Hey now, the original Matrix was a superb movie in it's own right. Don't let the shitty sequels bring it down.
Actually it's funny you bring up WoK... I actually think the original motion picture (director's DVD) is one of the best sci-fi flicks I've seen. It reminds me a lot of 2001... am I the only person that liked it?
The movie was not written for the music. As a matter of fact, there was an actual original score that was made for the film (it's released). While Kubrick was filming, he'd use classical music to set a mood... he ended up liking it so much that he decided to keep it for the final cut.
Doom 3 wouldn't let me play until I had deleted CloneCD. There might be a setting I could've just turned off, but when I first got the game (the day it came out), it wasn't clear what it was. Not cool. I uninstalled anyhow (this isn't a huge loss, just a pain in the ass), but the whole thing left a bad taste in my mouth.
Good points. To my knowledge (could be way off), NeXT was Jobs' project that him and a bunch of ex-Apple guys worked on, and didn't pixo just do the software on the iPod, not the design/etc?
Microsoft is a company that uses its monopoly to bully around competition and stifle competition. They've given us buggy software, a shitty OS, and bloatware.
Apple is a bit of an underdog that has brought us OS X, the iPod, the iTMS, etc.
Although Apple has done some things in the past that are pretty ruthless, they still don't compare to the shit that MS has done, and will do again.
So yes, in comparison to the Goliath that is MS, Apple is a good company that produces innovative and sleek products. If Apple's recent trackrecord is any indication, announcements like this GENERALLY mean that there's something cool on the way, not "well, this patent is going to be used to fuck the user or competition."
Dell simply doesn't do very attractive things that stand out and make people go "ooooooh!"
Apple does, or at the very least does this much more frequently than Dell does.
Apple has the cool factor and are becoming very well known for making very cool/sleek hardware, so seeing a patent like this and what Apple could do with this is interesting. Hearing about it from Dell, who aren't known for any sort of cool factor in comparison to Apple, is not nearly as exciting.
I imagine a debate about how PC gaming lusers are the only target market for something so stupid would then ensue.
Right, the only difference there being that, oh, the lights I think you're referring to don't really serve any major purpose, but because this is Apple and the patent talks about software interaction, the lighting scheme would probably be more useful or used in some more intuitive manner (posters have already talked about having it change colors for CPU usage, iTunes plug-ins, etc). Working with Apple hardware and software for long enough tells me they'll do all of that plus have more useful ideas for it than most of us could think of. That's why it's cool.
Your comment is quite depressing. Like Apple, don't deify it.
Although the parent poster wasn't deifying Apple, I see nothing wrong about being excited by a potentially interesting technology coming from a company whose trackrecord has been outstanding in recent years in terms of innovation and practicality.
OS X does not have ease of use for a typical user upgrading from OS 9; considerable retraining is required.
I doubt I'm understanding you correctly, are you saying that to get on a network and use OS X requires training because it's difficult or not clear cut?
I must be misunderstanding you... but if that is what you're implying, all I can say is that one of the reason OS X is such a great OS is because it is successfully doing what Linux seems to not be doing as well: providing a simple, unified GUI, a ridiculously simple method to install apps, and the ability to not have to be forced to use the command line.
OS X, front-end wise, has the general concepts that I believe Linux shoud be working toward. Once grandma doesn't have to worry about the command line or dependencies or re-compiles, once that's all taken care of in the background, then MAYBE it'll be a step closer.
I guess if you take the term literally, which noone who knows the genres really does, then every single game where you're looking down or whatnot at yourself is an FPS.
You're in a tank and shooting things.
Exactly. You're in a tank.
Exactly. You were flying around.
If you're being serious and not assinine, an FPS by the commonly agreed usage of the term is a Quake or Unreal-type game. Typically you play through the entire game through one persons eyes and you run around on foot. Very action-oriented, not usually a lot of emphasis on strategy.
Yeah! That's what they said they were setting out to do from the beginning. I used to be a pretty big FPS fan... I will tell you that I don't think it's as good as Half-Life was when it came out, but it's very far from being a POS as well. The multiplayer's a lot of fun, lord knows we're gonna get mods, and the single player is pretty creepy (definitely agree with 3dr, we've seen and done this already, but still fun).
