text:
All I would have wanted was a faster iPad
I've mentioned this several times already on the iPhone & iPad Live podcast, in the new iPad round-table, and on Twitter, but I wanted to get something up here as well. The Retina display is great, but I'm not a designer or a photographer and I still read more on a computer and on paper than I do on my iPad. I have a Wi-Fi iPad so LTE isn't a consideration for me. Dictation is great and will make a huge difference to people who prefer to, or need to, talk rather than type. But for me, none of that is truly compelling. For me, instead of supporting a double density display or a faster network, I would have loved the extra power of that Apple A5X chipset and that extra RAM to do one thing and one thing only -- make my iPad faster.
I hate waiting. I watch lower resolution videos because I hate waiting for streaming to start or buffering to finish. My iPad turns on instantly and I love that. But then when I launch a website, I'm still waiting for pages to render and when I launch a game, I'm still waiting for it to load. Because things like turning on are so fast, when you do have to wait for something it feels so much more apparent.
The iPad 2 was such a speed increase from the original iPad that it I noticed it immediately. Even the iPhone 4S is fast enough compared to the iPhone 4 that I noticed it immediately. The new iPad... is about the same as the iPad 2. That it's the same given a Retina display is awesome, but I can't help wishing it would have stuck with a regular display and been twice as fast again.
The resolution of text or images never bothered me; the speed of getting them to show up on screen did. Maybe that wouldn't have been as sexy and upgrade, or maybe "thinner, lighter, faster" wouldn't have been a strong enough selling point two years in a row, but I'm willing to bet it would have been welcome by many.
Also, let's not forget battery life. It's remarkable that the new iPad gets a Retina display and keeps the same 10 hour battery life as an iPad 2. Imagine how much battery life it would get without it? Probably 17 hours.
Retina display and LTE now done, next year's iPad will probably lose the extra bulk and speed up again, maybe even get longer battery life as well. he upgrade I'll be waiting for.
In the meantime I'll be waiting for my web pages to load and games to start...
Steve Jobs sometimes liked to quote Henry Ford -- "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses". Instead he gave them something they had no idea they wanted until he gave it to them -- a car. With the new iPad, however, I suddenly find myself on the opposite side of that equation. All I would have wanted was a faster iPad.
Have something to say about this story? Leave a comment! Need help with something else? Ask in our forums!
Reader comments
All I would have wanted was a faster iPad
I see your point, but I disagree. I'll wait a few fractions of a second or a few seconds for something to load, but I stare at the page for much longer and a better, easier on the eyes display is more important. To each his own, I guess. (By the way, I don't play games on my iPad--still can't understand why people waste time with video/computer games...yes, I'm over 50--can you tell?! ;-) )
Launching Infinite Blade II is retarded by a slow internet connection?
It does that on the iPad 2 as well. And the iPad 1.
As far as a I know, 802.11n functions at the same speed on both the iPad 2 and the new iPad.
And again, iPad 2 is significantly faster than the new iPad.
Like I said, I don't care. I'm happy they went with the Retina display, and I'm happy if people disagree.
I'm just not sure what the hell connection speed has to do with this discussion. They're equal.
Ummm.. No.
Load times may be connection dependent but rendering times are CPU dependent. JavaScript intensive websites, even with JIT in Nitro, are significantly CPU dependent.
I'm also hard pressed to figure out how "she doesn't know the difference" when it comes to launching a video game like Infinity Blade. Is that pulling heavy internet data?
Our tests showed significant speed improvements between the original iPad and the iPad 2 in both web rendering and app launching. They didn't show any perceptive difference between the iPad 2 and the new iPad.
For me this doesn't matter, I think the Retina display is worth the tradeoff. For Georgia (and others) it does and it isn't.
That's fine. There's an argument to be made there, and intelligent people can disagree intelligently about that.
Condescendingly -- and mistakingly -- brushing that aside is neither of those things.
Hi Rene,
It's nice to see that you're standing behind your team in their articles. I realize that this is an opinion piece but since you're the editor and you have commented, i'd like to point out that you might not have considered the validity of these comments with enough thought.
I just think that the choice of examples could have been better and the issue is the proportion of the wait time that is connection-dependent vs. processing dependent. Web page loading and streaming movies are traditionally more connection dependent than processing dependent. Even if the wait time is 50% connection and 50% processing (which in reality it's more like 70-30 for web pages and 90-10 for streaming), than improving the processing component by INFINITY would only yield a 50% decrease in the wait time for these tasks. More realistically, the possible improvement to processing is 40% at most, so you would really only get a max of a decrease of 20% in wait time even with these extremely generous estimates. Also, as one commenter mentioned, IB2 loads slowly because of the syncronization it does at the beginning of the game. My understanding is that games/graphics are actually quite a lot better on the new ipad because of the quad core processor. Given this information, it's a weak argument for wanting a faster ipad bc and so the article feels like it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Just my 2 cents. I genuinely admire the effort to filter out the junk in the blog-sphere here at imore. I understand that this is not a technical blog but perhaps getting an extra editor with a more technical background could help with understanding what's going on at Apple because they would have a better understandinng of what's physically possible to do with today's silicon.
The problem with some of the replies isn't that they disagree, it's that they're condescending and insulting, and some aren't technically accurate.
Georgia has an iPad 3. She tested a bunch of games to see what, if any, difference she could find. The came to an informed opinion that there wasn't a big one -- for her.
For the things she cares about, based on the tests she conducted, she determined that the original iPad to iPad 2 was a much more meaningful upgrade, in her use case, than the iPad 2 to the iPad 3. That's not a weak argument. That's the opposite of a weak argument.
She's not betraying Apple or punching puppies, she stating an informed, contextual opinion.
We don't need more technical editors. We may need to figure out away to get more people to read the articles before commenting :)
The issue is that the article is written on the assumption that a different allocation of resources in the design of the new ipad would in fact make it better for Georgia's use-case. I belive people are trying to point out that this is a bad assumption. Keeping the new ipad on lower res and directing the extra processing power to other things (the suggestion is iffy at best as well) will not improve the wait times of her tasks in a significant way! You're right that commenter's can be condescending, especially when they come across very presumptuous.
All the article says, in essence, is that Georgia preferred the iPad 1 to iPad 2 upgrade than the iPad 2 to iPad 3 upgrade.
Not sure what about that rankles so many people. I love the iPad 3 upgrade, but that doesn't mean I don't respect the opinion of those who don't.
Disagreement doesn't have to be disagreeable.
I still have, and use and love, my iPad 1. I was considering the new iPad but the more stuff like this I read, the less i see the reason to get a new iPad over an iPad 2. Especially a refurbished iPad 2. I know the Retina display is fantastic on the new iPad (although I have not yet seen one) but for me I am not sure that alone is worth $100-$150 dollars. I am not a heavy game player, mostly things like Words WIth Friends and Angry Birds, so that extra graphics power would be lost on my for the most part. I have a feeling they needed that "X" part of the chip to drive that display and realized they could use it as a selling point for things like games.
One thing is very apparent in every review about the new iPad that I have read: The iPad 2 is a great device. So great, in fact, even its successor is living in its shadow.
Yup, pretty much. I got the iPad 3, and honestly, besides the Display and LTE, there is nothing different about the iPad 3 from the iPad 2. If you really want the iPad 2, I say go for it. Or hold out til the 4th Gen iPad, maybe that will have more to offer.
First world problems....
You tell them Georgia - I am guessing that is the name you prefer rather than 'she'? ;-)
I was initially going to skip iPad 2 and get an iPad 3 next week but having read your readable and straightforward article, not to mention a few others, I am thinking of moving up to the iPad 2 and wait for next years new iPad. We all know apple will already be designing the next one, tweaking here and tweaking there.
Then again, a friend has suggested that I get an ipad 2 and iPad 3 side by side, but that only gives me one advantage, the screens ;-)
I use my iPad to write, read, email and play Mahjong, so will the iPad 3 give me anything extra from the iPad 2?
Keep the articles coming Georgia, I for one appreciate your viewpoint. We all have different opinions, which is what makes life so interesting ;-)
Cheers from England
Emails are much crisper on the new iPad. I had the 2 also and wOuld not go back. If your going to buy a new iPad spend the extra 100 and get the 3. Much better quality text.
I can't believe people comment without even seeing the new iPad. They probably hav sold tvs with digital tuners and haven't upgraded to HD
Thanks for the advice, much appreciate it and I do have an HD TV and an Apple TV2 and TV3 lol ;-)
Yet, Georgia, you have the new iPad and I guarantee you are not returning it. I know you said on the show you were considering it, but I guarantee once you've stared at the retina display for a week, you can not pick back up your old iPad 2 and continue without noticing the enormity of the pixels.
I disagree with your whole premise. It doesn't have to be "either or." You could be hailing the accomplishment of the new retina display and LTE, while expressing disappointment that they went with A5X over A6.
If you are hat concerned with speed, return the new iPad, and wait for the iPad 4 which will likely be similar to this iPad but quad core. I guarantee you will not return it, the retina display makes a huge difference.
I jus t think that Georgia's picking needles out of haystacks. Its a valid point of wanting the New iPad to be faster but even my play station 3 (that has way more gaming power than my iPad 2) won't allow me to play games instantaneously.
As far as web pages go thats mostly an connection issue unless you think that web pages should appear instantaneously as soon as you hit the search button.
The point is that the new iPad has a good deal more computing power, especially with the GPU and a lot more battery life. If the screen were kept at the same rez as the iPad 2, it would be WAY faster and last a lot longer. Apple choose to throw all those extra resources to drive that new display and just stay even with the iPad 2.
I'm with Georgia, as the iPad 2 is really as good of rez as I really need (roughly the same dpi as all the other computers and laptops I use). On a phone, it makes sense, as you often hold it much closer and are incredibly pressed for screen real-estate. But, I typically have my iPad roughly as far as I'd be away from my LCD at the desk or a laptop anyway. And when I do have it closer, I don't find the rez bothers me (of course, my eyesight isn't what it once was either).
I totally agree, great job Georgia lady person.
I would agree with Georgia . I have now had three new iPads and still not happy. The screen is good but that's it. The LTE only works about half the time. The dictation well let's put it this way again you can not count on it. I use mine to run my business everyday and I need to know that it will work right when I need it. That saided it might be time to go back to the ipad2. I could at least count on the 3G to be there when I needed it.
Turn LTE off. You obviously live on the outskirts of a LTE section. Mine works flawlessly. How's that the iPads fault??? What are you trying to do with dictation that it won't do??? Dictation works just fine. Are you trying to write the next chapter in your book. Here's a hint, quit saying...um, um, ummm. If you knew what you wanted to say a spoke it then you'd see it works fine. Giving you're not in a crowded ass restaurant and trying to dictate something. I think you seem to be one of those that'll find fault no matter what.
Well for starters I am not on the edge of the LTE network . Second dictation does work every time and I may try to do a sentence or 2.
Are you with AT&T or VZW? If you're not on the edge of a LTE network then something is not right. Try a restart. I had that issue with mine. I turned it on out of the box and had spotty LTE connectivity (VZW). I did a restart and it's been flawless ever since.
I think Georgia has a point. This update didn't get the speed, it got double the resolution. It's more of a complete ipad 2.
But she should take comfort in the fact that future ipad refreshes will most likely have to do with processor front and center, although i'm sure they'll work on thinner and lighter. The screen is as good as it gets for a long time.
Let's just say future ipad speculation won't be much fun. Faster processor? Check. Thinner & lighter? Sounds good. Improved battery life? Please. Call it a day after that. It's not like Apple will worry about sd slots, usb connections, etc.
The new iPad wasn't made for iPad 2 owners, but for no-iPad or iPad 1 owners. The original iPad was the clay, the subsequent ones have all been the chisel. iPad 4 won't be for iPad 3 owners (though I'm sure the web will have no end of "unimaginative" and "iterative" criticisms for it).
It does lead to an interesting question -- what happens when Apple achieves the exact hardware they've always wanted? They've always said they're a software company who makes hardware only to support that software, but their revenues are based on hardware.
How far can you tweak what's essentially the hardware behind a giant screen? And what do you do when there are no real tweaks left to make? (Transparent aluminum Avatar panels aside...)
Does it become like the iPod, where the base models really don't improve much any more, but something new takes its place?
I'm sure they will keep tweaking the form-factor and look over the years a bit (though, once you get a good design, why change it? Look how long the MacBook has been quite similar.). But, just like with computers, there will always be want for a faster CPU, GPU, more RAM, more storage, new type of interface or camera, etc. especially for the more advanced applications.
"The new iPad wasn't made for iPad 2 owners, but for no-iPad or iPad 1 owners." - Agreed.
In general, I think most users skip a generation of hardware update of iPads. I forced myself to wait and then made sure that I bought one that was carrier-specific to available LTE coverage in my area. For me, the new iPad is a BIG jump in CPU speed, RAM, Graphics, and a Huge jump in Internet connection speed - not to mention the inclusion of cameras. I couldn't be happier with it!
Or, for people with an iPad 2 who need the extra rez. I have a few friends who do have super-sharp eye-sight who were actually bothered with the iPad 2 when using it up close.
Also, there are some specific industries or applications that need the rez (like medical) or might use the better cameras to scan product UPCs, etc.
Yea, I don't know how much faster it needs to get. The iPad 2 seems almost there to me for the current level of applications and UI. The iPad 1 certainly left room for improvement. The iPad 2 was well worth the upgrade just for the speed gain. I think if it were to double in performance, it would be more than fast enough for all but the most advanced apps. After that, it just becomes important for power tasks.
This is the same as laptops and desktops. They are now generally fast enough for all but power apps, in that the UI is plenty snappy enough and typical apps are plenty fast. This used to not be the case 10 years ago... and certainly wasn't for the first-gen tablets.
I wish I could afford any iPad let alone complain about how my new iPad disappoints me because it is equally as fast as my old iPad 2. This article made me feel poor :(
They aren't inexpensive for sure, but in the realm of computers, they aren't out of reach of the typical computer buyer. If you can't afford a computer, then that is understandable. I think many of us have been there. I remember the days of counting change and deciding between the gas station and a burrito. I hope your situation improves.
First off your site is great I have used it several times for i-related things. But you have got to be kidding right? Is this a test to see how trolling works if started by the author instead comments from readers? Wanting slightly faster load times (cause that is what it would be to be instantaneous) on web pages over stunning graphics and text is like wanting the lag removed on DVRs when switching channels on HD TV over the incredible graphics we now can't live without. If you want faster channel surfing go back to a tube tv I dare ya.
I think Georgia is underestimating the impact of the incredible new screen. The old 1024x768 resolution just wasn't good enough for me. That's why I never got an iPad. Just didn't get there for me.
But to be able to get an industry-leading screen, with a vastly more powerful GPU, at the same price? Sold. I'll be getting an iPad in the next few months.
I have been listening to the iPhone/iPad live for a while. Though I do not agree with your point as I would prefer better display and usability instead of raw CPU power if apps don't take advantage of them (I have horrible experience with the Galaxy Tab claimed better CPU power ended up cannot even do a smooth screen rotate).
However, I use a lot more on my iPhone 4 than my ipad2, upgrading ipad2 to new iPad is not my current consideration.
For this, I don't agree with you, but it does not mean I will rush for the new iPad.
We did get a faster iPad quad-core graphics 4x as fast. And LTE faster data. But what we really want is optimized performance or quad-core (SOC).
Also we will never get a web that loads instantly or apps or games that load in seconds it will always fell slower.
And if you want spec pissing match go to androidcentral and buy a Transformer Prime plus
From what I gather reading about his "reality distortion field" it would have gone something like this:
SJ: You're all d**kless idiots. I want it thinner, faster, and battery life that's twice as long.
Engineers/Designers: Steve, that's impossible. Literally. For REAL this time.
SJ: I want a prototype to play with by this Thursday
Thursday comes
SJ: (holding operational prototype) See? Told you we could do it.
Engineers/Designers: Sure, we just had to create a few new periodic elements, and...
SJ: (interrupting) Why isn't Siri 100% functional yet?
Tim Cook: (mumbling in corner) ...something something Amazing something something...
Justify your purchase all you want, but Jesus... the woman just stated her opinion. A "retina display" is easier to market and advertise as the new must-have thing, compared to a faster CPU - which people tend to expect at every product launch. Plain and simple. Some of you Apple fanatics are hilarious: you scream about how "specs don't matter - it's the user experience", but when an Apple user (and fan) suggests that HER user experience would've benefitted by a different avenue taken by the company, all of a sudden she's "unknowledgeable". Comedy.
I happen to agree with Georgia on this, and while I enjoy my retina iPad and hardly find it 'unbearably slow' for my needs, a speed increase would've been more welcomed IF I had to choose between the two upgrades. Faster device, smaller file/app sizes (one of my apps went from 89MB to 483MB, with the only improvements listed being "includes support for the new iPad retina display"), dramatically-increased battery life... and for the love of God, improve the Facetime camera, if you're gonna update either of them. For a device that is essentially all screen, I won't try to undersell the importance of an HD screen, however at its size the previous resolution was more than sufficient. (See? The same argument for the improved screen can be made for a faster processor.) I also agree that the next iteration will see a slimming down of the chassis, as well as a more powerful CPU. Forget haptic feedback - not happening.
If iOS 6 has half of what I'm hoping for, a 'faster' iPad would've served people far better than this detailed screen. I would hate to think that this new iPad (and iPad 2) may have similar issues with the new upcoming iOS that many original iPad owners experienced on iOS 5.
Hi Goergia
I am in your camp also as my EVO 4G on Sprint here in Florida is painfully Slow as a WIFI. hotspot. It would be nice if they could switch the quad graphics density off and on, but I would guess this would take logic design change vs. Software change.
I also have the iPad2 and HTC FLYER with BT Scribe pen input which works well for things like draw something if I had artistic skills. The Flyer gets a lot more use than iPad because I carry with me in a front pocket all the time. I mean ALL THE TIME. Carrying the iPad is just to bulky, but works fine around the house if sitting at table or laying on my lap. It is almost like a laptop as I use a BT keyboard with it if typing alot. Laying in bed, the Flyer is definitely preferred over iPad or just use phone if I am listening to your podcasts as video is slow for me.
It would be nice to have Rene have a hybrid podcast that was mainly audio and insert static images when you have something to show. For example, I am looking forward to your review of pen inputs and would like to see them with good resolution.
Enough for now. Keep up the good work. I like your open attitude. ffastffrank
PS. Have you heard of FoxFi hotspot for some androids? No rooting required.
I actually bought an i Pad2 this week. My 50+ eyes don't see the separate pixels anyway and it will be 2014 before LTE comes to my country. I'm not unhapppy about the 2's speed: I wanted space! A 128 or 256 GB iPad was on my Christmas wishlist. Since it's not forthcoming, why not take advantage of the stock clearance sales going on at the moment?
I did the same thing. I do care about resolution, but that alone wasn't enough to persuade me to spend more on an otherwise pretty similar device. The other selling point, 4G capability, is useless to me as I live in Europe where 4G either runs on frequencies the iPad doesn't support or isn't available at all. Hopefully the next iPad (whatever it will be called) will have a gorgeous retina screen AND be faster and have more storage.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion but this is pretty ridiculous. First of all the iPad 2 and the new iPad are plenty fast, and at some point there is a limit to how fast pages can be delivered to a device. There are other components involved such as the router, modem and ISP that determine Internet speed. It's not a fault of the iPad.
How you can work for an iPhone/ iPad focused tech site and not consider a major advance in screen technology a worthy upgrade is beyond me. These devices are all about the screen.
Maybe you should consider a different line of work.
Meaningless slow-news-day posts resorted to by blog sites are annoying :-(
Find the iPad to slow? Sell it...
And thus Georgia, you have mentioned the reason why I opted for the iPad 2 versus the iPad. Between the fact that the new iPad is no faster than iPad 2 and the price drop, I opted for the iPad 2. I am a designer, amateur photographer, and artist, but also a musician and thus speed is very important to me. My Macbook Pro is lightening fast compared to any Windows Laptop I've ever used. My iPhone 4S blew away my old HTC EVO. But the new iPad isn't faster and thus, just wasn't worth getting. Nice Retina display, but I was looking for a Quad core CPU, not Quad core graphics without a Quad Core CPU.
You say you're these things but as someone whose business comes from images. I'd think you'd be willing to spend the extra bucks and the precious few seconds(seeing how the 3rd gen is just as fast most of the time) to have a better showcase for your work. There just isn't any comparison between displays.
Perhaps you need a Retina display. I do not, hence, I got the iPad 2 because that fulfilled my needs. Everyone doesn't have the same needs. We're all different people. Some of us read articles and agree or disagree. Others need to work on their English before responding to comments on the Internet. Either way, I got what worked for me and it wasn't the new iPad.
A Writer dares to post an article that isn't a giggling fan girl epic of love for the new iPad and you don't like it? Go read CNET. They gush about the new iPad. It's called choice and if this article didn't do it for you, throw your iPad at the wall and go to Android Central or better yet, read up on how RIM is choking today. Journalism is on occasion, the writing of opinion pieces. You don't have to agree with everything you read, but you can disagree in a respectful manner, no?
Great article Georgia. I agree with you. The new iPad isn't faster and thus, would be a let down for anyone wanting a faster iPad.
How fast do you need it. I don't see it being a set back in the least. If you're near a good wifi source, pages load instantly. If you're bitching about it being fast for business, almost all apps load within 2 seconds. I don't understand the need for some to say they "need" a faster iPad. I use mine for business every day. In the morning I close all apps that don't do with my daily routine. Safari,Goodreader,iPad,iBooks,Mail,and my company's app stays open and in memory all day. Once they are loaded they are instainous in switching fro one to the other. The speed is there. Utilize it and the screen is worth everything. What's the one thing you're always doing when using the iPad??????
I agree with Georgia's perspective and disagree with yours. If you're happy with your new iPad, then great. I'm happy with my iPad 2. It fits my needs. What you will not find is me bitching on some internet forum at someone for not agreeing with my choice in iPad2 and criticizing someone on the internet for choosing a different product than mine or having a different perspective than mine. I don't live in Russia or China, where there is no individuality and expressing a perspective that differs from yours might be considered a crime. The new iPad wasn't necessary for my needs, irregardless of the Retina display or your opinion. The iPad 2 fills my needs and I neither make any apologies for that perspective, nor do I really care if you agree with me or not. I support and agree with Georgia's article. You don't. Go read CNET. They love the new iPad there.
They had to sacrifice the processor to give us the Retina Display and the LTE radios with almost the same battery life. If people are complaining right now about their iPad getting warm imagine with the A6 processor. People is never going to be satisfied
Another thing, you guys should make a poll to see what the people should had preferred, Retina or Speed.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the problem that I have about Georgia's is that her opinion discounts one of the Major features of the new iPad and my personal favorite (LTE). She has a WiFi only iPad so her reasoning comes off as un-informed. She doesn't know what she's missing with LTE (and neither do LTE iPad owners who don't live in LTE (not HSPA+) coverage areas). Opinions are fine, but at least give an Informed Opinion. If she had an LTE iPad in LTE overage area) and still said that she would've preferred CPU speed over connection speed, then okay. Many new iPad owners who didn't think that LTE would be a big deal to them are displaying the exact behavior given by her Henry Ford quote - they didn't know how they wanted it until they got it. I would advise people on the fence to spend some time using LTE on a new iPad (maybe at an Apple Store if possible) and then turning the LTE switch off to compare. Many people say that they can't go bak from Retina Display and I love that too (I'm big on photos), but LTE is far & away the biggest jump for me and the feature that I can't go back from. For someone who doesn't like waiting, as Georgia describes herself, it's very strange to hear such an argument. The difference between 3G & LTE (specifically, not other flavors of 4G) is Huge - at least 10X faster and in many cases much more. That jump in connection speed is more impactful (to me) than the CPU jump - I'm coming from an iPad 1 to a 3. If LTE isn't available, then okay, that's an okay argument for personal preference of buying one I guess, but to say that the Apple should've chosen to offer a faster CPU over this much of a jump in Internet connection speed sounds like someone who hasn't experienced LTE (on a battery-efficient device) or someone who doesn't use the Internet much on their iPad.
I agree with EsJay for the most part. I own an (wifi only) iPad 2 and plan on purchasing the New iPad mainly because of its LTE connectivity. To be able to use an iPad with the same connectivity speeds i have at home is major jump for me. Throw in the retina display, camera, and I have to say that its a pretty substantial up grade.
* so every one that thinks the New iPad is not for iPad 2 owners, that's simply not the case.*
Georgia's article is about the WiFi iPad, so it isn't uninformed about THAT. Georgia's article has nothing to do with the LTE iPad and claiming it's uninformed about LTE has nothing to do with what the article is ACTUALLY about- Her perspective on the speed of the WiFi iPad. She spoke of load times for web pages, programs, and games. That deals with how the CPU loads software. To a point, that also deals with how fast web pages are rendered. Perhaps she expected more speed from the quad core graphics and that is the source of the disappointment, but none of that has anything to do with the LTE iPad, so even bringing LTE into the discussion is adding an element that isn't even in the article, thus making your claim that her opinion is "uninformed" due to not making this article about a completely different subject (LTE iPad), invalid.
LTE is very much a part of the article. The whole premise of the article is that Georgia would've preferred for Apple to have NOT included support for a faster network (LTE) & Retina Display in the new iPad since they use processor resources that would've been available for extra processor speed.
Georgia wrote,
"For me, instead of supporting a double density display or a faster network, I would have loved the extra power of that Apple A5X chipset and that extra RAM to do one thing and one thing only — make my iPad faster."
The article makes sense for activities on the iPad where that added processor speed would impact performance more-so than the added speed that LTE gives over 3G (and WiFi). Basically games and processor-intensive activities fall into this category. But not surfing the Internet. The speed-jump that LTE gives is more impactful for Internet browsing.
Georgia says, "I watch lower resolution videos because I hate waiting for streaming to start or buffering to finish."
LTE eliminates the need to sacrifice resolution for streaming speed. Watching video over LTE and not having to wait so long for buffering (because of the increased bandwidth of LTE) is one of the biggest differences that I notice in my new iPad.
Georgia states early in the article that she has "a Wi-Fi iPad so LTE isn't a consideration for me."
I guess that's a way of countering the point that she knew would stand in contrast to her point. It partially does, but if speed is the important thing to her, then why wouldn't she choose an LTE iPad. She isn't saying that cost is the issue - she's strictly making a case for performance. Anyway, it's an opinion piece so I respect her opinion - I just don't see how her reasoning (hate to wait) supports her opinion (preference of the absence of Retina Display & LTE for increased (Internet) speed. Commenters also have the right to disagree with opinion pieces, so there's no reason to be offended by our comments.
Your LTE is not all it crackup to be. One not all areas have the same speed. Second your LTE hand off is not the greatest. If you use your iPad in the car watch it the signal will drop out. I know I used mine for last week. I can tell you how many times I have seen on my screen NO DATA CONNECTION ,
The difference in LTE Internet connection speed & 3G is huge - at least 10X when compared using SpeedTest.net (website or app). Of course, if you have bad (or no) LTE coverage in your area, then it does you no good. One huge factor, which was a huge differentiator when buying mine, is which carrier-specific model iPad you have. Only one of the two available carriers has LTE in my area. While AT&T has 4G in the form of HSPA+ rolled out in many areas, it only has 4G LTE rolled out in about 25 cities right now - and LTE is MUCH faster than HSPA+ even though they're both considered '4G). Verizon has LTE rolled out in over 300 cities. I would advise anyone to find out which carrier (if any) has the best LTE coverage in your area before buying one of the two carrier-specific LTE iPads because LTE does you no good without LTE coverage. A good app to find out coverage areas is 'Coverage?'.
Did you apple fan nerds actually watch the entire video? There were speed tests done that didn't use the internet.
I understand the basic idea of the article, but it leaves out a significant element: Apple released an upgraded iPad at the SAME PRICE POINT.
I could see the complaint if Apple sold the New iPad $100 for $200 more. But in this case, it just sounds like whining.
Oops, I meant "for $100 or $200 more."
Georgia's article has nothing to do with Apple selling the new iPad with a Retina display for the same price. That isn't the topic of the article. The topic is her perspective on the speed of it's quad core graphics in rendering web pages and the perception of software load times. The price of the new iPad relative to it's technology upgrades is a different topic that has nothing to do with this article. A completely different discussion, just as a discussion about the perception of LTE iPads (which she doesn't even have. Hers is WIFI ONLY), is invalid.
Hey Rene,
I'd be curious what percentage of the buying public can consistently tell the difference between the iPad 2 and new iPad based on screen resolution during normal, every day use.
For me the boost in resolution between iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 was obvious, but having compared the new iPad and iPad 2 at Best Buy, I had to look in settings to confirm which was which. Now granted, they weren't "almost touching" side by side, which may have made it more obvious, but the question remains how many of us can really tell when using the device day to day?
In a perfect world -- where marketing didn't matter, my guess is the answer to that question would mean a bump in processor speed and battery life would be more universally valued.
I couldn't agree more. There is nothing about the new iPad that is a serious draw for me, and I'm still using an iPad 1 because it does exactly what I need. I, like you, would simply like it to do exactly what it does now twice as fast.
How much faster do you want it?!? I've owned all 3 iPads and every iPhone. This iPad is the fastest one yet. And even if the new iPad is "slow" how much faster can it get with the applications currently in production? .0008 ms faster? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
And for what it's worth, I'm really glad you new iPad owners are so happy, but it's not a religion guys, it's a tablet. Georgia not agreeing with you isn't going to send her to hell. Having an opinion that doesn't jibe with yours doesn't make her wrong or confused. It makes you pricks.
What you said bears repeating.
One would think we were discussing religion, politics, sexual preference, or people's weight, in this discussion. A young women bought a new iPad and is disappointed because she had expectations that were not met. HER EXPECTATIONS. NOT MINE. NOT anyone else's. She doesn't have to explain herself or apologize to anyone for having a perspective that differs from anyone else's. Some of the responses here are from people who seriously need to take a chill pill, switch to Decafe, and find a better way to relax than arguing over someone else's opinion differing from theirs. I watched the Keynote along with everyone else and while the Retina display is impressive along with the fact that LTE is now available in the USA for the new iPad, neither of those upgrades impressed me enough to make me want the new iPad. I got the iPad two. Some will agree with that choice. Others will not. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter who agrees or disagrees with her take on the speed of the new iPad. It's her opinion and she's entitled to write an opinion piece on this site about it. Anyone who doesn't like it, doesn't have to read it. Again, CNET Gushes about the iPad daily. Go read there. There are plenty of Type A's over there for several rounds of pointless opinion arguments.
I agree with everything you said except the last sentence. Quite hypocritical don't you think?
Georgia is entitled to her opinion, as is everyone else. Doesn't make em pricks tho. Let's play nice.
While a few people sure would have been happy if Apple had released an entirely different iPad, or perhaps two new versions (which actually would have been however many versions Apple has to make already, times two), the reality is - it didn't happen. We get the products we get.
If Apple had made a new iPad with the old screen plus the new iPad with the retina screen, what would they have cost? The same price? That's ridiculous. Anyone buying the low res screen version would have cried foul since they would be getting less tech for the same price. Would Apple have to sell the low res version for less than $499? That's silly too. If anything, this would have led to an increase in the base price for the new retina iPad.
It makes no sense for Apple to start complicating their iPad strategy. At least, not yet. Not while the platform is so young and the buyers are so new to it. Most people have never owned an iPad yet. The worst thing Apple could do for customers who are new to the iPad is complicate the process of picking one.
Well, you can't please everyone. Coming from the iPad 1, I am pleased with the iPad 3's performance. The Retina display is a huge battery drain and personally, I would choose Retina+10 hr battery life over increased clock speed+decreased battery life. Users that demand more raw performance will have to wait for the iPad 3S/4 when Apple will have figured out how to include a Retina display + A6 processor + 4G LTE without compromising battery life. Overall, I believe Apple made the appropriate design decisions for the iPad 3 and if you are not satisfied with the product then you can always vote "no" with your wallet.
As a sidebar, if pure raw clock speed performance is what you're looking for, then go with an Android tablet. If you are after the user experience and Retina display, then choose Apple.
The problem is that the OS really sucks on Android tablets. One of my good friends has one of the best Android tablets made and it bugs him to the point that he hardly ever uses it. He's shown me videos of him using it, and I can certainty see what he means. Even the way it responds to touch and picks things on-screen is a pain. Basically, it's a really poor user experience, but it has little to do with Retina display. The Retina display is just kind of like icing on the cake.
I agree wholeheartedly. The user experience on Android tablets is nowhere near as good as on the iPad. However, Android's focus is not on the user experience like it is for iOS. Instead, Android tablet manufacturers focus on raw clock speed performance and desktop-like functionality. My point is that Apple makes design decisions that favor user experience (e.g. Retina display, faster graphics, uncompromising battery life) over raw clock speed performance, and as the market currently stands if you want a tablet that focuses on raw clock speed performance you can always vote Android with your wallet.
I agree with Georgia. I would much rather have a thinner, faster iPad 2 with better battery life or 120gb than a retina display. Different people look for different thing, that doesn't one is better than the other. Any chance Apple might decide to release an upgraded iPad 2 with the specs if the Ipad 3 minus the retina display ?
What about people who only want the new screen but don't need the massive battery or faster processor? Ooh, ooh, I know! Apple should specifically make iPads geared toward them too. Then, when a new customer goes into an Apple Store, they'd be faced with a myriad of new iPads and options to figure out.
Or, how about this: instead of three entirely different kinds of new iPads (Awesome screen but slower with less battery life / So-so screen but faster with huge battery / Decked out version with everything) maybe Apple should just make THE NEW iPAD with the best of the best even if it outperforms the needs of some people?
That's what I'd do if I were at Apple. Come to think of it, that's what Apple did. It just makes sense.
I mean no offense, but the more I think about it, the more ridiculous this article is. Sometimes, iMore really does a great job of providing excellent well thought out content. Other times, we get stuff like this.
Agreed and well said. From a journalistic perspective this article is of poor quality. However, if the author's intent was to spark lively discussion, then the piece served that purpose.
Just don't buy one then, and get out more often !!!
As much as the new iPad looks great with its amazing retina display, it's not very much to fall back on. My friends all ask me if they should upgrade their iPad 2 to the new iPad and the real truth answer is. Do you NEED it? I made the mistake of buying an iPad 1 because I wanted one but I soon realized that I didn't need one at all. My iPhone 4S was incredibly sufficient enough to fulfill my everyday needs for Internet means. I also asked my friend to bring along his iPad 2 and bring it to AT&T to compare both devices and it is definitely noticeable with the new iPad having a nicer display. I am currently waiting on what the next iPad will have to offer because that's what we all would like to see is the next and new iDevice from Apple. Also people who say "You can't make everyone happy" I mean seriously, humans have opinions and it's not like everyone is going to buy "every" little thing puts out on the table. If I had an iPad 2, I would NOT buy the new iPad considering its not much of an upgrade. People use the retina display more of an excuse but you didn't see millions of people complaining about the iPad 2's screen. It's an opinion and I believe both devices are amazing, just have to look at with a little more perspective from where you stand with what device you own and if each new device is really a "want" or "need".
I couldnt be happier with my new iPad. The screen is a huge deal to me--always has been. People act like they can do without it but its the most important thing if you ask me. I skipped the iPad 2 but just because my husband wanted one for himself (he didnt have iPad 1) and I figured ok, I can wait till the next one to upgrade. It was a long hard wait for me. I was so jealous of my dear hubby with his gorgeous iPad 2. What made it gorgeous to me? The screen. It was so much brighter than my old iPad. I loved the slim form factor and the camera capabilities. Everytime he face timed or skyped on it while all I could do with mine is chat....it was torture! Now I have an even better screen than his and this really awesome camera to boot for the same price he paid for his! No complaints from me whatsoever! Georgia, I'm sorry you aren't as thrilled as I am.
I Agree with you.
A better screen is NICE! BUT. Sad to say content are always falling behind the resolution of the display. Even apps at retina resolution, may not be truly pixel perfect. I hate to wait to load and rather stream at a lower resolution. LTE is not fully international standardized and the rates are $$$.
HEY for that kind of resolution. They should make things on springboard SMALLER. Like allow more icons on same page!
In the 50s our Good Humor truck was a tired Chevrolet conversion. Once my brother kept the driver busy while I flooded the truck by pumping the heck out of the gas pedal. While the driver was trying to get the truck started, the kid down the street was screaming for ice cream but ran in the house when the frazzled driver finally got there. We were rotten.
Often times I knit to relax. I find many of the patterns available nice but occasionally I make up my own patterns. It takes a bit of the relaxing nature of knitting out of the project but I still find it fun. I am always much more confident when knitting from a pattern even though I know it is not uncommon to find mistakes in printed patterns.
Great weblog right here! Also your website so much up fast! What web host are you using? Can I am getting your affiliate link for your host? I wish my site loaded up as quickly as yours lol
Did you bother to try it? It's not very practical at the moment.


