just glad I already had my account before this new requirement, or I'd be reluctant to get it.
This seems to be a real source of confusion for people - giving them your cellphone number isn't a requirement. Its a second option. You don't need to use your cellphone to get an account. Just get one of the many people who have an account to send you an invite.
A lot of people seem to think that they're replacing the invitation method with this new cellphone method. They're not - its just another option.
probably just cut a huge chunk of potential users out there..
Not really, no. Prior to this, you could only get invites from other GMail users. At least now people can get invites through their cellphone in addition to that. Its not as open as something like Hotmail, but its still adding people who can sign up.
I'm actually glad to see they didn't just open it up. This allows more people to sign up (and I'm sorry, but a huge portion of people interested in a Gmail account WILL have a cellphone with SMS), yet doesn't allow for all the spammers to get a hold of one.
There are some great big-budget soundtracks for games. That I agree with.
I'd also like to point out the obvious - great music does not imply a lot of money. Anyone here play Beyond Good and Evil? That game had some of the best music I've ever heard in a game (or television show, or movie for that matter!) and it was a relatively low-budget game. Unfortunately, it was also very under-appreciated - but that is another argument all together.:)
A person speaking on behalf of Microsoft talking in circles,Now there is something unusual *cough*
I know that the usual thing to do on/. is to immediately start trashing Microsoft. But, c'mon. The guy is trying to drum up good PR for the Xbox and Xbox 360. I read the entire article, and he's not talking in circles - he's giving a nice spin on the entire Xbox experience. I actually found the interview interesting. He gave some solid answers and opinions. Even though he doesn't give any dates or numbers (we all know damned well that none of the companies would do that this early) but he doesn't ignore the questions either.
Besides, as if Ken Kutaragi is the most believable, reliable, reality-based person on the planet. He is one of the most aggressive hype-mongers I've witnessed. I think he's great for Sony, but don't start trashing Peter Moore just because he's from Microsoft.
good. let's get the fight over censorship out in the open now. i am tired of the first amendment being pecked away in small amounts.
Oh please. What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with the discussion in this thread!
This is the last time I respond to your arguments - they're circular, and have nothing to do with the parent posts.
Take a look at the GPP, and most posts before that. This is not a first ammendment issue - yet you keep dragging it out.
You quoted philiptan's first sentence of a rather lengthy paragraph, which goes into detail. He is not questioning the first ammendment. He is stating that Rockstar is causing outrage which will turn into political battles. These battles can increase censorship, restrict the first ammendment, and otherwise cause a lot of problems for other creative companies.
We are not saying that the first ammendment needs to be challenged. We are saying that Rockstar needs to be careful how often they push the envelope - it could result in increased censorship on the part of the government.
Please, when you get into an argument, try reading and understanding the parent post. You keep trying to battle us on the first ammendment. This is not the issue at all. You simply want to have a circular argument about something that is not being questioned.
Are you thinking that such a game will increase the amount of bullying going on?
I've never once said that. Go back through all my comments - I have never once said that this game will cause more bullying. I don't think you're paying attention to my argument, since you're arguing against why this game won't increase violence in schools. That has nothing to do with my comments.
My whole issue has nothing to do with whether this will affect kids. What I said is that it affects the image of the companies. The video game industry gets a lot of flack for its violence, drug references, sex, etc. I'm not offtended by it - I love it, makes the games more interesting - but it gives a bad impression of video games.
Extremist groups such as the one picketing outside Rockstar's building is a perfect example. The media sensationalizes it, and all of sudden, the video game industry sounds like the root of all evil.
This causes us (gamers) problems. Increased censorship, harder for games to get rated properly, and just general pressure from the public.
I don't think Rockstar has a duty to prevent kids from playing their games and increasing the violence in schools - that's the parent's job - I think Rockstar has a duty to help out the industry, and maybe lay off a bit.
