How does this compare to OLED displays, which are super cool. We've all been waiting for something without the pitfalls of LCD. This looks cool too. 400 - 1000 dpi? SWEET.
Resisting LCDs until OLEDs or this Iridigm thing is like resisting the tape cassette and listening to vinyl until CDs came out.
Intuitively shouldn't the economies of games like EQ follow the rules of those for flea markets. If buying/selling/trading isn't sanctioned by SOE (which it isn't) the economy is basically a black market. Otherwise some entity would have oversight (SOE for instance) and allow people to buy/sell/trade as they please for a standard fee, like the $13.95 or whatever a month it is to play EQ.
I used to play EQ (cancelled my acct just under a month ago). I witnessed the price changes over the time that I did play. I don't really find it all that disturbing though, and it's nothing to get upset over. I played PvP so my experience may be different from bluebies'. On SZ there are enough people who couldn't take the heat of PvP that the economy doesn't get shaken up too much.
Market saturation and subsequent boredom of players I think has to be two reasons that Verant keeps releasing expansions. If you don't give people new and exciting things to do they will get tired and quit. There are drops now that are so rare and that so few guilds can obtain that the same power structures are maintained. By this I mean basically that the mass of goodies have shifted down with newer sweeter pieces filling the top. EQ has changed A LOT from its inception, but this isn't a necessarily bad thing. I know people that pay rent and make good money playing. Of course they don't do much of else though. EQ can become a JOB, and it's everyone choice whether to do so.
So if you are quit bitching. So what, something that cost you a bunch of pp a month ago you can't sell for chicken scraps now. You still used it and there is always ways to make the money back. Let's not forget also that this is a GAME. For most of us who play(ed), we did it for the fun not the RL cash.
Re:Will they be able to compete with lcd in 2 year
on
15" OLED Display Prototype
·
· Score: 4, Informative
With the costs of energy constantly rising? Yes.
LCDs use about half the power as CRTs (Viewsonic). Sanyo and Kodak already have a 5.5 active matrix OLED that runs on 2 watts at 10 volts. While the 15 inch model would presumably use 9 times this, that's still close to half the power consumption of a similar LCD.
I'm sorry, but I don't care how high-tech TV gets I still won't pay for it. I get a few channels by default with my cable modem. And I mean a few, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, UPN, WB, Discovery. I basically only watch the WB and FOX for the Simpsons and once in a while the Discovery channel just for those cool forensics shows. I guess I'm out of sync with the general public but IMHO TV programming by and large is worthless.
"I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart sells rated-R movies (including those arguably targeted at the same age group as this game is), so make your own judgement..."
This is likely because video games present an interactive environment. While movies may desensitize us to violence and sex, video games give us the feel that we are part of the action. When presented this simply (which is how the general public is likely to perceive it) video games with similar adult or violent content are worse than movies of the same genre.
That said, this move by these retailers isn't something to poo-poo too much. Retailers are free in this society to choose what they carry. No one goes into a WalMart and demands they sell hardcore pr0n. As a corollary these businesses have their respective markets to think about. For instance, one may prefer to buy a book at B&N over some Christian book stores, even though they may carry the same book (I don't know what book but just as an example), because of the "JESUS! JESUS! JESUS!" mentality that store may push on its customers. While they aren't the same, IMHO proselytizing in a bookstore isn't all that different than big SALE signs and such over merchandise. Let's not also forget we do have a free market and where there is a demand for the game there will be someone willing to sell and produce it. I predict much of the sales of this game will be online.
"Therefore we are doing an API compatible PPC reimplementation of the OS using our own and AROS' technology, which we call A-Box. The goal is to extend the A-Box with new functionalities which it painfully needs and also work on a new OS layer using Quark functionality called Q-Box."
In other news Microsoft is suing MorphOS in 47 states and in federal court for copyright infringement. A company spokeman said, "This is an obvious attempt to capitalize on Microsoft's patents and copyrights. We are committed to protecting consumers worldwide from themselves. MorphOS's blatant attacks on innovation in the industry will not be tolerated."
