Wow! I've never seen a Linux zealot come right out and say it so bluntly! You mean, it's not about using the best tool? It's non-conformity? Hmmmm.
and you still haven't, that guy isn't a linux zealot, he's a mac zealot. and a zealot of any kind (and you seem to be a 'i'm so objective i use windoze' zealot) is stupid.
Listen, I used a Mac for years, but only because it was the best tool for what I did. (Graphic Design). As soon as I started doing other things (like programming business apps), I bought a Windows machine -- which, like it or not, is the platform choice for the business world.
uhh, ok great for you. what the hell does this have to do with what was being discussed?
no one is arguing that the business world is currently orbiting around m$.. that's a well known, widly accepted fact. it is also a generally accepted fact that this is not a good thing. (whether you hate m$ or just think there should be more diversity.)
There may come a time when I will use Linux or SunOS or whatever, because I feel like learning a new platform and that is the best tool for the job
it hink the bold portion is key because they already are the best platforms for various jobs, the question is not 'do you need to learn this?' because m$ has done a terrific job in making sure it is *possible* to do everything on windoze, because they want to own and control your experience with computers (and they have for the last several years been branching out from just that realm, as we all well know.)
you never/have/ to learn something new, you can always stumble through life ignorant and limited to shitty OSes that crash and bog down even the simplest tasks, requiring you to reboot, etc.
The important difference is that GNU/Linux *wants* to become the everyman's OS, whereas Mac OS users don't
want that to happen. I should know: I'm a Mac user that jumps ship when Mac OS can't handle what I want to do.
If Mac OS were in the position of Windows, I probably wouldn't use it. Talk to any Mac users and you'll notice
right away that they have no interest in making everyone in the world us Mac OS, just the people who care enough
about their experience to use Mac OS. In the past, this was the way with Linux, but now there are commercial
interest trying to displace Windows, so we can bet the distro wars will flame up. I might keep using Debian or
Slackware, whether they are the best or not, just becase everyone else on my street runs Red Hat or SuSE.
'i do it because everyone else doesn't!'
are you, by any chance, 12 years old? what the fuck does it matter what everyone else does? do you think somehow that makes you unique? no, it does not. you aren't *doing* anything new, you're merely attempting (feebly) to be different.
this is the philosophy of morons. like when nirvana became popular and suddenly a lot of 'fans' abandoned them. 'well now EVERYBODY likes them! i only liked them 'coz nobody else knew about them!' that's pure stupidity!
either it's good or it's not. either it does what you want or it doesn't.
fads and anti-fads are things for imbeciles to worry about.
i can say bye-bye to my karma but i think this needed to be said, and i do NOT think it is flamebait.
i've always used linux because it runs faster than windoze, and more stably as well. i do not use macos because it is restrictive, ugly and slow. (though i'm sure many mac zealots will disagree.)
...dave
hahahahahah man you're dumb:) i don't know what your native language is, but it's not english, obviously,.. and your thought processes are not in the language of 'logic';P
i addressed all your arguments in my post. sorry, sir you are wrong:P
...dave
your post was so self-absorbed i really don't want to answer it at all, but i will.
Not everyone plays PC games and like the experience
thank you captain obvious,.. your revelation astounds me. next you are going to tell me that not everyone is named dave matteson and not everyone lives in ann arbor and works at the u of m.. wow.. thank you sir! i would never have known without you!
You might because you are surperior to the majority of U.S. population with your technical skills.
now the fact alone that you think playing PC games requires technical skills tells me you are probably a mac user, and you are very, very dumb (not all mac users are but some are, just like a lot of linux users and windoze users,... and you are one of these dumb people.)
You represent a minor percentage of the population as a whole
yes and you would be surprised what a minor percentage owns game consoles, and what a major percentage owns PCs. (of the US and other industrialized countries of course,.. the world as a whole is lacking in computers.. well i wouldn't say lacking, it's probably a good thing,.. but most people the world over do not have them...)
Most people in this world are stupid as hell
this is the only thing in your post that is intelligent at all. unfortunately you do not seem to realize you are one of the throng of stupid people who annoy intelligent people like me.
