I agree completely. When I saw the headline, I thought "oh geez, *another* mario/metroid game--this is getting just silly now *yawn*." That's why I moved to other consoles and the PC about the time of the gamecube. When you played (since my first days on SMB1) the 28th (joking, but it's probably true) Mario game on the 'cube, it's like "ok, I'm done here."
Not that it matters to me whatsoever, but people forget the reason Nintendo was the champ back then was because it had the largest and most diverse library of games. The Wii was beautifully orchestrated hype hype; if it wants to stay relevant next generation, however, it better return to its original reason for success.
You know, I have to agree with your comment on reviews being BS. So many games which got great reviews were bad or boring. So many which got poor reviews were really good, great, or fun. I was just thinking about that the other day playing Age of Conan. Everybody hated it. I played the 7 day trial this week. That game is just a plain blast. And I've been playing RPGs since Dragon Warrior 1 (NES) and Final Fantasy 1(NES), so I'd like to think I have some semblance of a decent opinion on RPGs.
Others:
Alone in the Dark: awful reviews, but if you learn some advanced techniques, is quite easier, and I would say because of the story and such, quite possibly one of *the* BEST games I've ever played. Never been hooked more on a game in *years*. Dark Sector: alot of fun, not amazing but a pretty good alternative when you are done with RE 4/5. But got awful reviews. Assassin's Creed: so much fun, yet got mediocre reviews.
OTOH:
COD4: amazing reviews. I thought it was the most boring, generic shooter I ever played. Would play it, think it was awful, put it down. I only gave it a few shots more just because it was supposedly a greatly reviewed game. Half Life 2's: great reviews. To me, an awfully boring, un-fun game. Shoot a few guys, walk a few min. Jump on boxes. walk for a few min. shoot, walk, boxes, walk--rinse, repeat ad nauseum. i couldn't take it after a few hours total of playing.
So yea, I think ur totally right. When u said that, it just hit me--reviews are total bullshit. And as a side note, I almost forgot how they are just extensions of paid advertising.
The update for OSX is huge. What's the surprise? OSX has tons of bugs and problems to fix as well. Actually, that's a bigger minor update than I've ever seen on Windows. Makes you think.
Don't believe the Mac zealots or Apple marketing hype.
$5 USB hub (Newegg.com) $2 20 ft. mini-USB cable (Newegg) $2 DVI>HDMI cable (Newegg)
Price for sitting on my *couch* playing on your dreadful idea the PC, that delivers TRUE 1920x1080 output, almost all AAA titles, thousands upon thousands of "casual" free/piss-cheap games, thousands of older games, access to all ITunes content, hundreds of video streaming sites, a cheap internal Blu-Ray player, a 1TB storage device, ability to plug in a controller, surf the net, AND listen to mp3s...
I have to say I agree completely. The new Bionic Commando, which is 2D but utilizes 3D, ends up being the perfect implementation. That's what I hate about the new 3D games--always dealing with the camera. Another one--Castle Crashers--is a nice 3D RPG that is 2D. That said, anybody have any recommendations of any more good games (for the PC preferably, and definitely no handhelds like the OP) that meld 2D and 3D like the aforementioned? Especially RPGs or strategy games with a good story?
Except the Mac isn't a porsche. Not even close. Macs have always given u alot less for way too high a price. Take a look at the shitty specs for the mac mini and u tell me if it's worth $800-900.
Let me sell you this dodge neon for $150,000. I'll put a mercedes stick on it, so it's worth it!
I'll tell u this: I would *NEVER*, ever do wireless again. EVER. It is *the* most unreliable, difficult, buggy, awful concoction ever! It took me endless hours of configuring, tweaking, testing, to get it working. And this is on Windows (so it has proper driver support)!
Fellow Slashdotters, or anyone thinking of ever toying with wireless again, (Windows or Linux) save yourself the heartache and headache. Ethernet cables (and if you cannot make them yourself, buy a prepackaged 50-100' cable) are the only way to go with a wired (not wireless) router. No matter what. Just think, with Ethernet, all u have to do is just plug it in and it works!
Sorry, I can't even argue "most appropriate tool for the job" here. And in any house you build or move into (apartments are usually never big enough for a 100' Ethernet cable)... conduits! Pay for it, even if you can't do it urself and it costs a couple grand. It's worth it for us tech types!
Hmmm--very good points. The set in question is a Sony Bravia, 1080p, 40 in. (do not have the model number on hand) set. It's gorgeous for DVD and TV viewing. I mean incredible. I did use the VGA connection, but images looked washed out, and in playing games it had that effect during fast images that monitors with a pure digital connection (DVI) do not have. That's why I figured to go DVI -> HDMI. I'll test it again and let you know so you don't have to make a $2000 mistake:).
you brought up an excellent point. i thought the same thing--so i did it. hooked up a beautiful 40" 1080p LCD TV to my computer (but keep in mind u need a DVI-HDMI converter).
