What company to bash..?

This is a discussion on What company to bash..? within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by Elysia It was only at the same price level because it came after all the other consoles. ...

  1. #31
    Internet Superhero
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    964
    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    It was only at the same price level because it came after all the other consoles. And hey, once they introduced it, Sony and Nintendo began cutting prices. Microsoft were left in the dark and the Xbox would not have survived if it wasn't Microsoft who designed it with their deep pockets.
    I have no idea about prices in the US, but when i got my Xbox it was in a bundle with 2 games and it was exactly the same price as an equivalent PS2 bundle, only it had faster hardware, better games (Don't think anyone will agree with me on that one) and a harddrive...

    Well, as I stated, it's a computer in a box.
    I don't like it. Efficiency and power comes before "it's working."
    Computers draws lots of power and are inefficient. That's why I dislike the whole computer in a box ordeal.
    What a strange measure of a console's quality, power efficiency? You do realize that a PS2 leaks 17,5 kWh per year when it is in standby? The Xbox leaks 3,50kWh, also please take into consideration that the Xbox has a built in harddrive, while the PS2 doesn't, so it isn't really a fair comparison..

    Also, when both consoles are turned on and gaming, a PS3 uses about 13W more than an Xbox 360, so i still don't get your point?
    How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.

  2. #32
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    That's weird because no console can match the a personal computer in processor speed, graphics quality, sound suport... or anything for that matter.
    No, that's not right.
    A computer uses very high processor speeds and even more powerful graphics cards to make themselves at equal performance to their console counterpart.
    The gamecube for example used very high speed memory which operated at or near processor speed. Computers don't have that fast memory.
    Consoles are using different architectures because they need to be small, efficient and fast at a low price.

    I think the "I don't like it" is the real only valid argument you have. How exactly you feel XBox isn't a powerful console... actually what means powerful in this context? And do you mean that being less powerful (whatever that means) than something else means it's not powerful anymore?
    It's not really an argument. It's an opinion against Microsoft.
    Powerful meaning how much graphics it can cram on the screen before it starts to lag.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post
    I have no idea about prices in the US, but when i got my Xbox it was in a bundle with 2 games and it was exactly the same price as an equivalent PS2 bundle, only it had faster hardware, better games (Don't think anyone will agree with me on that one) and a harddrive...
    You forget, it's already been several years since it was released
    When it was released, it was almost crushed by the competition...

    What a strange measure of a console's quality, power efficiency? You do realize that a PS2 leaks 17,5 kWh per year when it is in standby? The Xbox leaks 3,50kWh, also please take into consideration that the Xbox has a built in harddrive, while the PS2 doesn't, so it isn't really a fair comparison..

    Also, when both consoles are turned on and gaming, a PS3 uses about 13W more than an Xbox 360, so i still don't get your point?
    No, no, no. No comparing the PS2. Or Xbox. They're both power monsters.
    The sleek, power efficient machine was the Gamecube. It had beefier specs than the PS2, yet drew less power.
    And the Revolution (Wii) is pretty much a GC 2.0, yet draws less power than the gamecube. Nice.
    And the Xbox had beefier specs than the PS2 and draws more power basically because it's a computer in a box.

    But you know, you can sometimes judge an application by its GUI, you know? If I see poor GUI, then most likely it's poorly coded (does not apply to all cases, however).
    Microsoft just wanted a console on the market so they rushed the xbox. By making it a computer in the box, they saved dev costs and it was easier to test since there wasn't so much custom hardware.
    Poor engineering.
    Last edited by Elysia; 02-01-2008 at 11:37 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  3. #33
    Ethernal Noob
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,901
    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    I really agree on that. I believe they're just making excuses with the typical "it's not easy to increase production." They also announced they won't increase production until after April. I mean, what the heck??? What's more important--your forecasts or making to satisfy demand?


    The thing's a toy. It doesn't require any extraneous technology or hardware to promote such a journeyed hardware shortage. Demand may be high, but it's just paving the way for funding their next system that will probably come out this year.

