However, I already have a browser, video player, music player, camera, video recorder, GPS navigation, Bluetooth, voice dictation, QWERTY keyboard, removable/expandable memory (and battery), 3G tethering, etc. on my phone. In order for a phone to suit me better than the one I already have, it has to have more of the features I'm interested in, not fewer.
That's an interesting way to put it, and I've never seen anyone saying it quite as open as this. You don't want a better phone; you just want one with more features. That's why the iPhone is not for you and will never be. I, however, will gladly trade some of my P990i's features for a bit more stability and usability.
Which is why I'll switch to an iPhone. I don't want more features (unless you count usability and reliability as a feature). I want the ones I have to work, and work well.
Like I said, there are over 120 million CDMA customers in the US, and if Apple doesn't release a CDMA iPhone, they probably aren't going to get many of those customers.
Why? Are these people CDMA customers because they just love CDMA so much and won't even consider phones using a different technology?
Interesting. I wonder how many of the million iPhone buyers are new to AT&T... Even if it's only 50%, 500'000 is a hell of a lot of new customers for a company with 64 million customers!
I would encourage you to spend a few hours doing phone support for a telco or a cell phone manufacturer (I did that as a summer job for Sagem a few years ago). Good luck.
"The tactic often works in the short term. The hype over insanely low prices functions as a form of free advertising, and the lower prices tend to attract buyers. Apple announced on Sept. 10 that it had sold its 1 millionth iPhone."
Okay, that is the stupidest thing I've read all week. Including last week, since it's monday. Apple announced that it had sold its millionth iPhone two days after the price cut. How in the world could anyone possibly think that they sold the millionth iPhone because of the price cut?
Apples loyal customers, or "fanboys" aren't loyal because they get good treatment from Apple. They are loyal because they (a) actually like the products, (b) see Apple as a fashion statement, (c) prefer to vote for the underdog, or (d) are graphic designers.
I know you're just flamebaiting, but I would still like to point out that I generally buy the product with the best price/performance ratio. Often, this ends up being an Apple product. I just replaced my self-built Ubuntu MythTV box at home with a Mac mini because it simply works better and costs less (if I factor in my time). Apple is successful because people love their products. Apple quite simply makes better products than most other companies.
What Apple is doing right now is hurting them. They generally try to do well with the people who buy their products, which is what sets them apart from Microsoft (Microsoft sells to corporations, the actual users be damned). Unfortunately, Apple has now started to give too much weight to the interests of content providers (see: ringtones) and AT&T (see: no unlocked iPhone).
People tend to be loyal to Apple because Apple tends to make well-made, pretty, usable, affordable stuff. If they stop doing what their users want, people will not be loyal anymore; it's that simple.
So, yeah. Labeling Apple's customers "fanboys" tells the reader more about your own views than about the people who actually purchase Apple's products.
I don't even quite understand what you're trying to say. What exactly did Xerox revolutionize "from a technological point of view"? Did they make PCs mainstream? Did they create a UI that everyone can use?
You also would expect people like Jobs, Woz, Gates or Thorvalds to have some insight into this stuff; one, because they have a lot of experience doing it; and two, because they are among the few who actually were successful.
But if Apple hed nevr existed I'm not sure the landscape now would have changed much. Again, much as I hate to say it, MS drove the market and was responsible for the advent of cheap usable computers even your grandmother could use.
I believe that without Apple, our user interfaces would look substantially different. I mean, try this: Get the latest Ubuntu Live CD and boot it. Now compare this to the UI of the Apple Lisa. Not a whole lot of differences! You got your overlapping windows that you move by dragging the title and resize by dragging the bottom right corner, your dropdown text menus with keyboard shortcuts, your trash can, your icons for files and applications with names below them... Apple actually came up with, or made popular, a great number of the UI abstrations we take for granted nowadays...
Microsoft actually went into a quite different direction with Windows 3.x, but "came back" to the Lisa/Macintosh way with Windows 95. Nowadays, most computers work like Lisas... So, in a way, it was neither Woz nor Gates who actually influenced computers. It was Jobs, who was part of (or leading) both the Lisa and the Mac team at Apple.
If you like the exploration part of the Zelda games, you might want to have a look at "Freshly-Picked Tingle's Rosy Rupeeland" for the DS. It's not officially published in the US, but it is in Europe, and the Europe version has an English language mode.
You don't play Link, you play Zelda, and the game is basically all exploration. It's one of my favourite games right now, especially due to all the inside jokes about Zelda.
Hey, the Virtual Boy is great. It started Mario Tennis (and still has one of the best versions of the game, in my opinion), and it has an awesome Wario sidescroller. It's a pity that it only had about seven games and made your eyes bleed after 2 minutes of using it, but it's still one of my favourite failed consoles:-)
As Sega demonstrated with Sonic the hard part is making the game actually work. You can slap 3d onto anything but often the gameplay needs a lot of adjustment after that change. Nintendo got it right and made what many consider the best games released while other developers failed and produced crappy games riddled with technical issues when the 2d games were among the better games out there.
