The article says that reporters are getting burnt out because the deadline for articles went from being daily/weekly to a constant of ASAP. If you're going to make a bad analogy at least try to explain how it applies.
You complain about some developers preferring to use a development environment. But then you go on to complain that you couldn't use your favorite text editor back in the day and were forced to use a lame one.
I don't trust any programmer that needs "their favorite editor" but I suppose that's beside the point. See how ridiculous that sounds? Hypocrite.
Different people prefer different environments. Hell, you can even get vim or emacs to do autocomplete, syntax checking, even compilation triggers. That's a development environment right there. I love vim, but get off your high horse and stop thinking that using the command line or a shitty editor makes you any better than someone who doesn't.
Whether or not people do work for money is irrelevant -- your argument is a giant red herring. An artist or musician who works for money isn't any more unholy than a carpenter, electrician, or doctor working for the same cash.
The issue here is whether piracy has killed a work. Stick to the issue.
What's fundamentally better about running a full performance-hogging OS along with the game that's playing in fullscreen? The PC is a fundamentally better power machine. For the cost, even. The problem is that when you are trying to run a full OS and your game at the same time, you must have a much more powerful system than todays consoles. That's why you never saw PS3 running Linux in the background. More capabilities and requirements mean more cash.
What's the full price of your ancient machine new? I'm betting it's more than a console.
Get a cheap quad core and a 5770 and you're done for 400$
That $400 machine still costs more than consoles. That's enough to deter most people from PC games altogether. I still doubt that the full end cost of the machine would be $400. Lets see some specs/costs.
Here's a good gauge: build yourself the lowest cost machine that will play Assassin's Creed II with the same graphics as the PS3 or XBOX. You'll probably spend more than a console on it.
I'd like to add that I think a lot of people get mislead into thinking gaming PCs cost less than they do. Yes, if you're just upgrading your old system then it will be cheaper. Monitor, mice, keyboard, chassis -- these are things that you probably will not replace and they really do cut down the costs by 500 dollars or more. But if you want real power and want to be able to run new games at a decent framerate and resolution, you'll always pay more than you would for a console.
My PC cost more than PS3 when it was new. No I'm not talking about the Ebay prices. Needless to say, most people are only willing to spend money on one good gaming machine be it a PC or console.
I just built a new PC earlier this year and it cost me around $1500 when all was said and done. If you want a PC that will have console graphics or better then you will probably end up spending more money than you would on console.
Art defined by historians isn't any more useful of a definition than what Ebert provided or quoted in his article. But for that matter, of what use is a definition of art? It seems primarily to serve the purpose of separating groups of works into different categories so that critics and buyers can focus on some works while blatantly dismiss others.
Take Andy Warhol for example. Many of his works are no more art than what your kid drew or what game Sony made. Nonetheless his work is considered some of the greatest and controversial to grace the world of art. When you call someone's works art you give them more power and credibility.
Art is a word of power and not of meaning. Much like the words "terrorist" or "savages" give power to the accusers without providing any more useful information about the accused.
Mississauga near Pearson Airport.
4th floor of office building.
Wavy and shaking. Nothing was broken but you could really feel it.
43.638968,-79.609534
It's in the DMCA that even though they are not hosting the content they must still remove links to it.
But the DMCA takedowns fix nothing. They should be going after the source of the offending content not the locator. They merely go after search engines like Google because requesting that someone takes down a link is far easier and more effective than going after the source itself.
Yes, this is a lot like universal healthcare: it's a government unreasonably telling private people what transactions they CANNOT engage in (private insurance in Canada is illegal).
You ever stop and think about WHY healthcare is public? When you allow people with more money to have better healthcare you are putting their lives at a greater value than those less fortunate. I don't care where you live but that's not right.
The first case we had of someone being able to pay more for better healthcare was last year I think. I'm not sure what loophole they used to legally do this. There was a social uproar about it.
You have the cost of the Eye but then factor in Motion Plus for all of your Wii controllers. Even with that you don't get matching functionality. The PS3 seems to provide the better dollar value here. Not to mention extra flexibility such as dual-wand Move games which would be freaking awesome.
My problem is that so few games are designed with the PC in mind today. Most developers are going multiplatform which essentially means console focused games (ie: lowest common denominator).
Microsoft has been failing in the PC gaming department lately. They have the Games for Windows brand and those games often don't have 360 controller support. Even when a game is ported to the PC from the 360 it often has the 360 controller support stripped out or useless. If the controller isn't supported then the PC interface is usually a crap port.
