Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Product with 95% market share and nearly 400 million units sold last year is "dying" according to CNN Money   (tech.fortune.cnn.com ) divider line
    More: Stupid, cnnmoney, Canalys, Microsoft Windows, IHS iSuppli, market share, bright spot, IDC, Craig Stice  
•       •       •

44527 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Aug 2012 at 4:11 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



403 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-08-07 09:01:49 PM  

pehvbot: NuttierThanEver: Yeah till they make a touch device that doesn't need one of these to get shiat done I don't think the lappy is going anywhere

Just be careful what you wish for.
[www.microsoft.com image 425x311]


Honestly, I think this case is an awesome piece of design. I can't wait to get one for an android tablet.
 
2012-08-07 09:02:57 PM  

umad: I'll give you the Live/PS+ bit, but I disagree about Steam sales. Yes, you can buy cheap games during Steam sales, but you can just as easily buy cheap console games by buying used/waiting for them to get dirt cheap on Amazon. It is a wash.


If you think buying used or buying from Amazon gets anywhere near as cheap as Steam, you're dreaming. During the last sale, I got Arkham Asylum, Arkham City, Gotham City Impostors, and all the DLC for all of them for a whopping $25. That doesn't even get you vanilla Arkham City for a console. I also picked up Skyrim for $25; that is still over $50 on consoles, and the cheapest used copy on Amazon right now is $38.50 shipped (plus, I can mod my copy of Skyrim).
 
2012-08-07 09:09:42 PM  
Wake me up when Apple desktops start taking over the business market from PCs.
 
2012-08-07 09:10:36 PM  
I have a couple towers, but they just don't go obsolete like they used to. They are fast enough and still going strong.

But I do use my laptop, tablet and phone more often, for sure.
 
2012-08-07 09:12:26 PM  

ZoeNekros: Broadcastdave: FinFangFark: Broadcastdave: Thanks to a pricing error this is my new rig...

[i155.photobucket.com image 743x727]

say what?!?!?!

At hp.com they had a sale on a $700 computer. It was supposed to be $120 off but the code monkey fixed the end price at $120. I added every upgrade I could and the price remained at $120. The glitch was fixed shortly after.

You forgot to get a secondary (storage) HDD.

But wow.... lucky you.


Yeah, but he now owns an HP. So it wasn't all positive.
 
2012-08-07 09:17:14 PM  

oldfarthenry: Hell, I'm so retro-hip that I'm posting this from a bus-sized mainframe - USING PUNCH-CARD INPUT!


meh. that's too modern. try vacuum tubes. and logic gates,
 
2012-08-07 09:19:21 PM  

noblewolf: Sure, I had vista on my laptop, I had to reboot the farking thing everyday because the print server on it would stop, and it would not let me into the control panel to fix it. It would crash other MS software intermittently, it would not recognize a lot of older hardware. It was a completely worthless OS. And that was just my laptop. I'm a network/system engineer for a local hospital and we have approx 1000 PC's that are currently running XP. The reason they are running XP and not vista, is that all the vendors refused to certify vista cause it was so damn unstable. They all waited for Win 7 to come out. We are now in the process of replacing all the old PC's with new ones installed with Win 7 since it has proven to be much more stable. Also the server equivalent of Vista is server 2008 (not R2 that is based on Win 7 code or vice versa). We refuse to use that either, we waited for 2008 R2 that has proven to be much more stable since its been rewritten. So from a personal and a professional level, I can say that Vista is worse than getting kicked in the prostate by a Budweiser Clydesdale. And to believe otherwise makes you look like this:



Sounds to me you had pretty shiatty laptop.

Vista was unstable because THIRD PARTY drivers were unstable. They had two farking years to get their act together (and working with MS) before 7 came along. You're the one liking turtles if you think the codebase for 7 is so much different. Vista + patches & service packs + a few added features and tweaks = 7. This isn't a Windows ME situation (something MS hurriedly put together when XP's unified codebase was delayed).

People also forget how horribly XP was initially received and wasn't adopted en-masse until SP2 was released. Vista never had that chance. 7 is Vista's SP2.
 
2012-08-07 09:20:53 PM  

lecavalier: Thunderpipes:
Umm, sure. PC gaming is most certainly not dead. Might want to check out sales numbers. Consoles cannot even remotely compete yet.

