Google Stadia details to be revealed this Thursday
Will you be tuning in?
SOURCE
I don't kno much about pc games and hardware but what I've read playing pc games with the settings they hav said 9 quid a month is nothing to me and to a lot of people and spending 30 40 quid on a game a month isn't a big deal either for most peopleyou pay 10$ to play older games, to play newer games you will pay the 10 + whatever their price is lol, they said technicaly only destiny 2 is free you will pay extra to play any newer releases lol.
so paying around 50$ a month and own nothing and hopping your internet is fast enough to play lol by 6 months you can buy a console and get used games very cheap lol and you can play them anytime for ever lol.I don't kno much about pc games and hardware but what I've read playing pc games with the settings they hav said 9 quid a month is nothing to me and to a lot of people and spending 30 40 quid on a game a month isn't a big deal either for most people
Such seniority. What a veteran. Much wisdom.i'e been using google since the year 2000
uh huhSuch seniority. What a veteran. Much wisdom.
you act like those innovations and much much better would not have happened without this cancer monopoly stifling competition and creativityActually... yes. Yahoo gave me relevant and accurate enough results before google became the "de facto" seearch engine. Altavista was lacking though. Netscape was a cool browser too.
Google Chrome is the new IE. Firefox was (before killing NPAPI) superior in both debugging and customization. It's still better overrall as of now. It baffles me that people would still rather use the not as customizable or fast, memory hogger called Chrome to do anything that does not involve running legacy Adobe Flash apps.
Since the Internet deals with information, I'd REALLY rather not have a monopoly on anything related to it.
Also, Android is not the savior of mobile, it's just a Linux port to mobile phones. If not Google, some other company would have done it eventually. Every feature implemented by it could have been done by any other OS, literally. In fact, phone owners should have a choice of which OS they want to put in their device, but since there is a clear lack of options, we do not. Having used a ton of mobile phones before Android existed, it wasn't even hard at all to adapt to what they offered, unless you're technologically impaired, so that is a really bad excuse.
Apple having any success at all is only due to their UI. Their devices are severely lacking in quality for their price point.
I don't know about you, but I've been using it since I was 7 years old, in 1992. And I've used BBS forums even before the Internet.
The Internet was not trash AT ALL if you knew how to use it. It just slowly evolved into the current status.
As a web developer, to me, the biggest changes were, in order, the introduction of CGI->FastCGI, AJAX, SSE, HTML5 and WebSockets.
uh huh
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
you act like those innovations and much much better would not have happened without this cancer monopoly stifling competition and creativity
sadly we will never know what we could have been or what better reality awaited us in the alternate timeline
Sure, duckduckgo and firefox for life. Or whatever else, lynx is good enough, it is just a damn search engine and a browser not rocket science.All these people slagging off Google I bet least 50% still use Google as ther search engine OK those tht do can you pls now uninstall Google chrome
i use google search engine and nothing against that but i use firefox browser for years so yeah no chrome for me.All these people slagging off Google I bet least 50% still use Google as ther search engine OK those tht do can you pls now uninstall Google chrome
You can say all of that but those figures are inaccurate. Regardless, streaming obviously isn't for people with bad internet, which is becoming less and less people these days. Even the 5-10 mbps you speak of is enough to use these.You are incorrect. Game streaming only works if you live close to the server. No matter how you try to rationalize it, game streaming is nothing more than a proof of concept. Game streaming might work for 5% of the world's gamers and that's it. Millions & millions of people in USA do not have access to high speed internet. They only have access to 35mbps or less, and even then those are just advertised speeds, in the real world it's more like 5-10mbps tops. ISPs throttle speeds, have data caps etc. Not to mention multiplayer can NEVER work. Latency is already noticeable if 1 person on the east coast plays online with someone from the west coast. Same goes for digital games, people with horrible internet can buy a digital game and spend a week waiting for it to download. For example, Red Dead Redemption 2 is 100gb, would take forever for some people to download. Fallout 76, broken on release, took some people a long time to download the 50gb patch. Internet is the downfall of games, game streaming is a joke, digital is a joke, releasing broken games that require gb upon gb of updates to fix is a joke. Before "high speed internet" finished polished games were released.
You can say all of that but those figures are inaccurate. Regardless, streaming obviously isn't for people with bad internet, which is becoming less and less people these days. Even the 5-10 mbps you speak of is enough to use these.