I agree.. that color is nasty. I keep hoping Nintendo will do a solid black version, or atleast a "Smoke" version like their clear-black N64 they released eons ago..
If anything Nintendo has proven recently, they're all about the color choices. Granted, most of their choices aren't ones many sane people would buy, but hey, they're there. Testament to this is the 6+ colors available for the Gameboy Color, or the variety of N64 colors (and, for Pokemon crazies, shapes) available.
Plus, don't forget, Nintendo has released other colors (metallic hues, as I understand it, that change color as you tilt it in the light) as special Pokemon editions in Japan (just do a search on eBay for "Gameboy Advance Pokemon", you're sure to turn up some hits with pictures). And then there's the Fuchsia version that's out/about to come out (clear pinkish color).
Just be patient, is what I'm saying, it's in Nintendo's nature to release more colors.
Oh, and we can never forget this beast of the dark side... yech
When a Judge reaches a verdict, he is being partial. As was said in the opinion handed down today, the things he said would have been FINE had he said them from the bench. His mistake was airing his opinions on TV and to the media without telling the defense or anyone else.
It's a Judge's JOB to be partial, it's just the setting in which he's partial that's important-- and being publically partial, ridiculing the defendent, etc., isn't something appeals courts or other Judge's smile upon.
He had every right to feel the way he did, and in the ruling handed down today, the opinion said as much-- but it also said if he felt the way he did, he should have made such comments from the bench, not on TV talk shows or to the press/media at large. By doing it from the bench, it gave both the defense and the prosecution a chance to object or defend themselves, whereas in public, there was no chance for that.
As for your claims of my anti-MS bigotry-- I actually run Windows 2000 and other MS products. I only run one Linux on one system-- RedHat Linux running on a monitor-less Pentium 166 sitting next to me that I telnet into from time to time. Other than that, I'm a professional Windows software developer and work literally only a few hundred yards from the Microsoft campus here in Redmond.
I just think Microsoft's inclusion of Internet Explorer into Windows, while argueably evolutionary, was also anti-competitive and in direct response to Netscape. Had they waited and included Internet Explorer a few years later (like say, in 2000) they might have had a better arguement (just as Microsoft, over the years, has included apps to play multi-media files (Windows Media Player), or included 'new' technology as part of the operating system (the toolbar control, which pretty much put vendors of toolbar controls for Visual Basic or Visual C++ out of business)).
As was said on the MSNBC article covering this ruling (or rather, it was a link to other antitrust cases in history, eg: AT&T, IBM, etc) these cases are usually drawn out for DECADES before they're either given up or ruled on. IBM's case started in 1969 and didn't end until the 80's, and AT&T's case lasted almost as long too. Considering Microsoft's case started in 1998, we've got atleast 8 more years of this in the courts before they get around to doing something meaningful..
The thing that's really too bad is Judge Jackson did this to himself-- if he'd kept his mouth shut, not appeared on TV and in the media making public remarks about the case, there's a decent chance he'd have atleast been able to continue presiding as Judge over the case. Now they're handing it to a different Judge, possibly one that will be more in line with what Microsoft's lawyers want.
Re:Rambus should have counted their blessings...
on
Fortune on Rambus
·
· Score: 1
I haven't read the Ars Technica article (but I will!), so bear this in mind in my reply--
From the Fortune article linked to in this story--
And the very chipmakers to which Rambus was trying to sell its products were developing a competing product called SDRAM. Where RDRAM was seen as revolutionary, SDRAM was resolutely evolutionary. (The most significant difference between the two, according to the judge's ruling in the Infineon trial: RDRAM transmits three different types of information on a single "bus"--essentially a collection of wires; SDRAM has separate buses, each dedicated to a single type of information.)
That's kind of where I got my info.. it's more likely that the author was just uninformed, but having not read the article you linked to, I don't know. =) I just wanted to let you know the source of my comment.
Rambus should have counted their blessings...
on
Fortune on Rambus
·
· Score: 5
Getting Intel to declare your memory architecure as the defacto standard for their new upcoming processor(s) should have been enough. The money they were getting for licensing RDRAM was guaranteed, and about the only way they could have failed in the open market is if the Pentium 4 had failed (which it has, to an extent, but it's not entirely dead).
