maelstromr
Mar 31, 02:49 PM
Until you stop making money.
:D
:D
Xeperu
Mar 22, 01:06 PM
My take on this.
The good:
1. Great specs
2. Great price
3. Great form factor
The Bad:
1. Looks plastic fantastic
2. Android (as in: bad ecosystem)
My verdict:
No thanks, I prefer the guarantee for fresh apps and business support that iOS provides me.
The good:
1. Great specs
2. Great price
3. Great form factor
The Bad:
1. Looks plastic fantastic
2. Android (as in: bad ecosystem)
My verdict:
No thanks, I prefer the guarantee for fresh apps and business support that iOS provides me.
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 14, 11:35 PM
I have enough skill to win the faster races, i just have more fun with a "real" car instead of something with neck-snapping acceleration and tires that stick to the road if you take a hair-pin at 200mph.
I have a lot more fun driving cars that anyone can afford.
I have a lot more fun driving cars that anyone can afford.
tripjammer
Apr 11, 01:04 PM
You guys really believe this? We all know the Iphone 5 will basically have the guts of the Ipad 2...so all the componets are ready...it will be out this summer. These rumors are just to keep Android and Microsoft not knowing.
Ipad in the spring
Iphone in the summer
Itouch\AppleTV\IPODs in the fall
Its like that and it will always be...it works for apple.
Ipad in the spring
Iphone in the summer
Itouch\AppleTV\IPODs in the fall
Its like that and it will always be...it works for apple.
ChrisA
Aug 7, 06:25 PM
It seems to me it would make some older versions available on your HD, but then you would want to make a copy to an external HD for space reasons and for backup in case of failure. But I'm just speculating of course
I suspect what happens is you get to specifiy _where_ the backup copies are kept. I hear Steve say that it "could be either an external disk or a server". The "Or a server" part is the most interresting. That server could be in another building or even across the Internet. and then how is that server backed up???? I can imagine a small home system would use an external disk but a network of computers would share 2 or 3 backup servers with at least on of the backup servers in a remote location.
Here in the office our big file server is kept sync'd of to two other servers that are each several hundred miles away. This protects against an Earthquake or building fire. This type of automated backup was not invented by Apple. It's been done for decades but it appears Apple has made is easy, cheap and universal.
"Tinme Machine" would also have value even if there was only one disk on say a notebook. It would alow you to recover from the common problem where to make a bad edit and then saved your work and then the next day want to recover the version you maked four days ago. Now I simply make multiple copies that clutter of the folder but now Mac OSX would in effect back these for you. Then if you add an extrnal disk you are protected from a disk fairue then if you add a remote server you are protected from a house fire or theft of the system. I think it will be very configurable but have a reasonable out of the box configuration.
Next I want to see if this is integrated with software RAID
I suspect what happens is you get to specifiy _where_ the backup copies are kept. I hear Steve say that it "could be either an external disk or a server". The "Or a server" part is the most interresting. That server could be in another building or even across the Internet. and then how is that server backed up???? I can imagine a small home system would use an external disk but a network of computers would share 2 or 3 backup servers with at least on of the backup servers in a remote location.
Here in the office our big file server is kept sync'd of to two other servers that are each several hundred miles away. This protects against an Earthquake or building fire. This type of automated backup was not invented by Apple. It's been done for decades but it appears Apple has made is easy, cheap and universal.
"Tinme Machine" would also have value even if there was only one disk on say a notebook. It would alow you to recover from the common problem where to make a bad edit and then saved your work and then the next day want to recover the version you maked four days ago. Now I simply make multiple copies that clutter of the folder but now Mac OSX would in effect back these for you. Then if you add an extrnal disk you are protected from a disk fairue then if you add a remote server you are protected from a house fire or theft of the system. I think it will be very configurable but have a reasonable out of the box configuration.
Next I want to see if this is integrated with software RAID
The ArchAngel
Mar 26, 08:22 AM
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Lion offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
I hear what you're saying, and agree in large part, but since when did most consumers select products on grounds other than primarily looks?
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
I hear what you're saying, and agree in large part, but since when did most consumers select products on grounds other than primarily looks?
KnightWRX
Apr 9, 11:12 AM
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
Why not ? A 320m successor would just destroy the Intel HD 3000 which is sub-par compared to the current 320m. Why not use 2 IGPs and go for a 2 chip solution instead of using a dedicated GPU and have to rely on a 3 chip solution if that 2nd IGP just blows away the first ?
Heck, just disable the Intel 3000 HD entirely.
Intel got greedy.
