Slashdot Mirror
The Engineer Behind Microsoft's TV Strategy
Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "A high-energy engineer named Joe Belfiore, age 37, has led Microsoft's Media Center team for four years. The effort has gained momentum in the past year, the Wall Street Journal reports, bolstering Microsoft's defense against a challenge from Apple's Front Row for control of home-entertainment software. 'The Apple threat seems menacing, in part because of recent history: Its iPod was a late entry in an established field of digital music players but soon stole the lion's share of the market,' the WSJ writes. At Microsoft, Front Row is already causing ripples: [Bill] Gates in an email to Mr. Belfiore asked why Apple's remote control had just six buttons. The standard Media Center remote from Microsoft has 39 buttons. (Mr. Belfiore's explanation: Front Row computers don't have TV or digital video recorder functions and thus don't need as many buttons.) At stake is more than just another piece of software for home computers. Both companies, and others, are trying to build the foundational technology for all home digital entertainment.'"
Cause thats all it needs!
Relying on Microsoft to build the foundation for all home digital entertainment is like relying on Ford to build the foundation for quality automobiles. (Psst. Hey geniuses. The Japanese already beat you to it.)
If neither Mr. Gates nor Mr. Belfiore can figure out how Front Row could have TV and digital video recorder functions without adding buttons to Apple's remote, Microsoft is in sorry shape.
Gates in an email to Mr. Belfiore asked why Apple's remote control had just six buttons. The standard Media Center remote from Microsoft has 39 buttons. (Mr. Belfiore's explanation: Front Row computers don't have TV or digital video recorder functions and thus don't need as many buttons.)
Personally, I suspect the Apple remote control would still have six buttons even with TV and DVR. But I imagine Gates still bought that explanation.
Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
Yeah, them dudes never realized that Apple's one-button mousey was superior, and now they are repeating the mistake yet again. Of course, the Lunix community will begin a new era of six button jokes as of this year.
MicroSoft are doing a massive PR job this year?
All was quiet for a while and now it seems like a BS tsunami.
spoonerize "magic trackpad"
I think the real battle here is between the xbox and the mac mini. The Windows Media center PC is nothing more than an expensive distraction. Microsoft's real wedge into the home media center space is the xbox. We saw this towards the end of the XBOX 1's lifetime, but it's all the more apparent with the XBOX 360's capabilities. Apple, of course, realizes this, and has positioned the mac mini and its iTunes offerings (and now Front Row) accordingly.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
For a second I read it as "The Engineer Behind Microsoft's Tragedy" - the other second I sensed something is wrong - Impossible. ONE Engineer can't create this big a Tragedy.
As fun, and seemingly simple, as it is to bash M$ for being a complete failure at taking over the living room, they are taking the tried-and-true approach to establishing dominance: baby steps. Put the Xbox in the living room, and after two or three iterations of that it's pretty commonplace to see Microsoft sitting under your tv. And so on.
The line from Pirates of Silicon Valley where Bill says (paraphrasing) "You have to make people need you" is perfectly descriptive of Microsoft's philosophy. You create a dependency over time... something that seems fringe or even silly in 1995 but in 2005 everyone can't live without it. It's a long process, but it works. You might not like it, either. But it makes money. It's a sound business practice.
Rex is 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
A successful PVR need not be more than a Hauppauge PVR-150, a Creative DXR3, a Soekris VPN-1401, a large hard drive, and an OS.
People have come to expect even the smallest innovation to become an endless renenue souce.
Case in point; Intel will flog Viiv for most of 2006. AMD won't have a chance to compete, Intel's marketing poop pump is just too big.
I want my TV via FTP. wget, gunzip, and xine
And even if it did have tv recording functions, my MythTV setup for instance uses about 9, maybe 10 buttons plus lets say 12 for the number pad. 22 total
Tivo Series 1 has 33 if you count the four way hat as four.
For me it's not so much how many buttons, but whether they layout is useful.
*My* living room media box is a Linux machine with a 104-key keyboard attached. And I'll bet it's a hell of a lot more capable than *either* of the above companies' offerings.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
He was the only one left who hadn't left for Google...yet.
Default - The two sweetest words in the English language!
Apple's 6-button approach is effective, but it DOES miss out on the numeric buttons you see in most TV remotes, so that might pose a bit of problem when Front Row has TV function added for those who channel surf by entering channel numbers. That's about the only argument I can see making sense about the but-it-doesn't-do-TV-or-DVR excuse.
Still, the 6-button approach is better in general over 39-button one IF the buttons are assigned in a clever way. It's obvious that most of those 39 buttons only get pressed once in a while or never get used at all.
Serving time in Aristotelean prison for violating laws of physics
Exactly--and more importantly, whether the common functions (volume, channel, play/pause) are sensible and can be discerned by feel. Nothing worse than having to look away from the display down at the remote in your hand to twiddle the volume, something I tend to do almost constantly.
My zd8000 MCE laptop remote control is about as bad as it gets, so it's just collecting dust.
it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
I thought Apple's remote control would have only ONE button.
Oh well, what the hell...
