Yes, we know Carmack from years ago when he actually was interesting. However, like his games, he has become trite and boring, unworthy of further discussion.
Perhaps when he makes an interesting game again he can be put on a list, but not one moment before.
I think DVD is alive and well, and will continue to be for a few more years at least.
Even with HD-DVD or Blu-ray looming around the corner, the bottom line is that DVD media will be supported on these newer devices.
If your talking about the end of using physical media for distributing movies, then I think your are a long way off. Hollywood is not really embracing online digital media, whether its for music or movies. Too many competing standards are vying to be the dominant online media format, Apple's quicktime, Microsoft's WMV, DIVX, XVID, etc, etc, etc. None of these players are going to want to give up their proprietary format to create a single industry standard, at least not with regards to Microsoft and Apple. Having too many file formats being distributed over the net will just be annoying. Having to buy or install multiple products to get a chance to watch a Hollywood movie will cause consumers to protest.
Also, I have yet to see a truely decent mergin of the PC in the living room. Most are still klunky hacks that try and force a PC into a home theater component, complete with boxy case, noisy fans, and cumbersome operation. DVD's are popular because of the easy of use, slip a disk in a try and hit play. Until computers match that in terms of simplicity, using a PC to playback movies won't become popular.
So what are these people talking about, other then making some grandiose statement to attract attention? Physical distribution of movies may change, but its still digital media, whether its in the form of a DVD, or someone comes up with a square holographic cube, any new digital player will support the previous generation of media, there is no reason for DVD to die to become obsolete.
DVD will be dead when Hollywood stops fighting online distribution of copyrighted content, Apple and Microsoft embrace the same file format, and someone finds a way of turning the computer into a dirt simple consumer electronics component. As you can see, it ain't going to happen anytime soon.
If all you need to do to appeal to the Japanese consumer is throw some teriyaki on it and fry some shrimp. I think McDonald's is a little patronizing or stereotypical to offer those choices on the menu.
But true, Microsoft has failed again to wow the Japanese market which continues the entire lackluster roll out of the Xbox360. They aren't wowing North American audiences with their overheating and locking up problems either.
The question is, why is this Microsoft's fault? Where are the Japanese game developers and why aren't they developing more Japan specific titles? Microsoft is releasing the hardware, they have offered an Xbox360 development kit for over a year now, so why can't the dedicated game houses in Japan pick up the ball and start making the Xbox360 an attractive game console for their own markets? Do they have to wait for Microsoft to ask them to make a game?
Anyways, I think Xbox360 failures is just because MS rushed it out the door. Both Quality Control and title support were lacking in all markets, MS could have waited for a few more months for more RPG's to hit the market and they really should have beta tested the platform better. But I mean, MS isn't the only software vendor for the Xbox platform, so the lack of interest in Japan isn't entirely all their fault.
Will the graphics be improved, or similar from the PC or PS2 versions? Again, give me a reason to get the Xbox360, not just offer ports of existing games on existing platforms.
Second, hasn't the fire under FFXI kind of fizzled out? Is there still much demand for this online RPG or are the only people playing it diehards that can't let go? From what I could tell, FFXI kind of failed for the PS2, considering how many returned openned HDD and FFXI game bundles you could pick up at a discounted price for months after its launch at most big box stores.
Anyways, as other recent online articles are suggesting, next gen console games seem to be sequels and ports of existing games rather then true original content. I will wait about a year until they stop porting old games over to the Xbox360 and come out with more original game concepts.
A Steve Jobs keynote is filled with self serving arrogance. I love Apple products, but can't stand Steve Jobs. His back slapping, self gratifying view of Apple's role in the computer industry as a whole is so laughable considering just how much Steve Job's ignores market trends and consumer needs.
Like in a recent keynote address, he disses Microsoft's Media Center PC remote control because it has 40+ buttons compared to Apple's new media remote that has 6. But what he fails to realize is the Microsoft's Media Center is actually designed to be a Home Theater component, allowing users to view and record television, payback DVD's and video, access media libraries, as well as general naviation of an OS environment.
Apple's solution to the emerging trend of home theater PC integration is a basic application which simply puts big fancy icons on Apple's iLife studio apps like iTunes, iPhoto and iDVD and allows the user a few control features like play, pause, fast forward and reverse, and volume controls. There is NO PVR capabilities, and few Apple products even support 5.1 surround sound or digital music connectivity to a home theater system.
Steve Jobs says that PC and home theater integration is a fad that won't last. So why even bother coming out with a half assed product that claims to do everything Windows Media Center does, only slicker, or so Steve Jobs says.
Its a fad until Steve Jobs says it isn't, a lot like portable video devices which he said were impractical for the average user. Until Steve Jobs added video support to the iPod. Now its the cat's meow.
From the one button mice to any real competition in the PC hardware market (face it, consumers don't want fancy overpriced and overdesigned Apple products, they are happy with low priced beige boxes), I think Apple would be better off without Steve Jobs and his ego and arrogance.
Where Steve Jobs is constantly failing is making Apple a real competitor to gain more then 5% of the computer market. For all his grandstanding and hype around Apple products and ESPECIALLY around OSX, I have yet to see Apple really want to gain more marketshare in the computer hardware market. They continuously sell overpriced hardware, even when the hardware significantly underperforms compared to PC products, its still overpriced. They insist on cutesly all-in-one products instead of more robust modulare components with a wide selection of available hardware and features. When Apple finally came out with a sub $1000 computer, it is so feature lacking and crippled that few PC users were ever convinced that the Mac Mini is a good alternative to a $600 PC. Apple's notebook division has been on vacation for the last 3 years. Apple has been selling only a few million computers a quarter, compared to dozens of millions by Dell, HP, an others. The average Asian OEM PC maker sells more computers then Apple. OBVIOUSLY these companies know what consumers want. Apple ( or rather, Steve Jobs ) does not. Apple firmly wants to remain in a niche market, or at least, Steve Jobs does.
It will be interesting to see how Steve Jobs screws up MacTels, new Intel based Macs, and he will screw up royally. I am sure his FIRST mistake will be to overprice computers which can be directly compared to against' PCs. The first Mactel to hit the market can have the same benchmarks running on it and direct comparisions to Dell, HP, and other PC computers. For the first time in history, a Mac is 99% identical to a PC except for the BIOS and a few hardware/software tweaks. Where Apple used to claim better performance becasue of RISC based architecture (and thus no real comparisons could be justified), now they must contend to offer a computer that has the same components as in the Wintel world. Steve Job's WILL make the mistake of overpricing Mactels, charging customers more for a Mac branded "PC" that contains the same components as a much cheaper PC which performs exactly the same. Dell and HP will be quick to clone Apple's style of Mactels, putting
I guess its just living in Canada, which sometimes sits in the stoneage when it comes to certain technology. TIVO has never been available up here, only what the monopolies Rogers (Cable) and Bell(Phone/Satellite) see fit to offer us Canucks.
While Rogers PVR features 2 input recording and is mostly a decent device (the Acientific Atlanta Explorer 8300), I really wish for more competition in the PVR/Digital Cable box market, allowing me to select more robust solutions like DVD/HDD recorders with support for digital cable and HDTV content.
Sony was, I believe, the first to offer CableCard support in their televisions, but I think that Rogers or Bell are so far way from releasing their tight grip of control of digital cable that Canada won't see a cable card solution for at least another decade. In the meantime, some dumb Canadian is paying $1000 more for a Sony TV with a feature they will never use. We are still waiting for even a TIVO like solution where we can subscribe to a third party service for cable recording.
I hope this new Tivo product is hugely successful in the US (as I am sure it will be). Given how much US technology and television market influences Canadians, perhaps if the CRTC (Central Repression of Technology for Canadians) starts getting more complaints about the anti-competitive behaviour of Rogers and Bell and the fact TIVO has never gotten a foothold in Canada, I am sure huge success of a CableCard supported device like this new TIVO will drive Canada to adopt the technology and open up the market sooner rather then later.
In the meantime, after paing $400 for a featurless Rogers PVR and $5/mth to support PVR capabilities on the device, I guess I have to be a good Canadian and ignore my repression and apologize for my bitching.
