Focus follows mouse allows you to have one window in the foreground while typing or selecting text in a background window --without it popping to the front.
Having the window pop to the front while getting input is distracting, particularly when said input is coming from various windows.
Being able to overlap windows in ways that make sense while still being able to work in all of them really is the primary driver for focus follows mouse for me.
I am in the process of doing that right now. Will take a few years to really sort out the next 10 or so, but the writing is on the wall. Having done exactly that 3 times now, its no big deal to do again.
I can't help but wonder about the vitality of our nation overall. Seems to me there is an awful lot of established interests buying legislation, writing contracts, and building technology designed to keep folks from doing exactly that.
The Internet will lead to a world government sooner than we all realize. Those that possess the power and ownership of existing technologies don't care about innovation or making things better for everyone or even progress. They care about their empires and the power that goes with them.
We (and I mean the typical geek) helped build this stuff and that scares the hell out of those holding the reins right now. A few geeks with passion and a permissive environment can topple the powers of today.
Why do you think the intellectual landscape has become so oppressive lately? It's not about what is right and wrong, it's about power and who has it right now. More importantly its about who is going to keep that power moving into the future.
Those that run the world today like it just the way it is and they have a clear advantage. The influence their economic power and knowledge of current technology implications is far greater than that of the general public.
We are under represented today and are suffering because of it. There is a land grab going on right now simply because most people have no idea it is there for the taking and that sucks.
I agree with you in that there are plenty of technical people with their heads in the sand, unwilling to make changes today. But they are simply not the real source of the problems we are beginning to see.
Lessig has it right. Technology is the most powerful tool for control we have ever experienced. The only real checks we have are education and freedom. Both of these are under direct attack right now today.
Legislation, like the DMCA, takes care of the freedom issue. You can't just get rid of all the smart people, but you can criminalize them. It's really a clever law in that regard. Keeping new ideas underground until they are useful to those in charge helps maintain control while at the same time continuing to benefit from their labours.
Education is being addressed through DRM. If you cannot get to the information, or if you cannot communicate what you know, it's pretty hard to raise awareness on a scale large enough to be a threat.
Maybe I am just a bit too extreme tonight, but every time I think about this it continues to make sense. We are seeing the beginnings of real political and social change that scares the hell out of me. --It should scare you too, because what we are seeing now is coming to a nation near you very soon.
I am an American, though I am not exactly proud of it at this moment in time. The values I was raised on have all seriously eroded in a bad way. Our current administration is doing more to eliminate freedom than any before it --all under the guise of war and national security.
They know most people are uninformed right now and are taking advantage. Having tasted some early initial success within our borders, they are seeking to make sure the rest of the planet is ready to play ball. How?
Treaties. We use our economic power to buy legislation just as our major industries did here in the States.
This sort of thing works just like the technology does. All you need is a controlling majority and some legislation to seal the deal. Here in America the ground work has already been nicely done. It will take years and and a few consecutive administrations, who actually are interested in properly representing the people, to undo. So a lot of the damage has already been done here. By the time, our political system can actually get around to fixing things, most of the othe
These words express emotions and ideas that some people find offensive or indecent or whatever excrementy other excuse they can find to justify their desire for others to limit their use.
I believe you are right about low IQ, but there is another factor present here as well; namely, straight up fear.
That's right, fear. Anybody who cannot handle these words is living in a self-built world of denial. Quite simply, they cannot handle the simple truth of their humanity and thus try to hide it. To me this is their loss really. It really sucks to always live in fear and ignorance.
Too bad they fuck up their kids one by one. Ever wonder why so many teenage kids, raised in conservative families, rebel? Look no further than this for most of them.
They should just shut the fuck up and learn to deal. Teach their kids the way the world really works and go from there. Hiding from all the bad things doesn't make them go away you know. This sort of witch hunt is foolish in the way that peril-sensitive sunglasses is funny.
Go ahead, keep your eyes closed and your mind in prison. Just know I am not afraid to not do the same. That's exactly why we have a first amendment.
