17 Year Old Male - Accident Central. Sorry, but statistically 17 year old male drivers SUCK. They take WAY too many risks. Personally I'd support no licenses untill you are 21, but it will never happen (18 maybe, but past that the kids could vote agianst it).
Old VW Bug - Safety Central. No air bags, no seat belts (at least on the earlier ones, I don't know about the later ones, and you could retrofit), no anti-lock breaks, no crumple zones, etc..
GPS is about the ONLY way you'll get your rates down for who you are. The best ways right now for you to lower your rates are: become a girl (sorry, statistics say so), grow up (get older, FAST. If you were 25 your rates would be much lower), get good grades (a sign of responsiblity so you are probably less of a risk), and don't get pulled over EVER. Those are in no particluar order by the way.
I'm sure you think you're a fine driver now. I'm 21 and I can't tell you how many 17 year old idiots I notice on the road. If someone is driving eratically, they tend to be on a cell phone, or a teenage male (in my expiriance).
So they can be off by up to 100%. Let's translate that:
28% Felt they paid too little, the rest felt they paid too much
94% would rather eat or have sex than watch TV
As for the 18% number, that doesn't even make sense. Why would anyone pay more to have customer service get worse?
The fact that anyone would publish something with such an outrageous error value is insane. I'd be balking if it was 20-50% margin of error, but 100???
If you go to the linked site, they say that Beastie will continue to be the project's mascot, but they simply don't have a logo. If they put Beastie on something, someone either knows what the product is, or they don't. What they need seems to be something more like the "Slashdot" graphic in the top left of every page here on Slashdot. No-one said the logo can't include Beastie.
I agree. I'm pretty sure I saw something like that somewhere. It was one the DVD box that it included the PSP version. I think it only cost an extra $10 (US) or less. That I would be willing to buy.
But why should I buy a movie for $20 (and that is generously low for some movies) and they buy it again for... $20 so I can watch it on the go?
I'm not big on buying movies in the first place, but I think most people would see that as a rip-off.
How about $15 dollar rebate if you can prove you own the DVD version or something like that?
There is more to it than that. How many support calls do you think Dell gets about spyware and viruses and other Windows problems. If they could offer OS X (which is at this point basically spyware and virus free, and due to design would be better than Windows (probably) even if it started to be a big target) could save them quite a bit in support. You'd also get computers that come with VERY nice software for video editing, photos, listening to music, etc. I'm sure they get more than a few calls about "How do I do this?" and "Why doesn't my computer include software to do that?" that could be answered by including the fantastic iLife suite.
I agree it is probably a tactic against Microsoft, but if it "backfires" and Apple is willing I think they would go through with it in a heartbeat.
I wrote about a week or so on the idea of HP selling Macs. I've pasted it below (with edits), much of it would apply to Dell as well.
Steve killed the clones, but why? Because they undercut Apple. But he is allowing iPod "clones." Why?
The difference is between "clone" and clone. The Mac clones were different hardware (asthetically, possibly physically) based on the platform. The HP iPod is nothing more than a Apple iPod with a different brand on it. Otherwise it is EXACTLY the same.
If Apple were to let Dell sell Macs (in the same way they let HP sell iPods) what would that do for them? It would give them another HUGE company saying "Macs are good!" (not to mention taking some of the tech support burden). Add onto this the economy of scale they could get on Intel processors if they put their weight in with Dell (Intel's #1 customer). They sell the same thing, maybe in a different color. But the guts, software, everything else is the same (except for the word "Dell" everywhere and maybe a bundled printer).
So Apple takes a small hit on revenue per box if Dell sells some. Big deal. In exchange they get all that marketing muscle, all that brand loyalty, and the economy of scale of making machines for Dell too (which would probably cover Dell's share of the machine's proffit). The Dell Macs could become their premium computers for power home users, and they could sell Windows machines for the low end. I think having Dell backing machines could really help Apple in the enterprise and server space.
I'm not saying it will happen, I doubt it. But the possibility is there. Benefits exist for both companies. As for the idea of just putting OS X on standard Dell boxes (true clones), I doubt it. Steve wouldn't let that happen.
