Then don't buy a phone that caters to those that want to play games. That's like saying, "I don't WANT a car that has a 20 speaker stereo, customized user settings and built in GPS." Well then don't get it. And don't say phone companies don't provide those anymore; they definitely always have a bare bones phone, usually a nokia 6xxx series, which is a) bulletproof and b) has good sound quality.
The point is, every time an article like this comes up, someone says, "But all I want is a simple phone!" and they get modded up (hence karma-whoring). And everyone afterwards says, "Duh, there are still plenty of those around. It's called market diversification."
And thank you, karma-whore, for fulfilling the required "I wish my phone only made phone calls and nothing else" post on every article about phones, no matter what the subject.
Yep, I have a full 30 GB iPod. So I guess I would have some idea.
And? How much time would it take to replicate a few of those examples with just a file directory structure? You have yet to show how it works to find/sort/filter songs in a way that is even slightly more than rudimentary dragging and dropping.
When I use JUMP each time I add a character the list changes. So its not like I have to start all over if I make a typo or the list doesn't update and sorten as I change. While it make operate differently, it is functionally the same.
No, it's not, and this is the entire crux of the matter. My point was that iTunes integrates all this stuff simply enough for a novice to use, yet flexible enough for you to get all fascist on it. Plop a novice down in front of both. Are you going to tell me he knows how to use the jump keystroke intuitively, or the iTunes find box?
If you mean the control freaks who do not like to be able to copy music back off their iPod then yes.
A myriad of tools do that for free, and can either maintain the directory structure or create it on the fly based on the ID tag What is the point of all this? iTunes is the dominant player not only because it's the default, but because it's good at what it does. If it didn't, people would be clamoring to get rid of it and the alternatives WOULD be more well known (see Notmad Explorer for example).
nd you wouldn't have to drag three times into Winamp for a 3 or great, 4 or great or 5 list. Make the 5. Add it to the 4 and make the 4. Repeat for the 3 if you so desire.
That's dragging it 3 times, now isn't it? And what happens when I get sick of a track and drop it from 5 to 3? or 5 to "I don't want to listen to it anymore"? And how do you rate them in the first place without moving them from the original file structure? In a library based system, you just rate it lower. Or you tag it with something that says "don't add me to popularity based playlists" or a million permutations thereof. iTunes is not the greatest thing ever made. Hell it's not even the greatest jukebox player. But it definitely does things a simple file structure can't do without some acrobatics - and that stuff is things that many users find themselves using. **THIS** is why people like libraries (and addresses the original point) - there is a layer of abstraction that separates physical location from metadata.
From what I gather, most people that don't use libraries do so because there is some sort of feeling that they lose control in the process. Clearly, that is not the case with iTunes and in fact empowers the user with many more options.
Only an unnecessarily complex home network design would call for both devices.
Um, no, not complex. My house has a poolhouse. It's at the far end of the property. There's an AP out there, and one in the house as well (AP, **NOT ROUTER**; there's a huge backbone switch and a linux machine set up as a gateway elsewhere). You can roam between them freely, and they don't use anything even remotely complex like range extensions.
Wait, why do you have two access points? FYI, wireless routers are access points. Furthermore, why do you have two routers? The WAP54G is a router as well. Take one of those devices back to the store and re-evaluate your network design
Please! He doesn't have to take anything back. The worst he might have to do is turn off the routing aspect of one of the router/APs and disable DHCP on it. While it wasn't clear how he had them configured, jumping all over him to get rid of unecessary equipment isn't too helpful. Maybe it would help if you weren't so jumpy and asked for clarification... not to mention that it's probably NOT a routing mistake as he seems to be able to conenct and grab an IP address is he just changes the password encryption settings.
If I want to send someone a track, I'm not going to do it in Apple Lossless or WAV if it's just for listening to casually - I'll transcode it to MP3. So I'm not transcoding between lossy formats.
That's beside the point anyway - the point is that it's pretty simple to do in most jukebox apps, especially iTunes. I don't seem to recall an obviously easy way of doing it in winamp, and while doing it at the CLI is quick and easy for most of us that read/., that is not even a blip on the radar for most people. And yes, most people transcode between lossy formats, mostly because they don't know better.
Can your folder structure automatically and on-the-fly give the list of all songs you played in the last month that you've rated higher than 4 stars that AREN'T in the classical genre?
Why the heck would I care? I know what songs I listen to and what songs I do not like at all. It is called a playlist and songs I do not like get removed from it. There is really no reason to rate songs, except for the purposes of a "weighted" random scheme, which media players support.
Sorry, but once you hit a large number of tracks, creative ways are the only way to sort through them. I know which tracks I like now, but it's human nature to forget that you liked a track way back in the day... and once again, it comes down to convenience. Let's say I want to make a playlist of all the tracks I like. For a folder system to do that, I have to go into each one, select the tracks I like and make a new playlist. Do you know how time consuming that is when you have over 30 gigs of music? And that's just ONE step.