I am big on ergonomic design because when programming for a living, I don't want a lousy keyboard or mouse combo to cause me pain and misery.
Most notebook mice comprimise on ergonomics for style, and I can see this one having this problem. If your debating if this mouse will work well for you, take a box of cards and rest your hand on it and move it around for a few hours. I think most people's issues from using mice is that they grip them too hard or pound on the buttons, perhaps a slim design like this one will get people used to the idea of simply resting their hand on a mouse and tapping the buttons rather then putting the mouse in a death grip.
I guess for short stints this product would work well and its nice to finally find a use for that PC Slot. Anything is better then those touch pads or track sticks in the long run.
I mean, from corporate logos to game logos, do we really care about them?
Graphic design in itself is useful for helping to differentiate products from one another, good box art will make the eyes drift to your game rather then a slew of similar games sitting on the shelf, but are we fixated on which game has a better logo?
I mean, if I bought Quake 4 because it had that highly noticable logo, wouldn't I still be dissapointed in the lack of innovation and originality in that franchise? Same goes for the Doom3 game.
Logos really only affect children and teens as they strive to be like everyone else, wearing name-brand jeans and Nike shirts with the checkmark because they seem to think these products are necessary and improve their social status. In reality, I am happy buying a pair of $20 off band jeans from Walmart instead of the Tommy Hillfiger's for $80 at some downtown boutique. When you compare them, they are the same thing, same stitching and materials with only a few subtle differences not including the logo.
Most games focused on logos are the same, largely similar with nothing really making them stand out except some box art the publisher probably spent more time and money on then the game itself. Put Civ 4 in a paper bag and I would have still rushed out and buy it, same with HL2 (which I actually didn't buy a physical copy of, just ordered it online through Steam). If the game is good, people will ask for it by name. Put it in a paper bag and save yourself some money rather then spending millions for some "designer logo artwork". Save logos for those losers paying 400% markup for a name-brand of clothing that comes out of the same Chinese factory as the $20 no-name brand.
Charging someone with a fine they could never pay is kind of missing the point, ain't it?
I mean, in the US anyways, a person simply declares bankruptcy, which lasts 7 years and then they can go back to applying for credit cards and such without reprocusions as if nothing ever happened.
If a US citizen goes bankrupt, just move to Canada and open a line of credit. I know of one person that did just that and wrote off $50,000 in university debt.
The legal system is rediculous as it is without awarding fantasy amounts of money to people that can't claim or prove they have come anywhere near that amount in damages or losses. This ISP is actually out 11 billion dollars?
Also, the guy can't go near a computer for 3 years? Does that penalty actually work or can even be enforced? Short of throwing the guy in solitary confinement, there is no way someone that unscrupulous is going to not touch a computer for 3 years. Why not just setup a consulting firm teaching other people how to spam, you don't have to touch the computer to be a public menace.
If the US isn't serious about spam protection, then stop joking around and either get serious or get over it.
When will people realize if your not one of the big three, your not going to succeed in the gaming industry. Especially if you design highly gimmicky devices that don't support on the of the big three companies games.
A 30inch LCD? I haven't found one yet that costs under $1200 CDN, so I can't imaging how a gaming device that adds touch sensitivity to an expensive LCD TV is going to be a success.
It would be different if this was an accessory to an Microsoft, Nintendo, or Sony game console, but even then, who would buy a $1200 TV to replace their current TV for a few novelty interactive games?
Lastely, don't most parents still tell their children no to sit too closely to the TV? So is coming out with a 30 inch display where you have to sit right beside it going to be good for children?
If Matt Groening had any brains, he would avoid Fox like the plague. Same goes to other innovative show creators like Joss Whedon.
I don't know what goes on over there at Fox, but how many decent shows have been axed for no good reason and others left on inperpetuity. Are you telling me that Kind of the Hill has had better ratings then Firefly?
Fox doesn't realize the benefit of a small but loyal fan base. Even if shows like Firefly or Futurama only have a few million viewers, they are usually viewers that tune in faithfuly every week. With that kind of dedicated fan base, you can focus more targetted advertising to a generally similar group of viewers. This opposed to a shows like American Idol that, while having 20+ million viewers, are so varied and wishy washy (only watching the show until their favourite contestant is axed) that you can't find any common advertising ground to target the viewers. In the end, you can actually get more money for advertising slots for cult shows like X-Files, Buffy, and Futurama because advertisers know there is are at least a few million Geeks faithfully watching every week that probably would want to buy some electronic underwear with PDA capabilities.
But Fox, in general, has been abysmal in terms of promoting innovative programming and instead dumping tired cliche sitcoms (at a time when sitcoms are dropping faster then flies on crap) and keeping long running and tiresome franchises like the Simpson's and King of the Hill on forever. Fox is realizing they are losing an audience, and so now have to rely on pulling up past successes in order to fill their timeslots.
But if Matt had a brain, he would can the Simpsons and bring Futurama to another network and end any relationship with Fox. Even if Futurama was reserected, Fox will probably keep it going sporadically until they find some other Malcom in the Middle, Married with Children, Simpson's, King of the Hill, American Dad, War At Home clone devoid of talent to replace it.
Quick poll. Does anybody still watch Fox these days?
The CEO of McAfee will get a slap on the wrist, if that?
Corporate execs are getting away with everything and not being held accountable for their actions. They are frauding stockholders, thats a crime, period. Yet someone with millions in assets can walk away from these issues without so much as reprimand.
From Nortel to WorldCom, Exxon, etc, these companies are being run by crooks aiming to get themselves richer at the expensive of stock holder just trying to invest in something to pay for their retirement.
In Canada, NO LEGAL ACTION has been taken against Nortel execs that drove the stock price over $100 and then allowed the stock to plunge to less then $5.00. The execs in charge simply walked away from Nortel with millions in compenstation while tens of thousands of people lost their jobs, pension, and stock holdings not to mention countless stock holders that lost their shirts investing in Nortel. Then, a few years after their stock price drop, Nortel was caught cooking the books AGAIN with no penalties!
This just proves the legal system and politics are corrupt, if you have enough money you can get away with anything, even murder, if you throw enough money into the system.
The first Mindstorms set was really more of a toy then anything, no real robotic concepts could be created except things that mimicked walking or rolling with some pre-programmed commands. There were too few motors and feedback devices. Also the programming environment was definitely aimed at kids.
Hopefully Lego will realize that adults love this kit too and perhaps even are aiming this new Mindstorms at older people with a more robust programming environment. Reading the press release they are already adding more advanced features to their servos and sensors that suggest they are gearing for a real robotic design. The inclusion of 3rd party support will also be benificial. Even if Lego somes out with robotic programming for dummies software, some other 3rd party developer may come out with an advanced set of software tools.
Also, I am hoping from the product shots that they actually have a decent pre-designed walking robot concept to put together and play with. I am not so mechanically inclined to design my own walking system, and was always frustrated with trying to create something robotic enough to work with, but by having a decent robot design come in the package then you could have fun finding ways to program it and interact with it without having to first figure out how to design it. All I could ever do with the old kit was make rolling or track based vehicles bump into things and reverse.
We have to wait until August though? Why do companies insist on release product information so early in advance. I would have bought this kit today if they announced it yesterday.
When DVD players first arrived on the market, I paid $600 for a basic featured player. Now, for under $80 you can get one with progressive scan and can play any digital file format on the market today.
I won't be fooled again into paying a premium for HD-DVD players.
First, they are essentially the same technology, simply tweaked to squeeze out more storage space and using a different wavelength of laser. This is hardly technology that required billions or even millions of R&D costs. Like the original DVD player and is close ties to CD technology, HD-DVD is just an extension, not an evolution of DVD technology. Thus, we shouldn't have to pay a huge premium for it.
When you consider that the chassis and most of the components in an HD-DVD player are going to be identical to a regular DVD player (especially the current up-conversion ones), your talking about probably $20 of unique technology that goes into every unit, this doesn't justtify a 400% - 800% markup over regular DVD players.
