Note that I didn't say he had many failures, I said that the company he founded did. Atari basically had one major success, the 2600. Bushnell, as a person, seems to have had two.
That's two more billion dollar successes than you've had, I wouldn't brush it off so lightly. Most business ventures fail. Very rarely is a runaway success that entrepeneur's first project (if it was it was probably a fluke), and once they do get a success their "next big thing" doesn't usually pan out either.
Dismissing the man because he's "only" had two success is completely ignoring the realities of being an entrepeneur. People who are successful are persistent, and they are optimistic. They don't let a failure stop them. They learn from it and move on the next project.
Are you kidding? The Wii has the best launch list Nintendo has ever had, probably one of the best ever. There's good titles in all the major genres.
RPGs/strategy: Zelda, Marvel: UA
FPS: Far Cry, Red Steel, Splinter Cell, CoD 3
Flight: Blazing Angels
Racing: NFS: Carbon (not a racing fan, so I don't know if this one is actually quality but it's a name franchise)
Platformers: Metal Slug, Rayman
Not to mention the oddball social and party games like WarioWare, Elebits, Monkey Ball and the Wii specific titles.
That misses the point of the AC parent. I could be updating it if I knew the subject, yes. But what if I didn't know the subject? How would I know it's wrong? I either have to be researching the subject anyway, in which case I wouldn't be using information from Wikipedia or I would have to just have a passing interest in the subject without being particularly concerned if it's wrong.
Tycho from Penny Arcade said it best, and this is a point that has never been addressed.
Wii preorders were available from Amazon for one day on 9/15. They had a huge volume so they closed them after that until they knew more about their allotment. It was available again briefly on 10/28, no one is sure why yet, Amazon hasn't given an explanation like they did in Spetember.
The point is that your "question" was just your opinion poorly disguised. By whose criteria is a game "worth playing"? The only opinion that matters there is the person who wants to play the game. By whose criteria is a game a PITA to run on Linux? What percentage of people having how much trouble? Check the Cedega forums and you'll see that a significant number of people have trouble even with "supported" games.
Funny, I just remembered that once I tried a different approach: it seemed to me that if I stored a disposable razor in oil, I might be able to prevent it from corroding
I use alcohol, works great. It ruins any lubricant strip that might be on it, but I don't care about those anyway.
Except that the article specifically refers to the games division.
The company's games division reported a ¥43.5 billion ($366.6m) loss, from a ¥8.2 million ($69,000) profit in 2005, thanks to research and development, manufacturing and marketing costs related to the launch of the PlayStation 3. Sales and operating revenue were down by 20.5 percent to ¥170.3 billion ($1.43bn).
I don't think a $366.6m loss is "exceptional profits" by any accounting method.
You can start a game in the afternoon. You'll be "just finishing up this turn" when the sun comes up the next morning, and you haven't slept at all. You've been warned.
Amateur. If you get up and eat breakfast at the PC you should be conquering the world by lunch (against the AI anyway).
This is all well and good, but what I'd really like to see on Steam is the "ancient school" games that used to run on Win95/DOS running under Windows XP and available $5-$10 a pop.
What you want is Gametap. They don't have System Shock, but they have a lot of old DOS games (including LucasArts adventures).
Great, Civ 3 Complete is $18.98 on Amazon. The listed MSRP is $19.99, so it's not like you're even getting a discount from them. Steam is selling it for $10 more than that. What benefit are they offering you for your $10?
Most Americans believe that US government is FAR more generous with international aid than they really are.
That may be true, I don't know. But it's not really relevant except to say that Americans would probably give more to foreign aid if that were true and they knew.
Second,VAST MAJORITY of charitable giving in US if for US citizens. 9/11 funds and Katrina funds raised billions... all for us.
I don't know about "vast majority". From what I can find approximately 1.4 billion was donated to 9/11 charities and $3.1 billion to Katrina/Rita charities.
In contrast $1.78 billion (more in raw dollars than anyone else) was donated to tsunami relief, which is more than 9/11. Those stingy Americans gave more to foreigners on the other side of the globe than to the victims of what was a defining event in history. Americans also gave $78 million to Pakistani earthquake victims, which is a significant amount of money for a relatively quiet news item. What may be becoming obvious is that Americans give when they know there's a specific need. That's the main reason for what imbalance there is. Lack of awareness, not desire.
Even if Americans DID give the "vast majority" of charity domestically that makes them less generous how? Individuals giving money with no benefit to themselves to those who need is it charitable giving no matter if the needy person is in the inner city or a Mexican barrio.
And must of the percentage includes giving to the local church, which as you probably know, in US comprise a significant majority of charitable giving
What's wrong with that? Those donations are used to run shelters and soup kitchens. That's not charitable?
Except the first set is a very limited subset of giving. It covers only official government giving, and not even all of that. Most American giving is to private charities, so of course that number will be low. The post I responded to intended to paint Americans in a negative light by using cherry picked statistics to find somewhere Americans were 23rd place.
