Yeah. Even MTV2 has sold out. I used to leave my living room's entertainment center tuned to MTV2 when idle, since it was a good source for constant videos. Now, it's just seems to be used for Beavis and Butthead and other mid-90's reruns.
I swear, it feels like a big conspiracy to make people stupider.
This is probably the worst article I've seen posted on making digital picture frames. I apologize if that hurts anyone's feelings, but a lot more thinking could have gone into the design and parts.
For starters, why not go to the flea market or ebay and pick up an ancient laptop? This gives you a cpu, motherboard, hard drive, network interface, and a display. I was able to find old, functional laptops for under $150 on ebay.
I would pull the motherboard and mount it against the back of the display, then order a premium, custom built frame from a picture frame shop for ~$25-$100. You could be cheap and build your own, but $100 should get something nice and elegant. Another option would be to just pick up a pre-built frame and put in an insert cut to your spec.
For people not up to the skill level of configuring Linux, they could simply boot to Windows and set their SHELL variable to a screen saver's executable for cycling pictures. There is one built-in to XP, but many freebies are out there for previous builds of Windows.
Personally, I would opt for a wireless NIC and mount a share where the pictures are to be stored. That way I could simply copy new pictures over to the system from my main computer.
If you want to blame someone, blame our current media sources or people's interests. NASA is the *least* guilty party involved in trying to expose people to information about space.
So NASA could put the next release on NASA TV instead of just having a conference call with reporters. Like you say, the station is there 24/7. It's fully funded to run programming 24 hours a day, so to broadcast their findings won't cost anything.
Have you watched the NASA channel? When there's not a news release, it's 0 budget programs that appear to have been put together by students at the Hunstville summer camp. Very, very lacking and outdated programming. Then there are those 5-6 hour stretches of being able to see a NASA reporter interviewing other news networks but unable to hear the audio from the other side of the feed. Kind of like pointing your dish to random sattelites and capturing raw feeds. Totally lame, I tell you.
Now, how much do you think it would cost for them to do a Science Guy or Mr Wizard type of show? They could recruit scientists internally and make the audience and participants students from the space academy summer camps. The benefits to education and bringing more science to the masses would out-weigh the associated costs. Especially when you are penetrating households with very young kids. They soak up PBS and educational programming like little sponges. Mind you, if you don't get their attention early, they won't care nearly as much about these things later in life.
My solution: Put me in charge of NASA with the exact same funding it gets now. I'll grab a camcorder and interview employees and scientists, broadcast all the public domain educational media I can find, and work with colleges to get special assignments for students to help run the gig. It won't be Fox News, but it would be better than it is now.:)
First off, I was really pissed off at NASA and the media outlets for the scant coverage of the mission results concerning water on mars. All we got was a 4 minute introduction and one panelist into the release and it was back to the CNN/FOX 30 minute cycle of endless Pro-Bush news bits and Iraq coverage. Luckily, I have the NASA TV channel on satellite, so I was able to flip over -- but for the >95% of americans without NASA tv, they missed out on an hour's worth of enlightening details of Mars, straight from scientists and not tabloid writers with no understanding of science.
Now, this release isn't even going to be televised. The only initial outlet is a conference call for reporters only.
I'm ashamed of NASA and I am ashamed of our media coverage of science. When I was a kid, every space shuttle launch was televised. Taking 10-30 minutes of time out of my day to watch the occasional launch helped inspire me to think above the quagmire I was born into, to know there was something greater. Kids today get MTV and 24 hour news spin channels in 30 minute loops.
But hey, at least they get a nice, fast Internet and ~225 national channels of garbage via satellite.
We already read the same exact thing, but in different words and headline over a week ago. This new article brings nothing new to the table except for a slightly misleading headline.
The [H] issue has more to do with halting what someone feels is slander, and little to do with the widespread problems with hardware review sites skewing benchmarks to keep a vendor, advertiser, or to get free stuff.
Unique as the issue may be, it's not worthy of multiple/. headlines until something new actually surfaces in the case.
If I wanted a 15 year old's opinion in essay format on the issue, I would have simply gone to [H]'s forum.**
** - Not that a 15 year old is less intelligent than anyone else, just young people tend to not have their heads glued on straight when it comes to business and law. Wisdom takes time to build.
Read up to one of my previous posts. It's quite ignorant to put yourself in a position of becoming dependant upon a freebie mailbox.
