Your assuming that the store can actually order more stock than is necessary. If you have limited stock, would you rather send it to a store that only sells half of it, or to a store that will sell all of it?
It should be noted that 10 or 15 years ago (that's 1990-1995 for the math impaired), 28.8kbps modems were considered top of the line. Those came out about '95. In 1990, you were lucky to have a 2400bps modem. I used to own one. You could read text as fast as you could download it. In 1990, Atari still made computers. In 1994, a 100mhz Pentium processor cost $1000.
The reason the concept of network computing was ridiculed in the early 90's was that there was no realistic way to deliver content to your target audience.
Fast forward to today with broadband representing the majority of internet connections; you've got download speeds that people didn't even dream about 10-15 years ago. You're seeing this "reinvention" today because the technology has advanced far enough to make it possible, not because someone woke up and decided a bad idea wasn't so bad afterall.
Yeah, why would anyone ever pay money to watch something in a movie theater? Or pay money to rent a movie? Or lease a car? Or rent an apartment? Or pay for phone service? For that matter, why would anyone pay money for cable service? Or hell, internet service?
There is a lot of money to be made with a "rental" software model, especially for people who don't use their software often enough to justify dropping green on it.
What it means is that if you're a US based company, and technology is patented by one person in the US and other person overseas, you have to pay licensing fee's twice.
No, in two years time everyone will be running around saying that MS copied it from Apple. Then someone else will jump in and say that Apple stole it from Unix. After that, someone else will claim that Apple stole it from Xerox. And I'm sure after further debate someone else will mention that it was originally an idea first postulated by the ancient greeks, before computers were even invented.
every manufacturer has high end LCDs with integrated colour correction that are as good, no matter what ignorant./ groupthink people always claim without anything to back it up
Accurate color display isn't the issue. The issues are limited gamut and contrast. Additionally, blacklevels and colors shift with your viewing angle AND based on where you're looking at on the screen.
You are incorrect about the display gamut CRTs are capable of. You don't have to look very hard to find professional wide gamut CRT displays that are more than capable of displaying the Adobe colorspace.
I wouldn't say this device blows CRTs out of the water. It definately blows traditional LCD displays out of the water -- bigtime (I've seen a demo unit; it is very impressive). I would definately consider replacing a CRT with one, but I'd have trouble picking out a winner between the two.
If you RTFA, you'll notice that they address this issue and note that performance in this area is lightyears ahead of traditional LCD monitors.
From what I saw of the demo unit, viewing angle wasn't an issue. I thought at some newfangled thin CRT at first (the monitor is rather 'thick'). I didn't notice any dropoff or color shifting.
I was impressed by it, and it isn't often that happens. As I said, this was the first display I'd ever seen that I'd consider replacing a CRT with.
Now, there is the small matter of the pricetag...:(
I can't speak for glasses, but with a circular polarizer the effect is that the screen looks off (completely black) or normal, with steps in between being different brightness levels of the display. I would suspect that the glasses just change how bright the screen appears.
Honestly, LCD monitors have improved drastically over the last couple of years, with viewing angle and color shift at the edges being acceptable for normal workstation use. However, they've still got contrast/gamut issues that bug the living crap out of me.
I've seen one of these in action before; color reproduction/quality was amazing. It was the first time I'd seen a non CRT display that I'd be willing to use for photo work.
The issues with wireless conflict (wherever they were arriving from) came up quickly, and were fixed quickly. However, there is no indication as to whether the instructions and anonymous walmart/retail reps quotes are pre- or post-fix. Can you get a date on the origin of these materials and accounts? All I see is that they are in response to the confusion of wired vs. wireless, and we can all agree that all kiosks are currently wired. As to whether there was wireless before microsoft fixed things is still unclear.
The date of origin for the materials is on or before they were posted. The material was submitted in the claim that there never were wireless controllers in the kiosks. My personal opinion is that it would take longer to produce and distribute updated documentation than it took for this information to become available.
Portable gaming units use batteries. Wires are run to them to supply power. Portable game systems must still be uncomfortably attached to their kiosks. Why should wireless controllers be any different? Running a wireless/portable device on batteries when you already have to secure the unit to prevent theft is pretty pointless.