"Apple's 6-button approach is effective, but it DOES miss out on the numeric buttons you see in most TV remotes, so that might pose a bit of problem when Front Row has TV function added for those who channel surf by entering channel numbers. That's about the only argument I can see making sense about the but-it-doesn't-do-TV-or-DVR excuse."
An IBM "nipple" would do as well, with an on-screen channel guide.*
*Gesture control is made easier this way.
"Mr. Gates, Apple didn't release their remote until we had already gone to manufacturing."
The XBox wasn't a baby step. It was jumping in feetfirst into the deep end, losing billions and costing billions.
The Mac mini is a baby step; cost effective, profitable, yet tentative. The iPod with video is a baby step; heck, even the original iPod was a baby step.
Apple has undertaken several baby steps to get themselves into the living room:
iPod
Mac mini
iMac with Front Row
Airport Express
iTunes Music Store
iTunes Video Store
Each one works on the experiences of the others and feeds off the successes of each other. Apple watches how Creative (mis)handles MP3 players and comes out with the iPod, watches how Sony and Creative and Real create jukeboxes and creates a correspondingly better one itself, watches how poor music stores are written and creates a nice one, etc.
Microsoft, in comparison hasn't taken any baby steps. It debuts the Media Center PC without any segue devices into the home, then years later introduces the XBox sans media center functionality, then introduce the XBox 360, again sans Media Center functionality.
If Microsoft were doing baby steps, why not release the XBox with build in Media Center functionality? It had the harddrive already, the DVD drive, the CPU! Why not use the XBox to refine the media center functionality, instead of a gaming PC? Why not introduce the XBox mini, who's sole purpose is to lower the price point for the XBox to $99, act as a DVR, and a digital hub? Of course they can't do it because Intel sees no reason to, but that is why you parter with AMD! Create a purpose built CPU, integrate the GPU and other hardware, for a system on a chip so that they can release an entire console with only three components and four devices!
Instead they end of life the XBox the same day the XBox 360 is released; unlike how Sony has successfully kept the PSOne and PS2 alive these past years, and likely will continue to support PS2 for years after the PS3 is out.
GPL Deconstructed
Just a quick count of buttons that I'd expect on a PVR remote
1) Power - Activates the PVR software or switches the computer to PVR mode
2,3) Channel up/down - Scroll channels through channels
4,5) Volume - Adjust volume levels up or down
6-15) 10 button pad - Could possibly be left out if channel scrolling is sufficient, but that's unlikely
16) Record - Start recording current channel
17) Menu - Bring up software menu. Reuse 2,3 and 4,5 to allow navigation of menu screens
18) Play - Play current selection
19) Stop - Stop current action (playing or recording)
20,21) FF/RW - Fast forward, Rewind. No special need for 30 second skip button
22) Pause - Pause/Unpause
Optional buttons:
1,2) Skip F/B - Skip 30 seconds forward or back
3) Back 1 chapter - Skip back to beginning of current chapter/scene
4) Next chapter - Skip to beginning of next chapter/scene
5) Next content - Skip to beginning of next media content (the next recorded video, for instance)
6) Slow - Slow playback rate
7) Slow reverse - Slow backwards playback
8) Mute - No sound (could be a mandatory button if device has large volume level count)
9) PinP - Picture in picture if software supports it.
10) PinP frame switch - Select which frame of PinP should get remote control commands
I am probably missing a few and adding a few that you probably don't need. But my final count is 22/23 mandatory buttons and up to 32 buttons for a full-featured remote control. The most important key is that all configuration and non-essential features are hidden in the menu.
The mini doesn't come with Front Row, only iMac's do.
Until next week that's true, but one of the main predictions for MacWorld is a Mac Mini with a TV Tuner and Front Row software.
It's amazing to me how the iPod came into its market, took over and completely dominates. Electronics manufacturers are building entire product lines from low-end to very high-end accessories, specifically to capitalize on the iPod's success. Most major high-end distributed audio systems now support directly connecting to the iPod to allow it as a source for whole-house audio.
The Mac Mini has been used as a cheap but solid music server by many custom electronics installers. Apple is not only winning with general consumers, but for very high-end applcations (read: rich people's houses and very nice commercial installations).
It's funny to me that Microsoft has been pitching the Media Center for a few years now, and it's starting to come around for expensive custom installs now, too, but I think it's too much. Too much complexity trying to give people stuff they didn't know they want, and not allowing the real control people need.
At work I see a lot of hype about Windows Media Center, and although the menu animations look smooth and almost fancy, and it would be nice to have full Tivo-like capabilities from my PC, I think it's too bulky, trying to be the great all-purpose PC, and give you Tivo functionality, too. I think Microsoft misunderstands a lot of the higher-end market they're trying to get into, because of their arrogance and assumptions that they can just enter any market they want. At the same time, Win MCE isn't really for alot of middle class people either, because those people mostly just want to check their e-mail and browse the internet.
I won't be surprised at all to see Apple provide an inexpensive Mac Mini-based solution that consumers from low-middle class to the very rich will be excited to own and use. I think Microsoft, even though they've been in the game for a relatively long time already, should be getting ready to have their lunch handed to them. I've never owned a Mac or an iPod, but I think I might be holding my own 6-button remote soon.
