You are looking at the new sheriff in town, and this sheriff resides with me in Rochester. For any technology lover, this is one hell of a machine. It not only is faster than my quad core workstation in EVERY aspect (video editing, 3D rendering, Application response) it took on the Xeon 8-core Mac Pro's from last year and beat them in a few tests.
This thing is sick. 17", 8MB LS3 Cache, 2.3Ghz Quad Core, Hyperthreading simulates 8 cores, with speed boost that automagically overclocks this baby from 2.3GHz to 3.4Ghz on demand. 8 Gigs of Ram, 1GB Video Card and separate onboard graphics card to save battery power, Solid State Hard drive delivers unprecedented application response (aka, I was able to open every single Adobe Application in the time it took my co-workers Macbook Pro to open just Photoshop).
This is one Mac, even a die-hard PC'er can't dis...and if I want, I can dual boot this with Windows or Mac and switch between the two OS systems without restarting. Welcome my friend...welcome.
Also, thanks for finding a bug in the Baumblog lol. Why you gotta be floating images to the left? :)
GJ said about 9 hours later
Darcy's Lenovo, purchased last spring, has the same 2.3 quad with hyperthreading. Who is your god now? :)
GJ said about 9 hours later
Oh, and last I checked, SSD hard disks are still very, very unreliable. Did that change recently, or did you buy a good backup solution to go along with this?
Geoff said about 16 hours later
Do you know if Darcy's overclocks itself? It is a killer chipset. I'm blown away how fast this thing is. The new SSD drives now support TRIM which is supposed to improve reliability. Honestly, the only thing I've got on this SSD is the OS itself, it's not a large drive so all my client files reside on separate drives (I've got it backed up on 2 external drives, and 2 internal drives...so I'm pretty well covered).
The SSD is quite new so this was more of a test to see how well it works. I ripped the internal HD that came with my laptop and installed it in a Seagate GoFlex external enclose which is super tiny. Great portable solution. The only problem I am really having is trying to get the proper expresscard so I can get superfast speeds (USB 2.0 isn't real great)
I first tried a slim eSATA expresscard, but it wasn't powered so it would not boot my external drive (which is powered by the connect cable). Then I tried USB 3.0 expresscard but that didn't provide enough juice either (which it had a 5V port to boost power, but of course, no cable). So this time I ordered a USB 3.0 expresscard WITH the cable. Hopefully that will do the trick.
I'm interested to see how the new Thunderbolt port will play out. I used that port to send a HD video signal to a 2nd display but it is quite quick for file transfer too. I imagine the drives for that early on will be expensive. Overall though, a nice piece of equipment.
GJ said 3 days later
No, it doesn't overclock itself. However, that's more of a software upgrade than a hardware spec. In other words, the CPU isn't new, it's just enhanced a bit with custom code (likely at the bios level, not the OS). We're not at the point we need to really be thinking about overclocking Darcy's laptop (which actually dates back more than a year, as Darcy reminded me yesterday), as the CPU is hardly the bottleneck on the machine. Windows 7 is. :)
Sounds like a nice machine, but knowing how Apple overprices the crap out of things, I'm guessing this was at least $1500, likely even more.
IBM was hosting the Chevrolet Volt Unplugged tour on our campus today, partially because IBM was involved in producing some of the software used on the car. With that, they brought the car to our campus and let us take a look, ask questions, and even get a test drive. Unfortunately the line for the test drive was too long, so I can't speak to that. Without further ado, here's some pictures (Click to enlarge):
Some basic facts that the marketing people offered were:
40-50 mile range on fully charged battery
9 gallon tank for combustion engine (Only turns on if hood is open for maintenance or battery is depleted)
Times to charge: 4 hrs (220V), 10 hrs (110V). There is no regenerative charging via braking or alternator)
34 MPG average
Base price: $41k (but you get a $7,500 government rebate)
That's it for facts, I'll save my opinions for the comments. :)
I must say, I'm quite unimpressed with this vehicle (Especially after seeing and reading about the Tesla electric cars). The 40-50 mile range is OK, but not for the price. 40K is really steep for people trying to save money. That and the base Tesla vehicle is only slightly more expensive and you get 160 mile range on battery. It's also a much faster car which is a bonus. Keep in mind that plugging these cars in at night to charge is going to be like running an additional drier or refrigerator, so your electric bill will go up. At 40-50 mile range, you'll likely need to plug in every night.