I do agree with the Fortune writer that Rambus got greedy, and that's too bad-- having more companies working on technology is never a bad thing, but in the case of Rambus, when a company tries to choke off their competitors, it's doomed to failure. I think everyone agrees that it was nice having 3DFX, nVidia and ATI competing in the 3D graphics chipset market-- which is why it's nice to have memory makers competing with different technologies or standards. As the competition is either bought or crushed, there's less incentive from the remaining companies to continue to innovate. (Granted I don't know that Rambus really innovated on anything-- from the article and what I've heard, RDRAM "technology" is nearly identical to SDRAM except for a handful of minor changes..)
It'll be interesting to see how these rulings against RMBS turn up on appeal (though I really doubt they'll get the verdicts overturned).
Yeah but if it's that screwed up that it's not evening working as-is, where's the harm in rebooting it? If it doesn't come back to life after you try to boot it, then you've just nailed the problem right on the head. Otherwise, you're still running around the server cage like a chicken with your head cut off; not the most effective way to deal with a problem.
I do agree that they should probably try SOMETHING before resorting to rebooting it, but it's the easiest way to tell if something is broke..
You can get the entire set of documentation with sample source code and more from that FTP site, direct from Microsoft, totally anonymous (save for the fact that they may save your IP address, heavens forbid!).
When they're the only source of Win32 documentation, what's the choice going to be? I hate it.
Uh, you can get the Win32 documentation without signing up for Passport, you can even get it via FTP (you can get the entire PlatformSDK, which is just about every useful piece of the Win32 SDK (example source code in C or C++, documentation, etc), for free, with no signup, completely anonymous, from ftp.microsoft.com/developr/platformsdk/feb2001/). The latest release of the PlatformSDK covers Windows XP Beta 2, including all of the new API functions, as well as a complete HTML reference for Internet Explorer. Now if you're talking about Beta operating systems downloads, this is a non-issue, you've had to sign in before, except now you're using Passport to authenticate, which is better since you don't need to sign up for 10 million accounts and remember all of their passwords. (Yeah, that last part is wayyy redundant, but it's a good point if this is the major complaint: downloading betas.)
In cases where it's just documentation and/or sample code, I've never came to a situation where I had to sign up or use Passport, only for MSDN Universal or the next one down, when downloading private betas, do you need to sign in for anything..
As has been said before-- you can sign up using your WORK information on a seperate freemail account (or, use a specially created work account (eg: If you work at fud.com, and your real account is john.doe@fud.com, then make a new account-- msdn_john.dos@fud.com, and use it for Passport)), viola, no problem with personal info or tracking to other sites you visit on your personal time.
Secondly, CT makes a stink about Microsoft using Passport-- what again is the problem with this? I'd rather have them using and trusting their own technology than trying to sell it to us without using it themselves (as has been the case with certain Microsoft owned servers running Apache even though MS has IIS and pushes IIS to the masses).
Finally, if you really are a Win32 developer or WinCE developer or whatever, you DON'T have to use Microsoft tools-- Borland (and other companies, Metrowerks comes to mind) make compilers for Microsoft based operating systems. If all you want are the SDK's for developing software under Windows, you can STILL download the entire PlatformSDK either over the web using their smallish installer, or download the entire mess from ftp.microsoft.com/developr/platformsdk/, just pick a recent release and download the entire CD contents (FYI: There's a Jun2001 directory, but it's currently empty as I write this, but the Feb2001 is REALLY recent, and deals with some recent additions with Windows XP Beta 2). Other SDK's I think you can grab via FTP too, but I'm not so sure.
In a nutshell, this isn't a major development, it's not new (I bought Encarta Deluxe 2001, and signed up for the online version (free with the deluxe purchase), and Encarta uses Passport to validate your access), and it's a damn good idea. I'd like to see some other competitors in the "authentication of user identities" biz though, but I don't know of any off-hand that are this well established and easy to use..
Actually megahertz isn't really even a good speed indicator NOW. With Intel's Pentium 4, they adjusted the length of their pipeline so that the speed (in megahertz) is far faster than anything AMD offers, but the actual real-world performance is slower than even their original Pentium III at some tasks.
