Isn't it uncanny? Like, each and every announcement just makes them look worse and worse. The arrogance is absolutely astounding.
I'm also getting so tired of informed people (i.e. Sony flack) bashing HD-DVD because *THE FIRST DISCS ARRIVING* are only 15GB. Double-layer discs are on the way already, and triple-layer are in development. That's going to give 45GB in the near future. They know this, but for obvious reasons don't share it.
Blu-Ray is going to be betamax and minidisc rolled into one...only this time, they are betting their most profitable division on it. The PS3 is going to be a high-end toy for the small percentage of people who have that kind of disposable income to spend on a console what a fully-loaded PC costs. I honestly think these guys believe the 12-17 year old audience that largely brought PS/PS2 to the successes they were (in spite of a dearth of truly good games) are going to somehow manage to come up with $750 on launch day to get a system, a couple of games, and an extra controller. I don't know many kids with that kind of cash, nor that would spend it on a game system if they did.
Again, enough to buy a fully-loaded PC...and this same audience isn't going to give a whip about Blu-Ray either (and likely don't have the HDTV's to care in their bedroom/basement where they actually game). Adultm serious early adopters also know that a game console sucks for movie playback (ever tried watching a DVD on a PS2 or an XBOX??), and will want a dedicated machine anyway - so there goes that crowd of buyers too.
When I am not using the Internet, it is safer to have it off. I often leave my PC unattended doing non-internet activities for long periods of time, and instead of relying simply on a software firewall I take 1/2 second and press the standby button the manufacturer put on the device. Why the fuck is this so offensive to you?
You said that I felt it made me safer when I was using the internet "the next day", and brought up things about common browsers and zero-day exploits that I never said it protected me from. Again, that's why I use a firewall, and I don't use a "common" browser. You seem to have invented this argument that I never made that somehow this was the be-all-end-all answer; it's not, just a tiny step that I do that was one sentence fragment in my original reply that you and a couple of other trolls decided mortally offended you enough to start bashing me.
Why can you just not accept the fact that, as I said, it makes me feel better to have that 100% assurance that nothing errant can happen when my computer is unattended and there is no need for the Internet to be active? Would it improve your life if I left it on? If you can convince me that is true, I'll do it just for you - out of pitty, because I can't imagine why something like this meant so much to you that days after I posted you felt the need to jump in and start insulting me because I take a precaution that costs nothing to do.
What is defensive about pointing out the fact that you assigned arguments to me that I never made?
Can you answer the question? When did I ever say putting my modem in standby had anything to do with securing the internet when I am online "the next day" as you put it? When did I say anything about using a "common browser"? Or anything about a "zero-day" anything?
Answer is : you can't, because I didn't. And now you are posturing to cover that up. When you make irrelevant comments and don't reply to the actual content but instead make what you think are witty comments (but actually come across as desperate), it really shows what little you have to stand on.
I never said it protected me from those things; you made that up, or, more likely, you read some of the replies that other smacktards like yourself made and never actually read my original post.
Besides, you admit I am right. It's an "almost always" versus "absolute". You don't think absolute means anything more, and I'm not arguing that it makes me exponentially safer, simply that it leaves ZERO chance. I like that, it makes me feel better. And yes, you are an idiot for arguing with me otherwise. I never told you that you should do it, nor do I give a shit if you do. Why do you care what I do, except to get your flamer rocks off, even if it's "futile" for me to do so, as you say?
there is some small statistical amount of protection coming from turning your cable modem off at night but that still won't protect you when you go on the Internet the next day. Especially if you use a common browser.
BTW, can you point out where I said putting the modem in standby had anything to do with using the internet the next day, or that I used a "common" browser? That's what the firewall is for, you can't have 100% when you are accessing the internet. But you CAN when you aren't.
You have a real problem with comprehension, don't you? You are making up points I never made.
Don't let anyone convince you otherwise. All the oppostion you've gotten from this is inexplicable. ON TOP OF USING A FIREWALL (as you've said you do), this is an excellent security practice. Security-wise, it's the akin to locking your car doors even when it's parked safely inside your garage....it's not necessarily required, but it sure doesn't hurt much. Power-wise, its like turning off your digital cable/satellite box in addition to your TV when you're done watching TV, which makes even more sense. Are there many people who leave their cable box or DVD player on all the time? I doubt it, and thse things have pretty much zero security concerns.
Thanks very much for saying that. It's nice to know someone understands - the analogy of locking your car in your closed garage is exactly right. It doesn't hurt anyone, it can only help. Is it really that difficult to press the button on your key (or cable modem) to unlock it when you are ready to use it?
As to the WiFi issue, I've been resisting for years. I just don't like feeling like I don't have to take extra security precautions. All the crap I've gotten for putting my modem in standby is funny, because I'm the one who doesn't do much else besides the firewall; I think much of security is over-rated if you use the right software (or, more accurately, don't use the wrong software). I never have any problems, and I want to keep it that way. To be honest, I just don't need those extra 6 flashing LED's going all night long, LOL.
When the DS connectivity came around, I picked up the USB Wi-Fi connector from Nintendo, and supposedly it will work with the Wii. However, if I'm able, I would much rather just hard-wire it via ethernet, since I can. The reason I posted in the first place was simply because "on 24/7" just isn't an automatic plus in my eyes; it's not an automatic negative either, I just have to understand why, and see the benefits of it. Nintendo is making it sound like a big deal, but I just don't think the types of things they are going to be sending are going to take more than a second or three (emails in Animal Crossing, a new avatar for an RPG).