Second, I won't pay more for HD-DVD titles. I don't care if they required new expensive technology to be mastered, Hollywood is making huge profits on the markup for regular DVD's, some of those initial HD-DVD costs can be absorbed in their current pricing scheme. Your talking about digital data formats, HD-DVD is simply film mastered with a higher bit-rate, again hardly revolutionary or required millions in research to get accomplished. If you start to consider that many movies are filmed digitally these days, conversion from one digital format to another is a brainless activity.
Lastely, what is the difference in quality? I mean, when I compared my first DVD movie to a VHS version, the difference was astonishing. Crystal clear video and digital surround sound sold me on the DVD format. I haven't been entirely blown away by the HD revolution. HDTV quality is good, but I find I can still live with standard def digital cable on a good quality television with a good cable signal. Most HDTV sets I am seeing also are not doing HDTV justice, especially the cheap LCD panels that can't display a good color gamut regardless of their resolution quality. I'll have to wait until I actually see HD-DVD on a good quality HDTV, but I am sure it won't be as ground breaking as the original DVD format.
My reasoning for holding off on adopting HD-DVD is based on past experiences, if I wait a few years, HD-DVD players will be in the $100 range, most movies will be masterd in HD-DVD for the same price, and if Blu-Ray does make an impact, I won't feel like I lost out in another Betamax-VHS or LaserDisc-DVD war.
No games deserve a sequel, this is the number one problem in the gaming industry today.
So many clones of existing franchises along with endless tired sequels is driving people away from games.
Look at Doom3 and Quack4, too highly anticipated sequels that went nowhere. They were simply regurgitations of tired concepts with fancy graphics.
Why I do believe there are game concepts that warrant revisits, Diablo's style of gameplay comes to mind, this does not mean we need Diablo 3. Why not create a new story with some new innovative features in a new game. Rather then working 4 years to create a Diablo clone that only offers better graphics, come out with new stories using the same engine with novel twists on the concept. I would much rather buy 4 games that are in the style of Diablo 2 that all offer original plots rather then waiting 4 years for a sequel of Diablo 3.
In all honestly, why can't the entertainment industry get it in their head that sequels kill a franchise, especially when NO effort is made to keep them fresh and original. I am sure XMEN 3 will do well this year, but only because they are banking on repeats by past fans, I am also very sure that XMEN 3 will have vapid and underwhelming story line with lots of duplicated scenes and action. I can't wait for the slew of franchise games based on XMEN 3 this year, we all know that games based on movies do well.
Not all sequels are bad, Civ 4 was hottly received, but this is more because new technology allows for richer and more intelligent gameplay while tweaking a game engine to make it more streamlined and entertaining. Civ 4 is simply not a regurgitation of Civ3 with better graphics as are most 3rd person shooters and RPG's.
If you don't have something new to say, then don't say it, same goes for movies and video games. Can't offer anything new and innovative, the simply leave it be. I for one would wish that the game industry be forced to implement money back guarantees, where you are fully reimbursed for the money they attempted to rip off you with another tired sequel.
I think the simple solution is to employ some form of litmus test when a person applies for a patent.
The test I would suggest is as follows:
"If the innovation in question can be duplicated by an individual, or a group of individuals with limited time, resources, and money, then the innovation in question cannot be patented. Period!" If I can create the same technology in my garage over the weekend, there is no reason why I should have to pay royalties or licensing to implement the technology.
Patents should apply to technology that requires years of research and/or lots of money and/or lots of people to develop (i.e. when there is definite financial risk to a company doing the R&D but unable to recover if the patent isn't awarded). I simply can't understand how a patent for putting a hyperlink in a web page or a special button on a device has the same legal standing as developing a hybrid car engine or a new innovative propulsion system that will take us out of the solar system, i.e. REAL INNOVATION!
Another aspect of the patent litmus test is to question whether the patent is ACTUALLY a unique innovation, or whether countless other people have the same idea and simply don't have the resources or time to go through the patent process. What right does someone with a high priced team of shysters have over winning a patent over a thousand other shmoes that wake up one day with the same idea but without the resources to make the patent happen. These days, patents are nothing more then a race to see who among hundreds or even thousands can cut through the red tape quickly enough.
Also, why not insist that if the innovation has merit to benefit mankind, then the patent will only be awarded if it becomes public domain. I.e. a process to create medicine to save the world from AIDS or Cancer cannot be licensed or impose royalties on to those companies willing to make the product a reality. This will separate those looking to profit from the suffering of mankind to those people looking only to make a quick buck squating on some new web idea.
Finally, a patent should only be awarded to a company or individual willing to make the innovation a reality. There are lots of companies being established that simply buy ideas off of the average joe or create think tanks and finance the patent into existence without EVER desiring to actual create the innovation or product in question. They instead rely on greedy licensing fees, or sit on the patent waiting for that fateful time when some other company actually creates a product that patent might infringe on, even if it has nothing to do with the original patent purpose, and sue the pants off that company.
In all honesty, the whole patent process is out to lunch, allowing of millions of meaningless and trifling ideas to become legally binding innovations when they can either be easily duplicated or are thought up by thousands of other people.
Someone should patent the patent process, this will end this stupid industry once and for all.
From Xbox360 fiascos to this, either people are just ganging up on MS or there is some serious problems with their XBox division. Didn't they recently reorganize their company? Hopefully this new organization will help to improve overal quality of the Xbox platform as I am loosing faith MS has any real control over the quality of their products or services.
Wait a minute, MS has no quality control over any product or service! So why is this news?
I mean, we are in serious need of a NEW OS, something not derived from 20+ year old technology.
Both NT and Linux and OSX streams are all based on last century technology using ancient file systems and trying to do modern techniquies like Database driven file systems and online Internet access.
For a Modern OS, I propose that Google start fresh, from the ground up, using these concepts:
1) TRUE meta driven DB file system. Append to the front or back of every file meta data and index meta data in a true DB file system. Tiger isn't there yet, Tiger simply endlessly indexes files in a half assed attempt to seem like a modern OS. WinFS might be closer, whenever MS figures out how to do it.
2) Flat file system, throw out folders and directories structures. There is no need to atrificailly distribute files across archaic tree structures if your using a true DB file system. All files could be accessed using database views (i.e. show me all pictures taken in 2005, or show me all letters written to Jane, or all music by Ween). You can actually imitate folder trees by putting a path meta tag in the file header, but there is no need to physically address files in tree structures. Instead, worry about putting frequently accessed files in faster parts of the hard drive.
3) Make a distinction between USER data and SYSTEM data. Who needs to be aware of 100,000+ files on your OS? 99% of all the files on your Windows or *nix OS are completely meaningless to you. A Modern OS should make a distinction between System data and User data. System data is ALL files that YOU didn't create, save to, or distribute from your computer, and these system files should not be indexed or maintained by a DB file system. System files can remain in a protected bubble on your hard drive and accessed by developer tools. Instead, index only those image, video, music and document files the user actually cares about and hide the rest. I don't want to see 100,000+ files on my computer anymore. Kind of like what Google Destop does, but being more aware of the difference between System and User files.
4) END FILE EXTENSIONS. REAL OSES don't need a.jpg to know its a jpeg file! META DATA PEOPLE!
5) Wrap Applications in ONE OBJECT. Apple had it, but lost it moving to OSX. The idea that ALL files associated with an Application remain in ONE OBJECT. Do not allow Applications to spread themselves across a hard drive, installing parts to a variety of locations and modifying other files (sorry, OSX does this, putting files and configuration settings in multiple locations, and then FORGETTING about them). A Modern OS will figure out how to protect an Application as an Object without allowing it to be distributed illegally, something Apple never figured out how to do. To install an Application, drag it to the partition, to uninstall it, delete it, period. Once an Application is uninstalled, the OS and computer should look like the Application never existed, period. NO ORPHANED APPLICATION DATA.
6) Make internet connectivity a requirement. A modern OS shouldn't operate without internet connectivity. By constantly keeping up-to-date on security issues, and also allowing for proper online authentification of applications and media, a modern OS would allow for a new generation of online media distribution that isn't prone to piracy (i.e. the music and movie industries actually embracing online distribution). Building an OS around the internet should also make is the most secure and safe environment. Rather then the constant forcing of old, pre-internet operating systems to modern day online needs and introducing security flaws, start fresh.
