GBA carts stick out of the bottom of the DS (both lite and regular). I agree that would be kinda cool... maybe homebrew of some sort? Come on modders, get to work!
I believe the argument against tables (from a CSS standpoint) has to do with the fact that it can be difficult to easily modify/update sitewide layouts. I certainly agree with you in that people understand tables easily, and I'll admit, I tend to do tables in situations I know CSS would be 'better'... OTOH, upkeep of a site can be made much easier if good CSS is implemented over tables. *shrug*
The reason GTA has sold well lies almost exclusively in its appeal to the male teen to young adult crowd, and has nothing to do with complexity (as it completely lacks it). I personally like that San Andreas (even moreso than GTA3 or Vice City) models a large area in which to drive, but that doesn't count for a whole lot when it comes to how immersive a game is.
I really have no idea what you're referring to when you compare GTA to the Sims as far as depth of gameplay. Are we talking about the same two games? GTA throws in a menage of mini games, but none are high quality nor are they particularly detailed. And really, if GTA *included* a street racing aspect that didn't suck, it could be a positive addition to the game.
I'm honestly curious what you see the 'other 90% of what GTA has' being.
You know, it'd be really cool if the other Elder Scrolls games(or at least the geographies of Morrowind and Solsteim etc) were all plugged into Oblivion. Looking at the larger map, it's almost like Oblivion was *designed* to be able to do this.
[San Andreas] is one of the greatest user experiences ever created.
Are you serious? San Andreas had...
+ sub-par graphics
+ awkward control when walking
+ mentally handicapped AI
+ extreme consolitis on the PC
+ awkward menu system
+ no multiplayer (when it would've been wildly popular and very possible)
+ odd and annoying camera movement (heaven-forbid I'd like to keep the camera view *slightly* higher when driving without it automatically snapping back every few seconds)
+ lame mini-games claiming to be more than they are
+ very little environmental or character interaction
I've enjoyed GTA3, Vice City, and San Andreas, but much less so than what I would consider great experiences (System Shock 2, HL1 and 2, Morrowind/Oblivion, and Forza Motorsport are ones that come immediately to mind). The GTA series of games were 'ok' and popular, but hardly great.
I don't see every damn FPS in space being subjected to the "Doom-Clone" treatment or WWII ones shot down as copying Wolfenstein. (although in this last case, many do)
First, what WW2 games have copied Wolfenstein in gameplay? If you're referring to modern games, Call of Duty and Day of Defeat are both better and more original than the Q3 engine Wolfenstein.
Second, every FPS was called a Doom-clone back in the day, until games existed that looked better or had better gameplay.
Look at some modern GTA-clones: True Crime and The Godfather; they were almost the exact same game. Then, look at the modern RPG genre: Oblivion (and Morrowind and Daggerfall before it... we won't talk about Battlespire or Redguard:P), WoW, the Diablos, Sacred (ok, a Diablo-clone, but better), Neverwinter Nights... they were all very different games. A lot of racing games are very different too; look at PGR (1, 2, or 3) vs Forza vs GT4 vs Need for Speed vs Wipeout vs Mario Kart...
GTA is a fun game, but isn't particularly deep; it's not too difficult to make a semi-effective knockoff and bank on the fact that GTA is wildly popular. A game like Oblivion, OTOH, is so expansive that a clone would be difficult to effectively produce.
Glut!? Sure, there've been a bunch in very recent history, most of them crap
I believe that's the definition of glut. And really, when the quality of the 'original' (GTA3+ in this situation; let's not forget about the original GTAs) isn't exactly stellar, the term clone is very applicable.
Where I'm at, the techs have insisted on firefox be installed on all new machines. There's only a few of us that need to use IE for one web app (meaning it's the homepage;), but other than that, it's all FF goodness:)
It's asking for authorization on all images in the/linuxvirus.net/awstats/icon/other/ folder... I was amused to have to click "cancel" a few dozen times. Interesting stats, nonetheless; thanks.
Windows supports them, but you'll get frustrated and eventually give up trying to use a CD due to the annoying Autorun 'feature.' MacOS supports them, but calls them iCD-Roms, and only allows the reading of U2 CDs purchased from iTunes. And yes, for chrissake, Linux supports them; all you have to do is write your own driver... didn't you RTFM at http://forums.linuxcdroms.com/cgi-bin/form.php?cat =drivers&topic=writingcdromdriversforn00bs?!
