I remember my dad typing in a quick little BASIC program (an example from some book he got with the machine) that prompted for a name and then output "Hello, [name]!".
He sat me down and ran it for me, and when this "machine" then proceeded to greet me by name, well... let's just say my fate was sealed.
I can still remember listening to the sweet sounds of analog data cassette tapes on my walkman while going to sleep at night.
proposing a rather novel way of interpreting that "Congress" means "The People".
There used to be this guy. Went by the name Abraham Lincoln. This one time, in speaking about the government of the U.S., he expressed his hope that "...government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth." Look it up.
"The People" elect congressional representatives. "Congress" is composed of congressional representatives from each of the states. Ergo, "Congress" means "The People"..
Pretty neat, huh? I didn't even have to paraphrase. Hope that's "novel" enough for ya.
p.s. it's "prohibiting the free exercise thereof [religion]", followed by "abridging the freedom of speech" (two separate concepts) - not "the prohibition on the abridgement of free speech" - looks like you need to follow your own advice and re-review the actual text
I think you (like O.P.) are failing to acknowledge one very important facet of musical "taste" (perhaps "enjoyment" would be a better word in this case):
Nostalgia!
Case in point: "Take On Me" (by A-Ha) is the very definition of "one hit wonder" - but I LOVE that song, NOT because it was a top-10 hit in 1985 (had to look that up, in fact), and most definitely not because the music industry marketed or pushed it (I actually DISliked that song when it came out). I love that song now because it reminds me of my childhood when I listen to it, and also because I greatly enjoy 80s music in general (for the same reason).
It wasn't until years later, in college, that I happened to hear that song somewhere, got flooded with nostalgia, and decided I just HAD to have it on a mix tape (my college years pre-dated the MP3 craze and the CD-burner-as-a-commodity era).
Do you have any idea how freaking difficult it was to find that song WITHOUT the benefit of "digital music piracy"??? Sheesh!
The reality is that most people who have a CD collection own both kinds of works - those that they listen to regularly, from the first song to the last, and those that they listen to only on occasion, or only to certain tracks.
Here's a newsflash - musical taste is SUBJECTIVE. What you consider to be the greatest musical masterpiece of humankind's existence might not be worth picking up from the 25-cent bargain bin at the local swap shop to someone else.
The "argument" here (going back to the original post) is quite valid: if I like a particular song or couple songs off some band or artist's album, and I *don't* like (or don't care one way or another) about the rest, I don't want to pay FULL price for the whole album.
Personally, I only buy new CDs for my absolute favorite bands and artists. For the rest, I first look at local CD exchange stores, followed by online used copies, and finally resorting to "piracy" if all other options have been exhausted.
That song that got released back in 1972 that I just heard the other day in a TV commercial and would really like to add to my collection? Um, yeah, I'm NOT going to go out and pay for the entire album when all I want is that song. If I can find the album on the cheap (and by cheap I mean $1 or less), I'll buy it.
the question doesn't make much sense to me. i've read books that made me cry, and seen movies that've done the same. i've also played video games that have done the same (i still get misty-eyed every time bugenhagen reveals the truth about seto to nanaki). i don't think the medium has anything to do with it.
in fact, i think the medium is completely irrelevant. it's the CONTENT that elicits emotion. so maybe a better question to ask is: when will video games meet or surpass books and movies in terms of story? i suspect many would argue it's already happened in many cases.
in addition to being the worst film i've ever seen (by a LONG shot), it contains the worst line of monologue i've ever heard in a movie. you'll have to wait until the closing scene to catch it, though (if you can make it that far).
make the browser support the standards and then expose the faulty css/html writers
for what it's worth, i hypothesize that following your prescription would result in the immediate and near-total failure of that browser in the marketplace.
why? let's use firefox as an example, and assume the firefox team takes gecko to 100% compliance.
because there are, in fact, "faulty css/html writers," a non-trivial number of sites may now appear (to the casual web surfer) to render incorrectly. but guess what? IE will continue to display those pages in such a fashion that those same casual users will be of the opinion that it is firefox, not IE, that is behaving "incorrectly." and, of course, perception is 9/10 of reality.
as soon as that happens, firefox can kiss its market share goodbye, because it will have virtually guaranteed IE's victory.
so i disagree that draconian adherence (all at once) to the standards would be a good thing. the process should be gradual, and should be accompanied by an aggressive "education in standards" campaign.