Ever heard of the First Amendment? Rockstar can make whatever kind of game they want. You are welcome to live in China if you are unhappy with the concept of freedom of speech. You want to drag this to the extreme? Ok. They can make a game where people yell fire in crowded theaters. Happy?
Yeah, that's the point I was trying to make - we should ban all forms of creative expression, and the government should have full control over all industry.
Geesh.
Its called having a social conscience. It has nothing to do with the first ammendment. The goal of a commercial company is to do what it can to make as much money as possible. However, a company can also have a social conscience. Just because something makes you money by selling millions of copies, doesn't neccessarily mean that you should do it.
A company can make whatever type of game they want, sure, but should they? I believe that there is a fine line. I love ultra-violent games. But when there's a social issue that is popular with extremists (ie. bullying in schools), why stir up the pot? Its just one side of the argument. I don't believe in censorship - I believe in having social conscience, and the fact that they should perhaps try and help the video game industry from looking bad.
As a matter of fact, it's a game that pits you, the average student, in a situation where you attempt to OVERCOME being bullied......when you don't even know what the game is about.
You are correct, in the game you are the one being bullied.
But the point of the games is to fight back against students that bully you, and teachers that harass you. You perpetuate violence against these bulles - both students and teachers.
I don't claim to know everything about the game, but I do know the general idea. I hate to bring this up, its often used as a scapegoat analogy, but do you remember Columbine? These were not bulles, these were people being bullied. The violence against the teachers and students is similar to what is being promoted in this game.
As I said before, I will most likely play this game. I will also probably enjoy it. But the fact is, Rockstar is using a socially-controversial topic to create their game. I think its hilarious, but I'm also aware that this helps give the video game industry a bad rap. Thus, my statement about the demonization of video games. Which, I stand by.
I love GTA: San Andreas. I've put a lot of hours into it, and think its some great entertainment. I agree with the standard argument of "Parents should regulate what their children play, and pay attention to what comes into their household", blah blah blah. We've all heard the arguments.
But a game about Bullying students and teachers in a fictional schoolyard? There's almost no doubt in my mind that I will purchase (and probably enjoy!) this game, but c'mon Rockstar, can you push some more buttons?
With all the sensationalized stories about bullying in schools, children committing suicide due to being harassed, etc. do you really think its wise to make a game like this?
I realize it'll be rated M. I know that there will be ESRB warnings around Violence, Language, etc. I also realize that this sort of stuff is great publicity for their game releases. But games like this DO give the electronic entertainment industry a bad name. Its already under fire for "Hot Coffee". Do they really need to demonize video games any more?
And before someone says it, NO, I don't believe creative game-making should be stymied by groups such as the ones protesting Bully. I just think they should become more creative in ways OTHER than kicking the crap out of children in a schoolyard. I think that Pikmin, Katamari Damacy, Morrowind, etc. were just as creative an "out there" as GTA. But no one is coming after the industry because you killed some cartoonish Pikmin.
I agree with most of your post, but a couple minor points:
How oblivious do you have to be to buy this game for a 14 year old kid?
Not very, in this case. I can guarantee she had no idea what the game was like, and probably just wrote down what her Grandson told her. Then, she probably walked into the store and showed them the name of what she wanted. A 14 year old kid would know exactly what he wanted, and would probably have already played it at his friends house. She probably didn't do research into what would be fun for her grandson.
...so please don't give me the "she's an old confused lady" bit.
I bet she's not the one who started the lawsuit. She's a front, but there is a larger force behind it - whether its the kids parents, other immediate family members, or even someone who heard that she bought it for the grandson. There is probably a group of people behind this, using the old lady as their "story".
Its funny you mention that the sea was so large, with not enough land.
From my viewpoint, as a person who does every and all side-quests, the sea was the best part. There were treasure chests the pull up from the bottom of the ocean. There were the phases of the moon to worry about, which spawned a ghost ship. There were TONS of treasure maps, enemy maps, island maps, etc. There were hints all over the land as to what you would find in the water - such as massive octorochs and ship battles.
