The difference this time is that the DS is actually a fantastic system. The Virtual Boy genuinely sucked. So it seems like a major waste of a great system for Nintendo to release it and then release another one a year later that is the "true" Gameboy successor.
We've already pushed off sound, graphics, and now physics onto seperate processors. Why not just craft an entire game console onto a single card and be done with it? Jeesh.
I love the DS, and I'd love to dev for it. But one thing that confuses me is Nintendo's vague stance about its future. Apparently, they plan a new Gameboy successor later this year and probably revealed at E3. However, most people don't consider the DS a "third-tier" and see it as the Gameboy successor. Not only will people get confused and upset after having already bought this system only to see new Gameboy come out, but developers will hold off on developing for the DS to wait and see what the new Gameboy will be like. Chance are they will program for the new Gameboy over the DS based on name recognition alone.
Does anyone have any info or links that better explain Nintendo's position on the future of the DS? Was it a one-shot deal? That's unfortunate if so, because it means there won't be a large library of games for this things. Already, it's pretty meager.
Are people here saying they're not "Enemies of Windows" who generalize about the Windows experience and try to portray it as a BSOD-ridden failure? For god's sake, I still see Clippy and Bob jokes here--five years after they stopped being either funny or applicable.
I find it all disturbing. They're operating systems. They're collections of code that don't give a shit either way who says what about them. People have instilled emotional attachment into these things.
Except that the search term was "traffic+estimate", and search keywords don't appear in the title pages of other cached pages on Google. Mostly because it's against Google's own rules!
What I find amusing and disturbing is how Google accepts any crazy left-wing website for its Google News page (see Democratic Underground), but often refuses conservative sites like LGF and Powerline for various bizarre reasons (for instance, Google claims the sites they list in Google News must have a staff of more than one person...yet they list several left-wing websites that are one-person blogs). See here and here.
They also refused gun ads in their results, but allowed all those phoney Internet pharmacies to advertise, where any kid wanting to get doped up could get some shipped in the mail.
Just saying. If you want more information, see here. To be perfectly fair, there are plenty of sites claiming Google News is conservative-biased. You can make up your own mind.
Every month, someone "takes on" an iPod. The next month, we don't hear about them again.
FM tuner? I can buy one of those as an accessory add-on thanks to the burgeoning "iPod economy," as Jobs puts it. I even have that FM broadcaster that lets me dial into the frequency with my car radio to hear my iPod through my car speakers without any special hookups.
I don't see Sony's player going anywhere. They feature a display, which Apple abandoned as being pointless in a tiny flash player (and they're right). And it's still more expensive.
...then we can go after Microsoft. Anyone remember when they had Windows Server 2003 beta running on an online server for a hacking contest? As I recall, in response, someone else then promptly stuck up a Linux server and challenged it to be hacked as well.
Does anyone remember what happened to either of these contests?
Instead, I'll link to this informative GMail page from Google-Watch and post a small excerpt (I suggest anyone interested read the whole page):
Google offers 1 gig of storage, which is many times the storage offered by Yahoo or Hotmail, or other Internet service providers that we know about. The powerful searching encourages account holders to never delete anything. It takes three clicks to put a message into the trash, and more effort to delete this message. It's much easier to "archive" the message, or just leave it in the inbox and let the powerful searching keep track of it. Google admits that even deleted messages will remain on their system, and may also be accessible internally at Google, for an indefinite period of time.
Google has been spinning their original position in press interviews, and with an informal page described as "a few words about privacy and Gmail." When we see fresh material from Google, we check the modification date at the bottom of the terms-of-use page and privacy page for Gmail. If these dates are still April 6 and April 8, we know that nothing has changed. Google can modify these pages too, any way they want and whenever they want, unilaterally. But at least these two pages carry slightly more legal weight than other pages, because Google should attempt to notify users of significant changes in these formal policies.
A new California law, the Online Privacy Protection Act, went into effect on July 1, 2004. Google changed their main privacy policy that same day because the previous version sidestepped important issues and might have been illegal. For the first time in Google's history, the language in their new policy makes it clear that they will be pooling all the information they collect on you from all of their various services. Moreover, they may keep this information indefinitely, and give this information to whomever they wish. All that's required is for Google to "have a good faith belief that access, preservation or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary to protect the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public." Google, you may recall, already believes that as a corporation they are utterly incapable of bad faith. Their corporate motto is "Don't be evil," and they even made sure that the Securities and Exchange Commission got this message in Google's IPO filing.
Google's policies are essentially no different than the policies of Microsoft, Yahoo, Alexa and Amazon. However, these others have been spelling out their nasty policies in detail for years now. By way of contrast, we've had email from indignant Google fans who defended Google by using the old privacy language -- but while doing so they arrived at exactly the wrong interpretation of Google's actual position! Now those emails will stop, because Google's position is clear at last. It's amazing how a vague privacy policy, a minimalist browser interface, and an unconventional corporate culture have convinced so many that Google is different on issues that matter.