Before I start, I am not saying it is dead. I will, however, argue that consoles cannot compete is a bit silly. Let's look at Battlefield 3; arguably the best game to compare since they are popular on all three platforms. According to VGchartz.com:

XBOX: 6.14m
PS3: 5.63m
PC: 2.06m

Diablo III sold 2.57 while II sold 2.81 ... LA Noire for PS3 sold 2.51.

If I am missing the point, please let me know.


I bought LA Noire on the xbox and could only play it for a few hours before the controller gave me the shiats so bad I just abandoned the game.

I'm usually a PC gamer (I inherited an xbox for free) and I've played multiple GTA games all the way through (and beyond!) on the PC, but the after using the xbox controller for LA Noire, I don't think I would've bought any of the GTA's.

Gaming with mouse/keyboard is just unbelievably better, to the point where I packed up my xbox and haven't touched it since. So whilst I'll buy PC games, I'm very unlikely to waste any more money on the xbox.
 
2012-08-07 09:21:58 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: This is why no one watches you anymore, cnn.


Seriously, what did they use to measure that? A Kardashian ass ruler?

Feh, and more to the point, meh.
 
2012-08-07 09:23:24 PM  
FTFA:
FORTUNE -- Blame it on lack of innovation. Blame it on the economy. Blame it on the tablet. Whatever one blames it on, PCs are not doing well.

Blame it on the a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-alcohol (that this Mr. Suciu was drinking when he wrote this abomination).

As long as the PC is the dominant platform for first-person shooters, I'm not giving mine up. I can upgrade $150 at a time every year and I'm doing pretty well.
 
2012-08-07 09:24:00 PM  
I don't know about the death of the PC. I just recently bought a Nexus 7, so I contributed to the "omg tablet" craze a bit, but I just tossed about $4,500 into PC components after building a new main rig and a freeNAS box for TV shows and movies.

i7-2600k @ 5.0Ghz, water cooled
32GB DDR3 @ 1600Mhz
2x 60GB SSD OCZ Vertex in Raid 0 (OS, few games)
500GB WD Black (other games, software dev related stuff)
2x EVGA 680GTX gpus
1200W Cosair PSU
3x 24" 1920x1080 Samsung monitors (for tri-monitor gaming)

FreeNas box:
6 3TB WD green in RaidZ (~14.5TB usable)
ASUS C60M1-I Mini-ITX mobo
8GB DDR3 @ 1333Mhz

/epeen
 
2012-08-07 09:26:45 PM  

DarkSkyForever: ...snip...


Here's a picture of the mobo mounted in the case (Cosair 600T).

I have a few more of the GPUs mounted somewhere too...
 
2012-08-07 09:31:19 PM  
I absolutely love my tablet (Asus Transformer TF101) but I'd use it as toilet paper long before I even considered parting with my desktop.
 
2012-08-07 09:34:45 PM  
Justin Bieber is dying?
 
2012-08-07 09:35:10 PM  

Ace25: LemSkroob: Personally, I've had to upgrade my PC less and less often as the tech got better.

When it was worth it to upgrade your PC so a photoshop file opens in 20 seconds instead of 40, there was some value there to dropping coin on new hardware. However, spending money so a file opens in 4 seconds instead of 8, well, its not really justifiable.

The law of diminishing returns comes into play.

My thoughts exactly.. my Dual Core desktop I built 10 years ago still works perfect to this day. Even plays all the new games I am interested in like Diablo III (I know that isn't a CPU intensive game). In 10 years, I have spent a whopping $35 to upgrade the video card to one that had HDMI output to connect my TV as a second monitor. I have been building/upgrading computers since the 80's, almost monthly though the 90's, and I have found no reason to do a major upgrade in 10 years. Ivy Bridge is the first time I have even been tempted to upgrade, but still in no rush.


Please give us the name of your dual core processor you built ten years ago. Did you mean dual processor desktop, because there is a difference between dual core and dual processor.
 
2012-08-07 09:37:49 PM  
I love my iPhone. It's so fun.

I also don't use it for anything but silly bulls**t or wasting time, ever. Unless you 1) only need e-mail and fun little casual games or 2) are some business person that can actually think of some way to integrate this stuff into your business model without losing money or productivity, the PC will always be around in some form.

