I'm gonna call BS on your call, at least in part. Companies have an unrealistic expectation of hiring every single technical employee fully qualified. I get calls all the time for mid to upper level development jobs, and sure, there aren't enough people around to fill those jobs, but that's because few people are looking to hire at entry-level. I've seen dozens of guys just getting out of school, hunting for development jobs with no luck, while many of my friends at other companies are still asking if I know of anyone to fill their mid-level developer position.
Companies need to suck it up. Maybe you would like to have an experienced developer, but the answer to a shortage of talent at that level needn't be whining or outsourcing. The experience threshold seems to be a reaction to the complete hacks hired into IT in the late 90's - by enforcing minimum experience, you reduce your chances of hiring a nitwit. The correction that needs to happen is that companies need to learn to filter and find qualified, inexperienced applicants. Companies aren't willing to invest in entry-level enough to create the mid-level talent that is needed. It's going to get worse before it gets better - I see new grads branching into other careers when they can't find a job, so there's even less new talent coming in.
Does it take less than a half hour to search a full disk drive? If so, why not wire it into the OS in a service pack? The current Win XP search capability is abysmal and borderline useless. I don't care whether the search is on the desktop or not (I'd probably prefer not), but I'd like it to work.
I have the exact player I linked to, and when I connect it with USB, it shows up as a generic storage device. I don't need MusicMatch - I just drag and drop. If yours does otherwise, I'm sorry to hear it.
And I am not talking about iTunes STORE purchases, I am talking about MP4 AAC...
If that's part of your requirements, then I guess this solution isn't for you. Few online stores and few MP3 players support AAC, so that's a big limitation. Affinity for AAC would suggest to me either a) audiophile, or b) iTMS customer. Really, unless someone believes AAC is superior to MP3/WMA and cares about the small difference in quality, lack of AAC playback is a small price to pay for upgradability. Audiophiles are excused. Though AAC vs. MP3 quality isn't an issue to me in most cases, I respect the decision for those who do care.
I still don't understand why anyone with sense would purchase a flash-based MP3 player that doesn't allow you to upgrade the memory. For $64, I can get a flash-based player with an SD slot that is small and runs on a single AAA battery.For $37, I can add a 512 MB SD card.$78 for 1 GB. Both price out at cheaper than the Shuffle and this thing. And get this - if I want more space, I don't have to buy a new device, and when I upgrade, I can use that same flash memory card in my digital camera or anything else. And I get an LCD screen. It's insane that Apple has somehow convinced people that the lack of an LCD is BETTER than even a poorly implemented LCD. I'd rather have the option to see the title of the song, or hunt for the one I want to hear than just hit the "next song" button and think about how happy I am that I don't have a screen to look at.
I'm well aware that some consumers are obsessed with the iPod "cool factor", but I expect more out of the clear thinkers among us. Why buy a flash-based player that won't let you upgrade the flash memory when a HUGE component of the price is the memory itself, and when you'll be able to upgrade the capacity to iPod Mini size within 2 years for less than $100? It's a vehicle to deliver music, not an expression of who you are.
And you try to diffuse that reaction? Why? To protect your corporate overlords?
Umm, no. But sensationalism isn't the way for Vonage to get their message across. I'm trying to curb abuse of "censorship" before misuse of the word desensitizes people to actual censorship. We need more people sensitive to abuses of corporate power, and to do that, we need to call it what it is, not throwing around overblown and inaccurate labels for it.
...just anti-competitive business practices by entrenched, government-sponsored monopolies. Still bad - but I guess "censorship" elicits the stronger, knee-jerk reacion.
Threw in the towel
on
SLI Primer
·
· Score: 1, Offtopic
The ongoing arms race in PC graphics is exactly the reason I own 2 graphics cards. One in my GameCube, one in my PS2. For the price of a serious gaming setup these days, I can buy a solid non-gaming desktop and 2 gaming consoles, and only upgrade every 5 years. Plus I can sit back on the couch while I play.
I used to be a huge upgrade-your-homebuilt-beige-box-every-6-months advocate, but the cost structure and rewards have changed. If you want to play primarily RTS and FPS games, a PC may still be your best bet, but with broader tastes, it seems to me that consoles rule the roost these days, and talk like this of needing dual video cards is part of the reason.