Star Trek style communicators. The whole touching the badge thing really does not do it for me.
Mix in the little connecting sound with the rough ability to recognize voice input and I'm sure you would have something people would love to buy. I know I would buy one. (Not really a trekkie, but I have always liked the show.) Seems to me the real trekkies would be all over something like that.
Paramount could benefit as well. Licensing the product likeness along with cool trek ring tones and such would be no brainer value adds. Just another way to continue to milk the Trek franchise that I would actually appreciate.
C'mon, there is somebody that reads/. that works somewhere that could at least float this idea. --do it!
Offtopic: (well, sort of)
Does anybody know where good replicas can be purchased? As a kid, I had a model that was pretty cool that got lost somehow. Have always wanted another one for a cool desk toy.
I still want to buy per channel. I would be willing to pay a premium for this service simply because I want to keep the crap / programming ratio at a sane level.
I install a program that claims to do 'X', but it actually does 'X' and or 'Y'.
I chose to remove a program from my system, yet parts of it remain.
Installation of one program depends on or triggers the installation of another one. The terms and conditions for the secondary, but required, software are not acceptable though the terms and conditions on the primary software are. Should I be able to return the package to its point of origin even though it has been opened?
In case the above is not really clear, my real question lies here:
When the Founders put America together they had some reasonable expectations as to how a free, fair and open society should run. Given this expectation, they were able to provide a framework to guide and foster development that benefit everyone. (This is a little out of balance today, but overall the idea is sound.)
Fast forward to today. Most people have reasonable expectations as to how their software should work for them, but are growing increasingly frustrated with increasingly aggressive software being produced and sold without a solid framework to maintain order.
If you take digital devices out of the discussion, for a moment, our current balance of law and freedom mostly works. People have the means to understand what they can and cannot do. There are reasonable protections for those that need them as well.
Instead of hashing out every issue in the courts, where the general public will end up at a clear disadvantage, shouldn't we be working hard to define and frame core issues and build from there?
I'm thinking of a cyber citizens bill of rights, where the right expectations can be set. Given those expectations, wouldn't our existing body of law largely handle most of the issues at hand today?
( Wishing to slow the great cyber land-grab long enough to see just what we really are losing.)
Your comment makes sense. It tells me that we need some regulation here more than ever.
Both sides are screwing the average person over. It's all a pissing contest designed to keep the perception of value as high as possible for as much of the crap as possible.
Getting the top 150 is no deal. Getting 20 channels I really would spend time watching is.
I personally do not have one of these systems. Had dish, dumped it for exactly the reasons you give. Father-in law is old and does have one. This puts me in a position to comment as I can see clearly nothing has changed since I dumped my services.
All you folks paying for some sort of Dish based access feel like cattle now?
Boy I sure do. If anything needs a bit of regulation, this industry does. People should not have to wonder if they can watch their paid for programming or not depending on the whims of some fat ass execs.
Do you think Dish will compensate their customer base? Do they even care about their customer base?
Too many programming choices are an either or bundle situation. People are stuck paying high rates in return for few real choices about their programming.
Dish and Direct TV both should be forced to carry programming on a RAND basis. Their customers should be able to choose what they want with a finer grained degree than they do now.
The bundled programming does not save any of us a dime because the 30 percent of good channels are spread throughout the bundles. This forces people to just pay for all the crap at once, rather than be able to pick 'n choose.
We are seeing this because there is no real check on the power these distributors have over both their customer base and those who seek to distribute programming.
Viacom is going to lose on this one because Dish holds most all the cards. People are going to wonder what happened. Dish will make sure and tell them their version first.
These guys are wanting some attention, so they whine a little and get nothing. Then they force the issue and get the wrong sort.
Seems to me, credit is given where credit is due. If they actually were doing something worth really knowing about, wouldn't they actually get it? We have been seeing little spats happen for long enough now to raise a few eyebrows. Personally, I suspect some deeper problems behind this.
We need an active X development group that does everything it can to enable *nix systems to continue to develop. We don't need these petty squabbles.
