SevenInchScrew
Aug 11, 07:33 PM
i know there have been more 'titles'. but they are not full releases, but i did leave out Gran Turismo for PSP, so they are up to 5 full releases now.
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series)) -{Wikipedia Quote}-
I really like you're choice of quoting.
Largest Number of cars in a Racing game
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
Highest Selling PlayStation Game
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
Oldest Car in a Racing Game
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series)) -{Wikipedia Quote}-
I really like you're choice of quoting.
Largest Number of cars in a Racing game
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
Highest Selling PlayStation Game
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
Oldest Car in a Racing Game
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
Super Dave
Aug 7, 04:33 PM
I dont think the "Top Secret" stuff is really top secret. I think Apple needs some more time to develope a few things before releasing them out into the public. No reason to release buggy apps.
Remember, WWDC was pushed back this year. THey aren't done with Leopard just yet.
They certainly aren't done, but they're announcing it within the same length time frame as they did with Tiger if I recall.
I actually believed him on the "Top Secret" stuff. Every vista build changes, so it's good to not let too much out of the bag until Vista is either interface frozen or released.
David :cool:
Remember, WWDC was pushed back this year. THey aren't done with Leopard just yet.
They certainly aren't done, but they're announcing it within the same length time frame as they did with Tiger if I recall.
I actually believed him on the "Top Secret" stuff. Every vista build changes, so it's good to not let too much out of the bag until Vista is either interface frozen or released.
David :cool:
iScott428
Mar 22, 01:37 PM
I would hardly consider any of these devices competition. The ecosystems that support these devices do not even come close to Apple's. Prices and specs are just trying to match the Ipad 2 but just like with any PC trying to match a Mac in performance or tech specs; you will not see the same or even close to the performance of the machine due to the software. Plus the Playbook has missed the train for businesses; show me a Corporate Executive with out an Ipad and I will show you an Executive on the way to retirement, bet they are the same person. :apple:
svenas1
Jul 15, 04:55 AM
The thing that perplexes me is the relocation of the Power Supply to the top. This is either bogus info or they know something they aren't letting on about all the Liquid Cooling problems that have been arising lately in the repair world.
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.
what if the plug is still at the bottom, and the connection to the actual power unit is internal? high voltage connection through the case innards - is that possible ?
Plus would this not put a strain on the power cord since the cord would have its own weight hanging down on it instead of how it currently comes out of the back of the tower and immediately lays on the floor or desk surface? Something's fishy about this.
what if the plug is still at the bottom, and the connection to the actual power unit is internal? high voltage connection through the case innards - is that possible ?
*LTD*
Mar 26, 06:41 AM
Been on Lion for the past month and I can't see myself going back to Snow Leopard.
This WILL be a landmark release for Apple and huge step forward in usability. It just ties everything together: one simple, elegant, functional, totally scalable OS. Apple will have achieved in no time at all what the competition is just beginning to attempt (and fail at constantly.)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
I think it's artificial belly-aching on MacRumors in order to get attention.
Am I getting warmer?
This WILL be a landmark release for Apple and huge step forward in usability. It just ties everything together: one simple, elegant, functional, totally scalable OS. Apple will have achieved in no time at all what the competition is just beginning to attempt (and fail at constantly.)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
I think it's artificial belly-aching on MacRumors in order to get attention.
Am I getting warmer?
mlmathews
Apr 11, 11:25 AM
My 3Gs contract ends in June and Apple will be pushing it's luck for me to go half a year without me being tempted to jump platforms instead of waiting for the iPhone 5.
kdarling
Apr 20, 09:49 AM
No they wouldn't. They have to prove likelihood of confusion, not actual confusion. Actual confusion is evidence of likelihood of confusion, but it's not necessary.
Yes sir, that's why I explicitly said "could" have to provide proof, because I read of cases where evidence of actual confusion ended up being one of the methods used.
Thank you, as always, for making the clarification in any case.