As another person posted, the article says "could". That said, here is how I think they will/might do it. A three pronged approach.
Trusted Computing - A chip that normal motherboards don't have that you can check against to make sure only Apple motherboards will run it. This will keep out the casual users.
OpenFirmware/EFI - I'm hoping for OpenFirmware, but ANYTHING other than the standard old BIOS. This would keep out casual users too. They'd have to write their own BIOS for their motherboard (or find one somewhere) because it would be different. Apple brought us USB (Intel made it, Apple made it a success), Apple got rid of the floppy, maybe Apple can get rid of the BIOS.
Signed Kernel - I wouldn't be suprised to see Apple use some kind of integrety check on the kernel during boot. The idea is you can still run any OS you want, but OS X (as part of startup) would check the kernel (again, maybe using the trusted computing stuff) to make sure it hasn't been modified. That way if people try to modify it to get around ideas 1 or 2, OS X wouldn't boot.
All three seem reasonable to me. The combination would definatly stop the casual users (until someone figured how to simulate it all in a VMWare type environment, which I would think would take awhile).
I have to start by saying I've seen this before, it is NOT new. It is at least a few months old. It may have just hit the web, but I remember reading the exact same thing in a magazine a while back.
That said, I agree. While the guys at my local GameStop are knowledgeable and do like games, I have seen people at my local Best Buy that are the same way. This comparison is pretty meaningless except to see just how rude some people are. Now if they went to 10 GameStops, 10 Best Buys, etc... then they could draw some conclusions.
I know that poker is played with a 52 card deck. What I meant is that these is no need to simulate 5 decks worth of cards, since the computer can radomly draw cards as if you had an infinite number of decks shuffled into one gigantic never ending pile.
As for the card counting not helping comment, I agree, but I was just responding to a point made by the grandparent comment to my origional comment.
Let's not forget the card counting. As long as you are testing poker bots, you're on a computer. That means that instead of simulating real decks (say a 10 deck shoe or something), you can simulate an infinite deck shoe (randint(52)). Can't count cards when there is an infinite deck.
Big deal. Most people have a SD TV right now. That will continue for a while. Sony and Microsoft are interesting and all in that they want to give us all 1080i signals, but I'm not going to go out and buy a $2000 TV just to play videogames (especially when I just bought a $300 console).
I think Nintendo's decision makes sense. For most people, this makes no difference. And my bet is that their console will do progressive scan (say 480p). Maybe they'll even offer 720i. They just aren't going after 1080i. I see no problem with this.
Things will still look good, they just won't be as jaw-dropping on that 50" TV. And considering how many people have 50" HDTVs, they are really "shooting themselves in the foot". It's cute that the PS3 can drive two 1080p TVs at once, but how many people are really going to USE that setup?
I don't see this as any real problem. I don't think it will really effect most people. And if you are so gung-ho that all your games must be 1080i or better, buy the versions for the PS3 or XBox 360.
Another clue comes from HP, where a rumor is going around that HP selling iPods could turn into HP becoming an Apple hardware partner for personal computers, too.
There is plenty to comment on, but this is the part that interests me. I think this is very possible. Steve killed the clones, but why? Because they undercut Apple. But he is allowing iPod "clones." Why?
The difference is between "clone" and clone. The Mac clones were different hardware (asthetically, possibly physically) based on the platform. The HP iPod is nothing more than a Apple iPod with a different brand on it. Otherwise it is EXACTLY the same.
If Apple were to let HP sell Macs (in the same way they sell iPods) what would that do for them? It would give them another HUGE company saying "Macs are good!" (not to mention taking some of the tech support burden). Add onto this the economy of scale they could get on Intel processors if they put their weight in with HP. They sell the same thing, maybe in a different color. But the guts, software, everything else is the same (except for the word "HP" everywhere and maybe a bundled DeskJet).
So Apple takes a small hit on revenue per box if HP sells some. Big deal. In exchange they get all that marketing muscle, all that brand loyalty, and the economy of scale of making machines for HP too (which would probably cover HP's share of the machine's proffit). It would also get them into stores that don't carry Macs but do carry HPs (Office Max would be one example, I think).
