The first however is what leads to you getting the second.
If Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo get a good response for their technology, the game developer wants to use it to make money selling games to those interested parties.
If you actually trust your ISP as much as you imply that we should in that paragraph, you're in trouble.
I run my own caching DNS service on my computer to resolve addresses (because I can) and get much better performance and security out of it than trusting my ISP. Either way, I can't know if a DNS address was signed or not when I'm actually using the results (whether on the web, through SSH or when MSN logs into the Microsoft servers), and that's a problem for adoption.
If the user can't tell that the records they're using are trusted or not, there's very little incentive for the records to be properly signed in the first place.
... and a trust network with ad-hoc IPSEC would be a much more valuable feature for the Internet than DNSSEC IMHO as it would completely eliminate these problems.
It would be even easier to do as I've mentioned before and offer domain signing services through trust agencies much the same way we do current browser certificates.
That way we have both the efficiency of a hierarchy and the stability of a non-centralized repository.
(yes I'm aware I didn't completely flesh out the idea this time... I'm sure you can come up with something similar to what's in my mind if you think about it)
Unlike console gaming, very few graphically intensive PC games are designed to work at a specific quality with a specific frame rate for a specific consumer card. Rather, they're designed to be able to harness power from cards that don't exist at the time of development, and make good use of the features they know of at the time of development.
On a console, the system you design on is the system your users play on and direct optimization for the platform is both necessary and worthwhile. In a PC gaming scenario, you can release a game that barely pulls 15fps on most peoples' systems (see Crysis) because hardware upgrades are or will become available to allow better performance for those who care to make the investment.
I've never used a more slick and easy to use media player than Amarok, and I go back to XMMS and many others before it.
Amarok 1.4 is easy to use, fast, intelligent, stable and extensible with good theming support and the ability to run as a tiny desktop widget or a big feature-filled iTunes-killing music browser.
I love how you got rated flamebait for pointing out that in a truly fair race, the 360 would never even have been made (since its predecessor lost so much money).
Fortunately for Microsoft, their pockets are very very deep and they're able to absorb huge losses to work on prototype after prototype before eventually finding something that really works or tanking the project completely.
No offence, but Sony's got a much better backward-compatibility track record than Nintendo.
Arguably backward compatibility has a lot more to do with your installed consumer base than anything else. If you count the number of Gameboy games that were on the market by the time the color or advance units were released, it would have been simply foolish to lose all those titles.
Sony on the other hand is obviously selling this product to people who don't yet have a PSP and several of the originally UMD-only games are available already on the PSN store to purchase as downloads already (and I'd expect a majority to make the transition in time).
Yes, if you have a classic PSP you'll want to replace it with another UMD-supporting PSP to play those games, or you can sell them and re-purchase the downloadable versions when you miss them. Yes, that's a pain. What did you do when you upgraded your SNES to your N64?
I really do like the motion-controlled fine grained aiming on sniper rifles in Killzone 2 on the PS3. I think its really well-done.
There are a few motion-controlled gimmick games on the PS3 that are actually quite fun, like the one with the rubber duckies that float. Did Sony force everyone to make use of motion? No. Is it available for developers who wanted it? Yes.
I know, before all you fanbois say it again, the Wii is immensely popular. Good for it. I still hate doing arm movements compared to button presses for special moves in fighting games.
His point stands on its own merits. "Good enough for making accurate movement calculations for new games" would be a good extension of the sentence though.
Nintendo's making a better motion controller. If they're making one, there's a perceived need for one. That's all.
Patenting actual hardware device innovations shouldn't be up for debate, its almost always a good thing for innovation. The problem is not licensing patents to competitors at fair rates.
We live very close to the school our daughter attends, and in a neighbourhood with several other children in her class (never mind her school) and yet she's the only one who walks herself to school.
Most of the other kids are driven (a couple blocks) and dropped off, and the rest are escorted by their parents down the sidewalk.
You don't have to live in a retirement area for there to be no other children to walk with, you just have to live near paranoid people.