If it is possible (but difficult) to sneak past 5 guards without them seeing you, it will be easy to sneak up on each one and break his neck.
that's my point - i don't want to just get through the game as quickly and easily as possible. if i spend my money on a stealth game, it's because i want stealth gameplay.
but besides that (regardless of genre), i'm first and foremost interested in a challenge. always doing something the easiest way is not a challenge.
Going for a 0% kill level is even more of an unrealistic challenge as 100%
again, i think you missed my point. i'm not talking about going for 0% kill ratio. i'll kill (in a stealth game) if/when it becomes necessary.
the fact that it is possible to achieve "silent assassin" in hitman means that on any given level, your objectives can be accomplished having killed no more than two enemies (iirc). to me, that's equivalent to the game developer throwing down the gauntlet and saying to me, "as difficult as that may seem, it IS possible; do you have the skill to do it?" that's a challenge i'll accept every time; it's the reason i play games. it's also the reason i play most games on the most difficult settings.
that'll work... but then (in hitman, at least) you could not achieve a perfect "silent assassin" rating. for me, the challenge of the hitman series in particular is in attaining that rating, not necessarily in simply completing the level (or completing the level simply).
as it relates to other games, i feel much the same way; i.e. if i'm playing a stealth game, i'm going to try to play stealthily. i'll save screwing around with 100% kill ratios or wild killing sprees or "tricks" to completing levels easily for after i've experienced the game as its genre intends.
The truth is that whitepace-delimited blocks can be a source of difficult-to-find bugs.
Actually, the truth is that any programmer with any experience in any language has encountered difficult-to-find bugs related to WHATEVER a particular language uses as a delimiter.
For the record, I've been programming in Python for nearly 10 years, and have never had a problem with whitespace-delimited blocks, even as I switch between coding C/Java and coding Python (on a near-daily basis). And I don't use any fancy IDE to assist me, either - strictly vi. It also makes it quite difficult to easily copy n paste code from one place to another.
Huh? The layout of any block of text (whether code, poetry, prose, or anything else) is entirely irrelevant to the process of copying it and then pasting it. If your editor has some funky auto-indent features turned on, I could see how you might be *confused* about where the "difficulty" lies, but white-space delimited code blocks are not inherently difficult to copy/paste.
and a consequence of those "unavoidable ambiguities" is that a person may make a statement that, while semantically "not false," can be quite misleading.
al gore made no attempt to clarify his meaning, which at the least marks his willingness to accept people's misunderstanding of the statement (to his benefit).
i can see it now... they pull a george lucas, fscking up the story by adding "TarTar Bits" - a loveable sidekick that means well but is mostly annoying. and three years after the release, the only redeeming quality is the fantastic light cycle race scene.
read the post, read the linked article... still a believer in "objectification is just a politically correct excuse to whine."
>> "Finally, equality of the sexes; we all get to have bad self-image >> thrust upon us!"
always cracks me up to hear someone say something like this. stop for a moment and think about what you wrote. if your SELF-image can be thrust UPON you (implies: by ANOTHER), then "objectification" is not the problem - the problem is that you permit external forces to define you when you should be defining yourself.
these complaints are inconceivable!
on
Top 50 DVDs
·
· Score: 1
i do not think this list means what you think it means.
from the "Why We Like It" section of each item on the list, it seems quite apparent to me that the ranking of dvds is not based so much on the movies themselves, but rather on the full media experience offered by the dvd (including such extras as outtakes, alternate endings, deleted scenes, interviews, trailers, etc.).
did anyone whining about "how could they think Movie X was better than Movie Y" actually RTFL?
good points all around. hope you didn't misinterpret my post - i can't stand TO and his egotistical baggage. however, his numbers are quite impressive. and right now, 2004/5 season, he IS by those numbers (and by what he did for philly's receiving corps) the best receiver in the NFL.
my point was simply that actually *being* important does not preclude you from being "full of yourself" if you take it upon yourself to extol your own virtues. and in that respect, TO is a case-in-point (as is Stallman, in my opinion, although to a lesser degree than TO).
I'm reminded of a recent holiday commercial featuring philadelphia eagles wide receiver terrell owens...
--- "T'was the night before Christmas and all through the house T.O. was the best receiver in the NFL I know it don't rhyme, but y'all know it's true" ---
Does anyone (well, anyone who follows the NFL) doubt T.O.'s ability on the field? And certainly, it would seem that T.O. is aware of and not timid in aggrandizing his importance.
But is the fact that he's right NOT make him "full of himself?"
I'd say no. And I'd also say no about Stallman for the same reason.
