Actually my PS3 just died. My daughter shoved change in the BluRay slot and screwed the laser up. However Sony has a deal where you can buy a new PS3 for $250 brand new through them if you sign up for a Sony card. I just ordered one. So a brand new PS3 at Wii pricing. It is hard to argue with.
Here is the weird thing, Nintendo isn't milking these franchises enough. Where is Castlevania? Where is Metroid? Why didn't they have a real Mario game during the entire Gamecube lifespan? (Sunshine wasn't a proper sequel to 64 the way Galaxy is).
Instead Nintendo leaves their fans screaming for more, year after year, and instead resells the same game we've bought on three different systems on the virtual console.
I didn't say that graphics don't matter. I said they don't HAVE TO matter.
By catering to a different demographic, graphics aren't an issue. The hardcore gamer who wants the best looking games will pick up the PS3/360 first. The casual gamer will pick up the Wii first.
Graphics do matter to me. I bought a PS3 first, and bought a Wii later. I like what the PS3 offers, and in a perfect world I would love to see Nintendo go the Sega route and focus on games, rather than offer a console anymore. Let Sony and/or Microsoft take a loss on the hardware, and then create peripherals and games.
That being said, it isn't just graphics as why PS3/360 games don't end up on the Wii. The Wii can't handle complex physics or anything that requires a decent CPU. Heck, Guitar Hero 3 for the Wii originally shipped with MONO sound, because it was really pushing the Wii apparently for the CPU to handle Guitar Hero 3 with stereo sound.
Yet the Wii is selling like mad. They're aiming for a different market than the 360/PS3 crowd. The casual gaming crowd is actually larger. That crowd doesn't care about graphics as much.
The PC world had been saying for years that 3D was where it was at, and you could see how well Wolfenstein 3D, Doom and the like took off. It took consoles a while to catch up, but the big thing for me with the N64 was the analog joystick. The 3D implementation wasn't great, and camera was terrible. Not to mention that the PS1 killed the N64 in the number of games and sales, despite many games on the PS1 remaining 2D.
Nintendo has proven graphics don't have to matter. Look at DS graphics compared to PSP graphics, or Wii graphics to PS3 graphics. Why issue a new console with the same controllers?
Either make a new console with updated controllers, or completely new controllers. If you're going to use the same controllers, keep the same console.
I agree that data plans are pretty ridiculous, but I think we will move away from the "per text message charge" era and people will embrace the unlimited plans. When everyone is offering a true unlimited plan for $99, then choosing networks is actually a matter of networks or unique features. I think it will force carriers to improve their networks and offer better speeds, or start lowering the price of their unlimited plan.
But a central repository doesn't disappear when seeders disappear, and it is more easily controlled to protect commits. The magic of git is that I can easily have a private branch, and then easily merge it. But is this really a good idea?
Wasn't the HTC Touch Dream supposed to be an Android phone? Wasn't it supposed to launch in November? The HTC Touch Pro is pretty nice, and I'd love a good Android touch phone with haptic feedback and a slide-out QWERTY keyboard. Anyone know what happened to it?
Normally I never respond to ACs, but you bring up a point worth responding to.
Google's share is around 70% given September's reports. Microsoft and Yahoo make up basically 30%.
A partnership is not the same as one company controlling both. Yahoo wouldn't control Google's search market, and Google wouldn't fully control Yahoo's search market. It is a partnership.
Regardless, 90% market share, while appearing dominant is far less of a monopoly as Microsoft's monopoly for 20 plus years in a variety of markets. Had Microsoft bought Yahoo, they'd be removing competition in several markets, and they have repeatedly demonstrated anti-competitive practices. They abuse market share in any market they enter.
Google has not abused market share. Wake me up when Google goes out of their way to stop Google products and services from working properly on a Microsoft platform to force some sort of proprietary-Google-vendor-lock-in.
My guess is that Microsoft is bribing someone at the DoJ to ignore Microsoft's actions while focusing heavily on stopping Google.
I understand concern over Google partnering with Yahoo. It is a valid concern, but not in the context that Microsoft should get carte-blanche in a similar situation.
