You know what I don't get? Why do they still call x86 PC's "IBM compatible", like in this article? Macs use IBM processors, not Wintel computers! IBM no longer even MAKES PC's!
Uhhh... XBox 2 runs with PowerPC and Windows. There's your Windows on Cell. And as far as your comment about Macs being slow... Only a doofus would think a Dual 2.5 ghz G5 is slow. And stop trolling. I have a P4 3.6 ghz on my desk right now.
The XBox uses a stripped down NT kernel. Microsoft had a PPC version of NT years ago, it's not too much work. Windows on Cell, though, will be completely unable to run ANY Windows/x86 binaries.
Microsoft would have a hard time switching to PowerPC, because all Windows software would instantly cease to work, and one of the biggest things preventing people from 'switching' to other OSes is that the software they already have wouldn't work. If suddenly all their Windows software didn't work with the next version of Windows, why stay with Windows?
As for Macs being slow...when did I say that? I certainly don't think Macs are slow. I'd kill for a dual 2.5 GHz G5. My comment was that if Macs got Cell (perhaps as a G6?) they would crush x86 PC's like a bug.
Except for games the next XBox, PS3, and Nintendo Revolution are on PowerPC (The cell is PPC). If the Mac gets cell, the article claims it could be a massive turnaround, as the cell benchmarks seem to be well and beyond anything Intel could offer in the near future.
No kidding. That's exactly what I was thinking. x86 has been completely supplanted in the console market, with no share whatsoever. This encourages game developers to the PowerPC playform.
PS3 is Cell (PowerPC based), XBox is PowerPC 970 based (G5), and Nintendo is going to use something PowerPC based but won't give any details.
If Macs got cell, AND this article isn't overhyping it and it actually is this powerful, suddenly Macs could blow Windows PC's away. Heck, VirtualPC could probably run faster than most Windows PC's!
This would cause a massive migration to Macs for the high-end market. Add that to the fact that:
1) Game developers would already be using PowerPC systems to develop their games for all three consoles
2) The Macs would be far more powerful than their x86 counterparts, allowing for much higher-powered software and games
Apple may even coin the gaming market with gamers looking for super-powered gaming rigs!
Of course, most of this may never happen, but it'll be interesting to see what becomes of Cell.
I don't know if this is true. Even the register says, "So CLAIMS".
I never expected them to ship a PowerBook G5. It's MUCH more likely that they're get the new 25w dual core G4 processors Motorola is almost done with.
Dual core 1.5 GHz running at 15-25w power consumption. That's awesome.
http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/display.j sp?nodeId=093623&filePath=/media_center/news_relea ses/2004/ncsg/09-28-04_DUALPROC.htm&title=News%20R elease
Plus it's capable of scaling up to 2 GHz (read on another page at the freescale site), and they plan to eventually add 64-bit extensions. AND they have a single-core version that runs at 10w.
I would MUCH rather see these in a PowerBook. A dual 1.5 17-inch PowerBook would be sweet.
Comcast should have bought TTV and kept them as seperate channels. Merging them was idiotic. They fired half the TTV cast and replaced them with rabid gamers.
Just look at the Screen Savers! Half the cast is gone (Leo ruled) and has been replaced with these wacky game-obsessed nuts.
This rumor is a few days old, though still good. What I'm shocked about is that while/. reported this rumor (a good one), they didn't report the BETTER rumor.
Namely, the Sub-$500 Mac. http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0412expo2.ht ml
AppleInsider also reports on it, calling it sub-$600 (ThinkSecret has however a near-perfect track record), and saying it has USB 2.0, FireWire, DVI, VGA via a dongle, and TV out.
Looks sweet.
As for this new iWorks, something not mentioned is that its supposed to include Keynote 2. Keynote is amazing from what I've heard, and if this is true, that'd be awesome. Especially if its included with the cheap Mac.