Why not ? A 320m successor would just destroy the Intel HD 3000 which is sub-par compared to the current 320m. Why not use 2 IGPs and go for a 2 chip solution instead of using a dedicated GPU and have to rely on a 3 chip solution if that 2nd IGP just blows away the first ?
Heck, just disable the Intel 3000 HD entirely.
Intel got greedy.
skunk
Mar 3, 05:18 AM
If everyone with genitals were always morally free to do that, homosexually abusive pedophile priests would have been morally free to molest their victims.Why do you conflate homosexuality with abuse and paedophilia?
You might say, "Bill, if the sex was consensual, maybe there nothing morally wrong with it." But people can coerce others into consenting.Your arguments are increasingly bizarre.
You might say, "Bill, if the sex was consensual, maybe there nothing morally wrong with it." But people can coerce others into consenting.Your arguments are increasingly bizarre.
bretm
Apr 11, 09:51 AM
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
I'm an independent corporate video editor. Work out of the house. I've been doing NLE since 1993. I started with VideoCube, then Media 100, then Avid, and then FCP in 2001. Avid had to get really behind (and threaten to leave the mac platform) before post houses made the switch. They really screwed that up at NAB that year. They had been languishing on the mac apps and releasing certain products- Symphony, DS, etc. on Windows only for a few years and at NAB one sales guy said to someone that they would essentially be phasing out the mac platform. They denied it later, but it was probably their plan. Then FCP came out and for the corporate folks that didn't need to spend 70,000 on an Avid system, it was wonderful. In the years that followed it closed the gap immensely and Avid fought back with cheaper products and options. It became a either or situation, with FCP being the slightly cheaper option. But with the new tech in the last 2 years, Apple has to leap frog again.
But still, it's so much more than just the app. Which is why Adobe (which has all the features everyone wants in FCP) is having such a hard time getting anyone but hacks to use it. There is an installed user base and an entire generation of people trained on FCP & Avid. And it was just the above fluke that gave FCP an in. It's one thing for an individual like me to switch, but for a company that uses contractors and other companies and rely on compatibility and workflows and such, it's a nightmare. I work with independent producers, and their clients are usually large companies. All 3 of us are using FCP. If I switch, I make life hard on the producer who is cutting together rough ideas on her laptop. When we deliver product, we deliver a product and the FCP project and files so that the big company, who has editing facilites of their own, can make changes without our help in an emergency. It's part of why they feel comfortable going out of house.
It's the smaller turnkey shops that do it all in house that can afford to keep totally cutting edge and buy every upgrade. But truth is, most good editing should rely on cuts and dissolves. You need anything fancier audio or graphic wise, you should be hiring an audio professional or a graphics professional.
I have the Adobe Master collection myself because I dabble in AE, PS, Flash and Dreamweaver. But the web authoring has just gone crazy. I can't keep up with all that. And AE is starting to get that way too. For me, I would just like FCP to upgrade and/or reinvent itself so I can integrate new tech simpler. Better authoring for Blu-Ray and DVD. Better web options. Importing file formats without log and transfer BS. And lets tune it up to make it use all the processors and be a ridiculous powerhouse. High end features rivaling Avid, and the touch and elegance of Apple. Plus a few neat tricks like offline editing on iPad or using the iPad as a controller, etc. would be cool and welcome.
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
I'm an independent corporate video editor. Work out of the house. I've been doing NLE since 1993. I started with VideoCube, then Media 100, then Avid, and then FCP in 2001. Avid had to get really behind (and threaten to leave the mac platform) before post houses made the switch. They really screwed that up at NAB that year. They had been languishing on the mac apps and releasing certain products- Symphony, DS, etc. on Windows only for a few years and at NAB one sales guy said to someone that they would essentially be phasing out the mac platform. They denied it later, but it was probably their plan. Then FCP came out and for the corporate folks that didn't need to spend 70,000 on an Avid system, it was wonderful. In the years that followed it closed the gap immensely and Avid fought back with cheaper products and options. It became a either or situation, with FCP being the slightly cheaper option. But with the new tech in the last 2 years, Apple has to leap frog again.
But still, it's so much more than just the app. Which is why Adobe (which has all the features everyone wants in FCP) is having such a hard time getting anyone but hacks to use it. There is an installed user base and an entire generation of people trained on FCP & Avid. And it was just the above fluke that gave FCP an in. It's one thing for an individual like me to switch, but for a company that uses contractors and other companies and rely on compatibility and workflows and such, it's a nightmare. I work with independent producers, and their clients are usually large companies. All 3 of us are using FCP. If I switch, I make life hard on the producer who is cutting together rough ideas on her laptop. When we deliver product, we deliver a product and the FCP project and files so that the big company, who has editing facilites of their own, can make changes without our help in an emergency. It's part of why they feel comfortable going out of house.