Consoles are fun. They are meants to be played in the living room, with other people, preferably with aids of alcohol and other substances. PC games are different; they are traditionally enjoyed in solitude in the physical sense of the word; the on-line aspect is virtual.
that might be how/you/ play console games, but not all console owners play sports games. most do not, in fact. sorry to burst your bubble. a lot do, but not near all.
the fact that you would say something about 'traditionally' and 'on-line' in the same sentence shows how ignorant you are. on-line gaming started getting big with DOOM.. that was maybe 7 years ago? not really very long.
People don't buy consoles, and by extension, their games because they can't get it on PC
yet again, your ignorance makes you wrong.
yes. they. do.
look at why you bought your console if you have one? i am sure it was to play a game that you couldn't get for the PC, or that if it WAS available, was not as good (some games are good on both, but most usually have a situation where they are better on one or the other)
people bought N64s to play Mario64 and Zelda64.
people bought PSXes to play... i dunno crash bandicoot, NFL'99, Gran Turismo, et cetera.
people will only buy the X-Box if there is a 'killer game' for it which makes people want to buy it. this is doubtful because who is going to program games for a Windows/Direct-X system? PC developers! they will port their PC games to the X-box. companies which have been console developers will already be busy making more games for the PSX2 by then, and will not be interested in starting X-box projects. they have finite resources. the PSX2 will be (and *is*) very wide-spread, the X-box has an uphill battle and it is doomed to failure.
the only reason/anyone/ anticipates it is because they are mongoloids who read M$ PR hype and eat it up like pigs in shit.
All this techno-jargon about the specs of different consoles? They don't care
techo-jargon? hmm what techno-jargon did i say? you are a very stupid person.
no, most people do not care. but i can tell you one thing, the teenage boys who will be pressuring their parents to buy the consoles do care.
it won't come into play as much as you'd think by looking at how much the game sites focus on it, but it does matter. it matters especially because the consumer needs to look at the console's games and go 'whoah', like they did with the PSX and the N64 and they are doing with the DreamCast and PSX2 now. this won't happen with the X-Box because their home PC, or their friends' PC will be smoking it in the graphics (and especially sound) departments.
As long as the console looks cool, the games looks playable, people will buy them.
wrong. i am out of energy to discuss this point anymore, but it is wrong.
you are very, very stupid. please shut up. go back to lurking.
It costs $200
It is designed for my 32-inch TV
No 30-minute DirectX downloads every time I get a new game
A standard, decent controller the game was designed for
No crashes
the X-box will not cost $200.
you can hook your PC up to your TV (and as i said, and i am 100% right on this, almost all games which will be created for the X-Box will also be released for the PC except those made by companies which M$ has controlling interests in) if you really want to, but really, if i could i'd rather play most games on my 19" monitor than my 32" tv...higher res is better in most cases (than a couple more inches. obviously this isn't the case where you need to have a lot of people see the screen at once)
the x-box will run direct-x... i even said this in my previous post,.. you obviously didn't read it. you think they'll never update direct-x again? this is M$.. they will not be able to leave it alone. it has a hdd for a reason.
a standard controller is a Good Thing for some games,... but not enough to warrant buying a console.
i'm still skeptical about the x-box's no crash promise.. in fact, i'd go so far as to say i don't believe it. it's going to run windows and direct-x.
...dave
besides final fantasy and need for speed, exactly what games are shared between the PSX and the PC? hmm not a lot really.. the vast majority of PSX games are not available on the PC.
it will not be an order of magnitude better than the PSX2, sorry, you are on crack. you are buying M$ PR hype. if you knew how to read the technical data on both systems and understand them, then you'd see this. but that's ok. i expected several replies like yours when i made the post.
you are entirely right very few people would buy a $400 system,.. most parents are not going to buy their kids $300 systems either. the N64 and PSX didn't start selling a lot 'til their prices dropped. the manufacturers have learned that they can introduce the systems at higher prices and still sell a lot to insane hardcore gamers (i.e. me, probably you, and a lot of other/. readers) and then lower it later for the more mainstream market. though, actually, come to think of it, they probably do sell most of them to people that consider themselves hardcore gamers. actually that would be an interesting graph to see, the curve of PSX sales over time.
anyway, my point was, the x-box is going to suck ass. sorry, that $300 system vs. $3000 computer comparison is bullshit and you know it. they won't have to buy a new computer, most people (especially those buying consoles) have computers already, and all they would have to buy is a better video card. thus the $300 comparison.