But a big problem occured that I didn't account for. Eveyrthing is blurry and all text and images look like crap. Forget even being close to sharp. Everything looks like it was run through high JPEG compression.
As it turns out, LCD TV's can't do lower than 96 dpi. most LCD *monitors* do much lower, which we take for granted--it makes monitors look so sharp. So unfortunately, unless u barely use ur computer or u just don't care, that 30" or or any LCD monitor for that matter, is necessary.
I can't let this one slide.:-) Most people choose BMW because they offer a truly incredible driving experience. Comfort combined with sports-car handling (it sounds like marketing fluff, but it really is true). And they do even the littlest nuances perfectly--like even if you jam on the accelerator, with throttle tip-in, it still delivers smooth power delivery; or BMW's perfect steering feel. Apple, on the other hand, offers nothing over a PC. It's the same components in a prettier box, marked up between 50-150% in price.
And one could make the argument, "but with OS X it does the nuances right as well, like the BMW." But also here, the difference is your preference. It is NOT like with BMW against other cars, where the BMW truly IS better.
2. I just have my bill automatically charge to my credit card. Beats your so called "elegant" method.
3. I use Opera, which blows away any web browser on mobile phones; uh, I double click on install software and plug my phone into a cradle--"just works"--no IPhone improvement there; as for the interface, take for example blackberry's scroll wheel and side button--use that and you'll wonder why an IPhone is worth the extra $200.
4. So in the real world, many smart phones are just as good, if not better, offer more features, less restrications, a better price, and a choice of carriers.
Keep in mind even though consoles says they do 1080i/p, doesn't mean it actually does. Call of Duty 4, etc, only display like 1080x600 or something like that, even though it says 1080i on the box. Only a rare few games actually display the full 1920x1080 or whatever the resolution is.
You know what is interesting? The real winner in the "console" wars, although many may not realize it, is the PC:
1. Vast library of titles available and also has titles available on multiple consoles (vs. PS3's dearth of a game library)
2. Option to have non-faulty hardware (vs. XBOX 360 "red ring of death"; btw, I'm not saying all have it--mine is in an extremely well ventilated area and I have no problems)
3. Superior graphics capabilities. Being able to play Oblivion at resolutions 1280x1024 and up--gorgeous (vs. the Wii)
4. No need to deal with figuring out the complexities of HDTV or even buying one (just choose the resolution your monitor, which you already have, supports)
5. The expense. You already have a computer if you are reading/. Pick up a cheap $200 video card (e.g. ATI Radeon X1950 XT) that can run pretty much any game out there with very good quality and good resolution, It will be very speedy and you have something that is cheaper than any of the consoles. And needing an expensive computer for games is a myth.
6. No loading times (for the most part). Forza Motorsport 2 or Oblivion on an XBOX 360--painful, after a while
7. Depending on the game, free online play
8. Games are always about $10-20 cheaper than console counterparts
9. Built-in hard drive, and whatever size you want at any price you want at that
You know what is interesting? The real winner in the "console" wars, although many may not realize it, is the PC:
1. Vast library of titles available and also has titles available on multiple consoles (vs. PS3's dearth of a game library)
2. Option to have non-faulty hardware (vs. XBOX 360 "red ring of death"; btw, I'm not saying all have it--mine is in an extremely well ventilated area and I have no problems)
3. Superior graphics capabilities. Being able to play Oblivion at resolutions 1280x1024 and up--gorgeous (vs. the Wii)
4. No need to deal with figuring out the complexities of HDTV or even buying one (just choose the resolution your monitor, which you already have, supports)
5. The expense. You already have a computer if you are reading/. Pick up a cheap $200 video card (e.g. ATI Radeon X1950 XT) that can run pretty much any game out there with very good quality and good resolution, It will be very speedy and you have something that is cheaper than any of the consoles. And needing an expensive computer for games is a myth.
6. No loading times (for the most part). Forza Motorsport 2 or Oblivion on an XBOX 360--painful, after a while
P.S. Only meant to recommend it for the pc because u probably already have one, and there is no sense in buying a used original xbox for 1 game. I don't mean to play platform favorites.;)
i totally agree with u! i was thinking this for the longest time, and when i saw the new list recently, morrowwind was the first thing i looked for.:) my advice, go buy it for the pc. I've seen it used for like $7 on amazon. I don't think it'll ever be released, probably a ploy by bethesda so that ppl will buy oblivion instead. I went this route because i recently got a new box. Its got an entry level ATI x1300. plays it fine, so u should be ok. (I was originally wanting Morrowind for the 360 because before I was stuck with a 2001 Thinkpad with a 32 MB integrated graphics accelerator and only 256 MB RAM. Ouch).
