Yes, almost exclusively. Games that rate highly tend to be games that have high production values in terms of video and audio. Games with such high production values tend to be games with poor gameplay.
Examples please. Usually if they make it to the top of the popularity list they have proven gameplay to meet player expectations.
If the ratings were a simple measure of popularity
Don't forget replication. A company that makes 15 million a year would never have considered 4 hour DR but with the low cost of hardware and VMs you can easily do this for a very small amount of money and time.
My experience with free software is that when shit hits the fan you are on your own. This isn't true of all free software since I believe MySQL provides commercial services to businesses. At the end of the day, databases can be transferred fairly easily over to another product. Is it a lot of work? Sure but at least the freedom you require is always there.
I've seen this issue twice (we have a few VS2010 enabled machines). If you apply the patch by going into the Windows Update screen it will simply attempt to install in an infinite loop and you can simply end the process using the task manager. If you shutdown the system while the patch is pending to be installed, Windows will attempt to perform the update before completing the shutdown procedure. This is what creates the appearance of a lock up. Because the patch never appears to end, it remains in shutdown mode for as long as you don't reboot manually. This is very different than an actual OS lock. Just though I'd clarify.
In this case they cater to the majority which doesn't make them pointless. After all the point of a score is to help you find what you are most probable to like. If you are more adventurous like I am, you'll actually go and try games that aren't in the top 50.
As far as I'm concerned the most popular games are the games that should get the best scores because they are the ones people like.
There was a study done in UK in the 90s where they gathered information from people before death. The information separated death resulting from cardiovascular issues to other reasons of natural death. The result of the study was that 1 drink per day resulted in the lowest rate of death (even better than none). This is also why it was said that one drink a day was fine. Doctors today still use this 1 drink a day as a guideline when patients ask. Some studies suggested the best drink to have daily was a glass of red wine.
What the original study didn't keep track of is what other health issues these drinkers had to cope with. Those who know of an older life time heavy drinker know that their biggest health complications are usually kidney and liver related. In addition to this, alcohol has a temporary effect on blood pressure as it makes the blood vessels stiffer and this can be dangerous to those with high blood pressure issues.
Was the article talking about compiler level code or IDE level code. I though they were talking IDE level code. If so 5% is ok, otherwise I'm with you.
I disagree this your statement because the scores are rated by all gamers regardless of their game preferences. The rating is there to guide you towards the popular choices. Popular in most cases doesn't mean you will like it, it just means many people like it. Movie ratings are no different in that matter. The critics sometimes rate a movie horribly but the public loves it.
If 9 out of 10 games don't like a game, why would the game rating get a good score?
I get what your saying with the customer service surveys as I've been involved in those to. First, I found it was important to keep surveys at 3-5 questions. If you exceed the 5 question mark you discourage the positive reviewers since they don't have the motivation to finish the survey. Negative reviewers are usually far more motivated since they are on a mission to display their dissatisfaction.
In addition, the questions need to be easily rated. Was the service good is too general. You need to narrow it down to: "Rate how easy the agent was to understand", "Rate how friendly the agent was", "Rate how easy it was to obtain the correct department",... Different questions will be ask depending on the type of service you provide.
I strongly believe a score out of 10 is too big of a scale. We usually kept it at 3 (Mediocre, Average and exceptional). As a company you don't need anymore information than that.
I'm curious as to why this matters. When I write functions I write lots of other code that doesn't pertain specifically to the objective but is required to provide stable reusable code. E.g. Re-working the data that was input so it can fit within the mold that is the core isn't representative of what the program's objectives BUT is required to achieve the final goal. Same goes for the interface and the validation routines. They don't depict the core function of the software but are critical to the successful use of said core code.
Am I surprised by the 5%? The answer is no. In most of my projects, lots of work goes into presentation and input validation. After all, making machine compatible with people isn't always easy.
However, some software -- particularly system software -- naturally becomes less useful over time unless it receives updates to ensure compatibility with newer things and to protect against newer security and privacy risks. So, my take is that big software companies like Microsoft are missing a huge opportunity right now. I would happily pay a reasonable recurring fee to a software company in return for ongoing compatibility and security fixes, if that meant I could keep using the version of software I actually liked and found useful indefinitely, without having to buy into "upgrades" that might break something. Some of the big names have taken some steps in this direction with various corporate licensing schemes, but these are usually the preserve of big business customers, while smaller businesses and private customers are stuck with off-the-shelf, upgrade-when-it-runs-out software.
I tend to agree with this bit. The hard part about software is that it is surrounded by so many other evolving software components. Keeping the software up to date is something required especially with industries that still have some growth to incur (CAD is one I deal with all the time). From the point of view of the developer, you need funds to continue developing the product and keeping it updated to today's specs. With simple software, say a calculator, you don't need this. When a better calculator comes out you can purchase it but with the OS, new multimedia requirements, new storage tech and new anything means changes to the core. This also possibly means change to the software running on the OS.