Now what if I was in the mood for stuff from the 90s? How do you separate that stuff out in a folder system? What if I only wanted the classical tracks? Do you realize how arduous it is figure out if Chopin "24 Preludes, Op.28: VII - A Major" was the one I really liked and "24 Preludes, Op.28: XVII - A Flat Major" was the one that I liked but not as much and didn't want in my playlist? What it boils down to is that most people know what tracks they like. Picking them out of a huge mess of tracks is difficult at best. Weighting songs is more than just a way for random playlists to figure out what is good and what isn't - it's a guide for YOU to remind you that 'hey, this album was full of mediocre stuff but there was this UNBELIEVABLE track in the middle'. And yes, that happens plenty of times when you have a good library.
You ever used the Jump function in winamp. Sounds to me you are describing the same thing.
Not even close. Jump works like a glorified find. iTunes works like a fuzzy search updated in real time, or a sql SELECT statement that requeries everytime you add or delete a character. I also don't remember Winamp able to JUMP based on arbitrary data inserted into a misc, though I could be mistaken. Winamp is really good for what it does - playing tracks efficiently. While it's library functionality is adequate, the interface and efficiency falls short of iTunes.
You realize that the meta-data and bulk of the information you keep touting is so great, is stored in ID3 tags.
You realize that the appeal of iTunes is NOT in its groundbreaking library management, but in the ease of use of the way it all fits together? For example, Smart Playlists have existed in other programs before, but it's easy for a brain dead monkey to build one in iTunes. How again do you do that in a folder structure? I can build a script that parses ID3 tag data and spits out all the matching files and builds a playlist file (oh and everytime I add some files, I have to rerun the script to update it). How again is that easier or more straightforward? Sure you can store printable quality album art in the folder's directory along with the tracks, but can you view the thumbnail and the full quality file in Winamp? Yes, but again, it's not straightforward or integrated very well. Same with lyrics. Someone even built an album parser for iTunes - you don't see any files, just album covers, and you thumb though them, just like you would an LP or CD collection, selecting the one you want to play by clicking on it. Again, I can build a script that does the same thing but... come on!
Even simpler, take this example: playdates aren't store in ID tags. Added dates aren't either (file dates get updated as soon as you update an ID tag). How do you list all the tracks you've added chronologically? If they're in subdirectories, how does that work?
Personally, I'll continue to take my own natural anal retention over someon
"Dude", it's simple. If you don't know how to properly use a computer, you can suffer all its consequences. Either pay someone to do it, or figure it out yourself. Do you know how to repair a transmission in a car, or replace it if it goes bad? Do it yourself or pay someone to do it.
IOW, it comes with the territory. Claiming ignorance and lack of time is no excuse.
It is naive. You purchased something. You own it. It is now your responsibility to safeguard it.
Napster is essentially a rental service - you do not own the music you download (unless you burn it to CD, at which you have a backup anyway, right?). If Napster ever disappears, so does your music collection. Not so with tracks from iTunes, especially when you strip out the DRM (trivially easy to do these days).
So if the CD you got warped in the sun in your car, or your house burned to the ground, or someone stole your CDs, or your CDs became unplayable because you left them in your damp basement and the plastic became soft/pliable and rotten, you'd be able to go back to the store and demand a new disc?
Take care of your stuff. You own it. Your responsibility. If this is not acceptable to you, go "rent" music (ie Napster and all those type of services).
Really? Can your folder structure automatically and on-the-fly give the list of all songs you played in the last month that you've rated higher than 4 stars that AREN'T in the classical genre? Can you update each track with metadata so you can sort and filter on arbitrary tracks? Does your folder + player system track the number of playcounts on the computer AND the portable? Can you find tracks while having the pointer follow just by typing a few words of either the name, artist, album name, format, random metadata you've assigned etc. and at the same time narrowing down as you continue to type? I won't even touch the fact that even a monkey could transcode between formats, iTunes adds a convenient way to display album art (printable quality, mind you, not just screen quality) and lyrics, and an API for digging through its guts; while the first two are doable on the CLI and scriptable, it's not the most simple thing, and god knows it's beyond the reach of most users.
iTunes is a db frontend. With that, you get all the niceities of a database with a friendly GUI wrapper. It's so beyond a structured file directory that it's like comparing a database driven application to one that stores data in discrete text files.
While I don't really like most of OSC's work, Ender's Game was entertaining, if not that thorough. But I consider it a definite sci-fi book. What do you consider sci-fi?
Have you ever read Stanislaw Lem stuff? Or Jorge Borges? Because many people consider that scifi, and some of the stories don't involve anything past the 19th century! SciFi is all about exploring the inner human condition with some elements of the future thrown in that server to heighten our connection with the characters - namely, that even if they're in a completely alien environment to where we are right now, they still feel and explore the same things we do in the here and now. Ender's game at least touches on those subjects.
Unfortunately, popular SciFi has co-opted the more thoughtful and provoking aspect of SciFi into blowing up planets and George Lucas flicks. And don't even get me started on "hard scifi", which in almost all books I've read are completely soulless, and read like a technical manual from a geek's wet dream.
