MacBook 2.0GHz:
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz
1GB DDR2-667
80GB HDD
Dual-layer burner
13.3 glossy widescreen
Integrated 802.11 a/b/g/n
Bluetooth 1.3 + EDR
Integrated webcam
Magnetic power cord
Intel GMA950 graphics
Total: $1299
Dell XPS M1210
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz
1GB DDR2-667
80GB HDD
Dual-layer burner
12.1" glossy widescreen
Integrated 802.11 a/b/g
NO bluetooth available as upgrade
Integrated webcam
NO magnetic power cord
Intel GMA950 graphics
Total: $1493
I chose the XPS M1210 because of the form factor. Dell's closest performer to the MacBook in question is a 15.4", and from my experience talking to MacBook owners, most feel that 15.4" is too large and immobile for their tastes (though I personally use a 15.4" MacBook Pro). Many PC users complain when I make the magnetic power cord as a bullet point, but I think it's valid. I've known multiple Dell users who have, in college environments, libraries and whatnot, trashed their laptops by someone tripping over the cord and yanking pins off the motherboard internally. There is a mini-industry repairing these things in my college for those not covered under warranty. I know personally that the MagSafe has saved this laptop at least twice since I got it.
Allow me to price out the alternative...
Dell Latitude D620 (look in the small business section)
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz
1GB DDR2-533
80GB HDD
Dual-layer burner
14.1" glossy widescreen
Integrated 802.11 g only (no a/b/n)
Integrated bluetooth 1.3 + EDR
NO webcam
NO magnetic power cord
The above machine runs XP SP2, since it won't let me configure a Vista machine with bluetooth options (driver issues still?)
I've tried to be as objective as possible with this comparison. From this I think it's clear that the Macs are very competitive. I usually get a lot of people complaining that you can buy a cheapo Dell for $600 but can't do so for a Mac... but that's not really an issue with Macs being too expensive, more of one with Apple not servicing your particular demographic.
Funny you mention college students. I work (like many of my college peers), I pay my own bills, tuition, etc, and I have a MacBook Pro. It set me back quite a bit but I can't be happier with any laptop (and I've owned a few!). Similarly, I walked into one of my school's libraries last week and was shocked at how many MacBooks were around. MacBook Pro's are out of the price range of most college students, but it seems there are a very large number that don't mind paying the $1100 for a MacBook. In fact, Macs are more popular than ever on campus, and I would say at LEAST 15% of all laptops that I saw in that building were Macs, which is a HUGE explosive growth from when I started here as a freshman.
Because, you know, Siberia has that *awesome* weather, system of law, and quality of life that attracts highly skilled and talented people... It would more like be a digital gulag for arrested Russian hackers:P
The Thinkpad is a well-established name. People know what it is. The iMac as well. I have no problem with somebody naming something Thinkpad R60, but when the name is "DSM-520" that says zilch to the customer about what it does. How about something like "D-link EZ-TV"? Would it kill to make the name somewhat descriptive?
As a Mac user, fully agreed. My question is though: Why haven't other manufacturers clued into Apple's techniques?
Case in point: AppleTV vs. D-link DSM-520. Which sounds sexier? Why do manufacturers keep insisting on using freaking SKUs for product names? It does not work! Especially when your brand name has no style cachet in existence!
Second: Apple spent a lot of time on that UI, and it's slick as hell and looks easy enough to use for a grandma. Why can't other DVR, set-top box, or any other electronics manufacturer for that matter, clue into this and start designing beautiful and functional UI?/p>
I may be an Apple fan, but I know that if these other companies started spending some actual effort on their packaging, presentation, and UI, they would have Apple in a world of pain. SanDisk did pretty well with the Sansa in that regard, IMHO, and I recently played with a Sony Ericsson K790, which is a hella slick phone. Why aren't other manufacturers doing this?
The summary is like proclaiming Toyota's victory over BMW, because they ship more cars per year. I believe consoles and handhelds exist in markets that overlap in only limited ways, so there's no real "victory" over the other.