IMHO I believe the following two options should be offered to customers: 1. Purchase of software + offer to get a maintenance subscription (charged yearly) 2. Rental of software (runs until you stop paying)
The link doesn't paint a full picture of Microsoft's failure/success. Considering they reported $86.8 B in earnings last year I would say these failures didn't affected their success (they were profitable in case you ask)
Not one person or company would look good if all you listed was their failures.
First the infrastructure needs to be put in place. This will happen through the wealthier asking to get better internet access. Facilities such as vacation resorts will also invest in said technology to improve their customers experience.
The upper bracket will get to enjoy the entertainment initially hence forcing the infrastructure to improve. As the infrastructure improves the rest of the country will get to benefit as well.
So if I see you being attacked I should just assume its your own business and walk away?
In this case threats to different countries were made hence their involvement. Regardless, I will always believe that countries capable of helping should help if people are being persecuted.
Maybe it's the lesser educated that requires the visual but watching the video didn't make the headlines more impactful for me. When I read "burned alive", I could already image how horrible it was without seeing the video. IMO, the video did nothing to make the situation appear worst than I already though it was.
Do I disagree with the video being available for viewing without it being shoved in my face? NO! Being able to see the video is proof the incident actually occurred if you trust the source that posted it.
I agree except opinions often get moded up/down. I've been an offender and the offended. I've recently moded up a number of posts moded down due to disagreeing opinions even if the opinion was worth a read (positive comments towards MS or Apple often get moded down). There's a difference between disagreeing and actually having an invalid, inaccurate or flaming comment.
You nailed it on the head. MS can only benefit by getting developers to push their product. By making it available on all platforms they will maintain and even grow the DEV base they have. I've developed in many platforms and I have found that for businesses MS offers the best set of tools. Migration from one version to another has always been smooth for me especially if I continue to work with the same.NET Framework version. Even migrating from one major.NET version to another is usually smooth.
The beauty of a library like.NET is that it is feature rich and very secure as long as it's patched when updates are made available. For the MS and Apple it's easy to make sure updates are pushed to clients. As for Linux I'm not sure how that works outside distributions that do not offer automatic updates.
Where I live a bonus is taxed as part of your main income so tax evasion is nada. A contractual bonus may be determined by many factors included objectives being met. This is very different than a bonus defined by your performance and the company's performance.
Slashdot Mirror
Why the nonsense. WHY?
Yes, almost exclusively. Games that rate highly tend to be games that have high production values in terms of video and audio. Games with such high production values tend to be games with poor gameplay.
Examples please. Usually if they make it to the top of the popularity list they have proven gameplay to meet player expectations.
If the ratings were a simple measure of popularity
I guess it depends where you go for your reviews.
A free product is still a free product if the support isn't free.
Don't forget replication. A company that makes 15 million a year would never have considered 4 hour DR but with the low cost of hardware and VMs you can easily do this for a very small amount of money and time.
My experience with free software is that when shit hits the fan you are on your own. This isn't true of all free software since I believe MySQL provides commercial services to businesses. At the end of the day, databases can be transferred fairly easily over to another product. Is it a lot of work? Sure but at least the freedom you require is always there.
I've seen this issue twice (we have a few VS2010 enabled machines). If you apply the patch by going into the Windows Update screen it will simply attempt to install in an infinite loop and you can simply end the process using the task manager. If you shutdown the system while the patch is pending to be installed, Windows will attempt to perform the update before completing the shutdown procedure. This is what creates the appearance of a lock up. Because the patch never appears to end, it remains in shutdown mode for as long as you don't reboot manually. This is very different than an actual OS lock. Just though I'd clarify.
Also the most popular hence the attrition to it's security flaws.
In this case they cater to the majority which doesn't make them pointless. After all the point of a score is to help you find what you are most probable to like. If you are more adventurous like I am, you'll actually go and try games that aren't in the top 50.
As far as I'm concerned the most popular games are the games that should get the best scores because they are the ones people like.
There was a study done in UK in the 90s where they gathered information from people before death. The information separated death resulting from cardiovascular issues to other reasons of natural death. The result of the study was that 1 drink per day resulted in the lowest rate of death (even better than none). This is also why it was said that one drink a day was fine. Doctors today still use this 1 drink a day as a guideline when patients ask. Some studies suggested the best drink to have daily was a glass of red wine.
What the original study didn't keep track of is what other health issues these drinkers had to cope with. Those who know of an older life time heavy drinker know that their biggest health complications are usually kidney and liver related. In addition to this, alcohol has a temporary effect on blood pressure as it makes the blood vessels stiffer and this can be dangerous to those with high blood pressure issues.
FYI, I was drunk as hell when I wrote this!!
I'm a fan of the alcohol and
Was the article talking about compiler level code or IDE level code. I though they were talking IDE level code. If so 5% is ok, otherwise I'm with you.
I disagree this your statement because the scores are rated by all gamers regardless of their game preferences. The rating is there to guide you towards the popular choices. Popular in most cases doesn't mean you will like it, it just means many people like it. Movie ratings are no different in that matter. The critics sometimes rate a movie horribly but the public loves it.
