On 4/13/2011 7:28 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Actually, I'm rather surprised at how low-end the XBox hardware and
> graphics stuff is. The CPU is surprisingly slow even at simple stuff
> like decompressing an image, and the graphics card pretty much chokes
> with about 800 models with a couple hundred vertx each. You really have
> to work hard to make even really simple scenes render fast. I was hoping
> I could just throw simple graphics at it and have it eat easily, or at
> least close to as well as my fairly old PC graphics card.
>
Snort. What disappoints me is my hardware. Given that its specs make the 
XBox look like complete shit, despite being a single core, and 5 years 
out of date, but it runs like complete crap, and new version of Linux 
would "improve" the situation enough to not make it still work like 
crap. Why? Because they can't, just to use the obvious example of games, 
make something that runs fine, if *slightly* less pretty, on an XBox, 
run either as well, or even *at all* in some cases, on a better core, 
with 4 times the memory, and a graphics card that.. well, you get the point.

Its like finding that the $20 radio on someone's bicycle has better 
woofers than some $4000 system they just installed in your, slightly out 
of date, Maserati (or equivalent)... Or better yet, discovering that 
some poor shlubs 100 foot sail boat has room for more people on it than 
your new 1,000 foot yacht. I mean, they develop these damn things "on" a 
PC, of some sort, even if they test and tweak the final thing on the 
console. How the hell do you do that and end up needing 2 cores, instead 
of one, a graphics cards that is 2-3 times better, 4 times the memory, 
etc., just to install the fracking thing, never mind run it?

This isn't a bad port (Force Unleashed being the example described), its 
someone making a damn 747, and out of tissue paper no less, when they 
only needed a damn Cessna.

Post a reply to this message