saying that you don't get better control with a keyboard and mouse, but I tend to find that the folks that say "you can't POSSIBLY play an FPS with a controller!" usually say that because they themselves are unable to.
I grew up gaming on both consoles and PC's (23, almost 24 now). I play all different genres, and frankly don't really care what system a game is on...I just love to game.
I find that after just a short bit of practice (it took about 1-2 months of solid training) I perform just as well in shooters with a controller as I do with a keyboard and mouse. It's really not that hard to learn how to use a controller effectively.
Just because you are unable to adapt to a different and harder to use control input does NOT instantly mean that it is entirely worthless. Did you ever consider that maybe you don't have the skill and rely on your "tried and true" way of doing things?
I am by absolutely no means a fantastic gamer...I play games roughly 25-30 hours a week, and have been for a large portion of my life, but you will never find me on the top of a list in a multiplayer match (you will generally find me ranked 4th-7th). Still, even I can understand that it just takes some time to get used to a different control set up. Using a controller to play an FPS is really not that difficult...maybe you should stop shitting on things you don't have the ability to use and actually try to learn it.
Right. Because Comcast alone isn't enough to show why things like Net Neutrality need to be taken seriously./sarcasm
Seriously though...The whole "throttling" issue with Comcast is just the tip of the iceberg. There is no reason to crash into the damn thing if we can steer around it.
Do we still have cotton plantations where white rich men are whipping blacks in the fields? Are we we still bringing black people from africa stuffed like sardines in the hulls of ships? Are we still lynching hundreds of black folks a year? Are blacks not allowed to vote, or have a good paying job, or make decisions that impact the entire country? Are blacks not allowed to talk back to white people?
Please. Slavery is long over. Black people today do not know the meaning of the word racism. Racism isn't having a hard time getting a cab or having trouble becoming a CEO. Racism is getting the shit beat out of you because you weren't picking fast enough.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple has succeeded primarily because they have some brilliant marketing folks working for them. While I personally cannot STAND Apple ads (and any ad targeted towards my age group in general, the 18-34s) they obviously have done something right.
In just a few short years, Apple has built a tremendous following of rabid fanboys/girls. While I don't subscribe to the fanboy-ish attitude, and while Apple fanboys seem to be the worst of the kind, there is no denying what the company has achieved. They have created a product line seen as being "on the cutting edge of trends", and doing so means big sales and big money.
The question I wonder about is, how long can Apple keep this up? What will they do to keep adding to their empire? They have been hugely successful with the "trendy" types, but what about people like me, the so called "social outcasts"? What about the folks that choose to be anti-trend not because they want to be different, but because they don't like the stigma that goes along with it? What about those for who advertising like what Apple does makes them want to use the products even LESS?
If Apple wants to truly expand their size and market penetration, they need to figure out how to convince folks like myself to move over to them. I hate the image that goes along with pulling a MacBook Air out of a manila folder...and I hate that being a part of the Apple community means sharing space with people who go apeshit when you make a single observation about the negative aspects that Apple's products sometimes have.
For those that wish to moderate me troll or flamebait, go right ahead. You are the exact reason why I refuse to stand next to you and instead choose to stand with my back to Apple and to it's users.
Anyone willing to act as a translator for the law-speak impaired?
Newspapers, certain websites, DVD's, streaming video, my own mouth...television isn't the only tool out there you can use to educate your children and keep them up to date on what is happening around the world, you know...while for some people this is a bad choice due to their own bias (and thus skewing what they read and tell their children), I usually try to get news from left-biased, right-biased, and middle of the road news sources. In doing so, you usually can piece together a clearer picture of what happened, because it enables you to see through the slanted opinion of each one. I would teach my child the same thing (once they aren't 4 years old, of course...don't want to confuse them), and would use those three different views to construct a single one when explaining something to them.
I don't like it when parents explain a current event to their child when they get their news all from one source. It projects your bias onto your children, and I'm a firm believer that you should raise your child to make up their own mind about things rather than indoctrinate them with your own opinions (and yes, that includes religion.) Obviously, things like manners and such don't fall into that category, but you get what I'm saying...
I found that since I played Warhammer (not 40k) growing up, I am FANTASTIC at estimating distances...this comes in handy in all sorts of places, be it driving a car or shooting a basketball. I would want something similar for my child (if they were interested in it, of course)
I personally love to read, and I attribute that to something my mom used to do; I was one of those kids that never did their homework. My mom would say to me "ok, if you aren't going to do your homework, the ONLY thing you are allowed to do is to read a book." And so when I didn't want to do my homework, I read...and read...and suddenly, I started to really enjoy reading because I associated the action with doing whatever I watned.
