I LOVED the idea of the Cube but then the Whiners took over complaining about some mythical expandability and the idea went "poof"
A low cost Cube with upgradable graphics and no fan would be great. The only thing the Cube needed was a reduction of cable cluttter.
As for the iMac it's going to appeal to people who don't necessarily care about the monitor being attached. One less Power and Video hookup to make.
I'd love to upgrade my PC's but adding another Vid card or CDRW card is ok..nothing big and you can do the same thing with a Powermac so it's was no real big deal.
Torifile, your points are well-made, but not well-taken: one guy trumpts his approach to 40 & crows about his addiction to games; I know guys like that - they ignore their wives and children because they have preserved their adolescent self-obsession intact, they spend all their time & money on computer stuff & their online buddies.
In short, they're pathetic sh!tbags who can't manage the reality & responsibilities of real life & real relationships, and push away the people who love them & depend on them; swearing on the one hand that no-one's the boss of them, and wailing on the other that only other alienated, clueless Shamu-types understand the pain of having to live around stupid people who don't understand them.
QB]<hr></blockquote>
Your comments show your total ignorance about what drives the market.
Games and gaming made more money than the entire Movie industry last year. It is quickly approaching the music industry as the top revenue producer in entertainment.
These things drive hardware sales.
Your post also shows your intolerence of other people's opinions and hobbies. It is this self-obsessed, holier-than-thou attitude that turns a lot of people off on Macs and the people that use them. I run a Mac forum on a PC website (www.tech-report.com). When you boil down the arguments of the pro-PC crowd, they all come down to "Mac users are snobs". It is a visceral response to the users, not the equipment.
Responses like yours only reinforce that argument.
I use a Mac because I like it, I can afford it, and I think the hardware is nifty. I use a PC because I like to play games. This does not justify a tirade such as yours simply because you feel games are a waste of time. There obviously plenty of people who don't. Furthermore, you know nothing about me, my income, my family, or anything else. For you to pass judgement like that says much about your narrowmindedness.
Not everyone who plays games on a PC looks or acts like the Comic Book guy from the Simpsons. Your reliance on stereotypes says more about your than about me.
Anyone have any stats about the impact 'gamers' have on the computing industry? I'd like to see them. I guess I'm not as convinced as some of you of their real importance. Don't get me started on the purchasing/decision making power of teenage boys. (Teenage girls have much more impact.)
ps - to whomever called me an idiot: you proved my point.
Dude, I love hotcakes! I also missed breakfast this morning. They cost $1.99 for 3 Hotcakes and 1 Sausage patty. They also give you 2 little plastic things with butter in them and 2 syrups. Um.... Dang, those are so good. Now I'm gonna hvae to go to IHOP (blast!). I prefer McDonalds but they already stopped serving. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I think this is the best post Ive read since MWNY!!!! I with Johnny!
<strong>Torifile you are an idiot, if you are a too cool for school mister all grown up, and you dont play games then fine, but don't be a blind fool. People care about graphics cards and a lot of people care about their CPUs being able to play games. Why don't you compare the sales of Microsft Office with the sales of Warcraft 3. There is a reason Jobs talks about the games coming to Mac all the time, but I guess you know more about how to get people to buy Macs than him and his marketing people.
For the moderators...Apple does need am expandable and inexpensive computer.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmm... MS office: $499, Warcraft III: $59. I wonder which will sell more???? Jobs talks about anything that's positive. Getting more games is a positive thing. Now, walk into any computer store and SEE how many people know what kind of gfx card is in their machine or the one they are looking at. There's a reason Dell sells computers with that integrated video crap. People just don't give a damn. Last I checked, Dell was doing pretty good. Getting a kickass gfx card in a mac would be GREAT because it's about choice, but don't say it'll solve all the problems.
Yes. Except that the Cube had some major flaws. Apple in its zealous efforts to produce a silent machine, killed the very features that should have made the Cube attractive .
Apple needs to slightly reengineer the Cube (bigger shell) so that it accepts a standard size graphic card and can internally tolerate the heat produced by modern GPUs and CPUs. Apple also needs to price it at < $1,000 USD.
