As far as the OS goes its pretty but a distant second to Windows.
I have a Mac and a PC (XP) and I won't take sides on what's a better overall system because both have their merits. But in terms of usability, OSX has that infuriating icon bar at the bottom which doesn't nest with sublevels. The file system has a weird horizontal orientation in the 'explorer' which smacks of "we need to look different from Windows" logic. The window maximize feature (which doesn't lock to the screen) is also infuriating. But most of all... and this is something that I cannot forgive Apple for: The one button mouse is fundamentally inferior. Support for two buttons is limited in the OS.
Apple is always getting credit for being design intensive -- but this is more of an aesthetic judgement IMHO. Microsoft (as much as I love to bash them) deserves far more credit than they get for designing an extraordinarily usable UI.
My two cents of course. Nothing intended as a flame here. As I said, I have both machines and use them both.
I think some of the posts here are confusing Scripted Length and Play Time. There's a difference between Scripted Length and the amount of time one can replay a game.
I've spent 100's of hours (1000's?) spent playing GuildWars and StarCraft. These games are more like Chess. The playability comes from the player-to-player competition and infinite strategic options, and team/opponent permutations. It has nothing to do with a scripted 'length'.
A Google is a number with 100 zeroes -- implying a vast array of results.
Amazon is something really big and really dense -- implying a rich, vibrant resource.
eBay was conceived to sound like an African word -- back in the day of the "global village" Internet image. It also sounds like a "Bay" which is something safe and encompassing.
This question sort of amazes me. I have a PS2, an X-BOX and I just got a 360. But I still spend more time playing Guild Wars than I spend on all 3 of my consoles combined. And that's just this year's addiction. Before that there was StarCraft, Diablo, Baldur's Gate II, System Shock II, Deus Ex, etc.
I'm not that much younger than the OP but I can't remember ever getting a hand cramp from a PC game.
Maybe a little carpal tunnel from the really twitchy first-person shooters. But.. that's where Guild Wars comes in. Not much twitch. A whole lot of action.
I can understand "iPod": A pod refers to something small and seedlike, but it also references a 2001 (the film) style space capsule. The brand is a mix of modernity and capacity. The prefix "i" is common parlance for anything 'interactive'.
Now what the hell is a "Zune"? It sounds sort of African and primitive. It sort of sounds like "Dune", which adds to the desert reference. Or maybe "Rune" which also sounds primitive. If its supposed to sound like "Tune", then that's somewhere between funny and sad.
What's the software component of the "iPod"? Well, its "iTunes" of course. A name which needs no explanation.
What's the software component of the "Zune"? Is it "Windows Media Player"? (Another horribly branded product). No. That would have made home integration too easy. Actually the brand team came up with "Zune Software". I can see the "Yeah. I like that. I think it really works" conversation now.
I haven't played with a Zune, or even seen one so I can't comment on whether or not its any good. But I can comment on it from a brand perspective because I (like everyone here) has been inundated by the ads. And IMHO the brand is a dot-com style disaster in the making. It says nothing to me.
> "His point is that the cost of the vanity items is far out of line with what they do, and it was so unrealistic that it was an affront to common sense."
Thank you for the "utility-theory of value".
Unfortunately the rest of the world disagrees with you.
Complaining about the cost of "trinkets" is a little silly. They're nothing other than "vanity items".
So the writer of this article is upset that vanity items cost too much? Hello?
Any disappointment on the part of players is a result of over-expectation in the 'freebie collectible' component of the offline game. I'm not sure that having one's un-researched expectations shattered by reality is something that warrants casting blame on the manufacturer.
IMHO as long as we're talking about something that has no other purpose but to flaunt in front of other players and say "Na-ha, look what I have!", there's no 'appropriate' price. As in the real world, vanity has no upper price limit.
No. That's silly. System requirements are clearly stated on the outside of all software packaging.
But imagine I sell you a house and I say: There are certain legal responsibilities and restrictions that come along with buying this house. But I'm not going to tell you what they are until you buy the house.
If, after purchasing the house, you disagree with the terms, you may seek a refund on the price of the house (minus tax in many states) and you'll have to go through an enormous amount of paperwork and frustration in claiming your refund.
