There a lot of knee-jerk responses here about what the problem is, but not a lot about how to find a good consultant
Having worked for myself providing IT services for small businesses in my area, I found that the best way to connect with new customers is word of mouth. I found the majority of my best customers that way.
You come in contact with local businesses that need IT support all the time. Just ask a manager of every not-franchise that you're in who they use for IT support, and if they like them. Get a name and number.
Consider attending local networking events for small businesses. You'll probably quickly meet a new IT provider face-to-face who is hungry for business. Also, other small business owners in your area who hire their own IT consultants. And hey, if you happen to live in the Boise, Idaho area, hit me up here.:-D
Regarding the fix: Updates can be scheduled easily using group policy. Spool up a WSUS server. Manage your updates with policy. This may or may not be more expensive than your wife's company wants (depending particularly if they have a domain and server in place), but it's less intrusive than asking the customer to change OS, and will definitely give her the results she wants.
Regarding warranties - Warranty for work already completed should be honored, if it's a true warranty. Examine the terms. But that doesn't keep you from changing consultants. At the very least, get a second opinion.
1. Check out Neil deGrasse Tyson, who hosts the excellent show Nova ScienceNOW, currently in it's third season. It runs just after NOVA for several weeks in a row.
2. Try Robert Krulwich, who co-hosts the great NPR show & podcast RadioLab, with the equally wonderful Jad Abumrad. They are great for driving and listening.
Both are brilliant at making complicated sciencey topics seem fun and interesting. My 13 year old daughter enjoys both shows immensely with me. RadioLab, especially, is fun and funny, and you can gather up all podcasts on iTunes (there are about 25 full shows presently, plus lots of smaller in-between podcasts).
Both of these guys appear frequently on public radio shows too, like Ira Flatow's Science Friday, which is also good but a little more current eventsy.
It's my understanding that the lead in "regular" fuel (regular meaning "with lead", not regular = lowest octane) is added as part of the refining process. And that subsequent removal of the lead, therefore, costs more.
Is it time for video game actors to be treated as well as those in other mediums? I'm not clear how they are not being treated the same as actors in other "mediums"(sic).
He has a talent, he has an agent. He accepts a contract, he performs his work, he gets paid according to the terms of the contract. Free market, it's a good thing.
And aside from that, let's be honest. Voice acting is not exactly like acting in front of a screen. You're judged purely on your voice. Not your age, appearance, or physical presence. If Michael Hollick wasn't available, his absence would not be difficult to fill. I don't see people flocking to buy ANY video game EVER based on who the voice talent is.
It is fun to sometimes recognize a screen actor's voice in a video game, but their names don't exactly make it to the front of the box. I mean, even Patrick Stewart did a voice in Oblivion, and he barely got a mention on the back of the box. And he's got crazy geek cred. But I don't think he moved any units for Bethesda on his own.
I spent hundreds of hours as a kid playing text adventure games. When Infocom switched the default display from white-on-black to white-on-blue, it made a tremendous difference.
Low-emissions monitors didn't become standard until the 90's. Before that, the wrong color combinations would really make your eyes sore.
Sorry I took so long to reply; I forgot to check my posting.:)
I'd consider it a personal preference. I don't subscribe to any magazines because I don't like having a house cluttered with them. I like to read. I love magazines in waiting rooms. But when I subscribe, I hold on to them until I've read every article that interests me, and then I fall behind in my reading sometimes, and then I next thing I know, I have a pile of unread magazines that fees like an obligation, and I begin to resent them because I'm reading magazines all the time instead of books. So to me, the online version is more valuable. I can read the articles if it's a slow day on Slashdot, but I usually just hit their website when I need to make a major purchase. It happens often enough for me that $26/year is a better deal that starting and stopping a subscription at $6/month. Although I should point out that when I first signed up, it was $24/year or $4/month.
I should also say that I grew up with the print edition. My parents have been subscribers to the magazine since before I can remember, and I'm 38 now. I LOVE reading it. The format of the magazine is great and the articles are great. I wish that I could download a PDF version of the print edition each month. The website seems to have all the same articles, just that they're not in journal format. Online, it's more like a heirarchical structure based on item categories. So if you're into home electronics and reading about those online, it's unlikely that you'll see the cool articles comparing the effectiveness of insect repellents. When you have the print edition, you get a more complete picture.
My recommendation; try both. Buy two issues at the newsstand, and sign up for the month-to-month. It'll cost you $20 spread over 2 months and you'll know what the pros and cons are. Good luck!
To answer your question, Yes. Convenience. When you Subscribe to the print edition, you have no access to back articles. They typically update their reviews of any given item every 2-3 years, to reflect new trends and features. (Electronics, more often, sometimes as often as every 6 months).
So when you get the paper subscription, you find yourself hording the magazines so you have the historical reviews, in the future. In the meantime, you have no back catalog until you accumulate one.
