But since then the ability to extract additional information through software interpolation of multiple images has increased tremendously. With multiple cameras pointed at the same area, or multiple shots from a single camera, you should be able to get enough raw data to create very high resolution images indeed, even if the individual images themselves aren't that great. Use cameras at very different geographical locations, and a full 3d image should be possible.
You can also use more of the spectrum, compensate for atmospheric effects, etc.
Mr Jamieson also called for Apple to open up its iTunes software so it is compatible with the technology of other manufacturers.
Mr Jamieson further went on to call for legislators to stop the partisian bickering, Walmart to pay their employees a living wage, and for those dogs to stop barking so damned late so that he can get some damned sleep.
The brother post may have used a car analogy, but he's basically right. There is a similar situation in Game Development.
Right now, you have machines that will do amazingly powerful things, especially with the Next-gen coming out. So what do you do with that power?
Quite simply, one of the things you can do is optimize less.
For example, early FPS games were written largely in assembly in an attempt to eke out every bit of power from the system. It worked, but it was really expensive financially and broke at the slightest provocation. But as computer power increased, you started to be able to write parts of your game in C, and use assembly for the rendering and other intense processes. Then you could write parts of your game in script, and your engine in C. Each step up the chain gets easier to maintain and extend, but at the expense of more clock cycles.
Another example of the above is simple data abstraction. On the NES a simple boss, like Frankenstein, would need his own code base and optimizations to get him to work. Now that boss might be pulled in through a "Boss" class of an "NPC" class of a "Character" class of a "Things" class. His behaviors might be tagged by a designer from a separate Behavioral AI library.
This might seem like it is being lazy, but remember that largely the limiting factor on huge projects is the complexity of the code. If you had to code the behavior of all of the monsters in your game one at a time without abstraction, you'll need to pare back the number tremendously. If you had to write the display code in assembly, you can forget about having an artist script a wispy smoke polygon shader effect. It would be much faster to hit the raw iron of your graphics card, but if you don't go through Direct X or Open GL you can forget about ever finishing.
So you optimize less, you create broader, slower code, and you get a lot more done. You get more game for your buck.
Is the code the most efficient ever? No. But that's not the point.
I'm remembering the early days of eBay. Sure, it costs 2 or 3 times as much to generate new customers, but if you're making 5% margins on those customers or 100% margins on the later ones, it's still 7 - 10 times more profitable to break the last batch of customers. People would do that all the time... build up a positive rating, then fire up a lot of transactions with a lot of people and disappear. 50k will let you retire in Thailand for about 10 years, which is what I assume a lot of these people did.
That's really cool about the FTC being online. I didn't realize it was there already. The first google link is for Filing a complaint. That's pretty awsome.
But again, there are a lot of baseline regulations that need to take place for that to work too. You need public knowledge of board members and employees. You need public knowledge of the company's financing. You need reliable 3rd party metrics. You need a lot of people willing to put a lot of time into doing research... which doesn't come for free. How do you know that when Yahoo says they have filtered out 75% of the sheisters that number is true?
The government shouldn't serve as a heavy-handed guider of the economy, but as a check for the abuses. Theoretically, looking out for the people's interests is what the government is supposed to do. It is an organization of the people, for the betterment of people. Free market companies aren't about the betterment of anything only about making money. Most of the time those interests are aligned, but when they're not, it's the government's role as the embodyment of the will of the people to step and regulate.
You politicians in the back can stop snickering now.
It's not that I lose quality. I'm not buying an album if I have to jump through a half dozen hoops unnecessarily just to play a bloody track. Sure, I can just use SharpMusique or a half dozen other hacks to skip the CD burning phase. But if I'm going to be a criminal for wanting to play my music fairly, I'm not going to give money to the system. Fuck that.
Oh, as a side note, music sounds best on headphones. An 80 dollar pair of Seinheizers will trounce a 600 dollar set of speakers with a 300 dollar amp. And unlike speakers, which tend to be genre-specific, headphones have good response for most types of music. I'd take a 40 dollar set of Sony cans on a 200 dollar iRiver over most people's home stereos any day.
