Speaking as a male, aged 32, with a career and a wife, I can say that I play my 360 MUCH more than the Wii. I still don't play a lot, as you rightly point out time doesn't allow it, but I'd rather play 20-30 mins of Crackdown or a few races of PGR3 than any of the Wii games I have so far. My wife likes the Wii, but that's because she's a Mario fan so she's currently hooked on Super Paper Mario. But I don't think she's even played any of the other games apart from Wii Sports which kept her interested for maybe 30 mins total.
We also play casual games on both platforms, but we both prefer the new games (like Boom Boom Rocket, Cloning Clyde, Zuma, etc) on XBLA much more than the old stuff on VC. I think if Nintendo opened the VC up to non-retro titles (maybe even homebrew as MS are planning to do with XNA) it could be pretty cool. Don't get me wrong, I loved paperboy as a kid, but it doesn't really do anything for me anymore.
So big up to Nintendo for selling all these boxes, I wish them well, but once SPM is done (few days now I'd guess) mine will be back gathering dust.
It's just wrong that corporations should not be able to force artists into contracts which deny them any profits after millions of dollars worth of sales.
Show me one example of a record company holding a gun to a band member's head to make them sign a contract.
Nope?
Then the artists have nothing to complain about. They were offered a contract and they took it, if they didn't read it properly, or better yet have it read for them by someone competent, it's entirely their own fault. The work I do for my employer generates a lot more income for them than they pay me - but that's exactly how companies generate profit for their shareholders. I wonder what would happen if Linus turned around tomorrow and said that he'd changed his mind about using the GPL for Linux and would actually like $1 a copy from everyone currently using it? The collective "WTF??!?? STFU!!" would be deafening. He chose how to license his work, and just like the anecdotal starving musician he's stuck with that decision.
Sure, that's a pain in the ass. But is it really Microsoft's fault? Their only other option is simply not to allow the file to be played back. Remember, MS (usually) don't set these dumb rules, that's done by the media companies. The same thing will apply to Apple if they choose to support these formats, and the same thing applies to hardware players already. As an A/V fan myself it's a huge problem, but I don't see MS having a whole lot of control over the situation.
However, what it REALLY is, is Microsoft using their complete dominance of the PC game market to extend that dominance to the console
That doesn't make sense to me. How does Windows as a gaming platform (which I rarely use) affect what I do with my 360? Why would the GfW program encourage people to buy a 360? Please - explain how MS intend to use their Windows market position to "extend that dominance to the console"?
The end result will be to get PC Gamers to pay extra for content they get for free now, just like console players are doing on X-Box Live.
So hang on, are they using GfW to take over the console space or Xbox to take over the PC space? Which is it? As for the "paying for extra content they get for free now" - which content exactly? I have to say from my limited Windows gaming experience I don't recall getting much free content other than patches. Want new levels? Buy an expansion pack, or the new version of the game. You see the same thing on XBL (e.g. recent Oblivion expansion). What you also see are small micro-payment upgrades, like additional characters, tracks, whatever. In my experience you generally don't see these at all on the PC as online purchasing is still pretty rare (Steam is fixing that) and distributing a retail box for a couple of new character models is not worthwhile.
A requirement for a game to be branded a "Game for Windows" is that it is compatible with an X-Box 360 Controller. Need I say more? They're pushing for all PC games to also be X-Box 360 Games.
Well first off, compatibility with the 360 controller is not a firm requirement, the way they word it implies that if you support any controllers, the 360 one should be one of them - but if you don't, no problem. Secondly, yes - of course they want to encourage games to come out on both platforms - why not? As a publisher I'd see that as very attractive, a larger potential audience for not much additional dev cost.
If the PC Game is also an X-Box game, then it can use X-Box Live. If it can use X-Box Live, they can figure out a way to release content for it in micro-payments, and nickel and dime us to death on games that we used to get updated content for free on. Ahhh....back to that mysterious PC-only free content. Do elaborate...
