Arrested Development is(er, was) easily one of the best shows on television. But it was quirky, and didn't have an immediate "hook" (e.g. "It's Pamela Anderson, and she works in a bookstore!!". Goddamn I hate you Fox).
Very similar to Seinfeld in that respect. But NBC was able to cultivate it into a hit. Fox would have killed Seinfeld halfway into the 2nd season.
Fox does free podcasts, you can download your favorite episode of Arrested Development free of DRM.
You've never downloaded one of these, have you? These "foxcasts" are a 15 minutes synopsis of the show read by some Fox staffer. It's not an audio-edition of Arrested Development.
Parent is absolutely right. I'm certain that the vast majority of viewers could tell the difference between a video captured at 24fps vs 60 fps.
And the claim that the blurryness of video offsets ths framerate is also debateable. I'd argue the opposite, in fact - 60fps video is much, much more sharp than 24fps because the motion blur obscures the detail(you only notice it on the edges, but it affects the entire frame).
Yeah, what is it with fox? You'd think that any network that can take a steaming turd and turn it into a national phenomena woulc be they'd be able to do something with a show that's earned 5 emmys and nominated for 5 golden globes. But then again, they also killed Firefly, Futurama, and Family Guy. Something about constantly shifting the schedule, showing first-run episodes out of sequence, and not showing any episodes at all during sweeps can dunno.
Yet Fox's ADHD scheduling methodology would be bearable if they would just work a deal with a of the online distribution services. But they wont. Hopefully the rumors about striking a deal with Apple are true... but given Fox's history I wont hold my breath.
I'm inclined to crack jokes, but I've been out of the game for a long time so I have questions. Better do both.
- I couldn't really tell, but in the images it only looks like the mobo has one cpu. Just one? I imagine the kind of frea^H^H^H^H consumer who would go for 4way SLI would demand nothing less than 2 dual-core CPU's.
- If it does only have 1 cpu, or even 1 dual core cpu, wont the games be CPU limited before you even scratch the surface of this qual-sli madness?
- They've drawn flames on this thing. I imagine this is redundant given the heat it will produce, and ultimately confusing to the jerk^H^H^H^H consumer when it actually does burst into flames.:-)
In the context of this article, HD stands for High-Definition....not Hard Drive.
In the context of the parent (which I was referring to) "hard drive" stands for "hard drive". At worst, the parent was offtopic, but I think part of his point was that aftermarket/optional peripherals are neglected by developers.
My apologies for belaboring the subtlety, but apparently you needed me to explain the points you didn't understand. (You're welcome)
...The device didnt ship with the product so, to reach the widest audience, games are created with the assumption that it isnt there-- wont the same thing happen for this drive?
All good points, and you're probably right when it comes to Marque title that want the broadest possible exposure. But I think the 360's HD will fair better. Some thoughts:
Already more 360 hd's have been purchased ps2 hd's... which is significant given the fact it's only been out for a month.
There are already a few examples of games that require non-bundled peripherals (Dance Dance Revolution is the best example, but there's also the eyetoy games and that wierd electric guitar game)
Microsoft is putting much, much more effort into making the HD worth getting than Sony ever did. Game demos, movie trailers, live arcade, etc. Personally, I think that game demos is the 360's dark horse "killer app". It's already motivated me to buy a couple games (and steer clear of some others... cough cough... madden.. cough).
I doubt will see top-tier games requiring the HD for some time (if ever), but as long as long as the installed base is high enough, we'll probably see niche games that use it. And provided that the DRM isn't cracked, there's nothing (technically)stopping a manufacturer from bundling a game with (or even pre-loaded on) a new hard drive. Doubtful, but they do it with dance pads so who knows.
I think you're absolutely right about how the IT industry tends to have a single-minded obsession with The Next New thing. I suppose it's partially motivated by a hope that some new technology will be the silver bullet to solve problems that have plagued the industry for ages - projects get missed and go overbudget.
Take ruby for example. Now, I'm not knocking it because I see a lot of things that I like. But when I look at it, I see it as basically a distillation of Smalltalk with concessions for LAMP programmers. Of course, we could all just all write in Smalltalk, but then it wouldn't be *NEW*.
However, for Java, Sun deserves a bit of blame. Most of what Ruby [on Rails] so great is not as much the language as it is a rejection of the methodology that Sun has promolgated. Alot of the frameworks that Sun champions (Struts, Hibernate, EJB's) are so overwrought and complex that they true implementations of such mostly exist in academic "proof of concept" apps. They require huge teams to develop for and support.