text:
Quick Links
Shop All Jewelry
RG10296 In Stock
This sterling silver Ankh ring features an Egyptian ankh that is 5/8 inch tall by 1/2 inch wide, on a 1/8 inch wide wand. The ankh is a symbol of the eternal life and divinity of the spirit, and is used as a symbol of longevity in pop culture today. Pair this with our ankh bracelet for extra luck in achieving a long, happy life!
Eve's Addiction.com wants you to be a happy customer. We want you to be completely satisfied with the sterling silver jewelry that you receive from us, as we only sell high quality silver and cubic zirconia cz jewelry. We do understand that you may not like your purchase for some reason.
You may return or exchange your jewelry within 60 days of purchase if you are not satisfied with it. The jewelry must be returned in its original condition for a refund or exchange. Engraved, personalized, photo, monogram, name and initial, chocolate and clearance items are not returnable or exchangeable.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Chicago, IL (Sports Network) - Jake Peavy tossed seven innings of one-run, four-hit ball and the White Sox defeated the Orioles 8-1 in the third test of a four-game set at U.S. Cellular Field on Wednesday.
"He just brings the level up and the other guys feed off of that," remarked White Sox manager Robin Ventura about Peavy.
Peavy (2-0) fanned eight hitters and did not surrender a walk for the White Sox, who finished with 11 hits. Adam Dunn knocked in three runs, A.J. Pierzynski added a two-run shot and Alejandro De Aza also went deep for Chicago, which had dropped the first two games to Baltimore.
Tommy Hunter (1-1) was charged with all eight runs in the loss after giving up nine hits and four walks in 5 2/3 innings. Adam Jones smacked a double and scored the only Baltimore run on an RBI double from Endy Chavez.
The O's got their run in the second as back-to-back doubles from Jones and Chavez around a Matt Wieters strike out gave Baltimore a short-lived 1-0 lead.
"Everybody here is going to have periods where they're not as good as they're capable of being," Orioles manager Buck Showalter said about the offense getting off to a slow start. "If that's our biggest issue this year, we're in real good shape."
Chicago answered in the bottom half when Paul Konerko opened the frame with a single and Pierzynski followed with a two-run blast to right field.
The White Sox added another run in the third after a Dunn walk and back- to-back singles loaded the bases with one out. Alex Rios then lifted a sacrifice fly to right, plating Dunn for the 3-1 lead.
De Aza made it a 4-1 contest with one swing of the bat in the fourth, sending a 3-2 curveball deep to right-center field for his third homer of the year.
Chicago broke the game open in the sixth, as Rios was plunked to start the frame. Alexei Ramirez roped a single two batters later and Gordon Beckham followed with a single through the left side, scoring Rios for a 5-1 lead.
Hunter was lifted with two outs in the sixth after intentionally walking De Aza and striking out Brent Morel. Troy Patton entered with the bases loaded and Dunn quickly cleared them, sending a fastball the other way down the left- field line for an 8-1 Chicago lead.
Thursday afternoon's series finale will feature two right-handed hurlers as Jason Hammel takes the mound for Baltimore against Gavin Floyd for the White Sox...Baltimore went 1-for-6 with runners in scoring position and left four on base while Chicago finished 3-for-11 with RISP and stranded eight men.