Considering the fact that Sony and Nintendo are incapable of competing with Microsoft on this initiative... I'm really surprised no one at the Justice Department has taken notice. It's blatant leveraging of a monopoly if you ask me. I don't see how it's legal.
Well judging by sales figures Nintendo (and to a lesser extent Sony) seem to be doing a pretty good job of competing on their own terms. Couldn't Sony launch a rival "Sony Games for Windows" brand which requires PS3 network compatibility? Of course they could. Couldn't Nintendo launch a PC version of the Wii controller? And add a way of generating a Friend code for your PC? Of course they could. They could even make it cross platform and grab the nascent Linux gaming market share (ha!).
I really can't comprehend how this is a monopoly issue. My purchase (or otherwise) of a Microsoft games console has NOTHING to do with whether I have a PC running Windows or not. There's virtually no functionality on one which is linked to the other (just some media playback stuff). All that's happening is that they're adding some features to one platform which used to be exclusive to another. So I can now use Xbox Live from a PC, great - nothing says I HAVE to and nothing says I need (or would even benefit from) an Xbox to do it.
Agreed with all your points, but just wanted to clarify that the Chunnel is for trains only. Any other traffic (e.g. cars) are loaded onto trains for the journey.
To clarify, it's not technically deprecated (i.e., there are no plans to take it out of the class library) but it's use is generally frowned upon these days. As was already mentioned, ArrayList is almost always a better choice.
Really? Seems the actual developers of these apps have a different opinion. Pulling up task manager and selecting the "thread count" column gives me some interesting numbers:
Outlook: 40 Mcaffee Virus Scan: 29 Windows Communicator: 19 Internet Explorer: 19 Explorer: 12
And that's how it should be. Threads are _essential_ for desktop apps, if for no other reason than to allow the UI to remain responsive while something else happens (e.g. background printing in Word, checking email in Outlook, animating some image in a browser).
no content holders are going to like that idea Well that obviously isn't the case given the number of subscription services which already exist, typically based on MS-DRM. Why Apple aren't doing it is a matter of debate - my guess is that they simply don't feel a need to as they already sell plenty using the traditional pay-per-track model. If your average customer is spending anything close to the proposed monthly subscription fee already you'd be crazy to offer them an all-you-can-eat.
It could be argued that because downloads don't carry a notice, that the downloader has no idea whether or not what he's downloading is copyrighted
Assuming you're operating within a country with standard copyright laws, in general everything is automatically copyrighted. So any reasonable person should assume that everything they download is copyrighted by someone.
and not licensed for download or if it is licensed for free download, or public domain or what.
This is the same as when developers want to use source code they find online - if it doesn't say it's GPL/BSD/whatever then you have to assume there is no special license and that it's covered under standard default licensing. Which generally prohibits you from using it, or in the case of music, downloading it.
This is why Creative Commons was created - to allow people to easily mark content which is available with a less restrictive license than the default.
The argument I've seen used (successfully) in the past against this kind of point is that whilst the remote server is physically making the copy, the downloader is the one who caused the copy to be made (by starting the download process). That makes the downloader the only human responsible, seeing as you can't sue or prosecute a server. An analogy would be that if I shot you, I could argue that I didn't kill you - the gun did. In reality though, I caused the gun to fire, so it's my responsibility.
Wow. Just wow. I had no idea. The built-in SPDIF in my Macs doesn't do this; neither does the older Creative card in my Win/Lin box. That certainly would #*&@ everything up. If I bought a card and discovered it was sending 48 kHz PCM to my receiver when playing tracks ripped from CD I'd probably think it was set up wrong and try to reconfigure it. Thanks for setting me straight.
Scary, huh?:) Hydrogenaudio has a bit about it, and I also found this page which specifcally mentions Creative as being bad offenders! The biggest things to watch out for it seems are any of the Audigy cards and anything which is labelled AC97. In some cases I've even heard of cards/drivers which take 44.1kHz from the player, then upsample to 48 for the mixer and then back down to 44.1 for output! Wacky...