Spoken like someone who doesn't develop games, which isn't your fault, but here's some clarification:
Depending on the types of games you play, production costs have risen dramatically since the last generation. Heck, they've been rising since long before then, but only have we seen a price hike now. The workload to produce your average FPS is now *many times* more than during the times of Halo 1 or Half-Life 1, and the size of teams have ballooned dramatically just to give you all the marvelous eye candy that gamers have come to demand.
Certain types of games are less susceptible to this content ballooning, like Sim-style games and strategy games where much of the content is stationary and can be re-used. This is also why a game like Supreme Commander debuted around here for $35, instead of $60 like most console shooters.
I don't agree with the publisher-developer system the industry operates under right now, but I do not believe this $60 price point is driven primarily by greed, but rather by the fact that production costs are skyrocketing with no end in sight. It is also because of this that more and more developers are looking at procedural content to ease the pain.
I would say that *some* (a small minority) of games have already achieved artistic status.
To me art is about communication in a non-verbal and non-written manner. It expresses the creators thoughts, feelings, and aesthetics. Some games today do this. I'll bring up the example clearest in my mind: Deus Ex.
While the game is entertaining, and engaging for the player, and there is a clear "winning" aspect to it, I cannot shake the feeling that the game reaches a place where great movies play. It extols the dangers of an information society, the rampant potential for abuse of an omnipresent informational convenience, where government can conduct surveillance at will. It also touches on class struggles, the legality of rebellion, and a whole slew of topics most normally covered by dramatic epics and philosophical texts.
The player cannot help but come away with a new angle on all of those issues. And that is what great art does.
How many because it really sucked, and how many because, well, they already played the game (and most likely beat it)?
I remember very distinctly that Doom 3, while not the revolutionary end-all of shooters, was well-received when it was first released. It wasn't until later that people complained about the cheap jump-at-you gameplay and darkness. On IRC at the time it was constantly full of "ZOMG check out Doom 3" exclamations.
I believe strongly that Doom 3's sales were completely decimated by piracy. Whether or not the game sucked is of a minor issue. Like you yourself admit, it's entirely likely that people decided not to buy the game after pirating it in impatient anticipation. Some may have done it out of the fact that they already played it, others may have done it because it wasn't the revolutionary title promised to them. In either case the fact that the game leaked days before release to a DOOM-thirsty audience DID totally destroy sales.
I remember the big mess when Doom 3 came out. History has not looked upon Doom 3 kindly, but upon first release the game was touted as a graphical revolution with incredible twitch gameplay. The whole "duct-taped flashlight" joke didn't even kick in till weeks after the game's release.
D3 is also a prime example of what piracy does to sales. The game was pirated far more than any other game before its time, there were torrents *everywhere*, and *everyone* had a copy. Anticipation was high, and when a warez group let slip the ISO *days* before the retail date, sales were instantly decimated.
Die-hard fans and casual interested gamers alike downloaded the ISO in great anticipation - why wait 3-4 more days for the actual release when I can get the *revolutionary* game right now? Of course, the die-hard fans that just couldn't wait for the retail release played the game (just to check it out), and ended up never paying for it.
Piracy ruined Doom 3, but one of the main factors was the combination of anticipation and an early ISO leak. If the ISO came out the day Doom 3 was released to retail, I bet piracy numbers would've been a lot less.
Agreed, for one thing Apple has proven themselves quite well over the last few years that they are able to see trends in the market before they occur (or better yet, create them). One thing to keep in mind is that the concept of the iPod didn't reach the status it enjoys now until the release of the iPod nano. Before then an iPod was strictly a premium item that few people had, while the rest of us scrounged around with cheap flash players. The nano changed all that, and I suspect Apple will at some point roll out the iPhone equivalent, and then the battle will be over for much of the mobile market.
Instead of everyone running their own private shuttles, hopefully what this means is that we will see collaboration to fund a comprehensive public transport system that is ubiquitous and truly competitive with private transport.