It's the smaller turnkey shops that do it all in house that can afford to keep totally cutting edge and buy every upgrade. But truth is, most good editing should rely on cuts and dissolves. You need anything fancier audio or graphic wise, you should be hiring an audio professional or a graphics professional.
I have the Adobe Master collection myself because I dabble in AE, PS, Flash and Dreamweaver. But the web authoring has just gone crazy. I can't keep up with all that. And AE is starting to get that way too. For me, I would just like FCP to upgrade and/or reinvent itself so I can integrate new tech simpler. Better authoring for Blu-Ray and DVD. Better web options. Importing file formats without log and transfer BS. And lets tune it up to make it use all the processors and be a ridiculous powerhouse. High end features rivaling Avid, and the touch and elegance of Apple. Plus a few neat tricks like offline editing on iPad or using the iPad as a controller, etc. would be cool and welcome.
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 03:11 PM
While I would also like to know why, I'm not sure this is a big deal as it seems to me that the remedy to going to be very simple: a) encryption is on by default, and/or b) flushing the database after, say, six months.
Oh I agree, it's not as big a deal as some are making it out to be.
I would still like to know the "why" part. If anything just to satisfy my own curiosity.
Oh I agree, it's not as big a deal as some are making it out to be.
I would still like to know the "why" part. If anything just to satisfy my own curiosity.
krcbkidz
Mar 22, 05:07 PM
You obviously don't know much about samsung. Samsung makes RAM and CPU that apple uses in iphone/ipad. Possibly LCD too. A4 was definitely made by samsung. It's pretty certain A5 is also made by samsung, despite rumors TSMC will make them for apple.
Samsung being samsung, they can match Apple in price in tablet forever (well maybe not forever but for a long time) even without making much profit (not that they would do it). Samsung is HUGE. They have plenty of other stuff they can sell with profit.
I know about Samsung & the company's size. Yes, Samsung does manufacture parts for Apple; the parts they manufacture are according to Apple's R&D specifications & are designed by/for Apple only. Apple holds the license for specific parts (ie. the A5/A4 chip designs). Therefore even though Samsung manufactures the parts, they cannot put these parts in other hardware unless deemed so by Apple. Apple pays Samsung a fee to utilize their production facilities, which is a profit for Samsung. This profit is small compared to the margin of parts/production to MSRP that Apple reaps on each iPad. Apple controls hardware development, OS development, & UI development by keeping everything in house. Samsung utilizes a third party OS, & third party processor technology. I don't feel their user experience is as good as it could be. Samsung ultimately controls the manufacturing of the Tab but they leave money on the table as opposed to Apple's business model.
Samsung being samsung, they can match Apple in price in tablet forever (well maybe not forever but for a long time) even without making much profit (not that they would do it). Samsung is HUGE. They have plenty of other stuff they can sell with profit.
I know about Samsung & the company's size. Yes, Samsung does manufacture parts for Apple; the parts they manufacture are according to Apple's R&D specifications & are designed by/for Apple only. Apple holds the license for specific parts (ie. the A5/A4 chip designs). Therefore even though Samsung manufactures the parts, they cannot put these parts in other hardware unless deemed so by Apple. Apple pays Samsung a fee to utilize their production facilities, which is a profit for Samsung. This profit is small compared to the margin of parts/production to MSRP that Apple reaps on each iPad. Apple controls hardware development, OS development, & UI development by keeping everything in house. Samsung utilizes a third party OS, & third party processor technology. I don't feel their user experience is as good as it could be. Samsung ultimately controls the manufacturing of the Tab but they leave money on the table as opposed to Apple's business model.
syklee26
Mar 26, 01:27 AM
I have a feeling Apple won't charge $129 for Lion. It is not going to be easy to tell users that, after charging only $29 for SL, they are back to charging $129.
I feel like Apple may charge around $49 for Lion.
This is unless Jobs is going to be at WWDC with some really awesome secret features in his sleeve, like he did with Leopard.
I feel like Apple may charge around $49 for Lion.