My point is that when you take charity as a whole into account, Americans are among the most generous people in the world. If you want to say that's because they're all giving to Pat Robertson rather than a "worthwhile" charity I'd like to see some evidence of that.
Volunteering and giving as a share of GDP by country, including gifts to religious worship organizations where available, ca. 1995-2002
All private philanthropy
The Netherlands 4.95%
Sweden * 4.03%
United States 3.94%
Tanzania 3.78%
United Kingdom 3.70%
Norway 3.42%
France 3.21%
Germany 2.56%
Finland 2.43%
Canada 2.40%
"Like" the Squats? What's another one? While occasional unit types are obsoleted in version changes I can't think of a single other faction that has been eliminated. The closest thing has been Chaos Dwarfs but they're actually still usable with Ravening Hordes.
Squats were a Rogue Trader era army that just never took off. The first box (2nd edition) included a "starter" army list for them in the included booklet but they never received a codex. The main reason for that is that GW was very designer driven in the 90's. Development direction was heavily influenced by whatever the core designers were into at the time. No one was ever into Squats, so they never got a codex. I still have some Squat minis and I can see why, to be honest, they're uninspiring and mostly resemble weeble wobbles on tricycles. Aside from that, and despite GW constantly pushing you to buy the next big thing, very rarely do the old models become unusable. One event from 13 years ago hardly counts as something GW "occasionally" does.
No, he's not saying that World of Warcraft was supposed to be GW's online Warhammer. he's saying that the original 1994 Warcraft began as a Warhammer RTS. I've heard that rumor too, but I don't recall the source. There was a Warhammer based RTS released shortly after Warcraft, 1995's Shadow of the Horned Rat, so it's reasonable that a fallout between GW and Blizzard could have led to development moving to Mindscape. While all fantasy is derivative the Warcraft universe does seem to draw very strong parallels with the Warhammer universe, especially with the original Orcs.
EA doesn't actually use XBL. They are the only exception I know of that is allowed to use their own service. I'm sure one of their main reasons was so that they can pull support. As far as I know no game's support has ever been removed from XBL.
Nintendo gave away Brain Age, not a specific retailer. I got my Lite + Brain Age at Circuit City (they wouldn't let me get the kit as well, but it wasn't that great anyway).
Accessibility, equal opportunity employment, etc are all bogeymen dragged out by people as keeping small business down, but they simply don't apply until you reach a certain size (100 employees seems to be a common minimum).
The minimum size is 15. However, that minimum applies the employment laws, not the accesibility part of the ADA. There is no minimum size for accessibility. There are tax credits for costs incurred by small businesses making things accessible though and the Act provides exceptions for taking on exceptions that could be overly expensive and harmful to the business.
I did, and the skewing actually supports my point. What browser they use is irrelevant so that won't skew anything, alternate browsers masquerading as IE still report the correct OS. Taking OS skew into account only works against you. Technically inclined people tend to use the latest technologies and will be more likely to be using WinXP than using an older version of Windows so the WinXP numbers there will be at least as high if not greater than anywhere else. The numbers for alternatives OS's are the highest they'll be anywhere, so even if you take the entire 7.2% of people using an alternative OS and apply it to WinXP instead (obviously ridiculous, but just to put everything in your favor) you still end up with only 82.3%, which we've established as the absolute ceiling that can only be (probably significantly) lower in reality.
More like 75%. It requires Windows XP, nothing earlier, not even 2000. The latest stats I can find put WinXP at only about 75% penetration as of August.
I do know for a fact that NS made a 3GHz 6502 that was not one of the three you list above, and that this ultra-high-speed model is not listed on NS' website either.
Slashdot Mirror
That's two more billion dollar successes than you've had, I wouldn't brush it off so lightly. Most business ventures fail. Very rarely is a runaway success that entrepeneur's first project (if it was it was probably a fluke), and once they do get a success their "next big thing" doesn't usually pan out either.
Dismissing the man because he's "only" had two success is completely ignoring the realities of being an entrepeneur. People who are successful are persistent, and they are optimistic. They don't let a failure stop them. They learn from it and move on the next project.
RPGs/strategy: Zelda, Marvel: UA
FPS: Far Cry, Red Steel, Splinter Cell, CoD 3
Flight: Blazing Angels
Racing: NFS: Carbon (not a racing fan, so I don't know if this one is actually quality but it's a name franchise)
Platformers: Metal Slug, Rayman
Not to mention the oddball social and party games like WarioWare, Elebits, Monkey Ball and the Wii specific titles.
Oh and there's also the Virtual Console.
Those are metric dollars. Or Celsius. Or Tire Money.
Tycho from Penny Arcade said it best, and this is a point that has never been addressed.
Wii preorders were available from Amazon for one day on 9/15. They had a huge volume so they closed them after that until they knew more about their allotment. It was available again briefly on 10/28, no one is sure why yet, Amazon hasn't given an explanation like they did in Spetember.
