That's probably not quite the best comparison, but no doubt there are significant problems with gold farming groups. Using WoW as an example:
Ok, it screws with the economy. I don't really see any way around inflation in the game, I don't think that's the biggest problem. As much as it irritates me to see someone buy their way through a game where I have played my way through, their choice I guess. I don't think that gold farming can screw an economy or unbalance game play very much because the best items in the game can't be purchased.
The real problem with gold farming is the people doing the farming will do absolutely anything they can to get gold. This means people are scammed, spammed, harrassed, griefed, etc. Prime example: just recently a trojan hidden in an advertisement (which only affected people still using IE, and unpatched at that) on a popular game-info site allowed hundreds of accounts to be hijacked, stripped down, and more or less ruined. Ruined through not only destroying items a character may have accumulated, but also by ruining a players' reputations. Their actions are malicious and greedy, and certainly not harmless.
I don't care if you're too lazy, don't have enough time, or just plain suck and feel you need to buy gold to compensate. I care that buying the gold screws over people trying to play a game.
And even though these are being modded funny, it seems this is a disturbing possibility for Lycos to make some extra money. I would be shocked if they are involved, but the fact that they've now got a large number of machines ready to DDoS the hell out of anyone they choose is a bit scary...I'd go make a tinfoil hat right now if I had the tinfoil.
It's pretty clear the RIAA|MPAA are behind the attacks, but it's pretty clear no one is going to be held accountable for anything because they've got too much money. The only way the RIAA|MPAA is going to be stopped is if this is made into a real issue with the government. Write your representatives, tell them this is something you care about and something you will base future votes on. They are organized, they are taking steps to get what they want at the expense of the rest of us, why aren't we organized even close to the same level and why aren't we taking steps to protect ourselves?
I doubt the majority of this software's intended userbase have the capacity to even do that. Sure some people will be able to but not enough to cause a serious problem.
While it's good to use caution when dealing with DRM (it is a foot-in-the-door technology), if there aren't massively available legal methods for p2p filesharing, then the industry is just going to tighten the vice on current p2p even more than they are already. The problem that might arise from this is not that more sources of 'illegal' mp3s will surface, it's that this is being described as p2p, not a digital music store like iTunes/Napster/etc. If they're going to be charging people to be a part of this service, I'm curious why someone would be willing to use their upload bandwidth on it, and likewise, why someone would want to download something at 20k/s that they could get from a professional service faster. Clearly there are ways to get around this, making it function like bittorrent for example, but someone with a large library might be continually uploading, while paying to do so. The news.com.com.com.com article mentions they're playing off the community aspect some p2p networks have, claiming this will make users have a stake in the network's success. I think they may be missing that the majority of the "community" surrounding p2p networks are those involved most heavily in the distribution of pirated content. These are the same people that'll be put off by DRM, put off by paying a service fee to share, and put off by paying the industry that is suing them.
Maybe when more details come out it'll be more clear as to what this service actually does, and maybe some people in these p2p communities will like a legal alternative. I hope, for the sake of continued p2p existence, that this company does well and, for the sake of consumer rights, the DRM isn't horribly restricted.
If there is no EULA then you have no right to the work at all in the first place..
I'm sorry, short of flat out insulting you, I can't say more than that's just stupid. I'll be coming by to confiscate all your food, furniture, clothing, and all your other personal possessions which you can't produce a license agreement to. Clearly without one you have no rights to these possessions.
Really, that's nonesense. Why would the default case be giving the consumer, you know, the person who paid for the product, no rights to the product at all? EULAs exist to restrict rights of the end user, you are (really, look it up) free to use a product that you purchase in any way you see fit unless you are explicitly forbidden to by law, or license agreement. If you do not agree to the law, you have little recourse besides not purchasing the product. If you do not agree to the license agreement you have more options: just don't buy it at all, or once bought and once you understand the terms of use, return it to the place selling it or the company producing it. This is typically protected by law in most rational states.
Remember all the arguments about how if the GPL is invalid then SCO has no right at all to any GLPd software... it doesn't just become public domain.
No, the argument there is that if SCO feels the GPL is not a valid license and they do not agree to it, they are not free to use it. That's pretty clear and your gross misunderstanding is, frankly, alarming.
Look, what this comes down to is that the consumer doesn't have a right to rip Valve off, and Valve has no right to rip the consumer off, it really is that simple. If Valve choose to make steam the only method to obtain the product fine, the EULA is presented before you purchase anything. If they want to have both means of distribution then they either need to make separate rights to the product and make this clear, or they need to make the terms of the license clear and available to everyone. Otherwise they should have no option but to refund every person who does not agree to the terms.
