Or, maybe some companies want to use that closed, proprietary system with a larger support base? Not every company in the world is going to run out and enthusiastically embrace something because it's Open Source. Obviously being OS isn't a big enough factor to move people to change or they would have. As for isolation, if you want to make a comparison in size and acceptance you might want to look at facts because I think you would have to switch the roles that you applied. Like it or not Microsoft products have a far larger install base than Linux and so to apply your analogy, they would be "civilization".
Agreed. It really depends on how the company is using Exchange. There are often additional applications run through Outlook and Exchange that there are no Linux equivalents for.
When I first started my experiment I was trying to keep it a secret out of fear of attacks from angry Microsoft worshipers...
Seriously, give it a rest. The vast majority of people in an office wouldn't give a shit what you are using. If sysadmins are concerned at all it's most likely because they don't want/need more support issues. Unlike zealots like yourself, most people use computers and software as tools, not as a religious sacrament. Maybe you were being tongue in cheek, but you failed horribly.
That's a load of crap. The GPU in the 360 is at least as powerful as the PS3 if not slightly better. Look at all the cross platform games out there and you'll see they usually look better on the 360. Not to mention EA saying that their new sport titles would be running at 60FPS on the 360 and 30FPS on the PS3. Get your facts right there pal.
In other words they wanted to, but in the end they didn't because Sony dragged their feet. So, it's more than likely they weren't very deep into the PS3 when this all went down. Considering how long it took final dev kits to get out and how much of a lead the 360 had not to mention that they have a working 360 engine. All this adds up to the fact that original intentions aside it's far more likely that the 360 is NOW the lead GTA IV platform. Your little quote doesn't prove that the PS3 was/is the lead platform. All it says is that R* wanted it to be to continue their relationship with Sony. Considering the way things are going now maybe it wasn't a bad thing for R* that it worked out this way. It's just too bad that 360 owners have to wait now while they iron out the PS3.
So, in other words you pulled this "fact" out of your ass and have nothing to back up the statement. All signs point to the fact that you are very mistaken. Considering they demo on the 360 AND have already released a title using their new engine on the 360. For an "Intellectual Elitist" you are very short on facts to back up your assertions.
Because no one else ever thought or developed a protocol with distributed file transfer. If MS is doing something they must have copied it from someone.
Possibly, so I guess I'm not the target market. I have a laptop, but it pisses me off that all I can change is the RAM. If they had an standard that allowed easy exchange of other parts, maybe like a PC card type of architecture that would encourage more people to do it I bet.
Until they come up with a standard that allows me to upgrade my laptop CPU, video, audio, etc. easily I won't be replacing desktop. The big advantage of having an open standard PC is the choice and ability to upgrade.
Out the dozen or so people that I know that own 360s there have been some dead ones, but not a single person has ever mentioned a scratched disc. This seems to be blown out of proportion.
Sometimes you pay for content on Live and sometimes you don't. Also, often if you are willing to wait it's free. All those Rainbow 6 maps plus even more are now free on Live. Oblivion came afterwards and it's pretty common to bundle in additional content with a port that comes at a later date than the first release. As for rumble being useless why don't you ask people that thought it was great on the Dual Shock and see if they feel that way. Rumble is a fantastic addition to gameplay. It's another form of feedback beyond audio and visual. I'd venture to say a poll would show people would chose rumble of the motion sensing in the PS3 controller. I have done my homework very well thank you. You are implying that your preference is some kind of standard when it's pretty obvious from sales numbers that most people don't feel the way you do.
Maybe it doesn't appeal to you, but obviously you aren't part of the millions that it does appeal to and you can't deny it. What appeals to me is the current catalog of good titles, excellent online integration and titles coming in the near future. Backwards compatibility is on of those things people like to bitch and complain about, but in practice most don't use it.