Lincoln Logs, Legos, and Erector Sets will certainly be in my child's room
I completely agree with you. Remaining active will certainly be a part of my child's life (and I don't mean being on ten different sports teams, I mean exactly as you said...playing outside) That being said, however, there are going to be rainy days/cold days/etc. Given the choice between watching mind-numbing TV and playing videogames, however, I would much rather that they play videogames.
Now, if the TV companies ever offer truely a la carte viewing and allow you to pick each and every station, PBS, Discovery (and all of it's offspring), TLC (offspring), and The History Channel will certainly be in our house. My girlfriend and I already collect documentaries/TLC/Discovery Channel/History channel shows on DVD, and not having to spend that much money to view those programs would be a welcome change.
And not have any form of TV service, be it cable or otherwise, coming into our house. Granted, my girlfriend and I don't have kids as of yet (we are only 23), but when we do, TV will be something that DVD's and video games are displayed on, not something that MTV will be piped into.
I would much rather have my child playing video games for 20 hours a week than watching TV for 20 hours a week. At least by playing video games, they are learning hand-eye coordination, problem solving, strategic thinking, and awareness of their surroundings. Granted, there is the whole "violent video games" argument, but that's neither here nor there insofar as what I think of TV.
I don't object to TV because it's violent or anything like that...I object to it because you are doing literally nothing while sitting in front of it. Try beating Ninja Gaiden Black on Master Ninja difficulty and tell me you weren't just doing something involved.
Who the fuck are you to assume what I have and haven't done? I have personally spent nearly every weekend of the last five years of my life doing exactly this while you made flame posts safely behind the annonimity of the internet. Next time, don't assume things about people you don't know.
They do say you are what you eat...
If you are so sure you are right and stand by your opinion so strongly...why post it as a coward?
We aren't trying to grant the government to be responsible for protecting us...we are trying to get the government to bitch-slap misbehaving monopolies because we as individual citizens don't have the money or the realistic possibility of legal avenues to make the changes ourselves.
I'm all for keeping the government out of our daily lives, but there are instances where government intervention is necessary. Or do you have millions of dollars, top-notch lawyers, and the legal ability at your disposal to slap the likes of Comcast in the face hard enough that they stop bullying everyone else on the playground?
Doubtful, at least not for the next game in the series. It's already been confirmed that an official sequel is in the works.
EA has already been acting like a bitch by buying out exclusive licensing deals with the NFL. They seem to be attempting to get their only remaining competition in the sports market out of the way by simply buying them.
I understand that the video game industry is like any other industry in that most companies exist solely for earning as much money as possible...but you know what? There are still some people that take pride in their work, and many of the folks that work under Take Two fall into that category. If they wanted to be owned by a big publisher like EA, they would have accepted the offer. They obviously don't want it, and EA is an even bigger asshole for trying to muscle their way in after they had the door slammed in their face.
As a person with high respect for those that create not just for profit but to make their creative vision a reality, I find EA's deal to be a slap in the face to gamers all over the world. EA has pissed off a LOT of people, and they seem to be content with adding to that number. Fuck EA, fuck their underhanded business practices, and lastly fuck you for supporting and defending them.
I...I cannot thank you enough... ::sacrificial offering::
...that this means Google can fix some of the horrible code/server issues DoubleClick seems to bring with it. A toast, in hopes that soon I won't have to wait thirty seconds while my Firefox window says "Waiting for doubleclick.com" at the bottom. ::salud::
I would venture to guess because the market share of folks who have HTPC's (much less HTPC's that are capable of gaming) are few and far between compared to the number of folks that have consoles hooked up to their TVs...it makes more sense to make those kinds of games for consoles. I'm not saying I agree with it (especially since I myself have a PC hooked up in my home theater), I'm just saying I think that's why it is the way that it is. ::shrug::
Rio presented two of the absolute best non-video MP3 players so far...the Rio Carbon and the Rio Karma.
I still have a Carbon that I bought at launch that works perfectly after repeated drops, getting stepped on, and even getting run over once. My Karma still works, although I did end up having to replace the hard drive in it a year ago (everything else works perfectly though...screen, scroll wheel, etc.)
To this day I have yet to find an MP3 player that had a better interface or that was easier to use with one hand than those two players. I personally think that if it weren't for iTunes, the iPod by itself would have never been as big as it is (try using a Carbon or a Karma's scroll wheel, and then sit there and tell me that you prefer Apple's mutilated nipple...it doesn't even compare)
Of course, all this is moot considering Rio went under and the last product they released was a hulking piece of crap...but for a time, they were the best on the block. In my eyes (since I don't care about video or any of that, just music) they still are top of the game.