The new gCube + 17" widescreen LCD + Superdrive < $2, 000 USD
gCube
800 MHz G4
gForce4Ti
60 gig HD
Combo Drive
= $999.00
gCube SE
1000 MHz G4
gForce4Ti
80 gig HD
Super Drive
= $1399.00
BTO options on better GPU available at a reasonable price.
Apple needs to slightly reengineer the Cube (bigger shell) so that it accepts a standard size graphic card and can internally tolerate the heat produced by modern GPUs and CPUs. Apple also needs to price it at < $1,000 USD.
The new gCube + 17" widescreen LCD + Superdrive < $2, 000 USD
gCube
800 MHz G4
gForce4Ti
60 gig HD
Combo Drive
= $999.00
gCube SE
1000 MHz G4
gForce4Ti
80 gig HD
Super Drive
= $1399.00
BTO options on better GPU available at a reasonable price.
I think that you have the rite prices there to make the Cube marketable, and the right specs as well. I'm not sure that you need to make it larger just for the Graphics Cards, sell enough of them and ATI will make their cards fit, most of Nvidia cards fit now, as does the ATI 7500, and since if they fit in a Cube, they will fit in a tower, why change the design for that alone. The heat issue would need to be addressed, but adding a quiet fan would be a small modification without adding much in R&D cost. The last thing that would help it sell is moving some of the ports, specifically the USB and FireWire for better accessability.
I like the Cube, I own one, and am glad that processor cards are coming out for them. I need to upgrade the Video for 10.2, and add memory, but with these few alterations it should last as a home computer for at least 2 years, and possibly another 4-5. I wont buy an iMac for personal use becouse it comes with a monitor, and I think there are a lot of people out there with that same attitude.
Please, nobody take offense, but this cube/pizza box/etc. topic comes up continually and Apple perpetually ignores it, why I don't know(I'm sure they have valid reasons, but they aren't sharing them)
<strong>Anyone have any stats about the impact 'gamers' have on the computing industry? I'd like to see them. I guess I'm not as convinced as some of you of their real importance. Don't get me started on the purchasing/decision making power of teenage boys. (Teenage girls have much more impact.)
ps - to whomever called me an idiot: you proved my point.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Torifile, the fact that you choose not to believe there is a relationship does not necessarily mean there isn't one.
Here are some links that at least can show how much is spent on games. At least a portion of this has to be driving the hardware as well.
I'd also read around a bit at the IDSA site, there is a lot of information that people just do not realize about gaming. It is a huge industry. To say that this has no bearing on the computer industry is just blinkered thinking.
Hmmm. Here's a thought - if Apple needs a gamer machine, why not just bring back Pippin?
You're right, gamers spend thousands of dollars making their systems the latest and greatest, then every 1 - 1 1/2 years THROW THE SYSTEM AWAY, to get a faster one. I NEVER understood this.
Med Shot:Room full of people, all sitting on cheap orange plastic chairs.
CU: Our hero stands, looking slightly embarrased. "Hi. My name is Mike, and I'm a game addict."
I, personally, also play games on a very frequent basis, eg at least every second day. That's why I own a game machine - a Playstation2. When it's out of date in 2 years, I'll throw it away, and buy the new machine available, spending $500 in the proccess, not $3000+.
My computers are not for gaming, but for work (and internet, email, etc).
Please get back to future hardware. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
With that sort of thinking I suppose you would also exclude any kind of decent audio capabilities for your computer, because you already have a dedicated stereo for that. Whatever..
You simply cannot get the level of perfomance that is in an Xbox or PS2 in a PC for $199. Gamers are the ones crazy enough to buy $400 Graphics cards. A crazy lot they are.
I'd also read around a bit at the IDSA site, there is a lot of information that people just do not realize about gaming. It is a huge industry. To say that this has no bearing on the computer industry is just blinkered thinking.
That's the reason I was asking. But the figures you give are WAY skewed. The gaming industry as a whole is HUGE, but what proportion of that is COMPUTER games?
This graph indicates that it's less than 1/3. Take a big money maker, cut it in 1/3s and you've got a force, but not a huge one. Certainly not one as big as you make it out to be. Consoles are also eating up some of the money from computer games.