In exchange, if HP wanted, they could slowly get out of the Wintel business and into the Mac business. They are having trouble competing with Dell, and this would give them something to sell that Dell can't. It would also lower their R&D budget because they would be sharing it with Apple. Who knows, maybe Apple will get back into the printer business with Apple branded LaserJets and DeskJets.
Very interesting. I'd find it less shocking than the Intel annoucement.
PS: Apple to merge with Intel? No way. Besides, wouldn't the SEC turn that down (it would make most computer makes dependant on another computer maker).
Well, they might just not be on the Revolution, or the games on the Revolution may simply be different (PS3 gets Rogue Squadron, Revolution gets Star Wars Bomber Racers). Maybe they will change it to be exclusive for 1 or 2 years (like Nintendo's deal is now, RS came out for the X-Box and PS2 later).
I think a better quetion is what will become of Star Wars games. They basically died out (because they were played out) untill Episode 1 showed up. Now with Episode 3 out, they can't keep 'em going for long by rehashing the same old things. They'd have to do more titles like KOTOR (set in the universe, but not on any of the storylines from the movies).
But that is all moot if another move (either Episode 0, or 10) is made. We'll see, I guess.
Well that is quite interesting. I must say I actually thought that Nintendo OWNED them (but I didn't know much about 'em other than what they've done).
I can understand what they say to a degree. 8 Cell CPUs probably is much more powerful than 3 PPC CPUs. It is pretty obvious there is some pro-Sony bias in that statement (they are overstating it to be dramatic for the announcement).
That said, I can't WAIT to see what they do. When I saw some of the sequences in Rogue Squadron 2 and 3 on the 'Cube where you had seemingly hundreds of Ties in the sky as you were fighting. Not only did it look amazing (and was it fun), but I couldn't believe they could push the 'Cube to do that. If they can do that with the 'Cube, I can't wait to see what they can make the PS3 do. Should make one hell of a game. How 'bout an update to X-Wing and Tie Fighter? A massivly multiplayer space combat sim using the Star Wars license that also had missions and such, that would be so cool.
That said, I hope they don't mess it up either. I tried to play through RS 3, but just gave up. The 3rd person levels were just so clunky and the animation and movement was so stiff. It also felt like gravity was 3Gs. It just didn't play right. The space combat is amazing, the 3rd person levels were terrible.
Still, no matter what all these companies proclaim that their system can do, and no matter what publishers say, there should be some cool looking stuff and some very interesting possiblities appearing on the new consoles. I can't wait to see what Nintendo can do. I'd love to see them make a comeback to number 1 (I kinda doubt it, I love 'em anyway, and they won't go anywhere, but it would be great). Then again, with all this "We'll do everything from play games to watch movies to make toast" stuff, Nintendo has a real chance to use their "We're just about games, great games" stance to take a great lead.
PS: I've been playing Wario Ware: Twisted!, and the play mechanic is great. They should use gyros in the Revolution's controller. Imagine being able to make quick movements of the controller (physically) and having that translate into movements of a boxer's hands. Shove right side quick, get a right jab. Shove both, it's an uppercut. Pull back for a block, etc. Could be very cool.
I wouldn't be suprised if they are half way there. While Sony is the first one to use this chip, I have no doubt that IBM will be trying to put this in all sorts of stuff. It's like Apple. While Apple is the biggest (or, should I say, most obvious/famous) use of PowerPC chips, they are also used in other servers, embeded things, etc. The more people get their heads around developing for the Cell, the easier it will be for IBM to sell the chip and it's descendants.
Of course, it would benefit Sony too.
Really there isn't too much of a story here. It is only a story because Sony is involved. If Sony wasn't using the Cell in the PS3 and the Cell was just some new chip from IBM, they would be doing the exact same thing anyways. We tend to think of the Cell as the "PS3 chip", but really the PS3 is just the first product to market to use it.