The exterior of this car sucks. The front looks like a new Malibu, which is fine, but the back end looks like a Honda Insight. Why?! The black back looks OK in this color, but they had some white Volts here and it looked atrocious on those. I remember seeing the concept style for this car a while back and it looked awesome, but they dropped that entirely.
The interior of this car is odd. The dashboard looks better than the typical GM vehicle, but look at those yellow/greenish color door panels. That "accent" piece is all over the interior and is childish and ugly. The only reason the interior doesn't suck is due to the nice GPS/LCD screen in the center console.
I don't know enough about the technology, but I'm really surprised there's no regenerative charging. I assume it's too expensive, but when you're running on a combustion engine, it seems like a waste to not charge the battery. On a related and relatively funny note, the car has an additional 12V battery used when starting it. :)
I'm hoping GM didn't put all their chips in for this car, as I don't think it's gonna be a hit. It may not be a miss, but it's just a foot in the electric door for GM, it's not going to lead the pack by any means when its competitors still beat it in a lot of categories and have been out for quite some time.
Geoff said about 1 hour later
Tesla is still a ways off. Production begins in 2012 for the $50k Model S...assuming it really even gets off the ground. So in fairness, I wouldn't compare the volt to the Tesla until they have a production vehicle on the road (and not the $100+ Roadster).
Having said that, the Volt will fail. It is far too expensive, and 40-50 mile range, which in most cases will be impossible to achieve unless under the optimal conditions, is pretty low. As I had said earlier when the Volt was really being pushed by GM, it would ONLY have a chance for success if gas was still above $4 gallon and rising. At $5/gallon, I think you could more than justify the costs to charge up the car for people with commutes like me where I'd should never have to fill the gas tank up going to work.
Since the climate has changed a bit, and gas is generally below $3/gallon, I think I'd rather own a Fusion Hybrid. For 27K, you get better styling, power, and really, a car that feels like a regular car...which just happens to get 40mpg on the highway. It is a practical sedan which gets killer gas mileage and just happens to be one of the best vehicles on the road today. Win win.
GJ said about 2 hours later
Marc, the car does have a regenerative mode--when in that mode, the car works like an AFX car (no joke). Accelerator on, car moves, accelerator off, car decelerates due to regenerative action on the drive train (and slows considerably).
Overall, the car might make sense for a specific kind of buyer--that is, the one who will use it primarily as a commuter car and stay within its electrical range for most of their driving. The car has an extremely complicated transmission--I'd be very concerned as to the longevity of this car for both that and the battery pack. That plus the price is likely going to keep this a novelty for at least a year or two. While I think Geoff's argument about the Fusion being a better car has a lot of weight, I'd add that I'm not sure the Volt offers enough to truly distinguish itself from the Prius, which gets better gas mileage, costs less, and has shown already to be fairly reliable.
It's definitely not going to "save" GM. I think the Cruze is a far better shot in the arm for GM, in my opinion.
Marc said about 2 hours later
The marketing guy certainly didn't know about the regenerative breaking and based on the article you showed me it does sound like a hidden and not too fun mode you can put the car in. I'm really surprised about the alternator though. Perhaps not enough power to give a decent charge back to the battery?
Geoff said about 8 hours later
I wonder, does this car have two batteries? One for power and the other for typical accessories, lighting, etc...? I would think if it has two, the alternator has enough on it's plate.
Marc said about 11 hours later
The marketing guy said the car has a typical 12V battery in addition to the rest of the batteries. He said it's used for just starting the car, then I assume the rest is taken over by the big batteries.
Steve said 2 days later
Styling - I really like the car. It looks sharp, especially in red. I've seen a lot of them on the road, and the red ones are sweet. Why does it look like an Insight? Same reason that the Insight looks like a Prius. Aerodynamics. That's the shape you're going to get used to seeing on cars aiming for top fuel economy.
Fuel economy - 34 mpg is not correct. 34 mpg is what you get when the engine is running. Not the average fuel economy for normal drivers. Lots of magazines have been testing these cars, and in combined electric only and electric plus gas, they average 60-90 mpg. That's in one days driving. Sure, on a cross country trip where you can't recharge, you only get 34 mpg. But if you plug in every night, you'll get much better. One mag drove the car very hard and averaged 60 mpg.