Running wireless AT ALL would be pointless when they ALREADY have to run a wire to the controller. Seriously, what is the benefit to using a wireless controller in the kiosk? Hell, they could claim the controller was wireless and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
What I find more interesting is that from the joystiq pictures, there is a black wire, a dark colored wire, and one lighter colored one.
I see two black wires (middle and right) and a lighter colored one (left). I don't know where you're seeing 3 colors.
Wireless is the intended standard for the system. To demonstrate something inferior than the standard for cost savings alone isn't very good marketing.
The benefit of wireless is that you're not tied to a cord. There is no other benefit to using a wireless controller. The controller in a kiosk is tied to a cord. Thus, no benefit is demonstrated.
Which indicates that the controller and other connections take place in the exterior portion of the kiosk
I didn't see that anywhere on the previous post either. He did mention that everything plugs into a usb-hub like master/control block thingy located on the interior of the unit.
Supposedly this hub runs a single wire around to the back of the 360 and plugs into the single USB port present, yielding a "clean" look to the display unit.
I assume Microsoft has figured out by now how to make controllers work with the console reliably. If not, then we're all in for a nasty surprise come release day.
The controllers class B devices; ie: they're certified for use in a home environment. A retail environment is not a home environment, and the equipment used in that sort of environment is not subject to the same regulations that home equipment is. Not only that, but in a retail environment you're going to have much MORE unique equipment being demonstrated, further polluting the band that they're using for the wireless controller. And then there is whatever interferrance may be introduced by whatever class A equipement that the retailer employs. The last thing you would want in a retail demonstration is for the controller to go bezerk because some freak combination of equipment hogs all of the available spectrum, so why take the risk?
Okay, so maybe I'm not up to speed on how the kiosks are supposed to be configured, but on the one I played with, pushing the X button brought up the dashbord display (or whatever it's called). I thought this was the intended use of the button, so it doesn't appear to be disabled.
I believe you are correct here. I think I misinterpreted some information I read, which stated that some controller functions are disabled.
You aren't gaining anything by using a wireless controller in a kiosk. You aren't eliminating a wire. You
Are you daft? The kiosk setup instructions show how to route wires for a wired controller. Walmart employees indicate that the controllers are wired. Anonymous retail reps indicate that the controllers are wired. Wireless controllers use batteries. Wires still have to be run outside of the cabinet for the memory card download unit. The gap to run wires from outside to inside the cabinet is large enough for only 3 wires (count 'em, 2 controllers + download unit). Wireless controllers are more expensive. Wireless controllers require "linking" to the console. Wireless controllers are subject TO interferrence from other devices in a retail enviornment. Wireless controllers still have to be physically attached to the kiosk. The "X" button signal on wireless controllers can't be intercepted and disabled.
They were not using wireless controllers in the kiosk.
The article is wrong. As should be clearly obvious given the link to excerts of the kiosk assembly manual.
That being said, I'm not saying that Walmart is making crap up, rather that it wasn't "wireless controllers" causing the issue -- rather, it is probably the result of the bits in the 360 that would communicate with a wireless controller if one were present... (which would also be why only a software 'fix' was needed)
Re:I saw what "the fix" was at my local wal-mart!
on
MS On 360 Wireless Issues
·
· Score: 3, Informative
They never had wireless controllers installed in the kiosks. If you think about it for a few minutes you'd realize why doing so would be a monumentially dumb idea.
The "extender" part indicates that it is capable of "extending" your Media Center PC to a different room/tv. If you think of the MCPC as a server, and the extender as a client that connects to the server, you should have a good idea of what an extender does.
As I stated, worst case, you end up with exactly what you get with bluray. Best case, you get a lot more. I fail to see how that is argument against it.
This thread is done. You obviously aren't interesting in debating this topic reasonably but are rather more interested in talking in circles claiming I'm making shit up when I mention something contrary to your point.
You gotta lot of faith in a contract written by only one side. My money says any such contract completely and totally eschews any liability under any condition because they've got no incentive to do otherwise.
Riight. Face it, at this point you're pulling shit out of your ass and are arguing that a feature is a negative point when at worst it is a neutral point and at best a positive point.