If you're someone who only looks on land for the dungeons, then I can see your point. For someone like me, who explores every nook and cranny, this game was great for me.
The Zelda games have always had great storylines. Even Windwaker's was good (although I agree it wasn't quite up to Ocarina standards).
I have to admit, I don't play the Zelda games for the storyline! What I love about the Zelda series is that there are so many side-quests to play with.
What I loved was all the little islands that each had something to do. I also loved the towns, where there were little side stories to get involved in. There were people in love, the shop keeper, the auction house, the schoolhouse, etc, etc. Despite the "boring" storyline near the end of the game, there was plenty to do - and almost all of it was carried out brilliantly.
This is why Majora's Mask is one of my favourite games ever. Despite the "weak" storyline, the sheer number of side quests made it an absolute blast to play. I worked 80% of my time to fill out my journal, especially figuring out the marriage side quest (which in itself could be a huge chunk of the game).
I'm sure the late release dates is one reason. I mean, I live in Canada, so I don't have to worry about that. I'm sure the late release dates are annoying as hell.
I can also believe that the high prices are a factor. ONE factor.
The real reason. The BASE reason is because its free and easy. You could charge $15 for every game. You know what? The people would still pirate. I can buy CDs for $9.99 off of iTunes now. Do I? Well... I'll leave that up to your imagination. The key here is that FREE is always better that having to pay something. I don't care if the release dates are pushed back and the price is sky-high - free is always best.
I agree - titles are becoming more complex, longer, and more mature. I don't mind, since they just happen to be following my interests as they mature.
The key right now is buying the right console. I own all three - a Gamecube, Xbox, and PS2.
There are plenty of games for the Gamecube that will appeal to kids. They have simple game mechanics, relatively simple controls, and colorful and meaningful graphics. The awesome thing about Nintendo-developed games is that they're also very in-depth - they can appeal to almost any age.
Black & White was an awesome game. Despite its flaws - lack of missions, creature AI sometimes unable to control/predict, and lack of options with the villagers - it was an awesome game.
Peter Molyneux has a reputation for promsing features and concepts that he can't deliver. Personally, I don't mind. He's not doing it because he's a sleezy salesman - he does it because he's a gaming visionary.
B&W had the same effect that Fable had on me - you almost feel like you're playing something magical. Sounds lame, I know, but its true. Despite all the broken promises of Fable, the game truly sucked you in.
Same thing happened with B&W. The entire time I played it, you almost feel like you're intruding on a whole other universe. It had a mystical feeling to it. As you you explored your island, you always had the feeling that anything could happen.
I'm looking forward to Black and White 2, but I would still like to give props to the original.
I'm a huge gamer, and a big supporter of holding parents accountable for controlling what their kids play. Blame it on the game makers, blame it on the ESRB, blame it on the government - if your little shit-rat beats someone up because of playing GTA, its your fault as a parent.
Anyway, I digress.
This will all die out. The Thompson's and Clinton's of the world will soon lose interest, and the gaming industry will be left alone for a while. Then, someone will do something stupid, and blame it on video games. Its all a vicious cycle.
Sorta like the 90's, when it was all about music. Everyone blamed their kids' bad behaviour on Marilyn Manson, NIN, etc.
From TFA "...confirming what's already in development."
Nowhere does it say that these are launch titles. All it does is list some games that are in development for the console.
Am I missing something, or did the submitter not realize that there is a big difference between a launch title and a title in development for a new system?
I was quite excited to see a list of launch titles for the 360, and was quite disappointed...
Anyone try an aerial zoom into Toronto. It's a big green blog until you get closer, then its got no coverage at all.
And yet, when you use Google Maps with Satellite view, you can see the shadow cast from the CN Tower.
