the update doesn't write over the existing front end
As a matter of fact, it does. The update comes in two parts - an 8Mb dash update and a 128Mb "content" update. The "content" update contains little more than the Avatars as far as I can tell, the dash update (which requires no extra space) contains everything else, including the interface. You can get by just fine with just this, but you wont be able to connect to live. Considering you only had 256Mb of storage, live was clearly never a priority to you, anyway.
Right, next time a new version of Linux/Windows/MacOS comes out that you upgrade do, DON'T spend time looking around the interface or playing with the new features - take up a new profession, instead!
I'm with you on that one. What's more, previously the dash used to be cluttered with ads everywhere, now they're all in one section that can be much more easily ignored. Sure, it's annoying that it's the default section, but it's a small price to pay and a much better way of integrating adverts, if you ask me. Plus it seems to be the only way to advertise new features, like the photo sharing app - I actually went looking for it before it appeared there and it must have taken me a good 15mins just to find where it was hidden (it's under "Game add-ons" for some reason).
Yeah for most of 2008 the PS3 outsold the 360, but for most of 2007 it was the other way around and right now, right as the holiday season kicks off, the 360 is outselling once again - even in Japan. If it's outselling Sony in Japan, you KNOW something is horribly wrong...or horribly right, depending on your perspective and since Sony isn't likely to have a price cut any time soon, it looks like this is how things are going to be until 2009 at the earliest. Plus, as you already pointed out, the 360 has the larger install base (by a good margin) and even at the rate Sony was outselling the 360, it would have still taken them several years to overtake the 360. I think Sony needs to triple the amount of PS3's being sold in order to "beat" the 360 at this rate. But still, I'm glad of all this, this has been the most competitive generation yet and we've all benefited from it.
I don't think Microsoft wants to try to replace the PC, per se, (after all, it's where they make most of their money), I think they're still pining for that long saught after dream of a PC in every living room. They've been trying for years to do it and all the fancy designs and "media centre" brandings in the world didn't help, but somewhere along the line someone noticed that Games Consoles were rapidly appearing in people's living room's and thus the Xbox was born. I'm nearly certain the Xbox started off as little more than a trojan to get PC's into the living room, but then someone realised there was quite a lot of money to be made from games, so the 360 was born - a genuine games console with support for PC stuff like this. Anyway, I've digressed far enough, what I'm trying to say is I believe this is another way for Microsoft to bring the PC into the Living room - while taking a cut along the way.
I didn't know you HAD to charge for games, though, that is indeed a bit of a pisser, but I suppose it does stop a million people remaking pong.
I think you're a little bit misinformed there, or slightly biased (but then aren't we all?).
Yes, Microsoft doesn't have half as many first-party developers as Sony or Nintendo, but I wouldn't say they've had "nothing" to show for the past year, there's still way more 360 exclusives than PS3 exclusives (But Nintendo has the runaway total of those because so many developers are happy to port crap games to the Wii to make a quick buck). What "mostly irrelevant PC ports" are you referring to, exactly? The myth of the Xbox 360 being little more than a PC is exactly that - a myth (the original Xbox definitely was, though), but it's no surprise that both platforms tend to go hand-in-hand when Microsoft supplies pretty much all the development tools for both. But I digress, I'm not sure what ports you're referring to, unless you count a few Arcade games.
As for being content starved and desperate, I really can't say anything to that because it's just so utterly, utterly wrong. The PS3 is way more content starved than the 360, the 360 has hundreds, possibly thousands of titles on it right now, way more than the PS3 and I've yet to see any kind of NPD data or similar that indicates that the 360 isn't the most profitable system of them all (For developers, that is). The RROD $1billion certainly ate into Microsoft's profits quite a bit, but the amount of money they're raking in through console, software and peripheral sales is staggering. What's more, aside from the Wii (Can you count it as a "current-gen" console? That's a debate for another time), it's selling stupendously well right now and absolutely out-pacing Sony in all markets - Even Japan. Yeah sure, Microsoft has a lot of ground to make up still, but they're currently in an extremely strong position (Stronger than Sony and that's saying something) and nothing seems desperate at all. One thing Microsoft is good at, though, is making money and I think with this XNA lark, they've noticed quite a large amount of potential market for indie games and this is an excellent way for them to get a piece of that pie.