Those of us who know what X brings to the table are happy using X. Replacing it really should not be an option at this point; however, I see plenty of folks not happy with X as it is today.
This is exactly why they are not getting the attention they crave. The job is not being done well enough plain and simple.
Fork or no, this is going to continue to be a problem until a group forms that can step up to the plate and hit a few home runs. Will it be the XFree guys or somebody else?
Whoever gets X development moving as it needs to will get all the attention they need. Stupid license clauses won't cut it.
I was one of those that just *had* to have one at launch time. Big mistake. It was a flaky unit.
The first machine lasted about a year or so. I did not replace it right away because I was busy at the time.
The second one has been flawless for quite a while now.
The graphics shortcomings really do not matter much to me because the display is easily good enough to enjoy the game. I know the hardware is capable, but it is a bear to program.
In this way, the PS2 is a lot like the old Atari 2600. For this reason, I expect a nice long life on the machine. --The smarter you are, the better the display can be. Is this better than systems with less flexible hardware, but easier programming interfaces? Early on, its a clear disadvantage, but later in the lifecycle, its a bonus, provided the developers actually *do* get more out of the machine. In the case of the PS2, the number of units out there is incentive enough to make this the case.
The Sony hardware is better than the Microsoft hardware. Better controllers, smaller design, nice video output. DVD playback through the component cables is very good. You can use a keyboard and mouse with PS2, and you can run Linux. (An older Linux, with limitations, but Linux!) Being able to program the machine means an even more extended life because the home-brew people *will* eventually manage to produce their own games. This does not matter today, but it will some time from now.
Load times are not quite what I would like to see, but reasonable. The dynamic nature of the hardware means heavy load on the drive. This bothers me a bit becuase I know it will wear. Memory cards are great, but a bit expensive. I like card saves because they are portable, where a hard drive save is not.
PS2 has enough games that appeal to me, so that area is covered. Being able to run older PS1 games is a nice bonus as well. I find the younger kids do better with the older games, because they are less complex. (Nester DC, running on Dreamcast gets a lot of playtime in my house.)
Online play is not quite what it could be, but being able to use either broadband, or modem is nice. Lots of people still use modems.
Brother in law has an Xbox. It is clearly the more powerful machine, but suffers in a couple of areas; namely, extra cost for DVD playback, controllers, no mouse support, size, game library (though this is slowly changing).
Did the PS2 meet my expectations. Yes, and there is more to see yet.
Sony has gotten enough right for two consoles in a row now to make me have little reason not to purchase a PS3. I will wait until a bit after launch though.
Remote display situations allow for true multi-user computing with a GUI.
Vnc exports an entire desktop session, which is pretty useful, but it falls way short of what X can do.
Want to share an application? Host it on one common application server. Better, want to allow 10 people to use an expensive application requiring expensive hardware? You could just buy them all nice boxes, then get a floating license, then install it everywhere... or get one nice box, install the app, then let users remote it to where they are. The second way is a lot cheaper from both an admin and hardware standpoint.
X allows the administrator and user to make best use of all computing resources on the network however they see fit. Solutions like VNC let people share single user desktops and can create many single user desktops for many users to use, but they do not allow multi-user computing to happen the way X does.
Remote display combined with true multi-user design allows X to play hard in the enterprise computing space. Take a hard look at LTSP for one example of this. Read about the city of largo for another couple.
At home here, I have several machines that all run UNIX. I have them all integrated onto one desktop. It is hard to tell which machine is doing what --it just works.
With X you can have one machine serve fonts, another manage your windows, yet another handle the actual physical display, yet another serve an application....
My point is this:
There are *lots* of people using remote display. It saves them time and money because they can design compute environments that suit their needs and budget where single-user systems cannot. (win32 is single user, for example)
Most folks that think others don't use multi-user display systems simply have not been exposed to them.
VNC will not serve as a replacement for a large number of situations. It does do what it does well however, I am not knocking VNC:)
The problems with X are presentation, for the most part. We need to work hard on good tools to configure the environment for those that don't know how today. The powerful multi-user features of X are probably one of the best features Linux (and UNIX in general) has to offer. Why throw a serious advantage, along with years of software away, only to produce another broken display system?
