I laughed out loud when I read your post. Amen to that. I used to go to Philly a lot. You are so right. It's hard to believe, but Philly is so damn dirty it really does make NYC look clean. And yea, you can live in Center City (the Park Ave of Philly) in a 1 bedroom for 800/mo LESS than a dumpy area studio. Philly rocks. Even though it's so dirty, I'm surprised u left. Short of the dirt, I think it's a superior city.
Well maybe the walk. But when you're going to work, do u want to arrive looking like u just worked out from a 45 minute walk? Though then again, after taking the subway, with how hot it is down there and basically everyone being homeless rubbing up again you, it ain't that bad!
Ha yes that's true. A pool does cost a bit more than a grand.:) Bikes aren't bad though. And look into used Nautilus's. I picked one up used for $700. And I admit that I even overpaid for that.
Not sure what your level/knowledge of working out is, but you should include weight lifting and free weights into your workout. In term's of effectiveness, I'd argue you should spend more of your time in that then the other. Like 60/40 in favor of weightlifting. So many more benefits (strength, reduced injuries, increase at rest calorie burning, higher weight loss from circuit training). But anyway, as for a spotter, you don't need it. Unless you're working out past failure or doing negatives, you don't need one. I haven't used a spotter in 10 years. And you can still make gains. I can gain easy 20 lbs of muscle in 8 months without a spotter or doing negatives or forced reps (and yes that is the max u can pretty much put on without the use of steroids in that time frame).
Well as a personal anecdote, I am currently living in a luxury apartment building (with gym, pool, concierge, doorman, laundry service and rooftop garden) on the Upper East Side and I am paying $3225 split between my girlfriend and I for a 1-br on the 30th floor with a view of central park. When searching for this place last month we saw at least 10 similar apartments in the same price range.
Look, please don't take offense to this. I'm not trying to be mean. But there is no way that exists. You're telling me you live in Central Park East and you're only paying $3225 for a 1 bedroom? I'd want to see the lease documents on that. That's quite frankly even more rare than seeing a unicorn. And to see 10 of them? Hogwash. And the excuse about the economy can't be used. NYC is the only one that was exempt on the housing market values.
Also, the East Village is no-longer the shithole it was in the 80's - sure it has NYU kids but it also has a bounty of small local shops and restaurants, and also a great sense of community, that really can't be found elsewhere in the city (apart from maybe the West Village).
That's very true. It's actually a nice, fun area. Though for me it kinda stinks. No interest in dating a 18 year old who is out drinking until 4 am at the local lounge every night. But yes it does have character. But the point still stands. If you're actually living and *working* in the city (students with mommy and daddy paying the rent don't count), no one wants to live in the E. village because it negates any conveniences living and working in the city offers.
But I really do wonder. Do all these plant articles and thinly-veiled advertisement "news articles" actually translate to sales? Apple probably because Apple-lovers are morons at this point. But aren't Android tablets dying sales-wise, regardless of the media push? I truly wonder.
True. For other companies. So normally I would agree with you.
But this is Apple. They don't care about developers. They don't care about users. It's their way, or the highway.
But of course the media will always put, at the end of the article, "but Apple will have it in the next version!" as they always do. Even though they don't. Yet they never do this for any other company
Seriously. Just no. Journalists--stop it. Stop it already.
I wonder what will happen when all the hype dies down and people actually use their tablet for more than casual BS. Right now it's The New Shiny (TM). But when the world over finally realizes it's collecting dust, will they buy another?
My guess--only the $200 tablets like the Nexus 7 will survive. Though the only thing that has peaked my interest would be *laptops* or convertible tablets (like that new Sony one with a slide out KB) with Win 8. Because as it stands now, unless you attach a mouse or use the nipple on the Thinkpads, Trackpads are quite possibly the worst thing ever to use.*
With Win 8 on a touch-screen laptop, I could for serious work use the mouse--but for casual stuff, using the touch-screen on a laptop would be a god-send. And no, I don't want iOS or even my preference--Android. I want a REAL computer to do REAL things. Like the simple act of being able to load SouthParkStudios.com or browse a company's job board.
* And no, don't listen to what the world's most biased site, the Verge says--the Mac's trackpads are not worth switching entire computers, ecosystems, or preferences for.
Lastly, NYC can NOT be traversed in the time u mention. Hell, I had a co-worker long time ago who lived in the Village and had a 45 minute commute (using a quick 1 train ride) to Wall St. So unless you live right next to work, you are "commuting" in Manhattan as well.
Dude, was your co-worker commuting on horse-and-carriage? You can *walk* from both the East Village and West Village to Wall St. in less than 45 minutes. I would regularly travel from the top of the Upper West Side down to the East Village and that would take only 45 minutes.
Haha, maybe.:) I'm just going by what she told me. 45 minutes, with a train ride. Don't forget Wall St is pretty big. Walking 45 min to the beginning of Wall *area* by the Seaport *maybe*. But I gotta call you out on walking from the Upper West to the East village. No way, train or walk, did you make it in 45 minutes.
And of course you know, 1 bedrooms start at $3,200/mo
In a luxury apartment building (i.e. gym, door and laundry service, concierge, rooftop garden), yes, that's about right. However in places like the East Village - which is considered quite expensive in Manhattan standards - most decent one-bedroom places go for around $2200 and you can pick up a two-bedroom for $2500.
I'm sure you can find places that cheap, but I doubt that they're no less than super-rare. All my friends live in the city for years, and I've never even heard of rent that cheap unless it was for a shitty walk-up studio. And it's the East Village. Who wants to live there? It's not close to anything. Part of why people live in NYC to live within walking distance to work. It would take 45 minute commute to get anywhere from the E. Village. And no, it's $3,200 for a place with no amenities like you mentioned. And a walk-up. And no doorman. I don't know how you get the places you do, but to all reading this, let me assure you it's not the norm.
