"SLI was such an obvious way to make graphics rendering parallelized! I'm glad they're bringing it back... I've been missing it."
From an economics point of view, it sounds pretty cool. Spend a few extra $$$ to get a top of the line card. Then, in a year or two, pick up a second card when the prices are considerably lower, then you get 2x the performance without tossing hardware. Bitchin.
Unfortunately, I wonder if that puts NVidia in an ugly place. It does set the bar for what the Geforce 7's have a minimum to do. But... that aint bad for us, now is it?:)
My Gamecube complains if I take the disc out. It says "put the original disc back in!". I think that's in the software of the game, though. I'm kinda curious if anybody knows more matter-of-factly if the Gamecube could span games across multiple discs.
"I have very little interest in the DS - Ohh, a touchscreen - I can use Pda Functions, just like... on... my... PDA... "
How can you play PC games and not find the PDA style screen interesting?
"And the Games just dont look as appealing."
As much as I'd love to run to Nintendo's defense, I think you're spot on here. The games, ultimately, should direct you where you want to go. If any of us Nintendo fan boys give you shit about that, hold on strong to the choice of games. Ultimately that's what we end up doing with these machines.
"At first i thought the GBA SP would still reign over the PSP for me, but after seeing this, i'm not so sure."
I wouldn't judge based on graphical quality. Problem #1 is you're seeing a video from a shakey cam, as opposed to the direct-to-video demos we've seen from Nintendo. Problem #2 is that Nintendo's changed the playing field somewhat. Even if the PSP can run circles around the DS in terms of graphical capabilities, there's still the interface to consider. The stylus interface for the DS kicks ass.
These are mostly technical demos, but watch the whole way through. I guarantee you you'll be seeing stuff you just won't possibly be able to do with the PSP. Read between the lines a bit, and it gets more exciting. Notice the handwriting-based IM program they have running on this demo. That, in and of itself, isn't so exciting. However, think about using this bad boy on an 802.11 connection. Not only would it be easy to get this thing on the net to play against other people, but you'd have a suitable interface for setting up your character and even having some in-game chats. All on a seperate screen, no less.
Yes, I'm a Nintendo fan boy, so take what I'm saying with a grain of salt. But man, I do get excited at the idea of playing on-line from my recliner. Assuming the PSP has 802.11 as the rumors suggest, it seems so pale in comparison.
" Say whatever you will, it's a new generation of portable hardware, with performance that lines up with the PS2. Therefore, software development takes quite a bit of work. If you don't give it your all when making games, producing something good is difficult."
He's gotta point. The IGN article didn't mention it, but I've heard it before: The ~$30 price tag of these portable games will no doubt have an effect on development as well. That's significantly less money to be made. It is unlikely we'll see the same amount of effort put into making these games.
The Nintendo zealot in me wants to point out that this could really hurt the PSP. The more practical side of me says that mabye this could lend to more innovative games. I mean, what is innovation if it isn't the overcoming of hurdles such as smaller development staff or simpler interface?
As much as I want Nintendo to win at everything it does, I'm very glad to see this competition taking place in the handheld market.
"Was it just me or did that guy in the video put that UMD disc into the PSP while it was "playing" another game? Would that mean all we're seeing here is a nice tft screen displaying a video feed (which is what I was suspecting all along)?"
Just you. But that's been covered in other posts. It's worth adding that since it's optical, the hardware would be able to keep running a program without the disc. If Sony's smart, they didn't build it to auto-reset in that event. Otherwise, how would Square make their multi-disc games?;)
I'd be more inclined to agree if he were taking steps to prevent the sale or ownership of these CDs. He's not. He doesn't want them passing through his department.
Frankly, I'm not sure we'll agree on this without some hair-splitting over the definition of censorship. The dictionary says one thing, but the images in people's minds is another. It might, to the letter, fulfill the dictionary term of it, but I'm quite sure people are picturing something far worse.
"Its not censorship since they're not stopping anyone from listening to it,"
I think this alone is an important point about censorship. There is a significant differene between "You can't listen to this" and "You can't get this HERE." Nobody seemed to understand this difference when Slashdot's pitchforks were aimed at the FCC over Mrs. Janet's boob.
I meant in the sense that it didn't earn that reputation to begin with. Differentiating the two makes a big difference when the percpetion is ill-defined.
"I like how you're comfortable with the occasional exploit..."