And, if the company goes bankrupt their ain't nobody left to sue anyway.
What are the odds that a major media company will go bankrupt but not sell off their assets as part of liquidation? If it got any closer to zero it would be negative...
1) No program guide data is required to play a DVD -- "MediaPC" does not necessarily mean "tivo replacement." 2) There are many non-internet sources of program guide data - usually embedded in the blanking interval of certain stations' broadcasts 3) Some people choose to move program guide data on a weekly basis via USB-fob sneaker-net. 4) Its pointless trying to deny that there is a substantial number of "media pcs" that are offline, go to avsforum.com and you'll find plenty of people who run that way.
I know of absolutely zero people who run this way. The whole point of a media center pc is the Tivo-like functionality. Why would you waste your time buying a glorified DVD player? It is pointless for you to deny that the "substantial number" (meaning a number greater than ten) represents a significant percentage.
You are making that up. Let's see some supporting evidence for your claim.
No, get your troll ass off the seat and prove me wrong. (hint: search for "aacs" and "managed copy", then note about how "support" for this feature is always referenced as something the player does)
Even today there are DVD's with "PC content" on them that want to phone home as part of their "unique interactive experience" if you play them on a PC.
Get a clue; this isn't a DVD with "pc content" we're talking about. Managed copy is part of the AACS specification (used in HD-DVD & Bluray).
Incorrect. It will play video in the following formats: - wmv - ms-dvr - avi - mpg (1 or 2)...where the formats listed above use standard codecs supported by Microsoft (ie: no divx or xvid).
Depending on how anal you want to be about how long a month is... Halo 2 went from gold to on-sale in 29 days. Some stores were selling then "accidentally" after the 24 day mark elapsed. As far as quantites are involved, they sold 2.4 million games in the first 24 hours after the official launch date...
Slashdot Mirror
Spyware companies can sign drivers; some already sign their binaries.
The presence of those APIs doesn't matter. They'll just write code that sits at a lower layer (ie: a driver) if a higher level API is unavailable.
Your assuming that the store can actually order more stock than is necessary. If you have limited stock, would you rather send it to a store that only sells half of it, or to a store that will sell all of it?
Sounds very much like the retail chains' requirements, not Microsoft's.
It should be noted that 10 or 15 years ago (that's 1990-1995 for the math impaired), 28.8kbps modems were considered top of the line. Those came out about '95. In 1990, you were lucky to have a 2400bps modem. I used to own one. You could read text as fast as you could download it. In 1990, Atari still made computers. In 1994, a 100mhz Pentium processor cost $1000.
The reason the concept of network computing was ridiculed in the early 90's was that there was no realistic way to deliver content to your target audience.
Fast forward to today with broadband representing the majority of internet connections; you've got download speeds that people didn't even dream about 10-15 years ago. You're seeing this "reinvention" today because the technology has advanced far enough to make it possible, not because someone woke up and decided a bad idea wasn't so bad afterall.
Yeah, why would anyone ever pay money to watch something in a movie theater? Or pay money to rent a movie? Or lease a car? Or rent an apartment? Or pay for phone service? For that matter, why would anyone pay money for cable service? Or hell, internet service?
There is a lot of money to be made with a "rental" software model, especially for people who don't use their software often enough to justify dropping green on it.
What it means is that if you're a US based company, and technology is patented by one person in the US and other person overseas, you have to pay licensing fee's twice.
My criteria was color accuracy and gamut. Yours was price and response time. Apples and oranges my friend.
This, as a side note, is probably why Microsoft is introducing it in a server oriented os instead of a desktop os. FWIW.
No, in two years time everyone will be running around saying that MS copied it from Apple. Then someone else will jump in and say that Apple stole it from Unix. After that, someone else will claim that Apple stole it from Xerox. And I'm sure after further debate someone else will mention that it was originally an idea first postulated by the ancient greeks, before computers were even invented.
every manufacturer has high end LCDs with integrated colour correction that are as good, no matter what ignorant ./ groupthink people always claim without anything to back it up
Accurate color display isn't the issue. The issues are limited gamut and contrast. Additionally, blacklevels and colors shift with your viewing angle AND based on where you're looking at on the screen.
