"Dude, for those prices I'd rather have a Pocket PC and pay for some slick games. "
I wouldn't. The PocketPC is a terrible gaming platform. If I'm willing to spend that much for a gaming machine, it sure as hell isn't going to be on a PocketPC.
"If you went camping with your geek friends and you woke up the next morning and your butt hurt and you couldn't remember what happened would you tell anyone?"
"Expect the Next Xbox to be a huge feature laden set top box, probably complete with UltimateTV and MSN TV capabilities, as well as even closer ties to connecting to Windows/Longhorn PCs. Games will end up being just part of the focus, instead of the main focus. They'll use the Xbox name to get it into homes where the Xbox already is, and hope to lock people into their control."
That's fine. But for them to make a monopoly out of it, they still need for the market to say "Yes, we like this." That's not leveraging of monopoly, that's making a successful product. It's hard to aim my pitchfork at MS when that type of situation occurs.
"Frankly it was an underhanded act which is on a parallel with some microsoft have made in the past."
The CEO of Lindows is constantly yanking Microsoft's chain. There's this, intentionally naming the software Lindows, offering a reward to hack the XBOX, etc... If this guy EVER gets support from the EFF, you all should be PISSED.
"It sounded like you were whining to me.... You whined that I used the words "nifty", "crying" and "spuds"."
Heh. Looks like you don't know what' whining is. Face it, you're just calling it whining so you can wriggle out of the hole you dug yourself in.
So now we're up to what... 3 responses and you still haven't come back to the discussion we're having. You can call me wrong, but you cannot defend your decision to do that. So I can see why your only defense is to say I'm 'whining'. (Interestingly, you're doing exactly what you're accusing me of. I guess when you do it it's "criticism"?)
Doesn't sound to me like you felt really strongly about your statement. Shootin for karma were we?
"Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!"
I wish I could laugh at this, but I listen to the Art Bell show. There are a lot of people out there who'd not only buy this story, but they'd set out to prove it.
I'm looking at a large high res panorama of mars right now. There's a nice silvery bit on the rover that is virtually untouched by any color alterations. I can see where they might have enhanced the saturation a little, but if they colorized it, they went through a hell of a lot of effort to do so. (i.e. cutting out the non-red objects, etc...)
Sorry, not buying this story. Even if Nasa did colorize it, so what? I spent a day at a major news network once. I got to watch how they get their stories up. EVERY photo that goes up for a story is retouched. When I was there, there was a big story about a wildfire eating up a lot of land. They took some stock footage of a firefighter putting out a fire in the woods. Then, they highlighted the fire itself and used a tool to make it look brighter and hotter. (Note: This wasn't supposed to be a photo of the fire itself, but rather one of those illustrations that appears behind the news anchor as he announces the story..)
The point? The reason they brightened the fire was to draw attention to the audience. Highlight the important elements of the scene. There's no crime or dishonest happening here. If Nasa boosted the saturation of their images to make their images more recognizable Mars, so what? Damn them for presenting their findings more clearly.
" I think I heard Leo LaPorte say something about how Jay Leno was unmercifully ribbing Bill Gates throughout the keynote speech. I'd love to see a video clip or even a transcript of that. Any links?"
This is the first time I've seen documented proof of anybody wanting to watch Jay Leno.
"All your paying for is thinness and lightness. That may be enough for some, but not me."
It's not meant for you. It's a niche product. It's meant for business travellers.
I saw a few laptops sorta like this (very small, no externals to speak of) being used by journalists and business peeps at Siggraph a couple of years ago. Whereas I have an Inspiron. I love this machine but I'd be nervous as hell trying to navigate around the show floor with it tucked under my arm.
"If we assume that adverts are required to support our favourite programs (a necessary evil), is there a way to have our recording devices to select our prefered category of advertising?, eg: we prefer to see adds for tech gadgets over medical products over personal injury lawyers."
Just remember, we're not talking about a very innovative industry here.;)
I personally shed no tears over commercials being skipped. Why? Because in order to skip commercials, I have to wait until the program is over. So I spend an hour to save 15 minutes? Yeah, I suppsoe I could do that, but there's still value to a good time slot. My Replay has been getting ER for months now, but I haven't missed an episode yet. They got their ad revenue. Now their time-slots are more valuable than ever. Competition is good.;) (Notice more TV shows are making it to DVD?)
