The difference is that this time out, both companies trying to sell high-priced superior technology are sitting on large cash reserves and other profitable divisions that balance out the losses.
Wouldn't that be unable to tell the difference between a PS2 game played on a PS2 and a PS2 game played on a PS3? Seems to me that this method would inflate the numbers for the PS2 and Xbox over the PS3 and Xbox 360.
He said that...and his company's games exemplify that. But while there is something to it, FPSes with compelling stories outsell FPSes without compelling stories. Halflife 2 outsold Doom 3.
Single player games without some story get tedious. (Multiplayer games are, of course, entirely different...no story needed.)
A market where each company is pursing a somewhat different customer base is better for consumers and better for the companies involved.
Which would you rather have, a choice between three consoles who are all somewhat different, each catering to a different set of gamers, or a market where all three console manufacturers shipped boxes that were essentially identical and catered to only a narrow market?
Whining about the Wii being too casual is like whining about how Cheerios don't taste like Frosted Flakes. If you don't like the Cheerios, just buy the fucking Frosted Flakes!
The only thing I'd need a faster computer for is games, and for games that need graphics speed, I use a console. (The laptop does just find for things like Civ IV, Galactic Civilizations, etc.)
For what I use that machine for (I'm on a different one now), a 10,000 rpm drive or a 3ghz processor would be an utter waste. On the other hand, a desktop simply cannot do what it can do, which is fit in my backpack to be taken to work every day, fit on my lap to play Kingdom of Loathing in the livingroom while watching TV, or sitting at the dining room table to read slashdot while eating breakfast. Yes, I'm sure your desktop is faster...but since my laptop is generally 90% idle anyway, who cares?
Heh...that is *exactly* my experience. My wife was a luddite who had to be harangued to check her email. Now she spends hours maintaining an incredibly complex iCal schedule and gets far more non-spam email than I do.
Best bit is that she spends so much time playing popcap games on her iBook that she can't complain that I play too much Oblivion.
If you want to play Oblivion at 1920x1200 45fps, you might want to get an XBox 360 or a PS3. Either of those plus an $40 box to convert DVI to component out would let you play Oblivion on your monitor using something that is *much* cheaper than your hot desktop rig.
Sure, 20 feet isn't far, but if you want to check your email while sitting in front of the TV, it's 20 important feet.
When my wife got an iBook her computer usage went up by a factor of four simply because she didn't have to sit in the den to use it. She never takes it out of the house.
In regards to 5: I shuttle my laptop between work, where it attaches to a 20" 1600x1200 monitor and home, where it attaches to a 23" 1920x1200 monitor.
A ten dollar brush would almost have certainly broken in flight. (Mechanical components not specifically designed for vacuum often seize up permanently. Not to mention that the landers underwent fairly large g-forces in the flight.)
The size and weight of a brush (ten dollars or otherwise) would required removing scientific instruments.
They won't "knock Sony out of the game", at least, not in the short term. Sony was profitable last year, lost $2 billion on the PS3 launch and had overall revenue of just over $60 billion. Microsoft was very profitable last year, lost $2 billion on the XBox 360 and had overall revenue of just over $60 billion. Sony can easily prop up an unprofitable PS3 as long as Microsoft has already propped up an unprofitable XBox, and if you look at the history of the PSP, you can see that Sony is quite willing to push a device for years to stay in the market. (All ignoring the fact that Sony still sells a ton of PS2s.)
Also keep in mind that the sales of the PS3 over its first eight months of sales are about the same as the sales of the XBox 360 over its first eight months of sales. I find it really amusing the way slashdot proclaims the XBox a success and the PS3 a failure when they have done about the same in the market.
But regardless, both Microsoft and Sony are massive companies that have extremely profitable divisions that can prop up losing game divisions. The only console maker that would be in trouble selling at a loss is Nintendo, as they don't have an OS division or a TV division to prop up the games. They're just games. Which is why they don't sell at a loss. The only competitor in the console that's might potentially be out of the game in the next five years is Nintendo, and given the way the Wii and the DS-Lite sell, that's extremely unlikely.
I once won a culture victory as the English in which the only battle I ever fought was when a barbarian attacked one of my spearmen during than beginning. This wasn't because I was trying to play pacifist...it's just the way that game worked out.
The conspiracy arc was great until it became clear that there was no "arc" and they were just throwing shit at the wall to see what stuck. I'd love to see a conspiracy arc movie that actually had some sort of explanation or resolution. Otherwise, it's just annoying.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference is that this time out, both companies trying to sell high-priced superior technology are sitting on large cash reserves and other profitable divisions that balance out the losses.