Ah, the "Linux Technical Resource Kit." I did get one of those a couple months ago (though, it took about 2 months from request to actually receiving it). Very nice to be able to check out SLES8 and Openexchange Server (though both products are now available for download at http://www.novell.com/products/ it seems, wish I knew that before I went and waited a couple months for them). I'm not 100% sure how I feel about Novell, but that was definitely a nice gesture. The link for the resource kit was http://www.novell.com/community/linux/order.php but that doesn't seem to work anymore.
Additionally while SuSE doesn't distribute their "professional" version in cd image format, net installs are of the professional distribution and are very easy to do. They offer a boot cd image (or a floppy disk set) to get the net install started. There are a lot of mirrors around the world and the net installs are usually pretty speedy.
Because I hadn't used it before and didn't need to search for anything, I just typed in asdf. The results contain a weird picture that may or maynot be 'safe for work.' They should think about incorporating google's safesearch if they want to include images with every result. Definitely can't use this search engine from anywhere but home if there's a chance a pair of tits are going to flash on the screen when I'm searching for something from the library or my workstation...
Other than that it seems to work as expected (I'm not noticing the problems other firefox users are complaining about?), maybe in another few months.
Using openbox with those settings right now. As I type this in Firefox I've got 4 other windows covering it and do not experience this problem. If this is truly a bug either with firefox or your wm, submit it.
Too bad you didn't read up on the issue before hand. Nvidia has one driver for all their cards, the Linux support is well known and reliable, and the installer just works. Even before they had their installer they had clear and well-written instructions on how to install the drivers, and where in your X config to edit values. Also, ATI cards are optimized specifically for directx, where nvidia cards tend to work much better on opengl games. If you had planned on running Linux and wanted a performance graphics card for anything on Linux, why would you get something from ATI when most good ATI features are useless?
I'm not going to mindlessly bash ATI but looking at their history and reading up on user reviews clearly shows ATI lacking when it comes to Linux and newer opengl games in general. If you use lots of directx stuff, get an ati card. If you use a lot of opengl stuff, get a nvidia card. That's what it comes down to until either company can get their stuff together and produce an all-around solid graphics card that doesn't cost thousands of dollars.
Excellent link. I think it's also worth me mentioning that I downloaded both Etherlords 2 and XIII before they hit retail and had no problems playing the pirated versions. In fact, I never burn discs because I know I'm either going to buy the game or not, and it's only going to take me an hour or two to make that decision, so my games were all mounted with d-tools. This software does not stop pirated versions from being distributed, it's just a pain in the ass for legitimate users. The problem of course is that declining sales don't immediatly make publishers think "hey, that game must have sucked," instead they think "hey, we need more copy protection."
And I did buy XIII, Etherlords 2 sucked. Learning that XIII uses this software makes me regret my purchase, but I'll state yet again that their software must suck because I've had no problems using d-tools.
A friend of mine back at school has 2 5.1 surround setups in his apartment, one for his pc, and the other on the huge tv his parents bought him. It pisses me off, especially when he starts rambling on about "the morons who don't realize how great surround sound is." Yeah, or the normal people who can't afford a $400+ price just to hear something a little clearer and coming from behind you.
Am I really the only one sick of this "must have the best everything in my pc" movement? You can have your $400 5.1 systems, $600 video cards, and $700 processors. When it comes to death match, I'll still kick their asses playing on my 2 year old laptop, using a pair of $10 head phones.
Just to touch on some of your comments. I'll preface this by saying I've been paid to move small offices over from Windows to Linux in the past (at the workstation level), so take my views and opinions as you will.
Microsoft Office -> Open Office is fine, and the training for OpenOffice is comparable to training someone on a new revision of Microsoft Office, obviously there are other features, lacking features, differently named features, etc. from the two, but these can typically be covered through books or online training.
Internet Explorer -> Konqueror is something I don't recommend to clients for web at all. It's slower and has more problems than Mozilla FireFox, even if it's more familiar and has more features. The extra features aren't worth it IMHO. No one should need to be trained how to use a web browser, but if they do need training the cost of training for IE vs any other browser should be no different.
Outlook -> Nothing Comparable just shows you aren't familiar with the issue (and a lot of people aren't). In my experience, the average user uses Outlook for more than e-mail, and this is a point a lot of pro-Linux people don't realize. This is where something like Ximian Evolution comes in. It is by far the best Outlook replacement that is currently out there, on any platform. I suppose if you disagree in saying it's ugly, I agree but that'd be a weird reason to not use a piece of software. It definitely gets the job done, while lacking most flaws that Outlook has. Training users how to use Evolution takes no longer than training users to use Outlook, and chances are if they know how to use Outlook, using Evolution won't be difficult at all.
Windows Explorer -> ? well, I usually like to set people up with Ximian Desktop. The interface is very close to most Windows desktops, and it integrates well with Evolution. It's not the prettiest desktop out there, but it is efficient and intuitive. If you go with a KDE Desktop, that works too, use Konqueror for a file manager and most people can pick it up quickly. I pointed out that it's somewhat unstable, which is true and the main reason I try to avoid this, but the problems are fewer when not using it for web. Training costs are small, after showing most users where the apps are located and how to launch them, they can figure it out based on what they know from Windows.
