What I'm getting at is: "If they think this is a good idea... what else do they think is a good idea?"
I love DRM-free content, but there is still that little lingering doubt in my mind... Do I really want to give these people my CC info?
Dunno, I've always used Paypal. So unless they started putting malware in the games there's not much to worry about.
Otherwise it seems no different to asking 'do I want to buy a bag of chips from the corner store, when it could go out of business'? If I hand over the money and get my chips, then I don't care whether it closes the door for good just after I leave.
If you're right GOG is gone. Adding DRM negates the advantage of buying from them.
Indeed: adding DRM would just make them another Steam competitor... in which case, why not just buy from Steam? OK, they could have better prices, but I usually only buy Steam games when they're on sale anyway.
Nope. I've bought more games from Gog.com in the last couple of years than anywhere else too; often buying games I already owned in DRM-crippled form, because having a legitimate DRM-free version was worth $5 to me.
I suspect a lot of people will be somewhat reluctant to do business with them if they think this is good marketing.... meh
Except all my game installers are on my hard drives, so even if they are permanently gone I still have all my games; unlike something like Steam, where I lose most of my games if they go away (some don't do any DRM checks, but the rest would be toast).
If they come back and are still DRM-free, I'll still be buying from them.
Why? Seriously, exactly what is it about this that would piss off a rational human being? Are you _seriously_ claiming that _not_ having the ability to upgrade your processor for a fee is a good thing?
Are you claiming that buying a car with a wheel-clamp on one wheel and being allowed to pay to upgrade to four working wheels would be a good thing?
Being sold something that's deliberately crippled even though all the hardware is there really, seriously pisses off an awful lot of people.
Along with other technology that AMD has developed makes you wonder why Intel is so dominant in the space.
Intel are bigger and better able to tune products to different markets. Leaving out virtualisation on Atoms means anyone crazy enough to consider doing so on an Atom will have to buy a more expensive CPU instead, and AMD don't have much to compete in the Atom's market.
AMD end up having to sell working quad-cores as dual-cores at significantly lower prices because they can't afford to build two different chips. In this case Intel seem to be selling intentionally crippled i3s for almost the same price as a fully functional i3, and then charging $50 on top to enable the i3 functionality that's been there all along... you'd be better to buy the real i3 in the first place.
Isn't this how Windows works now? There's a window somewhere which says that for $80 I can enable the 'Pro' features of Windows 7 that are already installed on my PC.
Okay, I get that when system calls are made to 32 bit whatever, bad things could happen. But why would there be anything 32 bit there at all? Shouldn't everything that is running on a server be compiled for 64 bit?
Flash. Ubuntu handles 32-bit Flash integration automatically with 64-bit Firefox, but on some other distros it's easier just to install 32-bit Firefox instead.
Unless you need the big address space and MOST apps don't - 32 bit code runs faster.
Since when?
64-bit code gives you twice as many registers at the cost of doubling the size of pointers, and on older Intel CPUs losing some of the microop fusion optimisations. Every time I've seen people post comparative benchmarks of their 32-bit code recompiled to 64-bit, they've shown significant speedups.
Peer review only works if the reviewers can be trusted and don't form a clique to get their work in and keep other people out. Surely anyone with even basic knowledge of human psychology would understand this?
Not true in the slightest. EVE, City of Heroes, Final Fantasy 11, Everquest 1 & 2...those are just the ones I can think of offhand. They all launched before WOW did and are doing just fine, nowhere near shutting down or going free.
Aside from the fact that Everquest 1 has been struggling with a declining player base for years, I take it you missed Everquest 2 going free to play?
Probably on the whole commercial products are better if only because people have money invested in them and they are less likely to get bored with them half way through.
I suspect most people developing commercial products get bored with them by the time they're half-way through, but they have to be shipped in order to keep beer and pizza on the table.
Yeah, no sense in releasing games for Windows either since you'll need to have binary compatible with Windows 7 and Windows 3x.... Just thought I'd point out the absurdity of your argument.
There is no absurdity in my argument: Windows is crippled by binary backwards compatibility, Linux isn't because most Linux software is open source and can just be recompiled... the odds of any binary from, say, 1996 Slackware running correctly on 2012 Ubuntu is low (does Ubuntu even support a.out format anymore?), particularly a game which requires a lot of external libraries.
Why do people insist on measuring boot time as the time it takes to log in?
Because that's what Microsoft tell them to do because they know that taking five minutes to a usable desktop is appalling?
That said, the average Windows' boxes five minute startup time is largely due to all the crap the OEMs load them up with so I guess Microsoft are only partly to blame.
I think the point is that you're trying to do things the Windows way and complaining that it doesn't work. Windows users are used to downloading random sofware from the Internet and installing it, thereby handing control of their PC over to the Russian mafia, whereas in any modern Linux distro there's an application for pretty much anything you want which is installable with a few mouse clicks or a line in the terminal.
