what the heck are you talking about.... are you blind... deaf or just plainly dumb !!! your goverment is going to boot you and start hurting.... that stupid patriot act is more harmful to americans then anyone else... yes i know you had a terrorist outrage... well shite happens... examine the cause.... tighten the loose ends...
I think you're the one that's confused here. Lighten up. It was all tongue-in-cheek man.
I travel regularly between the USA and Europe... What's to prevent me from buying several copies of this tool and take them back with me to Europe?
The TSA/customs. Remember! We are fighting the terrorists on many fronts including right here on our "homeland". Everyone in the government must do their part to stop those that are aiding terrorism.
If you think I'm joking, you're unfortunately only half right.
And now, Dubya & Company want to try to restrict crypto once again. I really wish I could say I was surprised, but this is sadly a completely predictable move.
Well, obviously because Clinton relaxed those laws the "terrorists" were able to get these products and then use them against the US! What don't you understand?!
This strategy is doomed to failure, not only because foreign companies are perfectly able to develop their own products, but because these 'restricted' products are easily available on warez servers all over the world. If I want a copy of LC5, I can get one in less than five minutes, entirely free of charge, and I don't need to be in the U.S. to do it.
Just like anything that we try to restrict the "terrorists" from getting their hands on. It's a losing battle but one that's not meant to do anything to stop terrorism. It's meant to control the US population.
You might think that D&C would at least try to just keep tabs on international users of LC5 (after all, a wasp in a tent is a lot friendlier when you can see it), but instead, they choose the option to ban export, insuring that truly malicious users will stay well under the radar. Well done, George.
Sorry, but you just lost all credibility. The graphics on the Xbox and PS2 are dramatically different. And if you are going to compare PS2 graphics to 360 graphics, please know what you are talking about beforehand.
You're an AC, what credibility do you have? None. I've seen the unit on display. I'm unimpressed.
The 360 is an excellent system, and there is a reason why there were people waiting in line for 20 hours last Sunday a month after the actual launch.
The system might be excellent but from what I've seen, the games that are *currently* out there just don't make it worthwhile to stand in line for hours on end (especially here in Minnesota where it's cold).
From what I have seen (based on the various displays in and around my home area), if it's not being displayed on a huge HD monitor, the graphics just aren't all that much different from what we've seen in the XBox 1 or the PS2. I personally don't know a single person with an HD monitor, nevermind one that's as large as those they display the 360 on in the stores. I know I will never have an HD monitor in my home so I'm not sure what benefit the 360 has for most people RIGHT now to stand in those long lines other than MS-funded and media-created hype.
1) Have shows produced completly by hobbiests. The hobbiests of course still need to make a profit, but they do that with their day job. In which case, expensive shows like Myth Busters will be very few and far between.
You mean that it's just not possible for people to sponser stuff w/o a commercial? Doesn't make much sense to me and it's only because of your indoctrination at the hands of commercialized TV since your were born that you think it's the only way it would work now.
What's wrong with an entire episode, shown commercial free, that touts a sponsor for the 1/2 hour time slot (or hour depending on the show)? I'd rather have a 2 or 3 minute commercial air before my show telling me about some product and how they are providing me the next 27 minutes of television than deal with commercials in the middle.
Because they don't "tout a sponser" at the beginning of the show for three minutes. In the case of the 24 episode I mentioned, IIRC, the entire episode showcased Ford automobiles going here there and everywhere and included more closeups of the automobiles' Ford emblem than it did on Jack Bauer.
Take CSI: Las Vegas as another example. They talk about a particular product, I believe in the case I'm remembering most recently it was a phone that did music and they mentioned downloading the song and playing it back on that phone. At the commercial break they showed a commercial for the phone and played that particular piece of music again. VERY LAME.
How about Survivor? They have car ads all over that thing (since the beginning of the show) and this time they showed *4* of them on the show and then advertised them not only on the show and in the commercial breaks but *also* at the end of the show at their "final episode" and "reunion show".
Let's do the Apprentice, shall we? Amazing bars? Know of them? They were "created" on the show and then marketed in real life afterwards. That entire show is an extreme example of payoffs to keep it going. Yahoo, Radio Shack, Nextel, etc all paid for spots on that show to come off as "tasks" that the show participants had to complete. All it really was for was to get more name recognition.