I've got a very similar system - it's all about your graphics card. I'm running on a Radeon 9800 Pro and it runs very nicely at high detail at 1024*768, but I do run into the occasional choppiness. Not enough to warrant turning any details or anything.
That was the stupidest thing I've read in this thread so far. Idiots might be going into debt for overextending themselves, as is with, oh, ALL THINGS. You'd be surprised what kind of toys you can get after you advance past the minimum wage jobs...
then criticizing other people for pointing out that the battery life sucks
I covered that numberous times already, you idiot. That wasn't the point I was making at all.
You seem really protective of the iPod. I suppose for someone who has been a spectacular failure, they view the iPod as their "champion".
Nah. I like my iPod, but what I'm really a fan of is the design principle of the thing. It does one thing, it does it well, it's sleek, functional and ridiculously easy to use. That's what I'm protective about. I'm sure it'll be bested eventually, of course, but for now I definitely think it's the most elegant solution for what I use it for, and I definitely believe that Apple designed and marketed the sucker pefectly. I want more toys like the iPod that are as innovatively elegant, that's all.
But the battery life could be a lot longer for it to be useful.
I'd love to see longer battery life, I don't think anyone doesn't. It's a positive. The question is whether or not the battery situation actually gets in the way of normal use by the average guy who DOESN'T listen to his iPod more than 4 hours a day without recharging. Is this a common case? Not from what I've seen or experienced. If it is an issue, go get the other player with the bigger battery life. You used the word "useful" though... how many hours of battery life do you think the iPod needs to have to be deemed useful to its target crowd (college kids)
I think the funniest people are those who actually have the time to set up play lists and are always fiddling with songs.
Play with iTunes. It keeps track of all sorts of crap like how many times you've played a song, what you've rated a song (you can adjust that on the iPod), and things like that. The nice thing with iPod and iTunes are the smart playlists. They literally take under a minute to setup. I've only got a couple, like my top 150 rated, worst 10 songs, top 10 played within the last month, all songs from a certain genre, artist, songs I've never listened to, stuff like that. The playlists are automatically generated, you just have to set some parameters. It's a snap, and it works great for my purposes. What you might be refering to are the folks setting up On-the-go playlists (you can't make normal, permanent playlists using the iPod alone). It's another little feature that I like that's ridiculously simple, but effective for me. You browse through your songs (which is again, easy), hold down the "button," and it adds whatever song/album/playlist you're on to your On-the-go playlist. Wash, rinse, repeat. The playlist sticks around for a day or two, then automatically clears itself out. Good for when you're in the mood for something that your smart playlists might not cover, but don't want to set something permanent up.
You should get a bigger ipod and make sure all your songs fit. Drop the playlists, and just listen to entire albums.
Nah... I dropped the money on it last March. I encode all of my stuff at 192 and have a bit over 3000 songs, which is plenty for me right now. I've got just about every album I own on it and still have 4 or 5 gigs left. I'm waiting for something large enough that I can do everything lossless down the road, but I'm more than content for now.
Yep. I hear ya, all I'm saying is that you're not the market the iPod is going for (you don't care about the massive space). Tons of people probably feel the same way, but the iPod is not going for your crowd. It's not going to hurt iPod sales any time soon, because the iPod is all about having enormous amounts of space on a sleek, simple device. The phone with the gig or two, comparatively, does not, and it would take some good designers to make an interface as simple to use as the iPods, especially without something like iTunes. Things WILL get interesting once this gets inexpensive, because at that point I think you're beginning to get into the Mini's scope.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to imply you're wrong, but if the White House had Stingers ready to go, the Pentagon would've had a Star Destroyer.
Uh... he's comparing Apples to Apples (who make excellent LCD displays), not apples to oranges. Pretty basic comparison.
Get it?
Games, CAD, image-work, folks that use high resolution displays, etc....
Perhaps the reason HP is doing this is so that it can perhaps bundle the iPod with some back-to-school computer they'll be selling.
A little late in the game, wouldn't you say?
Hey now, the original Matrix was a superb movie in it's own right. Don't let the shitty sequels bring it down.
