I've done quite a bit of playing on just about any portable system you can think of and, in my opinion, the difference is mainly about what types of games you really want to play. I'd rather play Ridge Racer on my 3DS and I'd rather play Back to the Future on my iPad. I actually even prefer BTTF on the iPad vs. the way superior PC version simply because I like to lay down on the couch while I'm playing.
There's a lot of blah blah blah about iPhones etc killing Nintndo's market, but I'm really not sold on that idea for exactly the reasons you've mentioned. I do feel, though, that Nintendo should better embrace the on-line store idea. Changing cartridges is really becoming a nuisance.
You know the thing about the Vita... I think I would have been really really excited about it, but man I sure am soured on Sony right now.
This may sound a little counter-intuitive, but I wish Sony would license a bunch of MAME ROMs and create a competitor to the Wii store. I've played MAME on an OLED device before and... you know, there's something about each pixel emitting light... it's like you're actually using a CRT again.
I'm just babbling, but man, I can't believe this machine was unveiled and all I did was make a fart noise.
Apple also released quad-core Macbook Pros at about the time of the iPad. That's also a fact. You'll also notice in any coffee shop you'll be illuminated by glowing Apple logos. You're applying cause where, at best, you have correlation.
How the fuck this ever (and in the previous article) got twisted into "Apple bans DUI checkpoint apps" is beyond me, other than some serious axe-grinding Apple haters are just making stuff up and posting it as news.
I used to think that but now I think Slashdot has noticed that stories about Android and iPhone generate a lot of ad-serving content. People still fall for this shit.
And given that Mac growth is in the area of 20%-30% whilst Windows PCs sales are flatlining, a similar thing is happening even more now. Its called the halo effect.
That's a bit of a stretch to me. We're not talking about a small step, here. Macs are not known for being cheap.
The Mac laptops have come a long way in the last few years. Boot Camp, small/thin/light designs. Strong battery life. Etc. You don't need something like the success of the iPhone to explain it, and you don't really get any added benefit with the iDevices by using a Mac. I will concede I cannot prove it, but I don't believe that the iOS devices are driving Mac sales. I think what's driving them is people seeing Mac laptops all over the place.
The reality is that people switch to Macs at the point at which their old PC is in need of replacing anyway. So it's a choice of buying a new PC or a new Mac. And the vast majority of people are not PC gamers.
People know they like using certain software and they don't like changing. They know if they get a Mac they're starting over and they have no idea if it'll be 'the same' or not. Additionally, they can get these new PCs for significantly cheaper. An iPod is not going to push them over the top.
Im talking about using an iOS device and drawing conclusions about the Mac from it. To attach a photo to am email on the iPhone, you have to open the photo in photo viewer then select 'send in email'. When you do that you are creating a new email. You cant, for example, start writing an email and attach a photo. It's obnoxious.
Speaking as a Mac user, are there really that many people who (1) Are still using WinXP and (2) Are at all interested in iCloud?
Speaking as a Windows user, no and no. I know a lot of Mac people and I haven't even heard anybody use the term 'iCloud' yet.
The *only* feature of the iCloud service that actually piqued my attention was that if you pay something like $25, all of the music you've ripped from CD's will get an accompanying 256k encoding of the songs they have in their library. If I had a bigger collection that could potentially be interesting, but I have a hard time imagining it being a 'whoop-de-doo' to a lot of people.
Not rewarding companies that do things that people don't like is more important to some than having the latest toys.
Yes, that certainly sounds a lot more noble than: "I don't really know what's going on in Apple land, but the word Insightful pops up when people use the term 'walled-garden'. The people I've decided to agree with are my friends!"
Does it really? If it pushes people to buy a newer PC, it also opens the option of switching to a Mac while they're at it.
That's a bit like saying red-light cameras are a ploy to sell more underwear. And, no, having an iPhone doesn't mean you automatically know how a Mac works. If anything, it'll show you that you'll need all new software and it might even imply (even though it's inccorect) that doing things like attaching files to emails is hair-rippingly obnoxious on a Mac.
The reality of the scenario you just painted is this: "well, you can spend $200 to upgrade to Windows 7, or you can buy a whole new machine and your games won't work."