The signal coming out the SPDIF outputs will be the same whether you're using Creative, M-Audio, or motherboard SPDIF False. Many sound cards (particularly newer ones) resample everything to 48kHz before outputting. That will reduce quality for 44kHz source material, so it's good to use a card which doesn't do that. Drivers also matter, you want ones which allow the signal coming from (say) a CD or FLAC file to get to the SPDIF without passing through the OS-level mixer which may attenuate levels, add EQ, or whatever else. So while it's perfectly possible to get "bit perfect" output from a computer's SPDIF socket, it's by no means "automatic" and you have to choose your device & software with some care.
And please don't talk to me about "jitter." Your DAC can compensate for any jitter you'll get with this equipment In some cases maybe, in other cases, not.
It's a pile of 1's and 0's, folks. Do you buy a $200 gold-plated Cat6 cable to improve network reliability? I didn't think so.
The fact that you compare SPDIF to Ethernet shows how little you know about the differences between them. SPDIF is, frankly, a crappy protocol - particularly when it comes to clocking. That, combined with the fact that the data is strictly realtime (i.e. you can't do a resend like ethernet when an error occurs), leads to some interesting situations. I'm not going to go into all the detail here, and I'm by no means a jitter fanatic like some people, but I'm perfectly able to understand how (at least theoretically) there could be some problems due to interference, wavering clocks or bad cables.
Monster cables suck. There are good cables and bad cables, but you'll often find the good ones cost less than the bad ones. For example, I know audio engineers (designers of equipment costing 10's of thousands) who use CAT-5 for interconnects and mains power cable for speakers. Why? Because it sounds good, it's easy to get hold of, and it's cheap.
Whilst I understand that the world of high end audio has more than it's fair share of snake oil salesman selling overpriced crap (like the wooden volume knob) I get really sick of sarcastic comments from know-it-alls whenever anyone mentions having a decent audio setup. You wouldn't mock someone for having a kick ass computer setup, but there's some kind of geek prejudice against audio - which just seems weird to me.
I pipe FLAC over wifi (how's that for electrical isolation!) to a Slimdevices Transporter and from there to the amp with a regular analogue hookup. The sound is amazing, the DAC in that thing is a work of art.
I have a question - why are you resampling to 24/192? If your source is 16/44 you're not going to improve anything by resampling...and that ratio is potentially going to lead to degredation (192 is not an integer multiple of 44).
Again I ask, if your brother rob a bank should you go to jail? Your father raised both of you, why shouldn't he go to jail? You talked to your brother at some point, surely you are to blame. All of these statements are as silly as what you are trying to say.
There's a fundamental difference you're missing (or rather, ignoring). The Sony board are legally responsible for the actions of their employees. My father is not legally responsible for my actions.
Well that's fair I guess, I picked on you as an example of a pattern - and you probably weren't the best example. Nonetheless, I doubt your comment was entirely based on actual sales figures - I imagine there's a hint of "Zune...haha!" in there somethere;)
What on earth are you on about? Last time I checked MS were very far indeed from having a monopoly in the game console market. The EU rulings (and US ones before that) are about MS illegally leveraging their desktop OS monopoly and using it to strong arm their way into other markets (e.g. browsers). Given that they are a minority player in the console market these are just competitive features they're adding to their products in the exact same way other manufacturers do.
A way to crush OpenGL (direct X development for their console and their os when no one else can influence what happens on their console)
News flash - ALL console manufacturers exert 100% control over what software is available for their platforms. You cannot release a game on the PS2, PS3, NGC, Wii, Xbox or Xbox 360 without getting licensed by the appropriate manufacturer. Likewise, the devkits, APIs etc are supplied by those manufacturers. The console arena is not (and hasn't been for a long time) anything like an open environment. Don't like it? Stick to PC development. As it happens, MS are doing pretty well in terms of opening things up in a controlled way with the XNA system which allows anyone to write their own apps (in C# typically) which have pretty much full access to the hardware. Sony provide Linux on the PS3 but it's hardware access is heavily limited (no GPU for example) and Nintendo offer no developer access at all outside of official dev kits.
