64DD can't have multi-disc games...
Cryptic Bug
In article <3367E4...@mail.utexas.edu>, BWA <B...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> Just to note, since this discussion has turned to the 64DD...
> The 64DD is NOT capable of having multiple disc games... at least that
> was reported by Next-generation.com... Just thought that was
> interesting...
That is not 100% true. It IS true, that a Game on Disk alone cannot
be swapped, but a game with the engine on the cart, and just datafiles
on the disk, COULD use different disks. I almost wonder if that isn't
the reason some companies have shown interest in combinations. Also,
even if it STILL didn't let you swap, you COULD still turn it off,
replace the disk, and Turn it back on, but that's a load of bother.
The point is, if it's necessary, it is possible, but I doubt the
necessity.
--
Cryptic Bug
Cr...@vcn.bc.ca
Charles Miller Jr.
So we're back at square one with the N64. The good games that need more
than 64 meg of mem are going to cost shitloads whereas a CD would do the
trick for cheap.
Josh Boyd
> So we're back at square one with the N64. The good games that need more
> than 64 meg of mem are going to cost shitloads whereas a CD would do the
> trick for cheap.
Please tell me --- how many games, that don't need fmv or large digital
sound, take up 64 megs of space?
--
Are you bored? Do you wish you had fun and exciting people to spend
your
time with? Do you want some lively company that you can count on? Do
you want a magnetic personality? If so, then this is for you --- Just
call 1-800-borgs-4u --- Yes that's 1-800-borgs-4u.
And remember --- the borg is for you.
Josh
Tetsuo
"Charles Miller Jr." <cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>So we're back at square one with the N64. The good games that need more
>than 64 meg of mem are going to cost shitloads whereas a CD would do the
>trick for cheap.
Lemme guess..you're assuming that the carts will add to the price.
Well..not really. If the cart is going to only hold the game engine
and then the cart will only need to be like 8 or 16 megabits. So the
carts won't add much to the pice and the 64DD disks are pretty much as
cheap as CDs are.
Besides, CD'S AREN'T WRITEABLE, which is a trick CD-ROMs can not do
cheaply.
jyu
all media is writable, or else it wouldn't be a medium for data storage.
cdroms just aren't RE-writable like magnetic disks.
jy
Tetsuo <N.B...@bc.sympatico.ca> wrote in article
<5kovli$j64$1...@news.bctel.net>...
FranceSuX
and also, cds are really slow.
ohh yeah and star trek is communist propiganda....think about it
"enemies?? Hell, I've got friends like that"
Charles Miller Jr.
Um... I would guess FF7 falls in there. You really think all the full
color rendered backdrops take less than 64 meg? Keep dreaming.
Josh Boyd <jb...@mail.coos.or.us> wrote in article
<337006...@mail.coos.or.us>...
> > So we're back at square one with the N64. The good games that need
more
> > than 64 meg of mem are going to cost shitloads whereas a CD would do
the
> > trick for cheap.
>
Charles Miller Jr.
That is about stupid. Yes it would add to the cost and risk of makling the
game.
Cart + DD is WAY MORE THAN a CD would ever be. Plus Sony makes it easy for
a game that doesn't sell well not to kill the company. They buy them back.
So... lets see you can put a shitload up on fees and cost of materials OR
make cheap CDs and not have the risk of not selling them be so high....
Hey, guess that's why the THIRD PARTY is staying away from the N64
like.......
Buitron
Charles Miller Jr. <cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote in article
<01bc5b3a$9745dc20$3dcaae80@granite>...
with a cart disk combo. The price is high because of demand not just
because of ROM. Nintendo is still topping the game sales. The cart/disk
combo gives the N64 8 megs of memory, modem and the ability to write. You
can keep your 2x CD and your 2 megs. Most of the so called 3rd parties
have plans for the N64 anyway with more coming.
Kyle Knight
Buitron wrote in article <01bc5b9e$9883b4e0$6564a8c0@rbuitron>...
>With your cheap CD you have only one option. There are a lot more
options
>with a cart disk combo. The price is high because of demand not just
>because of ROM. Nintendo is still topping the game sales. The cart/disk
>combo gives the N64 8 megs of memory, modem and the ability to write.
You
>can keep your 2x CD and your 2 megs. Most of the so called 3rd parties
>have plans for the N64 anyway with more coming.
>
How many more options do you have with a cart-disc combo? Just
writeability.
The price is high because Nintendo needs to keep licensing fees high to
turn a profit, and because carts and discsare more expensive to manufacture
than CDs.
When you say Nintendo's topping game sales you mean the average N64 title
is outselling the average PSX title. But if you do the math ( avg copies
sold per title * # of titles ) the PSX is actually selling more games per
period than the N64. N64 games sell better because there are so few of
them, more gamers are willing to buy a mediocre title just to have a new
game.
The 2X CDs and 2 megs have a larger install base and are outselling N64s,
especially in Japan. that's not likely to change much with the 64DD (
remember, it's an accessory, not every N64 owner will buy it ).
Who are the "so called 3rd parties" with plans for the N64?
Matt Hayden
>So we're back at square one with the N64. The good games that need
>more than 64 meg of mem are going to cost shitloads whereas a CD would
>do the trick for cheap.
It's always been like that though. Nintendo screwed themselves over a
LONG time ago, its only lately its been showing... Even back in the
8-bit days where they were system supreme, they treated developers like
shit (ala Maniac Mansion fiasco). Now, N64 chooses carts... Why? Well,
they'll push to you that they wanted speed and reliability. That's BS...
They had no one to manufacture them among other things. Who's left?
Sega's bagged their manufacturer, Sony has its own system, and Matushita
is coming out with their own system. Plus, Nintendo wanted COMPLETE
control over the system, so using carts, they achieved this. Is a CD
better than a CART? Yes and no. Can a GREAT game be achieved on a CART?
Yes. Problem is, why would third-party developers want to deal with
Nintendo's shit, small storage space, and expensive media when they
could get 650MB for next to nothing? In the end, its not about which is
better, CD or CART, its about which the 3rd parties see as more of a
money maker... And I believe most of them have spoken.
-=Sponge=-
----------
Matt Hayden
mha...@poboxes.com
Charles Miller Jr.
> With your cheap CD you have only one option.
Yep... GREAT BIG HUGE GAMES compared to 64 meg games. Um... less save
space but that can be changed if ever felt like it with a bigger save game
card. I doubt they could get as big as the 24 meg DD save game space
though... Until the N64 becomes big time the third parties will stay away
from it because of N's licensenning "scam." It's not worth it when the PSX
can still sell great games for LOTS more PROFIT and LOTS LESS RISK. 2 megs
of what? The PSX has 4 megs of ram... how much does the N64 have? 4 megs?
Cool. Soon 8 but the games are only 64 meg so big woop. Third party will
come to the N64 once N figgures out this isn't the 1980's anymore.
c64
In article <01bc5abf$1354a8e0$136a...@fermat.berkeley.edu>, "jyu"
<ju...@uclink4.berkeley.edu> wrote:
CDs aren't written, they're pressed like records used to be. Music is
initially recorded digitally on tape, then written to a special disc which
acts as a mold for CDs.
c64
Buitron
> >With your cheap CD you have only one option. There are a lot more
> options
> >with a cart disk combo. The price is high because of demand not just
> >because of ROM. Nintendo is still topping the game sales. The
cart/disk
> >combo gives the N64 8 megs of memory, modem and the ability to write.
> You
> >can keep your 2x CD and your 2 megs. Most of the so called 3rd parties
> >have plans for the N64 anyway with more coming.
> >
> writeability.
No there is also speed. The small lack of space cart will eat a CD for
lunch when it comes to loading speed. Critical parts of a game that need
to be loaded quickly can be stored on the cart. The rest of the data can
be stored on the disk along with the writeablilty. The other options as I
mentioned 4 extra megs of ram for a total of 8 and a modem. Multiple disks
can be used if necessary. That is a lot more options than just
writeability.
> The price is high because Nintendo needs to keep licensing fees high to
> turn a profit, and because carts and discsare more expensive to
manufacture
> than CDs.
From what I have read today it looks like the N64 cartridge honeymoon is
over. N64 sales are dropping because of high price games and lack there
of. This will hopefully get N64 cart games in line with SNES games for a
better price. ROM is not the only factor for the high price. If the games
are good it won't matter if they are CD or not. I think that that has
already been proven.
>
> When you say Nintendo's topping game sales you mean the average N64 title
> is outselling the average PSX title. But if you do the math ( avg copies
> sold per title * # of titles ) the PSX is actually selling more games per
> period than the N64. N64 games sell better because there are so few of
> them, more gamers are willing to buy a mediocre title just to have a new
> game.
The quality of games is your opinion. I can say the same about the PSX
selection of games. Remember that the total sales of games is spread
across developers. The ones that took the chance and made an N64 cart are
making out like bandits.
> The 2X CDs and 2 megs have a larger install base and are outselling N64s,
> especially in Japan. that's not likely to change much with the 64DD (
> remember, it's an accessory, not every N64 owner will buy it ).
Well I don't live in Japan. And as far as the 64DD we will have to see.
If Nintendo price it right and the 64DD with the N64 costs the same or less
than what a new PSX cost when it first came out most people will probably
buy it.
> Who are the "so called 3rd parties" with plans for the N64?
Go look at either n64.com or n64hq.com. There was a survey of all
developers who were either had developed, developing, negotiating,
deciding, or not planning games for the N64. After reading what NG's had
to say I was under the impression that there were very little 3rd party
developers for the N64. What I found was the opposite.
>
>
>
Ookaze BioACobol
Le 08 May 1997 13:26:18 les sens d'Ookaze furent réveillés par Kyle Knight Ã
propos de "Re: 64DD can't have multi-disc games...":
> Buitron wrote in article <01bc5b9e$9883b4e0$6564a8c0@rbuitron>...
>
> >With your cheap CD you have only one option. There are a lot more
> options
> >with a cart disk combo. The price is high because of demand not just
> >because of ROM. Nintendo is still topping the game sales. The cart/disk
> >combo gives the N64 8 megs of memory, modem and the ability to write.
> You
> >can keep your 2x CD and your 2 megs. Most of the so called 3rd parties
> >have plans for the N64 anyway with more coming.
> >
> How many more options do you have with a cart-disc combo? Just
> writeability.
> The price is high because Nintendo needs to keep licensing fees high to
> turn a profit, and because carts and discsare more expensive to manufacture
> than CDs.
>
> When you say Nintendo's topping game sales you mean the average N64 title
> is outselling the average PSX title. But if you do the math ( avg copies
> sold per title * # of titles ) the PSX is actually selling more games per
> period than the N64. N64 games sell better because there are so few of
> them, more gamers are willing to buy a mediocre title just to have a new
> game.
Yes, PSX is selling more shit games that I would never even play.
All N64 games are at least good, that's a fact. There are 2 or 3 bad
games, but nobody even talks about them. If a company releases a bad game
for N64, they'll make such bad sales they'll never do it again.
I'm always amazed when people say there are more games on their system.
What I always searched was not a lot of games, as I won't buy them all.
I'll alaways buy the few, very few ones that are the best for me.
I'm also always delightful to see how people are scared of seeing another
system than theirs win the console fight. A lot of people say N64 is bad
and such things, but instead of leaving the N64 owners die with their
so-told dying system, they always criticise them. I think that in fact,
they are scared.
--
Ookaze
The Psychic Dragon Knight Deva
EMail : ook...@hol.fr WWW: http://massena.univ-mlv.fr/~pollion/
Amateur d'Anime, Amiga, Jeux de Roles et Jeux Video
Aan, Ookaze Igai No Otoko Ganchuu Ni Nai... kusu ^_-
Kyle Knight
Buitron wrote in article <01bc5c5d$f983a740$6564a8c0@rbuitron>...
>> How many more options do you have with a cart-disc combo? Just
>> writeability.
>
>No there is also speed. The small lack of space cart will eat a CD for
>lunch when it comes to loading speed. Critical parts of a game that need
>to be loaded quickly can be stored on the cart. The rest of the data can
>be stored on the disk along with the writeablilty. The other options as
I
>mentioned 4 extra megs of ram for a total of 8 and a modem. Multiple
disks
>can be used if necessary. That is a lot more options than just
>writeability.
>
Those aren't anything that the N64 can't do already. The cart's data
transfer rate is higher than the 64DD's will be, so the 64DD won't add
speed. It'll add storage but that's still not at the level of the CD. The
extra memory will improve performance, it'll make the N64 do better in the
things it could before, but it won't allow the N64 to do anything it
previously couldn't
>From what I have read today it looks like the N64 cartridge honeymoon is
>over. N64 sales are dropping because of high price games and lack there
>of. This will hopefully get N64 cart games in line with SNES games for a
>better price. ROM is not the only factor for the high price. If the
games
>are good it won't matter if they are CD or not. I think that that has
>already been proven.