Microsoft's smart-tags co-opted text in a page to link to what were, in essence, advertisements. Google is pointing to services that are funded by advertisements - big difference. And the fact that Google isn't leveraging monopoly power to force it on people - they're using an optional program, and an optional feature in that program.
Some of the difference is qualitative. In a smart tag envioronment, it felt like we were going to be advertised to - like text saying "broadband" might be linked to MSN broadband. In this case, it feels like Google is trying to be legitimately helpful in a way that also happens to generate cash for them. If I see directions on a page, having the option of asking Google to magically link that address into Google maps is a good thing.
The business model is different. Google makes money because they help you. You have lots of choices, and still choose Google, and all of us can use something else the moment they piss us off. Microsoft was shoehorning smart tags in because people don't know they have a choice in web browsers. Users would either be annoyed or oblivous to smart tags, but would put up with it for a (perceived) lack of options. Google needs users, users "need" Microsoft - that's the differing dynamic.
The TV ratings people don't count torrents. TV programs make money through advertising. Advertising costs are based on ratings numbers. No ratings, no advertising, no TV shows.
Only as long as ad buyers are stupid enough to believe that ratings have any correlation to the number of people who will view their ad. That day is dying, and fast. Even if you kill torrents, the growth of DVRs is accelerating and inevitable. The current ad/ratings model is now broken. As advertisers begin to factor in DVR ad skipping, the price of traditional ads will decrease. Networks will try and compensate by selling more ads, which will make more people look into DVR technology. Time to figure out a different ad format or business model.
don't care how they deside. As long as they keep coming out with more usefull tools that will make my life easier, that's all I care about. Keep up the good work google!
I take it you're hoping a spell checker is next on their list?
SSX I'll give you, but Madden? A little hint for you, my disturbingly ignorant friend: El Reg is a BRITISH website. Madden is an AMERICAN FOOTBALL game. American football is a niche interest in Britain; it is considered about as interesting as tiddlywinks. Look at it this way. If a new console came out, and the only decent sport sim on it was a cricket game, would you start ejaculating with excitement?
You know, if I went and bought a console from another country on their release date, I wouldn't resent their lack of an American football game. If he wants a solid lineup appealing to someone from the U.K., perhaps he should wait until the EUROPEAN release date. Supporting someone's assertion that a release lineup is crap simply because their culture doesn't match the country in which the hardware was released is the ignorance. Or should I pick up the Japanese PSP and complain the lineup is crap because I don't appreciate puzzle games or Mahjong?
Okay, you described pretty well why the PSx succeded, but you did nothing to defend this comment.
The PSP is the first portable console in a long time that actually seems like it will provide Nintendo with some real competition in that market. This IS one of the most important things to happen in the industry in a while. My point is that the PSX LAUNCH wasn't the main event there. Nintendo already had the Saturn to compete with when the PSX launched. My point is that the important events in the life of the PSX were made before and after launch, and many of the key decisions were blunders made by Sony's competitors.
The PSP launch is interesting, but its importance can't be gauged until several years from now. It could be merely as important as the launch of the Game Gear, which is to say that it's an interesting footnote in the history of gaming, but by no means a defining moment.
So a) The PSX launch wasn't the important moment in its lifetime, and b) it's too early to say how important the PSP launch is. As it stands, it sounds like the guy's just jumping on the hype train.
And who else had a 3D system out to compare to? I know you're not going to try and say the N64's were any better, never mind THAT system's horrid design and controller.
Calling the PSX a "3D system" is a stretch. At first it was a "system that played back pre-rendered 3D scenes" - the actual 3D games came later in its life, and well after Mario64. The Sega Saturn was already out, and the N64 was on the way. Both had better graphics than PSX - denying that is nothing more than fanboyism. The N64 batwing-esque controller is also odd, but the button layout's similarity to the SNES made it more accessible to existing gamers.
So let me get this straight... They had the best technology. They had good developer relations and great games. The used CD's that could store *far* more game data than anything else, allowing for FMV, CD-Audio, and much longer games (and the dreaded "Now loading" screen). First to use 3D graphics and first to really prove disc-based games and memory cards (which allows for a much better swapping and renting of games - don't lose your save file with the game). And all of this from a "new" entrant into the video game arena.