In too many cities bus and rail service is so poor that it is mainly reserved for the poor and those with no other choice. I have lived and worked in many cities whose transit systems take after this model. It is incredibly discouraging and hypocritical - to harp about the environment and the virtues of public transit, but to maintain a system that is so slow, so unavailable, and so dirty and dangerous that no one with the income ability will choose to ride it.
Hopefully if companies become serious about funding transport for employees we will see some *real* transit choices in cities.
I live in Ottawa, Canada, and it has one of the better transit systems I've seen anywhere. There is a bus-only roadway that spans the entire city, which permits buses to go ludicrously fast with no traffic lights, and stops are designed hub-style, where extremely rapid buses come every 3 minutes and take you to the next hub, from which you can transfer onto local buses. It's not perfect, but it works remarkably well, and is MUCH better than the VAST majority of cities have.
I'd like to hear why you're talking about performance comparisons between such ancient machines. 8600/300/64MB? Holy cow. Sure, your argument may have been valid *years* ago when these machines were current-gen, but to infer that today's Macs are the same is just plain ignorant.
Is the above really trolling? I love GOW as much as the next guy, but having seen some of these interviews I think it's pretty clear Cliffy *is* quite full of himself. Even in the "Making of" documentary it was 50% about him and his legendary quest to make teh BEST GAME EVAR!!!
You clearly have never used Live. I suggest doing so before giving your criticism. If you did, you would know that Live is much more than a match-making chat server. You would also know that Xbox 360 *does* multitask and handle buddy lists (beautifully, IMHO, though there's always room to be better)... I would say XBL buddy list integration is better than any PC system I've seen.
What is so compelling about the MS service to justify forking out $50 to use it when the same can be had for free elsewhere?
The same reason it's always been to fork over $50 for Xbox Live - quality of service.
You've listed only one pro for PC multiplayer, and that is the free-ness (as in beer) of it all. Personally I can think of a couple more:
- Support for user mods.
- Text chatting... but that's more a hardware difference than a service one.
Allow me to explain why I believe Xbox Live is worth every penny:
- Global friends lists and enemies lists: Every single game I play on the service is tied to the same friend and foe lists. If I meet a very annoying player, I can blacklist him, making sure I do not get paired up with him *ever again* in *any game that I play*.
- Tighter profanity control: When I get on CS I am hit with a wall of prepubescent vulgarity. On Xbox Live users that swear excessively get bad reviews, are less likely to get paired up with you. At the extreme end there is an active system that will ban such players. With free PC multiplayer everything is at the server level. For every vulgar n00b that gets banned off a particular server there's a million more just waiting to log in.
- Skill based rankings: Ever notice in online shooters that the scoreboard always has a few top players that duke it out, while everyone is just cannon fodder? On Live the TrueSkill system will attempt to place you with others of similar skill, ensuring that as you improve your game so do your opponents. Gunning down hapless newbies isn't fun for too long, nor is getting your ass handed to you every time you spawn.
- Guaranteed availability: This one is not intrinsically unique to Live, but I've yet to see a PC game do this well. On PC I'd surf huge lists of servers to pick the game I wanted. This I find annoying but necessary - there are a ridiculous number of laggy servers out there, if I don't manually pick one odds are it's going to suck. On XBL I can trust the "Quick Match" feature to put me in a good game. Many on PC have tried, all that I have seen have failed.
- Instant join for friends and games: I turn on my Xbox. My buddy John is playing Gears of War. He sees me come online through a quick message on his screen. He pauses his game, hits his menu, and bam, he's invited me to play. Networks like Steam have this feature also, but... how many games does Steam have again (especially just counting the ones that people care about)? XBL enables this feature across the board for *every game you play*.
- Play type preference: On XBL there are 3 "zones" of play: Rec, Pro, and Underground. These zones have slightly different rules, and are designed to segregate casual gamers from competitive ones. Some people play some games religiously and demands squad tactics from all their fellow players. Others are just there to unwind and shoot aliens. On a PC I've run into this problem repeatedly. The only solution is to bookmark servers that you know fits your play "style"... Both time consuming and annoying. Of course popular servers tend to fill up, so you're right back to "refresh server list, find good server... attempt to join".