With the online edition, you have instant access to the most recent review of everything they've ever reviewed. So, for example, if you need to buy a new coffee maker, you might have to wait a couple years to get reviews in print. If you have the online service, you've got your info immediately. No pile of magazines, instant gratification.
I suscribed online initially to get reviews for mattresses - when you're going to spend $1000 on an item that the manfacturers intentionally make difficult to comapre, you want help from disinterested experts. I kept the subscription because instantly I found it useful for every purchase over $50. Short list: coffee maker, burr-style coffee grinder, 5-disc DVD Player, High Def TV, Mattress, digital camera, tires (oh yes! the tire reviews are GREAT), webcam, front-loading washer & dryer, lawnmower, in-home gym, toaster oven, humidifiers,... god the list goes on and on. Every time I make a purchase, it's great to know in advance that I'm not buying a lemon. I bought CR recommendations for every one of those items and I'm happy with every single one. Once you have it, you never want to give it up!
Even if you aren't ready to buy, they have "buyer guides" that break down features so you know what you're looking at. This is really helpful with electronics, like digital cameras. How many people thought about shutter speed when they bought their first digital camera? Nobody. It's a non-issue when you're used to using film. But The difference beween SLR (0 seconds), fast digital (.5 seconds), and slow cheap digital (2+ seconds) is tremendously important when you have little kids who won't hold still for a pose. CR breaks down the shutter speed of every camera they review. If that's what you care about, you can zero in on what you need.
There are some things for which I don't like their reviews: Cell phones, computers, automobiles. I find the reviews too superficial for complicated items like these. Although the 10-year track record for automobiles is helpful.
This turn of phrase struck me as stupid, too; I searched for your entry before posting my own, so I'll just reply here.
I can't think of a single example in PC gaming where "quantity" over "quality" was a good thing. Example, those $9.99 CDs at Best Buy (etc) that advertise "500 games!" and turn out to contain 500 really crappy shareware games. Like me, those of you old enough to remember when CD-ROM drives were first introduced to PCs probably bought one of these collections at some point in your life, and quickly learned that just because they can jam 700MB of crap onto a single CD doesn't mean that it's worth more than the disc it's burned onto.
Not to be confused with great anthology collections, like the Blizzard Battle Chests, the C&C "Ten Years" anthology, Infocom anthologies, etc. Those are great, and well priced for what you get. But they're great for the quality as much as the quantity.
...and because people will pay more for the bundle in anticipation. I hear what you're saying, but last time around, I could pre-order the individual games.
I am reluctant to position myself in front of your tirade, but the original poster is quite correct on one key point. Today, now, you can't buy the individual games. You can buy the Orange Box collection, or one of the massive game packs that they offer. The page you referenced lists the individual prices, yes, but today, now, you can't buy them that way. (Try it - it takes you to the bundles page.) Try as I might, I can't buy just Epsidode 2 or Portal.
They are allowing customers of Orange Box to electronically regift the individual games that they might already own. Example: I own HL2, and HL2E1... if I buy the Orange Box, I can "give" these two games to someone else. Which is pretty cool, but not exactly compelling.
to the original poster, I offer this advice... just wait a week. Valve traditionally drops prices (or offers sales) very quickly. I expect that they'll bust up the "Orange Box" into it's component pieces and you'll be able to buy Episode 2 for $30 within a week or two, possibly even on release day. But as GeckoX said, if you're planning to buy two or more games anyway, just buy the damned Orange Box, it's cheaper anyway.
Yes, 10-15 hours, that's what I meant to type. Maybe 6-8 hours on the best weeks. The downloads are slow. And now that I read what I wrote (and what you wrote), I agree, you're right. That doesn't sound terribly convenient. I suppose I was just happy with the tradeoff. I'd open the software on Tuesday morning, request the show, and then watch it that evening when my day was complete, or any time in the coming 7 days that my wife and I could sit down together to enjoy it. I much prefer that to being forced to watch it when NBC wants me to, with 15+ minutes of commericals added in. Where I live, it airs during the hour when we're helping kids with homework and getting them to bed, and we don't have a DVR or a VCR. So NBC's online service was perfect for us.
There was a streaming version in super-lo-def, too. It looked like ass. TFA said something about a P2P model for distributing the shows more quickly. That would be great, I suppose, but it's important to point out that the way it worked last year, you can't watch the show online on the day that it airs, period. It comes available for lo-def streaming or high(er)-def download the next day. I'm sure that's because of their deals with TV advertisers. If you're a "gotta have it now" kinda guy, then this online service (as it existed last year) isn't a good option for you.
Anyway, last comment... and again I'm coming from a mid-30's-and-married-and-kids perspective. It's not perfect, but it's a huge step forward from what the TV networks have offered in the past. NBC seems to be the only major network that's taking online broadcasting seriously. I'd prefer a player without DRM restrictions, and instant viewing options. But until FIOS-level service is available everywhere in my broadband-starved country (USA), I'm pretty happy with what they're doing now. And I'm pleased that they're continuing it for a second year and even expanding it to include new shows ("The Office" wasn't available last year), instead of just abandoning it. Go NBC, you rock!