Price - price is reasonable. The car is a sizeable car, not the size of a Prius or Insight. It's also going to give you the fuel economy of a Prius, and then some. It's also the first plug in hybrid being put up for sale to the public.
Tesla - I'll beleive it when I see it, them coming out with a good car for $50K or less. Same goes for Fisker, I don't think we'll ever see their car show up. That said, I saw a Tesla roadster run up the drag strip today, and wow that thing took off fast! Something about instant peak torque. Still only ran a mid 15 second time, not sure if it just runs out of juice at higher speed or what.
I think the Volt is a good thing for GM. They don't claim it's going to be their savior. The Cruze, Malibu, Camaro, Buicks, trucks, etc are what keep the company going. The Volt is a great move in the right direction, and will help expand the plug in hybrid field. For all those talking smack about GM and the Volt, I sure hope you're not the ones that were complaining when GM took back all of the Impact electric cars.
I give props to GM for going out on a limb with this car. I hope it's successful for them.
Marc said 2 days later
I don't necessarily mind the shape of the vehicle, it's actually relatively normal shaped, especially compared to the Insight. But what the heck is the point of the random black trunk? The Insight has the same design, so I find it odd that GM decided to go that route unless there's some reason it's needed. I've always thought it was ugly on the Insight and it doesn't look any better on the Volt.
Perhaps GM didn't bring their 'A' game marketers, because they never mentioned anything about the combined MPG. They basically said 34 with the gas engine and infinite with the battery. Naturally telling me infinite is the fastest way for me to dismiss your claims. :) I guess you could blame me for not asking the right questions, but they should know 34 isn't exactly mind boggling, so throwing out numbers like 60-90 would be a good idea.
I don't think the price is necessarily unreasonable for what the car provides, but it's a catch-22. $40k is outside a lot of people's price range for a car. Even with the discount, $30k is outside the range IMO. The people who will want or need to save this money, may not be able to afford the monthly payments. Perhaps if they offered a nice low-price lease it would feasible, but I don't think GM is going to be able to do that.
Another note that I didn't mention is the life of these batteries. I asked the guy how long he thought the batteries would last and he said they can't give a definitive length since there's so many factors which determine battery life. That's a fair statement, but then I asked: "Well what happens if my batteries die 5 years after I bought the car" and he said they offer a 10 year/80,000 mile warranty which will include battery replacement. But if I drive my usual 15k miles a year, I'll hit that 80k in a little over 5 years, so it doesn't really solve my problem. I imagine those batteries are a several thousand dollar replacement, so that would have to be factored into the price savings too. I guess most people don't keep cars much longer than 5 years, so maybe it's not a big issue for most.
If it turns out that people really like the car and buy tons of it, I'm all for it, GM could use the money. But I think I'll wait for the next generation electric cars before I'll consider it.
Geoff said 2 days later
I agree with some things Steve said, I think it is a move in the right direction, and if what he says us true about MPG, that's not too shabby. I'd like to know what real world driving puts the battery charge at. I imagine something around 30 miles. I still think the practicality of these is a few years off in development, but you do have to start somewhere I guess. I still have my doubts about it's success in the marketplace unless gas skyrockets again or until they can get the cost of the vehicle down to a reasonable level.
Interesting to hear about the roadster. They claim 0-60 in 3.6 seconds...but a 15s 1/4 mile run tells me the batteries don't have enough juice in the high end or perhaps the gearing is off (or it weighs too much). I guess could be a number of things, but I was watching American Chopper a few weeks ago where they were trying to create the fastest battery powered drag bike (and they did break the world record running a mid 7 second in the 1/4mile). I know they were about a second and a half off on their first initial runs and weight was a huge factor. Also needed to adjust gearing so it may not JUST be a battery issue. Either way, 0-60 in 3.6 seconds is plenty freaking fast!
GJ said 3 days later
The Tesla, last I checked, is using a single gear. They've toyed with twin gears, but the torque band for an electric motor is nothing like a gas engine (read: it's way better) and so transmissions can be way less complicated. I think they may eventually go back to a two-speed in the Tesla, but you won't need anything like the four, five, six, seven speeds found on high performance gas engines due to their narrow power bands.