If anyone has the resources to actually make a successful new OS, it would be Google. By taking their web indexing techniques and creating a new File system with these concepts in mind, a Google OS will make accessing data effortless and fast.
Just, please don't get into that trend and habit of using Linux as a base. NO LINUX
With regards to MSN music, this isn't a design flaw of MS, its a design flaw of the RIAA.
ANY new music distribution system, even that mirroring avialable Internet services, must be approved by the RIAA. Even though the Xbox Live service uses the Internet as a backbone, the RIAA considers it a different medium for music distribution, and so must agonize over whether the Xbox360 has appropriate DRM protection and cannot be used as a platform to pirate music. The bottom line is, there is probably some pending approval for the idea of selling/subscribing to music on the Xbox360 stuck on some RIAA desk.
Like the PSP and its obvious lack of online music integration, to believe that it is simple to establish a new market for online music sales suggests a total lack of understanding of the process of getting approval by the RIAA. Is MS had to wait for RIAA approval before integrating online music sales in the Xbox360, then we may have seen Windows Vista 2 long before the Xbox360.
Apple fought tooth and nail to get their iTMS established, and in other markets around the world, the process for getting approval by the appropriate local music cartel is slow, painful, and full of ignorance it isn't even funny. Even with the well established and successful iTMS in the US, it took Canada 2 years to get into the game, and some places like Australia and Japan are still pending or have just been approved. Every other legit online music service has had to jump through hoops to prove that their service will not be used as a sorce of piracy.
I doubt MS ignored the potential for the Xbox360 to be used as a retail marketplace for music and video, they did bank on the Live to have improved services for game sales. If it was entirely up to MS, they would have integrated MSN Music directly in the XBox360 at launch. Just as I would assume that Sony would have integrated a Sony based music store for their PSP product.
This is yet another example of how far behind the times the music industry is, how anal and overprotective they are of their copyrights and the fact they are stagnating the music industry by stonewalling any new innovative services or markets for online music sales.
To be firing objects back at earth? I don't care about them sending them out to space or landing on other planets, but I feel like I have a target on my back when they start returning them back to earth at such velocities.
I mean, subscribe to MSDN or log into Microsoft's Knowledge base. It's all there. Maybe not spelled out phonetically as the technology challenged EU seems to imply is necessary when trying to understand technology.
If I was MS, I would tell them to go screw themselves. Does Apple provide full disclosure of how to interoperate with their servers? I have yet to find a decent Windows tool that allows me to access Apple's HFS+ file system as easly as Apple offers NTFS access. Also, through Apple I can more easily connect to a Windows machine then I can from Windows to an Apple computer. Seems to me that at least Apple has figured out how to interface with Window's networks properly.
What is left is all the Linux and Unix gurus that probably are more intimately familiar with Windows networking then even Windows software developers. They are, after all, mimicking everying Microsoft does in an effort to make the Linux platform user friendly.
Lastly, consdering that 90%+ of the machines out there are running Windows, why should MS bend over backwards so the other 10% can more easily communicate with them.
Someone should sue the EU for being just plain idiots when it comes to their constant bias against MS. I guess MS didn't given them a big enough discount on bulk licenses for Windows, so now the EU is all bent out of shape about Windows.
What I think MS should do, simply, is pull Windows off the shelves in Europe. Lets see how quickly Europeans scream to the EU to drop their constant barage of lawsuits against MS and let them be able to choose which OS they prefer to run once again without government interference.
Finally, MS should charge EU with slander as the EU isn't targetting other platforms for the EXACT SAME issues MS is being charged with. Apple comes pre-installed with Safari, media and contact management. Linux comes installed with countless gnu sharware, whether you want them or not. Windows offers a fairly decent media player and suddenly they are the only evil company out there? Get real. If EU doesn't start applying the same restraints on Apple and Linux distros, then its fair game for MS to counter-sue for bias and prejudice.
I am sure overal game sales are slowing down because of the anticipation of next generation consoles. Why start wasting money on last year's technology when next-year's is just around the corner. Instead of wasting a few hundred on games now, save up and get that new $500 game console.
But in reality, EA is another company deluded into finding a scapegoat for loss of sales instead of pointing directly to themselves. Like Hollywood, Television, and Music, video games are becoming more boring and derivative. Even with the anticipation of new game consoles, offering impressive new graphics, are we really motivated to drop $1000 on a new system and games just for improved graphics?
Look at the PC gaming industry, one where a new video card offering impressive new graphics performance comes out every 6 months. Games like Quake 4 and Doom 3 have bombed simply because they are just current updates to old game ideas.
EA is one of those companies heavy into developing derivative franchises. All they do is make a few graphics tweaks and update the graphics engines and release the same games over and over again, especially in their Sports division. Has any new gameplay feature been added to their sports games? Last I checked, Tiger Woods Golf features a new character generation system to create a custom looking character, and you can win clothes for your character. Nice to see EA using The Sims' character engine in other games, but they have done nothing to really improve upon the golf game genre.
Like the rest of the entertainment industry, stop finding blame in the consumers for loss of sales. Start offering us stuff we want to spend money on, and you will eventually see your pockets grow with profit again.
I mean, isn't there another franchise us Geeks, Nerds, and Dweebs can obsess about that doesn't originate from a billionaire rip-off artist.
After Episode 3, I refuse to give George Lucas and all of his spinoff companies a dime after the years of wasted time hoping for and anticipating his next movies and games. The games are getting worse and derivative, much like the last 3 movies.
If we keep throwing him money, it will never change. He will keep coming out with crap because we all want to believe in the Force and hope that each new tidbit of story we can get out of him will recover our faith in it. How much dissapointment can we put up with?
Rise up and grow a pair, and end Star Wars once and for all. Don't buy SW products and stop talking about it online. Perhaps if Lucas sees how utterly unmoving his crap has become he might actually innovate again and offer us something new we can obsess about for the next 30 years.
For Windows development, Visual Studio is the only way to go, and MS now has a series of Express Editions that offer Free C++, Visual Basic, or C# development tools. Note that Express Editions do not allow you to sell or distribute your software, but as a hobbyist, they are great tools for getting back into software development without spending a dime.
I have found NO free development tools for the Windows platform that are easy to use and as well thought out as the Visual Studio product line.
For Mac development, the free XCode tools are good, however I would look into CodeWarrior because ObjectiveC, in my opinion, is an antiquated and bastardized attempt at object orientated programming, CodeWarrior offers C++ access to OSX programming API's.
I can't suggest anything for Linux, except that CodeWarrior also makes a Linux IDE. I don't recommend developing software using cheap command line text editors or gcc compilers, unless you love being counter productive and frustrated.
Google started up as this benevolent, Do No Evil company whose goals were to consolidate Internet data making it easier to search for and catalogue web sites.
Since then, they adopted a heavily utilized advertising program that is generating billions in revenu.
Since then, they initiated a program where people can buy their web site rankings.
Since then, the have progressivly increased exporsure on the internet by ripping off ideas from other web services and making their own version, undermining other benign ad-free efforts and placing Google advertising prevalent throughout their services.
Since then, hardly a website has enough balls not to pepper themseleves with Google Ads or Ad Words because of the bribes Google offers to include the feature.
Since then, Google is initiating services which have questionable legal merits, such as the recent Google Print service ignoring pleas by publishers and authors to be included in deciding if this feature violates copyright laws.
With billions in hand and ubiquitous web presence, can we safely believe that Google intends no evil? Like any company that gains power, power corrupts. Google is no different from Microsoft or any other technology company that suddenly finds themselves making money hand over fist and being adored as an industry leader. Only Google is deluded into believing they intend no evil. They are and will continue to grow and become an ad cluttered web service whoring themselves to anyone throwing them a buck, skewing search results in favour of those who throw enough money in Google's direction, supporting Google to create more rip off and malevolent services.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, we know Carmack from years ago when he actually was interesting. However, like his games, he has become trite and boring, unworthy of further discussion.
