If Nintendo's console is effective enough, they could cherry-pick enough market share to make them closer to where they were back last iteration of the console wars... From what I'm seeing, that'd be the case- it should do well and it's priced cheaper than the other players and can accomplish most of what the others are striving for.
The problem with Nintendo is the games. They in no way attempt to reach the same game market that Sony/Microsoft strive for, so any success for there console will be limited to casual gamers who don't buy lots of games to begin with.
For instance, I have a Gamecube for the sole purpose of playing ResidentEvil and Viewtiful Joe. It's nice that the Gamecube was cheap enough that it didn't hurt much to buy one just for two games, but otherwise I really have no need to own one.
Considering the difference in graphics capabilities between the Wii and the PS3/XBox360, I don't see many titles being cross-released for the Wii either.
Umm, rumble support doesn't just happen by magic. It has to be built into the games, and I seriously doubt very many game-makers are going to waste precious resources adding in rumble effects for the tiny portion of the market using third-party controllers that support rumble.
Actually, I felt that 3rd party controllers would be most usefull when playing PS1/PS2 games that already had Rumble on your PS3. Whether or not new games for the PS3 are developed to take advantage of the Tumble-tilt or Rumble is for the future.
Huh? You assume I just have standalone WiFi adapters sitting around the house that are compatible with a game system that hasn't been made yet? Why would I, so that I can play the plethora of online PS2 games out there?
Considering that the only way to currently add a Wi-Fi adapter to a PS2 or XBox is in the form of a bridge, where you connect your Wi-Fi box to the Ethernet port on your console, then yes, they're compatible. As for why would you already have one? Well, they sell them, and they sell network adapters for the PS2, so the people who really wanted one do probably already have one.
Yeah, but see, prices will drop on the OTHER systems too. I doubt Sony will be able to close that $200 price gap with Xbox360 a whole lot. The situation's even worse for Sony if Wii comes in at or below $200, as a lot of people are predicting. I know *I'm* not about to pay triple price for some high-def support I'll never use...
The single most expensive part of the PS3 is the Blue-Ray drive, so yes I can see the PS3's price dropping considerably once production ramps up, especially if the PS3 has slow sales. Regardless, if you want an HD video player, $600 is still cheaper than any current standalone HD capable machine, even if you never buy a game.
The Revolution/Wii might be cheaper but then the Gamecube was cheaper than XBox/PS2 and it never did much against them, so why do you think the Wii will gain much headway against the XBox360/PS3? In the end, it's the games that matter, and Nintendo isn't hurting themselves to break out of their niche. Your arguement would have some more weight if the games were transparently playable on the PS3/XBox360/Wii, but they're not, so you enjoy Mario Kart XXX on your Wii and I'll enjoy Sony's massive library of games on the PS3.
For those bitching that the base model won't be upgradeable:
The unit has 4 USB 2.0 ports, which would imply that a USB memory card reader can be added on.
The unit has an AV MultiOut port, which would imply that HDMI could be added as a seperate dongle. Considering how many HD TV sets have been sold that don't have HDMI ports, I don't see what everyone is bitching about this for anyway. If the outputs include an Analog HD cable, then you're pretty much set. Sony and all the movie studios are already backing away from enforcing their movies to downgrade themselves because they know the public backlash from people who don't own an HDMI capable set would kill their chances of selling HD movies, so this really seems like a non-issue.
The controller sucks. Well, I'd be very surprised if Penguin or MadCatz doesn't make a controller with Rumble to satisfy your needs. Unless the PS3 comes with 2 controllers you'll likely end up bying an additional one anyway.
The base unit doesn't do Wi-Fi. Well, how many of you who own an original XBox or PS2 don't already have some kind of Wi-Fi adapter around the house, if that's your thing? Considering how quickly Wi-Fi speeds change and that the lifespan of a console is around 5 years, who wants a locked in Wi-Fi anyway, you'll just be bitching about how slow it is 3 years from now.
The price isn't cheap, but most of that's the Blue-Ray player. The higher price will help to ensure that the people who really really have to have a PS3 now will be able to get one while production ramps up and and prices can start to drop. There are many critics saying that the XBox360 is underpriced and it doesn't even have an HD DVD player.
