Actually, I'd even paid more if I didn't have to walk to a store to buy the game (and deal with people:). It's a lot more convenient to buy it from steam and start playing it soon, and removes the hassle with dvd's etc.
I'm not from US so I dont know the exact price (8-9e here), but going to movies is not the only expense. You usually buy candy/popcorn and lemonade and other things too. Maybe even pay the ticket for your date. (btw, watching a girl you're dating playing a game is a lot more fun:)
Exactly, and it's quite interesting thing. You can count the lesser userbase as one of the affecting factors why the games did cost so "much" then, but the entertainment value and playing hours weren't even close to what they are now with the same prices, while development costs have skyrocketed from those days. Considering some games take years to develop with multimillion dollar budgets, $60 isn't really that much now a days, considering how much entertainment some games now a days give and how much hours you can spend with them.
While I agree myself that it's fun to create games and play around with them (man did I have some great ideas and projects at teenage years!), but it's not at all for everyone. I like sandbox type games and I like messing around in games to see how the environment and AI responds to it. But my programming oriented mind probably affects a lot into that too.
Many games start out at this retail price â" but why? Did the makers of The Beatles Rock Band game just happen upon $59.99, as did the makers of Batman Arkham Asylum? After all, those two titles surely took different amounts of man hours to develop, and result in different averages of entertainment time enjoyed by the consumer.
It's the same thing with movies and music. There's a certain "standard" price everyone goes with, because if they didn't, it'll affect their sales. Going a bit over the standard decreases sales, going a bit less than the standard can increase them. You have to find the fine line.
And to be honest, they $60 price isn't that much if it's a great game. You pay atleast $15+ to go the movies, probably even more if you make a night out of it. You might spend the same amount in bars too. Both of those give only a few hours of entertainment value, and to be honest aren't all that fun all the time. Good games give a lot more entertainment and fun hours. My stats for Left4Dead show 947 hours and I've probably spend *a lot* in WoW too. And dont even get me started on the civilization and settlers series.
That being said, I would probably try more games if they were cheaper. But I still will get the games I want.
$10 go toward cost of goods sold, which includes manufacturing the game disc, shipping the games to the store, and anything else directly related to production and delivery of the game package.
I think digital delivery is something that can bring this price down a lot. Yes, bandwidth does cost, but its nothing like producing tons of dvd's, packaging them, sending them all over the world and delivering to stores. And the user experience is usually a lot nicer, you can easily buy it without walking to store.
And to be honest, game development is no cheap business and it's getting even more costly all the time. Yeah you could argue that theres great indie games that have been developed at cheaper budgets, and you're right; there are. But their budgets also are $10 000 - $100 000. It means you have to get lots of sales. And indie developers really cant produce the games like Call of Duty series (specially the modern warfare ones!) and Left4Dead and Half-Life 2. There is place for indie developers, but you need professional commercial game developers too.
Nice way to twist the title and forget "with" too. They didn't screw up whole Windows Mobile like you could think, but they wanted to launch WM7 already.
I actually like Windows Mobile most from the mobile platforms (however, I haven't tried Android yet). It's *a lot* more open than iPhone, as in you can run any software on it that you want. Also it seems to be customizable quite much, since HTC's version is a lot different from others. And there's a lot programs available.
And dont even get me started on Symbian and the insanity to program something for it...
The large carriers had previously been required to sell access at a specific wholesale rate. If Bell and Telus can charge whatever they want, the small ISPs say, Canadians will see less competition, higher prices and slower Internet speeds.
I'd like to support the small ISP and they're being around most likely creates more competition, but I dislike goverment control like that too. Companies should be allowed to sell their services at a price they want. If its pricy for me, I need to be without it. Or pay the price they ask and get the service.
Goverment shouldn't be allowed to tell me that I'm not allowed to sell at a certain price, marketforces will do that.
If the prices will go too much up, I'm sure customers will be unhappy and there will be new ISP's taking place.
Google Maps, Google Talk and Gmail and so on require a license to distribute them. Cyanogen doesn't have one. Google C&D's because of that. Case closed.
Moving to Linux does little to help in the situation the article explains. If its targeted at your company, it doesn't matter if you're running Windows or Linux or some other OS. The malware will be designed for it. If its purpose is to steal information or banking details, it runs just fine on user space too, no root required. It might even make the situation worse, since the system is new to almost everyone (and spotting a well hidden malware in Linux is hard)
This is the reason traditional antivirus scanning will not work. If the specific malware is only inside your company or a few hundred PC's, there isn't signatures for them either. You have to educate your company's workers and restrict access in OS instead of blindly trusting your antivirus providers.