Stallman IS indispensible to and for the hardcore Free Software enthusiasts... and he's also full of himself. The two notions are not mutually exclusive.
but by the same token, maybe you should consider one's relative interest in playing a MMO game before you make such counter-statements.
i agree with the grandparent, not because i think it is overly expensive in and of itself, but because i have very little interest in online gaming.
i play games as an escape, so the idea of joining a community in order to play a game seems somewhat counterintuitive to me. i certainly am interested in some of the titles out there, but i find the cost prohibitive. it's not worth it to me to invest "just" $15/mo because the whole concept is iffy at best (to me).
as an aside, comparing a relatively low $15/mo fee to a $50 new game price tag is meaningless to me (and others, i suspect) because i rarely purchase new games anyway. i buy almost every title used, and rarely pay more than $15-$20. to give a sepcific frame of reference, i have purchased a brand new $50+ game exactly ONCE in the last two years.
so from my perspective, i could spend $15/mo on the SAME game, or i could spend $15/mo for a new game EVERY month and enjoy an ever-increasing game library. i happen to choose the latter, just as many others happen to choose the former.
(this is just my personal perspective, so please step away from the flamethrowers)
> am I the only one that's a bit concerned about > seeing all the parents buying the game for > their kids?
not at all. but you can't count on parents to even be *aware* of the esrb rating. unfortunately, you can't even count on them appreciating its existence, or your willingness to explain it. here's a true story:
when i was standing in line a couple years ago to purchase VC, i noticed a mother and her son in line behind me, the mother with VC in hand. her son looked to be no more than 7 years old. i hesitated for moment, but then turned to the woman and said, "excuse me, would you by chance be purchasing that game for your son?" she confirmed that she was. i then said, "i'm not sure if you're aware, but this game has very adult content - sex, guns, violence, cursing, drugs, pornography..." she looked horrified. she thanked me profusely for having informed her. i also gave her a quick description of the esrb system. she got out of line and began looking for a different game for her son.
feeling i had done a good deed, i turned to resume my wait in line, only to be tapped on the shoulder by another mother in line with her son (who looked to be around 10 years old). i was treated to a tongue lashing about how arrogant i was to have presumed that i could lecture the first mother and "force" my opinion on her, and how i have no right to speak in the manner i did unless i have children myself AND am directly solicited for my opinion.
annoyed by the tv in the airport/bar? move to another seat. better yet, grow up.
i've found myself in plenty of situations just as this guy describes. i'll ask politely for the volume to be turned down or the channel changed. if my request is granted, good for me. if not, oh well - i'm usually not the only person present, and my preferences do not trump everyone else's.
let this guy ask politely and then deal with the outcome in a NON-childlike manner. otherwise, i might be prompted to childishly knock that fob from his hand and stomp on it.
all the study concludes is that sold units of PCs with preinstalled linux will exceed units of PCs that *use* linux post-purchase because those PCs can then be used to install cheap copies of pirated windows.
for the reading-comprehension-impaired: (PriceOfLinuxPC + PriceOfPiratedWindows) PriceOfWindowsPC
neither the article nor the study is an indictment of linux or linux users.
i agree. people in theatres suck, for those reasons and several others.
i save the theatre "experience" for movies that i consider to be absolutely-must-see-as-soon-as-possible. then, i take a day or half day of vacation, and go to a 10am monday morning showing.
most of the time, i'm the only person in the theatre. and the times i'm not, there's only one or two other people.
gameplay hours are the primary factor in my decision to buy (or not) a game new, or wait a couple months and pick it up used for $20.
if a game catches my eye, the first thing i want to know is how many hours of gameplay i can expect to get out of it on the first play-through. why? because 99 times out of 100, i'm NOT going to pay $50 for a game that only gives me 15 to 20 hours of entertainment. on the other hand, i'm very likely to purchase a game (even one that might only seem to be "so-so") if i can get 60+ hours of gameplay.
there are a lot of ways to spend $50. if it's going to be on a new game, that game had better supply me with a sufficient amount of gameplay to make me feel that the $50 was well spent. if the estimated hours of gameplay tell me that i'll be finished with this game in under a week, then i'm not going to drop $50 on it.
Slashdot Mirror
I remember my dad typing in a quick little BASIC program (an example from some book he got with the machine) that prompted for a name and then output "Hello, [name]!".
He sat me down and ran it for me, and when this "machine" then proceeded to greet me by name, well... let's just say my fate was sealed.
I can still remember listening to the sweet sounds of analog data cassette tapes on my walkman while going to sleep at night.
proposing a rather novel way of interpreting that "Congress" means "The People".