So what we have here is something that needs 3 to 4 times the CPU power and a continuous 1Mbps stream. I hate to poo-poo, but how useful this going to be? As far as I know only a small segment of the population actually watches movies from their computer (i.e. Slashdot, geek, technophile crowd). That said, this would give a large boost to the quality of shorter video streams (i.e. news segments, stupid pet tricks, MCSE video promos:-) ). Slowly people will switch to high bandwidth internet lines. My cable gets more than enough bandwidth, but most DSLs are 768kbps. Not only this but if a site like CNN is going to implement this they have to make HUGE upgrades. They will need bandwidth and CPU power to serve the same (or growing) number of people with 1Mbps streams instead of 300kbps streams.
In other news, today American Airlines was granted a patent on a new airliner with more restrooms than seats. When asked about the new plane a company official said, "Well, we aren't exactly sure if someone can use more than one restroom at once, but we are keeping our options open. If necessary, for the sake of public safety and security we have plans to eliminate an addition 10% of seats. Either way we'll show IBM who's boss."
"...any specific types of works which should be exempted from part of the DMCA"
How bout EVERYTHING. I mean seriously, does anyone else think it's a little amusing that the same little notice that says it's a federal crime to use say paint thinner for anything other than its intended purpose applies to a freakin Xbox as well. I mean, we all know we need to be protected from ourselves, but this is out of hand:-)
Ok I am no hardcore gamer but this seems a bit steep. At Blockbuster I can rent a game a week and keep it that whole week for $4 a game. Thats $16 + 8.25% sales tax (Dallas) a month. And that's renting and playing EVERY week. Most games I want to play more than a two or three weeks I will buy. How much of a video game addict does one have to be to subscribe? No offense but don't most people have better things to do? You know a hobby that isn't in front of a glowing box or panel?
No doubt I'll get the "This is/. man, we don't know the meaning of physical activity."
Everyone knows the RIAA is trying to "protect" the financial security of the music industry. The big selling artists pull in millions for record labels. Less popular artists at least shouldn't lose money for the label given that many artists run under independent labels and still make a decent living. That and a record label is not a government agency; there should be a certain level of efficiency. If executives' salaries are tapping funds, fine, they should be paid less. Either way we need to consider what's behind the collective habits of those that copy music.
One of the biggest problems I see with music copying is that US culture and the music industry have a symbiotic relationship. We crave and pay for entertainment that's snazzy and cool which the industry provides. However, many people don't want to pay for the one hit wonder and the grossly commericialized entertainer (ie Britney, NSync, etc.) since they know they won't listen to the record in 3 months anyway. On the other hand they do want the convenience of hearing the hits they want to hear when they want to hear them. Whether this insatiable demand and need for instant gratification is good is up for debate. On this basis though, the problem is that without a lot of money coming in it is difficult to feed the public more Britney, more NSync, etc. If that's what the public really wants, then they need to pay for it. The old model of deliver obviously doesn't jive with the new trends in demand. What's needed is a new platform and a new way to pay (ie. pay-per-play). Consider a best selling CD. Many people will only listen to every song once while they will listen to one or two of them over and over and over. Very very simply put the industry can calculate the current cost of a record subtract basically the net gain from lower production costs and add the amortized costs of additional infrastructure. The desired result? The public should be able to pay about the same for more accurately what they actually want to hear.
What do I do? Although infrequently, I download songs that I will listen to once or twice. These are generally the Top 40 songs you hear on the radio. I don't know why I listen to them at all. I don't particularly like any of them but whatever. Stuff that I will listen to for a long time (Elliott Smith, Lou Reed, Pearl Jam, etc.) I buy.
"So the only thing different? A further expanded plot"
I'm not sure you would even get this. Unless the writers make a departure from recent years' episodes we might just see a LOT of loosely connected or completely disconnected subplots.
This lawsuit looks like it was brought before P2P and before Napster was big. If CDs were priced fairly to begin with I wonder whether file sharing would be AS big. No doubt file sharing would be big but its growth might have been slower and easier to contain. IMHO the RIAA dug (and is digging) its own grave.
OF COURSE I'm not saying I've never recovered something from the trash can. "In real life if we toss things in the trash *AND* the sanitation dept picks it up." I think the logical AND makes it pretty clear that I don't mean one can't or wouldn't search through their trash can at one's desk.
WTF if you aren't SURE, don't delete it. With that said a trash can is a good idea. The difference it makes seems merely cosmetic, but for people with a lot of "clutter" it's important.
