I actually don't mind a little loose html here and there. Small font types are more a problem for me than a table with a misaligned graphic.
My biggest gripe, however, is when some webdesigners *program* into their page to redirect if not using IE. They won't put forth extra effort to create compatible websites, but they will go out of their way to prevent you from entering their site if you don't use a specific browser.
Incidentally, this is not a small problem. As documented by bugzilla, users can enter hotmail.com using IE or Netscape, but not Gecko (or lesser known browsers). while the impact is small now (99.x% of users on IE), as embedded devices crop up and more users try to customize their browsers, it becomes more and more a problem.
Japanese place a huge value on packaging and aesthetics, not only with gadgetry. For instance, when looking at fruit, the most expensive watermelons are the roundest, consistantly greenest, and the stem forms a perfect 'T' shape. These perfect watermelons can cost $20 or more and may very taste bland.
It doesn't serve any purpose for Microsoft to disable file sharing applications or remove copyrighted content. Given the importance of P2P filesharing these days, it would be like removing a few of your limbs! Think of it, MS machines *can* do Filesharing without all of the legal ramifications. You must then ask, why would they shoot themselves in the foot?
Contract the neighborhood kid who's out of school for the summer. Offer a $50 scanner - maybe a $50 CD burner to scan in 20 or 30 rolls of film (24 pictures) at 600 dpi. Then you offer a buck or two for every roll after that.
Are the Andes Mountains between his home and the local liquor store? or is it common practice to carry Brandy with you while trekking through the Andes?...and alone (a missing detail if he was with a friend)? Wondering if we'll be seeing a number of Trekkies wandering aimlessly through mountain ranges next winter, planting batteries in the snow. This article does seem to be missing some details.
The industry is well prepared for this.
on
P2P Television?
·
· Score: 1
This has been on the board for a long time at our company. In fact, from what I understand, ReplayTV already *has* program sharing between STBs. Personally, I'm still not sold on stuffing a Hard drive into a Set-top box especially if its prone to crashes.
So in that light there are a lot of projects going on that are similar to this. Even Microsoft is pretty aware. Their 'Freestyle' project is a solution that's:
1. meant to display on the TV screen (either through STB or computer video-out card) and,
2. networks with the HD on your computer (a la works with 3rd party P2P file sharing).
It slips our minds that some of the best connected, high-tech clothing are no further than the local law enforcement. Next time you have a chance, take a look at police officer belt straps and clothing. Pretty slick and they're capable of fragging those uglies too!
Interesting stuff from Charmed.
Lineo obtains $1M additional funding
on
Lineo near Death
·
· Score: 2, Informative
FYI. I just read this article.
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS4958883656.html
Apple is focusing - on *popular* applications that doesn't try to do everything that a PC does. They see a niche to remove the computer from the desktop (which explains the design of this unit vs. old iMacs). It was meant to go anywhere in the home. Combined with the Wireless Airports and such... literally, *this* iMac can go anywhere. I liken this product as much with Information Appliances and Set Top Boxes than with typical workstations / computers.
The mainstream uses of an OS is geared for semi-high-end applications - Photoshop, 3d, Games, Development, etc. With Games moving to XBoxes, Playstations and the TV, everything else that a computer does, Web, Email, MP3's is somewhat platform independent. Heavy photoshop, video, and 3D people won't use the iMac - they use high-end workstations... developers too. Apple continues to develop for this market too.
It does, however, have one major barrier. Price. Information appliances all try to hit a $300 price point (if not lower). Even PC's can hit this price point as well as gaming stations. Like I said though, I think there's a lot of potential here.
Kinda sounds like TiVo now, except you still have to fit around the broadcast schedule.
This is actually *similar* to a TiVo as it too has to wait for the actual show to get broadcast before you view it. Think of a VOD as a TiVo server that contains a database of thousands upon thousands of programs that you can call up at whim. You can still do the play/pause/ffwd functions. The difference is that rather than deal with a TV schedule (TiVo), you have to interface with a search engine to find your requested movie or tv show.
This really isn't anything to get too inflated over. It was a pretty standard marketing whitepaper and could have come from just about any company. In college I did research on battery technologies (lead acid, lithium, ni-cad) and every company in this market drew a chart of power efficiency and capacity on a white paper that indicated their technology was favored.
Whitepapers are meant to point out your product's strengths (not weaknesses). Where there are gray areas, you spin it in your favor. To us, these spins look like inaccuracies, but I just assume that any company whose looking to embedded devices will take it with a grain of salt and do their research.
That aside, to me, one glaring thing that's missing from the whitepaper is that a company won't own any technology through licensing XP. With Linux, you can own it... and that's a large consideration when trying to build value from your work through IP or otherwise. I don't expect Microsoft to put that in their whitepaper though.
