Yeah, I think that 4% is pretty inaccurate. Before statmarket.com dropped it's free access (around December), I remember the percent of Linux users on the internet was closer to 1% - I think the number of people browsing with a particular OS is a better indicator of market share than OS'es purchased, because it doesn't take into account people who downloaded/copied/otherwise didn't purchase the OS, as well as those who, as you pointed out, buy an OS but do not use it. I have purchased both RedHat and Corel, but I don't use either.
What's the deal with this statement? Windows based PC ports will likely taper off though after the next version of Direct X is released and the task of porting backwards (across two versions of Direct X, and two versions of the Visual C compiler) becomes close to impossible unless the code was correctly implemented from scratch to accommodate the Dreamcast port up front.
WinCE is included on the game disc - it is not hard-coded into the system. And as such, the DirectX and Virtual C libraries would be included on the actual disc and could be kept current, correct?
Also, they're giving Nintendo far too much credit for recent success. Globally, the N64 is a bust - both the Playstation and the Dreamcast are outselling it. Nintendo's primary source of revenue for the past year has been Pokemon - not the N64.
Just a note - "Atari" didn't flood the market with bad games... external developers did that. Most of the Atari-developed games were pretty good - decent arcade ports and the like (we'll ignore ET and Pac-Man). It's when you had 1000 games a year released with terrible quality like "Letter Zap" and "Purina Chuck Wagon" that the market got oversaturated.
Yes, Atari did release several consoles following the 2600. But it was obviously not their focus. The 5200 was a bust, and the 7800 was too little too late. By the time the Jaguar rolled around, Nintendo and Sega were too firmly entrenched in gamer's minds to make any headway.
Atari *did* put the majority of their development effort during the mid 80's into competing with the Amiga through the ST. All their previous consoles and computers were just based on past technology (7800 was based on the 2600, and the 5200/XL/XE lines were all based on the original Atari 400/800)
Excellent point... The Commodore 64 gave you a better-than-console gaming experience for roughly the same price, plus you did have the option to do more (I learned programming on my C64). But let's not forget another *really* big point in the C64's success - pirating. You couldn't pirate a cartridge. But even today I *still* have hundreds of pirated C64 games in a closet at my parents' home.
One note - your estimate of 1986 is a little early for the C64's demise... The C64's peak was around 85-89. The NES didn't show up until 88, and the PC wasn't a viable gaming platform until the introduction of VGA and 386's (early 90s)
That's no one's fault but the Mac owners'. If you own a Mac and play games on it, you MUST accept that the games will arrive several months later than their Windows counterparts (if they arrive at all). This is just the way it is - it is not Blizzard's or anyone else's fault (other than Apple, possibly). You might point to Q3 or UT - but they are the exception, not the rule.
Because it's an issue of economics. They would probably sell a few Linux copies if such a version was released. But would it be enough to offset the expense of developing a Linux port? Also, you have to consider that many people would go ahead and buy the Win version and run it in WINE if a Linux port was not made available.
First rule of game marketing... NEVER even HINT at something that may not happen. If Blizzard did issue a statement saying "We are considering porting Diablo 2 to Linux", and then it didn't happen, regardless of what reasons they gave everyone here would be crying for a boycott.
Uh... most portable CD players have at least 10 second skip protection anyway. Just slap in 8MB of RAM, and you've got several minutes worth of skip protection.
Sorry, 64MB just isn't going to cut it. Portable MP3 players hold no interest for me until I can choose from several hours worth of music while running.
" 1) Why would I want some company to be able to atalog what CDs I have and which I don't? (I haven't seen their privacy policy yet... but should I expect direct mail asking if I want the "Latest CD from such and such"?) "
Read the service agreement - to my knowledge they won't be doing this.
"2) What about when I'm stuck behind a firewall somewhere and don't have easy access? I'd rather have a CD full of MP3's (I just finished burning one that had 15 CDs worth of music). "
Well, then you don't have access to it. This isn't magic - it won't do your laundry either.
"3) Are small volume and no-name CDs going to be available? (or am I going to have to make my own MP3s of them if I want to carry them around?). "
Probably not - at least for a long while. I'd imagine they will start filling requests from most popular to least. Considering the hundreds of thousands of recordings available, you can't expect them to have ALL of them available.
I think very few informed people believe Microsoft is responsible for being innovative. But for *many people*, Microsoft products do what they want them to do, with minimum hassle.
Believe it or not, not everyone is a venom-spewing, Microsoft-hating Linux zealot. I may not agree with some of their business practices, but for the most part their products get the job done.
While your assesment is true enough, it's missing one critical element - none of the events you mentioned had to deal with broadband internet access. When I can download and CD burn an entire artist's catalog in a matter of hours without the artist receiving any royalties whatsoever, it's a whole other ballgame.
