Wal-Mart. Of course, along with lower prices they also used their monopoly to cut their suppliers' payments even further than they did their own prices which is arguably even worse, but still.
For which YOU need manuals. Only games I've needed a manual for in the past decade have been the Europa Universalis and Hearts of Iron series, both available with my purchase in PDF form for free.
It's a small but important point: after all, there could be somebody else who also needs detailed manuals for FPSs and even if your policy were put in place, he'd complain about paying for only a thin reference sheet.
Google: "On the iPhone, you get only what Steve Jobs deems acceptable for you to have. On Android, you get the world". Cue fast slideshow of the cover of the Anarchist's Cookbook, some of O'Reilly's Java books, a comic from the cartonist that was banned from the App Store last week, and finally a photo of a couple kissing.
But I'm sure a marketing expert would be able to make it both more subtle and, at the same time, far more damning to Apple than I did, but yeah, it is possible.
Driving games belong on a PC, sorry. On consoles there's far too much temptation for devs to target the average user with his average gamepad, to the detriment of the game's quality, but on PCs it's recognized already that keyboards suck for driving so they're free to say "high-end racing wheel or GTFO" and crank the realism up to 11.
You also know what minimum level of CPU, GPU, and RAM to expect from a "2007 Mac" and an end user can understand this.
Same goes for Windows, it's just the minimum level is a bit lower since Apple doesn't make netbooks. The main difference however, is that Windows' costumer base includes a large segment who *knows* how to upgrade specific pieces of hardware and, as such, don't take kindly to being told to buy a whole new computer to run your app, leading to the dreaded hardware requirement lists. Of course, Apple's refusal to do this (in the name of "user experience") is one of the main causes why they're completely non-existant in the business sector outside art departments.
Another example is Shadow of the Colossus. The game, much like Braid, takes the basic preconceptions gamers have of 'games', then use and twist them to provoke a reaction, to make you question yourself, your actions and motivations. A more minor one is Metal Gear Solid 3's ending, where you have to mercy kill your own mentor yourself, by pressing the button. Many gamers and reviewers alike have stated that it's far more moving than it'd have been had it been a regular, non-interactive cutscene.
The genre is still new, so there's a lot of experimentation around and many who simply relegate themselves to mimicking other genres such as movies and books, but video games *are* maturing and becoming its own particular genre, and anyone who cannot see this simply hasn't examined the field too closely.
Most people? I believe you need a reality check on Apple's actual marketshare on, well, *everything* except iPods in the US.
And even then, 'loving' a product and 'being unable to find any flaw in it whatsoever' are two entirely different things, yet guess in which one Gizmodo's usual reporting falls on.
Obligatory Apple Product Cycle. Though they seem to have changed the "wait for nerds to throw wild-ass guesses based on our manufacturers' orders" to "leave a few prototypes around and hope somebody with a clue picks them up".
Then you should've bought PoP '08. Ubisoft is making an experiment of sorts with their games: PoP was released with no DRM or copy protection whatsoever (no, not even a CD-Key check), and now with AC2 and Settlers 7 they're going the other way and implemented the toughest protection they could make for it. Then, one guesses, after all is said and done they'll see which one sold better and they'll stay with that model from then on.
It is also quite a good game, in spite of what the younger kids who've only played Sands of Time may say. Easy, however, but fun nevertheless.
And then theres the point of one actually caring about licensing. Honestly I dont thing the MPEG will ever sue.
Pity that argument doesn't work with your average corporate lawyer, isn't it?
So I will use H.264 even without a license, just as I did with GIF, JPEG, etc, etc, etc. Because I think we are stronger, and the cant ever hurt us. Instead of backing down like a submissive beta-human loser.
Ohh, you're so *manly* when you infringe on a big company's patents! Take me, Hurricane, take me hard!
Don't be so childish and ridiculous. You're content with committing patent infringement and forcing everybody else to either do the same or pay MPEG-LA's extortion fees, and all that why? because you're a lazy fuck. You're not an alpha male, you're not part of La Resistance, you're just a nerd hiding behind anonymity to commit a crime, all to avoid making a stand for your principles.
If you really weren't a loser, you'd be like the guy in TFA working to make Theora (and other open codecs) better, but instead you bend down and hope you avoid being raped by being lost in the crowd of other losers like yourself. Grow the fuck up, will ya?
The question is, if you were starting a business that provides a software solution, would you want to be able to protect your solution from the competition?
I'd rather the competition couldn't protect themselves from me.
Patents protect small businesses and innovation from competition, including big companies that will do anything in their power to stomp little companies with disruptive technologies.
Prove it. Studies show that the overwhelming majority of patents are awarded to the 'big companies' you speak about, and I can't recall the last time I heard of a small business being on the winning side of patent litigation without being a patent troll (and therefore, not producing anything on which to base the enormous counter-lawsuit that typically follows from messing with the big guys).