And you would be right. The youngest in my family is 18...youngest person I game with on any kind of regular basis is 19 (oldest is 36...I'm 23)
I know that...hence why I said "when you play split-screen mode" and not "multiplayer" in my post.
I agree, it is definitely harder to be precise with a thumbstick.
That being said, while I personally prefer a mouse for aiming purposes, in nearly all other aspects of an FPS I prefer a controller. Having all the buttons grouped closely together makes it much faster to do other things and reduces the risk of pressing the wrong key in an intense moment... using a "trigger" style button instead of a mouse button makes it easier (again, in my opinion) to squeeze off shots faster while remaining accurate, and physically moving with an analogue stick is definitely easier than using WASD.
If I absolutely had to choose between one or the other to use and never use the other one again, I think I would go with a mouse/keyboard combo. That being said, I find that I seem to rank right around the same (4-7th place) using a mouse/keyboard as I do using a controller for an online FPS. I also actually trained for a month or so with a controller (used a notebook to keep track of my progress, did hand exercises, etc.) so that I could become profecient at using one. The reason was very much akin to the reason that I give people when I say that EVERYONE should know how to drive a manual transmission car. You may always buy an automatic, but you never know when you may be in a situation that requires you to drive a stick-shift (I personally drive a manual...never owned an automatic transmission car, and until I am physically unable to drive a manual I won't ever own an automatic.)
If that's the case, you are just using the trackball wrong.
Case in point, the big ones that I mentioned. You rest your palm on top of the ball, set the sensitivity to being super high, and you needn't move more than a half-inch and any direction to move the cursor from one corner of your monitor to the other...same goes for gaming, it allows for super-fast movement of your aim while moving very little. The less you have to move your hand, the faster you can aim.
I would venture to say that using a trackball (especially for an FPS) takes more practice than using a dual-analog controller...once mastered, however, it is far superior to a normal mouse or a controller (again, this also assumes that you bought a good trackball...good ones are expensive, and cheap ones are horrible for gaming as they don't have enough sensitivity in relation to their sensors)
You apparently have never used a good trackball then.
The sensitivity and amount of control you have onscreen goes in this order: Trackball>Mouse>Controller.
Grab one of those professional trackballs where the trackball is slightly smaller than a pool ball...they are super accurate.
Well, considering I'm not going to be buying my friend's PC's and their monitors for them, I would have to say the PC.
Not to mention that when you play split-screen on a console, your viewing area is VASTLY diminished.
I'm not saying PC's are better than consoles or vice versa...like I said in another post, I don't care what system a game is on, I just want to play it. They both have their advantages and disadvantages, but in the end they are pretty much equal at this point.
I frequently hear that argument. "Why play games on a PC when a good video card costs as much as my 360?"
My response is always the same. "Why play games on a 360 when your HDTV cost more than my whole computer?"
You know...I'm not saying that you don't get better control with a keyboard and mouse, but I tend to find that the folks that say "you can't POSSIBLY play an FPS with a controller!" usually say that because they themselves are unable to.
I grew up gaming on both consoles and PC's (23, almost 24 now). I play all different genres, and frankly don't really care what system a game is on...I just love to game.
I find that after just a short bit of practice (it took about 1-2 months of solid training) I perform just as well in shooters with a controller as I do with a keyboard and mouse. It's really not that hard to learn how to use a controller effectively.
Just because you are unable to adapt to a different and harder to use control input does NOT instantly mean that it is entirely worthless. Did you ever consider that maybe you don't have the skill and rely on your "tried and true" way of doing things?
I am by absolutely no means a fantastic gamer...I play games roughly 25-30 hours a week, and have been for a large portion of my life, but you will never find me on the top of a list in a multiplayer match (you will generally find me ranked 4th-7th). Still, even I can understand that it just takes some time to get used to a different control set up. Using a controller to play an FPS is really not that difficult...maybe you should stop shitting on things you don't have the ability to use and actually try to learn it.
Right. Because Comcast alone isn't enough to show why things like Net Neutrality need to be taken seriously. /sarcasm
Seriously though...The whole "throttling" issue with Comcast is just the tip of the iceberg. There is no reason to crash into the damn thing if we can steer around it.
Wrong. Completely wrong.
Do we still have cotton plantations where white rich men are whipping blacks in the fields? Are we we still bringing black people from africa stuffed like sardines in the hulls of ships? Are we still lynching hundreds of black folks a year? Are blacks not allowed to vote, or have a good paying job, or make decisions that impact the entire country? Are blacks not allowed to talk back to white people?
Please. Slavery is long over. Black people today do not know the meaning of the word racism. Racism isn't having a hard time getting a cab or having trouble becoming a CEO. Racism is getting the shit beat out of you because you weren't picking fast enough.
Slavery is finished, in the past...accept it.