Now the same approach doesn't work in homes or educating those random users, but it should work inside your company.
Though, the power switch achieves (almost) the same effect with no waiting at all.
Yeah thats a good idea. And why are you still sitting on your chair and watching the turning off screen while its going down? It will turn off itself, you know.
That is indeed really fast boot to desktop. I like it how it shows the Windows loading screen almost immediatly too.
This also brings a new friend for F5 hitting. To get to the bios menu you'll be smashing F12 as fast as you can during boot.
But the article is a little low on details of optimizations. As I've understood, BIOS isn't really that complicated nor does it do any heavy calculations. It basically just brings hardware up and tests it, which takes most of the time (not that the 5-6 seconds is so long wait anyway). So have they optimized something else, or are they just skipping those tests?
How surprising. We've seen lots of symantec articles already here on slashdot already. Please dont spamming us with worthless stuff. It's all for marketing.
The interesting question is NOT why Idaho state spams the most, but WHY usa spams so much. It's not even the largest country in the world; china, india, russia and others go beyound. Still their spam levels are a lot lower.
Noting about "US connectivity" doesn't work either. There's a lot more people with internet connections around the world, but only USA seems to have the problem with so much malware and spam.
Please educate your people, because it affects rest of the world too.
Scandinavia. In increasing amounts girls are getting "a little round" because of McDonalds and other US shit, but theres still lots of nice blond girls around. Not obese, not skinny, but just the perfect:) Blond girls with ponytails, ah 3
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I'd even paid more if I didn't have to walk to a store to buy the game (and deal with people :). It's a lot more convenient to buy it from steam and start playing it soon, and removes the hassle with dvd's etc.
I'm not from US so I dont know the exact price (8-9e here), but going to movies is not the only expense. You usually buy candy/popcorn and lemonade and other things too. Maybe even pay the ticket for your date. (btw, watching a girl you're dating playing a game is a lot more fun :)
Actually you can get left4dead for 18e ($26) from http://www.g2play.net/store/Left-4-Dead/ . It's a little over your $20, but close enough and its a great game (yes its a legit store, as confirmed by EA staff here )
Exactly, and it's quite interesting thing. You can count the lesser userbase as one of the affecting factors why the games did cost so "much" then, but the entertainment value and playing hours weren't even close to what they are now with the same prices, while development costs have skyrocketed from those days. Considering some games take years to develop with multimillion dollar budgets, $60 isn't really that much now a days, considering how much entertainment some games now a days give and how much hours you can spend with them.
While I agree myself that it's fun to create games and play around with them (man did I have some great ideas and projects at teenage years!), but it's not at all for everyone. I like sandbox type games and I like messing around in games to see how the environment and AI responds to it. But my programming oriented mind probably affects a lot into that too.
However, most people just want to play a game.
Many games start out at this retail price â" but why? Did the makers of The Beatles Rock Band game just happen upon $59.99, as did the makers of Batman Arkham Asylum? After all, those two titles surely took different amounts of man hours to develop, and result in different averages of entertainment time enjoyed by the consumer.
It's the same thing with movies and music. There's a certain "standard" price everyone goes with, because if they didn't, it'll affect their sales. Going a bit over the standard decreases sales, going a bit less than the standard can increase them. You have to find the fine line.
And to be honest, they $60 price isn't that much if it's a great game. You pay atleast $15+ to go the movies, probably even more if you make a night out of it. You might spend the same amount in bars too. Both of those give only a few hours of entertainment value, and to be honest aren't all that fun all the time. Good games give a lot more entertainment and fun hours. My stats for Left4Dead show 947 hours and I've probably spend *a lot* in WoW too. And dont even get me started on the civilization and settlers series.
That being said, I would probably try more games if they were cheaper. But I still will get the games I want.
$10 go toward cost of goods sold, which includes manufacturing the game disc, shipping the games to the store, and anything else directly related to production and delivery of the game package.
I think digital delivery is something that can bring this price down a lot. Yes, bandwidth does cost, but its nothing like producing tons of dvd's, packaging them, sending them all over the world and delivering to stores. And the user experience is usually a lot nicer, you can easily buy it without walking to store.
And to be honest, game development is no cheap business and it's getting even more costly all the time. Yeah you could argue that theres great indie games that have been developed at cheaper budgets, and you're right; there are. But their budgets also are $10 000 - $100 000. It means you have to get lots of sales. And indie developers really cant produce the games like Call of Duty series (specially the modern warfare ones!) and Left4Dead and Half-Life 2. There is place for indie developers, but you need professional commercial game developers too.
