Of course, the same is true with other providers. Netflix silently canceled my account without informing me because my ex had switched it to her credit card without telling me, then disputed the recurring charge a few months later without ever talking to me about it. Contacted Netflix when I couldn't watch shows even though it showed a successful charge, and they actually made me delete my entire account (losing all my shows in the process, and without warning me so I could quickly note them down myself). All I got for the inconvenience was a single month free, which I'd have gotten anyway by just canceling the account and starting a new one. I'm annoyed to the point that once my free month is up, I'll likely cancel altogether.
My interest goes no further than wishing my technology news site would focus on actual technology news, rather than endless Musk fellation sessions. This story has *nothing* to do with technology.
I have no interest in fellating him. He's done nothing which in any way impacts my life, nor is he ever likely to do so. Overhyped rich person vanity projects are of little interest to me.
Yes, except it's actually more than $45 per month because they rely on hidden fees that you can't find out about until you've started the order process (and likely, until you've almost completed it) to help them pad the price. Note: "Taxes and fees extra."
...and is the interests of nobody but a few of the obscenely wealthy. The Republican party no longer even pretends to give a shit about the poor and middle class, and yet we keep giving them power. It has to end.
Nope, not crazy in the least. I've been using Chrome as my daily driver since it first came out (like, literally the first day it was released to the public), and I work online so I spend upwards of 8-10 hours per day in my browser. Had no idea these features existed, wouldn't have used them if I did, won't use them now and won't miss them in the least, though.
My guess would be that because your brain expects a human copilot to screw up the directions or not provide them soon enough, you continue to focus on the route yourself. Your modern GPS is so close to infallible, though, that your brain just expects the directions to work and switches off. I've experienced the same thing myself.
Got it in one. Yes, most people would *try* it. However, it's unlikely to taste remotely as good as the real thing -- what artificial food *does*? -- and so I highly doubt that most people would end up eating it regularly.
Given that Google not infrequently flags my web searches as being "suspicious", you'll forgive me if I expect this to work rather poorly in practice. I won't be holding my breath for the pipe dream of seeing captcha images less frequently...
...and that means I have zero interest in it. Too little, too late, Microsoft: Your anti-consumer attitude in the original XBone launch ensured I won't consider any console you sell for at least a couple of generations.
Yup. Literally the only thing Trump cares about is removing all barriers to the rich gobbling up even more of the pie for themselves, and leaving the middle class and poor with even less to share between them.
That's kind of the problem: Nintendo doesn't actually have a policy, unless you think saying "tough luck" is a policy. It wouldn't be a problem if they were straightforward about it, and said "x number of stuck, hot or dead pixels in total, or x number within an area of x by y pixels will be considered faulty", as other manufacturers did. They've chosen instead to make it a war between consumers and customer service to try and see whether you can get a replacement or not.
Sorry, but no. It's not that hard to get quality products out of China *if you're willing to pay the cost*. I know, because I've owned many high-quality products made in China which outlasted the utility of their design long before the hardware failed. Chances are that you have too, whether or not you were conscious of it. I know it's fashionable to shout "China means low quality", but the fact of the matter is that for a company the size of Nintendo, China only means low quality if you want it to. Odds are that Nintendo has made a conscious decision to lower its in-house quality standards and thereby increase the yields / reduce the costs for the LCD panels used in the Switch. It is that simple.
...that Nintendo doesn't have to accept the lowest bid if it doesn't think a good job will be done, right? The buck stops with Nintendo, not the factory they contracted construction out to. The factory will happily take whatever quality control measures Nintendo deems necessary, so long as they're paid enough.
Probably not, though, given that OLED TVs *start* at US$2k for a current-year model or around US$1,500 for an outdated model, and that OLED monitors are basically nonexistent. (Dell announced one but canceled the project after a year due to unspecified issues, and to my knowledge your only other PC OLED display choice is an Alienware laptop with a tiny 13-inch display.)
Plus OLEDs suffer from burn-in, which means they're poorly-suited to arcade cabinet use where there's a high risk of burn-in.
No, it is not an example of good regulation, but then we wouldn't expect otherwise from Ajit Pai. He has no interest in protecting consumers, just in giving the impression of doing so -- and that's what this regulation will do. It only takes two seconds to realize that all the scammers have to do is change to spoofing real phone numbers instead, testing each number they plan to use once first to be sure it rings. Hey presto, no reduction in spam calls and possibly an increase in phantom rings.
I have tried all three side-by-side myself within the last two months. The Vive and Rift have a slight resolution advantage, yes, but it's nowhere near what it's been made out to be. The PSVR was far and away the most comfortable, which given that you *have* to wear it to use it is pretty critical. Plus you need the market to support it with software, which is likely with Sony's sales volumes, but quite a lot less likely with Oculus or HTC's sales volumes.
Oh, and you're right. I misread the price in the summary as I was rushing to post before I walked out the door. So yes, it's $600 versus $500, or 20% too expensive.
You're joking, right? 99% of the population would never watch one of these competitions in the first place. the 1% who might actually watch one, coincidentally enough, are typically going to be the same folks who would buy a VR rig solely for the geek value. VR competitions would not change VR adoption even slightly.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, the same is true with other providers. Netflix silently canceled my account without informing me because my ex had switched it to her credit card without telling me, then disputed the recurring charge a few months later without ever talking to me about it. Contacted Netflix when I couldn't watch shows even though it showed a successful charge, and they actually made me delete my entire account (losing all my shows in the process, and without warning me so I could quickly note them down myself). All I got for the inconvenience was a single month free, which I'd have gotten anyway by just canceling the account and starting a new one. I'm annoyed to the point that once my free month is up, I'll likely cancel altogether.