I agree. Writing good science fiction is incredibly difficult, and when it IS done well, a lot of the time, people don't classify it as science fiction anymore. Some of Jorge Borges' stuff could be considered sci-fi, but there's no exploding spaceships or planet hopping. And then there's Stanislaw Lem. The guy rocks so hard that it's painful. He has a very similar view of mainstream American sci-fi writing - mostly that a majority of it is juvenile.
I like sci-fi, but I have to agree with Lem on his views.
I'm of the impression that those who like "great literature" also enjoy sitting around listening to the grandfather clock tick...tock...tick...tock...and take great joy when it finally rings its bells, once an hour or so.
Wow. Simply... wow. Just because YOU don't like books that are considered classics doesn't mean those that do fit some sort of misinformed stereotype of stuffy old men smoking popes around a roaring fire. You couldn't possibly come off as more ignorant at this point.
(On the other hand, if I completely took something out of context and missed some sort of ironic endeavor, I am willing to take my lumps).
Great, that's all I need, a nine-foot display that can handle only a fraction of the resolution expected of a decent 21" monitor, so you end up with pixels the size of your head. Yeah, that just looks so *great*.
Spoken like someone who's never seen it in action. Putting aside the expensive upconvertor I have, it would still look good, and the upconvertor becomes less necessary when next gen stuff brings along 1080p - way above what your typical 21" will do.
That's kinda what the whole LAN thing is all about. You may have heard of this thing called "ethernet" that's getting to be more common all the time, to the point where even printers are coming with support for it out of the box now?
You're kidding right? LAN parties may night be as niche as they used to be, but they are absolutely microscopic in terms of who does that and who just comes over and plugs a controller in. Tell me how often your neighbor's kid says, "Oh yeah, let me just lug over my desktop and we can call a couple other people and sit in a cramped basement" or how often your girlfriend is comfortable doing the same thing. Ethernet may be ubiquitous. That doesn't mean the equipment to run the games is easily transportable by most people.
hese are not the cards the gamers tend to go after, but they get the job done, so for those of us who would buy a good video card anyway for its features that relate to getting work done, the extra hardware cost for gaming is basically just the controllers. IOW, the software cost of the games themselves is pretty much the whole cost.
Clearly that is not what the original poster meant. He was talking about how superior the experience was on a computer, and for that to happen, you need the high end stuff. 1280x1024 with 4x AA and 4x aniso with a minimum of sustained 30FPS is what I would consider the bottom end of high end. That is not going to happen with a stock + cheap PC.
People still *play* Intellivision games, but there's not a lot of profit in writing new ones.
Read the context it was in. He was positing that we go to next gen consoles simply for graphics and because companies move on, when in reality, lots of people still have their old systems around to play. These are the bulk of mainstream gamers - casual gamers.
Probably checkers, or maybe solitaire, but this is neither here nor there.
Since you couldn't keep things in context, I'll be explicit and say "best selling game for the PC". And that's The Sims - neither a graphical powerhouse nor a game that requires a monster system.
Sorry, that's not exactly correct. Microsoft can lock out your entire system from Xbox live (and if your friend did a mod and tried to get on XBL, that's his fault - most mods explicitly warn you immediately NOT TO DO THAT). That's not the same as revoking a license for a game, which will still work on any Xbox (even one banned from XBL). In addition, TONS of PC games are in the same boat in that they check for hashes and CD keys before letting you play online.
What I was referring to was that your game will still play wherever on whatever Xbox for as long as the media can be read properly. PC games can be like that, but are more likely to have copy protection built into the game (not the system). HL2 is a perfect example.
anyway, the PC is far superior to consoles in every way possible save installation and compatibility.
Really? When was the last time you played a silly game like Mario Kart DD on a 9' (yes, feet, not inches) diagonal HDTV projector with a bunch of your friends on the couch on your PC?
While you may PREFER PC style gameplay, and the games can be (emphasis on CAN be) technically superior, it doesn't mean one or the other is far superior in general terms. You may consider superior to be high framerates and resolutions. My friends may consider superior to be locally shared gameplay experiences (not over the internet) and ease of use.
Me? I can appreciate both sides of the coin. The platforms are so different that they can hardly be compared, aside from the crossover titles, which although growing, are not the norm.
pc games are also cheaper at launch (i just saw a new game, black and white 2 for sale at 37 bucks) whereas to this day halo 1 for the xbox is still 20 bucks. the halo pc version now costs like 10 dollars less than 2 years later whereas it debuted for 35
Wow, you pick the one of the few titles that Microsoft actually keeps at a high price to milk for all its worth. I rarely buy games that are over $20 for any of the consoles, and most of those are barely 6 months out. It's no different from the PC world. Just take a look at pricing for The Sims. Not the sequel. The original.
in the end, pc gaming is only a tiny bit more expensive or on par. and a computer is far FAR more useful and versatile. that and for the time being, it is free from Digital Handcuffs and you can truly access and own your property.
