Wow, another day, another article being used to try and bring down the Xbox 360. Is this seriously going to be happening every day till the PS 3 launches? Every 24 hours there's another article griping about something related to the Xbox 360. I mean, I know we're all supposed to just hate MS and anything they release, but come on. This is ludicrous.
From reading today's thread, everyone is pissed about not going to either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. Wow, Microsoft is being punished for not trying to force an unproven standard down everyone's throat. And can we stop the comparisons to when the PS2 chose DVD. The situations are very different. When the PS2 came out, DVD's were a standard backed by all of the major consumer electronics companies. Everyone was for it. It's not like they were taking some risk. By not picking either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, MS isn't going to get stuck forcing people to use what could ultimately become a dead standard. And no, multiple disks aren't going to kill anyone. Some of the most popular games for the PS and PS2 were multiple disks. It's not less immersive, and is it really so hard to get up and change once as you play through? (You don't boot off the first disk when you load a game from the second disks save point)
Why don't we stop trying to nitpick every little thing about the console. Wait, here's a better idea, let's actually wait till the console releases? Seeing as how very few people have even touched a 360, it seems a bit premature to talk about it like we're experts. And while we're at it, why don't we treat all three systems fairly. I don't see daily articles about the PS3 or the Revolution. Oh that's right, not much is being said because they aren't even close to being released.(Which means that the 360 is the new DC because releasing early = teh l0ssz0rs) But since they aren't MS, everyone knows they are clearly superior. Bah.
So let me get this straight, you're going to judge Longhorn based on a Beta, that's more than a year away from release? Did you ever think that maybe they didn't want to release all of it?
It's 2005, they said it should be out "in time for Christmas 2006." That's a year. If MS has an army of developers working on this, that's a lot of time. Both to find bugs, but also for their competitors to copy...er implement some of their stuff. Do you honestly think that MS will release it's full UI in a beta build a year from release? That would be immensely stupid on their part. Here's an idea, we'll show all of our competitors, both open and closed, what our new UI is going to look like. And we'll do it early enough that they can do their own versions of it to trivialize our release. Get real.
This build isn't meant to be like an OSS beta. OSS "betas" are treated like full fledged programs. Look at FF, everyone gobbled it up like it was crack when it was in v.7. Commercial software works differently. Since their selling this to make money, they aren't just going to give out a fully functioning preview release to the masses. They're going to be adding features, removing others and testing the crap out of this.
So instead of jumping to conclusions about what Longhorn will be like, just sit back and chill. You have no idea of what's going on in the Empire's stronghold. Everything you say about what will happen, what won't be in the software, what will work, and what will fail is conjecture. You're too far removed in terms of time or connections to the Longhorn release.
So basically, Open Source is suddenly going to eat up all of MS's market share. MS will cease to be. World Hunger will end. And Peace will break out around the world.
Or...
Maybe this is the same kind of analyzing that gets done on Apple every six months saying that it will go under. Let's just be honest for a second. Microsoft isn't going to go away. They may not be THE market share holder forever, but they aren't going to go away. The beauty of software is that people have a choice. Just like you can choose to use linux (or BSD,OSX,Netware,BE, whatever floats your boat), people can, and will, choose Windows. As great as Linux is, it has quite a few shortcomings, as does Windows, as does OS X. Everybody is basically equal.
So while their desktop market share will probably go down (at 90% it's hard for it not to), this doesn't mean that Linux will automagically become world leader supreme. Let's not kid ourselves.
Now, I understand that there will always be the possibility of defects in manufacturing. But I'm beginning to wonder if getting an Apple power book (in the next week) is such a smart idea. Beyond the whole Mac vs. PC flame-war, I'm now a bit worried about the QA on Apple's laptops. Major recalls on virtually all of the iBooks, and battery and screen issues with the 15" AlBooks. Can Apple still make the clams of superior quality hardware for its laptops when it seems to be having some major issues with their quality.
Or do they basically set up this kind of thing where if they see enough returns for the same problem, they just fix it for free and assume they gaffed? Or are they just trying to avoid another iBook Logic board-like PR disaster? If it's the former, then the decision to get an Apple is a no brainer. If it's the latter, then maybe I should really think about dropping 1800 on a Powerbook.