I was just reading some of the posts here. Infuriating. You know what I realized? Most of the people on Slashdot (who post anyway) may seem knowledgeable about computers and smart, but are not. Most are computer newbies. When a bunch of people bitch that Vista shows its using all their RAM... Wow... (hint: caching). Don't listen to most of the stuff on this post because the people think they know what they are talking about, but they really don't. And guaranteed I'll be modded down...
I just bough a brand new computer. I'm impressed. Vista works pretty flawlessly. Here is to denounce the FUD:
1) All my old programs work without a hitch 2) I *rarely* get a UAC prompt. If I do, it's pretty much for admin-only things anyway (which is the correct way to handle elevating privelages) like installing software or using the control panel. Lest you forget you also must be root to install packages with Yum or Apt. There is no prompt for using the calender or other BS like getting UAC prompts willy-nilly 3) It's not slow 4) Games work fine. I have an ATI x1300 and it plays the games fine
The only thing which is a pain is Vista's file manager. Even though there is an option to set all folders to use the same settings and view as the current directory, it doesn't do what it's told. Therefore, you will always be in one directory--say, with the details view, and the next directory is the tile view. A real big pain and more annoying than you think if you frequently manage files.
Btw, don't give me any BS about how "sure it works fine because you bought Vista pre-installed." Every computer from now on will be pre-installed so your issue is moot AND my computer is using the same damn drivers one would find by downloading them off their respective vendor's sites (and thereby installed by the oh-so-difficult clicking of next > next > finish).
I sincerely hope Linux doesn't bork Vista partitions. Just had this happen twice in a week with EliveCD and then Ubuntu. Never happened to me before--apparently I always used FAT32 when I dual booted Windows XP and Linux--I forgot about that. But anyways, had my last two installs use NTFS. EliveCD and Ubuntu corrupted my Windows XP partition (* See below)! Let's hope when the time comes I can dual-boot Vista (because it uses NTFS by default) and a Linux distro without this same problem occuring. Fellow users beware (keep good backups)!
* I'm guessing because EliveCD attempted to automount my XP partition and Ubuntu modified the partition table during an install. Either way they had access to my Windows XP partition. Then XP refused to start and always froze before the login screen loading on C:\WINDOWS\System32\drivers\mup.sys (courtesy Windows safe mode output). Ran Knoppix (I'm impressed by ntfsfix, btw) and it says I had a dirty NTFS volume (not properly unmounted). But Windows won't even get to safe mode to run chkdsk and when I use the install CD for recovery, the installer crashes. It must be Linux because this EXACT same process occured after I ran both EliveCD and Ubuntu 6.10.
(And btw, YES some people like me want to eventually run Vista, YES I want to use Linux, and YES I want to dual-boot.)
I know this could be considered off-topic, but it is game related and a good hint I wanted to share: to get the most out of your video card and computer in gaming, instead of buying a new LCD use the money for a CRT (21" for example). Get it with a high refresh rate (easy on the eyes, > 85hz IIRC). This way, you can play Oblivion at 800x600 on an aging card at say 60 FPS instead of at 1280x1000 (I forget the exact resolution) at say 10 FPS.
NOTE: for those uninitiated, LCD's only clearly display their native resolution. Otherwise, it will scale the picture and appear blurry. For example, displaying a 800x600 game full screen on a 1024x768 native LCD looks blurry and unclear (because it basically blows up the picture). Of course I would imagine playing a game in a window at 800x600 on a 1024x768 LCD would fix that problem; I just don't like playing games in a window, but that's me.
i gotta realize that with fanboys its a losing battle. but at least i can educate those who are normal. btw to everyone, read my post which this parent is responding to. It was modded down because fanboys don't like what truth i have to say.
apple doesn't only do this to the mac pro. look at the mac mini. its a "mid-ranged model". Most PC mid ranged computers offer some great power and value. Your wrong if you say the mini is a budget model--a decently configured one can be $977 (1.66ghz dual core, 80gb hd, 2 gb ram). Oh and that's without a monitor. but yet, you get the woefully underpowered intel integrated graphics... and you can't change it. On a PC you can. Just an extra ~$100 buys you a great card. If you want a *decent* graphics card in a Mac, you must get the 17in imac. but wait! you don't want a 17 in monitor. You want it bigger. tough. the monitors are integrated. you have to buy the $1700 20 in model (yea sure it's $1500, you want 2gb ram). You can't buy a mac mini and pop in the ~$100 card and have an $1077 computer, you must spend more ($1400 for the 17in imac w/ 2gb ram or $1700 for the 20in.). Same thing with the Imacs. Did it ever occur to you that people use monitors on many computers, or don't want to throw it out when they get a new computer. With an Imac, tough, you lose the monitor if you don't use it. You could save tons of money. Gee, that 24 $2300 imac sure is nice. too bad that $830 equivalent monitor is thrown away when you get a new computer.