  4. #34
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    But you know, you can sometimes judge an application by its GUI, you know? If I see poor GUI, then most likely it's poorly coded
    Hehe, you're definitely not a Linux user.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  5. #35
    Ethernal Noob
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,901
    Anyone ever use gimp...

    Great program, horrid gui.

  6. #36
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,627
    Quote Originally Posted by indigo0086 View Post
    The thing's a toy. It doesn't require any extraneous technology or hardware to promote such a journeyed hardware shortage. Demand may be high, but it's just paving the way for funding their next system that will probably come out this year.
    It uses pretty small chip sizes, but aside from that. Perhaps it will pave a way for a new console. Perhaps not. Nintendo will probably keep the Rev around until demand for it starts to slack. So why not up production to meet demand? They're making money off every produced console! Even more so this year, I would believe since they haven't made any price cuts.
    The PS3 and Xbox 360 has already fallen in manufacturing prices, so...

    Quote Originally Posted by indigo0086 View Post
    Anyone ever use gimp...
    Great program, horrid gui.
    Yeah, like any Adobe software. Horrible GUI (and also quite buggy), but widely used due to their functionality. Like Photoshop. Horrible program.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  7. #37
    Internet Superhero
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    964
    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    No, no, no. No comparing the PS2. Or Xbox. They're both power monsters.
    The sleek, power efficient machine was the Gamecube. It had beefier specs than the PS2, yet drew less power.
    And the Revolution (Wii) is pretty much a GC 2.0, yet draws less power than the gamecube. Nice.
    And the Xbox had beefier specs than the PS2 and draws more power basically because it's a computer in a box.
    Yea, the GC used less power than the other two, but what i fail to understand is how that makes it a better console? I think the Xbox was the best of the three because it had a harddrive and outperformed the other consoles (Amongst other things, but thats irrelevant for now..), why does power consumption mean anything? And why is the architecture important? Sure you might have lightning fast memory in a GC, but i'm still looking at you in my rear view mirror with my 733mHz P3 in the Xbox, to the user, it doesn't really matter how the console works internally does it? As long as it is fast?

    I'm perfectly happy with the Xbox as it is, even though it might resemble a PC more than the other 2, it's still faster, so who cares?

    But you know, you can sometimes judge an application by its GUI, you know? If I see poor GUI, then most likely it's poorly coded (does not apply to all cases, however).
    Microsoft just wanted a console on the market so they rushed the xbox. By making it a computer in the box, they saved dev costs and it was easier to test since there wasn't so much custom hardware.
    Poor engineering.
    You say poor engineering, i say a beneficial shortcut, why over complicate things. The way they did it worked, and better than how Sony and Nintendo did it even...
    How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.

  8. #38
    Reverse Engineer maxorator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    2,318
    Quote Originally Posted by citizen View Post
    Oh? If it weren't for Google, we wouldn't have text ads interrupting the flow of content on a page. If it weren't for Google, selling ads would be harder. In my opinion, the availability to advertise and market crap on the internet now is due to Google in part. I wouldn't be surprised if Google considered its own ads good pages. If Google wasn't for-profit, they might be more concerned about their core concept than making more billions of dollars.
    You don't want to say you think if there wouldn't be Google, there would be less advertisings. Give me a break. It's like if there wouldn't be Osama bin Laden, there would be less terrorism. It's not a about a person, it's about the religion there. As for advertisings - it's not about a company, it's about the market+technology. Google uses the power it has only for good purposes. You will understand that only when some greedy idiots take over the market.

    If Google wasn't popular, there wouldn't be less ads. There are many many many ad systems out there, many of them as easy to use as Google's. Google ads are just preferred because they aren't annoying. They look as a natural part of the site, not as some disturbing, blinking, popuping, screaming crap.

    Btw, they need the billions - they are maintaining ~500000 servers worldwide and they're building new datacenters. Only to be able to cache more and give faster results. Plus big companies CAN'T be non-profit companies because there aren't enough "programming social workers" to pay for all of those servers & other expenses.
    Last edited by maxorator; 02-01-2008 at 01:17 PM.
    "The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore

  9. #39
    Registered User whiteflags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,709
    > Yeah, like any Adobe software.