I love the PC because you have the greatest graphics anywhere. But the supporting companies always gimp it for us. WTF?
regardless of the units. The real takeaways from this article are that mpg is a stupid unit to use, and that most people don't understand per units at all.
Is there a way to tell if an app had iAds before buying/downloading it? I think it should be a requirement that iAd apps are flagged as such in the app store. It would really piss me off if I paid for an app only to find ads inside.
For that matter, there are so many apps that require you to register before using them. These should be flagged as well.
I find it astounding that we have so much crap to deal with in the mobile realm. We thought desktop apps were annoying. They were just the beginning.
If everyone in $country decided to use no more than 10W of electricity for a month, a lot of power plants would be shut down and less fuel would be used during that month. If everyone in $country decided to load their internet connection no more than 10kbps, the ISPs network would remain on and would use the same amount of power.
This is the point where everyone thinks it should be like electricity. Why would telcos continuously run their network at full bandwidth when they could have a variable bandwidth network that accounts for the demand? Obviously when everyone is using 10kbps you don't need as much bandwidth as if everyone was using 100. Is it too hard to do this or not possible given network fundamentals?
I get what you're saying. The fixed infrastructure means that the bandwidth is also fixed. But there must be some fees for the transfer of data such as extra power use and inter-network (between telcos) network fees.
I think of it like a tolled highway where you pay for the distance traveled. Essentially every lane on the highway is worth a certain amount. It may even be worth more or less in certain areas or and/or at different times of the day. When you take up a lane on the highway you're preventing others from using your exact space in the lane which could have been available for others. There's no charge for the highway to just sit there when not in use, but that doesn't mean they should just charge everyone who uses the highway daily a monthly rate.
Am I missing something? In the distance tolled highway I see nothing wrong with pay-per-use. This is exactly how I see network use. Maybe you can tell me where my highway analogy is wrong?
Slashdot Mirror
I stopped reading replies to my comments long ago because 80% of /. comments are flaming for the sake of flaming.
The article says that reporters are getting burnt out because the deadline for articles went from being daily/weekly to a constant of ASAP. If you're going to make a bad analogy at least try to explain how it applies.
You complain about some developers preferring to use a development environment. But then you go on to complain that you couldn't use your favorite text editor back in the day and were forced to use a lame one.
I don't trust any programmer that needs "their favorite editor" but I suppose that's beside the point. See how ridiculous that sounds? Hypocrite.
Different people prefer different environments. Hell, you can even get vim or emacs to do autocomplete, syntax checking, even compilation triggers. That's a development environment right there. I love vim, but get off your high horse and stop thinking that using the command line or a shitty editor makes you any better than someone who doesn't.
Whether or not people do work for money is irrelevant -- your argument is a giant red herring. An artist or musician who works for money isn't any more unholy than a carpenter, electrician, or doctor working for the same cash.
The issue here is whether piracy has killed a work. Stick to the issue.
And yet everyone gives out their real name on Facebook when they have the choice to give a fake one.
What's fundamentally better about running a full performance-hogging OS along with the game that's playing in fullscreen? The PC is a fundamentally better power machine. For the cost, even. The problem is that when you are trying to run a full OS and your game at the same time, you must have a much more powerful system than todays consoles. That's why you never saw PS3 running Linux in the background. More capabilities and requirements mean more cash.
What's the full price of your ancient machine new? I'm betting it's more than a console.
Get a cheap quad core and a 5770 and you're done for 400$
That $400 machine still costs more than consoles. That's enough to deter most people from PC games altogether. I still doubt that the full end cost of the machine would be $400. Lets see some specs/costs.
Here's a good gauge: build yourself the lowest cost machine that will play Assassin's Creed II with the same graphics as the PS3 or XBOX. You'll probably spend more than a console on it.
I'd like to add that I think a lot of people get mislead into thinking gaming PCs cost less than they do. Yes, if you're just upgrading your old system then it will be cheaper. Monitor, mice, keyboard, chassis -- these are things that you probably will not replace and they really do cut down the costs by 500 dollars or more. But if you want real power and want to be able to run new games at a decent framerate and resolution, you'll always pay more than you would for a console.
My PC cost more than PS3 when it was new. No I'm not talking about the Ebay prices. Needless to say, most people are only willing to spend money on one good gaming machine be it a PC or console.