There used to be this guy. Went by the name Abraham Lincoln. This one time, in speaking about the government of the U.S., he expressed his hope that "...government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth." Look it up.
"The People" elect congressional representatives. "Congress" is composed of congressional representatives from each of the states. Ergo, "Congress" means "The People"..
Pretty neat, huh? I didn't even have to paraphrase. Hope that's "novel" enough for ya.
p.s. it's "prohibiting the free exercise thereof [religion]", followed by "abridging the freedom of speech" (two separate concepts) - not "the prohibition on the abridgement of free speech" - looks like you need to follow your own advice and re-review the actual text
I think you (like O.P.) are failing to acknowledge one very important facet of musical "taste" (perhaps "enjoyment" would be a better word in this case):
Nostalgia!
Case in point: "Take On Me" (by A-Ha) is the very definition of "one hit wonder" - but I LOVE that song, NOT because it was a top-10 hit in 1985 (had to look that up, in fact), and most definitely not because the music industry marketed or pushed it (I actually DISliked that song when it came out).
I love that song now because it reminds me of my childhood when I listen to it, and also because I greatly enjoy 80s music in general (for the same reason).
It wasn't until years later, in college, that I happened to hear that song somewhere, got flooded with nostalgia, and decided I just HAD to have it on a mix tape (my college years pre-dated the MP3 craze and the CD-burner-as-a-commodity era).
Do you have any idea how freaking difficult it was to find that song WITHOUT the benefit of "digital music piracy"??? Sheesh!
C'mon! It's not that black-and-white!
The reality is that most people who have a CD collection own both kinds of works - those that they listen to regularly, from the first song to the last, and those that they listen to only on occasion, or only to certain tracks.
Here's a newsflash - musical taste is SUBJECTIVE. What you consider to be the greatest musical masterpiece of humankind's existence might not be worth picking up from the 25-cent bargain bin at the local swap shop to someone else.
The "argument" here (going back to the original post) is quite valid: if I like a particular song or couple songs off some band or artist's album, and I *don't* like (or don't care one way or another) about the rest, I don't want to pay FULL price for the whole album.
Personally, I only buy new CDs for my absolute favorite bands and artists. For the rest, I first look at local CD exchange stores, followed by online used copies, and finally resorting to "piracy" if all other options have been exhausted.
That song that got released back in 1972 that I just heard the other day in a TV commercial and would really like to add to my collection? Um, yeah, I'm NOT going to go out and pay for the entire album when all I want is that song. If I can find the album on the cheap (and by cheap I mean $1 or less), I'll buy it.
Otherwise, it's a pirate's life for me. ARRRRRR!
the question doesn't make much sense to me. i've read books that made me cry, and seen movies that've done the same. i've also played video games that have done the same (i still get misty-eyed every time bugenhagen reveals the truth about seto to nanaki). i don't think the medium has anything to do with it.
in fact, i think the medium is completely irrelevant. it's the CONTENT that elicits emotion. so maybe a better question to ask is: when will video games meet or surpass books and movies in terms of story? i suspect many would argue it's already happened in many cases.
if you need something 10 minutes faster, why not start the process 10 minutes sooner?
wow. uh... no.
if you need it ten minutes sooner, then sure, you can start it ten minutes sooner and meet your goal.
if the process takes one hour, then starting it ten minutes sooner does NOT reduce the elapsed time to 50 minutes; it will still take one hour.
Dude, Equilibrium was literally the worst film I've ever seen.
then you have obviously not seen Knights.
in addition to being the worst film i've ever seen (by a LONG shot), it contains the worst line of monologue i've ever heard in a movie. you'll have to wait until the closing scene to catch it, though (if you can make it that far).
make the browser support the standards and then expose the faulty css/html writers
for what it's worth, i hypothesize that following your prescription would result in the immediate and near-total failure of that browser in the marketplace.
why? let's use firefox as an example, and assume the firefox team takes gecko to 100% compliance.
because there are, in fact, "faulty css/html writers," a non-trivial number of sites may now appear (to the casual web surfer) to render incorrectly. but guess what? IE will continue to display those pages in such a fashion that those same casual users will be of the opinion that it is firefox, not IE, that is behaving "incorrectly." and, of course, perception is 9/10 of reality.
as soon as that happens, firefox can kiss its market share goodbye, because it will have virtually guaranteed IE's victory.
so i disagree that draconian adherence (all at once) to the standards would be a good thing. the process should be gradual, and should be accompanied by an aggressive "education in standards" campaign.
