Re:Beta? Or stable pre-alpha rushed out the door?
on
Adobe Lightroom Review
·
· Score: 1
Apple ticked off Adobe with FCPro, but like it matters, since Premiure has always been a consumer video-editor and even now still lacks in many areas, even after Adobe decided to finally try and make something of it. I'm thinking that if AfterEffects didn't have a much larger user base on the Mac and they weren't being dominated by Discreet's products on the PC in this area, that Adobe would've also dropped Mac support out of spite.
Adobe and Macromedia both release their products on both platforms simultaneously, at least the ones that I own and use. Which ones are you thinking about?
This new app does seem completely rushed. They should probably consider making somthing like ImageReady, but for photographers that integrates into Photoshop.
Just to be more specific, OS X still uses a 32-Bit Gui, so as to ensure compatibility with the thousands of existing apps. Not everything needs 64-bit support and moving to a 64-bit GUI would put OS X in the same boat as Win64, which still lags way behind the WinXP in support. 64-bit addressing can be slower than 32-bit if it's not needed.
"All" applictions under Tiger have access to 64-bit memory addressing and have had access to 64-bit computations since Panther. 64-bit support for OS X is not limited by any means, it's just practical.
Also Windows 64 uses a 32-bit long. Microsoft actually made up their own standard of LL64. OS X uses 64-bit long pointers just like Linux and is based on the industry standard LP64. MS of course chose this direction to maintain compatibily and make it easier for developers to port their legacy code.
Yeah, games like F.E.A.R would definitely use all 4 GPUS at that resolution if set to max detail. Games like Quake 4, which looks better IMO, could easily get buy with just 2 GPUS on ultra quality at tht rez though.:)
I run an Apple HD 30" on my DP G5 with a 6800 Ultra. The few games I actually play, like WC3 mods and I've tried WOW run great at 2560x1600, but of course they're not using the latest eye candy. I wouldn't want to run this screen on my PCs though, at least not on the current version of Windows. OS X at least accelerates all aspects of the GUI via the GPU and fully supports that resolution. Only older games won't run at that rez and are limited to 2048x1536. But I didn't buy this screen for games, I bought it for my profession.
It can also play videos with the same add-on, but that's not why I bought a DS, nor is it a selling point. (I'll leave it up to you to find out how a DS can play music and video.)
I own a DS and love it and I will eventually buy a PSP, but "not" for music playback. (I tried Sony for music and compared to Apple's iPod, their products are atrocious. ATRAC3 is Satan's spawn.)
It's not the price, it's the poor selection of games for PSP and a few other factors that make the DS a much better game machine and why it's not selling as well. Give me a game worth buying and my love for portables will have me owning a PSP. But even then, it will never replace my DS.
A technician and a self proclaimed psychologist... Who knew... ---wow--- simply amazing... Like that candy bar... You should probably keep your day job as a techie, but then again, with asinine statements like X360 games "do" look better than current PC games, and an uncanny ability to take most of what I've stated completely out of "context," while ignoring other parts, which you then post as your own rhetoric, maybe you should consider being a twit full time.
When reading most of what you've stated, this comes to mind; NO SHIT!!! Especially since parts are redundant to what I've stated to you and in other posts, which you claim to have read. FYI. Trying to rip on my posting history is merely a sign of "desperation" and this is the act of someone posting as an AC.
Your very last sentence is something I can whole heartily agree with; Amen.
Wow your brilliance has wowed me, excuse me while I vomit. I've never met anyone who's "read!"
Once again for someone who's well readified;
The X360 in its current state of mediocricy performs no better than my antiquated Athlon XP.
Now what does this mean? It's pretty clear, but obviously not for you.
Note the word "mediocricy" and "current." Oh, and note Athlon XP. Now who the fuck stated "T-Bird? Maybe you should use your ability to read, so that you'll know the difference between an Athlon XP and an Athlon T-Bird.