Productivity Tools -> ? this largely depends on what the users need to do. Most firms use some kind of custom software, and if this isn't able to be run remotely, or isn't compatible with Linux, that really is the deciding factor. If you're not familiar with the topic, you'd probably be suprised by the number of small businesses that use *nix based applications. So training is the same regardless of platform in this case (at least it is most of the time).
Switching to Linux really isn't as scary as a lot of people make it out to be, but it's also not nearly as simple as others claim it to be. Every firm's scenario is different and offers unique challenges. I applaud Munich's decision and hope their transition goes smoothly, they seem to have it pretty well planned out.
It's not about not having balls, though I agree game innovation has been slowing creatively. There have been a lot of sequels, a lot of movie games (which rarely are worth looking at), and a lot of the same stuff with prettier graphics. But guess what, people keep buying them, even if they're not new ideas. This is not a bad thing.
Take a look at this case from a business perspective, it can be applied to more than just this example: GTA3 sold incredibly well. It was a new idea in that the previous GTA titles weren't very 3d, and were no where near as extensive (that and there weren't any other games like it available at the time, now we have spin offs like "True Crime"). This did so well the company creates GTA:VC, basically an expanded GTA3 with flashier graphics and a bigger game in general. GTA3 made the company a ton of money. GTA:VC made the company even more money. The logical thing for this company to do would be to create another GTA, as the past indicates doing so will make them a lot of money.
Companies that produce a sub-par game sink because, as you said, they have enormous budgets. Take a look at the classic example of Daikatana. Bad marketing and bad management (not to mention a bad game) killed an innovative idea and shut a company down. I bought the game because at that point I believed Romero could make an excellent game, and the idea hadn't been done before, it sounded interesting and worth a shot. Turns out the innovation was done horribly and it did terribly as a result.
It's not that these companies have no balls, it's that they exist to make a profit, and the best way to do that isn't always in creating something entirely new. New things still come out because these sequels and clones need to come from somewhere. If you sincerely feel games are not original enough to be worth playing any more, don't buy them and the companies will get the hint. But if a company is selling record copies of a title that happens to be a sequel, you can't expect them to want to change what they're doing.
I'll start out by saying I don't like "realism" games like Counter Strike or any of the war-based games nearly as much as I like games like Quake3 and Unreal Tournament* (I like being able to be hit by a couple rockets and still run). Maybe I'm talking out of my ass for not playing them regularly, but here it goes. In my experience, the way to get the most fun out of a game online is to play with a group of people on a semi-regular basis, especially if you're playing team-oriented games. Onslaught and Assault in UT2004 are incredibly good if you've got two teams that are used to working together and have set strategies. The game tends to be much more exciting and fun. If you make use of voice chat features (and not by calling your opponent names), you gain a huge advantage and usually have a better time. It's also easy to watch a game and tell if there's a team, playing as a team, against a group of un-coordinated fools who just seem to be wearing the same color.
Also, when you consistently play with the same people you generally know people are going to be playing honestly and not doing dumb things, even if you're playing against them. It becomes a respect thing that no one on the team wants to break once you've played together long enough. You can find plenty of places online that list gamers looking for other people to play against/with, these are the kinds of people you should be looking to team up with, they've already got cooperation in mind. If that (meeting other gamers, online and/or in person) sounds daunting, you're probably not going to have as much fun, and you're almost certainly not going to do as well as you probably could.
First off, shame on me, and thanks for pointing this out. I never really thought to look past the error message I got and I'll definitely have to.
Second, it wasn't as good as Doom. And I don't think I implied it was, especially in single player, but it did have (at least in my opinion) much better multiplayer that kept me addicted for at least 3 years. The thing about Quake that I loved so much, and the reason I wasn't a big fan of Half Life, was that there wasn't a story bogging gameplay down. It was just fun to run around and kill stuff. I'm eagerly waiting for Doom3 but I can't be as excited about Doom3 as I was for Quake3 because I know the mod community isn't going to be very interested. Doom3 will have support for at most 4 players the last I heard. That's fine for a small deathmatch, but it doesn't leave room for much expansion in multiplayer. A lot of people complain about the Quake series simply being a tech demo, but I just think that's great. It means a lot of innovative and fun games are going to be made, mostly for free. So, if you'll allow me to modify my previous comment, I now claim the Quake engine, which happened to ship with a not-as-good game, can not fairly be called a "cruddy" game.
Except Quake won't install on any Windows >= NT, meaning new machines can't play it. This lets people using Windows play a great game without having to switch operating systems. And the next person to call Quake a "cruddy" game gets their knees broken.