Why must there only be buttons on a remote? What about a scroll wheel like on the iPod? The 'superluous' padlock on the iPod is an easy way to squeeze numeric buttons into one scroll wheel...
mirror http://www.thebesttrek.net/forum/index.php?topic=3 75.0
http://www.thebesttrek.net/forum/index.php - visit my FORUM
Front Row computers don't have TV or digital video recorder functions and thus don't need as many buttons.
On other words, according to Microsoft, at least 33 buttons are required for remote digital video recording and TV operation.
Memo to Microsoft: It's the UI, stupid.
The number of buttons on the average remote is absolutely ridiculous. Take the one that controls my set top box, for example. There's a blue button (actually, two blue buttons), 'OK', 'TV', 'Guide', and 'i', that all do the same thing in various situations. Other situations make you hit the red button for favourites - even though there's a 'Favourites' button that doesn't work in that situation, and so on.
The actual on-screen interface it controls is dire too. I don't know about anybody else, but it seems to me that the current generation of TV interfaces were designed and implemented by computer people, where the previous generation was designed and implemented by telecom people. You can tell the difference in professionalism in a heartbeat - ten years ago, the idea of something like a TV crashing would be laughable. Now, when I switch on my set top box, I'm greeted with a video explaining how to reboot it! Seriously!
PS: don't take this as a flame, I' m a computer person as well. But let's face it, our industry is full of cowboys, and it's been that way for so long, we've progressed past the point of "I can't believe those jokers get away with things like that", and we're now at the point of "this is normal, it's pie-in-the-sky nonsense to expect things not to break randomly". How pathetic of us.
From the snippet: Mr. Belfiore's explanation: Front Row computers don't have TV or digital video recorder functions and thus don't need as many buttons.
Front Row does NOT have TV or Digital Video recorder functions. Whereas Media Center does.
-everphilski-
Donald A. Norman's book.
The Design of Everyday Things.
Long time, no see, Yourdon! What are you up to these days?
I think PVR functionality in a media box is like making a toaster-radio combo. While it's interesting to see it done, how useful is it really in the long run? Trying to support PVR features is the Media Center's Achilles Heel. I simply cannot believe Microsoft does not have a video store of its own by now, also selling TV shows. When ITMS started to take off that was absolutely the right time to trump Apple and get ahead of them. The fact that Microsoft has done so little in that space shows they simply do not have vision any longer, they are just chasing after shiny objects.
Broadcast is a stupid model for delivery in a world where you can just buy what you want, when you want. Even if you want to really "broadcast" something because you want people to see it live, multicast is a nice replacement.
If I had a Mac MINI equivalent box that had digital audio out and supported 1080p and a DVD/Blu-Ray player, I would just drop my cable subscription altogether as we are rapidly approaching critical mass of TV content online. If I can just buy any show I think looks interesting, I have no use whatsoever for cable.
I think a TV remote with six buttons, plus a microphone for speech searching would be just about perfect for me.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
psst, watch Steve next Tuesday morning
If Apple introduces in a click-wheel (a la iPod), along with a good on-screen UI, I think they can get away with 6 buttons (plus or minus 2).
You see, it's a matter of continuous UI (knobs) vs. discrete UI (buttons). Sometimes continuous UIs are *just* better for certain things. Most of us are used to discrete UI for TVs and such -- but that doesn't mean a continuous UI is unworkable. It just needs to be designed properly, and the best company to design such a UI is probably Apple.
I'll tell you where a discrete UI doesn't work. I have a Sony cassette player in one of my cars that has two buttons for volume control (+ and -). To me, that's a really stupid UI. To change the volume, I have to glance at the player, feel for the buttons, and press the relevant button x number of times to get the volume I want. All this while I'm driving.
A volume knob would have been so much more effortless. I can just turn to get the volume I want quickly, and easily fine-tune it too.
As someone who uses computers semi-seriously, and who knows many people who use computers seriously, I wonder at what Microsoft is doing spending so much focus on the exact design of a sophisticated home entertainment center.
While Microsoft's good choices at picking and promoting a standardized user interface are certainly not to be overlooked, I wonder if it means that they are taking the actual guts of the system less seriously than they should.
After Linux first showed signs of becoming popular, Microsoft quickly upgraded Windows NT into a passably professional server product (Windows XP). But if Bill Gates' big speech to the CES was about a home entertainment computer, I wonder if the company is going to actually think about making their server product more secure at all.
To me, this is like someone going in to buy a utility truck for work...and having the salesman spend all of his time explaining how the car stereo system works.
Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
The only buttons you really need are as follows:
[UP] [UP] [LEFT] [RIGHT] [LEFT] [RIGHT] [B] [A] [START]
Pair the 30 lives with a little context-sensitive programming, and you have your remote.
DATABASE WOW WOW
...of your wretched lack of imagination.