I just built a new PC earlier this year and it cost me around $1500 when all was said and done. If you want a PC that will have console graphics or better then you will probably end up spending more money than you would on console.
Because gaming systems cost money. Gaming PCs cost even more money than their console counterparts.
Art defined by historians isn't any more useful of a definition than what Ebert provided or quoted in his article. But for that matter, of what use is a definition of art? It seems primarily to serve the purpose of separating groups of works into different categories so that critics and buyers can focus on some works while blatantly dismiss others.
Take Andy Warhol for example. Many of his works are no more art than what your kid drew or what game Sony made. Nonetheless his work is considered some of the greatest and controversial to grace the world of art. When you call someone's works art you give them more power and credibility.
Art is a word of power and not of meaning. Much like the words "terrorist" or "savages" give power to the accusers without providing any more useful information about the accused.
And there it is in the title for you.
Mississauga near Pearson Airport. 4th floor of office building. Wavy and shaking. Nothing was broken but you could really feel it. 43.638968,-79.609534
You just destroyed my hope in the Internet.
It's in the DMCA that even though they are not hosting the content they must still remove links to it.
But the DMCA takedowns fix nothing. They should be going after the source of the offending content not the locator. They merely go after search engines like Google because requesting that someone takes down a link is far easier and more effective than going after the source itself.
Yes, this is a lot like universal healthcare: it's a government unreasonably telling private people what transactions they CANNOT engage in (private insurance in Canada is illegal).
You ever stop and think about WHY healthcare is public? When you allow people with more money to have better healthcare you are putting their lives at a greater value than those less fortunate. I don't care where you live but that's not right.
The first case we had of someone being able to pay more for better healthcare was last year I think. I'm not sure what loophole they used to legally do this. There was a social uproar about it.
Agreed. But there are plenty of places in the US where you get both the snow and the crazies. I'll take snow without the crazies, thanks.
You have the cost of the Eye but then factor in Motion Plus for all of your Wii controllers. Even with that you don't get matching functionality. The PS3 seems to provide the better dollar value here. Not to mention extra flexibility such as dual-wand Move games which would be freaking awesome.
My problem is that so few games are designed with the PC in mind today. Most developers are going multiplatform which essentially means console focused games (ie: lowest common denominator).
Microsoft has been failing in the PC gaming department lately. They have the Games for Windows brand and those games often don't have 360 controller support. Even when a game is ported to the PC from the 360 it often has the 360 controller support stripped out or useless. If the controller isn't supported then the PC interface is usually a crap port.
I love the PC because you have the greatest graphics anywhere. But the supporting companies always gimp it for us. WTF?
Can't they just call it a NotSoBIOS? Not so basic input output system.
regardless of the units. The real takeaways from this article are that mpg is a stupid unit to use, and that most people don't understand per units at all.
Is there a way to tell if an app had iAds before buying/downloading it? I think it should be a requirement that iAd apps are flagged as such in the app store. It would really piss me off if I paid for an app only to find ads inside.
For that matter, there are so many apps that require you to register before using them. These should be flagged as well.
I find it astounding that we have so much crap to deal with in the mobile realm. We thought desktop apps were annoying. They were just the beginning.
Good points.
If everyone in $country decided to use no more than 10W of electricity for a month, a lot of power plants would be shut down and less fuel would be used during that month. If everyone in $country decided to load their internet connection no more than 10kbps, the ISPs network would remain on and would use the same amount of power.
This is the point where everyone thinks it should be like electricity. Why would telcos continuously run their network at full bandwidth when they could have a variable bandwidth network that accounts for the demand? Obviously when everyone is using 10kbps you don't need as much bandwidth as if everyone was using 100. Is it too hard to do this or not possible given network fundamentals?
I get what you're saying. The fixed infrastructure means that the bandwidth is also fixed. But there must be some fees for the transfer of data such as extra power use and inter-network (between telcos) network fees.
I think of it like a tolled highway where you pay for the distance traveled. Essentially every lane on the highway is worth a certain amount. It may even be worth more or less in certain areas or and/or at different times of the day. When you take up a lane on the highway you're preventing others from using your exact space in the lane which could have been available for others. There's no charge for the highway to just sit there when not in use, but that doesn't mean they should just charge everyone who uses the highway daily a monthly rate.
Am I missing something? In the distance tolled highway I see nothing wrong with pay-per-use. This is exactly how I see network use. Maybe you can tell me where my highway analogy is wrong?