Bioware is excellent about this. The Unreal developers are a great example and I hope the rest of the industry follows too, but you're absolutely right, other genres need to get on the ball.
The Neverwinter Nights toolset is really good if that stuff is your thing, not sure they do this with their other games, but I imagine they will with similar titles in the future. The better the toolsets are, the longer the game will remain popular and the longer it'll be profitable for them. I'm glad Epic and Bioware seem to realize that anyway. You definitely don't need to be a developer to use their tools (though it obviously helps quite a bit). Other companies could learn something.
The reason I like my GBA is because it essentially is a "system of ports" as you put it. I'm interested in the PSP, and I hope they do the same thing and port a lot of PS1 and PS2 games over to it. There's a lot of games I liked playing on the PS* that would be great on a portable, so I hope they do that. I don't think the DS is going to be the big innovator though. It offers some neat new stuff, but I can't see that new stuff providing a huge opportunity for innovation for a while.
A quick look at the prospective release titles for both handhelds shows mostly ports (based on a less than extensive search). The thing Sony has going for them though is that their "umd" cartridges look as though they'll be able to hold more than just games, giving people more of an incentive to pick up the PSP. I believe price will likely be the main issue for both of these units at first, the DS prospectivly costing $200, and the PSP unknown but likely higher. Both promise great things and I'm genuinly interested in both, but I don't think people are ready to drop $200+ on a portable game unit. I think that's the main reason the ngage failed, it was outrageously over-priced, poor design aside. Maybe that's just the unemployment talking though.
The games for these units likely aren't going to be unique, but that's probably a good thing at this point. When they're established and have the customer base to start making unique titles, the DS features could probably weigh in heavily, so long as the developers make use of them properly. I'm not too impressed with being able to see an over head map or an item menu, and that's the only two ways I've seen the extra screen used so far. I just hope, as always, the developers make use of what's given to them in new ways, even if they're working with old stuff.
That's strange, my SWG experience was quite the opposite. I saw plenty of marksmen shooting at things with pistols and rifles, but not many people whacking things with melee weapons. Maybe that's because I played a marksman and was just looking for them more though. Either way I grew bored with the game because I didn't have 50+ hours a month to dump into it just to be able to do the cool stuff. Which was really too bad, it looked like it would be excellent once I got up to the right level.
I also bought ffxi several months ago, but I still haven't gotten around to installing it. I feared if I started playing it while I was in school I'd fail out...that and my school's connection is really terrible. With 500,000 players though, they've got to be doing something right. I guess I'll have to throw away my life and check it out now.
Except that's not the issue since that's a derogatory term towards people of an African decent. The game doesn't use a derogatory term, it simply says "kill the Haitians." Since within the game the Haitian gang is simply refered to as "the Haitians" I don't see why "kill the Haitians" is unacceptable.
Don't worry though, there's an easy solution: "kill the group of persons whom have a common trait of originating in a non-specific country." Come to think of it, "kill" is a strong word and probably offends those not living. Let's replace all instances of "kill" with "give a basket of kittens to." It's not so bad really, sure "give a basket of kittens to the group of persons whom have a common trait of originating in a non-specific country," isn't as to-the-point as "kill the Haitians," but at least no one gets offended. Then we can all sing songs and dance amongst the trees and kittens and give flowers to each other and everyone will be happy, or else.
Check out the saitek joysticks if you're upset about the right-hand-centric world. My experience with their stuff has been great, I had one of their earlier "cyborg" sticks and really appreciated that I could switch around the pieces to fit my hand more comfortably.
Just a thought, since I've no experience with being limited in such a way, but would a keyboard be a decent "controller?" I would think having the keys custom mappable would solve the controller issue. Then again, my console experience is seriously limited, so I'm not sure how much of a viable solution that is.
Oh give me a break. Sure not every game is a new concept with revolutionary gameplay, but what entertainment medium doesn't suffer from this? ID has pretty much mastered the FPS, creating many spinoffs, but with each game they release, something new is also produced (if not by them, by a competitor trying to one up them). Take a look at Rockstar, their GTA has been imensly popular, it was innovative and has succeeded as a result. The Simposons Hit and Run isn't exactly an innovative title as it does follow closely the GTA style game play, but it's a lot of fun at the same time.
Last time I checked, games' main purpose was to be fun, if it doesn't take some huge innovation in story line or game play to be great, so what, it's still fun. Every so often I make sure to pick up a game I wouldn't normally think I'd like just for variety. Last game I picked up like that was Need For Speed Underground, and I gotta say I'm really impressed with the work they've put into it. It's got several annoying bugs, but I've dumped about 15 hours into the game. I don't "like" cars though, and honestly, I think a Honda Civic with tons of money dumped into making it "tricked out" is not only a waste of time and money, but possibly the only way to make the car uglier. Even still, I find the game a lot of fun.