Perhaps when he makes an interesting game again he can be put on a list, but not one moment before.
I think DVD is alive and well, and will continue to be for a few more years at least.
Even with HD-DVD or Blu-ray looming around the corner, the bottom line is that DVD media will be supported on these newer devices.
If your talking about the end of using physical media for distributing movies, then I think your are a long way off. Hollywood is not really embracing online digital media, whether its for music or movies. Too many competing standards are vying to be the dominant online media format, Apple's quicktime, Microsoft's WMV, DIVX, XVID, etc, etc, etc. None of these players are going to want to give up their proprietary format to create a single industry standard, at least not with regards to Microsoft and Apple. Having too many file formats being distributed over the net will just be annoying. Having to buy or install multiple products to get a chance to watch a Hollywood movie will cause consumers to protest.
Also, I have yet to see a truely decent mergin of the PC in the living room. Most are still klunky hacks that try and force a PC into a home theater component, complete with boxy case, noisy fans, and cumbersome operation. DVD's are popular because of the easy of use, slip a disk in a try and hit play. Until computers match that in terms of simplicity, using a PC to playback movies won't become popular.
So what are these people talking about, other then making some grandiose statement to attract attention? Physical distribution of movies may change, but its still digital media, whether its in the form of a DVD, or someone comes up with a square holographic cube, any new digital player will support the previous generation of media, there is no reason for DVD to die to become obsolete.
DVD will be dead when Hollywood stops fighting online distribution of copyrighted content, Apple and Microsoft embrace the same file format, and someone finds a way of turning the computer into a dirt simple consumer electronics component. As you can see, it ain't going to happen anytime soon.
If all you need to do to appeal to the Japanese consumer is throw some teriyaki on it and fry some shrimp. I think McDonald's is a little patronizing or stereotypical to offer those choices on the menu.
But true, Microsoft has failed again to wow the Japanese market which continues the entire lackluster roll out of the Xbox360. They aren't wowing North American audiences with their overheating and locking up problems either.
The question is, why is this Microsoft's fault? Where are the Japanese game developers and why aren't they developing more Japan specific titles? Microsoft is releasing the hardware, they have offered an Xbox360 development kit for over a year now, so why can't the dedicated game houses in Japan pick up the ball and start making the Xbox360 an attractive game console for their own markets? Do they have to wait for Microsoft to ask them to make a game?
Anyways, I think Xbox360 failures is just because MS rushed it out the door. Both Quality Control and title support were lacking in all markets, MS could have waited for a few more months for more RPG's to hit the market and they really should have beta tested the platform better. But I mean, MS isn't the only software vendor for the Xbox platform, so the lack of interest in Japan isn't entirely all their fault.
Will the graphics be improved, or similar from the PC or PS2 versions? Again, give me a reason to get the Xbox360, not just offer ports of existing games on existing platforms.
Second, hasn't the fire under FFXI kind of fizzled out? Is there still much demand for this online RPG or are the only people playing it diehards that can't let go? From what I could tell, FFXI kind of failed for the PS2, considering how many returned openned HDD and FFXI game bundles you could pick up at a discounted price for months after its launch at most big box stores.
Anyways, as other recent online articles are suggesting, next gen console games seem to be sequels and ports of existing games rather then true original content. I will wait about a year until they stop porting old games over to the Xbox360 and come out with more original game concepts.
A Steve Jobs keynote is filled with self serving arrogance. I love Apple products, but can't stand Steve Jobs. His back slapping, self gratifying view of Apple's role in the computer industry as a whole is so laughable considering just how much Steve Job's ignores market trends and consumer needs.
Like in a recent keynote address, he disses Microsoft's Media Center PC remote control because it has 40+ buttons compared to Apple's new media remote that has 6. But what he fails to realize is the Microsoft's Media Center is actually designed to be a Home Theater component, allowing users to view and record television, payback DVD's and video, access media libraries, as well as general naviation of an OS environment.
Apple's solution to the emerging trend of home theater PC integration is a basic application which simply puts big fancy icons on Apple's iLife studio apps like iTunes, iPhoto and iDVD and allows the user a few control features like play, pause, fast forward and reverse, and volume controls. There is NO PVR capabilities, and few Apple products even support 5.1 surround sound or digital music connectivity to a home theater system.
Steve Jobs says that PC and home theater integration is a fad that won't last. So why even bother coming out with a half assed product that claims to do everything Windows Media Center does, only slicker, or so Steve Jobs says.
Its a fad until Steve Jobs says it isn't, a lot like portable video devices which he said were impractical for the average user. Until Steve Jobs added video support to the iPod. Now its the cat's meow.
From the one button mice to any real competition in the PC hardware market (face it, consumers don't want fancy overpriced and overdesigned Apple products, they are happy with low priced beige boxes), I think Apple would be better off without Steve Jobs and his ego and arrogance.
Where Steve Jobs is constantly failing is making Apple a real competitor to gain more then 5% of the computer market. For all his grandstanding and hype around Apple products and ESPECIALLY around OSX, I have yet to see Apple really want to gain more marketshare in the computer hardware market. They continuously sell overpriced hardware, even when the hardware significantly underperforms compared to PC products, its still overpriced. They insist on cutesly all-in-one products instead of more robust modulare components with a wide selection of available hardware and features. When Apple finally came out with a sub $1000 computer, it is so feature lacking and crippled that few PC users were ever convinced that the Mac Mini is a good alternative to a $600 PC. Apple's notebook division has been on vacation for the last 3 years. Apple has been selling only a few million computers a quarter, compared to dozens of millions by Dell, HP, an others. The average Asian OEM PC maker sells more computers then Apple. OBVIOUSLY these companies know what consumers want. Apple ( or rather, Steve Jobs ) does not. Apple firmly wants to remain in a niche market, or at least, Steve Jobs does.
It will be interesting to see how Steve Jobs screws up MacTels, new Intel based Macs, and he will screw up royally. I am sure his FIRST mistake will be to overprice computers which can be directly compared to against' PCs. The first Mactel to hit the market can have the same benchmarks running on it and direct comparisions to Dell, HP, and other PC computers. For the first time in history, a Mac is 99% identical to a PC except for the BIOS and a few hardware/software tweaks. Where Apple used to claim better performance becasue of RISC based architecture (and thus no real comparisons could be justified), now they must contend to offer a computer that has the same components as in the Wintel world. Steve Job's WILL make the mistake of overpricing Mactels, charging customers more for a Mac branded "PC" that contains the same components as a much cheaper PC which performs exactly the same. Dell and HP will be quick to clone Apple's style of Mactels, putting
Any markets support CableCard yet?
I guess its just living in Canada, which sometimes sits in the stoneage when it comes to certain technology. TIVO has never been available up here, only what the monopolies Rogers (Cable) and Bell(Phone/Satellite) see fit to offer us Canucks.
While Rogers PVR features 2 input recording and is mostly a decent device (the Acientific Atlanta Explorer 8300), I really wish for more competition in the PVR/Digital Cable box market, allowing me to select more robust solutions like DVD/HDD recorders with support for digital cable and HDTV content.
Sony was, I believe, the first to offer CableCard support in their televisions, but I think that Rogers or Bell are so far way from releasing their tight grip of control of digital cable that Canada won't see a cable card solution for at least another decade. In the meantime, some dumb Canadian is paying $1000 more for a Sony TV with a feature they will never use. We are still waiting for even a TIVO like solution where we can subscribe to a third party service for cable recording.
I hope this new Tivo product is hugely successful in the US (as I am sure it will be). Given how much US technology and television market influences Canadians, perhaps if the CRTC (Central Repression of Technology for Canadians) starts getting more complaints about the anti-competitive behaviour of Rogers and Bell and the fact TIVO has never gotten a foothold in Canada, I am sure huge success of a CableCard supported device like this new TIVO will drive Canada to adopt the technology and open up the market sooner rather then later.
In the meantime, after paing $400 for a featurless Rogers PVR and $5/mth to support PVR capabilities on the device, I guess I have to be a good Canadian and ignore my repression and apologize for my bitching.