They offered Heroes and about a dozen other shows in HD downloadable content last season. I watched the 2nd half of the Heroes season this way. The download files are about 500 MB; very large. And they come slowly. Each one needed about 1015hours to find it's way to my computer. The results were great - it's like DVD-quality video. (Not quite 1080p but I don't remember the exact specs.) Very, very pretty video. And only one 15-second commercial between each segment means you're done in about 45 minutes. The only downside is that you had to watch your video during the week that it was broadcast, otherwise it would "expire" and be deleted from the player.
Speaking of the player - Proprietary player. Very clunky. The GUI is all about NBC content, just what you'd expect. Worse than ITMS by far. But, you know, I put up with a lot for that kind of convenience, and I'm pleased to send NBC the "message" that I'm interested in great high-quality video that I can timeshift on my computer, no TV required. I LOVE IT. I just run it in a Virtual PC because I'm a little scared of their software.
I downloaded Far Cry (2.6GB) from Fileplanet when this story first appeared on Slashdot. Didn't have time to install or play, so I let it sit. Finally went to install and play last night (9/7/07).
When I went to install, I was informed that I had to provide ubi.com logon credentials. Fine, that seems fair. So I registered a new account at ubi.com, provided the credentials and it *still* wouldn't allow me to install the game. Said I had to live in the US to enjoy the offer. Um... well I do live in the US. I figured maybe my account needed to steep a bit before I could sign up. *shrug*
Found this letter from Ubi.com in my inbox this morning:
"Thank you for downloading one of the promotional PC titles made available for ad-supported freeplay over the Labor Day weekend. The promotion is now closed and it is no longer possible to play the games for free.
If you are interested in further information on these titles, please visit our official website at www.ubi.com"
Nice! I guess "free, ad-supported" only means "free, ad-supported for three days!"
What a shame. I love the idea of playing older games in an ad-supported format. I really love it when classic games are given back to the fans at the end of their lifecycle. Example: Arena (TES 1) from Bethesda Softworks, Zork Trilogy from Infocom (now Activision), and now C&C from Westwood. I paid $40 or more for each of those games when they were first released (I'm 38 now), now they're long gone from my collection but it is a great feelgood to play them again. There is a huge positive karma effect for these companies to give it up this way.
For the record, there are already some good brief games out there that kids can enjoy. Two games in my closet that come to mind are TransAmerica (for 2-6 players) and Balloon Cup (2 players). Each of these take about 30 minutes to play, even with kids. And both are the types of games that can be played "just for fun" by younger kids (ages ~5-8), or with a little bit of strategy as their minds develop strategic thinking.
Fun for adults too! They're good gateway games to more strategic stuff as the kids get older. Alhambra is another great choice for kids 8+, but it takes more than an hour to play when you play with kids.
I also find that more traditional Hasbro games like Parcheesi and Sorry only take about 30-45 minutes to play, even with 5-year-olds, and are far more entertaining for everyone than mindless Candyland.
Also - IMHO - Kids under 12 should not be playing Monopoly, even if it is a Disney-scented theme. What a bad product idea that is!
Re:Here's the more interesting question -
on
Why Do Games Sell?
·
· Score: 1
...because I paid $200 (or whatever) for it three years ago and 95% of the features are the same, despite improved organization and layout.:-D I mean really, is there ever really a need to buy more than one office suite per decade, if even that often? I think most users could be using Office 97 and be perfectly satisfied.
Except for Clippy. Hmm.
From the article: Is the Idea Behind the Game Easy to Communicate?
Can players explain quickly, easily and in a convincing way why your game is awesome? Can the marketing team? If the high concept of the game is hard to communicate, then you'll have a hard time convincing players that it's worth their time.
[...] Is the Game Based on Something the Market Already Knows and Loves?
Put in other words, will the market "get it" quickly? It's a lot easier to convince people that a game is good if it's related to something they already like. Perfect example: Deer Hunter. Perfect name, perfect subject, perfectly low system requirements. (i.e., runs on any celeron 400mhz or higher, I'd say.)
Crappiest... game... ever! But I still find it installed on relatives' computers all the time.
...which would let people store digital information in durable physical artifacts and other forms to be preserved and revealed to future generations, and maybe even to future civilizations.
Did anyone else read this and think "tape storage"? Okay, maybe DAT tapes won't last until "future civilizations".:-)
Anyway, my point is: while all of that data-timecapsule stuff is a noble intent, I won't be surprised if "immortal computing" morphs into a new backup technology for corporate servers.
...or you may get it. And be seriously disappointed!