As for Apple's DRM being "a pain," I don't know how she could possibly think that. I've never even hit a limitation with it, and I forget it's there. It's the most liberal DRM in existence.
Except that I can't play Apple's DRM'ed songs, as I have an MP3 player.
Not to point fingers, but when developers that I work at have been interviewed by the press, generally the gaming press gets things right and the mainstream press is the one that doesn't fact check. Gems have included referring to us as "The publisher" (we're the developer), "The guys who made the music" (outsourced), the guys who were just bought by Activision (our publisher did that). We've been accused of making other people's games, of making games for platforms that had died before we were around, or the game not having features that it did, or running on PC hardware that hadn't been released yet, etc.
The frustrating thing about all of the above examples, is that in all but one case the person doing the interview had been told everything correctly, they just completely mis-remembered it and didn't review their notes... at all.
Game journalism isn't professional in that their writing style is frequently juvenile and bass, but at least they generally get the facts straight. "Real" journalists don't seem to think that stories about videogames are worth even the most cursory of fact checks.
In the real world, a truly free market rewards scams and sheisters. Set up shop, build up a customer base, then suddenly screw everyone and disappear to start another company. It's far more profitable than actually servicing your customers.
Oh you don't want people to do that? How is that then a "free" market without any regulation?
People keep saying they want a free market with zero regulation, except what they mean is they want a free market with no regulation except for those regulations that they expect. They expect that some portion of contract law will be held. They expect traditional criminal laws to apply. They expect certain fraud laws, libel, etc.
When someone else buys a new car that doesn't run, it's easy to say "free market, don't shop there." But when it comes right down to it, few people are satisfied by complaining on bizrate.com. Everyone wants lemon laws to apply to themselves.
The options are AllOfMP3, which has good selection for tiny prices in whatever format the consumer wants, iTunes, which sticks to the traditional sky high price structure but delivers music in a format that I can't even use, or a few smaller sites that have little available music. The keys are that while iTunes is a definite step in the right direction, A: the music is encumbered enough that you need specific hardware to play it and B: it still hasn't democratized the music business.
What is needed is a compulsory license to sell, similar to compulsory radio playback licensing. You don't have to negotiate the rights to each and every song you play on the radio, you simply play the song and send the record label a check. Similarly, mom'n pop record stores don't need to negotiate with each and every label, they simply buy from a distributor. But online? Everyone who wants to sell music online has to go groveling to each and every record company out there. And you have to negotiate terms like a pro, or you get sub-iTunes prices. It's far beyond the capability of all but the biggest companies, leading to situations where the music store is a dongle to sell DRM-encumbered hardware.
Competition is good for the market. Let's have a little more of it.
To be fair to the original article poster
on
Just Let Me Play!
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
He has some points.
1. No genre is more crap-flooded and treadmilly than MMPORPG's. Those are real work. Nobody who plays these will argue that they don't need more fun stuff to do and less work.
2. We need more 10 hour games. The last RPG I had time to beat was Xenogears, and that lasted about 70 hours. It was a great game (until they ran out of money), but it needed to be a lot shorter to fit in a real lifestyle. If an industry guy like me can't find time to play games through to the end, who will?
3. Mechanics need to be integrated with worldspace better. Why does killing 3,000k harmless forest deers make you level 19 in Wow? Why does Samus go "in bikini" if you beat the game in under an hour? He brings up GTA, which is really the perfect example. GTA has extensive scripting and conditioning, but that's all invisible to the player.
4. Our industry has blown pacing in quite a few high-profile titles recently. And that is a real problem. Doom 3 and Half Life 2 had levels that were far too long. They artificially threw the player across the world to walk back, just to throw them somewhere else. They needed a smaller, tighter experience, but overbuilt to the point of tedium. You know my opinion on most MMPORPG's.