I can't think of much else off of my tired, groggy head. But there are plenty of reasons to go from free online play to paid services. As long as you're getting your money's worth.
While I agree that segregation generally leads to better educations for smarter kids, this also creates a very negative social force.
I'll relate my experiences from Asia:
Where I came from (before immigrating to Canada), only elementary schools are based on local schooling areas. Middle school, high school, and university are entirely based on standardized testing. For middle school and high school this is city-wide, and we're talking *very very* large cities. Kids oftentimes ended up going to school clear on the other side of town, putting a huge traffic overtime on their day-to-day schedules. With even heavier workloads in the elite schools and the ever-looming graduation exams (that determines where you go *next*), as well as extremely cut-throat competition to stay where they are, kids have just about zero time for themselves, and, well, be kids.
I was privileged enough to come from a family that was largely very well educated, and we were expected to excel academically. A large part of the reason we moved out of Asia (besides unstable politics and horrifyingly bad pollution) is the fact that my parents did not belief in that type of life for their children. Neither did many parents, but most lack the means to leave the country altogether.
Many children would leave home at 6 o'clock in the morning to make it in time for 7:30am class (quite standard). School ends at 4-5pm, after which it's directly to tutoring and supplementary classes. Such classes are not even an option if one wishes to remain competitive and make it to the better schools. Those generally wrap up around 9-10pm, leaving the kids an hour to get home, snarf down some fast food, and go to sleep to repeat the cycle ad nauseum. I wish I were exaggerating these times. When an 11 year-old doesn't have time to sit down and eat supper, ever, you know your culture is in trouble.
And what do you get? An economic powerhouse with no soul, and absolutely no quality of life for children or adults alike. You hit "the grind" at age 11 harder than most Americans in their LIFETIMES. That is no way to live.
Not to mention the fact that the lesser schools get completely ignored. If you fail a graduation exam and get slotted into a lesser school, there is no way out. You are, in many ways, screwed for life. The odds are so stacked against you that going to a good high school, then a good university, is nigh impossible. In many ways it's virtually privatizing education. Those who can afford the expensive supplementary tutor classes can give their children an edge, and those who cannot afford it cannot compete.
If you want to truly stratify your society, prevent movement between lower, middle, and upper classes, and want to run an oligarchy, please, go ahead, segregate our education.
IMHO the better education for the gifted isn't worth that type of society.
Your suggestion is sound, except that it leads to a system that values hard skills above all else. Coming from Asia, where the education system heavily favors math and science over the arts, I have seen first hand that this is not a Good Thing(tm).
For the most part, math and science lead to more lucrative careers for most people. In a society that worships economic achievement above all else (Asia is there, America rapidly approaching), it results in an education system that reflects these ideals.
So you get a bunch of very highly qualified, highly trained math and science teachers instilling the best science and math into our students. And you get piss poor education in the arts. You create a generation of automatons who man your programming, engineering, and drone research positions. Creativity disappears and cultural output plummets. Great for the economy, not so great for the soul.
This is an issue that many Asian countries face. Please, America, don't fall into the same trap. I'm all for meritocracies and paying based on performance and qualifications, but to split English out from math, and claim that one should be paid less than the other, is just ignorant. *All* of the subjects we teach in elementary and high school are crucial to preparing a student for the world - otherwise we wouldn't be teaching it. I don't know about you, but a world where everyone can do multi-variable calculus but can't grok a stage play is something that greatly scares me.