Once again, but reworded for someone who's brilliance clouded "its" ability to comprehend; An unopitmized X360, because its available games are only using one fucking-thread and the developers are still "new" and were "rushed" when developing these games, in it is current state of being, meaning now, meaning the version I've "played" more than once, performs "no" better than my dated Athlon XP Barton, for similar games like COD2. Now is that a bit clearer? Probably not, since I added more words. But your readified edjumication should be able to handle it.
If you think that because on paper the X360 can do what MS states, when "currently" (Here's this word again) it can not, then you're truly in denial. Why else would you post as an "Anonymous Coward?" Afraid you'll offend someone? Obviously you're not even sure about what you spew, since you don't have the nads to post under your username.
And no shit, they do tweak the shit out of games for consoles, ONCE THEY KNOW THE INS-AND-OUTS(Hey, didn't I already mention this... Yes I did.) once they have enough experience under their belt to properly do so. Look at the PS2, it only took about 5 yars, but they really figured that one out. So until the X360 is in its prime, which it won't be for several years, it's all hype and even then I doubt it will live up to what looked good on paper. The Xbox never did, so why do you thing the X360 will be any different?
Guess what, the X360 doesn't perform as promissed, that's not being ignorant,that's just simple observation. Post again once the X360 has content that can squeeze it for every ounce of power and this time uncheck "Post Anonymously."
Nope, didn't buy into it, tis why I stated "maybe" on a purchase. But in comparisson to the X360, I have not doubt Sony will deliver something a step above that's more pleasing than light-blooms from hell. Afterall, they have more experience with consoles. But I do know from working in the game industry when I was younger, that they've always been full of it when it comes to their system's performance.
I'll show my bias towards mediocrity and if Sony doesn't live up to its hype, I'll show no restraint in expressing my opinions about them also. I left out Nintendo, because they've been pretty modest about their system, but until I get my hands on this new controller, I'll also have some doubts, but not as much since the DS was such a pleasant surprise.
And yes, a PC from a few years back. Don't tell me you fell for MS's hype? The X360 in its current state of mediocricy performs no better than my antiquated Athlon XP. Maybe in a few years once developers have figured out all the ins-and-outs it will live up to MS's hype, but I doubt it. They themselves stated it was 80 times faster than a XBox. Sure, maybe if I had mistaken my TS DVD for a game I would buy into that bull.
You get what you pay for when you buy a X360, a console that performs as well as a low-end PC.
Anyways, I own the deluxe edition of ToyStory and now that you menntion it, I've never been able to play it in my GameCube.
Also a GameCube and even a Xbox. Now doesn't your $1k notebook feel special. Now just like the X360 version of COD2, it has been "dumbed" down in detail to accommodate those console's shortcomings, so why don't you dumb down the detail on your notebook so that it will work well on it? The X360 version was optimized for 720p, if you hadn't noticed that's "lo-rez" compared to what PC games are generally optimized to work well with. Running it any higher stretches and blurs the textures and they look like shit and it also drops frame rate, which I also mentioned.
Now considering that the X360 is only about twice the performance of a 733Mhz Celeron/P3 hybrid, it doesn't take much to beat it out. I'll take my "old" (About 3 years now.) Athlon XP with a 9500 Pro (Can't get more than $100 for this, unless I rip off an ignorant peep.) over a X360 any day, since it runs games just fine. Oh, and if the CPU isn't fast enough to feed the GPU, which seems to be the case for your notebook, it doesn't matter what type of video card you have, and just like your notebook, the X360 with its unoptimized "weak" PPC variation doesn't have the throughput to feed a "real" x1800. This would be why it ships with a watered down derivative that doesn't hold up to its bigger brothers.
Now I've played COD2 on a X360 and it plays about the same as my old XP2500 with a 9500 Pro(Maybe they should've shoved this into a X360, since it does the job, but a X360 probably can't feed it fast enough either.) at 1024x768 (Works about the same at 1280x1024 also), which is what I run it on since I lug a 15" LCD to LAN parties. The difference though, is the PC version looks better, it doesn't look as jaggedy. Now if I weren't so cheap and replaced the Corsair DDR400 chip that deciced it no longer wanted to run at its native speed, I could jump my XP back up to XP3200, which makes a noticeable difference in performance, probably giving me better overal performance than X360 in its current state of pathetic-ness.