Actually, OSS software existed before stallman started the GNU Project. A lot of software was open source, distributed through local computer users groups. Programs were shared amongst people in the group. So even without Stallman's pushing, there would have been OSS.
If you check when they first set this up, they said about 9 years ago. So that means it's in the 1995 - 1996 time frame. If you go to MySQL's and PostgreSQL's web pages, you see that both weren't copyrighted untill 1995 (Mysql) and 1994 (Berkeley's Initial Copyright for Postges). Did they exist, yes. Would anyone in there right mind deploy them at the time for business applications. No. If you say yes, you're clearly looking at them with nine years of hind-sight and development. So at the time, the best option was Oracle.
Why they didn't upgrade or design it in a better way, well, I can't answer that.
Actually, it is about studying. Some people, myself included, only had the summers to "do something productive", the rest of the time was spent getting an education that consisted of more than just computers. Granted, I went to a very competative university, so i may be a bit jaded that I didn't have the time to try some of the things you mentioned. Still, not everyone's academic schedule allows them to be so "PRODUCTIVE" and still have a life away from technology.
Well, it doesn't require a new file system, but then again, using a huge XML file like iTunes does doesn't seem practical for an entire System.
And since your computer isn't a Google cluster, that doesn't seem like a good example to base things off of either.
There is a scalability issue with this. WinFS is a very ambitious idea. They want to be able to query for files. Not just match keywords. Sure I can search iTunes for music, but I'm not querying it. String matching and complex searches are not the same thing. Please do not confuse them.
40 Years ago:
I was black. Done.
I could be lynched for looking at my Italian girlfriend.
40 Years and Three months ago:
I couldn't even sit at the same table as my girlfriend. I couldn't Drink the same water.
Two weeks ago:
I walked through a museum with my girlfirned holding hands and generally being a young couple.
Maybe you don't see any progress, but maybe progress doesn't affect you the same way it does me. It's the internet, I don't know. But for me, there's been a lot of progress. My grandfather was a servant for a wealthy white man. My father was able to go to law school. I graduated from an Ivy League school. But I guess that isn't progress either.
Why do you assume that they are only targeting the Mac version? Last I checked, there were versions of both the iPod and the iTunes for Windows. Sure we (users of Apple's Windows products) are not the one's that Apple really cares about, but we do still exsist.
I get the feeling that Apple really didn't want this to happen. Raising the prices reduces the "deal" of downloading the album. As others have pointed out, why pay 16 bucks for an encrypted, DRM'd copy of an album that you have restricted rights to; when for 18 dollars you can have a CD that you can do what ever to.
Steve Jobs and Co. probably only agreed to this out of fear of losing the rights to distribute music. While selling music online helps the RIAA, it does not do so enough for Apple to really leverage their position on the pricing. From the vantage point of Apple, they need the RIAA more than the RIAA needs them.
I like my processor working on my tasks, not needless graphical widgets, thanks.
From what I've read at the Longhorn Developer Site, most of the graphics stuff is hardware accelerated. So your processor won't spend a lot of time drawing anything.
I'm surprised that people not only keep playing these games, but that people keep signing up for them. Over the past couple of weeks, the security of MMORPG's has become somewhat of a joke. Ragnarok might as well be called Ragnahack because it's been compromised so many times. And now this. Even Microsoft does a better job of protecting their information.
What gets me is that people are still signing up for these games. I personally haven't because the only one I've liked was RO, but I didn't have time to join. Now, I'll probably never join, based only upon the fact that their system has been severely compromised many times. How can someone be willing to pay money, every month, to play on a system that is probably open to attack. Sure a lot of the hacks have come in game, but if the game can be hacked, what is to stop them from actually getting my Credit Card or personal information. For me, it's just to risky to even join one of these games.
Er, you mean "Portability". Porting is cheap if you use cross-platform APIs from the beginning. What's needed more than anything is OpenGL 2.0 and SDL 2.0, so game companies can stop writing to DirectX.
