Wow, I am not as in the dark as I thought I was, apparently. I couldn't name a song by those bands either, but Blink 187 didn't sound right, and sure enough, iTunes confirms it: http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/ viewArtist?id=116851
The band is Blink 182. The funny thing is everyone else in the thread also just assumed it was Blink 187. Ah well, having looked at their "Greatest Hits" (Ah the irony, that a "Greatest Hits" album is always where you look to find out if you have even heard of a band you have no clue about.), it seems I knew a couple of their songs after all. Indeed, "All the Small Things" was even in Donkey Konga!
Now I know more pop culture than I did 5 minutes ago.
Let me tell you video games are not getting harder, they are getting easier.
Having recently played Zelda (the original), Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, Megaman and Megaman II, I can agree whole-heartedly. Every 3D game I have played on either the Nintendo 64 or the Gamecube (OK, so I have a limited resume since I have never owned a non-Nintendo system...) pales in comparison with the difficulty of Zelda II or Megaman. Metroid Prime, Mario 64, Zelda Windwaker, Crazy Taxi, any of the Lord of the Rings, Mario Sunshine, MarioKart and all the Harry Potters all are much much easier to complete fully than even getting halfway through Zelda II or Megaman. I think alot of it is the coddling of players with infinite lives and continuous save points (i.e., starting out whereever you save).
You may or may not remember, but in Zelda II, you get three lives, and once those three lives are exhausted you start back out where you start the game. You have to traverse back through the whole world before you even get to the dungeon you died in, and it isn't always easy to traverse the world. In Megaman, there are no save points. You either complete the world or you don't.
All the same, if you have a Gamecube, I would strongly recommend you buy used versions of both the Zelda Collector's disc (I, II, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask) and the Megaman Collector's disc for the Gamecube. These two discs have been responsible for the longest amount of continuous fun we have had on the Gamecube in a long time. Admittedly, it has been frustrating at times (who remembered these games being this hard?), but overall, it has been a blast.
Re:I don't care for these commercials
on
New "Get a Mac" TV ads
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I think Slate got it right when it comes to these ads. They're kinda funny, but really mean-spirited. They're "Haha...you suck!!"-ads that don't appeal to me. That, and the fact that they kinda make me happy that I'm running windows (not right now, right now it's Fedora all the way, I double-boot) instead of apple. It makes the PC look productive and serious, instead of the slacker Mac OS X.
So, interestingly, I talked to three different people - independent of each other - about these ads yesterday. All three were women with low to mid-level experience with computers. I tried to explain why people on the internet were angered by these ads being mean-spirited (although I sort of like them...). All three women argued that is was stupid people didn't like them, and that what they were depicting was true. Two of the three women have virtually no experience with Macs, and yet they still believed what the commercials were telling them.
What I am saying is that it has become clear to me that the ads are not back firing, and in fact, are reaching the target audience. All three of these women expressed a desire to buy a Mac for their next computer, when their current one finally breaks. This actually was surprising to me, because I assumed the ads probably were back firing because of what I had read on Slashdot.
It's always speed. There aren't any other factors.
This is a ridiculous argument. Yes, speed is involved in all automobile accidents, and yes a lower speed (i.e., 0) can prevent all automobile accidents. It is NOT - nor can it ever be - the ONLY factor. Speed is one control point of a vehicle; there are two (plus warning indicators), and steering is the other. What you are ignoring is that all driving (i.e., speed being higher than 0 mph) is a calculated risk. This risk is worth something. Obviously sitting in the driveway at 0 mph doesn't get the young one to school. Walking across the street to the bus stop could also get them hit. Nothing about traffic accidents requires high speeds, and with the large masses of vehicles, (particularly these days) low speeds don't even assure that injuries don't occur when an accident does occur.
As far as I am concerned, speed isn't even the major factor in accidents, the major factor is distractions. When someone is sitting at a red light and thinks the light turned green and presses the accelerator, rear-ending the person in front of them still stopped for the plainly green light, speed is not a factor.
That's just the point. No one makes a conscious decision, everyone is either following orders or oblivious. The legal aide (or hundreds of them) have been ordered by the associate lawyers to type the papers. The associate asked whether the partner wanted to keep the case going. The partner didn't ask his client (the RIAA) whether they wanted to keep going or if he did, he just asked the staff lawyer within the RIAA. I think it is quite likely it never made it above one of those levels of bureaucracy. Either the partner of the law firm or the staff lawyer in the RIAA. One of those people decided it wasn't worth asking because their boss would just say to carry on and the don't want to "bother" their bosses because it might hurt their careers.
Everyone involved is just trying to advance their careers - or keep their careers from being injured. CEOs can't make decisions if no one brings the questions to their attention... And once enough publicity is piled on the case, then it comes to the attention of the CEO (or president of the RIAA) and they have to make a tough decision of looking like an ass or sticking to their guns and looking like an ass.
...worst-case scenario. This is that Sony (your partner in the format war) bombs out badly with the PS3, selling only single digit millions of PS3 units.
