"I hate tyrants like Saddam, but what you did America was shameful."
WE as a people didn't want to invade Iraq. We didn't get to vote on it.
Make time in your schedule to read about The Project for a New American Century if you haven't already. This will explain a lot about why we invaded Iraq and deposed Hussein, as well as the Neoconservative philosophy of complete world dominance. It's some scary shit. And just so you don't think that the page I linked is some wacko leftist whining, you can visit the Project's website.
You might be right about the GENESIS of Spacewar!, which is the game you're referring to. But it wasn't actually completed by Steve Russell until 1962. Hackers has an extensive story about the MIT model train club and how some of those guys ended up hacking the PDP-1 or whatever it was they wrote Spacewar! on.
I think this argument will continue forever. I will say that your point of view makes more sense than the "it's not programmed, so it's not a true video game" argument that I attempt to rebuff here. I still think it's a question of semantics that all depends on ones point of view. Therefore, I won't argue semantics and stick to my "programmed vs hardware" point of view.
"It is something that is programmed with software, than Space Wars was the first video game created."
Pong, Breakout, and Tank are all solid state hardware machines that didn't run on software in their original, coin-operated forms, and I can safely assume that they're true video games.
There is a debate over Tennis For Two and whether it can be called a video game. I think Steven Kent called it the "first computer game" in his book The Ultimate History Of Video Games, and I took him to task about it in my Syzygy Magazine review of the book. My argument is that just because its a game that runs without software, does not mean it isn't a video game. If this were true, the first true coin-operated video game would be 1975's Gunfight and not the myriad of coinops that were released from 1971 to 1975 that ran on TTL logic and sometimes graphics PROMs.
Wikipedia has long ceased to be an accurate source of information, and more of an elitist bureaucracy. I had to call out one particular mod on his discussion page and on the Jonathan Ive page, because he considered my changing of the iMac's introduction from 1997 to 1998 "vandalism" (a change I had to make FIVE times), and it was FINALLY changed.
After that ridiculous incident, I stopped relying on Wikipedia for anything substantive. Its accuracy can not be assured due to the bureaucratic toolboxes that moderate the site.
I think they gave him that 25th Anniversary Mac for the desk, though. I thought I read that somewhere, but I can't be sure. Maybe Apple Confidential 2.0? I'll have to look it up.
The marketing blah blah that you're insecure about is your problem. Won't be associated with a computer because of some douchebag users?!?!?
Just because you hear every argument doesn't mean anyone else does.
I won't quote market share or statistics, but I guarantee if you match beans to rice, you'll find that the douchebaggery would fall on a different side simply based on pure numbers. But it really doesn't matter anyway.
Platform religious wars are pathetic, pointless, and change nobody's mind. Use what works for you and don't worry about what everyone else is doing. If you would have stopped at reason 1 in your point list, your insecurities wouldn't have shown through.
Just an FYI, mac users are pretty similar to PC users. Most of us just don't care.
I concur. Use what works for you; Windows, Mac, Linux, DOS, Pac-Man Hardware Operating System, etc. Bickering about platform choices is pointless and doesn't change anyone's mind.
I don't think there would be leases, but standalone versions of OS X would probably go byebye, and upgrades would come via Software Update, which would probably be modified to accept payment methods. The only standalone versions would be hacked versions from software install DVDs that come with each Mac, and uploaded to usenet or available via torrent.
Of course, this is all just my own bullshit meaningless theories.
Did you read that article? They portrayed Bogusky as the "Steve Jobs of Advertising". Well, he's got the ego, anyway. And his little quips and one-liners, at least the ones they published, were lame. "Life conspires to beat the rebel out of you?" What t-shirt did he read that crap on?
Slashdot Mirror
"I hate tyrants like Saddam, but what you did America was shameful."
WE as a people didn't want to invade Iraq. We didn't get to vote on it.
Make time in your schedule to read about The Project for a New American Century if you haven't already. This will explain a lot about why we invaded Iraq and deposed Hussein, as well as the Neoconservative philosophy of complete world dominance. It's some scary shit. And just so you don't think that the page I linked is some wacko leftist whining, you can visit the Project's website.
You might be right about the GENESIS of Spacewar!, which is the game you're referring to. But it wasn't actually completed by Steve Russell until 1962. Hackers has an extensive story about the MIT model train club and how some of those guys ended up hacking the PDP-1 or whatever it was they wrote Spacewar! on.
"Wait! If it's programmed it includes a computer which makes it a computer game."
:)
Exactly my point. Tomato, toemahtoe
Read this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089461/.
I know what you were referring to. You'd have to see the movie I linked above to understand the joke. Hence, it fell flat.
I think this argument will continue forever. I will say that your point of view makes more sense than the "it's not programmed, so it's not a true video game" argument that I attempt to rebuff here. I still think it's a question of semantics that all depends on ones point of view. Therefore, I won't argue semantics and stick to my "programmed vs hardware" point of view.
