I think this is just a game cube game, but it is still a very nice example of how good platformers can still please, just unfortunately not an amazingly popular one on a console that is doing better in sales right now
Personally I don't use products from Real (I haven't even looked at them for several years), however, they are popular.
People keep saying "Real sucks", well a hell of a lot of people use it/download it, so there are a lot more people out there who like Real. And all these people are now going to have a chance to try out Firefox.
Why does Firefox need to push its market share? More market share means more money for one (through the sponsored search), and more money *hopefully* translates into a better product, and more adverting/deals like this.
Right now, a lot of websites simply *arn't* Firefox friendly, if market share hit 35%, could these websites afford to ignore Firefox any more? As a Firefox user this is important to me...
Finally, the more market share Firefox takes, the better MS will have to make IE, and in turn the better Firefox will become.. Why release a product for something like web browsing if you only want a small market share?... Firefox isn't "A tool for geeks", it's something to make the web expierence better - and it certainly does (I know no mention of Opera and others in this post, they have their place, especially Opera, but Firefox is in the best position to gain market share right now it seems)
Wouldn't it have to be a "music player" to be an i-pod killer? This is a hand held gaming system, so of course it has a larger screen, of course it has wifi. PSP and DS have both of these but it wouldn't be considered an "i-pod killer", even if it did have a music store. This is like saying "the 360 is the same as a media PC". Yes, it can be used as a media centre, but in fact it is a game console. Marketing it as both is just that, marketing. I would still rather have devoted devices in *some* cases. I like being able to take my nano anywhere with me without having to worry about how much space it will take up.
"No I have to wear a jacket on a 35 deg. c day just so I can carry my Argo/PSP/whatever in my pocket" - doesn't make sense
The problem with hoping for this kind of public response is this:
Most people who use windows simply have *no* idea that it is essentially "Microsofts fault" when things go wrong on their PC. People assume that problems like malware/spyware are just part of the whole internet expierence. To them Microsoft finding a and plugging a security hole is a good thing. "Good on you MS, you are forever working on making things safer for me". People simply arn't aware that the onus of security lies on the developer, instead they assume that the product simply should do what it should do, and any problems are "the hackers fault", and not MS's.
I think something that people are missing is that the fact that this is P2P is actually in some ways a bad thing.
What advantage do we get out of it? - None.
On the other hand, we have to give up our upload bandwidth so that others can download music from us.
In other words this is basically the same stratergy as before, just instead the music label doesnt have to pay any real hosting costs as people won't be downloading from them.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this is just a game cube game, but it is still a very nice example of how good platformers can still please, just unfortunately not an amazingly popular one on a console that is doing better in sales right now
Personally I don't use products from Real (I haven't even looked at them for several years), however, they are popular.
People keep saying "Real sucks", well a hell of a lot of people use it/download it, so there are a lot more people out there who like Real. And all these people are now going to have a chance to try out Firefox.
Why does Firefox need to push its market share? More market share means more money for one (through the sponsored search), and more money *hopefully* translates into a better product, and more adverting/deals like this.
Right now, a lot of websites simply *arn't* Firefox friendly, if market share hit 35%, could these websites afford to ignore Firefox any more? As a Firefox user this is important to me...
Finally, the more market share Firefox takes, the better MS will have to make IE, and in turn the better Firefox will become.. Why release a product for something like web browsing if you only want a small market share?... Firefox isn't "A tool for geeks", it's something to make the web expierence better - and it certainly does (I know no mention of Opera and others in this post, they have their place, especially Opera, but Firefox is in the best position to gain market share right now it seems)
Ubuntu does actually have a DVD available for download with over 3 gig of stuff on it.....No waiting for hours required!
2016 actually
Pi goes: 3.14159... (and so on), so you would round up to 3.1416
Wouldn't it have to be a "music player" to be an i-pod killer? This is a hand held gaming system, so of course it has a larger screen, of course it has wifi. PSP and DS have both of these but it wouldn't be considered an "i-pod killer", even if it did have a music store. This is like saying "the 360 is the same as a media PC". Yes, it can be used as a media centre, but in fact it is a game console. Marketing it as both is just that, marketing. I would still rather have devoted devices in *some* cases. I like being able to take my nano anywhere with me without having to worry about how much space it will take up. "No I have to wear a jacket on a 35 deg. c day just so I can carry my Argo/PSP/whatever in my pocket" - doesn't make sense
One option is to encase the file name in quotes, eg: rm "-file", much like you might for a name with spaces
The problem with hoping for this kind of public response is this:
Most people who use windows simply have *no* idea that it is essentially "Microsofts fault" when things go wrong on their PC. People assume that problems like malware/spyware are just part of the whole internet expierence. To them Microsoft finding a and plugging a security hole is a good thing. "Good on you MS, you are forever working on making things safer for me". People simply arn't aware that the onus of security lies on the developer, instead they assume that the product simply should do what it should do, and any problems are "the hackers fault", and not MS's.
I think something that people are missing is that the fact that this is P2P is actually in some ways a bad thing. What advantage do we get out of it? - None. On the other hand, we have to give up our upload bandwidth so that others can download music from us. In other words this is basically the same stratergy as before, just instead the music label doesnt have to pay any real hosting costs as people won't be downloading from them.