Anyone else burst out laughing when they saw this?
I mean, I'll reserve judgement until I have actually tried one... but methinks Apple is just mocking us.
You will never get a multibutton mouse!! Never!! You will get a... squeezable... rocking... scroll-locking.... oblong pointer... that folds into.... origami.... white...
The difference is large enough that it's a no-brainer. I agree that taking a principled stance is nice -- in theory. But you have to choose your battles and battling the insurance industry over this issue is not one I am going to undertake...Does it suck? Yes. Do I hate it? Yes. Do I comply with it? Absolutely.
Ergo, you have no principles.
I'm sorry - these beliefs are not something you can apply when it is convenient. Do the right thing, stop the tests and treat your workers like adults.
I do sympathize - but if you can't 'fight the insurance industry' then you have to ask yourself some hard questions.
Re:In some ways it's inferior to IE5 and IE6...
on
IE7 Bugs and Reviews
·
· Score: 1
Thanks for your replay - I enjoy the discussion (even for something so small).
From a point of pure efficiency, I can see that argument, and if there was a cost to having multiple buttons... if we were building a physical object here... I could see a point to the efficiency argument. Buut we're not, so the question isn't "is it efficient", but "is it the right thing to do from a human-interface point of view"?... From that point of view this kind of alternation shouldn't just depend on whether the operation is modal, but on whether the operation is reversible and the two operations are complementary.
The human interface argument is a strong one. In practically all situations it is a bad idea to have a button change 'purpose' under any circumstances. However in practice this rule seems to be supplanted occasionally when a real-world metaphor is strong enough to 'overpower' the usual UI rules. So strictly speaking something like Play/Pause should not ever happen in a user interface; there should be discreet buttons that do not move or change function, ever. I believe this is what you are saying in regards to the Reload/Stop and you are absolutely right.
However, in my own experience (I do UI design), even though the QuickTime Play/Pause breaks the rules, no one ever has a problem understanding or using this. It just does not come up in usability testing. The experience of Play/Pause on real world devices (media devices) is enough to override the usual rules. Sometimes - often - this is not the case (i.e. the bad, bad volume 'wheel' on an earlier QuickTime).
So I suppose what I am getting at is: you are right, but the real world experience of using the browser somewhat overrides the usual rules. When someone wants to abort a page load, typically the very next thing they do is try to load it again. In this instance it becomes a double-click on the same button, which I like. Stop->Reload.
Aborting a page load is not to opposite of resuming a page load.
It's not the technical opposite, but it is the functional opposite. You cannot 'continue to load' really but for all intensive purposes Refresh is 'do-over', so it makes sense logically. "Stop and try again" maybe is a better way to phrase it. You are also correct in saying that Refresh is "Stop and try again" but maybe most users don't equate that as easily.
How do you know? If you're using a browser with separate stop and reload buttons (and you probably are, given that this is the normal state of affairs), you will never notice if you hit "stop" right at the end of the operation, because if you're a little too late you're hitting an inactive button and nothing happens.
I know because I have been using Safari for years.:)
Re:In some ways it's inferior to IE5 and IE6...
on
IE7 Bugs and Reviews
·
· Score: 1
Because it's not a media player. The stop button is not a "stop playing" (or more properly "pause" button), and the reload button isn't a "start playing" ("resume" button). You don't typically hit stop and reload alternately, and hitting either of these things isn't really reversed by hitting the other...
Eh, I figured you'd say that after I used the example. Key word there was 'similar'. I know its not a media player - what I meant was, the control is modal. Either you are loading, or you have finished loading. It is OR, not AND; ergo, having a two-state button makes sense since the functions are intrinsically linked (I am loading or I am cancelling - I never need access to both at the same time).
You normally only use the "stop" button when something's wrong, the web page is taking too long to download, it's gotten hung up loading some embedded object that's screwing up, or otherwise you need to abort the operation, sometimes in a hurry.
Yes...
If the "stop" button turns into a "reload" button", what happens when you're just a little too slow and you hit the "stop" button just as the page finishes loading?
That is an awfully specific example. Does this happen a lot? Not to me anyways. That sounds more like a sympton of a laggy interface. The odds of you clicking stop (now reload) at the exact moment the page sets itself are pretty low, you have to admit.