Except for that's almost impossible. I've tried it. You'll spend two hours talking to store managers and customer support, etc. The reality is that Staples, CompUSA, BestBuy have no systems in place for returns based upon a disagreement with the EULA. If that's not an indication of 'bad faith' I don't know what is.
At first there were no "gold" or "silver" accounts. There was simply X-Box Live and it was widely understood that membership to X-Box Live brought with it the priveleges of online play.
Then Microsoft created a tiered system where users could pay more to access advertisements for new games, and pay even more dollars to download 3rd rate games created in 1983.
The problem is that Microsoft has already made it perfectly clear that new content and new services will always represent additional costs. There is no sense of "membership priveleges", or that new content creation will come with even a Gold Membership.
For all of Microsoft's suggestions that Xbox LIVE is a content-rich service, the reality is that Gold Memberships are essentially paid for Internet access.
PC games have better and more diverse online gameplay for a small fraction of the cost. Demos are always free, and anyone who's played Diablo or Guild Wars has experienced something that Microsoft will never, ever, ever offer: Free online gameplay.
The trend is clear. Microsoft wants to charge you more and more and offer you less and less.
Platinum Memberships will soon be discussed for even "more" premium content. Or maybe just the same content previewed a couple weeks in advance.
"Post sale restrictions" are IMHO the legal flaw in just about *every* EULA.
You've gone to the store, you've purchased a product, you've driven home, you've opened the product and are in the process of installing the product and WHAMMO -- you're forced to agree to something after you've already expended time, energy and money towards posession of that product. If you disagree with the EULA, you'll need to expend further time, energy and money (and bereaucratic frustration) in order to undo the financial transaction and receive compensation. (Ever try taking XP back to Staples and saying you didn't agree with the EULA?).
This is a form of trickery and extortion that goes far beyond bait-and-switch. It is a transaction in which 'good faith' on the part of the manufacturer is non-existent. EULA's are legal documents which cannot be given due diligence (because the expense of said diligence would vastly exceed the price of the product), and they are agreed to by minors, the elderly and consumers with no legal background every day. The price for disagreement is more wasted effort, more lost time and more lost money.
"However realize when you buy an Ipod, you're agreeing to use it the way Apple says you can. "
You're talking about the EULA. The case is far from closed as to whether EULA's always constitute legal and enforcable "agreements". Let's say I was given my iPOD as an opened gift? Let's say I bought it on eBay? Let's say I'm 14 and I bought my iPOD and didn't understand the EULA (which, even if I did understand it, it wouldn't mean diddly-squat because minors can't agree to legally binding contracts). Hell, let's say I'm not particularly skilled with the mouse and I pressed the wrong button?
And lets talk about due legal process for a second: What is legal due diligence when entering into any binding agreement? Well, you show that contract to your lawyer of course. Now consider that I've supposedly "agreed" to about 50 EULA's in 2006 so far...
What would legal due diligence set me back if I were to *responsibly* enter all of these agreements? Let's say for the sake of argument its around $1500 per "contract". So I'd be looking at around $75k in legal bills (so far) this year, were I to have entered each of these contracts. Is this the expectation of the industry?
Microsoft's EULA's state that upon disagreement with the EULA, products can be returned. And yet none of Microsoft's software retailers (to my knowlege) accept returns on software. So are these "agreements" being issued to consumers in good faith?
But let's talk about something much more basic:
THE EULA IS PRESENTED TO THE CUSTOMER AFTER THE PURCHASE HAS BEEN MADE.
Tell me in what other industry a binding contractual agreement can be presented to a party after the purchase?
My position: EULA's are rarely binding. And if you're afraid they are, just give all your software to your (under 18 year old) kid as a present.
I don't know if "wikified" is the right term, but I've always thought that classic "no-longer-for-sale" games should be handed over to the public domain.
The intellectual property for future projects and sequels should of course remain in the hands of the copyright holder. It seems to me that this is a win/win for publishers since the properties would gain a new lease on life.
Really, I just want to be able to download M.U.L.E., some Infocom titles and Master of Orion (although I'm not sure I need another addiction in my life right now).
That's a strange way to measure a shortage. The strike price is simply the balance point between buys and sells of contracts on the exchange.