Have all the intelligent people left slashdot? I guess they wised up and stopped reading or posting years ago like i did.
1) Apple uses the same components as every other vendor
2) "Superior" apple quality: frequent random shutdowns (macbook), clear overheating issues (macbook pro), viruses in I-Pods, discolorations (macbook), cracking and overall poor assembly (apple cube), software incompatibility (apps breaking from OSX 10.3 - 10.4; software should still be usable only 2 years later)
3) The old analogy to cars: if Apple really was a Ferrari, it would be an "Apple F430" with a 4 cylinder engine and $50 all season tires, yet STILL priced at $180,000. To get anything even remotely more powerful, forget it. You cannot replace the tires or the engine (or even add a turbo- or super-charger). You must spend $600,000 on the "Apple Enzo." Meanwhile, the "Dell Carerra S" has Goodyear Eagle F1's, a 355 BHP flat-6, and does 0-60 in 4.3 for $90,000 (still cheaper than the "Apple F430" and blows it out of the water). More importantly, in daily driving, it does 9/10ths what it's $600,000 brother the carerra GT can do. Macs do not give you choice. I'm surprised that many Slashdot users love them, considering its users value choice and openness so much.
4) Properly designed. Please. Maybe aside from raw looks, I have an *old* (by today's standards) Dell D800 that is better designed. It is made to be especially durable; it has been to hell and back and still looks new. It includes every port you can think of (firewire, vga-out, s-video, pc card slots, 4 usb slots, etc). It runs very cool *ahem* (MBP). That is properly designed. But wait, it's a Dell *gasp*! And I love how people drool over the mac pro and its great design, when the Dell Precision series seriously wipes the floor with it. In addition, if you are a savvy consumer (note I said consumer, you don't even have to be a true geek--you can go to the 690, 490, etc. pages, and compare to see which is the cheapest even if you're not an extremely educated user) and get a Precision *cheaper* than the mac pro (unlike what many have been reading lately). And what is more, Dell clearly has the better design. They *truly* took into account (compared to a Mac Pro) the "workstation class" computer:
The Mac Pro comes with capabilites only to go to 16 GB RAM. The max one can get is a dreadful 7200 RPM hard drive. 2 TB of space you say! Whoop-de-do. The Precision 690s (which are properly designed) can have up to *5* hard drives at 750 GB each and you can even get 10,000 RPM drives. You can even (drool) get 15,000 RPM SAS hard drives. One of the computer's biggest bottlenecks is the hard drive (moreso than most things). A 15,000 RPM SAS HD would alone would *destroy* the Mac Pro. Also, never mind you can also get DUAL SLI Nvidia Quadros FX4500s (Mac Pro can only have 1) or FireGLs (none at all for the Mac Pro) and up to *64* GB RAM. There is even the option to have 1KW power supplies for all this power (MORE proper design). Oh, and don't forget you can output up to 4 monitors, not 2 like the mac pro.
Please do not fuel the lies than Macs are made are of superior -design- or -quality-.
"Note to Microsoft GUI gurus: Take a look at the latest version of Apple's iTunes software, the recently released Version 7. Gloss and shine are out, the 3-D sandblasted look is in. From what I've seen so far, Mac OS X 10.5, or Leopard, still looks pretty much like the current OS X 10.4 -- at least according to the developer preview Apple released selectively last month. But I'm really hoping that one of the tricks Apple CEO Steve Jobs has up his sleeve is a plan to make the entire operating system look like the interface used in iTunes 7. We'll know in a few months."
I sincerely hope that OS X doesn't adopt the new ITunes theme. I was thinking of getting a new Macbook when Leopard is released. But if the current theme that looks very nice now changes into that ugly ITunes theme, that purchase is out of the question.
I want know how the hell Myspace always crashes my browsers. I've never had FF or Opera crash if I recall correctly. Myspace has been the only site to do so. And when it doesn't crash my browser, it slows it down to what appears like an infinite loop (with at most 3 tabs of user pages active). You then don't get FF (or Opera) responsiveness back until a minute or so. *And* not only this, but somehow it gets around my settings in FF (tools>options>downloads>view & edit actions button) where I have any sort of media or plugin action be to save, yet it still opens and plays the file without my permission! You know a website is bad if this is the case.
More importantly, and these answers serve the/. community, how do u prevent all of the above? It's almost as if it violates all browser protection mechanisms.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree completely. When I saw the headline, I thought "oh geez, *another* mario/metroid game--this is getting just silly now *yawn*." That's why I moved to other consoles and the PC about the time of the gamecube. When you played (since my first days on SMB1) the 28th (joking, but it's probably true) Mario game on the 'cube, it's like "ok, I'm done here."