Now the DS demos are going to be a tiny bit larger (might take 30-60 seconds), but I don't think those are going to just appear - the limited internal flash memory of the Wii (which will be shared between virtual console games, game saves, and these downloads) makes me think we'll have to actually request them, or they'll just bypass the memory altogether (i.e., use your Wii as the conduit to get it to your DS but don't actually save it there). (And yes, before some flamer joins in, I know it will have external mem cards as well...)
Then again, there could be good reasons, and if there are I'll reconsider. But if it's just to make tiny downloads and for the "suprise" of seeing them appear, I can live without it. It is a minor PITA to use the USB connector for the DS, but I don't use it that often so it's not a huge deal. I've yet to see that killer game that makes me feel the need to go to the next level (Metriod Prime Hunters would have, if I didn't dislike the control scheme so much) and go WiFi.
Anyway, thanks for your reply. I don't know it all, and it's great to have a rational discussion without people violently telling me I'm wrong and making a dozen posts over one innocuous line that was really besides the point.
You made my point exactly - yes, asking if you leave your car headlights on WAS a stupid analogy to compare to putting my cable modem in standby. Just as asking me if I unplug my TV and DVD player are, which is why I made the comparison - unplugging a TV is has about as much to do with putting my cable modem in standby as does leaving your car headlights on; i.e., nothing alike at all and why I said (as you quoted) that it was about as relevant as me asking it.
I don't lack faith in anything, I just know "absolute" from "pretty reliable". It's so simple : firewalls are NOT 100% effective, even if properly configured. Flipping a switch and putting my cable modem in stand-by is 100%, absolute. No question. I see no reason to leave the device on 24 hours a day. Since it takes 1/2 a second to press the button, I think it's worth it. You don't. What I don't see is why the hell people felt the need to jump on me for it.
The reason my attitude is that the people arguing with me are beyond help is because I can't believe the shit people have tried to give me for flipping a fucking switch. A switch that the manufacturer put there for a reason. It's right on top, easy to reach, and says "standby". So yes, I do think I'm better than some asshole tech-know-it-alls who insult me for saying I use the standby button the manufacturer gave me because I know for a fact that firewalls (especially software firewalls, which most home users use) are never 100% reliable and I simply don't see the need to leave an electronic device on when I'm not going to be using it for at least 8 hours while I'm asleep.
So piss off right back at you, and I'll raise you a fuck you. I simply shared that I wasn't going to leave my Wii online 24/7, and why - there was no reason for people to start insulting me for it. Why the hell you or anyone who replied care what I do with my cable modem I'll never know; probably as much as a mystery as to why I bothered replying to blinded-by-believing-their-own-BS-smacktards who replied to insult me for something so innocuous.
I have a feeling, Mr. Anonymous Coward, that you and he are one and the same...
It's laughable that people call me names because I put my cable modem in standby when I'm shutting down for the night.
Just typical./ trolls, I'm guessing...otherwise, the level of myopic viewpoints has just exploded. There is absolutely no reason to leave it on, so I don't. Period.
Asking me if I unplug my TV and DVD player is ridiculous...about as much so as me asking "Do you leave your car headlights on all night?" If you guys aren't intelligent enough to see the difference, then you are beyond help.
I'm amazed at the responses here...absolutely amazed.
It's not what we're supporting, it's what we aren't.
I refuse to fund the disgusting, bloated, exploitive industry that has grown up around recording artists. They promised us over 20 years ago that CD's would eventually go down in price, they were just expensive because they were "new"; CD prices have done nothing but go up.
Call me immoral for listining to a song if it makes you feel better, but it's no skin off of my back. I simply refuse to pay for the limo that the executive is chauffered around in, or the 50 million dollar bonuses of executives when the artists recieve virtually nothing.
I'd have no problem buying individual songs off of something like iTunes, but I refuse to buy a crippled product that forces me to use one piece of overpriced hardware to listen to my music.
So I download. Send the fuzz after me. Mod me a troll, mod me flamebait, LOL. When these corporations start providing a product at a decent price and stop exploiting their artists and their customers, I'll reconsider my position. Until then, a song is an intangible object and the tired, fallacy of an argument that they are losing money isn't going to change my mind. I just wouldn't listen to it otherwise, but if I can, for free, I'm going to.
You probably keep a bucket of water next to your PC just in case it suddenly becomes malevolently intelligent too..
Ah, gotta love/.
Only here would some pithy post like that be scored "funny".
Yes, I'm a raving lunatic because I flick my finger on a switch twice a day to turn my internet on and off. There simply is no need for it to be on, so why leave it on? I'm not so feeble that the finger stroke is going to harm me.
Again, only here on/. would someone take think something like that is so outrageous...I completely value being connected, but I also know when it's unnecessary. When my PC is crunching video all night, it doesn't need the internet. I could lock down my firewall to deny all access, but that would take three key strokes/mouse moves, when I can just flip the switch next to my PC once.
You don't seem to understand what I am talking about.
Nintendo has already released a USB Wireless adapter that you hook to your PC so you don't have to use a wireless router to use Nintendo's WiFi service. I own one, and I use it when I wish to go online with my DS.