Of course, I also think the article poster is a little lost. Guild Wars? You can create a max level character the first time you play the game. Maxing a character manually takes about 8 hours, with no treadmilling.
The question, then, is why does this bother you? If no additional prodding is needed for you to challenge yourself, and you don't care that there are these artificial thresholds, why do they upset you? Is it the artificiality of the experience? Is it more natural to feel "I got to level 9 because I walked there" rather than "I got the 9th song because I satisfied the victory conditions?" Why hasn't anyone complained about not being able to see the ending movie in Halo without beating all of the levels, yet songs in DDR appear to be a strong point of contention? Is it the type of content? Is it that it feels like you're being denied access, rather than simply that you don't have access?
Or is it a question of desiring the goodies, but feeling like they are impossible to achieve, either due to skill or time constraints?
I don't mean this rhetorically... I really am curious as to the answer. Think of it as an impromptu focus test.
Re:Jumpers For Goalposts
on
Just Let Me Play!
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've always liked how some games let you recharge your mana / up your level / etc between tries. If you fail at something after a few tries, you can charge up a usage of a supermeteo and just obliterate whatever stands in your way.
These negative feedback systems are absolutely key to getting a game balanced for a diverse skill group. Final Fantasy Legends III on the game boy would let you return to life with 1/2 of the levels you had earned since the last save point, so that you were set back a little but you would be facing the boss a much stronger party. Some racing games let you keep your powerups, or give you more. Arcade games frequently give you big guns and nitro boosts for continuing. An evil lure, certainly, but also an effective balance. Truxton gave the player three super bombs per continue (life?), thus having the effect that if you died somewhere you could simply obliterate that boss and move on (in multiplayer).
I love negative feedback systems, and would like to see more of them in games.
The few games we've made in the past that simply gave the player everything from the start were reprimanded by critics and players alike for having no replay value. And it was a fair criticism: you're done before you start. There was no sense of progression or purpose to them. The progression can be light and the purpose can be hollow, but you still need a purpose for the player's activities in the game.
Even if the gameplay is the most fun you can imagine, you still have the feeling that there is nothing pulling you along. There is no light at the end of the tunnel. The tunnel may be worth traversing for itself, but you still have to put a light at the end.
The fact that people want these things shows that they're great motivators. And motivation is what you need to help make the player the best darned guitar player they can be, both in life and in games. Without motivation, the experience falls falt. Striking that balance between keeping stuff away and rewarding the player is delicate... it can't be too frequent or things feel like they have no value, but it can't be too sparse or else you really are simply milking the player for game time. And milking the player simply for game time is something we studiously avoid, and will continue to avoid in the future.
Also, you don't want to overload the player with too many options too soon, or they won't know what to do. Even having too deep a songlist too early will confuse. Maybe it won't befuddle the seasoned rocker / gamer, but it does befuddle a lot of people at playtests.
BTW, if you're stuck at a party without a memory card, try Yellow, Orange, Blue, Blue, Orange, Yellow, Yellow.
An older DIY design is here, and Riptide's videos as well. Build costs are estimated at 140 and 200 dollars. One more here.
The main problem with the InventGeek design is that it doesn't appear to have any tactile feedback. You need the subtle height differences to be able to read with your feet. Also, you want the standing surface in the middle to be solid metal (unless you're going to play Pump It Up, as that provides further feedback.
It also doesn't use any vertical crossbeams in the pads, leading to sensor and support disparity. This is why the base is generally built out of wood, or a bit more metal. That keeps the right side of the left sensor feeling the same as the up, down, and left sides. As it stands, I wouldn't be surprised if stepping on the right side of the left sensor crushed the pad material for a permanent button-down signal. Or if the acrylic began to bow there.
For that matter, generally you want Lucite or Lexan for the deck. Hard as hell, and going to take it for a while. But people have successfully used other things.
And if you're going to buy metal, you want a Cobalt Flux. Unless you're more casual / like your knees, at which point get an ignition. Most of the 150 metal mats will leave you disappointed, especially compared to the Cobalt. Though I've heard the 200 ninja is ok too.