But if you invent something, even if it is software, it deserves protection.
You're assuming the FPGA version is both a) outside the classification of 'software', and b) patentable. Remove those assumptions and the solution becomes obvious: neither is.
You can indeed distribute any app you want for MS phones, but if it competes with one of their favored apps, they won't simply say that releasing it is in violation of their T instead they will rapaciously put you out of business.
Yeah, just look at poor Google and what happened when they released the Chrome browser. Or IBM, Microsoft totally destroyed them after releasing Eclipse in a Visual Studio-dominated marketplace. And Oracle, going against MSSQL of all things!
The Apple zealots of this forum have a tendency towards making Microsoft (and Adobe, at times) look worse than they are just to make sure dearest Apple looks no worse than any other company, if not the victim outright. Face it, Microsoft doesn't eat children for breakfast and Apple doesn't fart flowers and sunshine, and in fact given their actions these recent couple years I'd expect more abuse from going into Apple's turf than Microsoft's, in spite of the latter's giant size. StevieJ really *is* a jerk, after all.
If, however, your agenda was to remain blissfully aware of evolution, and you deny purchasing any book that includes a mention of it, that *would* be censorship. Not a particularly damaging one, as the rest of the world would merely identify you as a moron and move on, but still censorship.
But copying games doesn't really bring anything new and good to the community:
Sure it does, particularly if the original game in question was made for a platform that's, for all intents and purposes, dead today. You may enjoy running an emulator inside a VM in compatibility mode just to play a game made for some weird C64 clone of old, but I prefer to type "apt-get install {clone name}" in a terminal and avoid all the trouble.
If it looks like a copy, it will be compared to that other game, and no matter how good you make it, there will be people who pan it because ${GAME} did X, and yours doesn't do X, or does Y instead and they liked X better.
And there'll be others who'll say that it's better *BECAUSE* it does Y instead of X. Such as "uses OpenGL graphics" instead of "uses crummy bitmaps for everything".
Even a poorly implemented or incomplete game will garner interest if it is NEW and INTERESTING.
Welcome to this world, oh traveler from a parallel universe. Sadly, I must inform you that some things in this world may differ from yours and so your expectations of how life should work may not be met at every opportunity.
That applies best to the anti-FEAR2 crowd than it does to the GP, though. Not liking a particular series' brand of gameplay and storytelling is perfectly normal, but liking it once then suddenly hating it 4 years later, coincidentally just when the series went from 'underrated gem' to 'popular and mainstream series' strains credibility a bit further.
And for the record I loved FEAR2 so I belong to neither crowd.
You get what you pay for. You want a good coder? Look at their code. Make them take some written tests and an oral exam. Have them write you something small for free.
Hell yeah. That's why, when deciding whether a job is worth taking, I always ask the prospective employers to give me a month of salary without working for it.
There does seem to be an awful lot of shitty jobs out there, though.
I hate using Apple zealot drivel to defend a Linux project but... maybe it just isn't for you? Gnome with the 2.0 version decided to cater more to new users (read: Windows rejects) and leave the 'hardcore Unix nerds' that had been its main market until then to more niche WMs, and I for one can't blame them for it.
Every one of us wants everything we need and nothing we don't, and Gnome 1.x was getting particularly problematic at the latter with everything and the kitchen sink thrown in somewhere, and each one of those features was a necessity to at least one user while being unnecessary bloat to at least one another. Remember, KDE was considered the *simpler* desktop of the two back then.
So, try one of the smaller desktops. Perhaps WindowMaker is for you, perhaps it's Openbox, perhaps you're like me and it's IceWM, or perhaps you're just weird and twisted and you'd prefer Ratpoison with a bunch of terminals running Emacs;) There's no shame in using a "non-mainstream" desktop, and by taking a bit of time to find the perfect one you can increase your comfort in your day-to-day usage a whole lot. One thing is clear though: if you aren't a normal "luser", your frustrations with Gnome are only gonna get worse from now on.
Calling Java an "outdated technology" is one of the best ways to proclaim your utter lack of experience in the IT field, after "Access is a great database" and "Internet Explorer is really secure".
Please spend a couple months out there in the real world then come back before posting again, thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
No. ARM has a core architecture, but they OPEN LICENSED that architecture to numerous firms, just as Intel did with AMD.
Exactly. You may notice, however, that said fact didn't stop Intel from getting hit with an Anti-trust lawsuit of their own a few years back.
Wal-Mart. Of course, along with lower prices they also used their monopoly to cut their suppliers' payments even further than they did their own prices which is arguably even worse, but still.
But Apple is better at what it does than Microsoft is at what IT does.
Which is why Apple is such a huge, powerful company compared to tiny startup Microsoft, in spite of having been founded much later.
Oh, wait...