Yesterday, Google announced that their long-beta application Google Voice was now available for everybody (in the US) to use. So now most of you will ignore me because it's just Marc talking about another Google or Apple technology you really won't use. Hold back that urge.
So what are some cool things you can do with Voice? Here's a few:
Have one phone number (picked by you) for any area code in the United States. You don't have to even live there.
Any time someone calls this number, you have lots of options. Forward the call to one of your other phones, OR forward it to a bunch of phones and first one to pick up, wins.
Call screening. Want to know who's calling? Google Voice will take their name like a good secretary and let you know via your phone. Then you have the option to send them to voicemail or pick it up.
Did you miss the call? Dang. Well how about a transcribed e-mail of the voicemail they leave sent directly to your e-mail inbox. Would you prefer a text message instead? Your choice.
Want one phone number for your whole family, but want certain numbers forwarded to certain phones, or certain numbers just blocked out right? Voice can do that too.
This is really cool technology. For me, I've just setup a phone number in my area code, which now I can stop all the people complaining that they need to make long distance calls to reach my cell phone. But some of these other features look pretty cool too! It works with any phone too, but mobile phones have a couple more options than regular land lines.
Note this won't replace any phone service you currently pay for. This is just a nice way to share a phone number or manage your voicemail in a pretty cool way. I can't speak to how well the transcribed voicemails are, but from what I've heard they're pretty good.
GJ said 2 days later
Ok, even GJ is using this. So far, no complaints. Of course, I haven't really given out my awesome phone number yet.
About a week ago, I decided to give Windows 7 a shot by installed it on my iMac. Microsoft has the Release Candidate available for free here. So here's a rundown of what I think so far:
Windows 7 vs. Windows Vista
Consider Vista non-existent, or Windows Me 2.0. Vista is completely and utterly useless with the release of Windows 7. Everything is better about it. I'll explain in more details in the next sections, but essentially Windows 7 is what Vista should have been.
Windows 7 vs. Windows XP
This is a tougher call. I've been using Windows XP since the day it came out and Windows 7 reminds me a lot of the days when XP first came out. A brand new interface, very different from it's predecessor, maybe slower in some areas, but a lot faster in others. Either way, XP is on its way out whether you like it or not, but the good news is Windows 7 seems like with a service pack or two, it'll be much better than XP. To be fair, I'm only using a Release Candidate, so the final release may be even better.
User Interface
This is the biggest change for people moving from Windows XP. The graphics are all glossy and transparent, things animate cleanly and the operating system just gets a feeling of "next generation." For anyone familiar with Vista, it looks very similar, there's some minor differences with graphics, but overall it'll seem like the same user interface, only faster. The huge UI difference is the taskbar.
Windows Taskbar
This is a big change to how you'll use the operating system. Take a peak:
So take note, those icons without names are a combination of the Quick Launch toolbar and currently running applications. Every running application will only have one icon in the taskbar now, similar to the Mac OS X dock. When you hover over the icon, you can see the windows associated with that application (with live updates to the window contents). Some other things to note is the hovered icon in the image shows what looks like little separators on the side of the icon. That's to let you know it has multiple windows opened.
Some other neat features to this are built-in progress bars, so if you're downloading files or copying files from one directory to another, the background of the icon in the taskbar will show you the total progress of your operations. Another cool feature is right clicking on the icon will bring up a context sensitive menu full of options you can do with the application. For example, right clicking on Internet Explorer lets you go directly to your homepage, or go to a favorite of your choice. Right clicking on that second icon (which is Windows Explorer) gives you quick links to your most accessed folders and files as well as your My Documents folder.
This by far takes the longest to get used to, but things feel very natural as you're doing them and you certainly feel like Windows is finally helping you get things done a little quicker and easier.
Performance
Compared to XP, Windows 7 still isn't quite there with performance, but give it time. It doesn't feel slow, but supposedly Windows XP is getting higher scores on benchmarks. Granted, the benchmarks are usually written and tuned for released operating systems, so it may be biased at the moment. There's no comparison to Vista though, it blows the doors off Vista. For all you people who rebuild computers all the time (read: GJ and Geoff), you'll be happy to know Windows 7 installs much faster and finds drivers better than XP and Vista.