As I said in my earlier post, if they want to copy-cat and rehash what Google has done, more power to them. The thing is, they should be aiming to do it better than Google... or at least, just as well. Their current offering is definitely sub-standard.
Typed in my home town including specifying that it is in Ontario, Canada.
MSN Virtually Useless Earth took me to some little town in the US. Apparently, it completely ignored my criteria.
I love a lot of Microsoft products, but if they're going to compete with the likes of Google Earth and Google Maps, they're going to have to do a lot better than this.
Besides, the interface isn't nearly as clean and fast. Just my two cents.
What I was hoping from DOOM 3 was the graphics and physics they delivered, but the gameplay style of a reaction-based shoot-em-up like Serious Sam.
If any of you miss the fast-paced action of the original DOOM games, give Serious Sam a try. It was exactly what I was looking for. The graphics aren't up to DOOM 3 standards (although they're damned good!), but the gameplay is more what I was hoping for.
One again the pompous argument that somehow reading books is beter than watching TV or playing video games. In particular, reading classics.
I believe that playing games is far superior to watching television. Rather than sit in front of the idiot box to be entertained, I believe its better for the mind to interact with your entertainment, to have some thought (or at least reflexes?) put into your form of entertainment.
Now as for reading, I believe that this is superior to games and television. I'm not being elitist. I have friends who haven't voluntarily read a book in their life. The result? Their ability to read, write, and speak has been crippled. They can't spell even moderately complex words. They read at the speed and comprehension level of someone 1/2 their age. When they speak, they don't make use of some our our language's more interesting adjectives, verbs, etc. It really is unfortunate. Say what you want, I still think that reading helps all these things immensely.
Now if you (a slashdot reader/poster) is saying this, imagine what the average joe user is thinking?
I'm not surprised there is little interest in this. Many manufacturers realize what their customers care about - after all, that's why they're still in business.
You ask the average person whether they want Windows XP with or without Media Player to allow a free choice, and they'll probably look at you like you have two heads.
Why? They don't care! They hardly care what OS they have PERIOD. All they want is for their office applications to work, for their email application to work, and their web browser to work.
Not only do they not care, but the moment they try to listen to an audio file or watch a video, they're going to be pissed that their computer "can't do it" out of the box.
There are a large number of people who haven't heard of Gmail. These are people who use the Internet to casually browse, and who check their email every other day. Hanging out in the geek community, its hard to believe people don't know their alternatives - but its true!
Many of these people view email as a very set-in-stone thing. Their friends and family all know their Hotmail address, and all their favourite news letters are delivered there. To them, its a huge pain in the arse to switch addresses. Its almost unthinkable.
Its these people that will happily put up with whatever Microsoft does to Hotmail, just so they don't have to bother with all this technical nonsense.
I'm not surprised by this at all. Don't get me wrong - I'll be one of the first in line to buy an Xbox 360 - but this is nothing more than a publicity stunt.
By dropping these comments and hinting at the impending explosion of their new console, Microsoft is just giving off the impression of its popularity. If things get repeated enough, its always in the back of your mind when you hear it mentioned.
I have no doubt that this console will sell very well. I do doubt that Microsoft is going to allow a retail shortage to occur.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless your cellphone company charges you to receive sms messages, it actually doesn't cost you anything.
Usually, it costs you 5 or 10 cents to send a text message with your phone, but I believe that most companies allow you to recieve them for free.
This seems to be a real source of confusion for people - giving them your cellphone number isn't a requirement. Its a second option. You don't need to use your cellphone to get an account. Just get one of the many people who have an account to send you an invite.
A lot of people seem to think that they're replacing the invitation method with this new cellphone method. They're not - its just another option.
Not really, no. Prior to this, you could only get invites from other GMail users. At least now people can get invites through their cellphone in addition to that. Its not as open as something like Hotmail, but its still adding people who can sign up.
