So go ahead, laugh at Microsoft, har dee har, "u r d3layed AG@1N!" For your purposes -- programming, running a server -- Linux may be the best. Or Mac OS X for that plus video editing, publishing, and other tasks and price points that don't require the full diversity of Wintel... But for most computer users, Windows offers wins because of its compatibility with an incredibly array of cheap hardware and an incredible back (and forward) catalog of software. Microsoft knows this, and THAT'S why they are going to wait until Vista is just right. Yes they screwed the pooch, but they are attempting something that neither Linux nor OS X can touch.
Well, that's all fine and good, as long as they get Vista running properly on my Mac.
(ducks)
And then there is the issue of Shift-JIS MP3 tags. If you open those with iTunes, not only do they get interpreted as ISO Latin I, but irreversably so if you do something that writes them back to the.mp3 file. (They get written back as a UTF-8 representation of the ISO Latin.) I've had luck in the past using a hex editor and SimpleText in Classic to convert them with much work, but I'm not sure what I'll do with the new Intel Macs that don't support Classic.
Try TextWrangler or BBEdit, I think they'll do what you want. You can AppleScript them as well.
What's to stop MS from just releasing an HDMI video cable that goes through that same port, for the sake of all those without HDMI built in, as well as an XBL or other update to make it possible?
The AV port on the X360 is an analog port; HDMI is a digital connection. That's the problem. It requires more sophisticated hardware to add a D-A converter in there, and you'd get no quality difference (not that it is particularly noticeable between component and DVI, anwyays). So they can't just give us a new cable - there is no way to convert the analog signal to a digital one, unless the converter is on the motherboard - OR that motherboard has a true digital port, and hence becomes a more expensive console. This is why the $600 PS3 has HDMI, and the cheaper one doesn't (well the primary reason anyways, I think they dropped the cardreaders as well).
I don't know enough about the hardware to know if a special motherboard is required for HDMI, but my guess is that it's not -- it's all in the cable. Maybe someone more adept can answer this question.
Unfortunately, no. You can't just add a new cable end. The problem is the digital-analog conversion.
Currently the X360 has an analog-out AV port. Converting from analog to digital is tricky and expensive, hardware-wise (and not ideal anyways). If the AV port was digital, you could indeed just change out the cable plug, the way you can between DVI and HDMI (both digital). But adding digital output componetry to the motherboard raises the cost, thus it is the major difference between the $500 PS3 and the $600 HDMI-enabled PS3.
Yes, we are. Not on the PS3 and Xbox 360, but definitely on the Wii.
Well, to be fair, that knife cuts both ways.
- More unique games will appear only on the Wii, because of its unique controller.
- More typically multiplatform games will NOT appear on the Wii, because of its unique controller.
Both statements are true. Now, you can quite plausibly say that this is to your liking, if you are sick and tired of also-ran franchise series games plaguing you. However I would hasten to add that, if you are a Nintendo fan, you haven't had to deal with this phenomenon much anyways, as the GC only had a handful (Price of Persia and Resident Evil come to mind.)
I do not mean to sound like a dick but teachers get paid too little and put up with too much garbage to deal with trash. She had to get her masters and 2 certifications and $100,000 in debt just to have the priviledge of putting up with gang bangers and death threats for a mere $39,000 a year.
Man, do I sympathize with that. I have friends who are teachers. And they say much the same thing.
Here's something else to ponder. My mother is also a techer, in a very small school in an out-of-the-way place (something like 400 students total). They have received so much pressure from parents demanding action on various childlike activities that they have simply enforced the logical conclusion: the children are not allowed to touch each other.
Let me mark that one up: The children are not allowed to touch each other at school. Not ever, not for any reason other than sanctioned sports or other activities. It really makes me wonder what that generation of kids will turn out like.
May God bless today's kids: They're in a far deeper prison than we were.
That was a great post; thanks for that. I had a very similar reaction. I wrote stories in high school with my friends in a similar manner - hell, we had illustrated comics depicting all sorts of crazy behaviour. And all I can think is, I never, ever would have made it out of high school in today's climate. (and for the record, I'm a contributing member of society, not a sociopath).