Some say the cause of this can be traced back to the same problems that originally plagued the Pentium Pro (which is the same core design used for the Pentium II and Pentium III), and that once Intel ramps up production the scores will be different, but I'm not so sure. Needless to say, just because someone can grab a Pentium 4 2.0 GHz doesn't mean it's going to be better than an AMD Athlon running at 1.5 GHz.
I think the best thing people can do for themselves, at least on a system level, is run benchmarks that test real-world performance, not static tests that throw a hundred thousand MOV instructions at a processor and base their results off that.
I do think speeds are ramping up though-- Intel forced itself to ramp up I think just so they could reclaim the megahertz speed crown, but that didn't reclaim the actual performance speed crown; it was a purely symbolic gesture in my mind. I figure once Intel hits 2.5 or 3.0 GHz I'll jump on board, hopefully at THAT speed their new core design will be able to outpace an AMD processor of the same generation.
My biggest gripe with the *original* Gameboy (the yellow-ish/green screened one) was the fact that in action games (like say, Battletoads, I think is what it was called) was that whenever it scrolled left or right, or whenever a sprite moved, the action BLURRED to the point of not being able to tell what was going on.
It was really bad. By comparison though, I agree, the GBC's screen is a GOD SEND, and the GBA's is just as good except for the previously noted possibility of it being shinier/more reflective.
1) A system is dead as soon as there's no longer any new titles for it-- using this definition, the Genesis IS dead.
2) I could care less about your opinion about the SNES vs. Genesis-- both systems died long ago, get over it.
3) The Nomad would make a horrible portable, explicitly for item #1 above. No new games = no new fun. Sure, I still like Street Fighter II, and I could probably play that, but what if I wanted to try my hand at say, the newest Sonic titles (of which there is one being released this fall/winter for the GBA)? No dice, since there's no new games.
4) Dirt cheap games? You mean if you can find them. Sure, you can buy them used, but forget finding many/any new. The GBA only has a handful because it literally just launched, but oh wait, let's exaggerate this the way you did-- the GBA already has more titles than the Sega Genesis. How, you ask? Easy. It plays old Gameboy and Gameboy Color titles.
As for your insistance that you wouldn't turn this into a "flame-war", you already did. I was merely pointing out some facts, most of which seem lost to you, chief amongst them being that the Genesis (and the SNES) are dead. No new titles. If you want to bring back arguements of olde about how you think the Genesis rules, try it with someone that still cares.
For all intents and purposes, the GBA screen is about the same as the GBC screen, except for the obvious changes being that the GBA screen can handle more colors, has a higher resolution, and is overall crisper to look at. The big reason people are complaining about it is that most people didn't OWN a GBC before they bought their GBA's, so they weren't used to the screen being kind of hard to deal with.
Perhaps the only change (and I'm not sure this is even a change, it might just be me) I've noticed is that the plastic covering over the LCD screen seems shinier and more reflective than the GBC cover. Like I said though, it may just be me, or it may be the orientation of the GBA vs. the GBC (the GBC's screen isn't as wide, or as large).
It really is a great system, and for $90-100, it's a great value for on-the-go gaming.
Apples to Oranges-- the Gameboy Advance is a suped up Super NES, and we all know how much better the SNES was than the Genesis (the only people still convinced that the Genesis was better are die-hard Sega fans that forgot the 16-bit console wars died EONS ago). Just like the SNES, the GBA does mode-7 style scaling and rotation, but it also supports this functionality for sprites as well. It also supports more colors on screen than the SNES or Genesis (I believe it can show thousands at a time, in fact, more than it can technically show because of it's resolution limitations (eg: pixel width x height isn't enough to show each individual color it can show in each of those pixels-- it can show more, but the screen doesn't have enough space)), and has pretty good Stereo sound (far better than the GBC!), though not so good as the SNES IMHO..
The Sega Genesis may have had a great selection of games, but for a portable it just doesn't work-- Genesis carts are bulky and large compared to GBA cartridges (GBA carts are the same physical width as GBC and GB carts, but they're about 1/3 the height, and the same thickness), and the Nomad probably sucks down the batteries.