>
I'm not arguing that the CD is a superior gaming media. Each has its
strengths and weaknesses.
>> When you say Nintendo's topping game sales you mean the average N64
title
>> is outselling the average PSX title. But if you do the math ( avg
copies
>> sold per title * # of titles ) the PSX is actually selling more games
per
>> period than the N64. N64 games sell better because there are so few of
>> them, more gamers are willing to buy a mediocre title just to have a
new
>> game.
>
>The quality of games is your opinion. I can say the same about the PSX
>selection of games. Remember that the total sales of games is spread
>across developers. The ones that took the chance and made an N64 cart
are
>making out like bandits.
>
IMO the percentage of good/bad games is the same on both systems. The PSX
definitely has more bad games than the N64, but then the number of good
games is accordingly greater. It's easier to spot a good game on the N64
because there are fewer games overall to evaluate.
>> The 2X CDs and 2 megs have a larger install base and are outselling
N64s,
>> especially in Japan. that's not likely to change much with the 64DD (
>> remember, it's an accessory, not every N64 owner will buy it ).
>
>Well I don't live in Japan. And as far as the 64DD we will have to see.
>If Nintendo price it right and the 64DD with the N64 costs the same or
less
>than what a new PSX cost when it first came out most people will probably
>buy it.
>
It will cost less than the PSX's launch price. Currently the N64 is $149
in the US and the yen equivalent of $139 in Japan ( I think ). It would be
very bad business for Nintendo to have the accessory ( 64DD ) cost as much
as the system itself. But the 64DD doesn't seem like the kind of accessory
that would increase N64 sales. Average consumers probably don't know the
specs on storage on carts and CDs, so the 64DD's storage capacity and
writeability won't really mean much to them.
>> Who are the "so called 3rd parties" with plans for the N64?
>
>Go look at either n64.com or n64hq.com. There was a survey of all
>developers who were either had developed, developing, negotiating,
>deciding, or not planning games for the N64. After reading what NG's had
>to say I was under the impression that there were very little 3rd party
>developers for the N64. What I found was the opposite.
>
I'm not arguing that there are third parties developing for the N64. What
I will argue is that there are many more third parties developing for Sony
than for Nintendo.
Warhawk
c64 <a...@an.com> wrote in article
<any-080597...@ppp950.on.sympatico.ca>...
> CDs aren't written, they're pressed like records used to be. Music is
> initially recorded digitally on tape, then written to a special disc
which
> acts as a mold for CDs.
So I guess my CD-R sitting on my desk here really DOESN'T
write stuff to the disc huh? Wonder how all that data gets
on there.
WTF does it matter if its written, pressed, or some little dinosaur
lives inside the drive and chips the data in with a hammer and
a spike ala "The Flintstones"? The data gets on the CD.
Now of course right now CD-R Drives are not cheap and are not
especially suited for console games. (DVD might be though, if
it really is re-writable like they say)
--
Allen Dickerson
exarch at ix.netcom.com
Scott Zissell
> "Most of them have spoken"? What are you talking about? Square is the ONLY
> company that has said they aren't going to work with carts. As we've seen in
> the past, companies often say they no longer want to develop for cart-based
> systems, but then totally flip-flop. Electronic Arts said that they would
> absolutely not develop for the N64 until a CD accessory was available, but
> they changed positions only a few months after the system was released.
> Nintendo has over 2 dozen developers currently working on or publishing N64
> games, with more all the time. 3D0 and Atari are even developing games for
> the N64, so don't feed us a bunch of bull about how all 3rd parties are
> developing for the Playstation.
I've recently been trying to find a job as a system programmer for a game company
and I've found that the majority of manufacturers prefer the N64 because its
easier to program for and its 3D engine has fewer documented bugs (ie the famous
Playstation texture mapping problem). The only problem is that carts are much
more expensive and hold less than CDs, but Nintendo is supposed to release some
sort of media similar to an Iomega Zip disk that is less expensive and holds near
CD capacity.
-DarkShadow
Jesse Dorland
>It's always been like that though. Nintendo screwed themselves over a
>LONG time ago, its only lately its been showing... Even back in the
>8-bit days where they were system supreme, they treated developers like
>shit (ala Maniac Mansion fiasco). Now, N64 chooses carts... Why? Well,
Maniac Mansion fiasco?
>they'll push to you that they wanted speed and reliability. That's BS...
No, it's not. If they were obviously false reasons, then I would accept your
comment, but carts ARE many times faster, and they don't skip if you get a
speck of dust on them.
>They had no one to manufacture them among other things. Who's left?
>Sega's bagged their manufacturer, Sony has its own system, and Matushita
>is coming out with their own system. Plus, Nintendo wanted COMPLETE
>control over the system, so using carts, they achieved this. Is a CD
This whole conspiracy theory is just silly. Nintendo made their reasons for
choosing a cart-based system very clear, and they are valid reasons. Please
explain the "complete control" they have over the system. It makes no sense.
Game developers have to have some cash to spend on the more expensive carts,
but obviously it's not as hard as it's cracked up to be. Acclaim produced
tens of thousands of copies of Turok, and they were inches away from
bankruptcy. No major game developer would have any problem producing carts.
True, Nintendo does have to approve games for them to receive the Seal of
Quality, but so does Sony, and if anything, Sony is more rigid about approving
games. Try getting a 2 dimensional game approved for sale on the Playstation.
It isn't easy.
>better than a CART? Yes and no. Can a GREAT game be achieved on a CART?
>Yes. Problem is, why would third-party developers want to deal with
>Nintendo's shit, small storage space, and expensive media when they
>could get 650MB for next to nothing? In the end, its not about which is
>better, CD or CART, its about which the 3rd parties see as more of a
>money maker... And I believe most of them have spoken.
>
"Most of them have spoken"? What are you talking about? Square is the ONLY
company that has said they aren't going to work with carts. As we've seen in
the past, companies often say they no longer want to develop for cart-based
systems, but then totally flip-flop. Electronic Arts said that they would
absolutely not develop for the N64 until a CD accessory was available, but
they changed positions only a few months after the system was released.
Nintendo has over 2 dozen developers currently working on or publishing N64
games, with more all the time. 3D0 and Atari are even developing games for
the N64, so don't feed us a bunch of bull about how all 3rd parties are
developing for the Playstation.
-Jesse
>
>-=Sponge=-
>
>
>----------
>Matt Hayden
>mha...@poboxes.com
>
====================================
Very funny Scotty!
Now beam down my clothes!
====================================
GOOSE
The 64DD is SOOOOO Far off ....earliest Spring 98 but most probably will
be released XMAS 98 to coincide with MARIO 64 Part 2....
64DD IMO is a bad idea......splits the market....
-GOOSE
Marc Morrisette
On 9 May 1997, Warhawk wrote:
> Date: 9 May 1997 06:07:48 GMT
> From: Warhawk <si...@darkside.force.com>
> Reply-To: Warhawk <sendme...@nospam.4me>
> Newsgroups: rec.games.video.nintendo, rec.games.video.sega,
> rec.games.video.sony
> Subject: Re: 64DD can't have multi-disc games...
Actually, you can write to the CD with a laser, which is what the CD-R's
do. But it is a lot more expensive and takes a lot longer than the mold
process. The molds are used for mass production of CD's, but that doesn't
mean you can't burn them with a laser...
Marc Morrisette
DVD isn't any different from CD except for the color of the laser. CD
uses red, DVD uses blue. DVD writable drives aren't even out yet (at
least at a price anybody could actually afford).
Bjørnar Bolsøy
Josh Boyd <jb...@mail.coos.or.us> wrote:
> Please tell me --- how many games, that don't need fmv or large digital
> sound, take up 64 megs of space?
Practically every decent title released for the PC is >50mb
these days. It's easy.
Regards.
Matt Hayden
>and I've found that the majority of manufacturers prefer the N64
>because its easier to program for and its 3D engine has fewer
>documented bugs (ie the famous Playstation texture mapping problem).
>The only problem is that carts are much more expensive and hold less
>than CDs, but Nintendo is supposed to release some
>sort of media similar to an Iomega Zip disk that is less expensive and
>holds near CD capacity.
While the developers may prefer the system of Nintendo64 to develop on,
they are going with what will make them money... The PSX... They can
make em cheap, and sell alot, and thats what they are in the business
for. As for the 64 Disk Drive, it still barely holds 1/10 of what a CD
can hold... A MAJOR mistake on Nintendo's part IMHO. This is supposed to
get the third parties back, but its just not gonna sell... The people
who are not happy with the system right now aren't going to shell out
another $100 for an accessory that MIGHT make it better.
Jesse Dorland
>With your cheap CD you have only one option. There are a lot more options
>with a cart disk combo. The price is high because of demand not just
>because of ROM. Nintendo is still topping the game sales. The cart/disk
>combo gives the N64 8 megs of memory, modem and the ability to write. You
>can keep your 2x CD and your 2 megs. Most of the so called 3rd parties
>have plans for the N64 anyway with more coming.
>
The PSX has 3 megs of memory: 2MB main RAM, and 1MB video RAM. But that still
can't compare to the 8 megs the N64 will have once the 64DD arrives. And the
N64's memory isn't divided like most other systems. If, for example, a
devloper only needs 1/2 a megabyte of video memory in a particular game, they
can use a half meg and have 3.5 megs left over as main RAM. If they need 2
megs, they can use 2 megs specifically, and use the other 2 or 6 megs as main
memory.
On to other things... You're right, there are a LOT of 3rd parties developing
for the N64. The reason you don't see games from them is that they are still
in development. The Nintendo 64 hasn't been out for long enough for every 3rd
party developer to finish games for the system. But that doesn't mean they're
not there. Most major console game developers and publishers (Capcom, Konami,
Acclaim, Nintendo [of course], Midway/Williams, Virgin, Kemco, Seta, Enix,
etc.) have games in the works. 3D0 and Atari, once arch rivals of the Big N,
are even developing games for the system. Atari's first N64 arcade
conversion, Wayne Gretzky's 3D Hockey, is already out (published by Williams,
who now owns Atari), and San Francisco Rush is coming out this fall.
-Jesse
Matt Hayden
>> Now of course right now CD-R Drives are not cheap and are not
>> especially suited for console games. (DVD might be though, if
>> it really is re-writable like they say)
Oh! So $400 CD-Recorders aren't suitable for console games, but DVD
drives that will probably debut at $1000+ in 2 years will be?
Cryptic Bug
In article <5l0hk5$afr$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>,
"Kyle Knight" <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote:
> Those aren't anything that the N64 can't do already. The cart's
> data transfer rate is higher than the 64DD's will be, so the 64DD
> won't add speed. It'll add storage but that's still not at the
> level of the CD. The extra memory will improve performance, it'll
> make the N64 do better in the things it could before, but it won't
Well, I don't know about a Cart/Disk Combo being so special, except
for the maximum storage is greater, and not much more expensive (Maybe
even less than a 12mb Cart for an 8mbCart+Disk?), and of course the
virtually Nil loading times, but the 64DD's features add a LOT of
Things N64 can't do, or do very well. First is music. The Quality's
been bashed before, but I think it's fine. it IS too repetitive and
"similar" (Not too many instruments). The 64DD is supposed to conme
with a chip that, among other things, containes more midi samples, and
the extra space means longer music. 4MB RAM will help a LOT. More
detail in the textures, more texture variety, more/better SFX and
Voice, more animations, etc., basically more of everything. While N64
currently has the capability, more space and RAM will Help enormously,
even if it doesn't show in the first few games. Writability Obviously
has many possibilities NO other (current) console, including N64 can
do. BTW, did you read the new specs? Though all COULD be ROM in all
cases, first, only 20mb was going to be writable, with 44 ROM, then it
was an even 32/32 split, and Now 38mb is going to be writable. I
wonder if it changes any more before the release? Also, obviously a
Modem adds capabilities N64 doesn't currently have.
--
Cryptic Bug
Cr...@vcn.bc.ca
Cryptic Bug
In article <01bc5b3a$9745dc20$3dcaae80@granite>,
"Charles Miller Jr." <cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
> Hey, guess that's why the THIRD PARTY is staying away from the N64
> like.......
games are from Third Parties. Have you looked at the Japanese
developer list on N64hq.com? That's not even all developers, just
those polled, and doesn't include any American Developers (is there
more? Factor-5 in Germany I guess). There's plenty of Third Party
developers. There will never be as many as Sony has, for the reasons
you mentioned, but there will also never be as many crap games (mainly
because there will never be as many games).
--
Cryptic Bug
Cr...@vcn.bc.ca
Kyle Knight
Cryptic Bug wrote in article ...