I haven't read any previous comments and I'm guessing this has been said, but the reason sales are down is that modern PCs last longer. Tech jumps aren't as impressive as they used to be and no one is utilizing what exists. Upgrading my 2 Radeon 5770s is a marginal improvement and wouldn't let me anything I can't do now, 12 GB of RAM is too much so I don't need to upgrade to 16 or 24, and the one thing I need more of, huge hard drives, is perhaps the slowest growing thing there is. I've had this PC like 3 years and there's absolutely no reason for me to buy another one.
 
2012-08-07 10:02:28 PM  
The pc will die as soon as the office becomes paperless. Ironic, no?
 
2012-08-07 10:05:00 PM  

lecavalier: Thunderpipes:
Umm, sure. PC gaming is most certainly not dead. Might want to check out sales numbers. Consoles cannot even remotely compete yet.

Before I start, I am not saying it is dead. I will, however, argue that consoles cannot compete is a bit silly. Let's look at Battlefield 3; arguably the best game to compare since they are popular on all three platforms. According to VGchartz.com:

XBOX: 6.14m
PS3: 5.63m
PC: 2.06m

Diablo III sold 2.57 while II sold 2.81 ... LA Noire for PS3 sold 2.51.

If I am missing the point, please let me know.


VGchartz only tracks retail sales. I don't have the proof on the numbers, but I'm fairly certain that most PC gamers buy their stuff online now, either through Steam, Amazon, D2D (if that still exists), Best Buy (ugh), or that horrible abortion that EA came up with.

Console games, however, are almost exclusively retail-only items.

And I'm no fan of Blizzard, nor Diablo 3 (I bought it, not realizing it was going to be crap), but:

http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/press/pressreleases.html?id=5967 8 68

Seems to fly in the face of your numbers. It sold 3.5 million copies within 24 hours, and last I checked, it goes for more than .75 per copy, and continued selling from that point on...

I'm just saying, you can't really compare the sales of console games which are easily quantifiable, having a single primary way of purchasing them with PC games in which the primary method of purchase is known for being hard to keep track of.
 
2012-08-07 10:17:41 PM  

realmolo: The PC is dead for as a platform to *sell games*. It's all ad-supported browser-based games from here on out. And, of course, free "homebrew" games. And that's fine. They were never great gaming platforms. Their strength has always been their "open" nature and the weird, niche styles of gameplay that allows.

Consoles are simply too good, and too cheap, and too easy to use for any rational person to want to use a PC to play games that they can get on a console. Yeah, you'll always have the morons that say "Oh, my eyes can't even SEE anything less than 3840x2400 and 300fps" and will have souped-up PCs, but for the normal people, an Xbox 360 is enough. Hell, I think that Micrsoft, Nintendo, and Sony are going to have a tough time with their nextgen consoles simply because the current generation is good enough.

But the PC vs. tablets and notebooks? Yeah, no. The PC will be around forever, in one form or another.


Bullshiat. Games are bigger than ever on PC thanks to Facebook and Steam. As gaming on consoles goes to motion and casual, and the next round of graphics upgrades are less than impressive, the PC will continue to advance.

A couple generations from now there may not even be consoles. But there will be PC's.
 
2012-08-07 10:20:54 PM  

Broadcastdave: Thanks to a pricing error this is my new rig...

[i155.photobucket.com image 743x727]


Did it actually ship?
 
2012-08-07 10:21:17 PM  
Mars rover: is all this really necessary?


Just a remember that the fark-tards here were saying it was going to be FOX that would be biatching about Curiosity.
 
2012-08-07 10:23:49 PM  
hmm... let's see...

I now have a few tablets in my home, which has taken me and most of the family away from sitting at the computer desks for playing simple games and browsing sites, such as Fark and looking stuff up real fast without having to get up... but while I can use it to type, it's just not a real keyboard. Overall, we love them and use them a lot more than I expected.

My desktop... purchase about two years ago, is a beast of a machine, quad core, 8GB RAM, over 4TB internal drives, liquid cooled, which I use for just about any type of work. I purchased it after I was finding that my old machine, about 4-5 years old was much too slow compared to a newer one.

I compare my present machine with a brand-new computer that I got at the office, and while I see the difference, it's not that drastic enough for me to junk my machine and get a new one.