A way to crush xfire et al (MS only game matchmaking service when no one else can influence alternatives for the xbox)
Yup. Want to do online on Xbox? you use XBL. Again, services like xfire are in the PC space, and always have been. They're not being "crushed" - they're just not able to move into a new space (the online consoles).
New feature! A way to lock up the IM market (MS only IM service where no one else can offer alternatives for the xbox)
Seeing as today you can't use any IM on any console (except with things like browser hacks), this is a step forward. Sure you can only use it with MSN, but if the customers don't like that they won't use it. Again, MS are far from having a monopoly in the IM arena, so they can't be accused of abusing it.
I know it's trendy to bash MS for pretty much anything they do (including having a go at Bill for "only" donating $billions to charity) but give it a rest. This release is attempting to give much-requested features to their customers within the constraints of running a business. I'd like to see actual DiVX/Xvid support (no, this release doesn't include it whatever the headline says), and I'm unlikely to ever use the IM support, but I don't see the problem with it being available.
Ahh, the usual anti-Zune flame. What I don't understand is what exactly is wrong with a Zune? From what I can tell, the only things I see people marking it down for are either subjective (don't like the color, doesn't work with iTunes) or unique features which don't work as well as they could (wifi). In terms of core features (sync with music collection, playback, etc) it seems fine (recently fixed playback bugs notwithstanding). Let me put it this way, if they released an 80gb Zune I'd probably buy it. I think they look better than iPods (my preference, you don't have to agree), I find the controls much easier to use than the scroll wheel (likewise, personal preference) and if I could live in a world entirely free of iTunes I'd be a happier person. So sure, it could be better, but I don't see why all the childish mocking is justified.
Well it looks like there might be a chance that our PC's and consoles will have interchangeable controllers! They already do, all Xbox 360 controllers (including wired, wireless, racing wheels, etc) work just fine on Windows PCs with the supplied microsoft drivers. For the wireless devices you need a $20 RF dongle, the wired ones are regular USB.
Surely the next generation of consoles will all but abandoned the d-pad controller types for the far superior keyboard/mouse type set-ups.
Yeah! That'll be awesome. Can't wait to try using a keyboard and mouse on my couch. Whilst KB&M may be the preferred controller of many for FPS games, it just doesn't fit with how most people use consoles. If I want to play a PC game at a desk, I will. But for sheer convenience in the living room nothing beats a small wireless controller I can grab off the coffee table when I want a quick game.
If I give you the source code of a program I write, and that source code is not accompanied by a copyright notice or a license, that would essentially put that source code in the public domain
Rubbish - for someone who proudly states his FSF membership you should be more knowledgable about copyright issues. In general, everything which is copyrightable is automatically copyrighted at creation. The music I write and record is under my copyright regardless of any (c) messages I might write on the label. The source I distribute on my website is copyrighted regardless of whether I put any headers on the files. The copyright messages often included in commercial (and non-commercial) works serve several useful purposes, including telling you who owns the copyright (so you may contact them for licensing) but they are not required to assert a claim.
Can anyone confirm, is 256kbps enough for an AAC file to be indistinguishable from a CD in a true double blind listening test?
That depends entirely on your ears and your equipment, and in many cases on the music itself. For playback on an ipod through stock buds? Certainly good enough. I wouldn't want to play it through my main system though.
But this is more like someone stealing gas from your car every day and putting it in their car. Then one day you buy a new car which takes diesel instead of regular gas, they steal that and it wrecks their engine. I think that even in the United States od Litigation your liability in that case is pretty minimal:)
Could it be that he "saw" it on radar? I don't know...just thinking that determining something is 5 miles away with the naked eye is also pretty tough.