What a game would do is immediately give you those three features and then as you progressed and became a more powerful character it would give you more features.
Being an avid gamer and delving into UI for my work, I'd have to agree with this statement. Games have to offer extremely rich environments... cram almost all of the info into a screen. Not an easy task. All features are there from the get go, but the most often used, the most basic features are also easier to remember and perform.
I'm not saying that any one game has the perfect UI, just that they are forced to attack the problem from a different angle... the game, Black & White, for example, has a gestural interface... How does this affect the normal graphics paradigm? Which has more importance? Is it easier/faster to remember/perform clicking an onscreen button or draw a circle with the pointer? There a lot that we can learn from.
Often, programs try to accomplish basic features by hiding them (Advanced/Beginner menus) or making the program smarter and smarter (thereby more and more useless). These tend to annoy the advanced users because then they have to spend an extra hour to customize it and turn everything off.
Consider the PowerPC G1, G2, G3, G4's... In this case, consumers wanted to know *how much* better the new processor was than the first - was it worth the upgrade? Clockspeed sort of just came out. If the name is too arbitrary, it doesn't help to hide clockspeed.
If they have purposely misleading model numbers such as amd1600, then some people may not question it.
For those of you arguing about this being stupid because of piracy... I mean, more power to you, but you are crazy.
The concept behind piracy is that its easier, cheaper to get a pirated copy than to get the original. This is a significant difference between movie files and music files. Yes, these copy schemes can be broken, but to what avail? Is everyone in the world going to start distributing movies now? Sharing their high bandwidth connections for gig after gig of pirated Adam Sandler? Yes, you'll save a few bucks in rental fees, but end up losing money on 1. HD space, 2. exceeding bandwidth limits, 3. time (it takes time to pirate stuff).
Note that DIVX and mpeg4 has been underground for some time now. Any thoughts on why this isn't taking off? You'll watch the movie once then forget about it.
How about <a href="http://slashdot.org/articles/01/01/04/132120 9.shtml">Starbucks</a>? Ever try to meet a friend at one of those these days? I mean, you can't just say, "Let's meet at the Starbucks." You have to be pretty specific... "It's the one next to McDonalds, next to the GAP, next to Starbucks, next to... oh... DOH!"
Tell that to Ansel Adams <br>
Well, there are actually a lot of ways to respond to this... Firstly, I'll say that you're right in that it is not 'completely devalued'... that was a bad exaggeration. However, consider that Ansel Adams negatives are worth a lot more than his prints. Consider that Ansel Adams doesn't work in Digital photography. And Consider that Ansel Adams prints are limited. Of course, I'm assuming that you take into consideration the relation of money to do with art.
<br><br>
I won't get into the aesthetic value differences between digital art and traditional art - to me there are no differences there... the only difference is monetary value.
Yeah, I see your point that reproducing Art (Mona Lisa for example) doesn't necessarily reduce its monetary value (or for that matter, its aesthetic value) - exposure definitely lends itself to a certain degree of marketability. However, the difference between computer Art and the Mona Lisa is simply that with the Mona Lisa, there is an original. Computer art doesn't have an original and therefore loses its collectible (monetary) value.
Of course one can argue that Art is not about money, but well... In our age where everything including a blank canvas can be Art, I really interpret the original posters question as
having to do with monetary value rather than one of aesthetics.
Really? What mad, supernatural art hacker skillz enable one to tell to perfectly identical objects apart?
It's actually a very old skill called lying and deceite.:).
ini, meeni, mini, mo.
I have all confidence that theoretically, if an exact replica could be made without destroying the original, someone will still claim to have the original and that one will be worth more.
You can still agree that 'perfect replications' is not the original. And so this is where art notaries and curators and experts come in - to prove which is the original... and that is the one worth the most.
first of all, I don't understand your hostility. Secondly, isn't the reproduction of the Mona Lisa not as valuable as the original? Doesn't this fact alone prove the point that value has to do with Art?
Look. Art value is actually evaluated in a more objective fashion than most of you would think. Certain quantizable aspects of art are valued higher than others. For instance, Size matters, Oil is more valuable than most other mediums such as acrylic, pastels, charcoal, watercolor. Finally, there's the artist - their proven record to sell at a particular price range, their proximity to death.
Finally, one last valuation of art is its (in)ability toward reproductions. There's simply no photograph that even comes close to the value of an original Picasso, Dali, Rodin. The only thing that comes close are serigraphs - even these are valued differently. Since the screens degrade with each reproduction - the lower numbered serigraphs are worth more than the higher numbered ones. Additionally, even serigraphs are not worth as much as originals.
This is specifically where Computer art is affected. If you can reproduce limitless numbers of the original, it completely devalues the work of art.