On a similar note, I just upgraded my friend's machine with a SSD and full rebuild, and this 4 year old (approx) machine that the guy at the store stated that it should be junked. We had brought it in for testing as I could see that there was some hardware issues, which turned out of be (as expected) a dying power supply, but the guy was trying to convince my friend to junk it and get a new machine that would be so much faster.

But at my suggestion, we got a SSD since it needed to be reformatted anyways as the power supply shorts had cause trouble with the OS's integrity. The results with an SSD in it, this thing (a older model quad with 4GB RAM) is Holy crap faster. It might be slower if I was to process something like video rendering, but for booting and opening software, etc. it beats out both my machine at home and the new i7 quad at work.

All this to say that why would people buy new machines every year when a reformat, a switch to an SSD, or such fairly simple and cheaper alternatives are available.

And since most people only use their computers to look up emails and such, a 5 year old machine that's still working fine, can do that very fast still.

So why would they junk them and pay a good 400$ and up to have to switch to something that would make their email reading a second or two faster ?

I understand that this is fairly typical (even stereotypical) with Apple users (not meant as an insult) as some of their users must have the latest and greatest and money is not object to them, but the PC user base is quite different.

So yeah, sales should be down for a while (few years) until motherboards are blown, until new technologies really makes it worth the switch, etc. And then sales will go back up again.

It's called saturation... something that I guess this article writer doesn't understand.

/will be getting an SSD for my home machine in the near future
/sorry for the book
 
2012-08-07 10:27:10 PM  

peterthx: noblewolf: Sure, I had vista on my laptop, I had to reboot the farking thing everyday because the print server on it would stop, and it would not let me into the control panel to fix it. It would crash other MS software intermittently, it would not recognize a lot of older hardware. It was a completely worthless OS. And that was just my laptop. I'm a network/system engineer for a local hospital and we have approx 1000 PC's that are currently running XP. The reason they are running XP and not vista, is that all the vendors refused to certify vista cause it was so damn unstable. They all waited for Win 7 to come out. We are now in the process of replacing all the old PC's with new ones installed with Win 7 since it has proven to be much more stable. Also the server equivalent of Vista is server 2008 (not R2 that is based on Win 7 code or vice versa). We refuse to use that either, we waited for 2008 R2 that has proven to be much more stable since its been rewritten. So from a personal and a professional level, I can say that Vista is worse than getting kicked in the prostate by a Budweiser Clydesdale. And to believe otherwise makes you look like this:


Sounds to me you had pretty shiatty laptop.

Vista was unstable because THIRD PARTY drivers were unstable. They had two farking years to get their act together (and working with MS) before 7 came along. You're the one liking turtles if you think the codebase for 7 is so much different. Vista + patches & service packs + a few added features and tweaks = 7. This isn't a Windows ME situation (something MS hurriedly put together when XP's unified codebase was delayed).

People also forget how horribly XP was initially received and wasn't adopted en-masse until SP2 was released. Vista never had that chance. 7 is Vista's SP2.


So Retard,
Again I will say. All of our vendors. You know, large healthcare organizations that service thousands of hospitals across the USA. Also wouldn't work with Vista.. I guess they just had a shiatty laptop too. I'd say you were a Microsoft Tool, but then you would praise all of MS stuff.. Your just stupid.
 
2012-08-07 10:45:25 PM  

HeartBurnKid: umad: I'll give you the Live/PS+ bit, but I disagree about Steam sales. Yes, you can buy cheap games during Steam sales, but you can just as easily buy cheap console games by buying used/waiting for them to get dirt cheap on Amazon. It is a wash.

If you think buying used or buying from Amazon gets anywhere near as cheap as Steam, you're dreaming. During the last sale, I got Arkham Asylum, Arkham City, Gotham City Impostors, and all the DLC for all of them for a whopping $25. That doesn't even get you vanilla Arkham City for a console. I also picked up Skyrim for $25; that is still over $50 on consoles, and the cheapest used copy on Amazon right now is $38.50 shipped (plus, I can mod my copy of Skyrim).