I'm half way there, the future rules.
on
Television Reloaded
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I'm half way there, and the future rules. I've got a TiVo, so by and large I don't know when things are on anymore (I used to know EVERYTHING). I can't even tell you what channel many thing are on without thinking. Is there a new episode this week? I don't know, I'd have to check my TiVo. It takes care of it all, and TV is MUCH MUCH better. Now it doesn't matter if a show comes on at 2 AM, I can still watch it. TV on my schedule.
But things will get better. Watching TV this way (and renting TV show DVDs from Netflix) have tought me one vital lesson that everyone will learn one day: Networks are meaningless.
Long ago, when the internet ran at 9600 BPS and computer literacy of the day made the current situation look like a paradise, you subscribed to a online service. You had AOL, or Compuserve, or Prodigy. That was your view of the world. But now everyting is on the internet. It doesn't matter how you get to the 'net, Slashdot looks the same.
TV will be the same way. It won't matter who airs CSI, your TiVo (or whatever) will download it off the 'net for you. All TV shows will be distributed that way. Once you aren't tied to a network schedule, it doesn't matter where you get the TV from, it's all the same.
Video on Demand for HBO and Showtime that you see advertised are basically the future (only things will be better than that). That is where we are going. It will be like podcasts, only with TV shows. And it will be great.
The sooner the TV exectives realize that, the better. In my opinion, half the reason shows like Futurama, Family Guy, and The Critic had problems was because they aired in a timeslot that was always getting pre-empted by football. How can people get into a show if it is almost never on for half a year? Well now it won't matter.
So instead of sinking or swimming economically in the global market, all the US industries should that inability to perform codified in law forever?
Arguments of wages and such aside (which is one of the major ways other countries undercut our price), there will always be jobs that are just cheaper to do locally (unless you want to fly in prebuilt skyscrapers from Asia). And so what if we don't make the same number of textiles we used to? Conusumers get better goods, cheaper; allowing them to better spend their money. And those people who might have grown up to work in textile mills? Well now they have OTHER service jobs, or... (horror of horrors...) they became Doctors, Lawyers, Programmers, Engineers, and other educated people.
We can't hold back our development because a few people might lose their jobs. If you want to do that personally, that's fine, just don't force it on the rest of us.
Do you still seek out full-service gas stations so you can do your part to prevent gas attendants from losing their jobs? When was the last time you hired a chimney sweep, or someone to muck out your stables?
When you take away people's jobs, they have two options. Find a new job, or become homeless. Since there are millions of homeless people clogging our streets because the jobs of yester-year don't exist, I'm going to guess most people did the first.
Save the $8, spend it on new fighters developed by Boeing, lunches at McDonald's, and Ford police cruizeres.
OK, this is stupid patriotism. Buy it cheap. I WANT you to. Let's look at the options. We can buy something American for $10 each, or we can buy it from China for $2 each (purely hypothetical numbers, my argument holds as long as the American item is more expensive, and when it's not, just buy American).
So the government can spend an extra $8 per item times how ever many items. What does that mean? That means they raise taxes to pay for it. That is always good for our economy. Sure that money is going to US companies, but it is getting taxed right back.
If we buy foreign, we SAVE $8 per item. There are two ways to look at that. There is the civilian, and the governement. The civilian ways say they need less money, so the government can send the money elsewhere (medicare, medicade, SS, military, etc.). The government way says that they can keep the same budget and spend that $8 on other things, like heated toilet seats (joking).
Either way, it is more efficient to buy foreign if cheaper. Spend the extra on little American flags to give out to anyone who calls you anti-american for voting to allow them to waive the provision. Save the flag waiving for when it matters, not pointless rules to make you look good.
Yes, it was simple and well designed for it's time. The problem is that it is now in OS 9's territory. It has been stretched, and added too, and asked to do things it was never origionally designed to do (like networking). It is simply time for a new OS, but they can (and quite possibly should) keep the interface the same. It's the guts that need updating.
Why were they a disaster? That's what I want to know. It's not in the article at all. Is it because there were no gameplay movies? Is it because it took the full power of the system to render them (thus games couldn't look that good), what?
The article is very short on ANYTHING.