This is unless Jobs is going to be at WWDC with some really awesome secret features in his sleeve, like he did with Leopard.
raymondso
Sep 19, 08:51 AM
the apple store is still going very healthy now
does that mean no update today?
does that mean no update today?
rerelease
Apr 11, 03:58 PM
A 4" screen at the current 3:2 ratio would look absolutely hideous with the general iPhone design (which I doubt they change) and not very sensible in the age where tablets are squeezing themselves between laptops and smartphones (a philosophy which Apple is a strong supporter of).
I'd rather have a more sleek, compact smartphone that fits in my pocket and where the screen doesn't suck the battery dry within a few hours and I expect (and/or hope) to see Apple deliver just that.
I'd rather have a more sleek, compact smartphone that fits in my pocket and where the screen doesn't suck the battery dry within a few hours and I expect (and/or hope) to see Apple deliver just that.
jmgregory1
Mar 22, 04:01 PM
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
This is a simple look at a complex process. Adding more ram may be good in a system that doesn't control app usage well, but it's something completely different when the system can control for app processes. If you have a product that works perfectly well with a certain spec, is there a need to add more of a certain thing? What benefit does it offer? Apple is a smart company - why build more cost into hardware if you can make your software make up any potential shortcomings in hardware?
Of course the competition has to market its products as being different in some way compared to Apple and convince you, the buying public, that it means something to have double this or less of that.
Frankly, I think these companies should be trying to come up with the next thing - instead of just trying to compete against the iPad - but they won't do that. They'll wait until Apple releases the next new thing and just copy that. It's pitiful really.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
This is a simple look at a complex process. Adding more ram may be good in a system that doesn't control app usage well, but it's something completely different when the system can control for app processes. If you have a product that works perfectly well with a certain spec, is there a need to add more of a certain thing? What benefit does it offer? Apple is a smart company - why build more cost into hardware if you can make your software make up any potential shortcomings in hardware?
Of course the competition has to market its products as being different in some way compared to Apple and convince you, the buying public, that it means something to have double this or less of that.
Frankly, I think these companies should be trying to come up with the next thing - instead of just trying to compete against the iPad - but they won't do that. They'll wait until Apple releases the next new thing and just copy that. It's pitiful really.
moebius
Mar 22, 08:36 PM
Probably someone mentioned before, but "a tablet for professionals" named PLAYbook?
I smell an identity crisis.
I smell an identity crisis.
Multimedia
Aug 27, 10:59 AM
Speaking of wish expectations Multimedia;
I know you're hangin' out for Santa Rosa. The article mentions that it's expected in early 2007. Do you think that would be the date for official announcement of production-standard architecture, or actual availability announcement?
Seems very early to be shipping...
I could go out in September and get a Merom notebook, but I don't mind waiting 6 months for Santa Rosa to hit the street.I don't expect the Santa Rosa setup to be ready before Leopard is next Spring. I was going to wait that long. But hanging out here makes me want something this Fall once Core 2 is in full swing - IE some of it hits the refurb page. :p
I'm thinking 17" MBP or MacBook depending on if MBP has the MB removable easy access HD feature. MacBook is really a bargain @ $949 refurb. I may even go for just a bottom of the line 1.66 GHz C2D refurb mini. But my penchant for spanning says a $949 MacBook at least. I've been a spanner since it became possible in 1986. Find one screen impossably confining - ESP since the 24" is also a TV most of the time thanks to Elgato's amazing EyeTV technologies.
Mac Pro does crush video about 33% faster than this Quad G5 does. Still not fast enough. But significantly faster than I can do it now. But so might the MacBook. I really can't say yet. My mind is in flux. Still have to test Core 2 Duo performance Vs. Mac Pro for my particular video crushing needs. Two bottom of the line Minis may be an option as well.
I know you're hangin' out for Santa Rosa. The article mentions that it's expected in early 2007. Do you think that would be the date for official announcement of production-standard architecture, or actual availability announcement?
Seems very early to be shipping...
I could go out in September and get a Merom notebook, but I don't mind waiting 6 months for Santa Rosa to hit the street.I don't expect the Santa Rosa setup to be ready before Leopard is next Spring. I was going to wait that long. But hanging out here makes me want something this Fall once Core 2 is in full swing - IE some of it hits the refurb page. :p
I'm thinking 17" MBP or MacBook depending on if MBP has the MB removable easy access HD feature. MacBook is really a bargain @ $949 refurb. I may even go for just a bottom of the line 1.66 GHz C2D refurb mini. But my penchant for spanning says a $949 MacBook at least. I've been a spanner since it became possible in 1986. Find one screen impossably confining - ESP since the 24" is also a TV most of the time thanks to Elgato's amazing EyeTV technologies.