Every time I hear G4/TechTV I get depressed. They combined an awesome channel with a sucky one to get a semi-sucky one. They fired all the good people on TechTV (We miss Leo!), replaced them with G4 people that are obsessive Mac-hating gamers (the new guy on the Screen Savers dislike Macs and is an obsessive gamer. Nothing like Leo, who had some actual intelligence and gave GREAT tips), and completely ruined the shows. And they removed a lot of the good stuff (Call for Help for example) and rarely air some of the surviving good shows.
Microsoft had BETTER improve IE7. I have it in the latest build of Longhorn (it's still in Alpha so there is a lot of improvement room).
It's a peice of crap. It's got a few minor improvements over IE6 (popup blocking, more security stuff), but adds: 1) The buttons are different sizes and placed in strange places to make it look more 'modern', but all it does is confuse the person using it. 2) On the File-Edit-View-etc bar, the background is light gray and the text is white. Very hard to see. 3) Back and forward buttons above the File-Edit-View bar, everything else below, and very small. 4) No major improvements over IE6 SP2. 5) Slow page load times. 6) Bloat- FireFox loads twice as fast.
In short, the current IE7 builds look bleak. Hopefully they'll improve for MS's sake, but otherwise, they're really not doing much other than ripping off Safari's look and rearranging the buttons to make it harder to figure out.
That's like saying an old radio can only tune-in radio stations that play Big Band music. A G4 Mac can run the latest MacOS X as well as all other current software.
Sure, if you pay $129 to buy Mac OS X, $49 for iLife '04, and some extra for AppleWorks.
It's CAPABLE of running the latest Mac OS X, but it won't HAVE it unless you throw a bunch of money into it.
1. Apple has long expressed no interest in selling such a machine.
The article mentions this and explains why Apple still may do it.
2. A new G4 desktop system in Spring of 2005? No chance. Apple is moving away from the Motorola G4 archetecture, in favor of the IBM G5. The eMac and the current laptops will probably be the end of the line for the G4.
INCORRECT! Motorola has announced that they are working on dual-core G4's that scale to 2 GHz, with 64-bit extensions, and only 25w power output. They've also announced single-core G4's with 10w power output. The G4 is not dead, and a dual core 64-bit G4 would be PERFECT for a PowerBook.
3. The current G4 eMac is $800, and their margin on it is thin (by Apple standards.) This rumored system is pretty much a G4 with the $100 monitor removed. No way Apple sells it for $500.
You're forgetting that the eMac is due for an upgrade soon. If they release an updated, faster eMac this January, then they could release this system for $500.
4. Everybody who says they would never buy one of the current Macs, but would buy this one for $500 out of impulse, is a damn liar. You can already buy a headless G4 Mac for under $600. Just go to eBay and buy an old G4 tower from about two years ago. Hell, for that matter, you can buy an old G3 tower which will run OS X just fine for about $300. Add a $100 CPU upgrade, and there's your G4 right there.
Not exactly. There's a few reasons not to do that. BTW, right now I have a PowerBook, but no Mac Desktop. If I could get one for $500, I'd seriously consider it.
Now, look at your suggestion. If I ran out and bought an old G3, then added a $100 CPU upgrade, bam, I have a good speed G4 system.
But wait! The system still has a sucky bus speed, slower RAM, and a small hard drive.
Oh well, I'll live. So NOW, because this computer is way older than Mac OS X, I have to go out and buy Mac OS X for $129. Oh, and don't forget, an extra $49 for iLife. AND some extra money on AppleWorks (don't remember the price!) Thats more than an extra $178 on the software I would get FREE with anything from Apple.
So now this system costs over $570, and still has slower memory and a smaller hard drive and lack of Airport Extreme support you'd get in a system from Apple. Plus the fact that it may have been abused since I would have bought it used, AND that there's no warranty...I'd take a $499 G4 from Apple, please.
"It's a Nintendo portable gaming system, and it plays all Game Boy Advance software. I don't see why you're so irked about someone considering the DS to be part of the Game Boy product line."
WRONG! It plays GameBoy Advance games in single player. It does not:
1) Play GameBoy games.