And you're trying to tell me that the Playstation was anything LESS than revolutionary? Actually, yes. The Saturn had memory cards and CD Audio, but Sega CD had the 'CD' part before that. The system hardware itself was nothing special, the sum of all the obvious console technologies. I never said it wouldn't have been successful, I say i was more successful than it should have been due to other console makers being stupid.
I lost faith in the article after reading, "the PSP is the most important thing to happen in the video game industry since the launch of the original PlayStation".
The LAUNCH of the original Playstation was a first-mover swipe to beat Nintendo with hardware originally developed FOR Nintendo as a SNES add-on. It had plain-as-grits graphics on a controller that was half-baked at the time (the non-lettered approach to button-naming confused almost anyone who had played any previous console). It was saved by severe screw-ups by both Nintendo and Sega. Sega beat Sony to the market with the Saturn, but the $399 price was WAY too high, and their rush to market meant that nobody had any time to develop games for it. Nintendo pissed off third-party developers by acting like a bully, and limited game size and (developer) profit margins with small and space-limited cartridges. The Atari Jaguar was still-born.
Sony won that generation of gaming with games, and with CD technology. The CD Audio wowed consumers while Nintendo had their characters speaking in noises like Charlie Brown's teacher. Their developer-friendly attitude left Nintendo scrambling for 3rd party games. Cheaper game manufacturing let them cut game prices faster amd lower than Nintendo. If Nintendo releases a CD-based console and treated its developers with respect, the PSX would have come in a distant 2nd.
That combined with his ignorance of Madden and SSX as A+ launch titles for the PS2 erode his credibility with me.
One extraordinary philosophical manifesto by the company's chief technical officer showed that he was aware that Kazaa's activities were a huge legal risk.
Why should this be damning evidence? Any sane executive should be aware of any and all legal risks associated with their activities.
Is your company using Linux? You could be at legal risk to a SCO lawsuit. Collect personal data on your customers? You could be at legal risk if that data gets hacked. Run a bungee jumping business? Legal risk. It doesn't say "he was aware they were performing illegal activities", it says he was aware of a risk. That is simply awareness that a) there was a real chance a lawsuit would be filed against them, and b) there was a non-trivial chance that, if sued, they would lose. Risk awareness does not imply guilt.
What's worse: the brunt of the pollution stems from North American and European industrialization. I cannot image what would happen if India or China had a 2 or 3 car family (let alone, the emerging trend of one car as income increases).
Are you aware of what China looks like NOW? There's a near-permanent haze over most of eastern China. I was there in October, and even on a "sunny" day, we couldn't see the sun. Most mornings in Hong Kong, we could barely see across the Bund, and even at mid-day, good luck seeing all the way across town, or seeing the tops of the skyscrapers. Even in more rural areas, the sun was something seen dimly through the haze.
Perhaps in western countries, we turn out some sort of less-visible and more harmful pollution, but there are perhaps only a few U.S. cities that come even close to the garbage we saw covering the entire eastern region of China. Judging from the responsibility they take with their industrial pollution there, I can only imagine that mass-owned vehicles over there would have little emissions control and make the problem even worse, if that's possible.
I don't own a PS2 because... and it doesn't have a good online system in my opinion
WHAT? This would be a reasonable criticism against the Gamecube (and you're entitled to your opinion), but essentially what you're saying here is that the XBox is the ONLY console with a good online system? PS2 online is exactly as good as the game's creator makes it. The fact that Sony hasn't stepped in the middle of it all to offer standardized tools and interfaces in exchange for a slice of revenue every month is a reasonable decision. Microsoft's approach is reasonable, though I personally find the subscription model unappealing, it is competitive. For people who play online regularly, XBox Live is worth it, but not so much for infrequent online gamers. Sony's approach is less convenient, but is pretty good considering it's free. Some people don't WANT to pay each month just to use the network adapter that they have on their console - I'm glad they have a free online system, even if you think it isn't 'good'.
If it wasn't obvious before, it should be fairly evident now. Sega pissed EA off like never before when it dropped all its game prices to $19.99. Not only did it threaten their market share, it threatened to change the paradigm for sports game pricing.