Actually it's funny you bring up WoK... I actually think the original motion picture (director's DVD) is one of the best sci-fi flicks I've seen. It reminds me a lot of 2001... am I the only person that liked it?
The movie was not written for the music. As a matter of fact, there was an actual original score that was made for the film (it's released). While Kubrick was filming, he'd use classical music to set a mood... he ended up liking it so much that he decided to keep it for the final cut.
Doom 3 wouldn't let me play until I had deleted CloneCD. There might be a setting I could've just turned off, but when I first got the game (the day it came out), it wasn't clear what it was. Not cool. I uninstalled anyhow (this isn't a huge loss, just a pain in the ass), but the whole thing left a bad taste in my mouth.
Well, pirating software is already illegal but happens constantly anyhow, so what would lobbying really do?
Good points. To my knowledge (could be way off), NeXT was Jobs' project that him and a bunch of ex-Apple guys worked on, and didn't pixo just do the software on the iPod, not the design/etc?
Hah, no problem dude. You learn something new every day, right?
Slashdot Rule #2:
Never step back and use common sense.
Microsoft is a company that uses its monopoly to bully around competition and stifle competition. They've given us buggy software, a shitty OS, and bloatware.
Apple is a bit of an underdog that has brought us OS X, the iPod, the iTMS, etc.
Although Apple has done some things in the past that are pretty ruthless, they still don't compare to the shit that MS has done, and will do again.
So yes, in comparison to the Goliath that is MS, Apple is a good company that produces innovative and sleek products. If Apple's recent trackrecord is any indication, announcements like this GENERALLY mean that there's something cool on the way, not "well, this patent is going to be used to fuck the user or competition."
Dell simply doesn't do very attractive things that stand out and make people go "ooooooh!"
Apple does, or at the very least does this much more frequently than Dell does.
Apple has the cool factor and are becoming very well known for making very cool/sleek hardware, so seeing a patent like this and what Apple could do with this is interesting. Hearing about it from Dell, who aren't known for any sort of cool factor in comparison to Apple, is not nearly as exciting.
I imagine a debate about how PC gaming lusers are the only target market for something so stupid would then ensue.
Right, the only difference there being that, oh, the lights I think you're referring to don't really serve any major purpose, but because this is Apple and the patent talks about software interaction, the lighting scheme would probably be more useful or used in some more intuitive manner (posters have already talked about having it change colors for CPU usage, iTunes plug-ins, etc). Working with Apple hardware and software for long enough tells me they'll do all of that plus have more useful ideas for it than most of us could think of. That's why it's cool.
Your comment is quite depressing. Like Apple, don't deify it.
Although the parent poster wasn't deifying Apple, I see nothing wrong about being excited by a potentially interesting technology coming from a company whose trackrecord has been outstanding in recent years in terms of innovation and practicality.
Just my opinion, anyhow.
Daisy May is actually Reznor's dog.
It fucking sucked, just not fun and buggy as always. Don't waste your time or money on it... check out some reviews.
I don't believe employers have any direct control as to whether or not you can receive insurance or not.
Well gee, is the majority of the action in tanks and jeeps or is it on foot in first person mode with the gun in front of you with stress on action?
Come on now, this isn't tough.
OS X does not have ease of use for a typical user upgrading from OS 9; considerable retraining is required.
I doubt I'm understanding you correctly, are you saying that to get on a network and use OS X requires training because it's difficult or not clear cut?
I must be misunderstanding you... but if that is what you're implying, all I can say is that one of the reason OS X is such a great OS is because it is successfully doing what Linux seems to not be doing as well: providing a simple, unified GUI, a ridiculously simple method to install apps, and the ability to not have to be forced to use the command line.
OS X, front-end wise, has the general concepts that I believe Linux shoud be working toward. Once grandma doesn't have to worry about the command line or dependencies or re-compiles, once that's all taken care of in the background, then MAYBE it'll be a step closer.
I guess if you take the term literally, which noone who knows the genres really does, then every single game where you're looking down or whatnot at yourself is an FPS.
You're in a tank and shooting things.
Exactly. You're in a tank.
Exactly. You were flying around.
If you're being serious and not assinine, an FPS by the commonly agreed usage of the term is a Quake or Unreal-type game. Typically you play through the entire game through one persons eyes and you run around on foot. Very action-oriented, not usually a lot of emphasis on strategy.