I'm having nightmares already. Web 2 keeps "rising" like a friggin' zombie every few days.
You need to think outside of the box about the multimedia potential for the new Web 2.0 paradigms. Web 2.0 has already pioneered B2B information management infrastructure, location-based services software, and co-marketed proximity enabled facility authorization. Collaboration with Web 2.0 fuels the innovation that will power the integration of the next generation of worldwide technology with record brand recognition leading to two or three times the market growth rate.
"You'd have to be a real idiot to not recognize the multi-vendor capabilities and sourcing opportunities facilitated by Web 2.0", said Kate Hainsworth, executive vice president of the Technology Solutions Group at HP. "A real idiot."
Your sucking balls metaphor sucks balls. The grandparent poster's analogy is more like accidentally nibbling balls. And even then the similie only sucks balls slightly less, metaphorically speaking.
Wasn't there a point in ancient history when Tom's hardware was actually, you know, good?
I vaguely remember accessible but technical articles, which talked about important things. Hardware hackery that showed exactly what an individual with a soldering iron could do if they were so inclined. Articles that were written for people who had a clue.
With Windows 95 you had a reasonably large system, with a lot going into it, but it was unstable and crashed all the time.
So they started introducing redundancy, including the.cab files for the original installation, allowing the system to be repaired with the original files at the expense of keeping the original files around.
Then they added system backup points, which backup huge chunks of the system across multiple points automatically, functionally doubling the size of the installation.
I'm guessing they'll start doing automatic full backups in Vista, thus doubling the OS size again. Hence, a 1 GB system balloons out to 8 GB.
Slashdot Mirror
But since then the ability to extract additional information through software interpolation of multiple images has increased tremendously. With multiple cameras pointed at the same area, or multiple shots from a single camera, you should be able to get enough raw data to create very high resolution images indeed, even if the individual images themselves aren't that great. Use cameras at very different geographical locations, and a full 3d image should be possible.
You can also use more of the spectrum, compensate for atmospheric effects, etc.
Mr Jamieson also called for Apple to open up its iTunes software so it is compatible with the technology of other manufacturers.
Mr Jamieson further went on to call for legislators to stop the partisian bickering, Walmart to pay their employees a living wage, and for those dogs to stop barking so damned late so that he can get some damned sleep.
The brother post may have used a car analogy, but he's basically right. There is a similar situation in Game Development.
Right now, you have machines that will do amazingly powerful things, especially with the Next-gen coming out. So what do you do with that power?
Quite simply, one of the things you can do is optimize less.
For example, early FPS games were written largely in assembly in an attempt to eke out every bit of power from the system. It worked, but it was really expensive financially and broke at the slightest provocation. But as computer power increased, you started to be able to write parts of your game in C, and use assembly for the rendering and other intense processes. Then you could write parts of your game in script, and your engine in C. Each step up the chain gets easier to maintain and extend, but at the expense of more clock cycles.
Another example of the above is simple data abstraction. On the NES a simple boss, like Frankenstein, would need his own code base and optimizations to get him to work. Now that boss might be pulled in through a "Boss" class of an "NPC" class of a "Character" class of a "Things" class. His behaviors might be tagged by a designer from a separate Behavioral AI library.
This might seem like it is being lazy, but remember that largely the limiting factor on huge projects is the complexity of the code. If you had to code the behavior of all of the monsters in your game one at a time without abstraction, you'll need to pare back the number tremendously. If you had to write the display code in assembly, you can forget about having an artist script a wispy smoke polygon shader effect. It would be much faster to hit the raw iron of your graphics card, but if you don't go through Direct X or Open GL you can forget about ever finishing.
So you optimize less, you create broader, slower code, and you get a lot more done. You get more game for your buck.
Is the code the most efficient ever? No. But that's not the point.