That's still millions of Blu-ray players out there, vs. how many HD-DVD players?
I like your point, and I agree with your conclusion that Sony went about this the best way that it can. That said, I think the numbers you are using are not enough to guarantee even tepid success for Blu-ray. My reasoning? The PSP. Sony has sold in the high-single-digit-millions of the PSP, and each unit is a movie player, just like the PS3. Now, what success does UMD enjoy? UMD doesn't even have a competitor in its marketspace. I am not saying that is by any means conclusive, and I still think Sony is doing the correct thing fiduciarily speaking, but having 10 million players out in the wild is very different than selling even 100 million discs.
The differences in favor of the PS3 relative to the success of the PSP:
The living room is already a place where consumers watch movies, and the PS3 is in the living room.
The experience is better than the cheaper alternative. (DVD)
People do use their game systems as DVD players now. (I've heard somewhere that the PS2 was the tipping point for DVD.)
The differences working against the PS3 relative to the PSP:
Blu-ray has extremely stiff competitors in HD-DVD. The UMD had nothing to go up against.
The new media is expensive.
The PS3 surely isn't portable. The iPod has proven mobile video is a lucrative market.
Now they've said "no games on HD-DVD" (which frankly I expect them to change in a few years)...
I think the only issue with that is HD-DVD is blue laser and not backwards compatible with DVD without adding a red laser to the drive. My guess is that one of the ways they will cut costs to undercut other HD-DVD players is to leave out the red laser.
It seems everyone is wondering why this doesn't support high-end phones. From the FAQ ( http://google.com/gmm/faq.html#5 ): "Which phones does Google Maps support? Google Maps works with most Java-enabled (J2ME) mobile phones offered by Cingular and Sprint, and all color BlackBerry devices regardless of carrier. At this time, Google Maps doesn't work with Nextel, T-Mobile USA or BREW-enabled phones (e.g. Verizon, Alltel, U.S. Cellular), or Palm devices. To see whether the application will work on your phone, simply visit http://www.google.com/gmm/devices.html."
I don't think the argument is that WoW is better, exactly. I think everyone who has bought PC games has bought a spectacular game, finished it, then purchased some other less spectacular game because they were looking for a new game to play.
I think the argument he makes is more based on finite gamer budgets and the continuing expense of WoW cutting down on other game expenditures.
For instance, if a player used to buy ~6 games per year at $35, that's $20 / month of gaming budget. Now, of that same $20 / month (assuming the player has already purchased WoW) $13 is going to keep up a WoW subscription, leaving only $7 / month to build up for new games. That's 1 new game every 5 months. Or - to get independent of the per month dollar amounts - keeping up a WoW subscription cuts 4 games per year out of a gaming budget.
Come on, we all know the important announcement is that of Tetris DS! I wouldn't buy the DS before now because the DS won't play the original Tetris for Game Boy. Just imagine the gameplay possibilities for a Tetris DS! Hey, it'll even be cheaper than a standard DS cart ($31 vs. $42)...
Ok, I mostly am joking, but still, it'll be cool. Also, can you imagine how cool Tetris Revolution will be? Whipping the stick to the left or right to move the pieces just seems awesome.
Slashdot Mirror
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa
The band is Blink 182. The funny thing is everyone else in the thread also just assumed it was Blink 187. Ah well, having looked at their "Greatest Hits" (Ah the irony, that a "Greatest Hits" album is always where you look to find out if you have even heard of a band you have no clue about.), it seems I knew a couple of their songs after all. Indeed, "All the Small Things" was even in Donkey Konga!
Now I know more pop culture than I did 5 minutes ago.
Having recently played Zelda (the original), Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, Megaman and Megaman II, I can agree whole-heartedly. Every 3D game I have played on either the Nintendo 64 or the Gamecube (OK, so I have a limited resume since I have never owned a non-Nintendo system...) pales in comparison with the difficulty of Zelda II or Megaman. Metroid Prime, Mario 64, Zelda Windwaker, Crazy Taxi, any of the Lord of the Rings, Mario Sunshine, MarioKart and all the Harry Potters all are much much easier to complete fully than even getting halfway through Zelda II or Megaman. I think alot of it is the coddling of players with infinite lives and continuous save points (i.e., starting out whereever you save).
You may or may not remember, but in Zelda II, you get three lives, and once those three lives are exhausted you start back out where you start the game. You have to traverse back through the whole world before you even get to the dungeon you died in, and it isn't always easy to traverse the world. In Megaman, there are no save points. You either complete the world or you don't.
All the same, if you have a Gamecube, I would strongly recommend you buy used versions of both the Zelda Collector's disc (I, II, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask) and the Megaman Collector's disc for the Gamecube. These two discs have been responsible for the longest amount of continuous fun we have had on the Gamecube in a long time. Admittedly, it has been frustrating at times (who remembered these games being this hard?), but overall, it has been a blast.
