Some people think I'm being suspicious and shouldn't comment on this thread, but I don't need
pep pills to be suspicious. If I wanna comment on it, I'll comment on it. Who's gonna stop me? You, Pep Pill Boy? Pep boys, pills, Beverly Sills, oh boy ah boy. Uh oh-uh oh...
Man, you come a little late to a new slashdot article and everyone's already made the same crappy 640kB and world market for 5 computers jokes you wanted to make...
I need some new material.
I do agree that it's very convenient for Intel that the market doesn't need a product they won't/can't produce.
I'm sure that's what they're saying internally, too. "Hey Harry, stop working on that 8-core processor. Turns out the market doesn't need it!"
... due to a significant increase in cornering speeds in F1 this season, the sport's Technical Working Group will be consulted regarding possible measures to slow the cars down.
Sounds like they're taking the right step in that direction by moving to Microsoft software.
I would argue that gmail is pretty successful. It's forced Yahoo, Hotmail to offer much larger mailboxes to keep their clients.
Heck, even my local ISP, after 15 years of a 10MB mailbox (with a float to 15MB) suddenly offer 200MB on all 5 email addresses their service lets you use.
In addition, every user of Hotmail or Yahoo that I've brought over to gmail hasn't looked back. They all love it.
From my blog entry this morning... saves me retyping it all in.
So the CBC has this story, about a recent poll of Americans which found that 73 per cent of them prefer watching movies at home, whether through DVD, VHS or pay-per-view, rather than in the theatre.
I'm sure Hollywood will get in a panic about this, and the MPAA will claim that piracy is to blame, even though only 5 per cent of those polled said they had downloaded a film.
My response to Hollywood is: can you blame people?
You're paying about $10 to go to the movies these days, just for admission (and even that's likely to get worse in Canada, when you read this about Cineplex Odeon buying Famous Players) to watch the latest crapstravaganza featuring the current flavour of the month actor who can't act their way out of a paper bag. The main character has some token development, and is surrounded by wooden characters brought to dubious life by bit actors. When will Hollywood realise the importance of casting for the small roles? Most of the Hollywood movies I've really enjoyed are the ones that people all of the roles, large or small, with quality character actors. Look at Shawshank Redemption, or even Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, which didn't win any actors any awards, but were riddled with people who know how to act. And that makes it so much more convincing versus say, garbage like The Fast and the Furious.
So people end up staying home--why get the car out, haul the family down to the theatre, spend $40 on admission and $30 on popcorn and drinks for a feature you're pretty sure, based on track record, is going to be disappointing? Much easier to stay at home and spend a few bucks renting the DVD or watching the pay-per-view.
But appallingly bad films are not the only reason people are staying at home. Look at the difference in the viewing experience.
At the theatre, I'm stuck in a seat that allows limited shifting of body position, the floor is sticky, people beside me talk to each other about other things throughout the movie, the guy behind me is busy explaining the film to his girlfriend (or worse yet, summarising the plot of Episodes I, II, IV, V and VI of Star Wars at the same time as watching and trying to explain RotS), I'm nowhere near the center of the screen because I no longer have the inclination or energy to line up first or barge past everyone else when they open the doors to get a good seat, the picture is grainy, often out of focus, and the sound is turned up so high and the sound system so poor that high-frequency noises like R2D2's beeps, are actively painful...
Contrast that with, say, watching a DVD at home. I get the seat I want (though I can move during the film if I want, as well). I can put my feet up. My seat is right in the center of the screen. I can have the amount of ambient light I want. I can get up and go to the bathroom without missing the only meaningful line of dialogue in the film, the popcorn is cheaper and tastes better, the picture looks great. And as for the sound system (audiophile geekout coming up, you have been warned)...
I have extreme control over the volume. I can boost the center channel volume so as to hear dialogue perfectly, while keeping the rest of the speakers lower. I've got an Arcam AVR100 amp driving the rear speakers, center channel and subwoofer, and a Musical FidelityA300 dual mono amplifier driving some Monitor AudioSilver 8 speakers on the front, and the whole experience is way better than what you get
Slashdot Mirror
"Okay I admit it. We ate them all up. They tasted so good, we thought eating a few couldn't hurt. But then we couldn't stop!"
Some people think I'm being suspicious and shouldn't comment on this thread, but I don't need pep pills to be suspicious. If I wanna comment on it, I'll comment on it. Who's gonna stop me? You, Pep Pill Boy? Pep boys, pills, Beverly Sills, oh boy ah boy. Uh oh-uh oh...
Uh oh. I gotta stop taking those pills...