I'm remembering the early days of eBay. Sure, it costs 2 or 3 times as much to generate new customers, but if you're making 5% margins on those customers or 100% margins on the later ones, it's still 7 - 10 times more profitable to break the last batch of customers. People would do that all the time... build up a positive rating, then fire up a lot of transactions with a lot of people and disappear. 50k will let you retire in Thailand for about 10 years, which is what I assume a lot of these people did.
That's really cool about the FTC being online. I didn't realize it was there already. The first google link is for Filing a complaint. That's pretty awsome.
But again, there are a lot of baseline regulations that need to take place for that to work too. You need public knowledge of board members and employees. You need public knowledge of the company's financing. You need reliable 3rd party metrics. You need a lot of people willing to put a lot of time into doing research... which doesn't come for free. How do you know that when Yahoo says they have filtered out 75% of the sheisters that number is true?
The government shouldn't serve as a heavy-handed guider of the economy, but as a check for the abuses. Theoretically, looking out for the people's interests is what the government is supposed to do. It is an organization of the people, for the betterment of people. Free market companies aren't about the betterment of anything only about making money. Most of the time those interests are aligned, but when they're not, it's the government's role as the embodyment of the will of the people to step and regulate.
You politicians in the back can stop snickering now.
And no, I don't know how to spell Sennheiser.
It's not that I lose quality. I'm not buying an album if I have to jump through a half dozen hoops unnecessarily just to play a bloody track. Sure, I can just use SharpMusique or a half dozen other hacks to skip the CD burning phase. But if I'm going to be a criminal for wanting to play my music fairly, I'm not going to give money to the system. Fuck that.
Oh, as a side note, music sounds best on headphones. An 80 dollar pair of Seinheizers will trounce a 600 dollar set of speakers with a 300 dollar amp. And unlike speakers, which tend to be genre-specific, headphones have good response for most types of music. I'd take a 40 dollar set of Sony cans on a 200 dollar iRiver over most people's home stereos any day.
As for Apple's DRM being "a pain," I don't know how she could possibly think that. I've never even hit a limitation with it, and I forget it's there. It's the most liberal DRM in existence.
Except that I can't play Apple's DRM'ed songs, as I have an MP3 player.
How long 'till Microsoft gets the one-click patent for buying addons to Oblivion *ON A CONSOLE*?
I'm guessing that it isn't long before Microsoft patents one-click buying of stuff *ON THE WII*.
That would show Nintendo.
Not to point fingers, but when developers that I work at have been interviewed by the press, generally the gaming press gets things right and the mainstream press is the one that doesn't fact check. Gems have included referring to us as "The publisher" (we're the developer), "The guys who made the music" (outsourced), the guys who were just bought by Activision (our publisher did that). We've been accused of making other people's games, of making games for platforms that had died before we were around, or the game not having features that it did, or running on PC hardware that hadn't been released yet, etc.
The frustrating thing about all of the above examples, is that in all but one case the person doing the interview had been told everything correctly, they just completely mis-remembered it and didn't review their notes... at all.
Game journalism isn't professional in that their writing style is frequently juvenile and bass, but at least they generally get the facts straight. "Real" journalists don't seem to think that stories about videogames are worth even the most cursory of fact checks.
As far as I know it's impossible to autoplay upon USB insertion. If anyone knows how to do this, please speak up.
That's a nice fantasy.
In the real world, a truly free market rewards scams and sheisters. Set up shop, build up a customer base, then suddenly screw everyone and disappear to start another company. It's far more profitable than actually servicing your customers.
Oh you don't want people to do that? How is that then a "free" market without any regulation?
People keep saying they want a free market with zero regulation, except what they mean is they want a free market with no regulation except for those regulations that they expect. They expect that some portion of contract law will be held. They expect traditional criminal laws to apply. They expect certain fraud laws, libel, etc.
When someone else buys a new car that doesn't run, it's easy to say "free market, don't shop there." But when it comes right down to it, few people are satisfied by complaining on bizrate.com. Everyone wants lemon laws to apply to themselves.
