The CPU is 218 GFLOPS, the GPU is supposedly 1.8 TFLOPS. Sony is mixing them together to get the 2 TFLOPS performance.
And damn you/.ers all to hell for killing my site!;-P
Seriously, we (GamesAreFun) went down right after the press conference started, and it took almost 2 hours for our webhost to manually go and hit the reset button...
Although I am upset to have heard that someone found WiFi access in the Sony conference... I know I sure as hell couldn't connect to the only network inside the studio that seemed to have an outside link to the world. and I'm on an Apple...
Uncheck, the last year has had alot of great titles, moreso than in previous years. Probably a dozen or more big name games that lived up to the hype (or did at least good job)
A dozen out of how many games released last year? Well over 100 games get released a year, so slightly more than 10% of 100 being in the "living up to hype" section is not really helping your argument.
The crap to good ratio is pretty horrid out there, right now, especially on the PS2. The Xbox is catching up to the PS2 in crap to good ratio, and the GC also has more crap games than good games.
The Madden Franchise is like 15 years old, how many Mario and Zelda games have there been?
Ok, so there's been like 15 Maddens released over the past 15 years. There's been 8 true Super Mario games released over the past 25 or so years (not including spinoffs that just have Mario characters); Donkey Kong, Mario Bros. Super Mario Bros. Super Mario Bros. 2, Super Mario Bros. 3, Super Mario World, Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine. As for console Zelda titles, you've got The Legend of Zelda, The Legend of Zelda 2: The Adventures of Link, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time; The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask; The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker,, and the upcoming LoZ title for the GC. That'll make 8 total over the past 20 or so years for Zelda titles as well (not counting GB/GBA games).
And with games like Super Mario 64 and TLoZ: Ocarina of Time, the genres were completely defined. SM64 created the template for what a 3D platformer should be; and Ocarina of Time defined what a 3D adventure game should be like (despite ofther 3D adventure games that came out before it).
people in Japan bought PS2s for the DVD funtionality
Because at the time, DVD players in Japan were much, much more expensive. Once the price of DVD players dropped, people in Japan stopped buying the PS2 for DVD playback, because it was clear that the PS2's DVD playback was pretty terrible compared to stand alone players.
mature genres
Mature in what way, though? I think you'd be hard pressed to find many M rated titles that actually fit the bill of "mature in design" over purely juvenile game play elements that get rated M just because there's tons and tons of blood. Tons of blood, a boob here and there, and cursing, does not make something mature, because that appeals to the juvenile aspect of gamers.
The video game industry may decline, but it won't collapse completely.
It depends. As more and more smaller studios and publishers get absorbed into larger ones, or die off completely, we'll see a decline in things like innovation and varied game play elements, and we'll be stuck in a video game industry of Madden 3456 and other sports titles, which might as well be a dead industry, as far as I am concerned.
How come we bash Microsoft's monopolizing tactics but praise Apple for doing pretty much the same thing with iPods and iTMS?
Without owning an iPod or other digital music player, I can only speculate.
I would assume it's for ease of use. iTunes synchs up with iPods, and allows for quick playlist changes and updates as well.
I don't know if other digital music players do this, or if they plan to. But I do know, from seeing my friend's synch up their iPods, that the ease of use for moving songs from PC/Mac to the iPod is a definite plus for people. No finding the folder and manually dragging the files, just choose the files you want, and they head on over to the iPod. If the other players don't have this ease of use, well, then Average Joe Users might not like them.
I'm willing to bet that this does cut the mustard for most people. If you use Windows and have a WMA player
But, given how much market share the iPod (in all its incarnations) currently has, the prospect of being a Windows user with just a WMA player seems unlikely. If the iPod was just for the Mac, then yeah, you'd be right. But with the iPod also working with Windows, it gave the iPod the market share it now has... which is somewhere around 70%-75% or so of hard drive music players.
Sure, there's more "choice" for Windows users with the ability to buy multiple brands of players with WMA support... but this choice hasn't been cutting into the iPod's market share, or at least not in any noticeable way as of yet.
I don't have any sort of portable digital music player, but if I did, I'd get an iPod, and for various reasons. It's compact and easy to use; it has a decent battery life; and since I have a Mac, it can easily act as a FireWire external hard drive if I need it to. The music I have on my iBook is 4.59 GB... so I could get myself a 40 GB iPod and still have 35 GB of space for other things besides music. I could currently back up my entire hard drive's contents (music included) and still have almost 11 GB left over on a 40 GB iPod.
I can't think of any WMA players that would let me do that, or at least none that would let me do that easily.
Except for some of us, your payment system wouldn't work out cheaper at all.
I've got 828 songs on my iBook. 28 of them have never been listened to the whole way through (since iTunes only counts complete play through of songs as a play) since I bought my iBook in March 2004.
I've got 3 songs at over 250 play throughs. I've got 4 more over 200 plays but under 250. 8 at over 150 but under 200. 36 at 100 or over but under 150. 70 at over 50 and under 100. 609 at between 10-50 plays. And 74 at under 10 full play throughs (but at least 1).
And I haven't even ripped all my CDs to this thing yet.
For people like me, who like to have background music, and sometimes fall asleep listening to their music, your proposed micro-payment system would bankrupt us in just a few years.
Half the time, I'm not even truly listening to the music, but I like the background noise. The other half, I'm choosing songs I want to hear at the time, and they are usually grouped together (hence the large amount of 100+ plays). The only reason my library hasn't been played through more is some of the tracks are over an hour long, so they take a while to go through... otherwise, I don't think I'd have many songs at under 50 play throughs at all.
Under your proposal, my 609, if we say they all got played just 10 times for a nice even number, is $60.90. We can add $0.74 for the 74 at least one play through (saying they only got played once) for $61.64. Another $35.00 for the ones played at least 50 times, for $91.64. $36 for the ones played at least 100 times, for $127.64. $12 for the 8 at 150, for $139.64. $8 for the 200 plays, for $147.64. And $7.50 for the 250 play throughs, for a grand total of $155.14.
$155.14 is more money than I've spent on CDs/iTMS in the past 2-3 years combined. And my music is playing in the background right now, so those little $0.01 charges would still be adding up in your proposal. I can easily suspect by next March, I will have racked up another $150+ in charges under your proposed system, not including any other music I buy.
For music fans, a pay per listen scheme is not a viable option. And, as a music fan, my music is basically playing almost 24 hours a day.
You obviously didn't read the GP. He/she mentioned the attach rate, and a lot of that attach rate has to do with MS forced bundles at launch (at least 3 games from most specialty retailers, that inflates the attach rate a lot), and many people are pretty sure the free game Xboxes have their free games counted towards that attach rate (as well as the free XBL games with a XBL starter kit).