Slashdot Mirror
Speaking as a male, aged 32, with a career and a wife, I can say that I play my 360 MUCH more than the Wii. I still don't play a lot, as you rightly point out time doesn't allow it, but I'd rather play 20-30 mins of Crackdown or a few races of PGR3 than any of the Wii games I have so far. My wife likes the Wii, but that's because she's a Mario fan so she's currently hooked on Super Paper Mario. But I don't think she's even played any of the other games apart from Wii Sports which kept her interested for maybe 30 mins total.
We also play casual games on both platforms, but we both prefer the new games (like Boom Boom Rocket, Cloning Clyde, Zuma, etc) on XBLA much more than the old stuff on VC. I think if Nintendo opened the VC up to non-retro titles (maybe even homebrew as MS are planning to do with XNA) it could be pretty cool. Don't get me wrong, I loved paperboy as a kid, but it doesn't really do anything for me anymore.
So big up to Nintendo for selling all these boxes, I wish them well, but once SPM is done (few days now I'd guess) mine will be back gathering dust.
It's just wrong that corporations should not be able to force artists into contracts which deny them any profits after millions of dollars worth of sales.
Show me one example of a record company holding a gun to a band member's head to make them sign a contract.
Nope?
Then the artists have nothing to complain about. They were offered a contract and they took it, if they didn't read it properly, or better yet have it read for them by someone competent, it's entirely their own fault. The work I do for my employer generates a lot more income for them than they pay me - but that's exactly how companies generate profit for their shareholders. I wonder what would happen if Linus turned around tomorrow and said that he'd changed his mind about using the GPL for Linux and would actually like $1 a copy from everyone currently using it? The collective "WTF??!?? STFU!!" would be deafening. He chose how to license his work, and just like the anecdotal starving musician he's stuck with that decision.
Sure, that's a pain in the ass. But is it really Microsoft's fault? Their only other option is simply not to allow the file to be played back. Remember, MS (usually) don't set these dumb rules, that's done by the media companies. The same thing will apply to Apple if they choose to support these formats, and the same thing applies to hardware players already. As an A/V fan myself it's a huge problem, but I don't see MS having a whole lot of control over the situation.
However, what it REALLY is, is Microsoft using their complete dominance of the PC game market to extend that dominance to the console
That doesn't make sense to me. How does Windows as a gaming platform (which I rarely use) affect what I do with my 360? Why would the GfW program encourage people to buy a 360? Please - explain how MS intend to use their Windows market position to "extend that dominance to the console"?
The end result will be to get PC Gamers to pay extra for content they get for free now, just like console players are doing on X-Box Live.
So hang on, are they using GfW to take over the console space or Xbox to take over the PC space? Which is it? As for the "paying for extra content they get for free now" - which content exactly? I have to say from my limited Windows gaming experience I don't recall getting much free content other than patches. Want new levels? Buy an expansion pack, or the new version of the game. You see the same thing on XBL (e.g. recent Oblivion expansion). What you also see are small micro-payment upgrades, like additional characters, tracks, whatever. In my experience you generally don't see these at all on the PC as online purchasing is still pretty rare (Steam is fixing that) and distributing a retail box for a couple of new character models is not worthwhile.
A requirement for a game to be branded a "Game for Windows" is that it is compatible with an X-Box 360 Controller. Need I say more? They're pushing for all PC games to also be X-Box 360 Games.
Well first off, compatibility with the 360 controller is not a firm requirement, the way they word it implies that if you support any controllers, the 360 one should be one of them - but if you don't, no problem. Secondly, yes - of course they want to encourage games to come out on both platforms - why not? As a publisher I'd see that as very attractive, a larger potential audience for not much additional dev cost.
If the PC Game is also an X-Box game, then it can use X-Box Live. If it can use X-Box Live, they can figure out a way to release content for it in micro-payments, and nickel and dime us to death on games that we used to get updated content for free on.
Ahhh....back to that mysterious PC-only free content. Do elaborate...