When you compare Java to Ruby as a language, the differences aren't all that staggering. But when you compare the mindset of "The J2EE Way" vs. "The Ruby on Rails Way", it's a very stark contrast.
How many cycles the gui eats up is not the "big deal"
The big deal is eliminating a potential source of crashes. Right now, a video driver bug can (and often does) bring down the entire system. By putting the gui in a user process you can (in theory) avoid all that. What's more, you get that addes stability Whether you decide to use the gui or not
Ah, yes. Just what we all want. Command-line administration of Active Directory and Exchange.
It's not that we want command-line AD administration, what we don't want is a buggy video driver crashing the backup domain controller.
I do agree with your statements, but I don't think that "GUI-less server" is the big picture. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft would offer such functionality except perhaps in a safe-mode/recovery context. In fact, most sysadmins wouldn't even notice the difference because most administration (even gui-based administration) is done via a client utility that runs on the admin's workstation.
The big win is that (in theory) the OS can gracefully recover from a fault in the video driver and simply write the issue to the event log, rather than bluescreening.
There are even benefits for home users, albeit smaller ones. For example, you could upgrade your video drivers without having to reboot the system. I bet you could even assign different video drivers to different logins (Dad gets the stable, WHQL-certified drivers, little johnny gets the bleeding-edge, pre-alpha directx10 ati drivers from that shadowy website operating out of prague...)
I disagree that C is the ideal learning language, but I agree that the primary importance of learning programming is learning how to think. I'm not even talking necessisarily about OOP concepts, but more generally how to define, approach, and break down problems.
On the other hand, I think the worst thing you could do to a completely green student is to sit them down with a text editor and and compiler. This will only attract people who want to program in the first place and are willing to "tough it out". A good teacher/tool should be able to engage people who wouldn't consider themselves programmers. The first language I learned was LOGO for the TRS-80 and I was instantly hooked - me and my brother tried to one-up each other's spirographs
LOGO is my favorite example of a teaching language. The syntax vocabulary is small and your feedback is entirely visual (at least starting out). At first you're just moving a turtle around and drawing spirograph-like patterns... the programming methodology is almost a passive, secondary experience.
That said, with computers and the net you have many exciting opportunities to teach programming. "Widgets" programming seems like it has promise (maybe not for 5-10 year olds, but probably jr. high and up), but even a campaign editor for Starcraft is basically a turing-complete "language" -- You still get to learn the concepts of a conditional statement, with the added bonus of blowing up aliens. Why not learn that way?
True - and I agree that's a knock against it (I can still right-click to get in another tab, but middle-click would be better). However, I much prefer how live.com handles the left-click. Namely, live.com will expand the link to include the article text and images. Google simply opens the link.
This is a huge usability plus in my opinion. live.com appears to be a collection of personalized links (like google), but is essentially an rss reader. Google has opted to break out their personalized homepage and rss reader as seperate apps, but in my opinion the live.com approach is more useful and simpler.
Another neat feature that live.com has over google: For rss feeds that have article summaries (digg for example), live.com will display the summary in a tooltip when you hover over the link.
Microsoft's has pulled that trick often, but they haven't been doing it's "sister" site, live.com. When it was first came out it worked like crap in FF but included a note saying "coming soon for Firefox". Now it works great in Firefox, and in my opinion its even better than the Google offering it competes with. I doubt they've abandoned Embrace and Extend, but this is probably Microsoft acknowlodging that Firefox is too big to ignore (or maybe that IE's suckiness is too great to ignore).
Part of the intent of the Microsoft "live" offerings is to get back it's legitmacy with a demographic that uses non-IE browsers almost exclusively. They simply can't accomplish that goal without coding for Firefox.
My guess is that they will eventually work out the kinks so that it works equally well in Firefox if not better. Of course, who's to say that it isn't part of a secret, much-more-cunning "Embrace" phase - whereby they woo the firefox users away from google apps, and then start offering windows-only firefox extensions. I wouldn't put it past 'em.
Apparently it's the mammoth power brick which causes most of the problems, coupled with people putting it in areas without good circulation (not necessarily the consumers fault... most entertainment centers are kinda cramped). Microsoft is saying that the defect rate is 3%, I'd believe something closer to 6%, but that is actually not out of the ordinary for consumer electronics.