Well, you're wrong and right. You can buy all the equipment you need for $1-2k*. BUT, working out at home is the most un-motivating, depressing thing ever. So if one starts, they'll never stick to it for more than a few months. It's nice to have a social scene and people to talk to at the gym. But then again, in most gyms, 50% of the people who go are either scumbags or are very superficial. So maybe it's not a bad idea to work out at home and skip that part!
As engineering students are always taught, there are trade-offs to everything!
* Treadmill: $800 multi-use Bench for bench presses, dumbell presses, etc.: $150 Dumbells (that mult-weight one): $100 Stand for barbell excercises (like bench, squats, etc): $150.
Sorry gotta call you out on this one. NY is quite possible the worse place ever. I've lived in the NY/NJ area for all my life pretty much, so I can vouch from experience. You mention:
Staten Island: yea, if you want to live in "The Jersey Shore." Every single person in SI is a ultra-tanned lip-smooching-in-pictures guido/guidette. Watch the "Jersey Shore." This *really* is how Staten Island is.
NJ: Shitty people, superficial, nothing to do (only exists as a resting place for those who commute into NYC), a place where everyone wants to get out but doesn't because "all my family lives here", no woman wants to talk/date you unless you are on steroids or look like you are on "the Jersey Shore" (see above). Commute takes 1.5 hours each way into NYC, and a 2 hour drive into the city on a fri/sat night. And to do anything around the area, it's a minimum 30 minute drive in soul-crushing traffic. NJ, short of southern NJ, is the worst place in the world to live. AVOID.
Bronx and Queens: really? No really? Quite possibly the dumpiest places ever, and you're saying they're great? And there are "suburbs" in these places. And they're even more dumpy. At least the urban areas of queen and bronx have things to do. The dumpy queens suburbs are just dirty and shitty with NOTHING to offer
I know. See my post elsewhere here. But this WSJ was shit. What company in their right mind would give up paying employees less, paying less rent for an office, and getting tax breaks for setting up shop at the location, for the cities. I'm from NJ, and all the banks are moving OUT of the city for that very reason. Everything is done over computers now. They don't need the locations. And tech companies don't need it AT ALL. The WSJ should really mention this. And even from the employee's perspective, why move to a city where startups are going when most of those listed are BS and are going to be bankrupt in 2-3 years. What will the person do when they're let go and have $3,500 in rent to pay every month?
All I can say is, those companies are idiots and you should think twice about companies with so little business sense.
Haha you're kinda right. I'm just laughing having spent almost half of my life driving in a car.
You must live in a suburban area where everything is close. Here in NJ, to go ANYWHERE, it's a minimum 30 minute drive. With soul-crushing traffic. It's all the congestion of a city, with none of the benefits.
But you are right, for the first 20 minutes, driving really is a pleasure. I love rolling down the windows, opening the panoramic sunroff, and listening to my music.
You are right. There are suburbs and there are suburbs. I live in a suburb that is almost country if you will. Lots of space, 1 acre lots, and next to towns that have a lot of stuff to do. But there are also suburbs right next to me where you literally see your neighbors bathroom window from yours. And a patch of grass is your lawn. So poster below you is right too.
Back to topic though, shame on the WSJ for this article. This isn't some BS blog. This is the WSJ, who is supposed to give great business insights. They mention NYC as a spot. However, look at the companies:
Pinterest: BS social networking site that won't be in business in 2-3 years. Yelp: no growth, but won't be out of business either. Zynga: bankrupt in 2-3 years.
Salesforce is the only company with any prospects, stability, or growth. The WSJ should state that yes, companies are coming to cities. But they should also state that what will employees do when their BS companies go bust and they are left with a $4000/mo apartment to pay for. And the fact that these are all startups. What happens when they realize, like the banks are doing (all moving out of NYC), that the city is fucking expensive. Like just a floor in a building is fifty-fucking-thousand dollars a month in rent! Yea, you heard me. It may be trendy, but in 3-5 years they will all say "screw it" and move out to Piscataway, NJ where the industrial parks are.
And again, this is the WSJ. They should mention that in NO WAY will these startups pay the salaries commensurate with living in NYC. A shitty one bedroom is $3,200/mo! Not only will the the companies rent costs be insane, but the salaries will have to be MINIMUM $120k/year. The WSJ should really mention this.
Look, I'm sure this was a fluff piece by the WSJ. But the WSJ should really know better.
So true. I live right by Manhattan. One bedroom's start at $3,200/mo. But unless you're pulling $120k+, you're stuck with the typical $1,800/mo studio. So you're stuck, in a box. I'd love to work and live in the city. But I can't justify not only paying that much, but paying that much and living in a dorm room.
As a disclaimer, I agree with you entirely. The suburbs are soul-crushing and the worst. Either live in the city or complete country. And the joy of being able to live and therefore have a 10-15 minute walk to work is the most amazing thing in the world. I come from a suburb in NJ and it's a soul-crushing commute. 45 minutes MINIMUM to any job in nearby NJ, or MINIMUM 1.5 hours *each way* (3 total) for the city. Nevermind the fact that that 1.5 hours includes a drive to the train station with NO parking and 3 trains.