I stopped wishing for a sequel to Grim Fandango about halfway through Thief: Deadly Shadows (the 3rd installment of that series). Deadly Shadows was a perfect example of tarnishing a great series... I would remember The first two games more fondly if I didn't have to think about the watered-down 3rd installment, and its compromises for the Xbox platform. A new Grim would most certainly not deliver the great experience that the original did, because a) the original creators are all off doing other things now, b) expectations of graphics quality have changed over 10 years and they'd try to make it look hyper-realistic, c) (insert your own reasons here, I'm no game design expert). You can't recreate magic, it just has to happen.:-)
Instead, of pining for a sequel, I'm instead looking forward to sharing these games with my kids when they're a little older. My daughter loves Thief and is now competent enough to play it herself on the easiest level. Same with the original Half-Life. This is very satisfying for me, to see these games again through her eyes. That may not mean much to you youngsters out there, but some day you may find yourself sharing "Halo" or some other modern classic with your kids. So keep those old installation CDs around!
From the article: The Atari 2600 has come back in several different forms, but the Atari Flashback 2.0 is the only product I've seen that captures the feel of the original late 1970s Atari 2600 console -- including the first Atari Flashback, which is a piece of junk. Among the console's 40 games are the three most important ones: Combat, Pitfall and Yar's Revenge. It's not hard to find a Flashback 2.0 discounted below its $29.82 retail price.
I was initially going to post that I bought one of these last week directly from atari.com for US$19.99, shipping included. Point being that if anyone was interested in this great console, then that was the place to get it.
BUT, now that I'm going to the Atari website to look for a link that I can post, there is no mention of the Flashback console on their website. So... I'm thinking: if you want one, and you see one in the stores, buy it today because it might not be there next month. Whenever I see it in the stores, it's $30.
I'll try to give you this link to the google cache for the page that I ordered from about two weeks ago. Which doesn't help you buy one for twenty bucks, but it does prove that I'm not crazy.:)
Yes, indeed that link does work. Good luck hunting for a deal.
It's been 15 years since I graduated, but after a quick review of the catalog at my alma mater, it all seems to still hold true.
The course(s) that you're suggesting is a great idea, and, in fact, it's offered in many universities as part of a different degree... Information Systems. With a degree in Information Systems, you learn project management, systems design lifecycle, RDBMS concepts, as well as programming. Plus a raft of other useful "real world" stuff like statistical modeling, networking, and a smattering of courses from the other business school depatments, like Finance and Accounting; so you can learn the language of the people you'll be coding for.
CS is for pure programmers. Information Systems is for applying computer-based solutions in the real world. It was frustrating how many of my colleagues seeking the same degree didn't know any computer languages when they entered... I was always a computer and math geek, and knew several languages before entering college. I was far better then my non-programming colleages in the programming courses, but they were typcially better communicators, which is more important when you get out of school.:)
Anyway, in my senior year, we actually did developed a real-world solution for a local hospital, sort of like you suggest. If I recall correctly, it was a real-time inventory tracking system. Using bar codes. Pretty good solution for a team of 4 working part time for 4 months. But we did it all, start to finish: interviewed the client, shared a prototype, developed and implemented the system. Looking back, I'm sure they abandoned it almost immediately; that it was more of an exercise for the students than a boon for the hospital, but it was still great experience for us.
At this point, consider coupling your CS degree with a Masters degree in Information Systems. (It would be an MBA.) Not immediately -- give it a few years in the real world. A BS in Computer Science with an MBA in Information Systems is a very powerful combination. You'll be someone who can do it all -- meet with top management and board members and understand their concerns, and also earn the respect of the programmers because he (or she) can speak their language.
I would love to see the Zune do well in the marketplace. Best thing about the Zune is that Apple freaked out and cut prices by $50 on the new line of ipods. $249 for the new 30 gb model, and $349 for the new 80 gb model.
Maybe the Zune will do well with the social-networking crowd (read: kids), and the ipod will remain the holy grail for purists.
While I'll never buy a Zune, I love the competition. It keeps Apple honest, and could create a push for new features, like, I dunno, an FM tuner, bigger screen, more customizability of the menus, and PLEASE someday: wireless connectivity with my network. I would love for my iPod to be able to update itself, sitting out in my car, whenever I have itunes open on my PC and the iPod turned on. Seems like a nobrainer feature to me, but it would probably be expensive, heavy, I don't know. But very very cool, a killer app for mp3 players.
("never", meaning "probably never". I've explored other players that had more features and lower pricetags... they all had a fatal flaw that showed up within a couple of days. When I moved to ipod, I completely fell in love with the thing and I don't WANT to consider anything else.)
Has anyone heard any speculation or knowledge of whether or not the new content will eventually be available for the 360 and PC? I read TFA and also the press release at the Elder Scrolls website; they don't say. Might be a selling hook for the new content to only be available for the PS3 for a while, but I would think that Bethesda Softworks would want to encourage the extra purchase as an expansion. Eventually.
Because, you know, after 3 years of steadily working at it, I've almost completed the main storylines to the Morrowind/ Tribunal/ Bloodmoon games. I'm one of those "dormant" gamers they keep writing about - I average about 2 hours per week, used to be about 20 per week BWK: Before Wife and Kids. Oblivion sounds like just what I need to keep my busy for the next 5 years or so.