Not that it matters to me whatsoever, but people forget the reason Nintendo was the champ back then was because it had the largest and most diverse library of games. The Wii was beautifully orchestrated hype hype; if it wants to stay relevant next generation, however, it better return to its original reason for success.
You know, I have to agree with your comment on reviews being BS. So many games which got great reviews were bad or boring. So many which got poor reviews were really good, great, or fun. I was just thinking about that the other day playing Age of Conan. Everybody hated it. I played the 7 day trial this week. That game is just a plain blast. And I've been playing RPGs since Dragon Warrior 1 (NES) and Final Fantasy 1(NES), so I'd like to think I have some semblance of a decent opinion on RPGs.
Others:
Alone in the Dark: awful reviews, but if you learn some advanced techniques, is quite easier, and I would say because of the story and such, quite possibly one of *the* BEST games I've ever played. Never been hooked more on a game in *years*.
Dark Sector: alot of fun, not amazing but a pretty good alternative when you are done with RE 4/5. But got awful reviews.
Assassin's Creed: so much fun, yet got mediocre reviews.
OTOH:
COD4: amazing reviews. I thought it was the most boring, generic shooter I ever played. Would play it, think it was awful, put it down. I only gave it a few shots more just because it was supposedly a greatly reviewed game.
Half Life 2's: great reviews. To me, an awfully boring, un-fun game. Shoot a few guys, walk a few min. Jump on boxes. walk for a few min. shoot, walk, boxes, walk--rinse, repeat ad nauseum. i couldn't take it after a few hours total of playing.
So yea, I think ur totally right. When u said that, it just hit me--reviews are total bullshit. And as a side note, I almost forgot how they are just extensions of paid advertising.
The update for OSX is huge. What's the surprise? OSX has tons of bugs and problems to fix as well. Actually, that's a bigger minor update than I've ever seen on Windows. Makes you think.
Don't believe the Mac zealots or Apple marketing hype.
$5 USB hub (Newegg.com)
$2 20 ft. mini-USB cable (Newegg)
$2 DVI>HDMI cable (Newegg)
Price for sitting on my *couch* playing on your dreadful idea the PC, that delivers TRUE 1920x1080 output, almost all AAA titles, thousands upon thousands of "casual" free/piss-cheap games, thousands of older games, access to all ITunes content, hundreds of video streaming sites, a cheap internal Blu-Ray player, a 1TB storage device, ability to plug in a controller, surf the net, AND listen to mp3s...
Priceless.
I have to say I agree completely. The new Bionic Commando, which is 2D but utilizes 3D, ends up being the perfect implementation. That's what I hate about the new 3D games--always dealing with the camera. Another one--Castle Crashers--is a nice 3D RPG that is 2D. That said, anybody have any recommendations of any more good games (for the PC preferably, and definitely no handhelds like the OP) that meld 2D and 3D like the aforementioned? Especially RPGs or strategy games with a good story?
Except the Mac isn't a porsche. Not even close. Macs have always given u alot less for way too high a price. Take a look at the shitty specs for the mac mini and u tell me if it's worth $800-900.
Let me sell you this dodge neon for $150,000. I'll put a mercedes stick on it, so it's worth it!
You Fail.
This is directed in general to all Slashdotters:
I'll tell u this: I would *NEVER*, ever do wireless again. EVER. It is *the* most unreliable, difficult, buggy, awful concoction ever! It took me endless hours of configuring, tweaking, testing, to get it working. And this is on Windows (so it has proper driver support)!
Fellow Slashdotters, or anyone thinking of ever toying with wireless again, (Windows or Linux) save yourself the heartache and headache. Ethernet cables (and if you cannot make them yourself, buy a prepackaged 50-100' cable) are the only way to go with a wired (not wireless) router. No matter what. Just think, with Ethernet, all u have to do is just plug it in and it works!
Sorry, I can't even argue "most appropriate tool for the job" here. And in any house you build or move into (apartments are usually never big enough for a 100' Ethernet cable)... conduits! Pay for it, even if you can't do it urself and it costs a couple grand. It's worth it for us tech types!
Hmmm--very good points. The set in question is a Sony Bravia, 1080p, 40 in. (do not have the model number on hand) set. It's gorgeous for DVD and TV viewing. I mean incredible. I did use the VGA connection, but images looked washed out, and in playing games it had that effect during fast images that monitors with a pure digital connection (DVI) do not have. That's why I figured to go DVI -> HDMI. I'll test it again and let you know so you don't have to make a $2000 mistake :).
you brought up an excellent point. i thought the same thing--so i did it. hooked up a beautiful 40" 1080p LCD TV to my computer (but keep in mind u need a DVI-HDMI converter).