It's worth mentioning that Linux and Mozilla have occasional exploits as well.
"... as if "being better than Outlook Express" were a redeeming quality."
In a sense, it is. If anybody here actually used Outlook >2000 next to OE, they'd understand the drag OE's had on OL's reputation. Just like how a bunch of dumbasses here don't know the difference between Windows 98 and Windows 2000 and tee hee hoddle haw at every stale BSOD joke.
So you'll pardon me if I don't take any real offense to your comment. If your opinion of any given software is based mostly on Slashdot stereotypes, then you're not in much of a position to take pokes at somebody who rises to its defense.;)
"From the article: "One stumbling block is how difficult it is to quantify the products value versus its price. (Right now, the technology is priced at $45 per square foot.)"
I think the point was that there are other benefits to this type of power. If, for example, these panels charged a battery that a house or building ran on, then you'd have a form of UPS in the event of a power failure. How much is that worth? Etc.
"Is $19 million worth of glass really what you would want to get?"
Depends, you have to ask more questions:
1.) How much does the ordinary glass cost?
2.) How much electricity is generated? How much would this reduce the yearly bill?
3.) How much would/could electric prices rise?
4.) How long do these panels last?
5.) What other benefits are you buying? (I.e. is there resistance to power failures? Those in Cali during the rolling blackouts would appreciate that....)
6.) How does this compare to the cost of the rest of the building?
7.) Is running on solar power going to be attractive to tenants?
"While it will no double have niche applications, it's not going to release the world from dependence on oil..."
Yet. Technology only gets better. Say a minor tweak to the process makes a solar panel last twice as long. That's half the resources to make one panel, right?
It's not so much that it's a falicy, it's that the game isn't over yet.
"Most glass is mounted vertically so it will only be good in the mornings/afternoons....."
Who's to say they wouldn't mount it at an angle to get more benefit from this technology? Could be aesthetically pleasing as well. Get the right guy working on the blueprint and all should be well.
" Wait, how much do the super-efficient panels cost? Oops..."
A.) Prices will go down if these things take off.
B.) Think of how much cheaper the electric bill will be. (Also consider how much more regular it has the potential to be.)
C.) Imagine if an ill-timed power outage wouldn't necessarily mean the building was affected.
I imagine once somebody sits down with a calculator and thinks out 5 to 10 years, the cost will end up being quite competitive AND they get bonus features to boot.
Just because something starts out at a high price doesn't always mean the value's not there, or that the price will always stay that way. The main reason I'm replying is not so much because of your particular comment, but because I've seen a great deal of sticker-shock on Slashdot without understanding some of these basic things about how technology economics works.
"While we test our pile of shit, could you please ask the maker of your fully functional secure fast and stable email client to disable the feature that sends me spam each time some script kiddy mails you an.exe attachment? Thank you."
Sorry to suck the fun out of your witty comment here, but please don't confuse Outlook for Outlook Express. OL still has the occasional exploit, but it is nowhere near as bad as OLE. In all seriousness, with OLXP (released in 02 I think) you have to hack the registry to even get it to download an.EXE.
(For the record, I did have a chuckle at this comment.;))
"Ah, you are trying to save face while retracting your original stance."
Nope. I can admit error. Ive done it before. However, I never said (or thought) anything supportive of that. You're reading way too much from what I said. (and what i ddn't say....)
For the record, Im not known for spontaneously changing sides just to be cool. I'm far better known for fighting my ill-thought positions deep into the dirt.;)
"Will Americans fight back to return control back to the public or will they roll over and keep buying Disney's stuff just to pacify their youngsters?"
Or are they going to worry more about less important things like wars and health care?
Face it, unless it trips the general populous (sp?) it'll just never show up on a big enough radar. I wouldn't describe it as rolling over.
Slashdot Mirror
"Hmm, I don't know about that. Personally, I keep everything that hits my PC, and it adds up, but still hasn't come close to 2TB..."
;)
Two words: HD Porn.
I doubt I'm speaking for just myself here.
"SLI was such an obvious way to make graphics rendering parallelized! I'm glad they're bringing it back... I've been missing it."
:)
From an economics point of view, it sounds pretty cool. Spend a few extra $$$ to get a top of the line card. Then, in a year or two, pick up a second card when the prices are considerably lower, then you get 2x the performance without tossing hardware. Bitchin.
Unfortunately, I wonder if that puts NVidia in an ugly place. It does set the bar for what the Geforce 7's have a minimum to do. But... that aint bad for us, now is it?