A lot of times I will use some file and know at that point that if I don't use it in three days, I will never need it again. On a busy day there may be many of these files. A trash can saves me the trouble of having to comb through directory after directory three days later.
On the other hand a real undelete utility seems pointless if you have a trash can. In real life we toss things in the trash and the sanitation dept picks it up. If we threw out something we needed most of us just ACCEPT that its gone. We don't go digging through the local landfill. While use of a trash can doesn't, really deleting something serves to free up space on your hard disk. Not in 1989, but in 2002 if anyone is deleting files solely to free up space and then needs a utility to recover those files, they just need to get another disk.
Don't get me wrong I think it's awesome that companies are releasing Linux supported games. I'm not a big 1st person shooter fan, but I'm glad many of you can now play a game you like in an OS we all love. Cheers.
I don't know how most people set up their computers but I have one Windows (1.4ghz) machine and 3 Linux machines (600mhz, 350mhz, 166mhz). The Windows machine is the fastest of the 4 basically because most games are played in Windows and they need the speed.
The limited number of people that just have a bunch of uber ninja boxen spells slow growth for the Linux gaming world.
You can argue that people dedicated to Linux gaming are already using it. Well, yes, but where does it go from there? To attract new customers you have to provide something they desire at a reasonable cost. For me giving up Civ3, EQ or Warcraft3 isn't worth making the switch (yet).
As interesting / absurd as this may be it's true. The company I used to work at used to send off all their old computers (ie in 2000, P2-400s) on palettes to be destroyed. One day I suggested that they give them to a school district or a charity. I was told that shipping them there would be more expensive since they had to be handled with greater care. I countered by suggesting the they let such schools or charities pick them up. Their response? It's a liability. That and most school districts won't pay to have them shipped out to themselves. Pretty stupid if you ask me.
I offered to take a palette home but apparently it's not a tax deduction if you give them to an employee, just if you give them to non-profit or destroy them.
To this day I imagine my apt with 100 computers placed here and there.
Slashdot Mirror
How does this compare to OLED displays, which are super cool. We've all been waiting for something without the pitfalls of LCD. This looks cool too. 400 - 1000 dpi? SWEET.
Resisting LCDs until OLEDs or this Iridigm thing is like resisting the tape cassette and listening to vinyl until CDs came out.
There was an article on the BBC yesterday about inflation in and the economics of EQ. Here is it.
Intuitively shouldn't the economies of games like EQ follow the rules of those for flea markets. If buying/selling/trading isn't sanctioned by SOE (which it isn't) the economy is basically a black market. Otherwise some entity would have oversight (SOE for instance) and allow people to buy/sell/trade as they please for a standard fee, like the $13.95 or whatever a month it is to play EQ.
I used to play EQ (cancelled my acct just under a month ago). I witnessed the price changes over the time that I did play. I don't really find it all that disturbing though, and it's nothing to get upset over. I played PvP so my experience may be different from bluebies'. On SZ there are enough people who couldn't take the heat of PvP that the economy doesn't get shaken up too much.
Market saturation and subsequent boredom of players I think has to be two reasons that Verant keeps releasing expansions. If you don't give people new and exciting things to do they will get tired and quit. There are drops now that are so rare and that so few guilds can obtain that the same power structures are maintained. By this I mean basically that the mass of goodies have shifted down with newer sweeter pieces filling the top. EQ has changed A LOT from its inception, but this isn't a necessarily bad thing. I know people that pay rent and make good money playing. Of course they don't do much of else though. EQ can become a JOB, and it's everyone choice whether to do so.
So if you are quit bitching. So what, something that cost you a bunch of pp a month ago you can't sell for chicken scraps now. You still used it and there is always ways to make the money back. Let's not forget also that this is a GAME. For most of us who play(ed), we did it for the fun not the RL cash.
With the costs of energy constantly rising? Yes.
LCDs use about half the power as CRTs (Viewsonic). Sanyo and Kodak already have a 5.5 active matrix OLED that runs on 2 watts at 10 volts. While the 15 inch model would presumably use 9 times this, that's still close to half the power consumption of a similar LCD.
I'm sorry, but I don't care how high-tech TV gets I still won't pay for it. I get a few channels by default with my cable modem. And I mean a few, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, UPN, WB, Discovery. I basically only watch the WB and FOX for the Simpsons and once in a while the Discovery channel just for those cool forensics shows. I guess I'm out of sync with the general public but IMHO TV programming by and large is worthless.