On a side note, why can't I ever get the demos. When the PS shipped, it came with a demo disc of techincal demos that I thought was great. We see all these cool demos that the PS2, PS3, X-Box, X-Box 360, GC and such can do, but why don't they put those on a disc and include it with the hardware just as a way of saying "see, this is what it can do" to the consumer, as a way of showing off. They already developed them, why not give 'em away.
There is only one real soltuion to this problem of local governments being at the mercy of large companies, but it won't happen.
I was thinking about it last night. You would have the FEDERAL government collect all the taxes and such, and then distribute it (based on population or something) back to the state governements to spend. That way the laws of the local governments wouldn't have to worry about what their policies, because their choices would have little effect on their income (there would still be some, but they wouldn't be able to be held hostage).
That would require a MAJOR overhaul of the system, and won't be happening any time soon. The only real solution is to not depend on one big company. The more, the better. Boeing is gone, I'm not sure who else is in Washington that is big (right now the only other company I can even think of is Reiner Beer, which probably doesn't count;).
It costs $500. For that (or a little more) I could get my Dell Axim x50v. What would that get me. Let's see...
Better screen. 480x640 as opposed to 320x480.
Faster processor. Intel X-Scale at 624 MHz, not 450.
Better graphics. You get Intel 2700 something-or-other embeded 3D graphics (pretty neat)
Better OS. Windows Mobile 2k3 has it's problems, but it is LIGHTYEARS ahead of the PalmOS.
More expansion. The Axim has a CF slot and an SD slot. You could stick a microdrive in it and get your 4GB that way.
You still get the other things like Bluetooth and WiFi too. It looks great, runs great, etc. If you can do without the 4GB of storage (do you really need it?) then the Axim is a MUCH better deal. And if you go with the QVGA screen it's even cheaper.
When Palm puts a real OS on this thing (Linux, as mentioned) it could be a very interesting PDA. But for now, it is unimpressive in many areas (screen and OS to name two big ones). I've watched DiVX movies on my Axim and they are AMAZING. I can stick the memory card out of my digicam in it and look at the pictures and they look beautiful. I can surf the web and things look great.
Did you bother to read the specs for the thing on Sony's site?
Ignoring the fact that most businesses would MUCH rather pay for a legal, supported device than a legally quesitonable hack without a warantee, this is not some simple slide show machine.
The page says that it can show up to five layers of content, dynamically changed if you want, with a soundtrack. It can show video, images, and even Macromedia Flash files.
Looking at the specs, it looks like if you could just get live video INTO the thing, you could do all the effects for your local nightly news with it and then some. This box is much more than you (or any hobbiest) could make out of a modded XBox.
Slashdot Mirror
GPS is about the ONLY way you'll get your rates down for who you are. The best ways right now for you to lower your rates are: become a girl (sorry, statistics say so), grow up (get older, FAST. If you were 25 your rates would be much lower), get good grades (a sign of responsiblity so you are probably less of a risk), and don't get pulled over EVER. Those are in no particluar order by the way.
I'm sure you think you're a fine driver now. I'm 21 and I can't tell you how many 17 year old idiots I notice on the road. If someone is driving eratically, they tend to be on a cell phone, or a teenage male (in my expiriance).
So they can be off by up to 100%. Let's translate that:
As for the 18% number, that doesn't even make sense. Why would anyone pay more to have customer service get worse?
The fact that anyone would publish something with such an outrageous error value is insane. I'd be balking if it was 20-50% margin of error, but 100???
If you go to the linked site, they say that Beastie will continue to be the project's mascot, but they simply don't have a logo. If they put Beastie on something, someone either knows what the product is, or they don't. What they need seems to be something more like the "Slashdot" graphic in the top left of every page here on Slashdot. No-one said the logo can't include Beastie.
But why should I buy a movie for $20 (and that is generously low for some movies) and they buy it again for... $20 so I can watch it on the go?
I'm not big on buying movies in the first place, but I think most people would see that as a rip-off.
How about $15 dollar rebate if you can prove you own the DVD version or something like that?
I agree it is probably a tactic against Microsoft, but if it "backfires" and Apple is willing I think they would go through with it in a heartbeat.
I wrote about a week or so on the idea of HP selling Macs. I've pasted it below (with edits), much of it would apply to Dell as well.
