Okay, so I'm living in Europe, not in the US. But I'm guessing younger people in the US use SMS quite a bit. Over here, it's huge. I hardly ever use the phone to call anyone. I use SMS, and so does everyone else. It's less intrusive, and written messages are much clearer. You can go back and re-read them if you forget the precise time of an appointment, or the address you're supposed to go to.
SMS is just much more convenient than calling somebody in most cases. I would easily use the 200 messages a month.
I've been reading various reviews, not various selected quotes from various selected reviews by one guy. But, whatever. I've seen a mix of both, but those negatives have weighed more than the positives overall; again, just from what I've seen.
Huh? All the actual reviews I've seen (you know, those where the reviewer actually had an actual iPhone) ended with a positive summary.
Apple is not going to do that. My guess is that Microsoft figured out that lots of people run Windows in VMs, and that many of these are the people who may actually pay for software, so they are trying to get as much money from them as possible.
If Nintendo doesn't either start putting out some quality titles, or convincing third parties to do it for them, the Wii excitement will quickly turn to Wiimorse. I really *want* to like this console, but I haven't found a game yet that holds my attention
But people didn't buy the Wii for "games that hold their attention" such as Zelda or Super Paper Mario. They bought Wiis for Wii Sports. Nintendo doesn't actually need "hardcore" games (although a few are coming out). What they need is a few strong follow-ups for Wii Sports. And they have these, too - Wii Fitness and Wii Music are looking extremely interesting.
Yeah, that would be ironic if Nintendo didn't have the supplies. They do. They sell more than the 360 and the PS3. The problem is that they still don't have enough.
By today's standards, the N64 is a pretty sucky console, but really, there's no comparison to the suckiness of the PS1. The PS1 had two things in its favour: It was cheap, and games had a lot of storage space. Other than that, it was a mediocre console, especially compared to the N64 with the memory enhancement. The N64 had no loading time, came with an analog controller, had four controller ports, could display much better 3D graphics, had a rumble pack for the controller...
I read more than a few articles and comments from people calling for Nintendo to do a Sega and become a third-party software developer after the Cube tanked. Actually, right up to E3 where people first got to play with the Wii...
I agree that Nintendo is overvalued, but not for the reasons you state. Nintendo will soon come out with Wii Sports follow ups like Wii Music and Wii Fitness. That will give them yet another boost - not to mention their "hardcore market" fanservices like the new Mario or the new Metroid games. I have little doubt that the Wii will be the dominant console this generation, just like the DS dominates the portable market. Personally, I think that within five years, Nintendo will have sold as many Wiis as 360s and PS3s combined.
No, the reason I think they've overvalued is that they are a console company and nothing else. Even if they dominate the console and the handheld market, they are in a different league than Sony. Furthermore, the console business is a harsh business. The fact that Nintendo will most likely dominate this generation does not mean that they can keep this up during the next gen. I would guess that Nintendo stock might be rather volatile. I have no doubt many people will try to dump their Nintendo stock as soon as there's the slightest hint of danger on the horizon.
Maybe Sony should be given credit because they DIDN'T have major flaws in their console?
Not sure what you're trying to say.
The PlayStation was the first console to offer real 3D acceleration
Not sure if the PlayStation's geometry transformation engine actually counts as "3D acceleration." Well, I guess it does, but really...
Also, the Jaguar had 3D hardware, too, and was on the market a year earlier.
which made a huge impact on the types of games available for this system versus anything else before it.
That is wrong. What made a huge impact on the types of games available was Sony's licensing restrictions.
They didn't have silly cartoon mascots.
What? Are you kidding? Were you even around back then? Of course they had "silly cartoon mascots." Just none that reached the popularity of Mario or Sonic.
The controllers were nearly perfect for any size hand.
It was definitely better than most other controllers available at the time. It hasn't stood the test of time, in my opinion, but it was a good controller back then.
Even the look of the machine itself was simple, elegant. The machine WAS pretty damned amazing.
Yes, the PS1 was an amazing machine, but not really that much better (or better at all) than many other contemporary consoles.
The other console options at the time were either A) Too expensive, B) Not available, or C) Old technology that couldn't compete with the PlayStation.
Yes. The PS1 had the advantage of being pretty cheap and readily available.
What Wii games? Well, I've played the one where you can play tennis, bowling, etc. My friend has a couple more, too. We played them with a few friends a couple times and then we all kinda started just wanting to watch a movie instead of playing the Wii. The games seem to end up being all about the controller and swinging it around, and without any real accuracy. It's not fun once you discover that you don't really need to develop any skill to play any of the games.
(For the record, that was clarifying your statement that "I think the games are rather boring after you play them twice")
Obviously, you haven't played Wii Sports enough. You don't just swing it around "without any real accuracy." In fact, all five Wii Sports games allow for astonishingly deep control. For example, you can slice the ball in Wii Tennis in all directions, and with timing, you can control its direction. In Wii Boxing, you can make uppercuts, block or hit on different heights, and hit from the side, among many other options.