Who was the douche that threw his company under the bus, calling out Yang and saying Yahoo was stupid for not immediately selling out to Microsoft? He didn't care about the future of Yahoo as a company. He wanted a quick payout of his stock. He threw a fit, started a huge fight with the board, made Yahoo look bad, and not only is the future of Yahoo in question, but his own stock has plummeted. Now a Microsoft deal may happen, but for far less. The bitching caused the stockholders to lose their ass, and their company. I say that is a job well done.
Google was never going to purchase Yahoo. Google was going to infuse Yahoo with money for a partnered search deal to protect Yahoo from Microsoft, but the DoJ thought that was practically a monopoly, while the DoJ thought it would be great if Microsoft BOUGHT Yahoo, and that wouldn't be a monopoly.
Con also had archives of his mailing list showing how well he supported his code. I emailed it myself a few times, and he was very accommodating. Linus always say that politics don't matter, he only cares about the best code. So instead of taking well established, tested, mature code, he went with unstable, new code that didn't match the performance of the stable code.
Baldur's Gate 3 or Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance 3? There is a MAJOR difference. And given that Obsidian handled NWN:2 for Atari, and they employ the former lead designer for BG3, including several staffers who worked on BG3, Obsidian seems like the logical choice for NWN3 if not also BG3.
The OP was asking whether or not they would be under the purview of judges for being a monopoly. A monopoly in the illegal sense is deemed not by market share, but by tactics. There are plenty of legal monopolies (utility companies being a prime example).
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't he have links on his site to watch his movies as well? I haven't watched his movies, but he has been linked to a lot over the years.
I really loved the PS2 portable with no enclosure over the DVD, but he said it cooled his hand like a fan while he played it.
Actually my PS3 just died. My daughter shoved change in the BluRay slot and screwed the laser up. However Sony has a deal where you can buy a new PS3 for $250 brand new through them if you sign up for a Sony card. I just ordered one. So a brand new PS3 at Wii pricing. It is hard to argue with.
Here is the weird thing, Nintendo isn't milking these franchises enough. Where is Castlevania? Where is Metroid? Why didn't they have a real Mario game during the entire Gamecube lifespan? (Sunshine wasn't a proper sequel to 64 the way Galaxy is).
Instead Nintendo leaves their fans screaming for more, year after year, and instead resells the same game we've bought on three different systems on the virtual console.
Who the hell modded that Troll?
Frankly I don't care, but I am really confused. I get when people disagree or don't like certain comments, but I am really confused here.
Who seriously thought I was trolling there?
Except the PS2 version could put out stereo sound.
I didn't say that graphics don't matter. I said they don't HAVE TO matter.
By catering to a different demographic, graphics aren't an issue. The hardcore gamer who wants the best looking games will pick up the PS3/360 first. The casual gamer will pick up the Wii first.
Graphics do matter to me. I bought a PS3 first, and bought a Wii later. I like what the PS3 offers, and in a perfect world I would love to see Nintendo go the Sega route and focus on games, rather than offer a console anymore. Let Sony and/or Microsoft take a loss on the hardware, and then create peripherals and games.
That being said, it isn't just graphics as why PS3/360 games don't end up on the Wii. The Wii can't handle complex physics or anything that requires a decent CPU. Heck, Guitar Hero 3 for the Wii originally shipped with MONO sound, because it was really pushing the Wii apparently for the CPU to handle Guitar Hero 3 with stereo sound.
Yet the Wii is selling like mad. They're aiming for a different market than the 360/PS3 crowd. The casual gaming crowd is actually larger. That crowd doesn't care about graphics as much.
The PC world had been saying for years that 3D was where it was at, and you could see how well Wolfenstein 3D, Doom and the like took off. It took consoles a while to catch up, but the big thing for me with the N64 was the analog joystick. The 3D implementation wasn't great, and camera was terrible. Not to mention that the PS1 killed the N64 in the number of games and sales, despite many games on the PS1 remaining 2D.
