Amen to that. The inability by counter people to count your change back is seriously appalling. It really is not that hard to do, but instead, whenever I buy anything, I get the readout from the register's display read to me verbatim and a wad of cash and change shoved into my hand all at once.
When I worked retail and counted change back to people there were always 1 of 2 reactions:
1. "Oh, finally someone who can count change back! Thank you!" -Old people
2. "Why are you counting my money, just give me what the register says." -Young people
I'm wondering how a $300 price point would compare to other console launches in terms of inflation and relevance to average salaries.
Its interesting to me that $300 is still the magic number after all these years, as we are making more and more money. I understand that your average parental video game console buyer (aka Mom & Dad who want the hot new toy for Billy) gives little thought to inflation and is more focused on a finite number, hence $300 still being right at the limit for the masses to embrace a product.
The reality though is that a $350 or $400 system would only make sense proportionally when you account for the steadily increasing Cost-of-living and salary bumps.
Has anyone seen a study or chart breaking this down?
Actually, I'd be quite alarmed to meet anyone 'passionately in love' with Windows, OSX or Linux. I like Linux and think OSX looks neat, but 'passionately love'? It's an OS, for pete's sake. That's kinda like saying I love my screwdriver-set passionately.
Ha. Point taken... Maybe love is too strong a word.. but I'll tell you what, when I get home from work (Windows) and finally get back to my Mac, I let out a barely audible sigh of relief and contentment, every day.
This post is seriously close to falling into obnoxious sticky-sweet OS fandom.. (too late?) so I will cut it short.. The fact is, its widely known that there are plenty of people who do have a high level of allegiance and dedication to their non-Windows OSs..(Most of which I would guess have to split their time with a Windows box and see the contrast between the two regularly)
This goes back to my previous point about Joe Sixpack not caring about other OSs because they have never cared nor had the opportunity to try anything else. I think for most, once you see the difference between Windows / Linux or Windows / OSX, you understand what the hoopla is about.
I think the main difference here is that Mac & Linux fans love their respective products because they are both fairly innovative and thinking ahead of the curve for the most part.
The idea of someone being 'passionately in love' with Windows is so laughable to all of us primarily because MS has been nothing but reactionary and predictable.
I honestly don't think that if Apple had the market share instead of MS that there would be the same amount of bashing.. At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, I have to say that everyone I've known that has switched to Mac has been amazed at the stability and uptime and lack of neverending configuration hoop-jumping.
Most people just plain have no idea that there is a better way to do it, or that you can have a digital life that is free from endless patches and conflicts.
Unfortunately, the flipside to this is that most people don't really think about or care about user experience, as long as their computer was really cheap at Costco and will "run the internets."
You're right, the ACTUAL playing of the game against an opponent is direct.
The entire point, however, was comparing the value of a free online experience to a subscription one. The element of the actual game playing may be the same for both, but the bells, whistles, ease of use and everything else is what puts xbox ahead IMO.
No one argued that one service was smoother/faster/more reliable in terms of actual gameplay. The question was "Is it worth it to pay less than $5 a month for a service that delivers so much more than the PS2?"
(In addition, don't forget that the PS2 network adapter was a $30 to $40 addon for the first few years of the system... )
Have you played with both systems online? If so, do you really believe that the PS2's interface at no cost is better than the Xbox's interface at $4.17 a month?
PS2 does an awful job of presenting the online experience. The configuration of network settings is a pain in the ass, there are no global friends lists so that you can see what games your friends are actually playing at the time, and there's nowhere near the depth that xbox has (in terms of leaderboards, game modes, content downloads, headset support, etc.)
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.. i.e. If I am being a jerk in Madden on xbox, they can suspend my xbox live account so that I cant play anything online... If I'm playing something on the PS2 and I am being a jerk, they can pretty much only ban me from that one game or possibly from games from that one developer, since there is no ruling body covering all online conduct for Playstation.
As much as I hate Microsoft, I have to say when it comes to online, the xbox does it right. I would happily pay $5 a month for a feature that is as fully flushed out as this.