Yes, WiFi is built in to both the Wii and the DS, the adapter is for your PC, not the unit.
Great tactic telling me I miss the point just because I disagree if it's a problem or not.
The fact is, the government can find out anything about you they wish much easier than asking JetBlue. JetBlue has no information about me that the government couldn't find much more easily in other ways.
I understand the issue, that the government is out of control spying on us, and I hope that those responsible loose power (and I am more politically active than most citizens so that isn't a passive wish). However, I fly JetBlue because it gives me what I want - a cheap flight where I want to go, and stellar service. Jet Blue has no information about me that I consider "secret", and considering that I have to show my ID and get searched just to walk through the airport my anonymity is already out the window. I can't afford other airlines that charge 3-5 times as much; if the difference is being able to travel the country and vacation or staying home because I'm afraid they are going to report my trip to Walt Disney World, I can tell you which I'll choose.
If they want to report to the government that I asked for two extra bags of blue chips, or that while I was in flight I used their internet access to look up travel sites about the destination I am visiting, they are more than welcome to. This may be considered "selling out", so be it; I'm getting a great trip at a great price and my name and credit card number (the only personal info Jet Blue has about me) are about as hard to find as a Mormon in Utah.
So I'm afriad you miss my point - I don't care if JetBlue turns over information. Life is much nicer when you have nothing to hide, and you learn to pick your battles and are able to recognize when something truly matters and when it really doesn't. Since I'm not a criminal, nor wanted by the law, I'm really not going to worry about it. While the over-reaching government issue needs to stop, my not going on vacation isn't what's going to do it.
No need to talk down to me, LOL. I have a firewall, thanks very much. I knew some smart alec would question me...
I don't hope to achieve anything in particular, it's simply, why have it on if no one is going to be using it? I can bring it back up in a split second when I start my day.
What's the point of a firewall? To lock a doorway. But if you are worried about locking it up, why not just close it off absolutely if it's possible? Often times I leave my PC on all night to crunch video or other CPU-intensive things, and there simply is no reason for my machine to access the internet while it's doing so.
I don't do anything I wish to hide on the internet, to do so is simply retarded. However, I do have a cable modem which is notoriously insecure anyway, and why leave it on if a) it's not in use and shouldn't be, and b) only takes the flick of one finger for it to instantly return? Why rely on a firewall when I can just make absolute certain nothing errant will happen, when it has absolutely no adverse affect at all?
Go check out Jet Blue's website...they are adding new routes all the time. From some places, yes, they require a stop in New York, but that's just for the more obscure airports (Portland, ME, for example).
I know they don't go everywhere, but they go to most major domestic travel locations these days. If you haven't checked their site in a few months, go do so - I'm always shocked at the expansion.
If it's an option, it's great; if it's not, then pray that it soon is. I'm amazed that I'm a "fan" of an airline, but Jet Blue is simply the most fun/convenience one can have in these days of not-so-fun airports and security.
This is the one thing I'm not all jazzed up about regarding the Wii. I'm a big supporter of what they are trying to do in general (see my/. history), but this 24/7 thing just makes me wince a bit.
There is just no need. Whatever little present in Animal Crossing, or whatever little "neato" thing they are going to download is going to only take a few seconds at most; could probably be done while the thing is booting up and we wouldn't even notice.
My Wii won't be connected 24/7, because I refuse to leave my Internet on that much. I flip the switch on the cable modem at night to cut it off, and turn it on in the AM. There is just no reason for it to run 24/7 if no one is using it, IMO, so I don't even take the chance.
My Wii won't even use wi-fi if I can avoid it. Ninty hasn't said anything for awhile about it, but at one point did say an optional accessory would allow you to add it to a wired network. I know wireless is all the rage among certain people, but why do wireless when I already have ethernet cable available in every room? Wired is better than wireless if you have access to it (and mine is wired just like most ppl's cable is, in sockets). Wireless just opens up a whole new can of security worries. If all fails, I do have the Nintendo USB wifi connector, but I hope I don't have to use it just to use my Wii.
Fine with me. What are you so scared of? Are you planning on downloading child porn while you are a mile high?
Look, the internet is an open book...anything you look at, or put on it, anywhere, is open game. It's just common sense.
If you expect any public connection like that to not be exposed you are sorely mistaken. If Bush and his cronies want to know that I read Yahoo! news, checked/., and went to BestBuy.com to check TV prices while I'm flying, they are more than welcome to waste their time.
Smart people don't do anything the wish to hide on the Internet...
Jet Blue is the most amazing airline out there - cheap tickets, no hassle terms (i.e. you can change your ticket without penalty for a measley 20 bucks up until the flight departs), super-accomodating employees, nice, roomy seats, DirectTV, those delicious blue chips, and now this!
Knowing JetBlue it won't be very expensive either. They are truly the model of how an airline should be, focused on the passenger, their cost, and experience, not simply a government-bailed-out bloated corporation that sells seats next to each other for hundreds and thousands different than the seat next to them.
So bravo to Jet Blue - they already are my favorite airline, and they just keep getting better!
All antivirus software does is bog down your PC. I used it for 10 years before I realized how useless it was.
