It has nothing to do with a keyboard. It has to do with the computer player having a mouse.
A mouse allows way more precision. Precision is absolutely necessary for FPS games. Try to draw a complex shape with your mouse right now. Then tell me if you can mimic that shape using a console controller.
I for one am sick of this argument too. And I want it settled just as much as you do, probably. I wish they would just put out a PC vs Console competition. Console players would be disallowed to use mice and keyboards, and only allowed to use their console controllers.
What are you going on about? Granted my post was a little bad in grammar, but still. That is totally not what I said.
I said that it is much preferable to reduce the waste that has to be thrown away than it is to extract more energy from that waste before having to throw it away.
If we have to spend energy to refine waste, then that is a perfectly acceptable solution. I was responding to people complaining that some waste refining solutions had a net loss of energy. As in more energy was used in refining it than was extracted during the refining process.
Take an identical game, have one person play with keyboard and mouse, and the other play with a controller with all the spiffy enhancements. Remove auto-aim from the equation. And what do you get? Yes, thank you for proving my point.
Just because it "works" doesn't mean it works well, nor does it mean that the solution is ideal.
All you proved in your post was that a dumbed down version of the game can "work" on a console. Which is what I said in my post, anyways.
FPS and RTS games(perhaps more, but those stand out the most) just don't work on a console, period. Unless you want to play a really dumbed down version of the game that lacks the need for fast paced controls, or the console gets a mouse. And when they do get a mouse, well, then my friends what you have is a glorified PC that is locked down beyond reasonable use.
Forget about the energy gained from waste. If this process can get rid of the amount of radioactive material we have to get rid of, then it doesn't matter if it didn't have a net output of energy.
Courtesy of the media brainwashing the public. People are spoon fed lies by the media. They are told to fear doctors for they are fallible, have alternate agendas and are just plain instruments of "big pharmaceutical". Yet at the same time they preach alternative medicine, spirit-healing, homeopathy, chi energies and other "alternative medicine" to the public, as if they are miracle cures that somehow all scientists and doctors have missed so far after so many years of study. Most fall for this kind of thing, just like they fall for the propaganda advocating against nuclear energy.
Logical and scientific thought is being spit on by the "average joe". Yet at the same time, "average joe" loves to watch tv, have a cell phone and enjoy dental work.
People used to trust and respect doctors. Now they all read medicine websites and think they know better than their doctors.
The US is in a huge deficit and is continuing to burn cash like it's paper! Well, it's not even real money they're burning, they're just taking out more and more loans.
Seriously, back that up with more than just cliches and rhetoric. 90% seems way too high, perhaps you just pulled it out of your ass to illustrate your point?
Secondly. Who is to say that "corporate theft and spying", or rather, the less rhetoric and hate filled "acquired by means other than inventing", is wrong? Most of the world did/does this. Not only that, but many developing nations are required to do this, else they would fall further behind the rest of the "honest" world.
Thirdly. Did you really need to phrase things the way you did? Do you really subscribe to the "west is best" or "west invented everything" attitude? If you do, then history disagrees with you, for the most part.
Everybody forgets that Apple was a HUGE holdout. They'd been competing in retail space seriously for a couple of years and were about the last of the retail sold notebooks to go glossy.
I whole heartedly disagree with you on that. Active intervention from the outside would have saved Zimbabwe long before the crisis got this bad.
The real people to blame are the member countries of the African Union as well as all other African countries. They sat idly by and watched Mugabe do this to Zimbabwe. Not only did it take a long time for them to even acknowledge that there was a problem, but when they did all they did was condemn his actions and what not. Not only that, but South Africa is currently sending Zimbabwean refugees back to Zimbabwe to face more persecution!!
I grew up in Zimbabwe and I have family living their right now. So I know perfectly well what is going on over there. And the fact remains, those people really can't feed themselves and deserve help. If you bothered reading my post, and understood it then you'd realize I pointed out two separate groups. Lazy people needing aid who actually are able to feed themselves if not for their laziness, and then you have people that need aid that are actually unable to get aid. Such as those people in Zimbabwe, or people living in a disaster or war torn area.
The 'people' who 'lived off the land' for thousands of years? Mostly illiterate, innumerate, and died at ages 35-40. If they were lucky.
