Only $1/gig? Probably much more then that. And, these discs are in cartridges (which personally I think normal DVD's should have been like) so that will add a little cost too.
I'm betting at least $60 a disc when they first hit market.
Cool stuff though, and I'd love to have a re-writable version of this for a real backup solution without mucking around with DLT tapes like I do now. (at home)
I so agree. Lots of these people miss the point. Sure, we don't need 64-bit for E-Mail and web. But at the same not, we don't even need 32-bit processors for that.
A 16-bit processor at 2Ghz would run general apps just fine.
But, if we all have 64-bit processors, we'll see lots of cool stuff come out that utilizes it. Software follows the hardware, that's always how it's been.
Speaking of c64 demos, did you see the re-make of Unreal on it? It's actually pretty damned good. You can play it on VICE (an excellent c64/c128 emulator) or a real C64 if you have one. It's pretty funny, but you'd have had to have seen the original Unreal on the PC by Future Crew to appreciate it. They show a lot of the old demos in WMV format in the ASM'02 "assemblyTV" stuff. You can find it all on Scene.org.
Anyways, look. I agree that lots of new games suck. I go to blockbuster to find the next game I'm going to copy, and I usually don't find anything.
Sometimes you just want to sit back and play a quick game of Crazy Taxi 3, or Outlaw Golf. They aren't necessarily brain-stimulating, but they are fun, and that's what a game should be.
Looking back, I see lots of really crappy old games too. I do think that there were MORE games that were well thought-out back in the day, but there's still some great new titles out there now.
The game industry is very competitive. Lots of game companies just pump out generic titles over and over because they make money. Take EA for instance. Most of their titles are re-used sports games over and over.
Personally, I like the new graphics and new sound. They appeal to me. But, it doesn't matter how good the graphics are; the game has to be fun and have a good basis. Some of the best looking games on my Xbox are the least fun to play. There must be a balance.
Overall, I'd say that 20% of new games are good, the rest are the same old. Out of those 20% though there's a lot of fun to be had.
Seriously! Mentality like this would have kept us using 16-bit processors because "We don't need 32-bit for Word Processing."
Gimme a break. Put a 64-bit CPU in the hands of every computer user out there and we'll all be better off. Even if my Games, Video editing, and 3d Rendering only goes 20% faster per-Mhz it's worth it to me.
The more 64-bit processors out there, the more cool software will show up to use it.
So get off your "Well, I'M a DBA and *I* KNOW I need 64-bit" high horse and let us have our fun too.
> Whenever it is stretched to fit your TV, you hate it? Sir, I feel you have fallen into the trap that most everyone else has. The better the graphics, sound, etc. the better the game?
If you bothered to read my response, you'd have read that although I still like to play the old games, I get bored with them. I still love F-Zero, SMB1, Solaris on the Atari, and all the other cool old games. They just don't spark my interest like they used to. I can play all these games on my Xbox with some of the excellent emulators available.
> You ever play chess? I can play that on an 8x8 ascii screen and it would still be fun.
I play chess on a real chess board. Occationally I'll play Outlook Chess via e-mail.
> I just don't understand people's immediate disqualification of games because of antiquated technology.
I agree, and you're not talking to the right guy. I still have a C64 set up, complete with 1541 floppy drive (With the push lever) and a Sakata RGB monitor. I don't play it much though, I use it mostly to play the oldschool demos they make at assembly and the oldschool music.
ON THE SAME NOTE, you can't disqualify NEW games and NEW systems (like you are doing) because they are "flashy." There's a lot of junky games, like there have always been. And, there's a lot of really fun games too. You have to find what you like.
> I think the BS generic crap and overhyped special effects of the movie industry made me lose all interest for the pretty little graphics on new systems.
Again, you're being a hypocrit. You're disqualifying new games because they are new with modern graphics. Some of them can be a blast. Try playing Fusion Frenzy with 4 people, it's a blast!
> Games no longer have a point besides to follow an event plotline, and getting to the end. Tetris will always be my favorite game.