I think you mean another 5 years late.
And I thought I was the only one.
I don't like this at all.
You IAU bastards! Now, My Very Educated Mother no longer Just Sat Under Napoleon's Picture. Now, My Very Educated Mother Just Sat Under Napoleon.
You guys are sick. Leave my mother out of this.
Heh. I guess a better statement would have been "How", not "Where"... but Pestie's got us all sorted out there anyway...
You know, I wonder how many of his readers have really shouted "OMFGz0rWTF!?!?"... I mean, how do you even say that? Where do you even start?
Man, you come a little late to a new slashdot article and everyone's already made the same crappy 640kB and world market for 5 computers jokes you wanted to make...
I need some new material.
I do agree that it's very convenient for Intel that the market doesn't need a product they won't/can't produce.
I'm sure that's what they're saying internally, too. "Hey Harry, stop working on that 8-core processor. Turns out the market doesn't need it!"
Sounds like they're taking the right step in that direction by moving to Microsoft software.
I would argue that gmail is pretty successful. It's forced Yahoo, Hotmail to offer much larger mailboxes to keep their clients.
Heck, even my local ISP, after 15 years of a 10MB mailbox (with a float to 15MB) suddenly offer 200MB on all 5 email addresses their service lets you use.
In addition, every user of Hotmail or Yahoo that I've brought over to gmail hasn't looked back. They all love it.
I call that a winner.
Yes, you're right.
After all, they're ASS-teroids.
Making the other obvious joke about the original poster fully expecting trojans in the region of Uranus is left as an exercise.
I don't say evasion, I say avoision.
"This trojan has been brought to you by...
Sony.
When your files are too important to be seen by anyone.
Just $sys$ it."
I wonder why they decided against it.
Was there a chance the track could bend?
From my blog entry this morning... saves me retyping it all in.
So the CBC has this story, about a recent poll of Americans which found that 73 per cent of them prefer watching movies at home, whether through DVD, VHS or pay-per-view, rather than in the theatre.
I'm sure Hollywood will get in a panic about this, and the MPAA will claim that piracy is to blame, even though only 5 per cent of those polled said they had downloaded a film.
My response to Hollywood is: can you blame people?
You're paying about $10 to go to the movies these days, just for admission (and even that's likely to get worse in Canada, when you read this about Cineplex Odeon buying Famous Players) to watch the latest crapstravaganza featuring the current flavour of the month actor who can't act their way out of a paper bag. The main character has some token development, and is surrounded by wooden characters brought to dubious life by bit actors. When will Hollywood realise the importance of casting for the small roles? Most of the Hollywood movies I've really enjoyed are the ones that people all of the roles, large or small, with quality character actors. Look at Shawshank Redemption, or even Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, which didn't win any actors any awards, but were riddled with people who know how to act. And that makes it so much more convincing versus say, garbage like The Fast and the Furious.
So people end up staying home--why get the car out, haul the family down to the theatre, spend $40 on admission and $30 on popcorn and drinks for a feature you're pretty sure, based on track record, is going to be disappointing? Much easier to stay at home and spend a few bucks renting the DVD or watching the pay-per-view.
But appallingly bad films are not the only reason people are staying at home. Look at the difference in the viewing experience.
At the theatre, I'm stuck in a seat that allows limited shifting of body position, the floor is sticky, people beside me talk to each other about other things throughout the movie, the guy behind me is busy explaining the film to his girlfriend (or worse yet, summarising the plot of Episodes I, II, IV, V and VI of Star Wars at the same time as watching and trying to explain RotS), I'm nowhere near the center of the screen because I no longer have the inclination or energy to line up first or barge past everyone else when they open the doors to get a good seat, the picture is grainy, often out of focus, and the sound is turned up so high and the sound system so poor that high-frequency noises like R2D2's beeps, are actively painful...
Contrast that with, say, watching a DVD at home. I get the seat I want (though I can move during the film if I want, as well). I can put my feet up. My seat is right in the center of the screen. I can have the amount of ambient light I want. I can get up and go to the bathroom without missing the only meaningful line of dialogue in the film, the popcorn is cheaper and tastes better, the picture looks great. And as for the sound system (audiophile geekout coming up, you have been warned)...
I have extreme control over the volume. I can boost the center channel volume so as to hear dialogue perfectly, while keeping the rest of the speakers lower. I've got an Arcam AVR100 amp driving the rear speakers, center channel and subwoofer, and a Musical Fidelity A300 dual mono amplifier driving some Monitor Audio Silver 8 speakers on the front, and the whole experience is way better than what you get