For which YOU need manuals. Only games I've needed a manual for in the past decade have been the Europa Universalis and Hearts of Iron series, both available with my purchase in PDF form for free.
It's a small but important point: after all, there could be somebody else who also needs detailed manuals for FPSs and even if your policy were put in place, he'd complain about paying for only a thin reference sheet.
On the contrary, Apple products have generated more freedom than Linux and Android have, combined.
Prove it.
Yes, you get a small number of additional choices with Android. But for those choices, you give up much more.
Prove it.
Because right now, you're sounding like a classic Apple apologist.
Google: "On the iPhone, you get only what Steve Jobs deems acceptable for you to have. On Android, you get the world". Cue fast slideshow of the cover of the Anarchist's Cookbook, some of O'Reilly's Java books, a comic from the cartonist that was banned from the App Store last week, and finally a photo of a couple kissing.
But I'm sure a marketing expert would be able to make it both more subtle and, at the same time, far more damning to Apple than I did, but yeah, it is possible.
Race On, iRacing, Live for Speed, rFactor, hell even good ol' NASCAR Racing 2003 Season is better than Gran Turismo and its ilk.
Driving games belong on a PC, sorry. On consoles there's far too much temptation for devs to target the average user with his average gamepad, to the detriment of the game's quality, but on PCs it's recognized already that keyboards suck for driving so they're free to say "high-end racing wheel or GTFO" and crank the realism up to 11.
You also know what minimum level of CPU, GPU, and RAM to expect from a "2007 Mac" and an end user can understand this.
Same goes for Windows, it's just the minimum level is a bit lower since Apple doesn't make netbooks. The main difference however, is that Windows' costumer base includes a large segment who *knows* how to upgrade specific pieces of hardware and, as such, don't take kindly to being told to buy a whole new computer to run your app, leading to the dreaded hardware requirement lists. Of course, Apple's refusal to do this (in the name of "user experience") is one of the main causes why they're completely non-existant in the business sector outside art departments.
Another example is Shadow of the Colossus. The game, much like Braid, takes the basic preconceptions gamers have of 'games', then use and twist them to provoke a reaction, to make you question yourself, your actions and motivations. A more minor one is Metal Gear Solid 3's ending, where you have to mercy kill your own mentor yourself, by pressing the button. Many gamers and reviewers alike have stated that it's far more moving than it'd have been had it been a regular, non-interactive cutscene.
The genre is still new, so there's a lot of experimentation around and many who simply relegate themselves to mimicking other genres such as movies and books, but video games *are* maturing and becoming its own particular genre, and anyone who cannot see this simply hasn't examined the field too closely.
Lately it has become rather overkill for everything, to be honest, but when all you learned in college was how to use a hammer...
Most people? I believe you need a reality check on Apple's actual marketshare on, well, *everything* except iPods in the US.
And even then, 'loving' a product and 'being unable to find any flaw in it whatsoever' are two entirely different things, yet guess in which one Gizmodo's usual reporting falls on.
Which is to say, in a perfectly market-based way, Apple is the leader in terms of features people actually want.
In a perfectly market-based way, the leader is he who has sold the most units. And Apple ain't, not yet.
Obligatory Apple Product Cycle. Though they seem to have changed the "wait for nerds to throw wild-ass guesses based on our manufacturers' orders" to "leave a few prototypes around and hope somebody with a clue picks them up".
Then you should've bought PoP '08. Ubisoft is making an experiment of sorts with their games: PoP was released with no DRM or copy protection whatsoever (no, not even a CD-Key check), and now with AC2 and Settlers 7 they're going the other way and implemented the toughest protection they could make for it. Then, one guesses, after all is said and done they'll see which one sold better and they'll stay with that model from then on.
It is also quite a good game, in spite of what the younger kids who've only played Sands of Time may say. Easy, however, but fun nevertheless.
Because I have yet to see a Theora video site.
Here's one.
And then theres the point of one actually caring about licensing. Honestly I dont thing the MPEG will ever sue.
Pity that argument doesn't work with your average corporate lawyer, isn't it?
So I will use H.264 even without a license, just as I did with GIF, JPEG, etc, etc, etc.
Because I think we are stronger, and the cant ever hurt us. Instead of backing down like a submissive beta-human loser.
Ohh, you're so *manly* when you infringe on a big company's patents! Take me, Hurricane, take me hard!
Don't be so childish and ridiculous. You're content with committing patent infringement and forcing everybody else to either do the same or pay MPEG-LA's extortion fees, and all that why? because you're a lazy fuck. You're not an alpha male, you're not part of La Resistance, you're just a nerd hiding behind anonymity to commit a crime, all to avoid making a stand for your principles.
If you really weren't a loser, you'd be like the guy in TFA working to make Theora (and other open codecs) better, but instead you bend down and hope you avoid being raped by being lost in the crowd of other losers like yourself. Grow the fuck up, will ya?