That's unfettered free market libertarianism for you: feudalism in disguise. swear fealty to your corporate masters. they believe in the common good, it's just that they measure "common" with dollars.
I understand you're being sarcastic, but this kind of crap is the exact opposite of the unfettered free market concept. I agree that most corporations talk up 'free markets' but they usually mean 'take out all the other guys advantages but protect my markets from competition', but your post seems to imply that the very concept of 'free markets' is a sham, which I don't agree with.
The armed combatants was a lame excuse for not having to follow the Geneva convention.
The armed combatants excuse was never part of the Geneva convention, POWs are not only soldiers, armed combatants not having to be part of the convention was just made up as a lame excuse so that Bush and his gang could open a concentration camp.
There's a problem with your argument, however. The prisoners at Gitmo are NOT POW's. To be a POW your government has to have declared war on another nation and then fielded an army against that nation. The prisoners at Gitmo are not soldiers, they are not field troops, they are private citizens who have decided to kill large numbers of people who's government they disagree with. That is why they are not covered by the Geneva conventions.
If the us dumps it, do you expect that the enemies of the US will uphold the geneva convention?
In what way has Hamas, Al Queida or any other terrorist group show that they give a toss about the Geneva conventions in any of the actions that preceeded 9/11? Where does beheading your captives for political propaganda films come under the Geneva conventions?
Re:So, what options does this release remove?
on
Gnome 2.14 Review
·
· Score: 1
The point I'm trying to make is that we here utter so much gibberish about usability because we're not users, we're computer experts. We're used to thinking like computers.
I don't think it's that we're 'experts' as much as it is that we are, in general, comfortable with the interface.
For myself, I would rather have a lot of options that I can set because I like complete control of my computer experience. I understand that someone who's never touched a mouse before would probably be intimidated by that kind of power.
Here's where I start to differ from the mainstream though: Many people can't program the clock on a VCR. Why do we expect these people to get on a computer, which is several orders of magnitude more complicated, and be productive in a few hours? Perhaps, and this is a radical thought, sometimes it's not the interface but the user that needs to be changed.
If you must make computers easier for people, here's a thought: Instead of concentrating on the interface, how about simplifying the content? If you've ever spent a few hours trying to explain to someone the difference between TIFF, BMP, JPG, PNG, GIF, PICT, etc. and where it's appropriate to use one instead of the other, then you'd understand what I mean.
The computer world would be much less frightening for people if there were ONE image file, ONE music file, ONE document file, and the PROGRAMS figured out what goes where.
That brief 24 hour window when I can crush my nephew in a new game before he can devote all his free time to memorizing all the combo-moves and strategy guides. It doesn't matter if I never win a game again after that, the memory of that defeat is seared into his soul. Muahahahahahahah
Straw man. The market has also "failed" to provide every American with affordable flying cars and a personal staff of servants to tend to their every need.
The market has, however, provided adequate medical care for those who have anything meagerly above poverty level income. Government intrusion into the system has caused the rise in healthcare costs; in most states, the coverage available to you is mandated by the government. So instead of getting to pick and choose which kinds of services you're covered on, you have to pay a blanket cost to cover the fact that the insurance company has to provide coverage for psychiatric evaluations, abortions, marriage counseling, drug abuse, alcoholism, cosmetic surgery, weight loss, wigs, Christian Science practitioners, etc.
Straw man. The government mandates provided coverage because insurance companies are willing to spend the smaller cost of arguing whether your affliction is covered until you're dead instead of actually paying out the sum required by your policy.
One one hand I can agree with you, but on the other sometimes you have to force a certain minimum size. Or does the idea of three columns of text exactly one letter wide really appeal to you?
So Linus is a power user who wants to tweak everything, and that's fine. But isn't the exact opposite of his attitude what brought success to Firefox in the first place? Mozilla wasn't successful until they "dumbed down" the browser until it was really easy to use, and it made for an easier switch than the old Mozilla monster.
The difference between Mozilla/Firefox is more than just how many options they let you access, ie. Mozilla is an application 'suite' with email, web editor, chat program, etc. while Firefox is just a browser.
However, even taking your arguement at face value, Firefox might have simplified the options menu but if you know what you're doing you can go to the about:config menu and play with the more technical tweaks, which is really Linus' point. GNOME doesn't just hide those advanced options, they completely remove them.