My friend has a Shuttle wiith a Athlon 64 running a 6600 and the game runs without hicccups, so maybe you should think aout investing in a standard PC next time. What did you buy, an older Pentium M, or is it a Celeron, and how much ram does your notebook have? Let me guess, your notebook only has 256 megs of RAM? Now if you won't spend $50 to bring it up, then you're just as cheap as me when it comes to my PCs. But I kind of figured that since you only paid a grand for your notebook. It's a Dell, isn't it?
You don't need to upgrade the X360? Well you shouldn't have to, because it's a "console." Of course if you don't buy its additional HDD, you'll be missing out. WTF is that, it's a console for Pete's sake!!!
A HDD is really needed if you want to take advantage of the X360. So $50 more to upgrade for your notebook is nothing, when it's $100 more for a X360, and if you weren't lucky enough to come buy a premium addition in this artificial shortage, then you'll be spending more than $500 after upgrades and accessories. Hey that's almost the price of a faster PC if you know what you're doing. Just imagine the idiots that paid more than a $1k for a X360 bundle, or paid more than $2k on eBay just to play a handful of second-rate games. Fuck, for that price I can assemble a fully decked out gaming rig with monitor that will floor an "optimized" X360.
I watched an infocomercial about it, I mean "Icon" on that shit-channel G4TV and they stated it has a PCI Express for future expansion. Now if this is true, just like the "shipping with bugs and then patching later" which MS introduced into the console market, (Thanks MS, just what we all wanted!!!) they'll probably introduce future games that will require a hardware upgrade to run, which is OK for PCs, but "not" for consoles! And I'm possitive that there will be several games in the future that will require the HDD option.
JFYI; My expensive PC is a G5 running a HD 30" (2560x1600), in some, (well mos
Wake up buddy, you've bought into MS's marketing hype. You're singing praise to a console that barely breaks the double-performance-mark over its predecessor and by the time developers get used to its shortcomings and can squeese it for every ounce of power, its tech, which is already dated, will be sub-par when compared to an entry level POS Dell of that time.
I'm buying a Revolution for the love of great games and something completely new, and maybe a PS3 for "true" visual eye candy. But will eventualy be upgrading my PC again, since it's better across the board for the types of games that consoles like the X360 "try" to handle. The controls alone on a PC are vastly better. I'll skip the X360, since it's maybe on par wtih my last PC from a few years back, which I could only get about $100 for if I'm lucky and MS is well known for making mediocre products that never perform as promised.
I'm not a fan of shoddy frame-rate, muddy/stretched/blurry textures, and an extreme overuse of light blooms. This seems to be the norm with the X360 games that I've tried. 2X aliasing... Wow. That's pretty amazing if it were the turn of the century again.
I can only imagine a MS iPod wannabe over-heating occasionally in the winter time, and damaging the internal HD if tilted. But the headphones will have a cool "on" button with little lights to tell you when the unit is not functioning.:)
MS couldn't even get their first store right, so I have little faith that they'll gain any real ground this time around, kind of like their game console in Japan.:)
3 "watered down" cores, which as a whole are quite "slow" in comparison to its bigger PPC brothers. Think of it as as 3 legged dog trying to run really fast.
In all reality, this thing is only about twice as fast as the first XBox, if we go by devloper's feedback, and there are plenty of chips on the market that aren't even considered mid-range these days that can easily best a Pentium/Celeron 733. So this 3.2 Ghz-tripple-core-sounds-good-on-paper, is most likely slower than even a single 1.6 Ghz G5.
And as arlready pointed out, your $300 mod can't play back HD content. It also doesn't integrate seamlessly with an iPod. The XBox has always been just ok for DVD playback, if anythign its 1/2 ass for everything except being a "cheap" Mame solution.
