Actually, a 16" LCD would be equivalent in terms of viewing space to a 17" CRT monitor as the biggest viewable space I've seen on a 17" CRT is 16.1"...Of course, this is mainly true in America where there are laws (FTC regulations/policies might be more accurate) regarding the advertised measurement of picture tubes. For example, in Japan a widescreen HDTV might be advertised as 36" because that is the size of the tube, while here in the US the exact same TV will be advertised as 34" which is the actual viewable diagonal measurement. It's amusing when people start complaining that Sony/Toshiba/etc. are selling 36" widescreens in the Far East while we only get 34"! It must be a conspiracy!:)
"Permanent 'works in progress'"? Not necessarily a bad thing, considering the dreck that George has provided us in these latest two films. I'm hopeful that eventually we will see Episodes I and II as the great films they could have been. After all, the technology should eventually be available to fix the script, plot and direction just as the special effects in the first three were changed.
It's likely that Angel will complete at least five seasons since that's supposedly the magic syndication number where the big bucks kick in (just completed season three, so probably two more years of Angel).
Did anyone else notice also that this article was posted on the site of a store that sells the physical M:TG cards? This would seem pretty obviously to be a conflict of interest since having WOTC sell the cards direct (the online versions and then the subsequent trade-ins for physical cards) knocks out some of their StarCity's business...
Well, another assured solution might be to track them down via their IP address (assuming it's static, there's always a way to get to them) and beat them repeatedly with a baseball bat...But, of course, I would never (always) approve of this kind of violent (delicious) activity.
Ivan Boesky, Michael Milkin and anyone who owned an S&L a few years back might disagree with you about how many people cheaters can affect in real life.:D
Unfortunately, not everyone has a static IP address. If you ban one IP at a place like AOL, then you could be banning 10 or more other non-cheaters at the same time...Of course, if someone is playing an FPS online through AOL then they're causing other problems, so maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing...
"Abysmal" resolution? The low-end (still too expensive, though that's a manufacturing problem) plasmas have 853x480 resolution which is more than enough to display DVDs at their highest quality, and with their advantages in terms of contrast ratio and ambient light tolerance (not to mention their color warmth and accuracy) they make a beautiful way to watch DVDs. The next step up goes to 1024x768 and 1024x1024, which very nearly resolves the full potential resolution of 720p HDTV signals (1280x720) and certainly doesn't do a terrible job with 1080i (540 lines at a time, let's not forget). Finally, the high-end models are at 1365x768 which allows for complete resolution of 720p signals. That ain't too shabby (especially in the mid range for 720p display) in my view.
It's also worth noting that a good many of these displays CAN be driven digitally through DVI (and many are using them this way) and that several of these models will accept all HDTV signals including 1080p (yes, I know that doesn't mean they resolve the whole signal, but they will accept them).
Based purely on price, plasmas are an iffy deal for just about anyone. Based on PC usability, I don't think plasmas are a great deal either considering the way most of us use computers (at desks). However, for a high-end videophile who just can't accomodate a projector in a particular room, either because of size or light, plasmas make an excellent choice and seem to offer more satisfaction (and oohs and aahs) than just about any other display tech I've seen. Oh yes, and their wall mountability is just hella cool.:)
I don't disagree with the idea that copyrights should expire after a reasonable period of time and revert to the public domain. I think that current copyright law (particularly in terms of duration) is a crock. HOWEVER (you just had to know that was coming, eh?), how would that apply to The Beatles? Even before the extensions of copyright in the 70s and 90s, that material would still be copyrightable because the creators are not dead (at least not all of them, though we are halfway there).
Also, I don't consider this an issue of rich versus poor, since even a relatively poor working person in this country can buy a CD (or even three), even at their inflated prices.