Here's a thought. If you don't have the money to add PVR or VOD to your monthly bill, you're not going to convince HBO that giving their shows away for free will get you to part with more non-existent money.
Here's another thought. If you don't have money to purchase something, do without. There are plenty of free entertainment services available. If you really want to see ROME, but don't want to subscribe to HBO, wait for the inevitable DVD release and then rent it. Problem solved.
As for a download on demand service, I'm sure they'd be thrilled to do that if they could be reasonably certain that you could not then redistribute that video to 20,000 or so of your closest friends over P2P.
But the fact does remain that, as a non-subscriber, I have no motivation to pay for HBO if I've never seen Rome. If I can't download it, I don't know why I should pay for it. I make a habit of trying before buying.
By this arguement, I presume that you have never been to the movie theater, as very few will let you sit through a movie for free before deciding to pay for a ticket. I also would guess that you have never purchased a DVD, for the same reason. Buy a book?? Nope, not till after you've read it for free.
Here's the thing though. Once the DVD is released you can choose to rent it, your friends might invite you over and and start talking the show up, possibly even lend you their copy. You can probably get a copy from your local library. Etc. There are numerous legal methods to check out the series without actually having to subscribe to HBO, that goes for any other media. People who consistently download illegal copies talk about how it's a form of promotion, or how they wanted to see the show first, but in truth they usually didn't want to pay for it and have no intention of ever paying for it.
The problem is that it still takes time to ban all of them, and if HBO is hiring some of those white hat idiot script kiddies to do this for them, they probably have a few hundred IPs to come from.
Now THERE's a marketing idea! Hey, HBO/SHOWTIME/etc..... How about offering a cut in the cable fee or some other exclusive bonuses to people who want to run a distributed P2P jamming tool for you? Something like SETI@HOME?
Dear Honda, I love your cars but driving is too expensive. Won't you please offer your cars free? I know your workers won't mind not getting paid, and I'm sure the high quality products that I've come to expect from you will continue to flow in this new market.
It's time that you evolved and move beyond your antiquated expectation of being paid for your products. After all, it's not like I can just walk, and I can't possibly live without your products.
So I had no choice but to download the first five episodes from my commerical usenet feed:) I did however watch the sixth episode "regularly" on HBO, so I guess their tactic gained them a viewer.
You have cable, but you had to download the first five episodes? Does your cable provider not offer Video On Demand? You see, it's this new invention where you can view any episode of the series that has been aired for free, whenever you want. Call your cable provider and demand that they upgrade to this centuries technology.
Next Sunday, I'll probably be on my couch watching the seventh episode as it airs. And then I'll download it, too.
Okay, most cable providers that offer the VOD also provide Personal Video Recorders to their customers. You could also pop for a DVD Recorder and record it. Again, why with the downloading??
Yeah, HBO is going to fire someone for preventing the free dissemination of their copyrighted material over the internet. Yeah, sure. Especially a cost effective, directly focused counter to what would otherwise be settled by $300 Per Hour legal departments who might or might not sue the right person. Um-hum.
What HBO is doing is what every business should be doing instead of taking the RIAA's route. HBO is not restricting your right to make copies at home, they are not restricting your archiving of those copies, or even sharing them with your family/close friends. They are not suing BitTorrent, they are not demanding that all P2P software be banned, they are pro-actively preventing the illegal distribution of their material in an incredibly low impact manner. Bravo, HBO.
Really admire SUSE and have used it for several years now. I only wish Novell admired the tremendous care and hard work put in by the SUSE engineers, but if you go to the front page of http://www.novell.com/ you'd be pushed to know Novell even have SUSE. This new version and the new OpenSUSE initiative are things to shout about, one might think. Sigh. Novell are their own worst enemies.
SuSE Linux and SuSE Enterprise Server are listed under Products directly on that page. They receive no special attention but then they aren't hidden either. There's also a rather prominent Flash add detailing 10 reasons to choose Novel Linux solutions.
As for Novell 'shouting out' about OpenSuSE, please keep in mind that Novell is a corporate entity doing business with other corporate entities and is much more likely to tout the products that it sells, thus generating revenue which can then support community projects like OpenSuSE. OpenSuSE is not a make or break for Novel, it is more a gesture towards the community and a thumb in the eye of RedHat/Fedora. I am more impressed with Novel's decision to continue offering a supported consumer version of SuSE rather than abandoning the consumer market like RedHat.