"And everyone else, for instance, has access to your fingerprints on every object you've touched in recent time."
How does one go about making use of those finger prints, and how hard would it really be to make a system that defends against false readings?
My Gamecube complains if I take the disc out. It says "put the original disc back in!". I think that's in the software of the game, though. I'm kinda curious if anybody knows more matter-of-factly if the Gamecube could span games across multiple discs.
"I have very little interest in the DS - Ohh, a touchscreen - I can use Pda Functions, just like... on... my... PDA... "
How can you play PC games and not find the PDA style screen interesting?
"And the Games just dont look as appealing."
As much as I'd love to run to Nintendo's defense, I think you're spot on here. The games, ultimately, should direct you where you want to go. If any of us Nintendo fan boys give you shit about that, hold on strong to the choice of games. Ultimately that's what we end up doing with these machines.
"At first i thought the GBA SP would still reign over the PSP for me, but after seeing this, i'm not so sure."
I wouldn't judge based on graphical quality. Problem #1 is you're seeing a video from a shakey cam, as opposed to the direct-to-video demos we've seen from Nintendo. Problem #2 is that Nintendo's changed the playing field somewhat. Even if the PSP can run circles around the DS in terms of graphical capabilities, there's still the interface to consider. The stylus interface for the DS kicks ass.
I encourage you to watch this video here:
http://www.cube-europe.com/news.php?nid=6748
These are mostly technical demos, but watch the whole way through. I guarantee you you'll be seeing stuff you just won't possibly be able to do with the PSP. Read between the lines a bit, and it gets more exciting. Notice the handwriting-based IM program they have running on this demo. That, in and of itself, isn't so exciting. However, think about using this bad boy on an 802.11 connection. Not only would it be easy to get this thing on the net to play against other people, but you'd have a suitable interface for setting up your character and even having some in-game chats. All on a seperate screen, no less.
Yes, I'm a Nintendo fan boy, so take what I'm saying with a grain of salt. But man, I do get excited at the idea of playing on-line from my recliner. Assuming the PSP has 802.11 as the rumors suggest, it seems so pale in comparison.
" Say whatever you will, it's a new generation of portable hardware, with performance that lines up with the PS2. Therefore, software development takes quite a bit of work. If you don't give it your all when making games, producing something good is difficult."
He's gotta point. The IGN article didn't mention it, but I've heard it before: The ~$30 price tag of these portable games will no doubt have an effect on development as well. That's significantly less money to be made. It is unlikely we'll see the same amount of effort put into making these games.
The Nintendo zealot in me wants to point out that this could really hurt the PSP. The more practical side of me says that mabye this could lend to more innovative games. I mean, what is innovation if it isn't the overcoming of hurdles such as smaller development staff or simpler interface?
As much as I want Nintendo to win at everything it does, I'm very glad to see this competition taking place in the handheld market.
"Was it just me or did that guy in the video put that UMD disc into the PSP while it was "playing" another game? Would that mean all we're seeing here is a nice tft screen displaying a video feed (which is what I was suspecting all along)?"
;)
Just you. But that's been covered in other posts. It's worth adding that since it's optical, the hardware would be able to keep running a program without the disc. If Sony's smart, they didn't build it to auto-reset in that event. Otherwise, how would Square make their multi-disc games?
"He's committing blatant censorship"
I'd be more inclined to agree if he were taking steps to prevent the sale or ownership of these CDs. He's not. He doesn't want them passing through his department.
Frankly, I'm not sure we'll agree on this without some hair-splitting over the definition of censorship. The dictionary says one thing, but the images in people's minds is another. It might, to the letter, fulfill the dictionary term of it, but I'm quite sure people are picturing something far worse.
"Its not censorship since they're not stopping anyone from listening to it,"
I think this alone is an important point about censorship. There is a significant differene between "You can't listen to this" and "You can't get this HERE." Nobody seemed to understand this difference when Slashdot's pitchforks were aimed at the FCC over Mrs. Janet's boob.
"*COUGH* Babylon 5 *COUGH*."
Well, let's see:
1.) No plot holes? - BZZt.
2.) Imaginative but believable universe? - BZZt.
3.) Character driven? - Half-credit. (see rule 2.)
"Again, no it's not redeeming."
I meant in the sense that it didn't earn that reputation to begin with. Differentiating the two makes a big difference when the percpetion is ill-defined.