I run windows, but I don't get malware and viruses. Worst thing I ever get is an errant cookie. Why? Because I don't go to shady porn sites, I never download anything I don't know is safe, and I don't use IE.
Every few months now I take the time to install NAV long enough to scan my system and ensure that I'm not infected, and every time, clean as a whistle.
Computer security isn't hard for the home user. Have a good firewall, don't download crap, don't go to shady websites, use AdAware/Spybot every once in awhile, and be happy.
Pop-ups, spam, spyware, malware, viruses...it's all but eliminated by just being smart and using the bare minimum tools to protect yourself. It's people that just click on random shit and who fall for those "YOU WON AN XBOX 360!" and download shady software that get the issues.
I'm not saying it can never happen to me; that would be foolish. But the chances of it happening are greatly exaggerated, and if you keep decent backups it doesn't matter anyway most of the time if it does happen. It's just not worth paying the increasing prices of AV software, nor is it worth how much it slows up your PC.
Um, I guess you missed it, but this isn't speculation.
Sony announced pricing at E3 a few weeks ago. $599/$499 is indeed the price, depending on configuration. I'd do a google search to get you a reference, but it's such common knowledge I'm not going to waste the keystrokes. You can if you wish.
Both PS3 and XBOX 360 are going after a shrinking market. There just aren't that many people out there who give a rats ass about either of them; the gaming market has gotten more and more narrow.
Normal people don't spend $400-700 on a video game console with a game or two. That's enough to buy a fully-loaded PC. And let's not forget the $60 games they expect you to continue to buy to go along with it, many of which suck and you feel like a big chump for spending your hard earned dollars on it.
Budgets on these games keep going up, they get more convoluted (not specificly complex), the control schemes are so whacked that it takes 10 hours to figure out just how to play some of them, and so many are simply rehashes of each other with pretty new skins. The audience for these titles is dwindling, not growing.
And among those that do want it, the easy-to-impress-with-pretty-things 12-17 year old market, they won't even be able to afford it. "Gee, Mom and Dad, can I have a $600 game system for Christmas? Oh, and I'll need a few $60 games too!" I don't know many kids in that age bracket that aren't from wealthy families who can save up that much cash from their after-school jobs.
People want fun, easy to play, but hard to master, games. Sony and MS are going after their shrinking audience, and the rest of the world is waiting for something like the Wii, which will be affordable, accessable, innovative, and it looks like will have some hella fun games.
Let Sony and MS fight over the dwindling "hardcore" market, and watch as Wii sells numbers that neither company can possibly imagine. Hell, even my parents want one - and they haven't touched a console since the NES let them play DuckHunt. I'm no Nintendo apologist, but I've got to tell you this time it really looks like their innovation is going to pay off.
Do people really believe these statistics? How can they loose 34 billion bucks if they didn't have it in the first place?
I buy reasonably priced software. I used to pirate MS Office just because when I was a student and needed those tools, I couldn't afford a $500 software package. However, if I hadn't been able to do that, I could have just done the work needed to be done with that software in the computer lab; they didn't "loose" that money, because if I used a pirated copy or not I still wouldn't have spent the $500, it just let me work on the laptop in my room instead of up the hill in the library.
The irony is, now that I can afford a $500 piece of software, I don't use it. Wordpad is enough for most everything I need, and for the rare occasions I do need a spreadsheet or something (a few times a month), I use OpenOffice.
I honestly hope no one out there takes this seriously in the business world, I hope they know better; if the world worked like this, I could claim losses of billions myself for all those lottery tickets I never bought for jackpots I never won...
...who absoltutely, no matter what, would never, ever, under any condition, "rent" music in any way, shape, or form?
All this B.S. and they'd kill all but the most dedicated of "illegal" downloaders if they just sold CD's for a reasonable price. The absolute vast majority of people want to buy CD's, not downloads or "rentals", EVEN those that use portable devices. Most serious music lovers I know buy the CD, rip it, then store it safely away.
What's discouraged all of this is $18-20 discs that we were promised once upon a time would eventually come down in price, not up. If a CD cost ten bucks, I'd buy three or four a week; I'd even be willing to take a chance on buying a crappy album for just a couple of songs at that price. But at twice the price, I have much more than twice the aversion and I'd just rather download a few songs and listen to what I already have instead of even trying out new music, sad to say.
As to MTV selling out, come on guys - MTV reinvented sell-out at it's inception. It's part of it's charm that it's always been a corporate mouth-piece in one way or another. Otherwise why do you think it's stayed on the air this long? It ain't Laguana Beach or whatever that psudo-reality crap they show between thinly veiled payola-based commericals (better known as TRL).
Why is this being talked about? Because someone at MS or Sony had their panties in a wad because a) virtually all the mainstream media is talking about from E3 is the Wii, b) the enormously positive reaction to the Wii by the gaming "press", and c) both MS and Sony spokespeople have been heavily quoted as saying that in addition to their respective console, consumers will likely want a Wii as well, so they thought this would cause some minor scandal.
In this case, it's too little, and too late, for character assasination.
This is why this will blow away into the nothingness; it's not a big deal to begin with, and it's even less of a deal because of the qualified success the Wii showing at E3 was. Just shows how scared they are because their "hardcore I want 32 buttons to mash in a game that takes 10 hours to learn" crowd is getting smaller by the generation, yet Wii is set to appeal to non-gamers, former-gamers, and existing-gamers is a virtually unlimited potential audience.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't it uncanny? Like, each and every announcement just makes them look worse and worse. The arrogance is absolutely astounding.