You are incorrect about the display gamut CRTs are capable of. You don't have to look very hard to find professional wide gamut CRT displays that are more than capable of displaying the Adobe colorspace.
I wouldn't say this device blows CRTs out of the water. It definately blows traditional LCD displays out of the water -- bigtime (I've seen a demo unit; it is very impressive). I would definately consider replacing a CRT with one, but I'd have trouble picking out a winner between the two.
If you RTFA, you'll notice that they address this issue and note that performance in this area is lightyears ahead of traditional LCD monitors.
From what I saw of the demo unit, viewing angle wasn't an issue. I thought at some newfangled thin CRT at first (the monitor is rather 'thick'). I didn't notice any dropoff or color shifting.
I was impressed by it, and it isn't often that happens. As I said, this was the first display I'd ever seen that I'd consider replacing a CRT with.
Now, there is the small matter of the pricetag...:(
I can't speak for glasses, but with a circular polarizer the effect is that the screen looks off (completely black) or normal, with steps in between being different brightness levels of the display. I would suspect that the glasses just change how bright the screen appears.
Honestly, LCD monitors have improved drastically over the last couple of years, with viewing angle and color shift at the edges being acceptable for normal workstation use. However, they've still got contrast/gamut issues that bug the living crap out of me.
I've seen one of these in action before; color reproduction/quality was amazing. It was the first time I'd seen a non CRT display that I'd be willing to use for photo work.
The issues with wireless conflict (wherever they were arriving from) came up quickly, and were fixed quickly. However, there is no indication as to whether the instructions and anonymous walmart/retail reps quotes are pre- or post-fix. Can you get a date on the origin of these materials and accounts? All I see is that they are in response to the confusion of wired vs. wireless, and we can all agree that all kiosks are currently wired. As to whether there was wireless before microsoft fixed things is still unclear.
The date of origin for the materials is on or before they were posted. The material was submitted in the claim that there never were wireless controllers in the kiosks. My personal opinion is that it would take longer to produce and distribute updated documentation than it took for this information to become available.
Portable gaming units use batteries. Wires are run to them to supply power. Portable game systems must still be uncomfortably attached to their kiosks. Why should wireless controllers be any different? Running a wireless/portable device on batteries when you already have to secure the unit to prevent theft is pretty pointless.
Running wireless AT ALL would be pointless when they ALREADY have to run a wire to the controller. Seriously, what is the benefit to using a wireless controller in the kiosk? Hell, they could claim the controller was wireless and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
What I find more interesting is that from the joystiq pictures, there is a black wire, a dark colored wire, and one lighter colored one.
I see two black wires (middle and right) and a lighter colored one (left). I don't know where you're seeing 3 colors.
Wireless is the intended standard for the system. To demonstrate something inferior than the standard for cost savings alone isn't very good marketing.
The benefit of wireless is that you're not tied to a cord. There is no other benefit to using a wireless controller. The controller in a kiosk is tied to a cord. Thus, no benefit is demonstrated.
Which indicates that the controller and other connections take place in the exterior portion of the kiosk
I didn't see that anywhere on the previous post either. He did mention that everything plugs into a usb-hub like master/control block thingy located on the interior of the unit.
Supposedly this hub runs a single wire around to the back of the 360 and plugs into the single USB port present, yielding a "clean" look to the display unit.
I assume Microsoft has figured out by now how to make controllers work with the console reliably. If not, then we're all in for a nasty surprise come release day.
The controllers class B devices; ie: they're certified for use in a home environment. A retail environment is not a home environment, and the equipment used in that sort of environment is not subject to the same regulations that home equipment is. Not only that, but in a retail environment you're going to have much MORE unique equipment being demonstrated, further polluting the band that they're using for the wireless controller. And then there is whatever interferrance may be introduced by whatever class A equipement that the retailer employs. The last thing you would want in a retail demonstration is for the controller to go bezerk because some freak combination of equipment hogs all of the available spectrum, so why take the risk?
Okay, so maybe I'm not up to speed on how the kiosks are supposed to be configured, but on the one I played with, pushing the X button brought up the dashbord display (or whatever it's called). I thought this was the intended use of the button, so it doesn't appear to be disabled.