EA would take a MASSIVE hit if customers began to EXPECT to only pay $19.99 for each year's incremental update to the prior year's sports games. It would not only hurt them in the games where Sega provides direct competition (NFL, NBA, NHL, etc), it would force them to shift the price of their unopposed games. Why would gamers pay $50 for Tiger Woods or NASCAR after paying just $20 for Madden?
Rest assured, somewhere in the upper levels of EA, the bosses are paying a premium for these deals because they're factoring in the extra cash they'll make once Sega is crushed. The NFL was the opening salvo, the failed NBA bid an attempted backbreaker (especially since Sega's NBA game has been generally better in recent years). The Arena Football League deal attempts to seal off Sega's escape route (Sega could have design an AFL game to keep their football engine primed for the expiration of the NFL deal). But this is the heavy artillery. While Sega had begun establishing itself as a credible creator of sports games, the added ESPN name gave immediate credibility to the series in the eyes of consumers. Sega is some company that made a console they used to play Sonic on, ESPN almost defines sports to many Americans. Taking ESPN out of their hands puts them back to trying to build the Sega Sports name, but without a licensed NFL game as their flagship. EA is out for blood.
I have to wonder how hard EA is trying to sew up exclusive rights with the NCAA as well. Complete that trifecta, and you've removed all reasonable outlets for a game company to build or maintain a simulation football engine, particularly heading into the next generation of consoles.
Should they succeed, even if they let the exclusivity expire in 2010, any company that wants to make an NFL game - will be building a football engine from scratch for aging PS3, XBox2, and Revolution hardware, only to do it again within 2 years for the next generation of hardware. They will build a lead that will be hard for others to catch up to - the cost may discourage many from even trying.
I have to imagine that football games are a cash cow that help fund development of the other sports games - not that the others don't make money, rather football games, especially NFL, justify higher year-round staffing levels, and higher effort on shared development tools. I have to imagine this will impact the quality of ANY company that makes games for the major U.S. sports, particularly Sega.
"Celeron, the name of which is derived from the latin word, 'celer', meaning 'fast' or 'swift'"
'fast' and 'swift' are NOT words I often hear associated with Celerons. Perhaps they should have gone with insumption or vilion. Is implying that Celerons are fast some sort of cruel joke?
"Centrino" may be a marketing strategy but the Pentium M processor kicks ass. Specs show a 2MB cache (Dothan variety), 21 W power req. and notebooks with it last atleast 5 hrs on a single battery. I don't think AMD has anything to top that in the same price range.
The Pentium M IS a fine processor. Honestly, I'm glad for it - it's forced AMD to get serious about power consumption on the mobile processor side of things.
On the matter of performance, I'd love to find a real comparison of XP-M vs. Pentium-M processors under identical conditions. The closest I can find is an early benchmark comparing the XP-M 1700+ to a Dothan 2.0 GHz. The performance is close enough to chalk up to clock speed. I can't even remotely find a battery life comparison, I'd bet Intel wins that one. For price, you're right, the Athlon XP-M 3000+ at $141 and the Mobile Athlon 64 3400+ aren't in the same class as the Pentium M 755 for $435. Especially since either one of those processors trounces the Pentium in raw power.
The cache size argument is a non-starter - it's only one input that determines system performance, the real comparison. It's like touting the Athlon's larger L1 cache - big deal. The power requirements and battery life are closely related, and I think Intel does win that one, but by how much, and is that worth an extra $300 to Joe Consumer, especially at a massive performance dropoff?
NOOOOOOooooooo.....I've been blinded by marketing, how could this happen, I must be getting older and more gullible. The sad part too is that the AMD equivalent looks to be about $100 cheaper than the Centrino Notebook I bought.
Don't be TOO ashamed. An article I was reading said that their campaign has been so successful, some people think they need Centrino in order to go wireless, others think that Centrino is the actual processor name - they said there was a demonstrable spike in demand for Centrino notebooks versus wirelessly enabled Pentium-M processors (essentially the same thing). I despise marketing.
They still rock in one spot, the mobile processor market. I just got a new laptop with their Centrino processor and it's awesome. Loads of power, and I can run for 3 hrs easily. I was looking for a similar offer from AMD but to no avail.