After 180 days in the U.S., email messages lose their status as a protected communication under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and become just another database record. This means that a subpoena instead of a warrant is all that's needed to force Google to produce a copy. Other countries may even lack this basic protection, and Google's databases are distributed all over the world. Since the Patriot Act was passed, it's unclear whether this ECPA protection is worth much anymore in the U.S., or whether it even applies to email that originates from non-citizens in other countries.
Google's relationships with government officials in all of the dozens of countries where they operate are a mystery, because Google never makes any statements about this. But here's a clue: Google uses the term "governmental request" three times on their terms-of-use page and once on their privacy page. Google's language
Google sets a cookie that: 1.) Tracks your IP. 2.) Tracks your usage. 3.) Doesn't expire until 2038.
Google's privacy policies state that: 1.) Any information on you is fair game. 2.) They will happily turn over any information they have on you at any government request. 3.) Your Gmail may reside on their servers indefinitely, even after you delete it. This may also be "indexed" on their servers and the contents read at any time.
Google also employs an ex-CIA guy with top secret security clearance in the government.
I don't want to know what Google might suddenly do with the indexed contents of a hard drive, but their policies state they'll turn over anything to the government. So what's to stop the government from going on an anti-terrorism binge and asking for whatever the hell they want? They'll have every search term you've ever done (think of the crazy shit you've searched for late on a Saturday night), every e-mail you've ever read and sent, and the indexed contents of your hard drive.
Um, no thanks.
People have fallen for Google without reading between the lines, and Google even invented a cute little slogan ("Don't be evil") to appear nicer than they are.
Call me paranoid, but I don't buy it. I refuse to use any service from a company whose policies don't protect my privacy and will hand over anything they want and index files even after I delete them from their servers. It's crazy.
Not to mention their search results have sucked since 2003, but that's totally beside the point.
Photoshop would never be able to do it unless they had their own code in order to recompile it (which they, of course had).
My point was they never had to change their code because the API stayed the same for over a decade. Welcome to the point of the whole discussion, API stability. Photoshop 5 still runs on my XP box despite originally being compiled against a system that had an entirely different kernel.
How else is there to take the reference to "kernel-swap?":) Old apps don't run because of the kernel. They run because their source has been ported to Carbon and recompiled against OS X developer tools.
Longhorn will still retain Win32 compatibility. No way Microsoft is going to rewrite everything and toss it out the window, especially with the slips Longhorn has made and the technologies that will not be available on release (and will even be backported later).
I, along with Grimes, will be very interested to see how much of Longhorn will actually be written in.NET. I bet you anything the Win32 layer will still be there, and that the.NET technologies will simply be running on top of it. That way,.NET apps and Win32 apps continue to run.
Fire up Google and search for something. The results are instant.
Now, pretend you have, like I do, over 200GB of files. Instead of drilling through folders and scrolling endlessly with my mouse, why can't I search my own hard drive as quickly as I search the entire Internet and get the file I was looking for in less than a second?
You're thinking way too closed-minded. Desktop search combined with smart folders will be the new way to fish through your years of files as hard drives increase in size yearly. Go ahead and keep on clicking through your folder heirarchy. The rest of us will just type a search term in a text field and get our file(s) instantly.
This is just a response to kill the buzz on Apple's Spotlight, which is actually shipping. When some competitor starts to make gains, Microsoft just lets loose that they're "working" on things sometime in the future to make the shareholders happy and to keep their name in the press.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference this time is that the DS is actually a fantastic system. The Virtual Boy genuinely sucked. So it seems like a major waste of a great system for Nintendo to release it and then release another one a year later that is the "true" Gameboy successor.
We've already pushed off sound, graphics, and now physics onto seperate processors. Why not just craft an entire game console onto a single card and be done with it? Jeesh.
I love the DS, and I'd love to dev for it. But one thing that confuses me is Nintendo's vague stance about its future. Apparently, they plan a new Gameboy successor later this year and probably revealed at E3. However, most people don't consider the DS a "third-tier" and see it as the Gameboy successor. Not only will people get confused and upset after having already bought this system only to see new Gameboy come out, but developers will hold off on developing for the DS to wait and see what the new Gameboy will be like. Chance are they will program for the new Gameboy over the DS based on name recognition alone.
Does anyone have any info or links that better explain Nintendo's position on the future of the DS? Was it a one-shot deal? That's unfortunate if so, because it means there won't be a large library of games for this things. Already, it's pretty meager.
Are people here saying they're not "Enemies of Windows" who generalize about the Windows experience and try to portray it as a BSOD-ridden failure? For god's sake, I still see Clippy and Bob jokes here--five years after they stopped being either funny or applicable.
I find it all disturbing. They're operating systems. They're collections of code that don't give a shit either way who says what about them. People have instilled emotional attachment into these things.
Actually, I was copying the other guy as a joke.
"I'm a Google fanboy and will accept and justify it when they're hypocritical. I'll blame the criticism on them being popular."
Except that the search term was "traffic+estimate", and search keywords don't appear in the title pages of other cached pages on Google. Mostly because it's against Google's own rules!