Yes, the games seem simple. No, they are not. They are rather deep for a free pack-in game.
And please don't tell me that games like Zelda, Godfather, Excite Truck, Super Paper Mario or Trauma Center are boring after playing them twice.
The graphics and processing power of the Wii are such a joke that I can't believe they even charge $250 for it. It's insane.
You don't buy a Wii for the graphics. You buy it for the fun.
Why do I think the PS3 and 360 are more mature systems? Because they aren't all cute bubble cartoon animations and cutesy sounds everywhere.
Yeah. See, that's the issue. You think that Hostel 2 is a more mature movie than Monsters Inc. because it doesn't have cute animations. I think this is an absurd way to determine what media is mature. I'd rather watch Monsters any day. I think Hostel 2 is a childish piece of crap aimed at teens.
And I think this applies to most 360 games.
Gears of War is a great game, but really, you're running around in a greyish-brown world, killing alien mutants with chainsaws that spill blood all over the place. How childish is that? How in the world is this mature?
Your single example is Opera Mini. You do realize that we're talking about an SDK for the iPhone, which comes with Safari, right?
I would love to see an SDK for the iPhone, and I actually believe that iPhone users would be a lot more likely to install third-party apps on their phones than any other groups of mobile phone users, but I'm not delusional to think that the missing SDK keeps more than 5-10% of the potential market from buying an iPhone.
that people are interested in Treos or WM phones precisely BECAUSE they can customize them as they will and install software like games and productivity applications onto them.
Otherwise, they might as well get a RAZR.
That makes no sense on so many levels. First, many more people are buying RAZRs and similar phones than Palms and similar phones. Second, you can costomize RAZRs and "install software like games and productivity applications onto them," so it's no reason to get a smartphone. People buy a Treo over a RAZR because it has a real, usable calendar app which they can synchronize with their computers, not because they can install software on them.
Yeah, a transparent menu bar is hardly revolutionary or even worth mentioning. That doesn't mean Leopard doesn't have a huge amount of new stuf. It's just that most of the changes in Leopard are in APIs.
Docklets existed in early versions of OS X. They were removed because (I guess) not a lot of people used them. It probably makes more sense to have a real application that updates its Dock icon regularly.
Your comments soulds trollish, but I have actually found that I manually resize windows under Windows much more often than under Mac OS X. The thing is, most often I want to see "all of it." If I open a an image and zoom it, I want the window to fit the zoomed image. If I open a file browser containing files, I want the window to fit the width and height of its content. This is easy on OS X, you just click the "zoom to fit" button. On Windows, there is no "zoom to fit," just "full window" or "normal." So seeing everything involves a lot of manual window resizing.
Mounted Volumes on Desktiop is a Finder option
on
The Roadmap to Leopard?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Showing mounted volumes on the Desktop was always a Finder option. Maybe Steve simply had it turned off. I think early versions of OS X did not have this option, and Mac users complained, so Apple put it in.
If there's no defaults write command, just make the top part of your background image a solid color, or use one of the thousands of utilities that will appear (and have already appeared) doing something like this.
Actually, animations in Mac OS X usually serve a purpose (windows "flowing" in and out of the dock tell you where you can find them) and/or tend to only appear when they aren't annoying (menus don't "fade in" because that is annoying when you want to select a menu item, but fade out after you've made your selection).
I would guess that all three Safaris use WebKit, but use a different frontend. So the actual HTML display is the same, while the window around it is different.
Since I don't use iTunes, I could only make an opinion based on other peoples posts, but it would appear that this meta-data would not be obvious to the average (naive) user.
I think the point of the metadata is to discourage sharing of files. In order to achieve this, users need to know the data is there. It's really not hidden at all, and since pretty much every newspaper on earth has now written about it, most iTunes users probably realize it's there.
Also, given your detailed information about what apps you use, I must admit that iTunes is not suitable for you - if you were to use the iTunes Store, it would definitely store your login name somewhere on your hard disk, so the music files containing your e-mail address would be the least of your problems:-)
I personally don't like any personal or private information stored in any of my files as meta-data, whether it be hidden, semi-hidden, etc.
The iTunes meta data is not even semi-hidden. It's right there in the iTunes info window for every last one of your files. Given that you don't like private information stored in your files, I trust you don't actually have an electronic address book, or any application that you have to register, or any of the numerous applications that store personal meta data in files - Word comes to mind. I'm guessing you also don't use sites that store cookies, or mail. Your mail store contains files containing your mail address, you know.
I agree with the grandparent that tag info is/not/ a watermark.
