Why Old People in Business Should Be Considered Obsolete

A question of whether or not consoles are obsolete.

I will agree that PCs are becoming cheaper and more likely to be in the home, but to have a graphically powerful computer that is capable of playing to top of the line games (or even anything new), you will constantly be upgrading the hardware. Considering the life span of a console (5-10 years), without any significant upgrades (microphones, dance pads and internet connectivity aside), programmers are given a set of stats they are to work with for an allotment of time. PC gaming, while allowing for independent programmers with low budget and even lower graphic resolutions to produce (which is starting to happen to console gaming as well), has a near-endless limit. Which, as awesome as infinity is, it's hard for a casual gamer (as the author of the above article mentions), to just say "I really want to play that new PC game" without having knowledge of their video card, RAM, O/S or hard disc space remaining. I think this kind of acknowledgement is important. Yes, our culture is geekier and more tech savvy, but ask the majority of those 35 to 55 year old women casual gamers what their processor speed is and they're likely to hit you with their purses.

I am not saying the casual gamer is incapable of knowing what their computer does while they are asleep (although this is also true), I am suggesting that these casual gamers are less likely to invest the large amounts (still) of capital required into casual gaming (computer + every damn upgrade when things aren't to the specs of a required game). If it comes preloaded on their Palm, BlackBerry or PopCap is emailed to them, they'll probably enjoy it and may seek out other online games. Ask them to pay $20, and some will. MacMommies will probably be livid that you need a PC, and PCGrannies will be upset that their grandson's old (and I mean old) computer doesn't have enough "sheeps or goats or rams" on her email box.

And here is where the console will thrive: no upgrades, no tech talk, plug it in (or sometimes, throw in a few batteries), put in cartridge, play.

Rather than software commanding the hardware market, consoles have established hardware that the software must conform to. If we look at Nintendo alone's journey into the software demanding hardware upgrades, we'll see the roadside littered with Super Nintendo's mouse & SuperScope, the 8-Bit's Power Glove, GameCube's microphone, GameBoy Advance's E-Card Reader and even the original light gun. But if we look at the DS & the Wii, we find two "gimmicky" ideas requiring software to adhere to the demands of the hardware; and two very large successes in casual gaming.

I won't pretend my readership knows me, so I will tell you now, I have never turned anyone a gamer by using a PC or Mac. I'm sure I could set up a casual gamer, but I sure as hell do not want to deal with the call about why World of Warcraft won't install.

----------------------------------

This rant comes courtesy of my father who, when having difficulties with his computer (likely because it's heavily fragmented and he would've installed Bonzi Buddy if it were still around), decided that it was time to buy and install Windows Vista in the opening weeks. The only reason my father even has a computer was because he wanted a camcorder that he could edit home movies on my mother's Mac. He bought one that was only compatible with a PC (although the salesman said otherwise). It was a Sony camcorder, so his solution was to buy a Sony Vaio. I hate these people, but love my father. A real dichotomy here. The amount of tech crap he's bought and installed (thank god he stopped buying Sony only products and has moved onto the Kodak line of thinking--diversity is good) reminds me of a Threadless shirt...

Back to the Windows Vista saga, his video card won't support Vista. His motherboard won't support a newer video card, and his solution? Buy a new computer.

Ask him about his Wii and he'll tell you it's never given him any troubles. Which is good for a toy.

My foray into The End

After spending just over an hour listening to the dulling hum of CBC Radio Two (which was markedly more vivid than CBC Radio One), I decided it was time to listen to something more upbeat. My office chum suggested The Beat, and seeing as how I had the entire world of internet & radio in front of me, I thought better of it. Besides, pint-size was off to do her afternoon run in 15 minutes.

Having not listened to a radio station of my choosing in close to a decade, nostalgia beckoned me to the radio dial’s logical conclusion: 107.7 The End.

First up, AOL Word Search, or its modern equivalent: Google! In a moment of judgement relapse or just plain laziness, only numbers and decimal made its way to the search bar. To my fortune, Seattle’s 107.7 was the top search item and I didn’t have to scroll at all. This is where the ease of internet radio and 107.7 end.

The website is black and red with white font all over; and, like a bad joke, it’s ugly. After deep searching for any information about listening online through the various sidebars, I returned to the front page mess. And finally a link was found! Hooray! So click, wait, wait… and… “please register to listen to streaming audio”. For a moment I consider the possibility of not listening to any music ever again, before going through the painless process that doesn’t even involve email verification!

Some more clicking and waiting, and finally, it arrives—with a video ad to greet me. And then:

As if the cosmos aligned to let me know my entertainment had arrived: Elvis Costello is in the midst of his rendition of Radio, Radio.

In the past 90 minutes, they have played two Violent Femmes songs (one was a cover by Gnarls Barkley), Weezer, Nine Inch Nails and Heart Shaped Box.I wonder how long it will take them to be called a “classic alternative” station…

Seven Months Later...

So, I've drank more Coca-Cola products than PepsiCo. brand, but I blame cherry flavouring for that. But PepsiCo. is the better company.

I have yet to be asked if I wanted to be on a test circuit for PD-1 suppressants, but I have learned that foreskin increases men's chances of HIV infection, and may lower a woman's odds. There's another argument for male genital mutilation for mysogynists to use. That, my friends, is called "irony".

Special juvenille bonus: The director of the World Health Organization's AIDS department is named Dr. Kevin De Cock.

The Crane Wife rose to the top of my favourite albums of 2006, but in doing so also put Decemberists fans at the bottom of my favourite list of 2006. How did they manage to get into the high schools? We must ban mixed tapes, CDs and iPods immediately to prevent good music from falling into immature hands! [/curmudgeon]

Another argument against the glass ceiling was released at some point in the past month: Boys are just as good at quitting as women. Take that Human Resources Departments! Equality in job hating! We have to start somewhere.

Making "men" technophobic?

Wired's Sex blog has posted a comment about robots that I found to have an interesting observation.

To suggest that men would fear being replaced by robotic counterparts seems rather unusual. Why would women not harbour the same "fears"? We've lived in a world dominated by sexvertising that has generally sold out the female form to everything from car parts to the very common toilettries market. Not to say that men have not been, but let's face it, men have done way more to "replace" women sexaully than women have of men. I don't imagine the first robots off the line for sexual purposes will be robots with phalluses. Call me crazy, but I have vivid, hauting images of men with too much money purchasing RealDolls (that link is not safe for work, even though I just clicked on it at work--thank god I'm a woman, I can probably get away with it).

Sure, a robot will do more household chores than the average man and be way more of a subservient (literally) slave, but do most people endure relationships for their use-purpose? I highly doubt that. I think the primary reason I, personally, stick to a relationship (without many of the robotic enhancements) is the companionship. An andrioid will represent a fiction; the human, non-fiction. Just as we can do some serious tweeking to fiction to fit our needs and ideals, an android's negative behavior can be reprogrammed. Human lives, on the the other hand, are required to live in a linear line and while some behavior can be modified, the majority will be met with comprimise and endurance (or disaster and heartbreak).

So, fear not the robots, men. Embrace them, as I imagine some will do.