But a big problem occured that I didn't account for. Eveyrthing is blurry and all text and images look like crap. Forget even being close to sharp. Everything looks like it was run through high JPEG compression.
As it turns out, LCD TV's can't do lower than 96 dpi. most LCD *monitors* do much lower, which we take for granted--it makes monitors look so sharp. So unfortunately, unless u barely use ur computer or u just don't care, that 30" or or any LCD monitor for that matter, is necessary.
I can't let this one slide. :-) Most people choose BMW because they offer a truly incredible driving experience. Comfort combined with sports-car handling (it sounds like marketing fluff, but it really is true). And they do even the littlest nuances perfectly--like even if you jam on the accelerator, with throttle tip-in, it still delivers smooth power delivery; or BMW's perfect steering feel. Apple, on the other hand, offers nothing over a PC. It's the same components in a prettier box, marked up between 50-150% in price.
And one could make the argument, "but with OS X it does the nuances right as well, like the BMW." But also here, the difference is your preference. It is NOT like with BMW against other cars, where the BMW truly IS better.
Meanwhile in the real world...
1. I had an HP IPaq... it "just worked" also.
2. I just have my bill automatically charge to my credit card. Beats your so called "elegant" method.
3. I use Opera, which blows away any web browser on mobile phones;
uh, I double click on install software and plug my phone into a cradle--"just works"--no IPhone improvement there;
as for the interface, take for example blackberry's scroll wheel and side button--use that and you'll wonder why an IPhone is worth the extra $200.
4. So in the real world, many smart phones are just as good, if not better, offer more features, less restrications, a better price, and a choice of carriers.
Again, your fanboyism makes me want to throw up.
O. My. God. After reading the first half of this post I could go on no more. It makes me want to throw up that your fanboyism is so incredibly strong.
Wow.
Keep in mind even though consoles says they do 1080i/p, doesn't mean it actually does. Call of Duty 4, etc, only display like 1080x600 or something like that, even though it says 1080i on the box. Only a rare few games actually display the full 1920x1080 or whatever the resolution is.
You know what is interesting? The real winner in the "console" wars, although many may not realize it, is the PC:
/. Pick up a cheap $200 video card (e.g. ATI Radeon X1950 XT) that can run pretty much any game out there with very good quality and good resolution, It will be very speedy and you have something that is cheaper than any of the consoles. And needing an expensive computer for games is a myth.
1. Vast library of titles available and also has titles available on multiple consoles (vs. PS3's dearth of a game library)
2. Option to have non-faulty hardware (vs. XBOX 360 "red ring of death"; btw, I'm not saying all have it--mine is in an extremely well ventilated area and I have no problems)
3. Superior graphics capabilities. Being able to play Oblivion at resolutions 1280x1024 and up--gorgeous (vs. the Wii)
4. No need to deal with figuring out the complexities of HDTV or even buying one (just choose the resolution your monitor, which you already have, supports)
5. The expense. You already have a computer if you are reading
6. No loading times (for the most part). Forza Motorsport 2 or Oblivion on an XBOX 360--painful, after a while
7. Depending on the game, free online play
8. Games are always about $10-20 cheaper than console counterparts
9. Built-in hard drive, and whatever size you want at any price you want at that
10. Mods. Tons. And they're free.
Something to think about.
You know what is interesting? The real winner in the "console" wars, although many may not realize it, is the PC:
/. Pick up a cheap $200 video card (e.g. ATI Radeon X1950 XT) that can run pretty much any game out there with very good quality and good resolution, It will be very speedy and you have something that is cheaper than any of the consoles. And needing an expensive computer for games is a myth.
1. Vast library of titles available and also has titles available on multiple consoles (vs. PS3's dearth of a game library)
2. Option to have non-faulty hardware (vs. XBOX 360 "red ring of death"; btw, I'm not saying all have it--mine is in an extremely well ventilated area and I have no problems)
3. Superior graphics capabilities. Being able to play Oblivion at resolutions 1280x1024 and up--gorgeous (vs. the Wii)
4. No need to deal with figuring out the complexities of HDTV or even buying one (just choose the resolution your monitor, which you already have, supports)
5. The expense. You already have a computer if you are reading
6. No loading times (for the most part). Forza Motorsport 2 or Oblivion on an XBOX 360--painful, after a while
Something to think about.
P.S. Only meant to recommend it for the pc because u probably already have one, and there is no sense in buying a used original xbox for 1 game. I don't mean to play platform favorites. ;)
i totally agree with u! i was thinking this for the longest time, and when i saw the new list recently, morrowwind was the first thing i looked for. :) my advice, go buy it for the pc. I've seen it used for like $7 on amazon. I don't think it'll ever be released, probably a ploy by bethesda so that ppl will buy oblivion instead. I went this route because i recently got a new box. Its got an entry level ATI x1300. plays it fine, so u should be ok. (I was originally wanting Morrowind for the 360 because before I was stuck with a 2001 Thinkpad with a 32 MB integrated graphics accelerator and only 256 MB RAM. Ouch).