Please do the math for me for this one. Please compare the price of the console to the equivalent hardware you would buy for a PC at that time, because I have a hard time believing any of that. And digital handcuffs? You do realize that almost all PC games have copy protection on them, right? You can break it, but you can do the same thing with consoles too. And when do you not OWN the game? Microsoft can't revoke any license you have for a game. They can't send a signal down to your xbox saying, "HE CAN NO LONGER PLAY THIS GAME ANYMORE".
a computer is far FAR more useful and versatile.
Obviously. But as you said, the ones that can play games to the level you describe are far out of reach of most normal consumers, most of whom don't want to play on their computer anyway, and even if they did, they would balk at spending over $500 on a computer these days. A $500 computer isn't going to get you very far in high end gaming unless you start adding some heavy duty stuff to it.
true... but you don't see companies still making ps1 games or dreamcast games. those systems are still very capable.
no, to say that gfx aren't important would mean we would still be on a lot older hardware. current consoles can do absolutely everything next gen can do except for a few extra special effects.
What a joke. Do you know how many people still play dreamcast and ps1 games? Ironically your comment is much more akin to the PC world. Most games are coded for much lower standards than the cutting edge, and have options to turn on the eye candy at higher levels.
Here's a hint. It MOSTLY all about the gameplay. Take for example in the PC world. What's the most popular in terms of bestselling game ever? Everyone knows the answer, and it has nothing to with graphics. Or PC power. While there will always be graphic whores on the console and PC side, what makes the games worth playing is the gameplay. I have a feeling, however, that you only care about graphics. And just so you know where I am coming from: I have a VERY high end PC and a whole slew of mac, since I work in video. There aren't many games that I have to turn down to 1280x1024, and even then I can run most anything with 16x aniso and 8x aa at 30+FPS. What do I play the most? Pla
That's subjective. I find it intuitive and easy to use.
Possibly, but it's shared by a vast majority - read up on reviews of the Zen, and every single one mentions the subpar software interface. If it wasn't so bad, Notmad Explorer wouldn't be a viable end product, now would it? Finally, plop someone down in front of the Creative solution, then iTunes, and guess which one they will find easier to use? (Note that you don't even have to find someone that's used iTunes before).
I've never had that problem. I just plug it into my PC and it appears as a device. I double click and I get a window with panes for Genre, Artist, Album and Tracks.
The software is bloated and slow. Check out your memory usage on it after leaving it running for a few hours. Using it as a jukebox is a joke. And let me tell you something about the whole 'plug in and get a device' method; it's a poor substitute for a properly managed database driven setup. For small flash based players or smaller devices, dragging and dropping from the explorer is a good thing and sometimes preferable. For anything serious, that quickly becomes arduous and painful. Since the Zen software is barely a step above that... well, there you go. At least the iPod work it a little better - music is managed by iTunes, and you can do whatever the hell you want with the extra space in disk mode.
It may function for you. But for me and a lot of other people, it's suboptimal, not from a hardware point of view, but on the software front, where it's just completely bowled over by the Apple solution - and this is coming from someone who up until that point really didn't want to have anything to do with the company.
When my 2G iPod's hd died on me days after I bought it, I got a Zen instead of a 2G iPod back when they came out because of the a) price and b) hesitations at Apple's lack of support for lossless (at the time).
Not only was the interface completely horrid, I spent more time trying to use the software without it dying horribly. Thank god for Notmad Explorer, the only thing that made it bearable. Creative should fire all their software people (for ALL their lines, the Audigy applets for example are paragons of BAD EVERYTHING - UI, usability, stability).
After a just-as-bad debacle with a Rio Karma, I went back to the iPod.
I rarely buy anything from the iTMS (which is, by the way NOT iTunes; you can't buy anything from iTunes, you buy it from the iTMS). However, the integration between all components (iTunes, iPod, iTMS, iSync even) is sooooo buttery smooth that everything else is really second rate in comparison. Other companies may have better or more interesting hardware, but Apple wins by a HUGE margin when it comes to usability and integration. And the lossless issue? Hasn't been one for a long time now.
Oh and if your IT person doesn't know the difference between UDP and ICMP, that's a whole different matter, as that doesn't have anything to do with 'old geezer' knowledge - that's still very current. That person needs to brush up on their skills.
Most CS students wouldn't know what you were talking about either. Ideally, CS isn't there to show you the technical guts of a matter - it's all about theory. The way you apply that theory depends on what you want to do, or what your job is. For the most part, CS will focus on algorithm analysis, numerical analysis, programming... etc. If that includes using a network stack with regards to IM protocols, they'll probably know about TCP communication. A person working on pushing bits around in ASM just above the metal probably won't.
In other words, CS abstracts other things just as much as any other field. In fact, the IM protocol example is perfect - that deals MORE with IT than CS, unless, as mentioned before, you are working on an IM project.
Ah Vines. It was teh new hotness awhile back (ok a long while back). I loved their print ads. The name always reminded me of those really good licorice whips of the same name.
Can I have a job?
Slashdot Mirror
Then don't buy a phone that caters to those that want to play games. That's like saying, "I don't WANT a car that has a 20 speaker stereo, customized user settings and built in GPS." Well then don't get it. And don't say phone companies don't provide those anymore; they definitely always have a bare bones phone, usually a nokia 6xxx series, which is a) bulletproof and b) has good sound quality.