2) Play GameBoy Color games.
3) Play GameBoy Advance games in multiplayer.
4) Support any of the older GameBoy, GBC, and GBA addons like the E-card reader.
It only plays the Advance games, and only in single player.
Nintendo calls it it's "third pillar". There will eventually be a GameBoy successor, that can play the older games as well.
This is completely pathetic. I can't believe this article was even posted.
1) Nitro Online are complete fools. They continually promise things, then change the story. Check out the current builds, there is hardly ANYTHING there. They have made almost no progress, and make promises that are literally impossible. This article should be about Team XLink, as they are the ONLY ONES who have successfully tunneled the DS.
2) GameBoy DS? More proof that the guy who wrote this doesn't know what he's doing. The Nintendo DS is N-O-T a GameBoy.
3) Teamxlink.org. Go there. Now. Seriously, Nitro Online are just trying to steal the limelight.
You can change the batteries (I'm not sure if you need any tools, but it looks easily swappable from the pictures I've seen), but the big problem is that PSP batteries cost $50 apeice. Not the cheapest thing. Wouldn't stop all complaints;)
The DS, though, has DOUBLE the PSP battery life. It's a huge difference.
Add to that the jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none design (games can't be too CD-intensive or battery dies, it can't play much music unless you spend extra money on a more expensive memory stick, you can't play movies unless you buy them on a proprietary format which won't play on anything else), and higher price ($200 + memory stick [$30 minimum] + possibly extra battery + no games > $150 + free Metroid Prime Hunters demo)...
On the subject of emulation and hacking, there is already a project underway of porting Linux to the DS. It already runs on PDA's, after all, and the DS has a touch screen. A lot of people on the boards (see dslinux.org . dslinux.com is no longer the official board) are already making plans on porting NES and GameBoy and possibly even SNES emulators that run on Linux to run on the Nintendo DS (running DSLinux, of course)...:D We might even (if we get lucky) get TCP/IP and a web browser.
...it's the price. The PSP is a more powerful system, but add the greater price ($50 more than the DS), plus the cost of the memory card, and you get at least $230 for the basic system without a game of any kind (while $150 gets you a Nintendo DS with Metroid Prime Hunters demo), plus the fact that the battery downright sucks (and costs $50 for a second one)...
Does anyone remember the lessons of the Sega Nomad? Console-grade graphics and backwards compatibility (it could play all Sega Genesis games), but the combination of bad battery life + awkward media (Nomad w/fat Genesis cartridges, PSP with disks) + high price = miserable failure.
How about Game Gear? It sold better than the Nomad, and had FAR superior graphics to the GB, but the bad battery life and higher price killed it.
While the PSP has better hardware, the Nintendo DS has:
1) Better battery life (10 hours vs 4 hours in game)
2) Game cards (Who wants to spend extra money on a memory card, and who wants to carry a bunch of disks in their pocket? I perfer to be able to save to the game media)
3) Touch screen. Without joysticks, how can you possibly play FPS on the PSP? The DS has the touch screen, which works like a mouse on Metroid Prime: Hunters (near-perfect control- I love the touch screen).
4) Cost. DS is $150, PSP is $200. Add to that the cost of the memory stick ($30 minimum) to the PSP, and the fact that an extra battery costs $50 (to equal the DS's battery life), means you get a much cheaper system with the DS.
5) Stability. That exposed screen must be very easy to damage. The flip-open DS design is a good protection. Plus, the PSP has a CD drive, you know how easy it is for those to skip with a little bump, and break with a good drop.
6) Nintendo games rule:)
Just my opinion. I've done some research into the topic.
"I mean a couple of billion years has fit in about 5 days. Speaking of which,, the whole idea of T-Rex/ evolution that a lot of cristians find contradictory to the bible does not have to contradict at all. The bible said that animals were created in one day. It does not say how. And it could have been a long day. The only direct reference is sculping adam out of clay (IIRC) and making eve out of a rib...that does not make much sense, but even christians agree that bible is full of metaphors. Taking it as the exact literal truth is not correct."