[Bill] Gates in an email to Mr. Belfiore asked why Apple's remote control had just six buttons. The standard Media Center remote from Microsoft has 39 buttons. (Mr. Belfiore's explanation: Front Row computers don't have TV or digital video recorder functions and thus don't need as many buttons.)
I see it didn't occur to either one that the Apple remote has fewer buttons becuase the interface is simply not as complicated as theirs. Another company falling for the dillusion that "more buttons = better".
Typical Microsoft. I wonder when they'll realize that Windows XP is not appliance-ready? AFAIK, Media Center is just XP Pro with an extra app (the main Media Center app) installed. I've personally worked with XP Embedded (a componentized version of XP Professional) and it's a total BITCH. You have to hack it to make it "embedded" by setting registry settings, and installing things that click "OK" to modal dialogue boxes and so on. If I can't get XP Embedded working like an embedded appliance, what makes MS think that they can make a standard XP Pro installation work for the average consumer?
Media Center is great for people like me, and also people on Slashdot that don't foam at the mouth every time MS is mentioned, mumbling "Linux! Linux!!". It's also pretty awesome as a bedroom computerTV or for a dorm, but I just can't see it making significant inroads into the living room. Apple may change things somewhat by simplfying things, and so perhaps will the Xbox360, which is where I'm putting my money (not literally of couse).
psst, I guarantee that if FrontRow gets TV functionality it will also get a new remote with more buttons (though most certainly less than 39 - which is about the largest MCE remote available and certainly not the required minimum button set).
Call me a Linux advocate (ohhh, the shame!) but it's amusing that even a Microsoft fluff article mentions a number of products (Bob, the first Media Center, Media Center Extender) sold by MS that just absolutely sucked, screwing the customer to buy MS more time. No one ever got fired for buying Microsoft, but they sure got ripped off!
If you take the stories published in the last X months,
/. for a better alternative, but could not find any yet.
it is clear that there has been a certain change in the views of the editors.
More glamorous pseudo-science that make most morons/curious click (like the silly warp-drive article).
More reassuring, Microsoft-friendly stories about the next oh-so-interesting presentation of Vista by mr. Gates.
I would gladly stop reading
I bought a Media Center PC; I found the UI to be mediocre, and after a few months, things gradually stopped working (as it received more and more patches and hotfixes). I eventually installed Linux and it works a lot better now. I also have used a Mac with a TV card, and I also find it a lot nicer than Media Center.
Microsoft can't win this war of the buttons.
Mac could go with only two buttons ("play" and "order a new battery from apple"), but Microsoft is stuck with at least four ("play", "reboot", "reinstall" and "upgrade").
Only Amazon.com could possibly come with a single button operation... but wait, don't they already have a patent on this?
lucm, indeed.
I would go along with that if Microsoft occasionally delivered simplicity. But they never do. I think it just shows that intelligence without insight may take you far but doesn't allow you to capture the 'hearts and minds' like apple's products do. Afterall, gates has seen and demoed MCE with the remote for years now - he could have put down a change order at any time if he thought it was a mistake.
I can easily picture an interface for front row that can be add dvr functionality without adding buttons to the remote - and I got a way lower SAT score than gates. MS has always tried to figure out how to get a product to do *more*; apple has always tried to figure out how to get a product to do what it does *better*. The latter speaks to me and my interests more than the former.
The ONLY thing I think that should ever be added to the front row remote would be numeric buttons for channels. I wish all my av gear had as simple a remote/interface.
-matt
was what was impractical.
I watch Cartoon Network on 29, History on 61, Scifi on 62. Switching between 61 and 62 is easy indirectly, but pushing up/down to get from them to Cartoon Network is a chore. Going through a mosaic/menu is even worse, especially when switching DVD chapters. Let me see, Hit next, and the DVD seeks to the next chapter, if the part that starts playing is what you want, you're done, or just hit next again, or hot next, the DVD seeks to the chapter menu, you try to guess from the small snippets an captions whether or not one of these is what you want, and perhaps what you want is actually on another page, then have it seek to what might be what you want, if not, another trip to menu land...
....one button and a trackball, with a nice little clear screen, but no one makes one like that that I am aware of. GUI menus are very well known now and work well, that's all that is needed. An enter key and a trackball, easy enough to use. You aren't texting from your remote all the time, so there's no need for all those buttons. OK, one more, power on/software off.
When Apple designed Front Row, they realised that because they have visual cues all over the screen, each of the six buttons can have several functions depending on the context. They just need enough buttons to navigate a menu system, and everything else is done on the screen.
Leave it to Microsoft to cram in the technology. Leave it to Apple to see the possibilities afforded by that technology.
Dan
The minimum reasonable button set for a TV tuner and DVR equipped remote is something around 20.
You've got 10 buttons for a direct access pad, channel up/down, volume up/down, a dpad (5 buttons), and a power button. You probably need a guide button too, that's 21 buttons.
If you decide you don't want to force the user to use the guide, you can get back 10 buttons (to 11), and it's possible to use the dpad for the volume/channel up/down buttons (dpad up/down becomes volume up/down, dpad left/right become channel up/down).
