Geek S**T NUMBER 5

Off Topic
741

I think Apple needs to find itself in a broker position, i.e. a 1:M relationship with console makers. Apple should provide a PaaS or IaaS like Amazon EC2…

For instance, if you’re a realtor, you sell 1:1 … you’re 1 realtor selling to 1 client at a time (yes, I know it can technically be 1:M, but I’m talking within a scalability context)…but if you’re a BROKER, you collect commission fees from EACH realtor, each of whom sells to many clients…that’s one way to exponentially scale up your revenue.

Apple’s strength right now is in large part due to its ecosystem, and that requires an amazing infrastructure for content delivery, which it has (225 million credit cards locked into iTunes, for instance).

Apple should be leasing its idle capacity to companies like Sony, so it can ride another company’s existing market penetration by simply being a key vendor in a space that others can’t compete in.

And with the rollout of each key service/platform, Apple could incrementally set itself up to offer a service that integrates all of those services/platforms. Because each would be existing and hopefully mature, bringing them all together down the line would be an easier sell to the consumer and major businesses.

Example:

iTunes = credit card accounts
iPhones = mobile, way to pay for things
iPhone market penetration + strength of Apple brand = convince carriers of a mobile payment system that piggy backs the carriers

Carriers more likely to accept because Apple has proven it’s market position in each sphere.

Being able to see that point far down the line is what makes someone visionary…

742

[quote]RSGZ wrote:
Looks like I spoke too soon:

If Apple gets in on the console market, they will gain a strong position in the market very quickly. MS needs to step it up and get their upcoming products to market ASAP.[/quote]

M$ should ride the wave of social gaming and integrate with existing M$ services/products to accelerate adoption of WP7. When WP7 has reached a market saturation point, M$ could use it as a true springboard for launching other services; it would become an infrastructure for content delivery at that point, just as the iPhone and iOS devices have become.

743

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I’m confused…all of that and no phone?

[/quote]

It reminds you of deals on steaks at Krogers. You can even reserve steaks through the handheld.

I would rather it NOT be a phone. I’m tired of integrated devices; all those components suck more juice and battery tech isn’t exactly advancing instep with all other tech.[/quote]

There’s an inverse relationship between the number of functions of a multifunction device and the quality of experience/degree of utility that that individual function brings.

i.e…phone, music player, camera, storage device? There’s little chance that every one of those functions is executed flawlessly. Yes, there are exceptions. No, you don’t get points for mentioning them, because I’m talking about trends, bell curves.[/quote]

the last thing i want is another NGAGE

i just want my psp to play some games and not a multimedia device

744

[quote]RSGZ wrote:

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I’m confused…all of that and no phone?

[/quote]

It reminds you of deals on steaks at Krogers. You can even reserve steaks through the handheld.

I would rather it NOT be a phone. I’m tired of integrated devices; all those components suck more juice and battery tech isn’t exactly advancing instep with all other tech.[/quote]

There’s an inverse relationship between the number of functions of a multifunction device and the quality of experience/degree of utility that that individual function brings.

i.e…phone, music player, camera, storage device? There’s little chance that every one of those functions is executed flawlessly. Yes, there are exceptions. No, you don’t get points for mentioning them, because I’m talking about trends, bell curves.[/quote]

I agree with not having too much in one device. They really need to work on improving the battery lives of all these upcoming devices next, the company that gets it right first will have a very strong product on their hands, provided the rest of the experience is up to scratch.

Saying that, I think Apple is actually in a good position to use something like Apple TV and Airplay to make it’s own type of console that could work directly from the iPhone.

Once you get around a battery life, if you can get the graphic power of a console from a mobile device like the PSV, you can turn that into a mobile console that pushes your gameplay onto a TV for something rather compelling.

On a side note, I just bought a new TV that should be turning up tomorrow, to replace my Bravia. A 46" Samsung LED with Smart TV.