Consoles up 10% Computer games down 1.7% Hmmm. Are we seeing a trend? I think so. Computer gaming is on the DECLINE for pete's sake. So my opinion and the reality are in synch. What about yours?
Care to continue discussing reality and the importance of gaming or are you finished?
Consoles up 10% Computer games down 1.7% Hmmm. Are we seeing a trend?
.
.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
No. We're not.
From what I understand Micro$oft was selling its game console at below cost. That kind of practice is unsustainable in the long term. And it also serves to skew the numbers. Also, I would argue that statistics for year 2001 are not at all representative of long-term trends. If you wish to gauge where the industry is going I'd suggest you look at on what platform cutting edge technology (software/hardware) is being developed. And here the PC industry is clearly in the lead, and in my opinion will remain so for a long time to come.
Torifile just Devastated you guys with that last post. Sorry but you just got stretched across the canvas with that Hook.
[quote] No. We're not.
From what I understand Micro$oft was selling its game console at below cost. That kind of practice is unsustainable in the long term. And it also serves to skew the numbers. Also, I would argue that statistics for year 2001 are not at all representative of long-term trends. If you wish to gauge where the industry is going I'd suggest you look at on what platform cutting edge technology (software/hardware) is being developed. And here the PC industry is clearly in the lead, and in my opinion will remain so for a long time to come.
<hr></blockquote>
Selling Consoles at or below consoles was happening even before Microsoft came into the market. It's the Gillette razor/razorblade idea and it is most definitely sustainable because your profits are derived from licensing.
PC as a platform for cutting edge hahahah. PC tech is evolutionary but not revolutionary
AGP 8x- merely a faster version of 2 and 4x
Serial ATA- Available to everyone
PCI- Available to everyone
DDR- The ONLY advantage that Macs don't have for whatever reason once that's gone we have a level playing field.
Intel/AMD- Ahead of Moto but not as much as people think. Xserve proves that smart design will unleash the power of the G4.
I don't look to PC's for groundbreaking stuff or stuff outta left field like when apple announced Airport. I look to them for incremental advances. To call the x86 industry Cutting Edge is a farce of epic porportion proprotions.
<strong>From what I understand Micro$oft was selling its game console at below cost. That kind of practice is unsustainable in the long term.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, its standard practice. Console manufacturers lose money on consoles and make money on licensing. Sony does it too. It means little to a console's success.
[quote]Originally posted by W1lsonStark:
Dedicated systems don't do most PC games better. I'll grant you that HALO is pretty hot for X-Box but Neverwinter nights, Warcraft II. Even the Sims?[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
Well, The Sims Online is coming for PS2, but really thats besides the point.
The same argument could be said the other way around. Would you get the same experience on a PC for games like Virtual Fighter 4, Gran Turismo or NHL 2002? No, you won't. Different genres and different games lend themselves to different platforms and methods. Live with it.
Apple once reigned champion of gaming, and it hurt sales. Now they seem to be behind, and it's hurting sales. Games aren't the end all to Apple's success.
Hardware needs to be improved. For fragging or photoshopping it doesn't matter. We have THE BEST operating system, now we just need better hardware.
Torifile just Devastated you guys with that last post. Sorry but you just got stretched across the canvas with that Hook.
Selling Consoles at or below consoles was happening even before Microsoft came into the market. It's the Gillette razor/razorblade idea and it is most definitely sustainable because your profits are derived from licensing.
PC as a platform for cutting edge hahahah. PC tech is evolutionary but not revolutionary
AGP 8x- merely a faster version of 2 and 4x
Serial ATA- Available to everyone
PCI- Available to everyone
DDR- The ONLY advantage that Macs don't have for whatever reason once that's gone we have a level playing field.
Intel/AMD- Ahead of Moto but not as much as people think. Xserve proves that smart design will unleash the power of the G4.
I don't look to PC's for groundbreaking stuff or stuff outta left field like when apple announced Airport. I look to them for incremental advances. To call the x86 industry Cutting Edge is a farce of epic porportion proprotions.</strong><hr></blockquote>
DOOM IIITM, the next revolution in action gaming and technology, was honored with a record five Game Critics Awards: Best of E3 2002 honors including Best of Show, Best PC Game, Best Action Game, Special Commendation for Sound and Special Commendation for Graphics.
mika.