I feel this actually shows how young you appear to be. Game companies really aren't all that interested in writing to many standards. This was apperent during the OpenGL/glide/Direct3D days. Right now, there is pretty much one viable choice for developers, Directx.
Because of it's installed user base, DirectX already has an edge, not to mention that DirectX makes many things, like network play, easier on the developer by giving them a pre-built framework. The other problem is that the majority of game developers look at DirectX as a godsend in terms of getting hardware to work. Easy access to all of the advanced features of the hardware without having to work for it.
While it is possible for OpenGL to make a comeback against D3D, SDL is kind of stuck. It's not going to provide enough features to make developers switch to it. As it stands, the only thing it holds over DirectX is that it is open and cross platform. Unfortunatly, this doesn't mean much to a game company who, in all honesty, isn't all that concerned with the small percentage of non-Windows gamers.
I think the first thing that should be asked is, what do you need to do with it? Distros have a strengths and weaknesses. If you just ask, what distro, you end up with a giant flame war over which distro is better.
Also, Have you considered possibly using a version of *BSD?
Nintendo is going to settle into a very comfortable niche in the market. Just like Apple, they will appeal to a certain market segment that will eat up every title thrown at them.
This could prove to be a problem for Nintendo. Mainly because of profit margins. Apple survives because, while their sales are not as high as their competitors, their profit margins are greater. The profit margins on consoles are generally very slim, if they are positive at all. In the console margin, shooting for high profit margins is generally not going to work. Partially because of what people are willing to pay for a system. People will spend thousands on a computer because it will do more than play games. Consoles on the other hand do not have that luxury.
The other thing you have to remember is that gamers (even the hardcore) are often not as loyal as the typical Apple fan. It can generally be assumed that a gamer will have loyalty to a company for the lifespan of the current system. After that, it's really a crap-shoot as to what they will want. Case in point is Sega. The Genesis was incredibly popular with lots of fans, but fast forward to the Saturn (let's not talk about the 32x); you couldn't give them away. It takes more than good games and a loyal fan base to survive in the modern console industry.
And because good karma was really keeping me down...
It's not about what games are made. All the systems make games for all types and ages of gamers. Saying that only hints at the real issue.
Image
Sprite saying that image is nothing was merely a sly remark about their own campaign. In all honesty, it is all about image. Image is what makes Apple, a company with 3% market share, seem like a powerhouse in terms of units sold. It's what keeps Linux off the desktops of the masses because it seems like a geek only thing. And image is what is really hurting the sales of the GC.
Does apple really sell all that many units? In the greater view of all computer sales, no. Is linux all that hard to install, not really. Is the GC a kiddie system? Only as much as PS2 or Xbox. The difference is the image portrayed by the console.
If you look at how the various consoles market themselves, you notice that Sony and Microsoft spend a lot of money to make their systems look mature and cool. The serious gamers (like those reading this) will look past that, but the casual gamers on the other hand won't. They'll buy into the hype, and believe what they are told. "PS2 and Xbox are cool, they are what real gamers play. GC is for kids." Then there are the up and coming hard core gamers (read kids). The same group that Nintendo is supposed to be targeting (complete bs in my opinion) sees this and thinks, "i don't want that, I want to be older and cool," so they don't buy GC's either.
Did nintendo do this deliberatly? No. But they also aren't helping matters. The gamecube looks like a kids system. It's big, it's multi-colored, it has a handle. This design could possibly be hard for some casual gamers to accept. Especially in a time when consoles are being made to look like they fit next to a dvd, vcr, tivo and other home electronics equipment.
The most interesting thing is, Nintendo knows how to fix these problems. Look at the GBA. In it's original form, it did alright, it wasn't a flop, but it wasn't anything spectacular. The problem, it didn't appeal to the casual market. It was big, it was multi-colored, it ate batteries. It was just not something casual eople were looking for.