I'm currently running SuSE 10.0 RC1 on a Mac Mini (I tried Darwin, couldn't stand it and frankly YaST surpasses any other linux config tool IMO) and find it to be pretty smooth. One hiccup that I hope has been fixed in the 10.0 final was that they had included a bastardized yaboot that didn't really work right.
I ended up installing YellowDog, then installing SuSE over top of it. Otherwise, it hasn't had any major issues.
Also, the software is getting way to bloated. Why all the software packages SUSE?
Only in the OSS community would someone complain about getting too much value for their money.
Let's talk bloat for a minute. Bloat might have been an issue when you were running DOS 3.0 on a 486 w/1Mb of RAM from a 5 1/4 in floppy, but when you're talking about installing 3 Gigs or so of software on a 4+GHz machine with an average 512MB RAM and an 80Gb Hard Drive then 'bloat' is a figment of your anal-retentive frigg'n imagination.
'Bloat' can relate to an unruly codebase, it can relate to excessive resource use, it 'might' become an issue if you're building an integrated device, but it does not in any way have a relation to the number of packages a distro chooses to offer for voluntary installation.
Many games are developed in Japan and are just translated for the US/Euro markets. Is anyone sweating Sony and Nintendo to hire more non-Japanese programmers?
Besides, if more minorities are playing games than whites, wouldn't it be reasonable to say that the programmers, although white, appear to be making games that appeal more to minority interests than white kids? How would hiring more minority programmers alter this?
Has Hollywood any originality left? Lately all they seem to release are rehashes of Japanese horror movies, video game movies or remakes of other movies & TV series.
Until the market's for Japanese horror movies, video games and TV reruns became big enough to get Hollywoods attention, you might notice that Hollywood has traditionally plundered the literary world for it's inspiration, also with mixed success. Hollywood is an attention whore, has always been an attention whore and will always be an attention whore.
In the end, it comes down to the bottom line: Originality is expensive and risky. Rehashing video games/books/tv series/original movies/etc. has fundamentally less risk because the market already exists, it's simply a matter of hitting the right mix.
The big factor is whether the developers are interested in making a quick buck or if they really understand the source materials. For example, Tim Burton Batman vs Joel Schumacher (may he burn in the pits of a neon lit hell) Batman.
That said, I'll hold judgment till I see the trailers.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with Nintendo is the games. They in no way attempt to reach the same game market that Sony/Microsoft strive for, so any success for there console will be limited to casual gamers who don't buy lots of games to begin with.
For instance, I have a Gamecube for the sole purpose of playing ResidentEvil and Viewtiful Joe. It's nice that the Gamecube was cheap enough that it didn't hurt much to buy one just for two games, but otherwise I really have no need to own one.
Considering the difference in graphics capabilities between the Wii and the PS3/XBox360, I don't see many titles being cross-released for the Wii either.
Actually, I felt that 3rd party controllers would be most usefull when playing PS1/PS2 games that already had Rumble on your PS3. Whether or not new games for the PS3 are developed to take advantage of the Tumble-tilt or Rumble is for the future.
Considering that the only way to currently add a Wi-Fi adapter to a PS2 or XBox is in the form of a bridge, where you connect your Wi-Fi box to the Ethernet port on your console, then yes, they're compatible. As for why would you already have one? Well, they sell them, and they sell network adapters for the PS2, so the people who really wanted one do probably already have one.
The single most expensive part of the PS3 is the Blue-Ray drive, so yes I can see the PS3's price dropping considerably once production ramps up, especially if the PS3 has slow sales. Regardless, if you want an HD video player, $600 is still cheaper than any current standalone HD capable machine, even if you never buy a game.
The Revolution/Wii might be cheaper but then the Gamecube was cheaper than XBox/PS2 and it never did much against them, so why do you think the Wii will gain much headway against the XBox360/PS3? In the end, it's the games that matter, and Nintendo isn't hurting themselves to break out of their niche. Your arguement would have some more weight if the games were transparently playable on the PS3/XBox360/Wii, but they're not, so you enjoy Mario Kart XXX on your Wii and I'll enjoy Sony's massive library of games on the PS3.