So, in my mind, the "viability" issues of three cores has been answered with the 360. And in fact there are Power Mac configurations that effectively give you 4 cores (2x dual-cores). However, the bigger question is whether it will be advantageous.
With that in mind the 360 is a pretty good test-bed to see 3-core configs are worthwhile. Developers will have more incentive to exploit the potential with the assurance that the hardware will remain relatively constant (at least as far as the API is concerned... hopefully Microsoft will be able to come out with a more compact 360 in a few years).
Okay, please show me these instances of where the Java version of an app is faster than the C version. That's not a troll: I'd really like to see it. Because I'm now just as tired of the "Java is as Fast or Faster than C Now" myth as I am the "Java is Slow" myth. Time for a reality check: task-for-task, Java is slower than C, period.
Just take a look at some benchmarks. There is only 1 test out of 26 where Java beats C (compiled with either gcc or vc). One!!!
The original Quake2 had a software rendering mode as well as OpenGL. If Jake2 attempted software rendering (does it? I played a Jake2 build from several months ago and I didn't check) I seriously doubt it would come near the performance of the C version.
Does this mean that C is "better" than Java? Certainly not. I am currently writing a JSP/Servlets for a financial web app, and I'd sooner chop off my arms than try to do the same thing in C. However, I am sick of language zealots who try to argue that the [fill in the blank] language is The One True Programming Language. Java is pretty cool but when you try to sell "your" language as all things to all people you're just asking for a backlash.
Ruby is the worst offender -- I'm sure it's great but in 5 years the proponents of [some cleverly named gem or mineral] will try to link Ruby with global warming... you just wait.
The N64 comparison isn't a good one for a few reasons:
The N64 was launched with only *2 games*: Mario 64 and Pilotwings 64.
Both games were sequels
While they were both very good games, neither was 'new': in spite of your claim, there were in fact 3D platformers and flight sims on the Saturn and/or the PS1 before the N64 launched.
I wont comment on the quality of the line up because I haven't played any of the games, and I wont even speculate as to whether the 360 will succeed in the long run. However, there's simply no getting around the fact beating your competitors to market by 6-12 months with 18 launch titles is very impressive.
How does one go about becoming an indie developer for xbox 360? I did a cursory check of various microsoft sites, but couldn't find any info on acquiring an sdk or that jazz. Also, my understanding is that the 360 devkit is quite expensive.
I think this is probably the most under-reported story on the 360. Developers have traditionally not been able to break into the console space because the cost of entry is so high that you need sign (your life away) with a publisher.
XBox live arcade has the potential to turn that around, but I haven't heard the details. Is there an avenue in place for indies to approach Microsoft? Or is Microsoft simply seeking out the standout indie developers and paying them to port to xbox live?
Supposedly Nintendo's Revolution will have an even more robust pay-for-download model... I'm just hoping that will be an indie scene.
I agree with the parent post that it's far-fetched that Apple would purposefully tank the ROKR. At the same time, they certainly didn't want it to be so popular that it would eat into iPod sales. Even if the royalties made up for it, I'm sure Apple (or maybe just Steve) would prefer the dominance of their product.
So it's kindof a fine line - if it sucks too much, it tarnishes the brand, but if it is wildly successful then Apple loses prominance and partners get more leverage.
Some company's make deals where each participant is making a gamble in the hopes that they both wind up ahead. Apple doesn't seem to take those kind of deals (not any more). With the HP iPod, Apple structured the deal in such a way that the HP iPod would not seem more appealing than an Apple iPod: no exclusive features, no WMA support, no HP music store, nada. I'm guessing the Motorola deal was similar to the HP iPod deal - regardless of what happens, Apple doesn't lose. Few people would take such a deal, and that's just fine by apple. But if they do, even better...
The last product licensing deal that Apple had with Motorola didn't go so well -- Motorola's Mac clones (as well as others) totally cannibalized Apple's mac sales. They probably didn't want a repeat.
Sorry, should have been more clear. Both scenarios were "actual scarcity", but my point was that the farmer benefits in that scenario (sell price exceeds labor+distribution costs) but Microsoft would not. The actual console sale isn't where the money is -- it's in the royalties and subscriber fees. So you need to get the installed base as big as possible. Talking about limited supply is one thing, but deliberately slowing down the assembly line wouldn't make sense.
Maybe if they had a glut... but my hunch is that they don't.