The point is, every time an article like this comes up, someone says, "But all I want is a simple phone!" and they get modded up (hence karma-whoring). And everyone afterwards says, "Duh, there are still plenty of those around. It's called market diversification."
They still do that, some better than others.
And thank you, karma-whore, for fulfilling the required "I wish my phone only made phone calls and nothing else" post on every article about phones, no matter what the subject.
Hello! Shaolin Soccer! One of the greatest movies (IMO) ever made!
Yep, I have a full 30 GB iPod. So I guess I would have some idea.
And? How much time would it take to replicate a few of those examples with just a file directory structure? You have yet to show how it works to find/sort/filter songs in a way that is even slightly more than rudimentary dragging and dropping.
When I use JUMP each time I add a character the list changes. So its not like I have to start all over if I make a typo or the list doesn't update and sorten as I change. While it make operate differently, it is functionally the same.
No, it's not, and this is the entire crux of the matter. My point was that iTunes integrates all this stuff simply enough for a novice to use, yet flexible enough for you to get all fascist on it. Plop a novice down in front of both. Are you going to tell me he knows how to use the jump keystroke intuitively, or the iTunes find box? If you mean the control freaks who do not like to be able to copy music back off their iPod then yes.
A myriad of tools do that for free, and can either maintain the directory structure or create it on the fly based on the ID tag What is the point of all this? iTunes is the dominant player not only because it's the default, but because it's good at what it does. If it didn't, people would be clamoring to get rid of it and the alternatives WOULD be more well known (see Notmad Explorer for example). nd you wouldn't have to drag three times into Winamp for a 3 or great, 4 or great or 5 list. Make the 5. Add it to the 4 and make the 4. Repeat for the 3 if you so desire.
That's dragging it 3 times, now isn't it? And what happens when I get sick of a track and drop it from 5 to 3? or 5 to "I don't want to listen to it anymore"? And how do you rate them in the first place without moving them from the original file structure? In a library based system, you just rate it lower. Or you tag it with something that says "don't add me to popularity based playlists" or a million permutations thereof. iTunes is not the greatest thing ever made. Hell it's not even the greatest jukebox player. But it definitely does things a simple file structure can't do without some acrobatics - and that stuff is things that many users find themselves using. **THIS** is why people like libraries (and addresses the original point) - there is a layer of abstraction that separates physical location from metadata.
From what I gather, most people that don't use libraries do so because there is some sort of feeling that they lose control in the process. Clearly, that is not the case with iTunes and in fact empowers the user with many more options.
Only an unnecessarily complex home network design would call for both devices.
Um, no, not complex. My house has a poolhouse. It's at the far end of the property. There's an AP out there, and one in the house as well (AP, **NOT ROUTER**; there's a huge backbone switch and a linux machine set up as a gateway elsewhere). You can roam between them freely, and they don't use anything even remotely complex like range extensions.
Wait, why do you have two access points? FYI, wireless routers are access points. Furthermore, why do you have two routers? The WAP54G is a router as well. Take one of those devices back to the store and re-evaluate your network design
Please! He doesn't have to take anything back. The worst he might have to do is turn off the routing aspect of one of the router/APs and disable DHCP on it. While it wasn't clear how he had them configured, jumping all over him to get rid of unecessary equipment isn't too helpful. Maybe it would help if you weren't so jumpy and asked for clarification... not to mention that it's probably NOT a routing mistake as he seems to be able to conenct and grab an IP address is he just changes the password encryption settings.
If I want to send someone a track, I'm not going to do it in Apple Lossless or WAV if it's just for listening to casually - I'll transcode it to MP3. So I'm not transcoding between lossy formats.
/., that is not even a blip on the radar for most people. And yes, most people transcode between lossy formats, mostly because they don't know better.
That's beside the point anyway - the point is that it's pretty simple to do in most jukebox apps, especially iTunes. I don't seem to recall an obviously easy way of doing it in winamp, and while doing it at the CLI is quick and easy for most of us that read
Can your folder structure automatically and on-the-fly give the list of all songs you played in the last month that you've rated higher than 4 stars that AREN'T in the classical genre?
Why the heck would I care? I know what songs I listen to and what songs I do not like at all. It is called a playlist and songs I do not like get removed from it. There is really no reason to rate songs, except for the purposes of a "weighted" random scheme, which media players support.
Sorry, but once you hit a large number of tracks, creative ways are the only way to sort through them. I know which tracks I like now, but it's human nature to forget that you liked a track way back in the day... and once again, it comes down to convenience. Let's say I want to make a playlist of all the tracks I like. For a folder system to do that, I have to go into each one, select the tracks I like and make a new playlist. Do you know how time consuming that is when you have over 30 gigs of music? And that's just ONE step.