I wouldn't call something like Unreal Tournament 2003 innovative, but I would call it a lot of fun and worth the money I paid the day it came out since I've gotten hundreds of hours of fun out of it. Innovation isn't a requist for fun, it's more of a risk the company would take on a new idea. Classic example of innovation being a bad thing: Daikatana. The game WAS innovative, it was just too little (the two ingame characters sucked in both personality and functionality, and the story just didn't need everything it had) too late (I shouldn't need to explain).
What exactly do you propose as an alternative? Perhaps we should imbed microchips in all children, and consoles can be programed not to let Mature or Adult games play unless the person holding the controller is over 18 according to the chip? There's no way to enforce strict adherence to the ratings without going completly Orwellian.
Here's a novel idea, why not instead of fancy microchips (or the equivalently effective m-16 weilding guard in the video game section) and the like, let's get parents to make sure their kids aren't doing stupid stuff, and make sure their kids can handle seeing an image get "shot" and not decide they've gotta immitate it. Granted, violence isn't the only issue behind some of these ratings, but explicit games are often filled with other explicit graphics. I really don't think a game like Unreal Tournament or Quake 3 Arena is going to warp a child and make them a cold heartless killer since anyone playing them for any length of time should realize that they're so unrealistic (see the hint at this in the title of Unreal Tournament?) that it's just not anything remotely real. I do think a game like GTA3/VC, on the other hand, can potentiallyfurther warp an already twisted child. But, in no way at all is it going to warp the child more than the parents that made him the way he is already. Rating systems are not going to do a parents job for them, the only parents it helps are the parents that don't give a damn, and all that means is it's harder for the kid to get, and thus, the kid will want to get it more. Helping out the parents who don't give a damn seems more than a little pointless to me. Video games don't make kids weird, bad parents do, it's as simple as that. Keep the rating system, enforce it however you like, it's better than nothing and better than too much, but a 100% fix to a not-so-bad problem doesn't exist. The ratings are relevent, maybe a subset of descriptors would be more appropriate though. Either way some people will feel they're doing too much, others will feel they're not doing enough, and there will always be a small but (overly) vocal group that feels anything not running around with a crucifix is evil...Nothing will ever please everyone, especially when you're determining what's appropriate for someone else and have fewer than 7 categories (I might be mixing different rating systems or leaving something out...I haven't had my coffee yet, so insert appropriate number and the point still stands) to group everything in.
Slashdot Mirror
That's probably not quite the best comparison, but no doubt there are significant problems with gold farming groups. Using WoW as an example:
Ok, it screws with the economy. I don't really see any way around inflation in the game, I don't think that's the biggest problem. As much as it irritates me to see someone buy their way through a game where I have played my way through, their choice I guess. I don't think that gold farming can screw an economy or unbalance game play very much because the best items in the game can't be purchased.
The real problem with gold farming is the people doing the farming will do absolutely anything they can to get gold. This means people are scammed, spammed, harrassed, griefed, etc. Prime example: just recently a trojan hidden in an advertisement (which only affected people still using IE, and unpatched at that) on a popular game-info site allowed hundreds of accounts to be hijacked, stripped down, and more or less ruined. Ruined through not only destroying items a character may have accumulated, but also by ruining a players' reputations. Their actions are malicious and greedy, and certainly not harmless.
I don't care if you're too lazy, don't have enough time, or just plain suck and feel you need to buy gold to compensate. I care that buying the gold screws over people trying to play a game.
It's pretty clear the RIAA|MPAA are behind the attacks, but it's pretty clear no one is going to be held accountable for anything because they've got too much money. The only way the RIAA|MPAA is going to be stopped is if this is made into a real issue with the government. Write your representatives, tell them this is something you care about and something you will base future votes on. They are organized, they are taking steps to get what they want at the expense of the rest of us, why aren't we organized even close to the same level and why aren't we taking steps to protect ourselves?
While it's good to use caution when dealing with DRM (it is a foot-in-the-door technology), if there aren't massively available legal methods for p2p filesharing, then the industry is just going to tighten the vice on current p2p even more than they are already. The problem that might arise from this is not that more sources of 'illegal' mp3s will surface, it's that this is being described as p2p, not a digital music store like iTunes/Napster/etc. If they're going to be charging people to be a part of this service, I'm curious why someone would be willing to use their upload bandwidth on it, and likewise, why someone would want to download something at 20k/s that they could get from a professional service faster. Clearly there are ways to get around this, making it function like bittorrent for example, but someone with a large library might be continually uploading, while paying to do so. The news.com.com.com.com article mentions they're playing off the community aspect some p2p networks have, claiming this will make users have a stake in the network's success. I think they may be missing that the majority of the "community" surrounding p2p networks are those involved most heavily in the distribution of pirated content. These are the same people that'll be put off by DRM, put off by paying a service fee to share, and put off by paying the industry that is suing them.