But your UI gets REALLY complicated really quickly - the more you overload the buttons, the more complicated the UI gets. And you start to lose functionality. For instance, if you implement volume up/down using the dpad, then you can't change the volume while changing the channel.
If all you're doing is cloning the iPod UI (which is basically all that FrontRow is), then 6 buttons is probably sufficient. But once you start doing more than that, you're going to to find 6 buttons VERY constraining.
Typo:
If you decide you don't want to force the user to use the guide
Should be:
If you decide you don't want to let the user directly address channels and instead force them to use the guide
psst, Apple would probably just add a scroll wheel to the remote, not buttons. No need for Channel Up/Down or Volume Up/Down. It'll behave like an iPod currently does where all that functionality is packed into one clickwheel, making things feel immediately intuitive and reducing interface clutter.
Microsoft has a lot of reason to worry.
"Sufferin' succotash."
What an insightful post. Now that you mention it, I could see apple totally going this way. Why add features that make the system dependent on your cable subscription and let them have the money? If you were apple with an elegant video download system, there is no need to rely on anyone but you. All the money can come to you through direct television purchases. The same benefits of DVR could be applied to this model: ITMs could find shows you would like by keyword and it could set up auto-purchasing and download of shows you subscribe to. The only thing you miss out on is live tv - but that isn't the primary benefit of a DVR anyway.
And at CES, microsoft is touting URGE. THey are so far behind the 8-ball on this. Music stores are yesterdays news, If apple can run with this, they are going to make an insane amount of money and redefine tv. You sir, should win a cupie doll.
More stories about Microsoft and less about Linux. Yea!!!
Huh ???
Front Row computers don't have TV or digital video recorder functions and thus don't need as many buttons.
With a properly-designed UI on the freaking screen, you don't need 39 buttons on the remote.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Oh yeah, the click wheel is so much superior to volume up/down controls. Hmmmm.... I want to turn this song up. Ok, scroll the wheel. WTF, why the Fuck is my song fast forwarding. Oh shit, I must have clicked twice. Lets try again. Im sorry, the interface on the iPod is pure shit. I hate mine, just off a few simple problems. 1) Volume controls should have had an up/down toogle. Reusing the same UI for fast forward/rewind and volume control is just retarded. If you disagree with me, try using an iPod in your car sometime ( while being a responsible driver and not staring at your iPod ). 2) Worst , most scratch screen ever 3) overly expensive. Now, I realise that slashdot is currently going through an Apple Wack-Off-Athon(tm) at the moment, and insulting apple is taboo. Yet, frankly the iPod is an over hyped POS. If mine wasnt given to me, I would be right pissed off at the money I (didnt) pay for it.
The more competitors in a marketplace, the better for everyone, the more innovation, creativity and redefinition of the status quo is possible.
The XBOX 1 DVD Remote has 27 buttons. It doesn't seem like a lot when accessing movies using XBox Media Centre. Sometimes too few buttons causes even more trouble.
If neither Mr. Gates nor Mr. Belfiore can figure out how Front Row could have TV and digital video recorder functions without adding buttons to Apple's remote, Microsoft is in sorry shape.
it COULD have tv functions w/out adding buttons, but it wouldn't be nearly as useful. entering channels, for example, is much easier w/ direct access buttons.
i heard that he's going to announce the Front Row Shuffle which has three buttons: "Next Random Channel", "Next Random Volume" and "Fast Forward Some Distance"
IIRC the original one did not have a click wheel, but put the fast forward etc buttons in a ring around a scroll wheel. I always thought that was the better design.
Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence
Maybe you have an older generation iPod or haven't ever updated it or something but I have never fast forwarded trying to increase/decrease volume, ever. To fast forward you would have to click the middle button when you don't have to click it at all to adjust volume. I use my iPod in my car everytime I drive and I have never had this problem, neither has anyone I know that owns an iPod. The screen scratch hasn't been a problem on mine (over a year old, not protector) and I've only heard complaints of the Nano's screen being a problem. As for overpriced, with the student discount it's not that bad, and many people I know got them free with their Apple computers (mail-in rebate though), so also not a bad price
Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
my custom built Pocket PC based remote ... controls every aspect of my HTPC ... with just one button: the touchscreen :)
Sure, and if Microsoft had its way, it would turn each of the 76,800 pixels on your 320x240 touchscreen into a button.
Think of all the wonderful functionality this could open up! And the marketing opportunities! Oh, joy!
... that already (untested, but according to the blurb) operates 37 brands of TV, 43 brands of VCR, 58 brands of... well you get the picture;-) So I open my morning paper and there's Uncle Bill on the Warpath at CES, "unveiling" Vista, and announcing his iTunes Killer, his Google killer, his iPod killer, his TiVo killer... I've got a 10 spot here says my Universal Remote won't work on any of his junk, nor on Brother Steve's either.
.wmvs to play on my iPod, and I certainly detest having to sit the equivalent of an airline pilot's type certification every time I pick up a different remote :-(
What is it with these people? I want my music from ITMS to play on my WinMCE, my
Why not aTv Playlist, ala Itunes, kind of like mabey Itv.