Slashdot Mirror
There a lot of knee-jerk responses here about what the problem is, but not a lot about how to find a good consultant
Having worked for myself providing IT services for small businesses in my area, I found that the best way to connect with new customers is word of mouth. I found the majority of my best customers that way.
You come in contact with local businesses that need IT support all the time. Just ask a manager of every not-franchise that you're in who they use for IT support, and if they like them. Get a name and number.
Consider attending local networking events for small businesses. You'll probably quickly meet a new IT provider face-to-face who is hungry for business. Also, other small business owners in your area who hire their own IT consultants. And hey, if you happen to live in the Boise, Idaho area, hit me up here. :-D
Regarding the fix: Updates can be scheduled easily using group policy. Spool up a WSUS server. Manage your updates with policy. This may or may not be more expensive than your wife's company wants (depending particularly if they have a domain and server in place), but it's less intrusive than asking the customer to change OS, and will definitely give her the results she wants.
Regarding warranties - Warranty for work already completed should be honored, if it's a true warranty. Examine the terms. But that doesn't keep you from changing consultants. At the very least, get a second opinion.
Good luck.
I prefer TeamViewer myself: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=free+remote+control
This is a no-brainer!
1. Check out Neil deGrasse Tyson, who hosts the excellent show Nova ScienceNOW, currently in it's third season. It runs just after NOVA for several weeks in a row.
2. Try Robert Krulwich, who co-hosts the great NPR show & podcast RadioLab, with the equally wonderful Jad Abumrad. They are great for driving and listening.
Both are brilliant at making complicated sciencey topics seem fun and interesting. My 13 year old daughter enjoys both shows immensely with me. RadioLab, especially, is fun and funny, and you can gather up all podcasts on iTunes (there are about 25 full shows presently, plus lots of smaller in-between podcasts).
Both of these guys appear frequently on public radio shows too, like Ira Flatow's Science Friday, which is also good but a little more current eventsy.
Hope you enjoy these!
It's my understanding that the lead in "regular" fuel (regular meaning "with lead", not regular = lowest octane) is added as part of the refining process. And that subsequent removal of the lead, therefore, costs more.
He has a talent, he has an agent. He accepts a contract, he performs his work, he gets paid according to the terms of the contract. Free market, it's a good thing.
And aside from that, let's be honest. Voice acting is not exactly like acting in front of a screen. You're judged purely on your voice. Not your age, appearance, or physical presence. If Michael Hollick wasn't available, his absence would not be difficult to fill. I don't see people flocking to buy ANY video game EVER based on who the voice talent is.
It is fun to sometimes recognize a screen actor's voice in a video game, but their names don't exactly make it to the front of the box. I mean, even Patrick Stewart did a voice in Oblivion, and he barely got a mention on the back of the box. And he's got crazy geek cred. But I don't think he moved any units for Bethesda on his own.
I spent hundreds of hours as a kid playing text adventure games. When Infocom switched the default display from white-on-black to white-on-blue, it made a tremendous difference.
Low-emissions monitors didn't become standard until the 90's. Before that, the wrong color combinations would really make your eyes sore.
Frotz book! Blorple cube! Ozmoo!
Rock on.
Sorry I took so long to reply; I forgot to check my posting. :)
I'd consider it a personal preference. I don't subscribe to any magazines because I don't like having a house cluttered with them. I like to read. I love magazines in waiting rooms. But when I subscribe, I hold on to them until I've read every article that interests me, and then I fall behind in my reading sometimes, and then I next thing I know, I have a pile of unread magazines that fees like an obligation, and I begin to resent them because I'm reading magazines all the time instead of books. So to me, the online version is more valuable. I can read the articles if it's a slow day on Slashdot, but I usually just hit their website when I need to make a major purchase. It happens often enough for me that $26/year is a better deal that starting and stopping a subscription at $6/month. Although I should point out that when I first signed up, it was $24/year or $4/month.
I should also say that I grew up with the print edition. My parents have been subscribers to the magazine since before I can remember, and I'm 38 now. I LOVE reading it. The format of the magazine is great and the articles are great. I wish that I could download a PDF version of the print edition each month. The website seems to have all the same articles, just that they're not in journal format. Online, it's more like a heirarchical structure based on item categories. So if you're into home electronics and reading about those online, it's unlikely that you'll see the cool articles comparing the effectiveness of insect repellents. When you have the print edition, you get a more complete picture.
My recommendation; try both. Buy two issues at the newsstand, and sign up for the month-to-month. It'll cost you $20 spread over 2 months and you'll know what the pros and cons are. Good luck!
I am a subscriber of ConsumerReports.org.
... god the list goes on and on. Every time I make a purchase, it's great to know in advance that I'm not buying a lemon. I bought CR recommendations for every one of those items and I'm happy with every single one. Once you have it, you never want to give it up!
To answer your question, Yes. Convenience. When you Subscribe to the print edition, you have no access to back articles. They typically update their reviews of any given item every 2-3 years, to reflect new trends and features. (Electronics, more often, sometimes as often as every 6 months).
