I could easily see the internet (a.k.a. "a series of tubes", Al "manbearpig" Gore's creation) completely replacing printed materials, especially newspapers, in the very near future
As you say yourself, PCs were not designed for gaming, so the fact that the Internet has some bad implications for gaming is largely irrelevant to them.
However, that doesn't make my statement any less true.
Most multiplayer games do belong on PC. I never said they all do. Regardless of the intention behind the design of the PC, it is the superior platform for the genres most commonly seen online.
Would you also mind explaining why a computer not designed for gaming is a superior platform for multi-player gaming?
The games I want to play offline aren't necessarily going to be available offline in a few years. Is adding online capability worth shortening the lifetime of all the offline games?
That's not relevant to the game I want to play not being available on the PC.
the only reasons a game could be going online from a console are because it jumped platforms from the PC, or is an offline game with pointless online features tacked on
I call bullshit. There do exist games for consoles that were originally designed with online play in mind and didn't start life on the PC. Again, I cite PSO. Then there's FFXI (originally a PS2 game, mind), Alien Front Online, Planet Ring (EU-only), Outtrigger, etc.
So because Internet access provides the potential for this, it's bad? That's flawed reasoning. I liked playing Phantasy Star Online with people around the globe, thank you.
The question is, "Will the pages I use the most render quickly and look nice?" NOT "Is the browser standards-compliant and will it make web development easy for people that I never see or care about?"
You do realise that the two are linked, right? Better standards compliance not only means easier web development, but more design capabilities, which leads to nicer pages.
While that's a good argument, those libraries are often complex, and not optimised for what you want to do. Function calling in JavaScript is more expensive than in other languages as well.
It would be silly to fear the resale market, because there's a reasonable expectation that the coins would already have been registered to the original owner of the game.
As far as I know, this only happened once, a half year back. I've been a Club Nintendo member for years. And it was only applying to stars of a certain age.
I bought a Mario Kart stopwatch one month before the partial wipe for 3500 stars.
I roll my eyes every time someone posts this ignorant argument. Look, sites get hacked. Sites embed third-party content that can also get hacked. You are not safe just by going to 'trusted' sites.
There was a website I went to years ago. Its host got hacked, and thus all the sites hosted on that server were serving malware through an iframe. IE users were either infected or were warned by their anti-virus. Users of other web browsers didn't notice a thing.
IE7 is definately a standard-ignoring bastard. And assuming you're an FF advocate, remember it didnt pass Acid2 until FF3.
The Acid tests are not an indicator of standards compliance. They're tests of flaws in web browsers that web developers want fixed. KHTML may have passed Acid2 first, but it had a lot of rendering flaws. When Gecko didn't pass Acid2, it had less flaws and was more standards compliant overall.
Bloated? How? I really don't see any bloat compared to other browsers.
Have you checked the size of the installer files? Way larger than that of any other web browser.
Slashdot Mirror
But only if they can keep the land that their fairy tale book told them was theirs.
That's either a lie, or you're deluding yourself. :)
Ik ben een belg.
I'm sure you're aware of the bigger picture: most people don't even have basic knowledge of computers, so they ask dumb questions.
LOL, why do you think that?
I'm a fun Men, real! :)
You certainly aren't the smartest one, as I have noticed at least three grammar and spelling errors in your post.
What the hell?! This is Slashdot; no one has a girlfriend or wife here!
Don't forget the CSS support. IE3 supported some CSS already, but IE4 greatly improved on this. Meanwhile Netscape 4 only supported some CSS.
Funny, people were saying this 10 years ago, too.
Popular misinformation. This was never the case. Its main focus was to to be a great Windows web browser with the "right set of features.
A Firefox install might be fresh, but is your profile fresh? I doubt it.
However, that doesn't make my statement any less true.
Would you also mind explaining why a computer not designed for gaming is a superior platform for multi-player gaming?
That's not relevant to the game I want to play not being available on the PC.
I call bullshit. There do exist games for consoles that were originally designed with online play in mind and didn't start life on the PC. Again, I cite PSO. Then there's FFXI (originally a PS2 game, mind), Alien Front Online, Planet Ring (EU-only), Outtrigger, etc.
It goes both ways:
Internet access provides possibilities for a number of issues which personal computers were immune to up until it was added. Thus it is bad.
Also:
It will stop working eventually. ROM chips don't last forever. Of course, that's where emulators come in.
So because Internet access provides the potential for this, it's bad? That's flawed reasoning. I liked playing Phantasy Star Online with people around the globe, thank you.
You do realise that the two are linked, right? Better standards compliance not only means easier web development, but more design capabilities, which leads to nicer pages.
Did you try to contact them about it? If not, why not?
While that's a good argument, those libraries are often complex, and not optimised for what you want to do. Function calling in JavaScript is more expensive than in other languages as well.
It would be silly to fear the resale market, because there's a reasonable expectation that the coins would already have been registered to the original owner of the game.
As far as I know, this only happened once, a half year back. I've been a Club Nintendo member for years. And it was only applying to stars of a certain age.
I bought a Mario Kart stopwatch one month before the partial wipe for 3500 stars.
Gamers buy cars?
I roll my eyes every time someone posts this ignorant argument. Look, sites get hacked. Sites embed third-party content that can also get hacked. You are not safe just by going to 'trusted' sites.
There was a website I went to years ago. Its host got hacked, and thus all the sites hosted on that server were serving malware through an iframe. IE users were either infected or were warned by their anti-virus. Users of other web browsers didn't notice a thing.
Then all it takes is for a program to disguise itself as an update, and voila.
Definitely. Definitely!
The Acid tests are not an indicator of standards compliance. They're tests of flaws in web browsers that web developers want fixed. KHTML may have passed Acid2 first, but it had a lot of rendering flaws. When Gecko didn't pass Acid2, it had less flaws and was more standards compliant overall.
Have you checked the size of the installer files? Way larger than that of any other web browser.
Good for you. But it won't help the servers.
Will your world also have flying pigs?