So, interestingly, I talked to three different people - independent of each other - about these ads yesterday. All three were women with low to mid-level experience with computers. I tried to explain why people on the internet were angered by these ads being mean-spirited (although I sort of like them...). All three women argued that is was stupid people didn't like them, and that what they were depicting was true. Two of the three women have virtually no experience with Macs, and yet they still believed what the commercials were telling them.
What I am saying is that it has become clear to me that the ads are not back firing, and in fact, are reaching the target audience. All three of these women expressed a desire to buy a Mac for their next computer, when their current one finally breaks. This actually was surprising to me, because I assumed the ads probably were back firing because of what I had read on Slashdot.
This is a ridiculous argument. Yes, speed is involved in all automobile accidents, and yes a lower speed (i.e., 0) can prevent all automobile accidents. It is NOT - nor can it ever be - the ONLY factor. Speed is one control point of a vehicle; there are two (plus warning indicators), and steering is the other. What you are ignoring is that all driving (i.e., speed being higher than 0 mph) is a calculated risk. This risk is worth something. Obviously sitting in the driveway at 0 mph doesn't get the young one to school. Walking across the street to the bus stop could also get them hit. Nothing about traffic accidents requires high speeds, and with the large masses of vehicles, (particularly these days) low speeds don't even assure that injuries don't occur when an accident does occur.
As far as I am concerned, speed isn't even the major factor in accidents, the major factor is distractions. When someone is sitting at a red light and thinks the light turned green and presses the accelerator, rear-ending the person in front of them still stopped for the plainly green light, speed is not a factor.
That's just the point. No one makes a conscious decision, everyone is either following orders or oblivious. The legal aide (or hundreds of them) have been ordered by the associate lawyers to type the papers. The associate asked whether the partner wanted to keep the case going. The partner didn't ask his client (the RIAA) whether they wanted to keep going or if he did, he just asked the staff lawyer within the RIAA. I think it is quite likely it never made it above one of those levels of bureaucracy. Either the partner of the law firm or the staff lawyer in the RIAA. One of those people decided it wasn't worth asking because their boss would just say to carry on and the don't want to "bother" their bosses because it might hurt their careers.
Everyone involved is just trying to advance their careers - or keep their careers from being injured. CEOs can't make decisions if no one brings the questions to their attention... And once enough publicity is piled on the case, then it comes to the attention of the CEO (or president of the RIAA) and they have to make a tough decision of looking like an ass or sticking to their guns and looking like an ass.
I like your point, and I agree with your conclusion that Sony went about this the best way that it can. That said, I think the numbers you are using are not enough to guarantee even tepid success for Blu-ray. My reasoning? The PSP. Sony has sold in the high-single-digit-millions of the PSP, and each unit is a movie player, just like the PS3. Now, what success does UMD enjoy? UMD doesn't even have a competitor in its marketspace. I am not saying that is by any means conclusive, and I still think Sony is doing the correct thing fiduciarily speaking, but having 10 million players out in the wild is very different than selling even 100 million discs.
The differences in favor of the PS3 relative to the success of the PSP:
- The living room is already a place where consumers watch movies, and the PS3 is in the living room.
- The experience is better than the cheaper alternative. (DVD)
- People do use their game systems as DVD players now. (I've heard somewhere that the PS2 was the tipping point for DVD.)
The differences working against the PS3 relative to the PSP:I think the only issue with that is HD-DVD is blue laser and not backwards compatible with DVD without adding a red laser to the drive. My guess is that one of the ways they will cut costs to undercut other HD-DVD players is to leave out the red laser.
Of course, I know nothing, but that's my guess...
It seems everyone is wondering why this doesn't support high-end phones. From the FAQ ( http://google.com/gmm/faq.html#5 ):
"Which phones does Google Maps support?
Google Maps works with most Java-enabled (J2ME) mobile phones offered by Cingular and Sprint, and all color BlackBerry devices regardless of carrier. At this time, Google Maps doesn't work with Nextel, T-Mobile USA or BREW-enabled phones (e.g. Verizon, Alltel, U.S. Cellular), or Palm devices. To see whether the application will work on your phone, simply visit http://www.google.com/gmm/devices.html."
I don't think the argument is that WoW is better, exactly. I think everyone who has bought PC games has bought a spectacular game, finished it, then purchased some other less spectacular game because they were looking for a new game to play.
I think the argument he makes is more based on finite gamer budgets and the continuing expense of WoW cutting down on other game expenditures.
For instance, if a player used to buy ~6 games per year at $35, that's $20 / month of gaming budget. Now, of that same $20 / month (assuming the player has already purchased WoW) $13 is going to keep up a WoW subscription, leaving only $7 / month to build up for new games. That's 1 new game every 5 months. Or - to get independent of the per month dollar amounts - keeping up a WoW subscription cuts 4 games per year out of a gaming budget.
Ok, I mostly am joking, but still, it'll be cool. Also, can you imagine how cool Tetris Revolution will be? Whipping the stick to the left or right to move the pieces just seems awesome.
lalala