The buttons do NOT look like they'd work well with most games - I wonder how easy it would be to play Mario on that thing? The C-buttons worked on the N64 controller because they were not in the middle of the A and B buttons - and they were nicely arranged to make using them somewhat easier.
Actually, Shigeru Miyamoto himself designed the controller. Just like the N64, the GameCube's controller was desgined for Mario.
Now then, I could go on a rant about how stupid the GameCube name is (Nintendo3 [cubed] would have been better, alluding to the previous generation), or the fact that the machine is butt-ugly. But it all comes down to the fact that they want to keep the entire thing simple, and maintain the fact that this is a toy, and it's about playing games.
Thus, you have the HUGE departure from the look of the PSX2. Although I must say, the strap on the back is interesting. But how would you carry the controllers around? And I'd be concerned about damaging the optics jerking it around like that.
Then again, Nintendo knows this thing will be used by kids, and they always keep those things in mind.
So despite it's kiddie look, I can't wait to get my hands on the damn thing! Those pictures of Luigi's Mansion and Metroid look fabulous!
It won't be able to play DVD Movies because Nintendo wants the machine to retain a gaming focus. It's not interested it having the machine be a internet appliance... it's about the GAMES.
Besides, I plan on owning the PS2 as well, so I can watch movies on that.
That said... Dolphin was a better name. "Cube" just lacks imagination. Ugh.
Slashdot's post on this is all messed up. And I don't mean just the spelling errors.:)
First, this is NOT the force-feedback mouse that Logitech released last year. This one is more simple, with something similar to a "Rumble Pack" type functionality (similar to today's game consoles.)
Also, the type of functionality that CmdrTaco describes (magnetic) is from that other force-feedback mouse. This one will be limited to vibrating.
Microsoft won't do one... focus groups have told them that they find it distracting and a nuisance. I tend to agree... the force-feedback joystick was a novel toy, but I went back to a regular stick to increase my accuracy.
Personally, I might use it in busines applications, or maybe web-browsing (I'd never code a page for it, though), but I'd NEVER use it for gaming. My aim would suffer terribly!
I would also urge you to boycott the RIAA by not buying any of their music from your local retail outlets or online until they drop their suit. Either way remember that any fool can make a law (or a ruling) and any fool will mind it. Consider this my way of telling the RIAA where to stick their injunction.
Um, if nobody buys albums, what are you going to rip to MP3 to distribute? Just a thought...
To illustrate my point, the Napster CEO is suggesting a "buy-cott"... having everyone buy albums that they've "sampled" to show their support.
People are already crying foul about how this is unconstitutional. It's not... The Bill of Rights only applies to Citizens of the United States, and a minor (under the age of majority... 18-21) is NOT a Citizen by definition.
That said, what this actually does is puts the decision making right back into the hands of the PARENT, where it belongs. As a responsible parent, if I want to allow my kid to play these games, that's my decision. This law would make me accompany my child and make sure that what they are doing is appropriate by MY standards.
That's why I'm not opposed to any "laws" that restrict what kids can do... I think that children SHOULD be limited. Parents in America need to take more responsibility for their children and find out what the hell their kids are doing!
I mean, when a couple of kids can assemble a full-fledged arsenal in their Garage, right under their parents' noses, then go on a killing rampage... who's fault is that? The parents were OBVIOUSLY absent in their kids' lives.
More restrictions on what minors can buy, or participate in, in public places helps parents get more involved. If it doesn't, then there is another problem here.
Personally, I think kids have just a bit too much freedom. I think it has to do with the very young driving age in most states (16 here in Washington). That gives a child the ability to go anywhere, without the parent having to know what's happening. There are more issues than just these, but as far as this particular statute is concerned... I don't see how it's anything but a good thing.
Not only is this not news (Carmack IS on the board for XBox), but it's not surprising, since he is/was part of the committee that consults on DIRECTX.
And to top it off, it means NOTHING. So he's on the board? So what. Maybe they listen to him, maybe they don't. It's an ADVISORY board, and you can ignore advice.
All of that being said, The xBox folks are a bunch of smart people. I'm sure they'll listen to Carmack when he makes smart comments and suggestions. Frankly, Carmack might try to muscle people around so that everything works the way HE wants it to. What does it matter? It's a closed platform! But if his suggestions are good for the platform, then I'm sure he could be an asset.
It's BUSINESS people. It's not personal, it's business. We should all know by now that business ethics and personal ethics are two completely different things.