Now look at the GBA SP. They redesigned it to fit the trends of portible devices. Made it smaller, sleaker, sexier. Gave it rechargable batteries like every other portable device. Suddenly, you can't keep them on shelves. Every toy store in America had them on back-order at some point (i had to travel all over town to find one and they had been out for months). It was just a matter of image. It's the same product, essentially. Same games, same basic hardware; just redesigned to be cooler to the mainstream market.
On a related note, I'm still kind of surprised that Adobe wouldn't port Photoshop over to Linux even for a company with as much clout as Disney. Seriously, I realize it's a LOT of work to port an app that massive, but if basically every animator who runs linux wants it, why not? Catering to your customers is definitely part of a good business model.
Catering to your paying customers is a good model. The majority of the people who are interested in paying for Photoshop are probably not going to be using Linux. Sure there are people who want to use Photoshop on linux, but not enough willing to pay the 600 bucks per copy for them to recoup the development costs. And while it is not a fair bias, the Linux community is often seen as people not willing to pay for software. When presented with this, why would adobe ever release Photoshop for Linux.
Ultimatly, this news totally benefits Adobe. Now they know that they DON'T have to develop for Linux because it works well under Wine. They can just sit back and reap the profits from selling Photoshop to Linux people. And the best part is, they don't have to support the software.
"Hello, I'm having problems with Photoshop"
"What operating system are you using?"
"Linux under..."
"I'm sorry, we don't support Linux. Have a nice day.
click
What exactly is a Mac unit? Is it just a computer, or does it also include the always popular Ipod? I'm not saying I doubt that they sold 771,000 PC's in a quarter, but it seems a little weird. Especially since apperently profits were actually down. I'd assume they make less profits on the Ipod then other things. Just wondering.
Well, Adobe is taking a page from Microsoft's book...
Although this is scarier than IE leaving the Mac. Premier is a major program, one that some might consider a major part of the Mac arsenal in terms of getting people to use the platform. It's interesting that Apple was applauded for writing their own versions of Apps (Keynote, Final Cut Pro), but there could be consequences for doing such. If Apple steps on the wrong toes, it could hurt the platform.
In a worse case Scenario, they release a complete office suite (on the level to compliment Keynote) or a major graphics program (like Photoshop). Say what you want about Office and Microsoft, Office for OS X is an excellent product. Photoshop is...well...Photoshop. If either of these programs were to get pulled from the platform, Apple could face an uphill battle in getting people to stay/switch.
This could be something good for OSS to work on. I mean, while improving security and stability is very good. Finding a truly good solution that would defeat spam bots and yet allow access to actual humans (even those with disabilities) would be more than just useful, it would be good for mankind. Besides, in the wake of the Linux on Xbox or else situation, the good PR couldn't hurt.
The reason that Joysticks and Gamepads are in decline is the style of games that are now popular. What are the most popular styles of games in this country? FPS, RTS, MMORPG. Do any of these games play well with anything besides a mouse and keyboard (let's forget about the strategic commander for a second).
Eight years ago, when plat formers, and flight games of all kinds ruled, then the joystick market was ripe. But people don't play those kind of games all that frequently. Even the Mechwarrior franchise plays as well with a mouse and keyboard as it does with a joystick.
I think this is a sign of a sadder state of games (at least for me). When games like Wing Commander and X-Wing/Tie Fighter are no longer made because people aren't into them. *shrugs* But that's life.
A lot of this stuff will really hinge on Panther. It will be tough for apple to sell G3's if Panther doesn't run well on the processor. I know Jaguar runs fine for what it does, but it still misses having Quartz. How much of Panther will require more than what the G3 can handle.
What's worse is that there is no guarantee from Apple that they will even continue to really care about the G3. They are already trying to steer people away from the sub 1ghz G4's with the creation of Pixlet. So it definitely leaves a hole with concern to the G3.
I hate to say it, but the G3's time may be almost up.