Slashdot Mirror
Some evidence:
MacBook 2.0GHz:
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz
1GB DDR2-667
80GB HDD
Dual-layer burner
13.3 glossy widescreen
Integrated 802.11 a/b/g/n
Bluetooth 1.3 + EDR
Integrated webcam
Magnetic power cord
Intel GMA950 graphics
Total: $1299
Dell XPS M1210
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz
1GB DDR2-667
80GB HDD
Dual-layer burner
12.1" glossy widescreen
Integrated 802.11 a/b/g
NO bluetooth available as upgrade
Integrated webcam
NO magnetic power cord
Intel GMA950 graphics
Total: $1493
I chose the XPS M1210 because of the form factor. Dell's closest performer to the MacBook in question is a 15.4", and from my experience talking to MacBook owners, most feel that 15.4" is too large and immobile for their tastes (though I personally use a 15.4" MacBook Pro). Many PC users complain when I make the magnetic power cord as a bullet point, but I think it's valid. I've known multiple Dell users who have, in college environments, libraries and whatnot, trashed their laptops by someone tripping over the cord and yanking pins off the motherboard internally. There is a mini-industry repairing these things in my college for those not covered under warranty. I know personally that the MagSafe has saved this laptop at least twice since I got it.
Allow me to price out the alternative...
Dell Latitude D620 (look in the small business section)
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz
1GB DDR2-533
80GB HDD
Dual-layer burner
14.1" glossy widescreen
Integrated 802.11 g only (no a/b/n)
Integrated bluetooth 1.3 + EDR
NO webcam
NO magnetic power cord
The above machine runs XP SP2, since it won't let me configure a Vista machine with bluetooth options (driver issues still?)
I've tried to be as objective as possible with this comparison. From this I think it's clear that the Macs are very competitive. I usually get a lot of people complaining that you can buy a cheapo Dell for $600 but can't do so for a Mac... but that's not really an issue with Macs being too expensive, more of one with Apple not servicing your particular demographic.
Intel GMA950 graphicsTotal: $1268
Funny you mention college students. I work (like many of my college peers), I pay my own bills, tuition, etc, and I have a MacBook Pro. It set me back quite a bit but I can't be happier with any laptop (and I've owned a few!). Similarly, I walked into one of my school's libraries last week and was shocked at how many MacBooks were around. MacBook Pro's are out of the price range of most college students, but it seems there are a very large number that don't mind paying the $1100 for a MacBook. In fact, Macs are more popular than ever on campus, and I would say at LEAST 15% of all laptops that I saw in that building were Macs, which is a HUGE explosive growth from when I started here as a freshman.
Because, you know, Siberia has that *awesome* weather, system of law, and quality of life that attracts highly skilled and talented people... It would more like be a digital gulag for arrested Russian hackers :P
The Thinkpad is a well-established name. People know what it is. The iMac as well. I have no problem with somebody naming something Thinkpad R60, but when the name is "DSM-520" that says zilch to the customer about what it does. How about something like "D-link EZ-TV"? Would it kill to make the name somewhat descriptive?
As a Mac user, fully agreed. My question is though: Why haven't other manufacturers clued into Apple's techniques?
Case in point: AppleTV vs. D-link DSM-520. Which sounds sexier? Why do manufacturers keep insisting on using freaking SKUs for product names? It does not work! Especially when your brand name has no style cachet in existence!
Second: Apple spent a lot of time on that UI, and it's slick as hell and looks easy enough to use for a grandma. Why can't other DVR, set-top box, or any other electronics manufacturer for that matter, clue into this and start designing beautiful and functional UI?/p>
I may be an Apple fan, but I know that if these other companies started spending some actual effort on their packaging, presentation, and UI, they would have Apple in a world of pain. SanDisk did pretty well with the Sansa in that regard, IMHO, and I recently played with a Sony Ericsson K790, which is a hella slick phone. Why aren't other manufacturers doing this?
The summary is like proclaiming Toyota's victory over BMW, because they ship more cars per year. I believe consoles and handhelds exist in markets that overlap in only limited ways, so there's no real "victory" over the other.
Except I'm still on my first console, as is every Xbox 360 owner I know. Anecdotal evidence and loudly complaining bloggers do not statistics make.
Spoken like someone who doesn't develop games, which isn't your fault, but here's some clarification:
Depending on the types of games you play, production costs have risen dramatically since the last generation. Heck, they've been rising since long before then, but only have we seen a price hike now. The workload to produce your average FPS is now *many times* more than during the times of Halo 1 or Half-Life 1, and the size of teams have ballooned dramatically just to give you all the marvelous eye candy that gamers have come to demand.