I'm also getting so tired of informed people (i.e. Sony flack) bashing HD-DVD because *THE FIRST DISCS ARRIVING* are only 15GB. Double-layer discs are on the way already, and triple-layer are in development. That's going to give 45GB in the near future. They know this, but for obvious reasons don't share it.
Blu-Ray is going to be betamax and minidisc rolled into one...only this time, they are betting their most profitable division on it. The PS3 is going to be a high-end toy for the small percentage of people who have that kind of disposable income to spend on a console what a fully-loaded PC costs. I honestly think these guys believe the 12-17 year old audience that largely brought PS/PS2 to the successes they were (in spite of a dearth of truly good games) are going to somehow manage to come up with $750 on launch day to get a system, a couple of games, and an extra controller. I don't know many kids with that kind of cash, nor that would spend it on a game system if they did.
Again, enough to buy a fully-loaded PC...and this same audience isn't going to give a whip about Blu-Ray either (and likely don't have the HDTV's to care in their bedroom/basement where they actually game). Adultm serious early adopters also know that a game console sucks for movie playback (ever tried watching a DVD on a PS2 or an XBOX??), and will want a dedicated machine anyway - so there goes that crowd of buyers too.
Just who is going to buy this thing?
AE
It *IS*.
Can you make a relevant comment?
When I am not using the Internet, it is safer to have it off. I often leave my PC unattended doing non-internet activities for long periods of time, and instead of relying simply on a software firewall I take 1/2 second and press the standby button the manufacturer put on the device. Why the fuck is this so offensive to you?
You said that I felt it made me safer when I was using the internet "the next day", and brought up things about common browsers and zero-day exploits that I never said it protected me from. Again, that's why I use a firewall, and I don't use a "common" browser. You seem to have invented this argument that I never made that somehow this was the be-all-end-all answer; it's not, just a tiny step that I do that was one sentence fragment in my original reply that you and a couple of other trolls decided mortally offended you enough to start bashing me.
Why can you just not accept the fact that, as I said, it makes me feel better to have that 100% assurance that nothing errant can happen when my computer is unattended and there is no need for the Internet to be active? Would it improve your life if I left it on? If you can convince me that is true, I'll do it just for you - out of pitty, because I can't imagine why something like this meant so much to you that days after I posted you felt the need to jump in and start insulting me because I take a precaution that costs nothing to do.
AE
What is defensive about pointing out the fact that you assigned arguments to me that I never made?
Can you answer the question? When did I ever say putting my modem in standby had anything to do with securing the internet when I am online "the next day" as you put it? When did I say anything about using a "common browser"? Or anything about a "zero-day" anything?
Answer is : you can't, because I didn't. And now you are posturing to cover that up. When you make irrelevant comments and don't reply to the actual content but instead make what you think are witty comments (but actually come across as desperate), it really shows what little you have to stand on.
I never said it protected me from those things; you made that up, or, more likely, you read some of the replies that other smacktards like yourself made and never actually read my original post.
Besides, you admit I am right. It's an "almost always" versus "absolute". You don't think absolute means anything more, and I'm not arguing that it makes me exponentially safer, simply that it leaves ZERO chance. I like that, it makes me feel better. And yes, you are an idiot for arguing with me otherwise. I never told you that you should do it, nor do I give a shit if you do. Why do you care what I do, except to get your flamer rocks off, even if it's "futile" for me to do so, as you say?
Happy trolling.
AE
BTW, can you point out where I said putting the modem in standby had anything to do with using the internet the next day, or that I used a "common" browser? That's what the firewall is for, you can't have 100% when you are accessing the internet. But you CAN when you aren't.
You have a real problem with comprehension, don't you? You are making up points I never made.
AE
No, it's not futile, but arging with idiots like you is.
Any rational person can understand the concept of "almost 100%" and "100%", and it seems you do not fit into that category.
AE
Thanks very much for saying that. It's nice to know someone understands - the analogy of locking your car in your closed garage is exactly right. It doesn't hurt anyone, it can only help. Is it really that difficult to press the button on your key (or cable modem) to unlock it when you are ready to use it?
As to the WiFi issue, I've been resisting for years. I just don't like feeling like I don't have to take extra security precautions. All the crap I've gotten for putting my modem in standby is funny, because I'm the one who doesn't do much else besides the firewall; I think much of security is over-rated if you use the right software (or, more accurately, don't use the wrong software). I never have any problems, and I want to keep it that way. To be honest, I just don't need those extra 6 flashing LED's going all night long, LOL.
When the DS connectivity came around, I picked up the USB Wi-Fi connector from Nintendo, and supposedly it will work with the Wii. However, if I'm able, I would much rather just hard-wire it via ethernet, since I can. The reason I posted in the first place was simply because "on 24/7" just isn't an automatic plus in my eyes; it's not an automatic negative either, I just have to understand why, and see the benefits of it. Nintendo is making it sound like a big deal, but I just don't think the types of things they are going to be sending are going to take more than a second or three (emails in Animal Crossing, a new avatar for an RPG).