I think part of the problem is that what people are looking for requires a lot of work to create. Exchange does have a lot of features that, while they may not work as well an OS equivalent, work adequately well, are (somewhat) easy to administer and are integrated together. Could a good alternative be put together, definitely, but the amount of work may be more than some are willing to put forth without monetary compensation.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, another day, another article being used to try and bring down the Xbox 360. Is this seriously going to be happening every day till the PS 3 launches? Every 24 hours there's another article griping about something related to the Xbox 360. I mean, I know we're all supposed to just hate MS and anything they release, but come on. This is ludicrous. From reading today's thread, everyone is pissed about not going to either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. Wow, Microsoft is being punished for not trying to force an unproven standard down everyone's throat. And can we stop the comparisons to when the PS2 chose DVD. The situations are very different. When the PS2 came out, DVD's were a standard backed by all of the major consumer electronics companies. Everyone was for it. It's not like they were taking some risk. By not picking either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, MS isn't going to get stuck forcing people to use what could ultimately become a dead standard. And no, multiple disks aren't going to kill anyone. Some of the most popular games for the PS and PS2 were multiple disks. It's not less immersive, and is it really so hard to get up and change once as you play through? (You don't boot off the first disk when you load a game from the second disks save point) Why don't we stop trying to nitpick every little thing about the console. Wait, here's a better idea, let's actually wait till the console releases? Seeing as how very few people have even touched a 360, it seems a bit premature to talk about it like we're experts. And while we're at it, why don't we treat all three systems fairly. I don't see daily articles about the PS3 or the Revolution. Oh that's right, not much is being said because they aren't even close to being released.(Which means that the 360 is the new DC because releasing early = teh l0ssz0rs) But since they aren't MS, everyone knows they are clearly superior. Bah.
So let me get this straight, you're going to judge Longhorn based on a Beta, that's more than a year away from release? Did you ever think that maybe they didn't want to release all of it?
It's 2005, they said it should be out "in time for Christmas 2006." That's a year. If MS has an army of developers working on this, that's a lot of time. Both to find bugs, but also for their competitors to copy...er implement some of their stuff. Do you honestly think that MS will release it's full UI in a beta build a year from release? That would be immensely stupid on their part. Here's an idea, we'll show all of our competitors, both open and closed, what our new UI is going to look like. And we'll do it early enough that they can do their own versions of it to trivialize our release. Get real.
This build isn't meant to be like an OSS beta. OSS "betas" are treated like full fledged programs. Look at FF, everyone gobbled it up like it was crack when it was in v.7. Commercial software works differently. Since their selling this to make money, they aren't just going to give out a fully functioning preview release to the masses. They're going to be adding features, removing others and testing the crap out of this.
So instead of jumping to conclusions about what Longhorn will be like, just sit back and chill. You have no idea of what's going on in the Empire's stronghold. Everything you say about what will happen, what won't be in the software, what will work, and what will fail is conjecture. You're too far removed in terms of time or connections to the Longhorn release.
Can't you also do this at the gateway level? If you're running any decent firewall you can easily create such a setup.
So basically, Open Source is suddenly going to eat up all of MS's market share. MS will cease to be. World Hunger will end. And Peace will break out around the world.
Or...
Maybe this is the same kind of analyzing that gets done on Apple every six months saying that it will go under. Let's just be honest for a second. Microsoft isn't going to go away. They may not be THE market share holder forever, but they aren't going to go away. The beauty of software is that people have a choice. Just like you can choose to use linux (or BSD,OSX,Netware,BE, whatever floats your boat), people can, and will, choose Windows. As great as Linux is, it has quite a few shortcomings, as does Windows, as does OS X. Everybody is basically equal.
So while their desktop market share will probably go down (at 90% it's hard for it not to), this doesn't mean that Linux will automagically become world leader supreme. Let's not kid ourselves.
Now, I understand that there will always be the possibility of defects in manufacturing. But I'm beginning to wonder if getting an Apple power book (in the next week) is such a smart idea. Beyond the whole Mac vs. PC flame-war, I'm now a bit worried about the QA on Apple's laptops. Major recalls on virtually all of the iBooks, and battery and screen issues with the 15" AlBooks. Can Apple still make the clams of superior quality hardware for its laptops when it seems to be having some major issues with their quality.
Or do they basically set up this kind of thing where if they see enough returns for the same problem, they just fix it for free and assume they gaffed? Or are they just trying to avoid another iBook Logic board-like PR disaster? If it's the former, then the decision to get an Apple is a no brainer. If it's the latter, then maybe I should really think about dropping 1800 on a Powerbook.