1. yes the kind of dev environment the system provides matters. but not as much as you'd think.. the console game development world is not like the PC world. companies like id software do not exist.. it is a very expensive proposition getting a game released on a console, you can't just release some shareware version across the net, etc. (at least not yet.) the decision whether or not to make a game for a system is generally made by a bunch of suits. now, the reason the n64 was so lacking in games that the n64 cartridge was only capable of holding about 20 megabytes (of course if they wanted the cartridge to cost $200 they could have made higher capacity ones, but they were already expensive enough at that size... $70).. so, this precluded a lot of the question of what platform to develop for in the past. the new nintendo has 1.5gig capacity per disk, and i would assume, can swap disks while running. so, while that is less than the DVD discs of the PSX2.. it should be enough to bring developers back. nintendo is a bit more fascist about content than sony as well...
2) the x-box will be a waste of money. i've said this countless times in the past. it is a scaled-down PC. by the time it comes out (christmas of 2001 is projected) it will be obsolete already. as it is the hardware is not very impressive. especially given that it will likely cost $300-400.. you will be able to by a video card for your PC to make it outperform the x-box by the time it comes out. also, other than the developers that M$ *buys* (see: bungie), it is very reasonable to expect that every game which comes out for the x-box (which will run windoze and direct-x) will also be released for the PC.
and the main reason for buying a console is?
to play games you cannot get on the PC!
because look at the games *i* have my playstation for : Gran Turismo (1 and 2) and street fighter alpha 3. both of these would run much better, and be more fun on my PC... but they are on the PSX, so that's why i have it.
we are at the same point we're always at when new consoles come out,.. they get ahead of PCs in graphics for a couple months, but not all that long... the x-box will have no time ahead of the pack, the PSX2 i expect will have 8 months to a year, the nintendo, even less.
people said similar crap about the South Park movie, and it was great. so, i advise you to..
rm/ass/head
thanks:)
...dave
uhrmm,.. one bit of advice,..
on
Techno Jacket
·
· Score: 1
lay off the crack.
you are completely nuts.
if you're carrying around that much crap you need to sit down and reevaluate your priorities. i recently got a cell phone, but i have it clipped onto my pocket, so,.. i don't need to worry about it.
i don't even own a discman or anything anymore.
as for GPS... i can kind of understand it for the car, but,.. if you don't know where you are when you're walking around often enough that it would be good to have it on a PIECE OF CLOTHING, then,... again.. lay off the crack. i could see how GPS could be useful when hiking and such but, really.. that's kind of cheating. use a compass.
anyway... if you don't think those clothes are preposterous you need to get reconnected with reality.
...dave
...dave
someone needs to print this article out in colour, laminate it and save it.
you know those articles from the 60s we read where they predict a jetsons-like world with flying cars, et cetera, which make use fall on the ground and roll around with laughter?
well, in 30 years, this is the article people will read and die of laughter.
What is Open Inventor?
Open Inventor is an object-oriented 3D toolkit offering a comprehensive solution to interactive graphics programming problems. It presents a programming model based on a 3D scene database that dramatically simplifies graphics programming. It includes a rich set of objects such as cubes, polygons, text, materials, cameras, lights, trackballs, handle boxes, 3D viewers, and editors that speed up your programming time and extend your 3D programming capabilities.
so, basically it's a set of OpenGL models and widgets,.. i haven't gotten to look at it in depth but if i had to guess i'd say it could be quite handy. i have yet to see it implimented in anything, though.
someone go out and make a 3d tetris with it;)
...dave
ok, putting aside the fact that this can and would be used to invade the privacy of innocent people (probably more often than guilty people), even the guilty have rights until they are proven so, and that means they have rights against the methods that are used to prove them guilty.
you cannot say 'hey that guy looks like a guy who would rob a kwik-e-mart!' and then go up to him and take his fingerprints, or search his house for the clothes the robber wore.