Anyways, I'm belabouring this. I guess its a preference, which is fine. I'm not knocking your choice. I just fail to see a concrete disadvantage, and I don't believe there is one.
About the only feature of MSIE that I prefer over Mozilla/Firefox is the ability to click the stop button even after a page has fully loaded in order to stop those fscking animated GIFs.
That function (stopping animGIFs) should not be linked to the 'halt page loading' button, it should be a preference.
The only feature in IE7 that I need is the ability to download the lastest version of Firefox.
That's brilliant. Here is the toolbar I would propose:
Icon -> "Get FireFox" (gets FireFox)
Icon -> "Meh" (plays the windows error beep, small animGIF of user slumping their shoulders)
Icon -> "GWAAAARRRRRRRRRRUUUUGGGAAAHHHHfug" (smashes browser window into a million DirectX ploys, quits)
Re:In some ways it's inferior to IE5 and IE6...
on
IE7 Bugs and Reviews
·
· Score: 1
Merged stop-and-reload is just plain daft. The only current browser I know that does this is Safari, and it's the biggest reason I use Shiira instead of Safari on Mac OS X. Is Microsoft copyng Apple's bad ideas again, like when they released the first version of Windows with cooperative multitasking despite having concurrent multitasking working first?
I agree with most of your points - except for this. Why is this a bad idea? I find it pretty intuitive, similar to the play/pause behaviour of a media player. A Stop button would do nothing while you are already 'stopped', and refresh cancels stop. What am I missing? What is the disadvantage?
Really? I can't remember the last time I used a navigation button on my browser. Escape, Ctrl-R, and mouse gestures are so much easier. ..
I agree completely, keyboard is faster. However you can't expect people to know the shortcuts right off the bat. The icons are there to smooth the learning curve. Otherwise why not just leave them out entirely and regain the screen real estate?
Wherever it is, let it stay there. I don't know why people think AA is the second coming, but all antialiased text does for me is give me a headache from looking at characters that are fuzzier than normal with my poor eyesight. Nice sharp edges, please!
I agree that it does not work great for everyone, and it is highly screen-dependent.. but still, the option would be appropriate.
My eyes!!! The goggles, they do nothing
on
IE7 Bugs and Reviews
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Ok, I need to rant about something. This is way overdue.
Please excuse my fixation on appearance and design as that is my line of work.
This looks like garbage. Total fucking garbage.
I realize it is a beta but I will assume Microsoft is using the standard def'n od 'beta' in that it is feature complete but with outstanding bugs.
The entire interface is a bug. God, I don't even know where to start. The tabs are brutal, completely nonsensical placement between a menubar and the toolbar. Tiny, tiny refresh/stop button, one of the most used buttons in any browser and its about 10 pixels across. Tiny, tiny throbber - which is nothing new from old versions but again, is a vital part of the browser's user feedback. That sucker should be a lot more obvious (how much time have you spent staring at the stupid globe?). Also a second tiny icon toolbar, mixed with the menu... god damn, if they didn't set out to break every rule of good UI design, they have failed miserably in the interface department. I really can't believe how bad that is.
And - where is the antialiased text? What year is it? My fuggin' PSP has antialiased browser text!
I know it seems like I am freaking out a bit, but honestly, for one of the world's biggest software companies with more money than Satan to inflict this on such a huge proportion of the computing public is just kind of sick. This one app will deeply affect most computer users. And it sucks worse than practically anything else.
Firefox devs, rejoice. You have handed the giant its own ass.
They opened up the PS2 (sort of -- they sell a cheap Linux kit for it). Why wouldn't they do the same with the PS2?
(I assume you mean 'why not the same for the PSP')
Its an excellent point you make. In fact both the PS2 and the PS1 had been somewhat 'opened' (linux dev kit and net yaroze, respectively). But certainly one cannot assume such opening with the PSP/PS3, so it would be a bad idea to base a purchasing decision off that sorta-track record.