Your cynicism is misplaced - it should not be directed at the pockets of the networks, but rather at your own inability to recognize that the problem is that the end-users who choose to pirate are an unbalancing force in the ecosystem, and if and when that ecosystem comes crashing down (as many here so often claim they wish it will, at least as music is concerned), then they better be the last in line bitching about how suddenly there are fewer shows on TV (or music CDs in the stores) or that copyrightholders increasingly resort to stricter and stricted methods to try to bring some balance back.
If anything it's 100% properly placed. Please don't confuse me with someone that cares if TV forever dropped off the face of the earth. I would be the first to dance in the streets that I would no longer have to pay $55.98 a month for DirecTV. I could care less if 4 hours of my day were taken up by TV. I have better things to waste my time and energy on.
Commercials piss everyone off, but there's no reason to get on your soapbox about it.
50 years ago they weren't showing taped programs and the actors had to really know their stuff to do their parts correctly. 50 years ago they weren't syndicating shows to show re-runs of forever after. 50 years ago was a long time ago and no longer matters.
People need to be on their soapbox and tell how they feel. How dare you infringe on another's rights because you are an anonymous troll?
JAMIE HYNEMAN -- Other similar ways of avoiding commercials are also having this effect, and companies like mine are going to go out of business because the advertising revenues are being cut. Somebody has to pay for good programming, and if you cut out all the ads, and cut out the cable revenues, then you will end up with nothing but the kind of programming that is on public access stations, which is fine if that is what you happen to like, but limiting and a bit of a waste for a medium that is as powerful as TV.
Or, like they have been doing more and more, they are going to move to blatant advertising inside programs via product placement, discussions by characters about products and then linking outside-show ads to that, or making TV shows "commercial free" and "sponsored by Foo" (i.e. 24's season premeire a couple years ago -- which is one of the reasons I stopped watching the show).
The shows that have been doing this (Survivor, The Apprentice, etc) have done nothing but piss me off more than their existence already does. The fact that my wife watches them and I like to be w/her forces me to watch these programs. The blatant in-show advertising is actually starting to piss HER off. Want to alienate your viewership? Piss off those that actually wanted to watch your shows.
ADAM SAVAGE -- Personally, I cannot condone the downloading of copyrighted work without the permission of the copyright holder. That being said, I look forward to a future where such a thing will be possible, and encouraged, and conducted in such a way that properly takes care of the needs of the artists, the distributors, AND the end users. We're not there yet, but Creative Commons is a step in the right direction to be sure.
Sadly the networks cannot condone properly taking care of the needs of the end users. That wouldn't be fiscally responsible to their pockets.
Geeks around the nation will revolt if this happens.
This would only occur if porn was controlled. It then wouldn't be the geeks revolting, it would be everyone. No, I'm not kidding.
Look at the atrocities that have occured since 2001 under the guise of "protections"! You don't see *anyone* revolting against the government because of those do you? No, everyone (including my shamed self) are sitting here whining and wondering "what's next?" instead of swarming Washington DC in protest.
Actually, because of how I use GMail, I'd prefer that they add an option to "Mark Messages as Read" before I label/Archive them. That way I don't have to visit GMail daily in order to make sure I don't have to thumb through multiple "All Mail" to manually mark them as read.
On a side note, I'm thrilled with the HTML version as it works *VERY WELL* on my mobile device and it's quite fast! I take back what I said last week about Google coming out w/lame stuff like Web Clips and GMusic;)
Or, in a more likely scenario, they aren't going to care and they will continue to only support IE for Windows or other browsers that happen to closely mimic its behavior.
And switching banks because of browser compatibility isn't an option for most people.
Washington is not going to change until you get some real competition in there and that means a third party.
Yes, because this holy "third party" will be so far detached from the two parties we currently have that none of this bullshit will go on, right? Oooh, you are thinking that we're going to get rid of ALL of those in office that are part of the "two party" system and replace them *all* with members from the "third party".
Technically, the New-aged GOP is exactly that, a "third party" that no one has ever seen in America before. One where ignorance, blatant disregard for everything the US stands for, and religious beliefs take precedence over everything else.
BTW -- I used to consider myself a Republican. I don't know what to call myself now.
Posted by samzenpus on 12:31 PM December 16th, 2005 would only take a single character move to make it spamzenus. But then again, if they were really trying to spam Slashdot to gain better PR they would have had to include a link.