Pay $100, get a domain registered for 10 years, pay a few dollars a month for someone to host your mail. This way, you have your "lifetime" email address you can take with you when your provider does something you don't agree with.
Anyone who depends on Hotmail, Yahoo, etc for their important email is not a good idea. The suckers that become dependant will learn the hard way.
People do have a right to complain if they feel a service is bad, even if it's free. Especially if it's a service such as e-mail, which is a pain to switch. It takes time and they know this and exploit it.
Yes, people have the right to look like complete morons for complaining about a freebie service. I see many in this thread have chosen that route today.
If you DEPEND on Hotmail, then you are an idiot. Hotmail accounts best used in a manner that is appropriate for a freebie mail service, not as a business account you need to depend on.
For example, I fired my last real estate agent because she only used Yahoo! mail. Almost every time I would send this woman a document, the mail would bounce because it pushed her inbox over 3-5MB limit. There's no excuse, aside from ignorance, to allow your business image to become degraded because you insist on depending on free services to provide your business email.
not suprisingly, they are getting a stranglehold on the email market, and then sqeezing everything out of their service, until you pay for the better upgraded service (bigger inbox, bigger attatchments, etc).
Hmm.. I guess since I only use them for a spare email account, I never became bothered by the web interface. From my point of view, they have supplied me with a reliable, free email account for years. None of you supplied me with anything like that, so it's likely I'll side with them before any of you in regards to their free service.
It just all reminds me of being in Tech Support so long ago and having people call in raising hell because Yahoo or Hotmail shut their account down for some reason. They acted like they had some entitlement to have everything their way, right away, and for no cost. When I detect that attitude in a forum, I tend to zero in on it and remind folks that you don't get the best for nothing.
Before I'd pay Hotmail for email, I would just get a 10 year deal on a domain name and set up email hosting with a webhosting provider. Way more options, tons of pop3 accounts for pals, etc. Since Email is so vital these days, it's almost retarded to trust your business and reputation with a freebie inbox.:)
I said that as a simple statement towards those that complain about free services. Sure, MS has a goal with it -- but it didn't cost you any money.
It's sad that moderators waste their mod points silencing my point. It's not a troll, it's a simple fact that most of you people seem to forget. It's even worse when people like Mr Technical Support don't even grasp it.
Hotmail was purchased by MS that my entire mail quota could be filled with spam in mere days, and it was then that the system got so sluggish and unreliable that it was never a surprise when I couldn't use it. (Microsoft is really good at some things, not least among them making people feel like pawns in billion dollar chess games.)
Yes.. That terrible, evil company.. They were so wrong to give you a free email service. How dare they..
Okay, let's get one thing out of the way. Sims Online is not a geek's game. It's designed more for teenage girls and soccer moms than any geek. Any geek would see it for what it is: IRC with graphics..
This game is right up there with There, inc. I think if both of these games vanished today less than 1% of the/. community would care. That is, unless there was some slick story about a technical failure of said company.
Let's keep/. going strong with News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.. Not with every Hello Kitty tea party, IRC world, attempt to mimic social behavior in real life. While on that same note, please cut back on the Wired articles. I remember a/. that made fun of them. Now, they appear to be/.'s most major news outlet.
If that was the case, it's not a closed system like they claim it to be. Considering they used a car's cooling system as an analogy, there is no blow-off of coolant unless overheating causes a dangerous expansion of gasses and the safety valve gets blown open.
If it was an open system, it would be even more dangerous of a system to manage, as you would have to remember to top off your coolant before using the laptop. This would increase the chances of microscopic particles clogging the works to the point of making a failure very probable.
From what I gather, the system is, in fact, closed. It would spray the fluid on the hotspots, then evaporate, be collected in a little dome, drip back through to a resivor (the part they leave out), then collect enough to cause gravity and/or the gas expansion in the prior steps to propel the fluid back to the cpu.
but it doesn't really seem to be such a great innovation as it is being hyped up to be..
Thanks, you saved me from starting a thread on that issue. I kept thinking "well, where does all this fluid go to cool off?".. The amount of fluid and circulation will be dependant on the CPU. If it's a hot running P4 or AMD64, then the resivor needed for proper cooling will be similar to that of a normal water cooling kit. While eliminating the need for a water pump, which can be made tiny enough to be insignificant compared to whatever you have to use as a radiator to dissipate the gathered heat.
