Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×
It's funny.  Laugh.

Wired News 2006 Vaporware Awards 215

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the it's-that-time-of-year-again dept.
silentounce writes "Wired News has released the winners of its 9th annual Wired News Vaporware Awards. I won't list any of them in the summary because I don't want to spoil anyone's surprise. They have some interesting entries, one that is more a concept of a product than an actual product. I'm not sure how you can claim something is vaporware if it hasn't even been given a specific name or a developer yet, but apparently they think they can. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wired News 2006 Vaporware Awards

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Duke (Score:2, Informative)

    by Dunbal (464142) on Wednesday December 27, 2006 @12:13PM (#17378178)
    Duke Nukem Never is still there. It is eligible for a lifetime achievement award.

          It already has ONE a lifetime achievement award!
  • by Thansal (999464) on Wednesday December 27, 2006 @12:17PM (#17378230)
    ha!

    that is an awsome list.
    # Over 75 games based in the MegaMan universe, and 12 games featuring MegaMan universe character cameos.
    # Over 50 games based in the Star Wars universe.
    # Mario has appeared in 58 different video games.


    Those are just fun statistics :D
  • by MasterC (70492) <cmlburnett@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Wednesday December 27, 2006 @12:18PM (#17378254) Homepage
    I like ruining surprises (uh, ok, whatever Mr. Story Poster) and I hate multi-page stories. Wikipedia links provided for the fun of it

  • Re:Vaporware (Score:5, Informative)

    by Thansal (999464) on Wednesday December 27, 2006 @12:37PM (#17378536)
    Actualy TF2 is currently slated for release with HL2:EP2 (I think that has a 2nd quarter '07 date, but I don't remember atm).

    The original TF2 was scrapped around the same time as HL2 started dev, but that was because they just compleatly restarted the project based on Source.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 27, 2006 @01:10PM (#17378940)
    Why did it get its type certification from the FAA then? Here it is. [faa.gov]
  • by Richard_at_work (517087) <richardprice@ g m a i l .com> on Wednesday December 27, 2006 @01:20PM (#17379044)
    Actually the X-33 never flew, the project was cancelled when the prototype was 85% complete.

    The A380 is not vapourware - its in production, the delays are due to production problems and not technical issues with the concept itself. Infact, the A380 delays are the perfect example of incompatabilities in IT based projects - different parts were designed with different versions of the CATIA system, leading to problems with the wiring bundles that Airbus are sorting out now.

    Airlines also disagree with you - two airlines (Singapore and Qantas) placed followon orders to their originals this year, even before they had the first one delivered, so that says something about confidence in the aircraft.
  • Re:Airbus A380... (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 28, 2006 @05:48AM (#17385798)
    I take it you're a jealous Boeing fan. I encounter many of you on airdisaster.com every day but most have arguments that actually have some factual basis (I'm considered pretty neutral there since I'm neither European or American).

    Who didn't see this one coming? A plane that is only a viable solution for no more than a handfull of routes worldwide, and based on the now long-dead "Mega-Hub" system (which has since given way to the "micro-hub" system).

    Nobody knows for sure what the future of airtravel will be like but both Airbus and Boeing employ the best people possible to analyze the market since their salaries are nothing compared to the costs of developing new aircraft - I think we can safely say that their analyses are much better than yours and boeing have now also drawn the conclusion that there is demand for a larger aircraft than the 747 and have indeed decided to build a larger variant. So far they have only been able to sell the cargo version of it, though (quite understandable since the 747 has certain benefits over the A380 as a cargo plane but it remains to be seen if any airline will want a passenger version when the A380 is available).

    Now couple that with the fact that it requires a specialized jetway to accomidate for the double-decker seating arrangement.

    It doesn't require it - it only makes loading and unloading faster but that won't be relevant until a few years from now when there are more of it in existence.

    Finally, add to that that the last real-life emergency exit test couldn't break 45 minutes for getting everyone out of the plane... the FAA requires 5 minutes; even the 747-400 can pull that off.

    You got all the facts wrong. The FAA requires that both passengers and crew can be evacuated within 90 seconds with half the emergency exits blocked. The A380 passed with flying colors evacuating 853 passengers and 20 crew in 78 seconds [flightglobal.com] (and remarkably few injuries compared to other such trials).

    Here's the funniest part. Boeing decided to play it safe for a while, and then later announced a redesign of the 747, stretching the double-decker section to about half to 2/3rds the way down the plane, surpassing the capacity of the A380 with an already tried-and-true airframe design.

    As I already noted, Boeing did indeed have to concede that there was a market for such a large airliner but the maximum pax capacity of the new Boeing is 467 vs. the A380's 853. They were certainly not playing it safe, though - it was announced without having a single launch customer because they had to have something for airlines to consider in addition to the A380.

    Since then (something like 8 months ago), I've heard that many of the A380 orders have been canceled and shifted to Boeing's design. In the mean-time, Boeing creates one of the most revolutionary mid-large sized jets (the Dreamliner), which is proving to be a huge success (order-wise).

    FedEx are the only customer to have canceled their order (but maintained their options). Quantas has placed an additional order and Singapore Airlines have placed two additional orders (after the delays had been announced and they are the launch customer and have waited for longer than anyone).

    Airbus, your days are numbered, you've screwed up BIG TIME, and I mean "PlayStation 3" BIG TIME.

    Admittedly, the A380 will take much longer to reach break-even but Airbus has been selling more aircraft than Boeing during the last three years and all other models have been more profitable than ever in the history of the company (Boeing still has more of the widebody market, which has higher profit margins per aircraft, though). So despite a number of managerial fuck-ups, Airbus' future looks good.

When the weight of the paperwork equals the weight of the plane, the plane will fly. -- Donald Douglas

Working...