I guess these were all console titles, some of which I'd never heard of (Viewtiful Joe?), maybe because I'm not a platform gamer. Some, like Spy Hunter, can barely be considered franchises. But there's no mention of several notable series which have floundered:
Madden -- Or the rest of the EA Sports' yearly rename-a-thon games.
Everquest -- Once the reigning champion of MMORPGs, now relegated to a small niche of faithfuls.
Star Trek -- Not that there was ever a good ST game.
Command & Conquer -- It may have launched the RTS genre, but they cranked out some fairly lackluster titles until Generals was released.
And that's just what I can think of off the top of my head.
Keep in mind too that all 150,000 people who bought add on HD-DVD players made an optional decision to buy that drive. 400,000 people who bought PS3s got a BluRay drive because you can't get a PS3 without one. HD-DVD is winning the "format war"
There are two significant flaws in your analysis. First, HD-DVD has been on the market for quite some time, while BR has only been available for about 2 months. Second, there are no integrated HD-DVD units, so you cannot compare stand alone sales for the two platforms. Moreover, you're discounting the possibility that people would buy a PS3 as a BR player, which is a pretty gross assumption considering that the PS3 costs less and does more than a stand alone drive.
The anecdotal evidence that's been going around...is that Nintendo's new console still has room for improvement.
Zonk: That's not evidence; that's a conclusion, and a ridiculous one at that. There's room for improvement on anything, including the Wii. For example: the obvious lack of lasers on the exterior.
I misread the headline, but strangely I didn't find the idea of serving a subpoena via YouTube to be surprising in the least. In fact, my initial thought was "Wow, YouTube's toning down their content."
I'm not going to argue how obviously irrelevant the slope of a cliff is to the quality of the view, or how irrelevant that is to the word vista to begin with (ok I will -- it's relevant to vistas like apples are relevant to fruit). It was a weak attempt at a put-down, and got modded up by groupthinking moderators who just clicked "Amen!" without bothering to consider whether or not the statement was true on its own, not to mention relevant.
How about $480? Yeah, it's $40 more than the target, but it's also has a 160GB HD (whereas the bottom end mac mini only has 60GB unlike the 80GB you quoted), a DVD burner, and it comes with a keyboard and mouse. Add wireless for $20, or $10 after rebate. Either way, you get more computer for less money.
I'm not the GPP, and I'm not saying the bottom end Apple products are a ripoff -- they're a decent value for the money -- but they tend to rapidly escalate in price for minor features. $200 is a lot to pay for a 200MHz increase and 20GB of HD space. They bank on the fact that people don't like to buy bottom end because it will (or they believe it will) be useless in a year.
Obviously advertising *is* useful, to both the advertiser and the consumer, otherwise it would not exist. You're arguing that McDonalds is more useful, but that's hard to argue with any measure of useful other than what you'd like to see. The only difference between a McDonalds (or other business) and advertising is that one is the point of sale, and the other helps generate sales. It's two sides of the same coin.
Don't get me wrong -- I hate empty domains and billboards equally (and fortunately there are none of the latter where I live) -- but to say that they're less useful than a business itself is oversimplifying. The people who own, work at, and invest in the company for whom the advertising is provided might beg to differ.
I'm pretty sure the GP was referencing the practical joke of throwing a charged capacitor at someone. Obviously if that's funny on its own, then using a supercapacitor will be hilarious.
The trick is to modify the composition of the barium-titanate powders to allow for a thousandfold increase in ultracapacitor voltage--in the range of 1,200 to 3,500 volts, and possibly much higher.
Oh man.. as if tossing a charged capacitor to an unsuspecting victim wasn't funny enough already.
The problem is that you would be getting paid retail value for the power you are selling to the company.
That's really not an issue. The meters in question are not standard analog meters, which are incapable of running backwards since they don't measure the direction of current. The "net meters" are digital, and programming to qualify returned power at a ratio -- say 0.75 -- could easily be added. That is to say, for every watt you add to the grid,.75 watts would be credited to your account. I don't think that's current practice, but it could be done. Nonetheless, you're generally providing power to the grid during the daytime, when it's most needed and most expensive for the power company to generate. They're getting value added through the power you're providing at your residential flat rate, which they sell to businesses at a tiered rate.
If and when microgeneration becomes ubiquitous then the power company might start to have some issues, but that's unlikely to happen in the near future -- likely not until solar power makes some significant advances in efficiency and cost. Even if efficiency hit 100%, which is impossible of course, I don't think there's enough surface area in cities to generate the requisite power (though I'm sure someone will tell me if I'm wrong). There will probably always be a demand for centralized power and/or the distribution of power, and the existing power companies can stay relevant even if their business models have to change a bit.
Slashdot Mirror
- Madden -- Or the rest of the EA Sports' yearly rename-a-thon games.
- Everquest -- Once the reigning champion of MMORPGs, now relegated to a small niche of faithfuls.
- Star Trek -- Not that there was ever a good ST game.
- Command & Conquer -- It may have launched the RTS genre, but they cranked out some fairly lackluster titles until Generals was released.
