With most networks in most markets already broadcasting digitally in HDTV, how can they say that the broadcast flag is going to help anything? They only part of the transition left is to turn off the old transmitters.
Game AI can easily use all the computing power you can throw at it. Look at how much CPU it takes to beat the best players at chess... And that has signifigantly less potential computational strategy involved than, say, a realistic tactical war sim...
The problem is that most current games these days are tests of reflexes and memory. Few games employ adaptive strategy. Of the games that do, I can't think of any that use it in real-time. That's probably why you see AI as a simple task... In reality, game AI is simple because computers are too slow for it to be complex.
I know people I work with camped out before midnight in front of their local game shop to get the "special edition" version because they were going to be sold out. The EB near me still has 5 copies of the "limited" release on the shelf...
Between that and the paid-for newscasts I really have to wonder how much of the Halo 2 hype was real, and how much Microsoft bought.
How could anybody have possibly worried that they weren't going to be able to get a copy of Halo 2 on release day were it not for the FUD?
In case you didn't get it from my other reply to you (I forgot to say it plainly), trademark and copyright aren't the same thing. This has nothing to do with copyright.
If people didn't talk in generics like "IP" all the time, maybe people would figure out the difference.
It's not the same thing as copyright, and the law *requires* that Nintendo do stuff like this to keep their trademark. Trademark law can include things like trade dress, which is what protects things like the shape of a Coke bottle, or the exterior look of McDonald's resturants.
There's no surprise. I think AMD does an amazing job at keeping power consumption low. I'm mostly annoyed by the 'apples to armadillos' comparisons TFA kept making.
You can't really take TFA seriously, since it's InformationWeek, and not a reputable source. Just look at your first quote. There are plenty of 2.0Ghz single core chips out there that can deliver beter performance than a 3.5Ghz P4...
When they talk about single core chips using 150 watts, they're talking about intel chips (almost certainly the Itanium). 100 Watts for a dual core 2.4 Ghz Opteron is a 60% increase in power usage over the single core version.
Of course the parent to your post is just plain wrong about not offering a performance benefit for most apps. Now that developers are starting to try and use Hyperthreading to their advantage, those apps will see some serious benefit from multi-core chips; benefit that users could only wish for with a P4HT.
Admittedly, I live really close to the Netflix Worrcester, MA depot, but I always recieve my new DVDs a day earlier than the e-mail say to expect them. Except for around the holidays, everything is typically prompt. It's not too uncommon to get a DVD in the mail the next day if I drop the previous one off at the post office early enough in the morning.
That said, I'm thinking of canceling after I get to the bottom of my current queue. I'm running out of things I want to watch, and the TV time has been being used for video games more and more...
The GB Advance (no d.) was out long before Sony was 'competition' in the handheld market.
You are correct. The GBA was a response to growing popularity of the NeoGeo pocket color in Japan.
Incidentally, the NeoGeo pocket is notable for having the best handheld controller ever, a reflective color screen that you could actually see, and battery life that rivals the GBA, all in a similar form factor. That's in addition to getting Nintendo to realize it couldn't rest on it's Gameboy Color laurels for as long as it had with the Gameboy and Gameboy pocket. The introduction of the GBA in the US helped prevent the NeoGeo pocket color from ever taking off in the US as it did in Japan.
I don't disagree that Nintendo is capable, indeed excelent at innovating. You're just plain wrong to assert that they push their technology to the limits without the pressure of competition though.
Chemicals with low water solubility have a low toxicity rating. You could eat a lump of plutonium and you'd probably be fine because it would go right through you. It also settles out of the air quickly in particulate form because of it's density.
There's no evidence there that the MIPS32 core they used implements the (optional) floating point instructions. Of course you have to sign up for details so I can't say for sure...
Since the video capabilities are handled by an accessory processing unit, and since they were trying to cut power consumption, I'd be surprised if there was an FPU in the general purpose core.
Funny that... There's four other new MMORPGS on the shelf with WoW that all include the first month and all cost under $40.
Now, if you (collective) are the sort of person who has purchased fewer than 4 video games in the course of a year, I tip my hat to you. You're absolutely right. A MMO is a waste of your money.
How much money I spend total on games isn't the point. If it were, you wouldn't be able to explain the $4800 I've spent in the the last three years on games (Some PS2, some GameCube, some PC). The point is that Blizard's pricing is not the standard. It's *higher* than the standard. And signifigantly so. If they charged approximately the same amount as everybody else, you'd have a point; but they don't.