No deal. I have no interest in continuing to piss my money away on things like ESPN which I will never, *ever* watch.
My interest goes no further than wishing my technology news site would focus on actual technology news, rather than endless Musk fellation sessions. This story has *nothing* to do with technology.
I have no interest in fellating him. He's done nothing which in any way impacts my life, nor is he ever likely to do so. Overhyped rich person vanity projects are of little interest to me.
Please commence your Elon Musk felation session in the comments section starting in 3, 2, 1...
By charging for them when pre-paying. It's right there on the freaking page that they exist. Do a find-in-page for "taxes" and see for yourself.
Yes, except it's actually more than $45 per month because they rely on hidden fees that you can't find out about until you've started the order process (and likely, until you've almost completed it) to help them pad the price. Note: "Taxes and fees extra."
...and is the interests of nobody but a few of the obscenely wealthy. The Republican party no longer even pretends to give a shit about the poor and middle class, and yet we keep giving them power. It has to end.
Nope, not crazy in the least. I've been using Chrome as my daily driver since it first came out (like, literally the first day it was released to the public), and I work online so I spend upwards of 8-10 hours per day in my browser. Had no idea these features existed, wouldn't have used them if I did, won't use them now and won't miss them in the least, though.
My guess would be that because your brain expects a human copilot to screw up the directions or not provide them soon enough, you continue to focus on the route yourself. Your modern GPS is so close to infallible, though, that your brain just expects the directions to work and switches off. I've experienced the same thing myself.
Yes, how dare they test things in the default configuration that only 99% of users will be using.
I was considering buying one of these for my kitchen. I'm not any more. I have no interest in adding more unsolicited advertising to my life.
Got it in one. Yes, most people would *try* it. However, it's unlikely to taste remotely as good as the real thing -- what artificial food *does*? -- and so I highly doubt that most people would end up eating it regularly.
Given that Google not infrequently flags my web searches as being "suspicious", you'll forgive me if I expect this to work rather poorly in practice. I won't be holding my breath for the pipe dream of seeing captcha images less frequently...
...and that means I have zero interest in it. Too little, too late, Microsoft: Your anti-consumer attitude in the original XBone launch ensured I won't consider any console you sell for at least a couple of generations.
Yup. Literally the only thing Trump cares about is removing all barriers to the rich gobbling up even more of the pie for themselves, and leaving the middle class and poor with even less to share between them.
That's kind of the problem: Nintendo doesn't actually have a policy, unless you think saying "tough luck" is a policy. It wouldn't be a problem if they were straightforward about it, and said "x number of stuck, hot or dead pixels in total, or x number within an area of x by y pixels will be considered faulty", as other manufacturers did. They've chosen instead to make it a war between consumers and customer service to try and see whether you can get a replacement or not.
Sorry, but no. It's not that hard to get quality products out of China *if you're willing to pay the cost*. I know, because I've owned many high-quality products made in China which outlasted the utility of their design long before the hardware failed. Chances are that you have too, whether or not you were conscious of it. I know it's fashionable to shout "China means low quality", but the fact of the matter is that for a company the size of Nintendo, China only means low quality if you want it to. Odds are that Nintendo has made a conscious decision to lower its in-house quality standards and thereby increase the yields / reduce the costs for the LCD panels used in the Switch. It is that simple.
No, they very much do not. I defy you to show me an arcade-sized CRT which (prior to the shortage) cost US$2,000 within the last 15 years.
...that Nintendo doesn't have to accept the lowest bid if it doesn't think a good job will be done, right? The buck stops with Nintendo, not the factory they contracted construction out to. The factory will happily take whatever quality control measures Nintendo deems necessary, so long as they're paid enough.
Probably not, though, given that OLED TVs *start* at US$2k for a current-year model or around US$1,500 for an outdated model, and that OLED monitors are basically nonexistent. (Dell announced one but canceled the project after a year due to unspecified issues, and to my knowledge your only other PC OLED display choice is an Alienware laptop with a tiny 13-inch display.)
Plus OLEDs suffer from burn-in, which means they're poorly-suited to arcade cabinet use where there's a high risk of burn-in.
No, it is not an example of good regulation, but then we wouldn't expect otherwise from Ajit Pai. He has no interest in protecting consumers, just in giving the impression of doing so -- and that's what this regulation will do. It only takes two seconds to realize that all the scammers have to do is change to spoofing real phone numbers instead, testing each number they plan to use once first to be sure it rings. Hey presto, no reduction in spam calls and possibly an increase in phantom rings.
Yes, it is. Not officially yet, but my understanding is that Sony's considering it.
I have tried all three side-by-side myself within the last two months. The Vive and Rift have a slight resolution advantage, yes, but it's nowhere near what it's been made out to be. The PSVR was far and away the most comfortable, which given that you *have* to wear it to use it is pretty critical. Plus you need the market to support it with software, which is likely with Sony's sales volumes, but quite a lot less likely with Oculus or HTC's sales volumes. Oh, and you're right. I misread the price in the summary as I was rushing to post before I walked out the door. So yes, it's $600 versus $500, or 20% too expensive.
You're joking, right? 99% of the population would never watch one of these competitions in the first place. the 1% who might actually watch one, coincidentally enough, are typically going to be the same folks who would buy a VR rig solely for the geek value. VR competitions would not change VR adoption even slightly.