Now, I do have to call you out though on a few things. First off, NYC is a dump. If you commute, it's not as bad. But if you live there, you'll get real tired of living in honest-to-goodness dirt and filth. Even in really nice buildings, it's just completely dirty. And of course you know, 1 bedrooms start at $3,200/mo. I doubt those companies WSJ mentions pay the salary that equals that. So good luck thinking you'll get to live in Manhattan and work at a tech company. You'll be relegated to living in the Bronx or Queens and again you'll get the commute.
Lastly, NYC can NOT be traversed in the time u mention. Hell, I had a co-worker long time ago who lived in the Village and had a 45 minute commute (using a quick 1 train ride) to Wall St. So unless you live right next to work, you are "commuting" in Manhattan as well.
Ouch that sucks. Guess I won't be going by their reccomendations then. Forget that Grado SR60. Though that JVC Harx 9000 or whatever it's called I see a lot of people love and it's $30. But anyway, thanks for the heads up.
I guess it gives even more credence to my advice of simply actually trying on a pair to see if it's comfy and produces the sound you like. Too bad I can't seem to find a lot of places like that. Shame also that there is no equivalent of like an Anandtech which really reviews headsets and attempts to be objective.
Where do you recommend finding places that have headsets to try? The only thing I can manage to find around here is a music store than has like only a selection of like 4.
I thought the common thread on head-fi is that sennheiser isn't all that amazing. That there are a lot of other options that are cheaper AND sound better.
Wasn't there an article a few months ago reccomending their favs, and sennheiser only had 1 out of like 10 in that list, and they weren't even that enthralled with it?
I'm not an audiophile, but I've spent a year testing just about every config you can think of and a ton of headphones. It seems that, no offense, the groupthink on the net is to choose sennheisers or people repeat it. But the most important thing is to try the headset on, and listen to it and see if the sound is pleasing to you. And apparently, there are a ton that sound amazing (again not for audiophiles tho) but are dirt cheap--like $40-60.
So no, even the above-average person doesn't need $200 sennheisers. Spend between $50 and 80 and call it a day. Tho my Sennheiser $35 earbuds are pretty damn good for earbuds
Forgot to mention that I also say use a dedi sound card because it seems that USB just can't handle the load, at least for games and 3D upmixing. But apparently creative makes upmixing software for $20. Check it out. I don't know the quality, and it still may sound like shit, but it might be better than investing $180 in a Creative Titanium X-Fi or whatever it's called, when it sounds good enough with integrated audio.
Also, get a dedicated USB mic. Gaming headsets are ALWAYS the worst pieces of shit ever. Yet a $20 stand-alone always sound amazing. Go figure.
And FYI I'm sorry but I can't remember the model of those Sennheiser ear buds I have. They're only $35 on amazon but I bought them in 2009. You could search on Tomshardware for the earbud roundup back then. That's where I found out about them
You actually are in luck. I spent like a year playing around and tinkering with all sorts of configs. What I found is that there is not a lot of information or data on this. So here is what I did find, and I welcome any different perspectives because quite frankly I can't find anything else:
Ignore gaming headsets or anything with a mic integrated. They are universally terrible. I've tested the Creative $60 one (only good for bass--mids and highs are distorted and sound very fuzzy), the Cooler Master Storm Sirus (sounded weak, volume was waaaaay too low even at highest settings & then at the highest the sound gets distorted, and only good bass comes from the left ear but not both), the supposed well-reccomended Corsair one (which was absolutely pathetic--no bass and all sounds sounded flat and no vibrancy). So the solution is to get a good pair of true stereo headphones, which are cheap $40-80, and if you must have surround sound, pair it with a sound card that does 3D upmixing. I have an old an old Creative X-Fi (ExtremeMusic I think--drivers don't recognize it properly--I think I have a XtremeGamer but it will only install extrememusic). It's pretty bad that I use a $35 pair of Sennheiser earbuds and overall it sounds better than any of those $100+ headsets. Yes, with earbuds it lacks significant bass and it's clear but not crisp clear, but I bet you a good set of stereo cans with a dedi sound card will be phenomenal. Those earbuds I mentioned are pretty damn good for earbuds, and pretty cheap. 300% better than earbuds thrown in electronics. But then again you don't want earbuds and I agree with you. I freaking hate them. It's just that I havent' gotten around to trying the JVC Harx something or the Grado SR60. I can't think of their exact names, but supposedly they deliver clear at all levels and hearty bass. But then again that's what I read. And astroturfing is so prevalent.
Best advice though is go to a place where you can TRY IT ON and listen to it. Seriously. Even if something is settled on, try it on before you buy it! An uncomfy headset is the absolute worst. I couldn't bare wearing that damn Creative headset because the small tight leather cups drove me mad. And an uncomfy headset will.
Can you install games to the card, or install VC games to the memory card? I'm genuinely curious. That would help a lot with wanting to play a lot of classic old school games from the VC.
Borderlands Mass effect 1 Assassin's creed 1 Dead Space 1 Mirror's Edge L4D 1 Dead Island Operation Flashpoint Dragon Rising Team Fortress 2 Shadow Complex Gears of War Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light Viva Pinata Flock Trials Braid Alan Wake Alone in the Dark (2008) Trine 2 Witcher 2 Crysis (yes it was recently ported)
So no, not everyone plays only those 2 franchises. A statement which everyone repeats, including yourself. And don't forget as a side note, yes, things like mass effect and dead space are franchises now, but only as of 2007/8 were they brand new.
Oh boy. Someone's getting irked. Whipping out a googled reuters article.
Color me not impressed.
I used to read reuters, bloomberg, various analyst periodicals, financial statements as part of my living. You can pull the wool over other armchair analysts on/., but not me.