Similarly, people come into Linux forums saying 'I just installed Linux and I must run SuperFrobitz which is only available for Windows and it won't work, what do I do?' and people say 'Well, you don't need SuperFrobitz, because there's Foobitz, which is Linux-native, open source and does everything it does', and then the OP says 'No, I must have SuperFrobitz, nothing else will do', and people say 'no, no, Foobitz is better' and the OP says 'I MUST HAVE SUPERFROBITZ!' and people say 'well you're screwed then', and the OP says 'LINUX SUCKS! LINUX USERS ARE ARROGANT SNOBS! I REINSTALLED WINDOWS!'
Unfortunately Valve say there are no plans for a Linux version of Steam.
But Steam runs in Wine and so do a surprising number of Steam games; I was playing Left 4 Dead and Fallout 3 at the weekend in Ubuntu, for example.
And given the vast variation in Linux distros, you're probably better off releasing Windows games that are Wine-compatible than a Linux binary that won't run on Ubuntu 12.04 or Redhat 6.3.
The reality turned out to be what this story will be - smoke and mirrors.
The i740 was OK once you stuck enough video memory on the card: what crippled it was Intel's crazy desire to pull textures over the AGP bus when other cards had large amounts of 128-bit VRAM. I presume the intention was to increase AGP takeup, but the reality was that it made AGP look bad when compared even to older 3dfx cards on PCI.
You do realize that a) Intel makes mobile chips as well that take power saving into consideration and b) TFA doesn't say it, but this feature will almost certainly be configurable by the bios and/or OS.
Indeed: in normal use while web-browsing and the like -- at least according to the Linux battery monitor -- my i5 laptop takes only slightly more power than my Atom netbook. But if I plug it into the wall I can play any modern game decently (with it's Nvidia GPU, not whatever's integrated with the CPU).
Slashdot Mirror
What I'm getting at is: "If they think this is a good idea... what else do they think is a good idea?"
I love DRM-free content, but there is still that little lingering doubt in my mind... Do I really want to give these people my CC info?
Dunno, I've always used Paypal. So unless they started putting malware in the games there's not much to worry about.
Otherwise it seems no different to asking 'do I want to buy a bag of chips from the corner store, when it could go out of business'? If I hand over the money and get my chips, then I don't care whether it closes the door for good just after I leave.
If you're right GOG is gone. Adding DRM negates the advantage of buying from them.
Indeed: adding DRM would just make them another Steam competitor... in which case, why not just buy from Steam? OK, they could have better prices, but I usually only buy Steam games when they're on sale anyway.
Too bad you were the only one.
Nope. I've bought more games from Gog.com in the last couple of years than anywhere else too; often buying games I already owned in DRM-crippled form, because having a legitimate DRM-free version was worth $5 to me.
I suspect a lot of people will be somewhat reluctant to do business with them if they think this is good marketing.... meh
Except all my game installers are on my hard drives, so even if they are permanently gone I still have all my games; unlike something like Steam, where I lose most of my games if they go away (some don't do any DRM checks, but the rest would be toast).
If they come back and are still DRM-free, I'll still be buying from them.
Why? Seriously, exactly what is it about this that would piss off a rational human being? Are you _seriously_ claiming that _not_ having the ability to upgrade your processor for a fee is a good thing?
Are you claiming that buying a car with a wheel-clamp on one wheel and being allowed to pay to upgrade to four working wheels would be a good thing?
Being sold something that's deliberately crippled even though all the hardware is there really, seriously pisses off an awful lot of people.
Along with other technology that AMD has developed makes you wonder why Intel is so dominant in the space.
Intel are bigger and better able to tune products to different markets. Leaving out virtualisation on Atoms means anyone crazy enough to consider doing so on an Atom will have to buy a more expensive CPU instead, and AMD don't have much to compete in the Atom's market.
AMD end up having to sell working quad-cores as dual-cores at significantly lower prices because they can't afford to build two different chips. In this case Intel seem to be selling intentionally crippled i3s for almost the same price as a fully functional i3, and then charging $50 on top to enable the i3 functionality that's been there all along... you'd be better to buy the real i3 in the first place.
Isn't this how Windows works now? There's a window somewhere which says that for $80 I can enable the 'Pro' features of Windows 7 that are already installed on my PC.
If you're using your Linux server to browse Flash apps on the web, you might be doing it wrong...
Yeah, I missed the 'server' part :).
Okay, I get that when system calls are made to 32 bit whatever, bad things could happen. But why would there be anything 32 bit there at all? Shouldn't everything that is running on a server be compiled for 64 bit?