I am big on ergonomic design because when programming for a living, I don't want a lousy keyboard or mouse combo to cause me pain and misery.
Most notebook mice comprimise on ergonomics for style, and I can see this one having this problem. If your debating if this mouse will work well for you, take a box of cards and rest your hand on it and move it around for a few hours. I think most people's issues from using mice is that they grip them too hard or pound on the buttons, perhaps a slim design like this one will get people used to the idea of simply resting their hand on a mouse and tapping the buttons rather then putting the mouse in a death grip.
I guess for short stints this product would work well and its nice to finally find a use for that PC Slot. Anything is better then those touch pads or track sticks in the long run.
I mean, from corporate logos to game logos, do we really care about them?
Graphic design in itself is useful for helping to differentiate products from one another, good box art will make the eyes drift to your game rather then a slew of similar games sitting on the shelf, but are we fixated on which game has a better logo?
I mean, if I bought Quake 4 because it had that highly noticable logo, wouldn't I still be dissapointed in the lack of innovation and originality in that franchise? Same goes for the Doom3 game.
Logos really only affect children and teens as they strive to be like everyone else, wearing name-brand jeans and Nike shirts with the checkmark because they seem to think these products are necessary and improve their social status. In reality, I am happy buying a pair of $20 off band jeans from Walmart instead of the Tommy Hillfiger's for $80 at some downtown boutique. When you compare them, they are the same thing, same stitching and materials with only a few subtle differences not including the logo.
Most games focused on logos are the same, largely similar with nothing really making them stand out except some box art the publisher probably spent more time and money on then the game itself. Put Civ 4 in a paper bag and I would have still rushed out and buy it, same with HL2 (which I actually didn't buy a physical copy of, just ordered it online through Steam). If the game is good, people will ask for it by name. Put it in a paper bag and save yourself some money rather then spending millions for some "designer logo artwork". Save logos for those losers paying 400% markup for a name-brand of clothing that comes out of the same Chinese factory as the $20 no-name brand.
Charging someone with a fine they could never pay is kind of missing the point, ain't it?
I mean, in the US anyways, a person simply declares bankruptcy, which lasts 7 years and then they can go back to applying for credit cards and such without reprocusions as if nothing ever happened.
If a US citizen goes bankrupt, just move to Canada and open a line of credit. I know of one person that did just that and wrote off $50,000 in university debt.
The legal system is rediculous as it is without awarding fantasy amounts of money to people that can't claim or prove they have come anywhere near that amount in damages or losses. This ISP is actually out 11 billion dollars?
Also, the guy can't go near a computer for 3 years? Does that penalty actually work or can even be enforced? Short of throwing the guy in solitary confinement, there is no way someone that unscrupulous is going to not touch a computer for 3 years. Why not just setup a consulting firm teaching other people how to spam, you don't have to touch the computer to be a public menace.
If the US isn't serious about spam protection, then stop joking around and either get serious or get over it.
When will people realize if your not one of the big three, your not going to succeed in the gaming industry. Especially if you design highly gimmicky devices that don't support on the of the big three companies games.
A 30inch LCD? I haven't found one yet that costs under $1200 CDN, so I can't imaging how a gaming device that adds touch sensitivity to an expensive LCD TV is going to be a success.
It would be different if this was an accessory to an Microsoft, Nintendo, or Sony game console, but even then, who would buy a $1200 TV to replace their current TV for a few novelty interactive games?
Lastely, don't most parents still tell their children no to sit too closely to the TV? So is coming out with a 30 inch display where you have to sit right beside it going to be good for children?
If Matt Groening had any brains, he would avoid Fox like the plague. Same goes to other innovative show creators like Joss Whedon.
I don't know what goes on over there at Fox, but how many decent shows have been axed for no good reason and others left on inperpetuity. Are you telling me that Kind of the Hill has had better ratings then Firefly?
Fox doesn't realize the benefit of a small but loyal fan base. Even if shows like Firefly or Futurama only have a few million viewers, they are usually viewers that tune in faithfuly every week. With that kind of dedicated fan base, you can focus more targetted advertising to a generally similar group of viewers. This opposed to a shows like American Idol that, while having 20+ million viewers, are so varied and wishy washy (only watching the show until their favourite contestant is axed) that you can't find any common advertising ground to target the viewers. In the end, you can actually get more money for advertising slots for cult shows like X-Files, Buffy, and Futurama because advertisers know there is are at least a few million Geeks faithfully watching every week that probably would want to buy some electronic underwear with PDA capabilities.
But Fox, in general, has been abysmal in terms of promoting innovative programming and instead dumping tired cliche sitcoms (at a time when sitcoms are dropping faster then flies on crap) and keeping long running and tiresome franchises like the Simpson's and King of the Hill on forever. Fox is realizing they are losing an audience, and so now have to rely on pulling up past successes in order to fill their timeslots.
But if Matt had a brain, he would can the Simpsons and bring Futurama to another network and end any relationship with Fox. Even if Futurama was reserected, Fox will probably keep it going sporadically until they find some other Malcom in the Middle, Married with Children, Simpson's, King of the Hill, American Dad, War At Home clone devoid of talent to replace it.
Quick poll. Does anybody still watch Fox these days?
The CEO of McAfee will get a slap on the wrist, if that?
Corporate execs are getting away with everything and not being held accountable for their actions. They are frauding stockholders, thats a crime, period. Yet someone with millions in assets can walk away from these issues without so much as reprimand.
From Nortel to WorldCom, Exxon, etc, these companies are being run by crooks aiming to get themselves richer at the expensive of stock holder just trying to invest in something to pay for their retirement.
In Canada, NO LEGAL ACTION has been taken against Nortel execs that drove the stock price over $100 and then allowed the stock to plunge to less then $5.00. The execs in charge simply walked away from Nortel with millions in compenstation while tens of thousands of people lost their jobs, pension, and stock holdings not to mention countless stock holders that lost their shirts investing in Nortel. Then, a few years after their stock price drop, Nortel was caught cooking the books AGAIN with no penalties!
This just proves the legal system and politics are corrupt, if you have enough money you can get away with anything, even murder, if you throw enough money into the system.
The first Mindstorms set was really more of a toy then anything, no real robotic concepts could be created except things that mimicked walking or rolling with some pre-programmed commands. There were too few motors and feedback devices. Also the programming environment was definitely aimed at kids.
Hopefully Lego will realize that adults love this kit too and perhaps even are aiming this new Mindstorms at older people with a more robust programming environment. Reading the press release they are already adding more advanced features to their servos and sensors that suggest they are gearing for a real robotic design. The inclusion of 3rd party support will also be benificial. Even if Lego somes out with robotic programming for dummies software, some other 3rd party developer may come out with an advanced set of software tools.
Also, I am hoping from the product shots that they actually have a decent pre-designed walking robot concept to put together and play with. I am not so mechanically inclined to design my own walking system, and was always frustrated with trying to create something robotic enough to work with, but by having a decent robot design come in the package then you could have fun finding ways to program it and interact with it without having to first figure out how to design it. All I could ever do with the old kit was make rolling or track based vehicles bump into things and reverse.
We have to wait until August though? Why do companies insist on release product information so early in advance. I would have bought this kit today if they announced it yesterday.
When DVD players first arrived on the market, I paid $600 for a basic featured player. Now, for under $80 you can get one with progressive scan and can play any digital file format on the market today.
I won't be fooled again into paying a premium for HD-DVD players.
First, they are essentially the same technology, simply tweaked to squeeze out more storage space and using a different wavelength of laser. This is hardly technology that required billions or even millions of R&D costs. Like the original DVD player and is close ties to CD technology, HD-DVD is just an extension, not an evolution of DVD technology. Thus, we shouldn't have to pay a huge premium for it.
When you consider that the chassis and most of the components in an HD-DVD player are going to be identical to a regular DVD player (especially the current up-conversion ones), your talking about probably $20 of unique technology that goes into every unit, this doesn't justtify a 400% - 800% markup over regular DVD players.