>Well, I don't know about a Cart/Disk Combo being so special, except
>for the maximum storage is greater, and not much more expensive (Maybe
>even less than a 12mb Cart for an 8mbCart+Disk?), and of course the
>virtually Nil loading times, but the 64DD's features add a LOT of
>Things N64 can't do, or do very well. First is music. The Quality's
>been bashed before, but I think it's fine. it IS too repetitive and
>"similar" (Not too many instruments). The 64DD is supposed to conme
>with a chip that, among other things, containes more midi samples, and
>the extra space means longer music. 4MB RAM will help a LOT. More
>detail in the textures, more texture variety, more/better SFX and
>Voice, more animations, etc., basically more of everything. While N64
>currently has the capability, more space and RAM will Help enormously,
>even if it doesn't show in the first few games. Writability Obviously
>has many possibilities NO other (current) console, including N64 can
>do. BTW, did you read the new specs? Though all COULD be ROM in all
>cases, first, only 20mb was going to be writable, with 44 ROM, then it
>was an even 32/32 split, and Now 38mb is going to be writable. I
>wonder if it changes any more before the release? Also, obviously a
>Modem adds capabilities N64 doesn't currently have.
>--
> Cryptic Bug
> Cr...@vcn.bc.ca
No doubt the extra RAM will allow for more/better of everything. The extra
storage can be used to hold more/better/longer music selections, but that's
related to storage capabilities and not really a hardware issue.
Writeability is the only completely new factor in the 64DD. The modem will
present a new set of logistical nightmares for Nintendo. My guess is that
since the 64DD is an add-on, less than half ( and that's a fairly liberal
assessment ) of N64 owners will go for it. Out of those people Nintendo
has to figure out how many percent will get the modem ( assuming it's not
packed in, but I think it would be a mistake to introduce them as two
separate add-ons ). Then Nintendo has to decide how users will connect and
what they will connect to, whether Nintendo will have some sort of N64
network or not.
Matt Hayden
>I'm always amazed when people say there are more games on their system.
>What I always searched was not a lot of games, as I won't buy them all.
>I'll alaways buy the few, very few ones that are the best for me.
>I'm also always delightful to see how people are scared of seeing
>another system than theirs win the console fight. A lot of people say
>N64 is bad and such things, but instead of leaving the N64 owners die
>with their so-told dying system, they always criticise them. I think
>that in fact, they are scared.
Or maybe it is that N64 owners like yourself feel insecure and think
they made the wrong choice, and now have to hype their system? Take it
from an N64 owner, it is not a good system... YET. I mean, a good system
has to have games, and the N64 just doesn't have them. I mean... Its
been 8 months... I want to play an RPG: Can't. I want to play a baseball
game: Can't. I want to play a football game: Can't. The list goes on...
The reason I said YET because the 64DD has yet to appear. What I mean by
"yet to appear" is that Nintendo needs to get a SOLID 50-60 games out
BEFORE the 64DD is released. With 2-3 games in every genre, at least 2
being great. I know it seems difficult, but for Nintendo to be
succesful, with the Nintendo64 and 64DD, they need to do this.
Jesse Dorland
>Yep... GREAT BIG HUGE GAMES compared to 64 meg games. Um... less save
>space but that can be changed if ever felt like it with a bigger save game
>card. I doubt they could get as big as the 24 meg DD save game space
>though... Until the N64 becomes big time the third parties will stay away
>from it because of N's licensenning "scam." It's not worth it when the PSX
>can still sell great games for LOTS more PROFIT and LOTS LESS RISK. 2 megs
>of what? The PSX has 4 megs of ram... how much does the N64 have? 4 megs?
The PSX does not have 4 megs of RAM. It has 2 megabytes of main memory, and 1
megabyte of video memory. 2 + 1 = 3. Better brush up on your PSX specs.
> Cool. Soon 8 but the games are only 64 meg so big woop. Third party will
>come to the N64 once N figgures out this isn't the 1980's anymore.
>
You are forgetting that the Nintendo 64 was designed to live without
gig-consuming Full Motion Video. Real-time animations of comparable quality
to FMV cutscenes with 100,000+ polygons per second are no problem for the N64,
and they are dozens of times smaller than the MPEG video used on the
Playstation. Add to that the massive amounts of compression used on N64 carts
already, and it's easy to see how the 64DD can hold as much content as a CD.
Andrew Ariens
On 10 May 1997 02:40:53 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy" <bol...@online.no>
wrote:
> Practically every decent title released for the PC is >50mb
> these days. It's easy.
Hell, Quake is what, 70 megs? No FMV (Though I kind of wish I had a
nice cutscene to watch instead of sitting there reading the text every
time I finish an episode)
Andrew Ariens
On 09 May 1997 01:31:27 GMT, Ookaze BioACobol <ook...@hol.fr> wrote:
>Yes, PSX is selling more shit games that I would never even play.
>All N64 games are at least good, that's a fact.
Wrong! That's an opinion, NOT a fact.
Unbeliever
if I offended anyone, I am just trying to be funny.
Matt Hayden
>Hey, I guess SO! Have you looked at a release list? Most of the
>games are from Third Parties. Have you looked at the Japanese
>developer list on N64hq.com? That's not even all developers, just
>those polled, and doesn't include any American Developers (is there
>more? Factor-5 in Germany I guess). There's plenty of Third Party
>developers. There will never be as many as Sony has, for the reasons
>you mentioned, but there will also never be as many crap games (mainly
>because there will never be as many games).
Truth is, Nintendo DOES NOT have enough 3rd party developers. If they
did, I think we'd have more than 12 US Games right now...
Kyle Knight
Ookaze BioACobol wrote in article <5l0gd1$2i6$2...@news3.isdnet.net>...
>
>Yes, PSX is selling more shit games that I would never even play.
>All N64 games are at least good, that's a fact. There are 2 or 3 bad
>games, but nobody even talks about them. If a company releases a bad game
>for N64, they'll make such bad sales they'll never do it again.
>I'm always amazed when people say there are more games on their system.
>What I always searched was not a lot of games, as I won't buy them all.
>I'll alaways buy the few, very few ones that are the best for me.
>
You say that all N64 games are at least good, and then turn around and say
that there are 2 or 3 bad games. The truth is even bad games sell well for
the N64, just because there are so few games to choose from. That's why
Mr. Lincoln can sit behind the sales figures for Cruisin'USA and say that
the figures show it's a good game, while the game is almost universally
dumped on.
>I'm also always delightful to see how people are scared of seeing another
>system than theirs win the console fight. A lot of people say N64 is bad
>and such things, but instead of leaving the N64 owners die with their
>so-told dying system, they always criticise them. I think that in fact,
>they are scared.
>
When did I criticise the N64 or their owners? I am a N64 owner. I believe
that Nintendo made several mistakes in the launch and support of the N64
but that they are still a major force in the business.
Kyle Knight
2megs + 1 meg vram
Pat Chaney wrote in article <338029b5...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>
>
>--
>Pat <p...@pchaney.demon.co.uk>
>PGP key available
>
Troy Davis
Whoever suggests Nintendo to go with DVD's is an ASSHOLE!!
Matt Hayden
>>It's always been like that though. Nintendo screwed themselves over a
>>LONG time ago, its only lately its been showing... Even back in the
>>8-bit days where they were system supreme, they treated developers
>>like shit (ala Maniac Mansion fiasco). Now, N64 chooses carts... Why?
>>Well,
>Maniac Mansion fiasco?
Check out this URL: http://www.communities.com/paper/maniac.html
Maybe not so unlike they treated Square?
>>they'll push to you that they wanted speed and reliability. That's
>>BS...
>No, it's not. If they were obviously false reasons, then I would
>accept your comment, but carts ARE many times faster, and they don't
>skip if you get a speck of dust on them.
People... Research this a little bit... Carts are NOT THAT MUCH FASTER
THAN CD'S... Nintendo throws in an 8X CDROM drive, and they've almost
got the same amount of speed...
>>They had no one to manufacture them among other things. Who's left?
>>Sega's bagged their manufacturer, Sony has its own system, and
>>Matushita is coming out with their own system. Plus, Nintendo wanted
>>COMPLETE control over the system, so using carts, they achieved this.
>This whole conspiracy theory is just silly. Nintendo made their
>reasons for choosing a cart-based system very clear, and they are valid
>reasons.
A little bit more speed is a valid reason for not choosing 500 more
megabytes of space? Maybe you should start forming your own opinions
instead of the shit Papa Nintendo feeds you. Hell, this is the same
Nintendo who claimed that Cruis'n USA was a great game because it sold
so well.
>Please explain the "complete control" they have over the system. It
>makes no sense.
It makes perfect sense. Nintendo invested millions of dollars in cart
manufacturing plants... What happened is, Nintendo has been around since
the 8-bit days... Making carts for NES, Gameboy, SNES, etc... Now that
the Next Generation machines come along, and CD is the new medium, what
is Nintendo supposed to do with their Cart Manufacturing Plants that
they've invested so much in? Sega had a tough time dropping theirs, but
it wasn't AS dificult as they only had one cart-only system that they
started to develop CD's for near its death. And Sony didn't lose any
money at all going with CD's, because this is their first console
machine, they never had any cart manufacturers. Its pretty obvious if
you look at it.
>Game developers have to have some cash to spend on the more expensive
>carts, but obviously it's not as hard as it's cracked up to be.
>Acclaim produced tens of thousands of copies of Turok, and they were
>inches away from bankruptcy. No major game developer would have any
>problem producing carts.
But do you realize that if Turok hadn't been good, Acclaim WOULD have
gone bankrupt? They took a MAJOR risk and it payed off. Not many
companies want to take those kinds of risks. Yes, if you make a great
game for the N64, it will sell well, but if you happen to make a game
that doesn't sell that well, you stand to lose alot of money, alot more
than you would if it was on the PSX market. So with that in mind,
developers are scared to take risks, thats why we keep getting the
rehashed titles (Mario, Doom-Clones, etc...) Rare went out on a limb
with Blast Corps, and it payed off. They are an exception.
>>better than a CART? Yes and no. Can a GREAT game be achieved on a
CART?
>>Yes. Problem is, why would third-party developers want to deal with
>>Nintendo's shit, small storage space, and expensive media when they
>>could get 650MB for next to nothing? In the end, its not about which
>>is better, CD or CART, its about which the 3rd parties see as more of
>>a money maker... And I believe most of them have spoken.
>"Most of them have spoken"? What are you talking about? Square is the
>ONLY company that has said they aren't going to work with carts. As
>we've seen in the past, companies often say they no longer want to
>develop for cart-based systems, but then totally flip-flop. Electronic
>Arts said that they would absolutely not develop for the N64 until a CD
>accessory was available, but they changed positions only a few months
>after the system was released.
"Most as them have spoken." I am referring to the developers... Look at
the Playstation's lineup of 3rd-Party titles and look at Nintendo's...
Nintendo64 has been out for 9 months and it has 5-6 third party US
games, most of which are made by Acclaim and Midway... Yes, SQUARE is
the only company that has said they WILL NOT develop for carts... The
only ones that have "SAID" it... I mean, look at the titles out and in
development, a whole bunch of developers have DONE it without SAYING it.
As for Electronic Arts, you act as though that EA just had a change of
heart, no one has ANY idea of what Nintendo offered EA... Most likely
alot.
>Nintendo has over 2 dozen developers currently working on or publishing
>N64 games, with more all the time. 3D0 and Atari are even developing
>games for the N64, so don't feed us a bunch of bull about how all 3rd
>parties are developing for the Playstation.
Two dozen? That's stretching it to say the least. But even then, those
companies are only making 1 maybe 2 games that they KNOW will sell...
None are taking the risks that make such a great game. As for 3rd
parties developing for Playstation, its not a bunch of bull. All you
have to do is look at the 3rd party titles for Nintendo64, and then look
at the 3rd party titles for the Playstation, I think its pretty obvious
which platform developers like more.
BOTTOM LINE: With carts, developers cant take risks... The stand to lose
a LOT more money if their N64 game bombs then if their PSX game bombs.
Simple as that.
----------
Matt Hayden
mha...@poboxes.com
Troy Davis
We do have more than 12 US games stupid ass!!! And there are enough 3rd
Party developers. Its just that they got their Dvelopment Kits 6 Months
before the release of the system. Thats why that many games are not out
yet.
Jedi
> Whoever suggests Nintendo to go with DVD's is an ASSHOLE!!
Why?
Wingman
I think the 64DD is time for developers to get as far away from Nintendo as
they can. I see it as Nintendo's idea to control them. With CD's, developers
can order as many as they want every time they want to manufacture more games.
With 64DD cartridges, availability is controlled by Nintendo. It would be
easier for Nintendo to make their famous "artificial shortages" with the
64DD...
Andrew Ariens
On 11 May 1997 19:51:24 GMT, mha...@poboxes.com (Matt Hayden) wrote:
>>Maniac Mansion fiasco?