Now the DS demos are going to be a tiny bit larger (might take 30-60 seconds), but I don't think those are going to just appear - the limited internal flash memory of the Wii (which will be shared between virtual console games, game saves, and these downloads) makes me think we'll have to actually request them, or they'll just bypass the memory altogether (i.e., use your Wii as the conduit to get it to your DS but don't actually save it there). (And yes, before some flamer joins in, I know it will have external mem cards as well...)
Then again, there could be good reasons, and if there are I'll reconsider. But if it's just to make tiny downloads and for the "suprise" of seeing them appear, I can live without it. It is a minor PITA to use the USB connector for the DS, but I don't use it that often so it's not a huge deal. I've yet to see that killer game that makes me feel the need to go to the next level (Metriod Prime Hunters would have, if I didn't dislike the control scheme so much) and go WiFi.
Anyway, thanks for your reply. I don't know it all, and it's great to have a rational discussion without people violently telling me I'm wrong and making a dozen posts over one innocuous line that was really besides the point.
AE
You made my point exactly - yes, asking if you leave your car headlights on WAS a stupid analogy to compare to putting my cable modem in standby. Just as asking me if I unplug my TV and DVD player are, which is why I made the comparison - unplugging a TV is has about as much to do with putting my cable modem in standby as does leaving your car headlights on; i.e., nothing alike at all and why I said (as you quoted) that it was about as relevant as me asking it.
I don't lack faith in anything, I just know "absolute" from "pretty reliable". It's so simple : firewalls are NOT 100% effective, even if properly configured. Flipping a switch and putting my cable modem in stand-by is 100%, absolute. No question. I see no reason to leave the device on 24 hours a day. Since it takes 1/2 a second to press the button, I think it's worth it. You don't. What I don't see is why the hell people felt the need to jump on me for it.
The reason my attitude is that the people arguing with me are beyond help is because I can't believe the shit people have tried to give me for flipping a fucking switch. A switch that the manufacturer put there for a reason. It's right on top, easy to reach, and says "standby". So yes, I do think I'm better than some asshole tech-know-it-alls who insult me for saying I use the standby button the manufacturer gave me because I know for a fact that firewalls (especially software firewalls, which most home users use) are never 100% reliable and I simply don't see the need to leave an electronic device on when I'm not going to be using it for at least 8 hours while I'm asleep.
So piss off right back at you, and I'll raise you a fuck you. I simply shared that I wasn't going to leave my Wii online 24/7, and why - there was no reason for people to start insulting me for it. Why the hell you or anyone who replied care what I do with my cable modem I'll never know; probably as much as a mystery as to why I bothered replying to blinded-by-believing-their-own-BS-smacktards who replied to insult me for something so innocuous.
AE
I already have a movie-burning kiosk in my home.
:)
It's called BitTorrent.
AE
I have a feeling, Mr. Anonymous Coward, that you and he are one and the same...
./ trolls, I'm guessing...otherwise, the level of myopic viewpoints has just exploded. There is absolutely no reason to leave it on, so I don't. Period.
It's laughable that people call me names because I put my cable modem in standby when I'm shutting down for the night.
Just typical
Asking me if I unplug my TV and DVD player is ridiculous...about as much so as me asking "Do you leave your car headlights on all night?" If you guys aren't intelligent enough to see the difference, then you are beyond help.
I'm amazed at the responses here...absolutely amazed.
AE
It's not what we're supporting, it's what we aren't.
I refuse to fund the disgusting, bloated, exploitive industry that has grown up around recording artists. They promised us over 20 years ago that CD's would eventually go down in price, they were just expensive because they were "new"; CD prices have done nothing but go up.
Call me immoral for listining to a song if it makes you feel better, but it's no skin off of my back. I simply refuse to pay for the limo that the executive is chauffered around in, or the 50 million dollar bonuses of executives when the artists recieve virtually nothing.
I'd have no problem buying individual songs off of something like iTunes, but I refuse to buy a crippled product that forces me to use one piece of overpriced hardware to listen to my music.
So I download. Send the fuzz after me. Mod me a troll, mod me flamebait, LOL. When these corporations start providing a product at a decent price and stop exploiting their artists and their customers, I'll reconsider my position. Until then, a song is an intangible object and the tired, fallacy of an argument that they are losing money isn't going to change my mind. I just wouldn't listen to it otherwise, but if I can, for free, I'm going to.
And there is some honesty for you.
AE
Ah, gotta love /.
Only here would some pithy post like that be scored "funny".
Yes, I'm a raving lunatic because I flick my finger on a switch twice a day to turn my internet on and off. There simply is no need for it to be on, so why leave it on? I'm not so feeble that the finger stroke is going to harm me.
Again, only here on /. would someone take think something like that is so outrageous...I completely value being connected, but I also know when it's unnecessary. When my PC is crunching video all night, it doesn't need the internet. I could lock down my firewall to deny all access, but that would take three key strokes/mouse moves, when I can just flip the switch next to my PC once.
AE
You don't seem to understand what I am talking about.
Nintendo has already released a USB Wireless adapter that you hook to your PC so you don't have to use a wireless router to use Nintendo's WiFi service. I own one, and I use it when I wish to go online with my DS.
Yes, WiFi is built in to both the Wii and the DS, the adapter is for your PC, not the unit.
AE
Great tactic telling me I miss the point just because I disagree if it's a problem or not.