Actually, OSS software existed before stallman started the GNU Project. A lot of software was open source, distributed through local computer users groups. Programs were shared amongst people in the group. So even without Stallman's pushing, there would have been OSS.
If you check when they first set this up, they said about 9 years ago. So that means it's in the 1995 - 1996 time frame. If you go to MySQL's and PostgreSQL's web pages, you see that both weren't copyrighted untill 1995 (Mysql) and 1994 (Berkeley's Initial Copyright for Postges). Did they exist, yes. Would anyone in there right mind deploy them at the time for business applications. No. If you say yes, you're clearly looking at them with nine years of hind-sight and development. So at the time, the best option was Oracle. Why they didn't upgrade or design it in a better way, well, I can't answer that.
Actually, it is about studying. Some people, myself included, only had the summers to "do something productive", the rest of the time was spent getting an education that consisted of more than just computers. Granted, I went to a very competative university, so i may be a bit jaded that I didn't have the time to try some of the things you mentioned. Still, not everyone's academic schedule allows them to be so "PRODUCTIVE" and still have a life away from technology.
Well, it doesn't require a new file system, but then again, using a huge XML file like iTunes does doesn't seem practical for an entire System. And since your computer isn't a Google cluster, that doesn't seem like a good example to base things off of either. There is a scalability issue with this. WinFS is a very ambitious idea. They want to be able to query for files. Not just match keywords. Sure I can search iTunes for music, but I'm not querying it. String matching and complex searches are not the same thing. Please do not confuse them.
From someone who is multi-racial to begin with:
40 Years ago:
I was black. Done.
I could be lynched for looking at my Italian girlfriend.
40 Years and Three months ago:
I couldn't even sit at the same table as my girlfriend. I couldn't Drink the same water.
Two weeks ago:
I walked through a museum with my girlfirned holding hands and generally being a young couple.
Maybe you don't see any progress, but maybe progress doesn't affect you the same way it does me. It's the internet, I don't know. But for me, there's been a lot of progress. My grandfather was a servant for a wealthy white man. My father was able to go to law school. I graduated from an Ivy League school. But I guess that isn't progress either.
Why do you assume that they are only targeting the Mac version? Last I checked, there were versions of both the iPod and the iTunes for Windows. Sure we (users of Apple's Windows products) are not the one's that Apple really cares about, but we do still exsist.
I get the feeling that Apple really didn't want this to happen. Raising the prices reduces the "deal" of downloading the album. As others have pointed out, why pay 16 bucks for an encrypted, DRM'd copy of an album that you have restricted rights to; when for 18 dollars you can have a CD that you can do what ever to. Steve Jobs and Co. probably only agreed to this out of fear of losing the rights to distribute music. While selling music online helps the RIAA, it does not do so enough for Apple to really leverage their position on the pricing. From the vantage point of Apple, they need the RIAA more than the RIAA needs them.
I like my processor working on my tasks, not needless graphical widgets, thanks.
From what I've read at the Longhorn Developer Site, most of the graphics stuff is hardware accelerated. So your processor won't spend a lot of time drawing anything.
I'm surprised that people not only keep playing these games, but that people keep signing up for them. Over the past couple of weeks, the security of MMORPG's has become somewhat of a joke. Ragnarok might as well be called Ragnahack because it's been compromised so many times. And now this. Even Microsoft does a better job of protecting their information.
What gets me is that people are still signing up for these games. I personally haven't because the only one I've liked was RO, but I didn't have time to join. Now, I'll probably never join, based only upon the fact that their system has been severely compromised many times. How can someone be willing to pay money, every month, to play on a system that is probably open to attack. Sure a lot of the hacks have come in game, but if the game can be hacked, what is to stop them from actually getting my Credit Card or personal information. For me, it's just to risky to even join one of these games.
Er, you mean "Portability". Porting is cheap if you use cross-platform APIs from the beginning. What's needed more than anything is OpenGL 2.0 and SDL 2.0, so game companies can stop writing to DirectX.