Steve killed the clones, but why? Because they undercut Apple. But he is allowing iPod "clones." Why?
The difference is between "clone" and clone. The Mac clones were different hardware (asthetically, possibly physically) based on the platform. The HP iPod is nothing more than a Apple iPod with a different brand on it. Otherwise it is EXACTLY the same.
If Apple were to let Dell sell Macs (in the same way they let HP sell iPods) what would that do for them? It would give them another HUGE company saying "Macs are good!" (not to mention taking some of the tech support burden). Add onto this the economy of scale they could get on Intel processors if they put their weight in with Dell (Intel's #1 customer). They sell the same thing, maybe in a different color. But the guts, software, everything else is the same (except for the word "Dell" everywhere and maybe a bundled printer).
So Apple takes a small hit on revenue per box if Dell sells some. Big deal. In exchange they get all that marketing muscle, all that brand loyalty, and the economy of scale of making machines for Dell too (which would probably cover Dell's share of the machine's proffit). The Dell Macs could become their premium computers for power home users, and they could sell Windows machines for the low end. I think having Dell backing machines could really help Apple in the enterprise and server space.
I'm not saying it will happen, I doubt it. But the possibility is there. Benefits exist for both companies. As for the idea of just putting OS X on standard Dell boxes (true clones), I doubt it. Steve wouldn't let that happen.
All three seem reasonable to me. The combination would definatly stop the casual users (until someone figured how to simulate it all in a VMWare type environment, which I would think would take awhile).
That said, I agree. While the guys at my local GameStop are knowledgeable and do like games, I have seen people at my local Best Buy that are the same way. This comparison is pretty meaningless except to see just how rude some people are. Now if they went to 10 GameStops, 10 Best Buys, etc... then they could draw some conclusions.
Interesting, but just anecdotes. Not data.
As for the card counting not helping comment, I agree, but I was just responding to a point made by the grandparent comment to my origional comment.
Let's not forget the card counting. As long as you are testing poker bots, you're on a computer. That means that instead of simulating real decks (say a 10 deck shoe or something), you can simulate an infinite deck shoe (randint(52)). Can't count cards when there is an infinite deck.
I think Nintendo's decision makes sense. For most people, this makes no difference. And my bet is that their console will do progressive scan (say 480p). Maybe they'll even offer 720i. They just aren't going after 1080i. I see no problem with this.
Things will still look good, they just won't be as jaw-dropping on that 50" TV. And considering how many people have 50" HDTVs, they are really "shooting themselves in the foot". It's cute that the PS3 can drive two 1080p TVs at once, but how many people are really going to USE that setup?
I don't see this as any real problem. I don't think it will really effect most people. And if you are so gung-ho that all your games must be 1080i or better, buy the versions for the PS3 or XBox 360.
There is plenty to comment on, but this is the part that interests me. I think this is very possible. Steve killed the clones, but why? Because they undercut Apple. But he is allowing iPod "clones." Why?
The difference is between "clone" and clone. The Mac clones were different hardware (asthetically, possibly physically) based on the platform. The HP iPod is nothing more than a Apple iPod with a different brand on it. Otherwise it is EXACTLY the same.
If Apple were to let HP sell Macs (in the same way they sell iPods) what would that do for them? It would give them another HUGE company saying "Macs are good!" (not to mention taking some of the tech support burden). Add onto this the economy of scale they could get on Intel processors if they put their weight in with HP. They sell the same thing, maybe in a different color. But the guts, software, everything else is the same (except for the word "HP" everywhere and maybe a bundled DeskJet).
So Apple takes a small hit on revenue per box if HP sells some. Big deal. In exchange they get all that marketing muscle, all that brand loyalty, and the economy of scale of making machines for HP too (which would probably cover HP's share of the machine's proffit). It would also get them into stores that don't carry Macs but do carry HPs (Office Max would be one example, I think).
In exchange, if HP wanted, they could slowly get out of the Wintel business and into the Mac business. They are having trouble competing with Dell, and this would give them something to sell that Dell can't. It would also lower their R&D budget because they would be sharing it with Apple. Who knows, maybe Apple will get back into the printer business with Apple branded LaserJets and DeskJets.
