I think you've confused "peak" with "optimal."
Peak = best possible output
Optimal = most satisfactory
You can tune an engine to run within optimal specs. But if you run it at peak nonstop...
Metrics. Excellent, I hate when bosses use the Imperial system.
All jokes aside: If you care about your job in this economic climate, I suggest you do what your 2 other teammates are doing - picking through the stats that make YOU look the best. The company isn't going to look out for you. IT is an expense to be cut, remember. Boosts the temporary bottom line, promotes "growth" in this fiscal quarter, gets the investors going so the CEO can shuffle another fold into his golden parachute. If non-important metrics are selected that sacrifice your job, it's a brief victory lap straight into the unemployment line.
We can't answer your question, though. In the end, I recommend you watch a clip from "Office Space" - wherein the Bobs interview the employees:
Bob: "So tell me, what is it, exactly, that you do here?"
If you can't answer that question, you probably should be job hunting already. Or should have kept a copy of the job posting from when you applied.
DO: Pack in the RAM. Of all of the factors that are driving developer frustration with the current console generation, RAM seems to be at the top of the pack. It's worse for the PS3 (with its awkward memory-split and larger OS footprint) than for the 360, but still... RAM is pretty cheap and packing plenty of it in will pay dividends in 5 years time.
This. This times a million.
When you actually look at the pitiful amount of RAM in a 360 or PS3 it's obvious why they look like crap compared to even a very modest PC. RAM is as cheap as its ever been and it is the most essential way to future-proof a console.
If they have any sense they'll resist putting in a disk to begin with. Saying "Oh, you need Blu-ray to be future proof" is laughable. The format isn't going anywhere, despite the best efforts of Hollywood to save it, the entire world is going online.
Written like someone who hasn't got a decent A/V setup with a blu ray player. The format kicks butt. Awesome resolution and picture quality, amazing sound, and carries an amount of data that would take a very long time to download and would be impossible to stream with existing network infrastructure.
I don't know where you live, but where I live blu ray is getting more and more popular and is finally starting to push out DVD as the default format.
What would you like to see slowed down to such a degree?
Hint: It involves a trampoline, or maybe a wet tshirt...
Yep, this will just about be the final straw for me in terms of coming here or contributing anything.
Very, very disappointing.
Why not power it using the key presses?
Try getting that proprietary battery in another 5-10 years. There are vintage cameras operating today that are many decades old. This will not be the case in future.
I understand what you're saying, but think you are wrong. I have a Panasonic camera which is 10 years old, was relatively unpopular at the time it was new, and relies on a proprietary battery which only works in that model and maybe 1-2 others of a similar vintage. I can still get that battery from third party manufacturers for about $30.
I also think you underestimate both the popular interest in DSLR equipment of all vintages and the commitment of Nikon and Canon in particular to supporting their products for a loooooooooong time after they are superseded.
The reality contradicts your theory. There are 121,000 companies and individuals with apps published on the iPhone App Store.
And how many of the apps released by those 121,000 companies do something which is contrary to Apple's interests or corporate strategy?
Man is very arrogant, to think that we should be the judge and jury of every species on the planet. We need to remember that we only one of countless other species of this planet and to be good neighbors.
Change is inevitable, it's probably my biggest gripe against people that are vehement about global warming, this idea that nothing should ever change. Just because a bird species used to stop at this place means that it should always stop at this place.
Ridiculous post is ridiculous.
We shouldn't be the "judge and jury", as you say. The problem with global warming is that we ARE being the judge and jury - we're condemning thousands of species to death for no reason at all through our own voluntary actions. We should be trying not to do that as far as possible.
Basically, you are confusing inaction in the face of some natural change with "inaction" in the face of huge change caused by our own actions. I.e., you are apparently in favour of some random action, but not action to undo that action.
Your bird species point would make more sense if there were thousands of places for the birds in question to stop. On recent human form, though, there's a decent chance that these birds and this place may have taken on a species-defining importance. Wipe them out here and that might be it for them. We are intelligent and aware that our actions have consequences, so we should work out whether this is the case and try to avoid wiping them out.
Yes, there have been big changes in the past. But human-induced climate change has the potential to rank with a major catastophe on an evolutionary timescale.
I GET IT!
What is now proved was once only imagin'd. -- William Blake