No matter how many software or hardware tools an ISP has in place to stop their customers computers from being turned into zombies, the only real way to combat the problem is to educate the end user more.
No amount of firewalls, switching to Mac or Linux, or anything else will stop people from having their computers taken over at the end of the day. Stupid users will always find a way to get infected dispite the best protection available.
Operating a computer should be like operating heavy machinary. You need to pass a test that says you're qualified to do it. Don't want to take the time to learn how to properly use a computer and avoid being just another zombie PC sending me emails about lowering my car payments or free nude pics of celebrities? Then don't use a computer at all.
If you think this is a little irrational, just remember that the financial damages caused by computer viruses are probably in the billions of dollars every year. Imagine how much trouble could be prevented.
After the last movie in the Matrix Trilogy and the horrible Enter the Matrix game, if they manage to get two blobs that look mildly like Neo and an Agent, I'll be fairly impressed.
Don't you think that beauty is in the eye of the beholder? It's really a matter of opinion which game "looks" better. You can ask which has more polygons on screen at any given moment, in which case you could probably guess Forza and be correct, but that doesn't necessarily translate to looking better.
I could make a car that takes all the processing power the the Xbox to draw, and still have it look like crap. I'm not saying this is the case with either game, but it's a valid point.
The software is always limited by the hardware. You can't go beyond these limitations without having negative effects (i.e. framerate being terribly low, etc.).
Looks are more or less dependent on the art style used by the game. This is what graphics should really be based around, rather than how many polygons can this console render at any given time. The next generation consoles (mainly the PS3 and Xbox 360) will be able to produce frighteningly large numbers of polygons at any given moment (the PS3 is supporting dual 1080p!) but that doens't necessarily mean the games will look any better.
Personally, I'd like to see more along the lines of an 80% focus on Software. That and more gameplay and less graphics.
In simple terms the MEMEXPORT function is a method by which Xenos can push and pull vectorised data directly to and from system RAM.
The only problem is that if the GPU has to use the same bus as the CPU in which case they'll have to compete with each other, potentially leading to bottlenecks and/or messy bus arbitration. Hopefully Microsoft will give the GPU direct access to the memory.
Performance-wise, it wouldn't be quite as good as having built-in memory on the GPU, but it will be a lot cheaper and have access to a lot of memory since the Xbox 360 is supposed to have 512 Mb of RAM.
Kind of funny how both ATI and Nvidea are pushed more by console graphics developement now days than anything else. At least something is fueling better technologies.
That's where a lot of the MMORPG players are at. Lineage has had a lot of popularity there and accounts for a lot of business.
The numbers might be skewed because a lot of Asian MMO gamers play online in cyber-cafes or something similar. I guess you could still count the number of accounts that are created, but what about the people who create and account, play for an hour and then never come back. If the internet cafe is the one being billed per hour of play time, that account will stick around forever. This makes it a little more difficult to accurately guage the number of actual subscribers.
I've never played either Lineage, but I'm going to guess that a lot of people in these countries are going to try WoW and a lot will probably like it and switch to playing it. The numbers will still be a little funny though.
While you could use a gaming console to download music, why would you want to?
First of all, unless the interface for doing it is really good, most people would rather use their computers. I've never used any of Microsoft's music store programs so I can't say whether or not they're worth using.
Also, because the next-gen consoles are not going to support dial-up, people who don't have access to broadband services won't be able to use the service.
Unless you'll be able to transfer the music files off your HD, the service will be completely worthless. MS has said you'll be able to view files on your PC on the Xbox through some form of connection, but I don't know if it works the other way around.
The original Xbox had a file system that a PC couldn't handle, so you can't just take the HD out and stick it in a PC. The only way to do it was to FTP to your Xbox. I'm not sure if this required modding it or not.
Additionally, with a 20 GB HD, an Xbox 360 would be a slightly more expensive, larger, and significantly less portable iPod or MP3 player. Unless they can offer a subscription service for an Xbox that's really cheap to justify possibly not being able to move the songs elsewhere (can you even burn CDs?) I don't forsee anyone buying it.
The article isn't too clear on exactly how the Xbox 360 will play into the online music business, but I can't see too many practical fits for it. Sure you could download music onto it, but why not just download it on your computer and transfer it to the Xbox, or buy a CD and copy it to the HD? Using a gaming console for music is really stretching it.