Certain types of games are less susceptible to this content ballooning, like Sim-style games and strategy games where much of the content is stationary and can be re-used. This is also why a game like Supreme Commander debuted around here for $35, instead of $60 like most console shooters.
I don't agree with the publisher-developer system the industry operates under right now, but I do not believe this $60 price point is driven primarily by greed, but rather by the fact that production costs are skyrocketing with no end in sight. It is also because of this that more and more developers are looking at procedural content to ease the pain.
I would say that *some* (a small minority) of games have already achieved artistic status.
To me art is about communication in a non-verbal and non-written manner. It expresses the creators thoughts, feelings, and aesthetics. Some games today do this. I'll bring up the example clearest in my mind: Deus Ex.
While the game is entertaining, and engaging for the player, and there is a clear "winning" aspect to it, I cannot shake the feeling that the game reaches a place where great movies play. It extols the dangers of an information society, the rampant potential for abuse of an omnipresent informational convenience, where government can conduct surveillance at will. It also touches on class struggles, the legality of rebellion, and a whole slew of topics most normally covered by dramatic epics and philosophical texts.
The player cannot help but come away with a new angle on all of those issues. And that is what great art does.
*That*, is art.
GOURANGA!
I don't mind rehashing old experiences as long as they're good ones. Hey Warren Spector, how's about a *non-crappy* sequel to Deus Ex this time?
Yes, we get the fact that you don't like television. Do you have to insult the rest of us for your preference?
How many because it really sucked, and how many because, well, they already played the game (and most likely beat it)?
I remember very distinctly that Doom 3, while not the revolutionary end-all of shooters, was well-received when it was first released. It wasn't until later that people complained about the cheap jump-at-you gameplay and darkness. On IRC at the time it was constantly full of "ZOMG check out Doom 3" exclamations.
I believe strongly that Doom 3's sales were completely decimated by piracy. Whether or not the game sucked is of a minor issue. Like you yourself admit, it's entirely likely that people decided not to buy the game after pirating it in impatient anticipation. Some may have done it out of the fact that they already played it, others may have done it because it wasn't the revolutionary title promised to them. In either case the fact that the game leaked days before release to a DOOM-thirsty audience DID totally destroy sales.
I remember the big mess when Doom 3 came out. History has not looked upon Doom 3 kindly, but upon first release the game was touted as a graphical revolution with incredible twitch gameplay. The whole "duct-taped flashlight" joke didn't even kick in till weeks after the game's release.
D3 is also a prime example of what piracy does to sales. The game was pirated far more than any other game before its time, there were torrents *everywhere*, and *everyone* had a copy. Anticipation was high, and when a warez group let slip the ISO *days* before the retail date, sales were instantly decimated.
Die-hard fans and casual interested gamers alike downloaded the ISO in great anticipation - why wait 3-4 more days for the actual release when I can get the *revolutionary* game right now? Of course, the die-hard fans that just couldn't wait for the retail release played the game (just to check it out), and ended up never paying for it.
Piracy ruined Doom 3, but one of the main factors was the combination of anticipation and an early ISO leak. If the ISO came out the day Doom 3 was released to retail, I bet piracy numbers would've been a lot less.
Agreed, for one thing Apple has proven themselves quite well over the last few years that they are able to see trends in the market before they occur (or better yet, create them). One thing to keep in mind is that the concept of the iPod didn't reach the status it enjoys now until the release of the iPod nano. Before then an iPod was strictly a premium item that few people had, while the rest of us scrounged around with cheap flash players. The nano changed all that, and I suspect Apple will at some point roll out the iPhone equivalent, and then the battle will be over for much of the mobile market.
Instead of everyone running their own private shuttles, hopefully what this means is that we will see collaboration to fund a comprehensive public transport system that is ubiquitous and truly competitive with private transport.