As for them making the same amount of money... they aren't making any right now on the current Xbox. The Xbox is around $3 billion in the hole. When it was pitched to shareholders, the amount of money that the division said they should lose was $900 million over five years. They're already around 3x+ that amount, and they haven't even hit the four-year mark.
Sure, MS has gained mindshare... but now they're going to be facing the Sony Hype Machine(TM) just like Sega did when they launched the DC a year before the PS2. It'll be interesting to see what happens after Sony unveils their specs for the PS3 and gets that Sony Hype Machine(TM) rolling. Sure, just like the PS2, the PS3 will probably never ever live up to that hype, but the Sony Hype Machine(TM) has a TON of people who listen to it and believe everything it says (unfortunately).
Sales of the S controller, though, were substantially higher than sales of the ginormous controller. That's why MS eventually packaged it in the box; sales showed that the majority of people who bought extra controllers for their Xboxes after the S controller was released preferred the S controller. I know when I bought my Xbox (2 weeks before they packaged the S with it), I bought a Controller-S and never used the original controller.
I hate the size of it, and the button configuration is teh suck. The S is much more comfortable, and the buttons are in a nice cross shape and round instead of in a oblong diamond shape with oval buttons.
Barring the fact that we on XBL are paying for a P2P system, there's this:
On top of that, Xbox has a much stricter code of conduct and more power to suspend and ban obnoxious players because you are playing through the xbox live system.
Which they practically never do. Why? Because that would be one less subscriber per banning, and that would mean Microsoft's XBL numbers would drop, as well as $50/year in subscription revenue.
The best example is with Halo 2. If you were caught cheating (and Bungie could prove it) you got banned for a day... do it again, and you were banned for 3 days... do it again and you were banned for a week... do it again you were banned for another 2 weeks... then another two weeks if caught again... then a month... then MAYBE lose your XBL account. Maybe. Unfortunately, almost no one who did it ever lost their account, and even if they did, they had lots and lots of free two month trial cards to get right back on.
So, instead of just banning the Xbox serial number, like they should have (and they do for modded Xboxes), they'd cancel an XBL account for cheating and stuff... and the person would get right back on with a 2 month card. But, in order for this to happen, Bungie would have to review the game stats for the games where cheating was mentioned in feedback, and they'd give out all these "warning" bannings that were of no consequence to the cheaters.
As long as MS is bringing in money off of XBL subscriptions, they won't be canceling accounts for things like they say they will. The Xbox and XBL are money pits, practically bottomless money pits right now, so they want to recoup as much as possible, and banning people for things they should be banned for does not bring in any revenue.
While you are right that a digital copy is exact from the source, the argument is something the RIAA has been putting forth, even before there was an official RIAA.
When radio was introduced, they fought long and hard, and they weren't the RIAA yet, to make sure music never got played on it under the argument "people will just listen to their favorite songs on the radio! We'll never sell another record again!"
Instead, the radio made them more money than they could have imagined.
When recordable cassette tapes were released, they again fought long and hard to try and make them illegal, because "people will just record their favorite songs off of the radio (which we once said was evil, but never-mind our old argument)! We'll never sell another album again!"
Again, same issue, nothing bad happened to them.
Now it's file sharing will make people never buy albums again! Odd, there's still a LOT of albums being sold, all over the world, and for the longest time they couldn't "prove" any damage because they were breaking all sorts of sales records and forecasts... until they finally raised the forecasts up so high, in the middle of an economic recession, that there was no way they would ever reach those numbers. They artificially made "lost sales" by saying how they didn't meet predictions, and that was only done by raising forecasts beyond any reasonable number.
And the RIAA has only themselves to blame, really. They turned down the idea of digital distribution in the first place, figuring no one would go for it. Then the file sharing programs hit, most notably Napster; then they gave Napster world attention by suing Napster and making the suit public on news broadcasts and such. Had there been no suit or at least no publicity on the suit, millions upon millions of people who now use file sharing programs might never have even known they existed. Joe Average Internet User certainly wouldn't have known about Napster, Kazaa, etc. without that world-wide attention the RIAA gave to file sharing programs.
And, in a bit of a blast of my own personal taste against the RIAA, it also doesn't help that 99.9999999999% of the music their labels put out is absolute shit, either. Certainly the true lost sales couldn't have happened because every new band they put forth is a "me too!" band, all sounding alike and all sucking just as equally, right?
The RIAA made their bed, by their own mistakes, now they can lie in it while I support the non-RIAA artists I enjoy by legally buying my music off of iTunes (when that has what I want) or buying their CDs at smaller stores that cater to my tastes.
Fine as long as they only made computers, but now they are in the record business and are still hasseling with Records over it.
Please name for me one single record that Apple Computers has produced and distributed in any way shape or form. I'd also like to know which band is signed to the Apple Computers Record Label.
As much as I like the Beatles as a band, the whole Apple Corps Records owning the trademark over the word "apple" is ridiculous. I suppose this means any apple orchard has to pay royalties to Apple Corps Records? What about the makers of apple sauce? Or apple juice? What about apple preservatives or jams?
That whole situation was a crock from the get go, as there is no one alive who would mistake Apple Corps Records and Apple Computers for the same thing. Apple Corps makes its money off of selling Beatles albums, not computers.
So, I suppose if I was to start a building company called Apple Builders, I'd have to cut a deal with Apple Corps Records, too, eh? Because we all know the word apple is not generic in any way and is only associated with the Beatles.
You seem to be under the impression that any reviews you read in magazines, or online are written by people who finish the game.
It depends on the magazine and sites, really.
I work for a review site, and I finish each and every game before I review it. My currently being out on long term disability helps; as does the fact that since we are a website, with no debug kits for any games, we have no "press time" to get the reviews out by. We have had one review that went up before the game was released, but only because we're friends with the game's developers.
The few times they actually do are with A list titles, which are going to get steller reviews anyhow.
Not always, Fable was an A List title, and I gave it a low score because it was, IMHO, a Piece of Shit(TM) that was over-hyped and too oft delayed. I beat it, 100% for my alignment, in 16 hours, and 4 hours of that was spent doing nothing but leveling up. That's all the side quests for my alignment, all the Demon Doors, all the secret weapons, etc. 12 hours to find and do all that? Pathetic.
It's always going to depend on the sites and mags, really. Most sites and magazines hyped Fable up to be the Second Coming of Christ, and even the glowing reviews listed most of the faults I mentioned in my review... it's just that since they had hyped the game up beyond belief, they'd look like a bunch of cock smoking cum dumpsters if they gave it a low score after telling people it was the Best Game Evar(TM) long before it hit store shelves.