On the other side of the fence, Warlocks keel over and die as Undead players turn on Way of the Forsaken, making the race immune to the class's primary form of attack for the next 20 seconds
I'm not positive, but quite sure it's Will of the Forsaken.
Isn't it great to hear someone complain about something when they really don't know what they're talking about. Basically, the thread devolves to another paladins suck, nerf shaman message. Why not leave other classes alone and fix the broken ones? No sense in dragging the working classes down to the crap level.
Although Microsoft seems to be pushing to have a say in the creative developement of the movie, I'm wondering how much they'll end up getting. I'd really hate to see a movie with so much promise end up being ruined by a movie company that probably doesn't know anything about the Halo universe.
The major console makers and game studies should jointly create a studio, or an offshoot of one of the major ones that currently exists that will be responsible for making all game movies. This way the game companies will have a lot more decision making process and control over the content of the movies. Although something like this will never happen, it would prevent any chance of Halo being turned into a romantic comedy by some movie company who's bigwigs wouldn't know their ass from an Xbox.
I don't think this ever really becomes a problem. Let's say, for instance, a person who is a well known blogger decides to make up some really unbelievable crap. If he continues to do this, he will lose credibility and some of his reader base.
In the cases where the blogger is a hardcore fanatic of something (Linux, Democrat, Christian, etc.) there will likely always be a few people who will take this persons word, regardless of how ridiculous it is. Since these people would hold this belief anyway and are merely reading the blog for reinforcement of their ideas, it doesn't hurt anyone.
The simple fact is, that bloggers who want to serve as reporters to a wide audience, will try to report the news as truthfully and with as little bias as possible. If a company were to make a good product and then switch to making a worthless one, would people continue to buy from said company? Eventually the problem corrects itself.
In the end, there's no need for censorship, only good, common-sense from the readers.
I'll admit that the statement is a little over-reaching, but you must admit that OSX is more secure than Windows. Granted a lot of this stems from no having a huge market to go after, but it seems they built with some security in mind rather than a "let's get this out the door and fix later" mentality that Windows has used for the past several incarnations.
If you look here you will notice a game called RuneScape, an mmo, can be played for free. Notice how it's beating the pants off EQ2, and looks like it will overtake EQ. Granted that the graphics aren't all that great and it's not the most in depth, but when you don't have to pay anything for it and it can be played nearly anywhere, it doesn't seem so bad.
Further proof that you don't need photorealistic graphics to make a good game that people will use.
The second reported sticking point was Microsoft's insistence that principal shooting begin as soon as possible, possibly as early as this fall. According to Variety, Universal and Fox will only "promise simply to get the pic into theaters by 2007 at the latest."
Microsoft always wants to rush everything and only ends up with a crappy product in the end. I hope whatever company decides to make the film takes their time and makes it worth seeing.
In unrelated news, I bet that if the said company does take their time and gets it out in 2007, it will still potentially beat a Microsoft Longhorn launch date.
It will make all of those products go out of business.
Maybe it'll help make ALL those products better by introducing a new interface idea or unique type of filter.
Or maybe they'll just copy any inovative feature that the competition has come up with, even if it breaks patent laws. Then they'll bundle it with Windows, which means over 90% of the computer users on the planet will be able to use, for free so that no one has to buy the other program, even though the Windows version probably isn't anywhere near as good. The other company might sue, but will just probably be bought off by MS, and eventually wither and die anyhow. Then there will be absolutely no incentive for MS to make the product better since there's no competition. The end result is that over 90% of the computer users get stuck with a sub-par product with no alternative.
FAIR competition is something that everyone can handle, but since when has Microsoft ever made the effort to do things even remotely fair?
But look at the quality of the products since then. Apple has gone on to make a highly secure and user-friendly OS, whereas Microsoft has managed to be little more than the target of almost every single virus, spyware, malware, and anything else you really don't want on your PC.
The other big difference is that Apple makes most of the money from selling iPods, and not the music. Microsoft doesn't make portable music players so at best they'll scrape in a few cents every now and again from music sales. Once you take out the cost to design, promote, and implament their music store, you almost wonder how much of a loss they're going to take. I'm sure that they must realize this, but are willing to do it anyway just so they can get in to the market.
Would anyone like to takes bets as to which online music store will be bundled with Windows? Microsoft is banking on the fact that a large number of windows users will be to ignorant of their other options to get any other service besides Microsoft's.