The fact is, the government can find out anything about you they wish much easier than asking JetBlue. JetBlue has no information about me that the government couldn't find much more easily in other ways.
I understand the issue, that the government is out of control spying on us, and I hope that those responsible loose power (and I am more politically active than most citizens so that isn't a passive wish). However, I fly JetBlue because it gives me what I want - a cheap flight where I want to go, and stellar service. Jet Blue has no information about me that I consider "secret", and considering that I have to show my ID and get searched just to walk through the airport my anonymity is already out the window. I can't afford other airlines that charge 3-5 times as much; if the difference is being able to travel the country and vacation or staying home because I'm afraid they are going to report my trip to Walt Disney World, I can tell you which I'll choose.
If they want to report to the government that I asked for two extra bags of blue chips, or that while I was in flight I used their internet access to look up travel sites about the destination I am visiting, they are more than welcome to. This may be considered "selling out", so be it; I'm getting a great trip at a great price and my name and credit card number (the only personal info Jet Blue has about me) are about as hard to find as a Mormon in Utah.
So I'm afriad you miss my point - I don't care if JetBlue turns over information. Life is much nicer when you have nothing to hide, and you learn to pick your battles and are able to recognize when something truly matters and when it really doesn't. Since I'm not a criminal, nor wanted by the law, I'm really not going to worry about it. While the over-reaching government issue needs to stop, my not going on vacation isn't what's going to do it.
AE
No need to talk down to me, LOL. I have a firewall, thanks very much. I knew some smart alec would question me...
I don't hope to achieve anything in particular, it's simply, why have it on if no one is going to be using it? I can bring it back up in a split second when I start my day.
What's the point of a firewall? To lock a doorway. But if you are worried about locking it up, why not just close it off absolutely if it's possible? Often times I leave my PC on all night to crunch video or other CPU-intensive things, and there simply is no reason for my machine to access the internet while it's doing so.
I don't do anything I wish to hide on the internet, to do so is simply retarded. However, I do have a cable modem which is notoriously insecure anyway, and why leave it on if a) it's not in use and shouldn't be, and b) only takes the flick of one finger for it to instantly return? Why rely on a firewall when I can just make absolute certain nothing errant will happen, when it has absolutely no adverse affect at all?
AE
Go check out Jet Blue's website...they are adding new routes all the time. From some places, yes, they require a stop in New York, but that's just for the more obscure airports (Portland, ME, for example).
I know they don't go everywhere, but they go to most major domestic travel locations these days. If you haven't checked their site in a few months, go do so - I'm always shocked at the expansion.
If it's an option, it's great; if it's not, then pray that it soon is. I'm amazed that I'm a "fan" of an airline, but Jet Blue is simply the most fun/convenience one can have in these days of not-so-fun airports and security.
AE
This is the one thing I'm not all jazzed up about regarding the Wii. I'm a big supporter of what they are trying to do in general (see my /. history), but this 24/7 thing just makes me wince a bit.
There is just no need. Whatever little present in Animal Crossing, or whatever little "neato" thing they are going to download is going to only take a few seconds at most; could probably be done while the thing is booting up and we wouldn't even notice.
My Wii won't be connected 24/7, because I refuse to leave my Internet on that much. I flip the switch on the cable modem at night to cut it off, and turn it on in the AM. There is just no reason for it to run 24/7 if no one is using it, IMO, so I don't even take the chance.
My Wii won't even use wi-fi if I can avoid it. Ninty hasn't said anything for awhile about it, but at one point did say an optional accessory would allow you to add it to a wired network. I know wireless is all the rage among certain people, but why do wireless when I already have ethernet cable available in every room? Wired is better than wireless if you have access to it (and mine is wired just like most ppl's cable is, in sockets). Wireless just opens up a whole new can of security worries. If all fails, I do have the Nintendo USB wifi connector, but I hope I don't have to use it just to use my Wii.
AE
Fine with me. What are you so scared of? Are you planning on downloading child porn while you are a mile high?
/., and went to BestBuy.com to check TV prices while I'm flying, they are more than welcome to waste their time.
Look, the internet is an open book...anything you look at, or put on it, anywhere, is open game. It's just common sense.
If you expect any public connection like that to not be exposed you are sorely mistaken. If Bush and his cronies want to know that I read Yahoo! news, checked
Smart people don't do anything the wish to hide on the Internet...
AE
Jet Blue is the most amazing airline out there - cheap tickets, no hassle terms (i.e. you can change your ticket without penalty for a measley 20 bucks up until the flight departs), super-accomodating employees, nice, roomy seats, DirectTV, those delicious blue chips, and now this!
Knowing JetBlue it won't be very expensive either. They are truly the model of how an airline should be, focused on the passenger, their cost, and experience, not simply a government-bailed-out bloated corporation that sells seats next to each other for hundreds and thousands different than the seat next to them.
So bravo to Jet Blue - they already are my favorite airline, and they just keep getting better!
AE
I'm glad someone is posting it.
All antivirus software does is bog down your PC. I used it for 10 years before I realized how useless it was.
I run windows, but I don't get malware and viruses. Worst thing I ever get is an errant cookie. Why? Because I don't go to shady porn sites, I never download anything I don't know is safe, and I don't use IE.
Every few months now I take the time to install NAV long enough to scan my system and ensure that I'm not infected, and every time, clean as a whistle.