You are fucking kidding. Professional movie editing on a computer that starts to crawl if you open more than five windows?
You are delusional, you know. While I won't go so far as to say a Mac Mini can do professional video editing, I know for a fact it can easily open well more than 5 windows without slowing to a crawl.
A Mac Mini has a faster processor than my iBook, and I can run way more than 5 windows open at any given time, and still switch to and from programs and run them effortlessly, including PhotoShop with around 20 pictures open while editing them.
Give a Mac Mini some extra RAM, at least bring it up to 512 MB, and it'll run fine. Sure, FinalCut Pro or HD won't be running all that great (re-compressing movies with FinalCut Pro 4 does slow my 1 GHz G4 with 640 MB of RAM to a crawl), but iMovie will work fine. But unlike your absolutely false statement that OS X slows to a crawl with more than 5 windows open, mine is factual, as anyone with OS X on a Mac Mini with adequate RAM (or an iBook like mine with adequate RAM) will attest to.
I have a 27" HDTV monitor, with a pair of rabbit ears supposedly able to receive HDTV signals. However, I do not have a HDTV receiver hooked into my TV, and since my HDTV is a monitor, it has no analog or digital (HD) tuner built in.
About a year ago I went to price out how much these boxes are, and at the time they were around $300. And that's too much, especially when you consider I watch maybe three shows a week (I got it to watch DVDs on and play my consoles on, mainly).
Plus, this is the only HDTV in the house, so the other TVs will need a converter box to convert the digital signals back into analog for them. And God only knows how much those are going to cost.
And I don't have cable or satellite TV, either. So spending over $100 (Per TV) just to get my local stations is pure bullshit.
Until we know how much these things are going to cost, congress and the FCC would do well to postpone the switch, at least until the devices necessary come down in price to something more affordable for everyone. For all we know, there may not even be any HD to analog converter boxes made yet in preparation for the switch.
I'd try a MAC out if I could even come close to getting the hardware performance I can get with a PC at even 20% more than cost. As it is, they simply cost too much. I can build a pretty posh PC myself for $800 and throw linux on it and watch it run like a top.
But, can the same thing be said about getting that sort of performance with Windows? That's the big thing, really.
PC to Mac switchers won't be Linux to Mac switchers in most cases, they'll be Windows to Mac switchers.
For instance, my friend is considering getting a Mac Mini, even though he has a very nice (although no longer high end) Windows PC. Why is he considering switching? Because he is tired of having to deal with all the programs he needs to keep his system free of spy-ware and ad-ware as well as the nearly constant virus software updates he has to do. He's also tired of other things that he has to do to his Windows PC to keep it running in tip top shape all the time.
The 1.42 GHz G4 Mini hardly compares to his 2+ GHz Intel desktop, and I believe he has a GB of RAM on it, plus he has two 120 GB HDDs on it. But for normal, everyday use, he just wants something simple, that just works, without his need to admin the box to extremes.
He's used Linux, as well, but he's mainly a Windows user. Sure, he said he'd probably still buy antivirus software for the Mini, just to be extra safe, but he has that option-- even if it is isn't as necessary on OS X.
And he's the type of person that would switch to a Mac. Someone tired of dealing with the bullshit of Windows just for everyday use.
You're a Linux user. You're not as prone to switch to a Mac, because while there's still bullshit to deal with on Linux to make it secure and whatnot, you're willing to take those extra steps and be able to configure your Linux box to pretty much run exactly how you want it. You're not the type of person who Apple is looking for in a switcher. You might even find that the Unix commands and stuff make you like OS X a lot, but there's still something about the complete customization ability of Linux that appeals to Linux users.
Plus, when you do actually factor in the real costs, can that same $800 WinTel machine really compare to any Mac out there? a $500 Mac Mini comes with an ATi Radeon 9200 with 32 MB VRAM; sure, it's not the best video card on the market, but compared to uber-cheap WinTel machines with their no video card and integrated Intel graphics, it's better. The $500 Mac Mini has a DVD-ROM/CD-ROM/CD-RW drive built in (upgradeable to become a DVD burner as well), uber-cheap Wintel machines normally do not come with burners. The Mac Mini has Firewire and USB built in, the uber-cheap PC will have USB, but no firewire built in, normally.
Granted, you could probably buy the parts separately, and make your own pretty sweet $800 PC, but when really comparing, you should compare OEM PCs to Macs. After all, it's not fair to compare prices when you can find a sweet deal on eBay for a piece of hardware for a PC that might otherwise cost $100 or more.
Tout os performance all you like, but really it boils down to a specialty OS for specialty hardware.
Honestly, the only specialty hardware in a Mac is the PPC chip that OS X runs on. Graphics cards and whatnot are basically the same for PC or Mac.
But OS performance is a big factor, as well. My 1 GHz G4 iBook with 640 MB RAM can outperform my brother's WinXP Pro box with a 3.0 GHz Intel with 1 GB RAM for some things, like PhotoShop use, but for others the Intel wins out. Still, I seem to always have faster focus switching than he does, as well, because Windows programs like to load themselves into memory at boot up which eats away at some of his performance. I have exactly one program that loads itself up at startup and that's used for video capture of my desktop for things like recording iChat AV videos if needed or for making demos of how to use programs.
Open GL updates are free on OS X and come with each real point update (10.x.y).
the addition of IPv6
Welcome to the 21st Century.
a rewrite of the firewall
Mac OS X firewall has been working fine since 10.0, long before SP2's rewrite came out.
major security infrastructure improvements
So they fixed things that have been problems for years? Joy. And security fixes as a major feature of a service pack is not a good thing. Apple releases security fixes through Software Update that are security updates alone, not service packs (although the true service packs have the older fixes in them as well).
a radically improved update mechanism
Software Update has worked fine for a while now on OS X, since before XP SP2 came out, as well.
Set Program Access and Defaults
And, yet, some programs still require the use of being logged in as an administrator account, which has no default settings to prevent unwanted programs from being installed while running that account.
Windows Media Player 10 (contrast this with the awful WMP 8 included with XP RTM)
Yay. Quicktime gets updated through Software Update if you want it to, or you can download it from the Quicktime part of Apple's site.
the addition of things like handwriting to Messenger
Been in OS X for a while. Has Windows yet gotten a reliable voice activation/dictation software yet? OS X has.
the security center
Something else to highlight the security flaws in Windows, and something not really needed on OS X.
a simpler wireless UI
As in WiFi? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA! WiFi on Windows is such a pain in the ass to set up, it isn't even funny. In OS X (cue overused but true saying) IT JUST WORKS. In fact, I literally just connect to any unsecured network in the immediate area if I choose to.