This is just a repeat of the internet browser wars. Eventually, Netscape lost out because Explorer came with Windows and was free. At the time Explorer was a pretty good browser, but look at what it's become today.
Why don't they just stay out of a business that they have no real business being involved in?
This is probably just Sony's reaction to this which was posted a few days ago. It's just a dick measuring contest between MS and Sony trying to get press for their consoles.
Nintendo may not look like the most technologically advanced, but at least they're looking like that most mature at the moment. I'm sure they'll eventually come out the door guns blazing.
I really have to agree with you on this one. If they were giving the award based on expectations you might be able to give the nod to the PS3 instead of the Xbox 360, but otherwise the only clear winner could have been the Xbox 360. While I'd personally give the nod the the Revolution, I feel it should be disqualified largely on the grounds that it wasn't there and we still don't know much about it.
The Xbox 360 may not have been running, but it was the closest thing to running. Apparently, the graphics card for the PS3 isn't even done yet, so anything other than the prerendered stuff they showed us is an impossibility. In an sense, they were as absent from the event as Nintendo, but chose to try and fool everyone by making it appear as if they actually had something. I also recall Sony saying that the footage they showed was not prerendered (a lie) and there was some controversy over it.
Because the other two consoles weren't even there, I don't see how you couldn't give it to the Xbox 360 even if you felt it was undeserving.
Burnout 3 comes to mind. I recall seeing a few Axe ads in the game. Do these ads make me want to stop playing the game? No. Obviously this is an overstatement. I think buying a game or not has to do with how well it's made, and not if there's advertising in it.
If advertisements in games are used appropriately, then I really won't care. If you're going to put a billboard in a game by a road because it's realistic, you might as well put an add on there. To a certain extent it makes a game seem more realistic. Just look at games like Gran Turismo, where there are logos of actual manufacturers plastered all over.
If you start plastering them on loading screens it might get a little annoying though. That's one example of where it's inappropriate to place an ad.
I'd like to believe you about all of the wonderful things you'll be giving us, but after Fable (possibly the most overhyped game I've ever played) I just can't trust you. What you promise today just might not be there tomorrow.
It seems to me that Microsoft is only playing catch up, has invention died over in Redmond?
Microsoft has largely been playing catchup throughout its entire existance. Before there was ever Windows, there was Apple's OS. Before there was IE, Netscape was king of the browser world. Spam Blocking and Security? Been around for a long time before Microsoft built it in to their products. Almost everywhere you look, Microsoft is trying to make up lost ground. Almost any inovation in computing has been "borrowed" by Microsoft, not created.
Microsoft made a good product that caught on like wildfire and made computers more accessible to people who weren't able to understand the complexities of computers. Because they have such a large customer base, they can get away with releasing inferior products when it's the only product available.
I don't mean to sound like I'm trying to start a flame war, but when Microsoft finally gets their product right, and the competition has been doing it for a year or more, it gets under my skin a little bit. Why not just get it right from the start or at least fix more along the way.
That's right folks, set right up and try the new IE 7.0. It's got everything our competition has already had for the last year or more.
This is the problem with Microsoft. They're capable of making a good product when they want to, but they throw their weight around and make it the only product on the market. After this, what incentive do they have to continue to make their product better or keep it up to date? IE hadn't changed forever and didn't look like it ever would until people started using Firefox.
I don't mind MS trying to make a product for every single aspect of the computer world (and occasionally beyond) but when they use their huge bank account and the huge Windows customer base to become monopolistic and the only product out there, it really hurts the consumers more than anyone else in the end.
Slashdot Mirror
No amount of firewalls, switching to Mac or Linux, or anything else will stop people from having their computers taken over at the end of the day. Stupid users will always find a way to get infected dispite the best protection available.
Operating a computer should be like operating heavy machinary. You need to pass a test that says you're qualified to do it. Don't want to take the time to learn how to properly use a computer and avoid being just another zombie PC sending me emails about lowering my car payments or free nude pics of celebrities? Then don't use a computer at all.
If you think this is a little irrational, just remember that the financial damages caused by computer viruses are probably in the billions of dollars every year. Imagine how much trouble could be prevented.
After the last movie in the Matrix Trilogy and the horrible Enter the Matrix game, if they manage to get two blobs that look mildly like Neo and an Agent, I'll be fairly impressed.
I could make a car that takes all the processing power the the Xbox to draw, and still have it look like crap. I'm not saying this is the case with either game, but it's a valid point.