text:
LOS ANGELES Hes acted, danced and sang his way through movies, television and the stage, making Dick Van Dyke an entertainment triple-threat long before Hollywood used such hyphenates.
The 87-year-old actor, best known for the 1960s hit comedy The Dick Van Dyke Show and Disneys big-screen musical Mary Poppins, can now add lifetime achievement honoree. He picked up that honor at Sunday nights 19th annual Screen Actors Guild Awards.
Ive knocked around in this business for 70 years and I still havent quite figured out exactly what it is I do, Van Dyke said after accepting his trophy from presenter Alec Baldwin.
The years have been full of surprises for me and a lot of fun. Arent we lucky to have found a line of work that doesnt require growing up?
Van Dykes career has spanned eight decades, starting with work as a disc jockey and a standup comic in the late `40s. He even worked as a national television morning-show host, with no less than Walter Cronkite serving as his news anchor.
But perhaps Van Dykes most critical career break came in 1960, when director Gower Champion hired him as the male lead opposite Chita Rivera in the new Broadway-bound stage musical Bye Bye Birdie.
Van Dyke had no professional dance experience, and out-of-town tryouts did not go well. Nevertheless, Champion refused to fire the actor, who would go on to New York with Rivera and win a Tony award for his performance.
About a year later, Van Dyke was starring in his own sitcom, in the role of TV comedy writer Rob Petrie on The Dick Van Dyke Show. Three prime-time Emmys for Van Dyke and more than 50 years later, the series remains revered by many critics as one of the earliest models of great workplace comedy.
The `Dick Van Dyke Show was the most fun I ever had and the most creative period of my life, he said on the red carpet.
During the series run, Van Dyke also enjoyed big-screen hits, including the 1963 Birdie movie and the 1964 all-star comedy, What a Way to Go! But biggest of all was Mary Poppins, in which he introduced the Oscar-winning song Chim Chim Cher-ee.
Last year, Van Dyke presented the same lifetime achievement honor to his former TV co-star, Mary Tyler Moore.
These days, Van Dyke sings with his vocal group, The Vantasix, and enjoys life with his wife of one year, makeup artist Arlene Silver. The couple met seven years ago at the SAG Awards.
They tell me you never work again once you get this award, Van Dyke said on the red carpet. Ill have to let them know Im available.
Actor Dick Van Dyke poses backstage with his life achievement award at the 19th Annual Screen Actors Guild Awards at the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles on Sunday Jan. 27, 2013. (Photo by Chris Pizzello/Invision/AP)×
Notice about comments:
Aiken Standard is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point.
We do not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click the X that appears in the upper right corner when you hover over a comment. This will send the comment to Facebook for review. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full terms and conditions.