Maybe when more details come out it'll be more clear as to what this service actually does, and maybe some people in these p2p communities will like a legal alternative. I hope, for the sake of continued p2p existence, that this company does well and, for the sake of consumer rights, the DRM isn't horribly restricted.
I'm sorry, short of flat out insulting you, I can't say more than that's just stupid. I'll be coming by to confiscate all your food, furniture, clothing, and all your other personal possessions which you can't produce a license agreement to. Clearly without one you have no rights to these possessions.
Really, that's nonesense. Why would the default case be giving the consumer, you know, the person who paid for the product, no rights to the product at all? EULAs exist to restrict rights of the end user, you are (really, look it up) free to use a product that you purchase in any way you see fit unless you are explicitly forbidden to by law, or license agreement. If you do not agree to the law, you have little recourse besides not purchasing the product. If you do not agree to the license agreement you have more options: just don't buy it at all, or once bought and once you understand the terms of use, return it to the place selling it or the company producing it. This is typically protected by law in most rational states.
Remember all the arguments about how if the GPL is invalid then SCO has no right at all to any GLPd software... it doesn't just become public domain.
No, the argument there is that if SCO feels the GPL is not a valid license and they do not agree to it, they are not free to use it. That's pretty clear and your gross misunderstanding is, frankly, alarming.
Look, what this comes down to is that the consumer doesn't have a right to rip Valve off, and Valve has no right to rip the consumer off, it really is that simple. If Valve choose to make steam the only method to obtain the product fine, the EULA is presented before you purchase anything. If they want to have both means of distribution then they either need to make separate rights to the product and make this clear, or they need to make the terms of the license clear and available to everyone. Otherwise they should have no option but to refund every person who does not agree to the terms.
Ah, the "Linux Technical Resource Kit." I did get one of those a couple months ago (though, it took about 2 months from request to actually receiving it). Very nice to be able to check out SLES8 and Openexchange Server (though both products are now available for download at http://www.novell.com/products/ it seems, wish I knew that before I went and waited a couple months for them). I'm not 100% sure how I feel about Novell, but that was definitely a nice gesture. The link for the resource kit was http://www.novell.com/community/linux/order.php but that doesn't seem to work anymore.
Additionally while SuSE doesn't distribute their "professional" version in cd image format, net installs are of the professional distribution and are very easy to do. They offer a boot cd image (or a floppy disk set) to get the net install started. There are a lot of mirrors around the world and the net installs are usually pretty speedy.
Other than that it seems to work as expected (I'm not noticing the problems other firefox users are complaining about?), maybe in another few months.
Using openbox with those settings right now. As I type this in Firefox I've got 4 other windows covering it and do not experience this problem. If this is truly a bug either with firefox or your wm, submit it.
I'm not going to mindlessly bash ATI but looking at their history and reading up on user reviews clearly shows ATI lacking when it comes to Linux and newer opengl games in general. If you use lots of directx stuff, get an ati card. If you use a lot of opengl stuff, get a nvidia card. That's what it comes down to until either company can get their stuff together and produce an all-around solid graphics card that doesn't cost thousands of dollars.
And I did buy XIII, Etherlords 2 sucked. Learning that XIII uses this software makes me regret my purchase, but I'll state yet again that their software must suck because I've had no problems using d-tools.
No, I think they only need to hand a sponge and a bucket of soapy water to anyone who asks for it.
Am I really the only one sick of this "must have the best everything in my pc" movement? You can have your $400 5.1 systems, $600 video cards, and $700 processors. When it comes to death match, I'll still kick their asses playing on my 2 year old laptop, using a pair of $10 head phones.
Microsoft Office -> Open Office is fine, and the training for OpenOffice is comparable to training someone on a new revision of Microsoft Office, obviously there are other features, lacking features, differently named features, etc. from the two, but these can typically be covered through books or online training.
Internet Explorer -> Konqueror is something I don't recommend to clients for web at all. It's slower and has more problems than Mozilla FireFox, even if it's more familiar and has more features. The extra features aren't worth it IMHO. No one should need to be trained how to use a web browser, but if they do need training the cost of training for IE vs any other browser should be no different.
Outlook -> Nothing Comparable just shows you aren't familiar with the issue (and a lot of people aren't). In my experience, the average user uses Outlook for more than e-mail, and this is a point a lot of pro-Linux people don't realize. This is where something like Ximian Evolution comes in. It is by far the best Outlook replacement that is currently out there, on any platform. I suppose if you disagree in saying it's ugly, I agree but that'd be a weird reason to not use a piece of software. It definitely gets the job done, while lacking most flaws that Outlook has. Training users how to use Evolution takes no longer than training users to use Outlook, and chances are if they know how to use Outlook, using Evolution won't be difficult at all.