You're assuming that all new games are like this, just like you assume that this is the kind of games that I like.
If you want to keep playing Tetris all your life, fine. I don't know what the deal is with some people, but for me I get bored with old things. I want something new. I want a new car after mine gets to be 10 years old. I want a new computer when it gets outdated. This doesn't mean that my old car doesn't drive, or that my old computer doesn't work. I want to experience new things, not stick with the old hat just because it worked.
> And any newbie can pickup a controller and play in a matter of seconds.
So, this is part of your arguement? You said that new game systems are mindless start to end games. I don't see how tetris is any different or how it can challenge your mind.
I never SAID that I don't like the old games. I'm an emulator freak, because my old game systems don't work anymore. I love to play the old games, but I also love the new games too.
YEA, graphics and sound definately have an appeal to me. You assume wrong when you say this is the only reason I like the new stuff.
I mean, we should all be using the Atari 2600 because it was fun right? Nothing to be said for new cool graphics and bells and whistles then?
Why do people get the new game systems? Because stuff looks cooler and they can do cool new stuff.
Who the hell are you to say that I don't like the old games? On my Xbox I happen to have about 800 SNES games, 250 NES games, 900 Atari 2600/7200 games, C64 stuff, all emulated on the Xbox. These games are fun to play - usually for nestalgic purposes. Overall, I play them, and I get bored with them pretty quick.
The GBA is not a modern game system. For a handheld, maybe. Not for a TV set console. If you're happy playing 320x200 games in all 256 glorious colors all day, be my guest.
You're a pompous fool. No, the graphics don't *MAKE* the game, but they sure as fuck can help.
I'm no mac user, but I can't see the benefits of using an Intel chip in a mac.
Personally, I'll take my high clocked hot as hell Athlon over a Mac anyday.
The x86 chips are fast now a days. The gap has gotten a lot smaller in the performance per Mhz between them and Apple's PPC chips. And, via brute-force (lots more Mhz) they outperform the PPC chips.
However, this doesn't seem like a forward step IMO.
Plus, Dvorak said "Intel" and in this case he meant "Itanium." Was my misunderstanding. Either way it's a load.
You know, I bet if Apple DID release MacOS for the x86 chips, it would do pretty well. I'd run it (for some stuff) and I bet it would get a lot of support. Unfortunately, it would probably also mean the demise of their hardware line, and it would be a lot of work. Of course, if it failed, Apple would probably go out of business.
Yea, you're right. Very misleading is the slashdot posting.
Anyways, Dvorak is silly. He knows he can write this kind of stuff and it doesn't matter if it comes true or not.
The Itanium, like you said, is just too expensive, and will remain so for a long time. Unless Apple wants to release a $19,000 workstation that nobody will buy and runs no old mac software (or runs old mac stuff slowly), I don't think this will happen anytime soon.
He says that they have been able to transition CPU architectures flawlessly in the past, which is true, but technology today it's a different story. The PPC was a LOT faster then the 68k processors, so emulation was pretty quick. Today, I'd like to see an Itanium emulate a modern PPC chip with any good speed. Yea, right.
The thing I found funny was when he writes "This new workstation will be optimized for Photoshop." Okay, since when does the mac user only use Photoshop?
I'm not a mac user, and I'm not even a mac fan. But even I can see the obvious flaws to his article.
It would most likely be a still apple-only proprietary system. Perhaps the BIOS would be different, or something. Who knows.
If they started using x86, it would mean possibly cheaper CPU's but also hotter ones (temperature) and less performance per-Mhz.
I don't see this happening anytime in the near future. They abandoned their x86 versions of OSX long ago. Doesn't seem to me like they would be willing to spend all the time, effort, and money on something that they don't really need to do.
.. and not very interesting. Certainly not very educational.
I mean, okay sure, it's the amazing, mysterious, magnificent and omnipotent Linux kernel. So I guess this means we should waste time doing things like this to "better understand" it.
Sorry. I am usually not this cynical, but sometimes enough is enough.
