Yeah it's bad enough to ask developer's to go multi-core all the sudden, much less deal with asymmetric multi-processing. Of course game devs were always a special breed, so we'll see how it works out.
I think Carmack is mad because it means he can leverage less of his PC code. Of course it is bound to be easier to port from Windows to a MS platform, even if it is on a different processor, than to port to someone else's API.
Try visiting a PS fan site. Well now I know where you're coming from. I can write off the Wii-dissing but Carmack-insulting? What do the PS fans have against Carmack?
Hell, you could include an entirely new copy of player software for every player on the planet today if you wanted. Since all the standalone players are running Linux anyways and presumably can be flashed, they could switch to a whole different DRM scheme for new movies.
Eh. I don't know anyone who is dismissing the Wii as a "kiddy system." Could be the best party game system ever. I think that many of the games have a cartoony feel. Not to mention the Mii's themselves. Nintendo's basically asking for it, but I haven't heard anyone dismissing the whole console or concept over this.
I agree with you that auto-parallelization is unlikely to happen in (your|my) lifetime. I think it's even more distant for C, although it is being tried for Fortran (see HPF and Co-array Fortran) and Java (err not-Java but whatever) (see Fortress).
We programmers are just going to have to adjust our mindset when it comes to performance programming. The compilers will be there to give us the means to express parallelism, but divining it is a lot to ask.
That said, some C compilers already auto-vectorize, and when they unroll loops, a similar kind of dependency-checking goes on. You could argue in those cases that you've already given the compiler information about parallelization in the form of a for-loop and restrict pointers. I've yet to see a compiler that will generate any parallel code that requires any kind of synchronization in C. We're going to have to change to something that sacrifices some of the flexibility of C for ease of parallelization.
Ok I'll bite. Of course better is subjective, but not allowing people to get booted is essential if you're going to have ranked matches, at least in those matches. I don't recall with Halo 2 but with GoW you can boot ppl out of unranked matches.
Same thing about making choices. GoW and Tiger Woods '07 both allow you to pick whom you play with, just like on PC... for unranked matches. I guess we'll see how Halo 3 goes. I've heard Microsoft is putting its foot down and changing things.
Cell versus x86 or PowerPC it will take years to get important software such as compilers optimized for it as well as a chip already on the market and gone through those growing pains Cell has a Power chip as the main processing unit. Xbox 360 has 3, and there are already optimizing compilers for those.
PCs have the advantage of new hardware coming out all the time, so "high end" is a moving target. With console releases every 5 years there's not way it can keep up for long. Plus PCs run at much higher resolution in general.
Still, the Xbox 360 spits out better graphics than any computer *I've* ever owned. You couldn't even buy a video card with equivalent power for 400 bucks, much less the rest of the box.
Oh and good luck getting your PC to output HD resolutions that are compatible with your TV, running cables all over the place, and figuring out how to use a wireless keyboard and mouse whilst vegging on the couch. PC gaming is just a different experience.
HDMI was so long coming. A/V integration. All digital, even though it doesn't look perceptibly better than component. It's a horrible crying shame that they had to package it with broken DRM that makes me unplug my TV every week and ruins ppls ps3 playing.
At some point in the future, the lower end model will sell well, but everything I've heard indicates it hasn't yet. You make a valid point that it's prolly 90% of the system the high end model is, but I still wouldn't buy one. To me it's like buying a fancy car with fabric seats. The things you are missing will rob you of the satisfaction of buying a high end item. The more frugal slashdotters would probably disagree. Of course they won't be buying a PS3 for a while.
The lack of WiFi won't bother hardcore twitch gamers (because they won't use it due to higher latency), but it does potentially require you to lace your house with cables. I can't run cable through the walls as I'm in an apartment, so this is big for me.
It's too hard to compare the 360 core and PS3 low end, so I won't effect such. I think there is widespread consensus that the PS3 is too expensive. The lower end model doesn't mitigate the problem because few early adopter gamers want anything that's second best.
