I really love Steam. Only thing I hate about it is that it's Windows-only, but then again 95% of everything about PC gaming is Windows-only anyway.
Other than that I can't see why I should hate Steam.
Because it's a form of DRM? Apart from allowing you to run only one instance of each game at any time for a given account (which is fair), Steam allows you to download and run each game you bought on an unlimited number of computers. All you have to do is log on to your Steam account and download. This is better in many ways to the traditional method (ie. physical disks). Unlike music or movie DRM I don't feel like my fundamental rights are being attacked at all. In fact no physical disks means no fucking CD protection bullshit, so the threat of "we treat all of our customers as potential thieves"-like malware tech is even SMALLER.
Because you have no material proof of your purchase? If you really care about that, most of Valve's games are also available in physical format, which is basically a dump of the game's resources so you don't have to download it all. Steam will update, validate, then you're off to play.
Because you need an Internet connection to run the games? Not entirely true: if you startup Steam and it can't find an Internet connection, you can play any (single player) game without any checks. You only really need a connection for initial validation of the game if it comes from physical media. And if you have no broadband available to download gigabytes of data, the physical format mentioned in the last paragraph can help.
Because Valve can pull the plug anytime? Why the fuck does it even matter? Pirated copies of all Steam games will ALWAYS be available in one way or another. Since you already bought the game, how wrong would it be to re-download it through illicit means after the official method of distribution is gone? That's Valve's problem, not yours.
But I'd really like to know why Steam is evil and all. Seriously.
It has been hinted in both Portal and Episode 2 that Portal is part of the Half-Life universe. Aperture Science was a direct competitor to Black Mesa prior to the alien invasion.
I bet the old AS ship they spotted near the end of Episode 2 has a still-working portal gun inside, and we'll get to retrieve it in Episode 3.
I think Portal could have done with some human enemies
Wow. Way to completely miss the whole point of Portal's setting.
(hint: You're the plaything of a psychotic AI that killed all of its creators and continued their work in an isolated environment without any contact with the outside world. You are alone, and the obvious lack of human presence gives the place a creepy feel. How the hell would "human enemies" had made any sense?)
I use OpenGL as well, for some things, but unless you can enlighten me what technical reason is there that you cannot use DirectX for scientific visualization?
How about not being tied up to Microsoft platforms only?
After you spend some time working on high resolution screens it becomes downright painful to work on something where you can't fit two 80 column terminals/editors side by side.
I really hate those PC vs. Mac laptop pissing contests, but I have to reply here: with the default Terminal.app font (6x8 I think), two 80 column terminals fit side by side just fine on my Macbook screen, including plenty of space left for a vertically-placed dock. One could argue that this is a small font but I don't see the point in using anything bigger on an LCD display.
This is great that someone keeps hacking Apple's firmware. I like the idea of people hacking Apple's firmware, but I don't like the idea of people complaining every time Apple voids their warranty for it. It takes time and money for Apple to repair or send you a new
Well if Apple weren't such assholes about not letting people run 3rd party applications on their handheld computers, there wouldn't be any problem. Getting complaints and bad press is exactly what Apple deserves for this.
Sigh... One day you guys will just have to accept the fact that the cost of life is lower in the USA than in the UK. Paying more (exchange rate wise) for non-essential consumer goods is PERFECTLY NORMAL.
The IE7 upgrade is still limited to XP SP2 only. There's still a lot of computers running prior versions of Windows (including XP without SP2).
Not to mention that only a small fraction of people actually install Windows updates.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say here is: IE6 won't die just yet. We Web devs will still have to support IE6 (in one way or another) for quite a long time.
Ok, I'm not even going to touch the fact that you bought a VIDEO iPod without realising it was meant to play videos.
That's not so far-fetched. Apple never called the fifth-generation iPod the "video iPod". It was always called the "iPod", nothing else. "video iPod" is what the most people called it, but it was never officially the real name.
They also failed because porting games and selling them at a higher price 6 months later is a completely broken business model.
The only way to turn up a profit porting games is to strike a contractual deal with the original developer/publisher to take care of the port and either bundle it with the game, or as a download that uses the resources from the original (Windows) version of the game.
Linux users have a strong trend of Wanting things free no matter at the cost of the developer.
No, they don't. Please stop making up uninformed shit about Linux users. Of all the people I frequently communicate with (friends/colleagues/family/etc), the only ones who are opposed to software piracy are Linux users. All others are pirating almost every software they use, and a lot of them are even proud of it.
Interest in open software usually goes hand-to-hand with having a sense of ethics towards software itself. Open or not.
Have you ever actually used an iPod? It's a plain USB 2.0 mass storage device. You need iTunes to transfer music to it because of the internal database that needs updating, but for normal file transfers it doesn't need any particular program to access it.
But, linux is more secure. These things are protected. No one is writing exploits for linux.
Oh, wait, it isn't, they aren't, and they are.