Mac Pro does crush video about 33% faster than this Quad G5 does. Still not fast enough. But significantly faster than I can do it now. But so might the MacBook. I really can't say yet. My mind is in flux. Still have to test Core 2 Duo performance Vs. Mac Pro for my particular video crushing needs. Two bottom of the line Minis may be an option as well.
toddybody
Apr 6, 11:06 AM
You obviously don't know how powerful SB actually is compared to C2D
I think he didnt see the mention of their turbo (auto OC) speed of 2.3Ghz.
I think he didnt see the mention of their turbo (auto OC) speed of 2.3Ghz.
JeffreyGreen
Apr 25, 03:09 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don�t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don�t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
IBradMac
Jun 14, 12:36 AM
Correct to the even though your an authorized user. Authorized users can do anything but add or upgrade, atleaset at RS.
-SD-
Aug 18, 05:14 AM
So Japan is getting GT5 on November 3rd too, but at least they get a nifty Titanium Blue console and Ltd Edition game bundle. (http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/18/ps3-gets-titanium-blue-makeover-for-gran-turismo-5-launch-bundle/)
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/08/10x08189ub234tewfja.jpg
:apple:
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/08/10x08189ub234tewfja.jpg
:apple:
regandarcy
Apr 6, 04:06 PM
I've never liked backlit keys and have it turned off on my MBPs. I find it annoying, personally, but I do touch type so I'm never looking at the keys. I totally understand those who do want that feature (and Apple should add it to the MBA because it appears to be important for a enough people), but personally I don't care for it and am glad I can turn it off.
I'm with you buddy. I totally don't need it either. Even if I was a hunt and peck guy, I could see keyboard fine in a dark room just by the light of the screen so I don't see the point. But that's just me. Personally I'd rather not have it drain my battery.
But since I am such a good touch typist, I don't have to worry about that. :-)
But to each their own.
I'm with you buddy. I totally don't need it either. Even if I was a hunt and peck guy, I could see keyboard fine in a dark room just by the light of the screen so I don't see the point. But that's just me. Personally I'd rather not have it drain my battery.
But since I am such a good touch typist, I don't have to worry about that. :-)
But to each their own.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 11, 07:33 PM
i know there have been more 'titles'. but they are not full releases, but i did leave out Gran Turismo for PSP, so they are up to 5 full releases now.
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series)) -{Wikipedia Quote}-
I really like you're choice of quoting.
Largest Number of cars in a Racing game
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
Highest Selling PlayStation Game
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
Oldest Car in a Racing Game
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
My point is, earlier you were saying that they only have 4 games and they sold 57M copies. If you look at that link, which is right from Polyphony themselves, you will see that if you only count the 4 main games, as you were eluding to, that only totals 46M.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
So, you don't count NFS? Ok then. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are really only comparing GT to 1 other console game; Forza. It is the only other console game of any similar type. But, using your own logic, is it fair to compare GT to Forza, since GT has been out much longer and has many more games in the series? I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series)) -{Wikipedia Quote}-
I really like you're choice of quoting.
Largest Number of cars in a Racing game
...of which about 1/3 of them are various Civics, Skylines and Imprezas.
Highest Selling PlayStation Game
...ok, that one is good. That says something.
Oldest Car in a Racing Game
...that no one ever drove, because it couldn't even get up the hilly parts of some tracks. Total waste.
Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game
...really? Oldest car and Largest guide?? REALLY?? Yikes.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
Um, according to your OWN link, the car was cancelled. And really, that isn't surprising. It is a concept car, plain and simple. So again I ask, what REAL cars have ever ACTUALLY been made just to be in this game??
littleman23408
Dec 2, 08:43 AM
I hate to link to IGN, but here goes:
GT5 damage explained (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1137446p1.html)
Confusion seems to have stemmed from its differing implementation across the game's extensive garage, a point that Sony further clarified. "Standard models have minor deformation and scratches," said Sony, "Premium cars have greater visible level of damage, and Premium racing models have the highest level of damage."
I can't open the links due to work internet, but they should have done equal damage to all cars. Besides, every real car dents and scratches pretty easily.
GT5 damage explained (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1137446p1.html)
Confusion seems to have stemmed from its differing implementation across the game's extensive garage, a point that Sony further clarified. "Standard models have minor deformation and scratches," said Sony, "Premium cars have greater visible level of damage, and Premium racing models have the highest level of damage."
I can't open the links due to work internet, but they should have done equal damage to all cars. Besides, every real car dents and scratches pretty easily.
No comments:
Post a Comment