If it is, is including your email in the filename a watermark too? Is placing a (separate) file with your email on a CD with aac files a watermark? Is just printing your name on the CD? Is printing it on a jewel case?
Oh my god, all the mail I receive is watermarked with my address! They are on to me!
The effects for the end user are different. A watermark survives many things that a tag does. Encode your AAC file into an MP3 file using another app than iTunes, and the tag is probably gone. Open the AAC file in a music editor and save, and the tag is probably gone. A good watermark would survive these actions.
Slashdot Mirror
How old are you?
Okay, so I'm living in Europe, not in the US. But I'm guessing younger people in the US use SMS quite a bit. Over here, it's huge. I hardly ever use the phone to call anyone. I use SMS, and so does everyone else. It's less intrusive, and written messages are much clearer. You can go back and re-read them if you forget the precise time of an appointment, or the address you're supposed to go to.
SMS is just much more convenient than calling somebody in most cases. I would easily use the 200 messages a month.
Huh? All the actual reviews I've seen (you know, those where the reviewer actually had an actual iPhone) ended with a positive summary.
Apple is not going to do that. My guess is that Microsoft figured out that lots of people run Windows in VMs, and that many of these are the people who may actually pay for software, so they are trying to get as much money from them as possible.
But people didn't buy the Wii for "games that hold their attention" such as Zelda or Super Paper Mario. They bought Wiis for Wii Sports. Nintendo doesn't actually need "hardcore" games (although a few are coming out). What they need is a few strong follow-ups for Wii Sports. And they have these, too - Wii Fitness and Wii Music are looking extremely interesting.
Yeah, that would be ironic if Nintendo didn't have the supplies. They do. They sell more than the 360 and the PS3. The problem is that they still don't have enough.
By today's standards, the N64 is a pretty sucky console, but really, there's no comparison to the suckiness of the PS1. The PS1 had two things in its favour: It was cheap, and games had a lot of storage space. Other than that, it was a mediocre console, especially compared to the N64 with the memory enhancement. The N64 had no loading time, came with an analog controller, had four controller ports, could display much better 3D graphics, had a rumble pack for the controller...
The N64 sucked, but not as badly as the PS1.
I read more than a few articles and comments from people calling for Nintendo to do a Sega and become a third-party software developer after the Cube tanked. Actually, right up to E3 where people first got to play with the Wii...
I agree that Nintendo is overvalued, but not for the reasons you state. Nintendo will soon come out with Wii Sports follow ups like Wii Music and Wii Fitness. That will give them yet another boost - not to mention their "hardcore market" fanservices like the new Mario or the new Metroid games. I have little doubt that the Wii will be the dominant console this generation, just like the DS dominates the portable market. Personally, I think that within five years, Nintendo will have sold as many Wiis as 360s and PS3s combined.
No, the reason I think they've overvalued is that they are a console company and nothing else. Even if they dominate the console and the handheld market, they are in a different league than Sony. Furthermore, the console business is a harsh business. The fact that Nintendo will most likely dominate this generation does not mean that they can keep this up during the next gen. I would guess that Nintendo stock might be rather volatile. I have no doubt many people will try to dump their Nintendo stock as soon as there's the slightest hint of danger on the horizon.
Maybe Sony should be given credit because they DIDN'T have major flaws in their console?
Not sure what you're trying to say.
The PlayStation was the first console to offer real 3D acceleration
Not sure if the PlayStation's geometry transformation engine actually counts as "3D acceleration." Well, I guess it does, but really...
Also, the Jaguar had 3D hardware, too, and was on the market a year earlier.
which made a huge impact on the types of games available for this system versus anything else before it.
That is wrong. What made a huge impact on the types of games available was Sony's licensing restrictions.
They didn't have silly cartoon mascots.
What? Are you kidding? Were you even around back then? Of course they had "silly cartoon mascots." Just none that reached the popularity of Mario or Sonic.
The controllers were nearly perfect for any size hand.
It was definitely better than most other controllers available at the time. It hasn't stood the test of time, in my opinion, but it was a good controller back then.
Even the look of the machine itself was simple, elegant. The machine WAS pretty damned amazing.
Yes, the PS1 was an amazing machine, but not really that much better (or better at all) than many other contemporary consoles.
The other console options at the time were either A) Too expensive, B) Not available, or C) Old technology that couldn't compete with the PlayStation.
Yes. The PS1 had the advantage of being pretty cheap and readily available.
What Wii games? Well, I've played the one where you can play tennis, bowling, etc. My friend has a couple more, too. We played them with a few friends a couple times and then we all kinda started just wanting to watch a movie instead of playing the Wii. The games seem to end up being all about the controller and swinging it around, and without any real accuracy. It's not fun once you discover that you don't really need to develop any skill to play any of the games.