The question is, if you were starting a business that provides a software solution, would you want to be able to protect your solution from the competition?
I'd rather the competition couldn't protect themselves from me.
Patents protect small businesses and innovation from competition, including big companies that will do anything in their power to stomp little companies with disruptive technologies.
Prove it. Studies show that the overwhelming majority of patents are awarded to the 'big companies' you speak about, and I can't recall the last time I heard of a small business being on the winning side of patent litigation without being a patent troll (and therefore, not producing anything on which to base the enormous counter-lawsuit that typically follows from messing with the big guys).
But if you invent something, even if it is software, it deserves protection.
Prove it.
Patents are part of capitalism
Wrong.
You're assuming the FPGA version is both a) outside the classification of 'software', and b) patentable. Remove those assumptions and the solution becomes obvious: neither is.
You can indeed distribute any app you want for MS phones, but if it competes with one of their favored apps, they won't simply say that releasing it is in violation of their T instead they will rapaciously put you out of business.
Yeah, just look at poor Google and what happened when they released the Chrome browser. Or IBM, Microsoft totally destroyed them after releasing Eclipse in a Visual Studio-dominated marketplace. And Oracle, going against MSSQL of all things!
The Apple zealots of this forum have a tendency towards making Microsoft (and Adobe, at times) look worse than they are just to make sure dearest Apple looks no worse than any other company, if not the victim outright. Face it, Microsoft doesn't eat children for breakfast and Apple doesn't fart flowers and sunshine, and in fact given their actions these recent couple years I'd expect more abuse from going into Apple's turf than Microsoft's, in spite of the latter's giant size. StevieJ really *is* a jerk, after all.
No, because pizzas aren't a message.
If, however, your agenda was to remain blissfully aware of evolution, and you deny purchasing any book that includes a mention of it, that *would* be censorship. Not a particularly damaging one, as the rest of the world would merely identify you as a moron and move on, but still censorship.
But copying games doesn't really bring anything new and good to the community:
Sure it does, particularly if the original game in question was made for a platform that's, for all intents and purposes, dead today. You may enjoy running an emulator inside a VM in compatibility mode just to play a game made for some weird C64 clone of old, but I prefer to type "apt-get install {clone name}" in a terminal and avoid all the trouble.
If it looks like a copy, it will be compared to that other game, and no matter how good you make it, there will be people who pan it because ${GAME} did X, and yours doesn't do X, or does Y instead and they liked X better.
And there'll be others who'll say that it's better *BECAUSE* it does Y instead of X. Such as "uses OpenGL graphics" instead of "uses crummy bitmaps for everything".
Even a poorly implemented or incomplete game will garner interest if it is NEW and INTERESTING.
Welcome to this world, oh traveler from a parallel universe. Sadly, I must inform you that some things in this world may differ from yours and so your expectations of how life should work may not be met at every opportunity.
That applies best to the anti-FEAR2 crowd than it does to the GP, though. Not liking a particular series' brand of gameplay and storytelling is perfectly normal, but liking it once then suddenly hating it 4 years later, coincidentally just when the series went from 'underrated gem' to 'popular and mainstream series' strains credibility a bit further.
And for the record I loved FEAR2 so I belong to neither crowd.
You get what you pay for. You want a good coder? Look at their code. Make them take some written tests and an oral exam. Have them write you something small for free.
Hell yeah. That's why, when deciding whether a job is worth taking, I always ask the prospective employers to give me a month of salary without working for it.
There does seem to be an awful lot of shitty jobs out there, though.
I hate using Apple zealot drivel to defend a Linux project but... maybe it just isn't for you? Gnome with the 2.0 version decided to cater more to new users (read: Windows rejects) and leave the 'hardcore Unix nerds' that had been its main market until then to more niche WMs, and I for one can't blame them for it.
Every one of us wants everything we need and nothing we don't, and Gnome 1.x was getting particularly problematic at the latter with everything and the kitchen sink thrown in somewhere, and each one of those features was a necessity to at least one user while being unnecessary bloat to at least one another. Remember, KDE was considered the *simpler* desktop of the two back then.
So, try one of the smaller desktops. Perhaps WindowMaker is for you, perhaps it's Openbox, perhaps you're like me and it's IceWM, or perhaps you're just weird and twisted and you'd prefer Ratpoison with a bunch of terminals running Emacs ;) There's no shame in using a "non-mainstream" desktop, and by taking a bit of time to find the perfect one you can increase your comfort in your day-to-day usage a whole lot. One thing is clear though: if you aren't a normal "luser", your frustrations with Gnome are only gonna get worse from now on.
Calling Java an "outdated technology" is one of the best ways to proclaim your utter lack of experience in the IT field, after "Access is a great database" and "Internet Explorer is really secure".
Please spend a couple months out there in the real world then come back before posting again, thanks.