Windows Explorer -> ? well, I usually like to set people up with Ximian Desktop. The interface is very close to most Windows desktops, and it integrates well with Evolution. It's not the prettiest desktop out there, but it is efficient and intuitive. If you go with a KDE Desktop, that works too, use Konqueror for a file manager and most people can pick it up quickly. I pointed out that it's somewhat unstable, which is true and the main reason I try to avoid this, but the problems are fewer when not using it for web. Training costs are small, after showing most users where the apps are located and how to launch them, they can figure it out based on what they know from Windows.
Productivity Tools -> ? this largely depends on what the users need to do. Most firms use some kind of custom software, and if this isn't able to be run remotely, or isn't compatible with Linux, that really is the deciding factor. If you're not familiar with the topic, you'd probably be suprised by the number of small businesses that use *nix based applications. So training is the same regardless of platform in this case (at least it is most of the time).
Switching to Linux really isn't as scary as a lot of people make it out to be, but it's also not nearly as simple as others claim it to be. Every firm's scenario is different and offers unique challenges. I applaud Munich's decision and hope their transition goes smoothly, they seem to have it pretty well planned out.
Take a look at this case from a business perspective, it can be applied to more than just this example: GTA3 sold incredibly well. It was a new idea in that the previous GTA titles weren't very 3d, and were no where near as extensive (that and there weren't any other games like it available at the time, now we have spin offs like "True Crime"). This did so well the company creates GTA:VC, basically an expanded GTA3 with flashier graphics and a bigger game in general. GTA3 made the company a ton of money. GTA:VC made the company even more money. The logical thing for this company to do would be to create another GTA, as the past indicates doing so will make them a lot of money.
Companies that produce a sub-par game sink because, as you said, they have enormous budgets. Take a look at the classic example of Daikatana. Bad marketing and bad management (not to mention a bad game) killed an innovative idea and shut a company down. I bought the game because at that point I believed Romero could make an excellent game, and the idea hadn't been done before, it sounded interesting and worth a shot. Turns out the innovation was done horribly and it did terribly as a result.
It's not that these companies have no balls, it's that they exist to make a profit, and the best way to do that isn't always in creating something entirely new. New things still come out because these sequels and clones need to come from somewhere. If you sincerely feel games are not original enough to be worth playing any more, don't buy them and the companies will get the hint. But if a company is selling record copies of a title that happens to be a sequel, you can't expect them to want to change what they're doing.
All tasks not requiring screaming fast processors. This is not for servers or gamers, it's for the other 75% of the PC market.
Also, when you consistently play with the same people you generally know people are going to be playing honestly and not doing dumb things, even if you're playing against them. It becomes a respect thing that no one on the team wants to break once you've played together long enough. You can find plenty of places online that list gamers looking for other people to play against/with, these are the kinds of people you should be looking to team up with, they've already got cooperation in mind. If that (meeting other gamers, online and/or in person) sounds daunting, you're probably not going to have as much fun, and you're almost certainly not going to do as well as you probably could.
Second, it wasn't as good as Doom. And I don't think I implied it was, especially in single player, but it did have (at least in my opinion) much better multiplayer that kept me addicted for at least 3 years. The thing about Quake that I loved so much, and the reason I wasn't a big fan of Half Life, was that there wasn't a story bogging gameplay down. It was just fun to run around and kill stuff. I'm eagerly waiting for Doom3 but I can't be as excited about Doom3 as I was for Quake3 because I know the mod community isn't going to be very interested. Doom3 will have support for at most 4 players the last I heard. That's fine for a small deathmatch, but it doesn't leave room for much expansion in multiplayer. A lot of people complain about the Quake series simply being a tech demo, but I just think that's great. It means a lot of innovative and fun games are going to be made, mostly for free. So, if you'll allow me to modify my previous comment, I now claim the Quake engine, which happened to ship with a not-as-good game, can not fairly be called a "cruddy" game.
Except Quake won't install on any Windows >= NT, meaning new machines can't play it. This lets people using Windows play a great game without having to switch operating systems. And the next person to call Quake a "cruddy" game gets their knees broken.
The Neverwinter Nights toolset is really good if that stuff is your thing, not sure they do this with their other games, but I imagine they will with similar titles in the future. The better the toolsets are, the longer the game will remain popular and the longer it'll be profitable for them. I'm glad Epic and Bioware seem to realize that anyway. You definitely don't need to be a developer to use their tools (though it obviously helps quite a bit). Other companies could learn something.
A quick look at the prospective release titles for both handhelds shows mostly ports (based on a less than extensive search). The thing Sony has going for them though is that their "umd" cartridges look as though they'll be able to hold more than just games, giving people more of an incentive to pick up the PSP. I believe price will likely be the main issue for both of these units at first, the DS prospectivly costing $200, and the PSP unknown but likely higher. Both promise great things and I'm genuinly interested in both, but I don't think people are ready to drop $200+ on a portable game unit. I think that's the main reason the ngage failed, it was outrageously over-priced, poor design aside. Maybe that's just the unemployment talking though.