The software is always limited by the hardware. You can't go beyond these limitations without having negative effects (i.e. framerate being terribly low, etc.).
Looks are more or less dependent on the art style used by the game. This is what graphics should really be based around, rather than how many polygons can this console render at any given time. The next generation consoles (mainly the PS3 and Xbox 360) will be able to produce frighteningly large numbers of polygons at any given moment (the PS3 is supporting dual 1080p!) but that doens't necessarily mean the games will look any better.
Personally, I'd like to see more along the lines of an 80% focus on Software. That and more gameplay and less graphics.
The only problem is that if the GPU has to use the same bus as the CPU in which case they'll have to compete with each other, potentially leading to bottlenecks and/or messy bus arbitration. Hopefully Microsoft will give the GPU direct access to the memory.
Performance-wise, it wouldn't be quite as good as having built-in memory on the GPU, but it will be a lot cheaper and have access to a lot of memory since the Xbox 360 is supposed to have 512 Mb of RAM.
Kind of funny how both ATI and Nvidea are pushed more by console graphics developement now days than anything else. At least something is fueling better technologies.
The numbers might be skewed because a lot of Asian MMO gamers play online in cyber-cafes or something similar. I guess you could still count the number of accounts that are created, but what about the people who create and account, play for an hour and then never come back. If the internet cafe is the one being billed per hour of play time, that account will stick around forever. This makes it a little more difficult to accurately guage the number of actual subscribers.
I've never played either Lineage, but I'm going to guess that a lot of people in these countries are going to try WoW and a lot will probably like it and switch to playing it. The numbers will still be a little funny though.
First of all, unless the interface for doing it is really good, most people would rather use their computers. I've never used any of Microsoft's music store programs so I can't say whether or not they're worth using.
Also, because the next-gen consoles are not going to support dial-up, people who don't have access to broadband services won't be able to use the service.
Unless you'll be able to transfer the music files off your HD, the service will be completely worthless. MS has said you'll be able to view files on your PC on the Xbox through some form of connection, but I don't know if it works the other way around.
The original Xbox had a file system that a PC couldn't handle, so you can't just take the HD out and stick it in a PC. The only way to do it was to FTP to your Xbox. I'm not sure if this required modding it or not.
Additionally, with a 20 GB HD, an Xbox 360 would be a slightly more expensive, larger, and significantly less portable iPod or MP3 player. Unless they can offer a subscription service for an Xbox that's really cheap to justify possibly not being able to move the songs elsewhere (can you even burn CDs?) I don't forsee anyone buying it.
The article isn't too clear on exactly how the Xbox 360 will play into the online music business, but I can't see too many practical fits for it. Sure you could download music onto it, but why not just download it on your computer and transfer it to the Xbox, or buy a CD and copy it to the HD? Using a gaming console for music is really stretching it.
If they just showed everyone a nude shot of her at school/work so everyone could get it out of their system, most of this problem would go away.
I'm not positive, but quite sure it's Will of the Forsaken.
Isn't it great to hear someone complain about something when they really don't know what they're talking about. Basically, the thread devolves to another paladins suck, nerf shaman message. Why not leave other classes alone and fix the broken ones? No sense in dragging the working classes down to the crap level.
The major console makers and game studies should jointly create a studio, or an offshoot of one of the major ones that currently exists that will be responsible for making all game movies. This way the game companies will have a lot more decision making process and control over the content of the movies. Although something like this will never happen, it would prevent any chance of Halo being turned into a romantic comedy by some movie company who's bigwigs wouldn't know their ass from an Xbox.
In the cases where the blogger is a hardcore fanatic of something (Linux, Democrat, Christian, etc.) there will likely always be a few people who will take this persons word, regardless of how ridiculous it is. Since these people would hold this belief anyway and are merely reading the blog for reinforcement of their ideas, it doesn't hurt anyone.
The simple fact is, that bloggers who want to serve as reporters to a wide audience, will try to report the news as truthfully and with as little bias as possible. If a company were to make a good product and then switch to making a worthless one, would people continue to buy from said company? Eventually the problem corrects itself.
In the end, there's no need for censorship, only good, common-sense from the readers.
What the hell is still in Longhorn?
I'll admit that the statement is a little over-reaching, but you must admit that OSX is more secure than Windows. Granted a lot of this stems from no having a huge market to go after, but it seems they built with some security in mind rather than a "let's get this out the door and fix later" mentality that Windows has used for the past several incarnations.