Old post, but my reaction is: That's exactly why we didn't buy an HDTV when I got the itch a while back. The thing is, you pony up $1500 and then you're stuck with something that actually looks worse for a lot of sources of video. To get the satisfaction of a true HD image, you're paying tons more than my cheapie cable connection... The costs start to mount. That's one of those treadmills I've learned I don't want to step onto. Not yet.
You know, I agree completely. If you'll indulge me for a second, I'll elucidate the train of thought that led me to buying an HDTV anyways.
First, my old set broke.:) And being the kind of person that likes to buy things that last many years, I had to consider what I want out of a TV for the next 5-7 years. So that was a biggie.
I decided to get an LCD HDTV, but with an important caveat: computer inputs. That way, no matter what copyprotected plug nonsense the content providers try to pull, I have an out.
Also - we actually don't watch a lot of TV. Maybe 5-9 hours a week between myself and my girlfriend. Which sort of makes you wonder why we would want a HD set. Answer is, do watch an awful lot of movies, and I play a lot of games. HDTV is great for those, even without native HD resolution.
But here's the kicker - I signed up for an HD cablebox for a month, just to check it out. And you are right, it is underwhelming. Sure the World Cup looks fantastic, but the rest of it is a fairly lackluster selection - that we don't watch anyways. So I took it back. Now I'm using an OTA antenna. I'm fortunate enough to live in a great corridor for this (Toronto-Buffalo), so I can pick up 5 channels in full HD, full dolby 5.1, over the air. And they are channels we tend to watch (CBC, CTV, PBS).
You are right in stating that SD signals tend to look like kife on an HD set. Of course this is because the TV is so much higher res, its showing you with exquisite detail the artifacts and compression macroblocks in the signal. Subjectively, it is a bit worse than the old CRT-based TV, but its sort of a doubleedged argument. Sorta like saying, I can't see the cracks in my walls if I just wear these blurry glasses.:)
So in the end, it really depends on what you are doing with the screen. If you are big into SD broadcasts, its not great yet; you'll spend a lot of money and end up with a slightly worse picture for that purpose. If you fall into a category like mine, which I would say is roughly split in thirds between movies, games, and tv, then two of those thirds are served quite well with an HD set now.
Besides, I'm paying hydro in the new apartment, so the LCD is nice for that as well... and I didn't have to lug a 75 pound set up three flights of stairs.
The result? To this day that guy is scared shitless by the smell dryer sheets.
I'm not surprised - apparently we humans strongly associate olfactory sense with memory. Everyone has a few certain odours that 'take them back' instantly to a different time in the past. For me its gasoline - always think of my grandfather's huge fire hazard of a garage.
I played Silent Hill as your friend did, in the dark, all alone.
I know there's going to be many many comments to this effect, but there is one game that scared the bejeezus out of me: Silent Hill.
And it wasn't any kind of gore, or zombies, or anything like that. Well, lots of things like that, but that wasn't the main cause -- it was the foreboding atmosphere.
Abandoned schools are scary. It taps into childhood fears. Seeing the 'regular' world turned upside down and redecorated with body parts and rust is deeply unsettling. The lack of regular communication with other characters in the game, the ambient sound effects - my god, the sound effects work in that game was good. I remember standing in what I think used to be a gymnasium but in the 'other' world, and just standing there, listening to this distant clank-clank-clank of some unseen machinery. I left my character standing there for awhile, just taking in the sound, and I truly began to feel disturbed.
It was shortly after that I descended the ladder to the first full-on satanic ritual looking setpiece in the game. This gigantic cucumber with four legs ran out and split in half as it opened its mouth, revealing about a million teeth, and i swear to fucking god I actually dropped my controller and shrieked like a little girl.
Good times.
Curious about the 'variety of online music stores'
on
Songbird Source Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Surely Songbird doesn't support DRM-wrapped content? (Not that this is their fault at all, even remotely).
(also, nitpick: did they have to make it look like iTunes so much? sheesh. As if these users need a superfriendly, superbasic user interface. XULRunner is innovative, but the app design, not so much.)