I would love to think of those two projects as forerunners to Sony becoming more 'open' with their hardware. Maybe they are figuring it out. Remember historically Sony has had its ass kicked whenever it ventured near computers, it was always about specialized electronic devices; the VAIOs and PS2 have changed that a little bit, and I think its a kind of learning curve for them. Maybe I'm being too nice though.
Which make and model of PDA has an appropriate joypad, one at least as good as the one on a GBA SP or a PSP?
Nothing, probably. Which will it be - no MAME at all or MAME with bad controls?
By the way, your PSP vs DS page (sig) really... lacks perspective. It reads like a typical kneejerk fanboy reactionary screed. No need to feel so threatened by the PSP, dude, you are obviously happy with a gameboy, why not leave it at that?
There was an absolutely fantastic text input system in a PS2 game I used to own. Its a little hard to explain if you haven't played Beyond Good and Evil.
Essentially you were presented with a spiral of letters and numbers (alphabetical order), with a highlight on one side. You used the analog stick to 'dial' through the letters. As you wound the stick in circles the spiral would disappear into the Z axis (away from you) and the stream of characters in the spiral would repeat from the beginning at the other end, with your analog stick being 'virtually' located in the center of the spiral. It sounds wacky but it worked very well - the analog stick allowed for a very fine degree of selection and you could type fairly quickly with it. Add T9 predictive text input and it would rock.
In fact I wish they would do a phone with an ipod-style touchwheel and use this to dial/enter text.
Without hacks it'd be useless except as a means of consuming expensive commercial content, and Sony are doing their worst, technically and legally, to keep it locked down.
You mean, like a DVD player?
Joking aside - I think some of you guys have an odd attitude when it comes to homebrew on the PSP.
It is a Sony PSP. The way I look at it is - if homebrew works, thats fantastic, but anyone who buys a PSP and hangs their hat on the homebrew capabilities is setting themselves up for heartbreak. Sony sells this platform to make money on software and media, period, full stop. Homebrew is bonus - sometimes really sweet bonus, but just that, extra. Don't buy a PSP for homebrew. There's no guarantee if, when, or how long it will work. It is icing. Buy it for the games and the photo/music/movie capabilities. Buy it because it has a neat little browser. If you want MAME, buy an appropriate PDA.
I'm not really defending Sony, I think they should open that sucker up yesterday - but they've never promised to do so, and personally I am happy with what they were selling, unmodified.
If the browser is really the only new feature, why doesn't someone just port a decent browser [getfirefox.com] to the PSP?
Well first off the slashdot write-up is incomplete.
This update includes other features, such as ability to swap backgrounds and change themes, and some other sundry items, but there are THREE major features:
Web browser
AVC video support on MemoryStick
AAC audio support on MemoryStick
Photo sharing via wireless
The web browser was never going to be Firefox, thats just not how Sony operates. Besides it would probably be very inappropriate (although using the rendering engine is a different story). From what I hear, it is pretty much HTML 4.01 compliant, has CSS support (not sure what level), HTTPS, and Javascript. That's pretty good. It also has some sort of pseudo-tabbed thing where you can keep 3 pages in saved state at once. You can pan around the page with the analog stick, and the bookmarks are kept in a regular HTML file (which I would suggest loading up on your comp in TextEdit or whatever to save your thumbs).
The AVC support is HUGE. This codec (H.264) is the basis for nearly everything coming out and the quality jump from the previous H.263 'simple profile' MP4 has to be seen to be believed. I would conservatively say a threefold increase in resolution - its that good. Also should result in smaller files. One hitch is that the format is still 320x240, so for widescreen content you are best to make an anamorphic clip. The PSP provides an anamorphic mode for unsquishing the picture and it interpolates very well. A shame to not use the 480x272 but I suspect many people would find out pretty quickly that at that rez, you're going to max even a 1GB stick really quick (doubt it could hold a 90min DVD at that; UMDs are 1.8 gigs I believe). Also note that AVC will take a lot longer to actually compress clips unless you have a fairly modern computer.
AAC audio support is huge as well for those of us with half their iTunes collection in AAC. No I have never bought anything from iTMS, I just like AAC. I had to set up a smart playlist that picked from my (much smaller) MP3 collection previously.
The photo sharing thing is just cool.