For those bitching that the base model won't be upgradeable:
The unit has 4 USB 2.0 ports, which would imply that a USB memory card reader can be added on.
The unit has an AV MultiOut port, which would imply that HDMI could be added as a seperate dongle. Considering how many HD TV sets have been sold that don't have HDMI ports, I don't see what everyone is bitching about this for anyway. If the outputs include an Analog HD cable, then you're pretty much set. Sony and all the movie studios are already backing away from enforcing their movies to downgrade themselves because they know the public backlash from people who don't own an HDMI capable set would kill their chances of selling HD movies, so this really seems like a non-issue.
The controller sucks. Well, I'd be very surprised if Penguin or MadCatz doesn't make a controller with Rumble to satisfy your needs. Unless the PS3 comes with 2 controllers you'll likely end up bying an additional one anyway.
The base unit doesn't do Wi-Fi. Well, how many of you who own an original XBox or PS2 don't already have some kind of Wi-Fi adapter around the house, if that's your thing? Considering how quickly Wi-Fi speeds change and that the lifespan of a console is around 5 years, who wants a locked in Wi-Fi anyway, you'll just be bitching about how slow it is 3 years from now.
The price isn't cheap, but most of that's the Blue-Ray player. The higher price will help to ensure that the people who really really have to have a PS3 now will be able to get one while production ramps up and and prices can start to drop. There are many critics saying that the XBox360 is underpriced and it doesn't even have an HD DVD player.
I understand you're being sarcastic, but this kind of crap is the exact opposite of the unfettered free market concept. I agree that most corporations talk up 'free markets' but they usually mean 'take out all the other guys advantages but protect my markets from competition', but your post seems to imply that the very concept of 'free markets' is a sham, which I don't agree with.
They still make their clerks get by on one chunck of coal to keep them warm as well.
There's a problem with your argument, however. The prisoners at Gitmo are NOT POW's. To be a POW your government has to have declared war on another nation and then fielded an army against that nation. The prisoners at Gitmo are not soldiers, they are not field troops, they are private citizens who have decided to kill large numbers of people who's government they disagree with. That is why they are not covered by the Geneva conventions.
In what way has Hamas, Al Queida or any other terrorist group show that they give a toss about the Geneva conventions in any of the actions that preceeded 9/11? Where does beheading your captives for political propaganda films come under the Geneva conventions?
I don't think it's that we're 'experts' as much as it is that we are, in general, comfortable with the interface.
For myself, I would rather have a lot of options that I can set because I like complete control of my computer experience. I understand that someone who's never touched a mouse before would probably be intimidated by that kind of power.
Here's where I start to differ from the mainstream though: Many people can't program the clock on a VCR. Why do we expect these people to get on a computer, which is several orders of magnitude more complicated, and be productive in a few hours? Perhaps, and this is a radical thought, sometimes it's not the interface but the user that needs to be changed.
If you must make computers easier for people, here's a thought: Instead of concentrating on the interface, how about simplifying the content? If you've ever spent a few hours trying to explain to someone the difference between TIFF, BMP, JPG, PNG, GIF, PICT, etc. and where it's appropriate to use one instead of the other, then you'd understand what I mean.
The computer world would be much less frightening for people if there were ONE image file, ONE music file, ONE document file, and the PROGRAMS figured out what goes where.
I think this is down to personal perception. I think ClearType makes the fonts too fuzzy, whereas on Linux it's about perfect. (SuSE 10.0/KDE btw).
That brief 24 hour window when I can crush my nephew in a new game before he can devote all his free time to memorizing all the combo-moves and strategy guides. It doesn't matter if I never win a game again after that, the memory of that defeat is seared into his soul. Muahahahahahahah
One one hand I can agree with you, but on the other sometimes you have to force a certain minimum size. Or does the idea of three columns of text exactly one letter wide really appeal to you?
Then Seagate wins, their drives have a 5 year warranty, everybody else only offers 3 years max, some as little as 1 year.
However, even taking your arguement at face value, Firefox might have simplified the options menu but if you know what you're doing you can go to the about:config menu and play with the more technical tweaks, which is really Linus' point. GNOME doesn't just hide those advanced options, they completely remove them.
