it used to be that your phone was mounted to your wall and never taken outside of the house unless you had a really really long cord.

Things change man. It'll be up to the market to decide who wants one. you clearly don't. I want one because there are things I don't want to fish into my pocket for, like changing what I'm listening to in my podcast player or checking maps.

No, but you are the beneficiary of systemic racism, sexism and depending if you're openly queer or not, homo and/or transphobia.

I was wondering if it'll help me do massively parallel computing AND decongest me.

Thanks, Xeon D.

not all white men are the heads of companies, running Fortune 500 companies, congressional officials, police chiefs, etc.

But very few non-white, non-men are.

That's why. It's not racism because when a black person calls you names to hurt your feelings, they also don't have the weight of systemic racial biases behind it. They call you names and that's it.

Will the sun eat the earth because Apple defied what you perceive to be fair pricing?

Because I really think you're underestimating market demand for these things.

Except on neither the Rolex, Tag Heuer, or Timex can I check my email or use maps to figure out where I am. There's a slab of electronics behind the glass that you don't find in either of them. I'm willing to bet the next few generations of Apple watch will have the same mounting points for the bands so all you have to do is just buy another 250/350 dollar robotic core and resync to your phone when it's time to upgrade.

I'm also not expecting to see a yearly upgrade cycle with this thing either, given that it's battery constrained. Unless a process shrink or some new design technique greatly improves CPU performance while offering the same or better battery life

I also can't check my email on the rolex and sext my mistress either

(I have no idea what Rolex owners do with their phones; so I'm extrapolating.)

Stainless steel is more expensive than aluminium and uses a sapphire front.

That's easily within reason to say 200 bucks for a fashion item.

Plus the higher end bands have these precision machined steel bands that are hand polished.

If you look at high end fashion watches, 1k for a high end steel watch is nothing, much less watch bands.

From Breitling:

Example for watches

example for bands.

From TAG Heuer:

Watches.

Everyone wants to scream at Apple for being a fashion brand, but the truth is is that if they were, they'd be Vertu. All gold and sapphire buttons with no real substance running some bland OS with crappy software on top.

Apple's a *fashionable* brand, and the key difference here is that a lot of people want them because they're nice products that are nice to use and look and feel nice. It's approaching consumerism from the other side where you're wanted not because you're exclusive or anything insane or insidious like that, but because you do what you do very well.

Sounds like a perfect match.

more seriously, I'm shocked at how low the price is on the stainless steel watch is. 549/599? I was expecting near 1k.

I bought a PS4 because the next generation of games I want to play are going to start coming out on them. Even if it's multiplatform, I'd rather have the PS4 versions because they do actually look nicer, because eventually there won't be PS3 versions.

So put me down for "higher resolution" but also put a big asterisk there because I know my PS3 is about to become obsolete soon.

I find it slightly disappointing that AAA studios couldn't be bothered to get the job done right just so they could meet some arbitrary ship deadline.

Still, I agree. I think anyone who's having a full on rage hardon for this should really rethink their life choices.

This is Jesus.

Stop playing with yourself.

Lololol. PCMR. Seriously. Peecee gamers, stop linking there. Stop referencing a stupid, insensitive joke from nearly a decade ago that was mocking you. People will start to think you're socially inept weirdos or something.

Only in peecee gamer logic can 480 bucks be in the same ballpark as 399. Oh and you have to build it yourself and it'll take up more space and has a PSU that provides 6 times the average load of a current gen console and you still have to provide input devices.

The kind of mindset needed to look at this and think, "this will be much better when the company who couldn't put out software on time is responsible for the OS" is staggering.

Let me talk about Bayonetta for a second.

Bayonetta's character as a sassy, sexy, badass bitch who'll stomp your brains in and look awesome doing it is absolutely fantastic.

However, her character and the games that she is in exist in a cultural context wherein the finer nuances of the character are lost and while in another time and another context, would be absolutely fine, are used to reenforce shitty sexist ideas about women, specifically women in games.

Now. Hatred has pretty much the same problem. Looks like a fun game, but we're all stewing in a morass of toxic violent masculinity. If we weren't in a place where oh say as an example(of many), sexually frustrated men decide to violently take out their frustrations on women, and failing that anyone who's within firing range... Yeah. I don't argue that games *make* you violent, however I will argue that culture as a whole glorifies violence and this would just reenforce that narrative. Calvin sums it up here

Sure, they're developed by a Polish team, but do I think that it should be for sale? No. Not here. Do I think the Government should do anything about it? No, that's censorship. It sounds like a great game if I wasn't worried it was going to reenforce someone's crappy idea of dealing with life was to get a bunch of military grade weapons and go on a shooting spree.

No product, no credit.

With Valve, I'll believe it when it launches, and even then I'm skeptical it'll run.