text:
I was so happy finally to get Gilded Envy to add to my collection of taupe/pewter type shadows. This shade has never been released in Canada but I found it easily at the Walmart in Buffalo when we went over the border a few days ago. It's a beautifuly neutral pewter shade that's a bit more metallic than I'd ideally like but not so much that I'm not delighted with it. It wears very well without creasing and so it also works great as a base under other shadows (I like using it under MAC's Caviar Dreams shadow, which is one of those problematic Lustre finishes; using Gilded Envy enhances how it looks once applied). Great inexpensive shadow.
There is another color in here that isn't listed and that's bronzed taupe, but these are a product that I can love or leave. They're super lovely on the skin, highly pigmented, but they're also not true to color (at least on me), and they're more expensive than MUG. I don't think I'll be buying another, but I'm happy with the ones I have.
0 out of 1 users found this review helpful
Was this review helpful? Yes No
I got Tender Caramel ages ago and I'm pretty sure that, unfortunately, it was limited edition although this is another shade that L'Oreal would have been wise to add to the permanent collection (instead of the 2 or 3 almost identical shades of shiny beige they have!). This is a lovely metallic/shimmery champagne-y taupe shade. It is great on its own or paired with a more matte neutral. It applies so smoothly and beautifully, like most of the Infallible shadows and it wears well all day. You can dab/smooth this on with a finger or with a brush – either gives great results and these shadows are so easy to work with and such good value.
Beautiful colour payoff – unfortunately the shade range is not that great in Australia. The consistency lies somewhere between a pigment and a shadow but theres not too much fall out and blending is great. It also works well with a traditional eyeshadow in terms of mixing and blending.
I finally hit pan on "downtown" from my Kat Von D Ludwig palette and when that happened, i shed a tear. Why? because that color was my everyday color that made my eyes pop without very much effort and the ludwig palette has been "out of stock" on sephoras' website for ages. Thankfully Kat Von D's recent Saint palette has "downtown" in it but why spend $36 for just one eyeshadow if the rest seem "meh, ill never wear those?" yeah, you know the feeling. You've bought a palette before just because one eyeshadow was the bomb-diggity that you couldn't resist not buying it. Admit it.
Back to the point, after hours of searching for a dupe, I finally found L'Oreal Infallible Eyeshadow in Amber Rush. After purchasing it, i did a comparison with "downtown" from the ludwig palette on one eye and Amber Rush on the other; they were exactly alike! I did a little happy dance around my house because I saved $28 and I got more product than would come in a pan from the Kat Von D palette!
Just to prove my point that they are identical:
Right as my mom came home from running errands I asked her if my eyes looked different from each other. She said "ummmm is one eyebrow different than the other?" No. "Is your eyeliner different?" NO. Then I told her that the two copper eyeshadows were different brands and you should have seen the look on her face. She yelled "NO WAY?!! how did you find that? They look exactly alike!!"
There is nothing bad I can say about Gleaming Bronze (which, in Canada, was called "Bronze Divine"). The colour is outstanding – one of those shades that works so well entirely on its own. It's a rich golden bronze that works with so many neutral or dark toned shadows in shades of brown, deep taupe or deep green. Wear is phenomenal and the price is so much less than similar (but no better) products from Armani and Chanel.
I wanted this shade very much after seeing it on Temptalia but this colour wasn't available here in Canada (though now I'm pretty sure it is, but just with a different name) so when I went to the US, I got it. It's my 3rd or 4th Infallible 24 hour shadow and while it applies and wears fine, I find it just too frosty bright for me to wear (and I am someone who absolutely loves shiny shadows!)
Beautiful color and idea. However, I hate the fallout in this eyeshadow. Gold or silver shimmer on my cheeks is one thing, but green flakes of foil are another. Also, none of the swatches seem to convey exactly how frosty the finish is on the eye.
1 out of 1 users found this review helpful
Was this review helpful? Yes No
Sahara Treasure is available in most countries, but not the US. It's my favorite neutral eyeshadow – it's sort of a cross between beige and pale gold, and on my NC20-ish skin, it's a perfect neutral; it goes with everything. It is blendable, pigmented/opaque and lasts all day.
Gleaming Bronze (LE, Summer 2012) is my favorite Infallible shade and one of my favorite eyeshadow shades of all time. It's a bronzey green, one of my favorite colors, easy to blend, long wearing, and gorgeous. If you missed out on it, Bronze Goddess and Bronze Divine are the same shade and permanent in the UK / Canada, respectively!
1 out of 1 users found this review helpful
Was this review helpful? Yes No