Well, obviously if your workplace wants Windows, you install Windows - unless you have some sort of management position, but generally such people just say "make it work" and leave it to us lowly technical guys to deal with the details.
So, you don't think there's *any* way to stop the "Corporate Key" software? I do. I think a local license authentication server is the first step. Whether you give people a copy of the license server to your friends or not, not everyone will have a spare Windows server hanging around (with probably AD running on it) to install it on. So, you'd be left with having to crack Windows again, or have a Windows server to put some software on.
Betcha we see it in the not-too-long from now.
As far as non-public networks, there's many ways to maintain something like a local license auth server, including periodic telephone calls to MS, mailing a floppy, sending an e-mail, etc. It sounds like a pain in the ass, and it is, but if MS is going to try to get business's legit and not give away their MSDN software, it'll happen.
At first it was a hacked XP with the activation stuff disabled or worked-around.
Unfortunately, many of these installs of XP were rendered unusable when SP1 was applied, forcing a switch to the "Corporate" (or as you say, VLK) edition.
Either way, I'm sure MS is cooking up some way to have VLK in businesses without compromising the "security" of the product. Perhaps you'll be able to set up your own license authentication server/proxy in shop.
Who knows, but if they are going to keep trying to enforce the product protection they won't stop at Windows XP that you buy at the store.
As it's been stated before, MS needs new sources of revenue to continue functioning. It's the way the company is set up. This is one way to keep money coming in.
I for one would never buy Windows, but there's other people out there that would if they couldn't easily get a copy from a friend, online, or from work.
Assembly is a demo competition held in Helsinki, Finland each year.
They show demos by demogroups using new PC's with 3d accelerators to old school demos on the C64's or VIC20's. Yea, people still code for the VIC20.
It's not about Money, it's all about bragging rights. These guys can code some amazing stuff. Last year they even had a guy do a live music set with a C64.
Assembly is the name of the competition because all these guys used to code in Assembly. It's not so much so anymore; now they have all sorts of events.
I think it's awesome, and I'd love to go to Assembly '03. Last year they had 4500+ people. The level of talent that some of these guys show is outstanding.
You can download all the Assembly (and other party) demos, music, animations, and art at scene.org. Be sure to check out Project Kerosene, and 32 degrees in the shade.
The GBA's graphics remind me of the Super Nintendo. They look really nice on the little LCD screen, but on the big TV they will probably look pretty old.
What do you mean the Playstation is worse? The PSOne doesn't have somehting that the original Playstation didn't?
Have you played the GBA? I hate it, because you have to have a lot of light to see the screen. I mean, even the Atari Lynx had a backlit display. This should have been included in the original GBA. They could have done it cheap with a white LED.
I didn't buy a GBA because of the screen, and now I can buy one with a nice lit screen from Nintendo (for probably a lot less then those companies that sell "modded" ones with lit screens.)
I think it does *now* - but at the beginning, it helped them lock in the Desktop market. I bet two "illegal" copies of Windows 95 were installed for every copy sold. And I think Windows 3.1 was even more so.
They don't need more market share now though. Now, they can start doing things like they do with Windows XP's activation to make it more difficult for everyone to install a single copy. Sure, you can crack it fairly easily, but maybe the next version of Windows won't be.
Yea, kinda like the old Sitcoms. Something would happen on the show that, in MY family, would have been a major event; but on the Sitcom they never talk about it ever again.
Enterprise doesn't seem to be as bad, but I know what you mean. It doesn't need to be like Deep Space 9 (miss three shows and you're lost) but maybe something more like The Next Generation. In TNG, episodes were seperate events for the most part, but there was a basic continuity that held them together.
I blame UPN. UPN puts in hot babes and lots of commercials and reruns, because hey, it works for Buffy right?
I've all but given up on Enterprise, it's even worse the Voyager. No, not the show. The fact that now that UPN runs the show, there's not enough episodes.
They play rerun after rerun during the season. I can understand one or two, for a holiday or something.. I've gotten to the point where I assume it's going to be another rerun.
How do they think this is good for the show? Especially considering the show is 2 seasons old, there's not a lot of old episodes to show.