About a year and a half ago I purchased a 40GB Creative ZEN Xtra. It wasn't very feature rich, was rather ugly, and was definitely larger than the 40GB iPod... but it was $200 cheaper, same amount of space, and I could easily use it as a portable harddrive for data. Sure, I didn't really get any envious glances while using it, but for quite a bit less money I was able to cart all of my music around and have a large (albeit slow) external harddrive.
My friend has had an iriver (not sure what model) that supports relatively good recording (with on-the-fly mp3 encoding) that he has used to record everything from lectures to concerts. It, also, was cheaper than the iPod of the same size.
OTOH, I have a friend who owned an iPod mini and just received a nano, and for my sister's graduation I gave her a nano as well. Both of them love their iPods, but only for their physical size. My sister is only slightly annoyed she can't carry more music, but she places far less importance on that than the fact that it's a fucking nano, and has a strong cool factor.
There are plenty of other players out there that are cheaper and have more features, so that's not really something you can argue against in defense of the iPod. If you *liked* your mini, by all means, get another iPod... just remember it is possible to find feature-rich players out there for pretty stellar prices.
Oh I get it, you can see the guy's point that maybe he, like others, and even you, shouldn't 'care', but, because he said he didn't care, he has some imagined 'Mac' disease?
90% of the computer users of the world don't care about these issues any more than they care to take up automotive mechanics in order to drive back and forth to their fucking jobs, okay?
I don't have a problem with the stated fact that most people care little for stuff like this. It's annoying, however, when those 90% of people, yourself and the parent included, feel that you're above that sort of knowledge. So you don't care (and don't wish to hear) about computer issues? That's awesome; I'm glad you have other interests. Just don't pretend you're a better person because you talk about something you don't fully understand.
And what's more, the 'not caring/not knowing', overwhelming majority of people DO shape the tech world, more than you think. Why? Because they're the buyers, get it, and the companies give them what they want. It's not a pretty thought, sure.
For years PC games have driven the consumer computer market. Sure, people have to buy those games, but gamers hardly make up a majority of computer users; they tend to associate more with the 10% you reference are interested in computer issues.
WTF was that supposed to mean? Heheh, bad for I-VI-II-V jazz progressions, bad for anything anywhere evolving or moving on? If "progress" was the word you were after...
Nothing worse than attempting an ill-attempted jab at someone else's writing and failing. Here's what progressionmeans (the first definition; the one I used): noun: 1. The process of progressing; progress.
It's a synonym for progress, and is a noun (I can't tell if you're implying it's an adjective or verb; in either case, you're wrong).
Have you ever thought that they simply don't care (like myself), and that by making them, you're not making them face the facts, but merely annoying them?
That's a pretty conceited view, and one that doesn't seem to be uncommon among macphiles. *Should* you care about something like that? Should the average computer user care? I'd answer 'probably not' to both, but that hardly invalidates his point.
The school of thought he probably follows is one that believes DRMed technology like that chip is overall a bad thing for computing in general. Thankfully, you're not someone who will have any say in the future of technology; the attitude you carry would be terribly detrimental to any sort of progression.
Mac fanboys, such as myself, claim Apple makes better computers for other reasons. One example is that when you compare a PowerBook or a MacBook to the average PC laptop the PC looks like a concrete sidewalk paving-slab.
This is one of the huge problems I have with fanboys... I respect when a machine can look good, but it's hardly something I value very high. Sure, Mom and Dad don't want an ugly machine... but how does the case make a mac a better computer? If toting your macbook around so that people will envy how sexy it looks is what you do, then you have little authority to decide the quality of a computer. There's a word for people like that.
The superiority of Apple hardware resides mostly in superior design, the fact that Apple usually loads their machines with the very latest hardware, excellent support and they also keep their value very well.
You mentioned previously the hardware in a mac comes from the same place as the rest of the PCs out there, and 'very latest hardware' isn't entirely accurate. Where's the 64 bit CPUs in the mac laptops (or in consumer desktops, for that matter)? For $2000 you get 512MB of RAM and a mid-level graphics card... hardly top of the line. Not to say the other PC manufacturers do better, but your claim of the "very latest" doesn't stand.
I just sold a three year old G4 PowerBook for about three times what I would have gotten for a WinDell laptop of similar vintage.