If it is possible (but difficult) to sneak past 5 guards without them seeing you, it will be easy to sneak up on each one and break his neck.
that's my point - i don't want to just get through the game as quickly and easily as possible. if i spend my money on a stealth game, it's because i want stealth gameplay.
but besides that (regardless of genre), i'm first and foremost interested in a challenge. always doing something the easiest way is not a challenge.
Going for a 0% kill level is even more of an unrealistic challenge as 100%
again, i think you missed my point. i'm not talking about going for 0% kill ratio. i'll kill (in a stealth game) if/when it becomes necessary.
the fact that it is possible to achieve "silent assassin" in hitman means that on any given level, your objectives can be accomplished having killed no more than two enemies (iirc). to me, that's equivalent to the game developer throwing down the gauntlet and saying to me, "as difficult as that may seem, it IS possible; do you have the skill to do it?" that's a challenge i'll accept every time; it's the reason i play games. it's also the reason i play most games on the most difficult settings.
that'll work... but then (in hitman, at least) you could not achieve a perfect "silent assassin" rating. for me, the challenge of the hitman series in particular is in attaining that rating, not necessarily in simply completing the level (or completing the level simply).
as it relates to other games, i feel much the same way; i.e. if i'm playing a stealth game, i'm going to try to play stealthily.
i'll save screwing around with 100% kill ratios or wild killing sprees or "tricks" to completing levels easily for after i've experienced the game as its genre intends.
The truth is that whitepace-delimited blocks can be a source of difficult-to-find bugs.
Actually, the truth is that any programmer with any experience in any language has encountered difficult-to-find bugs related to WHATEVER a particular language uses as a delimiter.
For the record, I've been programming in Python for nearly 10 years, and have never had a problem with whitespace-delimited blocks, even as I switch between coding C/Java and coding Python (on a near-daily basis). And I don't use any fancy IDE to assist me, either - strictly vi.
It also makes it quite difficult to easily copy n paste code from one place to another.
Huh? The layout of any block of text (whether code, poetry, prose, or anything else) is entirely irrelevant to the process of copying it and then pasting it. If your editor has some funky auto-indent features turned on, I could see how you might be *confused* about where the "difficulty" lies, but white-space delimited code blocks are not inherently difficult to copy/paste.
and a consequence of those "unavoidable ambiguities" is that a person may make a statement that, while semantically "not false," can be quite misleading.
al gore made no attempt to clarify his meaning, which at the least marks his willingness to accept people's misunderstanding of the statement (to his benefit).
HIS story, HIS decision.
YOUR memories, YOUR choice.
the end.
i can see it now... they pull a george lucas, fscking up the story by adding "TarTar Bits" - a loveable sidekick that means well but is mostly annoying. and three years after the release, the only redeeming quality is the fantastic light cycle race scene.
read the post, read the linked article... still a believer in "objectification is just a politically correct excuse to whine."
>> "Finally, equality of the sexes; we all get to have bad self-image
>> thrust upon us!"
always cracks me up to hear someone say something like this. stop for a moment and think about what you wrote. if your SELF-image can be thrust UPON you (implies: by ANOTHER), then "objectification" is not the problem - the problem is that you permit external forces to define you when you should be defining yourself.
i do not think this list means what you think it means.
from the "Why We Like It" section of each item on the list, it seems quite apparent to me that the ranking of dvds is not based so much on the movies themselves, but rather on the full media experience offered by the dvd (including such extras as outtakes, alternate endings, deleted scenes, interviews, trailers, etc.).
did anyone whining about "how could they think Movie X was better than Movie Y" actually RTFL?
good points all around. hope you didn't misinterpret my post - i can't stand TO and his egotistical baggage. however, his numbers are quite impressive. and right now, 2004/5 season, he IS by those numbers (and by what he did for philly's receiving corps) the best receiver in the NFL.
my point was simply that actually *being* important does not preclude you from being "full of yourself" if you take it upon yourself to extol your own virtues. and in that respect, TO is a case-in-point (as is Stallman, in my opinion, although to a lesser degree than TO).
I'm reminded of a recent holiday commercial featuring philadelphia eagles wide receiver terrell owens...
---
"T'was the night before Christmas and all through the house
T.O. was the best receiver in the NFL
I know it don't rhyme, but y'all know it's true"
---
Does anyone (well, anyone who follows the NFL) doubt T.O.'s ability on the field? And certainly, it would seem that T.O. is aware of and not timid in aggrandizing his importance.
