The reviewers were all for the Wii when it first came out. The massive amount of shovelware has taught them the lie behind "it's all about great games, not graphics!" and yes, people don't like being lied to.
The Wii is the McDonald's of gaming. Cheap and palatable in small doses, but ultimately a poor experience.
The new gamers that these me-too efforts were created to attracted are not impressed by the HD gimmick, they don't want to play with the people on XBL and PSN, and they haven't been convinced that the games on these consoles are much if any fun.
Given both the attach rates for the Wii and the reviews, it's only debatable if you clap your hands over your eyes and shout NUH-UH! By your logic we should all still be playing on the PS1/N64, if not the SNES and Genesis and watching VHS movies in black and white.
But don't let logic or facts get in the way of your conclusions.
Physics professors having this annoying habit of assuming that because the professor is thoroughly familiar with addition and subtraction, everyone else is too.
From my reading, Project Natal has technology in place to not get "confused by the dog walking in front of the TV again."
From my reading of Microsoft marketing materials, Windows Vista can run fine on hardware from 1996, the Zune will outsell all iPod models combined, and 640K should be enough for anyone.
Is that the $149 will be good for all users of natal's functionalty WHile multiple players for the wii or the ps3 move may require multiple hardware purchases. Once you start pricing out 2-4 players playing simultaneously, then the prices aren't that different.
I could swear I heard bitter complaints about being forced to buy a bunch of functionality all at once vs parts at a time somewhere at some point even though "the prices weren't all that different."
We establish rules that put the focus where we want it. I believe that speed and location of computers is not the focus we want with respect to the stock market.
If you read my reply to the same post, you'll see that I agree with you on what should be done but your sentiment in this post baffles me. Why shouldn't the "speed of your computer and connection" give you an advantage? It's one more investment that a trader can make to ensure that he can compete better. If I accepted your logic, I'd have to ban smarter traders with degrees from Harvard business school. Why should the speed of their brains give them an advantage over smaller, dumber traders? Millisecond trading should be stopped, but not for "leveling the playing field".
The speed and location of the computer is not an intrinsic quality. The speed of your brain and your education are.
How does one go about "sucking profits"? What does that even mean? If you're going to advocate telling people how, with whom, and when they are allowed to buy or sell items with other willing individuals, you should at least have the common courtesy to clearly explain why such voluntary trades should not be permitted to occur.
I'm pretty libertarian, but I agree these should be stopped. As the other poster said, it gives real estate closer to the market servers an advantage, I'm not quite clear how it works, but it is evident that it does because people are doing it. I assume they can recognize short term patterns and jump in ahead of anyone else who might try to take advantage of them.
Trading is something where we want to have as level a playing field as possible. It's also something specifically designed to serve humans. The speed of your computer and connection shouldn't give you an advantage. It keeps our market freer.
But hey, we can argue all we want online, I vote with my wallet (i.e. I will never buy anything with an Apple logo.)
I don't get this. I don't like Apple's policy on the iPhone/iPad, and even though I got an iPhone it is my first and last Apple product for the foreseeable future. I'll be going Android for the usual reasons. But not because I hate the company, they just don't offer anything I like.
People do the same thing with Sony, Microsoft, etc... it seems it would be more effective to pick the products that behave the way you want. Then the PHBs will see X isn't selling and Y is and favor Y. If you stop buying X and Y they have no reason to ask themselves why some locked down feature of X isn't a problem. In fact, just the opposite, they will decide it isn't a problem because the product without the locked down feature did no better.
Maybe you should investigate some of the criticisms of capitalism instead of just believing what you were told about it - by people who never seriously consider any alternatives.
If only we had a nation or two or three that had experimented with the alternatives you're suggesting.
Like Democracy for government, capitalism is the worst form of economic development we've come up with... except for all the others.
It has a host of flaws, and capitalist markets must be regulated to remain free. Yes, look it up, a free market doesn't mean no regulation, it means a level playing field containing no force or fraud. It's more a thought experiment than anything and an unregulated free market rapidly ceases being so.
So I'm all for tweaking capitalism to fix and regulate the flaws, but cooperative ownership at anything other than the smallest scales has been demonstrated to be nothing but an opportunity for the same sort of oligarchic corruption without any of the benefits that rapidly devolves into armed oppression.
...to throw the switch (no pun intended) on solar power for my house but every three months I hear of some new material that's supposed to make them cheaper and more efficient.
Slashdot Mirror
The attach rate for the Wii has been well above that of the PS3 for years now
Ahem, welcome to 2009.
The reviewers were all for the Wii when it first came out. The massive amount of shovelware has taught them the lie behind "it's all about great games, not graphics!" and yes, people don't like being lied to.
The Wii is the McDonald's of gaming. Cheap and palatable in small doses, but ultimately a poor experience.
The new gamers that these me-too efforts were created to attracted are not impressed by the HD gimmick, they don't want to play with the people on XBL and PSN, and they haven't been convinced that the games on these consoles are much if any fun.
Given both the attach rates for the Wii and the reviews, it's only debatable if you clap your hands over your eyes and shout NUH-UH! By your logic we should all still be playing on the PS1/N64, if not the SNES and Genesis and watching VHS movies in black and white.
But don't let logic or facts get in the way of your conclusions.
Not shipping with the system from the start = fail
Just like the Wii Fit and the MotionPlus.
Physics professors having this annoying habit of assuming that because the professor is thoroughly familiar with addition and subtraction, everyone else is too.