Personally, I'd trust a water cooling rig before something like this. Due to the teenie, tiny nature of the tubes, I could imagine any microscopic particles in the fluid would eventually clog it up. For instance, the chemicals released as the processor ages would be likely to collect and clog an area a few microns across, easily. Since it's a passive system, there would be no means to flush the blockage out via the pump. At least with normal liquid cooling, the user can repair problems before they cripple the system. With a solid-state solution like this, you'd be dead in the water.
I would be more prone to place the blame on Linux. Since mindless FUD, such as yours, results in a negative backlash on the Linux community as a whole.
BTW, most of the Linux drivers out there are made with vendor supplied documentation. Wanka Wanka.
Between the bad satire article and/. goons with their overly serious responses, I think I've lost my faith in humanity.
Regardless, the fact remains that video games are rarely anything more than pushing an avatar through virtual space. That virtual space and graphics for the avatar will typically remain at the current cutting-edge of graphics, so it will tend to look similar to other games of the same generation.
Before the 3D revolution, most 2D titles had the same basic appearance, colors, audible tones, etc. Grass was GREEN and water was BLUE. Most old gamers can tell you which console/arcade system a game was for after simply looking at a screen shot.
My advice: Quit complaining and taking gaming so seriously. Don't be a fanboy for one developer or hardware company (Nvidia, for instance) -- as these leaders today will be gone tomorrow.
Considering most games are ported to every console the quality vs cpu/gpu talk is a rather pointless endevor.
Prince of Persia looks outstanding on the xbox, too. Other games, like Soul Calibur 2, also look the same (if not 'enhanced' for the xbox).
My only complaint with XB titles are the PS2 games ported to the XB without any FSAA or bump mapping added. Microsoft should enforce a level of quality control before allowing titles to be licensed for play on the xbox, using it's extra features to force developers to make the game work in HDTV resolutions, with FSAA, etc.
I know people like to knock the xbox because it's a Microsoft product. Rather than giving it points for being the best one to hack, best graphics, most CPU, etc, people just gripe about it because it was M$'s baby. To those ppl: Grow up.
and a very strong argument for trying to leverage older equipment, not to mention upgrading rather than replacing.
Yes, whatever. Things are not going to change anytime soon. Manufacturing companies, more than ever, are making items with the intention of them being thrown away. Just look at all the fancy plastics used to package a simple pair of scissors. That plastic, destined for the garbage, took "millions of years" for the raw components to be produced.
Fact is, the enviroment takes a back seat in the path of capitalism.
Not that it's worth mention, but imports of coffee to the US are greater than any other nation. Time to quit mentioning smellier european countries in that 'HELLO WISCONSON' style everytime the subject comes up. Ok?:)
The US also produced all of the industrial methods of packaging, storing, and shipping coffee used around the world today.
Nice. You are firing an arm superior in accuracy to mine. I'm firing 7.62 russian surplus ammo in a gas powered assult rifle, aiming with a small 4x scope.
The only two games that get much coverage on/. seem to be Quake, Doom3, and Unreal(x).
Meanwhile, BF1942 and others get little coverage -- even though other titles were the ones to pioneer 64 player servers and larger maps.
The only thing I can figure is the old school FPS game with a gun that fires the EXACT same while running at a scale speed of 38mph, jumping, etc.
I remember posting the same question about Counter-Strike getting no/. press when it had like 20x the number of online players than Q3 had, at the time, and getting modded as a troll.
Personally, being a seasoned player of FPS titles since Wolf3D, I prefer games that have some level of chance when it comes to firing a perfect shot. Getting 18 consecutive headshots in MP with a sniper rifle is just lame after a while.
I also play paintball a lot, which is fairly inconsistent when it comes to accuracy. I've also got a couple of scoped rifles I enjoy doing some target practice with sometimes. Even with the bipod extended and laying prone, I can't hit consistently within a foot at 100 yards. Mind you, I have some eyesight problems.
This just makes the running and shooting perfectly thing in Unreal and Q3 just too cartoony for it to be fun.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. Even MTV2 has sold out. I used to leave my living room's entertainment center tuned to MTV2 when idle, since it was a good source for constant videos. Now, it's just seems to be used for Beavis and Butthead and other mid-90's reruns.
I swear, it feels like a big conspiracy to make people stupider.
This is probably the worst article I've seen posted on making digital picture frames. I apologize if that hurts anyone's feelings, but a lot more thinking could have gone into the design and parts.