without the requirement of getting a warrant (and even then i don't like it), these kinds of surveillance capabilities are too much power put in the hands of ignorant piggies.
attitudes like yours are facilitating the police state that we live in.
that kind of thing might be neat and fun, especially if you could turn it off at will... if it was just a wrist-band or something.
but as something the gov't and liberty-trampling police organizations can make use of to invade my privacy without any notice, i resent it.
it's not about whether it might be useful or fun as a toy, it's about other people having the ability to invade your privacy without you ever knowing anything about it.
i don't really want the whole world to know, for instance, what kind of porn i prefer, or even something as trivial as what stores and restaurants i frequent.
these are things that only the people i choose to tell and associate with should know, not something any little piggy can find out with the push of a few buttons.
if you don't see the threat of these kinds of things, i really don't know what to tell you except put down the crack pipe.
...dave
you're just pointing out a situation where you CAN'T get the CDs.. but you would if you could for a decent price, right?
well, if you don't care about quality you might not... anyway, this has nothing to do with the point i was making.
i listen to a lot of music you just can't walk into the random CD store and find, but i know good stores i can go to and find rare CDs, and i make it my business to do so.
...dave
i've used LAME, i've used everything, you are just not experienced in the ways of the audiophile. you even admit you haven't done any listening tests, why then do you bother trying to correct me?
i think most people, if they do some listening, will notice the difference. it is quite striking to me.
and to the person below, my MOD/S3M comment was a joke.. duh..:P
...dave
when going to CDs... that you won't hear the difference, but if you listen to a pristine vinyl LP on a high quality system and compare it to the CD equivallent, the vinyl LP still sounds better. it's smoother, has a 'warmer' sound to it.
obviously, though, vinyl wears out and the sound quality is never quite as good after the first few play throughs.
you are wrong about CDs containing more than our ears can use... that's like saying a movie contains more than our eyes can use. yes, you may not notice everything about the movie on every viewing, but on subsequent viewings you will notice things you didn't before...etc.
i realize there are also physical limitations to our ears, as there are to our eyes,.. however, once again, people can tell the difference between 60 frames per second and 80. even though your eye cannot distinguish each individual frame, you can tell one is 'smoother' than the other.
if you're not an audiophile, MP3s may be fine for you, maybe you cannot tell the difference.
Blank CDRs are going for about $0.50 / disk. Using ogg or mp3 format, they hold roughly 10 CDs worth of music on one disk
but this isn't all good, it's a question of quantity vs. quality:P obviously. but i thought it needed to be said... some people don't realize, but if you listen... at least, i can't help but hear the difference. mp3s soudn awful to me.
MP3 players which double as CD Players are the perfect solution -- you can burn your own music collection onto CDs and listen to them anywhere. As the original poster correctly points out, we need ogg support on these hardware mp3 players! Fortunately, most are flashable, so upgrading to new, better formats (such as ogg) shouldn't be a problem.
the whole hardware-mp3-player hype is mind boggling to me. i mean, i understand it, as a fad and gadgetry thing, but.. you're basically making a downgrade in your audio system when you go from a CD player to a straight-up mp3 player. the hybrids are the obvious, good, middle-ground.. as long as the price difference is reasonable.
the hardware fad is so bizarre though,.. there was never this kind of reaction over MOD or S3M;P
...dave
mp3 doesn't sound nearly as good as CD, and probably Ogg Vorbis won't either. they're good enough for listening to a song that i don't like enough to buy (ie, i only like the one song by the band), or checking out a new CD that i'm unsure whether i like or not, etc. etc.
but for serious listening there isn't a format that can replace my CDs yet. (yet.) thus, hardware mp3 players have always seemed rather useless to me. (why would i want to listen to an mp3 in a place where, obviously, i could have a CD player?) now the hybrids that can play CDs containing both are convenient, though i will more than likely, not put any mp3-CDs in...
minidisc is cute, but, that's a whole other thread...
...dave
Slashdot Mirror
Wow! I've never seen a Linux zealot come right out and say it so bluntly! You mean, it's not about using the best tool? It's non-conformity? Hmmmm.
and you still haven't, that guy isn't a linux zealot, he's a mac zealot. and a zealot of any kind (and you seem to be a 'i'm so objective i use windoze' zealot) is stupid.