I feel this actually shows how young you appear to be. Game companies really aren't all that interested in writing to many standards. This was apperent during the OpenGL/glide/Direct3D days. Right now, there is pretty much one viable choice for developers, Directx.
Because of it's installed user base, DirectX already has an edge, not to mention that DirectX makes many things, like network play, easier on the developer by giving them a pre-built framework. The other problem is that the majority of game developers look at DirectX as a godsend in terms of getting hardware to work. Easy access to all of the advanced features of the hardware without having to work for it.
While it is possible for OpenGL to make a comeback against D3D, SDL is kind of stuck. It's not going to provide enough features to make developers switch to it. As it stands, the only thing it holds over DirectX is that it is open and cross platform. Unfortunatly, this doesn't mean much to a game company who, in all honesty, isn't all that concerned with the small percentage of non-Windows gamers.
I think the first thing that should be asked is, what do you need to do with it? Distros have a strengths and weaknesses. If you just ask, what distro, you end up with a giant flame war over which distro is better. Also, Have you considered possibly using a version of *BSD?
Nintendo is going to settle into a very comfortable niche in the market. Just like Apple, they will appeal to a certain market segment that will eat up every title thrown at them.
This could prove to be a problem for Nintendo. Mainly because of profit margins. Apple survives because, while their sales are not as high as their competitors, their profit margins are greater. The profit margins on consoles are generally very slim, if they are positive at all. In the console margin, shooting for high profit margins is generally not going to work. Partially because of what people are willing to pay for a system. People will spend thousands on a computer because it will do more than play games. Consoles on the other hand do not have that luxury.
The other thing you have to remember is that gamers (even the hardcore) are often not as loyal as the typical Apple fan. It can generally be assumed that a gamer will have loyalty to a company for the lifespan of the current system. After that, it's really a crap-shoot as to what they will want. Case in point is Sega. The Genesis was incredibly popular with lots of fans, but fast forward to the Saturn (let's not talk about the 32x); you couldn't give them away. It takes more than good games and a loyal fan base to survive in the modern console industry.
And because good karma was really keeping me down...
It's not about what games are made. All the systems make games for all types and ages of gamers. Saying that only hints at the real issue.
Image
Sprite saying that image is nothing was merely a sly remark about their own campaign. In all honesty, it is all about image. Image is what makes Apple, a company with 3% market share, seem like a powerhouse in terms of units sold. It's what keeps Linux off the desktops of the masses because it seems like a geek only thing. And image is what is really hurting the sales of the GC.
Does apple really sell all that many units? In the greater view of all computer sales, no. Is linux all that hard to install, not really. Is the GC a kiddie system? Only as much as PS2 or Xbox. The difference is the image portrayed by the console.
If you look at how the various consoles market themselves, you notice that Sony and Microsoft spend a lot of money to make their systems look mature and cool. The serious gamers (like those reading this) will look past that, but the casual gamers on the other hand won't. They'll buy into the hype, and believe what they are told. "PS2 and Xbox are cool, they are what real gamers play. GC is for kids." Then there are the up and coming hard core gamers (read kids). The same group that Nintendo is supposed to be targeting (complete bs in my opinion) sees this and thinks, "i don't want that, I want to be older and cool," so they don't buy GC's either.
Did nintendo do this deliberatly? No. But they also aren't helping matters. The gamecube looks like a kids system. It's big, it's multi-colored, it has a handle. This design could possibly be hard for some casual gamers to accept. Especially in a time when consoles are being made to look like they fit next to a dvd, vcr, tivo and other home electronics equipment.
The most interesting thing is, Nintendo knows how to fix these problems. Look at the GBA. In it's original form, it did alright, it wasn't a flop, but it wasn't anything spectacular. The problem, it didn't appeal to the casual market. It was big, it was multi-colored, it ate batteries. It was just not something casual eople were looking for.