Now what if I was in the mood for stuff from the 90s? How do you separate that stuff out in a folder system? What if I only wanted the classical tracks? Do you realize how arduous it is figure out if Chopin "24 Preludes, Op.28: VII - A Major" was the one I really liked and "24 Preludes, Op.28: XVII - A Flat Major" was the one that I liked but not as much and didn't want in my playlist? What it boils down to is that most people know what tracks they like. Picking them out of a huge mess of tracks is difficult at best. Weighting songs is more than just a way for random playlists to figure out what is good and what isn't - it's a guide for YOU to remind you that 'hey, this album was full of mediocre stuff but there was this UNBELIEVABLE track in the middle'. And yes, that happens plenty of times when you have a good library.
You ever used the Jump function in winamp. Sounds to me you are describing the same thing.
Not even close. Jump works like a glorified find. iTunes works like a fuzzy search updated in real time, or a sql SELECT statement that requeries everytime you add or delete a character. I also don't remember Winamp able to JUMP based on arbitrary data inserted into a misc, though I could be mistaken. Winamp is really good for what it does - playing tracks efficiently. While it's library functionality is adequate, the interface and efficiency falls short of iTunes.
You realize that the meta-data and bulk of the information you keep touting is so great, is stored in ID3 tags.
You realize that the appeal of iTunes is NOT in its groundbreaking library management, but in the ease of use of the way it all fits together? For example, Smart Playlists have existed in other programs before, but it's easy for a brain dead monkey to build one in iTunes. How again do you do that in a folder structure? I can build a script that parses ID3 tag data and spits out all the matching files and builds a playlist file (oh and everytime I add some files, I have to rerun the script to update it). How again is that easier or more straightforward? Sure you can store printable quality album art in the folder's directory along with the tracks, but can you view the thumbnail and the full quality file in Winamp? Yes, but again, it's not straightforward or integrated very well. Same with lyrics. Someone even built an album parser for iTunes - you don't see any files, just album covers, and you thumb though them, just like you would an LP or CD collection, selecting the one you want to play by clicking on it. Again, I can build a script that does the same thing but... come on!
Even simpler, take this example: playdates aren't store in ID tags. Added dates aren't either (file dates get updated as soon as you update an ID tag). How do you list all the tracks you've added chronologically? If they're in subdirectories, how does that work?
Personally, I'll continue to take my own natural anal retention over someon
"Dude", it's simple. If you don't know how to properly use a computer, you can suffer all its consequences. Either pay someone to do it, or figure it out yourself. Do you know how to repair a transmission in a car, or replace it if it goes bad? Do it yourself or pay someone to do it.
IOW, it comes with the territory. Claiming ignorance and lack of time is no excuse.
It is naive. You purchased something. You own it. It is now your responsibility to safeguard it.
Napster is essentially a rental service - you do not own the music you download (unless you burn it to CD, at which you have a backup anyway, right?). If Napster ever disappears, so does your music collection. Not so with tracks from iTunes, especially when you strip out the DRM (trivially easy to do these days).
So if the CD you got warped in the sun in your car, or your house burned to the ground, or someone stole your CDs, or your CDs became unplayable because you left them in your damp basement and the plastic became soft/pliable and rotten, you'd be able to go back to the store and demand a new disc?
Take care of your stuff. You own it. Your responsibility. If this is not acceptable to you, go "rent" music (ie Napster and all those type of services).
Really? Can your folder structure automatically and on-the-fly give the list of all songs you played in the last month that you've rated higher than 4 stars that AREN'T in the classical genre? Can you update each track with metadata so you can sort and filter on arbitrary tracks? Does your folder + player system track the number of playcounts on the computer AND the portable? Can you find tracks while having the pointer follow just by typing a few words of either the name, artist, album name, format, random metadata you've assigned etc. and at the same time narrowing down as you continue to type? I won't even touch the fact that even a monkey could transcode between formats, iTunes adds a convenient way to display album art (printable quality, mind you, not just screen quality) and lyrics, and an API for digging through its guts; while the first two are doable on the CLI and scriptable, it's not the most simple thing, and god knows it's beyond the reach of most users.
iTunes is a db frontend. With that, you get all the niceities of a database with a friendly GUI wrapper. It's so beyond a structured file directory that it's like comparing a database driven application to one that stores data in discrete text files.
While I don't really like most of OSC's work, Ender's Game was entertaining, if not that thorough. But I consider it a definite sci-fi book. What do you consider sci-fi?
Have you ever read Stanislaw Lem stuff? Or Jorge Borges? Because many people consider that scifi, and some of the stories don't involve anything past the 19th century! SciFi is all about exploring the inner human condition with some elements of the future thrown in that server to heighten our connection with the characters - namely, that even if they're in a completely alien environment to where we are right now, they still feel and explore the same things we do in the here and now. Ender's game at least touches on those subjects.
Unfortunately, popular SciFi has co-opted the more thoughtful and provoking aspect of SciFi into blowing up planets and George Lucas flicks. And don't even get me started on "hard scifi", which in almost all books I've read are completely soulless, and read like a technical manual from a geek's wet dream.