Listen, I used a Mac for years, but only because it was the best tool for what I did. (Graphic Design). As soon as I started doing other things (like programming business apps), I bought a Windows machine -- which, like it or not, is the platform choice for the business world.
uhh, ok great for you. what the hell does this have to do with what was being discussed?
no one is arguing that the business world is currently orbiting around m$.. that's a well known, widly accepted fact. it is also a generally accepted fact that this is not a good thing. (whether you hate m$ or just think there should be more diversity.)
There may come a time when I will use Linux or SunOS or whatever, because I feel like learning a new platform and that is the best tool for the job
it hink the bold portion is key because they already are the best platforms for various jobs, the question is not 'do you need to learn this?' because m$ has done a terrific job in making sure it is *possible* to do everything on windoze, because they want to own and control your experience with computers (and they have for the last several years been branching out from just that realm, as we all well know.)
you never
I can learn and be objective.
it would appear not.
...dave
these are the words of a moron :
The important difference is that GNU/Linux *wants* to become the everyman's OS, whereas Mac OS users don't
want that to happen. I should know: I'm a Mac user that jumps ship when Mac OS can't handle what I want to do.
If Mac OS were in the position of Windows, I probably wouldn't use it. Talk to any Mac users and you'll notice
right away that they have no interest in making everyone in the world us Mac OS, just the people who care enough
about their experience to use Mac OS. In the past, this was the way with Linux, but now there are commercial
interest trying to displace Windows, so we can bet the distro wars will flame up. I might keep using Debian or
Slackware, whether they are the best or not, just becase everyone else on my street runs Red Hat or SuSE.
'i do it because everyone else doesn't!'
are you, by any chance, 12 years old? what the fuck does it matter what everyone else does? do you think somehow that makes you unique? no, it does not. you aren't *doing* anything new, you're merely attempting (feebly) to be different.
this is the philosophy of morons. like when nirvana became popular and suddenly a lot of 'fans' abandoned them. 'well now EVERYBODY likes them! i only liked them 'coz nobody else knew about them!' that's pure stupidity!
either it's good or it's not. either it does what you want or it doesn't.
fads and anti-fads are things for imbeciles to worry about.
i can say bye-bye to my karma but i think this needed to be said, and i do NOT think it is flamebait.
i've always used linux because it runs faster than windoze, and more stably as well. i do not use macos because it is restrictive, ugly and slow. (though i'm sure many mac zealots will disagree.)
...dave
hahahahahah man you're dumb
i addressed all your arguments in my post. sorry, sir you are wrong
...dave
..that just anybody can have children.
your post was so self-absorbed i really don't want to answer it at all, but i will.
Not everyone plays PC games and like the experience
thank you captain obvious,.. your revelation astounds me. next you are going to tell me that not everyone is named dave matteson and not everyone lives in ann arbor and works at the u of m.. wow.. thank you sir! i would never have known without you!
You might because you are surperior to the majority of U.S. population with your technical skills.
now the fact alone that you think playing PC games requires technical skills tells me you are probably a mac user, and you are very, very dumb (not all mac users are but some are, just like a lot of linux users and windoze users,... and you are one of these dumb people.)
You represent a minor percentage of the population as a whole
yes and you would be surprised what a minor percentage owns game consoles, and what a major percentage owns PCs. (of the US and other industrialized countries of course,.. the world as a whole is lacking in computers.. well i wouldn't say lacking, it's probably a good thing,.. but most people the world over do not have them...)
Most people in this world are stupid as hell
this is the only thing in your post that is intelligent at all. unfortunately you do not seem to realize you are one of the throng of stupid people who annoy intelligent people like me.
Consoles are fun. They are meants to be played in the living room, with other people, preferably with aids of alcohol and other substances. PC games are different; they are traditionally enjoyed in solitude in the physical sense of the word; the on-line aspect is virtual.
that might be how
the fact that you would say something about 'traditionally' and 'on-line' in the same sentence shows how ignorant you are. on-line gaming started getting big with DOOM.. that was maybe 7 years ago? not really very long.