And yes, a Mini can do much more than just Frontrow, since it is a full fledged computer. The last thing I would want in my entertainment room, is a black 80 pound blah looking failed attempt at a media center.
I'm sorry that the X360 isn't performing as MS overly promised, maybe next time they'll actually spend more time on Q&A.
I can only go by past experience and I it's a safe bet that Nintendo a "VETERAN" to game hardware design, who'm already has a PowerPC based game console on the market will ship a working system. They have in the past, so I really don't see why they would abandon their proven commitment to quality this time around.
I have no bias towards MS in peticular, but I do have a bias towards "poor" quality and MEDIOCRITY! MS just happens to fall into that category and their track record can attest to it.
ONCE AGAIN, HERE"S MY ANSWER:
So "NO" Slashdot will not be posting an article about the NR being unstable, because it won't become a reality.
But just to play along with your "unrealistic" scenario, if the NR were plagued with problems like the XBox 1.5, there would definately be an article on Slashdot aobut it. If you think otherwise, then you're in la-la land.
I doubt these issues, if present, would be as bad. Sony knows what they're doing when it comes to console hardware and isn't as new to this whole game thing like MS. They're also taking more time with their new console before releasing it.
MS "rushed" this new system to the market and really didn't give developers along with themselves enough time to make it work well from day one. My friend works as a manager for a local gamestore chains and was privy to seeing the X360 about 2 months ago and he mentioned at that time about how unstable it was, so MS clearly needed more time to make this work and should've pushed back the launch date. There would still been lemons, but that's different than software crashes.
The GameCube uses a PowerPC and it worked reliably from day one. The Revolution will also be using a PowerPC and it will also work as intended from the get go.
This is what MS gets for trying to be first. Remember the Dreamcast, it was also rushed the market and the initial batch were plagued by overheating issues, which in the long run ended up hurting Sega.
Nintendo isn't rushing their new console to the market, and has "real" game hardware design experience. Their system won't be unstable, because unlike MS they're taking the sensible and proven route with their new console's components. AND unlike MS, they haven't OVERLY-HYPED their new system by spreading blatant BS about its overall power. Maybe if MS had also taken the humble route and not made so many over-promises, they wouldn't get so much negative attention.
So "NO" Slashdot will not be posting an article about the NR being unstable, because it won't become a reality.
I'm buying a Revolution. Nintendo has been in the "good" on the evil-meter for years. They haven't been in the evil since the N64 days.:) They didn't even fall into the evil-BS hype that sucked Sony and MS in this past E3. They're the only company that has really never overpromised, but yet always broken new grounds.
The last thing I want is another 4-6 years of everything I've been bored with for the past 3 or 4 years, so Nintendo's offereings are the only choice that really makes sense in my book. Ironic how a compnay that produce games based on the same characters over and over, is the only one that manages to actually produce something new and fresh in this industry of the same.
At least this that... Blah blah blah. Well my this is better than that!!! Do you always question another man's ass when talking about games? Or is this part of your everyday discussion with guys in general?
How convienct that you own so many game machines, but yet you know so "little."
Big difference between GTA PSP and Mario Kart DS, MK DS is a hit and has massive replay value. Ge, A) would I rather go around killing the same guy over and over, or B) play up to eight of my friends... Well, I'll have to go with choice B.
Speaking of "old" shit, how many times will you pay to play the same GTA formula? If MK is shit, than the same can easilly be stated about GTA PSP, when in reality they both have their strengths and are good games. I prefer MK to GTA. I've played GTA and had fun, but it's not what I like to play with friends, so does that make me wrong? According to your naive-logic, it does. You're not only ignorant, but you're also a hypocrite.
You obviously haven't played MK since SNES and it shows. So wear your ignorant title with pride, or go out and gain some real experience about MK, not just what you assume as being the case. Oh, you'll need friends if you truly want to enjoy it, so hopefully you know other peeps with DSs.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple ticked off Adobe with FCPro, but like it matters, since Premiure has always been a consumer video-editor and even now still lacks in many areas, even after Adobe decided to finally try and make something of it. I'm thinking that if AfterEffects didn't have a much larger user base on the Mac and they weren't being dominated by Discreet's products on the PC in this area, that Adobe would've also dropped Mac support out of spite.