You make assumptions that based that in 2012 sales dropped off. Did you forget the part where we're just halfway of 2012? So maybe they're off by a million or two from the prior year if you extrapolate for the rest of the year. Not bad for consoles compared to the extreme drop off of the Wii. Now, assuming your unit sales numbers are correct, which I doubt, it debunks your argument right there. Did you miss the part about steady growth year over year for BOTH the ps3 and xbox, compared to the sharp drop off of the Wii. Again lending credence to people buying the Wii as a casual toy?
Did you even read what you wrote? You're saying you're wrong.
As for the Profitability of the PS3 Sony has had a 8 or 10 years in a row at an operational loss for its gaming division
Wrong. Point me to the annual reports where they've said that. And I want to see actual costs compared to EBITDA. Most companies want to show a loss for certain things for tax purposes. The objective is to maximize profit while minimizing taxes paid.
Did you miss the part where it was entirely attributed to the fall of the LCD? No, you just want to lump that into video games. Wrong again.
Can't blame that on Japan. Sales were down like 73%. You don't think that has ANY part in the fact that they lost $950 MILLION
Yes I can. Try reading something relevant. I mean really, how is a supply chain disruption not supposed to kill your margin. Honestly, if the tsunami never happened Nintendo's little misstep with the 3DS price point would have been completely erased by the end of the year. They made a little mistake at launch and they corrected it properly. That'll teach them not to listen to the E3 reporters and raise their price point 100 bucks. The tsunami also stopped game development for just about every Japanese developer. That little side effect is only now trickling down since game development take over year so the 20% drop in released games can be tied to it and the Wii U announcement. Since who's going to develop for the Wii when they know the Wii U is just around the corner.
I'm sure some had to do with supply chain disruption. Not the real reason. Real reason is their pricing analysts got the launch price wrong. And again, it shows your ignorance of the subject. They didn't listen to game journalists to determine the price. They're called pricing analysts and they're pretty much quants who use various models (statistical, financial, etc.) to determine the price.
Try again next time.
And it's common knowledge that the reason is not that people are waiting for the price drop. And did you even miss the huge dropoff with your OWN figures, dropping 4 million then 6 million. All before the Wii U was even announced in 2009 or on the horizon in 2010? Couple that with industry wide figures showing miserable attach rate. So yea, toy was a hot item, people bought toy, and once the toy hype died down, they stopped buying. And the ones who had one stuck it in their closet. But keep on thinking whatever makes u feel better at night.
Remember, a little bit of knowledge is dangerous. Just because you can understand a reuters article doesn't mean you're warren buffet or mario gabelli.
Yes I give kudos to sony for being open (as open as a console platform) can be for doing those games. I would argue though they need more. There are a ton out now and some are pretty cool. ST:O is fantastic, AoC is unique with it's combat, or while not a true MMO something unique like APB. DC is pretty unique at least with the setting (DC superheroes). Free realms though is a generic low res cartoon F2P IMHO. Dust sounds promising though I wonder how that will work considering it's for the PS3, and the new console will be out the following year. Will it be supported? And FFXI? They didn't shut it down following the sequel? Either way, I thought that one was irrelevant because it's known to be pretty much all Chinese gold farmers?
That's an interesting insight. Though are they really not making money? I thought companies like Perfect World or Nexon or whomever are actually bigger and more profitable than all the tradiitonal publishers lately, short of activision? Again I don't know. I'd be curious to know tho.
I can think of more than 12 and even name them off the to of my head:
SMB SMB 2 SMB 3 SNES SMB Mario Kart Mario Kart 64 Gamecube Mario Kart Wii Mario Kart or whatever it's called Super Mario Sunshine Super Mario Galaxy Super Mario Galaxy 2 Super Paper Mario Mario Party Wii Mario Party 4 Mario Party 5 Mario Party 7 Mario Party 6 Mario Party DS Super Mario World 2 GBA Super Mario the lost levels The New Super Mario Bros (that co-op one) SMB 64 Super Smash Bros SMB for the DS the original SMB for the DS Mario Kart for Gameboy advance Mario Kart for DS Mario Party for the DS Mario Bros for the 2600 Mario Bros for the C64
Want me to keep going?
The only issue for Nintendo has been third party support and always has been because they take their image and quality fairly serious.
Quality? Nintendo USED to be about quality back in the NES days. That was 20 years ago. 75% of Wii games since it's inception have been shovelware.
The wiiU rectified the lack of power issue and will ironically hobble the PS4/720 as developers will simply port the basest version to the others. So third party support will flood the system, we'll probably see a more "traditional" controller show up as well for the fps games. It's shaping up t be interesting for Nintendo.
No they won't. It costs time and money to port things. It's not magically free. No one is back-porting their wares to the Wii U. And as a separate but relevant comment in relation to our discussion of Nintendo and the Wii, with the Wii U devs already know they don't have a market for their wares. Hell, does the new controller won't even support Dead Space/GTA/etc. It's the same reason you still don't see controller support for iOS games. Not everyone has them so they would be eliminating a huge portion of their users. And your assumption about power? Because you are privvy to Nintendo's specs that are under NDA? And if you are going by rumors, well the rumors are that the Wii is only as powerful as the XBOX which will be leapfrogged in 1 year by the new XBOX and PS. No AAA dev will, yet again, bother to include Wii U in their business strategy.
You're completely right. Your solution is perfect actually. Simply give us the option. Same way it is with Windows Update. Manuall install or auto update 5 days out giving the option to see if anything is borked.
Like I said before, in reality it's either deal with possibly a broken patch, or the bulk of users not patching at all.