I would rather be illiterate, "innumerate" and have a short life span than to live in the kinds of conditions some people are currently living in. Having high infant mortality rates, rampant aids infections, lack of food since birth. Yes, people lived 35-40 years, but that's better than dying as a child due to hunger or aids. Really, step back and ask yourself which world would you prefer your child to be born in? To an aids-infected mother in a poverty stricken region? Or to a family living in a remote region of the world? Granted, access to a hospital might make things worse, but it is still a huge improvement to the other option.
A short while back I came across an old guy on my way through town who'd tripped and smashed his head open on a phone box.
So I skipped the game I was heading to and spent the next hour helping a drunk concussed guy into an ambulance.
Why should I help him? What made him special? What makes it my responsibility? I was standing right frikkin' there watching, that's why.
That doesn't address anything I was saying, really. You're just using your example in an attempt to make my post seem insensitive and as you say "ignorant". Fact is, you misunderstood my post. Perhaps you were just quick to see my post moderated as troll and didn't bother really reading it.
You don't own a computer just because you're hard-working and smart. It's because you're smart and hard-working and had the insane good luck to be born as one of the small fraction of the world's population who get a starting point good enough that that makes a difference.
I have to agree with you here. It's a sad fact of life that our lives depend on the situations we are born into.
As you said, some people live in disaster zones or wars and genuinely need help. This 'some people' is not a few stragglers; it's tens of millions. Where the hell do you think that UN aid goes? Look it up sometime. And until you do, you've been too lazy to comment on the issue, so don't.
Me knowing where the aid goes to makes little difference on the merits of my comment. I pointed out that people that CAN feed themselves by living off the land are the ones not deserving aid. The rest that are really unfortunate and have no options and really do need help, like your wounded old person example, are the ones that should be getting aid exclusively. How about if that ambulance didn't come so fast to help that man. What if that ambulance had to rush to help a woman having a panic attack because she thought she was having a heart attack? And they came 30 minutes later than expected to help the guy with the cracked open head. Ok, not a perfect analogy, but still.
The ignorance in this post is depressing, even for/.
Oh and attacking someone's opinion without bothering to understand it first isn't ignorant?
Why should we feed them? Seriously, now. What makes them special? What makes them our responsibility? Instead of sitting on their asses, begging for food at UN distribution points. Why don't they instead go back to the open land and farm. It's not that hard to live off the land. People have been doing it for thousands of years.
Problem is. They've gotten lazy. Now they expect to be fed, with no effort on their part other than to starve themselves intentionally. Yes, they chose that.
Fine. Some people are in a far worse situation and really can't feed themselves. Such as in a disaster situation, or war etc. These people are the ones that really deserve aid. We should rather use the aid money on these people, than on the ones that just ask for aid because they're lazy.
People may change and adapt. But they do it slowly and reluctantly. That's the whole problem with global warming. People know they need to change and adapt, yet we are all dragging our asses about changing, hoping others will pick up the slack for us until we have enough willpower to do the same ourselves.
Problem is, everyone's doing that exact same thing.
Firefox doesn't load nearly as fast as Internet Explorer. Not just on my PC, but on every PC I've tried this on. Granted, I haven't compared the speeds between IE and Firefox on an Amiga 500. But that's because you're such a seasoned veteran of the computing industry and knew better than to buy a low end laptop with the brand new OS that you should have read about while it was still in beta!
As for your post, well. I find it pretty amusing actually. You write this long post, making us think that you know what you're talking about. Yet at the same time you fell for this Vista-capable business and now you're whining about it. It's just as much your fault for buying the low-end laptop without researching it first as it is Microsoft's for thinking people like you didn't exist.
Heck, you could have been a real genius and tried that laptop at the shop! Assuming they had it on display, or you asked a sales assistant to get one for you to try! But wait, you're a seasoned veteran of the computer industry (because you had an Amiga 500), so you didn't bother with all that non-nerd-business of going to the computer store and talking to a sales assistant. No, you knew everything you had to know about Vista (not) and knew everything about computers (because you're a seasoned veteran of the computer industry) so you probably opted to instead just order her laptop online.
You went the cheap route and now you're whining to us about it. Then you add iHate Microsoft to your post and expect everyone to give you brownie points!
I can see your point. And if that what you quote is indeed true, then good on Apple for engineer it.
But that's kind of not what I was aiming at. I mean think about it, if someone is cheapo enough to not want to upgrade his hardware after 3-5 years, then how come s/he is willing to fork out for the latest newest Microsoft OS? And on top of that, this person expects this new OS to run on his/her outdated hardware. I don't know about you, but that seems pretty darn arrogant to me.
