Originally posted by twhint

Originally posted by Agent_X7

Would you like to cite some examples of the assumptions I make that are not true?

Where, exactly, did you read that it improves the ISP connection? I certainly did not write that. And you are right, something is wrong with my computer: Windows XP. The way it handles packets from games is pretty inefficient. Vista claims to do better, but I haven't had time to verify that yet.

Thank you for sharing your opinion. Twice.

Well, let's start off with the basics. Do you actually know how TCP/IP handles packets? I'd love to hear you explain how the Windows network stack operates. Let me hear you describe the model that TCP/IP is based off of, which everything operates using it, in one form or another.

Secondly, I'd love to hear your explanation of how a $180 NIC is a better investment than a CPU upgrade or a RAM upgrade, especially since most people have only 1 gig at most. Your review is riddled with all the little buzzwords that Bigfoot Networks uses in their advertisement flyers and such, with little or no understanding of what is actually happening, especially if you think Windows is responsible for your network having a 60ms overhead.

I know I'm being a troll here, but it bugs me that I see this kind of pandering on a site not even dedicated to these type of reviews. You say you're not influenced by their advertising and such, hey...I'll accept that. But if you think you're serving the community putting up trash like this, you might want to become a little more knowledgeable about what you're talking about. That is my only point.

I'm not going to feed the trolls. It is quite obvious by now that you merely wish to display your "superior" knowledge without really being concerened about the review itself. You did not cite any assumptions, you changed your approach and asked me to prove I know about networking. You state that you are knowledgeable about networking, but have yet to prove it yourself. I'm sorry, I don't have time to play your game.

In fact, this has come down to petty people trying to make themselves feel superior by claiming that I have no idea what I am talking about. If it makes you feel good, go for it, but I am no longer willing to waste my time replying to all the trolls.

Originally posted by twhint
When someone reviews something, it is generally assumed that they have knowledge of what they are talking about. The problem here is that the writer gives no appearance of knowledge whatsoever. He is also making assumptions which simply aren't true.  This is like some guy off the street who drives a Honda Civic who jumps into a Viper and raves about what a great car it is, without having a clue that it handles like crap even though it's fast.

The K1 NIC is simply not price efficient for what it is. A RAM upgrade or a CPU upgrade is far more cost-effective as far as replacement goes.  For you to get such improvements on your ping leads me to believe that something is wrong with your network and/or computer, because that's all the K1 NIC will affect.  It will have no affect on your ISP's connection to the rest of the world. It will have no affect on your router's connection to your ISP.  From everything I have read about the card, the improvements are modest, at best and fairly miniscule in real world applications. The only application I can see this card being absolutely worth it, is in a LAN gaming environment for a FPS contest where ping is king. In a MMORPG environment, your ping honestly doesn't matter that much unless it's way up there. And if it is way up there, then you're having problems besides what this NIC can do for you.

I'm sorry, but this review is pretty bad and seeing that Big Networks is waving it about on their website like it's some big deal further makes me doubt the effectiveness of the review, as well as the card.

Originally posted by Droniac
The information in this review is simply inaccurate.

There is no real technological difference between the previous G5 and this version. No the 1000 Hz polling rate is nothing new, install the drivers (setpoint) and press a button and you have the exact same friggin' thing for your oldschool G5 - no difference whatsoever. Indeed the only new thing about this updated version is a different look - oh and one extra button (not like you ever used the other one to begin with). And no - it doesn't offer more grip than the previous version, mainly because that version had no grip problems to begin with... I didn't think the buttons were sensitive at all either - try a Razer Diamondback: that is sensitive.

Considering the fact that the inherent technology hasn't changed at all - this remains an overpriced and underperforming mouse... and any gamer would do better with a Razer DeathAdder. It's not only less expensive, but performs infinitely better... because unlike the G5: it's not a laser mouse - and as such utilizes tried and true technology that's been utterly perfected... So where the G5 drops off after you accelerate it a bit (even when polled to 1000 Hz) and as such is not really a great mouse - the DeathAdder can handle anything any human can throw at it, easily.

Originally posted by fariic1

I use an MX revolution.  I will NEVER buy another mouse again.