People don't buy consoles, and by extension, their games because they can't get it on PC
yet again, your ignorance makes you wrong.
yes. they. do.
look at why you bought your console if you have one? i am sure it was to play a game that you couldn't get for the PC, or that if it WAS available, was not as good (some games are good on both, but most usually have a situation where they are better on one or the other)
people bought N64s to play Mario64 and Zelda64.
people bought PSXes to play... i dunno crash bandicoot, NFL'99, Gran Turismo, et cetera.
people will only buy the X-Box if there is a 'killer game' for it which makes people want to buy it. this is doubtful because who is going to program games for a Windows/Direct-X system? PC developers! they will port their PC games to the X-box. companies which have been console developers will already be busy making more games for the PSX2 by then, and will not be interested in starting X-box projects. they have finite resources. the PSX2 will be (and *is*) very wide-spread, the X-box has an uphill battle and it is doomed to failure.
the only reason
All this techno-jargon about the specs of different consoles? They don't care
techo-jargon? hmm what techno-jargon did i say? you are a very stupid person.
no, most people do not care. but i can tell you one thing, the teenage boys who will be pressuring their parents to buy the consoles do care.
it won't come into play as much as you'd think by looking at how much the game sites focus on it, but it does matter. it matters especially because the consumer needs to look at the console's games and go 'whoah', like they did with the PSX and the N64 and they are doing with the DreamCast and PSX2 now. this won't happen with the X-Box because their home PC, or their friends' PC will be smoking it in the graphics (and especially sound) departments.
As long as the console looks cool, the games looks playable, people will buy them.
wrong. i am out of energy to discuss this point anymore, but it is wrong.
you are very, very stupid. please shut up. go back to lurking.
i don't like you.
No. The reason(s) for buying a console is:
It costs $200
It is designed for my 32-inch TV
No 30-minute DirectX downloads every time I get a new game
A standard, decent controller the game was designed for
No crashes
the X-box will not cost $200.
you can hook your PC up to your TV (and as i said, and i am 100% right on this, almost all games which will be created for the X-Box will also be released for the PC except those made by companies which M$ has controlling interests in) if you really want to, but really, if i could i'd rather play most games on my 19" monitor than my 32" tv...higher res is better in most cases (than a couple more inches. obviously this isn't the case where you need to have a lot of people see the screen at once)
the x-box will run direct-x... i even said this in my previous post,.. you obviously didn't read it. you think they'll never update direct-x again? this is M$.. they will not be able to leave it alone. it has a hdd for a reason.
a standard controller is a Good Thing for some games,... but not enough to warrant buying a console.
i'm still skeptical about the x-box's no crash promise.. in fact, i'd go so far as to say i don't believe it. it's going to run windows and direct-x.
...dave
that means they aren't wasting their money.
besides final fantasy and need for speed, exactly what games are shared between the PSX and the PC? hmm not a lot really.. the vast majority of PSX games are not available on the PC.
it will not be an order of magnitude better than the PSX2, sorry, you are on crack. you are buying M$ PR hype. if you knew how to read the technical data on both systems and understand them, then you'd see this. but that's ok. i expected several replies like yours when i made the post.
you are entirely right very few people would buy a $400 system,.. most parents are not going to buy their kids $300 systems either. the N64 and PSX didn't start selling a lot 'til their prices dropped. the manufacturers have learned that they can introduce the systems at higher prices and still sell a lot to insane hardcore gamers (i.e. me, probably you, and a lot of other
anyway, my point was, the x-box is going to suck ass. sorry, that $300 system vs. $3000 computer comparison is bullshit and you know it. they won't have to buy a new computer, most people (especially those buying consoles) have computers already, and all they would have to buy is a better video card. thus the $300 comparison.
the bum around the corner picks up signals from deep space with his little aluminum foil hat! that couldn't have cost more than $0.20..
...dave
lemme 'splain a couple things to you..