Computer security isn't hard for the home user. Have a good firewall, don't download crap, don't go to shady websites, use AdAware/Spybot every once in awhile, and be happy.
Pop-ups, spam, spyware, malware, viruses...it's all but eliminated by just being smart and using the bare minimum tools to protect yourself. It's people that just click on random shit and who fall for those "YOU WON AN XBOX 360!" and download shady software that get the issues.
I'm not saying it can never happen to me; that would be foolish. But the chances of it happening are greatly exaggerated, and if you keep decent backups it doesn't matter anyway most of the time if it does happen. It's just not worth paying the increasing prices of AV software, nor is it worth how much it slows up your PC.
AE
Um, I guess you missed it, but this isn't speculation.
Sony announced pricing at E3 a few weeks ago. $599/$499 is indeed the price, depending on configuration. I'd do a google search to get you a reference, but it's such common knowledge I'm not going to waste the keystrokes. You can if you wish.
AE
You miss the entire point.
Both PS3 and XBOX 360 are going after a shrinking market. There just aren't that many people out there who give a rats ass about either of them; the gaming market has gotten more and more narrow.
Normal people don't spend $400-700 on a video game console with a game or two. That's enough to buy a fully-loaded PC. And let's not forget the $60 games they expect you to continue to buy to go along with it, many of which suck and you feel like a big chump for spending your hard earned dollars on it.
Budgets on these games keep going up, they get more convoluted (not specificly complex), the control schemes are so whacked that it takes 10 hours to figure out just how to play some of them, and so many are simply rehashes of each other with pretty new skins. The audience for these titles is dwindling, not growing.
And among those that do want it, the easy-to-impress-with-pretty-things 12-17 year old market, they won't even be able to afford it. "Gee, Mom and Dad, can I have a $600 game system for Christmas? Oh, and I'll need a few $60 games too!" I don't know many kids in that age bracket that aren't from wealthy families who can save up that much cash from their after-school jobs.
People want fun, easy to play, but hard to master, games. Sony and MS are going after their shrinking audience, and the rest of the world is waiting for something like the Wii, which will be affordable, accessable, innovative, and it looks like will have some hella fun games.
Let Sony and MS fight over the dwindling "hardcore" market, and watch as Wii sells numbers that neither company can possibly imagine. Hell, even my parents want one - and they haven't touched a console since the NES let them play DuckHunt. I'm no Nintendo apologist, but I've got to tell you this time it really looks like their innovation is going to pay off.
AE
Do people really believe these statistics? How can they loose 34 billion bucks if they didn't have it in the first place?
I buy reasonably priced software. I used to pirate MS Office just because when I was a student and needed those tools, I couldn't afford a $500 software package. However, if I hadn't been able to do that, I could have just done the work needed to be done with that software in the computer lab; they didn't "loose" that money, because if I used a pirated copy or not I still wouldn't have spent the $500, it just let me work on the laptop in my room instead of up the hill in the library.
The irony is, now that I can afford a $500 piece of software, I don't use it. Wordpad is enough for most everything I need, and for the rare occasions I do need a spreadsheet or something (a few times a month), I use OpenOffice.
I honestly hope no one out there takes this seriously in the business world, I hope they know better; if the world worked like this, I could claim losses of billions myself for all those lottery tickets I never bought for jackpots I never won...
AE
...who absoltutely, no matter what, would never, ever, under any condition, "rent" music in any way, shape, or form?
All this B.S. and they'd kill all but the most dedicated of "illegal" downloaders if they just sold CD's for a reasonable price. The absolute vast majority of people want to buy CD's, not downloads or "rentals", EVEN those that use portable devices. Most serious music lovers I know buy the CD, rip it, then store it safely away.
What's discouraged all of this is $18-20 discs that we were promised once upon a time would eventually come down in price, not up. If a CD cost ten bucks, I'd buy three or four a week; I'd even be willing to take a chance on buying a crappy album for just a couple of songs at that price. But at twice the price, I have much more than twice the aversion and I'd just rather download a few songs and listen to what I already have instead of even trying out new music, sad to say.
As to MTV selling out, come on guys - MTV reinvented sell-out at it's inception. It's part of it's charm that it's always been a corporate mouth-piece in one way or another. Otherwise why do you think it's stayed on the air this long? It ain't Laguana Beach or whatever that psudo-reality crap they show between thinly veiled payola-based commericals (better known as TRL).
AE
Why is this being talked about? Because someone at MS or Sony had their panties in a wad because a) virtually all the mainstream media is talking about from E3 is the Wii, b) the enormously positive reaction to the Wii by the gaming "press", and c) both MS and Sony spokespeople have been heavily quoted as saying that in addition to their respective console, consumers will likely want a Wii as well, so they thought this would cause some minor scandal.
In this case, it's too little, and too late, for character assasination.
This is why this will blow away into the nothingness; it's not a big deal to begin with, and it's even less of a deal because of the qualified success the Wii showing at E3 was. Just shows how scared they are because their "hardcore I want 32 buttons to mash in a game that takes 10 hours to learn" crowd is getting smaller by the generation, yet Wii is set to appeal to non-gamers, former-gamers, and existing-gamers is a virtually unlimited potential audience.
AE
...Just don't put shit on the Internet you want to keep secret. You never enter it in, it never gets out. AE