Adobe and Macromedia both release their products on both platforms simultaneously, at least the ones that I own and use. Which ones are you thinking about?
This new app does seem completely rushed. They should probably consider making somthing like ImageReady, but for photographers that integrates into Photoshop.
Just to be more specific, OS X still uses a 32-Bit Gui, so as to ensure compatibility with the thousands of existing apps. Not everything needs 64-bit support and moving to a 64-bit GUI would put OS X in the same boat as Win64, which still lags way behind the WinXP in support. 64-bit addressing can be slower than 32-bit if it's not needed.
"All" applictions under Tiger have access to 64-bit memory addressing and have had access to 64-bit computations since Panther. 64-bit support for OS X is not limited by any means, it's just practical.
Also Windows 64 uses a 32-bit long. Microsoft actually made up their own standard of LL64. OS X uses 64-bit long pointers just like Linux and is based on the industry standard LP64. MS of course chose this direction to maintain compatibily and make it easier for developers to port their legacy code.
Yeah, games like F.E.A.R would definitely use all 4 GPUS at that resolution if set to max detail. Games like Quake 4, which looks better IMO, could easily get buy with just 2 GPUS on ultra quality at tht rez though. :)
I run an Apple HD 30" on my DP G5 with a 6800 Ultra. The few games I actually play, like WC3 mods and I've tried WOW run great at 2560x1600, but of course they're not using the latest eye candy. I wouldn't want to run this screen on my PCs though, at least not on the current version of Windows. OS X at least accelerates all aspects of the GUI via the GPU and fully supports that resolution. Only older games won't run at that rez and are limited to 2048x1536. But I didn't buy this screen for games, I bought it for my profession.
It can also play videos with the same add-on, but that's not why I bought a DS, nor is it a selling point. (I'll leave it up to you to find out how a DS can play music and video.)
I own a DS and love it and I will eventually buy a PSP, but "not" for music playback. (I tried Sony for music and compared to Apple's iPod, their products are atrocious. ATRAC3 is Satan's spawn.)
It's not the price, it's the poor selection of games for PSP and a few other factors that make the DS a much better game machine and why it's not selling as well. Give me a game worth buying and my love for portables will have me owning a PSP. But even then, it will never replace my DS.
I was thinking basically the same thing. :)
All we have here are few girly boys. :) *kidding*
A technician and a self proclaimed psychologist... Who knew... ---wow--- simply amazing... Like that candy bar... You should probably keep your day job as a techie, but then again, with asinine statements like X360 games "do" look better than current PC games, and an uncanny ability to take most of what I've stated completely out of "context," while ignoring other parts, which you then post as your own rhetoric, maybe you should consider being a twit full time.
When reading most of what you've stated, this comes to mind; NO SHIT!!! Especially since parts are redundant to what I've stated to you and in other posts, which you claim to have read. FYI. Trying to rip on my posting history is merely a sign of "desperation" and this is the act of someone posting as an AC.
Your very last sentence is something I can whole heartily agree with; Amen.
Wow your brilliance has wowed me, excuse me while I vomit. I've never met anyone who's "read!"
,that's just simple observation. Post again once the X360 has content that can squeeze it for every ounce of power and this time uncheck "Post Anonymously."
Once again for someone who's well readified;
The X360 in its current state of mediocricy performs no better than my antiquated Athlon XP.
Now what does this mean? It's pretty clear, but obviously not for you.
Note the word "mediocricy" and "current." Oh, and note Athlon XP. Now who the fuck stated "T-Bird? Maybe you should use your ability to read, so that you'll know the difference between an Athlon XP and an Athlon T-Bird.
Once again, but reworded for someone who's brilliance clouded "its" ability to comprehend; An unopitmized X360, because its available games are only using one fucking-thread and the developers are still "new" and were "rushed" when developing these games, in it is current state of being, meaning now, meaning the version I've "played" more than once, performs "no" better than my dated Athlon XP Barton, for similar games like COD2. Now is that a bit clearer? Probably not, since I added more words. But your readified edjumication should be able to handle it.