    I think it's the industry's standard for a reason though. Yeah there is a lot to learn, but it's not really that different from a computer illiterate person learning how Office works. At least that was my experience. I really don't have any real artistic ability; the computer hasn't helped me get any. Even then I was able to find all the brushes and use the lasso tool and stuff.

    I'd eventually learned to alter photos to an extent... I put a friend of mine against a B&W backdrop. It turned out pretty nicely.

    If I remember gimp correctly it wasn't that different either (toolbox and layer windows), but it was different enough to be annoying, so I found Adobe to be a pleasant working experience.

    My $.02.

  10. #40
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post
    Yea, the GC used less power than the other two, but what i fail to understand is how that makes it a better console?
    It tells wonder of how much Nintendo has went to create a fast, power efficient architecture that works at blazing speeds at low clock speeds! You have to admire it, at least from an engineer's standpoint. And from a programmer's standpoint, when a program runs blazingly fast with little CPU, I'd be proud too.

    I think the Xbox was the best of the three because it had a harddrive and outperformed the other consoles (Amongst other things, but thats irrelevant for now..)
    It had an advantage in features, but not in its specs and architecture.

    why does power consumption mean anything?
    Do you want it to eat up your electric bill? Then how about we let them consoles eat away at 30k kilowatt hours?

    And why is the architecture important? Sure you might have lightning fast memory in a GC, but i'm still looking at you in my rear view mirror with my 733mHz P3 in the Xbox, to the user, it doesn't really matter how the console works internally does it? As long as it is fast?
    To me, it matters. I don't like wasted power. It speaks lengths of how far they went to make a good console. A console of build quality. The quality of the console is poor. Yes, it works, but that doesn't make it right.

    I'm perfectly happy with the Xbox as it is, even though it might resemble a PC more than the other 2, it's still faster, so who cares?
    Well, obviously not you

    You say poor engineering, i say a beneficial shortcut, why over complicate things. The way they did it worked, and better than how Sony and Nintendo did it even...
    They didn't do better than Sony & Nintendo. They had the advantage of time, that is all. By releasing the console later than the two, they could get away with adding beefier specs at the same price.
    Just image how could the Xbox could have been if they'd designed it as good as the Gamecube?

    Quote Originally Posted by citizen View Post
    > Yeah, like any Adobe software.

    I think it's the industry's standard for a reason though. Yeah there is a lot to learn, but it's not really that different from a computer illiterate person learning how Office works. At least that was my experience. I really don't have any real artistic ability; the computer hasn't helped me get any. Even then I was able to find all the brushes and use the lasso tool and stuff.

    If I remember gimp correctly it wasn't that different either (toolbox and layer windows), but it was different enough to be annoying, so I found Adobe to be a pleasant working experience.

    My $.02.
    You hit the nail with the hammer I think.
    It's standard for a reason indeed, and it's because of its functionality. Unfortunately, Adobe's software is awful. They're buggy and ugly. And it's sad to see Adobe has purchased Flash, as well.
    But this is why I'm rooting for Paint Shop Pro! It may not be its equal but it costs 10x less and has a pretty interface and less buggy! Go PSP!
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  11. #41
    Registered User whiteflags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,709
    It's standard for a reason indeed, and it's because of its functionality. Unfortunately, Adobe's software is awful. They're buggy and ugly.
    Maybe you could make a fairer evaluation in a different thread at some point, but I don't think that opinion is a good one. If the GUI were truly awful, I don't see how it could become the standard for a whole industry; some of the functionality you speak of, the feature richness, would be inacessable.

    "Buggy and ugly" ... well, buggy not so much in my experience, but that's what happens. Adobe's a pretty big program, and it's difficult to get things right until you discover new problems. Same thing with a mainstream OS that needs updating every second Tuesday of the month. I think Adobe's been pretty responsible when it comes to patching, provided you update stuff.