RAMBUS holds the patent. Period. Regardless of how they cam across the patent, they do. If it's not a legal patent, fine. Prove it. So far, two companies have been unable (or unwilling) to do so. Sure, RAMBUS probably greased them. They've been known to do that. So what? It's business.
Contrary to VERY popular belief, RIMMs are NOT bad technology. It's just expensive technology. And with any technology, it had a downside (mainly the latency). But it's NOT bad. If it were bad, no one would use it at all. No amount of money can make people adopt a BAD technology. Maybe one that isn't as good as it could be, but not a truly BAD technology.
No one believes that RAMBUS is bad. They just don't like the business practices, don't like what it "Might" do to the industry, and don't like the technology. Thus, RAMBUS is a Bad Thing (tm). Cry me a river. If you don't want it, don't buy it.
"But it might be our only choice in the future!"
Bullshit. Another technology will emerge. It always does. If RAMBUS is truly as bad as everyone claims, Digital Darwinism will take over and make sure it doesn't go any further. Sure, comapnies have monetary reasons for making sure RAMBUS succeeds. So what? They'll succeed, these companies will make their money, then leave RAMBUS out to dry. Watch.
All I'm trying to say is that everyone just needs to settle down. There's a buck to be made by all of us here (a LOT of people cashed in on the Intel MTH debacle getting themselves free RIMMs) and no one seemed to care about ethics in that situation. So just sit back and go with it. It'll all settle out eventually. Moore's law says so.
Re:No, hacking is not a good thing
on
Hacking The Tivo
·
· Score: 1
Awesome point. Simply awesome.
Brings me back to the whole Y2K thing really. Just because a couple of anal-retenives say that this isn't really the Millennium, it means nothing. Most of the media and public said it was, as the number 2000 was more significant. Hell, even PRINCE figured that out (1999).
Thus, all the hard-core geeks missed were some righteous parties. Whoops.
Reality IS perception. I like that. New mantra for me...
You're missing the point. Sony is a JAPANESE company, and in Japan, they pay for every minute of "landline" use. Cell phones are CHEAPER per minute in Japan than their hardlines, and thus, this is an EXCELLENT idea for that market.
However, it's completely unsuitable for the US market. The technology is now past it's prime, it's not truly portable, cell phones (while catching on fast) are not pervasive enough, and it's just not NEW.
They're trying to pull a Nintendo, taking really old technology (GameBoy) and making it seem new with a different casing. It's just not going to compete. People want a GameBoy-like version of the Playstation... not a smaller Playstation.
Sony's got an idea for the Japanese market, but it won't work here.
Re:I am not looking foward to Diablo 2 anyway
on
Diablo 2 Goes Gold
·
· Score: 1
See? They learned.:)
Re:I am not looking foward to Diablo 2 anyway
on
Diablo 2 Goes Gold
·
· Score: 1
I never got down on Blizzard for slipping a date. What I do get down on them for (back in the Diablo I days) is their constant promising that the game would be ready on such and such a date... right up until the day before. The exact DAY that the game slips it's date, they announce another one and keep right on rolling.
Come on... they have GOT to know at least a week in advance when they aren't going to make a date. I can't cut them any slack for that.
And think of it this way, people wouldn't care that the date slips if they weren't so excited about the game. That's gotta be worth something.
All of that information was on the Research website... pictures, UI stuff, all as part of the Data Mountain project, I believe. I don't know why most of it moved. Then again, things tend to disappear from the research site when they are moving into full development.
On an unrelated note, my first comment used to be scored a 3, now it's a two. Why on earth would someone moderate my comment DOWN??? I guess that's what someone gets for being pro-Microsoft in a pro-Linus, er... pro-LINUX environment. Oh well...
For the record, I have no idea who "Ed Muth" is. Seriously.:|
Yeah, you're right. We should just give our money to Microsoft for crap we don't want like good little sheeple. Then we can go out and buy the stuff we really wanted in the first place. I don't see any problem with that. Anyone else have a problem with that?
Funny, I didn't think you were giving your money to Microsoft. Microsoft didn't make a single thin dime from YOU. They got it from the OEM, and the OEM is the one that made the decision to include Microsoft products instead of something else. It was an economic decision for the OEM. You didn't lose ANYTHING, you just got a cheaper computer. Microsoft would have made the same amount of money regardless of whether you bought that machine or not.