The point is that your "question" was just your opinion poorly disguised. By whose criteria is a game "worth playing"? The only opinion that matters there is the person who wants to play the game. By whose criteria is a game a PITA to run on Linux? What percentage of people having how much trouble? Check the Cedega forums and you'll see that a significant number of people have trouble even with "supported" games.
All of them.
I use alcohol, works great. It ruins any lubricant strip that might be on it, but I don't care about those anyway.
Amateur. If you get up and eat breakfast at the PC you should be conquering the world by lunch (against the AI anyway).
What you want is Gametap. They don't have System Shock, but they have a lot of old DOS games (including LucasArts adventures).
Great, Civ 3 Complete is $18.98 on Amazon. The listed MSRP is $19.99, so it's not like you're even getting a discount from them. Steam is selling it for $10 more than that. What benefit are they offering you for your $10?
That may be true, I don't know. But it's not really relevant except to say that Americans would probably give more to foreign aid if that were true and they knew.
Second,VAST MAJORITY of charitable giving in US if for US citizens. 9/11 funds and Katrina funds raised billions... all for us.
I don't know about "vast majority". From what I can find approximately 1.4 billion was donated to 9/11 charities and $3.1 billion to Katrina/Rita charities.
In contrast $1.78 billion (more in raw dollars than anyone else) was donated to tsunami relief, which is more than 9/11. Those stingy Americans gave more to foreigners on the other side of the globe than to the victims of what was a defining event in history. Americans also gave $78 million to Pakistani earthquake victims, which is a significant amount of money for a relatively quiet news item. What may be becoming obvious is that Americans give when they know there's a specific need. That's the main reason for what imbalance there is. Lack of awareness, not desire.
Even if Americans DID give the "vast majority" of charity domestically that makes them less generous how? Individuals giving money with no benefit to themselves to those who need is it charitable giving no matter if the needy person is in the inner city or a Mexican barrio.
And must of the percentage includes giving to the local church, which as you probably know, in US comprise a significant majority of charitable giving
What's wrong with that? Those donations are used to run shelters and soup kitchens. That's not charitable?
My point is that when you take charity as a whole into account, Americans are among the most generous people in the world. If you want to say that's because they're all giving to Pat Robertson rather than a "worthwhile" charity I'd like to see some evidence of that.
Have you read the news today? The BBC has acknowledged it is institutionally biased, based on a report it commissioned itself.
Squats were a Rogue Trader era army that just never took off. The first box (2nd edition) included a "starter" army list for them in the included booklet but they never received a codex. The main reason for that is that GW was very designer driven in the 90's. Development direction was heavily influenced by whatever the core designers were into at the time. No one was ever into Squats, so they never got a codex. I still have some Squat minis and I can see why, to be honest, they're uninspiring and mostly resemble weeble wobbles on tricycles. Aside from that, and despite GW constantly pushing you to buy the next big thing, very rarely do the old models become unusable. One event from 13 years ago hardly counts as something GW "occasionally" does.
No, he's not saying that World of Warcraft was supposed to be GW's online Warhammer. he's saying that the original 1994 Warcraft began as a Warhammer RTS. I've heard that rumor too, but I don't recall the source. There was a Warhammer based RTS released shortly after Warcraft, 1995's Shadow of the Horned Rat, so it's reasonable that a fallout between GW and Blizzard could have led to development moving to Mindscape. While all fantasy is derivative the Warcraft universe does seem to draw very strong parallels with the Warhammer universe, especially with the original Orcs.
EA doesn't actually use XBL. They are the only exception I know of that is allowed to use their own service. I'm sure one of their main reasons was so that they can pull support. As far as I know no game's support has ever been removed from XBL.
Nintendo gave away Brain Age, not a specific retailer. I got my Lite + Brain Age at Circuit City (they wouldn't let me get the kit as well, but it wasn't that great anyway).
On a slightly lower end machine (with the 945GM video), 83 fps
The minimum size is 15. However, that minimum applies the employment laws, not the accesibility part of the ADA. There is no minimum size for accessibility. There are tax credits for costs incurred by small businesses making things accessible though and the Act provides exceptions for taking on exceptions that could be overly expensive and harmful to the business.
I did, and the skewing actually supports my point. What browser they use is irrelevant so that won't skew anything, alternate browsers masquerading as IE still report the correct OS. Taking OS skew into account only works against you. Technically inclined people tend to use the latest technologies and will be more likely to be using WinXP than using an older version of Windows so the WinXP numbers there will be at least as high if not greater than anywhere else. The numbers for alternatives OS's are the highest they'll be anywhere, so even if you take the entire 7.2% of people using an alternative OS and apply it to WinXP instead (obviously ridiculous, but just to put everything in your favor) you still end up with only 82.3%, which we've established as the absolute ceiling that can only be (probably significantly) lower in reality.
More like 75%. It requires Windows XP, nothing earlier, not even 2000. The latest stats I can find put WinXP at only about 75% penetration as of August.
Are you sure you know this for a fact?
Also, the only reference I can find anywhere to a 65I02 was another one of your own Slashdot posts from June.