...it makes perfect sense to limit supply to create a perception of scarcity and value.
You are absolutely right that scarcity (even perceived scarcity) drives up individual unit prices. Thats economics 101. During the great depression, farmers would purposefully destroy the majority of their yields in order to drive up price just so they could break even. But the problem here is that limiting supply doesn't create the perception of scarcity (what a console maker wants), it creates actual scarcity (what a console maker certainly does not want).
It's all about the model. For microsoft to make money, they need to achieve as much market penetration as possible because ultimately they make money off of game royalties and xbox live subscription fees. Less xboxes == less games sold == less $$. The fact that you've driven up demand is moot because because they aren't trying to drive up price on the console itself. What Microsoft wants -- what any console maker wants -- is for people to *think* their console is scarce but, in truth, have enough on-hand for so that anyone can purchase it on day one. You don't get that by lowering production.
Also there is the implicit assumption in your post that Microsoft has the ability to scale production up to meet initial demand. That's a pretty big assumption to make, especially when you consider that microsoft is aiming for a *global launch*. This could be possible, but seems unlikely. Many developers were only able to get their hands on the final-hardware devkits just weeks ago. This points to limited production being the culprit.
You've hit the nail on the head. It's as if Gizmodo haven't actually read the articles they're using as sources. Here's a perfect example:
Reuters Article: New Xbox Set for Slow Start. Summary: Microsoft acknowleges lower than anticipated sales, but ensures investors and retailers that they will be able to maintain predictable supply rates (unlike Sony, who had wildly unreliable supply rates for ps2).
Gizmodo version: XBox 360 Tests it's brakes. Summary: Micro$oft slowing production on purpose, yo! WTFLOL!!!??
.
There's no conspiracy here. Microsoft expects lower sales, and the PR machine is trying to explain why. Are they trying to spin the lower sales in the best way possible? Absolutely. Are the overzealous microsoft markedroids trying to turn the limited availability into positive thing? Of course. Are they deliberately driving down supply? No. The only news is that analysts and microsoft are restating sales estimates. Microsoft says that it's due to a late start in production (believable, given how late the new dev kits were). That might be the reason, or perhaps it's because the 1st gen content is lacking. However, it would be moronic to purposefully drive down supply in order to create "buzz".
I know I'm required to hate Microsoft, but come on. As long as we're throwing out logic, why stop at "Microsoft Plans Deliberate Shortage" when you can have "J Allard Responsible for Lingbergh Baby Kidnapping"?
Worse still is the fact that he forced you at gunpoint to read every last word, right? What nerve!
Look. You see a site you like, go there. Otherwise, don't. The games section has only been around for a year or so, and if you filter out zonk's stories it'll be just like your slashdot of yesteryear and your faith will be restored.
There are hundreds of video game websites and 99% of them just repost stories from other sites. I'm okay with that because it allows you to get multiple takes on the same story. Slashdot does alot of reposting,however, they also try post items that woudn't necessarily wind up in, say, Gamespot. The result of going outside of the mainstream is that you don't get as big of a response.
The PS3 is an utter dream machine for game programmers. The hardware and tools kick ass.
Ah, I see. Mr... Anonymous, is it? Thanks for the insight. And I guess you would know, since you've developed on every console in existence. Except dreamcast and xbox, and any before the past 10 years.
That's pretty funny, because there's this programmer out there named John Carmack who kinda disagrees with your views. Although, who the heck is that Carmack guy qnyway anyway? He's only written about a half-dozen 3D game engines from scratch and designs rockets in his spare time. He clearly doesn't have your level of expertise, what with your unknown work on these unspecified games at your unnamed employer.
Slashdot Mirror
Very similar to Seinfeld in that respect. But NBC was able to cultivate it into a hit. Fox would have killed Seinfeld halfway into the 2nd season.
Parent is absolutely right. I'm certain that the vast majority of viewers could tell the difference between a video captured at 24fps vs 60 fps.
And the claim that the blurryness of video offsets ths framerate is also debateable. I'd argue the opposite, in fact - 60fps video is much, much more sharp than 24fps because the motion blur obscures the detail(you only notice it on the edges, but it affects the entire frame).
I'm inclined to crack jokes, but I've been out of the game for a long time so I have questions. Better do both.
:-)
- I couldn't really tell, but in the images it only looks like the mobo has one cpu. Just one? I imagine the kind of frea^H^H^H^H consumer who would go for 4way SLI would demand nothing less than 2 dual-core CPU's.