So even old, outdated macs are overpriced? I feel a little bad for the person/institution you conned into paying more for a 5 year old system. Also, since when do PCs appreciate in value? I've always recommended that you recycle your old computers by donating them to people or places that need them (there's a soup kitchen in my hometown that took my parents' old packard bell and used it for an accounting computer).
I have had numerous issues with hardware component falilure in Apple computers but I have also never had the slightest difficutly with getting these defects straightened out under warranty.
This is kind of an odd way to argue in favor of Apple's support. I'd rather have an actual working product over stellar customer support. I guess I've been rather lucky in that I've only had two products DOA (motherboard and video card) and only one component fail (a stick of RAM). None of those problems existed with entire systems I've purchased; those particular machines have never had a problem, so dealing with customer service was a non-issue.
If you buy a bulk quality Wintel box from a random crapware manufacturer and have any issues with it geting it repaired, even under warranty, can be a daunting task and you will soon find that it ages faster than the high end gear due to it being loaded with hardware that is already obsolescent.
Do you have any basis to this? What if the machines actually *work*? Then, really, does it even matter if the support is non-existant? (also, you probably wanted to use "obsolete," as "already obsolescent" is kinda awkward (it means "already becoming obsolete"))
I don't know what kind of weird hardware you have hooked, up, but My linux box supports all the hardware I throw at it.
I've yet to see either my windows machine or my linux box handle devices thrown at it. If they're small, like a pen or a cat, the item will bounce off the side and chances are the machine simply won't do anything at all. If they're largish, like a motherboard or possibly an xbox, the computer falls over and I immediately get a BSOD on the windows machine or a kernel panic on the linux box.
My friend claims his mac can handle anything thrown at it, but I think he's only saying that because he doesn't actually own a mac, and therefore would be unable to actually hit it with any object.
First, have you ever had your tires chalked? Chalk is used because it's non-damaging and is relatively easy to wipe off. Second, the chalk is used when there is a violation; in this case it was a 'parking limit' that the OP was going over.
The locks you mention are wheel clamps, often used to keep a car stationary if a tow truck is not available at that moment.
Amusing, to be sure, but according to the original post, it was a cop, not a meter maid. Where I live there are both; I'd imagine that sometimes there are regular police that are put on traffic duty.
Where I used to work in Minnesota, parking cost $2 per hour, only allowing you to put in a max of 2 hours at a time. There was no total limit, but every two hours you had to walk back to the meter and pump some more quarters in. I would've gladly paid 30 cents every two hours to save the 15 minutes required to get to and from the parking ramp.
...although, it was nice to have extra sanctioned 15 minute breaks:)
i have [sic] him holy hell about vandilizing my car..
it was all in good fun though..
Congrats, asshole. Way to ruin a guy's day while he was doing his job. We've all been pissed about parking tickets, but the onus is on the owner of the car to make sure the meter is paid, not the person in charge of writing tickets. Why should you expect leniency from a cop who probably has to do that all day? To him, your car is no more important than the thousands of others out there.
Slashdot Mirror
If that's the case, your original post was terribly worded:
The first it is referring to "my computer" in the previous sentence, while the second it obviously refers to "a gig [of memory]."
GBA carts stick out of the bottom of the DS (both lite and regular). I agree that would be kinda cool... maybe homebrew of some sort? Come on modders, get to work!
I believe the argument against tables (from a CSS standpoint) has to do with the fact that it can be difficult to easily modify/update sitewide layouts. I certainly agree with you in that people understand tables easily, and I'll admit, I tend to do tables in situations I know CSS would be 'better'... OTOH, upkeep of a site can be made much easier if good CSS is implemented over tables. *shrug*
The reason GTA has sold well lies almost exclusively in its appeal to the male teen to young adult crowd, and has nothing to do with complexity (as it completely lacks it). I personally like that San Andreas (even moreso than GTA3 or Vice City) models a large area in which to drive, but that doesn't count for a whole lot when it comes to how immersive a game is.
I really have no idea what you're referring to when you compare GTA to the Sims as far as depth of gameplay. Are we talking about the same two games? GTA throws in a menage of mini games, but none are high quality nor are they particularly detailed. And really, if GTA *included* a street racing aspect that didn't suck, it could be a positive addition to the game.
I'm honestly curious what you see the 'other 90% of what GTA has' being.
You know, it'd be really cool if the other Elder Scrolls games(or at least the geographies of Morrowind and Solsteim etc) were all plugged into Oblivion. Looking at the larger map, it's almost like Oblivion was *designed* to be able to do this.