Considering the fact that Sony and Nintendo are incapable of competing with Microsoft on this initiative... I'm really surprised no one at the Justice Department has taken notice. It's blatant leveraging of a monopoly if you ask me. I don't see how it's legal.
Well judging by sales figures Nintendo (and to a lesser extent Sony) seem to be doing a pretty good job of competing on their own terms. Couldn't Sony launch a rival "Sony Games for Windows" brand which requires PS3 network compatibility? Of course they could. Couldn't Nintendo launch a PC version of the Wii controller? And add a way of generating a Friend code for your PC? Of course they could. They could even make it cross platform and grab the nascent Linux gaming market share (ha!).
I really can't comprehend how this is a monopoly issue. My purchase (or otherwise) of a Microsoft games console has NOTHING to do with whether I have a PC running Windows or not. There's virtually no functionality on one which is linked to the other (just some media playback stuff). All that's happening is that they're adding some features to one platform which used to be exclusive to another. So I can now use Xbox Live from a PC, great - nothing says I HAVE to and nothing says I need (or would even benefit from) an Xbox to do it.
Strangely enough, for some of us the world does not revolve around shopping.
Agreed with all your points, but just wanted to clarify that the Chunnel is for trains only. Any other traffic (e.g. cars) are loaded onto trains for the journey.
To clarify, it's not technically deprecated (i.e., there are no plans to take it out of the class library) but it's use is generally frowned upon these days. As was already mentioned, ArrayList is almost always a better choice.
Really? Seems the actual developers of these apps have a different opinion. Pulling up task manager and selecting the "thread count" column gives me some interesting numbers:
Outlook: 40
Mcaffee Virus Scan: 29
Windows Communicator: 19
Internet Explorer: 19
Explorer: 12
And that's how it should be. Threads are _essential_ for desktop apps, if for no other reason than to allow the UI to remain responsive while something else happens (e.g. background printing in Word, checking email in Outlook, animating some image in a browser).
no content holders are going to like that idea
Well that obviously isn't the case given the number of subscription services which already exist, typically based on MS-DRM. Why Apple aren't doing it is a matter of debate - my guess is that they simply don't feel a need to as they already sell plenty using the traditional pay-per-track model. If your average customer is spending anything close to the proposed monthly subscription fee already you'd be crazy to offer them an all-you-can-eat.
You're right, I got those confused. Told you I wasn't an audiophile ;)
It could be argued that because downloads don't carry a notice, that the downloader has no idea whether or not what he's downloading is copyrighted
Assuming you're operating within a country with standard copyright laws, in general everything is automatically copyrighted. So any reasonable person should assume that everything they download is copyrighted by someone.
and not licensed for download or if it is licensed for free download, or public domain or what.
This is the same as when developers want to use source code they find online - if it doesn't say it's GPL/BSD/whatever then you have to assume there is no special license and that it's covered under standard default licensing. Which generally prohibits you from using it, or in the case of music, downloading it.
This is why Creative Commons was created - to allow people to easily mark content which is available with a less restrictive license than the default.
The argument I've seen used (successfully) in the past against this kind of point is that whilst the remote server is physically making the copy, the downloader is the one who caused the copy to be made (by starting the download process). That makes the downloader the only human responsible, seeing as you can't sue or prosecute a server. An analogy would be that if I shot you, I could argue that I didn't kill you - the gun did. In reality though, I caused the gun to fire, so it's my responsibility.
Wow. Just wow. I had no idea. The built-in SPDIF in my Macs doesn't do this; neither does the older Creative card in my Win/Lin box. That certainly would #*&@ everything up. If I bought a card and discovered it was sending 48 kHz PCM to my receiver when playing tracks ripped from CD I'd probably think it was set up wrong and try to reconfigure it. Thanks for setting me straight.
:) Hydrogenaudio has a bit about it, and I also found this page which specifcally mentions Creative as being bad offenders! The biggest things to watch out for it seems are any of the Audigy cards and anything which is labelled AC97. In some cases I've even heard of cards/drivers which take 44.1kHz from the player, then upsample to 48 for the mixer and then back down to 44.1 for output! Wacky...