text:
|179 posts found
Advanced Member
Joined: 8/17/09
Awesome post, OP. You've obviously given a lot of thought to the situation and I thank you for putting it out there so eloquently.
Login or Register to never see this panel
Originally posted by Greyface
hmm .. whales are buying in F2P .. otherwise, it will die.
Advanced Member
Joined: 3/24/09
OP, in regards #1 you seem to be conflating Developers LISTENING to thier audience with allowing that audience to DICTATE exactly how to build a product. Developers and companies in general absolutely HAVE to listen to the people using thier products. You are pretty much dead without doing so. You are also pretty much dead abdicating responsibility for designing/building a product to that audience.
As a designer there is absolutely no substitute for hearing from the people actualy using your product. It doesn't mean that you automaticaly do everything that they say, it means that you try to understand thier experience with that product. If 95 percent of your customers say "I don't know how to do this." That's something you need to wake up and pay attention to. It doesn't mean that the product is "too hard"...it could just be that the help system or documentation or tutorial sucks.
Building a dialogue with your users is also really important for winning loyalty to your brand. Part of Blizzards early success wasn't that they ignored thier fans...it was that they had built a really good relationship with the fans of thier RTS titles.
Originally posted by Greyface
Why wouldn't he, if you can replace all the players in 3 months? 1M of subs for 6 month, is the same as 2M of players, 1M sub for 3 month, and the second M subs for another 3.
And while MMO is probably expensive compared to the average SP game, they are not more expensive than the big AAA games like COD (except may be TOR). Case in point, GW & GW2 are perfectly happy living on box sales.
And lastly, how devs design their mmo (for long or for short) is irrelevant .. it is up to the players to decide how they play. If everyone decides they are going to play 3 month then move on, there is really nothing the dev can do. In fact, isn't that why TOR is going F2P?
A dev can only respond to market desire.
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Actually there seems to be something of a potential fundamental flaw with some of that.
If a game is purely relying on box sales or even initial sub and then run numbers to turn a profit, then there is zero problem with them making mmos aimed at churning a consumerbase (from a business perspective). The trouble is though, that simply isn't the case for the main part, as cash shops seem to be intended to be a significant part of the revenue generation model.
One would imagine that generating profits via the sale of IG items necessitates attracting a signficant portion of players who are going to be prepared to invest in items for their IG toons. Someone who is going to ram through and then bail on a game in the space of a couple of months is unlikely to drop a significant amount of money in a cash shop in that time (although there will be exceptions ofc). Someone inclined to stay with the game however is going to generate more money via that model.
The likelyhood of replacing the entire playerpool every few months also seems somewhat slim.
Hard Core Member
Joined: 7/18/04
Do you want to improve the world? I don't think it can be done. -Lao Tzu
Originally posted by Greyface
OP: I didn't read through this entire thread, but I read the first post. For someone who is Not A Game Designer(tm), I have to say you pretty much nailed it. I wanted to respond to a few of the points you made (by the way, have you considered joining VO's PCC?) I think you said what a lot of people have been thinking; however, it's good to see it laid out in a clear, logical manner like this.
As players, we need to move beyond seeing sandboxes and theme parks as irreconcilable opposites. They should be looked at as points along a spectrum.
I think this is self-evident. You nailed it. It is a spectrum:
Context, not story, is what we need.
If I could I would change this to context and story, otherwise I think this is an important mantra as a content designer. Each player should have a story, but that story may not be how s/he saves the universe from the End Of Life as We Know It. This could also possibly be a spectrum, where each player fills a role somewhere between "commoner" and "hero", and perhaps where each player oscillates over the course of his/her playing career.
imagine a game without a level cap
Vendetta Online has no level cap. Actually, it has a level cap, it's just so high that you could not possibly reach it unless you handed down your account through several generations, possibly skipping a generation here/there, and each person that held the account played religiously until the end of his/her natural life. Most of the upper levels are devoid of content, presently, but they are there just waiting to be filled with content by the playerbase. I recently finished a 39-mission design project, co-authored by another player and browsed / reviewed / edited by the community, drawing inspiration from authors like William Gibson and Philip K. Dick. It's that kind of content I want to see percolate through all levels of Vendetta Online.
Hard Core Member
Joined: 7/29/09
Kudos to the OP for a well thought out and intelligent post.
I especially agree with #1. Listening to the playerbase is a sure fire way to get a game into trouble. Instead developers should WATCH what the playerbase is doing. For example if everyone is playing class X, then it's a sure fire indicator that class X is somehow advantageous. If none of the player base are doing public quests, then it's a sure fire indicator that public quests aren't what the playerbase wants.
In truth what most of the player base wants is easily defined. For themselves they want the most reward for the minimum commitment of time and effort. For their fellow gamers, which are now automatically viewed as opponents instead of comrades, they want the least reward for the maximum commitment of time and effort. Why? Because you "win" in a community game if you "pwn" everyone else in the community. Given that as a starting point it's futile to listen to the players.
Which leads to another thing that is killing MMOs. There has been a fundamental shift in the playerbase. The first generation of MMO players were former pencil and paper gamers with access to a computer modem. The recent generation of MMO players grew up playing video games and are used to a game having a story with a beginning, middle and end and then some kind of PvP attached to it. The first group was about community while the second group is used to being able to finish the game on their own. That's not right or wrong or good or bad. It just is a fact. People playing online games now have different expectations of a game than the people who first played MMORPGs.
Finally the game developers keep looking for one ring to rule them all. Even WoW doesn't do that and it's the closest anyone's ever gotten to that Holy Grail. WoW is like vanilla ice cream. Lots of people like vanilla ice cream. However instead of trying to copy vanilla gaming companies (and gamers) might be better served to adopt the Baskin Robbins approach, meaning there are 31 flavors so find the one that you like.
Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising.
Advanced Member
Joined: 3/11/08
Originally posted by nariusseldon
How do you suppose a game recoups an equal number of gamers if something within the game prompted an exodus like that?
Given how competitive MMO gaming is today (partially due to it moving into mainstream entertainment, and partially due to all the other MMO games available), word of mouth & reviews from gaming sites like MMORPG.com are HUGE. If a million gamers leave in 3 months of it's release...its highly likely that they will not recoup those same numbers....let alone be able to continously cycle players like that (unless drastic changes are made that would prompt others to give it another look)
HOW a game is designed has everything to do with player retention. If the game is designed to appeal to casual gamers (who by definition will play casually), you will have a more fickle player base....due to having to compete with other casual entertainment (TV, SP games, social media games, mobile platform games) and due to time limitations that many mainstream casual gamers have.
If you create a game that has the same formula as another game that has been in existance for 5-7 years, but just with another skin & gimmick....players will take their previous experience (and burnout) in similar type games with them and will grow bored very quick. (See SW:TOR, Rift, GW2, Warhammer, Aion, etc)
However, if you create a MMO game that is unique in the market, a quality product, and built on a model that rewards a player with experiences & relationships within the community...not cheap tangible items....then you might experience longer player retention.
Originally posted by bunnyhopper
Originally posted by RajCaj
BTW having really fun but short content? Think about a single player game. I love Dishonored, and it sold millions, but i don't play it for more than a month.
If you look at story missions in a MMO like STO, you can play it like a SP or MP online game, and exhaust that content in a few month. And there are plenty of other trekkies (there are tens of, if not hundreds of, millions of those), and if you churn a few hundred thousand a month, you are not running out of them anytime soon.
Originally posted by nariusseldon
I'm not questioning whether B2P/cash shop is viable or not. I have doubts as to the long term success of mmorpg/community centric games in particular if they have exceptionally low retention rates.
Elite Member
Joined: 8/13/09
"It is double pleasure to deceive the deceiver". - Niccolo Machiavelli
#2 - I think both players and the game company are the problem in their own way. When the company want to make a unique game then the gamers complain that it lacks the features they are used to. When the game company adds the features players want then the players complain that its a wow clone. When the game company finally makes a "too good to be true" game, then the publisher screw it over with bad business practices and many players(not all) keep supporting the bad practices just because the game has some good features and turn hostile towars players who actualy care about the game that try to make the company fix it.
#3 - I prefer a good mixed Sandpark if done correctly. The freedom, size, and openness of a sandbox with the character / story progression of a themepark. Also, i want artistic graphics like GW2 OR anime art style graphics like Blade & Soul or Tera. Too realistic(TSW) or too cartoony(except for wow) are not my cup of tea and i may look somewhere else.
#4 - The story in mmos is important to me because even if i dont roleplay with other people, i play and progress my character around the Lore of the game. If there is no deep story then all i have to do in the game is mindlessly grind kill like a bot to lvl up and that is too boring to even call it a game. After Swtor and TSW i do expect all mmos that require payment to have voice overs or i will most likely wont care about them and stick to f2p. If i want to pay to read dialog boxes i buy a book. Obviously Swtor and TSW did it wrong. Bioware's strong point is storytelling in singleplayer games, not mmos. That doesnt mean a more mmo experienced company wont do it right in an mmo and with less money than Swtors cost. Funcom is famous for making unfinished mmos so all i can say to them is to stop doing that because they are the ones suffering.
#5 - About end game.... Im not sure if End Game its what matter to most people, but to me, if my fun doesnt start from lvl 1 - 10 i will most likely dont care about the game. A good game is like a good essay. If the hook is boring and uninteresting, dont expect me to go through the whole thing.
This are just my personal thoughts on these 4 points. I fully agree with OP's #1
Novice Member
Joined: 2/27/09
Originally posted by jpnz
I wouldn't really call The Walking Dead a game. It's an interactive cartoon. Can't comment on the others as I haven't played them.
Originally posted by bunnyhopper
"The average lifetime for a player in the free-to-play space is 3-4 months per game, less than what is generally expected for a more traditional subscription MMO."
"That statistic leads to churn rate, which describes player loss per month. "It turns out you lose a lot," admitted Marks. "You should be prepared to say, 'I only brought in 100,000 players this month, but only 10,000 stayed.' That's okay! That's okay. Some of them will come back, and you can always get more."
... it is not just my opinion ... read this article. Couple with the fact that the market is going more and more F2P .. it is obvious that MMO does not need longer retention than 3-4 months to be viable.
Originally posted by tom_gore
And difficulty is in the eye of the beholder.
Look at Diablo 3 ... you have monster power 0-10 .. from trivial to very hard (depends on your gear, but for 99% of the players, MP10 is instanced death). Not to mention hardcore mode.
Some players will just do MP0 and breeze through hordes and hordes of mobs in the name of efficiencies. Personally i do the upper limit of MP (6 is the most i can do now and still feel like i am getting somewhere) so that there is a challenge.
And many are in between.
Originally posted by nariusseldon
That will be the Acclaim Games that had to get bought out a couple of years later and then shut down right? Not exactly the best case to give in fairness.
F2P clearly generates money. It is not though clear whether a typical fully fledged mmorpg (especially those with an emphasis on "world space" and community) with low retention rates is going to do well, regardless as to whether it has a cash shopped rammed onto it.
Originally posted by bunnyhopper
I am referring to this general statement:
"The average lifetime for a player in the free-to-play space is 3-4 months per game, less than what is generally expected for a more traditional subscription MMO."
So F2P works with low retention.
Elite Member
Joined: 9/27/12
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Many buy and P2P games don't seem to have a much higher one, I've played several MMO's where I was gone after my free 30 days or a few months later, and I've seen at least several other people doing it too.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
Novice Member
Joined: 12/05/07
Originally posted by Azaron_Nightblade
Yes. There are people who quit after 30 days, but there are also people who keep their subscriptions up since from the beginning and to the end if there is one. The rest of us fall somewhere in between.
The F2P model is good for quick return on investment. The head honcho of Final Fantasy XIV acknowledged this, but noted that many games solicit investors for venture capital. Those investors want to see their money returned with a profit fairly quickly, so they adopt a Free-to-Play model so they can pay them off. But what I found encouraging is that while Square-Enix obviously has to recoup production expenses, after that it's all in-house gravy and there is no one knocking on the door every three days asking where their money is. So, they are going to play the long game and make it a traditional sub.
Now we're calling prostitutes "sex workers". What's next? Calling hit men "end-of-life technicians"?
Novice Member
Joined: 5/23/04
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Did anyone else see this post on Massively yesterday?
Back in November, researchers at the University at Buffalo School of Management published a study tracing the roots of player loyalties in a variety of MMO environments. The study outlined the mentalities of MMO gamers and the things that successfully encouraged them to keep coming back for more looting, more grinding, and more /hugging. Most importantly, the study declared that an MMO that increases loyalty by just 5% can increase profits by 25-95%.