Second, I won't pay more for HD-DVD titles. I don't care if they required new expensive technology to be mastered, Hollywood is making huge profits on the markup for regular DVD's, some of those initial HD-DVD costs can be absorbed in their current pricing scheme. Your talking about digital data formats, HD-DVD is simply film mastered with a higher bit-rate, again hardly revolutionary or required millions in research to get accomplished. If you start to consider that many movies are filmed digitally these days, conversion from one digital format to another is a brainless activity.
Lastely, what is the difference in quality? I mean, when I compared my first DVD movie to a VHS version, the difference was astonishing. Crystal clear video and digital surround sound sold me on the DVD format. I haven't been entirely blown away by the HD revolution. HDTV quality is good, but I find I can still live with standard def digital cable on a good quality television with a good cable signal. Most HDTV sets I am seeing also are not doing HDTV justice, especially the cheap LCD panels that can't display a good color gamut regardless of their resolution quality. I'll have to wait until I actually see HD-DVD on a good quality HDTV, but I am sure it won't be as ground breaking as the original DVD format.
My reasoning for holding off on adopting HD-DVD is based on past experiences, if I wait a few years, HD-DVD players will be in the $100 range, most movies will be masterd in HD-DVD for the same price, and if Blu-Ray does make an impact, I won't feel like I lost out in another Betamax-VHS or LaserDisc-DVD war.
No games deserve a sequel, this is the number one problem in the gaming industry today.
So many clones of existing franchises along with endless tired sequels is driving people away from games.
Look at Doom3 and Quack4, too highly anticipated sequels that went nowhere. They were simply regurgitations of tired concepts with fancy graphics.
Why I do believe there are game concepts that warrant revisits, Diablo's style of gameplay comes to mind, this does not mean we need Diablo 3. Why not create a new story with some new innovative features in a new game. Rather then working 4 years to create a Diablo clone that only offers better graphics, come out with new stories using the same engine with novel twists on the concept. I would much rather buy 4 games that are in the style of Diablo 2 that all offer original plots rather then waiting 4 years for a sequel of Diablo 3.
In all honestly, why can't the entertainment industry get it in their head that sequels kill a franchise, especially when NO effort is made to keep them fresh and original. I am sure XMEN 3 will do well this year, but only because they are banking on repeats by past fans, I am also very sure that XMEN 3 will have vapid and underwhelming story line with lots of duplicated scenes and action. I can't wait for the slew of franchise games based on XMEN 3 this year, we all know that games based on movies do well.
Not all sequels are bad, Civ 4 was hottly received, but this is more because new technology allows for richer and more intelligent gameplay while tweaking a game engine to make it more streamlined and entertaining. Civ 4 is simply not a regurgitation of Civ3 with better graphics as are most 3rd person shooters and RPG's.
If you don't have something new to say, then don't say it, same goes for movies and video games. Can't offer anything new and innovative, the simply leave it be. I for one would wish that the game industry be forced to implement money back guarantees, where you are fully reimbursed for the money they attempted to rip off you with another tired sequel.
I think the simple solution is to employ some form of litmus test when a person applies for a patent.
The test I would suggest is as follows:
"If the innovation in question can be duplicated by an individual, or a group of individuals with limited time, resources, and money, then the innovation in question cannot be patented. Period!" If I can create the same technology in my garage over the weekend, there is no reason why I should have to pay royalties or licensing to implement the technology.
Patents should apply to technology that requires years of research and/or lots of money and/or lots of people to develop (i.e. when there is definite financial risk to a company doing the R&D but unable to recover if the patent isn't awarded). I simply can't understand how a patent for putting a hyperlink in a web page or a special button on a device has the same legal standing as developing a hybrid car engine or a new innovative propulsion system that will take us out of the solar system, i.e. REAL INNOVATION!
Another aspect of the patent litmus test is to question whether the patent is ACTUALLY a unique innovation, or whether countless other people have the same idea and simply don't have the resources or time to go through the patent process. What right does someone with a high priced team of shysters have over winning a patent over a thousand other shmoes that wake up one day with the same idea but without the resources to make the patent happen. These days, patents are nothing more then a race to see who among hundreds or even thousands can cut through the red tape quickly enough.
Also, why not insist that if the innovation has merit to benefit mankind, then the patent will only be awarded if it becomes public domain. I.e. a process to create medicine to save the world from AIDS or Cancer cannot be licensed or impose royalties on to those companies willing to make the product a reality. This will separate those looking to profit from the suffering of mankind to those people looking only to make a quick buck squating on some new web idea.
Finally, a patent should only be awarded to a company or individual willing to make the innovation a reality. There are lots of companies being established that simply buy ideas off of the average joe or create think tanks and finance the patent into existence without EVER desiring to actual create the innovation or product in question. They instead rely on greedy licensing fees, or sit on the patent waiting for that fateful time when some other company actually creates a product that patent might infringe on, even if it has nothing to do with the original patent purpose, and sue the pants off that company.
In all honesty, the whole patent process is out to lunch, allowing of millions of meaningless and trifling ideas to become legally binding innovations when they can either be easily duplicated or are thought up by thousands of other people.
Someone should patent the patent process, this will end this stupid industry once and for all.
From Xbox360 fiascos to this, either people are just ganging up on MS or there is some serious problems with their XBox division. Didn't they recently reorganize their company? Hopefully this new organization will help to improve overal quality of the Xbox platform as I am loosing faith MS has any real control over the quality of their products or services.
Wait a minute, MS has no quality control over any product or service! So why is this news?
I mean, we are in serious need of a NEW OS, something not derived from 20+ year old technology.
.jpg to know its a jpeg file! META DATA PEOPLE!
Both NT and Linux and OSX streams are all based on last century technology using ancient file systems and trying to do modern techniquies like Database driven file systems and online Internet access.
For a Modern OS, I propose that Google start fresh, from the ground up, using these concepts:
1) TRUE meta driven DB file system. Append to the front or back of every file meta data and index meta data in a true DB file system. Tiger isn't there yet, Tiger simply endlessly indexes files in a half assed attempt to seem like a modern OS. WinFS might be closer, whenever MS figures out how to do it.
2) Flat file system, throw out folders and directories structures. There is no need to atrificailly distribute files across archaic tree structures if your using a true DB file system. All files could be accessed using database views (i.e. show me all pictures taken in 2005, or show me all letters written to Jane, or all music by Ween). You can actually imitate folder trees by putting a path meta tag in the file header, but there is no need to physically address files in tree structures. Instead, worry about putting frequently accessed files in faster parts of the hard drive.
3) Make a distinction between USER data and SYSTEM data. Who needs to be aware of 100,000+ files on your OS? 99% of all the files on your Windows or *nix OS are completely meaningless to you. A Modern OS should make a distinction between System data and User data. System data is ALL files that YOU didn't create, save to, or distribute from your computer, and these system files should not be indexed or maintained by a DB file system. System files can remain in a protected bubble on your hard drive and accessed by developer tools. Instead, index only those image, video, music and document files the user actually cares about and hide the rest. I don't want to see 100,000+ files on my computer anymore. Kind of like what Google Destop does, but being more aware of the difference between System and User files.
4) END FILE EXTENSIONS. REAL OSES don't need a
5) Wrap Applications in ONE OBJECT. Apple had it, but lost it moving to OSX. The idea that ALL files associated with an Application remain in ONE OBJECT. Do not allow Applications to spread themselves across a hard drive, installing parts to a variety of locations and modifying other files (sorry, OSX does this, putting files and configuration settings in multiple locations, and then FORGETTING about them). A Modern OS will figure out how to protect an Application as an Object without allowing it to be distributed illegally, something Apple never figured out how to do. To install an Application, drag it to the partition, to uninstall it, delete it, period. Once an Application is uninstalled, the OS and computer should look like the Application never existed, period. NO ORPHANED APPLICATION DATA.
6) Make internet connectivity a requirement. A modern OS shouldn't operate without internet connectivity. By constantly keeping up-to-date on security issues, and also allowing for proper online authentification of applications and media, a modern OS would allow for a new generation of online media distribution that isn't prone to piracy (i.e. the music and movie industries actually embracing online distribution). Building an OS around the internet should also make is the most secure and safe environment. Rather then the constant forcing of old, pre-internet operating systems to modern day online needs and introducing security flaws, start fresh.