I'm more curious as to how the/. community feels about Microsoft's community games. I, personally, think it's a brilliant idea and hopefully it'll bring back the days of the "bedroom-made game". I'm a little worried that many quality (and more to the point, original) games will get overshadowed by the fad-of-the-month sort of thing, but the system seems to be working well enough for music and youtube, so I think we'll be all right. Plus it's still a lot better than what you currently have - publish and distribute it yourself, on your own site, at your own costs, etc.
I look forward to seeing some really awesome stuff over the coming months (And hopefully years).
No, I was talking about it being interoperable between supported languages. I.e. you can make a.dll using C++ and link it to an application written in VB.
Sure this sounds quite a bit like something Microsoft, of all people, tried to create? That's right, I'm talking about.Net! Microsoft loved touting how you could develop.Net applications in C#, C++ or even good ol' VB and it should all work the same and even interoperate. But it's.Net and I'm sure anyone with any experience knows that despite the supposed advantages, it has quite a few disadvantages as well. But at least it made VB somewhat useful again.
None the less, I wouldn't hold my breath on this one, sounds like a pipe dream to me and I'm sure some would argue - what's the point in running your code through a VM if you can just run it natively?
On a side note: As efficient as hand-coded C? In my experience, 90% of the time someone tries to write "efficient" C, they end up causing more problems than it's worth (early-optimisation and all that). Perhaps it should be reworded to say something like Hand-crafted C from a C Master".
The thing that intrigues me about Tesla, to this day, is that from his very humble beginnings, everyone always thought he was nuts and thinking about the impossible. From the science teacher that told him that his AC/DC converter was as viable as a "Perpetual motion" machine, to Edison himself who claimed he was dangerous and slightly insane, he still kept proving them wrong and was able to push hard enough to show that he was actually right the whole time. It was only later, when he was much older that people were able to fight him off from creating his inventions that he was labelled as crazy or insane but I do wonder if they had anything to them after all.
In a way, yes and no. Although Intels latest processors may use the same instruction set and such as the good ol' Pentium one (or any x86 processor), the actual design itself varies quite considerably between each revision. Even inside certain lines (such as pentium 4) there can be some considerable differences.
Such is the benefit of Open Firmware, but I don't think you can expect most regular people to flash their own firmware, the very thought would terrify some. I meant a good off-the-shelf one.
As far as I'm aware, business-grade networking stuff has been IPv6 aware and compliant for a few years now, but I've yet to see a Router marketed towards the home user that seemed to support it. I bought myself a new Wireless-N ADSL2+ router/modem comby unit only a few weeks ago and IPv6 isn't mentioned anywhere near it. I'd love to see a good Router that supported IPv6 and didn't cost 3 figures, does anyone here know of any out there?
Is it possible for ISPs to run an IPv6 network while the home users still use IPv4? Would it be possible to assign them any ol' IPv4 address, have the BT servers slap an IPv6 packet around it and send it on without breaking everything?
I'm guessing this is the real problem with upgrading the network - you can't just upgrade a few big hubs here and there, you need to update EVERYONE using the network and I doubt many people are going to take kindly to having to fork out £50 (because that seems to be the price all the ISPs here quote for their own supplied routers/modems) just to keep using their internets, which have worked fine for years anyway, forcing ISPs to foot the bill for all that new hardware. However, the least they could do is support IPv6 and just roll it out to new customers, while encouraging old customers to switch over (such as faster speeds - spend £50 and get a "Free" bandwidth upgrade, or something). If new customers go directly onto IPv6, there shouldn't be a problem with regards to costly upgrades and we'll not run out of IPv4 addresses (Simply because nobody should be allocating more) before everyone has a chance to migrate to the new networks.
Slashdot Mirror
As a matter of fact, it does. The update comes in two parts - an 8Mb dash update and a 128Mb "content" update. The "content" update contains little more than the Avatars as far as I can tell, the dash update (which requires no extra space) contains everything else, including the interface. You can get by just fine with just this, but you wont be able to connect to live. Considering you only had 256Mb of storage, live was clearly never a priority to you, anyway.