text:
BioWare Announces Story-Focused Star Wars: The Old Republic Expansion at E3 2015
Knights of the Fallen Empire coming this October.
Knights of the Fallen Empire coming this October.
Damion Schubert to give presentation at GDC 2015 explaining Star Wars: The Old Republic's transition to a free-to-play model.
BioWare's free-to-play MMO getting "Shadow of Revan" digital expansion on December 9.
These free to play PC games will keep you coming back without needing to spend a cent.
New report also suggests The Elder Scrolls Online has done well so far in 2014.
Lucasfilm announces its plans for handling the Expanded Universe.
Galactic Strongholds now expected to roll out in August instead of June; BioWare says "The result will be a far more compelling experience."
The free-to-play model currently dominates mobile gaming, but will it also take over Xbox One, PS4, and PC? GameSpot's editors discuss.
Galactic Strongholds digital expansion allows players to live on multiple planets and customize their apartments.
BioWare announces two new expansions coming to Star Wars: The Old Republic in 2014; will resemble Galactic Starfighter and Rise of the Hutt Cartel.
Star Wars: The Old Republic finally gets the full-fledged space battles fans have been calling for.
Nearly two years after launch, 12v12 space combat coming to BioWare's free-to-play MMO.
GTAV may have cost as much as $266 million to create and market, according to Scottish newspaper.
Will be available once the 2.3 patch is released on the main servers.
The list of domain names registered by Lucasfilm includes Star Wars Alliance, Star Wars Rebels, and Wookie Hunters.
New patches to fix bugs and add general improvements.
Electronic Arts reveals business model switch for Star Wars MMO has been lucrative; paying subscribers stand at 500,000.
Wedbush Securities analyst questions viability of sci-fi brand after The Old Republic came up short.
First digital expansion for BioWare's free-to-play MMO game launching next month; those who preordered on or before January 7 can jump in April 9.
Analysts estimate game development to have cost $100 million; additional $100 million spent on marketing and promotion. [UPDATE]: Creative director Ken Levine refutes the claims.
BioWare reveals new user milestone following business model conversion; thousands of new players join every day.
Game Update 2.0 to bring level cap up to 55 and introduce new skills for advanced classes.
BioWare producer says same-gender options with some NPCs--but not companions--will be available with upcoming expansion.
First expansion for BioWare's Star Wars MMO arriving spring 2013; increases level cap to 55, adds new planet Makeb.
BioWare's massively multiplayer online role-playing game adding free option next week, less than a year after launch.
COO Peter Moore believes games should be continual activities, says company is already on track to deliver this; explains why Galway customer service center is integral to business.
Tweets claiming to be from Daniel Erickson indicate longtime Electronic Arts developer and Star Wars MMO creative director looking for new work.
Battlecry Studios will be based in Austin, Texas; will be run by industry veteran former Star Wars: The Old Republic executive producer Rich Vogel; studio to work on unannounced project.
In part 2 of ongoing series, multiple online RPG designers give us further insight into the building of a persistent world.
In the first part of an ongoing series, multiple MMOG developers dissect the creative effort that goes into building a persistent world.
Greg Zeschuk and Ray Muzyka leave role-playing game studio and industry entirely after 17 years; BioWare general manager says culture will endure.
Publisher expanding Galway, Ireland, customer support center to provide multilingual assistance for unspecified "major titles."
Publisher says Greg Zeschuk and Ray Muzyka are still with company, but Zeschuk is taking time off and considering new projects.
BioWare MMORPG will let free players advance through all classes this fall, will restrict some content and functionality with microtransactions.
Cowen & Company analyst estimates value of deal between Activision and Jason West and Vince Zampella, says StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm will ship in 2013, with MoH: Warfighter ...
Publisher's top executive keen on F2P, says company is considering "different models" to help bring more players to Star Wars: The Old Republic.
[UPDATE]: BioWare Austin cofounder, producer, and vice president Rich Vogel leaves Star Wars MMO team as layoffs at Texas capital city studio continue.
Live from San Diego Comic-Con, Justin Calvert checks in with some more free gaming suggestions for the weekend.
New level-capped but unlimited Free Trial offer for BioWare's MMORPG allows those without previous accounts to try out opening adventures of eight character classes.
Lead designer Emmanuel Lusinchi indicates BioWare "looking into" Star Wars MMO game dropping subscription fee in favor of free business model.
Use your keyboard!
Log in to comment