For starters, why not go to the flea market or ebay and pick up an ancient laptop? This gives you a cpu, motherboard, hard drive, network interface, and a display. I was able to find old, functional laptops for under $150 on ebay.
I would pull the motherboard and mount it against the back of the display, then order a premium, custom built frame from a picture frame shop for ~$25-$100. You could be cheap and build your own, but $100 should get something nice and elegant. Another option would be to just pick up a pre-built frame and put in an insert cut to your spec.
For people not up to the skill level of configuring Linux, they could simply boot to Windows and set their SHELL variable to a screen saver's executable for cycling pictures. There is one built-in to XP, but many freebies are out there for previous builds of Windows.
Personally, I would opt for a wireless NIC and mount a share where the pictures are to be stored. That way I could simply copy new pictures over to the system from my main computer.
If you want to blame someone, blame our current media sources or people's interests. NASA is the *least* guilty party involved in trying to expose people to information about space.
:)
So NASA could put the next release on NASA TV instead of just having a conference call with reporters. Like you say, the station is there 24/7. It's fully funded to run programming 24 hours a day, so to broadcast their findings won't cost anything.
Have you watched the NASA channel? When there's not a news release, it's 0 budget programs that appear to have been put together by students at the Hunstville summer camp. Very, very lacking and outdated programming. Then there are those 5-6 hour stretches of being able to see a NASA reporter interviewing other news networks but unable to hear the audio from the other side of the feed. Kind of like pointing your dish to random sattelites and capturing raw feeds. Totally lame, I tell you.
Now, how much do you think it would cost for them to do a Science Guy or Mr Wizard type of show? They could recruit scientists internally and make the audience and participants students from the space academy summer camps. The benefits to education and bringing more science to the masses would out-weigh the associated costs. Especially when you are penetrating households with very young kids. They soak up PBS and educational programming like little sponges. Mind you, if you don't get their attention early, they won't care nearly as much about these things later in life.
My solution: Put me in charge of NASA with the exact same funding it gets now. I'll grab a camcorder and interview employees and scientists, broadcast all the public domain educational media I can find, and work with colleges to get special assignments for students to help run the gig. It won't be Fox News, but it would be better than it is now.
First off, I was really pissed off at NASA and the media outlets for the scant coverage of the mission results concerning water on mars. All we got was a 4 minute introduction and one panelist into the release and it was back to the CNN/FOX 30 minute cycle of endless Pro-Bush news bits and Iraq coverage. Luckily, I have the NASA TV channel on satellite, so I was able to flip over -- but for the >95% of americans without NASA tv, they missed out on an hour's worth of enlightening details of Mars, straight from scientists and not tabloid writers with no understanding of science.
Now, this release isn't even going to be televised. The only initial outlet is a conference call for reporters only.
I'm ashamed of NASA and I am ashamed of our media coverage of science. When I was a kid, every space shuttle launch was televised. Taking 10-30 minutes of time out of my day to watch the occasional launch helped inspire me to think above the quagmire I was born into, to know there was something greater. Kids today get MTV and 24 hour news spin channels in 30 minute loops.
But hey, at least they get a nice, fast Internet and ~225 national channels of garbage via satellite.
We already read the same exact thing, but in different words and headline over a week ago. This new article brings nothing new to the table except for a slightly misleading headline.
/. headlines until something new actually surfaces in the case.
The [H] issue has more to do with halting what someone feels is slander, and little to do with the widespread problems with hardware review sites skewing benchmarks to keep a vendor, advertiser, or to get free stuff.
Unique as the issue may be, it's not worthy of multiple
If I wanted a 15 year old's opinion in essay format on the issue, I would have simply gone to [H]'s forum.**
** - Not that a 15 year old is less intelligent than anyone else, just young people tend to not have their heads glued on straight when it comes to business and law. Wisdom takes time to build.
Read up to one of my previous posts. It's quite ignorant to put yourself in a position of becoming dependant upon a freebie mailbox.
Pay $100, get a domain registered for 10 years, pay a few dollars a month for someone to host your mail. This way, you have your "lifetime" email address you can take with you when your provider does something you don't agree with.
Anyone who depends on Hotmail, Yahoo, etc for their important email is not a good idea. The suckers that become dependant will learn the hard way.
People do have a right to complain if they feel a service is bad, even if it's free. Especially if it's a service such as e-mail, which is a pain to switch. It takes time and they know this and exploit it.