It's simple - the cost of making the update is significantly lower than the estimated revenue gained from all the "casuals" who want an Avatar.
Right, next time a new version of Linux/Windows/MacOS comes out that you upgrade do, DON'T spend time looking around the interface or playing with the new features - take up a new profession, instead!
I'm with you on that one. What's more, previously the dash used to be cluttered with ads everywhere, now they're all in one section that can be much more easily ignored. Sure, it's annoying that it's the default section, but it's a small price to pay and a much better way of integrating adverts, if you ask me. Plus it seems to be the only way to advertise new features, like the photo sharing app - I actually went looking for it before it appeared there and it must have taken me a good 15mins just to find where it was hidden (it's under "Game add-ons" for some reason).
No, that's the "welcome" channel, two completely different things.
Not to mention that there's now a dedicated "quick launch" option in the new guide so you can quickly get to all your Arcade games from ANYWHERE.
Ahhh but you forget that it costs a lot less to hire a few decent artists than a few decent programmers.
Lynx.
Doesn't knowing of multiple, unreleased exploits in advance count as being 1 step ahead?
Did I leave the Oven on?
Yeah for most of 2008 the PS3 outsold the 360, but for most of 2007 it was the other way around and right now, right as the holiday season kicks off, the 360 is outselling once again - even in Japan.
If it's outselling Sony in Japan, you KNOW something is horribly wrong...or horribly right, depending on your perspective and since Sony isn't likely to have a price cut any time soon, it looks like this is how things are going to be until 2009 at the earliest.
Plus, as you already pointed out, the 360 has the larger install base (by a good margin) and even at the rate Sony was outselling the 360, it would have still taken them several years to overtake the 360.
I think Sony needs to triple the amount of PS3's being sold in order to "beat" the 360 at this rate.
But still, I'm glad of all this, this has been the most competitive generation yet and we've all benefited from it.
I don't think Microsoft wants to try to replace the PC, per se, (after all, it's where they make most of their money), I think they're still pining for that long saught after dream of a PC in every living room.
They've been trying for years to do it and all the fancy designs and "media centre" brandings in the world didn't help, but somewhere along the line someone noticed that Games Consoles were rapidly appearing in people's living room's and thus the Xbox was born. I'm nearly certain the Xbox started off as little more than a trojan to get PC's into the living room, but then someone realised there was quite a lot of money to be made from games, so the 360 was born - a genuine games console with support for PC stuff like this. Anyway, I've digressed far enough, what I'm trying to say is I believe this is another way for Microsoft to bring the PC into the Living room - while taking a cut along the way.
I didn't know you HAD to charge for games, though, that is indeed a bit of a pisser, but I suppose it does stop a million people remaking pong.
I think you're a little bit misinformed there, or slightly biased (but then aren't we all?).
Yes, Microsoft doesn't have half as many first-party developers as Sony or Nintendo, but I wouldn't say they've had "nothing" to show for the past year, there's still way more 360 exclusives than PS3 exclusives (But Nintendo has the runaway total of those because so many developers are happy to port crap games to the Wii to make a quick buck).
What "mostly irrelevant PC ports" are you referring to, exactly? The myth of the Xbox 360 being little more than a PC is exactly that - a myth (the original Xbox definitely was, though), but it's no surprise that both platforms tend to go hand-in-hand when Microsoft supplies pretty much all the development tools for both. But I digress, I'm not sure what ports you're referring to, unless you count a few Arcade games.
As for being content starved and desperate, I really can't say anything to that because it's just so utterly, utterly wrong. The PS3 is way more content starved than the 360, the 360 has hundreds, possibly thousands of titles on it right now, way more than the PS3 and I've yet to see any kind of NPD data or similar that indicates that the 360 isn't the most profitable system of them all (For developers, that is). The RROD $1billion certainly ate into Microsoft's profits quite a bit, but the amount of money they're raking in through console, software and peripheral sales is staggering. What's more, aside from the Wii (Can you count it as a "current-gen" console? That's a debate for another time), it's selling stupendously well right now and absolutely out-pacing Sony in all markets - Even Japan.