I have an alternative suggestion for ad-related TiVo service. Instead of making me watch ads, how about having me unlock each Tv show by having 3 or 4 multiple choice questions?
"What is an iPod?"
a.) A genetically engineered plant. b.) A new form of work cubicle. c.) A music player by Apple. d.) A robot with 'i' shaped feet.
If you answer C, the show is permanently unlocked and there are no more ads in it. The other answers would show you a 30 second commercial and ask the question again.
In short, you pay for your program by remembering what the sponsor is offering. It's quicker, and it makes advertising more effective.
Anyway, like I said, this is not a very innovative industry. Wouldn't expect to see anything but moaning and groaning about ad-skip.
"the thing is that this is a feature why the thing should have been more open from day 1, up until now(and still!) you MUST mod your xbox to take advantage of it as a common media player(also to have more enjoyable playing from hd)."
So long as it opens the possibility for the machine to play 'pirated' games, then there's no 'should' about it. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you, but the reason game companies don't like you modding is that they don't want you burning ISOs and playing them. Remember, it's a game machine first.
"This is a feature that is addable to xbox at NO COST AT ALL,"
Not true. Microsoft loses money on every console. They make it up again with games. In theory, this 'feature' could make for a lot of XBOXes to be sold without plans to buy games for them. Microsoft risks losing serious money on something like that. Yeah, I know none of you care, but it does take the wind out of the whole "Microsoft's just being dumb" argument.
I'm not saying I agree with Microsoft. I think they're being overly protective of the system. It doesn't help, though, that everybody expressly hates Microsoft and would do anything they can to try to 'punish' them.
"I don't want to think about what influence Microsoft will have on content when America inevitably allows them to control every medium in existence. He who owns the bridge controls who and what can pass, and at what price."
Yeah, because Microsoft makes a monopoly out of everything it touches. For example, the XBOX, the PocketPC, Ultimate TV, Front Page, IIS, Microsoft Network Cards...
"Perhaps if the games cost less then I'd be okay with a few little things hidden in the game but as it is they are just annoying and don't do me any good."
Err, you do realize that many game companies come and go, right? It's hard to make a profit on a game unless it's really really good. If they can offset some of that cost by generating revenues in other places, then you've got a healthy market, plus they can even make money when a game is pirated.
I'm not defending overly obnoxious ad placement mind you, rather add placement in general. There are a lot of people here on Slashdot who have a real extreme view against them. To those I say: simmer down. It's disturbing to see an altered product on screen. It's strange seeing cola instead of Coke. It's strange seeing Cheetah instead of Ferrari. Why can't they just use the real products?
Back to the Futures I and II both had really strong ad placement. The funny thing is, though, it made the movies seem more real. The image that stuck in my mind was the Texaco in the future. It looked like a Texaco in the future. If that had been some made up gas station, would that have had the same effect?
I really think GTA, for example, would have been much more interesting if they had used product placement in the game. Especially in Vice City. I remember people were quite happy that 80's music was licensed for it.
"Not only does the pressure of button depression indicate the level of player arousal, but also the rate at which a button is pressed and eventually released indicates the emotion felt by a player."
Slashdot Mirror
"Dude, for those prices I'd rather have a Pocket PC and pay for some slick games. "
I wouldn't. The PocketPC is a terrible gaming platform. If I'm willing to spend that much for a gaming machine, it sure as hell isn't going to be on a PocketPC.
Well it's got neat specs, but it's very pricey. What games are being made for it?
Even if this was a Nintendo product, I doubt I'd be an early adopter for it. And I'm one hell of a Nintendo zealot.
"I think Slashdot'ers should organize such things!"
I can just imagine Netcraft reporting a surge in website up-time over that weekend.
"Reference lost on younger audience. "
So what is the reference?
"If you went camping with your geek friends and you woke up the next morning and your butt hurt and you couldn't remember what happened would you tell anyone?"