Edit:
In theory, the .com companies were also to derive profits through this kind of scheme. Of-course, we will just have to wait and see how long Micro$oft can sustain this kind of practice. I bet even they, with their deep pockets, will not duplicate this idiocy when xBox II is released. If it will be released. .
<strong>Games? That's what you're basing the majority of your argument on? That you can't upgrade the video card to play games? Everyone I know uses a computer. One of them plays games on his computer. You know, not all real people care about computer games. Teenage boys do. And even then, only some teenage boys. Why is this what it always comes back to?
I'm an avid computer user. Not once in my years as a computer user did I upgrade my video card. Not once in the past several years have I even upgraded anything in my computer. Not everyone cares about FPS or strategy or the latest obscenely violent, resource intensive, life-sucking computer game. </strong><hr></blockquote>
OK, I'm 30 yrs old, college graduated. I work in IT with Macs and PCs. When I go home after work, I like to play games. Specifically FPS games. I have owned Doom, Doom 2, Quake, Quake 2 Quake 3, Marathon, Marathon 2 Marathon 3, Unreal, Unreal 2, Wolfenstein, Red Faction, Medal of Honor, etc. I look forward to Doom 3 soon too.
I'm the type of guy who needs to get actual WORK done, as well as play, and I think components such as video and audio are important. Apple's pro boxes appeal to many people for many reasons. Apples revenue will contiune to grow if it keeps good partnerships with ATI and nVidia, and keeps the gamers and 3D artists happy. I remember the days when a decent graphics card DID NOT EXIST on the Mac. Those were scary times!
If you don't know anyone who doesn't play games on the Mac, then you need more friends! :0)
After a hard day fo pinging routers, building databases, reinstalling OS's, helping newbie employee users out, backing-up servers, FTPing web pages, defragging RAIDs, creating email accounts, managing software licenses, and deploying workstations, there is nothing better than a cold beer and a bloody LAN party! Frag away! Anyone else agree?
My argument is not that PC Games rule the industry, just that they are a prime motivator for progress on the platform. If you also look at the age groups, I believe the median was 27 or 28 (I don't have the page in front of me). People in this age group apparently have more disposable income.
So, you have 1.6 billion dollars in games being sold for computers, with PCs getting the lions share. To run many of those newer games, you have to have the latest hardware. If the age bracket is right, these are exactly the people buying this newer hardware. As the hardware becomes more mainstream, the prices drop and the later adopters can afford it.
To dismiss the influence of gamers on the sales of PCs, their accessories, and upgrades is not realistic. Their influence is tremendous. Otherwise, why would a GeForce 4 be the new standard for video cards. Do you need a Radeon 8500 to run Excel? Hardly, you need that kind of equipment to play games.
The marriage of OS X and some cutting edge hardware would be unstoppable. MS has burned its bridges and caused a lot of concern with its new .Net strategy. Many PC enthusiasts are sick of the onerous EULAs that give MS more control over your PC than you do. MS's version of DRM and media technologies has a lot of us worried. The time is ripe, if Apple can capitalize on this mistrust, bring out some killer hardware (based on a modified X86-64 platform), and price it right (which they are doing much better now), MS will be on its heels in very short order. Linux has made inroads for precisely this reason. OS X is buttloads better than any Linux distro.
I am a PC user who has seen the light and bough a Powerbook, but I have no illusions about its ability to play games. It will run them, barely. But that isn't what I bought this particular computer for.
Comments
A low cost Cube with upgradable graphics and no fan would be great. The only thing the Cube needed was a reduction of cable cluttter.
As for the iMac it's going to appeal to people who don't necessarily care about the monitor being attached. One less Power and Video hookup to make.
I'd love to upgrade my PC's but adding another Vid card or CDRW card is ok..nothing big and you can do the same thing with a Powermac so it's was no real big deal.