Yes, people have the right to look like complete morons for complaining about a freebie service. I see many in this thread have chosen that route today.
If you DEPEND on Hotmail, then you are an idiot. Hotmail accounts best used in a manner that is appropriate for a freebie mail service, not as a business account you need to depend on.
For example, I fired my last real estate agent because she only used Yahoo! mail. Almost every time I would send this woman a document, the mail would bounce because it pushed her inbox over 3-5MB limit. There's no excuse, aside from ignorance, to allow your business image to become degraded because you insist on depending on free services to provide your business email.
not suprisingly, they are getting a stranglehold on the email market, and then sqeezing everything out of their service, until you pay for the better upgraded service (bigger inbox, bigger attatchments, etc).
:)
Hmm.. I guess since I only use them for a spare email account, I never became bothered by the web interface. From my point of view, they have supplied me with a reliable, free email account for years. None of you supplied me with anything like that, so it's likely I'll side with them before any of you in regards to their free service.
It just all reminds me of being in Tech Support so long ago and having people call in raising hell because Yahoo or Hotmail shut their account down for some reason. They acted like they had some entitlement to have everything their way, right away, and for no cost. When I detect that attitude in a forum, I tend to zero in on it and remind folks that you don't get the best for nothing.
Before I'd pay Hotmail for email, I would just get a 10 year deal on a domain name and set up email hosting with a webhosting provider. Way more options, tons of pop3 accounts for pals, etc. Since Email is so vital these days, it's almost retarded to trust your business and reputation with a freebie inbox.
I said that as a simple statement towards those that complain about free services. Sure, MS has a goal with it -- but it didn't cost you any money.
It's sad that moderators waste their mod points silencing my point. It's not a troll, it's a simple fact that most of you people seem to forget. It's even worse when people like Mr Technical Support don't even grasp it.
Hotmail was purchased by MS that my entire mail quota could be filled with spam in mere days, and it was then that the system got so sluggish and unreliable that it was never a surprise when I couldn't use it. (Microsoft is really good at some things, not least among them making people feel like pawns in billion dollar chess games.)
Yes.. That terrible, evil company.. They were so wrong to give you a free email service. How dare they..
Okay, let's get one thing out of the way. Sims Online is not a geek's game. It's designed more for teenage girls and soccer moms than any geek. Any geek would see it for what it is: IRC with graphics..
/. community would care. That is, unless there was some slick story about a technical failure of said company.
/. going strong with News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.. Not with every Hello Kitty tea party, IRC world, attempt to mimic social behavior in real life. While on that same note, please cut back on the Wired articles. I remember a /. that made fun of them. Now, they appear to be /.'s most major news outlet.
This game is right up there with There, inc. I think if both of these games vanished today less than 1% of the
Let's keep
If that was the case, it's not a closed system like they claim it to be. Considering they used a car's cooling system as an analogy, there is no blow-off of coolant unless overheating causes a dangerous expansion of gasses and the safety valve gets blown open.
If it was an open system, it would be even more dangerous of a system to manage, as you would have to remember to top off your coolant before using the laptop. This would increase the chances of microscopic particles clogging the works to the point of making a failure very probable.
From what I gather, the system is, in fact, closed. It would spray the fluid on the hotspots, then evaporate, be collected in a little dome, drip back through to a resivor (the part they leave out), then collect enough to cause gravity and/or the gas expansion in the prior steps to propel the fluid back to the cpu.
That's okay, when the meta-moderators get ahold of that post, the moderator won't be getting any more mod points for a while.
:)
Think before you screw up your account in the sake of being cute.
The system works.
but it doesn't really seem to be such a great innovation as it is being hyped up to be..
Thanks, you saved me from starting a thread on that issue. I kept thinking "well, where does all this fluid go to cool off?".. The amount of fluid and circulation will be dependant on the CPU. If it's a hot running P4 or AMD64, then the resivor needed for proper cooling will be similar to that of a normal water cooling kit. While eliminating the need for a water pump, which can be made tiny enough to be insignificant compared to whatever you have to use as a radiator to dissipate the gathered heat.
Personally, I'd trust a water cooling rig before something like this. Due to the teenie, tiny nature of the tubes, I could imagine any microscopic particles in the fluid would eventually clog it up. For instance, the chemicals released as the processor ages would be likely to collect and clog an area a few microns across, easily. Since it's a passive system, there would be no means to flush the blockage out via the pump. At least with normal liquid cooling, the user can repair problems before they cripple the system. With a solid-state solution like this, you'd be dead in the water.
