Some of the things you read on the internet are just so funny, you have to post them. Yes, it’s another sex related post, but it is on the gadgety side of things. Just…

So there I was reading UK:Resistance which then sent you onto this story about “Onacups”. The guy who wrote the wasn’t going to be juvanile about this, but there are some cases where you just have to be! I mean come on, the “deep throat” cup! That’s one I’m just got to buy! Gem gets about halfway down and she starts to choke!*

There are 4 other types of cup too, but I’m going to let you read the story for yourselves. Oh, apparently, Japanese men have little shlongs. *snigger*

*This is by no means meant to be a bragging post about the size of my willy. Honest**
**But it is big though***
***Either that and Gem has a small mouth and been leading me on a bit by making me feel a bit better about the actual size of it

No, really! According to a news peice on Sky News, some bloke called David Levy has penned a book called “Love and Sex with Robots: The Evolution of Human-Robot Relationships”, were he reckons that we’ll all be doing the dirty with robots by the year 2050. Even in 2006, a chappie called Henrik Christensen thinks we’ll all be “doing” robots in the even closer future. Like 5 years!

Apparently, ugly and fat people (i.e. me) will be so lonely and depressed that even real-life prostitutes won’t even want to take their money. Either that or “ladies of the night” won’t be around any more. So the only way for them to “get it on” will be to go and grab themselves a robot. With holes. Or sticky out bits. Depending on your preferences, obviously.

Now I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume that these robots ain’t going to look like that Caprica 6 Cylon from Battlestar Galactica. Yeah, that’s one robot I’d like to stick my…err…flash drive in her…umm…USB port. Or something. I mean, if you take that Honda robot that’s doing the rounds at the moment and try and make hot sticky love to it, you’re going to get chaffed. A lot…

Sorry, but it’s just one of those wierd things that you have to post about. And this is a site about tech stuff…

I think I may have just gone overboard!

We’ve all heard the phrase “Backwards Compatibility”. It’s usually used to refer to hardware or software that will support hardware or software from versions before the latest set.

For example, the 360 is backwards compatible on most original Xbox games. Get the idea? Excellent - well I’m going to blow it out of the water now. (And there is no hope of this actually happening but hell, it’s an idea!)

We all know that major software houses such as EA like to have a franchise they can run and run with. Tiger Woods Golf, FIFA, NBA, the hockey one, the american football one, etc. Well imagine that each year a new FIFA came out you could play games on Xbox Live against those who still had last years version.

Think about it for a second. What changes year on year in FIFA or football as a whole?

• Players move
• Teams get relegated / promoted
• Managers move around the managerial merry-go-round
• Ummm…

Nothing else changes. The pitch doesn’t change. The rules don’t change (that often!). The general game stays the same. Graphics get a little better and the sounds gets better (arguable!) but the basic elements such as player position, ball position, score etc aren’t ever affected. So how difficult could it be to allow a new version to still interact on Xbox Live with correctly received and sent packets of data from maybe just one earlier version of the software?

Take Tiger Woods golf, I agree that bunker positions may change so maybe not so on that one but that hockey one, how does a hockey pitch change? Does the ice get warmer?

Whilst this concept won’t work for nearly 95% of the games out there - Halo 3 and Halo 2 wouldn’t work at all - different maps and such like - but most of the sports games would. So why hasn’t anyone thought of it? I’d think it would be a huge selling point.

Discuss in the comments bit . If you want to.

I fancied using this blog as an opportunity to get a few things off my chest. Let me know if you think I’m being to harsh.

First up is Bloatware
For those of you who aren’t familiar with the term bloatware, I’ll allow wikipedia to explain:

Software bloat, or bloatware, is a term used in both a neutral and disparaging sense, to describe the tendency of newer computer programs to be larger, or to use larger amounts of system resources (mass storage space, processing power or memory) than older versions of the same programs, without concomitant benefits being provided to end users.