Not only does this hardware hold a minority share in the market, but it probably isn't even enough to run the features that the OS provides for the user.
Here's a thought. Why doesn't this person just stay with the current hardware they have and don't want to let go of, and why don't they just their current OS, which I'm assuming runs fine on said outdated hardware. Problem solved? Yes, but not really, because this person expects the developers to work miracles on outdated hardware just to cater for this one person from a very small group.
Yes, I read your entire post. But the fact that the sentence that I quoted from you was pretty much near the end of your post should have been a major clue in telling you that I did indeed read most if not all of your post. But then again, your "Did you read the rest of my comment, or did you stop right there?" kind of makes you sound witty and all that. So I can see why you stopped at that, and didn't bother replying to anything I said. I simply responded to the main sticking point of your argument.
...but it seemed to me that Microsoft was being pretty arrogant to assume that I would buy a brand new, cutting edge machine just to run Vista.
I think it's pretty darn arrogant for you to expect Microsoft to release a brand new OS that can still cater for your old crummy hardware. If you want that, get a lean Linux distro, or keep using Win 98 or XP.
No seriously, I'm really curious to see your motives for saying/thinking such a thing. What makes you so darn special over everyone else?
And the height of ignorance and "pompousness" is you insulting someone for pointing out one of your mistakes. Hell I even gave you friendly advice on how to avoid making silly mistakes like the one you made earlier, in the future.
As for that bit you wrote in french to add dramatic flair to your point:
No, I will not try speak French for you so you can "ridicule it". Grow up. At least I know how definite articles work in French, which is more than I can say for you and indefinite articles in English.
Too many people posting AC these days. What were you so scared of when you posted your comment? Seriously, I can understand people posting AC when they want to say something really stupid or outrageous, but not when they post such a insignificant post such as yours!
Slashdot Mirror
It has nothing to do with a keyboard. It has to do with the computer player having a mouse.
A mouse allows way more precision. Precision is absolutely necessary for FPS games. Try to draw a complex shape with your mouse right now. Then tell me if you can mimic that shape using a console controller.
I for one am sick of this argument too. And I want it settled just as much as you do, probably. I wish they would just put out a PC vs Console competition. Console players would be disallowed to use mice and keyboards, and only allowed to use their console controllers.
What are you going on about? Granted my post was a little bad in grammar, but still. That is totally not what I said.
I said that it is much preferable to reduce the waste that has to be thrown away than it is to extract more energy from that waste before having to throw it away.
If we have to spend energy to refine waste, then that is a perfectly acceptable solution. I was responding to people complaining that some waste refining solutions had a net loss of energy. As in more energy was used in refining it than was extracted during the refining process.
Take an identical game, have one person play with keyboard and mouse, and the other play with a controller with all the spiffy enhancements. Remove auto-aim from the equation. And what do you get? Yes, thank you for proving my point.
Just because it "works" doesn't mean it works well, nor does it mean that the solution is ideal.
All you proved in your post was that a dumbed down version of the game can "work" on a console. Which is what I said in my post, anyways.
Not going to happen, buddy...
FPS and RTS games(perhaps more, but those stand out the most) just don't work on a console, period. Unless you want to play a really dumbed down version of the game that lacks the need for fast paced controls, or the console gets a mouse. And when they do get a mouse, well, then my friends what you have is a glorified PC that is locked down beyond reasonable use.
Forget about the energy gained from waste. If this process can get rid of the amount of radioactive material we have to get rid of, then it doesn't matter if it didn't have a net output of energy.
Courtesy of the media brainwashing the public. People are spoon fed lies by the media. They are told to fear doctors for they are fallible, have alternate agendas and are just plain instruments of "big pharmaceutical". Yet at the same time they preach alternative medicine, spirit-healing, homeopathy, chi energies and other "alternative medicine" to the public, as if they are miracle cures that somehow all scientists and doctors have missed so far after so many years of study. Most fall for this kind of thing, just like they fall for the propaganda advocating against nuclear energy.
Logical and scientific thought is being spit on by the "average joe". Yet at the same time, "average joe" loves to watch tv, have a cell phone and enjoy dental work.
People used to trust and respect doctors. Now they all read medicine websites and think they know better than their doctors.