The games for these units likely aren't going to be unique, but that's probably a good thing at this point. When they're established and have the customer base to start making unique titles, the DS features could probably weigh in heavily, so long as the developers make use of them properly. I'm not too impressed with being able to see an over head map or an item menu, and that's the only two ways I've seen the extra screen used so far. I just hope, as always, the developers make use of what's given to them in new ways, even if they're working with old stuff.
I also bought ffxi several months ago, but I still haven't gotten around to installing it. I feared if I started playing it while I was in school I'd fail out...that and my school's connection is really terrible. With 500,000 players though, they've got to be doing something right. I guess I'll have to throw away my life and check it out now.
Don't worry though, there's an easy solution: "kill the group of persons whom have a common trait of originating in a non-specific country." Come to think of it, "kill" is a strong word and probably offends those not living. Let's replace all instances of "kill" with "give a basket of kittens to." It's not so bad really, sure "give a basket of kittens to the group of persons whom have a common trait of originating in a non-specific country," isn't as to-the-point as "kill the Haitians," but at least no one gets offended. Then we can all sing songs and dance amongst the trees and kittens and give flowers to each other and everyone will be happy, or else.
Just a thought, since I've no experience with being limited in such a way, but would a keyboard be a decent "controller?" I would think having the keys custom mappable would solve the controller issue. Then again, my console experience is seriously limited, so I'm not sure how much of a viable solution that is.
Oh give me a break. Sure not every game is a new concept with revolutionary gameplay, but what entertainment medium doesn't suffer from this? ID has pretty much mastered the FPS, creating many spinoffs, but with each game they release, something new is also produced (if not by them, by a competitor trying to one up them). Take a look at Rockstar, their GTA has been imensly popular, it was innovative and has succeeded as a result. The Simposons Hit and Run isn't exactly an innovative title as it does follow closely the GTA style game play, but it's a lot of fun at the same time.
Last time I checked, games' main purpose was to be fun, if it doesn't take some huge innovation in story line or game play to be great, so what, it's still fun. Every so often I make sure to pick up a game I wouldn't normally think I'd like just for variety. Last game I picked up like that was Need For Speed Underground, and I gotta say I'm really impressed with the work they've put into it. It's got several annoying bugs, but I've dumped about 15 hours into the game. I don't "like" cars though, and honestly, I think a Honda Civic with tons of money dumped into making it "tricked out" is not only a waste of time and money, but possibly the only way to make the car uglier. Even still, I find the game a lot of fun.
I wouldn't call something like Unreal Tournament 2003 innovative, but I would call it a lot of fun and worth the money I paid the day it came out since I've gotten hundreds of hours of fun out of it. Innovation isn't a requist for fun, it's more of a risk the company would take on a new idea. Classic example of innovation being a bad thing: Daikatana. The game WAS innovative, it was just too little (the two ingame characters sucked in both personality and functionality, and the story just didn't need everything it had) too late (I shouldn't need to explain).
Here's a novel idea, why not instead of fancy microchips (or the equivalently effective m-16 weilding guard in the video game section) and the like, let's get parents to make sure their kids aren't doing stupid stuff, and make sure their kids can handle seeing an image get "shot" and not decide they've gotta immitate it. Granted, violence isn't the only issue behind some of these ratings, but explicit games are often filled with other explicit graphics. I really don't think a game like Unreal Tournament or Quake 3 Arena is going to warp a child and make them a cold heartless killer since anyone playing them for any length of time should realize that they're so unrealistic (see the hint at this in the title of Unreal Tournament?) that it's just not anything remotely real. I do think a game like GTA3/VC, on the other hand, can potentially further warp an already twisted child. But, in no way at all is it going to warp the child more than the parents that made him the way he is already. Rating systems are not going to do a parents job for them, the only parents it helps are the parents that don't give a damn, and all that means is it's harder for the kid to get, and thus, the kid will want to get it more. Helping out the parents who don't give a damn seems more than a little pointless to me. Video games don't make kids weird, bad parents do, it's as simple as that. Keep the rating system, enforce it however you like, it's better than nothing and better than too much, but a 100% fix to a not-so-bad problem doesn't exist. The ratings are relevent, maybe a subset of descriptors would be more appropriate though. Either way some people will feel they're doing too much, others will feel they're not doing enough, and there will always be a small but (overly) vocal group that feels anything not running around with a crucifix is evil...Nothing will ever please everyone, especially when you're determining what's appropriate for someone else and have fewer than 7 categories (I might be mixing different rating systems or leaving something out...I haven't had my coffee yet, so insert appropriate number and the point still stands) to group everything in.