There are some other odds and ends, like GIF/TIFF/BMP/WAV support, some additional wireless security, etc. On the whole I'd say the upgrade is worth it unless you are *really* into your homebrew (which some are).
Seems that Sony's more excited about the portable movie player stuff.
That's because, inexplicably, they have sold a lot more UMD movies in NA than they have in Japan. I forget where I saw the figure but it was something like 25 million UMD movies sold, vs. 4-5 mil in Japan. So maybe they are just reacting to the market. Plus, it is natural to assume that there would be a flood of UMD movies at the beginning, rushing to full the vacuum.
That authority comes from the war powers invoked in Public Law 107-40 [gpo.gov]. Individual cases are subject to oversight both by the Supreme Court and by Congress.
Was there a declaration of war? I am not clear at all on that.
Put that together and single player games have a lot of life left in them.
I, like you, typically invest my time into single-player (non-net-connected) games. WoW was the first MMORPG that I spent any time at all in. And I think it is an amazing achievement, made less amazing by the throngs of idiots playing it. Which is a shame really. I feel a little bad for Blizzard when I read the endless crabbing on the fora (but only a *little* bad... they are making millions per month).
Anyways, my point - after going to level 40 with a character I decided that WoW is great but I want my own copy. The whole frickin server to myself and my friends. The game is a wonderous mechanic, filled with amazing artwork, uplifting music, incredible scenery and challenging adventures. And I want everyone to get the hell off of it so I can enjoy it.:)
Anyone else experience this sensation? I wonder what kind of spec I need to run WoW Server (were that actually possible)...
This is simply not true. And I'll tell you the reasons why its not true.
Firstly, each race is balanced against the other in net ability and strength. If WoW were inherently racist, one or more of these races would be noticeably inferior to others, and this is not the case.
Secondly, it is ridiculous to insinuate that video games regulate anybody's behaviour. At all.
In fact, I would posit that statements such as yours reveal more about the eye of the beholder than the game itself. You are reading way too much into the language used. "Those filthy humans" is no more a racist statement than anything you would hear about a visiting sports team, or a competing company - its just hollow rah-rah invective. The power of racism lies in its ability to instil fear and threat in the recipient. Saying 'lets go kill those dirty Orcs' is the equivalent of a cheerleading slogan.
Is Star Trek racist? Ferenghi (sp?) are obviously a Shylock-esque Jewish characterization. Or, are they a manifestation of more universal human foibles?
There are infinitely many more examples of the blatant racist overtones that appear in this game, but I think my point has been made. Next time, before you go complaining about people acting "racist" in this game, remember that the game itself was made by and for racists. Blizzard should be ashamed, and so should you for playing it.
Spare me. Warcraft is not hate speech and no one in their right mind is going to be encouraged to start raiding Chinatown (or whatever) by playing it. Nobody in their right mind defends racism - no one - but you must draw a distinction between the words and the intent.
As far as the best buy thing: stupid people deserve to get ripped off. If you don't know anything about computers, you probably shouldn't be buying one.
Man, I was right with you up until this dumbass statement.
You are conflating stupidity and ignorance. People who are simply ignorant do not inherently deserve to be ripped off. The (original) point of the sales person is to educate a customer on the best choice for their needs.
You probably well know that keeping up with the latest email virus symptoms requires pretty much daily monitoring of IT news. Why the fuck should Joe Average have to track something that specific just to know that he can in fact download the security patch?
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, I'll reserve judgement until I have actually tried one... but methinks Apple is just mocking us.
You will never get a multibutton mouse!! Never!! You will get a... squeezable... rocking... scroll-locking.... oblong pointer... that folds into.... origami.... white...
Ergo, you have no principles.
I'm sorry - these beliefs are not something you can apply when it is convenient. Do the right thing, stop the tests and treat your workers like adults.
I do sympathize - but if you can't 'fight the insurance industry' then you have to ask yourself some hard questions.
From a point of pure efficiency, I can see that argument, and if there was a cost to having multiple buttons... if we were building a physical object here... I could see a point to the efficiency argument. Buut we're not, so the question isn't "is it efficient", but "is it the right thing to do from a human-interface point of view"? ... From that point of view this kind of alternation shouldn't just depend on whether the operation is modal, but on whether the operation is reversible and the two operations are complementary.