>
>Check out this URL: http://www.communities.com/paper/maniac.html
This is very interesting reading. I can't believe Nintendo did all
that crap. I remember them getting rid of some of the fatalaties in
MK1, and all the Nazi references in Wolfenstein, but I had no idea
that they were so damn picky with Maniac Mansion. Jeez, they got all
worried about them using the "SCUMM" acronym next to NES.
And what's funny is that they got all worked up about some of the
dialogue, but they had nothing to say about putting a live hamster in
the microwave? Sheez!
Kyle Knight
This IS interesting. Can anyone confirm or deny this? Nintendo certainly
has some ambiguous standards of what is appropraite and what is not.
Andrew Ariens wrote in article <337d58c0...@news.aiinc.com>...
Kian Maleki
This was very interesting.
Of course, I also find it interesting that they let them tie sandy down
on a platform, blow up a hamster, etc.
I'm glad that "Zack McKracken and the Alien MindBenders" was never
released for the nintendo.
You mutilate an egg AND flood a bathroom. Not to mention talk to people
with turbans.
Reeves
Josh Boyd
> Truth is, Nintendo DOES NOT have enough 3rd party developers. If they
Programming on the N64 is -supposedly- harder than on the PSX --- so it
takes longer for the 3rd parties to catch on to what they're doing...
(So, I would say that it should take longer for them to make games at
the start --- and that the production speed will increase as time goes
on and they figure out tricks of the trade...)
--
Are you bored? Do you wish you had fun and exciting people to spend
your
time with? Do you want some lively company that you can count on? Do
you want a magnetic personality? If so, then this is for you --- Just
call 1-800-borgs-4u --- Yes that's 1-800-borgs-4u.
And remember --- the borg is for you.
Josh
Josh Boyd
> >So we're back at square one with the N64. The good games that need
> >more than 64 meg of mem are going to cost shitloads whereas a CD would
> >do the trick for cheap.
I'll say it again... How many games, that don't need FMV or digital
music, require 64 megs of memory? (Hardly any...)
ItsaMePete
In article <01bc5e52$3a195840$ddb75c90@gabe>, "Jedi"
<gjl...@students.wisc.edu> writes:
>> Whoever suggests Nintendo to go with DVD's is an ASSHOLE!!
>
>Why?
>
>
Because to have a DVD would make the N64 cost several hundered dollars
more.
Kyle Knight
I don't suck, I'm cooleticly challenged wrote in article <01bc5f42$a41bd920
$121535cf@default>...
>
>> Carts ARE many times faster, and they don't skip if you get a
>> speck of dust on them.
A cart operates as about a 10X speed CD-ROM, under optimal conditions.
CDs don't skip if you get a speck of dust on them. In fact, you'd have to
do some major reworking of the surface area to get it to skip.
Aristophanes
In article <5l5i0s$k...@news.infoserve.net>, win...@infoserve.net
(Wingman) wrote:
But Nintendo has been a quality control freak forever and that is a key
part of their success. 64DD ofers far better gameplay options and
versatility than the clumsy, read-only CD-ROM format and the far too
expensive DVD setup. Also, there is an indication that Nintendo will not
control the 64DD format, much like Zip disks are made by others. Remember:
Nintendo itself raised the issue of downloading games from the Internet or
dedicated Nitendo servers directly onto the disks for play, including bug
fixes and new levels etc. That's a whole lot more versatile than a CD
system which is slow. The ability to also use the cartridge as a base for
the game and the diskettes for levels and the like is a killer combo. The
diskettes act like a micro-storage system and bulk code holder while the
cartridges are like the RAM pre-loaded with a massive amount of
performance engines with amazingly fast load times and reload performance.
Either way the 64DD add-on is a way to add many features and still keep
the price way down while the speed and quality stays high. Those 64DD and
cartridge transfer rates are as important as the 64-bit processor.
Cheers.
Sean Christian Daugherty
On 09 May 1997 01:31:27 GMT, Ookaze BioACobol <ook...@hol.fr> wrote:
>Yes, PSX is selling more shit games that I would never even play.
Eh. Your point? There were more than a good deal of stinkers for the SNES. Can
anyone say "7th Saga"? Howzabout "Final Fantasy Mystic Quest"? <G>
>All N64 games are at least good, that's a fact.
Umm... No, it isn't. It's an opinion. Even if the whole damned world agreed with
you, save one person living in a dung-encrusted shack in the Amazon River basin,
it will *still* be an opinion.
> There are 2 or 3 bad games, but nobody even talks about them.
Haven't you just contradicted yourself? "All N64 games are good", yet there are
"2 or 3 bad games"?
> If a company releases a bad game for N64, they'll make such bad sales
> they'll never do it again.
Ahhh... Never overestimate the intelligence of the buying public. N64, as its
selection grows, will have an equal number of shitty games as any other system.
>I'm always amazed when people say there are more games on their system.
>What I always searched was not a lot of games, as I won't buy them all.
>I'll alaways buy the few, very few ones that are the best for me.
Right, and by virtue of *having* more games, the PSX has more *good* games. Will
this change? Possibly. Probably, even. But those are the facts as they stand
now, and, truth be told, I don't like *any* games currently available for the
N64 (I disliked Mario 64 with a vengeance, before anyone asks. Give Super Mario
Bros. 3 anyday <G>)
>I'm also always delightful to see how people are scared of seeing another
>system than theirs win the console fight. A lot of people say N64 is bad
>and such things, but instead of leaving the N64 owners die with their
>so-told dying system, they always criticise them. I think that in fact,
>they are scared.
Very possibly. Of course, it's also possible that, since there is a relative
dearth of N64 games, many owners (such as myself) feel cheated for having bought
a supposedly superior system with so few games after so long. If I realized what
kind of mess things would be in now, I wouldn't have bought the N64 to begin
with. I really, really don't like having to wait a year for a game I like to
come out.
------
Sean Christian Daugherty
"I met a girl who sang the blues;
And I asked her for some happy news
But she just smiled and turned away..."
- Don McLean, "American Pie"
ALL UNSOLICITED E-MAILERS WILL BE SHOT ON SITE!
Sean Christian Daugherty
On 10 May 1997 11:04:01 -0700, jessed...@hotmail.com (Jesse Dorland) wrote:
>3D0 and Atari, once arch rivals of the Big N,
>are even developing games for the system. Atari's first N64 arcade
>conversion, Wayne Gretzky's 3D Hockey, is already out (published by Williams,
>who now owns Atari), and San Francisco Rush is coming out this fall.
Actaully, it should be pointed out that in a recent magazine, Sega is supposedly
working on some kind of crossplatform game (for the N64 and PSX). Food for
thought, I suppose.
Sean Christian Daugherty
On Sun, 11 May 1997 03:55:54 GMT, Unbeliever <vp...@nji.com> wrote:
>Forgive my ignorance, but what is 64DD?? An incredible bust size? Sorry
>if I offended anyone, I am just trying to be funny.
It's a disk drive (optical?) accessory thingee for the N64. With compression, a
64DD disk could hold about as much data as a CD, supposedly, but since it can't
have multi-disk games, it still holds considerably less info than is *possible*
for a CD-based game. Course, it's apples and oranges, since how the N64 and PSX
and Saturn handle things are each markedly different from each other.
Charles Miller Jr.
Yes, but the ratio of good to crap will remain the same so there won't be
many good games either compared to PSX. Um... ok, bye.
Cryptic Bug <cr...@vcn.bc.ca> wrote in article
<3MeczMXr/4eK0...@vcn.bc.ca>...
> In article <01bc5b3a$9745dc20$3dcaae80@granite>,
> "Charles Miller Jr." <cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
> > Hey, guess that's why the THIRD PARTY is staying away from the N64
> > like.......
> Hey, I guess SO! Have you looked at a release list? Most of the
> games are from Third Parties. Have you looked at the Japanese
> developer list on N64hq.com? That's not even all developers, just
> those polled, and doesn't include any American Developers (is there
> more? Factor-5 in Germany I guess). There's plenty of Third Party
> developers. There will never be as many as Sony has, for the reasons
> you mentioned, but there will also never be as many crap games (mainly
> because there will never be as many games).
> --
> Cryptic Bug
> Cr...@vcn.bc.ca
>
Charles Miller Jr.
Nope...
Has 3.5 just with sound/main/video
Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote in article
<5l4r60$7nj$2...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>...
> 2megs + 1 meg vram
> Pat Chaney wrote in article <338029b5...@news.demon.co.uk>...
> >"Charles Miller Jr." <cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
> >
I don't suck, I'm cooleticly challenged
> Carts ARE many times faster, and they don't skip if you get a
> speck of dust on them.
Oh, really, since when do CD's skip "if you get a speck of dust on them?
I've done much worse to my audio CD's and they still play better than my
cassette, but I suppose you'd prefer a cassette tape over a CD.
Nintendo could have had a good system. Could. But they made a few mistakes
with the launch (only releasing a certain number of systems, to keep the
demand up controller (especially the thumbstick). If you're gonna give us
a joystick give us a real joystick. Nuff said. The main reason Nintendo
sold so many systems was because of all the hype. A lot of people bought
theirs the first few days before they even tried it. There are few games
and even fewer (about 2)quality (read: fun)games. And no, Ookaze BioACobol,
I am not "scared of seeing another system other than" mine "win the console
fight." I own neither the PSX nor the N64. I'm waiting for the prices to
go down.
T McDonald
In article <01bc5f41$a73347c0$3dcaae80@granite>,>Do you also understand that graphics requier a lot of mem if they are going
>to be good? Sound samples anyone? Good sports games with play by play
Large screen shots require a fair amount of mem little swatches of
textures cost almost nothing. And midi files are hella small.
>that is not repetitive and anoying? Give it up. Smaller is by no means
>better in this field. DUH!
If the choice is a between bigger and faster, I'll take door number 2.
>Yes, and your (Hardly any...) is just the type of kick ass games the N64
>can't do. Sorry, but RPGs are going to need space, or you might as well
>have just made it for the SNES.
Cinimatics are the memory hogs, the n64 has an advantage here in that they
can be 3d seens and the systems can render them on the fly, with dynamic
camera angles too. It, in short, can get away with storing a HELL of a
lot less straight graphics. You may like the pre packaged movies that the
PSX has to offter, wwell good job you chose the right system for yyou.
Charles Miller Jr.
T McDonald <guy...@u.washington.edu> wrote in article
<5l8pfp$8...@nntp4.u.washington.edu>...
> In article <01bc5f41$a73347c0$3dcaae80@granite>,
> Charles Miller Jr. <cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
> >Do you also understand that graphics requier a lot of mem if they are
going
> >to be good? Sound samples anyone? Good sports games with play by play
> Large screen shots require a fair amount of mem little swatches of
> textures cost almost nothing. And midi files are hella small.
Great, so now the N64 can have only small swatches of textures! Great!
There goes the variety issue out the window. Midi files are, but midi
sound patches aren't.
> >that is not repetitive and anoying? Give it up. Smaller is by no means
> >better in this field. DUH!
> If the choice is a between bigger and faster, I'll take door number 2.
Then stick with the cart. Um, didn't think that one out did you.
> >Yes, and your (Hardly any...) is just the type of kick ass games the N64
> >can't do. Sorry, but RPGs are going to need space, or you might as well
> >have just made it for the SNES.
> Cinimatics are the memory hogs, the n64 has an advantage here in that
they
> can be 3d seens and the systems can render them on the fly, with dynamic
> camera angles too. It, in short, can get away with storing a HELL of a
> lot less straight graphics. You may like the pre packaged movies that
the
> PSX has to offter, wwell good job you chose the right system for yyou.
We go back to worse is better. 3D cut sceens are better on the PSX than
the N64.
dElUsiONS oF GraNDeUr
>Forgive my ignorance, but what is 64DD?? An incredible bust size? Sorry
>if I offended anyone, I am just trying to be funny.
>
Now, if you want funny, here's funny!
Everyone, why did the chicken cross the road?
Does anyone know that one?
...
Well then!
How about...
...Hmmmm....
Maybe...
Um....
Okay, any good jokes?
Could someone post a test post so I can make fun of it?
Hmmmm...This isn't as easy as I remember...
Am I getting old? Fat? Humorless?
Am I worrying for nothing?
Noooo!
I'd bet the only funny part of this post is my Sig...
It is funny!
Yes it is!
No, shut up. My sig is funny, dammit.
I'll show you!
Mu---Falimortalis
--
Moose wrote:
<snip>Just my .02.
If you want to say "Just my 2 cents" say "Just my 2 cents", "Just my
$.02", or "Just my 2в" What you just said was "Just my two hundredths"
That was my 2в
(Taken from the >>ALL-MIGHTY BOB<<)
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into yours and join the fun!