Another point you choose to make is that this material is not someone's property, which is not quite true. It is a product of someone's work/investment, to which they are entitled a reasonable profit (a reasonable profit in this country being defined as what the market will bear without price-fixing - which, of course, brings up another issue entirely as regards the RIAA). If you write and perform an original song that people want to buy, what limits would you want on that?
There are good reasons to change the existing laws, but trying to argue (as some do) that the RIAA and others like them are just wrong and shouldn't exercise their rights as defined under current law is foolish. Better to argue that the law is wrong and try to fix it (which some are trying to do). We're long overdue for a wholesale house cleaning of our Congress, and maybe someday that will happen, hopefully leaving us with legislators at least slightly less beholden to big business.
If music is copyrighted, then you have no right to have it for free.
Customers may want low/no-cost music, but that doesn't mean that piracy should be made legal.
Speaking in general terms, I think piracy can actually have an overall positive effect, particularly when that piracy is used to obtain content that people are over-charging for (as in the case of CDs). However, that does not mean that piracy should be approved by our laws and the courts.
If, at some point, it becomes the will of the people to kick [insert your own minority group here] people out of the country, should we then make that legal, too?
Oh, and in any other arena, I think everyone would agree that protecting your property (physical or intellectual) *is* the right response.
Should they then supplant their old business model with one wherein they make NO money, which is what services such as Audiogalaxy and Kazaa promote? I've found myself waffling in the past, but what it comes down to is that 99.9% of all traffic on these services consists of copyrighted material, which means that the RIAA, whatever one thinks of them, is right and should win (according to the law).
If you want to advocate changing copyright laws, then I'm with you, but I don't think that this is an appropriate area in which to violate the law in the spirit of some kind of civil disobedience. After all, nobody actually NEEDS an MP3 of the latest Linkin Park or Britney Spears song.
The VCR has "significant" fair use, specifically time-shifting, which is what it was determined most people were using it for. Internet sharing services such as Kazaa, Audiogalaxy, etc. can easily be found to be used primarily for sharing copyrighted material. Furthermore, I wouldn't be surprised if they could demonstrate actual INTENT to violate copyright laws on the part of the folks creating the software. The fact that they are making money on the deal just cements the case against them.
Once again, considering how many of these comments are at 2 or above (whether automatic or modded there), it should be pointed out that not buying an XBox at all ensures maximum loss to Microsoft AND it prevents you from buying a system that is going to offer a lot less than the PS2 (in terms of game volume and variety) and Gamecube (in terms of franchises and higher percentage of games that are just plain fun).
You have to get a new activation code, but you don't have to PAY for a new activation code. It's inconvenient, but it's not quite as evil as some folks imply.
One of the reasons that SimLife seemed better than SimEarth was the timing of development and release. SimEarth was a DOS game that was later "upgraded" to Win 3.1, while SimLife was a Win game from the start (with nicer graphics). Note that I use the word "seemed" as I thought SimEarth was a better game myownself, and I played it a great deal more. Trying to build a life-sustaining planet through the indirect manipulation of conditions was a blast, while I thought that the more direct nature of SimLife detracted from the fun. SimEarth was more like laying residential plots in SimCity and watching them fill or not, while SimLife was more like building a bunch of houses/apartments.
Cry me a f***in' river. Use any combination of semantics you want, but Kazaa's service was designed, and intended, to violate copyright law. What, should the RIAA, et. al. just not sue because they have too much money? Even if it HAD [potential] substantial non-infringing uses, 99% of its traffic consisted of infringing uses. If there was a method by which, say, 80% of copyrighted content could be blocked from their service, nobody would show up to use it and they'd bloody well go out of business anyway. TS.
I'm no fan of the content providers, particularly their penchant to consider every single customer a pirate waiting to happen, but in cases like Kazaa and Napster, the RIAA and their ilk are right. It's too bad that people can't be more selective about who deserves their support and who doesn't.
Could somebody please explain *why* nerds are always criticizing the things that *other* nerds like that they don't (and apparently doing so with their +1 turned on to boot)?