Many a long talk since then I have had with the man in the moon; he had my confidence on the voyage. Joshua Slocum
Apple could always conceivably build in a wireless mouse, ala the Revolution controller, to make menu navigation and guide navigation even FASTER than current buttons. It might work something like expose, and especially if the channels are sorted the way iTunes sorts music (album, genre, playlist, rating), it might be a breeze to go through.
So you have ratings; then you only see the top 10 shows at any time.
Or you browse via genre; or via station. Terrestrial TV only has roughly 15 or so stations, max, at any one time (at least when I grew up).
If you are using Cable, I imagine that is where a wireless keyboard comes into play; Spotlight/iTunes like live search: "Desp" will bring up instantly "Desperate Housewives", "Desperado", and "Desperation", all showing right now. I mean, you're looking for shows, right? There's no reason to look up numbers, after all if you're browsing through TV guide, you're looking up the station for the show you want to watch, and not the station itself!
GPL Deconstructed
You select the DVD Player and the Front Row Interface maps to the remote to play/rewind/stepthrough, etc.
You select the DVR and the Front Row Interface maps to the same remote to do specific UI features. The Operating System manages the MVC relationship and dynamically calls the appropriate method with Cocoa's frameworks to do the magic.
You don't need a separate dpad for the guide. You should have just one dpad. Pressing up/down changes channels and left/right changes volume. When you press the "guide" button, the dpad transforms into navigation pad for the menus. If you really want to adjust the sound while you're in the menu, a mute button works just fine.
A console has a very restricted interface. Simple but restrictive. A pc has hundreds of buttons. Complex but freeform.
One of the simplest examples is spell/weapon selection in game. On a PC you usually get a list handily labelled with the top row buttons 1-0 or in case of EQ2 1 to =. This allows fast switching/selection.
A console usually requires you to use and forwards/back setup.
Yet is this actually simpler? Depending on the game constantly having to search through a list could be considered a pain. Perhaps that is the reason Halo put grenades under a different button instead of making it a selectable weapon?
The Grenade under G is a nice feature however that also made it to PC land.So perhaps the limited input on the console made the PC with its 101 keys even easier to use? I can easily select my weapons directly AND thanks to consoles now can use grenades with a main weapon equipped.
The iPod is similar. I have had a lot of MP3 players and the iPod is my latest and it is nice. Yet at times I long for my iRiver player (wich died a painfull death) because while it had far more buttons and some odd button overloading once you figured them out it was so much easier. I never accidently changed the volume or skipped because all basic actions had their own function.
Simple example of how fewer buttons can be confusing? Well perhaps it is me and my fat clumsy fingers but I hate those buttons that combine skip and fastforward. The price we pay for saving two buttons is that you cannot instantly fast forward. You got to wait for the timeout and the fastforward to start.
There are other problems with the iPod, it is all to easy to screw up the volume as you try to change other settings. Yes the wheel is very nice usually but sometimes I just want to shuffle the selection (is it me or does iPod not support dynamic shuffling?) or change the equalizer settings without going deaf or losing all sound.
But this is nothing new. You got three kinds of gear control in cars. Full automatic, the american half-breed, and full manual. The fact that all three continue to be sold tells us that perhaps all three serve a segment of the market.
Perhaps it should be up to the consumer to decice what they want. For all the mac fans I do suggest that an awfull lot of people do not like the minimalist approach if it limits them in their speed. Proof? How many mac's are actually used with the original 1 button mouse?
Yes it is simple and the most default upgrade for a mac machine is a "real" mouse.
MS has always been in a sort of middle ground anyway. If you want total control you use a unix. If you want total simplicity you use a mac. The middle market is windows. It served them well. MS has plenty to worry about but their remote having more buttons is not one of them.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
and not the architect that really knows why design decisions were made?
I mean, you're looking for shows, right? There's no reason to look up numbers, after all if you're browsing through TV guide, you're looking up the station for the show you want to watch, and not the station itself!
But what if I just want to channel surf to see if there's anything on any channels that I don't currently know about that I might want to watch? Cable keeps adding more and more channels, I have a few hundred, and I like to browse every once in a while.
I see alot of statements about how an onscreen UI could simplify the button functionality. However, I don't agree with this at all in practice. This is from a person that owns a media center, and has since the first ones came out.
Sure, an onscreen UI can come down and save me a ton of buttons as far as fast forward and reversing video, but when I'm trying to get to a certain spot in the video, thats an extra step I'd rather NOT do. The separate fastfwd and reverse buttons work exceptionally well.
Also, about 6 of the buttons on the MCE remote are 'quick jump' buttons. with those 6, I can get to any section of the UI immediately. I can get there the same way using the 4 directionals and the ok button, but I find myself using the quick jump buttons quite a bit.
My parents, whom I purchased and MCE for, use just the directional buttons to do 90% of thier tasks, and that works fine. As far as they're concerned, the remote only has 5 buttons that they use.
I prefer to have both the excees buttons and an easy layout, as MS has done with this remote. It's the same as my mouse..it has 5 buttons and a scroll wheel. I prefer that then to be forced to Mac's 'LCD' of one button by default. I find that as a power user the extra buttons and wheels facilitate my work (esp. in graphics apps)
More may be more complex, but is not necessarily inferior or bad design.