Very interesting. I'd find it less shocking than the Intel annoucement.
PS: Apple to merge with Intel? No way. Besides, wouldn't the SEC turn that down (it would make most computer makes dependant on another computer maker).
I think a better quetion is what will become of Star Wars games. They basically died out (because they were played out) untill Episode 1 showed up. Now with Episode 3 out, they can't keep 'em going for long by rehashing the same old things. They'd have to do more titles like KOTOR (set in the universe, but not on any of the storylines from the movies).
But that is all moot if another move (either Episode 0, or 10) is made. We'll see, I guess.
If someone knows for sure, please post.
I can understand what they say to a degree. 8 Cell CPUs probably is much more powerful than 3 PPC CPUs. It is pretty obvious there is some pro-Sony bias in that statement (they are overstating it to be dramatic for the announcement).
That said, I can't WAIT to see what they do. When I saw some of the sequences in Rogue Squadron 2 and 3 on the 'Cube where you had seemingly hundreds of Ties in the sky as you were fighting. Not only did it look amazing (and was it fun), but I couldn't believe they could push the 'Cube to do that. If they can do that with the 'Cube, I can't wait to see what they can make the PS3 do. Should make one hell of a game. How 'bout an update to X-Wing and Tie Fighter? A massivly multiplayer space combat sim using the Star Wars license that also had missions and such, that would be so cool.
That said, I hope they don't mess it up either. I tried to play through RS 3, but just gave up. The 3rd person levels were just so clunky and the animation and movement was so stiff. It also felt like gravity was 3Gs. It just didn't play right. The space combat is amazing, the 3rd person levels were terrible.
Still, no matter what all these companies proclaim that their system can do, and no matter what publishers say, there should be some cool looking stuff and some very interesting possiblities appearing on the new consoles. I can't wait to see what Nintendo can do. I'd love to see them make a comeback to number 1 (I kinda doubt it, I love 'em anyway, and they won't go anywhere, but it would be great). Then again, with all this "We'll do everything from play games to watch movies to make toast" stuff, Nintendo has a real chance to use their "We're just about games, great games" stance to take a great lead.
PS: I've been playing Wario Ware: Twisted!, and the play mechanic is great. They should use gyros in the Revolution's controller. Imagine being able to make quick movements of the controller (physically) and having that translate into movements of a boxer's hands. Shove right side quick, get a right jab. Shove both, it's an uppercut. Pull back for a block, etc. Could be very cool.
Of course, it would benefit Sony too.
Really there isn't too much of a story here. It is only a story because Sony is involved. If Sony wasn't using the Cell in the PS3 and the Cell was just some new chip from IBM, they would be doing the exact same thing anyways. We tend to think of the Cell as the "PS3 chip", but really the PS3 is just the first product to market to use it.
But things will get better. Watching TV this way (and renting TV show DVDs from Netflix) have tought me one vital lesson that everyone will learn one day: Networks are meaningless.
Long ago, when the internet ran at 9600 BPS and computer literacy of the day made the current situation look like a paradise, you subscribed to a online service. You had AOL, or Compuserve, or Prodigy. That was your view of the world. But now everyting is on the internet. It doesn't matter how you get to the 'net, Slashdot looks the same.
TV will be the same way. It won't matter who airs CSI, your TiVo (or whatever) will download it off the 'net for you. All TV shows will be distributed that way. Once you aren't tied to a network schedule, it doesn't matter where you get the TV from, it's all the same.
Video on Demand for HBO and Showtime that you see advertised are basically the future (only things will be better than that). That is where we are going. It will be like podcasts, only with TV shows. And it will be great.
The sooner the TV exectives realize that, the better. In my opinion, half the reason shows like Futurama, Family Guy, and The Critic had problems was because they aired in a timeslot that was always getting pre-empted by football. How can people get into a show if it is almost never on for half a year? Well now it won't matter.
I can't wait. Things will be better.