Yeah! That's what they said they were setting out to do from the beginning. I used to be a pretty big FPS fan... I will tell you that I don't think it's as good as Half-Life was when it came out, but it's very far from being a POS as well. The multiplayer's a lot of fun, lord knows we're gonna get mods, and the single player is pretty creepy (definitely agree with 3dr, we've seen and done this already, but still fun).
The Battle Zone games weren't first person shooters.
I've got a very similar system - it's all about your graphics card. I'm running on a Radeon 9800 Pro and it runs very nicely at high detail at 1024*768, but I do run into the occasional choppiness. Not enough to warrant turning any details or anything.
You're going into debt to buy an iPod and .
That was the stupidest thing I've read in this thread so far. Idiots might be going into debt for overextending themselves, as is with, oh, ALL THINGS. You'd be surprised what kind of toys you can get after you advance past the minimum wage jobs...
then criticizing other people for pointing out that the battery life sucks
I covered that numberous times already, you idiot. That wasn't the point I was making at all.
Read all of the posts again, starting with the parent, moving through the thread.
Slowly, this time.
You seem really protective of the iPod. I suppose for someone who has been a spectacular failure, they view the iPod as their "champion".
Nah. I like my iPod, but what I'm really a fan of is the design principle of the thing. It does one thing, it does it well, it's sleek, functional and ridiculously easy to use. That's what I'm protective about. I'm sure it'll be bested eventually, of course, but for now I definitely think it's the most elegant solution for what I use it for, and I definitely believe that Apple designed and marketed the sucker pefectly. I want more toys like the iPod that are as innovatively elegant, that's all.
But the battery life could be a lot longer for it to be useful.
I'd love to see longer battery life, I don't think anyone doesn't. It's a positive. The question is whether or not the battery situation actually gets in the way of normal use by the average guy who DOESN'T listen to his iPod more than 4 hours a day without recharging. Is this a common case? Not from what I've seen or experienced. If it is an issue, go get the other player with the bigger battery life. You used the word "useful" though... how many hours of battery life do you think the iPod needs to have to be deemed useful to its target crowd (college kids)
I think the funniest people are those who actually have the time to set up play lists and are always fiddling with songs.
Play with iTunes. It keeps track of all sorts of crap like how many times you've played a song, what you've rated a song (you can adjust that on the iPod), and things like that. The nice thing with iPod and iTunes are the smart playlists. They literally take under a minute to setup. I've only got a couple, like my top 150 rated, worst 10 songs, top 10 played within the last month, all songs from a certain genre, artist, songs I've never listened to, stuff like that. The playlists are automatically generated, you just have to set some parameters. It's a snap, and it works great for my purposes. What you might be refering to are the folks setting up On-the-go playlists (you can't make normal, permanent playlists using the iPod alone). It's another little feature that I like that's ridiculously simple, but effective for me. You browse through your songs (which is again, easy), hold down the "button," and it adds whatever song/album/playlist you're on to your On-the-go playlist. Wash, rinse, repeat. The playlist sticks around for a day or two, then automatically clears itself out. Good for when you're in the mood for something that your smart playlists might not cover, but don't want to set something permanent up.
You should get a bigger ipod and make sure all your songs fit. Drop the playlists, and just listen to entire albums.
Nah... I dropped the money on it last March. I encode all of my stuff at 192 and have a bit over 3000 songs, which is plenty for me right now. I've got just about every album I own on it and still have 4 or 5 gigs left. I'm waiting for something large enough that I can do everything lossless down the road, but I'm more than content for now.
Personally, I don't need 20 GB of music on the go
Yep. I hear ya, all I'm saying is that you're not the market the iPod is going for (you don't care about the massive space). Tons of people probably feel the same way, but the iPod is not going for your crowd. It's not going to hurt iPod sales any time soon, because the iPod is all about having enormous amounts of space on a sleek, simple device. The phone with the gig or two, comparatively, does not, and it would take some good designers to make an interface as simple to use as the iPods, especially without something like iTunes. Things WILL get interesting once this gets inexpensive, because at that point I think you're beginning to get into the Mini's scope.