What is it with the five days thing, anyway? The Bible stated that "a thousand years is as but a day" to god, and states that god had 6 creative days creating the world. Why don't people put two and two together and figure out that these are FIGURATIVE, not literal? They could have been millions or billions of years for each day. And the order they are given in is perfect (creatures in the water before land, etc).
I don't know who to root for! I don't want Microsoft to win money from spammers, but I want to spammers to burn and die (and go broke in the process). Who should I root for? I'm so confused...
LucasArts? Worst Game Maker? Huh? LucasArts' recent offerings have been improving. Jedi Academy and Jedi Outcast were fine games (though Academy had a marvelously short single player game). Battlefront is an excellent game. Star Wars Episode 3: The Game looks incredible.
LA is certainly not the worst game maker. Not the best, definitely, but certainly nowhere near worst.
But there are those who insist that the Earth was created "with age" 6000 years ago, and that fossils, etc, are a diversionary trap for the unfaithful. The same arguments can be made about this work, or anything done with molecular fingerprinting. (or any other technique, for that matter.)
I find this incredibly ridiculous. Do those people who think the Earth was made in 6 days, 6000 years ago, even bother reading the Bible? Anyone who has read a large amount of the Bible knows that days are used FIGURATIVELY, often representing decades, or even centuries or millenia. For example, the "40 weeks" of Daniel...40 weeks = 280 days, if each day is a year you get 280 years, and the prophecy came true 280 years later, not days.
I wonder if it ever occured to them that maybe those "6 days" in the Bible is FIGURATIVE and not literal? Say, 6 million years?
Slashdot Mirror
You know what I don't get? Why do they still call x86 PC's "IBM compatible", like in this article? Macs use IBM processors, not Wintel computers! IBM no longer even MAKES PC's!
Uhhh... XBox 2 runs with PowerPC and Windows. There's your Windows on Cell. And as far as your comment about Macs being slow... Only a doofus would think a Dual 2.5 ghz G5 is slow. And stop trolling. I have a P4 3.6 ghz on my desk right now.
The XBox uses a stripped down NT kernel. Microsoft had a PPC version of NT years ago, it's not too much work. Windows on Cell, though, will be completely unable to run ANY Windows/x86 binaries.
Microsoft would have a hard time switching to PowerPC, because all Windows software would instantly cease to work, and one of the biggest things preventing people from 'switching' to other OSes is that the software they already have wouldn't work. If suddenly all their Windows software didn't work with the next version of Windows, why stay with Windows?
As for Macs being slow...when did I say that? I certainly don't think Macs are slow. I'd kill for a dual 2.5 GHz G5. My comment was that if Macs got Cell (perhaps as a G6?) they would crush x86 PC's like a bug.
Except for games the next XBox, PS3, and Nintendo Revolution are on PowerPC (The cell is PPC). If the Mac gets cell, the article claims it could be a massive turnaround, as the cell benchmarks seem to be well and beyond anything Intel could offer in the near future.
No kidding. That's exactly what I was thinking. x86 has been completely supplanted in the console market, with no share whatsoever. This encourages game developers to the PowerPC playform.
PS3 is Cell (PowerPC based), XBox is PowerPC 970 based (G5), and Nintendo is going to use something PowerPC based but won't give any details.
If Macs got cell, AND this article isn't overhyping it and it actually is this powerful, suddenly Macs could blow Windows PC's away. Heck, VirtualPC could probably run faster than most Windows PC's!
This would cause a massive migration to Macs for the high-end market. Add that to the fact that:
1) Game developers would already be using PowerPC systems to develop their games for all three consoles
2) The Macs would be far more powerful than their x86 counterparts, allowing for much higher-powered software and games
Apple may even coin the gaming market with gamers looking for super-powered gaming rigs!
Of course, most of this may never happen, but it'll be interesting to see what becomes of Cell.
1) Difficult to install.
2) Slow as heck.