Wouldn't that be unable to tell the difference between a PS2 game played on a PS2 and a PS2 game played on a PS3? Seems to me that this method would inflate the numbers for the PS2 and Xbox over the PS3 and Xbox 360.
I find that hard to believe given that handhelds usually outsell consoles by 2 or 3 to 1.
He said that...and his company's games exemplify that. But while there is something to it, FPSes with compelling stories outsell FPSes without compelling stories. Halflife 2 outsold Doom 3.
Single player games without some story get tedious. (Multiplayer games are, of course, entirely different...no story needed.)
On the other hand, Ubuntu would likely run just fine, assuming you didn't try to use Beryl.
The point is that if it isn't Google, it is Verizon or AT&T. Somebody will buy this spectrum.
I think he gave up and used an old Thinkpad he had lying around.
I run Ubuntu on an old VGN-S270P Vaio. I know someone who put in on a later SZ series Vaio, but had wireless card issues. (Otherwise it worked ok.)
A market where each company is pursing a somewhat different customer base is better for consumers and better for the companies involved.
Which would you rather have, a choice between three consoles who are all somewhat different, each catering to a different set of gamers, or a market where all three console manufacturers shipped boxes that were essentially identical and catered to only a narrow market?
Whining about the Wii being too casual is like whining about how Cheerios don't taste like Frosted Flakes. If you don't like the Cheerios, just buy the fucking Frosted Flakes!
For what I use that machine for (I'm on a different one now), a 10,000 rpm drive or a 3ghz processor would be an utter waste. On the other hand, a desktop simply cannot do what it can do, which is fit in my backpack to be taken to work every day, fit on my lap to play Kingdom of Loathing in the livingroom while watching TV, or sitting at the dining room table to read slashdot while eating breakfast. Yes, I'm sure your desktop is faster...but since my laptop is generally 90% idle anyway, who cares?
Heh...that is *exactly* my experience. My wife was a luddite who had to be harangued to check her email. Now she spends hours maintaining an incredibly complex iCal schedule and gets far more non-spam email than I do.
Best bit is that she spends so much time playing popcap games on her iBook that she can't complain that I play too much Oblivion.
I am currently typing this on a full-size keyboard while looking at a 20" monitor all attached to a 2 lb laptop.
If you want to play Oblivion at 1920x1200 45fps, you might want to get an XBox 360 or a PS3. Either of those plus an $40 box to convert DVI to component out would let you play Oblivion on your monitor using something that is *much* cheaper than your hot desktop rig.
Sure, 20 feet isn't far, but if you want to check your email while sitting in front of the TV, it's 20 important feet.
When my wife got an iBook her computer usage went up by a factor of four simply because she didn't have to sit in the den to use it. She never takes it out of the house.
In regards to 5: I shuttle my laptop between work, where it attaches to a 20" 1600x1200 monitor and home, where it attaches to a 23" 1920x1200 monitor.
Also keep in mind that the sales of the PS3 over its first eight months of sales are about the same as the sales of the XBox 360 over its first eight months of sales. I find it really amusing the way slashdot proclaims the XBox a success and the PS3 a failure when they have done about the same in the market.
But regardless, both Microsoft and Sony are massive companies that have extremely profitable divisions that can prop up losing game divisions. The only console maker that would be in trouble selling at a loss is Nintendo, as they don't have an OS division or a TV division to prop up the games. They're just games. Which is why they don't sell at a loss. The only competitor in the console that's might potentially be out of the game in the next five years is Nintendo, and given the way the Wii and the DS-Lite sell, that's extremely unlikely.
It's putting pressure on Sony. I don't think Nintendo is feeling particular pressure these days. (Other than the pressure to manufacture faster.)
Since Zunes are actually sold at a profit, even selling one "pushes revenues higher".
You cannot find local talent in Silicon Valley for $50k.
If!? If it was in doubt, it was a shitty joke.
Half of all outgoing port 80 requests are to slashdot.org.
I once won a culture victory as the English in which the only battle I ever fought was when a barbarian attacked one of my spearmen during than beginning. This wasn't because I was trying to play pacifist...it's just the way that game worked out.
The conspiracy arc was great until it became clear that there was no "arc" and they were just throwing shit at the wall to see what stuck. I'd love to see a conspiracy arc movie that actually had some sort of explanation or resolution. Otherwise, it's just annoying.
The Wii isn't selling extremely well?