Look out, you've been eaten by the marketing drones. Centrino is nothing more than a lame marketing name for a laptop containing a Pentium-M processor, an Intel 855 chipset, and one of 2 Intel wireless chipsets. It's incredible how highly people esteem "Centrino", particularly when all they really want is long battery life and wireless access, which can be had from a variety of chips and chipsets. AMD has a mobile processor too, and Consumer Reports tested an Athlon XP-M laptop to last over 3 hours. They just haven't spent $300 million promoting a word concocted by their marketing department.
Slashdot Mirror
Companies need to suck it up. Maybe you would like to have an experienced developer, but the answer to a shortage of talent at that level needn't be whining or outsourcing. The experience threshold seems to be a reaction to the complete hacks hired into IT in the late 90's - by enforcing minimum experience, you reduce your chances of hiring a nitwit. The correction that needs to happen is that companies need to learn to filter and find qualified, inexperienced applicants. Companies aren't willing to invest in entry-level enough to create the mid-level talent that is needed. It's going to get worse before it gets better - I see new grads branching into other careers when they can't find a job, so there's even less new talent coming in.
Does it take less than a half hour to search a full disk drive? If so, why not wire it into the OS in a service pack? The current Win XP search capability is abysmal and borderline useless. I don't care whether the search is on the desktop or not (I'd probably prefer not), but I'd like it to work.
I have the exact player I linked to, and when I connect it with USB, it shows up as a generic storage device. I don't need MusicMatch - I just drag and drop. If yours does otherwise, I'm sorry to hear it.
Because it doesn't support AAC?
And I am not talking about iTunes STORE purchases, I am talking about MP4 AAC...
If that's part of your requirements, then I guess this solution isn't for you. Few online stores and few MP3 players support AAC, so that's a big limitation. Affinity for AAC would suggest to me either a) audiophile, or b) iTMS customer. Really, unless someone believes AAC is superior to MP3/WMA and cares about the small difference in quality, lack of AAC playback is a small price to pay for upgradability. Audiophiles are excused. Though AAC vs. MP3 quality isn't an issue to me in most cases, I respect the decision for those who do care.
I'm well aware that some consumers are obsessed with the iPod "cool factor", but I expect more out of the clear thinkers among us. Why buy a flash-based player that won't let you upgrade the flash memory when a HUGE component of the price is the memory itself, and when you'll be able to upgrade the capacity to iPod Mini size within 2 years for less than $100? It's a vehicle to deliver music, not an expression of who you are.
And you try to diffuse that reaction? Why? To protect your corporate overlords?
Umm, no. But sensationalism isn't the way for Vonage to get their message across. I'm trying to curb abuse of "censorship" before misuse of the word desensitizes people to actual censorship. We need more people sensitive to abuses of corporate power, and to do that, we need to call it what it is, not throwing around overblown and inaccurate labels for it.
...just anti-competitive business practices by entrenched, government-sponsored monopolies. Still bad - but I guess "censorship" elicits the stronger, knee-jerk reacion.
I used to be a huge upgrade-your-homebuilt-beige-box-every-6-months advocate, but the cost structure and rewards have changed. If you want to play primarily RTS and FPS games, a PC may still be your best bet, but with broader tastes, it seems to me that consoles rule the roost these days, and talk like this of needing dual video cards is part of the reason.
Some of the difference is qualitative. In a smart tag envioronment, it felt like we were going to be advertised to - like text saying "broadband" might be linked to MSN broadband. In this case, it feels like Google is trying to be legitimately helpful in a way that also happens to generate cash for them. If I see directions on a page, having the option of asking Google to magically link that address into Google maps is a good thing.
The business model is different. Google makes money because they help you. You have lots of choices, and still choose Google, and all of us can use something else the moment they piss us off. Microsoft was shoehorning smart tags in because people don't know they have a choice in web browsers. Users would either be annoyed or oblivous to smart tags, but would put up with it for a (perceived) lack of options. Google needs users, users "need" Microsoft - that's the differing dynamic.
Only as long as ad buyers are stupid enough to believe that ratings have any correlation to the number of people who will view their ad. That day is dying, and fast. Even if you kill torrents, the growth of DVRs is accelerating and inevitable. The current ad/ratings model is now broken. As advertisers begin to factor in DVR ad skipping, the price of traditional ads will decrease. Networks will try and compensate by selling more ads, which will make more people look into DVR technology. Time to figure out a different ad format or business model.
don't care how they deside. As long as they keep coming out with more usefull tools that will make my life easier, that's all I care about. Keep up the good work google!
