It's not a question of whether I can afford it. I don't feel that paying to read about video games is worth any money. Occasionally I use to visit these sites and see a cool game, then go buy the games. Now I will not visit these sites, will not see games, and will not buy them. I will buy only games my friends say are good, which will mean spending much less on games. This could hurt the game industry as a whole, unless other people are not like me about their game buying habits. The game industry was way up this last year, and I really believe these sites had a hand in that, but they are throwing that away. I think if game companies would advertise more on these sites, it would be worth their while, but oh well. I'll save some money by no longer buying more games than I have time to play, which could be spent on something else. I really don't care if they block me out of their site though because their site doesn't mean that much to me. I'll be glad to have more money for other things.
The point of doing this is to give other companies a chance to sell their product. It's like this: Imagine a company has a monopoly in TV's. You want a tv, but to buy from that company, you must buy their tv, bundled with their DVD player, VCR, and Sound System. There are other companies who offer those other things, but you will already have them if you buy the TV. Do you want to buy them again just to get a different brand? (yes I know they are free since they need to be to in order not to die out completely) but it takes up extra space in your living room since you can't detach the ones that come with the tv. Do you want to have a room full of extra stuff just to use a different DVD player? Maybe it's not a big deal if you have a big house, but many people don't. Now, the government is suggesting that you should not have to take an attached VCR, DVD, and sound system. Instead these should be sepearte products and the price should be split just as the stuff is. Some people probably don't even want a VCR, and they would save money.
Say the TV+DVD+VCR+Sound costs $800.
a TV alone would be $400, a DVD alone would be $100, a VCR alone would be $100, and sound would be $200. Now, if it's split, you can buy this stuff without the VCR and save $100. And now that competition is back, the prices an all of these begin to drop as consumers get choices. This is the goal of the MS situation, not just to punish MS or to take free stuff from MS users. The goal is to allow people to choose what they want to buy and not have to pay the pentalty of a monopoly controlling all those products.
I'm going to hold off for the Nintendo GameMainFrame, their follow-up to the GameCube.
But you got to admit, the Microsoft X-Tablet is going to be pretty rad too. Using a game controller is not natural for games, so they will introduce a special pen to write with. But the coolest thing is that it will come with Microsoft TicTacToe-2003.
Actually, Sony's solution does sound the best now that I think about it:-)
Setting somebody's colors to red on red is just being a jerk. It's like setting somebody's default runlevel to 0 or 6. It's just being an idiot. Nobody would do that on purpose. It just confirms to me that this guy is an idiot because he thinks that doing that to somebody proves his point.
I think the point of that article is not that the Athlon is going to burn up.
There was a rumor being spread by some kids with AMD processors that the Pentium 4 runs at half speed whenever you do more than just checking email with your computer. They had taken a new feature in the Intel processor and manipulated it into a fault. Tom's article was only trying to explain what the feature is and why it's good, since many people did not understand what it was about. He was not in any way saying that your heatsinks are going to fall off and your processor will burn up, if you use an Athlon processor. It was not an attack on AMD, it was just an explaination of a new feature found in certain other processors.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not a question of whether I can afford it. I don't feel that paying to read about video games is worth any money. Occasionally I use to visit these sites and see a cool game, then go buy the games. Now I will not visit these sites, will not see games, and will not buy them. I will buy only games my friends say are good, which will mean spending much less on games. This could hurt the game industry as a whole, unless other people are not like me about their game buying habits. The game industry was way up this last year, and I really believe these sites had a hand in that, but they are throwing that away. I think if game companies would advertise more on these sites, it would be worth their while, but oh well. I'll save some money by no longer buying more games than I have time to play, which could be spent on something else. I really don't care if they block me out of their site though because their site doesn't mean that much to me. I'll be glad to have more money for other things.
The point of doing this is to give other companies a chance to sell their product. It's like this: Imagine a company has a monopoly in TV's. You want a tv, but to buy from that company, you must buy their tv, bundled with their DVD player, VCR, and Sound System. There are other companies who offer those other things, but you will already have them if you buy the TV. Do you want to buy them again just to get a different brand? (yes I know they are free since they need to be to in order not to die out completely) but it takes up extra space in your living room since you can't detach the ones that come with the tv. Do you want to have a room full of extra stuff just to use a different DVD player? Maybe it's not a big deal if you have a big house, but many people don't. Now, the government is suggesting that you should not have to take an attached VCR, DVD, and sound system. Instead these should be sepearte products and the price should be split just as the stuff is. Some people probably don't even want a VCR, and they would save money.
Say the TV+DVD+VCR+Sound costs $800. a TV alone would be $400, a DVD alone would be $100, a VCR alone would be $100, and sound would be $200. Now, if it's split, you can buy this stuff without the VCR and save $100. And now that competition is back, the prices an all of these begin to drop as consumers get choices. This is the goal of the MS situation, not just to punish MS or to take free stuff from MS users. The goal is to allow people to choose what they want to buy and not have to pay the pentalty of a monopoly controlling all those products.
I'm going to hold off for the Nintendo GameMainFrame, their follow-up to the GameCube.
:-)
But you got to admit, the Microsoft X-Tablet is going to be pretty rad too. Using a game controller is not natural for games, so they will introduce a special pen to write with. But the coolest thing is that it will come with Microsoft TicTacToe-2003.
Actually, Sony's solution does sound the best now that I think about it
Setting somebody's colors to red on red is just being a jerk. It's like setting somebody's default runlevel to 0 or 6. It's just being an idiot. Nobody would do that on purpose. It just confirms to me that this guy is an idiot because he thinks that doing that to somebody proves his point.
I think the point of that article is not that the Athlon is going to burn up.
There was a rumor being spread by some kids with AMD processors that the Pentium 4 runs at half speed whenever you do more than just checking email with your computer. They had taken a new feature in the Intel processor and manipulated it into a fault. Tom's article was only trying to explain what the feature is and why it's good, since many people did not understand what it was about. He was not in any way saying that your heatsinks are going to fall off and your processor will burn up, if you use an Athlon processor. It was not an attack on AMD, it was just an explaination of a new feature found in certain other processors.