I agree. Writing good science fiction is incredibly difficult, and when it IS done well, a lot of the time, people don't classify it as science fiction anymore. Some of Jorge Borges' stuff could be considered sci-fi, but there's no exploding spaceships or planet hopping. And then there's Stanislaw Lem. The guy rocks so hard that it's painful. He has a very similar view of mainstream American sci-fi writing - mostly that a majority of it is juvenile.
I like sci-fi, but I have to agree with Lem on his views.
I'm of the impression that those who like "great literature" also enjoy sitting around listening to the grandfather clock tick...tock...tick...tock...and take great joy when it finally rings its bells, once an hour or so.
Wow. Simply... wow. Just because YOU don't like books that are considered classics doesn't mean those that do fit some sort of misinformed stereotype of stuffy old men smoking popes around a roaring fire. You couldn't possibly come off as more ignorant at this point.
(On the other hand, if I completely took something out of context and missed some sort of ironic endeavor, I am willing to take my lumps).
1080? Are you serious? Maybe you've been using LCD displays too long and have completely lost track of what a *real* monitor can do.
This is what proves to me you have no idea what you're talking about. Look up what 1080p is resolution wise, then come back to me.
Great, that's all I need, a nine-foot display that can handle only a fraction of the resolution expected of a decent 21" monitor, so you end up with pixels the size of your head. Yeah, that just looks so *great*.
Spoken like someone who's never seen it in action. Putting aside the expensive upconvertor I have, it would still look good, and the upconvertor becomes less necessary when next gen stuff brings along 1080p - way above what your typical 21" will do. That's kinda what the whole LAN thing is all about. You may have heard of this thing called "ethernet" that's getting to be more common all the time, to the point where even printers are coming with support for it out of the box now? You're kidding right? LAN parties may night be as niche as they used to be, but they are absolutely microscopic in terms of who does that and who just comes over and plugs a controller in. Tell me how often your neighbor's kid says, "Oh yeah, let me just lug over my desktop and we can call a couple other people and sit in a cramped basement" or how often your girlfriend is comfortable doing the same thing. Ethernet may be ubiquitous. That doesn't mean the equipment to run the games is easily transportable by most people.
hese are not the cards the gamers tend to go after, but they get the job done, so for those of us who would buy a good video card anyway for its features that relate to getting work done, the extra hardware cost for gaming is basically just the controllers. IOW, the software cost of the games themselves is pretty much the whole cost.
Clearly that is not what the original poster meant. He was talking about how superior the experience was on a computer, and for that to happen, you need the high end stuff. 1280x1024 with 4x AA and 4x aniso with a minimum of sustained 30FPS is what I would consider the bottom end of high end. That is not going to happen with a stock + cheap PC.
People still *play* Intellivision games, but there's not a lot of profit in writing new ones.
Read the context it was in. He was positing that we go to next gen consoles simply for graphics and because companies move on, when in reality, lots of people still have their old systems around to play. These are the bulk of mainstream gamers - casual gamers.
Probably checkers, or maybe solitaire, but this is neither here nor there.
Since you couldn't keep things in context, I'll be explicit and say "best selling game for the PC". And that's The Sims - neither a graphical powerhouse nor a game that requires a monster system.
Sorry, that's not exactly correct. Microsoft can lock out your entire system from Xbox live (and if your friend did a mod and tried to get on XBL, that's his fault - most mods explicitly warn you immediately NOT TO DO THAT). That's not the same as revoking a license for a game, which will still work on any Xbox (even one banned from XBL). In addition, TONS of PC games are in the same boat in that they check for hashes and CD keys before letting you play online.
What I was referring to was that your game will still play wherever on whatever Xbox for as long as the media can be read properly. PC games can be like that, but are more likely to have copy protection built into the game (not the system). HL2 is a perfect example.
anyway, the PC is far superior to consoles in every way possible save installation and compatibility.
Really? When was the last time you played a silly game like Mario Kart DD on a 9' (yes, feet, not inches) diagonal HDTV projector with a bunch of your friends on the couch on your PC?
While you may PREFER PC style gameplay, and the games can be (emphasis on CAN be) technically superior, it doesn't mean one or the other is far superior in general terms. You may consider superior to be high framerates and resolutions. My friends may consider superior to be locally shared gameplay experiences (not over the internet) and ease of use.
Me? I can appreciate both sides of the coin. The platforms are so different that they can hardly be compared, aside from the crossover titles, which although growing, are not the norm.
pc games are also cheaper at launch (i just saw a new game, black and white 2 for sale at 37 bucks) whereas to this day halo 1 for the xbox is still 20 bucks. the halo pc version now costs like 10 dollars less than 2 years later whereas it debuted for 35
Wow, you pick the one of the few titles that Microsoft actually keeps at a high price to milk for all its worth. I rarely buy games that are over $20 for any of the consoles, and most of those are barely 6 months out. It's no different from the PC world. Just take a look at pricing for The Sims. Not the sequel. The original.
in the end, pc gaming is only a tiny bit more expensive or on par. and a computer is far FAR more useful and versatile. that and for the time being, it is free from Digital Handcuffs and you can truly access and own your property.