I take it you're hoping a spell checker is next on their list?
SSX I'll give you, but Madden? A little hint for you, my disturbingly ignorant friend: El Reg is a BRITISH website. Madden is an AMERICAN FOOTBALL game. American football is a niche interest in Britain; it is considered about as interesting as tiddlywinks.
Look at it this way. If a new console came out, and the only decent sport sim on it was a cricket game, would you start ejaculating with excitement?
You know, if I went and bought a console from another country on their release date, I wouldn't resent their lack of an American football game. If he wants a solid lineup appealing to someone from the U.K., perhaps he should wait until the EUROPEAN release date. Supporting someone's assertion that a release lineup is crap simply because their culture doesn't match the country in which the hardware was released is the ignorance. Or should I pick up the Japanese PSP and complain the lineup is crap because I don't appreciate puzzle games or Mahjong?
The PSP is the first portable console in a long time that actually seems like it will provide Nintendo with some real competition in that market. This IS one of the most important things to happen in the industry in a while.
My point is that the PSX LAUNCH wasn't the main event there. Nintendo already had the Saturn to compete with when the PSX launched. My point is that the important events in the life of the PSX were made before and after launch, and many of the key decisions were blunders made by Sony's competitors.
The PSP launch is interesting, but its importance can't be gauged until several years from now. It could be merely as important as the launch of the Game Gear, which is to say that it's an interesting footnote in the history of gaming, but by no means a defining moment.
So a) The PSX launch wasn't the important moment in its lifetime, and b) it's too early to say how important the PSP launch is. As it stands, it sounds like the guy's just jumping on the hype train.
And who else had a 3D system out to compare to? I know you're not going to try and say the N64's were any better, never mind THAT system's horrid design and controller.
Calling the PSX a "3D system" is a stretch. At first it was a "system that played back pre-rendered 3D scenes" - the actual 3D games came later in its life, and well after Mario64. The Sega Saturn was already out, and the N64 was on the way. Both had better graphics than PSX - denying that is nothing more than fanboyism. The N64 batwing-esque controller is also odd, but the button layout's similarity to the SNES made it more accessible to existing gamers.
So let me get this straight... They had the best technology. They had good developer relations and great games. The used CD's that could store *far* more game data than anything else, allowing for FMV, CD-Audio, and much longer games (and the dreaded "Now loading" screen). First to use 3D graphics and first to really prove disc-based games and memory cards (which allows for a much better swapping and renting of games - don't lose your save file with the game). And all of this from a "new" entrant into the video game arena.
And you're trying to tell me that the Playstation was anything LESS than revolutionary?
Actually, yes. The Saturn had memory cards and CD Audio, but Sega CD had the 'CD' part before that. The system hardware itself was nothing special, the sum of all the obvious console technologies. I never said it wouldn't have been successful, I say i was more successful than it should have been due to other console makers being stupid.
The LAUNCH of the original Playstation was a first-mover swipe to beat Nintendo with hardware originally developed FOR Nintendo as a SNES add-on. It had plain-as-grits graphics on a controller that was half-baked at the time (the non-lettered approach to button-naming confused almost anyone who had played any previous console). It was saved by severe screw-ups by both Nintendo and Sega. Sega beat Sony to the market with the Saturn, but the $399 price was WAY too high, and their rush to market meant that nobody had any time to develop games for it. Nintendo pissed off third-party developers by acting like a bully, and limited game size and (developer) profit margins with small and space-limited cartridges. The Atari Jaguar was still-born.
Sony won that generation of gaming with games, and with CD technology. The CD Audio wowed consumers while Nintendo had their characters speaking in noises like Charlie Brown's teacher. Their developer-friendly attitude left Nintendo scrambling for 3rd party games. Cheaper game manufacturing let them cut game prices faster amd lower than Nintendo. If Nintendo releases a CD-based console and treated its developers with respect, the PSX would have come in a distant 2nd.
That combined with his ignorance of Madden and SSX as A+ launch titles for the PS2 erode his credibility with me.