Sorry, but it looks like these new features are still behind stuff OS X had in some cases since 10.0.
Did I mention that this post is spell checked via the system-wide spell check feature?
May the gods bless this feature until the end of times. I didn't even know about it for the longest time, but now I can't live without it. I knew about it in iChat AV, AppleWorks, TextEdit, etc., but not Safari. Now I have been using it, and I can't live without it. Now my comments are t3h c0rr3ct $p3ll1ng!!!!!one!!!1111!!!!!eleventyone!
"They're the first to implement it but MS had certainly already thought about this feature before and their version will be better".
I particularly like the fact that he somehow automatically knows that the Longhorn search feature will be more "further-reaching" than Spotlight. Being as we haven't even seen MS' version demoed, we can't know.
The fields that Thurrot covered in his review concern generally the GUI. And, apart from Spotlight, there is little revolution in this area from Panther to Tiger, merely refinements. Most of the people that will upgrade won't notice a big difference in their habits.
Yeah, I noticed that. He completely left out things such as Automator (which I will most likely use extensively), and instead focused on the general GUI, Spotlight, and Dashboard. Out of all the new things in Tiger, Dashboard is the one I am least interested in. The general speed increases and speed boost in Safari are things I want to know about, not if this program looks different or not.
I have 640 MB RAM in my 1 GHz iBook, and I don't notice much lag when multitasking, unless I'm multitasking video apps and have Firefox or Safari open to pages with a lot of JAVA or Flash going on in them.
Still, I don't use MS Office on it, AppleWorks does my word processing tasks fine (I rarely have need for spreadsheets or powerpoint-type presentations).
Now, if I try and use Final Cut Pro 4 to re-compress video... well, then my whole system lags... but that's because I'm on an iBook and not a PowerBook or PowerMac.
From the judgment:
"For these reasons the Court has carefully reviewed the showing made by Apple to date. The posting by Mr. O'Grady contained an exact copy of a detailed drawing of "Asteroid" created by Apple. The drawing was taken from a confidential set of slides clearly labeled "Apple Need-to-Know Confidential." In addition, technical specifications were copied verbatim from the confidential slide set and posted on the online site. These postings by Mr. O'Grady were spread over three days, November 19, 22 and 23, 2004. The Court is convinced by Apple's presentation, including the materials produced in camera that this action has passed the thresholds necessary for discovery to proceed."
Guess what, nimrod? You can't have access to copies of confidential paperwork unless you are able to see them with your own eyes. Therefore, someone made copies of something marked confidential, and disseminated it to the site in question. Since the documents and specifications and such are Apple property, and they ended up in someone else's hands, they were stolen. Maybe not physically stolen, but taking pictures of confidential material is still considered stealing when the material is in written format.
If you don't believe me, find a way to take pictures of some government paperwork clearly labeled confidential eyes only and disseminate them on the web... and find out how long it takes before the FBI breaks down your door and arrests you for theft of government property and possibly treason.
Sure a company can TRY and hide illegal or harmful practices behind the guise of "trade secrets." However, true whistle blower laws protect those whistle blowers who expose said practices, NDA or not.
That's where the standard should be set.
Is the "trade secret" defrauding stockholders or employees? (Y/N)
Is the "trade secret" being used to knowingly put a harmful product on the market that can cause illness/debilitation/death to consumers? (Y/N)
Is the "trade secret" something that hides illegal dumping? (Y/N)
Is the "trade secret" doing anything else that would be considered illegal under national and/or international laws, or otherwise harmful to the good of the public? (Y/N)
If the answer to any of those questions is yes, then the whistle blowing clause would stand, and sources could be protected.
Is the "trade secret" information on an upcoming product that has yet to be announced to the public, and could be conceivably copied by a competitor before the official announcement, possibly allowing that competitor to release a similar product earlier? (Y/N)
This is the question posed for the blogger cases. This question is the only one in the case. This particular question, if answered yes, does not deserve the "anonymous sources" protection of the press, because all this is is a way for the "press" to break a story that while may be in the "public's interest for the newest gadgets," and in no way is in the interest of the public good or showing how a company is breaking any laws.
That's the difference between whistle blower laws and the trade secret laws being used to find the sources for the blogger cases. And, in this case, Apple, and not the bloggers who knowingly published info they should have reasonably known to be trade secrets that do not affect the well being of the public good or show violation of laws, are in the right.
Recent corporate scandals involving WorldCom, Enron and the tobacco industry all undoubtedly involved the reporting of information that the companies involved would have preferred to remain unknown to the public...
Except that the ThinkSecret et al cases have nothing to do with the whistle blowing that went on with Enron, WorldCom, and the tobacco industry. If the blogger sites had found out information that Apple was cooking the books and defrauding their stockholders and raiding their employees 401K plans and other retirement funds, or was knowingly coating their products in a toxic chemical that will eventually lead to a debilitating or fatal disease, then there would be similarities.
Releasing info on upcoming products that, while the public would be interested in for other reasons but do not affect the greater good of the public, is not whistle blowing. In the "public's interest" and for the Public Good are two entirely different things.
Basically, these news organizations and the AP are trying to ensure they cover their asses in the future, hoping that they can still protect whistle blowers, but it sounds to me like they have completely forgotten what the term whistle blower means. Either that, or a lot of the reporters had planned on doing similar things, and don't want to face the repercussions of doing so. Either way, they are in the wrong on this issue, not Apple.
Yeah, people are gonna choose a portable with a gimmicky double-screen set-up over the portable that's so powerful it's hard to believe it's a portable, as well as having mod capability to surf the net, play movies, etc.
People seem to already have done so. Right before the European launch of the DS, Nintendo announced that 4 million of them had been sold between the US and Japan (right around 2 million each region). With the US numbers, the PSP is hovering right around the 2 million mark, at best (600k, plus another 600k or so in Japan this year plus whatever they sold in 2004 in Japan which was ~500-600k).
Simple math says 4 million plus is higher than ~2 million give or take.
I can't speak for the parent you are asking about, but I love OS X. I'm far more productive on it than I am on any of my Windows machines. Ironic that I got my iBook strictly for portability and computing when I am away from home, and I use it almost exclusively at home as well (there are one or two Windows only programs I use, but rarely), and have since the first time I turned it on last March.
Unfortunately, I've had a string of bad luck with logic boards. I'm having my 4th logic board installed now, and am stuck on a Widnows PC right now, until I get it back on Monday.