Incidentally, its a beautiful old suburb with pretty trees, low traffic and no crime to speak of.
Are you unaware that most Linux distros don't use 'uninstall' software, but keep track of the files belonging to various 'packages' in a central database allowing the removal of any of said software at any time without any special third party software nor the permission of the installing package?
I like the parts that say that you agree to indemnify Microsoft of any harm caused by their software. The total disavowing of any guarantee of fitness for a particular use and the right to revoke your license to use their software at any time for any reason.
Also entertaining were the Office licenses that included the prohibition on using the software to in any way denigrate Microsoft or Windows.
The poster in question may not understand the sheer amount of marketing that went into releasing WoW, or the effect of marketing dollars on him or her.
On this platform, you happen to get a music single you listen to over and over again until you're sick of it for a dollar as well.
Its not as relevant what a dollar gets you in the rest of the world as what this particular market segment sees a dollar being worth.
If your game isn't as entertaining to them as the latest piece of music they downloaded and for at least as long, you should expect them to be annoyed at the price.
I often say to people who haven't picked up on it yet that good graphics are evident when you don't consciously notice them anymore.
I notice in one game that the grass I'm running on sucks really bad while fighting a beast. In another game, I don't notice how incredibly well they did the grass effect because its so fluid and well-created that I recognize it simply as grass.
There are situations where not noticing the graphics are in fact the proof that they are better, and if they were worse, that's when you'd start to notice.
Personally I find the low resolution background in GH distractingly annoying, but YMMV:-)
Slashdot Mirror
The first however is what leads to you getting the second.
If Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo get a good response for their technology, the game developer wants to use it to make money selling games to those interested parties.
Hopefully you've looked over dnscurve
If you actually trust your ISP as much as you imply that we should in that paragraph, you're in trouble.
I run my own caching DNS service on my computer to resolve addresses (because I can) and get much better performance and security out of it than trusting my ISP. Either way, I can't know if a DNS address was signed or not when I'm actually using the results (whether on the web, through SSH or when MSN logs into the Microsoft servers), and that's a problem for adoption.
If the user can't tell that the records they're using are trusted or not, there's very little incentive for the records to be properly signed in the first place.
... and a trust network with ad-hoc IPSEC would be a much more valuable feature for the Internet than DNSSEC IMHO as it would completely eliminate these problems.
It would be even easier to do as I've mentioned before and offer domain signing services through trust agencies much the same way we do current browser certificates.
That way we have both the efficiency of a hierarchy and the stability of a non-centralized repository.
(yes I'm aware I didn't completely flesh out the idea this time ... I'm sure you can come up with something similar to what's in my mind if you think about it)
Maybe you should actually read up on why Dan's right or wrong about DNSSEC and make a point instead of harping on about his attitude issues.
He may have a god complex, but he's rarely wrong, so you might want to prove him wrong before you assume you have the right to judge his attitude.
Unlike console gaming, very few graphically intensive PC games are designed to work at a specific quality with a specific frame rate for a specific consumer card. Rather, they're designed to be able to harness power from cards that don't exist at the time of development, and make good use of the features they know of at the time of development.
On a console, the system you design on is the system your users play on and direct optimization for the platform is both necessary and worthwhile. In a PC gaming scenario, you can release a game that barely pulls 15fps on most peoples' systems (see Crysis) because hardware upgrades are or will become available to allow better performance for those who care to make the investment.
I've never used a more slick and easy to use media player than Amarok, and I go back to XMMS and many others before it.
Amarok 1.4 is easy to use, fast, intelligent, stable and extensible with good theming support and the ability to run as a tiny desktop widget or a big feature-filled iTunes-killing music browser.
I love how you got rated flamebait for pointing out that in a truly fair race, the 360 would never even have been made (since its predecessor lost so much money).
Fortunately for Microsoft, their pockets are very very deep and they're able to absorb huge losses to work on prototype after prototype before eventually finding something that really works or tanking the project completely.
See Windows 1 & 2, IE (most versions), etc.