Star Trek is an evil cult
doo da doo da
Star Trek is an evil cult
all the doo da day
LEGAL NOTICE: Anyone who sends me unsolicited/commercial e-mail will be
charged a $500 proofreading fee. Consider this official notification.
Failure to abide by this will result in legal action.
"By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer meets the
definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is
unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment. By
Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section is punishable
by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever is greater,
for each violation."
Charles Miller Jr.
Also, I'd like to see the 64DD get just a SPECK of dust on it..... can you
say kaboomb!
Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote in article
<5l8iu6$fhb$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>...
>
> I don't suck, I'm cooleticly challenged wrote in article
<01bc5f42$a41bd920
> $121535cf@default>...
> >
> >> Carts ARE many times faster, and they don't skip if you get a
> >> speck of dust on them.
>
Charles Miller Jr.
64DD is a disk that holds 64 megs of data, 24 of which is writable. The
compression thing he stated was BS, then again dead space can compress
pretty good.
Sean Christian Daugherty <sean...@prodigy.net> wrote in article
<3379a046...@news.prodigy.net>...
> On Sun, 11 May 1997 03:55:54 GMT, Unbeliever <vp...@nji.com> wrote:
>
> >Forgive my ignorance, but what is 64DD?? An incredible bust size? Sorry
> >if I offended anyone, I am just trying to be funny.
>
Kevin M. Hebert
In article <5l8iu6$fhb$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>,
Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>A cart operates as about a 10X speed CD-ROM, under optimal conditions.
Where do you get this information? Information travels around a cart at
the speed of light. Hint: that's MUCH faster than even a 1000X CD-ROM.
Carts are faster than CD's, and CD's are (now) bigger than carts. That's
all, folks. There's no point in debating the facts.
-- KMH
--
Kevin M. Hebert kmhe...@seas.gwu.edu http://www.seas.gwu.edu/student/kmhebert
2126 "R" Street NW #5B Washington, DC 20008
Bjørnar Bolsøy
Andrew Ariens <ari...@aiinc.com.remove_this_to_reply> wrote in article
<33781a2a...@news.aiinc.com>...
> On 10 May 1997 02:40:53 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy" <bol...@online.no>
> wrote:
>
> > Practically every decent title released for the PC is >50mb
> > these days. It's easy.
>
> Hell, Quake is what, 70 megs? No FMV (Though I kind of wish I had a
> nice cutscene to watch instead of sitting there reading the text every
> time I finish an episode)
Yes indeed. Ugh, hated it when I completed Doom for the
first time. :)
Regards.
Carl Moody
--------------7952E78236D854E2D50BBD36
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Matt Hayden wrote:
> >Hey, I guess SO! Have you looked at a release list? Most of the
> >games are from Third Parties. Have you looked at the Japanese
> >developer list on N64hq.com? That's not even all developers, just
> >those polled, and doesn't include any American Developers (is there
>
> >more? Factor-5 in Germany I guess). There's plenty of Third Party
>
> >developers. There will never be as many as Sony has, for the
> reasons
> >you mentioned, but there will also never be as many crap games
> (mainly
> >because there will never be as many games).
>
> Truth is, Nintendo DOES NOT have enough 3rd party developers. If
> they
> did, I think we'd have more than 12 US Games right now...
>
> -=Sponge=-
>
> ----------
> Matt Hayden
> mha...@poboxes.com
I don't know what you are smoking? With the sales of the Nintendo
system, it doesn't matter how many 3rd parties there are. Demand drives
Supply, and since the demand is there the 3rd parties which nintend has
will become large enough, and produce enough games to fill the demand.
There is no difference between 1 company making 20 games and 20
companies each making one game!
--------------7952E78236D854E2D50BBD36
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><BODY>
Matt Hayden wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE><I>>Hey, I guess SO! Have you looked at a release
list? Most of the</I>
<BR><I>>games are from Third Parties. Have you looked at the Japanese</I>
<BR><I>>developer list on N64hq.com? That's not even all developers,
just</I>
<BR><I>>those polled, and doesn't include any American Developers (is there</I>
<BR><I>>more? Factor-5 in Germany I guess). There's plenty of Third
Party</I>
<BR><I>>developers. There will never be as many as Sony has, for the
reasons</I>
<BR><I>>you mentioned, but there will also never be as many crap games (mainly</I>
<BR><I>>because there will never be as many games).</I>
<BR>
<BR>Truth is, Nintendo DOES NOT have enough 3rd party developers. If they
<BR>did, I think we'd have more than 12 US Games right now...
<BR>
<BR>-=Sponge=-
<BR>
<BR>----------
<BR>Matt Hayden
<BR>mha...@poboxes.com
</BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't know what you are smoking? With the sales of the Nintendo
system, it doesn't matter how many 3rd parties there are. Demand
drives Supply, and since the demand is there the 3rd parties which nintend
has will become large enough, and produce enough games to fill the demand.
There is no difference between 1 company making 20 games and 20 companies
each making one game!
</BODY>
</HTML>
--------------7952E78236D854E2D50BBD36--
Charles Miller Jr.
> No, it can have large images too. Is just can't have a shit load of
> frames for some crappy movie.
Yep, and it can't have a shit load of frames for some kick ass FMV
cutsceen.
> And when you can have a meg of textures
> that are a few k a piece, thats a lot of textures. I'd tend to think
that
> would mean a shit load of variety, but I guess I, unlike you, just know
> what I'm talking about.
Yes, in low color depth and size. You want veriaty you need space. Sure,
the N64 has enough space for good games... he;ll it has that just using
carts. But that is also besides the point. Point is it is unneccessarily
small.
> >> If the choice is a between bigger and faster, I'll take door number 2.
> >Then stick with the cart. Um, didn't think that one out did you.
> You're parents must be proud that one of their children made it into
> college, sure it's as a janitor, but one step at a time right?
Wow! Good cut at the janitors there! Nice to see you decided to take the
flame war way out rather than back up your smaller is better theory.
> Seriously, are you pretending to be retarded, or really working at being
> retarded?
Also a great snap at those "retards!" I mean, why do they act the way they
do? Don't they know any better?!
> >> Cinimatics are the memory hogs, the n64 has an advantage here in that
> >> they
> >> can be 3d seens and the systems can render them on the fly, with
dynamic
> >> camera angles too. It, in short, can get away with storing a HELL of
a
> >> lot less straight graphics. You may like the pre packaged movies that
> >> the
> >> PSX has to offter, wwell good job you chose the right system for yyou.
> >We go back to worse is better. 3D cut sceens are better on the PSX than
> >the N64.
> Not from what I've seen of both systems.
Then I guess you are blind! Hahaha, can't leave out those silly blind
people that can't see! Have you seen Soul Edge? Um, guess not or you
wouldn't say such silly things, you blindy you!
Ok, come out Nobody's Perfect! Good disguse!
Charles Miller Jr.
Ok, next time we see information running in a vaccum and no more than light
then you got a good point, until then take a nap... no better yet, read a
book.
> Dipshit light carries information, and, hold on to your hat, it travels
at
> the speed of light.
> Go take a nap kyle.
Kyle Knight
Kevin M. Hebert wrote in article <5la704$p...@felix.seas.gwu.edu>...
>In article <5l8iu6$fhb$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>,
>Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>>A cart operates as about a 10X speed CD-ROM, under optimal conditions.
>
>Where do you get this information? Information travels around a cart at
>the speed of light. Hint: that's MUCH faster than even a 1000X CD-ROM.
>
>Carts are faster than CD's, and CD's are (now) bigger than carts. That's
>all, folks. There's no point in debating the facts.
>
Information travels at the speed of light? That's a good one. Are you
even aware of what units of measurement are involved? Or the technology?
I found that little bit of info in www.n64hq.com
I have a suspicion that they wounln't bash their title machine too hard, so
there may be a grain of truth to it. As of now I'm just throwing this into
play, and I won't defent it very hard.
Remember that we're talking about actual transfer rates, not theoretical.
Makes a difference.
Hint: information does not travel at the speed of light, even
theoretically.
Charles Miller Jr.
Do you also understand that graphics requier a lot of mem if they are going
to be good? Sound samples anyone? Good sports games with play by play
better in this field. DUH!
can't do. Sorry, but RPGs are going to need space, or you might as well
have just made it for the SNES.
Josh Boyd <jb...@mail.coos.or.us> wrote in article
<3376A9...@mail.coos.or.us>...
Matt Hayden
>Where do you get this information? Information travels around a cart at
>the speed of light. Hint: that's MUCH faster than even a 1000X CD-ROM.
hahahahaha GREAT FACTS!!!!
John Reilly
ari...@aiinc.com.remove_this_to_reply (Andrew Ariens) wrote:
>On 10 May 1997 02:40:53 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy" <bol...@online.no>
>wrote:
>> Practically every decent title released for the PC is >50mb
>> these days. It's easy.
>Hell, Quake is what, 70 megs? No FMV (Though I kind of wish I had a
>nice cutscene to watch instead of sitting there reading the text every
>time I finish an episode)
You want a large game? Check out GT Interactive's latest release,
BLOOD: The SHAREWARE (Ep. 1 of 4) is 53 MEGS!! Save files Take a MEG
each! Wow....
Gaius Tarquinius Superbus Maximus I Magnus Somniculosus Ex Patricis Priscis
================================================================
<<{{The Laughing Bandit!!!}}>>
<Strikes Again!/ha! Ha! HA!>
"Insanity is the ultimate low stress lifestyle." -Me
"The things we regret most are often those we do not do." -Me
"In Animis Vester, sum deus." -Me
-The Most Powerful man in Anime Fanficdom
-Graduate of Akane Tendo's Cookery Masterclass.
================================================================
Jeremiah Williamson
T McDonald wrote:
Ahh... joy, more geniuses come into the fold. I'm all for opinions but
when you try to defy simple logic with your so called "facts" I feel
obliged to jump into the fold. Alright, let's see if I can straighten
out this mess about physics defying machines.
> In article <5la8uk$eue$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>,
> Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Kevin M. Hebert wrote in article <5la704$p...@felix.seas.gwu.edu>...
> >>In article <5l8iu6$fhb$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>,
> >>Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote:
> >>>A cart operates as about a 10X speed CD-ROM, under optimal conditions.
> >>
> >>Where do you get this information? Information travels around a cart at
> >>the speed of light. Hint: that's MUCH faster than even a 1000X CD-ROM.
Really... I had no idea that information could travel through WIRES at
the speed of light! Boy I must have missed that physics lecture.
Alright, this may be a little tricky to explain without going deep into
semiconductor physics.
Guess what, information is transfered through metal wires (commonly
aluminum or a close derivative) by excited electrons. IMAGINE THAT!
What, no photons? NO!
Signals on a cart or through a chip (CMOS, BiCMOS, GAs or any other
type) are transferred by current. Current = excited electrons bumping
into each other creating all sorts of havoc which is transfered on down
the line. (Forgive me for my poor layman style but the IQ level I'm
dealing with takes a little adjusting to). Some of the current is lost
(or leaked) into different places where capacitances exist. (In the
substrate, the wires, etc. Capacitances are ALL OVER THE PLACE.) Guess
what this does, it reduces the speed of the signal because the energy is
reduced. Inductance is negligible inside the chip and only becomes a
factor at the chip boundaries (ala ground bounce). A signal is
transferred through a transistor by creating a "channel" underneath the
gate oxide layer which allows current to flow between the source and
drain. Inside transistor = more places where current can leak out. And
then there are transmission line effects along wires connecting
transistors and electromigration and crosstalk and a whole host of other
really nasty effects that occur on chip.
Alright, can the laser transfer information about the contents of the CD
at its present position at the speed of light. Uhh... Yes. Well, we're
dealing with photons again. Can it transfer information about the next
bit on the CD at the speed light. NO, a mechanical device has to come in
to move the CD to the next position.
> >>Carts are faster than CD's, and CD's are (now) bigger than carts. That's
> >>all, folks. There's no point in debating the facts.
Uhh... yeah. Is there a point anywhere in there. What's this (now)
business? There will ALWAYS be a way to store more information on an
external non-electric media (DVD, CD, etc...) than you could in a DRAM,
SRAM, EPROM, Flash ROM or any other electrical media.
> >Information travels at the speed of light? That's a good one. Are you
> >even aware of what units of measurement are involved? Or the technology?
Obviously he's not, so I'm trying to clear up his misconceptions.
> >Remember that we're talking about actual transfer rates, not theoretical.
> >Makes a difference.
> Wow transfer rate WOULD be a good indicator of speed if every game was
> really linear, like oh a movie. But I like a little more variety thanks.