Good news is, with AppleCare, the logic board replacements are free, and will be for 2 more years should I need any more (I hope not). And if I keep having these problems, I'm gonna use my AppleCare to just replace my current iBook with a new one (or see if I can get a PowerBook and pay the difference). I'm willing to let this replacement board go without asking for a replacement because the second board had a physical problem that wasn't detected till it started shorting on me. Depending on what was with this board, I'll see about replacing it under my warranty.
Yea but is this like a Redhat 7 - 7.1 switch or a win 98 to win 98Se type switch?
Well, it's not OS XI, but all the OS X upgrades have had a lot of useful features added and faster performance than the previous point releases.
I never really used 10.2, so I can't say everything that changed, but I got my Mac last March, and it had 10.3. I do know that the most useful feature I have ever found in an OS, Expose, was added to 10.3, and was not in 10.2. Also I think Finder was improved from 10.2 to 10.3.
As for what's coming in 10.4 that isn't in 10.3 that I'm looking forward to? Here's my list:
Spotlight: Uber fast searching of my hard drive, even looking in PDF files for my search keyword, works like the search function in iTunes, only for the entire hard drive. Also enables smart folders in many applications to auto store things I look for a lot.
Automator: Scripting for people like me, who haven't yet learned AppleScript. GUI scripter, looks incredibly easy to use, and might get used a lot for me when I make photo CDs and such for friends.
iChat AV improvements: 10 person audio chat, 4 person video chat. since I love using my iSight, I should get a ton of use out of this.
Core Video: might even make my iBook work well for video editing (not counting on this, though, it is only an iBook G4).
True 64 bit support in the OS: For when I get my G5. Mmmmmm.
RSS in Safari: I use Safari more on my Mac than I use Firefox on my Mac. I have Firefox for it, but I find Safari works easier for me for most pages... might have something to do with the way Firefox is coded for the Mac, though.
Those are the main features, besides the speed boost all programs should get like there was between 10.2 and 10.3
Slashdot Mirror
And damn you /.ers all to hell for killing my site! ;-P
Seriously, we (GamesAreFun) went down right after the press conference started, and it took almost 2 hours for our webhost to manually go and hit the reset button...
Although I am upset to have heard that someone found WiFi access in the Sony conference... I know I sure as hell couldn't connect to the only network inside the studio that seemed to have an outside link to the world. and I'm on an Apple...
A dozen out of how many games released last year? Well over 100 games get released a year, so slightly more than 10% of 100 being in the "living up to hype" section is not really helping your argument.
The crap to good ratio is pretty horrid out there, right now, especially on the PS2. The Xbox is catching up to the PS2 in crap to good ratio, and the GC also has more crap games than good games.
The Madden Franchise is like 15 years old, how many Mario and Zelda games have there been?
Ok, so there's been like 15 Maddens released over the past 15 years. There's been 8 true Super Mario games released over the past 25 or so years (not including spinoffs that just have Mario characters); Donkey Kong, Mario Bros. Super Mario Bros. Super Mario Bros. 2, Super Mario Bros. 3, Super Mario World, Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine. As for console Zelda titles, you've got The Legend of Zelda, The Legend of Zelda 2: The Adventures of Link, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time; The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask; The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker,, and the upcoming LoZ title for the GC. That'll make 8 total over the past 20 or so years for Zelda titles as well (not counting GB/GBA games).
And with games like Super Mario 64 and TLoZ: Ocarina of Time, the genres were completely defined. SM64 created the template for what a 3D platformer should be; and Ocarina of Time defined what a 3D adventure game should be like (despite ofther 3D adventure games that came out before it).
people in Japan bought PS2s for the DVD funtionality
Because at the time, DVD players in Japan were much, much more expensive. Once the price of DVD players dropped, people in Japan stopped buying the PS2 for DVD playback, because it was clear that the PS2's DVD playback was pretty terrible compared to stand alone players.
mature genres
Mature in what way, though? I think you'd be hard pressed to find many M rated titles that actually fit the bill of "mature in design" over purely juvenile game play elements that get rated M just because there's tons and tons of blood. Tons of blood, a boob here and there, and cursing, does not make something mature, because that appeals to the juvenile aspect of gamers.
The video game industry may decline, but it won't collapse completely.
It depends. As more and more smaller studios and publishers get absorbed into larger ones, or die off completely, we'll see a decline in things like innovation and varied game play elements, and we'll be stuck in a video game industry of Madden 3456 and other sports titles, which might as well be a dead industry, as far as I am concerned.
Without owning an iPod or other digital music player, I can only speculate.
I would assume it's for ease of use. iTunes synchs up with iPods, and allows for quick playlist changes and updates as well.
I don't know if other digital music players do this, or if they plan to. But I do know, from seeing my friend's synch up their iPods, that the ease of use for moving songs from PC/Mac to the iPod is a definite plus for people. No finding the folder and manually dragging the files, just choose the files you want, and they head on over to the iPod. If the other players don't have this ease of use, well, then Average Joe Users might not like them.
But, given how much market share the iPod (in all its incarnations) currently has, the prospect of being a Windows user with just a WMA player seems unlikely. If the iPod was just for the Mac, then yeah, you'd be right. But with the iPod also working with Windows, it gave the iPod the market share it now has... which is somewhere around 70%-75% or so of hard drive music players.
Sure, there's more "choice" for Windows users with the ability to buy multiple brands of players with WMA support... but this choice hasn't been cutting into the iPod's market share, or at least not in any noticeable way as of yet.
I don't have any sort of portable digital music player, but if I did, I'd get an iPod, and for various reasons. It's compact and easy to use; it has a decent battery life; and since I have a Mac, it can easily act as a FireWire external hard drive if I need it to. The music I have on my iBook is 4.59 GB... so I could get myself a 40 GB iPod and still have 35 GB of space for other things besides music. I could currently back up my entire hard drive's contents (music included) and still have almost 11 GB left over on a 40 GB iPod.
I can't think of any WMA players that would let me do that, or at least none that would let me do that easily.
I've got 828 songs on my iBook. 28 of them have never been listened to the whole way through (since iTunes only counts complete play through of songs as a play) since I bought my iBook in March 2004.
I've got 3 songs at over 250 play throughs. I've got 4 more over 200 plays but under 250. 8 at over 150 but under 200. 36 at 100 or over but under 150. 70 at over 50 and under 100. 609 at between 10-50 plays. And 74 at under 10 full play throughs (but at least 1).
And I haven't even ripped all my CDs to this thing yet.