3) Ugly as heck.
Keynote 2 can open Keynote files and export and import to PowerPoint (in addition to the obvious Keynote 2 format).
Pages can import and export Word (.doc), and save PDF, HTML, RTF, etc.
PowerPC? Can it run Mac OS X?
I don't know if this is true. Even the register says, "So CLAIMS". I never expected them to ship a PowerBook G5. It's MUCH more likely that they're get the new 25w dual core G4 processors Motorola is almost done with. Dual core 1.5 GHz running at 15-25w power consumption. That's awesome. http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/display.j sp?nodeId=093623&filePath=/media_center/news_relea ses/2004/ncsg/09-28-04_DUALPROC.htm&title=News%20R elease
Plus it's capable of scaling up to 2 GHz (read on another page at the freescale site), and they plan to eventually add 64-bit extensions. AND they have a single-core version that runs at 10w.
I would MUCH rather see these in a PowerBook. A dual 1.5 17-inch PowerBook would be sweet.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!
Comcast should have bought TTV and kept them as seperate channels. Merging them was idiotic. They fired half the TTV cast and replaced them with rabid gamers.
Just look at the Screen Savers! Half the cast is gone (Leo ruled) and has been replaced with these wacky game-obsessed nuts.
Can't believe I missed that. Most sites reported it at the same time.
This rumor is a few days old, though still good. What I'm shocked about is that while /. reported this rumor (a good one), they didn't report the BETTER rumor.
t ml
Namely, the Sub-$500 Mac.
http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0412expo2.h
AppleInsider also reports on it, calling it sub-$600 (ThinkSecret has however a near-perfect track record), and saying it has USB 2.0, FireWire, DVI, VGA via a dongle, and TV out.
Looks sweet.
As for this new iWorks, something not mentioned is that its supposed to include Keynote 2. Keynote is amazing from what I've heard, and if this is true, that'd be awesome. Especially if its included with the cheap Mac.
Every time I hear G4/TechTV I get depressed. They combined an awesome channel with a sucky one to get a semi-sucky one. They fired all the good people on TechTV (We miss Leo!), replaced them with G4 people that are obsessive Mac-hating gamers (the new guy on the Screen Savers dislike Macs and is an obsessive gamer. Nothing like Leo, who had some actual intelligence and gave GREAT tips), and completely ruined the shows. And they removed a lot of the good stuff (Call for Help for example) and rarely air some of the surviving good shows.
:'(
We miss Tech TV...
Microsoft had BETTER improve IE7. I have it in the latest build of Longhorn (it's still in Alpha so there is a lot of improvement room).
It's a peice of crap. It's got a few minor improvements over IE6 (popup blocking, more security stuff), but adds:
1) The buttons are different sizes and placed in strange places to make it look more 'modern', but all it does is confuse the person using it.
2) On the File-Edit-View-etc bar, the background is light gray and the text is white. Very hard to see.
3) Back and forward buttons above the File-Edit-View bar, everything else below, and very small.
4) No major improvements over IE6 SP2.
5) Slow page load times.
6) Bloat- FireFox loads twice as fast.
In short, the current IE7 builds look bleak. Hopefully they'll improve for MS's sake, but otherwise, they're really not doing much other than ripping off Safari's look and rearranging the buttons to make it harder to figure out.
That's like saying an old radio can only tune-in radio stations that play Big Band music. A G4 Mac can run the latest MacOS X as well as all other current software.
Sure, if you pay $129 to buy Mac OS X, $49 for iLife '04, and some extra for AppleWorks.
It's CAPABLE of running the latest Mac OS X, but it won't HAVE it unless you throw a bunch of money into it.
You're not exactly currect.
1. Apple has long expressed no interest in selling such a machine.
The article mentions this and explains why Apple still may do it.
2. A new G4 desktop system in Spring of 2005? No chance. Apple is moving away from the Motorola G4 archetecture, in favor of the IBM G5. The eMac and the current laptops will probably be the end of the line for the G4.