I'm sorry but linear has NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. Even if you had an
instruction stream with NO control flow instruction (branches, jumps,
etc.) you would not end up with a constant transfer rate. There are
many other things in the way. (I really don't feel like going through
the full explanation. If you can't take my word for it I'll direct you
to some books about computer architecture)
But guess what, we don't need to worry about constant transfer rate or
linear games because transfer rates are listed as sustainable. Isn't
that nice of them.
> >Hint: information does not travel at the speed of light, even
> >theoretically.
> Dipshit light carries information, and, hold on to your hat, it travels at
> the speed of light.
Yes, light inherently carries information (wavelength, energy etc..)
However, there is still this little matter of overhead in interpreting
the information. Just because I could transfer a signal at the speed of
light (radio waves, fiber-optic cable ...) doesn't mean I can understand
it at the speed of light. So, to say that information travels below the
speed of light is entirely accurate. NOTE: travels != carries.
> Go take a nap kyle.
Any more questions?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremiah Williamson University of Wisconsin - Madison
jere...@ece.wisc.edu Dept. of Electrical and Computer
Engineering
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
T McDonald
In article <5la8uk$eue$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>,
Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>
> Kevin M. Hebert wrote in article <5la704$p...@felix.seas.gwu.edu>...
>>In article <5l8iu6$fhb$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>,
>>Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>>>A cart operates as about a 10X speed CD-ROM, under optimal conditions.
>>
>>Where do you get this information? Information travels around a cart at
>>the speed of light. Hint: that's MUCH faster than even a 1000X CD-ROM.
>>
>>all, folks. There's no point in debating the facts.
>>
>
>even aware of what units of measurement are involved? Or the technology?
>
>I have a suspicion that they wounln't bash their title machine too hard, so
>there may be a grain of truth to it. As of now I'm just throwing this into
>play, and I won't defent it very hard.
>Makes a difference.
Wow transfer rate WOULD be a good indicator of speed if every game was
really linear, like oh a movie. But I like a little more variety thanks.
>Hint: information does not travel at the speed of light, even
>theoretically.
Dipshit light carries information, and, hold on to your hat, it travels at
the speed of light.
Go take a nap kyle.
T McDonald
In article <01bc5fc3$a6cc4e80$3dcaae80@granite>,
Charles Miller Jr. <cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>T McDonald <guy...@u.washington.edu> wrote in article
><5l8pfp$8...@nntp4.u.washington.edu>...
>
>> textures cost almost nothing. And midi files are hella small.
>
>Great, so now the N64 can have only small swatches of textures! Great!
>There goes the variety issue out the window. Midi files are, but midi
>sound patches aren't.
No, it can have large images too. Is just can't have a shit load of
frames for some crappy movie. And when you can have a meg of textures
that are a few k a piece, thats a lot of textures. I'd tend to think that
would mean a shit load of variety, but I guess I, unlike you, just know
what I'm talking about.
>> If the choice is a between bigger and faster, I'll take door number 2.
>
>Then stick with the cart. Um, didn't think that one out did you.
You're parents must be proud that one of their children made it into
college, sure it's as a janitor, but one step at a time right?
Seriously, are you pretending to be retarded, or really working at being
retarded?
>> Cinimatics are the memory hogs, the n64 has an advantage here in that
Buitron
Matt Hayden <mha...@poboxes.com> wrote in article
<5l0sc8$n...@lepton.startext.net>...
> >and I've found that the majority of manufacturers prefer the N64
> >because its easier to program for and its 3D engine has fewer
> >documented bugs (ie the famous Playstation texture mapping problem).
> >The only problem is that carts are much more expensive and hold less
> >than CDs, but Nintendo is supposed to release some
> >sort of media similar to an Iomega Zip disk that is less expensive and
> >holds near CD capacity.
>
> While the developers may prefer the system of Nintendo64 to develop on,
> they are going with what will make them money... The PSX... They can
> make em cheap, and sell alot, and thats what they are in the business
> for. As for the 64 Disk Drive, it still barely holds 1/10 of what a CD
> can hold... A MAJOR mistake on Nintendo's part IMHO. This is supposed to
> get the third parties back, but its just not gonna sell... The people
> who are not happy with the system right now aren't going to shell out
> another $100 for an accessory that MIGHT make it better.
Sell more huh. Here is a copy and paste from Next Gen On-Line:
"According to TRST figures for the month of March, the Nintendo 64 managed
to sell 226,664 units (62 percent) while Sony moved 107,256 units (29
percent) and Sega only 32,747 (9 percent). Nintendo is currently estimated
to have 2.6 million units installed in the US with an forecasted base of 6
million units by the end of 1997. At the same time, Sony is expected to
have nearly 7 million units by the end of 1997. "
It looks like developers who took the chance and made cart games for the
N64 did very well for themselves. Because of the flood of games for the
PSX, most good games get lost it the mix and don't do as well. You can
also save the lack of games argument because everybody know that there very
few games for the N64. The ball is starting to roll in the game department
but the N64 had to prove itself first. As for as the 64DD, if it costs
around $100 bucks and comes with a game it will be worth it. That makes
the total investment less than the $300 bucks people spent on the PSX when
it first came out. That makes the N64 an even more powerful machine with 8
megs of memory a possible modem and cart, cart and disk upgrade, or disk
only options plus writeablity. Because of the N64 3-D power the 64DD
doesn't need all that space like the PSX. The PSX will still be stuck with
a slow 2x CD-ROM and 2 megs of general RAM with no real 3-D performance
like the N64. Anything can happen. They may have to drop the price on the
PSX and it's games some more.
GOOSE
This is obviously someone who has been brainwashed by the Nintendo Hype
Engine...
> But Nintendo has been a quality control freak forever and that is a key
> part of their success.
Hmmm....Cruisn USA, KI GOLD, MK Trilogy, Shadows of the Empire....that's
Quality??
> 64DD ofers far better gameplay options and
> versatility than the clumsy, read-only CD-ROM format and the far too
> expensive DVD setup.
Sorry...a rewritable drive does not inherently improve Gameplay. It can
offer more options like designing your own levels....but that is NOT
gameplay.
> Also, there is an indication that Nintendo will not
> control the 64DD format, much like Zip disks are made by others.
Hahahaha....notice that this technology has been developed by
Nintendo....THey will not allow Just anyone to make this media. Why do you
think Nintendo Chose CARTS in the 1st Place?
Nintendo always wants to CONTROL its own media....they make a HUGE
Profit on this whether a game is good or bad. And if preliminary
schematics for 64DD MO Carts are anything similar to the proposed SNES
Drive....there is a Chip in the 64DD Carts to prevent pirated media.
Nintendo makes a huge profit on its media....Never forget that.
> Remember:
> Nintendo itself raised the issue of downloading games from the Internet or
> dedicated Nitendo servers directly onto the disks for play, including bug
> fixes and new levels etc.
This is the #1 common sense error.
Nintendo Will make Promises in order to sell their system/addon.
Remember the N64 "Shortages", The late 1995 release, then the April 21st
Worldwide Release, 9 Titles at N64 Release, The Sudden Availability of
N64s due to Increased Production, Quality over Quantity, The Dream
Team....???
THIS IS ALL NINTENDO HYPE.
All are meant to prevent you from buying the competitors games and
machine,and all companies do it.
NO Company will offer these games for Free....NO COMPANY. Not even Nintendo.
Especially when their profits are down.
EA would definitely prefer to sell a WHOLE NEW GAME of
Football/Hockey/Basketball rather than release updated stats.
Look at the PC Market.....
Bug Fixes for Console Games??? This isn't a PC or MAC with a complex OS
and non-dedicated Hardware....How often do games with Disastrous Glitches
get released on Consoles. With Nintendo's vaunted Quality control...there
should be NO major Bugs.
>That's a whole lot more versatile than a CD
> system which is slow. The ability to also use the cartridge as a base for
> the game and the diskettes for levels and the like is a killer combo.
This is nothing new.....the 64DD will NOT Revolutionize gaming. To see the
advantages of 64DD...look at the PC Market.
Not much Difference is there?? Remember the 64DD only holds 64MB and 20MB
Rewritable. And a Modem will not be standard.
The addition of Levels is always a good thing....dependent on how much
many more levels are provided that are of a high quality. But how much
does a Cart/DD COmbo cost....aren't N64 games already high enough?
So far the only real advantage I can see with 64DD is the creation of new
levels or download of new levels....the problem is most VG players prefer
to spend the time playing new levels rather than creating their own.
The late release of 64DD in 1998 is a bad purchase for the User IMO due to
the fact that the New Sega System and Sony PSX will only be a scant time
away....burying the capabilities of the N64.
And don't be surprised if either Sega or N64 don't offer rewritable
options as well....SONY does make ZIP Discs.
Andrew Ariens
On 13 May 1997 13:05:08 -0400, kmhe...@seas.gwu.edu (Kevin M. Hebert)
wrote:
>In article <5l8iu6$fhb$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>,
>Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>>A cart operates as about a 10X speed CD-ROM, under optimal conditions.
>
>Where do you get this information? Information travels around a cart at
>the speed of light. Hint: that's MUCH faster than even a 1000X CD-ROM.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!....Hold on....let me catch my breath....oh man that
is just too damn funny. Phew! I thought my head was going to
explode I was laughing so hard.
T McDonald
In article <5lb44e$t55$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>,
Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>
>>>Hint: information does not travel at the speed of light, even
>>>theoretically.
>>
>>
>light carries information. In theory anything can carry information, if
>interpreted in some meaningful way.
>But we're not talking about light information. We're talking about
>microprocessor technology and rom data transfer speeds.
Ya know it's funny I could have sworn you wrote: "Hint: information does
not travel at the speed of light, even theoretically." That is in fact
all you wrote. Thanks for the enlightening and FALSE statment. I'd also
like to point out that in your pathetic attempt at a save you imply
microprocessors carry information. They do process information how ever,
maybe that's where the name came from.
>Now tell me that this information travels at the speed of light. If
Depending on the point in its journey we're talking about it is. Monitor
to eye etc.
>somehow you've managed to make the data transfer rate go to zero, then you
>deserve the Nobel Prize of physics.
If I want my computer to transfer 0 Megs per second I turn it off. I
didn't think it was that spectacular of an achivement, but you want to
give me a nobel prize in physics.... Why am I not surprised.
>Why don't you go lie down and take a nap?
I can't sleep when I'm laughing this hard.
T McDonald
In article <01bc5ff2$3d684820$3dcaae80@granite>,
>then you got a good point, until then take a nap... no better yet, read a
>book.
Good god you are a dumb shit. Hello I was wondering if you hear about
satilites, they typically spend their time in space and send information
to whatever they happend to send it to via radio waves, or light. Not to
mention, stars, galaxies and all manner of astronomical objects. Did you
think that Voyager was fly by wire? Just who do they kick out of yer
shitty college if they let you in?
Are you Kyle's brother? I can see it now: USEnet reunites long lost
twins.
Charles Miller Jr.
> Ya know it's funny I could have sworn you wrote: "Hint: information does
> not travel at the speed of light, even theoretically." That is in fact
> all you wrote.
Wow, so we DO SEE information transfered at the speed of light! Thanks for
the enlightening and FLASE statement.
> Thanks for the enlightening and FALSE statment. I'd also
> like to point out that in your pathetic attempt at a save you imply
> microprocessors carry information.
Um, they do carry information.... duh.
> They do process information how ever,
> maybe that's where the name came from.
Or maybe information (bits) travel throught the wires in the processor.
Um, yep, and that is not at the speed of light either.
> >Now tell me that this information travels at the speed of light. If
> Depending on the point in its journey we're talking about it is. Monitor
> to eye etc.
Sorry, but that is not at the speed of light. The distance between the
monitor and the eye is not a vaccum.
> >somehow you've managed to make the data transfer rate go to zero, then
you
> >deserve the Nobel Prize of physics.
> If I want my computer to transfer 0 Megs per second I turn it off. I
> didn't think it was that spectacular of an achivement, but you want to
> give me a nobel prize in physics.... Why am I not surprised.
Yep, that was a lame snap which, in turn you replied to wittily.
> >Why don't you go lie down and take a nap?
> I can't sleep when I'm laughing this hard.
Yep, better chill too before the guys in the white coats "calm" you down
again.
Charles Miller Jr.
> Good god you are a dumb shit. Hello I was wondering if you hear about
> satilites, they typically spend their time in space and send information
> to whatever they happend to send it to via radio waves, or light. Not to
> mention, stars, galaxies and all manner of astronomical objects. Did you
> think that Voyager was fly by wire? Just who do they kick out of yer
> shitty college if they let you in?
hU? Dumbfuck... satilites do not transfer data at the speed of light.
Radio waves don't go the speed of light. To transfer data they must be
encoded on a frequency. So, stars are ways computers transfer data? Um...
and I'm the dumbfuck.. Wow... You're a pole smoke if I've ever seen one.
> Are you Kyle's brother? I can see it now: USEnet reunites long lost
> twins.