Maybe with the next revision it will have a full command-line interface? With this keyboard it could run DOS? Hell, perhaps this could be the first TV remote on which its actually sensible to run Linux! (NetBSD might be more appropriate though.)
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
As you can see here the remote control for the Dreambox has a lot more keys.
OK, maybe I'm just dense, but I just don't understand this obsession with "media centre" PCs. Why would I want a PC connected to my television. I already have Sky+, a DVD player and a stereo in my living room. Why would I want to connect my Mac Mini into all this?
One problem with your argument: it's flawed.
:P
You're working on the assumption that consoles are inherently limited to *JUST* a controller. The PS2 has had the capability to connect a USB keyboard and mouse from the very beginning, and games have been released that use this capabiltiy (albeit few). Ergo, the fault lies not on Sony, but on the games developers.
And while the keyboard/mouse combo might be good for FPS games and RTS games, there's not the level of control achieveable with a controller when playing, say, Burnout 3 or a flight sim (and yes, the PS2 controller is *EXCELLENT* for flight sims).
Besides, I'm waiting for my neural interface á la Matrix.
Goten Xiao
There is a giant flaw in your argument. A keyboard and mouse are *optional* peripherals for a PS2. The game still has to function with just a standard controller (and this IS the expected user experience on a console).
On the accidential web browsing front, that one gets on my nerves too. Simple solution: set up some new dummy user accounts on the phone and set them to be the default connection. Now when you bang the button, it can't connect, and you don't get billed.
A video that illustrates how great Microsoft really is, feat. Conan 'O Brien: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6774591592 070724791&q=bill+gates/
Per Aspera Ad Astra.
True. But if I'm playing on a console, I'm more likely to be faster on the game when using the controller.
Goten Xiao
Ok, so the Microsoft one has to do more stuff, so it needs more buttons. Sounds fair enough, but how can adding a couple of functions require it to need 6.5 times as many buttons?!
Surely the question BIll should be answering is, "Why don't the remotes have even vaguely similar numbers of buttons"? And if I were him I would expect an answer rather than some vague "Oh you know, it does more... things..." response. It might be that the Microsoft one is actually better, but seems unlikely at this point...
Microsoft need to realise that it's the fact that Apple think very carefully about this kind of thing (and the fact that Microsoft clearly don't) that causes Apple hardware to be that little bit nicer. Microsoft have the money to employ people to be nitpicking, pedantic and just downright geeky about every little detail, so maybe they should.
Apple customers are capitalist in that they place a value on content. It is an asset to be protected. It may only 99 cents a song but considering the nearly 10,000 songs that barely fit on my 60 gig iPod 5G, that amounts to something.
Rhapsody customers are communist in that they place no value on the content. Their subscription fees get them nothing but access. The day its over, for whatever reason, they're left with a ringing in their ears, but nothing to listen to.
The analogies can be extended further, but I think I'll do that on my blog and in my podcast.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
bought one engineer this time?
TiVo has shown that the old paradigm of viewing channels is no longer used by many people - it has changed to one of time shifting programs to watch as desired. When used in this way, there is little, if any, need for entering channel numbers (one records programs based on other attributes, such as title or keyword). Choices for viewing are picked from a menu of available selections, not by entering channel numbers.
If you're not using the Mac as a time shifting DVR and want to watch live TV, just use the TV remote. My assumption is that most people will prefer a TV with an add-on PC/DVR and not a PC/DVR used as a TV.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
You forgot to mention, that at first it will only be available on the "Mac Media Center Shuffle", which has no screen attached. Because who wants to watch todays crap TV anyway?
maybe not the required minimum but it is the standard button set.
From the article:
Menu->Navigate->Scan->Enter
Or
Menu->Up
Or
Up/Down
It boils down to design. If you're browsing channels, you might as well have a dedicated 'browse/scan/surf' function. If you're skipping through stations, then all you need to do is Up/Down, assuming volume is Left/Right. Are you asking for a keypad so you can go "014->enter", "022->enter", "036->enter"? You don't see iPods with number pads do you? People have been successfully navigating thousands, tens of thousands, of songs on iPods with only five buttons and a scroll wheel for years now.
GPL Deconstructed
I've been interested in MythTV for a while now, and have been planning on setting it up on some cheap hardware (with a hardware encoding tuner card). I've heard that in some ways it handles HDTV better than Win MCE, which won't really affect me for a while still, because I don't as yet have any interest in HDTV, or an HD capable TV.
But I've installed it on my laptop, which doesn't have a tuner, just for the sake of poking around the menus, checking out the program guide, it's really quite nice, I like it a lot. Hopefully I'll be able to get my hands on the hardware I need to build a real myth box soon.
You must get so many ladies with such an angry attitude toward a music playing device.
I want to turn this song up. Ok, scroll the wheel. WTF, why the Fuck is my song fast forwarding. Oh shit, I must have clicked twice.
So don't "click twice."