For people like me, who like to have background music, and sometimes fall asleep listening to their music, your proposed micro-payment system would bankrupt us in just a few years.
Half the time, I'm not even truly listening to the music, but I like the background noise. The other half, I'm choosing songs I want to hear at the time, and they are usually grouped together (hence the large amount of 100+ plays). The only reason my library hasn't been played through more is some of the tracks are over an hour long, so they take a while to go through... otherwise, I don't think I'd have many songs at under 50 play throughs at all.
Under your proposal, my 609, if we say they all got played just 10 times for a nice even number, is $60.90. We can add $0.74 for the 74 at least one play through (saying they only got played once) for $61.64. Another $35.00 for the ones played at least 50 times, for $91.64. $36 for the ones played at least 100 times, for $127.64. $12 for the 8 at 150, for $139.64. $8 for the 200 plays, for $147.64. And $7.50 for the 250 play throughs, for a grand total of $155.14.
$155.14 is more money than I've spent on CDs/iTMS in the past 2-3 years combined. And my music is playing in the background right now, so those little $0.01 charges would still be adding up in your proposal. I can easily suspect by next March, I will have racked up another $150+ in charges under your proposed system, not including any other music I buy.
For music fans, a pay per listen scheme is not a viable option. And, as a music fan, my music is basically playing almost 24 hours a day.
As for them making the same amount of money... they aren't making any right now on the current Xbox. The Xbox is around $3 billion in the hole. When it was pitched to shareholders, the amount of money that the division said they should lose was $900 million over five years. They're already around 3x+ that amount, and they haven't even hit the four-year mark.
Sure, MS has gained mindshare... but now they're going to be facing the Sony Hype Machine(TM) just like Sega did when they launched the DC a year before the PS2. It'll be interesting to see what happens after Sony unveils their specs for the PS3 and gets that Sony Hype Machine(TM) rolling. Sure, just like the PS2, the PS3 will probably never ever live up to that hype, but the Sony Hype Machine(TM) has a TON of people who listen to it and believe everything it says (unfortunately).
I hate the size of it, and the button configuration is teh suck. The S is much more comfortable, and the buttons are in a nice cross shape and round instead of in a oblong diamond shape with oval buttons.
On top of that, Xbox has a much stricter code of conduct and more power to suspend and ban obnoxious players because you are playing through the xbox live system.
Which they practically never do. Why? Because that would be one less subscriber per banning, and that would mean Microsoft's XBL numbers would drop, as well as $50/year in subscription revenue.
The best example is with Halo 2. If you were caught cheating (and Bungie could prove it) you got banned for a day... do it again, and you were banned for 3 days... do it again and you were banned for a week... do it again you were banned for another 2 weeks... then another two weeks if caught again... then a month... then MAYBE lose your XBL account. Maybe. Unfortunately, almost no one who did it ever lost their account, and even if they did, they had lots and lots of free two month trial cards to get right back on.
So, instead of just banning the Xbox serial number, like they should have (and they do for modded Xboxes), they'd cancel an XBL account for cheating and stuff... and the person would get right back on with a 2 month card. But, in order for this to happen, Bungie would have to review the game stats for the games where cheating was mentioned in feedback, and they'd give out all these "warning" bannings that were of no consequence to the cheaters.
As long as MS is bringing in money off of XBL subscriptions, they won't be canceling accounts for things like they say they will. The Xbox and XBL are money pits, practically bottomless money pits right now, so they want to recoup as much as possible, and banning people for things they should be banned for does not bring in any revenue.
When radio was introduced, they fought long and hard, and they weren't the RIAA yet, to make sure music never got played on it under the argument "people will just listen to their favorite songs on the radio! We'll never sell another record again!"
Instead, the radio made them more money than they could have imagined.
When recordable cassette tapes were released, they again fought long and hard to try and make them illegal, because "people will just record their favorite songs off of the radio (which we once said was evil, but never-mind our old argument)! We'll never sell another album again!"
Again, same issue, nothing bad happened to them.
Now it's file sharing will make people never buy albums again! Odd, there's still a LOT of albums being sold, all over the world, and for the longest time they couldn't "prove" any damage because they were breaking all sorts of sales records and forecasts... until they finally raised the forecasts up so high, in the middle of an economic recession, that there was no way they would ever reach those numbers. They artificially made "lost sales" by saying how they didn't meet predictions, and that was only done by raising forecasts beyond any reasonable number.
And the RIAA has only themselves to blame, really. They turned down the idea of digital distribution in the first place, figuring no one would go for it. Then the file sharing programs hit, most notably Napster; then they gave Napster world attention by suing Napster and making the suit public on news broadcasts and such. Had there been no suit or at least no publicity on the suit, millions upon millions of people who now use file sharing programs might never have even known they existed. Joe Average Internet User certainly wouldn't have known about Napster, Kazaa, etc. without that world-wide attention the RIAA gave to file sharing programs.
And, in a bit of a blast of my own personal taste against the RIAA, it also doesn't help that 99.9999999999% of the music their labels put out is absolute shit, either. Certainly the true lost sales couldn't have happened because every new band they put forth is a "me too!" band, all sounding alike and all sucking just as equally, right?
The RIAA made their bed, by their own mistakes, now they can lie in it while I support the non-RIAA artists I enjoy by legally buying my music off of iTunes (when that has what I want) or buying their CDs at smaller stores that cater to my tastes.
Please name for me one single record that Apple Computers has produced and distributed in any way shape or form. I'd also like to know which band is signed to the Apple Computers Record Label.
As much as I like the Beatles as a band, the whole Apple Corps Records owning the trademark over the word "apple" is ridiculous. I suppose this means any apple orchard has to pay royalties to Apple Corps Records? What about the makers of apple sauce? Or apple juice? What about apple preservatives or jams?
That whole situation was a crock from the get go, as there is no one alive who would mistake Apple Corps Records and Apple Computers for the same thing. Apple Corps makes its money off of selling Beatles albums, not computers.
So, I suppose if I was to start a building company called Apple Builders, I'd have to cut a deal with Apple Corps Records, too, eh? Because we all know the word apple is not generic in any way and is only associated with the Beatles.
It depends on the magazine and sites, really.
I work for a review site, and I finish each and every game before I review it. My currently being out on long term disability helps; as does the fact that since we are a website, with no debug kits for any games, we have no "press time" to get the reviews out by. We have had one review that went up before the game was released, but only because we're friends with the game's developers.
The few times they actually do are with A list titles, which are going to get steller reviews anyhow.