I believe you are correct here. I think I misinterpreted some information I read, which stated that some controller functions are disabled.
You aren't gaining anything by using a wireless controller in a kiosk. You aren't eliminating a wire. You
Are you daft? The kiosk setup instructions show how to route wires for a wired controller. Walmart employees indicate that the controllers are wired. Anonymous retail reps indicate that the controllers are wired. Wireless controllers use batteries. Wires still have to be run outside of the cabinet for the memory card download unit. The gap to run wires from outside to inside the cabinet is large enough for only 3 wires (count 'em, 2 controllers + download unit). Wireless controllers are more expensive. Wireless controllers require "linking" to the console. Wireless controllers are subject TO interferrence from other devices in a retail enviornment. Wireless controllers still have to be physically attached to the kiosk. The "X" button signal on wireless controllers can't be intercepted and disabled.
They were not using wireless controllers in the kiosk.
The article is wrong. As should be clearly obvious given the link to excerts of the kiosk assembly manual.
That being said, I'm not saying that Walmart is making crap up, rather that it wasn't "wireless controllers" causing the issue -- rather, it is probably the result of the bits in the 360 that would communicate with a wireless controller if one were present... (which would also be why only a software 'fix' was needed)
They never had wireless controllers installed in the kiosks. If you think about it for a few minutes you'd realize why doing so would be a monumentially dumb idea.
http://www.joystiq.com/entry/1234000870065068/
The "extender" part indicates that it is capable of "extending" your Media Center PC to a different room/tv. If you think of the MCPC as a server, and the extender as a client that connects to the server, you should have a good idea of what an extender does.
As I stated, worst case, you end up with exactly what you get with bluray. Best case, you get a lot more. I fail to see how that is argument against it.
This thread is done. You obviously aren't interesting in debating this topic reasonably but are rather more interested in talking in circles claiming I'm making shit up when I mention something contrary to your point.
You gotta lot of faith in a contract written by only one side. My money says any such contract completely and totally eschews any liability under any condition because they've got no incentive to do otherwise.
...
Riight. Face it, at this point you're pulling shit out of your ass and are arguing that a feature is a negative point when at worst it is a neutral point and at best a positive point.
And, if the company goes bankrupt their ain't nobody left to sue anyway.
What are the odds that a major media company will go bankrupt but not sell off their assets as part of liquidation? If it got any closer to zero it would be negative
1) No program guide data is required to play a DVD -- "MediaPC" does not necessarily mean "tivo replacement."
2) There are many non-internet sources of program guide data - usually embedded in the blanking interval of certain stations' broadcasts
3) Some people choose to move program guide data on a weekly basis via USB-fob sneaker-net.
4) Its pointless trying to deny that there is a substantial number of "media pcs" that are offline, go to avsforum.com and you'll find plenty of people who run that way.
I know of absolutely zero people who run this way. The whole point of a media center pc is the Tivo-like functionality. Why would you waste your time buying a glorified DVD player? It is pointless for you to deny that the "substantial number" (meaning a number greater than ten) represents a significant percentage.
You are making that up. Let's see some supporting evidence for your claim.
No, get your troll ass off the seat and prove me wrong. (hint: search for "aacs" and "managed copy", then note about how "support" for this feature is always referenced as something the player does)
Even today there are DVD's with "PC content" on them that want to phone home as part of their "unique interactive experience" if you play them on a PC.
Get a clue; this isn't a DVD with "pc content" we're talking about. Managed copy is part of the AACS specification (used in HD-DVD & Bluray).
A picture ought to be worth 1000 words ... http://img142.echo.cx/img142/3669/untitled38yq.gif
You've never seen an lcd in its non native resolution before have you? They look like shit.
Incorrect. It will play video in the following formats: ...where the formats listed above use standard codecs supported by Microsoft (ie: no divx or xvid).
- wmv
- ms-dvr
- avi
- mpg (1 or 2)
Depending on how anal you want to be about how long a month is ... Halo 2 went from gold to on-sale in 29 days. Some stores were selling then "accidentally" after the 24 day mark elapsed. As far as quantites are involved, they sold 2.4 million games in the first 24 hours after the official launch date...