Slashdot Mirror
I laughed out loud when I read your post. Amen to that. I used to go to Philly a lot. You are so right. It's hard to believe, but Philly is so damn dirty it really does make NYC look clean. And yea, you can live in Center City (the Park Ave of Philly) in a 1 bedroom for 800/mo LESS than a dumpy area studio. Philly rocks. Even though it's so dirty, I'm surprised u left. Short of the dirt, I think it's a superior city.
Well maybe the walk. But when you're going to work, do u want to arrive looking like u just worked out from a 45 minute walk? Though then again, after taking the subway, with how hot it is down there and basically everyone being homeless rubbing up again you, it ain't that bad!
Really? Wow. I forgot to check my grammer.
Asshole.
Ha yes that's true. A pool does cost a bit more than a grand. :) Bikes aren't bad though. And look into used Nautilus's. I picked one up used for $700. And I admit that I even overpaid for that.
Not sure what your level/knowledge of working out is, but you should include weight lifting and free weights into your workout. In term's of effectiveness, I'd argue you should spend more of your time in that then the other. Like 60/40 in favor of weightlifting. So many more benefits (strength, reduced injuries, increase at rest calorie burning, higher weight loss from circuit training). But anyway, as for a spotter, you don't need it. Unless you're working out past failure or doing negatives, you don't need one. I haven't used a spotter in 10 years. And you can still make gains. I can gain easy 20 lbs of muscle in 8 months without a spotter or doing negatives or forced reps (and yes that is the max u can pretty much put on without the use of steroids in that time frame).
Well as a personal anecdote, I am currently living in a luxury apartment building (with gym, pool, concierge, doorman, laundry service and rooftop garden) on the Upper East Side and I am paying $3225 split between my girlfriend and I for a 1-br on the 30th floor with a view of central park. When searching for this place last month we saw at least 10 similar apartments in the same price range.
Look, please don't take offense to this. I'm not trying to be mean. But there is no way that exists. You're telling me you live in Central Park East and you're only paying $3225 for a 1 bedroom? I'd want to see the lease documents on that. That's quite frankly even more rare than seeing a unicorn. And to see 10 of them? Hogwash. And the excuse about the economy can't be used. NYC is the only one that was exempt on the housing market values.
Also, the East Village is no-longer the shithole it was in the 80's - sure it has NYU kids but it also has a bounty of small local shops and restaurants, and also a great sense of community, that really can't be found elsewhere in the city (apart from maybe the West Village).
That's very true. It's actually a nice, fun area. Though for me it kinda stinks. No interest in dating a 18 year old who is out drinking until 4 am at the local lounge every night. But yes it does have character. But the point still stands. If you're actually living and *working* in the city (students with mommy and daddy paying the rent don't count), no one wants to live in the E. village because it negates any conveniences living and working in the city offers.
Yes.
But I really do wonder. Do all these plant articles and thinly-veiled advertisement "news articles" actually translate to sales? Apple probably because Apple-lovers are morons at this point. But aren't Android tablets dying sales-wise, regardless of the media push? I truly wonder.
True. For other companies. So normally I would agree with you.
But this is Apple. They don't care about developers. They don't care about users. It's their way, or the highway.
But of course the media will always put, at the end of the article, "but Apple will have it in the next version!" as they always do. Even though they don't. Yet they never do this for any other company
Seriously. Just no. Journalists--stop it. Stop it already.
I wonder what will happen when all the hype dies down and people actually use their tablet for more than casual BS. Right now it's The New Shiny (TM). But when the world over finally realizes it's collecting dust, will they buy another?
My guess--only the $200 tablets like the Nexus 7 will survive. Though the only thing that has peaked my interest would be *laptops* or convertible tablets (like that new Sony one with a slide out KB) with Win 8. Because as it stands now, unless you attach a mouse or use the nipple on the Thinkpads, Trackpads are quite possibly the worst thing ever to use.*
With Win 8 on a touch-screen laptop, I could for serious work use the mouse--but for casual stuff, using the touch-screen on a laptop would be a god-send. And no, I don't want iOS or even my preference--Android. I want a REAL computer to do REAL things. Like the simple act of being able to load SouthParkStudios.com or browse a company's job board.
* And no, don't listen to what the world's most biased site, the Verge says--the Mac's trackpads are not worth switching entire computers, ecosystems, or preferences for.
Lastly, NYC can NOT be traversed in the time u mention. Hell, I had a co-worker long time ago who lived in the Village and had a 45 minute commute (using a quick 1 train ride) to Wall St. So unless you live right next to work, you are "commuting" in Manhattan as well.
Dude, was your co-worker commuting on horse-and-carriage? You can *walk* from both the East Village and West Village to Wall St. in less than 45 minutes. I would regularly travel from the top of the Upper West Side down to the East Village and that would take only 45 minutes.
Haha, maybe. :) I'm just going by what she told me. 45 minutes, with a train ride. Don't forget Wall St is pretty big. Walking 45 min to the beginning of Wall *area* by the Seaport *maybe*. But I gotta call you out on walking from the Upper West to the East village. No way, train or walk, did you make it in 45 minutes.
And of course you know, 1 bedrooms start at $3,200/mo
In a luxury apartment building (i.e. gym, door and laundry service, concierge, rooftop garden), yes, that's about right. However in places like the East Village - which is considered quite expensive in Manhattan standards - most decent one-bedroom places go for around $2200 and you can pick up a two-bedroom for $2500.
I'm sure you can find places that cheap, but I doubt that they're no less than super-rare. All my friends live in the city for years, and I've never even heard of rent that cheap unless it was for a shitty walk-up studio. And it's the East Village. Who wants to live there? It's not close to anything. Part of why people live in NYC to live within walking distance to work. It would take 45 minute commute to get anywhere from the E. Village. And no, it's $3,200 for a place with no amenities like you mentioned. And a walk-up. And no doorman. I don't know how you get the places you do, but to all reading this, let me assure you it's not the norm.