I was just reading some of the posts here. Infuriating. You know what I realized? Most of the people on Slashdot (who post anyway) may seem knowledgeable about computers and smart, but are not. Most are computer newbies. When a bunch of people bitch that Vista shows its using all their RAM... Wow... (hint: caching). Don't listen to most of the stuff on this post because the people think they know what they are talking about, but they really don't. And guaranteed I'll be modded down...
I just bough a brand new computer. I'm impressed. Vista works pretty flawlessly. Here is to denounce the FUD:
1) All my old programs work without a hitch
2) I *rarely* get a UAC prompt. If I do, it's pretty much for admin-only things anyway (which is the correct way to handle elevating privelages) like installing software or using the control panel. Lest you forget you also must be root to install packages with Yum or Apt. There is no prompt for using the calender or other BS like getting UAC prompts willy-nilly
3) It's not slow
4) Games work fine. I have an ATI x1300 and it plays the games fine
The only thing which is a pain is Vista's file manager. Even though there is an option to set all folders to use the same settings and view as the current directory, it doesn't do what it's told. Therefore, you will always be in one directory--say, with the details view, and the next directory is the tile view. A real big pain and more annoying than you think if you frequently manage files.
Btw, don't give me any BS about how "sure it works fine because you bought Vista pre-installed." Every computer from now on will be pre-installed so your issue is moot AND my computer is using the same damn drivers one would find by downloading them off their respective vendor's sites (and thereby installed by the oh-so-difficult clicking of next > next > finish).
I sincerely hope Linux doesn't bork Vista partitions. Just had this happen twice in a week with EliveCD and then Ubuntu. Never happened to me before--apparently I always used FAT32 when I dual booted Windows XP and Linux--I forgot about that. But anyways, had my last two installs use NTFS. EliveCD and Ubuntu corrupted my Windows XP partition (* See below)! Let's hope when the time comes I can dual-boot Vista (because it uses NTFS by default) and a Linux distro without this same problem occuring. Fellow users beware (keep good backups)!
* I'm guessing because EliveCD attempted to automount my XP partition and Ubuntu modified the partition table during an install. Either way they had access to my Windows XP partition. Then XP refused to start and always froze before the login screen loading on C:\WINDOWS\System32\drivers\mup.sys (courtesy Windows safe mode output). Ran Knoppix (I'm impressed by ntfsfix, btw) and it says I had a dirty NTFS volume (not properly unmounted). But Windows won't even get to safe mode to run chkdsk and when I use the install CD for recovery, the installer crashes. It must be Linux because this EXACT same process occured after I ran both EliveCD and Ubuntu 6.10.
(And btw, YES some people like me want to eventually run Vista, YES I want to use Linux, and YES I want to dual-boot.)
I know this could be considered off-topic, but it is game related and a good hint I wanted to share: to get the most out of your video card and computer in gaming, instead of buying a new LCD use the money for a CRT (21" for example). Get it with a high refresh rate (easy on the eyes, > 85hz IIRC). This way, you can play Oblivion at 800x600 on an aging card at say 60 FPS instead of at 1280x1000 (I forget the exact resolution) at say 10 FPS.
NOTE: for those uninitiated, LCD's only clearly display their native resolution. Otherwise, it will scale the picture and appear blurry. For example, displaying a 800x600 game full screen on a 1024x768 native LCD looks blurry and unclear (because it basically blows up the picture). Of course I would imagine playing a game in a window at 800x600 on a 1024x768 LCD would fix that problem; I just don't like playing games in a window, but that's me.
i gotta realize that with fanboys its a losing battle. but at least i can educate those who are normal. btw to everyone, read my post which this parent is responding to. It was modded down because fanboys don't like what truth i have to say.
apple doesn't only do this to the mac pro. look at the mac mini. its a "mid-ranged model". Most PC mid ranged computers offer some great power and value. Your wrong if you say the mini is a budget model--a decently configured one can be $977 (1.66ghz dual core, 80gb hd, 2 gb ram). Oh and that's without a monitor. but yet, you get the woefully underpowered intel integrated graphics... and you can't change it. On a PC you can. Just an extra ~$100 buys you a great card. If you want a *decent* graphics card in a Mac, you must get the 17in imac. but wait! you don't want a 17 in monitor. You want it bigger. tough. the monitors are integrated. you have to buy the $1700 20 in model (yea sure it's $1500, you want 2gb ram). You can't buy a mac mini and pop in the ~$100 card and have an $1077 computer, you must spend more ($1400 for the 17in imac w/ 2gb ram or $1700 for the 20in.). Same thing with the Imacs. Did it ever occur to you that people use monitors on many computers, or don't want to throw it out when they get a new computer. With an Imac, tough, you lose the monitor if you don't use it. You could save tons of money. Gee, that 24 $2300 imac sure is nice. too bad that $830 equivalent monitor is thrown away when you get a new computer.