Wait, who said no one is writing exploits for Linux? People write exploits for everything. No software is 100% secure, and anyone who claims the opposite is a fool.
In fact, with all that open source, isn't it easier to see what is going on so I can write a better exploit?
Open code allows anyone to do security audits to patch vulnerabilities before they can be exploited. Patches also tend to propagate faster because of their public nature, and the fact that anyone with sufficient knowledge about the issue can write and apply those patches himself. On the other hand, when a vulnerability is found in closed software, you have no choice but to patiently wait for the vendor to fix it, which may take some time depending on various factors such as PR and the perceived priority of the vulnerability to the vendor's eyes.
Isn't it easier for me to, say, sneak a corporate or national spy into the development team and compromise the project?
You seem to imply that it would be harder to do the same in a non-open project. At least in an open project the code can be audited by anyone. When you get proprietary software you can't inspect it yourself unless you're a member of the project. And if said project is compromised, you can't do anything.
With millions of lines of code, do you think we could keep an Iranian or Chinese spy from getting malicious code into the project?
Chinese spy? I'm not even going to bother replying to this one.
Hypothetical:
- Start a project for a civilian equivelent of a military application - Form a project team - Accept a programmer from a country that has very specific ideology driven agendas against much of the western world - Wonder why the government won't switch to the OS of your desire
Again, the same thing could happen for a closed project, and with greater repercussions, so your argument is meaningless.
Now, the REAL reasons why some governments don't switch to open source: - Lack of understanding of the movement - Switching technologies is expensive, especially when the vendors of the current one has made sure it would be difficult to switch by disregarding standards - Misinformation from corporate interests that see open source as a threat to their current business model instead of embracing it, or people like you
But, wait, linux is more secure. These things are protected. Nobody is writing exploits.
Slashdot Mirror
The HL2 in orange doesn't include Counterstrike.
I really love Steam. Only thing I hate about it is that it's Windows-only, but then again 95% of everything about PC gaming is Windows-only anyway.
Other than that I can't see why I should hate Steam.
Because it's a form of DRM?
Apart from allowing you to run only one instance of each game at any time for a given account (which is fair), Steam allows you to download and run each game you bought on an unlimited number of computers. All you have to do is log on to your Steam account and download. This is better in many ways to the traditional method (ie. physical disks). Unlike music or movie DRM I don't feel like my fundamental rights are being attacked at all. In fact no physical disks means no fucking CD protection bullshit, so the threat of "we treat all of our customers as potential thieves"-like malware tech is even SMALLER.
Because you have no material proof of your purchase?
If you really care about that, most of Valve's games are also available in physical format, which is basically a dump of the game's resources so you don't have to download it all. Steam will update, validate, then you're off to play.
Because you need an Internet connection to run the games?
Not entirely true: if you startup Steam and it can't find an Internet connection, you can play any (single player) game without any checks. You only really need a connection for initial validation of the game if it comes from physical media. And if you have no broadband available to download gigabytes of data, the physical format mentioned in the last paragraph can help.
Because Valve can pull the plug anytime?
Why the fuck does it even matter? Pirated copies of all Steam games will ALWAYS be available in one way or another. Since you already bought the game, how wrong would it be to re-download it through illicit means after the official method of distribution is gone? That's Valve's problem, not yours.
But I'd really like to know why Steam is evil and all. Seriously.
It has been hinted in both Portal and Episode 2 that Portal is part of the Half-Life universe. Aperture Science was a direct competitor to Black Mesa prior to the alien invasion.
I bet the old AS ship they spotted near the end of Episode 2 has a still-working portal gun inside, and we'll get to retrieve it in Episode 3.
I think Portal could have done with some human enemies
Wow. Way to completely miss the whole point of Portal's setting.
(hint: You're the plaything of a psychotic AI that killed all of its creators and continued their work in an isolated environment without any contact with the outside world. You are alone, and the obvious lack of human presence gives the place a creepy feel. How the hell would "human enemies" had made any sense?)
I use OpenGL as well, for some things, but unless you can enlighten me what technical reason is there that you cannot use DirectX for scientific visualization?
How about not being tied up to Microsoft platforms only?
After you spend some time working on high resolution screens it
becomes downright painful to work on something where you can't fit
two 80 column terminals/editors side by side.
I really hate those PC vs. Mac laptop pissing contests, but I have to reply here: with the default Terminal.app font (6x8 I think), two 80 column terminals fit side by side just fine on my Macbook screen, including plenty of space left for a vertically-placed dock. One could argue that this is a small font but I don't see the point in using anything bigger on an LCD display.
You make good points. The iPod is a DRM-tainted device, and as usual with DRM, it's not about what the consumer wants.
It's sad how Apple made this awesome little device, but thanks to DRM it'll never reach its full potential.
But last I checked, the majority of them were dating sims. So yeah........
sell the Wii to upgrade the Xbox360's HD
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat??