text:
Want full access?
Current subscriber?Activate
Have an account? Login
PHOTO BY EDDIE SEAL/SPECIAL TO THE CALLER TIMES The Rodriguezes' master bedroom is a pleasing mix of colors and textures that exude rest and relaxation with a touch of pumpkin orange for the season.
Black cats, witches, pumpkins of all shapes and sizes and other Halloween decorations hang around the beautiful aqua blue and white living area in the Rodriquez home.
PHOTO BY EDDIE SEAL/SPECIAL TO THE CALLER TIMES The Rodriguez family goes all out for Halloween. The elegant formal dining room shines with pumpkin orange pillows, feathers, pennants and other scary/cute decorations.
ABOVE: A grinning black cat, spider, pumpkin man and fall leaves accentuate a space on the living room wall.
Beautiful Carrara marble blends well with the aqua blue walls, white cabinets and assorted Halloween decorations in the kitchen area.
ABOVE: Spiders, pumpkins and a spider web tablecloth go well with the modern look of the breakfast room in the Rodriguez home.
PHOTO BY EDDIE SEAL/SPECIAL TO THE CALLER TIMES Hulk and Spiderman pumpkins hang around the front yard water feature for Halloween at the Rodriguez home.


text:
« Exit photo gallery
Guns banned once, maybe again
Vice President Joe Biden is slated to make public his task force's plan to rein in gun violence on Tuesday, and it may include a proposal to ban assault weapons - something for which President Barack Obama voiced support during a White House press conference on Monday. "What you can count on is the things I've said in the past — the belief we have to have strong background checks, that we can do a much better job in terms of keeping those magazine clips with high capacity out of the hands of folks that shouldn't have them, an assault weapons ban that is meaningful — that those are things I continue to believe make sense," Obama said Monday. In 1994, a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons criminalized possession of nearly 20 kinds of those guns before it expired 10 years later. Here's a look at some of the assault weapons that were outlawed, according to legislation from the time:
1. Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models)
One member of the Kalashnikov family, a Legend AK-47/S originally produced in 1988, comes with three 30-round box magazines and a bayonet with a scabbard, according to a summary of the device. Optional accessories include "5-round, 20-round, and 40-round Box Mags" and a "75-round Drum Magazine," the Poly Technologies Inc. website says. Pictured here is an AK-47, some of which were banned by the 1994 law. Norinco and Mitchell Avtomat Kalashnikovs, all models, were forbidden by that law.(Photo: AP Photo)
More: See all POLITICO photo galleries
Did you know that this gallery has keyboard shortcuts? Use your left and right arrows to navigate through the gallery.


text:
|The most helpful favorable review
|The most helpful critical review
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
By nick from USA on 2010-03-28 13:01:05Things I liked:veery good gun little hop up feels real
Things I would have changed:i would like it to have a little stronger hold on the mag
What others should know:it is a very good gun for the price
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful:
By Neil from Canada on 2012-09-19 20:17:24Things I liked:Fast rate of fier, sounds like it has power behind it. Realistic look and feel.
Things I would have changed:Magazine and rifle stock have way too much play in them. So I would tighten them up or change the materials used.
What others should know:I got mine today and couldnt wait to take it out for field testing. I did and was a bit dissapointed. My rifle DOES NOT fire in semi-auto. I dont know if its an issue with the gear box or the manufacturing. Occasionally, the gear box seemed to jam or fail altogether. Accuracy seemed pretty decent and I didnt reallt take the time to site it in. Seems you need to have at least 50 rounds or more or the mags wont feed bb's anymore. As J.M. Shneider said "You can taste the difference quality makes!". This folks, is not a quality gun. Pretty dissapointed for what I was expecting. Looks better than a Canadian tire gun, but the overall performance just wasnt what I was expecting. Maybe I just got a bad gun?
|By Schuyler from USA on 2013-02-11
CheckoutSubtotal (USD):
does not include shipping and tax


text:
As the top tourist destination on earth, with over 50 million visitors drawn to this central Florida city every year, there is no shortage of hotels to choose from in Orlando. Visitors will discover tens of thousands of lodging options with something to suit the tastes of just about everyone. The biggest challenge may be in narrowing down all of the possibilities. From the utmost in luxurious, elegant hotels to low-cost hotels and plenty of budget-friendly choices, Orlando hotels have it all.
The city is best known for its many theme parks, like Disney World which is located in Kissimmee on the south side of Orlando, and many Orlando hotels are within walking distance from the most popular attractions. International Drive is the home of many low-cost accommodations that are ideal for a business trip to Orlando, with close proximity to the Orange County Convention Center and attractions like Universal Orlando. With its many bars, restaurants and clubs, downtown Orlando is fast becoming a trendy lodging choice.
No matter what type of amenities you're looking for, you're practically guaranteed to find a hotel that fits the bill. If you simply want a room to lay your head down at night, there are plenty of clean, comfortable rooms with just the basics. There are also numerous resorts that combine function with fantasy. From Disney properties that feature incredible swimming pools with pirate caves, waterfalls, and characters in costume to five-star resorts known for VIP treatment and world-class spas, these establishments are designed to help you forget your worries and indulge in the ultimate escape.
Whether you're looking for the best money can buy, the most affordable hotel, or something in between, it can easily be found in Orlando. Put on your comfortable walking shoes and take advantage of the wide range of attractions, or kick them off, relax, do nothing at all, and enjoy Orlando your way.


