I have the Asus Transformer Prime 201 with the Tegra 3 and it is/was a pretty damn good CPU. The tablet is still quite useful despite being a few years old. I skipped the Tegra 4s and have been waiting for K1 powered tablets. I do a fair bit of gaming on my tablet and I can't wait to see what developers do with the K1.
Then I assume you know NVIDIA just came out with their K1-powered SHIELD tablet that is focused on gaming and also has a decent stylus. 8 inches, 16GB wifi only version is $300. It's the first tablet to check all of the boxes for me so I ordered one last week (though it's still not here).
I dunno, but letting humans decide where an autonomous vehicle should go, might still be a recipe for unsafe operation...
The first thing that popped into my head after reading this was an image of an old person in New York telling their car to take them to Vegas. And the car locking them in until it arrives at its destination.
I think this sounds like an awesome idea.
With the Wii they realized they couldn't keep up with the PS and Xbox.
No, with the Wii they realized they didn't need to keep up with the PS and Xbox. They created a new type of gaming market and made billions because of it. They are arguably competing against the mobile phone, not the Xbox or Playstation.
They didn't need to at the time, no. They had the motion sensor which was a novel new idea and got a lot of people who had no interest in consoles to buy a Wii. But that wore off fast and those people lost interest years ago. They went for that market because Microsoft and Sony were spending a ton of money making more powerful consoles and selling them at a loss and Nintendo knew they couldn't stay in that game. The console gamers, the ones who buy consoles every generation, are clearly less interested in Nintendo's offerings than the PS or Xbox. And everyone else has no reason to buy a console when their phone/tablet/computer works well enough. If they made a phone or tablet OS the majority of the market wouldn't care and as we're seeing here they aren't having success competing with the other console makers. Sony and Microsoft don't need to make money from their gaming divisions because they have other products that make money. Nintendo doesn't have this luxury so they are at a disadvantage. Thus, they should really consider trying to reach a wider audience by focusing on just the games than trying to control the entire stack. If they have another breakthrough idea it might be smarter to integrate it with Steam Box or something and make a deal with Valve. Then they can capture the PC market as well. Maybe I'm wrong and they'll come up with an amazing console for their next generation, but I think it's much more likely that they will change strategy.
Nothing new. EA is still being EA. People are still calling for boycotts of EA. People are still getting excited about the trailers and preordering anyway. You have to get the special pre-order items, right?
I haven't bought an EA game in a very long time because their bad behavior has been going on for over a decade. If you think gamers are going to boycott them rather than getting sucked up in all the hype you haven't been paying attention. Don't let that stop you from trying though.
In the past I've primarily used Nvidia cards and always used the closed source drivers because they were so much better.
Now I have an AMD card and was having performance problems. I found out that the open source drivers for AMD are better than the proprietary ones.
So I consider it relevant just for the simplicity of the overall system. New users shouldn't have to research whether the proprietary driver is better than the open source one for their card. It's better for the success of Linux when things just work out of the box, and right now the box contains the open source drivers. Personally I think it was not very smart of them to ship with these drivers in the first place until they were mature enough, but that's where we are.
Presidents these days are mostly elected for their charisma. You have to look at who a candidate associates with to get an idea of what they are actually going to do. For example, Obama putting 5 RIAA lawyers in the DOJ then pushing for things like ACTA. It's usually the advisors that come up with the ideas, so analyze who is advising them. This is probably why the NSA stuff has been consistent between Bush and Obama.
As for the lack of accomplishments that's another plus in an election. Voters tend to react more strongly to the negative stuff and people sometimes make mistakes or do things you might not agree with. A ghost is more electable.
Without introducing any value? According to whose opinion, yours? We are very fortunate (in the US at least) that we are not yet entirely enslaved to one person's opinion as to what is valuable. Obviously, the exchanges see value in it or they wouldn't be supporting it.
I'm sure the exchanges see value in it when the banks are paying to put servers at the exchange: http://content.time.com/time/b... (5 years old but it was the first hit on Google).