Quaid
Trump's Staff
- 11,782
- 8,267
I'm pretty sure Bill Gates is Microsoft's top share holder at somewhere between 4-5%...
I'm guessing a 1% stake in MS is definitely in the top 20 investors.
The Big Bad Console Thread - Sway your Station with an Xboner !
- Thread starter Xexx
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
I'm guessing a 1% stake in MS is definitely in the top 20 investors.
Xarpolis
Life's a Dream
- 14,648
- 16,335
BlackRock owned 443 million Microsoft shares as of last Friday, representing 5.32 percent of the total shares outstanding.
Bill Gates, Microsoft co-founder and board chairman, owned 398 million shares as of May, a 4.78 percent stake.
Vanguard Group owned 354 million shares as of March, a 4.25 percent stake.
State Street owned 335 million shares as of last Friday, a 4.03 percent stake.
Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO, owned 333 million shares as of September, a 4 percent stake.
Bill Gates, Microsoft co-founder and board chairman, owned 398 million shares as of May, a 4.78 percent stake.
Vanguard Group owned 354 million shares as of March, a 4.25 percent stake.
State Street owned 335 million shares as of last Friday, a 4.03 percent stake.
Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO, owned 333 million shares as of September, a 4 percent stake.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,410
- 80,900
Joeboo
Molten Core Raider
- 8,157
- 140
Good post...not sure why you said there were so many incorrect things in my post. You basically just provided more facts that completely backed exactly what I was saying, that graphics/power mean squat. Console generations are way more often than not won on other fronts. I argued it was games, you argued it was marketing(some may argue launch timing), but regardless almost none were won because of hardware specs, which was my point that you corroborated.
Utnayan
F16 patrolling Rajaah until he plays DS3
- 16,526
- 12,567
This.
Regardless, everyone should get a new PC and already be another 3 generations ahead of these shitty consoles.
Vaclav
Bronze Baronet of the Realm
- 12,650
- 877
That guy I think but not that specific pic is what I recall. I'm confusing you with someone else?You mean
?
I don't even remember having him as my avatar!
Quaid
Trump's Staff
- 11,782
- 8,267
I don't think there's a PC out there right now that supports hUMA that is available to consumers... Could be wrong though. Either way, AMD is beng super cryptic about reports that both PS4?s and XBOX1's memory does in fact utilize hUMA... Could give it a little bump into the next gen, but not much further than 2014.
So ya, don't upgrade your PC just yet... AMD is releasing a new chipset in October called Hawaii or something retarded like that. Not sure if it'll have unified memory but it would certainly make sense. Worst case, wait for NVIDIA Maxwell, which most expect Q1/2 2014.
'88-'92 Genesis had 55% of the console market. In the end it lost the generation, but it started out way ahead. The final numbers of the generation were 49 million SNES to somewhere between 37-42 million Genesis. Which was way closer.
It was really early in the morning. Plus a lot of the technical things were a lot closer then you made them out to be. Minor exaggeration on my part, sorry.
Angelwatch
Trakanon Raider
- 3,053
- 133
I remember the Genesis coming out LONG before the Super Nintendo which meant that the 8 bit NES system was going head to head with the Sega Genesis. Despite that I feel that Nintendo still did better during that era because they had so many third party licensed games for the system that were fun. I just don't remember the Genesis library being all that great. Sure there were some gems here and there that I eventually went back and played on an emulator but compared to the games on the NES and SNES, Sega just couldn't compete in my opinion.
In particular, Sega only had a small handful of RPGs for their system (Phantasy Star being their leading franchise) while Nintendo had Square and Enix backing them up with Final Fantasy, Dragon Warrior (Quest) and the plethora of SNES JRPGs that we've all come to know and love.
In particular, Sega only had a small handful of RPGs for their system (Phantasy Star being their leading franchise) while Nintendo had Square and Enix backing them up with Final Fantasy, Dragon Warrior (Quest) and the plethora of SNES JRPGs that we've all come to know and love.
Two years ('88 vs '90). The Genesis had 915 official releases, the SNES had 784. The prior generation, as noted, had a much larger discrepancy due to Nintendo's forcing publishers not to port games for two years (which effectively meant they didn't get ported). Genesis actually had a very strong library, both in quality and quantity. And technically we're not even counting the 32X or SegaCD games, some of which are actually good and had graphics that, for the time, were amazing. But buying additional hardware was not something people were willing to do, so those add-ons generated a lot of ill-will towards Sega and severely hurt their bottom line. Especially the 32X, since they rushed it out the door because the Saturn was coming out the year after. It wasn't the games that lost the 16-bit generation (which, and I feel I cannot say this enough, they werewinningwith more than half the market share in the console market in '92), it was poor business decisions that pissed off Sega's customers. They never learned, either, they actually asked retailers to take a loss on each Dreamcast sold. They were selling the console below cost and wanted the retailers to eat some of that loss. Unbelievable.
Kuriin
Just a Nurse
- 4,046
- 1,020
Joeboo
Molten Core Raider
- 8,157
- 140
A Big reason the genesis was dominant in those early years was EA Sports. Madden, NHL Hockey, Bill Walsh College Football, Coach K College Basketball, were all HUGE hits in the United States. By the time the SNES got versions of their own, they were very inferior ports. Can you imagine how lopsided this new generation would be if one console had Madden and Fifa and the other didn't at all, or had horrible ports of them? That was the 16-bit era.
Angelwatch
Trakanon Raider
- 3,053
- 133
I definitely agree with your conclusion that it was poor business decisions that sunk Sega ultimately. Ultimately though, the reality that I lived in back in the late 80's and 90's was that everyone I knew had a NES and, later, a SNES. I knew one person with a Sega Genesis. The rest of us had Nintendo based systems and were gleefully swapping games around to play back and forth. The guy with the Genesis was left out but he'd bring the system over to our houses so we could try some of the games. I didn't think that the games were bad, but I felt that Nintendo had a much better lineup.
Joeboo
Molten Core Raider
- 8,157
- 140
It might have been a demographic issue. EVERYONE I knew had a Genesis, but I was in Jr High and Highschool during it's heyday. Everyone was big into Mortal Kombat, Madden, Joe Montana Football, NHL, College football, etc. All of my younger elementary school aged cousins and neighbors had a SNES
Vaclav
Bronze Baronet of the Realm
- 12,650
- 877
Szlia
Member
- 6,629
- 1,375
Joeboo
Molten Core Raider
- 8,157
- 140
Seems like that hUMA could be nice for devices with a closed architecture(game system, tablet, phone), it really wouldn't be ideal for the PC gaming market, as it's mainly going to be used with integrated GPUs. I can't imagine the performance gains of that style of memory architecture making up the massive performance gap between an integrated GPU and the modular GPUs(video cards) that most gaming PCs use now. It could work well in a console because you can optimize the shit out of it for the 1 and only piece of hardware that you are designing for.
Unless AMD really hits it out of the park with their next set of CPU/GPU chips that use this technology, I can't see it getting mainstream traction in the gaming PC marketplace. Replacing a video card when you need to upgrade every few years is one thing, but having everything integrated to the point that you have to replace motherboard/cpu/gpu/RAM every time you upgrade doesn't seem like a step forward in the right direction with PC gaming.
Unless AMD really hits it out of the park with their next set of CPU/GPU chips that use this technology, I can't see it getting mainstream traction in the gaming PC marketplace. Replacing a video card when you need to upgrade every few years is one thing, but having everything integrated to the point that you have to replace motherboard/cpu/gpu/RAM every time you upgrade doesn't seem like a step forward in the right direction with PC gaming.