Well, the bluetooth probably stays on otherwise you wouldn't be able to start the console from the controller.
As for USB ports, I discovered recently that the 360 doesn't turn off it's USB ports when you turn it off. It's pretty handy. This way, I can recharge my MP3 player without having to leave my computer on. (my computer USB ports turn off when the computer turns off)
Actually, I have stopped anticipating the Wii launch for a couple of weeks now. I am well aware that I can't really wave my arm for hours to play, and just doing flicks of a wrist doesn't seem fun to me. So I've stopped caring about the Wii. So what's the point with that controller? I think Nintendo is in for a very nasty surprise.
I don't agree with you. I don't see the point of playing a Wii game by being passive on a couch and doing simple flicks of the wrist. That to me looks incredibly boring. I think the fun in playing the Wii is making the actual motion with your arm. Also, please tell me how you'd similuate a golf swing or a baseball swing with just your wrist. Seems clunky to me. I might as well just push a button.
I totally agree with you. I was about to hit reply when I read your post. I've bought a few songs here and there on iTunes before. It made sense, I mean, I didn't want to spend 15$ + taxes on a CD for 2-3 songs, so I bought a couple of songs instead. I knew that the rest of the album wasn't my taste as I had listened to it at a store before. Thing is, I loved Marilyn Manson but hadn't bought his latest CD, and now stores sell it for 20CAN$ or so and I certainly wasn't about to pay that for a CD. So I headed to iTunes and saw the album was 10$. I was really at a dilema because, as you say, we are so used to holding the thing in our hands. I like having the CD because that means that if my MP3 collection ever gets wiped, I can always rip it again. But then, iTunes let's you download the song as often as you want once you've downloaded it, so it's almost like having the CD. I don't have the manual but then, I buy a CD for the music, not for the booklet that comes with it. So, after much debating, I bought the album. The download took a minute or two and bamm!!! I was listening to a brand new album. Cool. First thing I did was burn the songs in audio format to a rewritable disc and then rip it back to MP3s at VBRs (minimum 192kbps) (probably overkill, I suspect iTunes to use 192 or 256 kbps for their music anyway, anyone knows for sure?).
I think one of the problem virtual goods have is that computers in general have a reputation of being flaky and burned CDs always end up not working after a couple of years, so people don't really want to invest in virtual goods and then burn them to CD and cross their fingers the CD doesn't get scratched or something. They don't wantto have to backup anything either. In case of iTunes, it's nice because they can always get back the file from the iTunes store for free without any problem. That's why I haven't looked too much at stores like Napster or Yahoo Music tough. It seems to be Windows Media based and last time I checked your own computer has to keep track of the licenses. I don't want to have to manage my licenses on my computer and back them up everytime I format my computer. I'd rather have an account like the iTunes Store that knows what I've bought and let me redownload the stuff I lost.
I've seen this at NAB this year in Vegas. It's awesome. The sound system has 9 speakers on the upper layer surrounding the crowd, 10 middle speakers around and 3 lower speakers right in front, with two LFEs. It actually uses two projectors IIRC, one for chrominance and one for luminance. They showed a bunch of footage filmed for the occasion. Since it came from Japan, it involved a lot of soccer games, Japan landscapes and.... Ultra High Def sumo fat wiggling. At the end, they showed real-time footage from a tower on top of the convention center. It was pretty cool, tough you could see some noticeable compression artifacts in some places.
Well, there are receivers which support HDMI input so that's useful. But I agree, HDMI on a TV is useless. Actually, it could be useful, but I'd rather pipe my audio to a 7.1 receiver than my TVs speakers.
# DVI HDCP and DVI MAGIC Compatibility-enhancement devices for non-HDCP monitors [5] I am not advocating the use of HDCP or anything, but what this is is simply a clever hack. I mean, obviously if you break the chain of trust the data won't be protected anymore. It's like the network of HDCP devices that exchange keys hack and forth that can be used with 40 or so HDCP devices to uncover the private key thus rendering the encryption useless. As far as regular DVI and HDCP protection is implemented, DVI is just enough and HDMI offers no other advantage. What could prevent someone from doing the same hack with HDMI that has been done with DVI? Nothing.
What I meant is that HDMI's only advantage is the audio on the same wire. As far is video goes, HDMI has nothing over DVI. Anyway, the protocol has nothing to do with the wire it flows in. While every device that does HDMI also does HDCP, not every DVI based solutions does HDCP. But if you do own one, there's no reason for spending money on a newer TV with HDMI. You might as well use DVI/HDCP for now and use optical out for sound.
As far as being cracked for years, that's not the cable's fault, only the algorithm used in the device. DVI and HDMI are just wires.
Also, I fail to see where DVI devices unscramble/decrypt the signal before sending it to the display device.