Yeah. If you want to see how hard the switch from 2D to 3D is, look at Konami. They went from being the single best third-party developer for consoles to being a distributor of mainly crappy 3D games and DDR. I know this sounds a bit harsh; Konami does have franchises that made the jump (well, at least one: MGS), but this is no comparison to the NES/Gameboy/SNES days where you could go into a games shop, pick up any Konami game (even stupid spin-offs that should, by all rights, be crappy, such as Kid Dracula, or that Street Fighter clone on the Gameboy), and know that it would be awesome.
First of all, I too was disappointed with the 3D DS Metroid. The DS is perfect for Metroidvania games, as the two Castlevanias have shown. Now Hunters is not a bad game; in fact, it is one of the best games on the DS, and the best portable FPS you can have, even winning against a whole bunch of dual-analog FPS with its control scheme. Still, I agre with you: I would have preferred a 2D Metroid on the DS.
However, the Metroid Prime games on the Cube are clearly amongst the best games ever made. In fact, the first Metroid Prime is the third-best ranked game ever on gamerankings, and it deserves that place. It is an awesome, great game; probably one of the best 2D->3D switches ever. No other franchise did it that well; few can even compare (maybe Super Mario, Zelda and Prince of Persia - although the 2D Marios and Zeldas are still way better than the 3D versions).
Yes, it's not a 2D Metroid. Yes, we all want a new 2D Metroid. No, that doesn't mean it's a bad game.
I think Mario Sunshine really nailed the third-person platforming aspects with the "floating" water cannon. This helped you manage platforms, and it also gave you some reference of where you are via the streams of water going down from your pipes.
Re:Get Heavenly Sword - Its Brilliant.
on
Lair Review
·
· Score: 1
I usually don't finish 60+ hour games, but then 6 hours is just too short. 12-hour-games are usually described as "short" in reviews; personally, I think 12 hours are about right for me - if they are 12 good hours.
I have played the demo of Folkelaw and I have been very impressed with the PS3 sixaxis controller
While that game has many different names, "Folkelaw" is not among them. Also, you've been impressed with the PS3 sixaxis after using it in Folklore??? What??? You just waggle it around to steal those animals' souls! Nothing impressive at all.
The PS3 is a neat console. I know, I own one. But really, don't try to defend indefensible things. I just makes us PS3 owners look like stupid Sony shills.
What is significant is the massive take-up of the Wii which is not really that surprising considering the Wii is less than half the price of a PS3, whether this translates into good game sales remains to be seen.
I agree. However, it should be pointed out that as of now, attach rate on the Wii is higher than on the PS3 and on par with the 360 at the same time in its life. As more good games keep coming out, attach rate will only go up.
If it became such a problem, I am sure a Xbox 360 patch would be along the way to play this game over the HD DVD.
How do you propose that would work? Games would come in two versions, which means shops will have two SKUs? Or games will include both four DVDs as well as one HD-DVD?
I actually am in a bet right now with a Sony fanboy who claims that Microsoft will be forced to release games on HD-DVD before the end of '08 in order to keep up with Sony. I'm betting against it. Such console add-ons have never worked, and Microsoft isn't stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think they made it deliberately easy. I think they simply don't care one way or another, just like with the Apple TV.
That's an interesting way to put it, and I've never seen anyone saying it quite as open as this. You don't want a better phone; you just want one with more features. That's why the iPhone is not for you and will never be. I, however, will gladly trade some of my P990i's features for a bit more stability and usability.
Which is why I'll switch to an iPhone. I don't want more features (unless you count usability and reliability as a feature). I want the ones I have to work, and work well.
Why? Are these people CDMA customers because they just love CDMA so much and won't even consider phones using a different technology?
Interesting. I wonder how many of the million iPhone buyers are new to AT&T... Even if it's only 50%, 500'000 is a hell of a lot of new customers for a company with 64 million customers!
I would encourage you to spend a few hours doing phone support for a telco or a cell phone manufacturer (I did that as a summer job for Sagem a few years ago). Good luck.
Okay, that is the stupidest thing I've read all week. Including last week, since it's monday. Apple announced that it had sold its millionth iPhone two days after the price cut. How in the world could anyone possibly think that they sold the millionth iPhone because of the price cut?
I know you're just flamebaiting, but I would still like to point out that I generally buy the product with the best price/performance ratio. Often, this ends up being an Apple product. I just replaced my self-built Ubuntu MythTV box at home with a Mac mini because it simply works better and costs less (if I factor in my time). Apple is successful because people love their products. Apple quite simply makes better products than most other companies.
What Apple is doing right now is hurting them. They generally try to do well with the people who buy their products, which is what sets them apart from Microsoft (Microsoft sells to corporations, the actual users be damned). Unfortunately, Apple has now started to give too much weight to the interests of content providers (see: ringtones) and AT&T (see: no unlocked iPhone).
People tend to be loyal to Apple because Apple tends to make well-made, pretty, usable, affordable stuff. If they stop doing what their users want, people will not be loyal anymore; it's that simple.
So, yeah. Labeling Apple's customers "fanboys" tells the reader more about your own views than about the people who actually purchase Apple's products.