Scary, huh?
The signal coming out the SPDIF outputs will be the same whether you're using Creative, M-Audio, or motherboard SPDIF
False. Many sound cards (particularly newer ones) resample everything to 48kHz before outputting. That will reduce quality for 44kHz source material, so it's good to use a card which doesn't do that. Drivers also matter, you want ones which allow the signal coming from (say) a CD or FLAC file to get to the SPDIF without passing through the OS-level mixer which may attenuate levels, add EQ, or whatever else. So while it's perfectly possible to get "bit perfect" output from a computer's SPDIF socket, it's by no means "automatic" and you have to choose your device & software with some care.
And please don't talk to me about "jitter." Your DAC can compensate for any jitter you'll get with this equipment
In some cases maybe, in other cases, not.
It's a pile of 1's and 0's, folks. Do you buy a $200 gold-plated Cat6 cable to improve network reliability? I didn't think so.
The fact that you compare SPDIF to Ethernet shows how little you know about the differences between them. SPDIF is, frankly, a crappy protocol - particularly when it comes to clocking. That, combined with the fact that the data is strictly realtime (i.e. you can't do a resend like ethernet when an error occurs), leads to some interesting situations. I'm not going to go into all the detail here, and I'm by no means a jitter fanatic like some people, but I'm perfectly able to understand how (at least theoretically) there could be some problems due to interference, wavering clocks or bad cables.
Monster cables suck. There are good cables and bad cables, but you'll often find the good ones cost less than the bad ones. For example, I know audio engineers (designers of equipment costing 10's of thousands) who use CAT-5 for interconnects and mains power cable for speakers. Why? Because it sounds good, it's easy to get hold of, and it's cheap.
Whilst I understand that the world of high end audio has more than it's fair share of snake oil salesman selling overpriced crap (like the wooden volume knob) I get really sick of sarcastic comments from know-it-alls whenever anyone mentions having a decent audio setup. You wouldn't mock someone for having a kick ass computer setup, but there's some kind of geek prejudice against audio - which just seems weird to me.
I pipe FLAC over wifi (how's that for electrical isolation!) to a Slimdevices Transporter and from there to the amp with a regular analogue hookup. The sound is amazing, the DAC in that thing is a work of art.
I have a question - why are you resampling to 24/192? If your source is 16/44 you're not going to improve anything by resampling...and that ratio is potentially going to lead to degredation (192 is not an integer multiple of 44).
Again I ask, if your brother rob a bank should you go to jail? Your father raised both of you, why shouldn't he go to jail? You talked to your brother at some point, surely you are to blame. All of these statements are as silly as what you are trying to say.
There's a fundamental difference you're missing (or rather, ignoring). The Sony board are legally responsible for the actions of their employees. My father is not legally responsible for my actions.
Well that's fair I guess, I picked on you as an example of a pattern - and you probably weren't the best example. Nonetheless, I doubt your comment was entirely based on actual sales figures - I imagine there's a hint of "Zune...haha!" in there somethere ;)
What on earth are you on about? Last time I checked MS were very far indeed from having a monopoly in the game console market. The EU rulings (and US ones before that) are about MS illegally leveraging their desktop OS monopoly and using it to strong arm their way into other markets (e.g. browsers). Given that they are a minority player in the console market these are just competitive features they're adding to their products in the exact same way other manufacturers do.
A way to crush OpenGL (direct X development for their console and their os when no one else can influence what happens on their console)
News flash - ALL console manufacturers exert 100% control over what software is available for their platforms. You cannot release a game on the PS2, PS3, NGC, Wii, Xbox or Xbox 360 without getting licensed by the appropriate manufacturer. Likewise, the devkits, APIs etc are supplied by those manufacturers. The console arena is not (and hasn't been for a long time) anything like an open environment. Don't like it? Stick to PC development. As it happens, MS are doing pretty well in terms of opening things up in a controlled way with the XNA system which allows anyone to write their own apps (in C# typically) which have pretty much full access to the hardware. Sony provide Linux on the PS3 but it's hardware access is heavily limited (no GPU for example) and Nintendo offer no developer access at all outside of official dev kits.