So when you get the paper subscription, you find yourself hording the magazines so you have the historical reviews, in the future. In the meantime, you have no back catalog until you accumulate one.
With the online edition, you have instant access to the most recent review of everything they've ever reviewed. So, for example, if you need to buy a new coffee maker, you might have to wait a couple years to get reviews in print. If you have the online service, you've got your info immediately. No pile of magazines, instant gratification.
I suscribed online initially to get reviews for mattresses - when you're going to spend $1000 on an item that the manfacturers intentionally make difficult to comapre, you want help from disinterested experts. I kept the subscription because instantly I found it useful for every purchase over $50. Short list: coffee maker, burr-style coffee grinder, 5-disc DVD Player, High Def TV, Mattress, digital camera, tires (oh yes! the tire reviews are GREAT), webcam, front-loading washer & dryer, lawnmower, in-home gym, toaster oven, humidifiers,
Even if you aren't ready to buy, they have "buyer guides" that break down features so you know what you're looking at. This is really helpful with electronics, like digital cameras. How many people thought about shutter speed when they bought their first digital camera? Nobody. It's a non-issue when you're used to using film. But The difference beween SLR (0 seconds), fast digital (.5 seconds), and slow cheap digital (2+ seconds) is tremendously important when you have little kids who won't hold still for a pose. CR breaks down the shutter speed of every camera they review. If that's what you care about, you can zero in on what you need.
There are some things for which I don't like their reviews: Cell phones, computers, automobiles. I find the reviews too superficial for complicated items like these. Although the 10-year track record for automobiles is helpful.
I'm out!
This turn of phrase struck me as stupid, too; I searched for your entry before posting my own, so I'll just reply here.
I can't think of a single example in PC gaming where "quantity" over "quality" was a good thing. Example, those $9.99 CDs at Best Buy (etc) that advertise "500 games!" and turn out to contain 500 really crappy shareware games. Like me, those of you old enough to remember when CD-ROM drives were first introduced to PCs probably bought one of these collections at some point in your life, and quickly learned that just because they can jam 700MB of crap onto a single CD doesn't mean that it's worth more than the disc it's burned onto.
Not to be confused with great anthology collections, like the Blizzard Battle Chests, the C&C "Ten Years" anthology, Infocom anthologies, etc. Those are great, and well priced for what you get. But they're great for the quality as much as the quantity.
Have I beat this horse dead yet? Over and out
...and because people will pay more for the bundle in anticipation. I hear what you're saying, but last time around, I could pre-order the individual games.
I am reluctant to position myself in front of your tirade, but the original poster is quite correct on one key point. Today, now, you can't buy the individual games. You can buy the Orange Box collection, or one of the massive game packs that they offer. The page you referenced lists the individual prices, yes, but today, now, you can't buy them that way. (Try it - it takes you to the bundles page.) Try as I might, I can't buy just Epsidode 2 or Portal.
They are allowing customers of Orange Box to electronically regift the individual games that they might already own. Example: I own HL2, and HL2E1... if I buy the Orange Box, I can "give" these two games to someone else. Which is pretty cool, but not exactly compelling.
to the original poster, I offer this advice... just wait a week. Valve traditionally drops prices (or offers sales) very quickly. I expect that they'll bust up the "Orange Box" into it's component pieces and you'll be able to buy Episode 2 for $30 within a week or two, possibly even on release day. But as GeckoX said, if you're planning to buy two or more games anyway, just buy the damned Orange Box, it's cheaper anyway.
Best to both of you.
Yes, 10-15 hours, that's what I meant to type. Maybe 6-8 hours on the best weeks. The downloads are slow. And now that I read what I wrote (and what you wrote), I agree, you're right. That doesn't sound terribly convenient. I suppose I was just happy with the tradeoff. I'd open the software on Tuesday morning, request the show, and then watch it that evening when my day was complete, or any time in the coming 7 days that my wife and I could sit down together to enjoy it. I much prefer that to being forced to watch it when NBC wants me to, with 15+ minutes of commericals added in. Where I live, it airs during the hour when we're helping kids with homework and getting them to bed, and we don't have a DVR or a VCR. So NBC's online service was perfect for us.
There was a streaming version in super-lo-def, too. It looked like ass. TFA said something about a P2P model for distributing the shows more quickly. That would be great, I suppose, but it's important to point out that the way it worked last year, you can't watch the show online on the day that it airs, period. It comes available for lo-def streaming or high(er)-def download the next day. I'm sure that's because of their deals with TV advertisers. If you're a "gotta have it now" kinda guy, then this online service (as it existed last year) isn't a good option for you.