I guess I should have been more specific. The 360 came out in 2005. It still does a damn good job seven years later. I build a rig at least as often as each new console generation. I know that a computer that is going to be worth a shiat in seven years is going to cost waaaay more than $400 to build. It is enough of a difference that the money you save by shopping Steam sales doesn't overcome the cost of console software if you want to do that the cheap way. For people that only want to play games, a console is a good way to go. I don't see what is so controversial about this.

With that said, I'm not most people. I do real work and some PC gaming, so I needed to build a good rig. I also built htpcs for all of my tvs (I'm typing this on one right now) because my 360 and PS3 still aren't good enough to do everything I want to do. I have a foot in both camps. If anything, I'm more verbal on the console side because I don't want to be associated with the PC gaming elitists. You guys and the linux snobs are embarrassing to be around.

Now to tie this back to the article, most people don't need a real PC for what one is good for, so they use tablets and phones and shiat. It is no different for gaming.
 
2012-08-07 10:45:56 PM  

Old enough to know better: Yeah, they've been decaring PC's dead for years now. I just ignore them and keep plugging away at my six year old desktop.

The trouble is when developers start to believe it too, and start doing a little version of cultural engineering to steer us toward touchscreens and consoles only. Yes I'm looking at you Rockstar and Microsoft.


Microsoft are in a bit of a bind other that really aren't they? They make an OS for computers and computers are rather good at playing games, which their OS facilitates thanks to DirectX, of course developers could go with OpenGL but whatever we're not doing this argument here or now. They also make a games console.

That's kinda derpy when you think about it really.

noblewolf: So Retard,
Again I will say. All of our vendors. You know, large healthcare organizations that service thousands of hospitals across the USA. Also wouldn't work with Vista.. I ...


No, he is largely correct that the majority of problems were caused by 3rd party drivers, another group of issues surround machines stickered up as 'Vista ready' and 'Vista compatible' which had the Intel 915 chipset in them which is not, actually, compatible with some of Vista's features (like the Aero compositing stuff) and makes some bits of it randomly explode (like the print spooler for example). You are also quite correct that most of the organisations mentioned want and indeed will have nothing to do with Vista.

But they do Win7. Which is odd.... they won't deal with or touch NT 6.0 but they're more than happy to support their offerings on NT 6.1. So you have to wonder how much of that "we don't support Vista" stuff is because Vista was a bad OS and how much is Vista was a badly released OS? I'm actually leaning towards bad release myself as under the hood there is not a lot to separate the two, as denoted by their version numbers.
 
2012-08-07 10:55:54 PM  

realmolo: ...you'll always have the morons that say "Oh, my eyes can't even SEE anything less than 3840x2400 and 300fps"...


I have no problem with console graphics, I think the XBox looks great, just give me a mouse and keyboard for shooters - I can't stand playing FPS with a gamepad. If XBox supports keyboard and mouse properly then I will stop playing games on my PC.
 
2012-08-07 10:57:16 PM  

tomcatadam: Mikey1969: console scam

My launch 360 is still running.
Show me a $300 (for the complete unit, including M/KB) PC from 2005 that can run Battlefield 3.
Yes, even on lowest settings.


Sure, but first question before we start urinating up this brick construct: can I use every trick the 360 does? By tricks I also include the one being used on more modern games like BF3, render at sub-720P resolutions in the back buffer and up scale.

It's just I'm pretty sure a 2005 £400 PC can indeed play Battlefield 3 on low if I force it to render at 640x360 (i.e. half 720p) and let the TV up scale it back to 720p... just like the Xbox does.

Now, assuming you agree that I, in the PC corner can use the same tricks and tactics you in the console corner are using you'll need to supply me with said, abused, copy of BF3 for the PC which has it's back buffer render locked to that res and doesn't try to do it at the native resolution of the display.

Once you supply that I'm more than happy to litter YouTube or indeed the video sharing site of your choice with content about a 2005 PC playing BF3 on low and holding 30fps.
 
2012-08-07 11:10:54 PM  

Muta: 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2012 will be the year of Linux on the desktop.


To which everyone responds: You idiot! It's 2012 who gives a shiat about desktops?

Look dude, your troll-fu is weak it's not even funny. Do you see people like Pocket Ninja or MiKe posting crappy riffs like this DO YOU? No, you don't because they know what they're doing and both of them has at least some knowledge of which OS makes their cable box, cell phone, satnav and indeed any other 'smart' appliance they might own work. That's right: Linux.