Yes sir, that's why I explicitly said "could" have to provide proof, because I read of cases where evidence of actual confusion ended up being one of the methods used.
Thank you, as always, for making the clarification in any case.
bizzle
Apr 28, 06:00 AM
I am not going to read 7 pages to see if someone already said this because I am sure they did.
It's clearly a forgery.
Not liking Obama does not mean you are racist.
It's clearly a forgery.
Not liking Obama does not mean you are racist.
yg17
Apr 27, 09:21 AM
He could have released this years ago.
Why should he? He released the short form BC, which is valid and legal proof of citizenship.
Hawaii law states that no one can request an original long form BC, not even the person who's name is on the BC, so Obama had to call in a few favors to get this. I'm surprised the right wing loons aren't accusing him of overstepping his bounds and destroying states' rights to get it.
Why should he? He released the short form BC, which is valid and legal proof of citizenship.
Hawaii law states that no one can request an original long form BC, not even the person who's name is on the BC, so Obama had to call in a few favors to get this. I'm surprised the right wing loons aren't accusing him of overstepping his bounds and destroying states' rights to get it.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 27, 12:53 AM
PowerBook G5 next tuesday?
Now that has been replaced with Core 2 Dup next Monday ;)
Now that has been replaced with Core 2 Dup next Monday ;)
Nuck81
Nov 25, 02:46 PM
Need For Speed: Shift looks better than GT5. Especially the in car Cockpit cam. The shadows of GT5 are a fickering jaggy especially in car. I'm hoping they can patch all that out. Not to mention the AI of GT5 is horrible. The cars just stay on the driving line like those old time cars at the amusement park. There is no regard to racing or competition. In Shift, the AI is trying to beat you. They bump you they pass you, they get too aggressive and make mistakes, causing wrecks and spin outs. There is no better console racer in that regard. GT5 AI only makes contact if you are in their line, not that they are actually trying to "beat" you.
The Driving feels good though after I switched the brake/gas to the triggers and off the awkward right stick. GT5 would be better to be marketing as a Driving/Time Trial game. Not a Racing/Competition game. I'll put my time into GT5. and it will be a blast trying to beat my times on the tracks with the different cars, but I won't play the game looking to win races against competition. For that, I'm looking forward to Shift 2 already...
GT5 is a 8.5 for me.
The Driving feels good though after I switched the brake/gas to the triggers and off the awkward right stick. GT5 would be better to be marketing as a Driving/Time Trial game. Not a Racing/Competition game. I'll put my time into GT5. and it will be a blast trying to beat my times on the tracks with the different cars, but I won't play the game looking to win races against competition. For that, I'm looking forward to Shift 2 already...
GT5 is a 8.5 for me.
MacRumors
Sep 13, 06:49 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
AnandTech took (http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=6) a Mac Pro, which comes with two Dual-Core Xeon (Woodcrest) processors and replaced them with samples of two Quad-Core Xeon (Clovertown) processors.
We grabbed a pair of 2.4GHz Clovertown samples and tossed them in the system, and to our pleasure, they worked just fine. Our samples used a 1066MHz FSB, although we're expecting the final chip to use a 1333MHz FSB, but the most important part of the test is that all 8 cores were detected and functional.
The Mac Pro appeared to run fine with the Quad-Core processors, effectively givem them a 8-Core machine. While they are unable to give performance numbers due to non-disclosure agreements, the machine was reportedly stable. It also gives hope for current Mac Pro owners that they will be able to later upgrade the processors on their machine in the future. Clovertown Quad-core processors are expected to be available in late 2006.
AnandTech took (http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=6) a Mac Pro, which comes with two Dual-Core Xeon (Woodcrest) processors and replaced them with samples of two Quad-Core Xeon (Clovertown) processors.
We grabbed a pair of 2.4GHz Clovertown samples and tossed them in the system, and to our pleasure, they worked just fine. Our samples used a 1066MHz FSB, although we're expecting the final chip to use a 1333MHz FSB, but the most important part of the test is that all 8 cores were detected and functional.