[QB]
Torifile, your points are well-made, but not well-taken: one guy trumpts his approach to 40 & crows about his addiction to games; I know guys like that - they ignore their wives and children because they have preserved their adolescent self-obsession intact, they spend all their time & money on computer stuff & their online buddies.
In short, they're pathetic sh!tbags who can't manage the reality & responsibilities of real life & real relationships, and push away the people who love them & depend on them; swearing on the one hand that no-one's the boss of them, and wailing on the other that only other alienated, clueless Shamu-types understand the pain of having to live around stupid people who don't understand them.
QB]<hr></blockquote>
Your comments show your total ignorance about what drives the market.
Games and gaming made more money than the entire Movie industry last year. It is quickly approaching the music industry as the top revenue producer in entertainment.
These things drive hardware sales.
Your post also shows your intolerence of other people's opinions and hobbies. It is this self-obsessed, holier-than-thou attitude that turns a lot of people off on Macs and the people that use them. I run a Mac forum on a PC website (www.tech-report.com). When you boil down the arguments of the pro-PC crowd, they all come down to "Mac users are snobs". It is a visceral response to the users, not the equipment.
Responses like yours only reinforce that argument.
I use a Mac because I like it, I can afford it, and I think the hardware is nifty. I use a PC because I like to play games. This does not justify a tirade such as yours simply because you feel games are a waste of time. There obviously plenty of people who don't. Furthermore, you know nothing about me, my income, my family, or anything else. For you to pass judgement like that says much about your narrowmindedness.
Not everyone who plays games on a PC looks or acts like the Comic Book guy from the Simpsons. Your reliance on stereotypes says more about your than about me.
[ 07-19-2002: Message edited by: Thresher ]</p>
ps - to whomever called me an idiot: you proved my point.
<strong>
Dude, I love hotcakes! I also missed breakfast this morning. They cost $1.99 for 3 Hotcakes and 1 Sausage patty. They also give you 2 little plastic things with butter in them and 2 syrups. Um.... Dang, those are so good. Now I'm gonna hvae to go to IHOP (blast!). I prefer McDonalds but they already stopped serving. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I think this is the best post Ive read since MWNY!!!! I with Johnny!
Long live the pancake
<strong>Torifile you are an idiot, if you are a too cool for school mister all grown up, and you dont play games then fine, but don't be a blind fool. People care about graphics cards and a lot of people care about their CPUs being able to play games. Why don't you compare the sales of Microsft Office with the sales of Warcraft 3. There is a reason Jobs talks about the games coming to Mac all the time, but I guess you know more about how to get people to buy Macs than him and his marketing people.
For the moderators...Apple does need am expandable and inexpensive computer.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmm... MS office: $499, Warcraft III: $59. I wonder which will sell more???? Jobs talks about anything that's positive. Getting more games is a positive thing. Now, walk into any computer store and SEE how many people know what kind of gfx card is in their machine or the one they are looking at. There's a reason Dell sells computers with that integrated video crap. People just don't give a damn. Last I checked, Dell was doing pretty good. Getting a kickass gfx card in a mac would be GREAT because it's about choice, but don't say it'll solve all the problems.
<strong>Sounds like a Cube there, W1lson.
Ah, we can only hope...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes. Except that the Cube had some major flaws. Apple in its zealous efforts to produce a silent machine, killed the very features that should have made the Cube attractive .
Apple needs to slightly reengineer the Cube (bigger shell) so that it accepts a standard size graphic card and can internally tolerate the heat produced by modern GPUs and CPUs. Apple also needs to price it at < $1,000 USD.
The new gCube + 17" widescreen LCD + Superdrive < $2, 000 USD
gCube
800 MHz G4
gForce4Ti
60 gig HD
Combo Drive
= $999.00
gCube SE
1000 MHz G4
gForce4Ti
80 gig HD
Super Drive
= $1399.00
BTO options on better GPU available at a reasonable price.
And this can be done today!
mika.
[ 07-19-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</p>
<strong>
Apple needs to slightly reengineer the Cube (bigger shell) so that it accepts a standard size graphic card and can internally tolerate the heat produced by modern GPUs and CPUs. Apple also needs to price it at < $1,000 USD.