  12. #42
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    PSP still exists?
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  13. #43
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,475
    I do have a beef with one particular piece of Adobe software. And that is the Reader. It's a trend I never appreciated - certainly by far not an adobe exclusive - of filling software one wants simple, fast and almost transparent with so many useless features it becomes some combination of complex and heavy on resources.

    Like the Reader, all of a sudden I can think of all current web browsers or software like Nero.

    However, it doesn't make me feel anything other than a slight annoyance. Thankfully for each there's second options. For instance, I replaced the Reader a long timer ago for Foxit Reader.

    Conversely Adobe Acrobat (the software) is by far the best PDF editor in the market.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  14. #44
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,627
    Quote Originally Posted by citizen View Post
    Maybe you could make a fairer evaluation in a different thread at some point, but I don't think that opinion is a good one. If the GUI were truly awful, I don't see how it could become the standard for a whole industry; some of the functionality you speak of, the feature richness, would be inacessable.
    Haha, well... compare the GUI of Photoshop to Paint Shop Pro. PSP is much nicer, richer and a pleasure to work with while Photoshop's is... well, purely ugly.
    The GUI works, but it's an eyesore to look at, if you ask me
    So the program does its work well, and that's why it's the industry standard. But GUI and functionality are different things as we both know!

    "Buggy and ugly" ... well, buggy not so much in my experience, but that's what happens. Adobe's a pretty big program, and it's difficult to get things right until you discover new problems. Same thing with a mainstream OS that needs updating every second Tuesday of the month. I think Adobe's been pretty responsible when it comes to patching, provided you update stuff.
    OH, but I see Adobe's software equal to Microsoft's. Buggy.
    I used to work a lot with incoming work before. Typically where we had to print their work. It turns out we a lot of trouble with stuff made with Adobe. The rest went mostly easy from what I can vaguely remember.

    Quote Originally Posted by CornedBee View Post
    PSP still exists?
    Yeah, it's up to version 11 or 12 or something like that, but who counts? Corel purchased it and I can't I'm too happy about that >_<
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  15. #45
    Internet Superhero
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    964
    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    It tells wonder of how much Nintendo has went to create a fast, power efficient architecture that works at blazing speeds at low clock speeds! You have to admire it, at least from an engineer's standpoint. And from a programmer's standpoint, when a program runs blazingly fast with little CPU, I'd be proud too.
    That's true.

    Not that i know anything about porting console games to PC, but if you compare the minimum requirements for Halo 2 for the PC, and then look at the Xbox specs, then i'd say it's fairly impressive that it even runs on that ancient Geforce 3/P3 combination. Though there is probably more to it than that, i don't know..

    Do you want it to eat up your electric bill? Then how about we let them consoles eat away at 30k kilowatt hours?
    No, but i won't base my choice of console on power usage anyways? If it's efficient then that is a perk, but power usage is hardly something anyone focuses on when looking to buy a console, it's just not that relevant.

    Well, obviously not you
    I guess you and i differ, from my point of view, the Xbox is fast, durable and generally superior to other consoles of its time, maybe i'll think differently if i ever decide i wan't to write console games? But as a consumer, i couldn't care less about its internal workings.

    They didn't do better than Sony & Nintendo. They had the advantage of time, that is all. By releasing the console later than the two, they could get away with adding beefier specs at the same price.
    Just image how could the Xbox could have been if they'd designed it as good as the Gamecube?
    Well, the main reason that the PS2 outsold the Xbox by such a wide margin is because it came out alot earlier. By the time the Xbox was available, everyone and their mother had a PS2. So i don't think Microsoft considered the late release of the Xbox an "advantage".

    But again, if you're only going to use it as it was intended -for playing games-, then there is no reason to worry about the internal design, as long as it works, and is faster...
    How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-10-2009, 12:57 AM
  2. bash scripting?
    By Draco in forum Linux Programming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-08-2007, 05:15 AM
  3. How to start a company?
    By Liger86 in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-25-2003, 12:38 AM
  4. Company Hopping
    By FillYourBrain in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-07-2002, 11:24 AM
  5. redirecting standard error in Bash
    By wozza in forum Linux Programming
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-16-2002, 04:55 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21