"I like how you're comfortable with the occasional exploit..."
;)
It's worth mentioning that Linux and Mozilla have occasional exploits as well.
"... as if "being better than Outlook Express" were a redeeming quality."
In a sense, it is. If anybody here actually used Outlook >2000 next to OE, they'd understand the drag OE's had on OL's reputation. Just like how a bunch of dumbasses here don't know the difference between Windows 98 and Windows 2000 and tee hee hoddle haw at every stale BSOD joke.
So you'll pardon me if I don't take any real offense to your comment. If your opinion of any given software is based mostly on Slashdot stereotypes, then you're not in much of a position to take pokes at somebody who rises to its defense.
"From the article: "One stumbling block is how difficult it is to quantify the products value versus its price. (Right now, the technology is priced at $45 per square foot.)"
I think the point was that there are other benefits to this type of power. If, for example, these panels charged a battery that a house or building ran on, then you'd have a form of UPS in the event of a power failure. How much is that worth? Etc.
"Is $19 million worth of glass really what you would want to get?"
Depends, you have to ask more questions:
1.) How much does the ordinary glass cost?
2.) How much electricity is generated? How much would this reduce the yearly bill?
3.) How much would/could electric prices rise?
4.) How long do these panels last?
5.) What other benefits are you buying? (I.e. is there resistance to power failures? Those in Cali during the rolling blackouts would appreciate that....)
6.) How does this compare to the cost of the rest of the building?
7.) Is running on solar power going to be attractive to tenants?
"The first is simply to make more efficient use of natural light!"
Heh. Where I work, our computer screens light the room.
"While it will no double have niche applications, it's not going to release the world from dependence on oil..."
Yet. Technology only gets better. Say a minor tweak to the process makes a solar panel last twice as long. That's half the resources to make one panel, right?
It's not so much that it's a falicy, it's that the game isn't over yet.
"Most glass is mounted vertically so it will only be good in the mornings/afternoons....."
Who's to say they wouldn't mount it at an angle to get more benefit from this technology? Could be aesthetically pleasing as well. Get the right guy working on the blueprint and all should be well.
" Wait, how much do the super-efficient panels cost? Oops..."
A.) Prices will go down if these things take off.
B.) Think of how much cheaper the electric bill will be. (Also consider how much more regular it has the potential to be.)
C.) Imagine if an ill-timed power outage wouldn't necessarily mean the building was affected.
I imagine once somebody sits down with a calculator and thinks out 5 to 10 years, the cost will end up being quite competitive AND they get bonus features to boot.
Just because something starts out at a high price doesn't always mean the value's not there, or that the price will always stay that way. The main reason I'm replying is not so much because of your particular comment, but because I've seen a great deal of sticker-shock on Slashdot without understanding some of these basic things about how technology economics works.
"Thank you for asking, it's spelled 'populace'."
Thanks! Hope nobody mods ya down. The old DOS game has forever tainted me on that particular word.
"While we test our pile of shit, could you please ask the maker of your fully functional secure fast and stable email client to disable the feature that sends me spam each time some script kiddy mails you an .exe attachment? Thank you."
.EXE.
;))
Sorry to suck the fun out of your witty comment here, but please don't confuse Outlook for Outlook Express. OL still has the occasional exploit, but it is nowhere near as bad as OLE. In all seriousness, with OLXP (released in 02 I think) you have to hack the registry to even get it to download an
(For the record, I did have a chuckle at this comment.
"I've been hunting for a win32 email client that doesn't suck a bag of cocks."
Whoah.. I didn't know Outlook could fit an entire bag of chickens in its mouth. How do I demo this?
"Ah, you are trying to save face while retracting your original stance."
;)
Nope. I can admit error. Ive done it before. However, I never said (or thought) anything supportive of that. You're reading way too much from what I said. (and what i ddn't say....)
For the record, Im not known for spontaneously changing sides just to be cool. I'm far better known for fighting my ill-thought positions deep into the dirt.
"Nothing to see here, move along."
Crap, I'm confused now. Who'm I supposed to aim my pitchfork at?
"Will Americans fight back to return control back to the public or will they roll over and keep buying Disney's stuff just to pacify their youngsters?"
Or are they going to worry more about less important things like wars and health care?
Face it, unless it trips the general populous (sp?) it'll just never show up on a big enough radar. I wouldn't describe it as rolling over.