You guys demean the average customer too much. Most if not all of the best selling (ok let's exclude sports) games have great (or possibly unique) gameplay. People buy the latest sports games because they love the sport enough to stay up to date with rosters and whatnot. If the games improve over time, that's merely a bonus.
I think these statistics speak strong and negatively about the price of the PS3 vs. PS2. If I were considering replacing an Xbox right now, I would definitely get a 360. If I were replacing a PS2 (I am -- my own fault for modding improperly), I would have a hard time springing for a PS3.
To me, $600, is just too much for a console, and I'm not paying 500 for some half assed version I may have to pay to upgrade later. As long as Sony's prices are crazy the PS2 will sell well. Is this a part of Sony's strategy? I don't know.
You can get as high as you want. Just make sure you do it with pills from the store and not herbage or mushrooms you find in the woods, because those are for lazy stoners, and lazy stoners belong in jail or dead.
I cut my teeth on windows, and, although I wouldn't call myself a windows-only admin, or an admin at all unless you count my own machines at home and work, I still reboot my linux machines thinking it'll fix things, but it never does.
Come to think of it... there's a bug in the ethernet drivers for my thinkpad that does fix itself if you reboot. There's probably another way around it though.
The noise from the drive when playing DVDs is the worst, and I would argue that that's the situation where you most want it to be quiet. I haven't hear the HDDVD add on yet. Might be worth looking into...
This sounds implausible, but I have a Samsung and they are also firmware updatable via usb. I would imagine many other brands are as well. It is possible that one of these devices could be modified to output an unencrypted digital signal.
Xbox 360 games do not update the system AFAIK. I'm not saying it couldn't be. Every update of every significance I've downloaded has been from Xbox Live. You are encouraged to download them if you want to play online, and patches are required for online play. I don't believe Xbox has been patched at any time in such a way that it will no longer play legitimate games.
Slashdot Mirror
I just looked it up, and it seems as if it should be "we see further." Anyone else got an opinion on this?
No, but it runs every port of NetBSD in a different universe.
Yeah it's bad enough to ask developer's to go multi-core all the sudden, much less deal with asymmetric multi-processing. Of course game devs were always a special breed, so we'll see how it works out.
I think Carmack is mad because it means he can leverage less of his PC code. Of course it is bound to be easier to port from Windows to a MS platform, even if it is on a different processor, than to port to someone else's API.
Hell, you could include an entirely new copy of player software for every player on the planet today if you wanted.
Since all the standalone players are running Linux anyways and presumably can be flashed, they could switch to a whole different DRM scheme for new movies.
Eh. I don't know anyone who is dismissing the Wii as a "kiddy system." Could be the best party game system ever. I think that many of the games have a cartoony feel. Not to mention the Mii's themselves. Nintendo's basically asking for it, but I haven't heard anyone dismissing the whole console or concept over this.
I agree with you that auto-parallelization is unlikely to happen in (your|my) lifetime. I think it's even more distant for C, although it is being tried for Fortran (see HPF and Co-array Fortran) and Java (err not-Java but whatever) (see Fortress).
We programmers are just going to have to adjust our mindset when it comes to performance programming. The compilers will be there to give us the means to express parallelism, but divining it is a lot to ask.
That said, some C compilers already auto-vectorize, and when they unroll loops, a similar kind of dependency-checking goes on. You could argue in those cases that you've already given the compiler information about parallelization in the form of a for-loop and restrict pointers. I've yet to see a compiler that will generate any parallel code that requires any kind of synchronization in C. We're going to have to change to something that sacrifices some of the flexibility of C for ease of parallelization.
I believe this is more auto-vectorization for using SIMD instructions. They must've realized nobody was using the intrinsics...
Ok I'll bite. Of course better is subjective, but not allowing people to get booted is essential if you're going to have ranked matches, at least in those matches. I don't recall with Halo 2 but with GoW you can boot ppl out of unranked matches.
Same thing about making choices. GoW and Tiger Woods '07 both allow you to pick whom you play with, just like on PC... for unranked matches. I guess we'll see how Halo 3 goes. I've heard Microsoft is putting its foot down and changing things.