1) Volume controls should have had an up/down toogle. Reusing the same UI for fast forward/rewind and volume control is just retarded. If you disagree with me, try using an iPod in your car sometime ( while being a responsible driver and not staring at your iPod ).
Yeah, I do it every single day. Your idea would mean fumbling for volume up/down buttons.
2) Worst , most scratch screen ever
This doesn't have anything to do with the volume interface. Now you're just ranting.
3) overly expensive.
How so? For the price of a flash drive, you can get a flash-based player.
Now, I realise that slashdot is currently going through an Apple Wack-Off-Athon(tm) at the moment, and insulting apple is taboo.
You're just one of those trendy Apple-bashers who thinks they're so damned enlightened because they're "going against the grain." STICK TO THE MAN, YEAH! THAT'LL SHOW US!
Yet, frankly the iPod is an over hyped POS. If mine wasnt given to me, I would be right pissed off at the money I (didnt) pay for it.
Go to Undernet and visit IRC channel #aaff. Anyone in there? No? Yeah, that's the channel with all the people that care.
"Sufferin' succotash."
They can't release MCE for X360, because the hardware manufacturers would kill them. MS is hamstrung by their legacy business in PC software. And to make profits, the X360 can't just be purchased for use as a DVR, so they're hamstrung by the videogames business model.
I can barely imagine living without this setup or something like it now [that's called hyperbole, Captain Obvious]. Games, TV, Movies, Photos, Internet all from my "TV", all can be controlled using wireless mouse + keyboard (and the keyboard is not used for TV/DVD/Photos). A pair of wireless rumble pads complete the system.
I have a remote from ATI, and it went into the scrap heap after about 1 hour of service. Terrible design, many many buttons that don't feel or work very well. The mouse is a dream. In a previous life I used one of those Logitech Surfboards [or whatever the thing was called - trackball mouse you hold in your hand] - and that worked great, but mine broke, and I think they've since disappeared.
Anyway, the bulk interface shouldn't be in your hand, it should be on the screen. How can you make 62 buttons look sleek and elegant while preserving ease-of-use? On screen interfaces allow for dynamic changes and custom layouts to accomodate user preferences.
Relying on Microsoft to build the foundation for all home digital entertainment is like relying on Ford to build the foundation for quality automobiles. (Psst. Hey geniuses. The Japanese already beat you to it.)
All right, I'll admit up front that this post is gonna get modded down to -infinity politically incorrect fascist flamebait in like no time flat, but here goes:
Ford builds transportation for men. These thingamabobs are called "trucks". Toyota and their brethren build transportation for women and queers. These thingamabobs are called "cars".
If it weren't for the idiotic government-imposed CAFE standards, Ford wouldn't even bother producing a car anymore [with the possible exception of the Crown Vic for the police car/taxi market].
And yes, I've spent considerable time in Toyota pickups [and cars], and to compare any Toyota with a Ford F-Series is like comparing a can of sardines with a magnum of champagne.
Funny that that didn't turn out to be the case and they were actually boasting about 39 buttons and all their functions! I think the others replying to this article about how a grand PC in a box is less desirable when compared to something that just does what you want and follows the KISS rule are correct.
Twinstiq, game news
So there's an engineer in charge of Microsoft's TV strategy. No wonder it's going nowhere. Engineers should stick with what they're good at, which is not (usually) product design. Granted, there are some engineers who are also great designers, but in the case of Microsoft, it is one of my pet peeves that their software is often over-engineered and, as a result, unintuitive.
No, I don't want to explore the Recycle Bin.
Looking as technology moves from the desktop to the appliance I see MS having a LOT of problems in the future. It's not that they don't have smart people in the company, it's that they need a new company mindset. So far they've not doing that well. In the appliance space people DON'T want everything and the kitchen sink. For appliances, Less is More!! Contrast this with the idea of Windows, a huge monolith of intertwined programs where more programs are added on like garbage getting dumped into a landfill.
Apple definitely understands this idea on a corporate level, not just a individual level. Look at all of it's products very elegant and consumer friendly. Nintendo is another company I see understanding this idea very well. Look at the new revolution controller.
I think someone missed the joke. ...and is maybe a little too defensive.
Oh, and since this TV doesn't come with a dock, you need one unless you want to keep it in your pocket or on the back of your computer. You can get apple's...for about $1000 dollar. But hey, it's shiny!
ATI does one thing well: multimedia PC hardware. And then they ruin it with their craptacular add-ons, limited, ugly software, shockingly bad drivers, completely missed opportunities in game development, and apparently cheap useless remotes.
ATI is to video hardware as Microsoft is to operating systems: a hype machine backed up by defective trinkets.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
They just announced it, in cooperation with Starz!
I read that same announcement, but what comes to mind is "too little, too late"... especially with Google entering the video sale market with homebrew DRM (read: not Microsoft).
I was thinking more along the lines of why was Microsoft not distributing video well before even the Apple Disney deal that brought out Lost.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
the poster who mentioned that Apple uses context
rather than devices is on the mark.
Apple has always been more about the inner things
working well... they have also been more about
locking them away...