I'd sure pay them.
The options are AllOfMP3, which has good selection for tiny prices in whatever format the consumer wants, iTunes, which sticks to the traditional sky high price structure but delivers music in a format that I can't even use, or a few smaller sites that have little available music.
The keys are that while iTunes is a definite step in the right direction, A: the music is encumbered enough that you need specific hardware to play it and B: it still hasn't democratized the music business.
What is needed is a compulsory license to sell, similar to compulsory radio playback licensing. You don't have to negotiate the rights to each and every song you play on the radio, you simply play the song and send the record label a check. Similarly, mom'n pop record stores don't need to negotiate with each and every label, they simply buy from a distributor. But online? Everyone who wants to sell music online has to go groveling to each and every record company out there. And you have to negotiate terms like a pro, or you get sub-iTunes prices. It's far beyond the capability of all but the biggest companies, leading to situations where the music store is a dongle to sell DRM-encumbered hardware.
Competition is good for the market. Let's have a little more of it.
He has some points.
1. No genre is more crap-flooded and treadmilly than MMPORPG's. Those are real work. Nobody who plays these will argue that they don't need more fun stuff to do and less work.
2. We need more 10 hour games. The last RPG I had time to beat was Xenogears, and that lasted about 70 hours. It was a great game (until they ran out of money), but it needed to be a lot shorter to fit in a real lifestyle. If an industry guy like me can't find time to play games through to the end, who will?
3. Mechanics need to be integrated with worldspace better. Why does killing 3,000k harmless forest deers make you level 19 in Wow? Why does Samus go "in bikini" if you beat the game in under an hour? He brings up GTA, which is really the perfect example. GTA has extensive scripting and conditioning, but that's all invisible to the player.
4. Our industry has blown pacing in quite a few high-profile titles recently. And that is a real problem. Doom 3 and Half Life 2 had levels that were far too long. They artificially threw the player across the world to walk back, just to throw them somewhere else. They needed a smaller, tighter experience, but overbuilt to the point of tedium. You know my opinion on most MMPORPG's.
Of course, I also think the article poster is a little lost. Guild Wars? You can create a max level character the first time you play the game. Maxing a character manually takes about 8 hours, with no treadmilling.
The question, then, is why does this bother you? If no additional prodding is needed for you to challenge yourself, and you don't care that there are these artificial thresholds, why do they upset you? Is it the artificiality of the experience? Is it more natural to feel "I got to level 9 because I walked there" rather than "I got the 9th song because I satisfied the victory conditions?" Why hasn't anyone complained about not being able to see the ending movie in Halo without beating all of the levels, yet songs in DDR appear to be a strong point of contention? Is it the type of content? Is it that it feels like you're being denied access, rather than simply that you don't have access?
Or is it a question of desiring the goodies, but feeling like they are impossible to achieve, either due to skill or time constraints?
I don't mean this rhetorically... I really am curious as to the answer. Think of it as an impromptu focus test.
I've always liked how some games let you recharge your mana / up your level / etc between tries. If you fail at something after a few tries, you can charge up a usage of a supermeteo and just obliterate whatever stands in your way.
These negative feedback systems are absolutely key to getting a game balanced for a diverse skill group. Final Fantasy Legends III on the game boy would let you return to life with 1/2 of the levels you had earned since the last save point, so that you were set back a little but you would be facing the boss a much stronger party. Some racing games let you keep your powerups, or give you more. Arcade games frequently give you big guns and nitro boosts for continuing. An evil lure, certainly, but also an effective balance. Truxton gave the player three super bombs per continue (life?), thus having the effect that if you died somewhere you could simply obliterate that boss and move on (in multiplayer).
I love negative feedback systems, and would like to see more of them in games.
I assure you, nothing in there is out of habit.
The few games we've made in the past that simply gave the player everything from the start were reprimanded by critics and players alike for having no replay value. And it was a fair criticism: you're done before you start. There was no sense of progression or purpose to them. The progression can be light and the purpose can be hollow, but you still need a purpose for the player's activities in the game.