We already have lots of those. --They don't really do anything that helps people save time and money. X does that.
The guys in the front of the field *are* really excited.
It is amazing stuff really, but it also sounds pretty giddy. Oh well, we all paid for it, I hope they are getting our moneys worth. If they are not, its a shame.
Agreed. I was pretty young when Breakout, Night Driver, and Fire Truck hit the scene.
Probably should have said "the first wave I identify with, or some such."
Fire Truck does stick out though. I played the back wheel a few times with an older relative. I did wonder at the time, why they looked the way they did. The visuals did not impress as the classics did. Could have been age too. I did enjoy being able to play with someone though.
Later, in high school, I got hold of an old 4 player pong table. Should have kept it, but didn't. Anyway, it was the type of game that used a creative mix of logic chips to make the game go. Folded inside was a schematic that detailed all of the gates and triggers. Hand drawn no less. The only board inside had perhaps 200 16 pin DIP chips inside, connected to the control knobs and coin slot. It did have a wierd bus connector on one end, I assume it was to accept different game logic boards.
The best part was the 'monitor'. It was an old B & W tv, with the back cut off. (literally, it looked like somebody took a saw to it) No tuner, game signal went right into the IF port on the main electronics part of the TV! I suppose this kept both the cost and the noise down. That was the only time I ever saw a TV being used in that way. At the time, it struck be as being a cheap hack.
Too bad the signal was so poor. (A scope revealed fairly normal SYNC with black and white clamped to the extremes of the NTSC standard.) Using the IF directly would have likely been able to render some nice images, for the time.
All the other products I saw then either RM modulated through the tuner, or used a more expensive design that could accept composite input.
The TV actually had good resolution, once I attached a tuner. My first, and only cabinet mod to date involved putting a 2600 inside, and wiring the paddles to play Warlords. The cabinet did not have any buttons, just the paddles, so we used handheld switches for the button function needed for the Warlords game.
In my house, MAME on the computer, and the NES emulator, running on Dreamcast gets the most attention over PS2.
Every year, I break out the old Atari collection. The kids will play that for hours each time. (2600 with about 200 games + all controllers + Atari 400)
Old arcades. Musty places, the smell of electronics mixed with the high hum of monitors all sprinkled with the 60Hz buzz from the neons lighting the place.
The first wave of games was the most interesting to me. Vector games, like Rip-Off, Crystal Castles, Asteroids, Tail Gunner, Armor Attack, and later Tempest!, all provided sharp clear visuals. Color cycling, or the intense bright spot used for bullets. These things made the games look exciting from a distance. That and the sounds... Walking in was always a good experience. The wierd sounds. You would hear the patterns and listen a bit more. It reminds me of whistling to a dog. They sense something in the sound that begs their attention. --That's how the old game sounds worked.
Some raster games were good too. Galaxian, Defender (I am going to build a cabinet for that one, I swear), PacMan, Sinistar, Cloak and Dagger, Wizard of Wor, Gorf, all were plenty of fun.
Most all of these games rewarded skill with playtime. This caused some problems, but hour limits took care of that for the most part. One arcade I played in would only enforce the limit if players were waiting; otherwise, you could play all day long. They did appreciate you buying a couple of sodas though.
Handwritten high score boards were one feature I miss today. Simple name, date, time, score. Was a chance for a geek to get a bit of attention. Being on that board was cool --that also drove lots of sales because 'there could only be one' --per game.
Thinking back about all of this makes me want to say a bit more about the experience I really miss, and that is the Trance!
Old games, with their patterns and simple play, trigger, in me at least, a sort of high that comes with experienced play. You reach a spot where thought is action, and reaction. For a while, you forget the ongoing din around you and focus on the task at hand --what ever that may be.
Early on, I remember discussions about the addictive nature of video games. Well, the old ones have it over most newer games today, in this area. (Many of the interactive games are close though. You can trance and burn calories at the same time playing DDR!)