Not always, Fable was an A List title, and I gave it a low score because it was, IMHO, a Piece of Shit(TM) that was over-hyped and too oft delayed. I beat it, 100% for my alignment, in 16 hours, and 4 hours of that was spent doing nothing but leveling up. That's all the side quests for my alignment, all the Demon Doors, all the secret weapons, etc. 12 hours to find and do all that? Pathetic. It's always going to depend on the sites and mags, really. Most sites and magazines hyped Fable up to be the Second Coming of Christ, and even the glowing reviews listed most of the faults I mentioned in my review... it's just that since they had hyped the game up beyond belief, they'd look like a bunch of cock smoking cum dumpsters if they gave it a low score after telling people it was the Best Game Evar(TM) long before it hit store shelves.
You are delusional, you know. While I won't go so far as to say a Mac Mini can do professional video editing, I know for a fact it can easily open well more than 5 windows without slowing to a crawl.
A Mac Mini has a faster processor than my iBook, and I can run way more than 5 windows open at any given time, and still switch to and from programs and run them effortlessly, including PhotoShop with around 20 pictures open while editing them.
Give a Mac Mini some extra RAM, at least bring it up to 512 MB, and it'll run fine. Sure, FinalCut Pro or HD won't be running all that great (re-compressing movies with FinalCut Pro 4 does slow my 1 GHz G4 with 640 MB of RAM to a crawl), but iMovie will work fine. But unlike your absolutely false statement that OS X slows to a crawl with more than 5 windows open, mine is factual, as anyone with OS X on a Mac Mini with adequate RAM (or an iBook like mine with adequate RAM) will attest to.
Now with this, he could get more USB ports (I don't think he has many FireWire devices, if any) as well as get a ton of extra storage for his music.
When I see him online I'll point him to this as a possible external hard drive add on like we had discussed the other day.
About a year ago I went to price out how much these boxes are, and at the time they were around $300. And that's too much, especially when you consider I watch maybe three shows a week (I got it to watch DVDs on and play my consoles on, mainly).
Plus, this is the only HDTV in the house, so the other TVs will need a converter box to convert the digital signals back into analog for them. And God only knows how much those are going to cost.
And I don't have cable or satellite TV, either. So spending over $100 (Per TV) just to get my local stations is pure bullshit.
Until we know how much these things are going to cost, congress and the FCC would do well to postpone the switch, at least until the devices necessary come down in price to something more affordable for everyone. For all we know, there may not even be any HD to analog converter boxes made yet in preparation for the switch.
But, can the same thing be said about getting that sort of performance with Windows? That's the big thing, really.
PC to Mac switchers won't be Linux to Mac switchers in most cases, they'll be Windows to Mac switchers.
For instance, my friend is considering getting a Mac Mini, even though he has a very nice (although no longer high end) Windows PC. Why is he considering switching? Because he is tired of having to deal with all the programs he needs to keep his system free of spy-ware and ad-ware as well as the nearly constant virus software updates he has to do. He's also tired of other things that he has to do to his Windows PC to keep it running in tip top shape all the time.
The 1.42 GHz G4 Mini hardly compares to his 2+ GHz Intel desktop, and I believe he has a GB of RAM on it, plus he has two 120 GB HDDs on it. But for normal, everyday use, he just wants something simple, that just works, without his need to admin the box to extremes.
He's used Linux, as well, but he's mainly a Windows user. Sure, he said he'd probably still buy antivirus software for the Mini, just to be extra safe, but he has that option-- even if it is isn't as necessary on OS X.
And he's the type of person that would switch to a Mac. Someone tired of dealing with the bullshit of Windows just for everyday use.
You're a Linux user. You're not as prone to switch to a Mac, because while there's still bullshit to deal with on Linux to make it secure and whatnot, you're willing to take those extra steps and be able to configure your Linux box to pretty much run exactly how you want it. You're not the type of person who Apple is looking for in a switcher. You might even find that the Unix commands and stuff make you like OS X a lot, but there's still something about the complete customization ability of Linux that appeals to Linux users.
Plus, when you do actually factor in the real costs, can that same $800 WinTel machine really compare to any Mac out there? a $500 Mac Mini comes with an ATi Radeon 9200 with 32 MB VRAM; sure, it's not the best video card on the market, but compared to uber-cheap WinTel machines with their no video card and integrated Intel graphics, it's better. The $500 Mac Mini has a DVD-ROM/CD-ROM/CD-RW drive built in (upgradeable to become a DVD burner as well), uber-cheap Wintel machines normally do not come with burners. The Mac Mini has Firewire and USB built in, the uber-cheap PC will have USB, but no firewire built in, normally.
Granted, you could probably buy the parts separately, and make your own pretty sweet $800 PC, but when really comparing, you should compare OEM PCs to Macs. After all, it's not fair to compare prices when you can find a sweet deal on eBay for a piece of hardware for a PC that might otherwise cost $100 or more.
Tout os performance all you like, but really it boils down to a specialty OS for specialty hardware.
Honestly, the only specialty hardware in a Mac is the PPC chip that OS X runs on. Graphics cards and whatnot are basically the same for PC or Mac.
But OS performance is a big factor, as well. My 1 GHz G4 iBook with 640 MB RAM can outperform my brother's WinXP Pro box with a 3.0 GHz Intel with 1 GB RAM for some things, like PhotoShop use, but for others the Intel wins out. Still, I seem to always have faster focus switching than he does, as well, because Windows programs like to load themselves into memory at boot up which eats away at some of his performance. I have exactly one program that loads itself up at startup and that's used for video capture of my desktop for things like recording iChat AV videos if needed or for making demos of how to use programs.
I've come very close to buying a Mac Laptop, I'v
DirectX 9
Open GL updates are free on OS X and come with each real point update (10.x.y).
the addition of IPv6
Welcome to the 21st Century.
a rewrite of the firewall
Mac OS X firewall has been working fine since 10.0, long before SP2's rewrite came out.
major security infrastructure improvements
So they fixed things that have been problems for years? Joy. And security fixes as a major feature of a service pack is not a good thing. Apple releases security fixes through Software Update that are security updates alone, not service packs (although the true service packs have the older fixes in them as well).
a radically improved update mechanism
Software Update has worked fine for a while now on OS X, since before XP SP2 came out, as well.
Set Program Access and Defaults
And, yet, some programs still require the use of being logged in as an administrator account, which has no default settings to prevent unwanted programs from being installed while running that account.