Excellent. Moving on. I recently had the task of setting up a couple of PCs with a webcam for a video chat with some friends who have gone away for a week. First off was my very own Vista laptop. Using a fairly recent Logitech webcam I simply plugged the USB lead in, the laptop said “Oh, I don’t have that driver. Let me download it for you automatically off the ‘net as you are connected”. Lo and behold a few minutes later with absolutely no interaction from me, other than plugging the camera in and accepting the little dialog box “something wants to do something on your laptop”, it’s all working and the video chat begins. Everyone’s happy. I suspect the download got hold of standard drivers as their were no frilly bits of eye candy or complicated bits of software. (Why does everyone dislike Vista - see an upcoming rant!) So, one down, one to go.

The second PC was a Windows 2000 PC - slightly old in this day and age but up until now it has served the users well. This time the PC couldn’t download the drivers automatically so I had to download them myself from the Logitech website. Then I saw the size of the download - 90mb - for a webcam!! This has got to be taking the preverbial. Anyhow, ten minutes later all is downloaded and installation begins… and runs… and runs… and runs… seriously I must have been sat there for about fifteen minutes watching this small progress bar move along. Then right before the end an error pops up telling me I need to install DirectX 10 for the installation to complete and it promptly goes and quits!

So a download and relatively quick and painless install of DirectX 10 later and I have to start the Logitech installer again, and no, it doesn’t get quicker seeing as it’s already done most of it - it still took another 15 minutes to run. I could’ve formatted the HDD and reinstalled Vista in that time. (Not sure Vista would have run on the PC but it’s a useful analogy all the same)I remember the days when a driver came on a 1.44mb floppy. Maybe it’s the whole broadband age and increased storage that has made the developers lazy in their efforts to keep size down. Why does a driver need to be 90mb? How does someone on a dial-up connection handle it?

Regular visitors will probably remember a bit ago I posted about how the social site thing had become lost on me.

However, that sentiment is not shared by my other half, as she decided to sign up for Facebook a couple of days ago.  Aside from me asking why, when she’d never shown any interest in the social networking movement previously, there is actually a very good reason.

Being pregnant with our first at the moment she wanted to let her old school friends know, but only had contact with one of them via email.  Bit of digging later and she found out that quite a few of her old school buddies had signed up to Facebook and were active.  I have to say it seems to have turned out quite nicely too as she’s been able to catch up with quite a few people, tell them our news, find out what everyone else is up to etc.

Today, in a quiet moment at work (don’t get many of them these days, so it’s more a case of taking a quiet moment) I thought I’d do the obligatory tour of the site.  All looks simple to use, a clean interface, friend list management, and all that jazz; but it left me still thinking ‘why?’.

Breaking it down, it appeared to be nothing more than Flickr, which is already an excellent photosharing site, with a bit of blog software added on and profile management.  Am I missing the point? Can someone provide me reasons why it differs from something like Flickr and its other clones?

I have nothing against Facebook at all, as it is quite popular, and many people find it of value.  I just question its place in the online social networking future.

You know it had to happen at some point. And you probably also knew it would be from me! I do like it when I’m unpredictable! OK, onto the subject at hand.

You know that F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport. The technological achievements of what the teams create and the lengths they go to, to get that extra second out of their cars is phenomenal. So, why has the TV side of the sport been lagging behind for so long? I make this point, as this season is the first time that Formula 1 has been broadcast in widescreen!

I know, I know! You’re asking what the big deal is?

Well, for a good few years now, all of the major TV channels have been broadcasting in widescreen, and most recently, High Definition services have started to roll out. Take into account that you also have interactive services, and multi-start options for your favorite programs, TV has entered a nice cushty period of interactive bliss. My beef about the F1 side of this, is that a few years ago, there was a specific Formula 1 channel on Sky. It was also a fully interactive service which gave you the information that only the biggest, anal F1 geek could dream of. Yes, that also includes me

For a measly £50 for the season (I think it was), live timing streams, choose from a multitude of different camera angles, listen to different commentaries, and pretty much revel in the ultimate of geekdom. I loved it! I even managed to stay up for early morning races. Something I’m afraid to say, I just couldn’t manage this weekend!