I guess we shouldn't even trust the SEO spammers to know what they're talking about;)
This review is useless. It's paragraph after paragraph of some unknown web weenie exhalting a $200 "marketing kit". No where does the reviewer actually discuss the content of the book. It's an invaluable reasource for web professionals... yeah, yeah... don't be turned off by it's (never actually stated) price.... yeah, yeah... The author is a SEO genius... Ok, we get it! Now tell us something of substance!
Just like *any* SEO kits, companies, or techniques, it's all horseshit aimed at pwnz0ring unsuspecting business owners, CEOs, and other retards with pull in the company.
As for the Web Clips, those definitely are not advertisements, lest they're in the guise of Slashvertisements or their kin; It's simply an RSS aggregator that you can turn off quite easily in the preferences. I know, maybe they intruded slightly by turning it on with its launch, but don't you like to show off your new toys when you get them?
I didn't imply that they were ads. I merely stated that I was unimpressed with their existence.
Hasn't the RIAA issued cease-and-decist letters to lyric websites before?
Yeah, along with any number of other sites. What does that have to do with providing links (automatically) to these sites? Are you saying that Google should be liable for the content they link to?
I guess I'm set in my ways and all but I'm just not a fan of this. I realize Google has to make money and this is one way of doing it but I'd rather just enter the name of a band or part of a song and find out the lyrics, cover art, etc the old fashioned way... With the great results Google used to return.
Now, with this, I'm going to be inundated with more advertisements. I already knew that I could go to iTMS, Amazon.com, allofmp3, etc to get my music after I found what I was looking for. Why do I need Google to tell me?
I was raving about GMail, Google Maps, in the past but with the last two "additions" which were Web Clips in GMail and now this, I just can't say I'm impressed. It was fine the way it was.
Apart from the fact that Sony is the rootkit/spyware company, and it is a risk to let their products anywhere near your house?
Uhh, it's a game console. The only spyware that Sony could possibly put on me is what games I play and if I happened to be on the Internet playing them. If I did hook it up to the Internet to play the games they'd know all of that anyway. I don't see your point.
There are lots of "gory games for teens who want to be adults" available for the GameCube, you know. Maybe Nintendo creates these "cartoonish and childlike" games internally, but there are other games that are not made by Nintendo. Haven't you paid attention?
No, not particularly. Anytime discussion about Nintendo comes up people always point to the interesting and educational cartoons that Nintendo puts out. Please see the other poster in this thread that mentioned Mario Striker.
I can understand that you are a Sony fan now, but aren't you kind of contradicting yourself?
No. I can understand that you're a Nintendo fan now, but aren't you kind of trolling? Yeah, I thought so.
I dare you to take a 360 and hook it up to ANY tv with a native resolution of 720p, 1080i, or 1080p (the new Sony SXRDs for example). The image quality of a 360 is breathtaking when it is used correctly.
I saw the XBox 360 on display at several stores throughout the holiday shopping season. Honestly? I can't say I'm impressed. The leap between the PS1 and the PS2 was far greater than what I can see between the XBox 360 and the current generation of consoles on the market.
Anyway, gameplay is much more important to me than graphics. PGR 3 just didn't snag me like Gran Turismo did. Considering they are promoting the 360 so heavily with PGR 3 (at least from what I can tell) I would assume it would have not only looked hot but also played hot.
Although I fear, no matter what happens, sony and microsoft teenagers may never get rid of the anti-nintendo stigma that has been around for quite some time.
Being a "Sony Adult" and watching the random offerings of Nintendo over recent years, I can't find a single shred of evidence that will make me believe that I should move away from the PS3 for the Revolution.
Everyone says, "well it looks like the Revolution could do interesting things" but based on MY experience and knowledge it's going to be a whole slew of cartoonish and childlike gaming all over again. Some people like those games, and that's fine, but I'm more interested in REAL REVOLUTION. Something I have not seen before. Sadly, that's nearly impossible to accomplish.
So let's dump the karma whoring Revolution++ rhetoric and instead wait until we see what the Revolution offers after it's been on the market for a year.
Slashdot Mirror
what the heck are you talking about.... are you blind... deaf or just plainly dumb !!! your goverment is going to boot you and start hurting.... that stupid patriot act is more harmful to americans then anyone else... yes i know you had a terrorist outrage... well shite happens... examine the cause.... tighten the loose ends...