Now my question is, when will someone offer a TV tuner adapter for the GBA like was offered for the older portables (Lynx and GameGear had 'em), and will it support over the airwaves HDTV? =)
This is a link to both Visoli's homepage (which has downloadable software for their products, plus manuals and product descriptions) as well as a link to Lik Sang, who apperently sell the 64M Flash Card for $109 US, and the Flash Advance Linker (the actual 'ripper' of the carts, connects to your PC via your parallel port) for $35 US. They ship internationally, and it doesn't seem that expensive really. =)
I also understand that a 128M Flash Card is in the works, so it might pay off to wait awhile and see what comes of it.
Go to www.starblazers.com (the official homepage, according to the DVD boxes) and there's a link from there to watch episodes online. I tried it, but their connection is REALLY slow for some reason (atleast when using Windows Media).
Based on his e-mail addy, it appears his company either a) owns starblazers.com and runs it, or b) runs the 'watch on the internet' site (and that was what he was referring to), or c) both. =)
Well and more importantly, you don't even mention the fact that on the Gameboy Advance Nintendo EXPLICITLY added holes and hooks for attachments (presumeably lights, especially from their placement) to connect on to. I think there's two holes on the top of the system on either side of the game link port, and the case plastic case itself has other places for things to snap-on to (ridges and hard lines formed in the plastic).
In fact AFAIK this is how the import-only Lightboy Advance attaches to a GBA, by snapping onto and being secured to the GBA with the lil' holes Nintendo added to their design.
Yeah, my old one is actually in pristine condition-- I bought it without really trying it first, and I couldn't take the strain of focusing in on the blurry green screen they used back then.
I eventually picked up a Gameboy Color so I could try out Zelda DX and the days of blurry scrolling and a green LCD were gone. =) I've been hooked on portable gaming sense.
Having an original Gameboy (yicky green), Gameboy Color and Gameboy Advance I can say that the GBA's screen is about the same as far as poor lighting and reflectivity of the screen as the Gameboy Color. It might be a *little* worse, but you have the same issues as with the GBC; holding the system at proper angles so you don't have to deal with reflections, also holding it so light hits the screen enough so you can see the image, etc. The only game I have a difficult time seeing is Castlevania: Circle of the Moon-- games like Super Mario Advance and F-Zero: Maximum Velocity play fine at most angles and without a lot of effort to get the lighting right.
If you plan on playing it on the road a lot, or in dark environments though, use the same logic you'd use with your GBC-- buy a worm-light or other light if you need one for your GBC, pass if you don't.
Oh, and BTW.. you'll love this system. It's really the best portable out there, and finally something that's better than the Turbo Express or Atari Lynx.. =)
I agree, the OLED display would have been the ultimate solution, but just as far as working with what they're working with, backlit displays would have been fine. And I meant backlit in so far as laptop screens and some handheld/palm screens are backlit-- in the quantities Nintendo is producing this thing, I can't imagine it'd add much to the overall price. (Not forgetting that Nintendo claims to have sold 500,000+ units in the US since launch, and more than that in Japan-- Europe gets their first shipments this week.)
About OLED though, I've been semi-following (read: just checking the main story and one or two comments) the stories on Slashdot about them, but can you (or anyone) give a quick rundown on the overall status of this technology for people just hearing about it? Is it in production, does it cost significantly more than current LCD technology, and are there any major manufacturers ramping up production?
For now, unless OLED will be in major supply in the next year, I think backlit LCD's are it (again, more like laptop or other handheld LCD panels, not reflective ala the GBA's current display). Thanks for the info on the issue of reflectivity though. =)
I don't mean to come off as an ass, but I'd rather (than your options) have Nintendo add a backlight to the GBA and then add an on/off slider to the system so you can turn it off to save battery life.
I'm not too sure how much such a setup would cost though, but if it'd only raise the retail price by $50, I think it's worth it. (Hell, if they only want to release a 'special edition' with this feature for $200 instead of $100, I'd bite.. backlit displays look SO much better.)
Or people can get to the meat of the story by just going to http://pocket.ign.com/news/35946.html, which has full details on where the control is and how to access it. I'd rather buy the special screwdriver and take the thing apart than puncture the sticker on the back of my Gameboy Advance, but still, it's nice to know where it is if I'm desperate. =)
Slashdot Mirror
I agree.. that color is nasty. I keep hoping Nintendo will do a solid black version, or atleast a "Smoke" version like their clear-black N64 they released eons ago..