I've got it for you - playing FPS and a lot of MMORG games are just so much easier with your keyboard and mouse. Ever tried to play one with a standard game controller?
Playing games with the keyboard and mouse increase your degree of acuracy, speed, and control exponentially over controller-based games.
I agree that the mouse + keyboard is the superior control scheme (at the moment) for FPS, RTS and the vast majority of MMORGs.
But that's where the list ends.
Any other kind of game that I can think of is much better with a console-style controller. Racing? Yes, analog sticks. Flying, same. Action/twitchy games, much better suited for the console controller than a keyboard/mouse. Anything that involves a running 3rd-person character.
The mouse has precise aiming, and they keyboard has a lot of buttons... but dual analog sticks are fantastic for varying amounts of force in a particular (limitless) direction, and never having to look down to find a hotkey is quite advantageous as well.
Hey Ivan. Re-reading my earlier comments, I can see how you took them the wrong way. I'm sorry about that. I could have been a lot more polite about it.
If it makes any difference, truly I meant no animus at the time. This is the problem with online forums, all subtlety is lost. That's what I get for posting after long board meetings.
So: I apologize. I hope you see what I was getting at, but its my fault if my snark obscured the greater message.
You're right, this generation's not even here yet. But POV of a parent here: both the 360 and the PS3 seem to be fatally flawed in price. People with a regular TV -- me -- aren't going to think the 360 or the PS3 are worth the cost. It's not just the consoles, it's the HD monitor cost that puts me well above a grand before there's a game popped in there.
I agree completely. In fact I would go so far as to say, if you have kids, you really have one obvious choice, and its the Wii.
For a second though, just flip it around (to my position): you have a new HDTV. Are you really going to want to throw down money for a console that will never actually use the full resolution of that TV? The answer is: maybe, if the games are really good... but it sorta rankles, you know? Anyways you make a fine point.
By your assessment, and judging by your other Slashdot posts, you must be all the way to the right then?
Ha! That is the first time I've ever been accused of that; I don't consider myself a winge rin either direction but by american standards I'm certain I'd land solidly in loony left moonbat territory.
You are the person that is failing to deal with reality. The reality is that the climate is changing, and most people aren't going to do a damned thing about it until people like you shut up for a second and listen when people try to teach you how to be persuasive instead of being a fucking prick.
I agree that the climate is changing, I submitted the article. And I know that you agree with this, I have not said otherwise. This is your idea of persuasion? Shut up for a second?
One more time, from the top (the I let this die): assholes sometimes deliver truth. That's it, in a nutshell. I realize you are trying to help frame the message in a way that convinces a person with the opposite idea of climate change. That's fine. You're fucking awful at it; you can no more teach me to be persuasive than you can deal with the fact that I claim this is your problem. But I understand the truth in your message, even though I think the way you go about it sucks. Got it?
All that I'm saying can be summed up easily: People can sense hidden agendas, and they tend not to believe anything you say when they think you've got one.
And all I am saying is: that is your problem. Particularly, specifically, your problem. The climate change is a problem for everyone. You refusal to deal with reality, again because you find the message distasteful ("Don't try to tell me how to live my life! I don't care who I'm poisoning!") is something you need to solve.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that's all fine and good, as long as they get Vista running properly on my Mac.
(ducks)
Try TextWrangler or BBEdit, I think they'll do what you want. You can AppleScript them as well.
The AV port on the X360 is an analog port; HDMI is a digital connection. That's the problem. It requires more sophisticated hardware to add a D-A converter in there, and you'd get no quality difference (not that it is particularly noticeable between component and DVI, anwyays). So they can't just give us a new cable - there is no way to convert the analog signal to a digital one, unless the converter is on the motherboard - OR that motherboard has a true digital port, and hence becomes a more expensive console. This is why the $600 PS3 has HDMI, and the cheaper one doesn't (well the primary reason anyways, I think they dropped the cardreaders as well).
Unfortunately, no. You can't just add a new cable end. The problem is the digital-analog conversion.