How come I haven't seen a review for this mouse?

The g5 looks cool, but not as cool as my revolution. 

Originally posted by skywisenight

Originally posted by Agent_X7
That's a picture of the old G5 on the review. Technical glitch.

Here are some shots of the new mouse, courtesy of Logitech UK.

www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/large_view/GB/EN,crid=2464,contentid=13419,sh=1

By bad there.  I guess the logitech site is having a hard time keeping on top of having a new product with the same name too.  This newer blue version is absolutely no where to be found on the Canadian or US site.  Thanks for the link and I'll be updating the images today.

Originally posted by Briansho
I can't understand how the Catholic church keeps saying the only way into heaven is through them, and the only way to interpret the bible is through them. I just don't get how they can ignore Jesus simple teaching that the only way to heaven is through him, he is the church.

Peter was chosen to continue Jesus teaching after he acsended not to create a brand new church and appoint men as god-appointed head of church on Earth. That right there is the opposite of what Jesus had been teaching the entire time he was on Earth.

What? Do you want to go to hell? Never oppose the Catholic church!

My boss at my day job is a Catholic. No, wait, let me rephrase. My boss at my day job is a religious zealot. Much better.

Anyway, he has the same crap drilled so far in his skull he can't see the forest for the trees. If the pope farts it's a blessing from God to him.

I don't have time to rant completely here, maybe I'll blog it someday, but it boils down to this for me:

Nobody is going to hell, regardless of their religion. It's impossible to go someplace that doesn't exist. Hell is a mistranslation of the word Sheol, meaning grave. Interesting fact, bible translators translate the word Sheol in to grave in some spots, but translate it hell in others. Why would they do that? Easy, the word hell originated in the dark ages. It was a hole in the ground used for storing potatoes and roots. Hmm, hole in the ground, grave, sure, let's use them as the same word. The church got a hold of the word and twisted it for centuries until it became a firey dimension where Satan burns with his demons for all time. Messed up, huh?

Also, Peter did start churches. A church was originally a gathering of the community at private houses where they would pass on the word of Christ and discuss his message. The Romans (thus the name the ROMAN Catholic church) did not like the people doing all this without the government's consent. Thus, the Roman government started THE church so that they could maintain control of the people. Guess what? Rome burned, the empire fell, but its government is still around telling people what to do.

The cloak is pretty much crap except looks wise, you'll replace it with better before level 12. The trinket is great though.

This was a nice bonus, since I subscribe to PC Gamer. I doubt I would have bought the magazine just for these items, though.

Just a quick correction: The only areas completely surrounded by mountains like WoW or EQII are the new player areas. They have one way out and that's it. After you finish the newbie stuff, there is no area that I have found that you can say is surrounded by mountains. The marsh is not surrounded by mountains, you can walk out in any direction. Combe is surrounded by cliffs, but you can actually walk around through Bree and get back to Combe on top of those cliffs, so it's not like they are there to keep you penned in, it's for the look.

As far as visuals, I think LOTRO is probably the best looking game on the market right now, with the notable lack of character customization.

Man, I never win these contests.

I guess that's what happens when you're prohibited from entering, though...

Originally posted by Mylon
Wow uses a (curiously still) unique system that allows people that don't spend as much time online to make their time spent online more fruitful.  I speak of rested experience.  Casual players only have to really earn maybe 55% of the experience to get to max level.  Hardcore players might have to earn 75% or more experience to hit the same level.
While the difference is significant and nice, unfortunately it's not enough.

And combine this with the fact that there are a great many people that want good depth to the advancement but don't have the time to grind it all out and this explains an interesting conundrum.  Developers assume casual = simple.  Just because some people don't want to spend 20+ hours a week on a game does not mean the game has to be simple.  But additional complexity typically brings additional time required, not necessarily for learning, but because there's that many more facets to "grind".

Originally posted by mxmissile
I have a nice bridge, it has 8 lanes!  The road leading to the bridge only has 4.  Anyone interested?

Originally posted by 0k21
That's true actually one other game hasn't been put on the list yet is the Firefly MMORPG that's supposed to be coming 2008 but they haven't listed that or put any news about it, might be because they don't have any screenshots but I think they need to look into it.