Or, if you want to see a picture of it (or, even more unlikely, ORDER it), check out the dreaded beast from Redmond (not Microsoft!) in all it's splendor...
If anything Nintendo has proven recently, they're all about the color choices. Granted, most of their choices aren't ones many sane people would buy, but hey, they're there. Testament to this is the 6+ colors available for the Gameboy Color, or the variety of N64 colors (and, for Pokemon crazies, shapes) available.
Plus, don't forget, Nintendo has released other colors (metallic hues, as I understand it, that change color as you tilt it in the light) as special Pokemon editions in Japan (just do a search on eBay for "Gameboy Advance Pokemon", you're sure to turn up some hits with pictures). And then there's the Fuchsia version that's out/about to come out (clear pinkish color).
Just be patient, is what I'm saying, it's in Nintendo's nature to release more colors.
Oh, and we can never forget this beast of the dark side... yech
When a Judge reaches a verdict, he is being partial. As was said in the opinion handed down today, the things he said would have been FINE had he said them from the bench. His mistake was airing his opinions on TV and to the media without telling the defense or anyone else.
It's a Judge's JOB to be partial, it's just the setting in which he's partial that's important-- and being publically partial, ridiculing the defendent, etc., isn't something appeals courts or other Judge's smile upon.
He had every right to feel the way he did, and in the ruling handed down today, the opinion said as much-- but it also said if he felt the way he did, he should have made such comments from the bench, not on TV talk shows or to the press/media at large. By doing it from the bench, it gave both the defense and the prosecution a chance to object or defend themselves, whereas in public, there was no chance for that.
As for your claims of my anti-MS bigotry-- I actually run Windows 2000 and other MS products. I only run one Linux on one system-- RedHat Linux running on a monitor-less Pentium 166 sitting next to me that I telnet into from time to time. Other than that, I'm a professional Windows software developer and work literally only a few hundred yards from the Microsoft campus here in Redmond.
I just think Microsoft's inclusion of Internet Explorer into Windows, while argueably evolutionary, was also anti-competitive and in direct response to Netscape. Had they waited and included Internet Explorer a few years later (like say, in 2000) they might have had a better arguement (just as Microsoft, over the years, has included apps to play multi-media files (Windows Media Player), or included 'new' technology as part of the operating system (the toolbar control, which pretty much put vendors of toolbar controls for Visual Basic or Visual C++ out of business)).
As was said on the MSNBC article covering this ruling (or rather, it was a link to other antitrust cases in history, eg: AT&T, IBM, etc) these cases are usually drawn out for DECADES before they're either given up or ruled on. IBM's case started in 1969 and didn't end until the 80's, and AT&T's case lasted almost as long too. Considering Microsoft's case started in 1998, we've got atleast 8 more years of this in the courts before they get around to doing something meaningful..
The thing that's really too bad is Judge Jackson did this to himself-- if he'd kept his mouth shut, not appeared on TV and in the media making public remarks about the case, there's a decent chance he'd have atleast been able to continue presiding as Judge over the case. Now they're handing it to a different Judge, possibly one that will be more in line with what Microsoft's lawyers want.
I haven't read the Ars Technica article (but I will!), so bear this in mind in my reply--
From the Fortune article linked to in this story--
That's kind of where I got my info.. it's more likely that the author was just uninformed, but having not read the article you linked to, I don't know. =) I just wanted to let you know the source of my comment.
Getting Intel to declare your memory architecure as the defacto standard for their new upcoming processor(s) should have been enough. The money they were getting for licensing RDRAM was guaranteed, and about the only way they could have failed in the open market is if the Pentium 4 had failed (which it has, to an extent, but it's not entirely dead).