The reality is that there is an acute shortage, and the price of silver is maintained at its current low position by 5 (or fewer) "massive" short positions. ("Massive", as in, "the largest short positions of any commodity in history"). It is estimated that the current short position in silver far exceeds the world's available supply of silver, which is illegal from a securities law perspective. (One cannot short shares or commodities which do not exist).
A case in point is the Nickel market. The London commodities exchange defaulted on Nickel contracts this year for the first time in history.
The reason for the massive manipulation *is* the acute shortage. The big silver banks are currently caught between a rock and a hard place. They don't have the silver, and the price has more than doubled in the last couple years -- leaving them holding the bill. A bill which cannot be paid because available silver simply does not exist. Hence a handful of players are currently forced to take out the world's largest short positions in an effort to drive the price back down. Such actions usually do work, but with the launch of the Silver ETF this year, investor demand has skyrocketed -- cancelling out the effect of the massive short position. Now the banks are truly screwed. The case for silver is bullish on a historically unprecedented scale.
> Most newly mined silver comes as a by-product of copper and zinc mining, there are very few "silver" mines left.
(That's because there are very few high quality silver deposits left)
> Therefore, new silver + recycled silver more than satisfies demand.
(No, world silver supplies are lower now than they have ever been in history and depleting rapidly)
> One of silvers biggest uses used to be photography, but digital is killing that use, hence price of film is going to go up, not because there is less silver, but because there is less demand for photographic film.
Manufacturing and antibacterial uses have risen faster than the decline in photographic uses.
The price of silver has more than tripled in the last 4 years.
Slashdot Mirror
Please, Mac makes beautiful hardware.
As far as the OS goes its pretty but a distant second to Windows.
I have a Mac and a PC (XP) and I won't take sides on what's a better overall system because both
have their merits. But in terms of usability, OSX has that infuriating icon bar at the bottom
which doesn't nest with sublevels. The file system has a weird horizontal orientation in the
'explorer' which smacks of "we need to look different from Windows" logic. The window maximize
feature (which doesn't lock to the screen) is also infuriating. But most of all... and this is
something that I cannot forgive Apple for: The one button mouse is fundamentally inferior.
Support for two buttons is limited in the OS.
Apple is always getting credit for being design intensive -- but this is more of an aesthetic
judgement IMHO. Microsoft (as much as I love to bash them) deserves far more credit than they
get for designing an extraordinarily usable UI.
My two cents of course. Nothing intended as a flame here. As I said, I have both machines
and use them both.
No one else has ever slammed on the brakes and sued for neck injury? Come on.
You all had me going.
Start working on that resume...
I think some of the posts here are confusing Scripted Length and Play Time. There's a difference between Scripted Length and the amount of time one can replay a game.
I've spent 100's of hours (1000's?) spent playing GuildWars and StarCraft. These games are more like Chess. The playability comes from the player-to-player competition and infinite strategic options, and team/opponent permutations. It has nothing to do with a scripted 'length'.
> "In other words, the more a company focuses on beating its competitors, rather than on the bottom line, the worse it is likely to do.'"
Sadly, this applies to our nation as well.
Actually --
A Google is a number with 100 zeroes -- implying a vast array of results.
Amazon is something really big and really dense -- implying a rich, vibrant resource.
eBay was conceived to sound like an African word -- back in the day of the "global village" Internet image. It also sounds like a "Bay" which is something safe and encompassing.
This question sort of amazes me. I have a PS2, an X-BOX and I just got a 360. But I still spend more time
playing Guild Wars than I spend on all 3 of my consoles combined. And that's just this year's addiction.
Before that there was StarCraft, Diablo, Baldur's Gate II, System Shock II, Deus Ex, etc.
I'm not that much younger than the OP but I can't remember ever getting a hand cramp from a PC game.
Maybe a little carpal tunnel from the really twitchy first-person shooters. But.. that's where Guild Wars comes
in. Not much twitch. A whole lot of action.
My 2 cents.
No really -- what the hell is a "Zune"?
I can understand "iPod": A pod refers to something small and seedlike, but it also references a 2001 (the film) style space capsule. The brand is a mix of modernity and capacity. The prefix "i" is common parlance for anything 'interactive'.
Now what the hell is a "Zune"? It sounds sort of African and primitive. It sort of sounds like "Dune", which adds to the desert reference. Or maybe "Rune" which also sounds primitive. If its supposed to sound like "Tune", then that's somewhere between funny and sad.