If you think that because on paper the X360 can do what MS states, when "currently" (Here's this word again) it can not, then you're truly in denial. Why else would you post as an "Anonymous Coward?" Afraid you'll offend someone? Obviously you're not even sure about what you spew, since you don't have the nads to post under your username.
And no shit, they do tweak the shit out of games for consoles, ONCE THEY KNOW THE INS-AND-OUTS (Hey, didn't I already mention this... Yes I did.) once they have enough experience under their belt to properly do so. Look at the PS2, it only took about 5 yars, but they really figured that one out. So until the X360 is in its prime, which it won't be for several years, it's all hype and even then I doubt it will live up to what looked good on paper. The Xbox never did, so why do you thing the X360 will be any different?
Guess what, the X360 doesn't perform as promissed, that's not being ignorant
Nope, didn't buy into it, tis why I stated "maybe" on a purchase. But in comparisson to the X360, I have not doubt Sony will deliver something a step above that's more pleasing than light-blooms from hell. Afterall, they have more experience with consoles. But I do know from working in the game industry when I was younger, that they've always been full of it when it comes to their system's performance.
I'll show my bias towards mediocrity and if Sony doesn't live up to its hype, I'll show no restraint in expressing my opinions about them also. I left out Nintendo, because they've been pretty modest about their system, but until I get my hands on this new controller, I'll also have some doubts, but not as much since the DS was such a pleasant surprise.
And yes, a PC from a few years back. Don't tell me you fell for MS's hype? The X360 in its current state of mediocricy performs no better than my antiquated Athlon XP. Maybe in a few years once developers have figured out all the ins-and-outs it will live up to MS's hype, but I doubt it. They themselves stated it was 80 times faster than a XBox. Sure, maybe if I had mistaken my TS DVD for a game I would buy into that bull.
You get what you pay for when you buy a X360, a console that performs as well as a low-end PC.
Anyways, I own the deluxe edition of ToyStory and now that you menntion it, I've never been able to play it in my GameCube.
Also a GameCube and even a Xbox. Now doesn't your $1k notebook feel special. Now just like the X360 version of COD2, it has been "dumbed" down in detail to accommodate those console's shortcomings, so why don't you dumb down the detail on your notebook so that it will work well on it? The X360 version was optimized for 720p, if you hadn't noticed that's "lo-rez" compared to what PC games are generally optimized to work well with. Running it any higher stretches and blurs the textures and they look like shit and it also drops frame rate, which I also mentioned.
Now considering that the X360 is only about twice the performance of a 733Mhz Celeron/P3 hybrid, it doesn't take much to beat it out. I'll take my "old" (About 3 years now.) Athlon XP with a 9500 Pro (Can't get more than $100 for this, unless I rip off an ignorant peep.) over a X360 any day, since it runs games just fine. Oh, and if the CPU isn't fast enough to feed the GPU, which seems to be the case for your notebook, it doesn't matter what type of video card you have, and just like your notebook, the X360 with its unoptimized "weak" PPC variation doesn't have the throughput to feed a "real" x1800. This would be why it ships with a watered down derivative that doesn't hold up to its bigger brothers.
Now I've played COD2 on a X360 and it plays about the same as my old XP2500 with a 9500 Pro(Maybe they should've shoved this into a X360, since it does the job, but a X360 probably can't feed it fast enough either.) at 1024x768 (Works about the same at 1280x1024 also), which is what I run it on since I lug a 15" LCD to LAN parties. The difference though, is the PC version looks better, it doesn't look as jaggedy. Now if I weren't so cheap and replaced the Corsair DDR400 chip that deciced it no longer wanted to run at its native speed, I could jump my XP back up to XP3200, which makes a noticeable difference in performance, probably giving me better overal performance than X360 in its current state of pathetic-ness.