I'm actually glad to see they didn't just open it up. This allows more people to sign up (and I'm sorry, but a huge portion of people interested in a Gmail account WILL have a cellphone with SMS), yet doesn't allow for all the spammers to get a hold of one.
I'd also like to point out the obvious - great music does not imply a lot of money. Anyone here play Beyond Good and Evil? That game had some of the best music I've ever heard in a game (or television show, or movie for that matter!) and it was a relatively low-budget game. Unfortunately, it was also very under-appreciated - but that is another argument all together. :)
I know that the usual thing to do on /. is to immediately start trashing Microsoft. But, c'mon. The guy is trying to drum up good PR for the Xbox and Xbox 360. I read the entire article, and he's not talking in circles - he's giving a nice spin on the entire Xbox experience. I actually found the interview interesting. He gave some solid answers and opinions. Even though he doesn't give any dates or numbers (we all know damned well that none of the companies would do that this early) but he doesn't ignore the questions either.
Besides, as if Ken Kutaragi is the most believable, reliable, reality-based person on the planet. He is one of the most aggressive hype-mongers I've witnessed. I think he's great for Sony, but don't start trashing Peter Moore just because he's from Microsoft.
Oh please. What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with the discussion in this thread!
This is the last time I respond to your arguments - they're circular, and have nothing to do with the parent posts.
Take a look at the GPP, and most posts before that. This is not a first ammendment issue - yet you keep dragging it out.
You quoted philiptan's first sentence of a rather lengthy paragraph, which goes into detail. He is not questioning the first ammendment. He is stating that Rockstar is causing outrage which will turn into political battles. These battles can increase censorship, restrict the first ammendment, and otherwise cause a lot of problems for other creative companies.
We are not saying that the first ammendment needs to be challenged. We are saying that Rockstar needs to be careful how often they push the envelope - it could result in increased censorship on the part of the government.
Please, when you get into an argument, try reading and understanding the parent post. You keep trying to battle us on the first ammendment. This is not the issue at all. You simply want to have a circular argument about something that is not being questioned.
I've never once said that. Go back through all my comments - I have never once said that this game will cause more bullying. I don't think you're paying attention to my argument, since you're arguing against why this game won't increase violence in schools. That has nothing to do with my comments.
My whole issue has nothing to do with whether this will affect kids. What I said is that it affects the image of the companies. The video game industry gets a lot of flack for its violence, drug references, sex, etc. I'm not offtended by it - I love it, makes the games more interesting - but it gives a bad impression of video games.
Extremist groups such as the one picketing outside Rockstar's building is a perfect example. The media sensationalizes it, and all of sudden, the video game industry sounds like the root of all evil.
This causes us (gamers) problems. Increased censorship, harder for games to get rated properly, and just general pressure from the public.
I don't think Rockstar has a duty to prevent kids from playing their games and increasing the violence in schools - that's the parent's job - I think Rockstar has a duty to help out the industry, and maybe lay off a bit.
Yeah, that's the point I was trying to make - we should ban all forms of creative expression, and the government should have full control over all industry.
Geesh.
Its called having a social conscience. It has nothing to do with the first ammendment. The goal of a commercial company is to do what it can to make as much money as possible. However, a company can also have a social conscience. Just because something makes you money by selling millions of copies, doesn't neccessarily mean that you should do it.
A company can make whatever type of game they want, sure, but should they? I believe that there is a fine line. I love ultra-violent games. But when there's a social issue that is popular with extremists (ie. bullying in schools), why stir up the pot? Its just one side of the argument. I don't believe in censorship - I believe in having social conscience, and the fact that they should perhaps try and help the video game industry from looking bad.
You are correct, in the game you are the one being bullied.
But the point of the games is to fight back against students that bully you, and teachers that harass you. You perpetuate violence against these bulles - both students and teachers.
I don't claim to know everything about the game, but I do know the general idea. I hate to bring this up, its often used as a scapegoat analogy, but do you remember Columbine? These were not bulles, these were people being bullied. The violence against the teachers and students is similar to what is being promoted in this game.