What's the software component of the "iPod"? Well, its "iTunes" of course. A name which needs no explanation.
What's the software component of the "Zune"? Is it "Windows Media Player"? (Another horribly branded product). No. That would have made home integration too easy. Actually the brand team came up with "Zune Software". I can see the "Yeah. I like that. I think it really works" conversation now.
I haven't played with a Zune, or even seen one so I can't comment on whether or not its any good. But I can comment on it from a brand perspective because I (like everyone here) has been inundated by the ads. And IMHO the brand is a dot-com style disaster in the making. It says nothing to me.
Nice stereotype. And you're barfing behind the frathouse while you're not working towards a Realtors(tm) license?
Neanderthal chick and ancient guy?
Or ancient chick and neanderthal guy?
My open source XBOX-360 Web Browser doesn't render Flash yet.
> "His point is that the cost of the vanity items is far out of line with what they do, and it was so unrealistic that it was an affront to common sense."
Thank you for the "utility-theory of value".
Unfortunately the rest of the world disagrees with you.
Useless baubles frequently have unlimited value.
Fine. No hardware for you either.
Complaining about the cost of "trinkets" is a little silly. They're nothing
other than "vanity items".
So the writer of this article is upset that vanity items cost too much? Hello?
Any disappointment on the part of players is a result of over-expectation
in the 'freebie collectible' component of the offline game. I'm not sure that
having one's un-researched expectations shattered by reality is something that warrants
casting blame on the manufacturer.
IMHO as long as we're talking about something that has no other purpose but to
flaunt in front of other players and say "Na-ha, look what I have!", there's no
'appropriate' price. As in the real world, vanity has no upper price limit.
No. That's silly. System requirements are clearly stated on the outside of all software packaging.
But imagine I sell you a house and I say: There are certain legal responsibilities and restrictions
that come along with buying this house. But I'm not going to tell you what they are until you
buy the house.
If, after purchasing the house, you disagree with the terms, you may seek a refund on the price of the
house (minus tax in many states) and you'll have to go through an enormous amount of paperwork and
frustration in claiming your refund.
Yeah. I agree.
Except for that's almost impossible. I've tried it. You'll spend two hours talking to store managers and customer support, etc.
The reality is that Staples, CompUSA, BestBuy have no systems in place for returns based upon a disagreement with the EULA.
If that's not an indication of 'bad faith' I don't know what is.
At first there were no "gold" or "silver" accounts. There was simply
X-Box Live and it was widely understood that membership to X-Box Live brought with it
the priveleges of online play.
Then Microsoft created a tiered system where users could pay more to access advertisements for new
games, and pay even more dollars to download 3rd rate games created in 1983.
The problem is that Microsoft has already made it perfectly clear that new content
and new services will always represent additional costs. There is no sense of
"membership priveleges", or that new content creation will come with even a Gold Membership.
For all of Microsoft's suggestions that Xbox LIVE is a content-rich service, the
reality is that Gold Memberships are essentially paid for Internet access.
PC games have better and more diverse online gameplay for a small fraction of the cost.
Demos are always free, and anyone who's played Diablo or Guild Wars has experienced
something that Microsoft will never, ever, ever offer: Free online gameplay.
The trend is clear. Microsoft wants to charge you more and more and offer you less and less.
Platinum Memberships will soon be discussed for even "more" premium content. Or maybe
just the same content previewed a couple weeks in advance.
"Post sale restrictions" are IMHO the legal flaw in just about *every* EULA.
You've gone to the store, you've purchased a product, you've driven home, you've opened the product and are in the process of installing the
product and WHAMMO -- you're forced to agree to something after you've already expended time, energy and money towards posession of that
product. If you disagree with the EULA, you'll need to expend further time, energy and money (and bereaucratic frustration) in order to
undo the financial transaction and receive compensation. (Ever try taking XP back to Staples and saying you didn't agree with the EULA?).
This is a form of trickery and extortion that goes far beyond bait-and-switch. It is a transaction in which 'good faith' on the part of the
manufacturer is non-existent. EULA's are legal documents which cannot be given due diligence (because the expense of said diligence would vastly
exceed the price of the product), and they are agreed to by minors, the elderly and consumers with no legal background every day. The price
for disagreement is more wasted effort, more lost time and more lost money.