1. yes the kind of dev environment the system provides matters. but not as much as you'd think.. the console game development world is not like the PC world. companies like id software do not exist.. it is a very expensive proposition getting a game released on a console, you can't just release some shareware version across the net, etc. (at least not yet.) the decision whether or not to make a game for a system is generally made by a bunch of suits. now, the reason the n64 was so lacking in games that the n64 cartridge was only capable of holding about 20 megabytes (of course if they wanted the cartridge to cost $200 they could have made higher capacity ones, but they were already expensive enough at that size... $70).. so, this precluded a lot of the question of what platform to develop for in the past. the new nintendo has 1.5gig capacity per disk, and i would assume, can swap disks while running. so, while that is less than the DVD discs of the PSX2.. it should be enough to bring developers back. nintendo is a bit more fascist about content than sony as well...
2) the x-box will be a waste of money. i've said this countless times in the past. it is a scaled-down PC. by the time it comes out (christmas of 2001 is projected) it will be obsolete already. as it is the hardware is not very impressive. especially given that it will likely cost $300-400
and the main reason for buying a console is?
to play games you cannot get on the PC!
because look at the games *i* have my playstation for : Gran Turismo (1 and 2) and street fighter alpha 3. both of these would run much better, and be more fun on my PC... but they are on the PSX, so that's why i have it.
we are at the same point we're always at when new consoles come out,.. they get ahead of PCs in graphics for a couple months, but not all that long... the x-box will have no time ahead of the pack, the PSX2 i expect will have 8 months to a year, the nintendo, even less.
anyway that's enough rambling.
you should go back to your Dharma and Greg episodse and stay away from the Simpsons and South Park which, apparently, go over your head.
"Bigger, Longer and Uncut" is one of the funniest things ever to cross a movie screen.
'Essen mein scheisse!"
...dave
last season had some great moments,..
"I don't even believe in Jeebus!"
people said similar crap about the South Park movie, and it was great. so, i advise you to
rm
thanks
...dave
lay off the crack.
you are completely nuts.
if you're carrying around that much crap you need to sit down and reevaluate your priorities. i recently got a cell phone, but i have it clipped onto my pocket, so,.. i don't need to worry about it.
i don't even own a discman or anything anymore.
as for GPS... i can kind of understand it for the car, but,.. if you don't know where you are when you're walking around often enough that it would be good to have it on a PIECE OF CLOTHING, then,... again.. lay off the crack. i could see how GPS could be useful when hiking and such but, really.. that's kind of cheating. use a compass.
anyway... if you don't think those clothes are preposterous you need to get reconnected with reality.
...dave
...dave
someone needs to print this article out in colour, laminate it and save it.
you know those articles from the 60s we read where they predict a jetsons-like world with flying cars, et cetera, which make use fall on the ground and roll around with laughter?
well, in 30 years, this is the article people will read and die of laughter.
oh...my...god.
...dave
from the FAQ :
What is Open Inventor?
Open Inventor is an object-oriented 3D toolkit offering a comprehensive solution to interactive graphics programming problems. It presents a programming model based on a 3D scene database that dramatically simplifies graphics programming. It includes a rich set of objects such as cubes, polygons, text, materials, cameras, lights, trackballs, handle boxes, 3D viewers, and editors that speed up your programming time and extend your 3D programming capabilities.
so, basically it's a set of OpenGL models and widgets,.. i haven't gotten to look at it in depth but if i had to guess i'd say it could be quite handy. i have yet to see it implimented in anything, though.
someone go out and make a 3d tetris with it
...dave
just install a little chip ala cartman's v-chip which shocks the little piggies every time they break the law!
unfortunately it wouldn't be long before most major cities were overrun with the smell of bacon.
...dave
ok, putting aside the fact that this can and would be used to invade the privacy of innocent people (probably more often than guilty people), even the guilty have rights until they are proven so, and that means they have rights against the methods that are used to prove them guilty.
you cannot say 'hey that guy looks like a guy who would rob a kwik-e-mart!' and then go up to him and take his fingerprints, or search his house for the clothes the robber wore.
without the requirement of getting a warrant (and even then i don't like it), these kinds of surveillance capabilities are too much power put in the hands of ignorant piggies.
attitudes like yours are facilitating the police state that we live in.
as the snooty waiter in ferris bueller says :
i weep for the future.