The first link says they took a pre-tax charge of one billion. What is a pre-tax charge? Is it an actual expenditure or is it a commital? The reason I ask is that number is being used to try to work out the defect rate. If they only spend a fraction of that, the defect rate is also only a fraction.
As for the second link, I used to work in video game retail and I am going to share with you my experience with selling the original Playstations: 1 in 4 came back defective with skipping problems. Yes, twenty five percent. 20 machines would come in, 5 would be sent back to Sony. Assuming that you could verify that my statement was factual, would you then believe Sony had that high of defect rate?
And, no, I am not an Xbox fan. Other than the accusation affecting your credibility, it doesn't matter. Microsoft is blasting lots of money into the Xbox, that does not actually mean they wipe their asses with cash. Fanboy or not it is completely rational to ask why they would produce machines with a known defect rate that high. The answer that they just like to burn up cash is not a reasonable enough answer.
Yeah that's why I'm asking. The problem I have with these estimates is that Microsoft would have put the brakes on production waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay before the media started babbling about it. Anything above 5% and any profit margin they ever had (not that they had one at that time...) is gone.
Where do they admit that they spent 1 billion? I remember them committing to a warranty plan that somebody worked out could end up being a billion, but when did they say they actually reached that level of spending?
Also, where did the $100 number come from?
These are important questions. It is *very* difficult to believe that if they truly hit 30%, they wouldn't stop the factories and nip that right away.
Uh, ya, you totally missed the point of my post. I'll make it simpler: Slashdot would develop more 'integrity' if good stories got lots of comments and link-bait got none.
Slashdot Mirror
No problem, as long as they have a Twitter account...
I've done quite a bit of playing on just about any portable system you can think of and, in my opinion, the difference is mainly about what types of games you really want to play. I'd rather play Ridge Racer on my 3DS and I'd rather play Back to the Future on my iPad. I actually even prefer BTTF on the iPad vs. the way superior PC version simply because I like to lay down on the couch while I'm playing.
There's a lot of blah blah blah about iPhones etc killing Nintndo's market, but I'm really not sold on that idea for exactly the reasons you've mentioned. I do feel, though, that Nintendo should better embrace the on-line store idea. Changing cartridges is really becoming a nuisance.
And then, what, miniaturize it? Smart ass. You should learn how to properly use a question mark.
You know the thing about the Vita... I think I would have been really really excited about it, but man I sure am soured on Sony right now.
This may sound a little counter-intuitive, but I wish Sony would license a bunch of MAME ROMs and create a competitor to the Wii store. I've played MAME on an OLED device before and... you know, there's something about each pixel emitting light... it's like you're actually using a CRT again.
I'm just babbling, but man, I can't believe this machine was unveiled and all I did was make a fart noise.
Not until Google controls weapons. Watch the movies, Skynet wasn't evil.
Apple also released quad-core Macbook Pros at about the time of the iPad. That's also a fact. You'll also notice in any coffee shop you'll be illuminated by glowing Apple logos. You're applying cause where, at best, you have correlation.
How the fuck this ever (and in the previous article) got twisted into "Apple bans DUI checkpoint apps" is beyond me, other than some serious axe-grinding Apple haters are just making stuff up and posting it as news.
I used to think that but now I think Slashdot has noticed that stories about Android and iPhone generate a lot of ad-serving content. People still fall for this shit.
Hahah yeah! We should be voting for non-corrupt, selfless people instead! You're a genius!!!
Nope, didn't even know about it. Thank you! I'm used to clicking a 'browse' button.
I suspect you've lost everyone with that analogy.
Pity, it's real simple skidmarks and all.
And given that Mac growth is in the area of 20%-30% whilst Windows PCs sales are flatlining, a similar thing is happening even more now. Its called the halo effect.
That's a bit of a stretch to me. We're not talking about a small step, here. Macs are not known for being cheap.
The Mac laptops have come a long way in the last few years. Boot Camp, small/thin/light designs. Strong battery life. Etc. You don't need something like the success of the iPhone to explain it, and you don't really get any added benefit with the iDevices by using a Mac. I will concede I cannot prove it, but I don't believe that the iOS devices are driving Mac sales. I think what's driving them is people seeing Mac laptops all over the place.