Almost all of the great old games, allowed good players to play long enough to really enjoy the experience. Game play balance was more in favor of the player then. Today, it is calculated to the 95th percentile (my guess, but I doubt I am wrong). Only a few players ever have the skill or the money to prevail. Almost like a casino.
I remember Nintendo appearing on the scene about the same time I began to resent the Arcade a bit. They made games that actually ended. --Sometimes the ending was a long way coming, other times it happened right as you were beginning to reach mastery of the game. (Can't trance on a finished game, you know.)
Today, we know that trend has lasted. Seems the arcade has diminished in that time as well. Could they possibly be missing something here?
This dollars / per hour / experience thing is a mistake in the business model --at least at the amounts set here in the states. It simply costs too much to really enjoy the experience.
seems the hype on this thing is way out of scale. I am not trying to marginalize NASA accomplishments, though I do find some statements pretty funny.
When they cut into one of the rocks:
"It went deeper than we ever imagined!" (Few millimeters)
Assessing the landing site:
"We can't believe our luck!" (Flat, with a few rocks)
etc.
Now, I think the rover is cool, and want the science just as much as anyone else does, but the statements from the scientists (or their PR person) are just giddy.
Slashdot Mirror
seriously. I have noticed the *large* amount of ads starting sometime in late 2001.
Spend all you want, I can always click more.
Still am not going to buy another Microsoft product again. Will I use them? Sure, as long as somebody else pays for it.
Focus follows mouse allows you to have one window in the foreground while typing or selecting text in a background window --without it popping to the front.
Having the window pop to the front while getting input is distracting, particularly when said input is coming from various windows.
Being able to overlap windows in ways that make sense while still being able to work in all of them really is the primary driver for focus follows mouse for me.
you point out.
I am in the process of doing that right now. Will take a few years to really sort out the next 10 or so, but the writing is on the wall. Having done exactly that 3 times now, its no big deal to do again.
I can't help but wonder about the vitality of our nation overall. Seems to me there is an awful lot of established interests buying legislation, writing contracts, and building technology designed to keep folks from doing exactly that.
The Internet will lead to a world government sooner than we all realize. Those that possess the power and ownership of existing technologies don't care about innovation or making things better for everyone or even progress. They care about their empires and the power that goes with them.
We (and I mean the typical geek) helped build this stuff and that scares the hell out of those holding the reins right now. A few geeks with passion and a permissive environment can topple the powers of today.
Why do you think the intellectual landscape has become so oppressive lately? It's not about what is right and wrong, it's about power and who has it right now. More importantly its about who is going to keep that power moving into the future.
Those that run the world today like it just the way it is and they have a clear advantage. The influence their economic power and knowledge of current technology implications is far greater than that of the general public.
We are under represented today and are suffering because of it. There is a land grab going on right now simply because most people have no idea it is there for the taking and that sucks.
I agree with you in that there are plenty of technical people with their heads in the sand, unwilling to make changes today. But they are simply not the real source of the problems we are beginning to see.
Lessig has it right. Technology is the most powerful tool for control we have ever experienced. The only real checks we have are education and freedom. Both of these are under direct attack right now today.
Legislation, like the DMCA, takes care of the freedom issue. You can't just get rid of all the smart people, but you can criminalize them. It's really a clever law in that regard. Keeping new ideas underground until they are useful to those in charge helps maintain control while at the same time continuing to benefit from their labours.
Education is being addressed through DRM. If you cannot get to the information, or if you cannot communicate what you know, it's pretty hard to raise awareness on a scale large enough to be a threat.
Maybe I am just a bit too extreme tonight, but every time I think about this it continues to make sense. We are seeing the beginnings of real political and social change that scares the hell out of me. --It should scare you too, because what we are seeing now is coming to a nation near you very soon.
I am an American, though I am not exactly proud of it at this moment in time. The values I was raised on have all seriously eroded in a bad way. Our current administration is doing more to eliminate freedom than any before it --all under the guise of war and national security.
They know most people are uninformed right now and are taking advantage. Having tasted some early initial success within our borders, they are seeking to make sure the rest of the planet is ready to play ball. How?