In too many cities bus and rail service is so poor that it is mainly reserved for the poor and those with no other choice. I have lived and worked in many cities whose transit systems take after this model. It is incredibly discouraging and hypocritical - to harp about the environment and the virtues of public transit, but to maintain a system that is so slow, so unavailable, and so dirty and dangerous that no one with the income ability will choose to ride it.
Hopefully if companies become serious about funding transport for employees we will see some *real* transit choices in cities.
I live in Ottawa, Canada, and it has one of the better transit systems I've seen anywhere. There is a bus-only roadway that spans the entire city, which permits buses to go ludicrously fast with no traffic lights, and stops are designed hub-style, where extremely rapid buses come every 3 minutes and take you to the next hub, from which you can transfer onto local buses. It's not perfect, but it works remarkably well, and is MUCH better than the VAST majority of cities have.
I'd like to hear why you're talking about performance comparisons between such ancient machines. 8600/300/64MB? Holy cow. Sure, your argument may have been valid *years* ago when these machines were current-gen, but to infer that today's Macs are the same is just plain ignorant.
Is the above really trolling? I love GOW as much as the next guy, but having seen some of these interviews I think it's pretty clear Cliffy *is* quite full of himself. Even in the "Making of" documentary it was 50% about him and his legendary quest to make teh BEST GAME EVAR!!!
I skimmed the comments and am surprised this wasn't brought up:
"Hello Air Control? We are the terrorists. If you do not relinquish control of this plane we will execute a passenger every 5 minutes. Thank you!"
How do terrorists EVER get anything done?
You clearly have never used Live. I suggest doing so before giving your criticism. If you did, you would know that Live is much more than a match-making chat server. You would also know that Xbox 360 *does* multitask and handle buddy lists (beautifully, IMHO, though there's always room to be better)... I would say XBL buddy list integration is better than any PC system I've seen.
What is so compelling about the MS service to justify forking out $50 to use it when the same can be had for free elsewhere?
The same reason it's always been to fork over $50 for Xbox Live - quality of service.
You've listed only one pro for PC multiplayer, and that is the free-ness (as in beer) of it all. Personally I can think of a couple more:
- Support for user mods.
- Text chatting... but that's more a hardware difference than a service one.
Allow me to explain why I believe Xbox Live is worth every penny:
- Global friends lists and enemies lists: Every single game I play on the service is tied to the same friend and foe lists. If I meet a very annoying player, I can blacklist him, making sure I do not get paired up with him *ever again* in *any game that I play*.
- Tighter profanity control: When I get on CS I am hit with a wall of prepubescent vulgarity. On Xbox Live users that swear excessively get bad reviews, are less likely to get paired up with you. At the extreme end there is an active system that will ban such players. With free PC multiplayer everything is at the server level. For every vulgar n00b that gets banned off a particular server there's a million more just waiting to log in.
- Skill based rankings: Ever notice in online shooters that the scoreboard always has a few top players that duke it out, while everyone is just cannon fodder? On Live the TrueSkill system will attempt to place you with others of similar skill, ensuring that as you improve your game so do your opponents. Gunning down hapless newbies isn't fun for too long, nor is getting your ass handed to you every time you spawn.
- Guaranteed availability: This one is not intrinsically unique to Live, but I've yet to see a PC game do this well. On PC I'd surf huge lists of servers to pick the game I wanted. This I find annoying but necessary - there are a ridiculous number of laggy servers out there, if I don't manually pick one odds are it's going to suck. On XBL I can trust the "Quick Match" feature to put me in a good game. Many on PC have tried, all that I have seen have failed.
- Instant join for friends and games: I turn on my Xbox. My buddy John is playing Gears of War. He sees me come online through a quick message on his screen. He pauses his game, hits his menu, and bam, he's invited me to play. Networks like Steam have this feature also, but... how many games does Steam have again (especially just counting the ones that people care about)? XBL enables this feature across the board for *every game you play*.