Gaming
Don't know, but Windows 7 supposedly has greatly increased the capabilities of backward compatbility support, even more so than Windows Vista and XP. So GJ, you may be able to run your DOSBOX games even easier on Windows 7.
Conclusion
Get it when it comes out. Sure Windows XP works fine, but I don't see why I wouldn't use Windows 7 from now on.
I forgot to mention, but User Account Control (UAC), which was introduced in Windows Vista, has been greatly scaled back in terms of being annoying. You used to see it trying to do basic operating system operations. Now it pretty much only shows up when copying files to system folders or installing a new program.
And finally, MS Paint has been updated. It's a huge update too, you can accomplish a lot of the basic functionality you can get out of Photoshop and GIMP, although I don't think there's any Layers, but it certainly gives you much more control of things you can do with it.
GJ said about 5 hours later
Thanks for the excellent write up...of course, the problem is, since XP64 is doing pretty much everything I need now, I'm not shelling out a hundred dollars or more for a shiny new interface--at least, not until they drop support for XP, which is still a ways out.
Does it handle memory and multi-core processors any differently than XP64? I'd be most interested in that--XP64 is a vast improvement over vanilla XP in that aspect, but I've found that a certain hardware suppliers are pretty much ignoring XP64 in terms of driver support (Hewlett Packard, I'm looking at you, mofo!).
Geoff said about 7 hours later
the fact that XP64 didn't support iTunes, is just plain insane. For that and that reason alone, I uninstalled it. No way I can design and listen to music through, god forbid, Windows Media Player.
Marc said about 10 hours later
In terms of memory and multi-core, I believe they've made both of those significantly better. So no more 3GB limitations on memory like you saw in XP. This time around Microsoft has really focused on making sure driver suppliers are ready for Windows 7. From what I've read and seen from my own experience installing this on an iMac, most of the drivers are there out of the box. I only had to reinstall a new audio driver, but that was it. My bluetooth keyboard and mouse worked during the install process, which has never happened and was much appreciated!
The XP64 iTunes support is Apple's fault. I'm not sure why they are so far behind on supporting that, but I agree, it's ridiculous. And don't look to Windows 7 for a much improved Windows Media Player, it still sucks.
GJ said about 10 hours later
The 3GB thing was fixed in xp64, btw.
Geoff said about 14 hours later
and Vista...I'm running 8 gigs.
GJ said about 19 hours later
8 Gigs is far more than most folks need. 2GB is all you need if you surf the web with lots of tabs open. Play games, you could get by with 2GB just fine. Run heavy apps? Might need 4GB. Rendering? Ok, now 8GB makes sense. App server? Keep going. :)
Marc said 1 day later
Yea, I knew Vista had the removal of the limit, but you're one of the few who uses it. :) Plus you can't really say 8GB since Vista probably wastes about 2G constantly.
Geoff said 1 day later
if not more.
Geoff said 6 days later
Hey Marc, how is the demo version of Windows 7? Should I wait for the final release? Is it fairly stable?
Marc said 6 days later
Demo version seems pretty stable, but I'd wait, it's only a month and a half until release I believe. The big reason to wait: There's no magic switch you can throw to convert to the final release. The only way out of the Windows 7 RC to final is to do a full reformat.
Google is releasing a new product called Wave soon and it looks to be a very interesting way to communicate on the web (Warning, this is a long video):
This certainly won't replace e-mail, but this will be a great tool to use for communicating in groups.
GJ said about 18 hours later
For those that use it, it will replace email. It looks kind of like a blackberry for the web. The key for me--does it work seamlessly with other users who do not use Wave? Can it interact with traditional email, IM, etc.? (I didn't watch much more than 20 min of this, so maybe they covered that).
Looks neat, but it's not definitely a home run--yet.
Marc said 1 day later
It doesn't look like it integrates with regular e-mail just yet. Integrating with regular IM is practically a given...they have a relatively extensive API, so you can bet that will be developed.
I can see this being extremely popular in the college scene. All of the team projects would benefit greatly from the threadlike e-mails and collaborative document editing.
GJ said 1 day later
It'll be popular with the Facebook crowd, too. :) Business crowd, I'm not sure if this will catch on or not. In order for it to be successful, it'll require a change to the mindset of the average business user in how they approach email. I don't see this necessarily reducing the amount of time people spend in email--and that's one thing that most folks want to see drop.