Are you serious? San Andreas had...
+ sub-par graphics
+ awkward control when walking
+ mentally handicapped AI
+ extreme consolitis on the PC
+ awkward menu system
+ no multiplayer (when it would've been wildly popular and very possible)
+ odd and annoying camera movement (heaven-forbid I'd like to keep the camera view *slightly* higher when driving without it automatically snapping back every few seconds)
+ lame mini-games claiming to be more than they are
+ very little environmental or character interaction
I've enjoyed GTA3, Vice City, and San Andreas, but much less so than what I would consider great experiences (System Shock 2, HL1 and 2, Morrowind/Oblivion, and Forza Motorsport are ones that come immediately to mind). The GTA series of games were 'ok' and popular, but hardly great.
...unless you *are* a minority.
First, what WW2 games have copied Wolfenstein in gameplay? If you're referring to modern games, Call of Duty and Day of Defeat are both better and more original than the Q3 engine Wolfenstein.
Second, every FPS was called a Doom-clone back in the day, until games existed that looked better or had better gameplay.
Look at some modern GTA-clones: True Crime and The Godfather; they were almost the exact same game. Then, look at the modern RPG genre: Oblivion (and Morrowind and Daggerfall before it... we won't talk about Battlespire or Redguard :P), WoW, the Diablos, Sacred (ok, a Diablo-clone, but better), Neverwinter Nights... they were all very different games. A lot of racing games are very different too; look at PGR (1, 2, or 3) vs Forza vs GT4 vs Need for Speed vs Wipeout vs Mario Kart...
GTA is a fun game, but isn't particularly deep; it's not too difficult to make a semi-effective knockoff and bank on the fact that GTA is wildly popular. A game like Oblivion, OTOH, is so expansive that a clone would be difficult to effectively produce.
I believe that's the definition of glut. And really, when the quality of the 'original' (GTA3+ in this situation; let's not forget about the original GTAs) isn't exactly stellar, the term clone is very applicable.
Where I'm at, the techs have insisted on firefox be installed on all new machines. There's only a few of us that need to use IE for one web app (meaning it's the homepage ;), but other than that, it's all FF goodness :)
It's asking for authorization on all images in the /linuxvirus.net/awstats/icon/other/ folder... I was amused to have to click "cancel" a few dozen times. Interesting stats, nonetheless; thanks.
Windows supports them, but you'll get frustrated and eventually give up trying to use a CD due to the annoying Autorun 'feature.' MacOS supports them, but calls them iCD-Roms, and only allows the reading of U2 CDs purchased from iTunes. And yes, for chrissake, Linux supports them; all you have to do is write your own driver... didn't you RTFM at http://forums.linuxcdroms.com/cgi-bin/form.php?cat =drivers&topic=writingcdromdriversforn00bs?!
About a year and a half ago I purchased a 40GB Creative ZEN Xtra. It wasn't very feature rich, was rather ugly, and was definitely larger than the 40GB iPod... but it was $200 cheaper, same amount of space, and I could easily use it as a portable harddrive for data. Sure, I didn't really get any envious glances while using it, but for quite a bit less money I was able to cart all of my music around and have a large (albeit slow) external harddrive.
My friend has had an iriver (not sure what model) that supports relatively good recording (with on-the-fly mp3 encoding) that he has used to record everything from lectures to concerts. It, also, was cheaper than the iPod of the same size.
OTOH, I have a friend who owned an iPod mini and just received a nano, and for my sister's graduation I gave her a nano as well. Both of them love their iPods, but only for their physical size. My sister is only slightly annoyed she can't carry more music, but she places far less importance on that than the fact that it's a fucking nano, and has a strong cool factor.
There are plenty of other players out there that are cheaper and have more features, so that's not really something you can argue against in defense of the iPod. If you *liked* your mini, by all means, get another iPod... just remember it is possible to find feature-rich players out there for pretty stellar prices.
I don't have a problem with the stated fact that most people care little for stuff like this. It's annoying, however, when those 90% of people, yourself and the parent included, feel that you're above that sort of knowledge. So you don't care (and don't wish to hear) about computer issues? That's awesome; I'm glad you have other interests. Just don't pretend you're a better person because you talk about something you don't fully understand.