There are games that go the other way too... I was addicted to Puzzle Pirates for over a year. They got my monthly fee, and I was perfectly OK with that. Incidentally, unless you buy the retail box, they don't charge up front, but only for the monthly usage.
Stores *are* obsolete for digital content. Who needs the mail? you can download a full CD image in less time than most people can drive to the local mall and back. For digital content you should be able to cut out the middleman and the extra fee... And you *can* with a lot of titles.
Blizzard has always been 'special' though. Their software always costs more than the other software on the shelf. As long as there are enough Blizzard fanboys and rich kids with mommy's credit card out there, I suppose they can keep doing that as long as they like.
A large chunk of that income goes to the publisher.
Oh, you mean that obsolete middleman that skims some money off the top while adding the inconvienience of me having to go out to the store? That makes me feel better.
the person you're getting the copy from should have given you the login and password.
You didn't even read the article, did you... Wait, what am I thinking... Slashdot.... Right...
If there's no way to transfer the password and account in a way that prevents the original owner from regaining control of the account later, then that doesn't make that such a practical solution.
Pretty much the retail price is a deposit on your first month, plus the cost of CD manufacture, manual printing, and retail box manufacture.
That's total bull, since if that were the case there would be no reason for them to charge me for a second one when both my wife and myself wanted to play... I could just pay them a second monthly fee and install from the CDs I already had.
Not only that, but The manufacturing costs are signifigantly lower than $35 ($50 minus the first month).
'm pretty sure thats the going rate for retail MMO games these days.
Than that rate is too high, and I won't be playing any of those games.
All making something like this public would do is spread the cost out over the entire population instead of just over the population of users. Who are you to force other people to pay for your network access?
I don't think Apple is really trying to "clamp down" on the press. They're not saying that this guy can't write whatever he wants, they just want to hold the person who (illegally) leaked the info accountable.
You're using Watergate as an example for the wrong side of this argument. That was a perfect example of how journalists should act. Sure, Woodward and Bernstein got an anonymous tip but there are some serious diferences. First of all the person who gave them the tip wasn't breaking the law, and didn't reveal his/her name to them. Secondly, they did independant investigation and obtained corroborating evidence before they published. They didn't go to press with a story solely on the word of a single anonymous, unverified source. A victory for Apple here would have no effect in the case of another watergate except perhaps to force reporters to behave in a way that would add credibility.
Why do you accept reports from journalists with anonymous sources as acceptable? Who's to say they didn't just make it up? How do you hold them accountable for what they write?
Freedom of speech and freedom of the press give you the right to say or print whatever you want, but they don't give you freedom from taking responsibilty for what you say and write. If a journalist can't get independant corroboration for a tip they recieve then they should reveal the source when they publish or assume that the tip was inaccurate. We shouldn't continue to hold journalists in such high regard when they don't provide any proof for what they claim.
Remember that journalism is a business too. Most journalists are out to make a profit just as much or more than they are out to serve the community.
To take the matter one step further, you should care about trade secret rights because they're a powerful tool for small companies to break into markets dominated by large players. If it weren't for trade secret protection, numerous startups would fail because a large existing company would be able to bring good ideas to market faster than the smaller inventors. Just because large companies can use the protections too doesn't make them bad. If you ever hope to start a business outside of the service field or ever hope to work for a sucessful startup, particularly a technology startup, this journalist's actions and the EFF's side of this case are hurting you. Wouldn't it suck if an idea that you had and pland to build was leaked to a reporter, that reporter published your idea and some big company made millions off your idea because they were able to move more quickly than you? Whouldn't you want to be able to find out who leaked your idea so you could recover damages?
Slashdot Mirror
Better question:
With most networks in most markets already broadcasting digitally in HDTV, how can they say that the broadcast flag is going to help anything? They only part of the transition left is to turn off the old transmitters.
The cpu is left to do tasks such as opponent AI
Funny that you call that a "basic task."
Game AI can easily use all the computing power you can throw at it. Look at how much CPU it takes to beat the best players at chess... And that has signifigantly less potential computational strategy involved than, say, a realistic tactical war sim...
