I'm not sure about the others things you mention, but firewall was included (at least) since the original windows xp release. Service pack 2 only turned it on by default and added some polish. So relatively cautious men turned on firewall from the get go and didn't have much (or any) problems with worms.
I disagree with your second sentence.
They were never called netbooks at first. They were called (sub/ultraportable) notebooks(1) and later some idiot invented "netbook" word which news sites like engadget and gizmodo propagated. And the name netbook is completely undeserverd because those kind of devices can be (and are) much more than simple internet dumb/thin clients. But the name stuck and my whole point is that it is laughable to put devices strictly under special names/definitions. As the definitions vary from person to person and change from time to time (as shown above) it is pointless to argue about them.
(1) ss you can find at the first reviews, or at my MSI Wind U100 cleary using notebook words.
Doctors make mistakes all the time (...)
No they don't. Complications happen by themselves!
That was a Croatian movie I suppose? One those selected movies they swear absolutely too much so it makes them unreal and unwatchable (aside from robotic acting, no script and pretty much everything else).
I understand your point but the new 1 icon only system does take something away.
Try opening 3 to n Windows Explorer windows and you'll have a big problem indentifying the right one. It just takes more time looking at those tiny preview windows.
I would give anything to have an option to disable 1-icon only in taskbar just for some programs (eg. Windows Explorer) so you can actually see by title in the taskbar which window do you need.
I know that you can turn on the classic view and some hybrid view but that is beside the point.
Of course I'm basing this on beta. This is in beta and I don't think its foolish to predict that it will be the same in release version. Or you assert that Blizzard likes to change fundamental parts of the games just before they release it? Not likely.
Concerning the AI difficulty. It makes no difference if the AI is very easy or very hard. And I just don't see a connection between AI levels and networking infrastructure. If you see it, please enlight me.
Maybe they could try croatian (or probably, serbian) language. Written and spoken letters/words match exactly.
Removing LAN has the effect of forcing players to connect through Blizzard's servers, Battle.net, before playing multiplayer locally.
Better make that *any* game locally. So even you play against AI on your own computer it goes through battle.net. So if you have laggy connection your AI enemies would lag on your own computer. Even if you have 100ms to battle.net you still notice the lag to be honest.
So what? Is using words now a crime? Well, not a crime, but immoral?
Do nazis have a copyright on that phrase? We used "final solution" alot in my math classes. Does that make my teacher a nazi?
Get a grip man. We have to learn from the past, but leave aside stupidity and ideology in history where it belongs.
Sorry, I would rather pay 5 times more and know that they are made by workers not slaves. Same goes for anything else regardless of your shrug-it-off indifference.
They did lower the price on first iPhone though.
I don't think it will happen again with the ipad but they did lower it at least once.
Beat this one-liner by Archimonde, some guy from slashdot.org:
'Large ipod touch and still more expensive".
Opinions are like asses - everyone has one. Even idols have them too.
Want to check the news at breakfast, grab your instant-on iPad that you can control with a finger while eating at the breakfast table.
That is a recipe for a disaster. I know that many people see themselves using ipad when eating/drinking but I've learned my lesson a looong time ago. Liquids and non-waterproof electronics just don't mix.
At all.
You may be a ninja and you don't spill things but others do and they ruin $500+ devices easily.
Even though we both can't predict the future I'm certain that *much* more players will buy all three games for multiplayer. It just doesn't make much sense to pigeonhole themselves into the first game only. How many people would buy only the first game or first and second or all three of them? I think the safest bet is that to play with much more gamers one would certainly buy all three games. My comparison generally still stands with WoW. Lvl 60, 70 and 80 characters don't meet much (if at all). They all play different battlegrounds and dungeons. But we all know that there is only a handful of lvl 60 and lvl 70 gamers on a server. I bet >99% of players always play at max (80) level which is completely understandable. That is my point with with SC2.
Yes, you can try to quote Starcraft vs Brood War players, but frankly I would like to see some source of that. Even if the the ratio is much more favourable to SC, I still think that its not very relevant to compare a not released game with a very old game released when gaming industry was just a little more than in it's infancy.
According to Blizzard; no. The first game will only contain one campaign, the human one I think, but will contain full multi-player, including all the units and races from the next two expansions. Thus, if you are only interested in multi-player you can completely ignore the two other campaigns.
You are unfortunately wrong there.
From http://www.starcraft2.com/faq.xml
How will the expansion sets impact multiplayer gameplay?
The expansion sets will add new content to each race for use in multiplayer matches. This could include additions such as new units, abilities, and structures, along with new maps and Battle.net updates.
In other words you *will* need all three expansions for multiplayer matches. Of course they won't force it, but that would be exactly like playing wow at lvl 60 when everybody is lvl 80.
Reality must take precedence over public relations, for Mother Nature cannot be fooled. -- R.P. Feynman