I think you're the one that's confused here. Lighten up. It was all tongue-in-cheek man.
I travel regularly between the USA and Europe... What's to prevent me from buying several copies of this tool and take them back with me to Europe?
The TSA/customs. Remember! We are fighting the terrorists on many fronts including right here on our "homeland". Everyone in the government must do their part to stop those that are aiding terrorism.
If you think I'm joking, you're unfortunately only half right.
And now, Dubya & Company want to try to restrict crypto once again. I really wish I could say I was surprised, but this is sadly a completely predictable move.
Well, obviously because Clinton relaxed those laws the "terrorists" were able to get these products and then use them against the US! What don't you understand?!
This strategy is doomed to failure, not only because foreign companies are perfectly able to develop their own products, but because these 'restricted' products are easily available on warez servers all over the world. If I want a copy of LC5, I can get one in less than five minutes, entirely free of charge, and I don't need to be in the U.S. to do it.
Just like anything that we try to restrict the "terrorists" from getting their hands on. It's a losing battle but one that's not meant to do anything to stop terrorism. It's meant to control the US population.
You might think that D&C would at least try to just keep tabs on international users of LC5 (after all, a wasp in a tent is a lot friendlier when you can see it), but instead, they choose the option to ban export, insuring that truly malicious users will stay well under the radar. Well done, George.
It's just another way to help the trade deficit!
Sorry, but you just lost all credibility. The graphics on the Xbox and PS2 are dramatically different. And if you are going to compare PS2 graphics to 360 graphics, please know what you are talking about beforehand.
You're an AC, what credibility do you have? None. I've seen the unit on display. I'm unimpressed.
The 360 is an excellent system, and there is a reason why there were people waiting in line for 20 hours last Sunday a month after the actual launch.
The system might be excellent but from what I've seen, the games that are *currently* out there just don't make it worthwhile to stand in line for hours on end (especially here in Minnesota where it's cold).
From what I have seen (based on the various displays in and around my home area), if it's not being displayed on a huge HD monitor, the graphics just aren't all that much different from what we've seen in the XBox 1 or the PS2. I personally don't know a single person with an HD monitor, nevermind one that's as large as those they display the 360 on in the stores. I know I will never have an HD monitor in my home so I'm not sure what benefit the 360 has for most people RIGHT now to stand in those long lines other than MS-funded and media-created hype.
1) Have shows produced completly by hobbiests. The hobbiests of course still need to make a profit, but they do that with their day job. In which case, expensive shows like Myth Busters will be very few and far between.
You mean that it's just not possible for people to sponser stuff w/o a commercial? Doesn't make much sense to me and it's only because of your indoctrination at the hands of commercialized TV since your were born that you think it's the only way it would work now.
Like I'm going to take advice from a Slashdotter about women! ;-)
You should really read what I post, it then allows you to understand what's going on. Ooooh, but then you couldn't troll, right?
The fact that my wife watches them and I like to be w/her forces me to watch these programs.
What's wrong with an entire episode, shown commercial free, that touts a sponsor for the 1/2 hour time slot (or hour depending on the show)? I'd rather have a 2 or 3 minute commercial air before my show telling me about some product and how they are providing me the next 27 minutes of television than deal with commercials in the middle.
Because they don't "tout a sponser" at the beginning of the show for three minutes. In the case of the 24 episode I mentioned, IIRC, the entire episode showcased Ford automobiles going here there and everywhere and included more closeups of the automobiles' Ford emblem than it did on Jack Bauer.
Take CSI: Las Vegas as another example. They talk about a particular product, I believe in the case I'm remembering most recently it was a phone that did music and they mentioned downloading the song and playing it back on that phone. At the commercial break they showed a commercial for the phone and played that particular piece of music again. VERY LAME.
How about Survivor? They have car ads all over that thing (since the beginning of the show) and this time they showed *4* of them on the show and then advertised them not only on the show and in the commercial breaks but *also* at the end of the show at their "final episode" and "reunion show".
Let's do the Apprentice, shall we? Amazing bars? Know of them? They were "created" on the show and then marketed in real life afterwards. That entire show is an extreme example of payoffs to keep it going. Yahoo, Radio Shack, Nextel, etc all paid for spots on that show to come off as "tasks" that the show participants had to complete. All it really was for was to get more name recognition.
I could go on, but you get the idea.