Well, you're wrong and right. You can buy all the equipment you need for $1-2k*. BUT, working out at home is the most un-motivating, depressing thing ever. So if one starts, they'll never stick to it for more than a few months. It's nice to have a social scene and people to talk to at the gym. But then again, in most gyms, 50% of the people who go are either scumbags or are very superficial. So maybe it's not a bad idea to work out at home and skip that part!
As engineering students are always taught, there are trade-offs to everything!
* Treadmill: $800
multi-use Bench for bench presses, dumbell presses, etc.: $150
Dumbells (that mult-weight one): $100
Stand for barbell excercises (like bench, squats, etc): $150.
Sorry gotta call you out on this one. NY is quite possible the worse place ever. I've lived in the NY/NJ area for all my life pretty much, so I can vouch from experience. You mention:
Staten Island: yea, if you want to live in "The Jersey Shore." Every single person in SI is a ultra-tanned lip-smooching-in-pictures guido/guidette. Watch the "Jersey Shore." This *really* is how Staten Island is.
NJ: Shitty people, superficial, nothing to do (only exists as a resting place for those who commute into NYC), a place where everyone wants to get out but doesn't because "all my family lives here", no woman wants to talk/date you unless you are on steroids or look like you are on "the Jersey Shore" (see above). Commute takes 1.5 hours each way into NYC, and a 2 hour drive into the city on a fri/sat night. And to do anything around the area, it's a minimum 30 minute drive in soul-crushing traffic. NJ, short of southern NJ, is the worst place in the world to live. AVOID.
Bronx and Queens: really? No really? Quite possibly the dumpiest places ever, and you're saying they're great? And there are "suburbs" in these places. And they're even more dumpy. At least the urban areas of queen and bronx have things to do. The dumpy queens suburbs are just dirty and shitty with NOTHING to offer
I know. See my post elsewhere here. But this WSJ was shit. What company in their right mind would give up paying employees less, paying less rent for an office, and getting tax breaks for setting up shop at the location, for the cities. I'm from NJ, and all the banks are moving OUT of the city for that very reason. Everything is done over computers now. They don't need the locations. And tech companies don't need it AT ALL. The WSJ should really mention this. And even from the employee's perspective, why move to a city where startups are going when most of those listed are BS and are going to be bankrupt in 2-3 years. What will the person do when they're let go and have $3,500 in rent to pay every month?
All I can say is, those companies are idiots and you should think twice about companies with so little business sense.
Haha you're kinda right. I'm just laughing having spent almost half of my life driving in a car.
You must live in a suburban area where everything is close. Here in NJ, to go ANYWHERE, it's a minimum 30 minute drive. With soul-crushing traffic. It's all the congestion of a city, with none of the benefits.
But you are right, for the first 20 minutes, driving really is a pleasure. I love rolling down the windows, opening the panoramic sunroff, and listening to my music.
You are right. There are suburbs and there are suburbs. I live in a suburb that is almost country if you will. Lots of space, 1 acre lots, and next to towns that have a lot of stuff to do. But there are also suburbs right next to me where you literally see your neighbors bathroom window from yours. And a patch of grass is your lawn. So poster below you is right too.
Back to topic though, shame on the WSJ for this article. This isn't some BS blog. This is the WSJ, who is supposed to give great business insights. They mention NYC as a spot. However, look at the companies:
Pinterest: BS social networking site that won't be in business in 2-3 years.
Yelp: no growth, but won't be out of business either.
Zynga: bankrupt in 2-3 years.
Salesforce is the only company with any prospects, stability, or growth. The WSJ should state that yes, companies are coming to cities. But they should also state that what will employees do when their BS companies go bust and they are left with a $4000/mo apartment to pay for. And the fact that these are all startups. What happens when they realize, like the banks are doing (all moving out of NYC), that the city is fucking expensive. Like just a floor in a building is fifty-fucking-thousand dollars a month in rent! Yea, you heard me. It may be trendy, but in 3-5 years they will all say "screw it" and move out to Piscataway, NJ where the industrial parks are.
And again, this is the WSJ. They should mention that in NO WAY will these startups pay the salaries commensurate with living in NYC. A shitty one bedroom is $3,200/mo! Not only will the the companies rent costs be insane, but the salaries will have to be MINIMUM $120k/year. The WSJ should really mention this.
Look, I'm sure this was a fluff piece by the WSJ. But the WSJ should really know better.
So true. I live right by Manhattan. One bedroom's start at $3,200/mo. But unless you're pulling $120k+, you're stuck with the typical $1,800/mo studio. So you're stuck, in a box. I'd love to work and live in the city. But I can't justify not only paying that much, but paying that much and living in a dorm room.
As a disclaimer, I agree with you entirely. The suburbs are soul-crushing and the worst. Either live in the city or complete country. And the joy of being able to live and therefore have a 10-15 minute walk to work is the most amazing thing in the world. I come from a suburb in NJ and it's a soul-crushing commute. 45 minutes MINIMUM to any job in nearby NJ, or MINIMUM 1.5 hours *each way* (3 total) for the city. Nevermind the fact that that 1.5 hours includes a drive to the train station with NO parking and 3 trains.
Now, I do have to call you out though on a few things. First off, NYC is a dump. If you commute, it's not as bad. But if you live there, you'll get real tired of living in honest-to-goodness dirt and filth. Even in really nice buildings, it's just completely dirty. And of course you know, 1 bedrooms start at $3,200/mo. I doubt those companies WSJ mentions pay the salary that equals that. So good luck thinking you'll get to live in Manhattan and work at a tech company. You'll be relegated to living in the Bronx or Queens and again you'll get the commute.