Currently the X360 has an analog-out AV port. Converting from analog to digital is tricky and expensive, hardware-wise (and not ideal anyways). If the AV port was digital, you could indeed just change out the cable plug, the way you can between DVI and HDMI (both digital). But adding digital output componetry to the motherboard raises the cost, thus it is the major difference between the $500 PS3 and the $600 HDMI-enabled PS3.
I thought Sony's movie studio reversed its position on this, in light of the non-HDMI enabled PS3 model?
C:ONGRTLNS.W95
Well, to be fair, that knife cuts both ways.
- More unique games will appear only on the Wii, because of its unique controller.
- More typically multiplatform games will NOT appear on the Wii, because of its unique controller.
Both statements are true. Now, you can quite plausibly say that this is to your liking, if you are sick and tired of also-ran franchise series games plaguing you. However I would hasten to add that, if you are a Nintendo fan, you haven't had to deal with this phenomenon much anyways, as the GC only had a handful (Price of Persia and Resident Evil come to mind.)
Man, do I sympathize with that. I have friends who are teachers. And they say much the same thing.
Here's something else to ponder. My mother is also a techer, in a very small school in an out-of-the-way place (something like 400 students total). They have received so much pressure from parents demanding action on various childlike activities that they have simply enforced the logical conclusion: the children are not allowed to touch each other.
Let me mark that one up: The children are not allowed to touch each other at school. Not ever, not for any reason other than sanctioned sports or other activities. It really makes me wonder what that generation of kids will turn out like.
That was a great post; thanks for that. I had a very similar reaction. I wrote stories in high school with my friends in a similar manner - hell, we had illustrated comics depicting all sorts of crazy behaviour. And all I can think is, I never, ever would have made it out of high school in today's climate. (and for the record, I'm a contributing member of society, not a sociopath).
Doesn't matter. Zonk sez PS3 = bad.
He didn't say they would go higher.
Doesn't matter. Zonk sez PS3 = bad.
He didn't hint they would go higher. He meerly refused to rule it out as a possibility in an uncertain future.
Maybe you are not understanding properly. ZONK. SAYS. PS3. BAD. What is with this critical analysis? You must be new here.
Um, what?! Whether 'rigged' or not, the Killzone demo was easily, easily the most impressive game demo at E3.
You know, I agree completely. If you'll indulge me for a second, I'll elucidate the train of thought that led me to buying an HDTV anyways.
First, my old set broke. :) And being the kind of person that likes to buy things that last many years, I had to consider what I want out of a TV for the next 5-7 years. So that was a biggie.
I decided to get an LCD HDTV, but with an important caveat: computer inputs. That way, no matter what copyprotected plug nonsense the content providers try to pull, I have an out.
Also - we actually don't watch a lot of TV. Maybe 5-9 hours a week between myself and my girlfriend. Which sort of makes you wonder why we would want a HD set. Answer is, do watch an awful lot of movies, and I play a lot of games. HDTV is great for those, even without native HD resolution.
But here's the kicker - I signed up for an HD cablebox for a month, just to check it out. And you are right, it is underwhelming. Sure the World Cup looks fantastic, but the rest of it is a fairly lackluster selection - that we don't watch anyways. So I took it back. Now I'm using an OTA antenna. I'm fortunate enough to live in a great corridor for this (Toronto-Buffalo), so I can pick up 5 channels in full HD, full dolby 5.1, over the air. And they are channels we tend to watch (CBC, CTV, PBS).
You are right in stating that SD signals tend to look like kife on an HD set. Of course this is because the TV is so much higher res, its showing you with exquisite detail the artifacts and compression macroblocks in the signal. Subjectively, it is a bit worse than the old CRT-based TV, but its sort of a doubleedged argument. Sorta like saying, I can't see the cracks in my walls if I just wear these blurry glasses. :)
So in the end, it really depends on what you are doing with the screen. If you are big into SD broadcasts, its not great yet; you'll spend a lot of money and end up with a slightly worse picture for that purpose. If you fall into a category like mine, which I would say is roughly split in thirds between movies, games, and tv, then two of those thirds are served quite well with an HD set now.
