Actually, as I mentioned in my comment above, it's closer to a X1900
Why, because somebody said that Oblivion looks the same on an X1900 as on a 360?
It doesn't matter what's in it. Within a year it'll be slower than a bargain PC card. If the console succeeds, 99% of them will be sold after that anyway. That means most people who buy them will be buying overpriced video hardware.
It's been said that the 360 is equivalent to two Geforce 6800 Ultras. Depending on which benchmarkyoupick, there are plenty of sub-$300 cards that are faster than a 6800 Ultra SLI rig. Better looking too. Try running your 360 at 1200p (widescreen, of course).
Yes and if you had waited like me (cuz I'm poor, not cuz any planning) then you could get the new Gforce 7900 series of Video Cards, or at least the 7800 will be cheeper because of it.
Actually, I got lucky. The X800XL I had bought just died, and NewEgg gave me a full retail price credit because they don't make it anymore. So I got a 7800GT plus $20 back. I'm not happy with the heat and the fan noise compared to the ATI card, but it makes up for it in framerate.
Want to race? I can't write fast with a stylus. They're too thin, and I'm not a fast writer anyway. I bet I can thumb type faster tham most grafitti users though. And both require both hands.
I almost never use the stylus on my Treo. Only on poorly designed websites, and games. Everything else is well mapped to keys.
I loved my standalone palm, but now that I've had the Treo, I wouldn't trade the phone integration for anything.
You know, Apple is not the only hardware manufacturer that produces computers that do not make noise.
I don't disagree. Dell isn't one of those companies though. None of the 'big' PC brands are. You want silent, you're talking a special 'expensive' brand, or home built.
the wonderful thing about the PC architecture is that it is open and there are many competitors.
Do people who see somebody say something positive about Apple just *assume* that said person hates PCs, or isn't a PC user? As somebody who owns many computers of multiple architectures, I would say that you use the right tool for the right task.
I hate it when people talk about PC gaming like it's cheaper than console
Good for you.
you could also use a much cheaper PC
My video card cost less than a 360, and is faster than the 360's video. It's the only difference between my machine and a machine I would use for work. Again, not saying it's cheaper...Just smarter unless you play a lot of games and don't do much work. (Personally, I buy the consoles too)
that you don't have to upgrade every year
I hate when console gamers talk about how PC games have to upgrade all the damned time. If you buy smart you don't have to upgrade more than once every 3 years or so. Maybe you won't get the latest graphical features enabled in the latest games after a little while, but you don't get 'em on your non upgraded console either. Not only that, but how long did that original Xbox last you before it was obsolete?
but don't try to pretend they aren't a lot more money.
They're not a lot more money. They're more money, sure. But they're not a *lot* more money.
My wife and I each got new machines. I'm just annoyed that the game was delayed. We could have spent less if we knew we could ahve waited a few months to buy.
You're better off on the PC. Not much more money, and you can use it for other stuff too. Plus there's the downloadable mods, the higher resolution, the faster CPU (which increases AI distance, etc...)...
Things may not be great for the industry right now, but it's the same as the period between the release of the Dreamcast and the PS2. Why Microsoft chose to do what Sega did is beyond me, but the similarities are amazing.
hey, just look how many people (inside and outside the press) claim that the PS3 will cost $ 900
That was *one* analyst at Merryl Lynch Japan. There were several dozen news stories that published the report. That's an example of what I'm saying, not an argument against it.
You can just check the Wikipedia entries. They have fairly up-to-date specs, since the fanboys from both sides rabidly maintain the pages.
The big deal was the laser and the caddy, but you'll see that they both use the blue laser now, and BluRay ditched the caddy so facilities that were set up to automatically process DVD sized discs wouldn't have to re-tool.
I don't think the people who are writing and linking to these stories are willing to do that much work though. If they need a litmus test to see if it's worth parroting what joe-analyst says, at least they could use one that is more effective than what they're doing now.
but there have been rumors about how such a universal player would be difficult (due to incompatible lenses/lasers)
Right, and then they tried to merge the formats, and they became very similiar, and then the deal died.
They both use the same laser. They both support a standard DVD layer along with their HD layer. They both use the same optics.
The big difference is the media construction. BluRay has a thinner bottom layer with a proprietary coating, allowing higher densities. HD-DVD uses the same plastic as DVD, and is thicker which lowers the densities. All other differences are software and licensing at this point.
When one analyst says something that is vastly different than what everybody else is saying, that is *not* a cue to publish sensationalst news stories, that is your clue to ignore the crackpot.
When many analysts agree, then they're probably on to something.
I know this is the exact oposite of how news sites operate now, but please, for the sake of flame wars everywhere, fix it!
Yes. Really, all you need is different lasers to read the surface
That's old info.
BluRay and HD-DVD are almost identical on the drive side now. BluRay ditched the caddy, and HD-DVD went to a blue laser. Both format use the same laser now. The big differences are all in the construction of the media.
You will need a different focussing lens for each disk
Not necessecarily. The distance between the lens and the data is the key, because you really want to focus your laser as tightly as possible regardless of format. It's the physical media that distorts the beam and reduces the density in HD-DVD, not the lens. BluRay gets around this by placing the data layer much closer to the surface, making the disc more expensive and holding more data without making the drive more expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, also, an X1900 is about the same speed as dual 6800 Ultras. You're not saying anything different than I am.
It would be stupid to buy an X1900 when you can get 98% of the performance for less than half the price.
Actually, as I mentioned in my comment above, it's closer to a X1900
Why, because somebody said that Oblivion looks the same on an X1900 as on a 360?
It doesn't matter what's in it. Within a year it'll be slower than a bargain PC card. If the console succeeds, 99% of them will be sold after that anyway. That means most people who buy them will be buying overpriced video hardware.