From my reading, Project Natal has technology in place to not get "confused by the dog walking in front of the TV again."
From my reading of Microsoft marketing materials, Windows Vista can run fine on hardware from 1996, the Zune will outsell all iPod models combined, and 640K should be enough for anyone.
Why pay $150 for just the motion controller when you can get a whole motion-controlled console for the same price?
Because the Wii has less than half the functionality of the Xbox/PS3 when HD / PSN or XBL / Game quality is factored in.
Is that the $149 will be good for all users of natal's functionalty WHile multiple players for the wii or the ps3 move may require multiple hardware purchases. Once you start pricing out 2-4 players playing simultaneously, then the prices aren't that different.
I could swear I heard bitter complaints about being forced to buy a bunch of functionality all at once vs parts at a time somewhere at some point even though "the prices weren't all that different."
I just can't recall.
Well, at the expense of whom?
Currently, other traders with less sophisticated algorithms.
How long can this trend be maintained before major problems arise in the economy ?
Until they start gets jobs as Secretary of the Treasury and writing laws that distort markets in their favor at the expense of everyone.
what happens when the economy improves?
What happens if it doesn't? 10% unemployment has recently been forecast to last for years.
We establish rules that put the focus where we want it. I believe that speed and location of computers is not the focus we want with respect to the stock market.
That's all. You may feel differently.
If you read my reply to the same post, you'll see that I agree with you on what should be done but your sentiment in this post baffles me. Why shouldn't the "speed of your computer and connection" give you an advantage? It's one more investment that a trader can make to ensure that he can compete better. If I accepted your logic, I'd have to ban smarter traders with degrees from Harvard business school. Why should the speed of their brains give them an advantage over smaller, dumber traders? Millisecond trading should be stopped, but not for "leveling the playing field".
The speed and location of the computer is not an intrinsic quality. The speed of your brain and your education are.
How does one go about "sucking profits"? What does that even mean? If you're going to advocate telling people how, with whom, and when they are allowed to buy or sell items with other willing individuals, you should at least have the common courtesy to clearly explain why such voluntary trades should not be permitted to occur.
I'm pretty libertarian, but I agree these should be stopped. As the other poster said, it gives real estate closer to the market servers an advantage, I'm not quite clear how it works, but it is evident that it does because people are doing it. I assume they can recognize short term patterns and jump in ahead of anyone else who might try to take advantage of them.
Trading is something where we want to have as level a playing field as possible. It's also something specifically designed to serve humans. The speed of your computer and connection shouldn't give you an advantage. It keeps our market freer.
It's amazing how much upper body strength you can develop throwing a 14-16lb ball an average of 60 times in 2 hours.
Not to mention lifting a 12 ounce drink a couple hundred times...
You might as well have said "Imagine what would happen if Steve Jobs' One More Thing this year is that Apple is invading Poland?"
Obligatory.
But hey, we can argue all we want online, I vote with my wallet (i.e. I will never buy anything with an Apple logo.)
I don't get this. I don't like Apple's policy on the iPhone/iPad, and even though I got an iPhone it is my first and last Apple product for the foreseeable future. I'll be going Android for the usual reasons. But not because I hate the company, they just don't offer anything I like.
People do the same thing with Sony, Microsoft, etc... it seems it would be more effective to pick the products that behave the way you want. Then the PHBs will see X isn't selling and Y is and favor Y. If you stop buying X and Y they have no reason to ask themselves why some locked down feature of X isn't a problem. In fact, just the opposite, they will decide it isn't a problem because the product without the locked down feature did no better.
Maybe you should investigate some of the criticisms of capitalism instead of just believing what you were told about it - by people who never seriously consider any alternatives.
If only we had a nation or two or three that had experimented with the alternatives you're suggesting.
Like Democracy for government, capitalism is the worst form of economic development we've come up with... except for all the others.
It has a host of flaws, and capitalist markets must be regulated to remain free. Yes, look it up, a free market doesn't mean no regulation, it means a level playing field containing no force or fraud. It's more a thought experiment than anything and an unregulated free market rapidly ceases being so.
So I'm all for tweaking capitalism to fix and regulate the flaws, but cooperative ownership at anything other than the smallest scales has been demonstrated to be nothing but an opportunity for the same sort of oligarchic corruption without any of the benefits that rapidly devolves into armed oppression.
I know this sounds like a heresy to many Americans, but perhaps that's because Marx had a point.
Not heresy. Just stupid. A lot of places tried it. It doesn't fit with human nature.
"Had" would only apply if we were talking about history. We are not.
You may not be.
The person you replied to was.
After a few days the results will show that the ideal woman is a Japanese cat-like alien creature with a built in modem and touchscreen.
Imagine a beowulf cluster of those!
Not to mention they all had sharp knees.
Honestly launching delicate ugly bags of water into space is really dumb for real exploration.
Don't you ever watch SyFy? Astronauts are all babes!
What happens if I run out of hydrogen at night?
You have to make H while the sun shines.
The vasectomy fright is so overblown. I had it done 2 months ago.
Mine had done about 1000 as well. Very experienced. Ended up hurting for two straight weeks.
...to throw the switch (no pun intended) on solar power for my house but every three months I hear of some new material that's supposed to make them cheaper and more efficient.
Sigh.
This is a joke, right? Instant-on is mentioned about 15 times throughout the article.
Instant-on! Apply directly to the instant!