The new gCube + 17" widescreen LCD + Superdrive < $2, 000 USD
gCube
800 MHz G4
gForce4Ti
60 gig HD
Combo Drive
= $999.00
gCube SE
1000 MHz G4
gForce4Ti
80 gig HD
Super Drive
= $1399.00
BTO options on better GPU available at a reasonable price.
And this can be done today!
mika.
[ 07-19-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think that you have the rite prices there to make the Cube marketable, and the right specs as well. I'm not sure that you need to make it larger just for the Graphics Cards, sell enough of them and ATI will make their cards fit, most of Nvidia cards fit now, as does the ATI 7500, and since if they fit in a Cube, they will fit in a tower, why change the design for that alone. The heat issue would need to be addressed, but adding a quiet fan would be a small modification without adding much in R&D cost. The last thing that would help it sell is moving some of the ports, specifically the USB and FireWire for better accessability.
I like the Cube, I own one, and am glad that processor cards are coming out for them. I need to upgrade the Video for 10.2, and add memory, but with these few alterations it should last as a home computer for at least 2 years, and possibly another 4-5. I wont buy an iMac for personal use becouse it comes with a monitor, and I think there are a lot of people out there with that same attitude.
or should I say pizza box argument!!!!
Please, nobody take offense, but this cube/pizza box/etc. topic comes up continually and Apple perpetually ignores it, why I don't know(I'm sure they have valid reasons, but they aren't sharing them)
<strong>Anyone have any stats about the impact 'gamers' have on the computing industry? I'd like to see them. I guess I'm not as convinced as some of you of their real importance. Don't get me started on the purchasing/decision making power of teenage boys. (Teenage girls have much more impact.)
ps - to whomever called me an idiot: you proved my point.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Torifile, the fact that you choose not to believe there is a relationship does not necessarily mean there isn't one.
Here are some links that at least can show how much is spent on games. At least a portion of this has to be driving the hardware as well.
<a href="http://www.idsa.com/2001SalesData.html"; target="_blank">http://www.idsa.com/2001SalesData.html</a>;
I'd also read around a bit at the IDSA site, there is a lot of information that people just do not realize about gaming. It is a huge industry. To say that this has no bearing on the computer industry is just blinkered thinking.
<a href="http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/ptech/generalstories/bi_oldergamer071102.ca78c.html"; target="_blank">http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/ptech/generalstories/bi_oldergamer071102.ca78c.html</a>;
You're right, gamers spend thousands of dollars making their systems the latest and greatest, then every 1 - 1 1/2 years THROW THE SYSTEM AWAY, to get a faster one. I NEVER understood this.
Med Shot:Room full of people, all sitting on cheap orange plastic chairs.
CU: Our hero stands, looking slightly embarrased. "Hi. My name is Mike, and I'm a game addict."
I, personally, also play games on a very frequent basis, eg at least every second day. That's why I own a game machine - a Playstation2. When it's out of date in 2 years, I'll throw it away, and buy the new machine available, spending $500 in the proccess, not $3000+.
My computers are not for gaming, but for work (and internet, email, etc).
Please get back to future hardware. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
With that sort of thinking I suppose you would also exclude any kind of decent audio capabilities for your computer, because you already have a dedicated stereo for that. Whatever..
mika.
You simply cannot get the level of perfomance that is in an Xbox or PS2 in a PC for $199. Gamers are the ones crazy enough to buy $400 Graphics cards. A crazy lot they are.
<strong>
Torifile, the fact that you choose not to believe there is a relationship does not necessarily mean there isn't one.
Here are some links that at least can show how much is spent on games. At least a portion of this has to be driving the hardware as well.
<a href="http://www.idsa.com/2001SalesData.html"; target="_blank">http://www.idsa.com/2001SalesData.html</a>;
I'd also read around a bit at the IDSA site, there is a lot of information that people just do not realize about gaming. It is a huge industry. To say that this has no bearing on the computer industry is just blinkered thinking.