The human interface argument is a strong one. In practically all situations it is a bad idea to have a button change 'purpose' under any circumstances. However in practice this rule seems to be supplanted occasionally when a real-world metaphor is strong enough to 'overpower' the usual UI rules. So strictly speaking something like Play/Pause should not ever happen in a user interface; there should be discreet buttons that do not move or change function, ever. I believe this is what you are saying in regards to the Reload/Stop and you are absolutely right.
However, in my own experience (I do UI design), even though the QuickTime Play/Pause breaks the rules, no one ever has a problem understanding or using this. It just does not come up in usability testing. The experience of Play/Pause on real world devices (media devices) is enough to override the usual rules. Sometimes - often - this is not the case (i.e. the bad, bad volume 'wheel' on an earlier QuickTime).
So I suppose what I am getting at is: you are right, but the real world experience of using the browser somewhat overrides the usual rules. When someone wants to abort a page load, typically the very next thing they do is try to load it again. In this instance it becomes a double-click on the same button, which I like. Stop->Reload.
Aborting a page load is not to opposite of resuming a page load.
It's not the technical opposite, but it is the functional opposite. You cannot 'continue to load' really but for all intensive purposes Refresh is 'do-over', so it makes sense logically. "Stop and try again" maybe is a better way to phrase it. You are also correct in saying that Refresh is "Stop and try again" but maybe most users don't equate that as easily.
How do you know? If you're using a browser with separate stop and reload buttons (and you probably are, given that this is the normal state of affairs), you will never notice if you hit "stop" right at the end of the operation, because if you're a little too late you're hitting an inactive button and nothing happens.
I know because I have been using Safari for years. :)
Eh, I figured you'd say that after I used the example. Key word there was 'similar'. I know its not a media player - what I meant was, the control is modal. Either you are loading, or you have finished loading. It is OR, not AND; ergo, having a two-state button makes sense since the functions are intrinsically linked (I am loading or I am cancelling - I never need access to both at the same time).
You normally only use the "stop" button when something's wrong, the web page is taking too long to download, it's gotten hung up loading some embedded object that's screwing up, or otherwise you need to abort the operation, sometimes in a hurry.
Yes...
If the "stop" button turns into a "reload" button", what happens when you're just a little too slow and you hit the "stop" button just as the page finishes loading?
That is an awfully specific example. Does this happen a lot? Not to me anyways. That sounds more like a sympton of a laggy interface. The odds of you clicking stop (now reload) at the exact moment the page sets itself are pretty low, you have to admit.
Anyways, I'm belabouring this. I guess its a preference, which is fine. I'm not knocking your choice. I just fail to see a concrete disadvantage, and I don't believe there is one.
That function (stopping animGIFs) should not be linked to the 'halt page loading' button, it should be a preference.
That's brilliant. Here is the toolbar I would propose:
Icon -> "Get FireFox" (gets FireFox)
Icon -> "Meh" (plays the windows error beep, small animGIF of user slumping their shoulders)
Icon -> "GWAAAARRRRRRRRRRUUUUGGGAAAHHHHfug" (smashes browser window into a million DirectX ploys, quits)
I agree with most of your points - except for this. Why is this a bad idea? I find it pretty intuitive, similar to the play/pause behaviour of a media player. A Stop button would do nothing while you are already 'stopped', and refresh cancels stop. What am I missing? What is the disadvantage?
I agree completely, keyboard is faster. However you can't expect people to know the shortcuts right off the bat. The icons are there to smooth the learning curve. Otherwise why not just leave them out entirely and regain the screen real estate?
I agree that it does not work great for everyone, and it is highly screen-dependent.. but still, the option would be appropriate.
Please excuse my fixation on appearance and design as that is my line of work.
This looks like garbage. Total fucking garbage.
I realize it is a beta but I will assume Microsoft is using the standard def'n od 'beta' in that it is feature complete but with outstanding bugs.