Remember when IBM's Deep Blue super computer took on chess champion Garry Kasparov and actually won? Well IBM Research is at it again, only this time the challenge is beyond ridiculous. Meet Watson:
I second that. If IBM can pull this off, AI takes a gigantic step forward. However, IBM will fail. I'd be willing to put money on that bet.
GJ said about 1 hour later
I think.
GJ said about 1 hour later
:)
Marc said about 1 hour later
I must say, I'd be extremely impressed. I'm hopeful, but also betting against them. Chess is a much, much simpler problem to solve.
Google Chrome posted by Marc on September 2, 2008 @ 3:29PM
Google today has released a beta of their own web browser based on the Webkit Rendering engine (The same one used by Apple's Safari). If you like a minimalistic and fast browser, this is it. Here's a screenshot from the website:
Feel free to post on any things you find that you like or dislike. I've already found a few, but remember it's in beta. One dislike so far:
Dislikes:
1.) Where the heck are my supposed imported bookmarks
2.) No support for XML/RSS. Lame.
Likes:
1.) Ridiculously fast. This even slaughters Safari.
2.) No status bar....or is there?! Hover over a link to see the behavior.
3.) Each tab is it's own process...no more rogue web apps taking down my browser. (Haven't had the experience with this yet, but if this doesn't appear to function, it will be moved to the dislikes :) )
GJ said 18 minutes later
Dislike: no apparent way to import my Google Toolbar bookmarks. Seriously, Google, WTF?
Like: way, way fast.
GJ said 19 minutes later
also, downloading on Firefox may not work with Marc's URL. Try this
GJ said 21 minutes later
Dammit, Baumblog doesn't seem to work with it. Just tried posting a link in the comment, like this one and it failed. Trying it again, just for kicks.
GJ said 24 minutes later
Never mind--apparently I managed to make a comment that broke the ability to edit said comment. Fixed the link, though.
GJ said 25 minutes later
that's funny--I added a comment, and the comment posted BELOW the comment box.
Marc said about 22 hours later
So who's still using it? Geoff dropped out last night, and I dropped it this morning. I had a crash, which moved my #3 like to the dislike section, as I predicted and my roommate set his default browser to be Chrome, which then ended up breaking Lotus Notes, which doesn't take much but is a deal breaker.
Also, as a side note, Chrome runs slow as ever on Windows Vista. But I'll blame Vista for now.
GJ said about 22 hours later
I'm still using it. It's sweet, other than the fact that it uses more memory that XP. :)
Blu-Ray Wins! posted by Geoff on February 15, 2008 @ 4:49PM
With the announcement from Walmart today that they will no longer carry HD-DVD hardware or software, the HD-DVD coffin has been nailed shut. I knew the end was fast approaching when I received an email from Netflix last week that they were phasing out HD-DVD over this coming year. Soon after, Best Buy endorsed Blu-ray, and now Walmart dropped it entirely.
Toshiba should be formally announcing the dismantling of HD-DVD in the coming weeks, putting to bed this useless war. Unfortunatly, I bought into the losing format. Not a total loss as it still makes my DVD's look extra crisp, but I will miss the HD content for the time being. Blu-ray still has some catching up to do in terms of performance, reliability, and price. While their counterpart has been eliminated, the true competitor, DVD, is still the predominate choice. Not surprisingly as the difference between the two is marginal, and that is coming from a big screen viewer.
On that note, stick with your DVD's for the time being.
"stick with your DVDs" no kidding. At the end of the day, I'm not certain Blu-Ray will win the war, either. Neither BR nor HDDVD ever did much of anything to the share of DVDs in the market, because for most people, DVDs are fine and will be for the foreseeable future. As Geoff and I have discussed many times, most people simply don't have room to stick five-foot wide TVs in their house, or don't want the TV to be the centerpiece of the house. Since the high-end formats only make a difference on the bigger screens, they've had "niche product" written all over them. Their manufacturers are guilty of assuming that customers would just keep buying bigger and bigger screens--something I think is bottoming out for most people under 44".