He didn't say it sucks. He said they wanted to get WM7 done already and they screwed up with *that*. Title is just misleading as hell.
Red Light tickets is uninteresting, but what if we discuss Red-light district here?
Nice way to twist the title and forget "with" too. They didn't screw up whole Windows Mobile like you could think, but they wanted to launch WM7 already.
I actually like Windows Mobile most from the mobile platforms (however, I haven't tried Android yet). It's *a lot* more open than iPhone, as in you can run any software on it that you want. Also it seems to be customizable quite much, since HTC's version is a lot different from others. And there's a lot programs available.
And dont even get me started on Symbian and the insanity to program something for it...
The large carriers had previously been required to sell access at a specific wholesale rate. If Bell and Telus can charge whatever they want, the small ISPs say, Canadians will see less competition, higher prices and slower Internet speeds.
I'd like to support the small ISP and they're being around most likely creates more competition, but I dislike goverment control like that too. Companies should be allowed to sell their services at a price they want. If its pricy for me, I need to be without it. Or pay the price they ask and get the service.
Goverment shouldn't be allowed to tell me that I'm not allowed to sell at a certain price, marketforces will do that.
If the prices will go too much up, I'm sure customers will be unhappy and there will be new ISP's taking place.
Android itself is, but of course some software written for it can be closed or even, hold your breath, commercial.
Google Maps, Google Talk and Gmail apps are closed software.
And before someone jumps on the "but I want the whole thing to be open!!", its more open when developers have choices.
Google Maps, Google Talk and Gmail and so on require a license to distribute them. Cyanogen doesn't have one. Google C&D's because of that. Case closed.
For that matter the earlier story ( http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/09/24/238251/Microsoft-Releases-Prototype-of-Research-OS-Barrelfish ) has turned in to this and the comments go to both.
Someone started their friday drinking a little bit too early?
Everyone decided it was uninteresting and now we're talking about Windows 7 and Microsoft instead.
CmdrTaco wants some more Windows vs Linux vs Apple fanboy fighting, even if its in a completely unrelated story. You can never get enough of that!
Okay guys, who though it would be funny to prefill the story with comments from other story. damn you kdawson!
Or is recession so bad that now slashdot is recycling our comments?
Moving to Linux does little to help in the situation the article explains. If its targeted at your company, it doesn't matter if you're running Windows or Linux or some other OS. The malware will be designed for it. If its purpose is to steal information or banking details, it runs just fine on user space too, no root required. It might even make the situation worse, since the system is new to almost everyone (and spotting a well hidden malware in Linux is hard)
This is the reason traditional antivirus scanning will not work. If the specific malware is only inside your company or a few hundred PC's, there isn't signatures for them either. You have to educate your company's workers and restrict access in OS instead of blindly trusting your antivirus providers.
Now the same approach doesn't work in homes or educating those random users, but it should work inside your company.
Have you ever noticed there's a bright yellow spot in the sky? You should check it out sometime..
Didn't anyone ever tell you that looking directly at sun is bad for your eyes? Are you trying to kill us or something?
They're only demonstrating the time it takes in BIOS (almost nothing), not in OS.
Though, the power switch achieves (almost) the same effect with no waiting at all.
Yeah thats a good idea. And why are you still sitting on your chair and watching the turning off screen while its going down? It will turn off itself, you know.
That is indeed really fast boot to desktop. I like it how it shows the Windows loading screen almost immediatly too.
This also brings a new friend for F5 hitting. To get to the bios menu you'll be smashing F12 as fast as you can during boot.
But the article is a little low on details of optimizations. As I've understood, BIOS isn't really that complicated nor does it do any heavy calculations. It basically just brings hardware up and tests it, which takes most of the time (not that the 5-6 seconds is so long wait anyway). So have they optimized something else, or are they just skipping those tests?
How surprising. We've seen lots of symantec articles already here on slashdot already. Please dont spamming us with worthless stuff. It's all for marketing.
The interesting question is NOT why Idaho state spams the most, but WHY usa spams so much. It's not even the largest country in the world; china, india, russia and others go beyound. Still their spam levels are a lot lower.
Noting about "US connectivity" doesn't work either. There's a lot more people with internet connections around the world, but only USA seems to have the problem with so much malware and spam.
Please educate your people, because it affects rest of the world too.
Scandinavia. In increasing amounts girls are getting "a little round" because of McDonalds and other US shit, but theres still lots of nice blond girls around. Not obese, not skinny, but just the perfect :) Blond girls with ponytails, ah 3