INCORRECT! Motorola has announced that they are working on dual-core G4's that scale to 2 GHz, with 64-bit extensions, and only 25w power output. They've also announced single-core G4's with 10w power output. The G4 is not dead, and a dual core 64-bit G4 would be PERFECT for a PowerBook.
3. The current G4 eMac is $800, and their margin on it is thin (by Apple standards.) This rumored system is pretty much a G4 with the $100 monitor removed. No way Apple sells it for $500.
You're forgetting that the eMac is due for an upgrade soon. If they release an updated, faster eMac this January, then they could release this system for $500.
4. Everybody who says they would never buy one of the current Macs, but would buy this one for $500 out of impulse, is a damn liar. You can already buy a headless G4 Mac for under $600. Just go to eBay and buy an old G4 tower from about two years ago. Hell, for that matter, you can buy an old G3 tower which will run OS X just fine for about $300. Add a $100 CPU upgrade, and there's your G4 right there.
Not exactly. There's a few reasons not to do that. BTW, right now I have a PowerBook, but no Mac Desktop. If I could get one for $500, I'd seriously consider it.
Now, look at your suggestion. If I ran out and bought an old G3, then added a $100 CPU upgrade, bam, I have a good speed G4 system.
But wait! The system still has a sucky bus speed, slower RAM, and a small hard drive.
Oh well, I'll live. So NOW, because this computer is way older than Mac OS X, I have to go out and buy Mac OS X for $129. Oh, and don't forget, an extra $49 for iLife. AND some extra money on AppleWorks (don't remember the price!) Thats more than an extra $178 on the software I would get FREE with anything from Apple.
So now this system costs over $570, and still has slower memory and a smaller hard drive and lack of Airport Extreme support you'd get in a system from Apple. Plus the fact that it may have been abused since I would have bought it used, AND that there's no warranty...I'd take a $499 G4 from Apple, please.
"It's a Nintendo portable gaming system, and it plays all Game Boy Advance software. I don't see why you're so irked about someone considering the DS to be part of the Game Boy product line." WRONG! It plays GameBoy Advance games in single player. It does not: 1) Play GameBoy games. 2) Play GameBoy Color games. 3) Play GameBoy Advance games in multiplayer. 4) Support any of the older GameBoy, GBC, and GBA addons like the E-card reader. It only plays the Advance games, and only in single player. Nintendo calls it it's "third pillar". There will eventually be a GameBoy successor, that can play the older games as well.
This is completely pathetic. I can't believe this article was even posted.
1) Nitro Online are complete fools. They continually promise things, then change the story. Check out the current builds, there is hardly ANYTHING there. They have made almost no progress, and make promises that are literally impossible. This article should be about Team XLink, as they are the ONLY ONES who have successfully tunneled the DS.
2) GameBoy DS? More proof that the guy who wrote this doesn't know what he's doing. The Nintendo DS is N-O-T a GameBoy.
3) Teamxlink.org. Go there. Now. Seriously, Nitro Online are just trying to steal the limelight.
You can change the batteries (I'm not sure if you need any tools, but it looks easily swappable from the pictures I've seen), but the big problem is that PSP batteries cost $50 apeice. Not the cheapest thing. Wouldn't stop all complaints ;)
The DS, though, has DOUBLE the PSP battery life. It's a huge difference.
Add to that the jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none design (games can't be too CD-intensive or battery dies, it can't play much music unless you spend extra money on a more expensive memory stick, you can't play movies unless you buy them on a proprietary format which won't play on anything else), and higher price ($200 + memory stick [$30 minimum] + possibly extra battery + no games > $150 + free Metroid Prime Hunters demo)...
I'll take the DS.
On the subject of emulation and hacking, there is already a project underway of porting Linux to the DS. It already runs on PDA's, after all, and the DS has a touch screen. A lot of people on the boards (see dslinux.org . dslinux.com is no longer the official board) are already making plans on porting NES and GameBoy and possibly even SNES emulators that run on Linux to run on the Nintendo DS (running DSLinux, of course)... :D We might even (if we get lucky) get TCP/IP and a web browser.