(For the record, that was clarifying your statement that "I think the games are rather boring after you play them twice")
Obviously, you haven't played Wii Sports enough. You don't just swing it around "without any real accuracy." In fact, all five Wii Sports games allow for astonishingly deep control. For example, you can slice the ball in Wii Tennis in all directions, and with timing, you can control its direction. In Wii Boxing, you can make uppercuts, block or hit on different heights, and hit from the side, among many other options.
Yes, the games seem simple. No, they are not. They are rather deep for a free pack-in game.
And please don't tell me that games like Zelda, Godfather, Excite Truck, Super Paper Mario or Trauma Center are boring after playing them twice.
The graphics and processing power of the Wii are such a joke that I can't believe they even charge $250 for it. It's insane.
You don't buy a Wii for the graphics. You buy it for the fun.
Why do I think the PS3 and 360 are more mature systems? Because they aren't all cute bubble cartoon animations and cutesy sounds everywhere.
Yeah. See, that's the issue. You think that Hostel 2 is a more mature movie than Monsters Inc. because it doesn't have cute animations. I think this is an absurd way to determine what media is mature. I'd rather watch Monsters any day. I think Hostel 2 is a childish piece of crap aimed at teens.
And I think this applies to most 360 games.
Gears of War is a great game, but really, you're running around in a greyish-brown world, killing alien mutants with chainsaws that spill blood all over the place. How childish is that? How in the world is this mature?
They don't focus on games li
Your single example is Opera Mini. You do realize that we're talking about an SDK for the iPhone, which comes with Safari, right?
I would love to see an SDK for the iPhone, and I actually believe that iPhone users would be a lot more likely to install third-party apps on their phones than any other groups of mobile phone users, but I'm not delusional to think that the missing SDK keeps more than 5-10% of the potential market from buying an iPhone.
That makes no sense on so many levels. First, many more people are buying RAZRs and similar phones than Palms and similar phones. Second, you can costomize RAZRs and "install software like games and productivity applications onto them," so it's no reason to get a smartphone. People buy a Treo over a RAZR because it has a real, usable calendar app which they can synchronize with their computers, not because they can install software on them.
Yeah, a transparent menu bar is hardly revolutionary or even worth mentioning. That doesn't mean Leopard doesn't have a huge amount of new stuf. It's just that most of the changes in Leopard are in APIs.
Docklets existed in early versions of OS X. They were removed because (I guess) not a lot of people used them. It probably makes more sense to have a real application that updates its Dock icon regularly.
Your comments soulds trollish, but I have actually found that I manually resize windows under Windows much more often than under Mac OS X. The thing is, most often I want to see "all of it." If I open a an image and zoom it, I want the window to fit the zoomed image. If I open a file browser containing files, I want the window to fit the width and height of its content. This is easy on OS X, you just click the "zoom to fit" button. On Windows, there is no "zoom to fit," just "full window" or "normal." So seeing everything involves a lot of manual window resizing.
Showing mounted volumes on the Desktop was always a Finder option. Maybe Steve simply had it turned off. I think early versions of OS X did not have this option, and Mac users complained, so Apple put it in.
I think most "normal" Mac users I know don't even know that they can move the Dock, and don't care, either.
If there's no defaults write command, just make the top part of your background image a solid color, or use one of the thousands of utilities that will appear (and have already appeared) doing something like this.
Actually, animations in Mac OS X usually serve a purpose (windows "flowing" in and out of the dock tell you where you can find them) and/or tend to only appear when they aren't annoying (menus don't "fade in" because that is annoying when you want to select a menu item, but fade out after you've made your selection).
I would guess that all three Safaris use WebKit, but use a different frontend. So the actual HTML display is the same, while the window around it is different.
I think the point of the metadata is to discourage sharing of files. In order to achieve this, users need to know the data is there. It's really not hidden at all, and since pretty much every newspaper on earth has now written about it, most iTunes users probably realize it's there.
Also, given your detailed information about what apps you use, I must admit that iTunes is not suitable for you - if you were to use the iTunes Store, it would definitely store your login name somewhere on your hard disk, so the music files containing your e-mail address would be the least of your problems :-)
The iTunes meta data is not even semi-hidden. It's right there in the iTunes info window for every last one of your files. Given that you don't like private information stored in your files, I trust you don't actually have an electronic address book, or any application that you have to register, or any of the numerous applications that store personal meta data in files - Word comes to mind. I'm guessing you also don't use sites that store cookies, or mail. Your mail store contains files containing your mail address, you know.
Yes. The EFF did. The audio streams are the same for every download.
Oh my god, all the mail I receive is watermarked with my address! They are on to me!
Except that it can.
The effects for the end user are different. A watermark survives many things that a tag does. Encode your AAC file into an MP3 file using another app than iTunes, and the tag is probably gone. Open the AAC file in a music editor and save, and the tag is probably gone. A good watermark would survive these actions.