From an end-user standpoint, this is a win-win. I have an HDTV and have resisted getting HD service from Comcast because I have heard that the software/UI on their DVRs is awful compared to TiVo.
Now I can finally enjoy HD programming without having to suffer through a poorly designed interface.
I know there are a ton of HD comcast subscribers that face this same dilemna, due to TiVo's ridiculous delay in providing an HD DVR.
Slashdot Mirror
Amen to that. The inability by counter people to count your change back is seriously appalling. It really is not that hard to do, but instead, whenever I buy anything, I get the readout from the register's display read to me verbatim and a wad of cash and change shoved into my hand all at once.
When I worked retail and counted change back to people there were always 1 of 2 reactions:
1. "Oh, finally someone who can count change back! Thank you!" -Old people
2. "Why are you counting my money, just give me what the register says." -Young people
Its interesting to me that $300 is still the magic number after all these years, as we are making more and more money. I understand that your average parental video game console buyer (aka Mom & Dad who want the hot new toy for Billy) gives little thought to inflation and is more focused on a finite number, hence $300 still being right at the limit for the masses to embrace a product.
The reality though is that a $350 or $400 system would only make sense proportionally when you account for the steadily increasing Cost-of-living and salary bumps.
Has anyone seen a study or chart breaking this down?
Ha. Point taken... Maybe love is too strong a word.. but I'll tell you what, when I get home from work (Windows) and finally get back to my Mac, I let out a barely audible sigh of relief and contentment, every day.
This post is seriously close to falling into obnoxious sticky-sweet OS fandom.. (too late?) so I will cut it short.. The fact is, its widely known that there are plenty of people who do have a high level of allegiance and dedication to their non-Windows OSs..(Most of which I would guess have to split their time with a Windows box and see the contrast between the two regularly)
This goes back to my previous point about Joe Sixpack not caring about other OSs because they have never cared nor had the opportunity to try anything else. I think for most, once you see the difference between Windows / Linux or Windows / OSX, you understand what the hoopla is about.
The idea of someone being 'passionately in love' with Windows is so laughable to all of us primarily because MS has been nothing but reactionary and predictable.
I honestly don't think that if Apple had the market share instead of MS that there would be the same amount of bashing.. At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, I have to say that everyone I've known that has switched to Mac has been amazed at the stability and uptime and lack of neverending configuration hoop-jumping.
Most people just plain have no idea that there is a better way to do it, or that you can have a digital life that is free from endless patches and conflicts.
Unfortunately, the flipside to this is that most people don't really think about or care about user experience, as long as their computer was really cheap at Costco and will "run the internets."
The entire point, however, was comparing the value of a free online experience to a subscription one. The element of the actual game playing may be the same for both, but the bells, whistles, ease of use and everything else is what puts xbox ahead IMO.
No one argued that one service was smoother/faster/more reliable in terms of actual gameplay. The question was "Is it worth it to pay less than $5 a month for a service that delivers so much more than the PS2?"
(In addition, don't forget that the PS2 network adapter was a $30 to $40 addon for the first few years of the system... )
PS2 does an awful job of presenting the online experience. The configuration of network settings is a pain in the ass, there are no global friends lists so that you can see what games your friends are actually playing at the time, and there's nowhere near the depth that xbox has (in terms of leaderboards, game modes, content downloads, headset support, etc.)
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.. i.e. If I am being a jerk in Madden on xbox, they can suspend my xbox live account so that I cant play anything online... If I'm playing something on the PS2 and I am being a jerk, they can pretty much only ban me from that one game or possibly from games from that one developer, since there is no ruling body covering all online conduct for Playstation.
As much as I hate Microsoft, I have to say when it comes to online, the xbox does it right. I would happily pay $5 a month for a feature that is as fully flushed out as this.
From an end-user standpoint, this is a win-win. I have an HDTV and have resisted getting HD service from Comcast because I have heard that the software/UI on their DVRs is awful compared to TiVo. Now I can finally enjoy HD programming without having to suffer through a poorly designed interface. I know there are a ton of HD comcast subscribers that face this same dilemna, due to TiVo's ridiculous delay in providing an HD DVR.