Lastly, NYC can NOT be traversed in the time u mention. Hell, I had a co-worker long time ago who lived in the Village and had a 45 minute commute (using a quick 1 train ride) to Wall St. So unless you live right next to work, you are "commuting" in Manhattan as well.
Ouch that sucks. Guess I won't be going by their reccomendations then. Forget that Grado SR60. Though that JVC Harx 9000 or whatever it's called I see a lot of people love and it's $30. But anyway, thanks for the heads up.
I guess it gives even more credence to my advice of simply actually trying on a pair to see if it's comfy and produces the sound you like. Too bad I can't seem to find a lot of places like that. Shame also that there is no equivalent of like an Anandtech which really reviews headsets and attempts to be objective.
Where do you recommend finding places that have headsets to try? The only thing I can manage to find around here is a music store than has like only a selection of like 4.
I thought the common thread on head-fi is that sennheiser isn't all that amazing. That there are a lot of other options that are cheaper AND sound better.
Wasn't there an article a few months ago reccomending their favs, and sennheiser only had 1 out of like 10 in that list, and they weren't even that enthralled with it?
I'm not an audiophile, but I've spent a year testing just about every config you can think of and a ton of headphones. It seems that, no offense, the groupthink on the net is to choose sennheisers or people repeat it. But the most important thing is to try the headset on, and listen to it and see if the sound is pleasing to you. And apparently, there are a ton that sound amazing (again not for audiophiles tho) but are dirt cheap--like $40-60.
So no, even the above-average person doesn't need $200 sennheisers. Spend between $50 and 80 and call it a day. Tho my Sennheiser $35 earbuds are pretty damn good for earbuds
Forgot to mention that I also say use a dedi sound card because it seems that USB just can't handle the load, at least for games and 3D upmixing. But apparently creative makes upmixing software for $20. Check it out. I don't know the quality, and it still may sound like shit, but it might be better than investing $180 in a Creative Titanium X-Fi or whatever it's called, when it sounds good enough with integrated audio.
Also, get a dedicated USB mic. Gaming headsets are ALWAYS the worst pieces of shit ever. Yet a $20 stand-alone always sound amazing. Go figure.
And FYI I'm sorry but I can't remember the model of those Sennheiser ear buds I have. They're only $35 on amazon but I bought them in 2009. You could search on Tomshardware for the earbud roundup back then. That's where I found out about them
You actually are in luck. I spent like a year playing around and tinkering with all sorts of configs. What I found is that there is not a lot of information or data on this. So here is what I did find, and I welcome any different perspectives because quite frankly I can't find anything else:
Ignore gaming headsets or anything with a mic integrated. They are universally terrible. I've tested the Creative $60 one (only good for bass--mids and highs are distorted and sound very fuzzy), the Cooler Master Storm Sirus (sounded weak, volume was waaaaay too low even at highest settings & then at the highest the sound gets distorted, and only good bass comes from the left ear but not both), the supposed well-reccomended Corsair one (which was absolutely pathetic--no bass and all sounds sounded flat and no vibrancy). So the solution is to get a good pair of true stereo headphones, which are cheap $40-80, and if you must have surround sound, pair it with a sound card that does 3D upmixing. I have an old an old Creative X-Fi (ExtremeMusic I think--drivers don't recognize it properly--I think I have a XtremeGamer but it will only install extrememusic). It's pretty bad that I use a $35 pair of Sennheiser earbuds and overall it sounds better than any of those $100+ headsets. Yes, with earbuds it lacks significant bass and it's clear but not crisp clear, but I bet you a good set of stereo cans with a dedi sound card will be phenomenal. Those earbuds I mentioned are pretty damn good for earbuds, and pretty cheap. 300% better than earbuds thrown in electronics. But then again you don't want earbuds and I agree with you. I freaking hate them. It's just that I havent' gotten around to trying the JVC Harx something or the Grado SR60. I can't think of their exact names, but supposedly they deliver clear at all levels and hearty bass. But then again that's what I read. And astroturfing is so prevalent.
Best advice though is go to a place where you can TRY IT ON and listen to it. Seriously. Even if something is settled on, try it on before you buy it! An uncomfy headset is the absolute worst. I couldn't bare wearing that damn Creative headset because the small tight leather cups drove me mad. And an uncomfy headset will.
Can you install games to the card, or install VC games to the memory card? I'm genuinely curious. That would help a lot with wanting to play a lot of classic old school games from the VC.
Ok I'll bite. Games I own, only on the ps3/xbox:
Borderlands
Mass effect 1
Assassin's creed 1
Dead Space 1
Mirror's Edge
L4D 1
Dead Island
Operation Flashpoint Dragon Rising
Team Fortress 2
Shadow Complex
Gears of War
Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light
Viva Pinata
Flock
Trials
Braid
Alan Wake
Alone in the Dark (2008)
Trine 2
Witcher 2
Crysis (yes it was recently ported)
So no, not everyone plays only those 2 franchises. A statement which everyone repeats, including yourself. And don't forget as a side note, yes, things like mass effect and dead space are franchises now, but only as of 2007/8 were they brand new.
Try again.
Oh boy. Someone's getting irked. Whipping out a googled reuters article.
Color me not impressed.
I used to read reuters, bloomberg, various analyst periodicals, financial statements as part of my living. You can pull the wool over other armchair analysts on /., but not me.