I do agree with the Fortune writer that Rambus got greedy, and that's too bad-- having more companies working on technology is never a bad thing, but in the case of Rambus, when a company tries to choke off their competitors, it's doomed to failure. I think everyone agrees that it was nice having 3DFX, nVidia and ATI competing in the 3D graphics chipset market-- which is why it's nice to have memory makers competing with different technologies or standards. As the competition is either bought or crushed, there's less incentive from the remaining companies to continue to innovate. (Granted I don't know that Rambus really innovated on anything-- from the article and what I've heard, RDRAM "technology" is nearly identical to SDRAM except for a handful of minor changes..)
It'll be interesting to see how these rulings against RMBS turn up on appeal (though I really doubt they'll get the verdicts overturned).
Yeah but if it's that screwed up that it's not evening working as-is, where's the harm in rebooting it? If it doesn't come back to life after you try to boot it, then you've just nailed the problem right on the head. Otherwise, you're still running around the server cage like a chicken with your head cut off; not the most effective way to deal with a problem.
I do agree that they should probably try SOMETHING before resorting to rebooting it, but it's the easiest way to tell if something is broke..
I've replied to you elsewhere with this, since you're apperently not a very experienced MSDN browser, but I'll say it again--
ftp.microsoft.com/developr/platformsdk/feb2001
You can get the entire set of documentation with sample source code and more from that FTP site, direct from Microsoft, totally anonymous (save for the fact that they may save your IP address, heavens forbid!).
Uh, you can get the Win32 documentation without signing up for Passport, you can even get it via FTP (you can get the entire PlatformSDK, which is just about every useful piece of the Win32 SDK (example source code in C or C++, documentation, etc), for free, with no signup, completely anonymous, from ftp.microsoft.com/developr/platformsdk/feb2001/). The latest release of the PlatformSDK covers Windows XP Beta 2, including all of the new API functions, as well as a complete HTML reference for Internet Explorer. Now if you're talking about Beta operating systems downloads, this is a non-issue, you've had to sign in before, except now you're using Passport to authenticate, which is better since you don't need to sign up for 10 million accounts and remember all of their passwords. (Yeah, that last part is wayyy redundant, but it's a good point if this is the major complaint: downloading betas.)
In cases where it's just documentation and/or sample code, I've never came to a situation where I had to sign up or use Passport, only for MSDN Universal or the next one down, when downloading private betas, do you need to sign in for anything..
As has been said before-- you can sign up using your WORK information on a seperate freemail account (or, use a specially created work account (eg: If you work at fud.com, and your real account is john.doe@fud.com, then make a new account-- msdn_john.dos@fud.com, and use it for Passport)), viola, no problem with personal info or tracking to other sites you visit on your personal time.
Secondly, CT makes a stink about Microsoft using Passport-- what again is the problem with this? I'd rather have them using and trusting their own technology than trying to sell it to us without using it themselves (as has been the case with certain Microsoft owned servers running Apache even though MS has IIS and pushes IIS to the masses).
Finally, if you really are a Win32 developer or WinCE developer or whatever, you DON'T have to use Microsoft tools-- Borland (and other companies, Metrowerks comes to mind) make compilers for Microsoft based operating systems. If all you want are the SDK's for developing software under Windows, you can STILL download the entire PlatformSDK either over the web using their smallish installer, or download the entire mess from ftp.microsoft.com/developr/platformsdk/, just pick a recent release and download the entire CD contents (FYI: There's a Jun2001 directory, but it's currently empty as I write this, but the Feb2001 is REALLY recent, and deals with some recent additions with Windows XP Beta 2). Other SDK's I think you can grab via FTP too, but I'm not so sure.
In a nutshell, this isn't a major development, it's not new (I bought Encarta Deluxe 2001, and signed up for the online version (free with the deluxe purchase), and Encarta uses Passport to validate your access), and it's a damn good idea. I'd like to see some other competitors in the "authentication of user identities" biz though, but I don't know of any off-hand that are this well established and easy to use..
Actually megahertz isn't really even a good speed indicator NOW. With Intel's Pentium 4, they adjusted the length of their pipeline so that the speed (in megahertz) is far faster than anything AMD offers, but the actual real-world performance is slower than even their original Pentium III at some tasks.
Some say the cause of this can be traced back to the same problems that originally plagued the Pentium Pro (which is the same core design used for the Pentium II and Pentium III), and that once Intel ramps up production the scores will be different, but I'm not so sure. Needless to say, just because someone can grab a Pentium 4 2.0 GHz doesn't mean it's going to be better than an AMD Athlon running at 1.5 GHz.