If 9 out of 10 games don't like a game, why would the game rating get a good score?
I get what your saying with the customer service surveys as I've been involved in those to. First, I found it was important to keep surveys at 3-5 questions. If you exceed the 5 question mark you discourage the positive reviewers since they don't have the motivation to finish the survey. Negative reviewers are usually far more motivated since they are on a mission to display their dissatisfaction.
In addition, the questions need to be easily rated. Was the service good is too general. You need to narrow it down to: "Rate how easy the agent was to understand", "Rate how friendly the agent was", "Rate how easy it was to obtain the correct department", ... Different questions will be ask depending on the type of service you provide.
I strongly believe a score out of 10 is too big of a scale. We usually kept it at 3 (Mediocre, Average and exceptional). As a company you don't need anymore information than that.
I'm curious as to why this matters. When I write functions I write lots of other code that doesn't pertain specifically to the objective but is required to provide stable reusable code. E.g. Re-working the data that was input so it can fit within the mold that is the core isn't representative of what the program's objectives BUT is required to achieve the final goal. Same goes for the interface and the validation routines. They don't depict the core function of the software but are critical to the successful use of said core code.
Am I surprised by the 5%? The answer is no. In most of my projects, lots of work goes into presentation and input validation. After all, making machine compatible with people isn't always easy.
Go to Cuba and travel through their towns and tell me there aren't some that are better off. You'll quickly realize there are.
However, some software -- particularly system software -- naturally becomes less useful over time unless it receives updates to ensure compatibility with newer things and to protect against newer security and privacy risks. So, my take is that big software companies like Microsoft are missing a huge opportunity right now. I would happily pay a reasonable recurring fee to a software company in return for ongoing compatibility and security fixes, if that meant I could keep using the version of software I actually liked and found useful indefinitely, without having to buy into "upgrades" that might break something. Some of the big names have taken some steps in this direction with various corporate licensing schemes, but these are usually the preserve of big business customers, while smaller businesses and private customers are stuck with off-the-shelf, upgrade-when-it-runs-out software.
I tend to agree with this bit. The hard part about software is that it is surrounded by so many other evolving software components. Keeping the software up to date is something required especially with industries that still have some growth to incur (CAD is one I deal with all the time). From the point of view of the developer, you need funds to continue developing the product and keeping it updated to today's specs. With simple software, say a calculator, you don't need this. When a better calculator comes out you can purchase it but with the OS, new multimedia requirements, new storage tech and new anything means changes to the core. This also possibly means change to the software running on the OS.
IMHO I believe the following two options should be offered to customers:
1. Purchase of software + offer to get a maintenance subscription (charged yearly)
2. Rental of software (runs until you stop paying)
The link doesn't paint a full picture of Microsoft's failure/success. Considering they reported $86.8 B in earnings last year I would say these failures didn't affected their success (they were profitable in case you ask)
Not one person or company would look good if all you listed was their failures.
First the infrastructure needs to be put in place. This will happen through the wealthier asking to get better internet access. Facilities such as vacation resorts will also invest in said technology to improve their customers experience.
The upper bracket will get to enjoy the entertainment initially hence forcing the infrastructure to improve. As the infrastructure improves the rest of the country will get to benefit as well.
The point is there's a bully. There's a need for someone that can help to help. I don't see why it's an issue that the world wants to help.
So if I see you being attacked I should just assume its your own business and walk away?
In this case threats to different countries were made hence their involvement. Regardless, I will always believe that countries capable of helping should help if people are being persecuted.
Maybe it's the lesser educated that requires the visual but watching the video didn't make the headlines more impactful for me. When I read "burned alive", I could already image how horrible it was without seeing the video. IMO, the video did nothing to make the situation appear worst than I already though it was.
Do I disagree with the video being available for viewing without it being shoved in my face? NO! Being able to see the video is proof the incident actually occurred if you trust the source that posted it.
I agree except opinions often get moded up/down. I've been an offender and the offended. I've recently moded up a number of posts moded down due to disagreeing opinions even if the opinion was worth a read (positive comments towards MS or Apple often get moded down). There's a difference between disagreeing and actually having an invalid, inaccurate or flaming comment.
You nailed it on the head. MS can only benefit by getting developers to push their product. By making it available on all platforms they will maintain and even grow the DEV base they have. I've developed in many platforms and I have found that for businesses MS offers the best set of tools. Migration from one version to another has always been smooth for me especially if I continue to work with the same .NET Framework version. Even migrating from one major .NET version to another is usually smooth.
The beauty of a library like .NET is that it is feature rich and very secure as long as it's patched when updates are made available. For the MS and Apple it's easy to make sure updates are pushed to clients. As for Linux I'm not sure how that works outside distributions that do not offer automatic updates.
Where I live a bonus is taxed as part of your main income so tax evasion is nada. A contractual bonus may be determined by many factors included objectives being met. This is very different than a bonus defined by your performance and the company's performance.
You mixing apples and oranges but I'm done explaining the obvious to you. Failure will occur in every process but generally succeeds.