Wow, an unwitty snap! Good job, now back to figuring out the speed of
light and how this in someway is relevant to the subject of computers...
good luck.
Paul Hausp
In article <01bc6038$b07dc9c0$3dcaae80@granite>,
cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu says...
Isn't information the human interpretation of data?
Kyle Knight
I was going to respond to your other post, but Mr. Miller got to it first,
so I'll do this one instead.
T McDonald wrote in article <5lbgen$h...@nntp4.u.washington.edu>...
>Ya know it's funny I could have sworn you wrote: "Hint: information does
>not travel at the speed of light, even theoretically." That is in fact
>all you wrote. Thanks for the enlightening and FALSE statment. I'd also
>like to point out that in your pathetic attempt at a save you imply
>microprocessors carry information. They do process information how ever,
>maybe that's where the name came from.
>
Look at the newsgroups we're posting to stupid. What do they all have in
common? Not physics, video games. We're talking about video games here,
and everything we say ( should ) relate to that. When I wrote that I was
writing specifically about video game information.
I never said anything about microprocessors carrying information. Don't
put words into my mouth. It hurts your legitimacy. I said "We're talking
about microprocessor technology and rom data transfer speeds". But you're
still wrong. Microprocessors take/pass information from the system bus, as
well as passing information arouund within themselves. And microprocessors
DO store information. No processing happens without the processors storing
the information somewhere to process and passing it around to process.
>>Now tell me that this information travels at the speed of light. If
>
>Depending on the point in its journey we're talking about it is. Monitor
>to eye etc.
>
Uh huh. That's a pathetic reply.
>>somehow you've managed to make the data transfer rate go to zero, then
you
>>deserve the Nobel Prize of physics.
>
>If I want my computer to transfer 0 Megs per second I turn it off. I
>didn't think it was that spectacular of an achivement, but you want to
>give me a nobel prize in physics.... Why am I not surprised.
>
I misspoke myself here, but I think it was fairly obvious what I meant.
>>Why don't you go lie down and take a nap?
>
>I can't sleep when I'm laughing this hard.
>
I don't make a habit of "saving face" or covering my statements. If I'm
wrong I'm wrong. I've been wrong on newsgroups before, and I've apologised
for that before. I'll probably be wrong again in the future, and I'll
apologise for my misinformation in the future as well. But you haven't
convinced me that I'm wrong here, only that you have a talent for twisting
words.
Kyle Knight
SAInt
Jason T. Breeze wrote:
>
> >
> >Cinimatics are the memory hogs, the n64 has an advantage here in that
> they
> >can be 3d seens and the systems can render them on the fly, with dynamic
> >camera angles too. It, in short, can get away with storing a HELL of a
> >lot less straight graphics. You may like the pre packaged movies that
> the
> >PSX has to offter, wwell good job you chose the right system for yyou.
>
> THE GAMES GRAPHICS. THEY DO NOT HOLD THE GRAPHICS!! REPEAT, THE CARTS DO
> NOT HOLD THE GAMES GRAPHICS!! The N64 renders the graphics on the fly from
> the code supplied by the cart. There are absolutely no graphics, textures
> on the N64 carts. Enough said. That is how Mario64 and the other games
> are able to be on a cart. DONE.
Oh yeah. So that's why they use same textures over and over again
with SOTE? M64 is quite repititive in this area as well, but at least
the game is fun to play. If the carts don't hold the game graphics, what
does?
N64 has the largest ROM in the gaming history to hold ALL the graphic
data
ever known to the man? The graphic data has to come from somewhere,
that's
why there are the in-house artists doing all those flashy graphics.
If N64 renders the graphics on the fly, they should have more "detailed"
textures
than any other consoles. Funny, I just failed to see that in N64 games.
OTOH, FF7 has many enemies that don't share same textures. Must be those
bloated CDs and inferior PSXs that don't render on fly! Do you know what
rendering actually does?
Oh, flaming is fun once in a while...
Au revoir.
Chi Won "SAInt" Choi
-----------------------------------------
SAInt's Recent Play List:
[SS] VC2, Tatics Ogre, Snatcher
[PS] FF7, Tomb Raider, Rage Racer
[Arcade] SF3, TK3, VF3
[Films] Chunking Express, Trainspotting
[Manhwa] Red Blood
[Manga] Five Star Stories
[Anime] Neon Genesis Evangelion, Memories,
On Your Mark
[Fav. Chararacter] Ibuki(SF3),
Reiko(RR),
Angel(On Your Mark)
SAInt's Index Page - (C)1997 SAInt Studio
http://www.students.uiuc.edu/~cw-choi/
-----------------------------------------
Jason T. Breeze
T McDonald
In article <01bc6034$bd9a4060$3dcaae80@granite>,
>> satilites, they typically spend their time in space and send information
>> to whatever they happend to send it to via radio waves, or light. Not to
>> mention, stars, galaxies and all manner of astronomical objects. Did you
>> think that Voyager was fly by wire? Just who do they kick out of yer
>> shitty college if they let you in?
>
>hU? Dumbfuck... satilites do not transfer data at the speed of light.
>Radio waves don't go the speed of light. To transfer data they must be
Radio wave are light. I smell .sig quote.
BTW satilites use radiowaves.
>encoded on a frequency. So, stars are ways computers transfer data? Um...
>and I'm the dumbfuck.. Wow... You're a pole smoke if I've ever seen one.
Starlight carries information about the star, and what lies between the
star and the observer.
>> Are you Kyle's brother? I can see it now: USEnet reunites long lost
>> twins.
>
>Wow, an unwitty snap! Good job, now back to figuring out the speed of
>light and how this in someway is relevant to the subject of computers...
>good luck.
I find it amazing that someone, you, is ignorant on as many you are. I
can only assume our educational system is to blame. I weep for the
children.
T McDonald
In article <33793D...@ece.wisc.edu>,
Jeremiah Williamson <jere...@ece.wisc.edu> wrote:
>T McDonald wrote:
>
>Ahh... joy, more geniuses come into the fold. I'm all for opinions but
>when you try to defy simple logic with your so called "facts" I feel
>obliged to jump into the fold. Alright, let's see if I can straighten
>out this mess about physics defying machines.
>> really linear, like oh a movie. But I like a little more variety thanks.
>
>I'm sorry but linear has NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. Even if you had an
>instruction stream with NO control flow instruction (branches, jumps,
>etc.) you would not end up with a constant transfer rate. There are
>many other things in the way. (I really don't feel like going through
>the full explanation. If you can't take my word for it I'll direct you
>to some books about computer architecture)
I'm sorry, but the probability that the data you need is laying next to
the data you read does acctually have something to do with it. You might
need data at addresses A B and P, but you have to go to p before you can
read it, and cd's spin slow. Thanks for sharing. As for books on
computer archatechture, I have _Structured_Computer_Organization_ 3rd
edition, isbn 0-13-854662-2. They don't include the seek time just for
show.
>But guess what, we don't need to worry about constant transfer rate or
>linear games because transfer rates are listed as sustainable. Isn't
>that nice of them.
>
>> Dipshit light carries information, and, hold on to your hat, it travels at
>> the speed of light.
>
>Yes, light inherently carries information (wavelength, energy etc..)
>However, there is still this little matter of overhead in interpreting
>the information. Just because I could transfer a signal at the speed of
>light (radio waves, fiber-optic cable ...) doesn't mean I can understand
>it at the speed of light. So, to say that information travels below the
>speed of light is entirely accurate. NOTE: travels != carries.
If light carries information, and light travels at the speed of light,
then the information is also doing so. This is kind of a fundemental
concept in reletivity, which can be difficult, so I certainly won't
hold it against you. Just ask yourself if light, carrying information, is
traveling towards me where is the information at time t1 relative to the
light, and agian at time t2 etc. Processing time isn't the same thing as
travel time.
>Any more questions?
Yeah, new to the department?
T McDonald
In article <5lbqp6$inn$5...@news.internetmci.com>,
There is a screen shot at the end of mario 64 as well as backgrounds, not
to mention sprites in MK 64 etc. There graphics are somewhere son.
T McDonald
In article <01bc6038$b07dc9c0$3dcaae80@granite>,
>> not travel at the speed of light, even theoretically." That is in fact
>> all you wrote.
>
>the enlightening and FLASE statement.
Prove it false. And you're going to have to do better than claiming that
a form is light is a cow or what ever you think radio waves are.
>> Thanks for the enlightening and FALSE statment. I'd also
>> like to point out that in your pathetic attempt at a save you imply
>> microprocessors carry information.
>
>Um, they do carry information.... duh.
The take information in and give different information out. They don't
'carry' anything, they operate on it, by definition.
Let's stack up credentials shall we?
I can code in hmm Ada/fortran/lisp/c/c++/html
I've had classes in programing 3, one 300 level, and a class in computer
archetecture. Not to mention 3 classes in quantum mechanics and another
in processing of microelectronic devices.
And yourself?
>> They do process information how ever,
>> maybe that's where the name came from.
>
>Or maybe information (bits) travel throught the wires in the processor.
>Um, yep, and that is not at the speed of light either.
Yeah and maybe yer a smart guy is diguise, a REALLY great one I must say.
>> >Now tell me that this information travels at the speed of light. If
>
>> Depending on the point in its journey we're talking about it is. Monitor
>> to eye etc.
>
>Sorry, but that is not at the speed of light. The distance between the
>monitor and the eye is not a vaccum.
right it's the speed of light in air, which I might add is the speed light
travels at and thus the speed of light. Funny how definitions work isn't
it?
>> >somehow you've managed to make the data transfer rate go to zero, then
>you
>> >deserve the Nobel Prize of physics.
>
>> If I want my computer to transfer 0 Megs per second I turn it off. I
>> didn't think it was that spectacular of an achivement, but you want to
>> give me a nobel prize in physics.... Why am I not surprised.
>
>Yep, that was a lame snap which, in turn you replied to wittily.
It's people like you that remind people like me how fortunate everyone is
that there are few people like you.
>> >Why don't you go lie down and take a nap?
>
>> I can't sleep when I'm laughing this hard.
>
>Yep, better chill too before the guys in the white coats "calm" you down
>again.
Are you looking for a golf clap? you'll need to do better than that.
T McDonald
In article <5lbjbo$68o$1...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>,
Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>I don't make a habit of "saving face" or covering my statements. If I'm
>wrong I'm wrong. I've been wrong on newsgroups before, and I've apologised
>for that before. I'll probably be wrong again in the future, and I'll
>apologise for my misinformation in the future as well. But you haven't
>convinced me that I'm wrong here, only that you have a talent for twisting
>words.
Look you can stick to what you know, or you can diverge from it. Mean
what you say, or say what you mean. Information != electrons nessecarily,
I think that's been fairly well established. I haven't put any words in
your mouth, i haven't rewritten any of your statments to suit my whims.
If ya misspoke ya misspoke, but at leats if ya say that up front and say
what you mean, you won't find yourself in the ludicrious position of
claiming radio waves aren't light as someone has recently taken to doing.
My main criticism of your argument, in other posts, is that you seem to
think transfer rate is the end all and be all of device speed. I submit
that you're not giving seek times their due. And carts, as well as what
I've seen of the 64dd beat the snot out of cd-roms in that capacity.
Talk about processor speeds till your blue in the face, but until a
disinterested 3rd party does a set of equivalent pan spectrum benchmarks
on each system it will never be quantified. If you like movies, and can
deal with really long load times, then the PSX is probably for you. If ya
want to just turn it on and play with some superior 3d animation in a
physically smaller game, then go with the 64.
Notice that the mips chip != system in that in each case the other
componants will be optimized to work with their system and vary greatly
between the two.
Kyle Knight
You can't really objectively compare the 64DD to a CD. The compression
actually is about 2:1. What makes N64 games smaller than other consoles'
is because of the different programming language.
Sean Christian Daugherty wrote in article <3379a046...@news.prodigy.ne
t>...
>On Sun, 11 May 1997 03:55:54 GMT, Unbeliever <vp...@nji.com> wrote:
>
>>Forgive my ignorance, but what is 64DD?? An incredible bust size? Sorry
>>if I offended anyone, I am just trying to be funny.
>
>It's a disk drive (optical?) accessory thingee for the N64. With
compression, a
>64DD disk could hold about as much data as a CD, supposedly, but since it
can't
>have multi-disk games, it still holds considerably less info than is
*possible*
>for a CD-based game. Course, it's apples and oranges, since how the N64
and PSX
>and Saturn handle things are each markedly different from each other.
>
>
>------
>Sean Christian Daugherty
> "I met a girl who sang the blues;
> And I asked her for some happy news
> But she just smiled and turned away..."
> - Don McLean, "American Pie"
>ALL UNSOLICITED E-MAILERS WILL BE SHOT ON SITE!