I think the best thing people can do for themselves, at least on a system level, is run benchmarks that test real-world performance, not static tests that throw a hundred thousand MOV instructions at a processor and base their results off that.
I do think speeds are ramping up though-- Intel forced itself to ramp up I think just so they could reclaim the megahertz speed crown, but that didn't reclaim the actual performance speed crown; it was a purely symbolic gesture in my mind. I figure once Intel hits 2.5 or 3.0 GHz I'll jump on board, hopefully at THAT speed their new core design will be able to outpace an AMD processor of the same generation.
My biggest gripe with the *original* Gameboy (the yellow-ish/green screened one) was the fact that in action games (like say, Battletoads, I think is what it was called) was that whenever it scrolled left or right, or whenever a sprite moved, the action BLURRED to the point of not being able to tell what was going on.
It was really bad. By comparison though, I agree, the GBC's screen is a GOD SEND, and the GBA's is just as good except for the previously noted possibility of it being shinier/more reflective.
1) A system is dead as soon as there's no longer any new titles for it-- using this definition, the Genesis IS dead.
2) I could care less about your opinion about the SNES vs. Genesis-- both systems died long ago, get over it.
3) The Nomad would make a horrible portable, explicitly for item #1 above. No new games = no new fun. Sure, I still like Street Fighter II, and I could probably play that, but what if I wanted to try my hand at say, the newest Sonic titles (of which there is one being released this fall/winter for the GBA)? No dice, since there's no new games.
4) Dirt cheap games? You mean if you can find them. Sure, you can buy them used, but forget finding many/any new. The GBA only has a handful because it literally just launched, but oh wait, let's exaggerate this the way you did-- the GBA already has more titles than the Sega Genesis. How, you ask? Easy. It plays old Gameboy and Gameboy Color titles.
As for your insistance that you wouldn't turn this into a "flame-war", you already did. I was merely pointing out some facts, most of which seem lost to you, chief amongst them being that the Genesis (and the SNES) are dead. No new titles. If you want to bring back arguements of olde about how you think the Genesis rules, try it with someone that still cares.
For all intents and purposes, the GBA screen is about the same as the GBC screen, except for the obvious changes being that the GBA screen can handle more colors, has a higher resolution, and is overall crisper to look at. The big reason people are complaining about it is that most people didn't OWN a GBC before they bought their GBA's, so they weren't used to the screen being kind of hard to deal with.
Perhaps the only change (and I'm not sure this is even a change, it might just be me) I've noticed is that the plastic covering over the LCD screen seems shinier and more reflective than the GBC cover. Like I said though, it may just be me, or it may be the orientation of the GBA vs. the GBC (the GBC's screen isn't as wide, or as large).
It really is a great system, and for $90-100, it's a great value for on-the-go gaming.
Apples to Oranges-- the Gameboy Advance is a suped up Super NES, and we all know how much better the SNES was than the Genesis (the only people still convinced that the Genesis was better are die-hard Sega fans that forgot the 16-bit console wars died EONS ago). Just like the SNES, the GBA does mode-7 style scaling and rotation, but it also supports this functionality for sprites as well. It also supports more colors on screen than the SNES or Genesis (I believe it can show thousands at a time, in fact, more than it can technically show because of it's resolution limitations (eg: pixel width x height isn't enough to show each individual color it can show in each of those pixels-- it can show more, but the screen doesn't have enough space)), and has pretty good Stereo sound (far better than the GBC!), though not so good as the SNES IMHO..
The Sega Genesis may have had a great selection of games, but for a portable it just doesn't work-- Genesis carts are bulky and large compared to GBA cartridges (GBA carts are the same physical width as GBC and GB carts, but they're about 1/3 the height, and the same thickness), and the Nomad probably sucks down the batteries.
Now my question is, when will someone offer a TV tuner adapter for the GBA like was offered for the older portables (Lynx and GameGear had 'em), and will it support over the airwaves HDTV? =)
It was posted in another comment, but here's the important links--
http://www.visoly.com/fa_linker.phpc ategory=6&products_id=1051&
http://www.lik-sang.com/catalog/product_info.php?