Even if the gameplay is the most fun you can imagine, you still have the feeling that there is nothing pulling you along. There is no light at the end of the tunnel. The tunnel may be worth traversing for itself, but you still have to put a light at the end.
The fact that people want these things shows that they're great motivators. And motivation is what you need to help make the player the best darned guitar player they can be, both in life and in games. Without motivation, the experience falls falt. Striking that balance between keeping stuff away and rewarding the player is delicate... it can't be too frequent or things feel like they have no value, but it can't be too sparse or else you really are simply milking the player for game time. And milking the player simply for game time is something we studiously avoid, and will continue to avoid in the future.
Also, you don't want to overload the player with too many options too soon, or they won't know what to do. Even having too deep a songlist too early will confuse. Maybe it won't befuddle the seasoned rocker / gamer, but it does befuddle a lot of people at playtests.
BTW, if you're stuck at a party without a memory card, try Yellow, Orange, Blue, Blue, Orange, Yellow, Yellow.
An older DIY design is here, and Riptide's videos as well. Build costs are estimated at 140 and 200 dollars. One more here.
The main problem with the InventGeek design is that it doesn't appear to have any tactile feedback. You need the subtle height differences to be able to read with your feet. Also, you want the standing surface in the middle to be solid metal (unless you're going to play Pump It Up, as that provides further feedback.
It also doesn't use any vertical crossbeams in the pads, leading to sensor and support disparity. This is why the base is generally built out of wood, or a bit more metal. That keeps the right side of the left sensor feeling the same as the up, down, and left sides. As it stands, I wouldn't be surprised if stepping on the right side of the left sensor crushed the pad material for a permanent button-down signal. Or if the acrylic began to bow there.
For that matter, generally you want Lucite or Lexan for the deck. Hard as hell, and going to take it for a while. But people have successfully used other things.
And if you're going to buy metal, you want a Cobalt Flux. Unless you're more casual / like your knees, at which point get an ignition. Most of the 150 metal mats will leave you disappointed, especially compared to the Cobalt. Though I've heard the 200 ninja is ok too.
I'm having nightmares already. Web 2 keeps "rising" like a friggin' zombie every few days.
You need to think outside of the box about the multimedia potential for the new Web 2.0 paradigms. Web 2.0 has already pioneered B2B information management infrastructure, location-based services software, and co-marketed proximity enabled facility authorization. Collaboration with Web 2.0 fuels the innovation that will power the integration of the next generation of worldwide technology with record brand recognition leading to two or three times the market growth rate.
"You'd have to be a real idiot to not recognize the multi-vendor capabilities and sourcing opportunities facilitated by Web 2.0", said Kate Hainsworth, executive vice president of the Technology Solutions Group at HP. "A real idiot."
Thankfully, you're right. God B wins.
Your sucking balls metaphor sucks balls. The grandparent poster's analogy is more like accidentally nibbling balls. And even then the similie only sucks balls slightly less, metaphorically speaking.
Is it possible to get subjects baned for a year for spamvertizing behavior?
Wasn't there a point in ancient history when Tom's hardware was actually, you know, good?
I vaguely remember accessible but technical articles, which talked about important things. Hardware hackery that showed exactly what an individual with a soldering iron could do if they were so inclined. Articles that were written for people who had a clue.
How long ago was that?
With Windows 95 you had a reasonably large system, with a lot going into it, but it was unstable and crashed all the time.
.cab files for the original installation, allowing the system to be repaired with the original files at the expense of keeping the original files around.
So they started introducing redundancy, including the
Then they added system backup points, which backup huge chunks of the system across multiple points automatically, functionally doubling the size of the installation.
I'm guessing they'll start doing automatic full backups in Vista, thus doubling the OS size again. Hence, a 1 GB system balloons out to 8 GB.
It's not a dupe. The original poster just finished reading the article.
Yes. It's a dark day for the Ninja Party.