>
Kyle Knight
T McDonald wrote in article <5lc0it$o...@nntp4.u.washington.edu>...
>I find it amazing that someone, you, is ignorant on as many you are. I
>can only assume our educational system is to blame. I weep for the
>children.
>
Look people. It doesn't matter if ants travel at the speed of light. The
newsgroups we're posting to are VIDEO GAME newsgroups. VG system bus'
don't carry data at the speed of light. If you want to argue physics
please take it to the physics newsgroups.
Kyle Knight
Andrew Ariens
On Wed, 14 May 1997 00:49:06 -0700, "Jason T. Breeze"
<jtbr...@MCI2000.com> wrote:
>OK, I'M GOING TO CLEAR UP THIS MISCONCEPTION ABOUT THE N64 CARTS HOLDING
>THE GAMES GRAPHICS. THEY DO NOT HOLD THE GRAPHICS!! REPEAT, THE CARTS DO
>NOT HOLD THE GAMES GRAPHICS!! The N64 renders the graphics on the fly from
>the code supplied by the cart. There are absolutely no graphics, textures
>on the N64 carts. Enough said. That is how Mario64 and the other games
>are able to be on a cart. DONE.
Wireframe models that represent the 3D graphics are on the carts. The
2D sprites are kept on the carts. And yes, the textures ARE on the
cart.
Charles Miller Jr.
Kyle Knight <hy...@columbia.edu> wrote in article
<5lciig$iu5$2...@lol.cs.columbia.edu>...
> You can't really objectively compare the 64DD to a CD. The compression
> actually is about 2:1. What makes N64 games smaller than other consoles'
> is because of the different programming language.
Um... in anycase the "language" is assembler. The instructions are longer
on the N64 so to do the same thing takes more space. Ratios are only valid
when the context they arte used in is looked at. 2:1 on some data... much
more on other... much less on most. Yes, N64 games are smaller and will
continue to be smaller with the 64DD but it can still play pac man, so who
cares? :)
Charles Miller Jr.
> >hU? Dumbfuck... satilites do not transfer data at the speed of light.
> >Radio waves don't go the speed of light. To transfer data they must be
> Radio wave are light. I smell .sig quote.
> BTW satilites use radiowaves.
Sorry, but the information is encoded with waves. So, nope, the data
doesn't move at the speed of light. Sorry, try again.
> >encoded on a frequency. So, stars are ways computers transfer data?
Um...
> >and I'm the dumbfuck.. Wow... You're a pole smoke if I've ever seen one.
> Starlight carries information about the star, and what lies between the
> star and the observer.
In the form of colors, not just the light, so no, not the speed of light.
Also, as far as space and the "objects between" us and the star slow this
info down.
> >> Are you Kyle's brother? I can see it now: USEnet reunites long lost
> >> twins.
> >Wow, an unwitty snap! Good job, now back to figuring out the speed of
> >light and how this in someway is relevant to the subject of computers...
> >good luck.
> I find it amazing that someone, you, is ignorant on as many you are. I
> can only assume our educational system is to blame. I weep for the
> children.
Damn, try putting that snap in some form that even resembles a thought and
I might know if I should be insulted or not. Your lame and vain attempts
on my education go right on through. Until you prove to be the more
intellegent one these attempts at insults are worthless. Infomation in any
useful form must be able to be encoded and decoded. So, even if the data
travels at the speed of light at some point on it's course, it still must
be encoded and decoded... taking magnitudes greater time than the speed of
light. Oops... didn't read your book there did you?
Charles Miller Jr.
What a dumb dumb! All I can guess is he is trying to be funny. Maybe you
should check out www.nintendo.com and check out your little theory there
skippy... now run along and play!
T McDonald
In article <01bc6099$36b007a0$3dcaae80@granite>,
Charles Miller Jr. <cwmi...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>> Prove it false. And you're going to have to do better than claiming that
>> a form is light is a cow or what ever you think radio waves are.
>
>means it must come from one place... and go to another. Even if the
>"going" part was at the speed of light the endpoints apply their overhead
>and walla, you got a sub-light-speed transfer.
And walla you've just said every text book that discusses time dilation is
wrong. Pick one up.
>
>> The take information in and give different information out. They don't
>> 'carry' anything, they operate on it, by definition.
>
>Dumb dumb... try this on for size...
>ADD r1, r0, r1
Add an operation! how clever.
>Wow! data travled there. It carries information in its wires and
>registers... by god, I think you lost there skippy.
By god i think you forgot ADD is an operation.
>> Let's stack up credentials shall we?
>
>Well... if you want to fine.
>
>> I can code in hmm Ada/fortran/lisp/c/c++/html
>
>Wow, I can in C/C++/LISP/C64 assembler/Intel 80X86 assembler/MIPS 3500
>assembler/MIPS 4000 assembler....
>Oh yeah, I know HTML but wouldn't use that as filler like you did.
>
>> I've had classes in programing 3, one 300 level, and a class in computer
>> archetecture.
>
>Wow! I'm a senior in Computer Science University of Illinois, college of
>Engineering!
>I've had more programming courses than you... oh yeah, not your little
>syntax course, but compution theory and such. Wow a whole 1 300 level
>course! Well, I've had more than I care to have had. One class in arch?
>I've had 4. Looks like I got you there.....
Looks like your still wrong. But I did like you little 1 + 0 example tho.
>> Not to mention 3 classes in quantum mechanics and another
>> in processing of microelectronic devices.
>
>Quantum? 2, not devouted like your of course, but part of larger courses.
>Your one in micro loses against me too.
Yeah, i've seen ee courses on microelectronic processing those are a joke.
>> And yourself?
>
>Well... looks like I know what I'm talking about when it comes to
>computers. You might light, but that doesn't mean much to computers.
Hello. Pick up a copy of PHOTONICS a journal in a library near you.
>> Yeah and maybe yer a smart guy is diguise, a REALLY great one I must say.
>
>So, the information is not passed from componet to componet in the micro
>chip via wires... ok, whatever you say Mr. 1 micro class.
The bit moves on wire in the chip. But where does the chip carry
information to? No where it operates on the info and returns it. Hint:
If it just carried information from point A to B without carrying out an
operation on it, the information would be the same, you silly adding
examples aside.
>Ok, so the speed of light is not meaningful? Yep, funny how you describe
>it. So, cool... you are arguing that information travels in the range of
>near light in a vaccum to 0. Good call... not going to argue that one with
>you. What a dipstick.
Hm considering that light in a vacuum carries information, kinda inherent,
and that it's moving at a speed of light, you'll get a point for the first
one. And if some bit of information isn't moving, it is a good bet that
it's dx/dt will be zero. So you get a point for that too. To bad you
were attempting to be sarcastic, you get -2 points for that. Damn just
can't win can ya.
>> It's people like you that remind people like me how fortunate everyone is
>> that there are few people like you.
>
>Man, give up the snaps man... you can't hang. Go back to your information
>travels at A speed. You're too damn stupid to see when someone compliments
>you.
No, he's still a dipshit. So are you.
>> Are you looking for a golf clap? you'll need to do better than that.
>
>Fine, lets stick to the arguement and drop the flames then? Oh, that's
>right, you have no arguement. My bad.
Oooh Big burn from the little man. If you've got all those textbooks use
them for more than expencive paper wieghts. I don't think you're going to
find 'microprocessor: a device used to carry information', in them tho.
My claims stand on their own, and your textbooks stand with them.
Kyle Knight
Charles Miller Jr. wrote in article <01bc6099$36b007a0$3dcaae80@granite>...
>> >> Thanks for the enlightening and FALSE statment. I'd also
>> >> like to point out that in your pathetic attempt at a save you imply
>> >> microprocessors carry information.
>
>> >Um, they do carry information.... duh.
>
>> The take information in and give different information out. They don't
>> 'carry' anything, they operate on it, by definition.
>
>Dumb dumb... try this on for size...
>ADD r1, r0, r1
>
>Wow! data travled there. It carries information in its wires and
>registers... by god, I think you lost there skippy.
>
Let me elaborate on this point. The processor takes in data, operates on
it, then outputs it. But in order for the processor to operate on the
information it must necessarily "carry" it, both passing data and storing
it within the processor itself ( that's why we have internal cache ). For
example, to add the processor would take one number and store it in a
register, then take the second and store it in another register. Then the
processor reads the two registers, adds the values, and stores it in a
third register for output. Note that this is an oversimplification of the
process.
>> I can code in hmm Ada/fortran/lisp/c/c++/html
>
>Wow, I can in C/C++/LISP/C64 assembler/Intel 80X86 assembler/MIPS 3500
>assembler/MIPS 4000 assembler....
>Oh yeah, I know HTML but wouldn't use that as filler like you did.
>
>> I've had classes in programing 3, one 300 level, and a class in
computer
>> archetecture.
>
>Wow! I'm a senior in Computer Science University of Illinois, college of
>Engineering!
>I've had more programming courses than you... oh yeah, not your little
>syntax course, but compution theory and such. Wow a whole 1 300 level
>course! Well, I've had more than I care to have had. One class in arch?
>I've had 4. Looks like I got you there.....
>
There's really no point in dueling credentials. It just makes us CS/CE
people look insecure.
Charles Miller Jr.
> >Wow, so we DO SEE information transfered at the speed of light! Thanks
for
> >the enlightening and FLASE statement.
> Prove it false. And you're going to have to do better than claiming that
> a form is light is a cow or what ever you think radio waves are.
Likewise... prove it true. Anyways. For information to be transfered
means it must come from one place... and go to another. Even if the
"going" part was at the speed of light the endpoints apply their overhead
and walla, you got a sub-light-speed transfer.
> >> Thanks for the enlightening and FALSE statment. I'd also
> >> like to point out that in your pathetic attempt at a save you imply
> >> microprocessors carry information.
> >Um, they do carry information.... duh.
> The take information in and give different information out. They don't
> 'carry' anything, they operate on it, by definition.
Dumb dumb... try this on for size...
ADD r1, r0, r1
Wow! data travled there. It carries information in its wires and
registers... by god, I think you lost there skippy.
> Let's stack up credentials shall we?
Well... if you want to fine.
> I can code in hmm Ada/fortran/lisp/c/c++/html
Wow, I can in C/C++/LISP/C64 assembler/Intel 80X86 assembler/MIPS 3500
assembler/MIPS 4000 assembler....
Oh yeah, I know HTML but wouldn't use that as filler like you did.
> I've had classes in programing 3, one 300 level, and a class in computer
> archetecture.
Wow! I'm a senior in Computer Science University of Illinois, college of
Engineering!
I've had more programming courses than you... oh yeah, not your little
syntax course, but compution theory and such. Wow a whole 1 300 level
course! Well, I've had more than I care to have had. One class in arch?
I've had 4. Looks like I got you there.....
> Not to mention 3 classes in quantum mechanics and another
> in processing of microelectronic devices.
Quantum? 2, not devouted like your of course, but part of larger courses.
Your one in micro loses against me too.
> And yourself?
Well... looks like I know what I'm talking about when it comes to
computers. You might light, but that doesn't mean much to computers.
> >> They do process information how ever,
> >> maybe that's where the name came from.
> >Or maybe information (bits) travel throught the wires in the processor.
> >Um, yep, and that is not at the speed of light either.
> Yeah and maybe yer a smart guy is diguise, a REALLY great one I must say.
So, the information is not passed from componet to componet in the micro
chip via wires... ok, whatever you say Mr. 1 micro class.
> >> >Now tell me that this information travels at the speed of light. If
> >> Depending on the point in its journey we're talking about it is.
Monitor
> >> to eye etc.
> >Sorry, but that is not at the speed of light. The distance between the
> >monitor and the eye is not a vaccum.
> right it's the speed of light in air, which I might add is the speed
light
> travels at and thus the speed of light. Funny how definitions work isn't
> it?
Ok, so the speed of light is not meaningful? Yep, funny how you describe
it. So, cool... you are arguing that information travels in the range of
near light in a vaccum to 0. Good call... not going to argue that one with
you. What a dipstick.
> >> >somehow you've managed to make the data transfer rate go to zero,
then
> >you
> >> >deserve the Nobel Prize of physics.
> >> If I want my computer to transfer 0 Megs per second I turn it off. I
> >> didn't think it was that spectacular of an achivement, but you want to
> >> give me a nobel prize in physics.... Why am I not surprised.
> >Yep, that was a lame snap which, in turn you replied to wittily.
> It's people like you that remind people like me how fortunate everyone is
> that there are few people like you.
Man, give up the snaps man... you can't hang. Go back to your information
travels at A speed. You're too damn stupid to see when someone compliments
you.
> >> >Why don't you go lie down and take a nap?
> >> I can't sleep when I'm laughing this hard.
>
> >Yep, better chill too before the guys in the white coats "calm" you down
> >again.