Viewing Thread:
"Ditch the Gamecube Nintendo (43% drop in profit)"

I know some of you will point out the fact that, in spite of the loss compared to last year's earnings, Nintendo has still accrued a profit to the tune of $600,000,000. While that is a large sum of money it needs to be realized that the amount of that profit is not too far from being HALF of their previous year's profits. That means that Nintendo has that much money LESS to put into things like research and development for things like new games and new systems. Also, game companies are less likely to put their time and money into a company that posts losses as massive as 43%. If this trend continues, it could have some nasty repercussions. People could lose their jobs (I feel sure some heads have already rolled after the news of a profit loss this significant), for one thing. And companies will not want to invest in another company that will not post a meaningful profit for their efforts. So yeah, Nintendo still posted a profit. But when that profit is in the shadow of a previous year that was 43% HIGHER, then the 'profit' tends to lose significance. Just some things to consider.

The Gamecube is costing Nintendo big and sagging sales are a large part of their problem, ditch the deadwood before it's to late.

Ah, right. I did have a feeling it had something to do with networking.

Mav wrote:
> So what's NT?

New Testament

Mav wrote:
> So what's NT?

The predecessor to Win 2000, XP is best described as a cross between NT and 2000 - it has the best of both. :-)

EDIT: Just remembered: Win NT = Windows Network it was the preffered windows version for business use due to its networking capabilities and rock solid stability...

*Geek I know

So what's NT?

munn wrote:
> ME is 2000 with added exdtras, i think.

Nah - 2000 is what XP is based on, thats 32 bit. ME is a glorified 98 (supremely rubbish as well)

My computer's got M.E., yep it's slow and lethargic etc.

ME is 2000 with added exdtras, i think.

Mav wrote:
> Notorious Biggles wrote:
> Windows 9x line
>
> Am I right in assuming that 9x refers to Windows 95, 98 FE and 98 SE?
> Maybe Windows ME too given that that was also a DOS based OS, but
> that doesn't follow logically from the "9x" suffix...
>
> I've never really known what people have meant by that.

95=1995 98=1998 ME=millenium=2000 so yes windows ME is still part of the 9x family

Mav wrote:
> suffix...

That's my dominatrix alter-ego.

Yes Mav, it does.