The problem is that most current games these days are tests of reflexes and memory. Few games employ adaptive strategy. Of the games that do, I can't think of any that use it in real-time. That's probably why you see AI as a simple task... In reality, game AI is simple because computers are too slow for it to be complex.
I know people I work with camped out before midnight in front of their local game shop to get the "special edition" version because they were going to be sold out. The EB near me still has 5 copies of the "limited" release on the shelf...
Between that and the paid-for newscasts I really have to wonder how much of the Halo 2 hype was real, and how much Microsoft bought.
How could anybody have possibly worried that they weren't going to be able to get a copy of Halo 2 on release day were it not for the FUD?
In case you didn't get it from my other reply to you (I forgot to say it plainly), trademark and copyright aren't the same thing. This has nothing to do with copyright.
Trademark!
Trademark! Trademark! Trademark!
If people didn't talk in generics like "IP" all the time, maybe people would figure out the difference.
It's not the same thing as copyright, and the law *requires* that Nintendo do stuff like this to keep their trademark. Trademark law can include things like trade dress, which is what protects things like the shape of a Coke bottle, or the exterior look of McDonald's resturants.
Where's the surprise in this?
There's no surprise. I think AMD does an amazing job at keeping power consumption low. I'm mostly annoyed by the 'apples to armadillos' comparisons TFA kept making.
You can't really take TFA seriously, since it's InformationWeek, and not a reputable source. Just look at your first quote. There are plenty of 2.0Ghz single core chips out there that can deliver beter performance than a 3.5Ghz P4...
When they talk about single core chips using 150 watts, they're talking about intel chips (almost certainly the Itanium). 100 Watts for a dual core 2.4 Ghz Opteron is a 60% increase in power usage over the single core version.
Of course the parent to your post is just plain wrong about not offering a performance benefit for most apps. Now that developers are starting to try and use Hyperthreading to their advantage, those apps will see some serious benefit from multi-core chips; benefit that users could only wish for with a P4HT.
Admittedly, I live really close to the Netflix Worrcester, MA depot, but I always recieve my new DVDs a day earlier than the e-mail say to expect them. Except for around the holidays, everything is typically prompt. It's not too uncommon to get a DVD in the mail the next day if I drop the previous one off at the post office early enough in the morning.
That said, I'm thinking of canceling after I get to the bottom of my current queue. I'm running out of things I want to watch, and the TV time has been being used for video games more and more...
The GB Advance (no d.) was out long before Sony was 'competition' in the handheld market.
You are correct. The GBA was a response to growing popularity of the NeoGeo pocket color in Japan.
Incidentally, the NeoGeo pocket is notable for having the best handheld controller ever, a reflective color screen that you could actually see, and battery life that rivals the GBA, all in a similar form factor. That's in addition to getting Nintendo to realize it couldn't rest on it's Gameboy Color laurels for as long as it had with the Gameboy and Gameboy pocket. The introduction of the GBA in the US helped prevent the NeoGeo pocket color from ever taking off in the US as it did in Japan.
I don't disagree that Nintendo is capable, indeed excelent at innovating. You're just plain wrong to assert that they push their technology to the limits without the pressure of competition though.
You can't find better references because you're wrong.
http://atsdr1.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts143.html
Chemicals with low water solubility have a low toxicity rating. You could eat a lump of plutonium and you'd probably be fine because it would go right through you. It also settles out of the air quickly in particulate form because of it's density.
The wavebird doesn't eat batteries because it doesn't use the vibration features that most games have.
Probably zero.
There's no evidence there that the MIPS32 core they used implements the (optional) floating point instructions. Of course you have to sign up for details so I can't say for sure...
Since the video capabilities are handled by an accessory processing unit, and since they were trying to cut power consumption, I'd be surprised if there was an FPU in the general purpose core.
One month of play is included in the fee.
Funny that...
There's four other new MMORPGS on the shelf with WoW that all include the first month and all cost under $40.
Now, if you (collective) are the sort of person who has purchased fewer than 4 video games in the course of a year, I tip my hat to you. You're absolutely right. A MMO is a waste of your money.
How much money I spend total on games isn't the point. If it were, you wouldn't be able to explain the $4800 I've spent in the the last three years on games (Some PS2, some GameCube, some PC). The point is that Blizard's pricing is not the standard. It's *higher* than the standard. And signifigantly so. If they charged approximately the same amount as everybody else, you'd have a point; but they don't.