Hmm I don't really know. What'd you end up doing?
"But I do wonder if gasoline can really replace beer? "
Only if its your turn to buy.
"Expect the Next Xbox to be a huge feature laden set top box, probably complete with UltimateTV and MSN TV capabilities, as well as even closer ties to connecting to Windows/Longhorn PCs. Games will end up being just part of the focus, instead of the main focus. They'll use the Xbox name to get it into homes where the Xbox already is, and hope to lock people into their control."
That's fine. But for them to make a monopoly out of it, they still need for the market to say "Yes, we like this." That's not leveraging of monopoly, that's making a successful product. It's hard to aim my pitchfork at MS when that type of situation occurs.
" Can't see this HARMING them all that much... "
If they get sued? Oh yes it can.
"Frankly it was an underhanded act which is on a parallel with some microsoft have made in the past."
The CEO of Lindows is constantly yanking Microsoft's chain. There's this, intentionally naming the software Lindows, offering a reward to hack the XBOX, etc... If this guy EVER gets support from the EFF, you all should be PISSED.
"It sounded like you were whining to me.... You whined that I used the words "nifty", "crying" and "spuds"."
Heh. Looks like you don't know what' whining is. Face it, you're just calling it whining so you can wriggle out of the hole you dug yourself in.
So now we're up to what... 3 responses and you still haven't come back to the discussion we're having. You can call me wrong, but you cannot defend your decision to do that. So I can see why your only defense is to say I'm 'whining'. (Interestingly, you're doing exactly what you're accusing me of. I guess when you do it it's "criticism"?)
Doesn't sound to me like you felt really strongly about your statement. Shootin for karma were we?
"Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!"
I wish I could laugh at this, but I listen to the Art Bell show. There are a lot of people out there who'd not only buy this story, but they'd set out to prove it.
I'm looking at a large high res panorama of mars right now. There's a nice silvery bit on the rover that is virtually untouched by any color alterations. I can see where they might have enhanced the saturation a little, but if they colorized it, they went through a hell of a lot of effort to do so. (i.e. cutting out the non-red objects, etc...)
Sorry, not buying this story. Even if Nasa did colorize it, so what? I spent a day at a major news network once. I got to watch how they get their stories up. EVERY photo that goes up for a story is retouched. When I was there, there was a big story about a wildfire eating up a lot of land. They took some stock footage of a firefighter putting out a fire in the woods. Then, they highlighted the fire itself and used a tool to make it look brighter and hotter. (Note: This wasn't supposed to be a photo of the fire itself, but rather one of those illustrations that appears behind the news anchor as he announces the story..)
The point? The reason they brightened the fire was to draw attention to the audience. Highlight the important elements of the scene. There's no crime or dishonest happening here. If Nasa boosted the saturation of their images to make their images more recognizable Mars, so what? Damn them for presenting their findings more clearly.
" I think I heard Leo LaPorte say something about how Jay Leno was unmercifully ribbing Bill Gates throughout the keynote speech. I'd love to see a video clip or even a transcript of that. Any links?"
This is the first time I've seen documented proof of anybody wanting to watch Jay Leno.
"but i resist, because it's like making a deal with the devil. I am tempted to sell out, i really am."
Selling out? Well, true, purchasing the XBOX will result in the revocation of your cool status here on Slashdot.
"Considering my Monitor (24") is bigger than my TV (21"), I think I value computing more than "entertainment" :)"
Internet porn is not computing, it's entertainment.
"All your paying for is thinness and lightness. That may be enough for some, but not me."
It's not meant for you. It's a niche product. It's meant for business travellers.
I saw a few laptops sorta like this (very small, no externals to speak of) being used by journalists and business peeps at Siggraph a couple of years ago. Whereas I have an Inspiron. I love this machine but I'd be nervous as hell trying to navigate around the show floor with it tucked under my arm.
"My God. $4,000 who is going to buy this? P-Diddy? Martha Stewart?"
A sales manager who travels a lot with an expense account...
"If we assume that adverts are required to support our favourite programs (a necessary evil), is there a way to have our recording devices to select our prefered category of advertising?, eg: we prefer to see adds for tech gadgets over medical products over personal injury lawyers."