A way to crush xfire et al (MS only game matchmaking service when no one else can influence alternatives for the xbox)
Yup. Want to do online on Xbox? you use XBL. Again, services like xfire are in the PC space, and always have been. They're not being "crushed" - they're just not able to move into a new space (the online consoles).
New feature! A way to lock up the IM market (MS only IM service where no one else can offer alternatives for the xbox)
Seeing as today you can't use any IM on any console (except with things like browser hacks), this is a step forward. Sure you can only use it with MSN, but if the customers don't like that they won't use it. Again, MS are far from having a monopoly in the IM arena, so they can't be accused of abusing it.
I know it's trendy to bash MS for pretty much anything they do (including having a go at Bill for "only" donating $billions to charity) but give it a rest. This release is attempting to give much-requested features to their customers within the constraints of running a business. I'd like to see actual DiVX/Xvid support (no, this release doesn't include it whatever the headline says), and I'm unlikely to ever use the IM support, but I don't see the problem with it being available.
Ahh, the usual anti-Zune flame. What I don't understand is what exactly is wrong with a Zune? From what I can tell, the only things I see people marking it down for are either subjective (don't like the color, doesn't work with iTunes) or unique features which don't work as well as they could (wifi). In terms of core features (sync with music collection, playback, etc) it seems fine (recently fixed playback bugs notwithstanding). Let me put it this way, if they released an 80gb Zune I'd probably buy it. I think they look better than iPods (my preference, you don't have to agree), I find the controls much easier to use than the scroll wheel (likewise, personal preference) and if I could live in a world entirely free of iTunes I'd be a happier person. So sure, it could be better, but I don't see why all the childish mocking is justified.
Well it looks like there might be a chance that our PC's and consoles will have interchangeable controllers!
They already do, all Xbox 360 controllers (including wired, wireless, racing wheels, etc) work just fine on Windows PCs with the supplied microsoft drivers. For the wireless devices you need a $20 RF dongle, the wired ones are regular USB.
Surely the next generation of consoles will all but abandoned the d-pad controller types for the far superior keyboard/mouse type set-ups.
Yeah! That'll be awesome. Can't wait to try using a keyboard and mouse on my couch. Whilst KB&M may be the preferred controller of many for FPS games, it just doesn't fit with how most people use consoles. If I want to play a PC game at a desk, I will. But for sheer convenience in the living room nothing beats a small wireless controller I can grab off the coffee table when I want a quick game.
If I give you the source code of a program I write, and that source code is not accompanied by a copyright notice or a license, that would essentially put that source code in the public domain
Rubbish - for someone who proudly states his FSF membership you should be more knowledgable about copyright issues. In general, everything which is copyrightable is automatically copyrighted at creation. The music I write and record is under my copyright regardless of any (c) messages I might write on the label. The source I distribute on my website is copyrighted regardless of whether I put any headers on the files. The copyright messages often included in commercial (and non-commercial) works serve several useful purposes, including telling you who owns the copyright (so you may contact them for licensing) but they are not required to assert a claim.
Can anyone confirm, is 256kbps enough for an AAC file to be indistinguishable from a CD in a true double blind listening test?
That depends entirely on your ears and your equipment, and in many cases on the music itself. For playback on an ipod through stock buds? Certainly good enough. I wouldn't want to play it through my main system though.
But this is more like someone stealing gas from your car every day and putting it in their car. Then one day you buy a new car which takes diesel instead of regular gas, they steal that and it wrecks their engine. I think that even in the United States od Litigation your liability in that case is pretty minimal :)
Could it be that he "saw" it on radar? I don't know...just thinking that determining something is 5 miles away with the naked eye is also pretty tough.