But is the fact that he's right NOT make him "full of himself?"
I'd say no. And I'd also say no about Stallman for the same reason.
Stallman IS indispensible to and for the hardcore Free Software enthusiasts... and he's also full of himself. The two notions are not mutually exclusive.
but by the same token, maybe you should consider one's relative interest in playing a MMO game before you make such counter-statements.
i agree with the grandparent, not because i think it is overly expensive in and of itself, but because i have very little interest in online gaming.
i play games as an escape, so the idea of joining a community in order to play a game seems somewhat counterintuitive to me. i certainly am interested in some of the titles out there, but i find the cost prohibitive. it's not worth it to me to invest "just" $15/mo because the whole concept is iffy at best (to me).
as an aside, comparing a relatively low $15/mo fee to a $50 new game price tag is meaningless to me (and others, i suspect) because i rarely purchase new games anyway. i buy almost every title used, and rarely pay more than $15-$20. to give a sepcific frame of reference, i have purchased a brand new $50+ game exactly ONCE in the last two years.
so from my perspective, i could spend $15/mo on the SAME game, or i could spend $15/mo for a new game EVERY month and enjoy an ever-increasing game library. i happen to choose the latter, just as many others happen to choose the former.
(this is just my personal perspective, so please step away from the flamethrowers)
> am I the only one that's a bit concerned about
> seeing all the parents buying the game for
> their kids?
not at all. but you can't count on parents to even be *aware* of the esrb rating. unfortunately, you can't even count on them appreciating its existence, or your willingness to explain it. here's a true story:
when i was standing in line a couple years ago to purchase VC, i noticed a mother and her son in line behind me, the mother with VC in hand. her son looked to be no more than 7 years old. i hesitated for moment, but then turned to the woman and said, "excuse me, would you by chance be purchasing that game for your son?" she confirmed that she was. i then said, "i'm not sure if you're aware, but this game has very adult content - sex, guns, violence, cursing, drugs, pornography..." she looked horrified. she thanked me profusely for having informed her. i also gave her a quick description of the esrb system. she got out of line and began looking for a different game for her son.
feeling i had done a good deed, i turned to resume my wait in line, only to be tapped on the shoulder by another mother in line with her son (who looked to be around 10 years old). i was treated to a tongue lashing about how arrogant i was to have presumed that i could lecture the first mother and "force" my opinion on her, and how i have no right to speak in the manner i did unless i have children myself AND am directly solicited for my opinion.
can't win 'em all, i guess.
i couldn't agree more.
annoyed by the tv in the airport/bar? move to another seat. better yet, grow up.
i've found myself in plenty of situations just as this guy describes. i'll ask politely for the volume to be turned down or the channel changed. if my request is granted, good for me. if not, oh well - i'm usually not the only person present, and my preferences do not trump everyone else's.
let this guy ask politely and then deal with the outcome in a NON-childlike manner. otherwise, i might be prompted to childishly knock that fob from his hand and stomp on it.
make that:
(PriceOfLinuxPC + PriceOfPiratedWindows) < PriceOfWindowsPC
apparently i am typing-impaired today.
as in: understand the f***ing article.
all the study concludes is that sold units of PCs with preinstalled linux will exceed units of PCs that *use* linux post-purchase because those PCs can then be used to install cheap copies of pirated windows.
for the reading-comprehension-impaired: (PriceOfLinuxPC + PriceOfPiratedWindows) PriceOfWindowsPC
neither the article nor the study is an indictment of linux or linux users.
i agree. people in theatres suck, for those reasons and several others.
i save the theatre "experience" for movies that i consider to be absolutely-must-see-as-soon-as-possible. then, i take a day or half day of vacation, and go to a 10am monday morning showing.
most of the time, i'm the only person in the theatre. and the times i'm not, there's only one or two other people.
gameplay hours are the primary factor in my decision to buy (or not) a game new, or wait a couple months and pick it up used for $20.
if a game catches my eye, the first thing i want to know is how many hours of gameplay i can expect to get out of it on the first play-through. why? because 99 times out of 100, i'm NOT going to pay $50 for a game that only gives me 15 to 20 hours of entertainment. on the other hand, i'm very likely to purchase a game (even one that might only seem to be "so-so") if i can get 60+ hours of gameplay.
there are a lot of ways to spend $50. if it's going to be on a new game, that game had better supply me with a sufficient amount of gameplay to make me feel that the $50 was well spent. if the estimated hours of gameplay tell me that i'll be finished with this game in under a week, then i'm not going to drop $50 on it.