Nintendo has proven graphics don't have to matter. Look at DS graphics compared to PSP graphics, or Wii graphics to PS3 graphics. Why issue a new console with the same controllers?
Either make a new console with updated controllers, or completely new controllers. If you're going to use the same controllers, keep the same console.
Sun is a big-name company, and they no better than to support a dying ship in Solaris.
I agree that data plans are pretty ridiculous, but I think we will move away from the "per text message charge" era and people will embrace the unlimited plans. When everyone is offering a true unlimited plan for $99, then choosing networks is actually a matter of networks or unique features. I think it will force carriers to improve their networks and offer better speeds, or start lowering the price of their unlimited plan.
But a central repository doesn't disappear when seeders disappear, and it is more easily controlled to protect commits. The magic of git is that I can easily have a private branch, and then easily merge it. But is this really a good idea?
I wasn't aware the G1 was the Dream. Okay, I am firmly an idiot. Thanks. Do you know if any other carriers might possibly pick up the Dream?
Wasn't the HTC Touch Dream supposed to be an Android phone? Wasn't it supposed to launch in November? The HTC Touch Pro is pretty nice, and I'd love a good Android touch phone with haptic feedback and a slide-out QWERTY keyboard. Anyone know what happened to it?
I'd presume anything that supports Mozilla add-ons would be affected. But that is just a guess.
Normally I never respond to ACs, but you bring up a point worth responding to.
Google's share is around 70% given September's reports. Microsoft and Yahoo make up basically 30%.
A partnership is not the same as one company controlling both. Yahoo wouldn't control Google's search market, and Google wouldn't fully control Yahoo's search market. It is a partnership.
Regardless, 90% market share, while appearing dominant is far less of a monopoly as Microsoft's monopoly for 20 plus years in a variety of markets. Had Microsoft bought Yahoo, they'd be removing competition in several markets, and they have repeatedly demonstrated anti-competitive practices. They abuse market share in any market they enter.
Google has not abused market share. Wake me up when Google goes out of their way to stop Google products and services from working properly on a Microsoft platform to force some sort of proprietary-Google-vendor-lock-in.
My guess is that Microsoft is bribing someone at the DoJ to ignore Microsoft's actions while focusing heavily on stopping Google.
I understand concern over Google partnering with Yahoo. It is a valid concern, but not in the context that Microsoft should get carte-blanche in a similar situation.
Apple realizes that companies are run by people.
Yep, that would be him. Thanks.
Who was the douche that threw his company under the bus, calling out Yang and saying Yahoo was stupid for not immediately selling out to Microsoft? He didn't care about the future of Yahoo as a company. He wanted a quick payout of his stock. He threw a fit, started a huge fight with the board, made Yahoo look bad, and not only is the future of Yahoo in question, but his own stock has plummeted. Now a Microsoft deal may happen, but for far less. The bitching caused the stockholders to lose their ass, and their company. I say that is a job well done.
Google was never going to purchase Yahoo. Google was going to infuse Yahoo with money for a partnered search deal to protect Yahoo from Microsoft, but the DoJ thought that was practically a monopoly, while the DoJ thought it would be great if Microsoft BOUGHT Yahoo, and that wouldn't be a monopoly.
And it isn't like Microsoft doesn't have a dog in the search business.
Con also had archives of his mailing list showing how well he supported his code. I emailed it myself a few times, and he was very accommodating. Linus always say that politics don't matter, he only cares about the best code. So instead of taking well established, tested, mature code, he went with unstable, new code that didn't match the performance of the stable code.
Which distros will include this as an option at install time? That is what I want to know.
Baldur's Gate 3 or Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance 3? There is a MAJOR difference. And given that Obsidian handled NWN:2 for Atari, and they employ the former lead designer for BG3, including several staffers who worked on BG3, Obsidian seems like the logical choice for NWN3 if not also BG3.
The OP was asking whether or not they would be under the purview of judges for being a monopoly. A monopoly in the illegal sense is deemed not by market share, but by tactics. There are plenty of legal monopolies (utility companies being a prime example).
I answered the poster on the terms they used.