PCs have the advantage of new hardware coming out all the time, so "high end" is a moving target. With console releases every 5 years there's not way it can keep up for long. Plus PCs run at much higher resolution in general.
Still, the Xbox 360 spits out better graphics than any computer *I've* ever owned. You couldn't even buy a video card with equivalent power for 400 bucks, much less the rest of the box.
Oh and good luck getting your PC to output HD resolutions that are compatible with your TV, running cables all over the place, and figuring out how to use a wireless keyboard and mouse whilst vegging on the couch. PC gaming is just a different experience.
HDMI was so long coming. A/V integration. All digital, even though it doesn't look perceptibly better than component. It's a horrible crying shame that they had to package it with broken DRM that makes me unplug my TV every week and ruins ppls ps3 playing.
At some point in the future, the lower end model will sell well, but everything I've heard indicates it hasn't yet. You make a valid point that it's prolly 90% of the system the high end model is, but I still wouldn't buy one. To me it's like buying a fancy car with fabric seats. The things you are missing will rob you of the satisfaction of buying a high end item. The more frugal slashdotters would probably disagree. Of course they won't be buying a PS3 for a while.
The lack of WiFi won't bother hardcore twitch gamers (because they won't use it due to higher latency), but it does potentially require you to lace your house with cables. I can't run cable through the walls as I'm in an apartment, so this is big for me.
It's too hard to compare the 360 core and PS3 low end, so I won't effect such. I think there is widespread consensus that the PS3 is too expensive. The lower end model doesn't mitigate the problem because few early adopter gamers want anything that's second best.
I have a source that seems to indicate that consumers are more willing to pay for things now (if 2002 ~= now), but you'll have to pay for it.
here
You guys demean the average customer too much. Most if not all of the best selling (ok let's exclude sports) games have great (or possibly unique) gameplay. People buy the latest sports games because they love the sport enough to stay up to date with rosters and whatnot. If the games improve over time, that's merely a bonus.
I think these statistics speak strong and negatively about the price of the PS3 vs. PS2. If I were considering replacing an Xbox right now, I would definitely get a 360. If I were replacing a PS2 (I am -- my own fault for modding improperly), I would have a hard time springing for a PS3.
To me, $600, is just too much for a console, and I'm not paying 500 for some half assed version I may have to pay to upgrade later. As long as Sony's prices are crazy the PS2 will sell well. Is this a part of Sony's strategy? I don't know.
Restless leg syndrome is on NBC Nightly News tonight. I will reply again momentarily and explain what is RLS.
You can get as high as you want. Just make sure you do it with pills from the store and not herbage or mushrooms you find in the woods, because those are for lazy stoners, and lazy stoners belong in jail or dead.
I'd say it's a pretty accurate message.
I cut my teeth on windows, and, although I wouldn't call myself a windows-only admin, or an admin at all unless you count my own machines at home and work, I still reboot my linux machines thinking it'll fix things, but it never does.
Come to think of it... there's a bug in the ethernet drivers for my thinkpad that does fix itself if you reboot. There's probably another way around it though.
Seems like we're confusing the propriety of process with the propriety of implementation. Microsoft has the one, and Apple has both.
As a first rate P2P pirate let me also express my disdain for this noob.
The noise from the drive when playing DVDs is the worst, and I would argue that that's the situation where you most want it to be quiet. I haven't hear the HDDVD add on yet. Might be worth looking into...
Didn't even make it past the summary.
This sounds implausible, but I have a Samsung and they are also firmware updatable via usb. I would imagine many other brands are as well. It is possible that one of these devices could be modified to output an unencrypted digital signal.
Xbox 360 games do not update the system AFAIK. I'm not saying it couldn't be. Every update of every significance I've downloaded has been from Xbox Live. You are encouraged to download them if you want to play online, and patches are required for online play. I don't believe Xbox has been patched at any time in such a way that it will no longer play legitimate games.