Treaties. We use our economic power to buy legislation just as our major industries did here in the States.
This sort of thing works just like the technology does. All you need is a controlling majority and some legislation to seal the deal. Here in America the ground work has already been nicely done. It will take years and and a few consecutive administrations, who actually are interested in properly representing the people, to undo. So a lot of the damage has already been done here. By the time, our political system can actually get around to fixing things, most of the othe
These words express emotions and ideas that some people find offensive or indecent or whatever excrementy other excuse they can find to justify their desire for others to limit their use.
I believe you are right about low IQ, but there is another factor present here as well; namely, straight up fear.
That's right, fear. Anybody who cannot handle these words is living in a self-built world of denial. Quite simply, they cannot handle the simple truth of their humanity and thus try to hide it. To me this is their loss really. It really sucks to always live in fear and ignorance.
Too bad they fuck up their kids one by one. Ever wonder why so many teenage kids, raised in conservative families, rebel? Look no further than this for most of them.
They should just shut the fuck up and learn to deal. Teach their kids the way the world really works and go from there. Hiding from all the bad things doesn't make them go away you know. This sort of witch hunt is foolish in the way that peril-sensitive sunglasses is funny.
Go ahead, keep your eyes closed and your mind in prison. Just know I am not afraid to not do the same. That's exactly why we have a first amendment.
Our leaders would do well to remember that.
Star Trek style communicators. The whole touching the badge thing really does not do it for me.
/. that works somewhere that could at least float this idea. --do it!
Mix in the little connecting sound with the rough ability to recognize voice input and I'm sure you would have something people would love to buy. I know I would buy one. (Not really a trekkie, but I have always liked the show.) Seems to me the real trekkies would be all over something like that.
Paramount could benefit as well. Licensing the product likeness along with cool trek ring tones and such would be no brainer value adds. Just another way to continue to milk the Trek franchise that I would actually appreciate.
C'mon, there is somebody that reads
Offtopic: (well, sort of)
Does anybody know where good replicas can be purchased? As a kid, I had a model that was pretty cool that got lost somehow. Have always wanted another one for a cool desk toy.
I still want to buy per channel. I would be willing to pay a premium for this service simply because I want to keep the crap / programming ratio at a sane level.
related to software and user rights?
Some examples:
I install a program that claims to do 'X', but it actually does 'X' and or 'Y'.
I chose to remove a program from my system, yet parts of it remain.
Installation of one program depends on or triggers the installation of another one. The terms and conditions for the secondary, but required, software are not acceptable though the terms and conditions on the primary software are. Should I be able to return the package to its point of origin even though it has been opened?
In case the above is not really clear, my real question lies here:
When the Founders put America together they had some reasonable expectations as to how a free, fair and open society should run. Given this expectation, they were able to provide a framework to guide and foster development that benefit everyone. (This is a little out of balance today, but overall the idea is sound.)
Fast forward to today. Most people have reasonable expectations as to how their software should work for them, but are growing increasingly frustrated with increasingly aggressive software being produced and sold without a solid framework to maintain order.
If you take digital devices out of the discussion, for a moment, our current balance of law and freedom mostly works. People have the means to understand what they can and cannot do. There are reasonable protections for those that need them as well.
Instead of hashing out every issue in the courts, where the general public will end up at a clear disadvantage, shouldn't we be working hard to define and frame core issues and build from there?
I'm thinking of a cyber citizens bill of rights, where the right expectations can be set. Given those expectations, wouldn't our existing body of law largely handle most of the issues at hand today?
( Wishing to slow the great cyber land-grab long enough to see just what we really are losing.)
If the cost to distribute is the same, carrying lots of channels is the same as only carrying a few right?
I would also opt to pay more for fewer channels, sans crap.
If nobody really watches Golf Channel, shouldn't it be gone?
Your comment makes sense. It tells me that we need some regulation here more than ever.
Both sides are screwing the average person over. It's all a pissing contest designed to keep the perception of value as high as possible for as much of the crap as possible.