Oh, and the Xbox was release in November of 2001. November 2001 to November 2005 is only four years.
It's been said that the 360 is equivalent to two Geforce 6800 Ultras. Depending on which benchmark you pick, there are plenty of sub-$300 cards that are faster than a 6800 Ultra SLI rig. Better looking too. Try running your 360 at 1200p (widescreen, of course).
Yes and if you had waited like me (cuz I'm poor, not cuz any planning) then you could get the new Gforce 7900 series of Video Cards, or at least the 7800 will be cheeper because of it.
Actually, I got lucky. The X800XL I had bought just died, and NewEgg gave me a full retail price credit because they don't make it anymore. So I got a 7800GT plus $20 back. I'm not happy with the heat and the fan noise compared to the ATI card, but it makes up for it in framerate.
That ink stain on your shirt pocket says otherwise. :)
Want to race? I can't write fast with a stylus. They're too thin, and I'm not a fast writer anyway. I bet I can thumb type faster tham most grafitti users though. And both require both hands.
I almost never use the stylus on my Treo. Only on poorly designed websites, and games. Everything else is well mapped to keys.
I loved my standalone palm, but now that I've had the Treo, I wouldn't trade the phone integration for anything.
You know, Apple is not the only hardware manufacturer that produces computers that do not make noise.
I don't disagree. Dell isn't one of those companies though. None of the 'big' PC brands are. You want silent, you're talking a special 'expensive' brand, or home built.
the wonderful thing about the PC architecture is that it is open and there are many competitors.
Do people who see somebody say something positive about Apple just *assume* that said person hates PCs, or isn't a PC user? As somebody who owns many computers of multiple architectures, I would say that you use the right tool for the right task.
I hate it when people talk about PC gaming like it's cheaper than console
Good for you.
you could also use a much cheaper PC
My video card cost less than a 360, and is faster than the 360's video. It's the only difference between my machine and a machine I would use for work. Again, not saying it's cheaper...Just smarter unless you play a lot of games and don't do much work. (Personally, I buy the consoles too)
that you don't have to upgrade every year
I hate when console gamers talk about how PC games have to upgrade all the damned time. If you buy smart you don't have to upgrade more than once every 3 years or so. Maybe you won't get the latest graphical features enabled in the latest games after a little while, but you don't get 'em on your non upgraded console either. Not only that, but how long did that original Xbox last you before it was obsolete?
but don't try to pretend they aren't a lot more money.
They're not a lot more money. They're more money, sure. But they're not a *lot* more money.
My wife and I each got new machines. I'm just annoyed that the game was delayed. We could have spent less if we knew we could ahve waited a few months to buy.
You're better off on the PC. Not much more money, and you can use it for other stuff too. Plus there's the downloadable mods, the higher resolution, the faster CPU (which increases AI distance, etc...)...
I'm quickly going from interested to, well, not.
$500 should be the high end of the price range.
Things may not be great for the industry right now, but it's the same as the period between the release of the Dreamcast and the PS2. Why Microsoft chose to do what Sega did is beyond me, but the similarities are amazing.
hey, just look how many people (inside and outside the press) claim that the PS3 will cost $ 900
That was *one* analyst at Merryl Lynch Japan. There were several dozen news stories that published the report. That's an example of what I'm saying, not an argument against it.
A DS that doesn't have the construction charactaristics of a device made for 4 year olds.
Now I'll actually buy one.
this unique mechanism offers a significantly higher level of security then existing technology.
Don't they mean "a signifigantly higher level of obscurity"?
You can just check the Wikipedia entries. They have fairly up-to-date specs, since the fanboys from both sides rabidly maintain the pages.
The big deal was the laser and the caddy, but you'll see that they both use the blue laser now, and BluRay ditched the caddy so facilities that were set up to automatically process DVD sized discs wouldn't have to re-tool.
I agree with you in principle.
I don't think the people who are writing and linking to these stories are willing to do that much work though. If they need a litmus test to see if it's worth parroting what joe-analyst says, at least they could use one that is more effective than what they're doing now.
What worries me is the number of BluRay launch titles that were DVD launch titles.
but there have been rumors about how such a universal player would be difficult (due to incompatible lenses/lasers)
Right, and then they tried to merge the formats, and they became very similiar, and then the deal died.
They both use the same laser. They both support a standard DVD layer along with their HD layer. They both use the same optics.
The big difference is the media construction. BluRay has a thinner bottom layer with a proprietary coating, allowing higher densities. HD-DVD uses the same plastic as DVD, and is thicker which lowers the densities. All other differences are software and licensing at this point.
When one analyst says something that is vastly different than what everybody else is saying, that is *not* a cue to publish sensationalst news stories, that is your clue to ignore the crackpot.
When many analysts agree, then they're probably on to something.
I know this is the exact oposite of how news sites operate now, but please, for the sake of flame wars everywhere, fix it!
The Dell machine is clearly superior, because it doubles as a 'white noise' generator.
the NSA has changed the way it spies
they're probably spying on all of us
Those two statements contradict each other.
Yes. Really, all you need is different lasers to read the surface
That's old info.
BluRay and HD-DVD are almost identical on the drive side now. BluRay ditched the caddy, and HD-DVD went to a blue laser. Both format use the same laser now. The big differences are all in the construction of the media.
You will need a different focussing lens for each disk
Not necessecarily. The distance between the lens and the data is the key, because you really want to focus your laser as tightly as possible regardless of format. It's the physical media that distorts the beam and reduces the density in HD-DVD, not the lens. BluRay gets around this by placing the data layer much closer to the surface, making the disc more expensive and holding more data without making the drive more expensive.
I'm willing to go as low as $25,000....
And my UID is *way* lower than the parent's!