As I said before, I will most likely play this game. I will also probably enjoy it. But the fact is, Rockstar is using a socially-controversial topic to create their game. I think its hilarious, but I'm also aware that this helps give the video game industry a bad rap. Thus, my statement about the demonization of video games. Which, I stand by.
But a game about Bullying students and teachers in a fictional schoolyard? There's almost no doubt in my mind that I will purchase (and probably enjoy!) this game, but c'mon Rockstar, can you push some more buttons?
With all the sensationalized stories about bullying in schools, children committing suicide due to being harassed, etc. do you really think its wise to make a game like this?
I realize it'll be rated M. I know that there will be ESRB warnings around Violence, Language, etc. I also realize that this sort of stuff is great publicity for their game releases. But games like this DO give the electronic entertainment industry a bad name. Its already under fire for "Hot Coffee". Do they really need to demonize video games any more?
And before someone says it, NO, I don't believe creative game-making should be stymied by groups such as the ones protesting Bully. I just think they should become more creative in ways OTHER than kicking the crap out of children in a schoolyard. I think that Pikmin, Katamari Damacy, Morrowind, etc. were just as creative an "out there" as GTA. But no one is coming after the industry because you killed some cartoonish Pikmin.
How oblivious do you have to be to buy this game for a 14 year old kid?
Not very, in this case. I can guarantee she had no idea what the game was like, and probably just wrote down what her Grandson told her. Then, she probably walked into the store and showed them the name of what she wanted. A 14 year old kid would know exactly what he wanted, and would probably have already played it at his friends house. She probably didn't do research into what would be fun for her grandson.
I bet she's not the one who started the lawsuit. She's a front, but there is a larger force behind it - whether its the kids parents, other immediate family members, or even someone who heard that she bought it for the grandson. There is probably a group of people behind this, using the old lady as their "story".
From my viewpoint, as a person who does every and all side-quests, the sea was the best part. There were treasure chests the pull up from the bottom of the ocean. There were the phases of the moon to worry about, which spawned a ghost ship. There were TONS of treasure maps, enemy maps, island maps, etc. There were hints all over the land as to what you would find in the water - such as massive octorochs and ship battles.
If you're someone who only looks on land for the dungeons, then I can see your point. For someone like me, who explores every nook and cranny, this game was great for me.
I have to admit, I don't play the Zelda games for the storyline! What I love about the Zelda series is that there are so many side-quests to play with.
What I loved was all the little islands that each had something to do. I also loved the towns, where there were little side stories to get involved in. There were people in love, the shop keeper, the auction house, the schoolhouse, etc, etc. Despite the "boring" storyline near the end of the game, there was plenty to do - and almost all of it was carried out brilliantly.
This is why Majora's Mask is one of my favourite games ever. Despite the "weak" storyline, the sheer number of side quests made it an absolute blast to play. I worked 80% of my time to fill out my journal, especially figuring out the marriage side quest (which in itself could be a huge chunk of the game).
I can also believe that the high prices are a factor. ONE factor.
The real reason. The BASE reason is because its free and easy. You could charge $15 for every game. You know what? The people would still pirate. I can buy CDs for $9.99 off of iTunes now. Do I? Well... I'll leave that up to your imagination. The key here is that FREE is always better that having to pay something. I don't care if the release dates are pushed back and the price is sky-high - free is always best.
The key right now is buying the right console. I own all three - a Gamecube, Xbox, and PS2.
There are plenty of games for the Gamecube that will appeal to kids. They have simple game mechanics, relatively simple controls, and colorful and meaningful graphics. The awesome thing about Nintendo-developed games is that they're also very in-depth - they can appeal to almost any age.
Peter Molyneux has a reputation for promsing features and concepts that he can't deliver. Personally, I don't mind. He's not doing it because he's a sleezy salesman - he does it because he's a gaming visionary.