;)
;) (Notice more TV shows are making it to DVD?)
Just remember, we're not talking about a very innovative industry here.
I personally shed no tears over commercials being skipped. Why? Because in order to skip commercials, I have to wait until the program is over. So I spend an hour to save 15 minutes? Yeah, I suppsoe I could do that, but there's still value to a good time slot. My Replay has been getting ER for months now, but I haven't missed an episode yet. They got their ad revenue. Now their time-slots are more valuable than ever. Competition is good.
I have an alternative suggestion for ad-related TiVo service. Instead of making me watch ads, how about having me unlock each Tv show by having 3 or 4 multiple choice questions?
"What is an iPod?"
a.) A genetically engineered plant.
b.) A new form of work cubicle.
c.) A music player by Apple.
d.) A robot with 'i' shaped feet.
If you answer C, the show is permanently unlocked and there are no more ads in it. The other answers would show you a 30 second commercial and ask the question again.
In short, you pay for your program by remembering what the sponsor is offering. It's quicker, and it makes advertising more effective.
Anyway, like I said, this is not a very innovative industry. Wouldn't expect to see anything but moaning and groaning about ad-skip.
"who the hell wants or needs Oprah in high def?"
Well I had to look at SOMETHING to satisfy my craving for Mars pictures.
"the thing is that this is a feature why the thing should have been more open from day 1, up until now(and still!) you MUST mod your xbox to take advantage of it as a common media player(also to have more enjoyable playing from hd)."
So long as it opens the possibility for the machine to play 'pirated' games, then there's no 'should' about it. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you, but the reason game companies don't like you modding is that they don't want you burning ISOs and playing them. Remember, it's a game machine first.
"This is a feature that is addable to xbox at NO COST AT ALL,"
Not true. Microsoft loses money on every console. They make it up again with games. In theory, this 'feature' could make for a lot of XBOXes to be sold without plans to buy games for them. Microsoft risks losing serious money on something like that. Yeah, I know none of you care, but it does take the wind out of the whole "Microsoft's just being dumb" argument.
I'm not saying I agree with Microsoft. I think they're being overly protective of the system. It doesn't help, though, that everybody expressly hates Microsoft and would do anything they can to try to 'punish' them.
"I don't want to think about what influence Microsoft will have on content when America inevitably allows them to control every medium in existence. He who owns the bridge controls who and what can pass, and at what price."
Yeah, because Microsoft makes a monopoly out of everything it touches. For example, the XBOX, the PocketPC, Ultimate TV, Front Page, IIS, Microsoft Network Cards...
"Or do you think they'd study everything on planet earth ?."
Niether. I actually think the story submitter didn't understand the article.
Actually I wasn't whining or complaining, I was answering your question. You blew your own credibility before you even made your point heh.
So are ya reply with a rebuttal or are you going to sit there and continue to sulk because I pointed out your folly?
"Perhaps if the games cost less then I'd be okay with a few little things hidden in the game but as it is they are just annoying and don't do me any good."
Err, you do realize that many game companies come and go, right? It's hard to make a profit on a game unless it's really really good. If they can offset some of that cost by generating revenues in other places, then you've got a healthy market, plus they can even make money when a game is pirated.
I'm not defending overly obnoxious ad placement mind you, rather add placement in general. There are a lot of people here on Slashdot who have a real extreme view against them. To those I say: simmer down. It's disturbing to see an altered product on screen. It's strange seeing cola instead of Coke. It's strange seeing Cheetah instead of Ferrari. Why can't they just use the real products?
Back to the Futures I and II both had really strong ad placement. The funny thing is, though, it made the movies seem more real. The image that stuck in my mind was the Texaco in the future. It looked like a Texaco in the future. If that had been some made up gas station, would that have had the same effect?
I really think GTA, for example, would have been much more interesting if they had used product placement in the game. Especially in Vice City. I remember people were quite happy that 80's music was licensed for it.
"Not only does the pressure of button depression indicate the level of player arousal, but also the rate at which a button is pressed and eventually released indicates the emotion felt by a player."
This article is rated M for mature.