I've never understood the complaint about EQ (and any other online game) that it rewards people who have no outside life. What part of your life outside the game SHOULD be affecting your gameplay? Should you be getting experience in EQ for going outside and taking a hike through the forest? Should you be getting experience for starting a brawl in a bar?
ALL MMOGs are going to reward you for playing more, just like Final Fantasy can only be completed through many hours of play or Diablo rewards you for playing as long as you can. How much success are you going to have with The Sims (offline) in less than a couple of hours?
Now, if you are making the argument that you don't like the "fixed" time commitments of things like joining your guild on a raid, exploration of a dungeon, well, I guess I can understand that. But, the only real difference between EQ and an offline RPG in that area is that in an offline RPG you can just save and come back to where you left off. I would suggest the EQ is more interesting BECAUSE it requires you to plan your time, coordinate events with your friends and/or guildmates and generally demonstrate some commitment to get ahead. If you can't do that, then it isn't the game for you, but that doesn't mean that it is a "bad" game or that the people who play it have no lives...they just enjoy different entertainment than you do.
And apparently you've missed the X-Box-related Microsoft handjobs handed out by posters here over the last few months. BTW- If all you care about are technical specifications, perhaps you would be better off sticking to PC gaming where you can actually keep up with the pace of technology. In terms of gaming power, the X-Box was obselescent the moment the GeForce4 came out (and was arguably obselescent once 1.2 GHz processors were relatively cheap and plentiful.
To paraphrase the Clinton campaign of a few years ago: "It's the games, stupid!"
Mario Sunshine is on its way. It's probably a good thing that they waited on Mario, for at least two reasons: 1) They got an automatic push last Christmas season by virtue of the fact that the system was brand new; thus, they can get a second big Nintendo push this Christmas when Mario Sunshine hits the stores (can you say 70% profit margin? I knew you could!) and 2) Because Mario64 was considered one of the finest console games ever, they've really got to get it right with the new Mario. I wouldn't be surprised if Luigi's Mansion was originally going to be a Mario game but they reconsidered because it didn't have enough of the "wow factor" (it's handy having two characters who look exactly the same and all you have to do is change the colors).:)
Yes, yes. We all know that Microsoft has a ton of cash. They also have the "most powerful" console out there, and to boot it's supposed to be the easiest to develop for. Given these two conditions, one would think that Microsoft would have the best games, wouldn't one?
Even granting that there are a few more fun games than HALO, which one has gotten any buzz whatsoever? With all that cash, why isn't Microsoft owning my eyeballs with commercials touting the exclusive properties they have that can compete with the PS2 (and the best games, in quantity, on the market).
Here's what I think it's going to come down to, at least in this generation of consoles. Sony got the big advantage by releasing an excellent system a year earlier than their two major competitors. Nintendo could afford to wait that extra year (presumably to make their hardware better and allow their game developers time to come up with some great stuff; see Pikmin, Super Monkey Ball, SS Bros. and Rogue Leader) because of their excellent brand name, getting young 'uns with Pokemon and getting older folks with Mario and Zelda (and their reputation going back to the Kong). Microsoft is, inevitably, sucking hind teat because they were a year later than the PS2, they don't have any real brand recognition in the console field AND they have the baggage of a poor public image because of their illegal business practices and, to a lesser extent, their repeated failures in home electronics (see WebTV and UltimateTV).
If Microsoft drops their price anymore, I think it will send the wrong signal to consumers. It would smack of desperation and could indicate that the console is already on its way to Dreamcastville.
For me, I just don't trust that anything so compelling or interesting is going to come out anytime soon that will make me want an X-Box. I've already got PS2 (and will pick up a GameCube tomorrow). If X-Box was bringing more to my living room than tech specs, they might sell a few more of the things.
Well, I also disagree with Blizzard on the bnetd issue. Yet I will still be willing to buy their games as well. Having stupid lawyers doesn't mean that you don't make good games.