There are games that go the other way too... I was addicted to Puzzle Pirates for over a year. They got my monthly fee, and I was perfectly OK with that. Incidentally, unless you buy the retail box, they don't charge up front, but only for the monthly usage.
Stores *are* obsolete for digital content. Who needs the mail? you can download a full CD image in less time than most people can drive to the local mall and back. For digital content you should be able to cut out the middleman and the extra fee... And you *can* with a lot of titles.
Blizzard has always been 'special' though. Their software always costs more than the other software on the shelf. As long as there are enough Blizzard fanboys and rich kids with mommy's credit card out there, I suppose they can keep doing that as long as they like.
A large chunk of that income goes to the publisher.
Oh, you mean that obsolete middleman that skims some money off the top while adding the inconvienience of me having to go out to the store? That makes me feel better.
the person you're getting the copy from should have given you the login and password.
You didn't even read the article, did you... Wait, what am I thinking... Slashdot.... Right...
If there's no way to transfer the password and account in a way that prevents the original owner from regaining control of the account later, then that doesn't make that such a practical solution.
I didn't say it should be free...
But why does it have to be way more expensive than every other online game on the shelf?
Also, considering that every non-Blizzard/LucasArts PC game out there right now is released at $35, I'd hardly call the first month "free".
Pretty much the retail price is a deposit on your first month, plus the cost of CD manufacture, manual printing, and retail box manufacture.
That's total bull, since if that were the case there would be no reason for them to charge me for a second one when both my wife and myself wanted to play... I could just pay them a second monthly fee and install from the CDs I already had.
Not only that, but The manufacturing costs are signifigantly lower than $35 ($50 minus the first month).
'm pretty sure thats the going rate for retail MMO games these days.
Than that rate is too high, and I won't be playing any of those games.
$49.99
Pretty steep for a game you have to pay monthly to play too.
My wife and I would be playing it if it weren't for the $100 initial cost.
but I'm still paying to subsidize rural power and rural phones
At least nobody forces you to pay for phone service.
You say "A $3bn investment" and then
wait for it...
"free"
Within 3 words of each other!
Plus that doesn't cover maintnence.
All making something like this public would do is spread the cost out over the entire population instead of just over the population of users. Who are you to force other people to pay for your network access?
I don't think Apple is really trying to "clamp down" on the press. They're not saying that this guy can't write whatever he wants, they just want to hold the person who (illegally) leaked the info accountable.
a spring-loaded trigger may be more prone to wear
Screw wear... I hate that it makes your finger tired.
Oh please.
You're using Watergate as an example for the wrong side of this argument. That was a perfect example of how journalists should act. Sure, Woodward and Bernstein got an anonymous tip but there are some serious diferences. First of all the person who gave them the tip wasn't breaking the law, and didn't reveal his/her name to them. Secondly, they did independant investigation and obtained corroborating evidence before they published. They didn't go to press with a story solely on the word of a single anonymous, unverified source. A victory for Apple here would have no effect in the case of another watergate except perhaps to force reporters to behave in a way that would add credibility.
Why is that so obvious to you?
Why do you accept reports from journalists with anonymous sources as acceptable? Who's to say they didn't just make it up? How do you hold them accountable for what they write?
Freedom of speech and freedom of the press give you the right to say or print whatever you want, but they don't give you freedom from taking responsibilty for what you say and write. If a journalist can't get independant corroboration for a tip they recieve then they should reveal the source when they publish or assume that the tip was inaccurate. We shouldn't continue to hold journalists in such high regard when they don't provide any proof for what they claim.
Remember that journalism is a business too. Most journalists are out to make a profit just as much or more than they are out to serve the community.
To take the matter one step further, you should care about trade secret rights because they're a powerful tool for small companies to break into markets dominated by large players. If it weren't for trade secret protection, numerous startups would fail because a large existing company would be able to bring good ideas to market faster than the smaller inventors. Just because large companies can use the protections too doesn't make them bad. If you ever hope to start a business outside of the service field or ever hope to work for a sucessful startup, particularly a technology startup, this journalist's actions and the EFF's side of this case are hurting you. Wouldn't it suck if an idea that you had and pland to build was leaked to a reporter, that reporter published your idea and some big company made millions off your idea because they were able to move more quickly than you? Whouldn't you want to be able to find out who leaked your idea so you could recover damages?