Flash. Ubuntu handles 32-bit Flash integration automatically with 64-bit Firefox, but on some other distros it's easier just to install 32-bit Firefox instead.
Unless you need the big address space and MOST apps don't - 32 bit code runs faster.
Since when?
64-bit code gives you twice as many registers at the cost of doubling the size of pointers, and on older Intel CPUs losing some of the microop fusion optimisations. Every time I've seen people post comparative benchmarks of their 32-bit code recompiled to 64-bit, they've shown significant speedups.
Ubuntu, at least, has already released the patch as a kernel upgrade; it was fixed early in the week so I presume most other distros have too.
So people not only leave the default password on their industrial controllers, they put them on the same network as Windows PCs... Wow.
Peer review only works if the reviewers can be trusted and don't form a clique to get their work in and keep other people out. Surely anyone with even basic knowledge of human psychology would understand this?
Not true in the slightest. EVE, City of Heroes, Final Fantasy 11, Everquest 1 & 2...those are just the ones I can think of offhand. They all launched before WOW did and are doing just fine, nowhere near shutting down or going free.
Aside from the fact that Everquest 1 has been struggling with a declining player base for years, I take it you missed Everquest 2 going free to play?
Probably on the whole commercial products are better if only because people have money invested in them and they are less likely to get bored with them half way through.
I suspect most people developing commercial products get bored with them by the time they're half-way through, but they have to be shipped in order to keep beer and pizza on the table.
Guess that "never expires" part isn't entirely accurate now. Or, if it is, not useful.
The points didn't expire, the game did :).
I'm sure Fusion was only 20 years away when I was a kid 30 years ago.
Yeah, no sense in releasing games for Windows either since you'll need to have binary compatible with Windows 7 and Windows 3x.... Just thought I'd point out the absurdity of your argument.
There is no absurdity in my argument: Windows is crippled by binary backwards compatibility, Linux isn't because most Linux software is open source and can just be recompiled... the odds of any binary from, say, 1996 Slackware running correctly on 2012 Ubuntu is low (does Ubuntu even support a.out format anymore?), particularly a game which requires a lot of external libraries.
Why do people insist on measuring boot time as the time it takes to log in?
Because that's what Microsoft tell them to do because they know that taking five minutes to a usable desktop is appalling?
That said, the average Windows' boxes five minute startup time is largely due to all the crap the OEMs load them up with so I guess Microsoft are only partly to blame.
I think the point is that you're trying to do things the Windows way and complaining that it doesn't work. Windows users are used to downloading random sofware from the Internet and installing it, thereby handing control of their PC over to the Russian mafia, whereas in any modern Linux distro there's an application for pretty much anything you want which is installable with a few mouse clicks or a line in the terminal.
Similarly, people come into Linux forums saying 'I just installed Linux and I must run SuperFrobitz which is only available for Windows and it won't work, what do I do?' and people say 'Well, you don't need SuperFrobitz, because there's Foobitz, which is Linux-native, open source and does everything it does', and then the OP says 'No, I must have SuperFrobitz, nothing else will do', and people say 'no, no, Foobitz is better' and the OP says 'I MUST HAVE SUPERFROBITZ!' and people say 'well you're screwed then', and the OP says 'LINUX SUCKS! LINUX USERS ARE ARROGANT SNOBS! I REINSTALLED WINDOWS!'
Hopefully that's helped.
Unfortunately Valve say there are no plans for a Linux version of Steam.
But Steam runs in Wine and so do a surprising number of Steam games; I was playing Left 4 Dead and Fallout 3 at the weekend in Ubuntu, for example.
And given the vast variation in Linux distros, you're probably better off releasing Windows games that are Wine-compatible than a Linux binary that won't run on Ubuntu 12.04 or Redhat 6.3.
The reality turned out to be what this story will be - smoke and mirrors.
The i740 was OK once you stuck enough video memory on the card: what crippled it was Intel's crazy desire to pull textures over the AGP bus when other cards had large amounts of 128-bit VRAM. I presume the intention was to increase AGP takeup, but the reality was that it made AGP look bad when compared even to older 3dfx cards on PCI.
You do realize that a) Intel makes mobile chips as well that take power saving into consideration and b) TFA doesn't say it, but this feature will almost certainly be configurable by the bios and/or OS.
Indeed: in normal use while web-browsing and the like -- at least according to the Linux battery monitor -- my i5 laptop takes only slightly more power than my Atom netbook. But if I plug it into the wall I can play any modern game decently (with it's Nvidia GPU, not whatever's integrated with the CPU).
Because this is primary motivation as no one is even coming close to maxing out an i7.
Maxing it out at what? Maxing out an i7's CPU performance is trivial on a server that's doing CPU-intensive work.
I know exactly how a one time pad works.
No you don't, if your posts on the subject are anything to go by.