So you think more people have bought say Sony or Panasonic TVs and DVD players than knock-offs from Korea and China?
People buy cheap. If they could, they'd buy the knock-off Wii from some no-name company at Walmart for $15 less than a real one.
No offence, but Sony's got a much better backward-compatibility track record than Nintendo.
Arguably backward compatibility has a lot more to do with your installed consumer base than anything else. If you count the number of Gameboy games that were on the market by the time the color or advance units were released, it would have been simply foolish to lose all those titles.
Sony on the other hand is obviously selling this product to people who don't yet have a PSP and several of the originally UMD-only games are available already on the PSN store to purchase as downloads already (and I'd expect a majority to make the transition in time).
Yes, if you have a classic PSP you'll want to replace it with another UMD-supporting PSP to play those games, or you can sell them and re-purchase the downloadable versions when you miss them. Yes, that's a pain. What did you do when you upgraded your SNES to your N64?
I really do like the motion-controlled fine grained aiming on sniper rifles in Killzone 2 on the PS3. I think its really well-done.
There are a few motion-controlled gimmick games on the PS3 that are actually quite fun, like the one with the rubber duckies that float. Did Sony force everyone to make use of motion? No. Is it available for developers who wanted it? Yes.
I know, before all you fanbois say it again, the Wii is immensely popular. Good for it. I still hate doing arm movements compared to button presses for special moves in fighting games.
Exactly. Without patents, Sony or Microsoft could simply sell their own Wii and be done with it.
His point stands on its own merits. "Good enough for making accurate movement calculations for new games" would be a good extension of the sentence though.
Nintendo's making a better motion controller. If they're making one, there's a perceived need for one. That's all.
I really love Ren & Stimpy :-)
Patents don't prevent competition. You're confused.
Unfair licensing practises prevent competition.
Patenting actual hardware device innovations shouldn't be up for debate, its almost always a good thing for innovation. The problem is not licensing patents to competitors at fair rates.
We live very close to the school our daughter attends, and in a neighbourhood with several other children in her class (never mind her school) and yet she's the only one who walks herself to school.
Most of the other kids are driven (a couple blocks) and dropped off, and the rest are escorted by their parents down the sidewalk.
You don't have to live in a retirement area for there to be no other children to walk with, you just have to live near paranoid people.
Incidentally, its a beautiful old suburb with pretty trees, low traffic and no crime to speak of.
Leave room for a look-up table and multiple phone numbers so the tattoo artist can add more and mark which is current.
Are you unaware that most Linux distros don't use 'uninstall' software, but keep track of the files belonging to various 'packages' in a central database allowing the removal of any of said software at any time without any special third party software nor the permission of the installing package?
I like the parts that say that you agree to indemnify Microsoft of any harm caused by their software. The total disavowing of any guarantee of fitness for a particular use and the right to revoke your license to use their software at any time for any reason.
Also entertaining were the Office licenses that included the prohibition on using the software to in any way denigrate Microsoft or Windows.
So that's where the top-secret super-collider was located.
Wait, isn't that game called Burnout?
The poster in question may not understand the sheer amount of marketing that went into releasing WoW, or the effect of marketing dollars on him or her.
On this platform, you happen to get a music single you listen to over and over again until you're sick of it for a dollar as well.
Its not as relevant what a dollar gets you in the rest of the world as what this particular market segment sees a dollar being worth.
If your game isn't as entertaining to them as the latest piece of music they downloaded and for at least as long, you should expect them to be annoyed at the price.
I often say to people who haven't picked up on it yet that good graphics are evident when you don't consciously notice them anymore.
I notice in one game that the grass I'm running on sucks really bad while fighting a beast. In another game, I don't notice how incredibly well they did the grass effect because its so fluid and well-created that I recognize it simply as grass.
There are situations where not noticing the graphics are in fact the proof that they are better, and if they were worse, that's when you'd start to notice.
Personally I find the low resolution background in GH distractingly annoying, but YMMV :-)