Anyway, last comment... and again I'm coming from a mid-30's-and-married-and-kids perspective. It's not perfect, but it's a huge step forward from what the TV networks have offered in the past. NBC seems to be the only major network that's taking online broadcasting seriously. I'd prefer a player without DRM restrictions, and instant viewing options. But until FIOS-level service is available everywhere in my broadband-starved country (USA), I'm pretty happy with what they're doing now. And I'm pleased that they're continuing it for a second year and even expanding it to include new shows ("The Office" wasn't available last year), instead of just abandoning it. Go NBC, you rock!
Best to you.
They offered Heroes and about a dozen other shows in HD downloadable content last season. I watched the 2nd half of the Heroes season this way. The download files are about 500 MB; very large. And they come slowly. Each one needed about 1015hours to find it's way to my computer. The results were great - it's like DVD-quality video. (Not quite 1080p but I don't remember the exact specs.) Very, very pretty video. And only one 15-second commercial between each segment means you're done in about 45 minutes. The only downside is that you had to watch your video during the week that it was broadcast, otherwise it would "expire" and be deleted from the player.
Speaking of the player - Proprietary player. Very clunky. The GUI is all about NBC content, just what you'd expect. Worse than ITMS by far. But, you know, I put up with a lot for that kind of convenience, and I'm pleased to send NBC the "message" that I'm interested in great high-quality video that I can timeshift on my computer, no TV required. I LOVE IT. I just run it in a Virtual PC because I'm a little scared of their software.
Cheers.
I downloaded Far Cry (2.6GB) from Fileplanet when this story first appeared on Slashdot. Didn't have time to install or play, so I let it sit. Finally went to install and play last night (9/7/07).
When I went to install, I was informed that I had to provide ubi.com logon credentials. Fine, that seems fair. So I registered a new account at ubi.com, provided the credentials and it *still* wouldn't allow me to install the game. Said I had to live in the US to enjoy the offer. Um... well I do live in the US. I figured maybe my account needed to steep a bit before I could sign up. *shrug*
Found this letter from Ubi.com in my inbox this morning:
Nice! I guess "free, ad-supported" only means "free, ad-supported for three days!"
What a shame. I love the idea of playing older games in an ad-supported format. I really love it when classic games are given back to the fans at the end of their lifecycle. Example: Arena (TES 1) from Bethesda Softworks, Zork Trilogy from Infocom (now Activision), and now C&C from Westwood. I paid $40 or more for each of those games when they were first released (I'm 38 now), now they're long gone from my collection but it is a great feelgood to play them again. There is a huge positive karma effect for these companies to give it up this way.
Oh well, at least C&C is still working. :-)
For the record, there are already some good brief games out there that kids can enjoy. Two games in my closet that come to mind are TransAmerica (for 2-6 players) and Balloon Cup (2 players). Each of these take about 30 minutes to play, even with kids. And both are the types of games that can be played "just for fun" by younger kids (ages ~5-8), or with a little bit of strategy as their minds develop strategic thinking.
Fun for adults too! They're good gateway games to more strategic stuff as the kids get older. Alhambra is another great choice for kids 8+, but it takes more than an hour to play when you play with kids.
I also find that more traditional Hasbro games like Parcheesi and Sorry only take about 30-45 minutes to play, even with 5-year-olds, and are far more entertaining for everyone than mindless Candyland.
Also - IMHO - Kids under 12 should not be playing Monopoly, even if it is a Disney-scented theme. What a bad product idea that is!
...because I paid $200 (or whatever) for it three years ago and 95% of the features are the same, despite improved organization and layout. :-D I mean really, is there ever really a need to buy more than one office suite per decade, if even that often? I think most users could be using Office 97 and be perfectly satisfied.
Except for Clippy. Hmm.
Is the Idea Behind the Game Easy to Communicate?
Can players explain quickly, easily and in a convincing way why your game is awesome? Can the marketing team? If the high concept of the game is hard to communicate, then you'll have a hard time convincing players that it's worth their time.
[...]
Is the Game Based on Something the Market Already Knows and Loves?
Put in other words, will the market "get it" quickly? It's a lot easier to convince people that a game is good if it's related to something they already like. Perfect example: Deer Hunter. Perfect name, perfect subject, perfectly low system requirements. (i.e., runs on any celeron 400mhz or higher, I'd say.)
Crappiest... game... ever! But I still find it installed on relatives' computers all the time.
True. But I think the operative words are "that you will speak with."
Presumably his boss is aware of the situation, backs him up, and doesn't want to speak to the irate customer. Been there!
Anyway, my point is: while all of that data-timecapsule stuff is a noble intent, I won't be surprised if "immortal computing" morphs into a new backup technology for corporate servers.
...or you may get it. And be seriously disappointed!
:-)
I stopped wishing for a sequel to Grim Fandango about halfway through Thief: Deadly Shadows (the 3rd installment of that series). Deadly Shadows was a perfect example of tarnishing a great series... I would remember The first two games more fondly if I didn't have to think about the watered-down 3rd installment, and its compromises for the Xbox platform. A new Grim would most certainly not deliver the great experience that the original did, because a) the original creators are all off doing other things now, b) expectations of graphics quality have changed over 10 years and they'd try to make it look hyper-realistic, c) (insert your own reasons here, I'm no game design expert). You can't recreate magic, it just has to happen.