Windows Media Player 10 (contrast this with the awful WMP 8 included with XP RTM)
Yay. Quicktime gets updated through Software Update if you want it to, or you can download it from the Quicktime part of Apple's site.
the addition of things like handwriting to Messenger
Been in OS X for a while. Has Windows yet gotten a reliable voice activation/dictation software yet? OS X has.
the security center
Something else to highlight the security flaws in Windows, and something not really needed on OS X.
a simpler wireless UI
As in WiFi? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA! WiFi on Windows is such a pain in the ass to set up, it isn't even funny. In OS X (cue overused but true saying) IT JUST WORKS. In fact, I literally just connect to any unsecured network in the immediate area if I choose to.
Sorry, but it looks like these new features are still behind stuff OS X had in some cases since 10.0.
Did I mention that this post is spell checked via the system-wide spell check feature?
May the gods bless this feature until the end of times. I didn't even know about it for the longest time, but now I can't live without it. I knew about it in iChat AV, AppleWorks, TextEdit, etc., but not Safari. Now I have been using it, and I can't live without it. Now my comments are t3h c0rr3ct $p3ll1ng!!!!!one!!!1111!!!!!eleventyone!
I particularly like the fact that he somehow automatically knows that the Longhorn search feature will be more "further-reaching" than Spotlight. Being as we haven't even seen MS' version demoed, we can't know. The fields that Thurrot covered in his review concern generally the GUI. And, apart from Spotlight, there is little revolution in this area from Panther to Tiger, merely refinements. Most of the people that will upgrade won't notice a big difference in their habits.
Yeah, I noticed that. He completely left out things such as Automator (which I will most likely use extensively), and instead focused on the general GUI, Spotlight, and Dashboard. Out of all the new things in Tiger, Dashboard is the one I am least interested in. The general speed increases and speed boost in Safari are things I want to know about, not if this program looks different or not.
Still, I don't use MS Office on it, AppleWorks does my word processing tasks fine (I rarely have need for spreadsheets or powerpoint-type presentations).
Now, if I try and use Final Cut Pro 4 to re-compress video... well, then my whole system lags... but that's because I'm on an iBook and not a PowerBook or PowerMac.
If you don't believe me, find a way to take pictures of some government paperwork clearly labeled confidential eyes only and disseminate them on the web... and find out how long it takes before the FBI breaks down your door and arrests you for theft of government property and possibly treason.
That's where the standard should be set.
Is the "trade secret" defrauding stockholders or employees? (Y/N)
Is the "trade secret" being used to knowingly put a harmful product on the market that can cause illness/debilitation/death to consumers? (Y/N)
Is the "trade secret" something that hides illegal dumping? (Y/N)
Is the "trade secret" doing anything else that would be considered illegal under national and/or international laws, or otherwise harmful to the good of the public? (Y/N)
If the answer to any of those questions is yes, then the whistle blowing clause would stand, and sources could be protected.
Is the "trade secret" information on an upcoming product that has yet to be announced to the public, and could be conceivably copied by a competitor before the official announcement, possibly allowing that competitor to release a similar product earlier? (Y/N)
This is the question posed for the blogger cases. This question is the only one in the case. This particular question, if answered yes, does not deserve the "anonymous sources" protection of the press, because all this is is a way for the "press" to break a story that while may be in the "public's interest for the newest gadgets," and in no way is in the interest of the public good or showing how a company is breaking any laws.
That's the difference between whistle blower laws and the trade secret laws being used to find the sources for the blogger cases. And, in this case, Apple, and not the bloggers who knowingly published info they should have reasonably known to be trade secrets that do not affect the well being of the public good or show violation of laws, are in the right.
Except that the ThinkSecret et al cases have nothing to do with the whistle blowing that went on with Enron, WorldCom, and the tobacco industry. If the blogger sites had found out information that Apple was cooking the books and defrauding their stockholders and raiding their employees 401K plans and other retirement funds, or was knowingly coating their products in a toxic chemical that will eventually lead to a debilitating or fatal disease, then there would be similarities.
Releasing info on upcoming products that, while the public would be interested in for other reasons but do not affect the greater good of the public, is not whistle blowing. In the "public's interest" and for the Public Good are two entirely different things.
Basically, these news organizations and the AP are trying to ensure they cover their asses in the future, hoping that they can still protect whistle blowers, but it sounds to me like they have completely forgotten what the term whistle blower means. Either that, or a lot of the reporters had planned on doing similar things, and don't want to face the repercussions of doing so. Either way, they are in the wrong on this issue, not Apple.
People seem to already have done so. Right before the European launch of the DS, Nintendo announced that 4 million of them had been sold between the US and Japan (right around 2 million each region). With the US numbers, the PSP is hovering right around the 2 million mark, at best (600k, plus another 600k or so in Japan this year plus whatever they sold in 2004 in Japan which was ~500-600k).
Simple math says 4 million plus is higher than ~2 million give or take.
Unfortunately, I've had a string of bad luck with logic boards. I'm having my 4th logic board installed now, and am stuck on a Widnows PC right now, until I get it back on Monday.
Good news is, with AppleCare, the logic board replacements are free, and will be for 2 more years should I need any more (I hope not). And if I keep having these problems, I'm gonna use my AppleCare to just replace my current iBook with a new one (or see if I can get a PowerBook and pay the difference). I'm willing to let this replacement board go without asking for a replacement because the second board had a physical problem that wasn't detected till it started shorting on me. Depending on what was with this board, I'll see about replacing it under my warranty.
Well, it's not OS XI, but all the OS X upgrades have had a lot of useful features added and faster performance than the previous point releases.
I never really used 10.2, so I can't say everything that changed, but I got my Mac last March, and it had 10.3. I do know that the most useful feature I have ever found in an OS, Expose, was added to 10.3, and was not in 10.2. Also I think Finder was improved from 10.2 to 10.3.
As for what's coming in 10.4 that isn't in 10.3 that I'm looking forward to? Here's my list:
Spotlight: Uber fast searching of my hard drive, even looking in PDF files for my search keyword, works like the search function in iTunes, only for the entire hard drive. Also enables smart folders in many applications to auto store things I look for a lot.
Automator: Scripting for people like me, who haven't yet learned AppleScript. GUI scripter, looks incredibly easy to use, and might get used a lot for me when I make photo CDs and such for friends.
iChat AV improvements: 10 person audio chat, 4 person video chat. since I love using my iSight, I should get a ton of use out of this.
Core Video: might even make my iBook work well for video editing (not counting on this, though, it is only an iBook G4).
True 64 bit support in the OS: For when I get my G5. Mmmmmm.
RSS in Safari: I use Safari more on my Mac than I use Firefox on my Mac. I have Firefox for it, but I find Safari works easier for me for most pages... might have something to do with the way Firefox is coded for the Mac, though.
Those are the main features, besides the speed boost all programs should get like there was between 10.2 and 10.3