The entire interface is a bug. God, I don't even know where to start. The tabs are brutal, completely nonsensical placement between a menubar and the toolbar. Tiny, tiny refresh/stop button, one of the most used buttons in any browser and its about 10 pixels across. Tiny, tiny throbber - which is nothing new from old versions but again, is a vital part of the browser's user feedback. That sucker should be a lot more obvious (how much time have you spent staring at the stupid globe?). Also a second tiny icon toolbar, mixed with the menu... god damn, if they didn't set out to break every rule of good UI design, they have failed miserably in the interface department. I really can't believe how bad that is.
And - where is the antialiased text? What year is it? My fuggin' PSP has antialiased browser text!
I know it seems like I am freaking out a bit, but honestly, for one of the world's biggest software companies with more money than Satan to inflict this on such a huge proportion of the computing public is just kind of sick. This one app will deeply affect most computer users. And it sucks worse than practically anything else.
Firefox devs, rejoice. You have handed the giant its own ass.
(I assume you mean 'why not the same for the PSP')
Its an excellent point you make. In fact both the PS2 and the PS1 had been somewhat 'opened' (linux dev kit and net yaroze, respectively). But certainly one cannot assume such opening with the PSP/PS3, so it would be a bad idea to base a purchasing decision off that sorta-track record.
I would love to think of those two projects as forerunners to Sony becoming more 'open' with their hardware. Maybe they are figuring it out. Remember historically Sony has had its ass kicked whenever it ventured near computers, it was always about specialized electronic devices; the VAIOs and PS2 have changed that a little bit, and I think its a kind of learning curve for them. Maybe I'm being too nice though.
Nothing, probably. Which will it be - no MAME at all or MAME with bad controls?
By the way, your PSP vs DS page (sig) really... lacks perspective. It reads like a typical kneejerk fanboy reactionary screed. No need to feel so threatened by the PSP, dude, you are obviously happy with a gameboy, why not leave it at that?
Essentially you were presented with a spiral of letters and numbers (alphabetical order), with a highlight on one side. You used the analog stick to 'dial' through the letters. As you wound the stick in circles the spiral would disappear into the Z axis (away from you) and the stream of characters in the spiral would repeat from the beginning at the other end, with your analog stick being 'virtually' located in the center of the spiral. It sounds wacky but it worked very well - the analog stick allowed for a very fine degree of selection and you could type fairly quickly with it. Add T9 predictive text input and it would rock.
In fact I wish they would do a phone with an ipod-style touchwheel and use this to dial/enter text.
Mods please disregard - my numbers are way off.
You mean, like a DVD player?
Joking aside - I think some of you guys have an odd attitude when it comes to homebrew on the PSP.
It is a Sony PSP. The way I look at it is - if homebrew works, thats fantastic, but anyone who buys a PSP and hangs their hat on the homebrew capabilities is setting themselves up for heartbreak. Sony sells this platform to make money on software and media, period, full stop. Homebrew is bonus - sometimes really sweet bonus, but just that, extra. Don't buy a PSP for homebrew. There's no guarantee if, when, or how long it will work. It is icing. Buy it for the games and the photo/music/movie capabilities. Buy it because it has a neat little browser. If you want MAME, buy an appropriate PDA.
I'm not really defending Sony, I think they should open that sucker up yesterday - but they've never promised to do so, and personally I am happy with what they were selling, unmodified.
I can't speak to the SNES9x support, but do you realize that a web browser is an e-reader...?
Well first off the slashdot write-up is incomplete.
This update includes other features, such as ability to swap backgrounds and change themes, and some other sundry items, but there are THREE major features:
Web browser
AVC video support on MemoryStick
AAC audio support on MemoryStick Photo sharing via wireless
The web browser was never going to be Firefox, thats just not how Sony operates. Besides it would probably be very inappropriate (although using the rendering engine is a different story). From what I hear, it is pretty much HTML 4.01 compliant, has CSS support (not sure what level), HTTPS, and Javascript. That's pretty good. It also has some sort of pseudo-tabbed thing where you can keep 3 pages in saved state at once. You can pan around the page with the analog stick, and the bookmarks are kept in a regular HTML file (which I would suggest loading up on your comp in TextEdit or whatever to save your thumbs).