Content bonuses go to the PS3? You really think that Sony won't charge for extra content? They never said that once. In fact because they don't charge for their version of Live I would think they might even charge more. It doesn't matter at this point though because no one knows. Also, motion sensing might be cool, but not having rumble and dealing with the way PS3 controllers charge and are assigned to the console is a pain compared to the 360. Basically it just seems like you are trying find reasons to justify you stance, but the reasons are flimsy and in some cases pulled out of your hiney.
Failure rate is horrible, but library wise it's far better than the PS3 or Wii right now. In the end it depends on the kind of games you like to play. For me the 360 has the best choices.
It's a matter of cost at the time they came out. Fixed platforms are better for tuning and tweaking. Adding more RAM means that games that need that extra RAM won't play on earlier versions and that's bad in the console world. You'll see people do some pretty amazing things with these new consoles as they stand.
The PS3 is moving half the units the 360 is. The 360 has a head start on games and has some decent exclusives as well as titles that were previously Sony exclusives. For those of us that don't care about backwards compat. and using our game boxes as media players the games are what count the most. In the department the 360 and the Wii have the PS3 beat. I am glad you are happy with yours, but that doesn't eliminate legitimate criticisms of the PS3.
Obviously you don't get the concept of consoles. The point is to keep them compatible across the board. Every time you introduce some expansion device (N64 for instance) you fragment the market and that's not what you want to do with consoles.
You just named off commonalities between a million platformers out there. Also, the "XTREME" market you are talking about did exist int he way it does now, so I think you are trying to look at something developed in the early 90's with the filter of recent marketing. Regardless of your opinion of how Sonic was developed (and I think you are very mistaken) it has been a fairly good series (with the exception of the last game) and that's what matters the most. That's how iteration works, someone develops a genre and other add to expand it. By your reasoning all FPS games are Ultima Underworld clones.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, there are games that support dedicated servers like Rainbow 6. You'd have to have a spare 360 and an extra copy of the game though.
Or, maybe some companies want to use that closed, proprietary system with a larger support base? Not every company in the world is going to run out and enthusiastically embrace something because it's Open Source. Obviously being OS isn't a big enough factor to move people to change or they would have. As for isolation, if you want to make a comparison in size and acceptance you might want to look at facts because I think you would have to switch the roles that you applied. Like it or not Microsoft products have a far larger install base than Linux and so to apply your analogy, they would be "civilization".
Agreed. It really depends on how the company is using Exchange. There are often additional applications run through Outlook and Exchange that there are no Linux equivalents for.
When I first started my experiment I was trying to keep it a secret out of fear of attacks from angry Microsoft worshipers... Seriously, give it a rest. The vast majority of people in an office wouldn't give a shit what you are using. If sysadmins are concerned at all it's most likely because they don't want/need more support issues. Unlike zealots like yourself, most people use computers and software as tools, not as a religious sacrament. Maybe you were being tongue in cheek, but you failed horribly.
That's a load of crap. The GPU in the 360 is at least as powerful as the PS3 if not slightly better. Look at all the cross platform games out there and you'll see they usually look better on the 360. Not to mention EA saying that their new sport titles would be running at 60FPS on the 360 and 30FPS on the PS3. Get your facts right there pal.
I know the quote you are talking about and that's not really what the R* dev said, but everyone jumped on it.
In other words they wanted to, but in the end they didn't because Sony dragged their feet. So, it's more than likely they weren't very deep into the PS3 when this all went down. Considering how long it took final dev kits to get out and how much of a lead the 360 had not to mention that they have a working 360 engine. All this adds up to the fact that original intentions aside it's far more likely that the 360 is NOW the lead GTA IV platform. Your little quote doesn't prove that the PS3 was/is the lead platform. All it says is that R* wanted it to be to continue their relationship with Sony. Considering the way things are going now maybe it wasn't a bad thing for R* that it worked out this way. It's just too bad that 360 owners have to wait now while they iron out the PS3.