You make assumptions that based that in 2012 sales dropped off. Did you forget the part where we're just halfway of 2012? So maybe they're off by a million or two from the prior year if you extrapolate for the rest of the year. Not bad for consoles compared to the extreme drop off of the Wii. Now, assuming your unit sales numbers are correct, which I doubt, it debunks your argument right there. Did you miss the part about steady growth year over year for BOTH the ps3 and xbox, compared to the sharp drop off of the Wii. Again lending credence to people buying the Wii as a casual toy?
Did you even read what you wrote? You're saying you're wrong.
As for the Profitability of the PS3 Sony has had a 8 or 10 years in a row at an operational loss for its gaming division
Wrong. Point me to the annual reports where they've said that. And I want to see actual costs compared to EBITDA. Most companies want to show a loss for certain things for tax purposes. The objective is to maximize profit while minimizing taxes paid.
Did you miss the part where it was entirely attributed to the fall of the LCD? No, you just want to lump that into video games. Wrong again.
Can't blame that on Japan. Sales were down like 73%. You don't think that has ANY part in the fact that they lost $950 MILLION
Yes I can. Try reading something relevant. I mean really, how is a supply chain disruption not supposed to kill your margin. Honestly, if the tsunami never happened Nintendo's little misstep with the 3DS price point would have been completely erased by the end of the year. They made a little mistake at launch and they corrected it properly. That'll teach them not to listen to the E3 reporters and raise their price point 100 bucks. The tsunami also stopped game development for just about every Japanese developer. That little side effect is only now trickling down since game development take over year so the 20% drop in released games can be tied to it and the Wii U announcement. Since who's going to develop for the Wii when they know the Wii U is just around the corner.
I'm sure some had to do with supply chain disruption. Not the real reason. Real reason is their pricing analysts got the launch price wrong. And again, it shows your ignorance of the subject. They didn't listen to game journalists to determine the price. They're called pricing analysts and they're pretty much quants who use various models (statistical, financial, etc.) to determine the price.
Try again next time.
And it's common knowledge that the reason is not that people are waiting for the price drop. And did you even miss the huge dropoff with your OWN figures, dropping 4 million then 6 million. All before the Wii U was even announced in 2009 or on the horizon in 2010? Couple that with industry wide figures showing miserable attach rate. So yea, toy was a hot item, people bought toy, and once the toy hype died down, they stopped buying. And the ones who had one stuck it in their closet. But keep on thinking whatever makes u feel better at night.
Remember, a little bit of knowledge is dangerous. Just because you can understand a reuters article doesn't mean you're warren buffet or mario gabelli.
Try again please.
Yes I give kudos to sony for being open (as open as a console platform) can be for doing those games. I would argue though they need more. There are a ton out now and some are pretty cool. ST:O is fantastic, AoC is unique with it's combat, or while not a true MMO something unique like APB. DC is pretty unique at least with the setting (DC superheroes). Free realms though is a generic low res cartoon F2P IMHO. Dust sounds promising though I wonder how that will work considering it's for the PS3, and the new console will be out the following year. Will it be supported? And FFXI? They didn't shut it down following the sequel? Either way, I thought that one was irrelevant because it's known to be pretty much all Chinese gold farmers?
That's an interesting insight. Though are they really not making money? I thought companies like Perfect World or Nexon or whomever are actually bigger and more profitable than all the tradiitonal publishers lately, short of activision? Again I don't know. I'd be curious to know tho.
I can think of more than 12 and even name them off the to of my head:
SMB
SMB 2
SMB 3
SNES SMB
Mario Kart
Mario Kart 64
Gamecube Mario Kart
Wii Mario Kart or whatever it's called
Super Mario Sunshine
Super Mario Galaxy
Super Mario Galaxy 2
Super Paper Mario
Mario Party Wii
Mario Party 4
Mario Party 5
Mario Party 7
Mario Party 6
Mario Party DS
Super Mario World 2 GBA
Super Mario the lost levels
The New Super Mario Bros (that co-op one)
SMB 64
Super Smash Bros
SMB for the DS
the original SMB for the DS
Mario Kart for Gameboy advance
Mario Kart for DS
Mario Party for the DS
Mario Bros for the 2600
Mario Bros for the C64
Want me to keep going?
The only issue for Nintendo has been third party support and always has been because they take their image and quality fairly serious.
Quality? Nintendo USED to be about quality back in the NES days. That was 20 years ago. 75% of Wii games since it's inception have been shovelware.
The wiiU rectified the lack of power issue and will ironically hobble the PS4/720 as developers will simply port the basest version to the others. So third party support will flood the system, we'll probably see a more "traditional" controller show up as well for the fps games. It's shaping up t be interesting for Nintendo.
No they won't. It costs time and money to port things. It's not magically free. No one is back-porting their wares to the Wii U. And as a separate but relevant comment in relation to our discussion of Nintendo and the Wii, with the Wii U devs already know they don't have a market for their wares. Hell, does the new controller won't even support Dead Space/GTA/etc. It's the same reason you still don't see controller support for iOS games. Not everyone has them so they would be eliminating a huge portion of their users. And your assumption about power? Because you are privvy to Nintendo's specs that are under NDA? And if you are going by rumors, well the rumors are that the Wii is only as powerful as the XBOX which will be leapfrogged in 1 year by the new XBOX and PS. No AAA dev will, yet again, bother to include Wii U in their business strategy.
Your assumption is patently false.
You're completely right. Your solution is perfect actually. Simply give us the option. Same way it is with Windows Update. Manuall install or auto update 5 days out giving the option to see if anything is borked.
Like I said before, in reality it's either deal with possibly a broken patch, or the bulk of users not patching at all.