Is your company using Linux? You could be at legal risk to a SCO lawsuit. Collect personal data on your customers? You could be at legal risk if that data gets hacked. Run a bungee jumping business? Legal risk. It doesn't say "he was aware they were performing illegal activities", it says he was aware of a risk. That is simply awareness that a) there was a real chance a lawsuit would be filed against them, and b) there was a non-trivial chance that, if sued, they would lose. Risk awareness does not imply guilt.
Perhaps in western countries, we turn out some sort of less-visible and more harmful pollution, but there are perhaps only a few U.S. cities that come even close to the garbage we saw covering the entire eastern region of China. Judging from the responsibility they take with their industrial pollution there, I can only imagine that mass-owned vehicles over there would have little emissions control and make the problem even worse, if that's possible.
WHAT? This would be a reasonable criticism against the Gamecube (and you're entitled to your opinion), but essentially what you're saying here is that the XBox is the ONLY console with a good online system? PS2 online is exactly as good as the game's creator makes it. The fact that Sony hasn't stepped in the middle of it all to offer standardized tools and interfaces in exchange for a slice of revenue every month is a reasonable decision. Microsoft's approach is reasonable, though I personally find the subscription model unappealing, it is competitive. For people who play online regularly, XBox Live is worth it, but not so much for infrequent online gamers. Sony's approach is less convenient, but is pretty good considering it's free. Some people don't WANT to pay each month just to use the network adapter that they have on their console - I'm glad they have a free online system, even if you think it isn't 'good'.
EA would take a MASSIVE hit if customers began to EXPECT to only pay $19.99 for each year's incremental update to the prior year's sports games. It would not only hurt them in the games where Sega provides direct competition (NFL, NBA, NHL, etc), it would force them to shift the price of their unopposed games. Why would gamers pay $50 for Tiger Woods or NASCAR after paying just $20 for Madden?
Rest assured, somewhere in the upper levels of EA, the bosses are paying a premium for these deals because they're factoring in the extra cash they'll make once Sega is crushed. The NFL was the opening salvo, the failed NBA bid an attempted backbreaker (especially since Sega's NBA game has been generally better in recent years). The Arena Football League deal attempts to seal off Sega's escape route (Sega could have design an AFL game to keep their football engine primed for the expiration of the NFL deal). But this is the heavy artillery. While Sega had begun establishing itself as a credible creator of sports games, the added ESPN name gave immediate credibility to the series in the eyes of consumers. Sega is some company that made a console they used to play Sonic on, ESPN almost defines sports to many Americans. Taking ESPN out of their hands puts them back to trying to build the Sega Sports name, but without a licensed NFL game as their flagship. EA is out for blood.
Should they succeed, even if they let the exclusivity expire in 2010, any company that wants to make an NFL game - will be building a football engine from scratch for aging PS3, XBox2, and Revolution hardware, only to do it again within 2 years for the next generation of hardware. They will build a lead that will be hard for others to catch up to - the cost may discourage many from even trying.
I have to imagine that football games are a cash cow that help fund development of the other sports games - not that the others don't make money, rather football games, especially NFL, justify higher year-round staffing levels, and higher effort on shared development tools. I have to imagine this will impact the quality of ANY company that makes games for the major U.S. sports, particularly Sega.
'fast' and 'swift' are NOT words I often hear associated with Celerons. Perhaps they should have gone with insumption or vilion. Is implying that Celerons are fast some sort of cruel joke?
On the matter of performance, I'd love to find a real comparison of XP-M vs. Pentium-M processors under identical conditions. The closest I can find is an early benchmark comparing the XP-M 1700+ to a Dothan 2.0 GHz. The performance is close enough to chalk up to clock speed. I can't even remotely find a battery life comparison, I'd bet Intel wins that one. For price, you're right, the Athlon XP-M 3000+ at $141 and the Mobile Athlon 64 3400+ aren't in the same class as the Pentium M 755 for $435. Especially since either one of those processors trounces the Pentium in raw power.
The cache size argument is a non-starter - it's only one input that determines system performance, the real comparison. It's like touting the Athlon's larger L1 cache - big deal. The power requirements and battery life are closely related, and I think Intel does win that one, but by how much, and is that worth an extra $300 to Joe Consumer, especially at a massive performance dropoff?