The reality is that people switch to Macs at the point at which their old PC is in need of replacing anyway. So it's a choice of buying a new PC or a new Mac. And the vast majority of people are not PC gamers.
People know they like using certain software and they don't like changing. They know if they get a Mac they're starting over and they have no idea if it'll be 'the same' or not. Additionally, they can get these new PCs for significantly cheaper. An iPod is not going to push them over the top.
They're saying "If you want your app approved, don't crowdsource DUI checkpoints."
Im talking about using an iOS device and drawing conclusions about the Mac from it. To attach a photo to am email on the iPhone, you have to open the photo in photo viewer then select 'send in email'. When you do that you are creating a new email. You cant, for example, start writing an email and attach a photo. It's obnoxious.
Using an iDevice doesn't train you to use a Mac.
Is anyone else getting sick of iEverything? I mean, I hate Apple regardless, but this crap is just annoying.
Yeah, K is a much better letter!
Speaking as a Mac user, are there really that many people who (1) Are still using WinXP and (2) Are at all interested in iCloud?
Speaking as a Windows user, no and no. I know a lot of Mac people and I haven't even heard anybody use the term 'iCloud' yet.
The *only* feature of the iCloud service that actually piqued my attention was that if you pay something like $25, all of the music you've ripped from CD's will get an accompanying 256k encoding of the songs they have in their library. If I had a bigger collection that could potentially be interesting, but I have a hard time imagining it being a 'whoop-de-doo' to a lot of people.
Not rewarding companies that do things that people don't like is more important to some than having the latest toys.
Yes, that certainly sounds a lot more noble than: "I don't really know what's going on in Apple land, but the word Insightful pops up when people use the term 'walled-garden'. The people I've decided to agree with are my friends!"
Does it really? If it pushes people to buy a newer PC, it also opens the option of switching to a Mac while they're at it.
That's a bit like saying red-light cameras are a ploy to sell more underwear. And, no, having an iPhone doesn't mean you automatically know how a Mac works. If anything, it'll show you that you'll need all new software and it might even imply (even though it's inccorect) that doing things like attaching files to emails is hair-rippingly obnoxious on a Mac.
The reality of the scenario you just painted is this: "well, you can spend $200 to upgrade to Windows 7, or you can buy a whole new machine and your games won't work."
But..but..but jumping into Steve's version of the interwebs sounds bad!
There's an exemption in the Apple Store policy about DUI checkpoints that are published by the authorities.
The first link says they took a pre-tax charge
of one billion. What is a pre-tax charge? Is it an actual expenditure or is it a commital? The reason I ask is that number is being used to try to work out the defect rate. If they only spend a fraction of that, the defect rate is also only a fraction.
As for the second link, I used to work in video game retail and I am going to share with you my experience with selling the original Playstations: 1 in 4 came back defective with skipping problems. Yes, twenty five percent. 20 machines would come in, 5 would be sent back to Sony. Assuming that you could verify that my statement was factual, would you then believe Sony had that high of defect rate?
And, no, I am not an Xbox fan. Other than the accusation affecting your credibility, it doesn't matter. Microsoft is blasting lots of money into the Xbox, that does not actually mean they wipe their asses with cash. Fanboy or not it is completely rational to ask why they would produce machines with a known defect rate that high. The answer that they just like to burn up cash is not a reasonable enough answer.
Yeah that's why I'm asking. The problem I have with these estimates is that Microsoft would have put the brakes on production waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay before the media started babbling about it. Anything above 5% and any profit margin they ever had (not that they had one at that time...) is gone.
So the 30% number is really just the most extreme estimate?
Where do they admit that they spent 1 billion? I remember them committing to a warranty plan that somebody worked out could end up being a billion, but when did they say they actually reached that level of spending?
Also, where did the $100 number come from?
These are important questions. It is *very* difficult to believe that if they truly hit 30%, they wouldn't stop the factories and nip that right away.
I know switching email addresses is annoying and all, but comparing it to moving?
May I remind you that Nintendo sold over 30 million of each of those consoles? The money they made in each of those generations was astounding.
Uh, ya, you totally missed the point of my post. I'll make it simpler: Slashdot would develop more 'integrity' if good stories got lots of comments and link-bait got none.