What difference does it make how much money they spend on researching stuff? Why should that give them the right to illegally stifle competition?
Because they aren't fully recouping the cost of the research through the sales of the product being developed. They are using the money gained from Windows (and Office) to research and develop the hardware. So if they have to leverage those same products in order to make ANY money back on said research, I don't think that's wrong. But INAL, so what do I know? It might be illegal. I don't know. But I don't think it's wrong.
If Microsoft is broken into several companies, they can't use those resources to develop better hardware products. In that case, a lot of great hardware is just going to go away. Frankly, I don't think another competitor COULD step up and fill those shoes, because it would be too expensive. ONLY Microsoft can make the kind of Hardware that they do.
Notice I keep saying hardware... that's pretty much all I'm focusing on.
Whatever. Look, MS may have "established" themselves in the hardware arena through leveraging OEM relationships, or they may not have. As a consumer, I don't know. What I DO know is that as a user of Microsoft hardware, I have never used a better Keyboard than the Natural (or now, the Natural Pro) or a better mouse than the Intellimouse (and now, the Optical).
If Microsoft made products that utterly reeked, people wouldn't use them. The market would force an alternative. Microsoft cannot force anyone to use BAD products. Adequate ones, maybe. But not truly BAD products.
The difference here is that Microsoft actaully does research into usability and ergonomics. Their products are the results of billions of dollars of said research. And there are several companies out there who make a living creating third-rate knock-off's of those products with no ergonomics whatsoever. (Just because your keyboard has a "split" design doesn't make it easier to use!)
Also, regardless of what is shipped with a new computer due to OEM relationships with ANY company, the user is empowered to change anything they want. No one is forcing them to use what they are given. If that were true, Linux wouldn't exist. That said, why does Microsoft need to be broken up? They don't have a monopoly in the sense that there is zero competition. It just seems like it to someone who hasn't educated themselves in how to use their computer.
But is that YOUR opinion ... (off topic, a bit)
on
Fahrenheit 451
·
· Score: 1
Interesting. I have thought long and hard about being a teacher in order to avoid doing what I believe was done to you. Your teacher seems to have given you his/her opinion of F.451 BEFORE having you read it... thus coloring your perception of it. I've always despised teachers that would do that, because once that seed is planted, there's no telling what it can do. If I were ever going to teach English, I'd have everyone read the book (without telling them what it's about), have a class discussion on the book, THEN tell the kids what I think, which would allow them to incorporate a learned opinion into their own... if they choose. Another tough thing about teachers is that they can also color your opinion through the grade they give you on a project. If your thoughts don't mesh with the teacher's, do you get graded down? I know I had teachers that did this. The best teacher I ever had had me write a book report on a book I can't even remember. I can't remember it because it was a lousy book (IMO). My report was one paragraph, effectively saying that the book was terrible, poorly written, boring, and that I couldn't understand why it was a classic. I got an A on that report, with a note from the teacher applauding me for not giving her what she wanted, but telling her what I honestly thought. Everyone else's report she graded on content, but mine, she graded on spirit. Ok... glad I have that out of my system now.
Katz' list is right on. But unfortunately, he' forgotten (or perhaps, would like to forget) what we can call HateNet. There are a great many sites out there that spread hate like a disease. Just as it's made us able to find out information quickly by the Internet, it's made hate messages from groups like the KKK more accessible. It doesn't end there. There are tons of smaller hate sites out there, sites that trash pop groups, corporations, etc. Even SlashDot occasionally becomes a forum for hate. I sometimes wonder if freedom of speech is a little "too free" on the Internet. But it's a worldwide forum, and I wouldn't want to be the one who decides to start policing the world.
I can't see how this would be able to catch on if it were not backwards compatible. I only got into DVD because I didn't lose the ability to use CD's with it. It sounds like this tech may need several lasers to do that, even further driving up what looks to be an incredibly high cost. Writability isn't as big a deal... for me, at least. I can't imagine I'd ever have to write that much data myself. I' have yet to even wish I could write to a DVD. This sounds like it may end up becoming a likely format for HDTV-quality movies... a higher-end DVD. So what's this thing going to cost, anyway? About $2500?
Don't get down on Hook because of that. Tom just seems to have this problem with him thinking his is the end-all, be-all of the hardware scene. There's a great many people out there now doing it better that Tom, and on a regular basis. I have a problem with anyone thinking that if they didn't do it, it couldn't have possibly been done right, even if you did help write the damn software. "Gee, Tom, that's a mighty tall stallion you've got there! Why don't you come on down and chat with us down here?"