<a href="http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/ptech/generalstories/bi_oldergamer071102.ca78c.html"; target="_blank">http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/ptech/generalstories/bi_oldergamer071102.ca78c.html</a></strong><hr></blockquote>;
That's the reason I was asking. But the figures you give are WAY skewed. The gaming industry as a whole is HUGE, but what proportion of that is COMPUTER games?
This graph indicates that it's less than 1/3. Take a big money maker, cut it in 1/3s and you've got a force, but not a huge one. Certainly not one as big as you make it out to be. Consoles are also eating up some of the money from computer games.
Consoles up 10% Computer games down 1.7% Hmmm. Are we seeing a trend? I think so. Computer gaming is on the DECLINE for pete's sake. So my opinion and the reality are in synch. What about yours?
Care to continue discussing reality and the importance of gaming or are you finished?
[ 07-19-2002: Message edited by: torifile ]</p>
<strong>
.
.
Consoles up 10% Computer games down 1.7% Hmmm. Are we seeing a trend?
.
.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
No. We're not.
From what I understand Micro$oft was selling its game console at below cost. That kind of practice is unsustainable in the long term. And it also serves to skew the numbers. Also, I would argue that statistics for year 2001 are not at all representative of long-term trends. If you wish to gauge where the industry is going I'd suggest you look at on what platform cutting edge technology (software/hardware) is being developed. And here the PC industry is clearly in the lead, and in my opinion will remain so for a long time to come.
mika.
Torifile just Devastated you guys with that last post. Sorry but you just got stretched across the canvas with that Hook.
[quote] No. We're not.
From what I understand Micro$oft was selling its game console at below cost. That kind of practice is unsustainable in the long term. And it also serves to skew the numbers. Also, I would argue that statistics for year 2001 are not at all representative of long-term trends. If you wish to gauge where the industry is going I'd suggest you look at on what platform cutting edge technology (software/hardware) is being developed. And here the PC industry is clearly in the lead, and in my opinion will remain so for a long time to come.
<hr></blockquote>
Selling Consoles at or below consoles was happening even before Microsoft came into the market. It's the Gillette razor/razorblade idea and it is most definitely sustainable because your profits are derived from licensing.
PC as a platform for cutting edge hahahah. PC tech is evolutionary but not revolutionary
AGP 8x- merely a faster version of 2 and 4x
Serial ATA- Available to everyone
PCI- Available to everyone
DDR- The ONLY advantage that Macs don't have for whatever reason once that's gone we have a level playing field.
Intel/AMD- Ahead of Moto but not as much as people think. Xserve proves that smart design will unleash the power of the G4.
I don't look to PC's for groundbreaking stuff or stuff outta left field like when apple announced Airport. I look to them for incremental advances. To call the x86 industry Cutting Edge is a farce of epic porportion proprotions.
<strong>From what I understand Micro$oft was selling its game console at below cost. That kind of practice is unsustainable in the long term.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, its standard practice. Console manufacturers lose money on consoles and make money on licensing. Sony does it too. It means little to a console's success.
[quote]Originally posted by W1lsonStark:
Dedicated systems don't do most PC games better. I'll grant you that HALO is pretty hot for X-Box but Neverwinter nights, Warcraft II. Even the Sims?[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
Well, The Sims Online is coming for PS2, but really thats besides the point.
The same argument could be said the other way around. Would you get the same experience on a PC for games like Virtual Fighter 4, Gran Turismo or NHL 2002? No, you won't. Different genres and different games lend themselves to different platforms and methods. Live with it.
Apple once reigned champion of gaming, and it hurt sales. Now they seem to be behind, and it's hurting sales. Games aren't the end all to Apple's success.
Hardware needs to be improved. For fragging or photoshopping it doesn't matter. We have THE BEST operating system, now we just need better hardware.
<strong>Yikes!
Torifile just Devastated you guys with that last post. Sorry but you just got stretched across the canvas with that Hook.
Selling Consoles at or below consoles was happening even before Microsoft came into the market. It's the Gillette razor/razorblade idea and it is most definitely sustainable because your profits are derived from licensing.
PC as a platform for cutting edge hahahah. PC tech is evolutionary but not revolutionary
AGP 8x- merely a faster version of 2 and 4x
Serial ATA- Available to everyone
PCI- Available to everyone
DDR- The ONLY advantage that Macs don't have for whatever reason once that's gone we have a level playing field.