Steve said 1 day later
I agree with GJ. With the exception of disc capacity, blu-ray is not as attractive to me as HD-DVD. And who needs 50 GB for movies? I assume they don't use near that much space for a typical blu-ray movie.
Had they lowered the price of HD-DVD players back before I bought an upconverting DVD player, I would have bought an HD-DVD player.
That said, neither format put a dent in DVD sales, maybe a little ding, or a scratch - that's it. I would expect the war to continue, and I think some studios may regret selecting Blu-Ray as their high-def DVD format in the future, unless Sony drops the price of Blu-Ray players to match HD-DVD.
Web 2.0 won't work on my Vista phone without buying the AJAX at Best Buys. Duh!
Geoff said about 3 hours later
lol....I'm trying to install the Internet, dammit!
Marc said about 3 hours later
You're probably trying to install the Internet on your Vista. That won't work, you need to install it off the CD application onto your Apple Mac. You could probably do it through your USB on your Vista through the iPhone.
Geoff said about 5 hours later
Can I do it off my Vista phone? Also, is the Vista phone backwards compatible with Web 1.x versions and can I open the Internet through my email on the iPhone via the Vista phone using AJAX with Web 2.0?
As most of you know, I spent the wii hours of a Sunday morning outside of the Clifton Park Target store, hoping to land a Wii console on launch day. It was a spur of the moment decision made the previous afternoon. I figured the demand for the Wii would be less than the PS3 which was released a few days earlier. So, I showed up at 4:20 am and found maybe 30-35 people in line. Ouch...I was pretty sure that this target only had maybe 40 consoles based on some inventory numbers I stumbled across on Saturday. As it turned out, there was 40 people in front of me. Target had 42 consoles. Several folks that arrived just minutes after I did left without a console. Ouch.
Seven months later, it's no different. If you want a Wii, you are still waiting in line in the early morning hours (at least it's not November now) and you still have to be pretty lucky. Nintendo grossly underestimated the demand for this console. But, surprise, this isn't the point of my post--just the background.
The real point is, what do we think of ours? Is it ground-breaking? Was it worth the investment? Will it truly revolutionize the console world?
First, the numbers: Wii Console: $250. That gives you one Wiimote, and one Nunchuk. It supports up to four of each, and a Wiimote runs $40, a Nunchuk runs $20. Want component cables for your Wii, or even S-video? Fork over another $30. Rechargeable batteries for the Wiimotes (a must), plus a fast-charger: $35. Most every game released to date: $50. Holy crap I've spent a lot of dough on this thing. I won't bother to tell you how many games we've acquired. :)
Game Impressions: a few gems (Wii Sports, Wario, Raving Rabbids, Resident Evil 4), a few amusing ones (Big Brain Academy, Mario Party 8, Wii Play, Trauma Center, Excite Truck, Marvel Ultimate Alliance), and a few duds (Farcry, Tony Hawk). Not bad, but so far the third party games are far behind the Nintendo authored ones. If that doesn't get fixed soon, the Wii could go the way of the GameCube.
Did I mention that the GameCube compatibility is 100%? We are still playing (and buying) GameCube games. If you own a GameCube, the Wii is not a bad choice for an upgrade console.
Another benefit--the Wii is a great first-person-shooter console system. The Wiimote makes an excellent aiming device. If you love shooters on a PC, and don't much like console shooters, again, the Wii is for you.
Now for the bad news: graphics. Nope, it's not that the Wii can't do it--it's actually more powerful than the GameCube, but you'd never know it. Most of the games done to date wouldn't have pushed the GameCube CPU very hard. This is very disconcerting. One hopes it's only due to the fact that developers are still new to the system. It's definitely not the equal of either the 360 or PS3 in terms of raw horsepower, but it cannot appear to its owners that it isn't much better than an SNES.
Oh you forgot another dud game--Cooking Mama. What a stinker.
GJ said about 2 hours later
Geez, I had pretty much wiped that one from memory.
Geoff said about 7 hours later
So, you never told us...is it worth it?
GJ said 1 day later
It depends on what you're looking for. If you aren't bored of button mashing the same buttons on your respective Xbox or PS2 (because that's all your do on the 360 or ps3), and graphics mean a great deal to you, then the Wii isn't for you. If you are intrigued by the Wii's controls, or have a lot of GC titles on hand, it's a no-brainer if you can find one.