Criticism of something is now a "witchhunt?"
No, it's called objectively examining your beliefs in order to make sure they're valid. If they are, there's no problem.
Unconditional praise all the time would be truly evil. Google controls a lot of the web.
What I find amusing and disturbing is how Google accepts any crazy left-wing website for its Google News page (see Democratic Underground), but often refuses conservative sites like LGF and Powerline for various bizarre reasons (for instance, Google claims the sites they list in Google News must have a staff of more than one person...yet they list several left-wing websites that are one-person blogs). See here and here.
They also refused gun ads in their results, but allowed all those phoney Internet pharmacies to advertise, where any kid wanting to get doped up could get some shipped in the mail.
Just saying. If you want more information, see here. To be perfectly fair, there are plenty of sites claiming Google News is conservative-biased. You can make up your own mind.
If the others that existed before it sucked, they may as well not have existed at all.
So make a playlist and turn off shuffling. Is this so hard?
This is the second post I've had claiming my sig is "bogus."
Every page was of Slashdot.
So create a playlist with the song you want on top and turn off the shuffling. Or, get an iPod that has a screen.
Every month, someone "takes on" an iPod. The next month, we don't hear about them again.
FM tuner? I can buy one of those as an accessory add-on thanks to the burgeoning "iPod economy," as Jobs puts it. I even have that FM broadcaster that lets me dial into the frequency with my car radio to hear my iPod through my car speakers without any special hookups.
I don't see Sony's player going anywhere. They feature a display, which Apple abandoned as being pointless in a tiny flash player (and they're right). And it's still more expensive.
...then we can go after Microsoft. Anyone remember when they had Windows Server 2003 beta running on an online server for a hacking contest? As I recall, in response, someone else then promptly stuck up a Linux server and challenged it to be hacked as well.
Does anyone remember what happened to either of these contests?
Something doesn't need a standards body to become a standard.
I don't trust Google.
Google sets a cookie that:
1.) Tracks your IP.
2.) Tracks your usage.
3.) Doesn't expire until 2038.
Google's privacy policies state that:
1.) Any information on you is fair game.
2.) They will happily turn over any information they have on you at any government request.
3.) Your Gmail may reside on their servers indefinitely, even after you delete it. This may also be "indexed" on their servers and the contents read at any time.
Google also employs an ex-CIA guy with top secret security clearance in the government.
I don't want to know what Google might suddenly do with the indexed contents of a hard drive, but their policies state they'll turn over anything to the government. So what's to stop the government from going on an anti-terrorism binge and asking for whatever the hell they want? They'll have every search term you've ever done (think of the crazy shit you've searched for late on a Saturday night), every e-mail you've ever read and sent, and the indexed contents of your hard drive.
Um, no thanks.
People have fallen for Google without reading between the lines, and Google even invented a cute little slogan ("Don't be evil") to appear nicer than they are.
Call me paranoid, but I don't buy it. I refuse to use any service from a company whose policies don't protect my privacy and will hand over anything they want and index files even after I delete them from their servers. It's crazy.
Not to mention their search results have sucked since 2003, but that's totally beside the point.
And your point is?
Photoshop would never be able to do it unless they had their own code in order to recompile it (which they, of course had).
My point was they never had to change their code because the API stayed the same for over a decade. Welcome to the point of the whole discussion, API stability. Photoshop 5 still runs on my XP box despite originally being compiled against a system that had an entirely different kernel.
Every tab had a Slashdot page open.
37MB is still nearly twice as much as Opera's 20MB.
He references a kernel-swap--i.e., the change in kernels. He mentions backwards-compatibility built into this kernel change.
I'm saying there was no backwards compatibility built into this switch. The Carbon APIs compile to the new system. The new system doesn't run the old.
How else is there to take the reference to "kernel-swap?" :) Old apps don't run because of the kernel. They run because their source has been ported to Carbon and recompiled against OS X developer tools.
Longhorn will still retain Win32 compatibility. No way Microsoft is going to rewrite everything and toss it out the window, especially with the slips Longhorn has made and the technologies that will not be available on release (and will even be backported later).
.NET. I bet you anything the Win32 layer will still be there, and that the .NET technologies will simply be running on top of it. That way, .NET apps and Win32 apps continue to run.
I, along with Grimes, will be very interested to see how much of Longhorn will actually be written in
Fire up Google and search for something. The results are instant.
Now, pretend you have, like I do, over 200GB of files. Instead of drilling through folders and scrolling endlessly with my mouse, why can't I search my own hard drive as quickly as I search the entire Internet and get the file I was looking for in less than a second?
You're thinking way too closed-minded. Desktop search combined with smart folders will be the new way to fish through your years of files as hard drives increase in size yearly. Go ahead and keep on clicking through your folder heirarchy. The rest of us will just type a search term in a text field and get our file(s) instantly.
This is just a response to kill the buzz on Apple's Spotlight, which is actually shipping. When some competitor starts to make gains, Microsoft just lets loose that they're "working" on things sometime in the future to make the shareholders happy and to keep their name in the press.