I’m REALLY looking forward to being able to stream all my videos wirelessly via DLNA, and my goal is to completely replace my cable TV.[/quote]

I’m curious why we haven’t seen a mobile device that has something like a graphically intensive game be rendered remotely–like web pages on a web server–and delivered to the handheld. I bet we’d save on battery life rendering it on a larger server.

And I wonder if it’s possible to serve up multiple instances of the same thing to multiple devices, the way BitTorrent works (i.e. a file transferring faster the more people are serving it)…so, Game X is served to handhelds A, B, and C simultaneously…

That’s one example of going from 1:1 to 1:M in a direction that saves on resources. I don’t know the technical limitations/feasibility, though…

745

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]RSGZ wrote:

I’m REALLY looking forward to being able to stream all my videos wirelessly via DLNA, and my goal is to completely replace my cable TV.[/quote]

Soooooo…

You are saying that I could watch tv episodes I have downloaded on a 40+ inches flatscreen via the magic of W-Lan?[/quote]

Yes sir, this is my goal.

My lounge setup will be:

Smart TV connected to my wireless router via LAN (300mb wireless N is essential here if you opt for a wireless dongle, or a TV with wireless built in). PC on the network will share all my media wirelessly and with enough content, no more need for a cable or satellite service. You could also buy a NAS hard drive, which can plug directly into the router and store all your media too, this can remove the need for a PC altogether.

I already do this on my PC with Zune and the Xbox, but this will cut out a step.

In the bedroom I’ll have my old 40" with another Xbox (down the line) and another router that will link into the router downstairs. Since the old TV doesn’t have DLNA or wireless, I’ll rely on the 360 for streaming.

All I really use cable for right now is documentaries and re-runs of the Simpsons, etc. I have a fairly hefty collection of TV shows on my PC already, so I can just add to it as time goes on.

Another cool feature of the Samsung Smart TV’s is you can browse YouTube and other services direct.

TV as we know it will start to die out within the next decade, and hopefully within the next year in my household.

746

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Being able to see that point far down the line is what makes someone visionary…
[/quote]

You smug bastard.

But really, you have an excellent point. I’m not sure how open Apple would be to some of the idea’s because of how they like to have control over so many aspects of their products, but I’m sure they could find a way.

If they don’t, someone definitely will.

Isn’t this similar to how so many companies simply make money off of IP infringement and lawsuits?

747

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:

[quote]RSGZ wrote:
Looks like I spoke too soon:

If Apple gets in on the console market, they will gain a strong position in the market very quickly. MS needs to step it up and get their upcoming products to market ASAP.[/quote]

M$ should ride the wave of social gaming and integrate with existing M$ services/products to accelerate adoption of WP7. When WP7 has reached a market saturation point, M$ could use it as a true springboard for launching other services; it would become an infrastructure for content delivery at that point, just as the iPhone and iOS devices have become.[/quote]

I’m fairly confident that is exactly what they are going to do, the DoJ injunction is gone now and they can finally push forward and start integrating their products a lot more aggressively.

748

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
I’m curious why we haven’t seen a mobile device that has something like a graphically intensive game be rendered remotely–like web pages on a web server–and delivered to the handheld. I bet we’d save on battery life rendering it on a larger server.

And I wonder if it’s possible to serve up multiple instances of the same thing to multiple devices, the way BitTorrent works (i.e. a file transferring faster the more people are serving it)…so, Game X is served to handhelds A, B, and C simultaneously…

That’s one example of going from 1:1 to 1:M in a direction that saves on resources. I don’t know the technical limitations/feasibility, though…[/quote]

Isn’t that kind of what OnLive does, on your TV? If not, it must be another service I read about somewhere, which essentially has a server farm that handles processing of all the games while the user gets to have a fluid experience on a computer that doesn’t have the power to support the game in the first place.

The only downside I can think of is a reliably cellular data connection, I can speak for the US and it’s LTE, but 3G in the UK isn’t all the reliable - or fast. Data Caps are also a massive drawback.

Carriers are everyone’s enemy. Google, Apple or MS should invest in starting their own carrier company and they would have the epitome of mobile control.