text:
In contrast to other countries, the launch of Street View was met with considerable resistance from politicians and privacy protection advocates in Germany, including the country's consumer protection minister, Isle Aigner of the conservative Christian Social Union, who criticized the service as an incursion on people's privacy. (... )
As was widely expected, one doesn't have to look very far in Street View to find homes that have been blurred out. Prior to the introduction of the service, more than 244,000 households in the first 20 cities to be placed online submitted requests to have their homes blurred out. Google claims the figure represents only 3 percent of households. (...)
Nevertheless, there are considerable obstructed images in the German version of Street View. In any instance where an apartment renter asked to have their flat pixilated, Google blurred out the entire building they live in. Data protection authorities believe that up to a million households across the country have been blurred out by the company.
Workin' In A Cocktail Bar
2 hours ago


text:
Arizona reform advocates hail immigration reform
PHOENIX -- Elected Arizona officials who advocate for immigration reform are hailing a proposal by eight U.S. senators to overhaul the current system while questioning some of the proposal's provisions.
U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva said Monday's proposal by Arizona Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake and four others puts ``the wind at the back'' of those seeking comprehensive immigration reform. But he questions the proposal's emphasis on securing the border and enforcement.
The Tucson Democrat said at a state Capitol press conference that the proposal gives only provisional visas to illegal immigrants until the border is deemed secure. He says border governors get too much power to determine when that is met.
Others called the proposal ``a good day for America.''
President Barack Obama releases his immigration reform proposal Tuesday.
``I am pleased that there is expressed recognition of what we have been saying in Arizona: immigration reform will not succeed unless and until we have achieved effective border security,'' Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said in a statement.
``In the weeks ahead, I will review the specific details of this immigration plan when proposed in actual legislation,'' Brewer added. ``In the meantime, I'll be speaking with Arizona ranchers, business leaders and other residents of the border region as well as law enforcement. I will continue to talk with those on the front lines and I will make sure their voices are heard.''


text:
Any Unix-like operating system needs a C library: the library which defines the ``system calls'' and other basic facilities such as open, malloc, printf, exit...
The GNU C Library is used as the C library in the GNU systems and most systems with the Linux kernel.
The GNU C Library is primarily designed to be a portable and high performance C library. It follows all relevant standards including ISO C11 and POSIX.1-2008. It is also internationalized and has one of the most complete internationalization interfaces known.
The current stable version of glibc is 2.21. See the NEWS file in the glibc sources for more information.
2015-02-06: glibc 2.21 released.
2014-09-07: glibc 2.20 released.
2014-02-08: glibc 2.19 released.
2013-08-12: glibc 2.18 released.
2012-12-25: glibc 2.17 released.
2012-06-30: glibc 2.16 released.
2012-03-21: glibc 2.15 released.
2011-06-07: glibc 2.14 released.
2011-02-04: glibc 2.13 released.
The history of Unix and various standards determine much of the interface of the C library. In general the GNU C Library supports the ISO C and POSIX standards. We also try to support the features of popular Unix variants (including BSD and System V) when those do not conflict with the standards. Different compatibility modes (selectable when you compile an application) allow the peaceful coexistence of compatibility support for different varieties of Unix.
The GNU C Library is currently maintained by a community of developers many of which are listed on the MAINTAINERS page of the project wiki.
Many others have contributed in large amounts as documented in the glibc Contributors.
Thank you to all who have contributed, either in bug reports, or by answering a question, your help is appreciated.


text:
Pastor in same-sex parent dispute remains jailedBy WILSON RING
The Associated Press | January 31,2013MONTPELIER — A Virginia pastor who interfered with a custody dispute involving a lesbian couple in Vermont will remain jailed for refusing to testify before a federal grand jury.
Forty-seven-year-old Kenneth Miller was convicted last summer of helping Lisa Miller and her daughter leave the country in September 2009 to avoid sharing custody with her former partner. Prosecutors are trying to compel the pastor to testify against someone else involved in the flight, but Miller said his fundamentalist Christian faith prevents him from doing so.
Miller, of Stuarts Draft, Va., was jailed a week ago after refusing a judge's order that he testify before a grand jury. At a hearing Thursday said he hasn't changed his mind.
The Millers are not related.MORE IN This Just InThe family of a Connecticut man who was killed in a car accident on Route 4 last Friday night is... Full StoryAssociated Press Full StoryIt seems like I just started to warm up from last winter and I see back-to-school displays. Full Story
- Most Popular
- Most Emailed
- RICHARD'S POOR ALMANACK: On this day 1739, 'Richard Palmer' identified in prison at York Castle as the notorious outlaw DICK TURPIN; IN 1836, Battle of the Alamo begins near San Antonio de Bexar, Texas; 1896, the Tootsie Roll invented by LEO HIRSCHFELD.
- RICHARD'S POOR ALMANACK: On this day in 1472, Orkney, Shetland islands put up as collateral by Norway to Scotland in lieu of dowry for MARGARET OF DENMARK on her marriage with JAMES III, king of Scotland; 1962, JOHN GLENN first American to orbit Earth.
- TOMORROW'S HEADLINES TODAY: City mayoral candidates debate campaign issues; Hartford, Conn., woman still missing; Neal Goswami reports attempts to legislate suicide; local woman loses 100 pounds through TOPS program.
- RICHARD'S POOR ALMANACK: On this day in 1878, JOHN TUNSTALL murdered near Lincoln, New Mexico, by the outlaw JESSE EVANS; in 1930, ELM FARM OLLIE first cow to fly in aircraft, first to be milked airborne; 1955, nuke test WASP; '79, snow in Sahara.
- TOMORROW'S HEADLINES TODAY: Rutland Herald News Editor Alan J. Keays and staff writer Gordon Dritschilo discuss stories planned for the February 18, 2015, edition of the newspaper: Winter budgets maxed, legal marijuana, Springfield bank job, USPS slowdown
- RICHARD'S POOR ALMANACK: On this day in 1249 AD, ANDRE of LONGJUMEAU is dispatched by LOUIS IX of France to meet the KHAGAN, ruler of the Mongol Empire; in 1804, during 1st Barbary War, STEPHEN DECATUR scuttles the pirate-held USS Philadelphia in Tripoli.


text:
The term "squash-puppy" may evoke a little nostalgia and even a few hunger pains in those who have tasted the fluffy, fried morsels.
They were once available at The Buffet, which closed in 2008, but the couple who owned that restaurant has opened up another business and squash-puppies are one of many food items on the menu.
Jim and Wendy Kelly have established a casual, buffet-styled restaurant in Burnettown which had a soft opening in September.
It's called Kelly's Family Buffet and offers mostly Southern cuisine such as fried chicken, meatloaf and all the fixings as well as the occasional Asian and barbecue dishes.
The Kellys owned The Buffet, which was located on University Parkway and lasted for 21 years. In 2008, the couple was a bit burnt out and had just adopted their little girl, Samantha. They decided to step out of the restaurant business for a few years so they could spend more time with family.
But, several years later, Jim Kelly started itching to get back in the kitchen.
"It's just in his blood," Wendy said laughing.
She wasn't kidding. Jim's father, John Kelly, started a restaurant in 1977 called the Heart of Aiken. In 1978, his father opened another restaurant in Augusta called Harvest Table which is still around today.
Since the new restaurant opened, several old customers of The Buffet have found their way to the eatery and to the locally famous squash-puppies.
Jim said the squash-puppies were an accident when they were first made but turned out to be well-received by their customers. They are a sweeter version of a hush-puppy with chunks of squash fried inside the dough.
The style of the restaurant is laid-back, with a few small sayings sketched onto the wall such as, "Enjoy the little things in life," and each table is complete with an upright paper towel holder.
There's also a "crooked coat rack," humorously labeled as such in green lettering, that was installed at an angle so they could fit more than two hooks on it. It became a little joke at the restaurant.
"We just wanted to keep it simple," Jim said. "We didn't want it to be cluttered. That's the whole theme – not too fancy but simple."
The kitchen has been completely remodeled with all new equipment, new carpet was put into place and the walls got a fresh coat of paint.
The Kellys are having fun with the new business where their son, Chris, also works as well as a few waitresses from The Buffet. The only real difference between "The Buffet" and this restaurant is that it's in a smaller, more intimate location and the Kellys have been more hands-on.
"I like it. It's really all I know," Jim said. "We're really excited to be back in it."
The Kellys said they've gotten great support from customers and are receptive to any feedback.
Kelly's Family Buffet is located at 3032 Augusta Road in Burnettown and can be reached at 593-7299. They can also be found on Facebook by searching "Kelly's Family Buffet."
It's open Monday through Friday from 10:45 a.m. to 2 p.m.
Starting this week, they will also open from 5 to 8 p.m. every Friday for dinner.
Customers can dine in or carry out. The restaurant also offers bulk orders for events.
Notice about comments:
Aiken Standard is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point.
We do not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click the X that appears in the upper right corner when you hover over a comment. This will send the comment to Facebook for review. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full terms and conditions.


text:
Why do I have to log in to see certain pages?
Because many of the books in Google Books are still under copyright, we limit the amount of these books that you can see. In order to enforce these limits, we make some pages available only after you log in to a Google Account. If you don't already have a Google Account, you can create one now. The aim of Google Books is to help you discover books and learn where to buy or borrow them, not read them online from start to finish. It's like going to a bookstore and browsing - with a Google twist.