Further proof that you don't need photorealistic graphics to make a good game that people will use.
Microsoft always wants to rush everything and only ends up with a crappy product in the end. I hope whatever company decides to make the film takes their time and makes it worth seeing.
In unrelated news, I bet that if the said company does take their time and gets it out in 2007, it will still potentially beat a Microsoft Longhorn launch date.
Maybe it'll help make ALL those products better by introducing a new interface idea or unique type of filter.
Or maybe they'll just copy any inovative feature that the competition has come up with, even if it breaks patent laws. Then they'll bundle it with Windows, which means over 90% of the computer users on the planet will be able to use, for free so that no one has to buy the other program, even though the Windows version probably isn't anywhere near as good. The other company might sue, but will just probably be bought off by MS, and eventually wither and die anyhow. Then there will be absolutely no incentive for MS to make the product better since there's no competition. The end result is that over 90% of the computer users get stuck with a sub-par product with no alternative.
FAIR competition is something that everyone can handle, but since when has Microsoft ever made the effort to do things even remotely fair?
The other big difference is that Apple makes most of the money from selling iPods, and not the music. Microsoft doesn't make portable music players so at best they'll scrape in a few cents every now and again from music sales. Once you take out the cost to design, promote, and implament their music store, you almost wonder how much of a loss they're going to take. I'm sure that they must realize this, but are willing to do it anyway just so they can get in to the market.
Would anyone like to takes bets as to which online music store will be bundled with Windows? Microsoft is banking on the fact that a large number of windows users will be to ignorant of their other options to get any other service besides Microsoft's.
This is just a repeat of the internet browser wars. Eventually, Netscape lost out because Explorer came with Windows and was free. At the time Explorer was a pretty good browser, but look at what it's become today.
Why don't they just stay out of a business that they have no real business being involved in?
Nintendo may not look like the most technologically advanced, but at least they're looking like that most mature at the moment. I'm sure they'll eventually come out the door guns blazing.
Sorry :P
So much for, "It's only a game."
The Xbox 360 may not have been running, but it was the closest thing to running. Apparently, the graphics card for the PS3 isn't even done yet, so anything other than the prerendered stuff they showed us is an impossibility. In an sense, they were as absent from the event as Nintendo, but chose to try and fool everyone by making it appear as if they actually had something. I also recall Sony saying that the footage they showed was not prerendered (a lie) and there was some controversy over it.
Because the other two consoles weren't even there, I don't see how you couldn't give it to the Xbox 360 even if you felt it was undeserving.
If advertisements in games are used appropriately, then I really won't care. If you're going to put a billboard in a game by a road because it's realistic, you might as well put an add on there. To a certain extent it makes a game seem more realistic. Just look at games like Gran Turismo, where there are logos of actual manufacturers plastered all over.
If you start plastering them on loading screens it might get a little annoying though. That's one example of where it's inappropriate to place an ad.
Crunch mode apparently happens because game developers and others in the industry are screwing around on the clock instead of coding ;)
I'd like to believe you about all of the wonderful things you'll be giving us, but after Fable (possibly the most overhyped game I've ever played) I just can't trust you. What you promise today just might not be there tomorrow.
Microsoft has largely been playing catchup throughout its entire existance. Before there was ever Windows, there was Apple's OS. Before there was IE, Netscape was king of the browser world. Spam Blocking and Security? Been around for a long time before Microsoft built it in to their products. Almost everywhere you look, Microsoft is trying to make up lost ground. Almost any inovation in computing has been "borrowed" by Microsoft, not created.
Microsoft made a good product that caught on like wildfire and made computers more accessible to people who weren't able to understand the complexities of computers. Because they have such a large customer base, they can get away with releasing inferior products when it's the only product available.
I don't mean to sound like I'm trying to start a flame war, but when Microsoft finally gets their product right, and the competition has been doing it for a year or more, it gets under my skin a little bit. Why not just get it right from the start or at least fix more along the way.
This is the problem with Microsoft. They're capable of making a good product when they want to, but they throw their weight around and make it the only product on the market. After this, what incentive do they have to continue to make their product better or keep it up to date? IE hadn't changed forever and didn't look like it ever would until people started using Firefox.
I don't mind MS trying to make a product for every single aspect of the computer world (and occasionally beyond) but when they use their huge bank account and the huge Windows customer base to become monopolistic and the only product out there, it really hurts the consumers more than anyone else in the end.