Besides, I'm paying hydro in the new apartment, so the LCD is nice for that as well... and I didn't have to lug a 75 pound set up three flights of stairs.
Thanks for the reply. Cheers.
If only they were really doing that for 'cognitive balance' and not for blind allegiance...
I'm not surprised - apparently we humans strongly associate olfactory sense with memory. Everyone has a few certain odours that 'take them back' instantly to a different time in the past. For me its gasoline - always think of my grandfather's huge fire hazard of a garage.
I played Silent Hill as your friend did, in the dark, all alone.
Ok, thanks. Thanks a lot for that. I thought I had forgotten that fucking spider. Ughgghghghg
If you have to ask where the fear is in Super Mario Bros.... then I just can't explain it to you. :)
And it wasn't any kind of gore, or zombies, or anything like that. Well, lots of things like that, but that wasn't the main cause -- it was the foreboding atmosphere.
Abandoned schools are scary. It taps into childhood fears. Seeing the 'regular' world turned upside down and redecorated with body parts and rust is deeply unsettling. The lack of regular communication with other characters in the game, the ambient sound effects - my god, the sound effects work in that game was good. I remember standing in what I think used to be a gymnasium but in the 'other' world, and just standing there, listening to this distant clank-clank-clank of some unseen machinery. I left my character standing there for awhile, just taking in the sound, and I truly began to feel disturbed.
It was shortly after that I descended the ladder to the first full-on satanic ritual looking setpiece in the game. This gigantic cucumber with four legs ran out and split in half as it opened its mouth, revealing about a million teeth, and i swear to fucking god I actually dropped my controller and shrieked like a little girl.
Good times.
(also, nitpick: did they have to make it look like iTunes so much? sheesh. As if these users need a superfriendly, superbasic user interface. XULRunner is innovative, but the app design, not so much.)
I agree that the mouse + keyboard is the superior control scheme (at the moment) for FPS, RTS and the vast majority of MMORGs.
But that's where the list ends.
Any other kind of game that I can think of is much better with a console-style controller. Racing? Yes, analog sticks. Flying, same. Action/twitchy games, much better suited for the console controller than a keyboard/mouse. Anything that involves a running 3rd-person character.
The mouse has precise aiming, and they keyboard has a lot of buttons... but dual analog sticks are fantastic for varying amounts of force in a particular (limitless) direction, and never having to look down to find a hotkey is quite advantageous as well.
If it makes any difference, truly I meant no animus at the time. This is the problem with online forums, all subtlety is lost. That's what I get for posting after long board meetings.
So: I apologize. I hope you see what I was getting at, but its my fault if my snark obscured the greater message.
You should take the proceeds from your phat bank, buy yourself a booktionary.
I agree completely. In fact I would go so far as to say, if you have kids, you really have one obvious choice, and its the Wii.
For a second though, just flip it around (to my position): you have a new HDTV. Are you really going to want to throw down money for a console that will never actually use the full resolution of that TV? The answer is: maybe, if the games are really good... but it sorta rankles, you know? Anyways you make a fine point.
Ha! That is the first time I've ever been accused of that; I don't consider myself a winge rin either direction but by american standards I'm certain I'd land solidly in loony left moonbat territory.
I agree that the climate is changing, I submitted the article. And I know that you agree with this, I have not said otherwise. This is your idea of persuasion? Shut up for a second?
One more time, from the top (the I let this die): assholes sometimes deliver truth. That's it, in a nutshell. I realize you are trying to help frame the message in a way that convinces a person with the opposite idea of climate change. That's fine. You're fucking awful at it; you can no more teach me to be persuasive than you can deal with the fact that I claim this is your problem. But I understand the truth in your message, even though I think the way you go about it sucks. Got it?
And all I am saying is: that is your problem. Particularly, specifically, your problem. The climate change is a problem for everyone. You refusal to deal with reality, again because you find the message distasteful ("Don't try to tell me how to live my life! I don't care who I'm poisoning!") is something you need to solve.