I think the fourth episode of Enterprise was a rerun of the second.
This is probably due in no small fact that there isn't enough good science fiction out there.
People like Science Fiction. When something comes out (Like Farscape) that's good quality, and it's cancelled in it's 4th season by a bad cliffhanger, people get pissed.
So now we're stuck with more "Everyone love Raymond" and "Friends." Not to say I hate these shows, but they aren't as interesting and thought-prevoking as a good Scifi.
Someday when Science Fiction is accepted by the industry, we'll get what we want. Until then, don't blame SciFi fans of being loud when the one good show is cancelled.
You're right. The show was more expensive then any other show on their network. They figure that people will watch Scifi whether it's Farscape or some dumb SciFi movie, so why pay a lot?
Unfortunately rabit ears will only get me one station of HTDV =(
It will be nice if the cable companies start doing HDTV.
Satellite is generally more expensive then cable, but if I were about to spend some big bucks on a decent HDTV setup, I'd also go for Satellite anyways, and get digital (surround)sound too.
> Of course, the macintosh had this for years before hand
Yea and MacOS (I dunno about OSX but it's probably the same) takes it to an extreme; you treat just about everything as a document. (or.. "object", since Object Oriented was the big buzzword back in '95)
On the windows end though, with Win95 they basically just took the file manager, made it better looking, and made it the default "desktop" behind all the programs. You could always double-click a document in file manager and pop open your program with it.
Not to say I hate the Windows interface, or that there's something wrong with it. It's very functional, which is why many other GUI's now incorporate the "start menu" type thing and many other aspects of the Windows UI. Of course most of these things weren't "MS Firsts!" - nothing ever is.
My KDE desktop looks very much like a Windows desktop. Why? Because it works. No reason to change something that isn't broke; that's why I'm running Linux in the first place. The UI aspects of Windows are fine by me.
Slashdot Mirror
Only $1/gig? Probably much more then that. And, these discs are in cartridges (which personally I think normal DVD's should have been like) so that will add a little cost too.
I'm betting at least $60 a disc when they first hit market.
Cool stuff though, and I'd love to have a re-writable version of this for a real backup solution without mucking around with DLT tapes like I do now. (at home)
I so agree. Lots of these people miss the point. Sure, we don't need 64-bit for E-Mail and web. But at the same not, we don't even need 32-bit processors for that.
A 16-bit processor at 2Ghz would run general apps just fine.
But, if we all have 64-bit processors, we'll see lots of cool stuff come out that utilizes it. Software follows the hardware, that's always how it's been.
Speaking of c64 demos, did you see the re-make of Unreal on it? It's actually pretty damned good. You can play it on VICE (an excellent c64/c128 emulator) or a real C64 if you have one. It's pretty funny, but you'd have had to have seen the original Unreal on the PC by Future Crew to appreciate it. They show a lot of the old demos in WMV format in the ASM'02 "assemblyTV" stuff. You can find it all on Scene.org.
Anyways, look. I agree that lots of new games suck. I go to blockbuster to find the next game I'm going to copy, and I usually don't find anything.
Sometimes you just want to sit back and play a quick game of Crazy Taxi 3, or Outlaw Golf. They aren't necessarily brain-stimulating, but they are fun, and that's what a game should be.
Looking back, I see lots of really crappy old games too. I do think that there were MORE games that were well thought-out back in the day, but there's still some great new titles out there now.
The game industry is very competitive. Lots of game companies just pump out generic titles over and over because they make money. Take EA for instance. Most of their titles are re-used sports games over and over.
Personally, I like the new graphics and new sound. They appeal to me. But, it doesn't matter how good the graphics are; the game has to be fun and have a good basis. Some of the best looking games on my Xbox are the least fun to play. There must be a balance.
Overall, I'd say that 20% of new games are good, the rest are the same old. Out of those 20% though there's a lot of fun to be had.
Seriously! Mentality like this would have kept us using 16-bit processors because "We don't need 32-bit for Word Processing."