B&W had the same effect that Fable had on me - you almost feel like you're playing something magical. Sounds lame, I know, but its true. Despite all the broken promises of Fable, the game truly sucked you in.
Same thing happened with B&W. The entire time I played it, you almost feel like you're intruding on a whole other universe. It had a mystical feeling to it. As you you explored your island, you always had the feeling that anything could happen.
I'm looking forward to Black and White 2, but I would still like to give props to the original.
Anyway, I digress.
This will all die out. The Thompson's and Clinton's of the world will soon lose interest, and the gaming industry will be left alone for a while. Then, someone will do something stupid, and blame it on video games. Its all a vicious cycle.
Sorta like the 90's, when it was all about music. Everyone blamed their kids' bad behaviour on Marilyn Manson, NIN, etc.
*sigh* I really do get sick of it though...
Nowhere does it say that these are launch titles. All it does is list some games that are in development for the console.
Am I missing something, or did the submitter not realize that there is a big difference between a launch title and a title in development for a new system?
I was quite excited to see a list of launch titles for the 360, and was quite disappointed...
And yet, when you use Google Maps with Satellite view, you can see the shadow cast from the CN Tower.
As I said in my earlier post, if they want to copy-cat and rehash what Google has done, more power to them. The thing is, they should be aiming to do it better than Google... or at least, just as well. Their current offering is definitely sub-standard.
MSN Virtually Useless Earth took me to some little town in the US. Apparently, it completely ignored my criteria.
I love a lot of Microsoft products, but if they're going to compete with the likes of Google Earth and Google Maps, they're going to have to do a lot better than this.
Besides, the interface isn't nearly as clean and fast. Just my two cents.
If any of you miss the fast-paced action of the original DOOM games, give Serious Sam a try. It was exactly what I was looking for. The graphics aren't up to DOOM 3 standards (although they're damned good!), but the gameplay is more what I was hoping for.
I believe that playing games is far superior to watching television. Rather than sit in front of the idiot box to be entertained, I believe its better for the mind to interact with your entertainment, to have some thought (or at least reflexes?) put into your form of entertainment.
Now as for reading, I believe that this is superior to games and television. I'm not being elitist. I have friends who haven't voluntarily read a book in their life. The result? Their ability to read, write, and speak has been crippled. They can't spell even moderately complex words. They read at the speed and comprehension level of someone 1/2 their age. When they speak, they don't make use of some our our language's more interesting adjectives, verbs, etc. It really is unfortunate. Say what you want, I still think that reading helps all these things immensely.
I'm not surprised there is little interest in this. Many manufacturers realize what their customers care about - after all, that's why they're still in business.
You ask the average person whether they want Windows XP with or without Media Player to allow a free choice, and they'll probably look at you like you have two heads.
Why? They don't care! They hardly care what OS they have PERIOD. All they want is for their office applications to work, for their email application to work, and their web browser to work.
Not only do they not care, but the moment they try to listen to an audio file or watch a video, they're going to be pissed that their computer "can't do it" out of the box.
There are a large number of people who haven't heard of Gmail. These are people who use the Internet to casually browse, and who check their email every other day. Hanging out in the geek community, its hard to believe people don't know their alternatives - but its true!
Many of these people view email as a very set-in-stone thing. Their friends and family all know their Hotmail address, and all their favourite news letters are delivered there. To them, its a huge pain in the arse to switch addresses. Its almost unthinkable.
Its these people that will happily put up with whatever Microsoft does to Hotmail, just so they don't have to bother with all this technical nonsense.
By dropping these comments and hinting at the impending explosion of their new console, Microsoft is just giving off the impression of its popularity. If things get repeated enough, its always in the back of your mind when you hear it mentioned.
I have no doubt that this console will sell very well. I do doubt that Microsoft is going to allow a retail shortage to occur.