Imagine what would have happened if the government patented the game...
"It is something that is programmed with software, than Space Wars was the first video game created."
Pong, Breakout, and Tank are all solid state hardware machines that didn't run on software in their original, coin-operated forms, and I can safely assume that they're true video games.
There is a debate over Tennis For Two and whether it can be called a video game. I think Steven Kent called it the "first computer game" in his book The Ultimate History Of Video Games, and I took him to task about it in my Syzygy Magazine review of the book. My argument is that just because its a game that runs without software, does not mean it isn't a video game. If this were true, the first true coin-operated video game would be 1975's Gunfight and not the myriad of coinops that were released from 1971 to 1975 that ran on TTL logic and sometimes graphics PROMs.
>>Making a 1 on 1 specs comparison between Mac and PC is unfair in my opinion.
>Why? Because it reveals the ridiculous overpricing of Apple hardware? Yes, how terribly unfair.
Better read that article again.
"This gives me an awful feeling that Steve Jobs is just the latest incarnation of The Master."
Yeah, because Sho-Nuff and Bruce Leroy have retired. After all, The Last Dragon came out in '85; someone had to take over!
Wikipedia has long ceased to be an accurate source of information, and more of an elitist bureaucracy. I had to call out one particular mod on his discussion page and on the Jonathan Ive page, because he considered my changing of the iMac's introduction from 1997 to 1998 "vandalism" (a change I had to make FIVE times), and it was FINALLY changed.
After that ridiculous incident, I stopped relying on Wikipedia for anything substantive. Its accuracy can not be assured due to the bureaucratic toolboxes that moderate the site.
More worthless blather from some self-important anal-yst. Where are the figures backing this crap up?
Apple didn't get to where they are today by listening to anyone, much less these stupid analysts.
16 billion bucks in the bank. Give my regards to that asshole Daniel Lyons.
... was coin-op. Atari Games is dead. Long live Atari Games!
I think they gave him that 25th Anniversary Mac for the desk, though. I thought I read that somewhere, but I can't be sure. Maybe Apple Confidential 2.0? I'll have to look it up.
The marketing blah blah that you're insecure about is your problem. Won't be associated with a computer because of some douchebag users?!?!?
Just because you hear every argument doesn't mean anyone else does.
I won't quote market share or statistics, but I guarantee if you match beans to rice, you'll find that the douchebaggery would fall on a different side simply based on pure numbers. But it really doesn't matter anyway.
Platform religious wars are pathetic, pointless, and change nobody's mind. Use what works for you and don't worry about what everyone else is doing. If you would have stopped at reason 1 in your point list, your insecurities wouldn't have shown through.
Just an FYI, mac users are pretty similar to PC users. Most of us just don't care.
I concur. Use what works for you; Windows, Mac, Linux, DOS, Pac-Man Hardware Operating System, etc. Bickering about platform choices is pointless and doesn't change anyone's mind.
Hahah! You must be the same guy who posts this stuff on MacDailyNews whenever someone uses fanboy or fanboi. Not a very imaginative troll...
I don't think there would be leases, but standalone versions of OS X would probably go byebye, and upgrades would come via Software Update, which would probably be modified to accept payment methods. The only standalone versions would be hacked versions from software install DVDs that come with each Mac, and uploaded to usenet or available via torrent.
Of course, this is all just my own bullshit meaningless theories.
I think the problem is that people buy too much into marketing and not what they really need.
If you like PCs and they fill your needs, use them.
If you like Macs and they fill your needs, use them.
Everything else is just more meaningless bullshit.
You must be new here.
It's alive!!! ALIIIIIIIIVE!!!
(cue Oingo Boingo...)
"And yeah, Bill Gates really does seem more likable than Jobs, but I think that deep down he's as much of a maniac."
All you have to do is watch his deposition videos from the trial a few years ago for proof of that fact.
You forgot the biggest asshole of them all- that tellybingo Irishman, Barse. Grundle, Choadhe, Tainte, and Barse. Guard your cackles!
Did you read that article? They portrayed Bogusky as the "Steve Jobs of Advertising". Well, he's got the ego, anyway. And his little quips and one-liners, at least the ones they published, were lame. "Life conspires to beat the rebel out of you?" What t-shirt did he read that crap on?
OH NO!
People will form an uninformed opinion of me based on what i OWN?!?!? And I won't be cool in their eyes, so they won't like me?!?!?
A wise man once said, "You would be shocked at the atrocities a man will commit because of something as trivial as what someone thinks of him."
My opinion that 95% of the world's population are worthless moronic douchebags still stands...
30-56-99 are correct. Limited 4 and 8 are missing.
And now you'll have two renegade programs running all over the system in a stolen simulation.
End of line.