...dave
that kind of thing might be neat and fun, especially if you could turn it off at will... if it was just a wrist-band or something.
but as something the gov't and liberty-trampling police organizations can make use of to invade my privacy without any notice, i resent it.
it's not about whether it might be useful or fun as a toy, it's about other people having the ability to invade your privacy without you ever knowing anything about it.
i don't really want the whole world to know, for instance, what kind of porn i prefer, or even something as trivial as what stores and restaurants i frequent.
these are things that only the people i choose to tell and associate with should know, not something any little piggy can find out with the push of a few buttons.
if you don't see the threat of these kinds of things, i really don't know what to tell you except put down the crack pipe.
...dave
oh my god that's hilarious, i'm so sorry
i think you should be able to get Hazardous Work Condition pay for that..
...dave
think of all the hundreds of characters you could use for kludgey variable names. you think bad code is unreadable now...
oi!
we should be glad that we came up with this stuff
...dave
you're just pointing out a situation where you CAN'T get the CDs.. but you would if you could for a decent price, right?
well, if you don't care about quality you might not... anyway, this has nothing to do with the point i was making.
i listen to a lot of music you just can't walk into the random CD store and find, but i know good stores i can go to and find rare CDs, and i make it my business to do so.
...dave
i can't currently and why would i want to install a system that would allow me to?
and no it is not going to be the same quality as a CD player, that's a load of crap. see the other thread on this subject.
...dave
i've used LAME, i've used everything, you are just not experienced in the ways of the audiophile. you even admit you haven't done any listening tests, why then do you bother trying to correct me?
i think most people, if they do some listening, will notice the difference. it is quite striking to me.
and to the person below, my MOD/S3M comment was a joke.. duh..
...dave
when going to CDs... that you won't hear the difference, but if you listen to a pristine vinyl LP on a high quality system and compare it to the CD equivallent, the vinyl LP still sounds better. it's smoother, has a 'warmer' sound to it.
obviously, though, vinyl wears out and the sound quality is never quite as good after the first few play throughs.
you are wrong about CDs containing more than our ears can use... that's like saying a movie contains more than our eyes can use. yes, you may not notice everything about the movie on every viewing, but on subsequent viewings you will notice things you didn't before...etc.
i realize there are also physical limitations to our ears, as there are to our eyes,.. however, once again, people can tell the difference between 60 frames per second and 80. even though your eye cannot distinguish each individual frame, you can tell one is 'smoother' than the other.
if you're not an audiophile, MP3s may be fine for you, maybe you cannot tell the difference.
i can.
...dave
even the best MP3s, and i have made them myself, do not sound as good.
MP3 is lossy compression, this is an expected..er... feature.
...dave
Blank CDRs are going for about $0.50 / disk. Using ogg or mp3 format, they hold roughly 10 CDs worth of music on one disk
:P obviously. but i thought it needed to be said... some people don't realize, but if you listen... at least, i can't help but hear the difference. mp3s soudn awful to me.
;P
but this isn't all good, it's a question of quantity vs. quality
MP3 players which double as CD Players are the perfect solution -- you can burn your own music collection onto CDs and listen to them anywhere. As the original poster correctly points out, we need ogg support on these hardware mp3 players! Fortunately, most are flashable, so upgrading to new, better formats (such as ogg) shouldn't be a problem.
the whole hardware-mp3-player hype is mind boggling to me. i mean, i understand it, as a fad and gadgetry thing, but.. you're basically making a downgrade in your audio system when you go from a CD player to a straight-up mp3 player. the hybrids are the obvious, good, middle-ground.. as long as the price difference is reasonable.
the hardware fad is so bizarre though,.. there was never this kind of reaction over MOD or S3M
...dave
mp3 doesn't sound nearly as good as CD, and probably Ogg Vorbis won't either. they're good enough for listening to a song that i don't like enough to buy (ie, i only like the one song by the band), or checking out a new CD that i'm unsure whether i like or not, etc. etc.
but for serious listening there isn't a format that can replace my CDs yet. (yet.) thus, hardware mp3 players have always seemed rather useless to me. (why would i want to listen to an mp3 in a place where, obviously, i could have a CD player?) now the hybrids that can play CDs containing both are convenient, though i will more than likely, not put any mp3-CDs in...
minidisc is cute, but, that's a whole other thread...
...dave