Parent has a really good point.
The US is in a huge deficit and is continuing to burn cash like it's paper! Well, it's not even real money they're burning, they're just taking out more and more loans.
Seriously, back that up with more than just cliches and rhetoric. 90% seems way too high, perhaps you just pulled it out of your ass to illustrate your point?
Secondly. Who is to say that "corporate theft and spying", or rather, the less rhetoric and hate filled "acquired by means other than inventing", is wrong? Most of the world did/does this. Not only that, but many developing nations are required to do this, else they would fall further behind the rest of the "honest" world.
Thirdly. Did you really need to phrase things the way you did? Do you really subscribe to the "west is best" or "west invented everything" attitude? If you do, then history disagrees with you, for the most part.
Everybody forgets that Apple was a HUGE holdout. They'd been competing in retail space seriously for a couple of years and were about the last of the retail sold notebooks to go glossy.
[citation needed]
I whole heartedly disagree with you on that. Active intervention from the outside would have saved Zimbabwe long before the crisis got this bad.
The real people to blame are the member countries of the African Union as well as all other African countries. They sat idly by and watched Mugabe do this to Zimbabwe. Not only did it take a long time for them to even acknowledge that there was a problem, but when they did all they did was condemn his actions and what not. Not only that, but South Africa is currently sending Zimbabwean refugees back to Zimbabwe to face more persecution!!
I grew up in Zimbabwe and I have family living their right now. So I know perfectly well what is going on over there. And the fact remains, those people really can't feed themselves and deserve help. If you bothered reading my post, and understood it then you'd realize I pointed out two separate groups. Lazy people needing aid who actually are able to feed themselves if not for their laziness, and then you have people that need aid that are actually unable to get aid. Such as those people in Zimbabwe, or people living in a disaster or war torn area.
The 'people' who 'lived off the land' for thousands of years? Mostly illiterate, innumerate, and died at ages 35-40. If they were lucky.
I would rather be illiterate, "innumerate" and have a short life span than to live in the kinds of conditions some people are currently living in. Having high infant mortality rates, rampant aids infections, lack of food since birth. Yes, people lived 35-40 years, but that's better than dying as a child due to hunger or aids. Really, step back and ask yourself which world would you prefer your child to be born in? To an aids-infected mother in a poverty stricken region? Or to a family living in a remote region of the world? Granted, access to a hospital might make things worse, but it is still a huge improvement to the other option.
A short while back I came across an old guy on my way through town who'd tripped and smashed his head open on a phone box.
So I skipped the game I was heading to and spent the next hour helping a drunk concussed guy into an ambulance.
Why should I help him? What made him special? What makes it my responsibility? I was standing right frikkin' there watching, that's why.
That doesn't address anything I was saying, really. You're just using your example in an attempt to make my post seem insensitive and as you say "ignorant". Fact is, you misunderstood my post. Perhaps you were just quick to see my post moderated as troll and didn't bother really reading it.
You don't own a computer just because you're hard-working and smart. It's because you're smart and hard-working and had the insane good luck to be born as one of the small fraction of the world's population who get a starting point good enough that that makes a difference.
I have to agree with you here. It's a sad fact of life that our lives depend on the situations we are born into.
As you said, some people live in disaster zones or wars and genuinely need help. This 'some people' is not a few stragglers; it's tens of millions. Where the hell do you think that UN aid goes? Look it up sometime. And until you do, you've been too lazy to comment on the issue, so don't.
Me knowing where the aid goes to makes little difference on the merits of my comment. I pointed out that people that CAN feed themselves by living off the land are the ones not deserving aid. The rest that are really unfortunate and have no options and really do need help, like your wounded old person example, are the ones that should be getting aid exclusively. How about if that ambulance didn't come so fast to help that man. What if that ambulance had to rush to help a woman having a panic attack because she thought she was having a heart attack? And they came 30 minutes later than expected to help the guy with the cracked open head. Ok, not a perfect analogy, but still.
The ignorance in this post is depressing, even for /.
Oh and attacking someone's opinion without bothering to understand it first isn't ignorant?
Why should we feed them? Seriously, now. What makes them special? What makes them our responsibility? Instead of sitting on their asses, begging for food at UN distribution points. Why don't they instead go back to the open land and farm. It's not that hard to live off the land. People have been doing it for thousands of years.