My problem with all this though, is that the F1 channel only lasted for the one season. From what I gather, it was massivly popular, and way ahead of the times. And I think that is part of the problem. Good ol’ Bernie Ecclestone (F1’s big boss man, and the ultimate rich bar steward) thought that it was costing a little too much money, and so asked Sky if they would like to pay a little bit more money. They said no. Bear in mind that Bernie bought all the equipment needed and moves it from race to race.

This is the shitter. It seems that the TV stream was so far ahead of everyone else, it was also effing expensive. So much so, that the decision was taken to pull the plug on the service after only one season. Mr E probably shat himself when he saw the bill and decided that normal, non-interactive service will be resumed, and bollocks to the technology, which is a damned shame.

I was pleasently surprised to see that F1 is finally being broadcast in widescreen. Other channels have been doing it for years now. Take into account that almost every channel on TV now has some sort of interactive service for the viewer to play with, I think it would be time to bring back the F1 digital service. You have the football with it’s “player cam”, goal replays, and you can even re-watch the days matches too! Well, before I got rid of the Sports package from Sky you could!

This is a message for Mr Bernard Ecclestone; bring back the interactive service. Hell, even push the boat out and broadcast in HD. Just don’t be put off by what went wrong last time. There are people like me screaming for more in-depth coverage. As a friend of mine is fond of saying…

JFDI

Last night I decided to have a bit of a session on Call of Duty 3 over Xbox Live after realising it had been a while since I picked the game up.

Aside from reminding me how much I enjoyed this title online with a good bunch of players, during a few deathmatch games I was also reminded how much the sniper is hated in online shooters.

One particular match of note took place on the Les Ormes map, a small town layout with a central crossroads, and by it’s nature, not a map that lends normally well to snipers because of it’s often twisty nature. About half way through I began taking note of one particular player.

Now usually, when you get killed in deathmatch it is a bit annoying. Some people chunter to themselves, others swear loudly for all to hear, and everything in between. As I as in it for a bit of fun, and it was a lazy Sunday night, I was unusually just playing for the fun of it.

Yet this guy didn’t whine everytime he got killed, only when it was a sniper that took him out. Each time it happened he got a bit louder, and swore a bit more, and each time it just got funnier. So I decided to pick up a sniper rifle too. Not once did I say anything, preferring just to listen to the game chat from other players; after all it was every man, woman or child for themselves, I didn’t have time to talk!

The match ends as I sit chuckling to myself still, thinking this poor sod has been struggling all match to score decent kills. Until the score appears. Low and behold, the same guy who was getting so wound up was actually the clear winner by a good ten or so kills. Now I’m not gonna reveal the guys tag on here because I can’t remember it properly, but neither would I if I could.

It left me asking a question of FPS players, and shooters in general, that include a sniper and/or a boomstick (shotgun) in the selectable weapons line up. Why get so peeved about it? It’s there for a reason, and it just so happens that somebody else is good at it and can snipe the breath out of your lungs from the other side of the map.

Here’s a tip to anybody that hates snipers; pick up a sniper and take some practice. Then you’ll find out just why it’s so popular with those who know how to use one properly. Yeah sure, some guys pick it because it’s an almost guaranteed one shot kill, especially at close quarters, but it’s the kind of weapon that if used effectively in matches with players of high skill levels that can make a severe difference.

Another example. First game I played last night, picked to be a rifleman as it’s my normal weapon of choice. As the game kicks off I realise that the other five players were all snipers, two guys on my team, and three on the other. Then how the hell did we come away with teh win? That’s because I’m decent enough with the rifle and can use the map and cover, but I’m by no means a top player, I just practice with it alot. Trust me, I started out completely shite with it. The enemy could stand still for 10 seconds and I’d still miss!

Luck is one thing in shooters like CoD3, but get past a certain point and start facing players who have many hours under their belts, and skill really shows up. So if you hate snipers, tough, they’re part of the fabric of shooters. It’s not like the various generals through time would have all said ‘You know what, these sharpshooter chappies are a bit unfair. Let’s just make a huge bloody mess on the battlefield where we can see the whites of each others eyes!’

Now rocket whores, that’s a whole different frickin’ ball game!