...it's the price. The PSP is a more powerful system, but add the greater price ($50 more than the DS), plus the cost of the memory card, and you get at least $230 for the basic system without a game of any kind (while $150 gets you a Nintendo DS with Metroid Prime Hunters demo), plus the fact that the battery downright sucks (and costs $50 for a second one)...
Does anyone remember the lessons of the Sega Nomad? Console-grade graphics and backwards compatibility (it could play all Sega Genesis games), but the combination of bad battery life + awkward media (Nomad w/fat Genesis cartridges, PSP with disks) + high price = miserable failure.
How about Game Gear? It sold better than the Nomad, and had FAR superior graphics to the GB, but the bad battery life and higher price killed it.
The PSP strikes me as a repeat of history.
[i] The PSP has a perfectly fine analog joystick.[/i]
I almost forgot about that. But every review I've seen says that the mini-Joystick was a nightmare to use.
While the PSP has better hardware, the Nintendo DS has:
:)
1) Better battery life (10 hours vs 4 hours in game)
2) Game cards (Who wants to spend extra money on a memory card, and who wants to carry a bunch of disks in their pocket? I perfer to be able to save to the game media)
3) Touch screen. Without joysticks, how can you possibly play FPS on the PSP? The DS has the touch screen, which works like a mouse on Metroid Prime: Hunters (near-perfect control- I love the touch screen).
4) Cost. DS is $150, PSP is $200. Add to that the cost of the memory stick ($30 minimum) to the PSP, and the fact that an extra battery costs $50 (to equal the DS's battery life), means you get a much cheaper system with the DS.
5) Stability. That exposed screen must be very easy to damage. The flip-open DS design is a good protection. Plus, the PSP has a CD drive, you know how easy it is for those to skip with a little bump, and break with a good drop.
6) Nintendo games rule
Just my opinion. I've done some research into the topic.
"I mean a couple of billion years has fit in about 5 days. Speaking of which,, the whole idea of T-Rex/ evolution that a lot of cristians find contradictory to the bible does not have to contradict at all. The bible said that animals were created in one day. It does not say how. And it could have been a long day. The only direct reference is sculping adam out of clay (IIRC) and making eve out of a rib...that does not make much sense, but even christians agree that bible is full of metaphors. Taking it as the exact literal truth is not correct." What is it with the five days thing, anyway? The Bible stated that "a thousand years is as but a day" to god, and states that god had 6 creative days creating the world. Why don't people put two and two together and figure out that these are FIGURATIVE, not literal? They could have been millions or billions of years for each day. And the order they are given in is perfect (creatures in the water before land, etc).
I don't know who to root for! I don't want Microsoft to win money from spammers, but I want to spammers to burn and die (and go broke in the process). Who should I root for? I'm so confused...
LucasArts? Worst Game Maker? Huh?
LucasArts' recent offerings have been improving. Jedi Academy and Jedi Outcast were fine games (though Academy had a marvelously short single player game). Battlefront is an excellent game. Star Wars Episode 3: The Game looks incredible.
LA is certainly not the worst game maker. Not the best, definitely, but certainly nowhere near worst.
But there are those who insist that the Earth was created "with age" 6000 years ago, and that fossils, etc, are a diversionary trap for the unfaithful. The same arguments can be made about this work, or anything done with molecular fingerprinting. (or any other technique, for that matter.)
I find this incredibly ridiculous. Do those people who think the Earth was made in 6 days, 6000 years ago, even bother reading the Bible? Anyone who has read a large amount of the Bible knows that days are used FIGURATIVELY, often representing decades, or even centuries or millenia. For example, the "40 weeks" of Daniel...40 weeks = 280 days, if each day is a year you get 280 years, and the prophecy came true 280 years later, not days.
I wonder if it ever occured to them that maybe those "6 days" in the Bible is FIGURATIVE and not literal? Say, 6 million years?