This is great that someone keeps hacking Apple's firmware. I like the idea of people hacking Apple's firmware, but I don't like the idea of people complaining every time Apple voids their warranty for it. It takes time and money for Apple to repair or send you a new
Well if Apple weren't such assholes about not letting people run 3rd party applications on their handheld computers, there wouldn't be any problem. Getting complaints and bad press is exactly what Apple deserves for this.
What's Apple's excuse for locking up the iPod Touch...?
With the iPhone it was apparently part of the contract they signed with AT&T, but with the iPod Touch, Apple has NO fucking excuse.
Did you just use "frak" in a serious post? Ugh.
Did you intentionally quote an incomplete sentence in order to change its meaning for quick laughs or are you just stupid?
Sigh... One day you guys will just have to accept the fact that the cost of life is lower in the USA than in the UK. Paying more (exchange rate wise) for non-essential consumer goods is PERFECTLY NORMAL.
(Disclaimer: I'm not an American, nor a Brit)
The IE7 upgrade is still limited to XP SP2 only. There's still a lot of computers running prior versions of Windows (including XP without SP2).
Not to mention that only a small fraction of people actually install Windows updates.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say here is: IE6 won't die just yet. We Web devs will still have to support IE6 (in one way or another) for quite a long time.
Ok, I'm not even going to touch the fact that you bought a VIDEO iPod without realising it was meant to play videos.
That's not so far-fetched. Apple never called the fifth-generation iPod the "video iPod". It was always called the "iPod", nothing else. "video iPod" is what the most people called it, but it was never officially the real name.
They also failed because porting games and selling them at a higher price 6 months later is a completely broken business model.
The only way to turn up a profit porting games is to strike a contractual deal with the original developer/publisher to take care of the port and either bundle it with the game, or as a download that uses the resources from the original (Windows) version of the game.
Kind of ironic that you supposedly "reward" id by buying "at least 2 or 3 copies" of every game they make... but think Windows should be free.
He never said that.
Linux users have a strong trend of Wanting things free no matter at the cost of the developer.
No, they don't. Please stop making up uninformed shit about Linux users. Of all the people I frequently communicate with (friends/colleagues/family/etc), the only ones who are opposed to software piracy are Linux users. All others are pirating almost every software they use, and a lot of them are even proud of it.
Interest in open software usually goes hand-to-hand with having a sense of ethics towards software itself. Open or not.
I hate the new nano too. It doesn't look like it could comfortably fit a shirt pocket, which is the killer feature for me.
It has a camera.
Have you ever actually used an iPod? It's a plain USB 2.0 mass storage device. You need iTunes to transfer music to it because of the internal database that needs updating, but for normal file transfers it doesn't need any particular program to access it.
Major upgrades aren't service packs. 10.4.9 was a service pack. 10.4 was like going from NT4 to 2000 or 2000 to XP or XP to Vista.
The thing's a freaking derivative of OpenOffice. Why would it use anything else as its standard format?
But, linux is more secure. These things are protected. No one is writing exploits for linux.
Oh, wait, it isn't, they aren't, and they are.
Wait, who said no one is writing exploits for Linux? People write exploits for everything. No software is 100% secure, and anyone who claims the opposite is a fool.
In fact, with all that open source, isn't it easier to see what is going on so I can write a better exploit?
Open code allows anyone to do security audits to patch vulnerabilities before they can be exploited. Patches also tend to propagate faster because of their public nature, and the fact that anyone with sufficient knowledge about the issue can write and apply those patches himself. On the other hand, when a vulnerability is found in closed software, you have no choice but to patiently wait for the vendor to fix it, which may take some time depending on various factors such as PR and the perceived priority of the vulnerability to the vendor's eyes.
Isn't it easier for me to, say, sneak a corporate or national spy into the development team and compromise the project?
You seem to imply that it would be harder to do the same in a non-open project. At least in an open project the code can be audited by anyone. When you get proprietary software you can't inspect it yourself unless you're a member of the project. And if said project is compromised, you can't do anything.
With millions of lines of code, do you think we could keep an Iranian or Chinese spy from getting malicious code into the project?
Chinese spy? I'm not even going to bother replying to this one.
Hypothetical:
- Start a project for a civilian equivelent of a military application
- Form a project team
- Accept a programmer from a country that has very specific ideology driven agendas against much of the western world
- Wonder why the government won't switch to the OS of your desire
Again, the same thing could happen for a closed project, and with greater repercussions, so your argument is meaningless.
Now, the REAL reasons why some governments don't switch to open source:
- Lack of understanding of the movement
- Switching technologies is expensive, especially when the vendors of the current one has made sure it would be difficult to switch by disregarding standards
- Misinformation from corporate interests that see open source as a threat to their current business model instead of embracing it, or people like you
But, wait, linux is more secure. These things are protected. Nobody is writing exploits.
Made-up bullshit again.