Actually, you might be wrong. I mean, the 600$ package probably has more than 100$ of added value to it. Think about it : digital video output connection (HDMI), builtin flash card reader, builtin wifi, bigger HD and extra PS1/2 memory card slots IIRC. See for yourself.
I'd rather have someone hack something that is handy than cumbersome. It's like. Look, I made a portable version of my Xbox by soldering a plasma screen to it! Well, it still weights 10 pounds and risk or developping carpal tunnel syndrome just from holding it. Plus, you'll look like an ass in the subway using that.
Sure, ok, he did it because he could. Congrats. But really. Why not use a micro drive instead or a very high capacity flash card? It would at least be portable.
Actually, companies like ID Software and Valve explicitely give away librairies and plugins to develop mods for their games. I must have missed the part when Bungie said to the world "Yeah, use our artwork in other things, we are cool with this."
I cannot agree less with your post. These people have spent time and most of all money to create a story and develop a product around it. It is entirely reasonable for them to want to protect said investment. Especially since, in the Chrono Trigger case, they weren't actually making a side story set in the same universe, but blatantly ripping off the entire game and giving it a 3d look. I think its sad that Square did this, but I totally understand why they did it.
I don't know about you, but ever since I've been a professional developer, I have stopped pirating movies, games and any other kind of media because I expect to recieve compensation for my efforts and I couldn't morally expect people to pay for what comes from my hard work and not respect other people's hard work.
I am not sold on the idea of software patents. But if you create a universe and a story within it, you are right to expect compensation for use of it which is related to your business. Or that people should at the minimum ask you permission if they want to derive something free from it that intersects with your own business.
Can anyone give me a moral and/or legal downside to leaving the mod team alone? Or maybe signing some rights over to them, if you need to make it legal?
Maybe because Bungie is working on an unannounced project that IS an Halo RTS? That would be a pretty good incentive for Microsoft to send this mod an legal warning.
discover that the intersection between owners of the Wii and consumers of porn is too small I thought that the majority of porn consumers had a we^Hii.
Actually, you paid for the right to watch the movie with the restrictions put upon the media by the manufacturer. If you can't agree to those terms, don't buy it. Meanwhile, I'll watch HD-DVDs on my HD TV set with HDCP and I couldn't care less about all this noise generated by Slashdot users.
Graphics accelerator, physics accelerator. Now we have AI accelerators. I don't to have to buy multiple accelerator cards next time I buy a computer to play the latest game. What we need is some sort of generic chip that does all of this. Oh wait...
Actually, I just thought about looking at Wikipedia, and I've found the information my other reply to my post was lacking. Seriously, Wikipedia is way better at finding information than Google now. Anyway... straight from Sony's website Playstation 1 shipping figures Playstation 2 shipping figures
Now, before anybody get's excited, I know that consoles shipped != consoles sold, but they are a pretty good indicator of sales anyway. And if you go to a store right now, you'll see both PS2s and 360s sitting on store shelves.
Sony started shipping PS2 on March 6, 2000. 10 months into the PS2 life span, they had shipped 6.4 million units. Microsft has shipped just north of 5 million consoles 10 months into their console life.
At the same time, Sony kept on shipping Playstation 1s. The number of console shipped from march 31 2000 to december 31rst 2000 went from 71.2 to 79.61. This means they actually shipped (thus more or less sold, face it, no stores like to keep too much unsold consoles in stock), 8.41 million consoles, while the shipped only 6.4 million PS2s.
After a year, Sony has shipped 10 million PS2 (interresting, since this is the figure Microsoft is shooting at for their first year with the 360). And shipped 9.31 million more PS1. So it nearly took a year for the PS2 to outsell the PS1.
Now, fast forward a couple of years to the 360's launch. On June 30th, Sony had shipped roughly 6.22 million consoles since the 360 came out. 21 days later, Microsoft accounced they had shipped 5 millions.
So where does that leave us. Yes, the 360 is selling less. Keep in mind that it's (360's retail at 400CAN$ and 500CAN$) between 3.1 and 3.8 times more costly than a PS2(129CAN$) and 4 to 5 times the price of a GameCube(100CAN$). On the other end, PS2(299US$) was 3 times PS1's price when it launched(99US$).
So all of this considered, I think Microsoft is doing a pretty good job.
So did the PS1 when the PS2 came out. At least, that's what I've been told. I don't remember the sales figures back then, and I can't find any figures to back up this. Anyone knows if this was actually true?
Slashdot Mirror
Well, the bluetooth probably stays on otherwise you wouldn't be able to start the console from the controller.
As for USB ports, I discovered recently that the 360 doesn't turn off it's USB ports when you turn it off. It's pretty handy. This way, I can recharge my MP3 player without having to leave my computer on. (my computer USB ports turn off when the computer turns off)
Or that Miss Scarlett uses the lead pipe to kill Mr. Boddy in the library.