If anyone has the resources to actually make a successful new OS, it would be Google. By taking their web indexing techniques and creating a new File system with these concepts in mind, a Google OS will make accessing data effortless and fast.
Just, please don't get into that trend and habit of using Linux as a base. NO LINUX
With regards to MSN music, this isn't a design flaw of MS, its a design flaw of the RIAA.
ANY new music distribution system, even that mirroring avialable Internet services, must be approved by the RIAA. Even though the Xbox Live service uses the Internet as a backbone, the RIAA considers it a different medium for music distribution, and so must agonize over whether the Xbox360 has appropriate DRM protection and cannot be used as a platform to pirate music. The bottom line is, there is probably some pending approval for the idea of selling/subscribing to music on the Xbox360 stuck on some RIAA desk.
Like the PSP and its obvious lack of online music integration, to believe that it is simple to establish a new market for online music sales suggests a total lack of understanding of the process of getting approval by the RIAA. Is MS had to wait for RIAA approval before integrating online music sales in the Xbox360, then we may have seen Windows Vista 2 long before the Xbox360.
Apple fought tooth and nail to get their iTMS established, and in other markets around the world, the process for getting approval by the appropriate local music cartel is slow, painful, and full of ignorance it isn't even funny. Even with the well established and successful iTMS in the US, it took Canada 2 years to get into the game, and some places like Australia and Japan are still pending or have just been approved. Every other legit online music service has had to jump through hoops to prove that their service will not be used as a sorce of piracy.
I doubt MS ignored the potential for the Xbox360 to be used as a retail marketplace for music and video, they did bank on the Live to have improved services for game sales. If it was entirely up to MS, they would have integrated MSN Music directly in the XBox360 at launch. Just as I would assume that Sony would have integrated a Sony based music store for their PSP product.
This is yet another example of how far behind the times the music industry is, how anal and overprotective they are of their copyrights and the fact they are stagnating the music industry by stonewalling any new innovative services or markets for online music sales.
To be firing objects back at earth? I don't care about them sending them out to space or landing on other planets, but I feel like I have a target on my back when they start returning them back to earth at such velocities.
I mean, subscribe to MSDN or log into Microsoft's Knowledge base. It's all there. Maybe not spelled out phonetically as the technology challenged EU seems to imply is necessary when trying to understand technology.
If I was MS, I would tell them to go screw themselves. Does Apple provide full disclosure of how to interoperate with their servers? I have yet to find a decent Windows tool that allows me to access Apple's HFS+ file system as easly as Apple offers NTFS access. Also, through Apple I can more easily connect to a Windows machine then I can from Windows to an Apple computer. Seems to me that at least Apple has figured out how to interface with Window's networks properly.
What is left is all the Linux and Unix gurus that probably are more intimately familiar with Windows networking then even Windows software developers. They are, after all, mimicking everying Microsoft does in an effort to make the Linux platform user friendly.
Lastly, consdering that 90%+ of the machines out there are running Windows, why should MS bend over backwards so the other 10% can more easily communicate with them.
Someone should sue the EU for being just plain idiots when it comes to their constant bias against MS. I guess MS didn't given them a big enough discount on bulk licenses for Windows, so now the EU is all bent out of shape about Windows.
What I think MS should do, simply, is pull Windows off the shelves in Europe. Lets see how quickly Europeans scream to the EU to drop their constant barage of lawsuits against MS and let them be able to choose which OS they prefer to run once again without government interference.
Finally, MS should charge EU with slander as the EU isn't targetting other platforms for the EXACT SAME issues MS is being charged with. Apple comes pre-installed with Safari, media and contact management. Linux comes installed with countless gnu sharware, whether you want them or not. Windows offers a fairly decent media player and suddenly they are the only evil company out there? Get real. If EU doesn't start applying the same restraints on Apple and Linux distros, then its fair game for MS to counter-sue for bias and prejudice.
I am sure overal game sales are slowing down because of the anticipation of next generation consoles. Why start wasting money on last year's technology when next-year's is just around the corner. Instead of wasting a few hundred on games now, save up and get that new $500 game console.
But in reality, EA is another company deluded into finding a scapegoat for loss of sales instead of pointing directly to themselves. Like Hollywood, Television, and Music, video games are becoming more boring and derivative. Even with the anticipation of new game consoles, offering impressive new graphics, are we really motivated to drop $1000 on a new system and games just for improved graphics?
Look at the PC gaming industry, one where a new video card offering impressive new graphics performance comes out every 6 months. Games like Quake 4 and Doom 3 have bombed simply because they are just current updates to old game ideas.
EA is one of those companies heavy into developing derivative franchises. All they do is make a few graphics tweaks and update the graphics engines and release the same games over and over again, especially in their Sports division. Has any new gameplay feature been added to their sports games? Last I checked, Tiger Woods Golf features a new character generation system to create a custom looking character, and you can win clothes for your character. Nice to see EA using The Sims' character engine in other games, but they have done nothing to really improve upon the golf game genre.
Like the rest of the entertainment industry, stop finding blame in the consumers for loss of sales. Start offering us stuff we want to spend money on, and you will eventually see your pockets grow with profit again.
I mean, isn't there another franchise us Geeks, Nerds, and Dweebs can obsess about that doesn't originate from a billionaire rip-off artist.
After Episode 3, I refuse to give George Lucas and all of his spinoff companies a dime after the years of wasted time hoping for and anticipating his next movies and games. The games are getting worse and derivative, much like the last 3 movies.
If we keep throwing him money, it will never change. He will keep coming out with crap because we all want to believe in the Force and hope that each new tidbit of story we can get out of him will recover our faith in it. How much dissapointment can we put up with?
Rise up and grow a pair, and end Star Wars once and for all. Don't buy SW products and stop talking about it online. Perhaps if Lucas sees how utterly unmoving his crap has become he might actually innovate again and offer us something new we can obsess about for the next 30 years.
Friends don't let friends care about Star Wars!
For Windows development, Visual Studio is the only way to go, and MS now has a series of Express Editions that offer Free C++, Visual Basic, or C# development tools. Note that Express Editions do not allow you to sell or distribute your software, but as a hobbyist, they are great tools for getting back into software development without spending a dime.
I have found NO free development tools for the Windows platform that are easy to use and as well thought out as the Visual Studio product line.
For Mac development, the free XCode tools are good, however I would look into CodeWarrior because ObjectiveC, in my opinion, is an antiquated and bastardized attempt at object orientated programming, CodeWarrior offers C++ access to OSX programming API's.
I can't suggest anything for Linux, except that CodeWarrior also makes a Linux IDE. I don't recommend developing software using cheap command line text editors or gcc compilers, unless you love being counter productive and frustrated.
Google started up as this benevolent, Do No Evil company whose goals were to consolidate Internet data making it easier to search for and catalogue web sites.
Since then, they adopted a heavily utilized advertising program that is generating billions in revenu.
Since then, they initiated a program where people can buy their web site rankings.
Since then, the have progressivly increased exporsure on the internet by ripping off ideas from other web services and making their own version, undermining other benign ad-free efforts and placing Google advertising prevalent throughout their services.
Since then, hardly a website has enough balls not to pepper themseleves with Google Ads or Ad Words because of the bribes Google offers to include the feature.
Since then, Google is initiating services which have questionable legal merits, such as the recent Google Print service ignoring pleas by publishers and authors to be included in deciding if this feature violates copyright laws.
With billions in hand and ubiquitous web presence, can we safely believe that Google intends no evil? Like any company that gains power, power corrupts. Google is no different from Microsoft or any other technology company that suddenly finds themselves making money hand over fist and being adored as an industry leader. Only Google is deluded into believing they intend no evil. They are and will continue to grow and become an ad cluttered web service whoring themselves to anyone throwing them a buck, skewing search results in favour of those who throw enough money in Google's direction, supporting Google to create more rip off and malevolent services.