Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:How about they kill activation too? (Score 1) 233

I absolutely agree. I have Microsoft Office 2010 provided by my company, which I connect to via VPN. Unfortunately I have 9 days left to activate my legal copy, which REFUSES to actually activate. My coworker had no problems activating... but mine is stubborn. It's a FAILED system when you have to find a way to crack paid, legit software.

Comment Re:Captain Obvious (Score 1) 412

Sir, look at what you said, and ask yourself... why bundle a custom miniPC with a 360 Controller advertising "Games for Windows" that support the 360 controller... When Microsoft has already done exactly what you just stated. The Xbox 360 is literally a custom PC with a custom interface (XBMC stands for XBox Media Center I believe ;) ) with games that are already certified, will work with the hardware and interface with controller directly. I get what you're saying, but my answer is wait for the next-gen consoles.

Comment Re:Captain Obvious (Score 1) 412

They would also have to ship with a well designed controller (and not an after-thought)... add onto that a fancy UI that is easy to navigate from the couch. The problem with PCs as a game center is that every game is different. When you have an xbox 360, you know how the interface works, you know what to expect. A always selects, B goes back a menu. It's not about the hardware. It's about the easy of use and the experience.

Comment Re:Captain Obvious (Score 3, Insightful) 412

A problem with this is... you have to be on Sony and Microsoft's time table.. and even then, that won't help you. For instance, let's say a new console came out next year. Two times as powerful as a PS3, with all the charm of a 360. It still lacks games. But once it gets some good to-die-for games, then what? The year after that PS4 and neXbox come out, with mostly backwards compatibility, and global branding. They would probably be another step above in performance on that new console, too. That new console is now dead in the water. But even if you wait for the next wave of consoles, and release along with Sony and Microsoft.. you have no reputation. It's just not going to happen unless you're a well known company, or have major publisher backing.

Comment Re:Heh (Score 1) 212

I absolutely agree with you, really. FireFox refuses to support H.264 (you already stated why), which defeats the whole purpose of one unified standard, which is what HTML5 is shooting for. The only thing I hope, is that whatever codec gets used, it better be good. H.264 has already been proven.. that's why it's so popular. WebM, for the most part seems to be pretty identical. If WebM doesn't make the cut, I honestly believe the whole push will stall out. Whichever codec gets used has to be GOOD for all platforms (desktop and mobile, good on CPU, etc.). Reason being, it's going to stick around for a while... like MP3; it might not be the best, but it's the standard.

Comment Re:Heh (Score 3, Informative) 212

The fact that most of them suck, and you would have to install multiple plugins just to be able to browse the internet regularly.. but then because of that you end up having lots of security holes all of the place due to hastily written plugins. Back in the day you had Real Audio, and you hated it, because all it did was BUFFER all the time. A lot of sites had WMV, which couldn't be played on Macs. A lot of sites had MOV which required QuickTime, which behaves horrendously on Windows. Now, the majority of sites use flash, which is prone to security problems, crashes, and also can't be played on Macs, if Apple has their way. With a unified codec, each browser is free to implement the specifics however they want, and the media is still guaranteed to play across all platforms. EVERYBODY wins.

Comment What's the point of Encrypting if it's so easy... (Score 2, Interesting) 177

What's the point of the encrypting in Windows if you can easily go to Tools -> Personal Stuff -> Show Saved Passwords, and clicking Show Password? Chrome doesn't appear to have any password-required feature to get INTO those settings and/or launch the browser. Firefox, on the other hand uses a password that protects them either when you try to view the passwords through the dialog box, OR when the passwords have to get loaded in order to be used by a site. It boggles the mind even more when you consider Chrome lets you store and view your credit card information if you choose to save it (on by default I think)

Comment Re:Ok.. now if there were OSS engines of this qual (Score 1) 75

Ogre I believe is strictly graphics (maybe stretching out a bit more than that, but definitely far from a complete engine).. and Irrlitch is definitely not in the same league. Having said that, I'm not sure something like this would show up anytime soon. If a group came together and started working on an open source engine, and actually got to the point of these commercial engines, they'd probably realize their worth and switch to a pay-for model. Sadly a lot of software i've seen has done this. Start out free, get attention, get a user base, then switch to a pay model.

Comment Getting sick of... (Score 1) 419

I'm really getting sick of 'rushed' releases with open source / free software. I found an issue with VLC player's RC3 release (the issue was around for RC1&2 as well, but I reported it during RC3). It was acknowledged, and confirmed by another user. RC4 got released, I bumped the thread saying the problem still existed in RC4. Now VLC 1.0 has been released, and the issue still stands. It's a problem with WMV's audio skipping/glitching up. It's not a complaint about VLC. VLC is really great. It's just really about practices of software releases that seem to be getting worse and worse lately. Rushing through the beta phase, and ignoring pretty big functionality problems just to get a new release out in time. I understand these guys are usually not getting paid for their work, but it makes more sense to make good solid releases rather than just releasing, and then patching a few weeks later. Having said that, VLC's newest release does fix major gripes I've had with the previous versions of the application, and I look forward to new releases.

Comment Re:Better than mplayer? (Score 1) 488

I've used Windows media player. I've used VLC. I've used SMPlayer (the gui frontend of mplayer) WMP plays maybe 60% of the stuff I have. It's easy to use, and is user friendly. WMP 12 (Windows 7) Is absolutely terrible, hard to navigate, unprofessional, and lacking. VLC Player: plays everything I have, except FLV (if I remember correctly).. Settings are NOT user friendly. Has horrible quirks about it, such as resizing the video window every damn time a new video starts. Glitches the sound/video for a couple seconds while seeking. Pretty MEH interface. I would like to have a playlist that integrates with the main player, as well. SM/MPlayer: plays everything I have flawlessly. The settings are a BREEZE to flip through. They all make sense. Nice options available, the interface looks good. However, this is not without cons. Because SMPlayer is just the frontend, it opens two processes.. the GUI and the MPlayer backend. This causes a slightly noticable delay upon opening the application, and interacting with the movie (seeking, etc). It also causes crashes when they get confused with one another and they both decide to crash. Another thing I noticed is that the keyboard controls are TERRIBLE. SHIFT + keys are required to change videos. Every other application known to man just requires N or something similar. Verdict: I've stopped using WMP completely. I've stopped using VLC because of the quirks. I use SMPlayer right now, but as VLC improves I may switch back, because it feels more responsive. If the SMPlayer gui was integrated with MPlayer more tightly, and the keyboard controls were changed, I would absolutely keep it. I apologize.. Slashdot is not keeping my data in paragraph form.

Slashdot Top Deals