Gimme a break. Put a 64-bit CPU in the hands of every computer user out there and we'll all be better off. Even if my Games, Video editing, and 3d Rendering only goes 20% faster per-Mhz it's worth it to me.
The more 64-bit processors out there, the more cool software will show up to use it.
So get off your "Well, I'M a DBA and *I* KNOW I need 64-bit" high horse and let us have our fun too.
> Whenever it is stretched to fit your TV, you hate it? Sir, I feel you have fallen into the trap that most everyone else has. The better the graphics, sound, etc. the better the game?
If you bothered to read my response, you'd have read that although I still like to play the old games, I get bored with them. I still love F-Zero, SMB1, Solaris on the Atari, and all the other cool old games. They just don't spark my interest like they used to. I can play all these games on my Xbox with some of the excellent emulators available.
> You ever play chess? I can play that on an 8x8 ascii screen and it would still be fun.
I play chess on a real chess board. Occationally I'll play Outlook Chess via e-mail.
> I just don't understand people's immediate disqualification of games because of antiquated technology.
I agree, and you're not talking to the right guy. I still have a C64 set up, complete with 1541 floppy drive (With the push lever) and a Sakata RGB monitor. I don't play it much though, I use it mostly to play the oldschool demos they make at assembly and the oldschool music.
ON THE SAME NOTE, you can't disqualify NEW games and NEW systems (like you are doing) because they are "flashy." There's a lot of junky games, like there have always been. And, there's a lot of really fun games too. You have to find what you like.
> I think the BS generic crap and overhyped special effects of the movie industry made me lose all interest for the pretty little graphics on new systems.
Again, you're being a hypocrit. You're disqualifying new games because they are new with modern graphics. Some of them can be a blast. Try playing Fusion Frenzy with 4 people, it's a blast!
> Games no longer have a point besides to follow an event plotline, and getting to the end. Tetris will always be my favorite game.
You're assuming that all new games are like this, just like you assume that this is the kind of games that I like.
If you want to keep playing Tetris all your life, fine. I don't know what the deal is with some people, but for me I get bored with old things. I want something new. I want a new car after mine gets to be 10 years old. I want a new computer when it gets outdated. This doesn't mean that my old car doesn't drive, or that my old computer doesn't work. I want to experience new things, not stick with the old hat just because it worked.
> And any newbie can pickup a controller and play in a matter of seconds.
So, this is part of your arguement? You said that new game systems are mindless start to end games. I don't see how tetris is any different or how it can challenge your mind.
I never SAID that I don't like the old games. I'm an emulator freak, because my old game systems don't work anymore. I love to play the old games, but I also love the new games too.
YEA, graphics and sound definately have an appeal to me. You assume wrong when you say this is the only reason I like the new stuff.
Wow, we got a real winner here huh?
I mean, we should all be using the Atari 2600 because it was fun right? Nothing to be said for new cool graphics and bells and whistles then?
Why do people get the new game systems? Because stuff looks cooler and they can do cool new stuff.
Who the hell are you to say that I don't like the old games? On my Xbox I happen to have about 800 SNES games, 250 NES games, 900 Atari 2600/7200 games, C64 stuff, all emulated on the Xbox. These games are fun to play - usually for nestalgic purposes. Overall, I play them, and I get bored with them pretty quick.
The GBA is not a modern game system. For a handheld, maybe. Not for a TV set console. If you're happy playing 320x200 games in all 256 glorious colors all day, be my guest.
You're a pompous fool. No, the graphics don't *MAKE* the game, but they sure as fuck can help.
I'm no mac user, but I can't see the benefits of using an Intel chip in a mac.
Personally, I'll take my high clocked hot as hell Athlon over a Mac anyday.
The x86 chips are fast now a days. The gap has gotten a lot smaller in the performance per Mhz between them and Apple's PPC chips. And, via brute-force (lots more Mhz) they outperform the PPC chips.
However, this doesn't seem like a forward step IMO.
Plus, Dvorak said "Intel" and in this case he meant "Itanium." Was my misunderstanding. Either way it's a load.