Problem is. They've gotten lazy. Now they expect to be fed, with no effort on their part other than to starve themselves intentionally. Yes, they chose that.
Fine. Some people are in a far worse situation and really can't feed themselves. Such as in a disaster situation, or war etc. These people are the ones that really deserve aid. We should rather use the aid money on these people, than on the ones that just ask for aid because they're lazy.
People may change and adapt. But they do it slowly and reluctantly. That's the whole problem with global warming. People know they need to change and adapt, yet we are all dragging our asses about changing, hoping others will pick up the slack for us until we have enough willpower to do the same ourselves.
Problem is, everyone's doing that exact same thing.
grassroots
I feel disgusted whenever I hear someone use that word in a political context.
Or not at all.
Firefox doesn't load nearly as fast as Internet Explorer. Not just on my PC, but on every PC I've tried this on. Granted, I haven't compared the speeds between IE and Firefox on an Amiga 500. But that's because you're such a seasoned veteran of the computing industry and knew better than to buy a low end laptop with the brand new OS that you should have read about while it was still in beta!
As for your post, well. I find it pretty amusing actually. You write this long post, making us think that you know what you're talking about. Yet at the same time you fell for this Vista-capable business and now you're whining about it. It's just as much your fault for buying the low-end laptop without researching it first as it is Microsoft's for thinking people like you didn't exist.
Heck, you could have been a real genius and tried that laptop at the shop! Assuming they had it on display, or you asked a sales assistant to get one for you to try! But wait, you're a seasoned veteran of the computer industry (because you had an Amiga 500), so you didn't bother with all that non-nerd-business of going to the computer store and talking to a sales assistant. No, you knew everything you had to know about Vista (not) and knew everything about computers (because you're a seasoned veteran of the computer industry) so you probably opted to instead just order her laptop online.
You went the cheap route and now you're whining to us about it. Then you add iHate Microsoft to your post and expect everyone to give you brownie points!
I can see your point. And if that what you quote is indeed true, then good on Apple for engineer it.
But that's kind of not what I was aiming at. I mean think about it, if someone is cheapo enough to not want to upgrade his hardware after 3-5 years, then how come s/he is willing to fork out for the latest newest Microsoft OS? And on top of that, this person expects this new OS to run on his/her outdated hardware. I don't know about you, but that seems pretty darn arrogant to me.
Not only does this hardware hold a minority share in the market, but it probably isn't even enough to run the features that the OS provides for the user.
Here's a thought. Why doesn't this person just stay with the current hardware they have and don't want to let go of, and why don't they just their current OS, which I'm assuming runs fine on said outdated hardware. Problem solved? Yes, but not really, because this person expects the developers to work miracles on outdated hardware just to cater for this one person from a very small group.
Yes, I read your entire post. But the fact that the sentence that I quoted from you was pretty much near the end of your post should have been a major clue in telling you that I did indeed read most if not all of your post. But then again, your "Did you read the rest of my comment, or did you stop right there?" kind of makes you sound witty and all that. So I can see why you stopped at that, and didn't bother replying to anything I said. I simply responded to the main sticking point of your argument.
...but it seemed to me that Microsoft was being pretty arrogant to assume that I would buy a brand new, cutting edge machine just to run Vista.
I think it's pretty darn arrogant for you to expect Microsoft to release a brand new OS that can still cater for your old crummy hardware. If you want that, get a lean Linux distro, or keep using Win 98 or XP.
No seriously, I'm really curious to see your motives for saying/thinking such a thing. What makes you so darn special over everyone else?
English isn't my mother tongue. Enough said.
And the height of ignorance and "pompousness" is you insulting someone for pointing out one of your mistakes. Hell I even gave you friendly advice on how to avoid making silly mistakes like the one you made earlier, in the future.
As for that bit you wrote in french to add dramatic flair to your point:
No, I will not try speak French for you so you can "ridicule it". Grow up. At least I know how definite articles work in French, which is more than I can say for you and indefinite articles in English.
And you had to post that as an AC why, exactly?
Too many people posting AC these days. What were you so scared of when you posted your comment? Seriously, I can understand people posting AC when they want to say something really stupid or outrageous, but not when they post such a insignificant post such as yours!
He didn't imply anything of the sort. You just happened to misunderstand his comment.
Hint hint. He wasn't talking about one single computer.
Flash would supposedly be better because it doesn't have the "Evil Microsoft" tag. I know, quite silly...