Your cynicism is misplaced - it should not be directed at the pockets of the networks, but rather at your own inability to recognize that the problem is that the end-users who choose to pirate are an unbalancing force in the ecosystem, and if and when that ecosystem comes crashing down (as many here so often claim they wish it will, at least as music is concerned), then they better be the last in line bitching about how suddenly there are fewer shows on TV (or music CDs in the stores) or that copyrightholders increasingly resort to stricter and stricted methods to try to bring some balance back.
If anything it's 100% properly placed. Please don't confuse me with someone that cares if TV forever dropped off the face of the earth. I would be the first to dance in the streets that I would no longer have to pay $55.98 a month for DirecTV. I could care less if 4 hours of my day were taken up by TV. I have better things to waste my time and energy on.
Commercials piss everyone off, but there's no reason to get on your soapbox about it.
50 years ago they weren't showing taped programs and the actors had to really know their stuff to do their parts correctly. 50 years ago they weren't syndicating shows to show re-runs of forever after. 50 years ago was a long time ago and no longer matters.
People need to be on their soapbox and tell how they feel. How dare you infringe on another's rights because you are an anonymous troll?
JAMIE HYNEMAN -- Other similar ways of avoiding commercials are also having this effect, and companies like mine are going to go out of business because the advertising revenues are being cut. Somebody has to pay for good programming, and if you cut out all the ads, and cut out the cable revenues, then you will end up with nothing but the kind of programming that is on public access stations, which is fine if that is what you happen to like, but limiting and a bit of a waste for a medium that is as powerful as TV.
Or, like they have been doing more and more, they are going to move to blatant advertising inside programs via product placement, discussions by characters about products and then linking outside-show ads to that, or making TV shows "commercial free" and "sponsored by Foo" (i.e. 24's season premeire a couple years ago -- which is one of the reasons I stopped watching the show).
The shows that have been doing this (Survivor, The Apprentice, etc) have done nothing but piss me off more than their existence already does. The fact that my wife watches them and I like to be w/her forces me to watch these programs. The blatant in-show advertising is actually starting to piss HER off. Want to alienate your viewership? Piss off those that actually wanted to watch your shows.
ADAM SAVAGE -- Personally, I cannot condone the downloading of copyrighted work without the permission of the copyright holder. That being said, I look forward to a future where such a thing will be possible, and encouraged, and conducted in such a way that properly takes care of the needs of the artists, the distributors, AND the end users. We're not there yet, but Creative Commons is a step in the right direction to be sure.
Sadly the networks cannot condone properly taking care of the needs of the end users. That wouldn't be fiscally responsible to their pockets.
Geeks around the nation will revolt if this happens.
This would only occur if porn was controlled. It then wouldn't be the geeks revolting, it would be everyone. No, I'm not kidding.
Look at the atrocities that have occured since 2001 under the guise of "protections"! You don't see *anyone* revolting against the government because of those do you? No, everyone (including my shamed self) are sitting here whining and wondering "what's next?" instead of swarming Washington DC in protest.
We are a sad excuse.
Actually, because of how I use GMail, I'd prefer that they add an option to "Mark Messages as Read" before I label/Archive them. That way I don't have to visit GMail daily in order to make sure I don't have to thumb through multiple "All Mail" to manually mark them as read.
;)
On a side note, I'm thrilled with the HTML version as it works *VERY WELL* on my mobile device and it's quite fast! I take back what I said last week about Google coming out w/lame stuff like Web Clips and GMusic
Or, in a more likely scenario, they aren't going to care and they will continue to only support IE for Windows or other browsers that happen to closely mimic its behavior.
And switching banks because of browser compatibility isn't an option for most people.
I call bullshit Garcia. I've seen enough of you to know you're a wacko liberal.
LOL. yes, you know me and everything I believe from the posts you happen across because they are modded +5. Sure dumbass.
Washington is not going to change until you get some real competition in there and that means a third party.
Yes, because this holy "third party" will be so far detached from the two parties we currently have that none of this bullshit will go on, right? Oooh, you are thinking that we're going to get rid of ALL of those in office that are part of the "two party" system and replace them *all* with members from the "third party".
Technically, the New-aged GOP is exactly that, a "third party" that no one has ever seen in America before. One where ignorance, blatant disregard for everything the US stands for, and religious beliefs take precedence over everything else.