So I suggest you crawl back in to whichever dingy little hole you came from and study. Study hard, learn from your peers and eventually you might be able to troll a thread on Fark without making yourself look like a total retard in the process.

Begon until your troll-fu is strong.

/Console gamers are strictly casual and they know it.
 
2012-08-07 11:11:58 PM  

umad: I'm more verbal on the console side because I don't want to be associated with the PC gaming elitists. You guys and the linux snobs are embarrassing to be around.


"You guys"? Trust me, I'm no elitist. I own a 360 and a Wii in addition to my gaming PC. The gaming PC sees far more use due to the twin facts that 1) games are way cheaper and more conveniently available, and 2) paying for Live sucks. My gaming PC is a self-built bargain-basement AMD-based rig from 3 years ago, and it still manages to outdo the 360 much of the time. I think I sank $500 total on the parts I have in this thing, if that, and I've saved at least that $200 difference on games from Steam and not paying for Live. I'm not trying to crap on anybody's choices, I'm just telling it like I see it.
 
2012-08-07 11:14:37 PM  

noblewolf: So Retard,
Again I will say. All of our vendors. You know, large healthcare organizations that service thousands of hospitals across the USA. Also wouldn't work with Vista.. I guess they just had a shiatty laptop too. I'd say you were a Microsoft Tool, but then you would praise all of MS stuff.. Your just stupid.


I'm a retard yet I know the difference between "your" and "you're".

I also know large organizations are just starting to adopt 7 after two to three years. They won't adopt anything NEW and UNTESTED (and all the hysterical, ignorant horror stories from the likes of you weren't helping). Not to mention XP still had Microsoft's full support. Now support for XP is ending. Vista cleared a path and 7 paved the road. It will be years before large ops adopt Windows 8, I'm sure if it doesn't happen in the first 6 months you'll be like "OMG! FAIL! WTF BBQ!"

/do your vendors know you're an ignorant ITG?
 
2012-08-07 11:20:27 PM  

Stephen_Falken: ...


And people said I could go off on one. To you sir, I pass my crown. That is utter brilliance and I love it.
 
2012-08-07 11:20:46 PM  

trappedspirit: Ouya, a new kind of video game console
I've donated to get a console and extra controller. And I for one welcome our android overlords.


I sure hope you haven't wasted your money.

I'm staying the hell away from that until I see some actual games that are made by real game developers. And no, Angry Birds and other Android crap don't count. To me, it looks like with the amount of money donated to that only shows that fools and their money are soon parted.
 
2012-08-07 11:25:39 PM  

BudTheSpud: To me, it looks like with the amount of money donated to that only shows that fools and their money are soon parted.


I'm not touching that Ouya thing with a 10ft barge pole either. But I think it does show how eager people are for this current generation of consoles to end.
 
2012-08-07 11:28:04 PM  

BudTheSpud: I sure hope you haven't wasted your money.


Somebody better tell Onlive, Squaresoft, Netflix, and everybody else that's gotten on board with them that.
 
2012-08-07 11:33:15 PM  

Vaneshi: Stephen_Falken: ...

And people said I could go off on one. To you sir, I pass my crown. That is utter brilliance and I love it.


But he spent all that money and went with AMD over Ivy Bridge...
 
2012-08-07 11:41:36 PM  

HeartBurnKid: BudTheSpud: I sure hope you haven't wasted your money.

Somebody better tell Onlive, Squaresoft, Netflix, and everybody else that's gotten on board with them that.


Just because they're known brands doesn't mean they're going to help these people build the actual machine. At this stage they don't even have a working prototype of the thing, not even cheeseboard & wires let alone a rev0.9 unit sat in it's chassis at an expo for people to touch. I'd also go so far as to suggest that the $99 asking price is rather low considering the hardware being, allegedly, used; true it could be another Sinclair Spectrum at work (using factory seconds with known defects) but I can't see how the traditional business model for supporting console releases will work for a device that can bypass all of that and fark off to Google directly... ya know?

Nor should those company names appearing in press material for the Ouya be taken as meaning those companies mentioned are going to do anything beyond the Android offerings they already have.
 