My friend has a Shuttle wiith a Athlon 64 running a 6600 and the game runs without hicccups, so maybe you should think aout investing in a standard PC next time. What did you buy, an older Pentium M, or is it a Celeron, and how much ram does your notebook have? Let me guess, your notebook only has 256 megs of RAM? Now if you won't spend $50 to bring it up, then you're just as cheap as me when it comes to my PCs. But I kind of figured that since you only paid a grand for your notebook. It's a Dell, isn't it?
You don't need to upgrade the X360? Well you shouldn't have to, because it's a "console." Of course if you don't buy its additional HDD, you'll be missing out. WTF is that, it's a console for Pete's sake!!!
A HDD is really needed if you want to take advantage of the X360. So $50 more to upgrade for your notebook is nothing, when it's $100 more for a X360, and if you weren't lucky enough to come buy a premium addition in this artificial shortage, then you'll be spending more than $500 after upgrades and accessories. Hey that's almost the price of a faster PC if you know what you're doing. Just imagine the idiots that paid more than a $1k for a X360 bundle, or paid more than $2k on eBay just to play a handful of second-rate games. Fuck, for that price I can assemble a fully decked out gaming rig with monitor that will floor an "optimized" X360.
I watched an infocomercial about it, I mean "Icon" on that shit-channel G4TV and they stated it has a PCI Express for future expansion. Now if this is true, just like the "shipping with bugs and then patching later" which MS introduced into the console market, (Thanks MS, just what we all wanted!!!) they'll probably introduce future games that will require a hardware upgrade to run, which is OK for PCs, but "not" for consoles! And I'm possitive that there will be several games in the future that will require the HDD option.
JFYI; My expensive PC is a G5 running a HD 30" (2560x1600), in some, (well mos
Wake up buddy, you've bought into MS's marketing hype. You're singing praise to a console that barely breaks the double-performance-mark over its predecessor and by the time developers get used to its shortcomings and can squeese it for every ounce of power, its tech, which is already dated, will be sub-par when compared to an entry level POS Dell of that time.
I'm buying a Revolution for the love of great games and something completely new, and maybe a PS3 for "true" visual eye candy. But will eventualy be upgrading my PC again, since it's better across the board for the types of games that consoles like the X360 "try" to handle. The controls alone on a PC are vastly better. I'll skip the X360, since it's maybe on par wtih my last PC from a few years back, which I could only get about $100 for if I'm lucky and MS is well known for making mediocre products that never perform as promised.
I'm not a fan of shoddy frame-rate, muddy/stretched/blurry textures, and an extreme overuse of light blooms. This seems to be the norm with the X360 games that I've tried. 2X aliasing... Wow. That's pretty amazing if it were the turn of the century again.
The GameCube for the most part is on par with a Xbox, and in some areas better. But being "naive," you wouldn't have known that bit of info.
Kidding of course.
:)
:)
I can only imagine a MS iPod wannabe over-heating occasionally in the winter time, and damaging the internal HD if tilted. But the headphones will have a cool "on" button with little lights to tell you when the unit is not functioning.
MS couldn't even get their first store right, so I have little faith that they'll gain any real ground this time around, kind of like their game console in Japan.
3 "watered down" cores, which as a whole are quite "slow" in comparison to its bigger PPC brothers. Think of it as as 3 legged dog trying to run really fast.
In all reality, this thing is only about twice as fast as the first XBox, if we go by devloper's feedback, and there are plenty of chips on the market that aren't even considered mid-range these days that can easily best a Pentium/Celeron 733. So this 3.2 Ghz-tripple-core-sounds-good-on-paper, is most likely slower than even a single 1.6 Ghz G5.
And as arlready pointed out, your $300 mod can't play back HD content. It also doesn't integrate seamlessly with an iPod. The XBox has always been just ok for DVD playback, if anythign its 1/2 ass for everything except being a "cheap" Mame solution.
And yes, a Mini can do much more than just Frontrow, since it is a full fledged computer. The last thing I would want in my entertainment room, is a black 80 pound blah looking failed attempt at a media center.