- If it does only have 1 cpu, or even 1 dual core cpu, wont the games be CPU limited before you even scratch the surface of this qual-sli madness?
- They've drawn flames on this thing. I imagine this is redundant given the heat it will produce, and ultimately confusing to the jerk^H^H^H^H consumer when it actually does burst into flames.
In the context of this article, HD stands for High-Definition....not Hard Drive.
In the context of the parent (which I was referring to) "hard drive" stands for "hard drive". At worst, the parent was offtopic, but I think part of his point was that aftermarket/optional peripherals are neglected by developers.
My apologies for belaboring the subtlety, but apparently you needed me to explain the points you didn't understand. (You're welcome)
I think you're absolutely right about how the IT industry tends to have a single-minded obsession with The Next New thing. I suppose it's partially motivated by a hope that some new technology will be the silver bullet to solve problems that have plagued the industry for ages - projects get missed and go overbudget.
Take ruby for example. Now, I'm not knocking it because I see a lot of things that I like. But when I look at it, I see it as basically a distillation of Smalltalk with concessions for LAMP programmers. Of course, we could all just all write in Smalltalk, but then it wouldn't be *NEW*.
However, for Java, Sun deserves a bit of blame. Most of what Ruby [on Rails] so great is not as much the language as it is a rejection of the methodology that Sun has promolgated. Alot of the frameworks that Sun champions (Struts, Hibernate, EJB's) are so overwrought and complex that they true implementations of such mostly exist in academic "proof of concept" apps. They require huge teams to develop for and support.
When you compare Java to Ruby as a language, the differences aren't all that staggering. But when you compare the mindset of "The J2EE Way" vs. "The Ruby on Rails Way", it's a very stark contrast.
How many cycles the gui eats up is not the "big deal"
The big deal is eliminating a potential source of crashes. Right now, a video driver bug can (and often does) bring down the entire system. By putting the gui in a user process you can (in theory) avoid all that. What's more, you get that addes stability Whether you decide to use the gui or not
I do agree with your statements, but I don't think that "GUI-less server" is the big picture. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft would offer such functionality except perhaps in a safe-mode/recovery context. In fact, most sysadmins wouldn't even notice the difference because most administration (even gui-based administration) is done via a client utility that runs on the admin's workstation.
The big win is that (in theory) the OS can gracefully recover from a fault in the video driver and simply write the issue to the event log, rather than bluescreening.
There are even benefits for home users, albeit smaller ones. For example, you could upgrade your video drivers without having to reboot the system. I bet you could even assign different video drivers to different logins (Dad gets the stable, WHQL-certified drivers, little johnny gets the bleeding-edge, pre-alpha directx10 ati drivers from that shadowy website operating out of prague...)
Hey, you asked for it
I disagree that C is the ideal learning language, but I agree that the primary importance of learning programming is learning how to think. I'm not even talking necessisarily about OOP concepts, but more generally how to define, approach, and break down problems.
On the other hand, I think the worst thing you could do to a completely green student is to sit them down with a text editor and and compiler. This will only attract people who want to program in the first place and are willing to "tough it out". A good teacher/tool should be able to engage people who wouldn't consider themselves programmers. The first language I learned was LOGO for the TRS-80 and I was instantly hooked - me and my brother tried to one-up each other's spirographs
LOGO is my favorite example of a teaching language. The syntax vocabulary is small and your feedback is entirely visual (at least starting out). At first you're just moving a turtle around and drawing spirograph-like patterns... the programming methodology is almost a passive, secondary experience.
That said, with computers and the net you have many exciting opportunities to teach programming. "Widgets" programming seems like it has promise (maybe not for 5-10 year olds, but probably jr. high and up), but even a campaign editor for Starcraft is basically a turing-complete "language" -- You still get to learn the concepts of a conditional statement, with the added bonus of blowing up aliens. Why not learn that way?
True - and I agree that's a knock against it (I can still right-click to get in another tab, but middle-click would be better). However, I much prefer how live.com handles the left-click. Namely, live.com will expand the link to include the article text and images. Google simply opens the link.
This is a huge usability plus in my opinion. live.com appears to be a collection of personalized links (like google), but is essentially an rss reader. Google has opted to break out their personalized homepage and rss reader as seperate apps, but in my opinion the live.com approach is more useful and simpler.