2012-08-07 11:41:48 PM  

Treize26: lecavalier: Thunderpipes:
Umm, sure. PC gaming is most certainly not dead. Might want to check out sales numbers. Consoles cannot even remotely compete yet.

Before I start, I am not saying it is dead. I will, however, argue that consoles cannot compete is a bit silly. Let's look at Battlefield 3; arguably the best game to compare since they are popular on all three platforms. According to VGchartz.com:

XBOX: 6.14m
PS3: 5.63m
PC: 2.06m

Diablo III sold 2.57 while II sold 2.81 ... LA Noire for PS3 sold 2.51.

If I am missing the point, please let me know.

VGchartz only tracks retail sales. I don't have the proof on the numbers, but I'm fairly certain that most PC gamers buy their stuff online now, either through Steam, Amazon, D2D (if that still exists), Best Buy (ugh), or that horrible abortion that EA came up with.

Console games, however, are almost exclusively retail-only items.

And I'm no fan of Blizzard, nor Diablo 3 (I bought it, not realizing it was going to be crap), but:

http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/press/pressreleases.html?id=5967 8 68

Seems to fly in the face of your numbers. It sold 3.5 million copies within 24 hours, and last I checked, it goes for more than .75 per copy, and continued selling from that point on...

I'm just saying, you can't really compare the sales of console games which are easily quantifiable, having a single primary way of purchasing them with PC games in which the primary method of purchase is known for being hard to keep track of.


Leo Laporte and Paul Thurrott discuss this on occasion; apparently Steam itself sells as many units as retail total, or something bizarre like that. That alone will throw any kind of market analysis on its ear.
 
2012-08-07 11:44:32 PM  
People like to rabble rouse.. world of warcraft has more than 8million active subs and its "dying" the same death lol
 
2012-08-07 11:45:28 PM  

Vaneshi: HeartBurnKid: BudTheSpud: I sure hope you haven't wasted your money.

Somebody better tell Onlive, Squaresoft, Netflix, and everybody else that's gotten on board with them that.

Just because they're known brands doesn't mean they're going to help these people build the actual machine. At this stage they don't even have a working prototype of the thing, not even cheeseboard & wires let alone a rev0.9 unit sat in it's chassis at an expo for people to touch.


Wrong. They have a proto, and have demonstrated it on video.

I'd also go so far as to suggest that the $99 asking price is rather low considering the hardware being, allegedly, used; true it could be another Sinclair Spectrum at work (using factory seconds with known defects) but I can't see how the traditional business model for supporting console releases will work for a device that can bypass all of that and fark off to Google directly... ya know?

Why not? Google is pulling it off with a device that can bypass their ecosystem and fark off to Amazon or any number of other vendors.

Nor should those company names appearing in press material for the Ouya be taken as meaning those companies mentioned are going to do anything beyond the Android offerings they already have.

Well, Onlive has confirmed they're going to deliver a version of their client that works with Ouya's controller, and Square Enix has announced a new HD version of FF3 for the Ouya, so there's that.
 
2012-08-07 11:48:33 PM  

tbhouston: People like to rabble rouse.. world of warcraft has more than 8million active subs and its "dying" the same death lol


WoW is dying because even the most obsessive compulsive alarm clock setting diaper wearing raider realises it's being turned in to a massive cash cow to farm... THEM. Sure it'll take years before that biatch finally shuts up and takes its final gasp but that I'm afraid, doesn't change the fact it's hemoraging subscribers.

/8 down from 12 and falling.
 
2012-08-07 11:53:20 PM  

HeartBurnKid:
Why not? Google is pulling it off with a device that can bypass their ecosystem and fark off to Amazon or any number of other vendors.


Because if the people making the console don't get a cut of the sales then their boned? Google looses money on Android, but all that juicy data for targeting adverts does, to a degree, offset it.

Got a link to this prototype? It has appeared in VERY short order, it's not that I distrust you it's that I distrust them.
 
2012-08-07 11:55:43 PM  

Mike_LowELL: business model


There are the two magic words.

Having said that, dude- make an alt. They're free here. When you talk about most subjects, you're in character, and easy to ignore. When you talk about this stuff, you're serious. And I instinctively scroll past your name because I know you're just trying to get a rise out of rubes. Don't make me miss good stuff.
 
2012-08-07 11:56:43 PM  

aevert: brap: I know my lappy "died" a few weeks ago.