The AVC support is HUGE. This codec (H.264) is the basis for nearly everything coming out and the quality jump from the previous H.263 'simple profile' MP4 has to be seen to be believed. I would conservatively say a threefold increase in resolution - its that good. Also should result in smaller files. One hitch is that the format is still 320x240, so for widescreen content you are best to make an anamorphic clip. The PSP provides an anamorphic mode for unsquishing the picture and it interpolates very well. A shame to not use the 480x272 but I suspect many people would find out pretty quickly that at that rez, you're going to max even a 1GB stick really quick (doubt it could hold a 90min DVD at that; UMDs are 1.8 gigs I believe). Also note that AVC will take a lot longer to actually compress clips unless you have a fairly modern computer.
AAC audio support is huge as well for those of us with half their iTunes collection in AAC. No I have never bought anything from iTMS, I just like AAC. I had to set up a smart playlist that picked from my (much smaller) MP3 collection previously.
The photo sharing thing is just cool.
There are some other odds and ends, like GIF/TIFF/BMP/WAV support, some additional wireless security, etc. On the whole I'd say the upgrade is worth it unless you are *really* into your homebrew (which some are).
That's because, inexplicably, they have sold a lot more UMD movies in NA than they have in Japan. I forget where I saw the figure but it was something like 25 million UMD movies sold, vs. 4-5 mil in Japan. So maybe they are just reacting to the market. Plus, it is natural to assume that there would be a flood of UMD movies at the beginning, rushing to full the vacuum.
How the hell did this get scored up?
Moderators are assholes. Period.
I mean this in the kindest way possible:
Stay in your own country and help fix the problem you helped create.
You do not want to play 'war of the bibles', they're both really fucking bad when interpreted so literally (dare I say, in a fundamentalist light).
Was there a declaration of war? I am not clear at all on that.
I, like you, typically invest my time into single-player (non-net-connected) games. WoW was the first MMORPG that I spent any time at all in. And I think it is an amazing achievement, made less amazing by the throngs of idiots playing it. Which is a shame really. I feel a little bad for Blizzard when I read the endless crabbing on the fora (but only a *little* bad... they are making millions per month).
Anyways, my point - after going to level 40 with a character I decided that WoW is great but I want my own copy. The whole frickin server to myself and my friends. The game is a wonderous mechanic, filled with amazing artwork, uplifting music, incredible scenery and challenging adventures. And I want everyone to get the hell off of it so I can enjoy it. :)
Anyone else experience this sensation? I wonder what kind of spec I need to run WoW Server (were that actually possible)...
This is simply not true. And I'll tell you the reasons why its not true.
Firstly, each race is balanced against the other in net ability and strength. If WoW were inherently racist, one or more of these races would be noticeably inferior to others, and this is not the case.
Secondly, it is ridiculous to insinuate that video games regulate anybody's behaviour. At all. In fact, I would posit that statements such as yours reveal more about the eye of the beholder than the game itself. You are reading way too much into the language used. "Those filthy humans" is no more a racist statement than anything you would hear about a visiting sports team, or a competing company - its just hollow rah-rah invective. The power of racism lies in its ability to instil fear and threat in the recipient. Saying 'lets go kill those dirty Orcs' is the equivalent of a cheerleading slogan.
Is Star Trek racist? Ferenghi (sp?) are obviously a Shylock-esque Jewish characterization. Or, are they a manifestation of more universal human foibles?
There are infinitely many more examples of the blatant racist overtones that appear in this game, but I think my point has been made. Next time, before you go complaining about people acting "racist" in this game, remember that the game itself was made by and for racists. Blizzard should be ashamed, and so should you for playing it.
Spare me. Warcraft is not hate speech and no one in their right mind is going to be encouraged to start raiding Chinatown (or whatever) by playing it. Nobody in their right mind defends racism - no one - but you must draw a distinction between the words and the intent.
Man, I was right with you up until this dumbass statement.
You are conflating stupidity and ignorance. People who are simply ignorant do not inherently deserve to be ripped off. The (original) point of the sales person is to educate a customer on the best choice for their needs.
You probably well know that keeping up with the latest email virus symptoms requires pretty much daily monitoring of IT news. Why the fuck should Joe Average have to track something that specific just to know that he can in fact download the security patch?