Another neat feature that live.com has over google: For rss feeds that have article summaries (digg for example), live.com will display the summary in a tooltip when you hover over the link.
Microsoft's has pulled that trick often, but they haven't been doing it's "sister" site, live.com. When it was first came out it worked like crap in FF but included a note saying "coming soon for Firefox". Now it works great in Firefox, and in my opinion its even better than the Google offering it competes with. I doubt they've abandoned Embrace and Extend, but this is probably Microsoft acknowlodging that Firefox is too big to ignore (or maybe that IE's suckiness is too great to ignore).
Part of the intent of the Microsoft "live" offerings is to get back it's legitmacy with a demographic that uses non-IE browsers almost exclusively. They simply can't accomplish that goal without coding for Firefox.
My guess is that they will eventually work out the kinks so that it works equally well in Firefox if not better. Of course, who's to say that it isn't part of a secret, much-more-cunning "Embrace" phase - whereby they woo the firefox users away from google apps, and then start offering windows-only firefox extensions. I wouldn't put it past 'em.
Apparently it's the mammoth power brick which causes most of the problems, coupled with people putting it in areas without good circulation (not necessarily the consumers fault... most entertainment centers are kinda cramped). Microsoft is saying that the defect rate is 3%, I'd believe something closer to 6%, but that is actually not out of the ordinary for consumer electronics.
So, in my mind, the "viability" issues of three cores has been answered with the 360. And in fact there are Power Mac configurations that effectively give you 4 cores (2x dual-cores). However, the bigger question is whether it will be advantageous .
With that in mind the 360 is a pretty good test-bed to see 3-core configs are worthwhile. Developers will have more incentive to exploit the potential with the assurance that the hardware will remain relatively constant (at least as far as the API is concerned... hopefully Microsoft will be able to come out with a more compact 360 in a few years).
Okay, please show me these instances of where the Java version of an app is faster than the C version. That's not a troll: I'd really like to see it. Because I'm now just as tired of the "Java is as Fast or Faster than C Now" myth as I am the "Java is Slow" myth. Time for a reality check: task-for-task, Java is slower than C, period.
Just take a look at some benchmarks. There is only 1 test out of 26 where Java beats C (compiled with either gcc or vc). One!!!
The original Quake2 had a software rendering mode as well as OpenGL. If Jake2 attempted software rendering (does it? I played a Jake2 build from several months ago and I didn't check) I seriously doubt it would come near the performance of the C version.
Does this mean that C is "better" than Java? Certainly not. I am currently writing a JSP/Servlets for a financial web app, and I'd sooner chop off my arms than try to do the same thing in C. However, I am sick of language zealots who try to argue that the [fill in the blank] language is The One True Programming Language. Java is pretty cool but when you try to sell "your" language as all things to all people you're just asking for a backlash.
Ruby is the worst offender -- I'm sure it's great but in 5 years the proponents of [some cleverly named gem or mineral] will try to link Ruby with global warming... you just wait.
You're kidding, right? More Mario. More Goombas. More Stomping. The gameplay is fresh, but it's clearly a sequel.
- The N64 was launched with only *2 games*: Mario 64 and Pilotwings 64.
- Both games were sequels
- While they were both very good games, neither was 'new': in spite of your claim, there were in fact 3D platformers and flight sims on the Saturn and/or the PS1 before the N64 launched.
I wont comment on the quality of the line up because I haven't played any of the games, and I wont even speculate as to whether the 360 will succeed in the long run. However, there's simply no getting around the fact beating your competitors to market by 6-12 months with 18 launch titles is very impressive.How does one go about becoming an indie developer for xbox 360? I did a cursory check of various microsoft sites, but couldn't find any info on acquiring an sdk or that jazz. Also, my understanding is that the 360 devkit is quite expensive.
I think this is probably the most under-reported story on the 360. Developers have traditionally not been able to break into the console space because the cost of entry is so high that you need sign (your life away) with a publisher.
XBox live arcade has the potential to turn that around, but I haven't heard the details. Is there an avenue in place for indies to approach Microsoft? Or is Microsoft simply seeking out the standout indie developers and paying them to port to xbox live?
Supposedly Nintendo's Revolution will have an even more robust pay-for-download model... I'm just hoping that will be an indie scene.
I agree with the parent post that it's far-fetched that Apple would purposefully tank the ROKR. At the same time, they certainly didn't want it to be so popular that it would eat into iPod sales. Even if the royalties made up for it, I'm sure Apple (or maybe just Steve) would prefer the dominance of their product.
