Everyone has a moment where it all began, a first encounter with or purchase of a video games system. Those are a person's personal gaming roots.
There's nothing particularly ironic about wearing a NES pad on your t-shirt with a 'know your roots' on it. It's more sentimental
I, for one, wouldn't want a sony PSP if i didn't think that I could make it do things that it wasn't manufacured to do, like checking my gmail using my wi-fi connection while cooking dinner. The ability to manipulate a technology to do things it wasn't meant to do is, i think, a large part of its appeal.
Die, blu-ray, die!
Okay, so these companies have a right to protect content that they've spent hundreds of millions of dollars creating.
However who is paying the price for all this hardware and copy protection. Permanent internet connections? Players that render themselves inoperable once a copyright violation has been detected? It might sound like a sweet deal to industry lawyers, but these machines and discs are going to be needlessly expensive and few people are going to buy into a technology that resembles a copyright minefield.
People like simple funcional things, like disks that you slot into a machine and watch movies on, not permanently internet-connected, big brother-esque machines that throw a fit and need to be repaired if you try and watch a naughty, naughty copied movie on. "Bad consumer, very baaad consumer!"
People (by which i mean the 95% of people who are happy with DVD and don't see a reason to upgrade to HD) won't buy into a new technology unless it is simple, reasonably cheap and offers a clear advantage the DVD player they bought a few years ago.
I, for one won't be buying a Blu-Ray machine. My money is on HD-DVD. A lower capacity disk yes, but probably cheaper, probably easier to make +R discs of (which is what I REALLY want them for) and probably better overall.
At the same time, I may end up downloading my HD movies from Apple through iTunes (or whatever) , which is the way things may well end up if these people don't get their s**t together.
"For the most part a mirror and prism setup isn't really needed with digital cameras as the whole see what the lens thing can be done electronically"
Not needed? Have you ever tried to quickly focus on a subject using the screen on the back of a compact digital camera? Properly focusing a 6-8MP image manually on a tiny low-res screen takes at least 5-8 seconds and results in inaccurate focusing. For the forseeable future, nothing will beat being able to look through the actual lens with the human eye and checking the focus there.
Slashdot Mirror
You of course forget that liability laws in europer in general aren't as nuts as the U.S of A and probably wouldn't be as big a problem.
Everyone has a moment where it all began, a first encounter with or purchase of a video games system. Those are a person's personal gaming roots. There's nothing particularly ironic about wearing a NES pad on your t-shirt with a 'know your roots' on it. It's more sentimental
I, for one, wouldn't want a sony PSP if i didn't think that I could make it do things that it wasn't manufacured to do, like checking my gmail using my wi-fi connection while cooking dinner. The ability to manipulate a technology to do things it wasn't meant to do is, i think, a large part of its appeal. Die, blu-ray, die!
Okay, so these companies have a right to protect content that they've spent hundreds of millions of dollars creating.
However who is paying the price for all this hardware and copy protection. Permanent internet connections? Players that render themselves inoperable once a copyright violation has been detected? It might sound like a sweet deal to industry lawyers, but these machines and discs are going to be needlessly expensive and few people are going to buy into a technology that resembles a copyright minefield.
People like simple funcional things, like disks that you slot into a machine and watch movies on, not permanently internet-connected, big brother-esque machines that throw a fit and need to be repaired if you try and watch a naughty, naughty copied movie on. "Bad consumer, very baaad consumer!"
People (by which i mean the 95% of people who are happy with DVD and don't see a reason to upgrade to HD) won't buy into a new technology unless it is simple, reasonably cheap and offers a clear advantage the DVD player they bought a few years ago.
I, for one won't be buying a Blu-Ray machine. My money is on HD-DVD. A lower capacity disk yes, but probably cheaper, probably easier to make +R discs of (which is what I REALLY want them for) and probably better overall.
At the same time, I may end up downloading my HD movies from Apple through iTunes (or whatever) , which is the way things may well end up if these people don't get their s**t together.
"For the most part a mirror and prism setup isn't really needed with digital cameras as the whole see what the lens thing can be done electronically" Not needed? Have you ever tried to quickly focus on a subject using the screen on the back of a compact digital camera? Properly focusing a 6-8MP image manually on a tiny low-res screen takes at least 5-8 seconds and results in inaccurate focusing. For the forseeable future, nothing will beat being able to look through the actual lens with the human eye and checking the focus there.