You know, I bet if Apple DID release MacOS for the x86 chips, it would do pretty well. I'd run it (for some stuff) and I bet it would get a lot of support. Unfortunately, it would probably also mean the demise of their hardware line, and it would be a lot of work. Of course, if it failed, Apple would probably go out of business.
Yea, you're right. Very misleading is the slashdot posting.
Anyways, Dvorak is silly. He knows he can write this kind of stuff and it doesn't matter if it comes true or not.
The Itanium, like you said, is just too expensive, and will remain so for a long time. Unless Apple wants to release a $19,000 workstation that nobody will buy and runs no old mac software (or runs old mac stuff slowly), I don't think this will happen anytime soon.
He says that they have been able to transition CPU architectures flawlessly in the past, which is true, but technology today it's a different story. The PPC was a LOT faster then the 68k processors, so emulation was pretty quick. Today, I'd like to see an Itanium emulate a modern PPC chip with any good speed. Yea, right.
The thing I found funny was when he writes "This new workstation will be optimized for Photoshop." Okay, since when does the mac user only use Photoshop?
I'm not a mac user, and I'm not even a mac fan. But even I can see the obvious flaws to his article.
heheh
It would most likely be a still apple-only proprietary system. Perhaps the BIOS would be different, or something. Who knows.
If they started using x86, it would mean possibly cheaper CPU's but also hotter ones (temperature) and less performance per-Mhz.
I don't see this happening anytime in the near future. They abandoned their x86 versions of OSX long ago. Doesn't seem to me like they would be willing to spend all the time, effort, and money on something that they don't really need to do.
.. and not very interesting. Certainly not very educational.
I mean, okay sure, it's the amazing, mysterious, magnificent and omnipotent Linux kernel. So I guess this means we should waste time doing things like this to "better understand" it.
Sorry. I am usually not this cynical, but sometimes enough is enough.
Well, obviously if your workplace wants Windows, you install Windows - unless you have some sort of management position, but generally such people just say "make it work" and leave it to us lowly technical guys to deal with the details.
So, you don't think there's *any* way to stop the "Corporate Key" software? I do. I think a local license authentication server is the first step. Whether you give people a copy of the license server to your friends or not, not everyone will have a spare Windows server hanging around (with probably AD running on it) to install it on. So, you'd be left with having to crack Windows again, or have a Windows server to put some software on.
Betcha we see it in the not-too-long from now.
As far as non-public networks, there's many ways to maintain something like a local license auth server, including periodic telephone calls to MS, mailing a floppy, sending an e-mail, etc. It sounds like a pain in the ass, and it is, but if MS is going to try to get business's legit and not give away their MSDN software, it'll happen.
At first it was a hacked XP with the activation stuff disabled or worked-around.
Unfortunately, many of these installs of XP were rendered unusable when SP1 was applied, forcing a switch to the "Corporate" (or as you say, VLK) edition.
Either way, I'm sure MS is cooking up some way to have VLK in businesses without compromising the "security" of the product. Perhaps you'll be able to set up your own license authentication server/proxy in shop.
Who knows, but if they are going to keep trying to enforce the product protection they won't stop at Windows XP that you buy at the store.
As it's been stated before, MS needs new sources of revenue to continue functioning. It's the way the company is set up. This is one way to keep money coming in.
I for one would never buy Windows, but there's other people out there that would if they couldn't easily get a copy from a friend, online, or from work.
Assembly is a demo competition held in Helsinki, Finland each year.
They show demos by demogroups using new PC's with 3d accelerators to old school demos on the C64's or VIC20's. Yea, people still code for the VIC20.
It's not about Money, it's all about bragging rights. These guys can code some amazing stuff. Last year they even had a guy do a live music set with a C64.
Assembly is the name of the competition because all these guys used to code in Assembly. It's not so much so anymore; now they have all sorts of events.
I think it's awesome, and I'd love to go to Assembly '03. Last year they had 4500+ people. The level of talent that some of these guys show is outstanding.
