As a former Mac word processor dissident, this really brings back some memories. I mean on the first computer I ever owned, a Power Computing 604e machine (Mac Clone) I insisted on using ClarisWorks 4 throughout high school for all my papers. For a few months I defected, but only to use the equally awesome Nisus Writer. I'm not sure if Nisus Writer still exists, but I remember it being a powerful, yet easy to use word processor with lots of cool features. Anyway, I've long since sold out to MS Office for Mac. When I got my G4 desktop for college, it came with Word and I just decided to give in and use the best tool available. I mean for a while ClarisWorks was pretty compatible, but by 2001 it was a good bet to use MS Word to ensure cross-platform compatibility. Or maybe I'm just rationalizing a poor decision...sigh.
Quake, Quake 3, Quake 4, Marathon, Marathon Infinity, Myth 2, Myth 3, Warcraft II, Starcraft, Age of Empires II, Age of Empires III, Civ 2, Civ 3, Civ 4, Simcity, Simcity 2000, The Sims, Alpha Centauri, Aliens Vs. Predator 2, Halo, Myst, Riven, Myst III: Exile, Myst IV, Myst V, Rollercoaster Tycoon 3, Zoo Tycoon, Railroad Tycoon, Unreal Tournament, Jedi Knight 2, Knights of the Old Republic, Star Wars Battlefront, WoW, Warcraft 3, Diablo, Diablo 2, Fallout, Obsidian, Call of Duty 2, Splinter Cell, Rainbow Six 3, Worms 3D, Alice, America's Army, Command and Conquer: Generals, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, LEGO Star Wars, Nascar 2003, F1 Championship Season, Heroes of Might and Magic 4, AGON, Rhem 2, Battlefield 1942, Homeworld 2, Masters of Orion 3, Tiger Woods PGA Tour '05, and a bunch of others.
add to that all the quirky, independently produced games by companies like Freeverse and Ambrosia and older classics like the MacVenture series (Shadowgate, Deja Vu, etc.) and you've got a pretty solid group of games to choose from.
Actually Apple made a big deal of aiming at gamers about six years ago after the first or maybe second gen iMac was released. Quake 3 was on the Mac, Myth 2, Starcraft, etc. And they started a games page on Apple.com.
In the USA today article that was mentioned above, former Byrds frontman Roger McGuinn is used as an example of an artist that has made gains in his career through giving away mp3s for free. Of course, the mp3s he gives away are of his performances of old folk songs, not his new original material. Those songs are available on CDs, which he sells at his concerts. For a profit.
The question still remains, how do less popular artists gain from the free digital music movement? If an artist sells their own self-produced recordings (CDs or MP3s, whatever) directly to the public, and these sales make up a significant part of their income, do they really gain anything by suddenly giving away their music for free?
Lets take a New York Jazz Pianist for example. Let's call him Frank. Frank gigs constantly with four different groups all over the five bouroughs and elsewhere, and between the gigs and sales of his independently produced cds (as well as teaching/workshops) he can eek out a reasonable living. Now what if we suddenly make the whole idea of "buying music" an anachronism. Does that really help Frank?
Obviously, huge pop stars like Beyonce or Britney would be fine, because they would get commericals and other endorsement deals, and the like. They also play sold out stadium shows, but what about independent artists who mostly play smaller venues? And if you say the public will be more likely to hear their music if its free, that just isn't really true. Tons of people had free mp3s on mp3.com back in the day, and they didn't do so well.
Also another thought. It takes money to build a recording studio. Who's gonna pay for that? There won't even be any indie record labels or indie recording studios if they don't have anything they can sell to make a profit.
Slashdot Mirror
As a former Mac word processor dissident, this really brings back some memories. I mean on the first computer I ever owned, a Power Computing 604e machine (Mac Clone) I insisted on using ClarisWorks 4 throughout high school for all my papers. For a few months I defected, but only to use the equally awesome Nisus Writer. I'm not sure if Nisus Writer still exists, but I remember it being a powerful, yet easy to use word processor with lots of cool features. Anyway, I've long since sold out to MS Office for Mac. When I got my G4 desktop for college, it came with Word and I just decided to give in and use the best tool available. I mean for a while ClarisWorks was pretty compatible, but by 2001 it was a good bet to use MS Word to ensure cross-platform compatibility. Or maybe I'm just rationalizing a poor decision...sigh.
A Classic!
and Mr. Relaxer. don't forget Mr. Relaxer
List of Big Budget Mac Games:
Quake, Quake 3, Quake 4, Marathon, Marathon Infinity, Myth 2, Myth 3, Warcraft II, Starcraft, Age of Empires II, Age of Empires III, Civ 2, Civ 3, Civ 4, Simcity, Simcity 2000, The Sims, Alpha Centauri, Aliens Vs. Predator 2, Halo, Myst, Riven, Myst III: Exile, Myst IV, Myst V, Rollercoaster Tycoon 3, Zoo Tycoon, Railroad Tycoon, Unreal Tournament, Jedi Knight 2, Knights of the Old Republic, Star Wars Battlefront, WoW, Warcraft 3, Diablo, Diablo 2, Fallout, Obsidian, Call of Duty 2, Splinter Cell, Rainbow Six 3, Worms 3D, Alice, America's Army, Command and Conquer: Generals, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, LEGO Star Wars, Nascar 2003, F1 Championship Season, Heroes of Might and Magic 4, AGON, Rhem 2, Battlefield 1942, Homeworld 2, Masters of Orion 3, Tiger Woods PGA Tour '05, and a bunch of others.
add to that all the quirky, independently produced games by companies like Freeverse and Ambrosia and older classics like the MacVenture series (Shadowgate, Deja Vu, etc.) and you've got a pretty solid group of games to choose from.
Actually Apple made a big deal of aiming at gamers about six years ago after the first or maybe second gen iMac was released. Quake 3 was on the Mac, Myth 2, Starcraft, etc. And they started a games page on Apple.com.
nah, men don't walk around all day with their penises exposed. Its still possible to be an aggressive, violent asshole with a tiny penis.
In the USA today article that was mentioned above, former Byrds frontman Roger McGuinn is used as an example of an artist that has made gains in his career through giving away mp3s for free. Of course, the mp3s he gives away are of his performances of old folk songs, not his new original material. Those songs are available on CDs, which he sells at his concerts. For a profit.
The question still remains, how do less popular artists gain from the free digital music movement? If an artist sells their own self-produced recordings (CDs or MP3s, whatever) directly to the public, and these sales make up a significant part of their income, do they really gain anything by suddenly giving away their music for free?
Lets take a New York Jazz Pianist for example. Let's call him Frank. Frank gigs constantly with four different groups all over the five bouroughs and elsewhere, and between the gigs and sales of his independently produced cds (as well as teaching/workshops) he can eek out a reasonable living. Now what if we suddenly make the whole idea of "buying music" an anachronism. Does that really help Frank?
Obviously, huge pop stars like Beyonce or Britney would be fine, because they would get commericals and other endorsement deals, and the like. They also play sold out stadium shows, but what about independent artists who mostly play smaller venues? And if you say the public will be more likely to hear their music if its free, that just isn't really true. Tons of people had free mp3s on mp3.com back in the day, and they didn't do so well.
Also another thought. It takes money to build a recording studio. Who's gonna pay for that? There won't even be any indie record labels or indie recording studios if they don't have anything they can sell to make a profit.