Arguments of wages and such aside (which is one of the major ways other countries undercut our price), there will always be jobs that are just cheaper to do locally (unless you want to fly in prebuilt skyscrapers from Asia). And so what if we don't make the same number of textiles we used to? Conusumers get better goods, cheaper; allowing them to better spend their money. And those people who might have grown up to work in textile mills? Well now they have OTHER service jobs, or... (horror of horrors...) they became Doctors, Lawyers, Programmers, Engineers, and other educated people.
We can't hold back our development because a few people might lose their jobs. If you want to do that personally, that's fine, just don't force it on the rest of us.
Do you still seek out full-service gas stations so you can do your part to prevent gas attendants from losing their jobs? When was the last time you hired a chimney sweep, or someone to muck out your stables?
When you take away people's jobs, they have two options. Find a new job, or become homeless. Since there are millions of homeless people clogging our streets because the jobs of yester-year don't exist, I'm going to guess most people did the first.
Save the $8, spend it on new fighters developed by Boeing, lunches at McDonald's, and Ford police cruizeres.
So the government can spend an extra $8 per item times how ever many items. What does that mean? That means they raise taxes to pay for it. That is always good for our economy. Sure that money is going to US companies, but it is getting taxed right back.
If we buy foreign, we SAVE $8 per item. There are two ways to look at that. There is the civilian, and the governement. The civilian ways say they need less money, so the government can send the money elsewhere (medicare, medicade, SS, military, etc.). The government way says that they can keep the same budget and spend that $8 on other things, like heated toilet seats (joking).
Either way, it is more efficient to buy foreign if cheaper. Spend the extra on little American flags to give out to anyone who calls you anti-american for voting to allow them to waive the provision. Save the flag waiving for when it matters, not pointless rules to make you look good.
Yes, it was simple and well designed for it's time. The problem is that it is now in OS 9's territory. It has been stretched, and added too, and asked to do things it was never origionally designed to do (like networking). It is simply time for a new OS, but they can (and quite possibly should) keep the interface the same. It's the guts that need updating.
The article is very short on ANYTHING.
On a side note, why can't I ever get the demos. When the PS shipped, it came with a demo disc of techincal demos that I thought was great. We see all these cool demos that the PS2, PS3, X-Box, X-Box 360, GC and such can do, but why don't they put those on a disc and include it with the hardware just as a way of saying "see, this is what it can do" to the consumer, as a way of showing off. They already developed them, why not give 'em away.
Article.
I was thinking about it last night. You would have the FEDERAL government collect all the taxes and such, and then distribute it (based on population or something) back to the state governements to spend. That way the laws of the local governments wouldn't have to worry about what their policies, because their choices would have little effect on their income (there would still be some, but they wouldn't be able to be held hostage).
That would require a MAJOR overhaul of the system, and won't be happening any time soon. The only real solution is to not depend on one big company. The more, the better. Boeing is gone, I'm not sure who else is in Washington that is big (right now the only other company I can even think of is Reiner Beer, which probably doesn't count ;).
It costs $500. For that (or a little more) I could get my Dell Axim x50v. What would that get me. Let's see...
You still get the other things like Bluetooth and WiFi too. It looks great, runs great, etc. If you can do without the 4GB of storage (do you really need it?) then the Axim is a MUCH better deal. And if you go with the QVGA screen it's even cheaper.
When Palm puts a real OS on this thing (Linux, as mentioned) it could be a very interesting PDA. But for now, it is unimpressive in many areas (screen and OS to name two big ones). I've watched DiVX movies on my Axim and they are AMAZING. I can stick the memory card out of my digicam in it and look at the pictures and they look beautiful. I can surf the web and things look great.
Palm was nice, but they need that OS update.
Ignoring the fact that most businesses would MUCH rather pay for a legal, supported device than a legally quesitonable hack without a warantee, this is not some simple slide show machine.
The page says that it can show up to five layers of content, dynamically changed if you want, with a soundtrack. It can show video, images, and even Macromedia Flash files.
Looking at the specs, it looks like if you could just get live video INTO the thing, you could do all the effects for your local nightly news with it and then some. This box is much more than you (or any hobbiest) could make out of a modded XBox.