Yeah sure, Microsoft has a lot of ground to make up still, but they're currently in an extremely strong position (Stronger than Sony and that's saying something) and nothing seems desperate at all. One thing Microsoft is good at, though, is making money and I think with this XNA lark, they've noticed quite a large amount of potential market for indie games and this is an excellent way for them to get a piece of that pie.
I'm more curious as to how the /. community feels about Microsoft's community games. I, personally, think it's a brilliant idea and hopefully it'll bring back the days of the "bedroom-made game". I'm a little worried that many quality (and more to the point, original) games will get overshadowed by the fad-of-the-month sort of thing, but the system seems to be working well enough for music and youtube, so I think we'll be all right. Plus it's still a lot better than what you currently have - publish and distribute it yourself, on your own site, at your own costs, etc.
I look forward to seeing some really awesome stuff over the coming months (And hopefully years).
The point is that it's not far off from what this article is talking about.
No, I was talking about it being interoperable between supported languages. I.e. you can make a .dll using C++ and link it to an application written in VB.
I didn't know that Java supported more than one language and was interoperable.
Sure this sounds quite a bit like something Microsoft, of all people, tried to create? That's right, I'm talking about .Net! Microsoft loved touting how you could develop .Net applications in C#, C++ or even good ol' VB and it should all work the same and even interoperate. .Net and I'm sure anyone with any experience knows that despite the supposed advantages, it has quite a few disadvantages as well. But at least it made VB somewhat useful again.
But it's
None the less, I wouldn't hold my breath on this one, sounds like a pipe dream to me and I'm sure some would argue - what's the point in running your code through a VM if you can just run it natively?
On a side note: As efficient as hand-coded C? In my experience, 90% of the time someone tries to write "efficient" C, they end up causing more problems than it's worth (early-optimisation and all that). Perhaps it should be reworded to say something like Hand-crafted C from a C Master".
But at the time, he did violate the "laws" of physics. By "laws", I mean the laws we humans coined up, not the actual laws.
That hadn't stopped him before...
The thing that intrigues me about Tesla, to this day, is that from his very humble beginnings, everyone always thought he was nuts and thinking about the impossible. From the science teacher that told him that his AC/DC converter was as viable as a "Perpetual motion" machine, to Edison himself who claimed he was dangerous and slightly insane, he still kept proving them wrong and was able to push hard enough to show that he was actually right the whole time.
It was only later, when he was much older that people were able to fight him off from creating his inventions that he was labelled as crazy or insane but I do wonder if they had anything to them after all.
Sadly, if Dilbert has taught me anything, it's actually the other way around....
In a way, yes and no. Although Intels latest processors may use the same instruction set and such as the good ol' Pentium one (or any x86 processor), the actual design itself varies quite considerably between each revision. Even inside certain lines (such as pentium 4) there can be some considerable differences.
Such is the benefit of Open Firmware, but I don't think you can expect most regular people to flash their own firmware, the very thought would terrify some. I meant a good off-the-shelf one.
As far as I'm aware, business-grade networking stuff has been IPv6 aware and compliant for a few years now, but I've yet to see a Router marketed towards the home user that seemed to support it. I bought myself a new Wireless-N ADSL2+ router/modem comby unit only a few weeks ago and IPv6 isn't mentioned anywhere near it. I'd love to see a good Router that supported IPv6 and didn't cost 3 figures, does anyone here know of any out there?
Is it possible for ISPs to run an IPv6 network while the home users still use IPv4? Would it be possible to assign them any ol' IPv4 address, have the BT servers slap an IPv6 packet around it and send it on without breaking everything?
I'm guessing this is the real problem with upgrading the network - you can't just upgrade a few big hubs here and there, you need to update EVERYONE using the network and I doubt many people are going to take kindly to having to fork out £50 (because that seems to be the price all the ISPs here quote for their own supplied routers/modems) just to keep using their internets, which have worked fine for years anyway, forcing ISPs to foot the bill for all that new hardware.
However, the least they could do is support IPv6 and just roll it out to new customers, while encouraging old customers to switch over (such as faster speeds - spend £50 and get a "Free" bandwidth upgrade, or something). If new customers go directly onto IPv6, there shouldn't be a problem with regards to costly upgrades and we'll not run out of IPv4 addresses (Simply because nobody should be allocating more) before everyone has a chance to migrate to the new networks.