Go mods go, flaimbait, offtopic, troll.
err... collaborate
Isn't it going to be hard to collaberate on closed source projects? :-)
"I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart sells rated-R movies (including those arguably targeted at the same age group as this game is), so make your own judgement..."
This is likely because video games present an interactive environment. While movies may desensitize us to violence and sex, video games give us the feel that we are part of the action. When presented this simply (which is how the general public is likely to perceive it) video games with similar adult or violent content are worse than movies of the same genre.
That said, this move by these retailers isn't something to poo-poo too much. Retailers are free in this society to choose what they carry. No one goes into a WalMart and demands they sell hardcore pr0n. As a corollary these businesses have their respective markets to think about. For instance, one may prefer to buy a book at B&N over some Christian book stores, even though they may carry the same book (I don't know what book but just as an example), because of the "JESUS! JESUS! JESUS!" mentality that store may push on its customers. While they aren't the same, IMHO proselytizing in a bookstore isn't all that different than big SALE signs and such over merchandise. Let's not also forget we do have a free market and where there is a demand for the game there will be someone willing to sell and produce it. I predict much of the sales of this game will be online.
"Therefore we are doing an API compatible PPC reimplementation of the OS using our own and AROS' technology, which we call A-Box. The goal is to extend the A-Box with new functionalities which it painfully needs and also work on a new OS layer using Quark functionality called Q-Box."
In other news Microsoft is suing MorphOS in 47 states and in federal court for copyright infringement. A company spokeman said, "This is an obvious attempt to capitalize on Microsoft's patents and copyrights. We are committed to protecting consumers worldwide from themselves. MorphOS's blatant attacks on innovation in the industry will not be tolerated."
So what we have here is something that needs 3 to 4 times the CPU power and a continuous 1Mbps stream. I hate to poo-poo, but how useful this going to be? As far as I know only a small segment of the population actually watches movies from their computer (i.e. Slashdot, geek, technophile crowd). That said, this would give a large boost to the quality of shorter video streams (i.e. news segments, stupid pet tricks, MCSE video promos :-) ). Slowly people will switch to high bandwidth internet lines. My cable gets more than enough bandwidth, but most DSLs are 768kbps. Not only this but if a site like CNN is going to implement this they have to make HUGE upgrades. They will need bandwidth and CPU power to serve the same (or growing) number of people with 1Mbps streams instead of 300kbps streams.
In other news, today American Airlines was granted a patent on a new airliner with more restrooms than seats. When asked about the new plane a company official said, "Well, we aren't exactly sure if someone can use more than one restroom at once, but we are keeping our options open. If necessary, for the sake of public safety and security we have plans to eliminate an addition 10% of seats. Either way we'll show IBM who's boss."
"...any specific types of works which should be exempted from part of the DMCA"
:-)
How bout EVERYTHING. I mean seriously, does anyone else think it's a little amusing that the same little notice that says it's a federal crime to use say paint thinner for anything other than its intended purpose applies to a freakin Xbox as well. I mean, we all know we need to be protected from ourselves, but this is out of hand
"285 kelvin is not about 12 degrees celsius, its exactly 12 degrees celsius."
Actually, no, its exactly 11.85 degrees celcius. 0K = -273.15 C not -273 C if you want to be exact. But, yes the scale is 1 to 1.
For those that don't know 3 K is not 3000 degrees whatever, its 3 Kelvin. 285 K is 285 Kelvin which is about 12C. 0 K is said to be absolute zero.
this
Ok I am no hardcore gamer but this seems a bit steep. At Blockbuster I can rent a game a week and keep it that whole week for $4 a game. Thats $16 + 8.25% sales tax (Dallas) a month. And that's renting and playing EVERY week. Most games I want to play more than a two or three weeks I will buy. How much of a video game addict does one have to be to subscribe? No offense but don't most people have better things to do? You know a hobby that isn't in front of a glowing box or panel?
/. man, we don't know the meaning of physical activity."
No doubt I'll get the "This is
Everyone knows the RIAA is trying to "protect" the financial security of the music industry. The big selling artists pull in millions for record labels. Less popular artists at least shouldn't lose money for the label given that many artists run under independent labels and still make a decent living. That and a record label is not a government agency; there should be a certain level of efficiency. If executives' salaries are tapping funds, fine, they should be paid less. Either way we need to consider what's behind the collective habits of those that copy music.