I don't mind sending a message by not buying something but not when that something wouldn't see a major dent in sales even if every person who KNOWS about the problem decided not to buy. Plus, I don't think the clause is enforceable, so I (and everyone else) will just do what the hell I want and screw their EULA.:)
It's far more likely that instead of OPEC becoming obsolete, Russia would simply join OPEC. OPEC, after all, is not a Muslim or Middle East only club; Venezuela was a founding member.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, a 16" LCD would be equivalent in terms of viewing space to a 17" CRT monitor as the biggest viewable space I've seen on a 17" CRT is 16.1"...Of course, this is mainly true in America where there are laws (FTC regulations/policies might be more accurate) regarding the advertised measurement of picture tubes. For example, in Japan a widescreen HDTV might be advertised as 36" because that is the size of the tube, while here in the US the exact same TV will be advertised as 34" which is the actual viewable diagonal measurement. It's amusing when people start complaining that Sony/Toshiba/etc. are selling 36" widescreens in the Far East while we only get 34"! It must be a conspiracy! :)
"Permanent 'works in progress'"? Not necessarily a bad thing, considering the dreck that George has provided us in these latest two films. I'm hopeful that eventually we will see Episodes I and II as the great films they could have been. After all, the technology should eventually be available to fix the script, plot and direction just as the special effects in the first three were changed.
It's likely that Angel will complete at least five seasons since that's supposedly the magic syndication number where the big bucks kick in (just completed season three, so probably two more years of Angel).
Did anyone else notice also that this article was posted on the site of a store that sells the physical M:TG cards? This would seem pretty obviously to be a conflict of interest since having WOTC sell the cards direct (the online versions and then the subsequent trade-ins for physical cards) knocks out some of their StarCity's business...
Well, another assured solution might be to track them down via their IP address (assuming it's static, there's always a way to get to them) and beat them repeatedly with a baseball bat...But, of course, I would never (always) approve of this kind of violent (delicious) activity.
Ivan Boesky, Michael Milkin and anyone who owned an S&L a few years back might disagree with you about how many people cheaters can affect in real life. :D
Unfortunately, not everyone has a static IP address. If you ban one IP at a place like AOL, then you could be banning 10 or more other non-cheaters at the same time...Of course, if someone is playing an FPS online through AOL then they're causing other problems, so maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing...
It's also worth noting that a good many of these displays CAN be driven digitally through DVI (and many are using them this way) and that several of these models will accept all HDTV signals including 1080p (yes, I know that doesn't mean they resolve the whole signal, but they will accept them).
Based purely on price, plasmas are an iffy deal for just about anyone. Based on PC usability, I don't think plasmas are a great deal either considering the way most of us use computers (at desks). However, for a high-end videophile who just can't accomodate a projector in a particular room, either because of size or light, plasmas make an excellent choice and seem to offer more satisfaction (and oohs and aahs) than just about any other display tech I've seen. Oh yes, and their wall mountability is just hella cool. :)
-Aaron
Also, I don't consider this an issue of rich versus poor, since even a relatively poor working person in this country can buy a CD (or even three), even at their inflated prices.
Another point you choose to make is that this material is not someone's property, which is not quite true. It is a product of someone's work/investment, to which they are entitled a reasonable profit (a reasonable profit in this country being defined as what the market will bear without price-fixing - which, of course, brings up another issue entirely as regards the RIAA). If you write and perform an original song that people want to buy, what limits would you want on that?
There are good reasons to change the existing laws, but trying to argue (as some do) that the RIAA and others like them are just wrong and shouldn't exercise their rights as defined under current law is foolish. Better to argue that the law is wrong and try to fix it (which some are trying to do). We're long overdue for a wholesale house cleaning of our Congress, and maybe someday that will happen, hopefully leaving us with legislators at least slightly less beholden to big business.