Intel/AMD- Ahead of Moto but not as much as people think. Xserve proves that smart design will unleash the power of the G4.
I don't look to PC's for groundbreaking stuff or stuff outta left field like when apple announced Airport. I look to them for incremental advances. To call the x86 industry Cutting Edge is a farce of epic porportion proprotions.</strong><hr></blockquote>
:eek: <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
] <a href="http://www.idsoftware.com/index.php?flash=true&version=6"; target="_blank">http://www.idsoftware.com/index.php?flash=true&version=6</a>;
quote:
DOOM IIITM, the next revolution in action gaming and technology, was honored with a record five Game Critics Awards: Best of E3 2002 honors including Best of Show, Best PC Game, Best Action Game, Special Commendation for Sound and Special Commendation for Graphics.
mika.
Edit:
In theory, the .com companies were also to derive profits through this kind of scheme. Of-course, we will just have to wait and see how long Micro$oft can sustain this kind of practice. I bet even they, with their deep pockets, will not duplicate this idiocy when xBox II is released. If it will be released. .
[ 07-19-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</p>
<strong>Games? That's what you're basing the majority of your argument on? That you can't upgrade the video card to play games? Everyone I know uses a computer. One of them plays games on his computer. You know, not all real people care about computer games. Teenage boys do. And even then, only some teenage boys. Why is this what it always comes back to?
I'm an avid computer user. Not once in my years as a computer user did I upgrade my video card. Not once in the past several years have I even upgraded anything in my computer. Not everyone cares about FPS or strategy or the latest obscenely violent, resource intensive, life-sucking computer game. </strong><hr></blockquote>
OK, I'm 30 yrs old, college graduated. I work in IT with Macs and PCs. When I go home after work, I like to play games. Specifically FPS games. I have owned Doom, Doom 2, Quake, Quake 2 Quake 3, Marathon, Marathon 2 Marathon 3, Unreal, Unreal 2, Wolfenstein, Red Faction, Medal of Honor, etc. I look forward to Doom 3 soon too.
I'm the type of guy who needs to get actual WORK done, as well as play, and I think components such as video and audio are important. Apple's pro boxes appeal to many people for many reasons. Apples revenue will contiune to grow if it keeps good partnerships with ATI and nVidia, and keeps the gamers and 3D artists happy. I remember the days when a decent graphics card DID NOT EXIST on the Mac. Those were scary times!
If you don't know anyone who doesn't play games on the Mac, then you need more friends! :0)
After a hard day fo pinging routers, building databases, reinstalling OS's, helping newbie employee users out, backing-up servers, FTPing web pages, defragging RAIDs, creating email accounts, managing software licenses, and deploying workstations, there is nothing better than a cold beer and a bloody LAN party! Frag away! Anyone else agree?
So, you have 1.6 billion dollars in games being sold for computers, with PCs getting the lions share. To run many of those newer games, you have to have the latest hardware. If the age bracket is right, these are exactly the people buying this newer hardware. As the hardware becomes more mainstream, the prices drop and the later adopters can afford it.
To dismiss the influence of gamers on the sales of PCs, their accessories, and upgrades is not realistic. Their influence is tremendous. Otherwise, why would a GeForce 4 be the new standard for video cards. Do you need a Radeon 8500 to run Excel? Hardly, you need that kind of equipment to play games.
The marriage of OS X and some cutting edge hardware would be unstoppable. MS has burned its bridges and caused a lot of concern with its new .Net strategy. Many PC enthusiasts are sick of the onerous EULAs that give MS more control over your PC than you do. MS's version of DRM and media technologies has a lot of us worried. The time is ripe, if Apple can capitalize on this mistrust, bring out some killer hardware (based on a modified X86-64 platform), and price it right (which they are doing much better now), MS will be on its heels in very short order. Linux has made inroads for precisely this reason. OS X is buttloads better than any Linux distro.
I am a PC user who has seen the light and bough a Powerbook, but I have no illusions about its ability to play games. It will run them, barely. But that isn't what I bought this particular computer for.