lebkin

I have replaced using an RSS reader with a combination of Twitter and Readability. If I have time, I immediately read articles on Twitter. If not, I send them to Readability to read later. I have found myself reading fewer articles every day, but what I do read is of a much higher quality. I highly recommend trying it out.

I can't stream anything without buffering, except for youtube. I also have no problems on other sites, including Netflix and Amazon.

Tracing route to cp198953.edgefc.net [208.73.211.174]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.2.1

2 * * * Request timed out.

3 36 ms 21 ms 23 ms 99-59-192-3.lightspeed.livnmi.sbcglobal.net [99.

59.192.3]

4 * * 62 ms 75.26.64.52

5 * * * Request timed out.

6 * * * Request timed out.

7 22 ms 23 ms 23 ms 12.83.32.173

8 74 ms 84 ms 74 ms 12.122.104.69

9 * * * Request timed out.

10 75 ms 74 ms 75 ms border1.te3-1-bbnet1.lax015.pnap.net [216.52.255

.56]

11 * * * Request timed out.

12 * * * Request timed out.

13 * * * Request timed out.

14 * * * Request timed out.

15 * * * Request timed out.

16 * * * Request timed out.

17 * * * Request timed out.

18 * * * Request timed out.

19 * * * Request timed out.

20 * * * Request timed out.

21 * * * Request timed out.

22 * * * Request timed out.

23 * * * Request timed out.

24 * * * Request timed out.

25 * * * Request timed out.

26 * * * Request timed out.

27 * * * Request timed out.

28 * * * Request timed out.

29 * * * Request timed out.

30 * * * Request timed out.

Trace complete.

@tescovee said:

No newspapers in my career path. But I do practice architecture - which involves a great deal of clear communication, both written and visual. When you want to convince someone a big chunk of change on their house, you need to be able to make it very clear what they are getting. And why they should get it from you instead of some other company.

@earlessshrimp said:

Thanks for finding the typo. Fixed!

As for Microsoft backing off and the above deal is being currently off the table, I have seen several posts and comments complaining about that change (like this one or this one). I started writing a comment, then it ballooned long enough I felt it was worth it's own post.

I don't need to show you a game LIKE The Witcher 3 on the PC, because Witcher 3 IS a PC game. It was announced as a PC game back in February. Promoting it like it's something special for consoles is silly.

What are you talking about with the Witcher 3 and "haven't seen it on PC yet"? That's a PC franchise first and foremost. The PC has been lead on both the prior two and CD Projekt Red has already said this one will be lead as well. Hell, the Witcher 2 already looks as good as anything shown today, and it's two years old.

@Agnogenic said:

Nothing I saw or read mentioned anything like this. So I'd guess it is still a no.

New features:

• Swipe up for "control center", to adjust brightness, media controls, Do Not Disturb mode, WiFi/Data/Airplane mode, etc from within any app
• Better multitasking and faster app switching
• Notification center on the lock screen
• Better Siri, including Wikipedia integration
• iTunes Radio - streaming music ala Rdio or Spotify
• New flatter look
• Better integration into Mac OS

@kp1a268 said:

The biggest difference is backwards compatibility. If I buy a game from Steam, it will work both now and into the future. I own games from when Steam launched in 2003 that still work. This is the rule, with only a few exceptions. Yes, I am licensing a digital game, but it is a game that I will be able to play on whatever my PC hardware becomes.

The opposite is true on the Xbox One. It won't even play games from 2012, let alone 2003. Based on current history, my expectation is that when the Xbox Two is launched, it won't any games before its launch either. So all my games are locked to a specific piece of hardware.

You may argue that console games have always been locked to hardware. This is true, but those games always worked on the old hardware despite lack of support. An Atari 2600 will still play Atari 2600 games even though that Atari no longer exists. The Xbox One games require online activation, so they will disappear when Microsoft disappears.

The Xbox One gives you the worst of consoles (tied to a single hardware) and the worst of PC gaming (reliance on digital platforms for authentication). It is a bad deal all around.

@dgtlmeatloaf said:

Steam is different for several reasons. First is the details of the deal. Steam gives a MONTH in offline mode. That is dramatically different than the 24 hours that Microsoft is proposing. It is rare to go a month without internet access. A day? Happens regularly.

Steam has also show reliability. Games bought on their service at launch in 2003 still work today. They are still available today. If I buy a new computer in the next year, it will play all those games. They have shown both a length of support and attention to backwards compatibility. They are not perfect, but there are only a few exceptions rather than blanket rules. The idea that I will still have access to a game I buy today in ten years on my current PC hardware is high.

The Xbox One won't play the games I bought today, let alone in 2003. I accepted console lacking backwards compatibility because the discs would also work, even if LIVE goes away. When the Xbox Two comes out, there is a strong possibility it won't be backwards compatible either. So anything I buy today is locked to a specific species of hardware AND to a constant online check. There is no advantage of this system over Steam - it is worse terms for a worse experience.