Have all the intelligent people left slashdot? I guess they wised up and stopped reading or posting years ago like i did.
Please stop spreading lies and myths.
1) Apple uses the same components as every other vendor
2) "Superior" apple quality: frequent random shutdowns (macbook), clear overheating issues (macbook pro), viruses in I-Pods, discolorations (macbook), cracking and overall poor assembly (apple cube), software incompatibility (apps breaking from OSX 10.3 - 10.4; software should still be usable only 2 years later)
3) The old analogy to cars: if Apple really was a Ferrari, it would be an "Apple F430" with a 4 cylinder engine and $50 all season tires, yet STILL priced at $180,000. To get anything even remotely more powerful, forget it. You cannot replace the tires or the engine (or even add a turbo- or super-charger). You must spend $600,000 on the "Apple Enzo." Meanwhile, the "Dell Carerra S" has Goodyear Eagle F1's, a 355 BHP flat-6, and does 0-60 in 4.3 for $90,000 (still cheaper than the "Apple F430" and blows it out of the water). More importantly, in daily driving, it does 9/10ths what it's $600,000 brother the carerra GT can do. Macs do not give you choice. I'm surprised that many Slashdot users love them, considering its users value choice and openness so much.
4) Properly designed. Please. Maybe aside from raw looks, I have an *old* (by today's standards) Dell D800 that is better designed. It is made to be especially durable; it has been to hell and back and still looks new. It includes every port you can think of (firewire, vga-out, s-video, pc card slots, 4 usb slots, etc). It runs very cool *ahem* (MBP). That is properly designed. But wait, it's a Dell *gasp*! And I love how people drool over the mac pro and its great design, when the Dell Precision series seriously wipes the floor with it. In addition, if you are a savvy consumer (note I said consumer, you don't even have to be a true geek--you can go to the 690, 490, etc. pages, and compare to see which is the cheapest even if you're not an extremely educated user) and get a Precision *cheaper* than the mac pro (unlike what many have been reading lately). And what is more, Dell clearly has the better design. They *truly* took into account (compared to a Mac Pro) the "workstation class" computer:
The Mac Pro comes with capabilites only to go to 16 GB RAM. The max one can get is a dreadful 7200 RPM hard drive. 2 TB of space you say! Whoop-de-do. The Precision 690s (which are properly designed) can have up to *5* hard drives at 750 GB each and you can even get 10,000 RPM drives. You can even (drool) get 15,000 RPM SAS hard drives. One of the computer's biggest bottlenecks is the hard drive (moreso than most things). A 15,000 RPM SAS HD would alone would *destroy* the Mac Pro. Also, never mind you can also get DUAL SLI Nvidia Quadros FX4500s (Mac Pro can only have 1) or FireGLs (none at all for the Mac Pro) and up to *64* GB RAM. There is even the option to have 1KW power supplies for all this power (MORE proper design). Oh, and don't forget you can output up to 4 monitors, not 2 like the mac pro.
Please do not fuel the lies than Macs are made are of superior -design- or -quality-.
From the article:
"Note to Microsoft GUI gurus: Take a look at the latest version of Apple's iTunes software, the recently released Version 7. Gloss and shine are out, the 3-D sandblasted look is in. From what I've seen so far, Mac OS X 10.5, or Leopard, still looks pretty much like the current OS X 10.4 -- at least according to the developer preview Apple released selectively last month. But I'm really hoping that one of the tricks Apple CEO Steve Jobs has up his sleeve is a plan to make the entire operating system look like the interface used in iTunes 7. We'll know in a few months."
I sincerely hope that OS X doesn't adopt the new ITunes theme. I was thinking of getting a new Macbook when Leopard is released. But if the current theme that looks very nice now changes into that ugly ITunes theme, that purchase is out of the question.
I want know how the hell Myspace always crashes my browsers. I've never had FF or Opera crash if I recall correctly. Myspace has been the only site to do so. And when it doesn't crash my browser, it slows it down to what appears like an infinite loop (with at most 3 tabs of user pages active). You then don't get FF (or Opera) responsiveness back until a minute or so. *And* not only this, but somehow it gets around my settings in FF (tools>options>downloads>view & edit actions button) where I have any sort of media or plugin action be to save, yet it still opens and plays the file without my permission! You know a website is bad if this is the case.
/. community, how do u prevent all of the above? It's almost as if it violates all browser protection mechanisms.
More importantly, and these answers serve the
let me put it a different way. this is not news! this is not the second coming (unlike apple fanboys like to think). it's all advertisements!