This is a link to both Visoli's homepage (which has downloadable software for their products, plus manuals and product descriptions) as well as a link to Lik Sang, who apperently sell the 64M Flash Card for $109 US, and the Flash Advance Linker (the actual 'ripper' of the carts, connects to your PC via your parallel port) for $35 US. They ship internationally, and it doesn't seem that expensive really. =)
I also understand that a 128M Flash Card is in the works, so it might pay off to wait awhile and see what comes of it.
Go to www.starblazers.com (the official homepage, according to the DVD boxes) and there's a link from there to watch episodes online. I tried it, but their connection is REALLY slow for some reason (atleast when using Windows Media).
Based on his e-mail addy, it appears his company either a) owns starblazers.com and runs it, or b) runs the 'watch on the internet' site (and that was what he was referring to), or c) both. =)
Well and more importantly, you don't even mention the fact that on the Gameboy Advance Nintendo EXPLICITLY added holes and hooks for attachments (presumeably lights, especially from their placement) to connect on to. I think there's two holes on the top of the system on either side of the game link port, and the case plastic case itself has other places for things to snap-on to (ridges and hard lines formed in the plastic).
In fact AFAIK this is how the import-only Lightboy Advance attaches to a GBA, by snapping onto and being secured to the GBA with the lil' holes Nintendo added to their design.
Definately not a monopoly IMHO.
Yeah, my old one is actually in pristine condition-- I bought it without really trying it first, and I couldn't take the strain of focusing in on the blurry green screen they used back then.
I eventually picked up a Gameboy Color so I could try out Zelda DX and the days of blurry scrolling and a green LCD were gone. =) I've been hooked on portable gaming sense.
Having an original Gameboy (yicky green), Gameboy Color and Gameboy Advance I can say that the GBA's screen is about the same as far as poor lighting and reflectivity of the screen as the Gameboy Color. It might be a *little* worse, but you have the same issues as with the GBC; holding the system at proper angles so you don't have to deal with reflections, also holding it so light hits the screen enough so you can see the image, etc. The only game I have a difficult time seeing is Castlevania: Circle of the Moon-- games like Super Mario Advance and F-Zero: Maximum Velocity play fine at most angles and without a lot of effort to get the lighting right.
If you plan on playing it on the road a lot, or in dark environments though, use the same logic you'd use with your GBC-- buy a worm-light or other light if you need one for your GBC, pass if you don't.
Oh, and BTW.. you'll love this system. It's really the best portable out there, and finally something that's better than the Turbo Express or Atari Lynx.. =)
I agree, the OLED display would have been the ultimate solution, but just as far as working with what they're working with, backlit displays would have been fine. And I meant backlit in so far as laptop screens and some handheld/palm screens are backlit-- in the quantities Nintendo is producing this thing, I can't imagine it'd add much to the overall price. (Not forgetting that Nintendo claims to have sold 500,000+ units in the US since launch, and more than that in Japan-- Europe gets their first shipments this week.)
About OLED though, I've been semi-following (read: just checking the main story and one or two comments) the stories on Slashdot about them, but can you (or anyone) give a quick rundown on the overall status of this technology for people just hearing about it? Is it in production, does it cost significantly more than current LCD technology, and are there any major manufacturers ramping up production?
For now, unless OLED will be in major supply in the next year, I think backlit LCD's are it (again, more like laptop or other handheld LCD panels, not reflective ala the GBA's current display). Thanks for the info on the issue of reflectivity though. =)
I don't mean to come off as an ass, but I'd rather (than your options) have Nintendo add a backlight to the GBA and then add an on/off slider to the system so you can turn it off to save battery life.
I'm not too sure how much such a setup would cost though, but if it'd only raise the retail price by $50, I think it's worth it. (Hell, if they only want to release a 'special edition' with this feature for $200 instead of $100, I'd bite.. backlit displays look SO much better.)
Or people can get to the meat of the story by just going to http://pocket.ign.com/news/35946.html, which has full details on where the control is and how to access it. I'd rather buy the special screwdriver and take the thing apart than puncture the sticker on the back of my Gameboy Advance, but still, it's nice to know where it is if I'm desperate. =)