For years PC games have driven the consumer computer market. Sure, people have to buy those games, but gamers hardly make up a majority of computer users; they tend to associate more with the 10% you reference are interested in computer issues.
Nothing worse than attempting an ill-attempted jab at someone else's writing and failing. Here's what progression means (the first definition; the one I used):
noun: 1. The process of progressing; progress.
It's a synonym for progress, and is a noun (I can't tell if you're implying it's an adjective or verb; in either case, you're wrong).
Ahh, willful ignorance. Must be frustrating for you when others negate your views with real logic, eh?
That's a pretty conceited view, and one that doesn't seem to be uncommon among macphiles. *Should* you care about something like that? Should the average computer user care? I'd answer 'probably not' to both, but that hardly invalidates his point.
The school of thought he probably follows is one that believes DRMed technology like that chip is overall a bad thing for computing in general. Thankfully, you're not someone who will have any say in the future of technology; the attitude you carry would be terribly detrimental to any sort of progression.
MattPF: please stop spamming slashdot; it's annoying.
To be fair, he hasn't posted much... still, when nearly all of your comments are self-promotion, something is suspect.
Sigh... you're trolling, but I'll bite:
This is one of the huge problems I have with fanboys... I respect when a machine can look good, but it's hardly something I value very high. Sure, Mom and Dad don't want an ugly machine... but how does the case make a mac a better computer? If toting your macbook around so that people will envy how sexy it looks is what you do, then you have little authority to decide the quality of a computer. There's a word for people like that.
You mentioned previously the hardware in a mac comes from the same place as the rest of the PCs out there, and 'very latest hardware' isn't entirely accurate. Where's the 64 bit CPUs in the mac laptops (or in consumer desktops, for that matter)? For $2000 you get 512MB of RAM and a mid-level graphics card... hardly top of the line. Not to say the other PC manufacturers do better, but your claim of the "very latest" doesn't stand.
So even old, outdated macs are overpriced? I feel a little bad for the person/institution you conned into paying more for a 5 year old system. Also, since when do PCs appreciate in value? I've always recommended that you recycle your old computers by donating them to people or places that need them (there's a soup kitchen in my hometown that took my parents' old packard bell and used it for an accounting computer).
This is kind of an odd way to argue in favor of Apple's support. I'd rather have an actual working product over stellar customer support. I guess I've been rather lucky in that I've only had two products DOA (motherboard and video card) and only one component fail (a stick of RAM). None of those problems existed with entire systems I've purchased; those particular machines have never had a problem, so dealing with customer service was a non-issue.
Do you have any basis to this? What if the machines actually *work*? Then, really, does it even matter if the support is non-existant? (also, you probably wanted to use "obsolete," as "already obsolescent" is kinda awkward (it means "already becoming obsolete"))
Please, 1070 years. Did you see the first episode? Fry was clearly frozen for 1000 years.
I've yet to see either my windows machine or my linux box handle devices thrown at it. If they're small, like a pen or a cat, the item will bounce off the side and chances are the machine simply won't do anything at all. If they're largish, like a motherboard or possibly an xbox, the computer falls over and I immediately get a BSOD on the windows machine or a kernel panic on the linux box.
My friend claims his mac can handle anything thrown at it, but I think he's only saying that because he doesn't actually own a mac, and therefore would be unable to actually hit it with any object.
First, have you ever had your tires chalked? Chalk is used because it's non-damaging and is relatively easy to wipe off. Second, the chalk is used when there is a violation; in this case it was a 'parking limit' that the OP was going over.
The locks you mention are wheel clamps, often used to keep a car stationary if a tow truck is not available at that moment.
Amusing, to be sure, but according to the original post, it was a cop, not a meter maid. Where I live there are both; I'd imagine that sometimes there are regular police that are put on traffic duty.
Where I used to work in Minnesota, parking cost $2 per hour, only allowing you to put in a max of 2 hours at a time. There was no total limit, but every two hours you had to walk back to the meter and pump some more quarters in. I would've gladly paid 30 cents every two hours to save the 15 minutes required to get to and from the parking ramp.
...although, it was nice to have extra sanctioned 15 minute breaks :)
Congrats, asshole. Way to ruin a guy's day while he was doing his job. We've all been pissed about parking tickets, but the onus is on the owner of the car to make sure the meter is paid, not the person in charge of writing tickets. Why should you expect leniency from a cop who probably has to do that all day? To him, your car is no more important than the thousands of others out there.
3) Profit!