I'm sorry that the X360 isn't performing as MS overly promised, maybe next time they'll actually spend more time on Q&A.
I can only go by past experience and I it's a safe bet that Nintendo a "VETERAN" to game hardware design, who'm already has a PowerPC based game console on the market will ship a working system. They have in the past, so I really don't see why they would abandon their proven commitment to quality this time around.
I have no bias towards MS in peticular, but I do have a bias towards "poor" quality and MEDIOCRITY! MS just happens to fall into that category and their track record can attest to it.
ONCE AGAIN, HERE"S MY ANSWER:
So "NO" Slashdot will not be posting an article about the NR being unstable, because it won't become a reality.
But just to play along with your "unrealistic" scenario, if the NR were plagued with problems like the XBox 1.5, there would definately be an article on Slashdot aobut it. If you think otherwise, then you're in la-la land.
I doubt these issues, if present, would be as bad. Sony knows what they're doing when it comes to console hardware and isn't as new to this whole game thing like MS. They're also taking more time with their new console before releasing it.
MS "rushed" this new system to the market and really didn't give developers along with themselves enough time to make it work well from day one. My friend works as a manager for a local gamestore chains and was privy to seeing the X360 about 2 months ago and he mentioned at that time about how unstable it was, so MS clearly needed more time to make this work and should've pushed back the launch date. There would still been lemons, but that's different than software crashes.
The GameCube uses a PowerPC and it worked reliably from day one. The Revolution will also be using a PowerPC and it will also work as intended from the get go.
This is what MS gets for trying to be first. Remember the Dreamcast, it was also rushed the market and the initial batch were plagued by overheating issues, which in the long run ended up hurting Sega.
Nintendo isn't rushing their new console to the market, and has "real" game hardware design experience. Their system won't be unstable, because unlike MS they're taking the sensible and proven route with their new console's components. AND unlike MS, they haven't OVERLY-HYPED their new system by spreading blatant BS about its overall power. Maybe if MS had also taken the humble route and not made so many over-promises, they wouldn't get so much negative attention.
So "NO" Slashdot will not be posting an article about the NR being unstable, because it won't become a reality.
I'm buying a Revolution. Nintendo has been in the "good" on the evil-meter for years. They haven't been in the evil since the N64 days. :) They didn't even fall into the evil-BS hype that sucked Sony and MS in this past E3. They're the only company that has really never overpromised, but yet always broken new grounds.
The last thing I want is another 4-6 years of everything I've been bored with for the past 3 or 4 years, so Nintendo's offereings are the only choice that really makes sense in my book. Ironic how a compnay that produce games based on the same characters over and over, is the only one that manages to actually produce something new and fresh in this industry of the same.
Thanks. :)
At least this that... Blah blah blah. Well my this is better than that!!! Do you always question another man's ass when talking about games? Or is this part of your everyday discussion with guys in general?
How convienct that you own so many game machines, but yet you know so "little."
Big difference between GTA PSP and Mario Kart DS, MK DS is a hit and has massive replay value. Ge, A) would I rather go around killing the same guy over and over, or B) play up to eight of my friends... Well, I'll have to go with choice B.
Speaking of "old" shit, how many times will you pay to play the same GTA formula? If MK is shit, than the same can easilly be stated about GTA PSP, when in reality they both have their strengths and are good games. I prefer MK to GTA. I've played GTA and had fun, but it's not what I like to play with friends, so does that make me wrong? According to your naive-logic, it does. You're not only ignorant, but you're also a hypocrite.
You obviously haven't played MK since SNES and it shows. So wear your ignorant title with pride, or go out and gain some real experience about MK, not just what you assume as being the case. Oh, you'll need friends if you truly want to enjoy it, so hopefully you know other peeps with DSs.
Thanks for the laugh. :)
Seriously, you're only showing your ignorance.
You mean you haven't already sold your PSP like so many "previous" owners I know?
Seriously dude, get yerself a DS and admire the "this century" feel of what makes games "fun.
YEAH, shows your ignorance.