749

[quote]RSGZ wrote:

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Being able to see that point far down the line is what makes someone visionary…
[/quote]

You smug bastard.

But really, you have an excellent point. I’m not sure how open Apple would be to some of the idea’s because of how they like to have control over so many aspects of their products, but I’m sure they could find a way.

If they don’t, someone definitely will.

Isn’t this similar to how so many companies simply make money off of IP infringement and lawsuits?[/quote]

It wasn’t a reference to Steve Jobs, by the way :slight_smile:

Many examples of visionaries…SAP gave a template of its software out for free (I believe) in exchange for collecting data on how specific industries operate, so that, down the line, it could create software for that industry. Freemium model.

re: IP infringement…

What I’m talking about is closer to licensing. I believe, for instance, that Nokia licensed networking technology to Apple, even though the two are technically competitors (smartphones)…yet, Nokia might have had the comparative advantage over Apple in R&D for this kind of tech, so Apple just licensed it (again, not 100% sure).

Vendor lock in is a huge advantage…

750

[quote]RSGZ wrote:

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
I’m curious why we haven’t seen a mobile device that has something like a graphically intensive game be rendered remotely–like web pages on a web server–and delivered to the handheld. I bet we’d save on battery life rendering it on a larger server.

And I wonder if it’s possible to serve up multiple instances of the same thing to multiple devices, the way BitTorrent works (i.e. a file transferring faster the more people are serving it)…so, Game X is served to handhelds A, B, and C simultaneously…

That’s one example of going from 1:1 to 1:M in a direction that saves on resources. I don’t know the technical limitations/feasibility, though…[/quote]

Isn’t that kind of what OnLive does, on your TV? If not, it must be another service I read about somewhere, which essentially has a server farm that handles processing of all the games while the user gets to have a fluid experience on a computer that doesn’t have the power to support the game in the first place.

The only downside I can think of is a reliably cellular data connection, I can speak for the US and it’s LTE, but 3G in the UK isn’t all the reliable - or fast. Data Caps are also a massive drawback.

Carriers are everyone’s enemy. Google, Apple or MS should invest in starting their own carrier company and they would have the epitome of mobile control.[/quote]

There should just be an open spectrum EVERYWHERE without carrier support, and all GSM phones able to use this frequency. They’ve attempted it, but too many politics. Should just be free so that carriers have to provide value over this free spectrum for people to sign up. Right now, the fact that phones can be exclusive to certain carriers means carriers don’t have to compete on JUST their network, which is how it should be if you ask me.

If everyone had the same phones, the differentiating factor would be the network and customer service and contracts–the core of the business.

LTE is fast, man…in my area, one of the pilot cities, it gets 12-20 MBps…my home cable modem gets 16 MBps, and that’s above average; most areas get 6-12 MBps from my ISP. I was silently upgraded to this a while back by the ISP.

But, LTE is power hungry and we need to wait for 2nd or even 3rd gen chips.

751

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:

[quote]RSGZ wrote:

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Being able to see that point far down the line is what makes someone visionary…
[/quote]

You smug bastard.

But really, you have an excellent point. I’m not sure how open Apple would be to some of the idea’s because of how they like to have control over so many aspects of their products, but I’m sure they could find a way.

If they don’t, someone definitely will.

Isn’t this similar to how so many companies simply make money off of IP infringement and lawsuits?[/quote]

It wasn’t a reference to Steve Jobs, by the way :slight_smile:

Many examples of visionaries…SAP gave a template of its software out for free (I believe) in exchange for collecting data on how specific industries operate, so that, down the line, it could create software for that industry. Freemium model.

re: IP infringement…

What I’m talking about is closer to licensing. I believe, for instance, that Nokia licensed networking technology to Apple, even though the two are technically competitors (smartphones)…yet, Nokia might have had the comparative advantage over Apple in R&D for this kind of tech, so Apple just licensed it (again, not 100% sure).