Apparently it doesn't like drinking in malbec as much as I do.

I spilled a pint of wine on my computer too a while back.


My favorite keyboard turned into a pirate after I spilled rum on it. All it would type was rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
 
2012-08-08 12:02:33 AM  

Vaneshi: Got a link to this prototype? It has appeared in VERY short order, it's not that I distrust you it's that I distrust them.


They demo it in the video on their Kickstarter page.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Ouya will definitely be an instant success, but it just seems like everybody's quick to jump in and scream "SCAM!" when, to me at least, it's pretty apparent that they're at least trying to make this happen.
 
2012-08-08 12:10:23 AM  

justanotherfarkinfarker: Porn looks better on my desktop. Last thing I need is a to touch screen for that.afterwards


FTFY
 
2012-08-08 12:15:51 AM  
a3.dealfindcdn.com
 
2012-08-08 12:36:25 AM  

HeartBurnKid:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Ouya will definitely be an instant success, but it just seems like everybody's quick to jump in and scream "SCAM!" when, to me at least, it's pretty apparent that they're at least trying to make this happen.


I'm not screaming "Scam!" either, I get the impression this is a group of people who have a good idea but they may not necessarily know exactly how much of a ball ache designing a games machine can be; even with off-the-shelf parts such as they're using.

I can just see it vanishing in a puff of smoke when they hand over the $3m? (or more) to Nvidia for the first shipment of Tegra3 silicon and the response is "Nice deposit, where's the rest of it?"
 
2012-08-08 12:43:29 AM  

you have pee hands: For some types of games keyboard & mouse is a much better input device than a controller. Sure, you can hook up a keyboard and a mouse to a 360, but you can pipe your PC output to your 46" plasma too. To some degree consoles and computers aren't that different anymore.


Consoles today are simply computers that are locked down more than Apples. There's nothing more than philosophical/business decisions that prevent the production of keyboards, mice, and Office suites/applications for them.

That and plain entry level business machines are cheaper.

Mitch Taylor's Bro: Meh, I used to love PC (well, Mac) gaming. But I got sick of all the aimbots and hacks in online play, plus always HAVING to upgrade stuff to run the latest games. So I bought a PS3 in, what, 2007?, and haven't looked back. Oh, I did upgrade the HD last year. Went from the stock 40GB to the 120 that came out of my old laptop and am probably good until the PS4 comes out...whenever that will be.


Aimbots - VAC and such. Still, you get on a server with teens who play that game for 12-16 hours a day 7 days a week and they do a good imitation of an aimbot.
Upgrading - My upgrade schedule is roughly 5 years. Consoles tend to last about the same amount of time. Last time I did a major update was for Bioshock; needed a new video card. My gaming machine at the time, that ran everything else more or less fine, was so old it had AGP for the video, PCI-X not having come out yet.
 
2012-08-08 01:09:27 AM  
You know what I love most about Mac vs. PC threads? They always devolve into discussions about which system plays games the best. Games! As if there is anything better to do in life than play video games. Gigantic. Waste. Of. Time.
 
2012-08-08 01:11:01 AM  

Vaneshi: HeartBurnKid:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Ouya will definitely be an instant success, but it just seems like everybody's quick to jump in and scream "SCAM!" when, to me at least, it's pretty apparent that they're at least trying to make this happen.

I'm not screaming "Scam!" either, I get the impression this is a group of people who have a good idea but they may not necessarily know exactly how much of a ball ache designing a games machine can be; even with off-the-shelf parts such as they're using.

I can just see it vanishing in a puff of smoke when they hand over the $3m? (or more) to Nvidia for the first shipment of Tegra3 silicon and the response is "Nice deposit, where's the rest of it?"


I'd like to think they wouldn't have gone into this without having gotten quotes from the players involved so they could figure out how much seed money they needed to get started. Then again, I've seen a lot of projects that were going to change the gaming world (3DO? Phantom? Indrema?) go down to mismanagement, as well. I just kind of want to stay optimistic here, because it is a fantastic idea whose time has come.

What I'm saying is, I see where you're coming from, but I do want to give them the benefit of the doubt, and if I hadn't just had to fix my roof, I'd probably have handed them $100 myself.
 
Displayed 50 of 403 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report