One of the biggest problems I see with music copying is that US culture and the music industry have a symbiotic relationship. We crave and pay for entertainment that's snazzy and cool which the industry provides. However, many people don't want to pay for the one hit wonder and the grossly commericialized entertainer (ie Britney, NSync, etc.) since they know they won't listen to the record in 3 months anyway. On the other hand they do want the convenience of hearing the hits they want to hear when they want to hear them. Whether this insatiable demand and need for instant gratification is good is up for debate. On this basis though, the problem is that without a lot of money coming in it is difficult to feed the public more Britney, more NSync, etc. If that's what the public really wants, then they need to pay for it. The old model of deliver obviously doesn't jive with the new trends in demand. What's needed is a new platform and a new way to pay (ie. pay-per-play). Consider a best selling CD. Many people will only listen to every song once while they will listen to one or two of them over and over and over. Very very simply put the industry can calculate the current cost of a record subtract basically the net gain from lower production costs and add the amortized costs of additional infrastructure. The desired result? The public should be able to pay about the same for more accurately what they actually want to hear.
What do I do? Although infrequently, I download songs that I will listen to once or twice. These are generally the Top 40 songs you hear on the radio. I don't know why I listen to them at all. I don't particularly like any of them but whatever. Stuff that I will listen to for a long time (Elliott Smith, Lou Reed, Pearl Jam, etc.) I buy.
"So the only thing different? A further expanded plot"
I'm not sure you would even get this. Unless the writers make a departure from recent years' episodes we might just see a LOT of loosely connected or completely disconnected subplots.
This lawsuit looks like it was brought before P2P and before Napster was big. If CDs were priced fairly to begin with I wonder whether file sharing would be AS big. No doubt file sharing would be big but its growth might have been slower and easier to contain. IMHO the RIAA dug (and is digging) its own grave.
OF COURSE I'm not saying I've never recovered something from the trash can. "In real life if we toss things in the trash *AND* the sanitation dept picks it up." I think the logical AND makes it pretty clear that I don't mean one can't or wouldn't search through their trash can at one's desk.
WTF if you aren't SURE, don't delete it. With that said a trash can is a good idea. The difference it makes seems merely cosmetic, but for people with a lot of "clutter" it's important.
A lot of times I will use some file and know at that point that if I don't use it in three days, I will never need it again. On a busy day there may be many of these files. A trash can saves me the trouble of having to comb through directory after directory three days later.
On the other hand a real undelete utility seems pointless if you have a trash can. In real life we toss things in the trash and the sanitation dept picks it up. If we threw out something we needed most of us just ACCEPT that its gone. We don't go digging through the local landfill. While use of a trash can doesn't, really deleting something serves to free up space on your hard disk. Not in 1989, but in 2002 if anyone is deleting files solely to free up space and then needs a utility to recover those files, they just need to get another disk.
Don't get me wrong I think it's awesome that companies are releasing Linux supported games. I'm not a big 1st person shooter fan, but I'm glad many of you can now play a game you like in an OS we all love. Cheers.
I don't know how most people set up their computers but I have one Windows (1.4ghz) machine and 3 Linux machines (600mhz, 350mhz, 166mhz). The Windows machine is the fastest of the 4 basically because most games are played in Windows and they need the speed.
The limited number of people that just have a bunch of uber ninja boxen spells slow growth for the Linux gaming world.
You can argue that people dedicated to Linux gaming are already using it. Well, yes, but where does it go from there? To attract new customers you have to provide something they desire at a reasonable cost. For me giving up Civ3, EQ or Warcraft3 isn't worth making the switch (yet).
As interesting / absurd as this may be it's true. The company I used to work at used to send off all their old computers (ie in 2000, P2-400s) on palettes to be destroyed. One day I suggested that they give them to a school district or a charity. I was told that shipping them there would be more expensive since they had to be handled with greater care. I countered by suggesting the they let such schools or charities pick them up. Their response? It's a liability. That and most school districts won't pay to have them shipped out to themselves. Pretty stupid if you ask me.
I offered to take a palette home but apparently it's not a tax deduction if you give them to an employee, just if you give them to non-profit or destroy them.
To this day I imagine my apt with 100 computers placed here and there.