Vendor lock in is a huge advantage…[/quote]

But they’re only licensing it because they own the patents, not so? I suppose it could be both planned and a symptom of patenting, in that a company could form an agreement to license a technology owned by another, or, the other party could simply infringe the patent and then fight over the licensing agreement in court.

Much like how MS, among others, gets a kickback from every Android device sold. Google infringed on quite a few patents and the OEM’s pay the price since Android is [technically] given away for free.

752

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
LTE is fast, man…in my area, one of the pilot cities, it gets 12-20 MBps…my home cable modem gets 16 MBps, and that’s above average; most areas get 6-12 MBps from my ISP. I was silently upgraded to this a while back by the ISP.

But, LTE is power hungry and we need to wait for 2nd or even 3rd gen chips.[/quote]

They’re starting to test it here, but only in a little town on the South-East of the UK. Bullshit I say!

753

Yes, the patent system here is FLAWED. They should actually get rid of it; it impedes on the free market, in my opinion.

Also, my friend said from what he’s observed in his field, many companies file a provisional patent, give it to the USPTO, have the govt basically do the dirty work of what the patent is missing, and then resbumit the completed patent.

754

[quote]RSGZ wrote:
Isn’t that kind of what OnLive does, on your TV? If not, it must be another service I read about somewhere, which essentially has a server farm that handles processing of all the games while the user gets to have a fluid experience on a computer that doesn’t have the power to support the game in the first place.

The only downside I can think of is a reliably cellular data connection, I can speak for the US and it’s LTE, but 3G in the UK isn’t all the reliable - or fast. Data Caps are also a massive drawback.

Carriers are everyone’s enemy. Google, Apple or MS should invest in starting their own carrier company and they would have the epitome of mobile control.[/quote]

I’m pretty sure that’s what OnLive does - and I just saw an ad that said OnLive is coming to tablet devices this year.

As far as the PSV - apparently the 3G option will not allow online multiplayer, but rather web browsing, and PS store downloading only. Because there is no online multiplayer via 3G my guess is that it will be dirt cheap service if not free (like the 3G kindle).

755

Man I wish this was around back in the Goldeneye days to stop screen watching.

Besides the small size (24") I think it’s a pretty cool idea.

756

Farcry 2 had its issues but overall I really enjoyed it, I think this will be amazing.

757

[quote]Johnny T Frisk wrote:

Farcry 2 had its issues but overall I really enjoyed it, I think this will be amazing.[/quote]

I loved Far Cry 1 and 2. Interestingly enough, this uses the same engine used in FC2 with some tweaks and improvement.

758

If you guys haven’t checked this out yet I would highly recommend you do so. This was one of the best DC Animated movies I’ve seen. It ranks up there with Batman:Redhood and Batman Gotham Knights. The stories are great animation more than solid and the action is epic. This gets my highest recommendation.

Side note: If you came exclusively for Hal Jordan. Your gonna be dissapoint. He’s in it but definitely not the main character.

759

Full link to the comics getting the reboot I’m a little saddened Action just hit 900 and Detective was almost there what other monthly title can say that? I’m also on the other hand excited I’m so happy Grayson is going back to being Nightwing, and Jason Todd is getting his own series, but then Gail Simone isn’t goign to write Birds of Prey anymore and her writing made those stories, we’re also getting a new Hawk and Dove series and a new Hawkman, but no JSA. So a liitle good a little bad just wish they wouldn’t start over with issue 1’s.

760

[quote]Pootie Tang wrote:
If you guys haven’t checked this out yet I would highly recommend you do so. This was one of the best DC Animated movies I’ve seen. It ranks up there with Batman:Redhood and Batman Gotham Knights. The stories are great animation more than solid and the action is epic. This gets my highest recommendation.

Side note: If you came exclusively for Hal Jordan. Your gonna be dissapoint. He’s in it but definitely not the main character.

Yeah and there where a few stories based on Alan Moore’s run in DC like Mogo doesn’t socialize(Mogo was da man until fucking John Stewart killed him/her/it)