You can download all the Assembly (and other party) demos, music, animations, and art at scene.org. Be sure to check out Project Kerosene, and 32 degrees in the shade.
The GBA's graphics remind me of the Super Nintendo. They look really nice on the little LCD screen, but on the big TV they will probably look pretty old.
I think I'd rather play my Xbox games on the TV.
What do you mean the Playstation is worse? The PSOne doesn't have somehting that the original Playstation didn't?
Have you played the GBA? I hate it, because you have to have a lot of light to see the screen. I mean, even the Atari Lynx had a backlit display. This should have been included in the original GBA. They could have done it cheap with a white LED.
I didn't buy a GBA because of the screen, and now I can buy one with a nice lit screen from Nintendo (for probably a lot less then those companies that sell "modded" ones with lit screens.)
I think it does *now* - but at the beginning, it helped them lock in the Desktop market. I bet two "illegal" copies of Windows 95 were installed for every copy sold. And I think Windows 3.1 was even more so.
They don't need more market share now though. Now, they can start doing things like they do with Windows XP's activation to make it more difficult for everyone to install a single copy. Sure, you can crack it fairly easily, but maybe the next version of Windows won't be.
Yea, kinda like the old Sitcoms. Something would happen on the show that, in MY family, would have been a major event; but on the Sitcom they never talk about it ever again.
Enterprise doesn't seem to be as bad, but I know what you mean. It doesn't need to be like Deep Space 9 (miss three shows and you're lost) but maybe something more like The Next Generation. In TNG, episodes were seperate events for the most part, but there was a basic continuity that held them together.
I blame UPN. UPN puts in hot babes and lots of commercials and reruns, because hey, it works for Buffy right?
I've all but given up on Enterprise, it's even worse the Voyager. No, not the show. The fact that now that UPN runs the show, there's not enough episodes.
They play rerun after rerun during the season. I can understand one or two, for a holiday or something.. I've gotten to the point where I assume it's going to be another rerun.
How do they think this is good for the show? Especially considering the show is 2 seasons old, there's not a lot of old episodes to show.
I think the fourth episode of Enterprise was a rerun of the second.
This is probably due in no small fact that there isn't enough good science fiction out there.
People like Science Fiction. When something comes out (Like Farscape) that's good quality, and it's cancelled in it's 4th season by a bad cliffhanger, people get pissed.
So now we're stuck with more "Everyone love Raymond" and "Friends." Not to say I hate these shows, but they aren't as interesting and thought-prevoking as a good Scifi.
Someday when Science Fiction is accepted by the industry, we'll get what we want. Until then, don't blame SciFi fans of being loud when the one good show is cancelled.
Yea, I bet they make a special Farscape movie for SciFi channel. Seems to make sense to me.
You're right. The show was more expensive then any other show on their network. They figure that people will watch Scifi whether it's Farscape or some dumb SciFi movie, so why pay a lot?
Unfortunately rabit ears will only get me one station of HTDV =(
It will be nice if the cable companies start doing HDTV.
Satellite is generally more expensive then cable, but if I were about to spend some big bucks on a decent HDTV setup, I'd also go for Satellite anyways, and get digital (surround)sound too.
> Of course, the macintosh had this for years before hand
Yea and MacOS (I dunno about OSX but it's probably the same) takes it to an extreme; you treat just about everything as a document. (or.. "object", since Object Oriented was the big buzzword back in '95)
On the windows end though, with Win95 they basically just took the file manager, made it better looking, and made it the default "desktop" behind all the programs. You could always double-click a document in file manager and pop open your program with it.
Not to say I hate the Windows interface, or that there's something wrong with it. It's very functional, which is why many other GUI's now incorporate the "start menu" type thing and many other aspects of the Windows UI. Of course most of these things weren't "MS Firsts!" - nothing ever is.
My KDE desktop looks very much like a Windows desktop. Why? Because it works. No reason to change something that isn't broke; that's why I'm running Linux in the first place. The UI aspects of Windows are fine by me.
This is Slashdot, aren't you used to it by now?
If you can't cope with it, feel free to ignore such comments.