BTW -- I used to consider myself a Republican. I don't know what to call myself now.
Posted by samzenpus on 12:31 PM December 16th, 2005 would only take a single character move to make it spamzenus. But then again, if they were really trying to spam Slashdot to gain better PR they would have had to include a link.
;)
I guess we shouldn't even trust the SEO spammers to know what they're talking about
This review is useless. It's paragraph after paragraph of some unknown web weenie exhalting a $200 "marketing kit". No where does the reviewer actually discuss the content of the book. It's an invaluable reasource for web professionals... yeah, yeah... don't be turned off by it's (never actually stated) price.... yeah, yeah... The author is a SEO genius... Ok, we get it! Now tell us something of substance!
Just like *any* SEO kits, companies, or techniques, it's all horseshit aimed at pwnz0ring unsuspecting business owners, CEOs, and other retards with pull in the company.
As for the Web Clips, those definitely are not advertisements, lest they're in the guise of Slashvertisements or their kin; It's simply an RSS aggregator that you can turn off quite easily in the preferences. I know, maybe they intruded slightly by turning it on with its launch, but don't you like to show off your new toys when you get them?
I didn't imply that they were ads. I merely stated that I was unimpressed with their existence.
Hasn't the RIAA issued cease-and-decist letters to lyric websites before?
Yeah, along with any number of other sites. What does that have to do with providing links (automatically) to these sites? Are you saying that Google should be liable for the content they link to?
I guess I'm set in my ways and all but I'm just not a fan of this. I realize Google has to make money and this is one way of doing it but I'd rather just enter the name of a band or part of a song and find out the lyrics, cover art, etc the old fashioned way... With the great results Google used to return.
Now, with this, I'm going to be inundated with more advertisements. I already knew that I could go to iTMS, Amazon.com, allofmp3, etc to get my music after I found what I was looking for. Why do I need Google to tell me?
I was raving about GMail, Google Maps, in the past but with the last two "additions" which were Web Clips in GMail and now this, I just can't say I'm impressed. It was fine the way it was.
Apart from the fact that Sony is the rootkit/spyware company, and it is a risk to let their products anywhere near your house?
Uhh, it's a game console. The only spyware that Sony could possibly put on me is what games I play and if I happened to be on the Internet playing them. If I did hook it up to the Internet to play the games they'd know all of that anyway. I don't see your point.
There are lots of "gory games for teens who want to be adults" available for the GameCube, you know. Maybe Nintendo creates these "cartoonish and childlike" games internally, but there are other games that are not made by Nintendo. Haven't you paid attention?
No, not particularly. Anytime discussion about Nintendo comes up people always point to the interesting and educational cartoons that Nintendo puts out. Please see the other poster in this thread that mentioned Mario Striker.
I can understand that you are a Sony fan now, but aren't you kind of contradicting yourself?
No. I can understand that you're a Nintendo fan now, but aren't you kind of trolling? Yeah, I thought so.
I dare you to take a 360 and hook it up to ANY tv with a native resolution of 720p, 1080i, or 1080p (the new Sony SXRDs for example). The image quality of a 360 is breathtaking when it is used correctly.
I saw the XBox 360 on display at several stores throughout the holiday shopping season. Honestly? I can't say I'm impressed. The leap between the PS1 and the PS2 was far greater than what I can see between the XBox 360 and the current generation of consoles on the market.
Anyway, gameplay is much more important to me than graphics. PGR 3 just didn't snag me like Gran Turismo did. Considering they are promoting the 360 so heavily with PGR 3 (at least from what I can tell) I would assume it would have not only looked hot but also played hot.
Although I fear, no matter what happens, sony and microsoft teenagers may never get rid of the anti-nintendo stigma that has been around for quite some time.
Being a "Sony Adult" and watching the random offerings of Nintendo over recent years, I can't find a single shred of evidence that will make me believe that I should move away from the PS3 for the Revolution.
Everyone says, "well it looks like the Revolution could do interesting things" but based on MY experience and knowledge it's going to be a whole slew of cartoonish and childlike gaming all over again. Some people like those games, and that's fine, but I'm more interested in REAL REVOLUTION. Something I have not seen before. Sadly, that's nearly impossible to accomplish.
So let's dump the karma whoring Revolution++ rhetoric and instead wait until we see what the Revolution offers after it's been on the market for a year.