Now look at the GBA SP. They redesigned it to fit the trends of portible devices. Made it smaller, sleaker, sexier. Gave it rechargable batteries like every other portable device. Suddenly, you can't keep them on shelves. Every toy store in America had them on back-order at some point (i had to travel all over town to find one and they had been out for months). It was just a matter of image. It's the same product, essentially. Same games, same basic hardware; just redesigned to be cooler to the mainstream market.
Of course, I could be wrong...
On a related note, I'm still kind of surprised that Adobe wouldn't port Photoshop over to Linux even for a company with as much clout as Disney. Seriously, I realize it's a LOT of work to port an app that massive, but if basically every animator who runs linux wants it, why not? Catering to your customers is definitely part of a good business model.
Catering to your paying customers is a good model. The majority of the people who are interested in paying for Photoshop are probably not going to be using Linux. Sure there are people who want to use Photoshop on linux, but not enough willing to pay the 600 bucks per copy for them to recoup the development costs. And while it is not a fair bias, the Linux community is often seen as people not willing to pay for software. When presented with this, why would adobe ever release Photoshop for Linux.
Ultimatly, this news totally benefits Adobe. Now they know that they DON'T have to develop for Linux because it works well under Wine. They can just sit back and reap the profits from selling Photoshop to Linux people. And the best part is, they don't have to support the software.
"Hello, I'm having problems with Photoshop"
"What operating system are you using?"
"Linux under..."
"I'm sorry, we don't support Linux. Have a nice day.
click
It's ingenious really.
What exactly is a Mac unit? Is it just a computer, or does it also include the always popular Ipod? I'm not saying I doubt that they sold 771,000 PC's in a quarter, but it seems a little weird. Especially since apperently profits were actually down. I'd assume they make less profits on the Ipod then other things. Just wondering.
Well, Adobe is taking a page from Microsoft's book...
Although this is scarier than IE leaving the Mac. Premier is a major program, one that some might consider a major part of the Mac arsenal in terms of getting people to use the platform. It's interesting that Apple was applauded for writing their own versions of Apps (Keynote, Final Cut Pro), but there could be consequences for doing such. If Apple steps on the wrong toes, it could hurt the platform.
In a worse case Scenario, they release a complete office suite (on the level to compliment Keynote) or a major graphics program (like Photoshop). Say what you want about Office and Microsoft, Office for OS X is an excellent product. Photoshop is...well...Photoshop. If either of these programs were to get pulled from the platform, Apple could face an uphill battle in getting people to stay/switch.
This could be something good for OSS to work on. I mean, while improving security and stability is very good. Finding a truly good solution that would defeat spam bots and yet allow access to actual humans (even those with disabilities) would be more than just useful, it would be good for mankind. Besides, in the wake of the Linux on Xbox or else situation, the good PR couldn't hurt.
The reason that Joysticks and Gamepads are in decline is the style of games that are now popular. What are the most popular styles of games in this country? FPS, RTS, MMORPG. Do any of these games play well with anything besides a mouse and keyboard (let's forget about the strategic commander for a second).
Eight years ago, when plat formers, and flight games of all kinds ruled, then the joystick market was ripe. But people don't play those kind of games all that frequently. Even the Mechwarrior franchise plays as well with a mouse and keyboard as it does with a joystick.
I think this is a sign of a sadder state of games (at least for me). When games like Wing Commander and X-Wing/Tie Fighter are no longer made because people aren't into them. *shrugs* But that's life.
A lot of this stuff will really hinge on Panther. It will be tough for apple to sell G3's if Panther doesn't run well on the processor. I know Jaguar runs fine for what it does, but it still misses having Quartz. How much of Panther will require more than what the G3 can handle.
What's worse is that there is no guarantee from Apple that they will even continue to really care about the G3. They are already trying to steer people away from the sub 1ghz G4's with the creation of Pixlet. So it definitely leaves a hole with concern to the G3.
I hate to say it, but the G3's time may be almost up.
I think part of the problem is that what people are looking for requires a lot of work to create. Exchange does have a lot of features that, while they may not work as well an OS equivalent, work adequately well, are (somewhat) easy to administer and are integrated together. Could a good alternative be put together, definitely, but the amount of work may be more than some are willing to put forth without monetary compensation.