Slashdot Mirror
I actually don't mind a little loose html here and there. Small font types are more a problem for me than a table with a misaligned graphic. My biggest gripe, however, is when some webdesigners *program* into their page to redirect if not using IE. They won't put forth extra effort to create compatible websites, but they will go out of their way to prevent you from entering their site if you don't use a specific browser.
Incidentally, this is not a small problem. As documented by bugzilla, users can enter hotmail.com using IE or Netscape, but not Gecko (or lesser known browsers). while the impact is small now (99.x% of users on IE), as embedded devices crop up and more users try to customize their browsers, it becomes more and more a problem.
Japanese place a huge value on packaging and aesthetics, not only with gadgetry. For instance, when looking at fruit, the most expensive watermelons are the roundest, consistantly greenest, and the stem forms a perfect 'T' shape. These perfect watermelons can cost $20 or more and may very taste bland.
It doesn't serve any purpose for Microsoft to disable file sharing applications or remove copyrighted content. Given the importance of P2P filesharing these days, it would be like removing a few of your limbs! Think of it, MS machines *can* do Filesharing without all of the legal ramifications. You must then ask, why would they shoot themselves in the foot?
Contract the neighborhood kid who's out of school for the summer. Offer a $50 scanner - maybe a $50 CD burner to scan in 20 or 30 rolls of film (24 pictures) at 600 dpi. Then you offer a buck or two for every roll after that.
Are the Andes Mountains between his home and the local liquor store? or is it common practice to carry Brandy with you while trekking through the Andes? ...and alone (a missing detail if he was with a friend)? Wondering if we'll be seeing a number of Trekkies wandering aimlessly through mountain ranges next winter, planting batteries in the snow. This article does seem to be missing some details.
This has been on the board for a long time at our company. In fact, from what I understand, ReplayTV already *has* program sharing between STBs. Personally, I'm still not sold on stuffing a Hard drive into a Set-top box especially if its prone to crashes.
So in that light there are a lot of projects going on that are similar to this. Even Microsoft is pretty aware. Their 'Freestyle' project is a solution that's:
1. meant to display on the TV screen (either through STB or computer video-out card) and,
2. networks with the HD on your computer (a la works with 3rd party P2P file sharing).
I'm sure there are some Linux equivalents.
It slips our minds that some of the best connected, high-tech clothing are no further than the local law enforcement. Next time you have a chance, take a look at police officer belt straps and clothing. Pretty slick and they're capable of fragging those uglies too!
Interesting stuff from Charmed.
FYI. I just read this article.l
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS4958883656.htm
usability expert with an unusable name! The irony.
They can name them ...
'MoxiPad's!
Apple is focusing - on *popular* applications that doesn't try to do everything that a PC does. They see a niche to remove the computer from the desktop (which explains the design of this unit vs. old iMacs). It was meant to go anywhere in the home. Combined with the Wireless Airports and such... literally, *this* iMac can go anywhere. I liken this product as much with Information Appliances and Set Top Boxes than with typical workstations / computers.
The mainstream uses of an OS is geared for semi-high-end applications - Photoshop, 3d, Games, Development, etc. With Games moving to XBoxes, Playstations and the TV, everything else that a computer does, Web, Email, MP3's is somewhat platform independent. Heavy photoshop, video, and 3D people won't use the iMac - they use high-end workstations... developers too. Apple continues to develop for this market too.
It does, however, have one major barrier. Price. Information appliances all try to hit a $300 price point (if not lower). Even PC's can hit this price point as well as gaming stations. Like I said though, I think there's a lot of potential here.
Kinda sounds like TiVo now, except you still have to fit around the broadcast schedule.
This is actually *similar* to a TiVo as it too has to wait for the actual show to get broadcast before you view it. Think of a VOD as a TiVo server that contains a database of thousands upon thousands of programs that you can call up at whim. You can still do the play/pause/ffwd functions. The difference is that rather than deal with a TV schedule (TiVo), you have to interface with a search engine to find your requested movie or tv show.
I always thought this was an idea that Starbucks should have deployed. I think that there is one on every block in San Francisco.
This really isn't anything to get too inflated over. It was a pretty standard marketing whitepaper and could have come from just about any company. In college I did research on battery technologies (lead acid, lithium, ni-cad) and every company in this market drew a chart of power efficiency and capacity on a white paper that indicated their technology was favored.
Whitepapers are meant to point out your product's strengths (not weaknesses). Where there are gray areas, you spin it in your favor. To us, these spins look like inaccuracies, but I just assume that any company whose looking to embedded devices will take it with a grain of salt and do their research.
That aside, to me, one glaring thing that's missing from the whitepaper is that a company won't own any technology through licensing XP. With Linux, you can own it... and that's a large consideration when trying to build value from your work through IP or otherwise. I don't expect Microsoft to put that in their whitepaper though.