Whoops... You're right... I meant 96. My bad. I was in a hurry typing. Anyway, I've had three different jobs in the N64's life span, covering 4 years. It will be five years (probably 6) before the N64 is replaced. That's still an excellent life span, and I have to add... better than most PC's these days.
Check your facts... the IBM chip and Sony's Emotion Engine can pull more FLOPS than the Intel processor. It's truly bleeding edge stuff. Also, DVD is NOT mainstream yet, even if you have it. Most consumers have not jumped on the bandwagon. A game console at $200 is the perfect way to do it.
Nintendo stuck with carts for 3 main reasons. 1) They can control the manufacturing process. 2) They are more kid-friendly. 3) They make massive $$$ off the chip-fabs. But DVD's can store ridiculous amounts of data. It was the only way to go.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, Shigeru Miyamoto himself designed the controller. Just like the N64, the GameCube's controller was desgined for Mario.
Now then, I could go on a rant about how stupid the GameCube name is (Nintendo3 [cubed] would have been better, alluding to the previous generation), or the fact that the machine is butt-ugly. But it all comes down to the fact that they want to keep the entire thing simple, and maintain the fact that this is a toy, and it's about playing games.
Thus, you have the HUGE departure from the look of the PSX2. Although I must say, the strap on the back is interesting. But how would you carry the controllers around? And I'd be concerned about damaging the optics jerking it around like that.
Then again, Nintendo knows this thing will be used by kids, and they always keep those things in mind.
So despite it's kiddie look, I can't wait to get my hands on the damn thing! Those pictures of Luigi's Mansion and Metroid look fabulous!
Besides, I plan on owning the PS2 as well, so I can watch movies on that.
That said ... Dolphin was a better name. "Cube" just lacks imagination. Ugh.
First, this is NOT the force-feedback mouse that Logitech released last year. This one is more simple, with something similar to a "Rumble Pack" type functionality (similar to today's game consoles.)
Also, the type of functionality that CmdrTaco describes (magnetic) is from that other force-feedback mouse. This one will be limited to vibrating.
Microsoft won't do one ... focus groups have told them that they find it distracting and a nuisance. I tend to agree ... the force-feedback joystick was a novel toy, but I went back to a regular stick to increase my accuracy.
Personally, I might use it in busines applications, or maybe web-browsing (I'd never code a page for it, though), but I'd NEVER use it for gaming. My aim would suffer terribly!
Um, if nobody buys albums, what are you going to rip to MP3 to distribute? Just a thought ...
To illustrate my point, the Napster CEO is suggesting a "buy-cott" ... having everyone buy albums that they've "sampled" to show their support.
That said, what this actually does is puts the decision making right back into the hands of the PARENT, where it belongs. As a responsible parent, if I want to allow my kid to play these games, that's my decision. This law would make me accompany my child and make sure that what they are doing is appropriate by MY standards.
That's why I'm not opposed to any "laws" that restrict what kids can do ... I think that children SHOULD be limited. Parents in America need to take more responsibility for their children and find out what the hell their kids are doing!
I mean, when a couple of kids can assemble a full-fledged arsenal in their Garage, right under their parents' noses, then go on a killing rampage ... who's fault is that? The parents were OBVIOUSLY absent in their kids' lives.
More restrictions on what minors can buy, or participate in, in public places helps parents get more involved. If it doesn't, then there is another problem here.
Personally, I think kids have just a bit too much freedom. I think it has to do with the very young driving age in most states (16 here in Washington). That gives a child the ability to go anywhere, without the parent having to know what's happening. There are more issues than just these, but as far as this particular statute is concerned ... I don't see how it's anything but a good thing.
Not only is this not news (Carmack IS on the board for XBox), but it's not surprising, since he is/was part of the committee that consults on DIRECTX.
And to top it off, it means NOTHING. So he's on the board? So what. Maybe they listen to him, maybe they don't. It's an ADVISORY board, and you can ignore advice.
All of that being said, The xBox folks are a bunch of smart people. I'm sure they'll listen to Carmack when he makes smart comments and suggestions. Frankly, Carmack might try to muscle people around so that everything works the way HE wants it to. What does it matter? It's a closed platform! But if his suggestions are good for the platform, then I'm sure he could be an asset.