-Aaron
Speaking in general terms, I think piracy can actually have an overall positive effect, particularly when that piracy is used to obtain content that people are over-charging for (as in the case of CDs). However, that does not mean that piracy should be approved by our laws and the courts.
If, at some point, it becomes the will of the people to kick [insert your own minority group here] people out of the country, should we then make that legal, too?
Oh, and in any other arena, I think everyone would agree that protecting your property (physical or intellectual) *is* the right response.
-Aaron
If you want to advocate changing copyright laws, then I'm with you, but I don't think that this is an appropriate area in which to violate the law in the spirit of some kind of civil disobedience. After all, nobody actually NEEDS an MP3 of the latest Linkin Park or Britney Spears song.
-Aaron
-Aaron
-Aaron
-Aaron
-Aaron
I'm no fan of the content providers, particularly their penchant to consider every single customer a pirate waiting to happen, but in cases like Kazaa and Napster, the RIAA and their ilk are right. It's too bad that people can't be more selective about who deserves their support and who doesn't.
-Aaron
Could somebody please explain *why* nerds are always criticizing the things that *other* nerds like that they don't (and apparently doing so with their +1 turned on to boot)?
Coffee??? Who in their right mind buys anything but the espresso machine? U R n07 1337! :)
ALL MMOGs are going to reward you for playing more, just like Final Fantasy can only be completed through many hours of play or Diablo rewards you for playing as long as you can. How much success are you going to have with The Sims (offline) in less than a couple of hours?
Now, if you are making the argument that you don't like the "fixed" time commitments of things like joining your guild on a raid, exploration of a dungeon, well, I guess I can understand that. But, the only real difference between EQ and an offline RPG in that area is that in an offline RPG you can just save and come back to where you left off. I would suggest the EQ is more interesting BECAUSE it requires you to plan your time, coordinate events with your friends and/or guildmates and generally demonstrate some commitment to get ahead. If you can't do that, then it isn't the game for you, but that doesn't mean that it is a "bad" game or that the people who play it have no lives...they just enjoy different entertainment than you do.
-Aaron
To paraphrase the Clinton campaign of a few years ago: "It's the games, stupid!"
-Aaron
-Aaron
Even granting that there are a few more fun games than HALO, which one has gotten any buzz whatsoever? With all that cash, why isn't Microsoft owning my eyeballs with commercials touting the exclusive properties they have that can compete with the PS2 (and the best games, in quantity, on the market).
Here's what I think it's going to come down to, at least in this generation of consoles. Sony got the big advantage by releasing an excellent system a year earlier than their two major competitors. Nintendo could afford to wait that extra year (presumably to make their hardware better and allow their game developers time to come up with some great stuff; see Pikmin, Super Monkey Ball, SS Bros. and Rogue Leader) because of their excellent brand name, getting young 'uns with Pokemon and getting older folks with Mario and Zelda (and their reputation going back to the Kong). Microsoft is, inevitably, sucking hind teat because they were a year later than the PS2, they don't have any real brand recognition in the console field AND they have the baggage of a poor public image because of their illegal business practices and, to a lesser extent, their repeated failures in home electronics (see WebTV and UltimateTV).
If Microsoft drops their price anymore, I think it will send the wrong signal to consumers. It would smack of desperation and could indicate that the console is already on its way to Dreamcastville.
For me, I just don't trust that anything so compelling or interesting is going to come out anytime soon that will make me want an X-Box. I've already got PS2 (and will pick up a GameCube tomorrow). If X-Box was bringing more to my living room than tech specs, they might sell a few more of the things.
-Aaron
I don't mind sending a message by not buying something but not when that something wouldn't see a major dent in sales even if every person who KNOWS about the problem decided not to buy. Plus, I don't think the clause is enforceable, so I (and everyone else) will just do what the hell I want and screw their EULA. :)
-Aaron
-Aaron
As a sidenote, I plan to include in the mod at least one NPC who will say "Come sue me, Bioware!" in every box of text. =P