Ahhhh.... G5 powerbook....drooling...
That's an aweful lot of power for a one-button mouse to be in charge of!
I would be more prone to place the blame on Linux. Since mindless FUD, such as yours, results in a negative backlash on the Linux community as a whole.
BTW, most of the Linux drivers out there are made with vendor supplied documentation. Wanka Wanka.
Between the bad satire article and /. goons with their overly serious responses, I think I've lost my faith in humanity.
Regardless, the fact remains that video games are rarely anything more than pushing an avatar through virtual space. That virtual space and graphics for the avatar will typically remain at the current cutting-edge of graphics, so it will tend to look similar to other games of the same generation.
Before the 3D revolution, most 2D titles had the same basic appearance, colors, audible tones, etc. Grass was GREEN and water was BLUE. Most old gamers can tell you which console/arcade system a game was for after simply looking at a screen shot.
My advice: Quit complaining and taking gaming so seriously. Don't be a fanboy for one developer or hardware company (Nvidia, for instance) -- as these leaders today will be gone tomorrow.
My great grandmother, who is definitely not the origin of this passage, used to say "If you dance with the Devil, you are going to get burned."
Considering most games are ported to every console the quality vs cpu/gpu talk is a rather pointless endevor.
Prince of Persia looks outstanding on the xbox, too. Other games, like Soul Calibur 2, also look the same (if not 'enhanced' for the xbox).
My only complaint with XB titles are the PS2 games ported to the XB without any FSAA or bump mapping added. Microsoft should enforce a level of quality control before allowing titles to be licensed for play on the xbox, using it's extra features to force developers to make the game work in HDTV resolutions, with FSAA, etc.
I know people like to knock the xbox because it's a Microsoft product. Rather than giving it points for being the best one to hack, best graphics, most CPU, etc, people just gripe about it because it was M$'s baby. To those ppl: Grow up.
and a very strong argument for trying to leverage older equipment, not to mention upgrading rather than replacing.
Yes, whatever. Things are not going to change anytime soon. Manufacturing companies, more than ever, are making items with the intention of them being thrown away. Just look at all the fancy plastics used to package a simple pair of scissors. That plastic, destined for the garbage, took "millions of years" for the raw components to be produced.
Fact is, the enviroment takes a back seat in the path of capitalism.
Not that it would stop an Italian...
:)
Not that it's worth mention, but imports of coffee to the US are greater than any other nation. Time to quit mentioning smellier european countries in that 'HELLO WISCONSON' style everytime the subject comes up. Ok?
The US also produced all of the industrial methods of packaging, storing, and shipping coffee used around the world today.
All your bean are belong to us.
He checks into hotels under assumed names.
Isn't that illegal? If anyone here happens to work at a hotel, please call johnny law if you happen to catch him doing this.
Nice. You are firing an arm superior in accuracy to mine. I'm firing 7.62 russian surplus ammo in a gas powered assult rifle, aiming with a small 4x scope.
Actually, I really dislike bots. I never play on servers with 'em. I play FPS games soley to play with other people.
I don't care if playing hardest of bots makes you better, I feel the human element is much more engaging if everyone is actually trying to win.
The only two games that get much coverage on /. seem to be Quake, Doom3, and Unreal(x).
/. press when it had like 20x the number of online players than Q3 had, at the time, and getting modded as a troll.
Meanwhile, BF1942 and others get little coverage -- even though other titles were the ones to pioneer 64 player servers and larger maps.
The only thing I can figure is the old school FPS game with a gun that fires the EXACT same while running at a scale speed of 38mph, jumping, etc.
I remember posting the same question about Counter-Strike getting no
Personally, being a seasoned player of FPS titles since Wolf3D, I prefer games that have some level of chance when it comes to firing a perfect shot. Getting 18 consecutive headshots in MP with a sniper rifle is just lame after a while.
I also play paintball a lot, which is fairly inconsistent when it comes to accuracy. I've also got a couple of scoped rifles I enjoy doing some target practice with sometimes. Even with the bipod extended and laying prone, I can't hit consistently within a foot at 100 yards. Mind you, I have some eyesight problems.
This just makes the running and shooting perfectly thing in Unreal and Q3 just too cartoony for it to be fun.