Instead, of pining for a sequel, I'm instead looking forward to sharing these games with my kids when they're a little older. My daughter loves Thief and is now competent enough to play it herself on the easiest level. Same with the original Half-Life. This is very satisfying for me, to see these games again through her eyes. That may not mean much to you youngsters out there, but some day you may find yourself sharing "Halo" or some other modern classic with your kids. So keep those old installation CDs around!
Cheers.
From the article:
:)
The Atari 2600 has come back in several different forms, but the Atari Flashback 2.0 is the only product I've seen that captures the feel of the original late 1970s Atari 2600 console -- including the first Atari Flashback, which is a piece of junk. Among the console's 40 games are the three most important ones: Combat, Pitfall and Yar's Revenge. It's not hard to find a Flashback 2.0 discounted below its $29.82 retail price.
I was initially going to post that I bought one of these last week directly from atari.com for US$19.99, shipping included. Point being that if anyone was interested in this great console, then that was the place to get it.
BUT, now that I'm going to the Atari website to look for a link that I can post, there is no mention of the Flashback console on their website. So... I'm thinking: if you want one, and you see one in the stores, buy it today because it might not be there next month. Whenever I see it in the stores, it's $30.
I'll try to give you this link to the google cache for the page that I ordered from about two weeks ago. Which doesn't help you buy one for twenty bucks, but it does prove that I'm not crazy.
Yes, indeed that link does work. Good luck hunting for a deal.
Cheers.
It's been 15 years since I graduated, but after a quick review of the catalog at my alma mater, it all seems to still hold true.
:)
The course(s) that you're suggesting is a great idea, and, in fact, it's offered in many universities as part of a different degree... Information Systems. With a degree in Information Systems, you learn project management, systems design lifecycle, RDBMS concepts, as well as programming. Plus a raft of other useful "real world" stuff like statistical modeling, networking, and a smattering of courses from the other business school depatments, like Finance and Accounting; so you can learn the language of the people you'll be coding for.
CS is for pure programmers. Information Systems is for applying computer-based solutions in the real world. It was frustrating how many of my colleagues seeking the same degree didn't know any computer languages when they entered... I was always a computer and math geek, and knew several languages before entering college. I was far better then my non-programming colleages in the programming courses, but they were typcially better communicators, which is more important when you get out of school.
Anyway, in my senior year, we actually did developed a real-world solution for a local hospital, sort of like you suggest. If I recall correctly, it was a real-time inventory tracking system. Using bar codes. Pretty good solution for a team of 4 working part time for 4 months. But we did it all, start to finish: interviewed the client, shared a prototype, developed and implemented the system. Looking back, I'm sure they abandoned it almost immediately; that it was more of an exercise for the students than a boon for the hospital, but it was still great experience for us.
At this point, consider coupling your CS degree with a Masters degree in Information Systems. (It would be an MBA.) Not immediately -- give it a few years in the real world. A BS in Computer Science with an MBA in Information Systems is a very powerful combination. You'll be someone who can do it all -- meet with top management and board members and understand their concerns, and also earn the respect of the programmers because he (or she) can speak their language.
Cheers! Good luck to you.
I would love to see the Zune do well in the marketplace. Best thing about the Zune is that Apple freaked out and cut prices by $50 on the new line of ipods. $249 for the new 30 gb model, and $349 for the new 80 gb model.
Maybe the Zune will do well with the social-networking crowd (read: kids), and the ipod will remain the holy grail for purists.
While I'll never buy a Zune, I love the competition. It keeps Apple honest, and could create a push for new features, like, I dunno, an FM tuner, bigger screen, more customizability of the menus, and PLEASE someday: wireless connectivity with my network. I would love for my iPod to be able to update itself, sitting out in my car, whenever I have itunes open on my PC and the iPod turned on. Seems like a nobrainer feature to me, but it would probably be expensive, heavy, I don't know. But very very cool, a killer app for mp3 players.
("never", meaning "probably never". I've explored other players that had more features and lower pricetags... they all had a fatal flaw that showed up within a couple of days. When I moved to ipod, I completely fell in love with the thing and I don't WANT to consider anything else.)
Cheers.
Has anyone heard any speculation or knowledge of whether or not the new content will eventually be available for the 360 and PC? I read TFA and also the press release at the Elder Scrolls website; they don't say. Might be a selling hook for the new content to only be available for the PS3 for a while, but I would think that Bethesda Softworks would want to encourage the extra purchase as an expansion. Eventually.
Because, you know, after 3 years of steadily working at it, I've almost completed the main storylines to the Morrowind/ Tribunal/ Bloodmoon games. I'm one of those "dormant" gamers they keep writing about - I average about 2 hours per week, used to be about 20 per week BWK: Before Wife and Kids. Oblivion sounds like just what I need to keep my busy for the next 5 years or so.
Cheers.