Actually, I have stopped anticipating the Wii launch for a couple of weeks now. I am well aware that I can't really wave my arm for hours to play, and just doing flicks of a wrist doesn't seem fun to me. So I've stopped caring about the Wii. So what's the point with that controller? I think Nintendo is in for a very nasty surprise.
I don't agree with you. I don't see the point of playing a Wii game by being passive on a couch and doing simple flicks of the wrist. That to me looks incredibly boring. I think the fun in playing the Wii is making the actual motion with your arm. Also, please tell me how you'd similuate a golf swing or a baseball swing with just your wrist. Seems clunky to me. I might as well just push a button.
I totally agree with you. I was about to hit reply when I read your post. I've bought a few songs here and there on iTunes before. It made sense, I mean, I didn't want to spend 15$ + taxes on a CD for 2-3 songs, so I bought a couple of songs instead. I knew that the rest of the album wasn't my taste as I had listened to it at a store before. Thing is, I loved Marilyn Manson but hadn't bought his latest CD, and now stores sell it for 20CAN$ or so and I certainly wasn't about to pay that for a CD. So I headed to iTunes and saw the album was 10$. I was really at a dilema because, as you say, we are so used to holding the thing in our hands. I like having the CD because that means that if my MP3 collection ever gets wiped, I can always rip it again. But then, iTunes let's you download the song as often as you want once you've downloaded it, so it's almost like having the CD. I don't have the manual but then, I buy a CD for the music, not for the booklet that comes with it. So, after much debating, I bought the album. The download took a minute or two and bamm!!! I was listening to a brand new album. Cool. First thing I did was burn the songs in audio format to a rewritable disc and then rip it back to MP3s at VBRs (minimum 192kbps) (probably overkill, I suspect iTunes to use 192 or 256 kbps for their music anyway, anyone knows for sure?).
I think one of the problem virtual goods have is that computers in general have a reputation of being flaky and burned CDs always end up not working after a couple of years, so people don't really want to invest in virtual goods and then burn them to CD and cross their fingers the CD doesn't get scratched or something. They don't wantto have to backup anything either. In case of iTunes, it's nice because they can always get back the file from the iTunes store for free without any problem. That's why I haven't looked too much at stores like Napster or Yahoo Music tough. It seems to be Windows Media based and last time I checked your own computer has to keep track of the licenses. I don't want to have to manage my licenses on my computer and back them up everytime I format my computer. I'd rather have an account like the iTunes Store that knows what I've bought and let me redownload the stuff I lost.
Actually, they couldn't make it past the second base.
I've seen this at NAB this year in Vegas. It's awesome. The sound system has 9 speakers on the upper layer surrounding the crowd, 10 middle speakers around and 3 lower speakers right in front, with two LFEs. It actually uses two projectors IIRC, one for chrominance and one for luminance. They showed a bunch of footage filmed for the occasion. Since it came from Japan, it involved a lot of soccer games, Japan landscapes and.... Ultra High Def sumo fat wiggling. At the end, they showed real-time footage from a tower on top of the convention center. It was pretty cool, tough you could see some noticeable compression artifacts in some places.
Well, there are receivers which support HDMI input so that's useful. But I agree, HDMI on a TV is useless. Actually, it could be useful, but I'd rather pipe my audio to a 7.1 receiver than my TVs speakers.
# DVI HDCP and DVI MAGIC Compatibility-enhancement devices for non-HDCP monitors [5]
I am not advocating the use of HDCP or anything, but what this is is simply a clever hack. I mean, obviously if you break the chain of trust the data won't be protected anymore. It's like the network of HDCP devices that exchange keys hack and forth that can be used with 40 or so HDCP devices to uncover the private key thus rendering the encryption useless. As far as regular DVI and HDCP protection is implemented, DVI is just enough and HDMI offers no other advantage. What could prevent someone from doing the same hack with HDMI that has been done with DVI? Nothing.
What I meant is that HDMI's only advantage is the audio on the same wire. As far is video goes, HDMI has nothing over DVI. Anyway, the protocol has nothing to do with the wire it flows in. While every device that does HDMI also does HDCP, not every DVI based solutions does HDCP. But if you do own one, there's no reason for spending money on a newer TV with HDMI. You might as well use DVI/HDCP for now and use optical out for sound.
As far as being cracked for years, that's not the cable's fault, only the algorithm used in the device. DVI and HDMI are just wires.
Also, I fail to see where DVI devices unscramble/decrypt the signal before sending it to the display device.
They are all consenting adults doing this of their own free will. Nobody is being tricked or forced into doing anything.
So why the hate?
Maybe he got burned by the same way of thinking in another kind of activity.