So it's kindof a fine line - if it sucks too much, it tarnishes the brand, but if it is wildly successful then Apple loses prominance and partners get more leverage.
Some company's make deals where each participant is making a gamble in the hopes that they both wind up ahead. Apple doesn't seem to take those kind of deals (not any more). With the HP iPod, Apple structured the deal in such a way that the HP iPod would not seem more appealing than an Apple iPod: no exclusive features, no WMA support, no HP music store, nada. I'm guessing the Motorola deal was similar to the HP iPod deal - regardless of what happens, Apple doesn't lose. Few people would take such a deal, and that's just fine by apple. But if they do, even better...
The last product licensing deal that Apple had with Motorola didn't go so well -- Motorola's Mac clones (as well as others) totally cannibalized Apple's mac sales. They probably didn't want a repeat.
Sorry, should have been more clear. Both scenarios were "actual scarcity", but my point was that the farmer benefits in that scenario (sell price exceeds labor+distribution costs) but Microsoft would not. The actual console sale isn't where the money is -- it's in the royalties and subscriber fees. So you need to get the installed base as big as possible. Talking about limited supply is one thing, but deliberately slowing down the assembly line wouldn't make sense.
Maybe if they had a glut... but my hunch is that they don't.
You are absolutely right that scarcity (even perceived scarcity) drives up individual unit prices. Thats economics 101. During the great depression, farmers would purposefully destroy the majority of their yields in order to drive up price just so they could break even. But the problem here is that limiting supply doesn't create the perception of scarcity (what a console maker wants), it creates actual scarcity (what a console maker certainly does not want).
It's all about the model. For microsoft to make money, they need to achieve as much market penetration as possible because ultimately they make money off of game royalties and xbox live subscription fees. Less xboxes == less games sold == less $$. The fact that you've driven up demand is moot because because they aren't trying to drive up price on the console itself. What Microsoft wants -- what any console maker wants -- is for people to *think* their console is scarce but, in truth, have enough on-hand for so that anyone can purchase it on day one. You don't get that by lowering production.
Also there is the implicit assumption in your post that Microsoft has the ability to scale production up to meet initial demand. That's a pretty big assumption to make, especially when you consider that microsoft is aiming for a *global launch*. This could be possible, but seems unlikely. Many developers were only able to get their hands on the final-hardware devkits just weeks ago. This points to limited production being the culprit.
Hey thanks! Although if I come off as intelligent maybe slashdot has gotten soft ;-)
There's no conspiracy here. Microsoft expects lower sales, and the PR machine is trying to explain why. Are they trying to spin the lower sales in the best way possible? Absolutely. Are the overzealous microsoft markedroids trying to turn the limited availability into positive thing? Of course. Are they deliberately driving down supply? No. The only news is that analysts and microsoft are restating sales estimates. Microsoft says that it's due to a late start in production (believable, given how late the new dev kits were). That might be the reason, or perhaps it's because the 1st gen content is lacking. However, it would be moronic to purposefully drive down supply in order to create "buzz".
I know I'm required to hate Microsoft, but come on. As long as we're throwing out logic, why stop at "Microsoft Plans Deliberate Shortage" when you can have "J Allard Responsible for Lingbergh Baby Kidnapping"?
Worse still is the fact that he forced you at gunpoint to read every last word, right? What nerve!
Look. You see a site you like, go there. Otherwise, don't. The games section has only been around for a year or so, and if you filter out zonk's stories it'll be just like your slashdot of yesteryear and your faith will be restored.
There are hundreds of video game websites and 99% of them just repost stories from other sites. I'm okay with that because it allows you to get multiple takes on the same story. Slashdot does alot of reposting,however, they also try post items that woudn't necessarily wind up in, say, Gamespot. The result of going outside of the mainstream is that you don't get as big of a response.
Ah, I see. Mr... Anonymous, is it? Thanks for the insight. And I guess you would know, since you've developed on every console in existence. Except dreamcast and xbox, and any before the past 10 years.
That's pretty funny, because there's this programmer out there named John Carmack who kinda disagrees with your views. Although, who the heck is that Carmack guy qnyway anyway? He's only written about a half-dozen 3D game engines from scratch and designs rockets in his spare time. He clearly doesn't have your level of expertise, what with your unknown work on these unspecified games at your unnamed employer.