So, in other words you pulled this "fact" out of your ass and have nothing to back up the statement. All signs point to the fact that you are very mistaken. Considering they demo on the 360 AND have already released a title using their new engine on the 360. For an "Intellectual Elitist" you are very short on facts to back up your assertions.
And you know the know the PS3 is the lead platform how? Do you have "insider" information?
Because no one else ever thought or developed a protocol with distributed file transfer. If MS is doing something they must have copied it from someone.
Possibly, so I guess I'm not the target market. I have a laptop, but it pisses me off that all I can change is the RAM. If they had an standard that allowed easy exchange of other parts, maybe like a PC card type of architecture that would encourage more people to do it I bet.
Until they come up with a standard that allows me to upgrade my laptop CPU, video, audio, etc. easily I won't be replacing desktop. The big advantage of having an open standard PC is the choice and ability to upgrade.
I guess I am lucky as well. I own about 25 360 games and not a single one is scratched.
Out the dozen or so people that I know that own 360s there have been some dead ones, but not a single person has ever mentioned a scratched disc. This seems to be blown out of proportion.
Sometimes you pay for content on Live and sometimes you don't. Also, often if you are willing to wait it's free. All those Rainbow 6 maps plus even more are now free on Live. Oblivion came afterwards and it's pretty common to bundle in additional content with a port that comes at a later date than the first release. As for rumble being useless why don't you ask people that thought it was great on the Dual Shock and see if they feel that way. Rumble is a fantastic addition to gameplay. It's another form of feedback beyond audio and visual. I'd venture to say a poll would show people would chose rumble of the motion sensing in the PS3 controller. I have done my homework very well thank you. You are implying that your preference is some kind of standard when it's pretty obvious from sales numbers that most people don't feel the way you do.
For cost reduction, absolutely. For perception, not so much.
Maybe it doesn't appeal to you, but obviously you aren't part of the millions that it does appeal to and you can't deny it. What appeals to me is the current catalog of good titles, excellent online integration and titles coming in the near future. Backwards compatibility is on of those things people like to bitch and complain about, but in practice most don't use it.
Content bonuses go to the PS3? You really think that Sony won't charge for extra content? They never said that once. In fact because they don't charge for their version of Live I would think they might even charge more. It doesn't matter at this point though because no one knows. Also, motion sensing might be cool, but not having rumble and dealing with the way PS3 controllers charge and are assigned to the console is a pain compared to the 360. Basically it just seems like you are trying find reasons to justify you stance, but the reasons are flimsy and in some cases pulled out of your hiney.
Failure rate is horrible, but library wise it's far better than the PS3 or Wii right now. In the end it depends on the kind of games you like to play. For me the 360 has the best choices.
It's a matter of cost at the time they came out. Fixed platforms are better for tuning and tweaking. Adding more RAM means that games that need that extra RAM won't play on earlier versions and that's bad in the console world. You'll see people do some pretty amazing things with these new consoles as they stand.
You can already download movies, TV and games on Live.
The PS3 is moving half the units the 360 is. The 360 has a head start on games and has some decent exclusives as well as titles that were previously Sony exclusives. For those of us that don't care about backwards compat. and using our game boxes as media players the games are what count the most. In the department the 360 and the Wii have the PS3 beat. I am glad you are happy with yours, but that doesn't eliminate legitimate criticisms of the PS3.
Obviously you don't get the concept of consoles. The point is to keep them compatible across the board. Every time you introduce some expansion device (N64 for instance) you fragment the market and that's not what you want to do with consoles.
Apple doesn't make poor design decisions, you just make poor listening choices.
You just named off commonalities between a million platformers out there. Also, the "XTREME" market you are talking about did exist int he way it does now, so I think you are trying to look at something developed in the early 90's with the filter of recent marketing. Regardless of your opinion of how Sonic was developed (and I think you are very mistaken) it has been a fairly good series (with the exception of the last game) and that's what matters the most. That's how iteration works, someone develops a genre and other add to expand it. By your reasoning all FPS games are Ultima Underworld clones.