Doesn't it cost money to ipo? Underwriting costs, marketing costs, etc...
What a game would do is immediately give you those three features and then as you progressed and became a more powerful character it would give you more features.
... cram almost all of the info into a screen. Not an easy task. All features are there from the get go, but the most often used, the most basic features are also easier to remember and perform.
I'm not saying that any one game has the perfect UI, just that they are forced to attack the problem from a different angle... the game, Black & White, for example, has a gestural interface... How does this affect the normal graphics paradigm? Which has more importance? Is it easier/faster to remember/perform clicking an onscreen button or draw a circle with the pointer? There a lot that we can learn from.
Being an avid gamer and delving into UI for my work, I'd have to agree with this statement. Games have to offer extremely rich environments
Often, programs try to accomplish basic features by hiding them (Advanced/Beginner menus) or making the program smarter and smarter (thereby more and more useless). These tend to annoy the advanced users because then they have to spend an extra hour to customize it and turn everything off.
Consider the PowerPC G1, G2, G3, G4's... In this case, consumers wanted to know *how much* better the new processor was than the first - was it worth the upgrade? Clockspeed sort of just came out. If the name is too arbitrary, it doesn't help to hide clockspeed.
If they have purposely misleading model numbers such as amd1600, then some people may not question it.
For those of you arguing about this being stupid because of piracy... I mean, more power to you, but you are crazy.
The concept behind piracy is that its easier, cheaper to get a pirated copy than to get the original. This is a significant difference between movie files and music files. Yes, these copy schemes can be broken, but to what avail? Is everyone in the world going to start distributing movies now? Sharing their high bandwidth connections for gig after gig of pirated Adam Sandler? Yes, you'll save a few bucks in rental fees, but end up losing money on 1. HD space, 2. exceeding bandwidth limits, 3. time (it takes time to pirate stuff).
Note that DIVX and mpeg4 has been underground for some time now. Any thoughts on why this isn't taking off? You'll watch the movie once then forget about it.
Who will fill this vacuum?
0 9.shtml">Starbucks</a>? Ever try to meet a friend at one of those these days? I mean, you can't just say, "Let's meet at the Starbucks." You have to be pretty specific... "It's the one next to McDonalds, next to the GAP, next to Starbucks, next to... oh... DOH!"
How about <a href="http://slashdot.org/articles/01/01/04/13212
Tell that to Ansel Adams
<br>
Well, there are actually a lot of ways to respond to this... Firstly, I'll say that you're right in that it is not 'completely devalued'... that was a bad exaggeration. However, consider that Ansel Adams negatives are worth a lot more than his prints. Consider that Ansel Adams doesn't work in Digital photography. And Consider that Ansel Adams prints are limited. Of course, I'm assuming that you take into consideration the relation of money to do with art.
<br><br>
I won't get into the aesthetic value differences between digital art and traditional art - to me there are no differences there... the only difference is monetary value.
Yeah, I see your point that reproducing Art (Mona Lisa for example) doesn't necessarily reduce its monetary value (or for that matter, its aesthetic value) - exposure definitely lends itself to a certain degree of marketability. However, the difference between computer Art and the Mona Lisa is simply that with the Mona Lisa, there is an original. Computer art doesn't have an original and therefore loses its collectible (monetary) value.
Of course one can argue that Art is not about money, but well... In our age where everything including a blank canvas can be Art, I really interpret the original posters question as
having to do with monetary value rather than one of aesthetics.
Really? What mad, supernatural art hacker skillz enable one to tell to perfectly identical objects apart?
:).
It's actually a very old skill called lying and deceite.
ini, meeni, mini, mo.
I have all confidence that theoretically, if an exact replica could be made without destroying the original, someone will still claim to have the original and that one will be worth more.
You can still agree that 'perfect replications' is not the original. And so this is where art notaries and curators and experts come in - to prove which is the original... and that is the one worth the most.
You forget that Computer Art *has* no original.
Look. Art value is actually evaluated in a more objective fashion than most of you would think. Certain quantizable aspects of art are valued higher than others. For instance, Size matters, Oil is more valuable than most other mediums such as acrylic, pastels, charcoal, watercolor. Finally, there's the artist - their proven record to sell at a particular price range, their proximity to death.
Finally, one last valuation of art is its (in)ability toward reproductions. There's simply no photograph that even comes close to the value of an original Picasso, Dali, Rodin. The only thing that comes close are serigraphs - even these are valued differently. Since the screens degrade with each reproduction - the lower numbered serigraphs are worth more than the higher numbered ones. Additionally, even serigraphs are not worth as much as originals.
This is specifically where Computer art is affected. If you can reproduce limitless numbers of the original, it completely devalues the work of art.