And that's just what I can think of off the top of my head.Keep in mind too that all 150,000 people who bought add on HD-DVD players made an optional decision to buy that drive. 400,000 people who bought PS3s got a BluRay drive because you can't get a PS3 without one. HD-DVD is winning the "format war"
There are two significant flaws in your analysis. First, HD-DVD has been on the market for quite some time, while BR has only been available for about 2 months. Second, there are no integrated HD-DVD units, so you cannot compare stand alone sales for the two platforms. Moreover, you're discounting the possibility that people would buy a PS3 as a BR player, which is a pretty gross assumption considering that the PS3 costs less and does more than a stand alone drive.
DVD was a huge improvement over VHS, and it was compatible with existing displays. The next gen of DVD isn't.
Sure it is. You won't get much, if any, noticable improvement on a standard display, but they're absolutely compatible.
But don't let facts get in the way of a good rant...
The anecdotal evidence that's been going around...is that Nintendo's new console still has room for improvement.
Zonk: That's not evidence; that's a conclusion, and a ridiculous one at that. There's room for improvement on anything, including the Wii. For example: the obvious lack of lasers on the exterior.
I misread the headline, but strangely I didn't find the idea of serving a subpoena via YouTube to be surprising in the least. In fact, my initial thought was "Wow, YouTube's toning down their content."
I think you mean meatier.. meetior.. metear.. weather man license.
I'm not going to argue how obviously irrelevant the slope of a cliff is to the quality of the view, or how irrelevant that is to the word vista to begin with (ok I will -- it's relevant to vistas like apples are relevant to fruit). It was a weak attempt at a put-down, and got modded up by groupthinking moderators who just clicked "Amen!" without bothering to consider whether or not the statement was true on its own, not to mention relevant.
...using explosions to detect radio waves.
...nevermind the fact that vistas are not at all synonymous with cliffs.
Oh, and also that cliffs are all steep by definition.
Other than that, good analogy.
This one is a bit better, but apparently the Nature article will be released tomorrow, which I assume would have the sort of detail you're asking for.
Oops, it's $60 more. My mistake.
How about $480? Yeah, it's $40 more than the target, but it's also has a 160GB HD (whereas the bottom end mac mini only has 60GB unlike the 80GB you quoted), a DVD burner, and it comes with a keyboard and mouse. Add wireless for $20, or $10 after rebate. Either way, you get more computer for less money.
I'm not the GPP, and I'm not saying the bottom end Apple products are a ripoff -- they're a decent value for the money -- but they tend to rapidly escalate in price for minor features. $200 is a lot to pay for a 200MHz increase and 20GB of HD space. They bank on the fact that people don't like to buy bottom end because it will (or they believe it will) be useless in a year.
Hell yes they are! I haven't had one single problem with my pet rock since I got it 30 years ago.
Obviously advertising *is* useful, to both the advertiser and the consumer, otherwise it would not exist. You're arguing that McDonalds is more useful, but that's hard to argue with any measure of useful other than what you'd like to see. The only difference between a McDonalds (or other business) and advertising is that one is the point of sale, and the other helps generate sales. It's two sides of the same coin.
Don't get me wrong -- I hate empty domains and billboards equally (and fortunately there are none of the latter where I live) -- but to say that they're less useful than a business itself is oversimplifying. The people who own, work at, and invest in the company for whom the advertising is provided might beg to differ.
And what about the majority of those on Slashdot where the computer IS their significant other?
They should count their blessings.
The Xbox 360 has to software emulate each game in its back catalog.
Which still doesn't make sense. You don't emulate a game, you emulate the hardware it was designed to run on.
But we know what you meant.
From what I've read (subscription required), we don't yet have the computing power to confirm predictions.
Only the ones that are witches. The rest of them stay on the bottom.
I just assumed English speakers would be too lazy to pronounce the hard "de," since they can't be bothered to look up the correct spelling...
Prepare for 1 in 4!
I'm pretty sure the GP was referencing the practical joke of throwing a charged capacitor at someone. Obviously if that's funny on its own, then using a supercapacitor will be hilarious.
The trick is to modify the composition of the barium-titanate powders to allow for a thousandfold increase in ultracapacitor voltage--in the range of 1,200 to 3,500 volts, and possibly much higher.
Oh man.. as if tossing a charged capacitor to an unsuspecting victim wasn't funny enough already.
Schadenfreude: Seeing someone try to use an important sounding three syllable word and spell it wrong.
Enough with the foreign word memes. "Schadenfreude" is the "chique" of 2006/7.
We concur.
The problem is that you would be getting paid retail value for the power you are selling to the company.
.75 watts would be credited to your account. I don't think that's current practice, but it could be done. Nonetheless, you're generally providing power to the grid during the daytime, when it's most needed and most expensive for the power company to generate. They're getting value added through the power you're providing at your residential flat rate, which they sell to businesses at a tiered rate.
That's really not an issue. The meters in question are not standard analog meters, which are incapable of running backwards since they don't measure the direction of current. The "net meters" are digital, and programming to qualify returned power at a ratio -- say 0.75 -- could easily be added. That is to say, for every watt you add to the grid,
If and when microgeneration becomes ubiquitous then the power company might start to have some issues, but that's unlikely to happen in the near future -- likely not until solar power makes some significant advances in efficiency and cost. Even if efficiency hit 100%, which is impossible of course, I don't think there's enough surface area in cities to generate the requisite power (though I'm sure someone will tell me if I'm wrong). There will probably always be a demand for centralized power and/or the distribution of power, and the existing power companies can stay relevant even if their business models have to change a bit.