Slashdot Mirror
Two words: Windows 2000
Yeah, I think that 4% is pretty inaccurate. Before statmarket.com dropped it's free access (around December), I remember the percent of Linux users on the internet was closer to 1% - I think the number of people browsing with a particular OS is a better indicator of market share than OS'es purchased, because it doesn't take into account people who downloaded/copied/otherwise didn't purchase the OS, as well as those who, as you pointed out, buy an OS but do not use it. I have purchased both RedHat and Corel, but I don't use either.
Yep - Companies have a right to protect their trademarks.
What's the deal with this statement? Windows based PC ports will likely taper off though after the next version of Direct X is released and the task of porting backwards (across two versions of Direct X, and two versions of the Visual C compiler) becomes close to impossible unless the code was correctly implemented from scratch to accommodate the Dreamcast port up front.
WinCE is included on the game disc - it is not hard-coded into the system. And as such, the DirectX and Virtual C libraries would be included on the actual disc and could be kept current, correct?
Also, they're giving Nintendo far too much credit for recent success. Globally, the N64 is a bust - both the Playstation and the Dreamcast are outselling it. Nintendo's primary source of revenue for the past year has been Pokemon - not the N64.
Just a note - "Atari" didn't flood the market with bad games... external developers did that. Most of the Atari-developed games were pretty good - decent arcade ports and the like (we'll ignore ET and Pac-Man). It's when you had 1000 games a year released with terrible quality like "Letter Zap" and "Purina Chuck Wagon" that the market got oversaturated.
Atari *did* put the majority of their development effort during the mid 80's into competing with the Amiga through the ST. All their previous consoles and computers were just based on past technology (7800 was based on the 2600, and the 5200/XL/XE lines were all based on the original Atari 400/800)
One note - your estimate of 1986 is a little early for the C64's demise... The C64's peak was around 85-89. The NES didn't show up until 88, and the PC wasn't a viable gaming platform until the introduction of VGA and 386's (early 90s)
It's all about the games and their value. If the games aren't there, the console will bust. If the hardware/software is too expensive, same result.
Yep - pretty annoying, and not a good way to start out an article that's obviously targeted towards the geek community.
That's no one's fault but the Mac owners'. If you own a Mac and play games on it, you MUST accept that the games will arrive several months later than their Windows counterparts (if they arrive at all). This is just the way it is - it is not Blizzard's or anyone else's fault (other than Apple, possibly). You might point to Q3 or UT - but they are the exception, not the rule.
Because it's an issue of economics. They would probably sell a few Linux copies if such a version was released. But would it be enough to offset the expense of developing a Linux port? Also, you have to consider that many people would go ahead and buy the Win version and run it in WINE if a Linux port was not made available.
First rule of game marketing... NEVER even HINT at something that may not happen. If Blizzard did issue a statement saying "We are considering porting Diablo 2 to Linux", and then it didn't happen, regardless of what reasons they gave everyone here would be crying for a boycott.
We just want to know what Jeff, Frank, Tommy and the rest are doing these days!!!
How is "LinuxMac" a "generic Microsoft-style product name"??? If you're going to flame MS, at least let it make sense.
Uh... most portable CD players have at least 10 second skip protection anyway. Just slap in 8MB of RAM, and you've got several minutes worth of skip protection.
Sorry, 64MB just isn't going to cut it. Portable MP3 players hold no interest for me until I can choose from several hours worth of music while running.
You can choose to have a victim mentality or not.
Funny - my girlfriend is a mechanical engineer. She went through calculus classes I couldn't *begin* to comprehend.
That is how it works. And it's why the RIAA is suing... someone could potentially figure out how to access the entire collection MP3.com is hosting.
Read the service agreement - to my knowledge they won't be doing this.
"2) What about when I'm stuck behind a firewall somewhere and don't have easy access? I'd rather have a CD full of MP3's (I just finished burning one that had 15 CDs worth of music). "
Well, then you don't have access to it. This isn't magic - it won't do your laundry either.
"3) Are small volume and no-name CDs going to be available? (or am I going to have to make my own MP3s of them if I want to carry them around?). "
Probably not - at least for a long while. I'd imagine they will start filling requests from most popular to least. Considering the hundreds of thousands of recordings available, you can't expect them to have ALL of them available.
My own personal experience has shown no problems with Beam-it - and this is on three separate PCs with several hundred discs.
I think very few informed people believe Microsoft is responsible for being innovative. But for *many people*, Microsoft products do what they want them to do, with minimum hassle.
According to the DOJ, Linux is not a viable alternative.
Believe it or not, not everyone is a venom-spewing, Microsoft-hating Linux zealot. I may not agree with some of their business practices, but for the most part their products get the job done.
While your assesment is true enough, it's missing one critical element - none of the events you mentioned had to deal with broadband internet access. When I can download and CD burn an entire artist's catalog in a matter of hours without the artist receiving any royalties whatsoever, it's a whole other ballgame.