I don't even quite understand what you're trying to say. What exactly did Xerox revolutionize "from a technological point of view"? Did they make PCs mainstream? Did they create a UI that everyone can use?
You also would expect people like Jobs, Woz, Gates or Thorvalds to have some insight into this stuff; one, because they have a lot of experience doing it; and two, because they are among the few who actually were successful.
I believe that without Apple, our user interfaces would look substantially different. I mean, try this: Get the latest Ubuntu Live CD and boot it. Now compare this to the UI of the Apple Lisa. Not a whole lot of differences! You got your overlapping windows that you move by dragging the title and resize by dragging the bottom right corner, your dropdown text menus with keyboard shortcuts, your trash can, your icons for files and applications with names below them... Apple actually came up with, or made popular, a great number of the UI abstrations we take for granted nowadays...
Microsoft actually went into a quite different direction with Windows 3.x, but "came back" to the Lisa/Macintosh way with Windows 95. Nowadays, most computers work like Lisas... So, in a way, it was neither Woz nor Gates who actually influenced computers. It was Jobs, who was part of (or leading) both the Lisa and the Mac team at Apple.
Damn, I meant to write "You don't play as Link, you play as Tingle."
If you like the exploration part of the Zelda games, you might want to have a look at "Freshly-Picked Tingle's Rosy Rupeeland" for the DS. It's not officially published in the US, but it is in Europe, and the Europe version has an English language mode.
You don't play Link, you play Zelda, and the game is basically all exploration. It's one of my favourite games right now, especially due to all the inside jokes about Zelda.
Speaking like somebody who is not old enough to actually have played it.
Wii Sports and Wii Fit perhaps? I think he was working on several Wii titles or concepts. Wii Music is another one.
Hey, the Virtual Boy is great. It started Mario Tennis (and still has one of the best versions of the game, in my opinion), and it has an awesome Wario sidescroller. It's a pity that it only had about seven games and made your eyes bleed after 2 minutes of using it, but it's still one of my favourite failed consoles :-)
Yeah. If you want to see how hard the switch from 2D to 3D is, look at Konami. They went from being the single best third-party developer for consoles to being a distributor of mainly crappy 3D games and DDR. I know this sounds a bit harsh; Konami does have franchises that made the jump (well, at least one: MGS), but this is no comparison to the NES/Gameboy/SNES days where you could go into a games shop, pick up any Konami game (even stupid spin-offs that should, by all rights, be crappy, such as Kid Dracula, or that Street Fighter clone on the Gameboy), and know that it would be awesome.
It's in large parts the same team and basically a kind of spiritual sequel, just without the rights to the actual name.
First of all, I too was disappointed with the 3D DS Metroid. The DS is perfect for Metroidvania games, as the two Castlevanias have shown. Now Hunters is not a bad game; in fact, it is one of the best games on the DS, and the best portable FPS you can have, even winning against a whole bunch of dual-analog FPS with its control scheme. Still, I agre with you: I would have preferred a 2D Metroid on the DS.
However, the Metroid Prime games on the Cube are clearly amongst the best games ever made. In fact, the first Metroid Prime is the third-best ranked game ever on gamerankings, and it deserves that place. It is an awesome, great game; probably one of the best 2D->3D switches ever. No other franchise did it that well; few can even compare (maybe Super Mario, Zelda and Prince of Persia - although the 2D Marios and Zeldas are still way better than the 3D versions).
Yes, it's not a 2D Metroid. Yes, we all want a new 2D Metroid. No, that doesn't mean it's a bad game.
I think Mario Sunshine really nailed the third-person platforming aspects with the "floating" water cannon. This helped you manage platforms, and it also gave you some reference of where you are via the streams of water going down from your pipes.
I usually don't finish 60+ hour games, but then 6 hours is just too short. 12-hour-games are usually described as "short" in reviews; personally, I think 12 hours are about right for me - if they are 12 good hours.
1) Release a game
2) Get destroyed in all reviews
3) Fix it
4) Don't tell anyone the issues which made them avoid the game are fixed
5) Profit???
I don't think so. The firmware update didn't change a damn thing with the Lair control.
While that game has many different names, "Folkelaw" is not among them. Also, you've been impressed with the PS3 sixaxis after using it in Folklore??? What??? You just waggle it around to steal those animals' souls! Nothing impressive at all.
The PS3 is a neat console. I know, I own one. But really, don't try to defend indefensible things. I just makes us PS3 owners look like stupid Sony shills.
I agree. However, it should be pointed out that as of now, attach rate on the Wii is higher than on the PS3 and on par with the 360 at the same time in its life. As more good games keep coming out, attach rate will only go up.
If you think the Gamecube and the DS offer what the Wii does, you're missing what the Wii is offering :-)
Oh, totally off-topic, but I just bought Tingle's for the DS, and man, that is one awesome game!
How do you propose that would work? Games would come in two versions, which means shops will have two SKUs? Or games will include both four DVDs as well as one HD-DVD?
I actually am in a bet right now with a Sony fanboy who claims that Microsoft will be forced to release games on HD-DVD before the end of '08 in order to keep up with Sony. I'm betting against it. Such console add-ons have never worked, and Microsoft isn't stupid.