Because HDMI also does audio and I think it has even higher bitrates. DVI does HDCP just fine.
Actually, you might be wrong. I mean, the 600$ package probably has more than 100$ of added value to it. Think about it : digital video output connection (HDMI), builtin flash card reader, builtin wifi, bigger HD and extra PS1/2 memory card slots IIRC. See for yourself.
I'd rather have someone hack something that is handy than cumbersome. It's like. Look, I made a portable version of my Xbox by soldering a plasma screen to it! Well, it still weights 10 pounds and risk or developping carpal tunnel syndrome just from holding it. Plus, you'll look like an ass in the subway using that.
MS isn't exactly a direct competitor to EA, so who cares if they get a few more sales.
Ages of Empires says it does.
Sure, ok, he did it because he could. Congrats. But really. Why not use a micro drive instead or a very high capacity flash card? It would at least be portable.
Actually, companies like ID Software and Valve explicitely give away librairies and plugins to develop mods for their games. I must have missed the part when Bungie said to the world "Yeah, use our artwork in other things, we are cool with this."
I cannot agree less with your post. These people have spent time and most of all money to create a story and develop a product around it. It is entirely reasonable for them to want to protect said investment. Especially since, in the Chrono Trigger case, they weren't actually making a side story set in the same universe, but blatantly ripping off the entire game and giving it a 3d look. I think its sad that Square did this, but I totally understand why they did it.
I don't know about you, but ever since I've been a professional developer, I have stopped pirating movies, games and any other kind of media because I expect to recieve compensation for my efforts and I couldn't morally expect people to pay for what comes from my hard work and not respect other people's hard work.
I am not sold on the idea of software patents. But if you create a universe and a story within it, you are right to expect compensation for use of it which is related to your business. Or that people should at the minimum ask you permission if they want to derive something free from it that intersects with your own business.
Can anyone give me a moral and/or legal downside to leaving the mod team alone? Or maybe signing some rights over to them, if you need to make it legal?
Maybe because Bungie is working on an unannounced project that IS an Halo RTS? That would be a pretty good incentive for Microsoft to send this mod an legal warning.
discover that the intersection between owners of the Wii and consumers of porn is too small
I thought that the majority of porn consumers had a we^Hii.
People already go in sex shops to buy porn, why should this Wanker-mote be different?
Actually, you paid for the right to watch the movie with the restrictions put upon the media by the manufacturer. If you can't agree to those terms, don't buy it. Meanwhile, I'll watch HD-DVDs on my HD TV set with HDCP and I couldn't care less about all this noise generated by Slashdot users.
Graphics accelerator, physics accelerator. Now we have AI accelerators. I don't to have to buy multiple accelerator cards next time I buy a computer to play the latest game. What we need is some sort of generic chip that does all of this. Oh wait...
Actually, I just thought about looking at Wikipedia, and I've found the information my other reply to my post was lacking. Seriously, Wikipedia is way better at finding information than Google now. Anyway... straight from Sony's website
Playstation 1 shipping figures
Playstation 2 shipping figures
Now, before anybody get's excited, I know that consoles shipped != consoles sold, but they are a pretty good indicator of sales anyway. And if you go to a store right now, you'll see both PS2s and 360s sitting on store shelves.
Sony started shipping PS2 on March 6, 2000. 10 months into the PS2 life span, they had shipped 6.4 million units. Microsft has shipped just north of 5 million consoles 10 months into their console life.
At the same time, Sony kept on shipping Playstation 1s. The number of console shipped from march 31 2000 to december 31rst 2000 went from 71.2 to 79.61. This means they actually shipped (thus more or less sold, face it, no stores like to keep too much unsold consoles in stock), 8.41 million consoles, while the shipped only 6.4 million PS2s.
After a year, Sony has shipped 10 million PS2 (interresting, since this is the figure Microsoft is shooting at for their first year with the 360). And shipped 9.31 million more PS1. So it nearly took a year for the PS2 to outsell the PS1.
Now, fast forward a couple of years to the 360's launch. On June 30th, Sony had shipped roughly 6.22 million consoles since the 360 came out. 21 days later, Microsoft accounced they had shipped 5 millions.
So where does that leave us. Yes, the 360 is selling less. Keep in mind that it's (360's retail at 400CAN$ and 500CAN$) between 3.1 and 3.8 times more costly than a PS2(129CAN$) and 4 to 5 times the price of a GameCube(100CAN$). On the other end, PS2(299US$) was 3 times PS1's price when it launched(99US$).
So all of this considered, I think Microsoft is doing a pretty good job.
So did the PS1 when the PS2 came out. At least, that's what I've been told. I don't remember the sales figures back then, and I can't find any figures to back up this. Anyone knows if this was actually true?