- Play type preference: On XBL there are 3 "zones" of play: Rec, Pro, and Underground. These zones have slightly different rules, and are designed to segregate casual gamers from competitive ones. Some people play some games religiously and demands squad tactics from all their fellow players. Others are just there to unwind and shoot aliens. On a PC I've run into this problem repeatedly. The only solution is to bookmark servers that you know fits your play "style"... Both time consuming and annoying. Of course popular servers tend to fill up, so you're right back to "refresh server list, find good server... attempt to join".
I can't think of much else off of my tired, groggy head. But there are plenty of reasons to go from free online play to paid services. As long as you're getting your money's worth.
There are no "gold member only" demos. The most you get are demos that hit Gold members earlier than they do Silver, usually by about 3-4 days.
While I agree that segregation generally leads to better educations for smarter kids, this also creates a very negative social force.
I'll relate my experiences from Asia:
Where I came from (before immigrating to Canada), only elementary schools are based on local schooling areas. Middle school, high school, and university are entirely based on standardized testing. For middle school and high school this is city-wide, and we're talking *very very* large cities. Kids oftentimes ended up going to school clear on the other side of town, putting a huge traffic overtime on their day-to-day schedules. With even heavier workloads in the elite schools and the ever-looming graduation exams (that determines where you go *next*), as well as extremely cut-throat competition to stay where they are, kids have just about zero time for themselves, and, well, be kids.
I was privileged enough to come from a family that was largely very well educated, and we were expected to excel academically. A large part of the reason we moved out of Asia (besides unstable politics and horrifyingly bad pollution) is the fact that my parents did not belief in that type of life for their children. Neither did many parents, but most lack the means to leave the country altogether.
Many children would leave home at 6 o'clock in the morning to make it in time for 7:30am class (quite standard). School ends at 4-5pm, after which it's directly to tutoring and supplementary classes. Such classes are not even an option if one wishes to remain competitive and make it to the better schools. Those generally wrap up around 9-10pm, leaving the kids an hour to get home, snarf down some fast food, and go to sleep to repeat the cycle ad nauseum. I wish I were exaggerating these times. When an 11 year-old doesn't have time to sit down and eat supper, ever, you know your culture is in trouble.
And what do you get? An economic powerhouse with no soul, and absolutely no quality of life for children or adults alike. You hit "the grind" at age 11 harder than most Americans in their LIFETIMES. That is no way to live.
Not to mention the fact that the lesser schools get completely ignored. If you fail a graduation exam and get slotted into a lesser school, there is no way out. You are, in many ways, screwed for life. The odds are so stacked against you that going to a good high school, then a good university, is nigh impossible. In many ways it's virtually privatizing education. Those who can afford the expensive supplementary tutor classes can give their children an edge, and those who cannot afford it cannot compete.
If you want to truly stratify your society, prevent movement between lower, middle, and upper classes, and want to run an oligarchy, please, go ahead, segregate our education.
IMHO the better education for the gifted isn't worth that type of society.
Your suggestion is sound, except that it leads to a system that values hard skills above all else. Coming from Asia, where the education system heavily favors math and science over the arts, I have seen first hand that this is not a Good Thing(tm).
For the most part, math and science lead to more lucrative careers for most people. In a society that worships economic achievement above all else (Asia is there, America rapidly approaching), it results in an education system that reflects these ideals.
So you get a bunch of very highly qualified, highly trained math and science teachers instilling the best science and math into our students. And you get piss poor education in the arts. You create a generation of automatons who man your programming, engineering, and drone research positions. Creativity disappears and cultural output plummets. Great for the economy, not so great for the soul.
This is an issue that many Asian countries face. Please, America, don't fall into the same trap. I'm all for meritocracies and paying based on performance and qualifications, but to split English out from math, and claim that one should be paid less than the other, is just ignorant. *All* of the subjects we teach in elementary and high school are crucial to preparing a student for the world - otherwise we wouldn't be teaching it. I don't know about you, but a world where everyone can do multi-variable calculus but can't grok a stage play is something that greatly scares me.
False, I routinely pick up cars that still have people in it. It's rather hilarious.