RAMBUS holds the patent. Period. Regardless of how they cam across the patent, they do. If it's not a legal patent, fine. Prove it. So far, two companies have been unable (or unwilling) to do so. Sure, RAMBUS probably greased them. They've been known to do that. So what? It's business.
Contrary to VERY popular belief, RIMMs are NOT bad technology. It's just expensive technology. And with any technology, it had a downside (mainly the latency). But it's NOT bad. If it were bad, no one would use it at all. No amount of money can make people adopt a BAD technology. Maybe one that isn't as good as it could be, but not a truly BAD technology.
No one believes that RAMBUS is bad. They just don't like the business practices, don't like what it "Might" do to the industry, and don't like the technology. Thus, RAMBUS is a Bad Thing (tm). Cry me a river. If you don't want it, don't buy it.
"But it might be our only choice in the future!"
Bullshit. Another technology will emerge. It always does. If RAMBUS is truly as bad as everyone claims, Digital Darwinism will take over and make sure it doesn't go any further. Sure, comapnies have monetary reasons for making sure RAMBUS succeeds. So what? They'll succeed, these companies will make their money, then leave RAMBUS out to dry. Watch.
All I'm trying to say is that everyone just needs to settle down. There's a buck to be made by all of us here (a LOT of people cashed in on the Intel MTH debacle getting themselves free RIMMs) and no one seemed to care about ethics in that situation. So just sit back and go with it. It'll all settle out eventually. Moore's law says so.
Brings me back to the whole Y2K thing really. Just because a couple of anal-retenives say that this isn't really the Millennium, it means nothing. Most of the media and public said it was, as the number 2000 was more significant. Hell, even PRINCE figured that out (1999).
Thus, all the hard-core geeks missed were some righteous parties. Whoops.
Reality IS perception. I like that. New mantra for me ...
However, it's completely unsuitable for the US market. The technology is now past it's prime, it's not truly portable, cell phones (while catching on fast) are not pervasive enough, and it's just not NEW.
They're trying to pull a Nintendo, taking really old technology (GameBoy) and making it seem new with a different casing. It's just not going to compete. People want a GameBoy-like version of the Playstation ... not a smaller Playstation.
Sony's got an idea for the Japanese market, but it won't work here.
See? They learned. :)
Come on ... they have GOT to know at least a week in advance when they aren't going to make a date. I can't cut them any slack for that.
And think of it this way, people wouldn't care that the date slips if they weren't so excited about the game. That's gotta be worth something.
Wait, I think I have that backwords. How and I supposed to get any quality time with my new game when I have this wife to be playing?
Hmmm ... that doesn't seem right either.
Ah yes ... multitasking. That's the answer. Can I run my wife in a window while the game is running?
Uh, dude? They're talking about the CD ... not in game.
On an unrelated note, my first comment used to be scored a 3, now it's a two. Why on earth would someone moderate my comment DOWN??? I guess that's what someone gets for being pro-Microsoft in a pro-Linus, er ... pro-LINUX environment. Oh well ...
They used to have better pictures there, but I can't find them.
Oh, and I apologize if someone alreay posted this info, but I just wanted to be helpful.
For the record, I have no idea who "Ed Muth" is. Seriously. :|
Yeah, you're right. We should just give our money to Microsoft for crap we don't want like good little sheeple. Then we can go out and buy the stuff we really wanted in the first place. I don't see any problem with that. Anyone else have a problem with that?
Funny, I didn't think you were giving your money to Microsoft. Microsoft didn't make a single thin dime from YOU. They got it from the OEM, and the OEM is the one that made the decision to include Microsoft products instead of something else. It was an economic decision for the OEM. You didn't lose ANYTHING, you just got a cheaper computer. Microsoft would have made the same amount of money regardless of whether you bought that machine or not.
What difference does it make how much money they spend on researching stuff? Why should that give them the right to illegally stifle competition?
Because they aren't fully recouping the cost of the research through the sales of the product being developed. They are using the money gained from Windows (and Office) to research and develop the hardware. So if they have to leverage those same products in order to make ANY money back on said research, I don't think that's wrong. But INAL, so what do I know? It might be illegal. I don't know. But I don't think it's wrong.
If Microsoft is broken into several companies, they can't use those resources to develop better hardware products. In that case, a lot of great hardware is just going to go away. Frankly, I don't think another competitor COULD step up and fill those shoes, because it would be too expensive. ONLY Microsoft can make the kind of Hardware that they do.