Please do the math for me for this one. Please compare the price of the console to the equivalent hardware you would buy for a PC at that time, because I have a hard time believing any of that. And digital handcuffs? You do realize that almost all PC games have copy protection on them, right? You can break it, but you can do the same thing with consoles too. And when do you not OWN the game? Microsoft can't revoke any license you have for a game. They can't send a signal down to your xbox saying, "HE CAN NO LONGER PLAY THIS GAME ANYMORE".
a computer is far FAR more useful and versatile.
Obviously. But as you said, the ones that can play games to the level you describe are far out of reach of most normal consumers, most of whom don't want to play on their computer anyway, and even if they did, they would balk at spending over $500 on a computer these days. A $500 computer isn't going to get you very far in high end gaming unless you start adding some heavy duty stuff to it.
true... but you don't see companies still making ps1 games or dreamcast games. those systems are still very capable.
no, to say that gfx aren't important would mean we would still be on a lot older hardware. current consoles can do absolutely everything next gen can do except for a few extra special effects.
What a joke. Do you know how many people still play dreamcast and ps1 games? Ironically your comment is much more akin to the PC world. Most games are coded for much lower standards than the cutting edge, and have options to turn on the eye candy at higher levels.
Here's a hint. It MOSTLY all about the gameplay. Take for example in the PC world. What's the most popular in terms of bestselling game ever? Everyone knows the answer, and it has nothing to with graphics. Or PC power. While there will always be graphic whores on the console and PC side, what makes the games worth playing is the gameplay. I have a feeling, however, that you only care about graphics. And just so you know where I am coming from: I have a VERY high end PC and a whole slew of mac, since I work in video. There aren't many games that I have to turn down to 1280x1024, and even then I can run most anything with 16x aniso and 8x aa at 30+FPS. What do I play the most? Pla
That's subjective. I find it intuitive and easy to use. Possibly, but it's shared by a vast majority - read up on reviews of the Zen, and every single one mentions the subpar software interface. If it wasn't so bad, Notmad Explorer wouldn't be a viable end product, now would it? Finally, plop someone down in front of the Creative solution, then iTunes, and guess which one they will find easier to use? (Note that you don't even have to find someone that's used iTunes before).
I've never had that problem. I just plug it into my PC and it appears as a device. I double click and I get a window with panes for Genre, Artist, Album and Tracks.
The software is bloated and slow. Check out your memory usage on it after leaving it running for a few hours. Using it as a jukebox is a joke. And let me tell you something about the whole 'plug in and get a device' method; it's a poor substitute for a properly managed database driven setup. For small flash based players or smaller devices, dragging and dropping from the explorer is a good thing and sometimes preferable. For anything serious, that quickly becomes arduous and painful. Since the Zen software is barely a step above that... well, there you go. At least the iPod work it a little better - music is managed by iTunes, and you can do whatever the hell you want with the extra space in disk mode.
It may function for you. But for me and a lot of other people, it's suboptimal, not from a hardware point of view, but on the software front, where it's just completely bowled over by the Apple solution - and this is coming from someone who up until that point really didn't want to have anything to do with the company.
When my 2G iPod's hd died on me days after I bought it, I got a Zen instead of a 2G iPod back when they came out because of the a) price and b) hesitations at Apple's lack of support for lossless (at the time).
Not only was the interface completely horrid, I spent more time trying to use the software without it dying horribly. Thank god for Notmad Explorer, the only thing that made it bearable. Creative should fire all their software people (for ALL their lines, the Audigy applets for example are paragons of BAD EVERYTHING - UI, usability, stability).
After a just-as-bad debacle with a Rio Karma, I went back to the iPod. I rarely buy anything from the iTMS (which is, by the way NOT iTunes; you can't buy anything from iTunes, you buy it from the iTMS). However, the integration between all components (iTunes, iPod, iTMS, iSync even) is sooooo buttery smooth that everything else is really second rate in comparison. Other companies may have better or more interesting hardware, but Apple wins by a HUGE margin when it comes to usability and integration. And the lossless issue? Hasn't been one for a long time now.
Oh and if your IT person doesn't know the difference between UDP and ICMP, that's a whole different matter, as that doesn't have anything to do with 'old geezer' knowledge - that's still very current. That person needs to brush up on their skills.
Most CS students wouldn't know what you were talking about either. Ideally, CS isn't there to show you the technical guts of a matter - it's all about theory. The way you apply that theory depends on what you want to do, or what your job is. For the most part, CS will focus on algorithm analysis, numerical analysis, programming... etc. If that includes using a network stack with regards to IM protocols, they'll probably know about TCP communication. A person working on pushing bits around in ASM just above the metal probably won't.
In other words, CS abstracts other things just as much as any other field. In fact, the IM protocol example is perfect - that deals MORE with IT than CS, unless, as mentioned before, you are working on an IM project.
I still use pine for my email
:-P
Newb!! The pine power users all switched to mutt. You're using the IE of the email world!
Which caused the come of IE7
Disturbing image.
Ah Vines. It was teh new hotness awhile back (ok a long while back). I loved their print ads. The name always reminded me of those really good licorice whips of the same name. Can I have a job?