Post Sale Agreements should be illegal.
"However realize when you buy an Ipod, you're agreeing to use it the way Apple says you can. "
You're talking about the EULA. The case is far from closed as to whether EULA's always
constitute legal and enforcable "agreements". Let's say I was given my iPOD as an opened
gift? Let's say I bought it on eBay? Let's say I'm 14 and I bought my iPOD and didn't
understand the EULA (which, even if I did understand it, it wouldn't mean diddly-squat because minors
can't agree to legally binding contracts). Hell, let's say I'm not particularly skilled with
the mouse and I pressed the wrong button?
And lets talk about due legal process for a second: What is legal due diligence when entering
into any binding agreement? Well, you show that contract to your lawyer of course. Now consider that
I've supposedly "agreed" to about 50 EULA's in 2006 so far...
What would legal due diligence set me back if I were to *responsibly* enter all of these
agreements? Let's say for the sake of argument its around $1500 per "contract". So
I'd be looking at around $75k in legal bills (so far) this year, were
I to have entered each of these contracts. Is this the expectation of the industry?
Microsoft's EULA's state that upon disagreement with the EULA, products can be returned. And
yet none of Microsoft's software retailers (to my knowlege) accept returns on software.
So are these "agreements" being issued to consumers in good faith?
But let's talk about something much more basic:
THE EULA IS PRESENTED TO THE CUSTOMER AFTER THE PURCHASE HAS BEEN MADE.
Tell me in what other industry a binding contractual agreement can be presented to a party
after the purchase?
My position: EULA's are rarely binding. And if you're afraid they are, just give all your
software to your (under 18 year old) kid as a present.
I don't know if "wikified" is the right term, but I've always thought that
classic "no-longer-for-sale" games should be handed over to the public domain.
The intellectual property for future projects and sequels should of course
remain in the hands of the copyright holder. It seems to me that this is a win/win
for publishers since the properties would gain a new lease on life.
Really, I just want to be able to download M.U.L.E., some Infocom titles
and Master of Orion (although I'm not sure I need another addiction in my life
right now).
Yes, but who decides which issues make the questionnaire?
The questionnaire's authors would in-effect be defining the criteria for election.
Maybe I vote for someone based upon whether or not they annoy the crap out of me.
That's my prerogative.
That's a strange way to measure a shortage. The strike price is simply the balance point between buys and sells of contracts on the exchange.
The reality is that there is an acute shortage, and the price of silver is maintained at its current low position by 5 (or fewer) "massive" short positions. ("Massive", as in, "the largest short positions of any commodity in history"). It is estimated that the current short position in silver far exceeds the world's available supply of silver, which is illegal from a securities law perspective. (One cannot short shares or commodities which do not exist).
A case in point is the Nickel market. The London commodities exchange defaulted on Nickel contracts this year for the first time in history.
The reason for the massive manipulation *is* the acute shortage. The big silver banks are currently caught between a rock and a hard place. They don't have the silver, and the price has more than doubled in the last couple years -- leaving them holding the bill. A bill which cannot be paid because available silver simply does not exist. Hence a handful of players are currently forced to take out the world's largest short positions in an effort to drive the price back down. Such actions usually do work, but with the launch of the Silver ETF this year, investor demand has skyrocketed -- cancelling out the effect of the massive short position. Now the banks are truly screwed. The case for silver is bullish on a historically unprecedented scale.
Also worth checking out:
h p
http://news.silverseek.com/TedButler/1160149628.p
I have a friend who works for a hedgefund and he told me about a month ago that they were starting to accumulate silver.
> Most newly mined silver comes as a by-product of copper and zinc mining, there are very few "silver" mines left.
(That's because there are very few high quality silver deposits left)
> Therefore, new silver + recycled silver more than satisfies demand.
(No, world silver supplies are lower now than they have ever been in history and depleting rapidly)
> One of silvers biggest uses used to be photography, but digital is killing that use, hence price of film is going to go up, not because there is less silver, but because there is less demand for photographic film.
Manufacturing and antibacterial uses have risen faster than the decline in photographic uses.
The price of silver has more than tripled in the last 4 years.