Notice I keep saying hardware ... that's pretty much all I'm focusing on.
If Microsoft made products that utterly reeked, people wouldn't use them. The market would force an alternative. Microsoft cannot force anyone to use BAD products. Adequate ones, maybe. But not truly BAD products.
The difference here is that Microsoft actaully does research into usability and ergonomics. Their products are the results of billions of dollars of said research. And there are several companies out there who make a living creating third-rate knock-off's of those products with no ergonomics whatsoever. (Just because your keyboard has a "split" design doesn't make it easier to use!)
Also, regardless of what is shipped with a new computer due to OEM relationships with ANY company, the user is empowered to change anything they want. No one is forcing them to use what they are given. If that were true, Linux wouldn't exist. That said, why does Microsoft need to be broken up? They don't have a monopoly in the sense that there is zero competition. It just seems like it to someone who hasn't educated themselves in how to use their computer.
Interesting. I have thought long and hard about being a teacher in order to avoid doing what I believe was done to you. Your teacher seems to have given you his/her opinion of F.451 BEFORE having you read it ... thus coloring your perception of it. I've always despised teachers that would do that, because once that seed is planted, there's no telling what it can do. If I were ever going to teach English, I'd have everyone read the book (without telling them what it's about), have a class discussion on the book, THEN tell the kids what I think, which would allow them to incorporate a learned opinion into their own ... if they choose. Another tough thing about teachers is that they can also color your opinion through the grade they give you on a project. If your thoughts don't mesh with the teacher's, do you get graded down? I know I had teachers that did this. The best teacher I ever had had me write a book report on a book I can't even remember. I can't remember it because it was a lousy book (IMO). My report was one paragraph, effectively saying that the book was terrible, poorly written, boring, and that I couldn't understand why it was a classic. I got an A on that report, with a note from the teacher applauding me for not giving her what she wanted, but telling her what I honestly thought. Everyone else's report she graded on content, but mine, she graded on spirit. Ok ... glad I have that out of my system now.
Katz' list is right on. But unfortunately, he' forgotten (or perhaps, would like to forget) what we can call HateNet. There are a great many sites out there that spread hate like a disease. Just as it's made us able to find out information quickly by the Internet, it's made hate messages from groups like the KKK more accessible. It doesn't end there. There are tons of smaller hate sites out there, sites that trash pop groups, corporations, etc. Even SlashDot occasionally becomes a forum for hate. I sometimes wonder if freedom of speech is a little "too free" on the Internet. But it's a worldwide forum, and I wouldn't want to be the one who decides to start policing the world.
I can't see how this would be able to catch on if it were not backwards compatible. I only got into DVD because I didn't lose the ability to use CD's with it. It sounds like this tech may need several lasers to do that, even further driving up what looks to be an incredibly high cost. Writability isn't as big a deal ... for me, at least. I can't imagine I'd ever have to write that much data myself. I' have yet to even wish I could write to a DVD. This sounds like it may end up becoming a likely format for HDTV-quality movies ... a higher-end DVD. So what's this thing going to cost, anyway? About $2500?
Don't get down on Hook because of that. Tom just seems to have this problem with him thinking his is the end-all, be-all of the hardware scene. There's a great many people out there now doing it better that Tom, and on a regular basis. I have a problem with anyone thinking that if they didn't do it, it couldn't have possibly been done right, even if you did help write the damn software. "Gee, Tom, that's a mighty tall stallion you've got there! Why don't you come on down and chat with us down here?"
Whoops ... You're right ... I meant 96. My bad. I was in a hurry typing. Anyway, I've had three different jobs in the N64's life span, covering 4 years. It will be five years (probably 6) before the N64 is replaced. That's still an excellent life span, and I have to add ... better than most PC's these days.
Check your facts ... the IBM chip and Sony's Emotion Engine can pull more FLOPS than the Intel processor. It's truly bleeding edge stuff. Also, DVD is NOT mainstream yet, even if you have it. Most consumers have not jumped on the bandwagon. A game console at $200 is the perfect way to do it.
Nintendo stuck with carts for 3 main reasons. 1) They can control the manufacturing process. 2) They are more kid-friendly. 3) They make massive $$$ off the chip-fabs. But DVD's can store ridiculous amounts of data. It was the only way to go.
A lot of us were at E3 at the time, and didn't see it.