Here's another thought. If you don't have money to purchase something, do without. There are plenty of free entertainment services available. If you really want to see ROME, but don't want to subscribe to HBO, wait for the inevitable DVD release and then rent it. Problem solved.
As for a download on demand service, I'm sure they'd be thrilled to do that if they could be reasonably certain that you could not then redistribute that video to 20,000 or so of your closest friends over P2P.
Here's the thing though. Once the DVD is released you can choose to rent it, your friends might invite you over and and start talking the show up, possibly even lend you their copy. You can probably get a copy from your local library. Etc. There are numerous legal methods to check out the series without actually having to subscribe to HBO, that goes for any other media. People who consistently download illegal copies talk about how it's a form of promotion, or how they wanted to see the show first, but in truth they usually didn't want to pay for it and have no intention of ever paying for it.
It's time that you evolved and move beyond your antiquated expectation of being paid for your products. After all, it's not like I can just walk, and I can't possibly live without your products.
You have cable, but you had to download the first five episodes? Does your cable provider not offer Video On Demand? You see, it's this new invention where you can view any episode of the series that has been aired for free, whenever you want. Call your cable provider and demand that they upgrade to this centuries technology.
Okay, most cable providers that offer the VOD also provide Personal Video Recorders to their customers. You could also pop for a DVD Recorder and record it. Again, why with the downloading??
Wait, you're serious? ROFLMFAO!!!!!!!
Yeah, HBO is going to fire someone for preventing the free dissemination of their copyrighted material over the internet. Yeah, sure. Especially a cost effective, directly focused counter to what would otherwise be settled by $300 Per Hour legal departments who might or might not sue the right person. Um-hum.
What HBO is doing is what every business should be doing instead of taking the RIAA's route. HBO is not restricting your right to make copies at home, they are not restricting your archiving of those copies, or even sharing them with your family/close friends. They are not suing BitTorrent, they are not demanding that all P2P software be banned, they are pro-actively preventing the illegal distribution of their material in an incredibly low impact manner. Bravo, HBO.
As for Novell 'shouting out' about OpenSuSE, please keep in mind that Novell is a corporate entity doing business with other corporate entities and is much more likely to tout the products that it sells, thus generating revenue which can then support community projects like OpenSuSE. OpenSuSE is not a make or break for Novel, it is more a gesture towards the community and a thumb in the eye of RedHat/Fedora. I am more impressed with Novel's decision to continue offering a supported consumer version of SuSE rather than abandoning the consumer market like RedHat.
I'm currently running SuSE 10.0 RC1 on a Mac Mini (I tried Darwin, couldn't stand it and frankly YaST surpasses any other linux config tool IMO) and find it to be pretty smooth. One hiccup that I hope has been fixed in the 10.0 final was that they had included a bastardized yaboot that didn't really work right.
I ended up installing YellowDog, then installing SuSE over top of it. Otherwise, it hasn't had any major issues.
It even includes OpenOffice 2.0 for PPC.
Let's talk bloat for a minute. Bloat might have been an issue when you were running DOS 3.0 on a 486 w/1Mb of RAM from a 5 1/4 in floppy, but when you're talking about installing 3 Gigs or so of software on a 4+GHz machine with an average 512MB RAM and an 80Gb Hard Drive then 'bloat' is a figment of your anal-retentive frigg'n imagination.
'Bloat' can relate to an unruly codebase, it can relate to excessive resource use, it 'might' become an issue if you're building an integrated device, but it does not in any way have a relation to the number of packages a distro chooses to offer for voluntary installation.
Besides, if more minorities are playing games than whites, wouldn't it be reasonable to say that the programmers, although white, appear to be making games that appeal more to minority interests than white kids? How would hiring more minority programmers alter this?
In the end, it comes down to the bottom line: Originality is expensive and risky. Rehashing video games/books/tv series/original movies/etc. has fundamentally less risk because the market already exists, it's simply a matter of hitting the right mix.
The big factor is whether the developers are interested in making a quick buck or if they really understand the source materials. For example, Tim Burton Batman vs Joel Schumacher (may he burn in the pits of a neon lit hell) Batman.
That said, I'll hold judgment till I see the trailers.