The Mac Pro appeared to run fine with the Quad-Core processors, effectively givem them a 8-Core machine. While they are unable to give performance numbers due to non-disclosure agreements, the machine was reportedly stable. It also gives hope for current Mac Pro owners that they will be able to later upgrade the processors on their machine in the future. Clovertown Quad-core processors are expected to be available in late 2006.
basesloaded190
Apr 6, 11:12 AM
I still don't think this means new MacBook Airs in June. Can anyone really see Apple releasing new hardware before Lion is released?
Why not?
Why not?
aquanutz
Aug 16, 10:47 PM
all if have to say is: I want one (along with everyone else on this forum.) :D
LightSpeed1
Apr 5, 05:26 PM
Hopefully there will be new iMacs to go with it. Refresh please!You and me both.
dernhelm
Aug 7, 03:48 PM
Hey nice to see osx will have system restore =D
YOU MUST BE KIDDING. Have you actually used System Restore to restore a single file? Oh that's right, you can't. All you can do it reset your system back to a point where the file existed.
This is MUCH more powerful, and more like something users would actually want.
System Restore is great for those times when you want to apply a system patch that could be iffy, and you are willing to "snap" a restore point, apply the patch, and roll back if something didn't fly.
But for the normal user, it is much more useless.
YOU MUST BE KIDDING. Have you actually used System Restore to restore a single file? Oh that's right, you can't. All you can do it reset your system back to a point where the file existed.
This is MUCH more powerful, and more like something users would actually want.
System Restore is great for those times when you want to apply a system patch that could be iffy, and you are willing to "snap" a restore point, apply the patch, and roll back if something didn't fly.
But for the normal user, it is much more useless.
cmaier
Apr 20, 01:42 PM
Which tells me somebody botched it. Does it impact damage claims if Samsung decides to present one model that doesn't bear any ressemblance to the iPhone like the ones depicted above ?
Or can Apple amend to add specifity to the claim.
They don't need to amend. This is a federal pleading so the standard is whether it puts Samsung on notice. This is a different standard than state courts, where they would have to be much more specific. Eventually they will have to prove which models are accused. Looks to me like the complaint is fine.
Or can Apple amend to add specifity to the claim.
They don't need to amend. This is a federal pleading so the standard is whether it puts Samsung on notice. This is a different standard than state courts, where they would have to be much more specific. Eventually they will have to prove which models are accused. Looks to me like the complaint is fine.
SeaFox
Apr 8, 01:49 AM
Best Buy is now WORST BUY!!!!
2004 called. They want their joke back. :rolleyes:
I think it would be quite hilarious if Best Best lost their iPads and everyone had to go to ToysRUs instead. :D
2004 called. They want their joke back. :rolleyes:
I think it would be quite hilarious if Best Best lost their iPads and everyone had to go to ToysRUs instead. :D
buckers
Apr 6, 01:29 PM
What do you intend to do on an Air that will require what little extra power the nvidia gfx offers over Intel. You sure as hell can't game with it.
You sure as hell can.
This.
You sure as hell can.
This.
Stella
Aug 7, 04:43 PM
Is Leopard going to take advantage of the 64 bit Dual G5?
Whats the point? Its history.
My guess is, that its how Tiger is now.
Whats the point? Its history.
My guess is, that its how Tiger is now.
netdog
Aug 12, 02:40 AM
I'll be happy as long as it resurrects the Wild Eep.
ergle2
Sep 15, 12:50 PM
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
nagromme
Mar 22, 01:01 PM
Widescreen is great for movie watching, and the spec-lover in me is all over that... but it’s not very flexible for portrait use. (Which is how you hold a tablet one-handed, and is how you see the most content on a web page or scrolling document.)
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
vincenz
Apr 28, 01:30 PM
Trump is the ultimate troll. Worst of all, he's just getting tons of free publicity every time the subject is brought up.