Getting the top 150 is no deal. Getting 20 channels I really would spend time watching is.
Thanks for the info!
I personally do not have one of these systems. Had dish, dumped it for exactly the reasons you give. Father-in law is old and does have one. This puts me in a position to comment as I can see clearly nothing has changed since I dumped my services.
Antenna only, buy most content on DVD.
All you folks paying for some sort of Dish based access feel like cattle now?
Boy I sure do. If anything needs a bit of regulation, this industry does. People should not have to wonder if they can watch their paid for programming or not depending on the whims of some fat ass execs.
Do you think Dish will compensate their customer base? Do they even care about their customer base?
Too many programming choices are an either or bundle situation. People are stuck paying high rates in return for few real choices about their programming.
Dish and Direct TV both should be forced to carry programming on a RAND basis. Their customers should be able to choose what they want with a finer grained degree than they do now.
The bundled programming does not save any of us a dime because the 30 percent of good channels are spread throughout the bundles. This forces people to just pay for all the crap at once, rather than be able to pick 'n choose.
We are seeing this because there is no real check on the power these distributors have over both their customer base and those who seek to distribute programming.
Viacom is going to lose on this one because Dish holds most all the cards. People are going to wonder what happened. Dish will make sure and tell them their version first.
I am interested in seeing this guide as well. Will it be published beyond the fortune 1000 / govt folks?
These guys are wanting some attention, so they whine a little and get nothing. Then they force the issue and get the wrong sort.
Seems to me, credit is given where credit is due. If they actually were doing something worth really knowing about, wouldn't they actually get it? We have been seeing little spats happen for long enough now to raise a few eyebrows. Personally, I suspect some deeper problems behind this.
We need an active X development group that does everything it can to enable *nix systems to continue to develop. We don't need these petty squabbles.
Those of us who know what X brings to the table are happy using X. Replacing it really should not be an option at this point; however, I see plenty of folks not happy with X as it is today.
This is exactly why they are not getting the attention they crave. The job is not being done well enough plain and simple.
Fork or no, this is going to continue to be a problem until a group forms that can step up to the plate and hit a few home runs. Will it be the XFree guys or somebody else?
Whoever gets X development moving as it needs to will get all the attention they need. Stupid license clauses won't cut it.
...once I got a good one.
I was one of those that just *had* to have one at launch time. Big mistake. It was a flaky unit.
The first machine lasted about a year or so. I did not replace it right away because I was busy at the time.
The second one has been flawless for quite a while now.
The graphics shortcomings really do not matter much to me because the display is easily good enough to enjoy the game. I know the hardware is capable, but it is a bear to program.
In this way, the PS2 is a lot like the old Atari 2600. For this reason, I expect a nice long life on the machine. --The smarter you are, the better the display can be. Is this better than systems with less flexible hardware, but easier programming interfaces? Early on, its a clear disadvantage, but later in the lifecycle, its a bonus, provided the developers actually *do* get more out of the machine. In the case of the PS2, the number of units out there is incentive enough to make this the case.
The Sony hardware is better than the Microsoft hardware. Better controllers, smaller design, nice video output. DVD playback through the component cables is very good. You can use a keyboard and mouse with PS2, and you can run Linux. (An older Linux, with limitations, but Linux!) Being able to program the machine means an even more extended life because the home-brew people *will* eventually manage to produce their own games. This does not matter today, but it will some time from now.
Load times are not quite what I would like to see, but reasonable. The dynamic nature of the hardware means heavy load on the drive. This bothers me a bit becuase I know it will wear. Memory cards are great, but a bit expensive. I like card saves because they are portable, where a hard drive save is not.
PS2 has enough games that appeal to me, so that area is covered. Being able to run older PS1 games is a nice bonus as well. I find the younger kids do better with the older games, because they are less complex. (Nester DC, running on Dreamcast gets a lot of playtime in my house.)
Online play is not quite what it could be, but being able to use either broadband, or modem is nice. Lots of people still use modems.
Brother in law has an Xbox. It is clearly the more powerful machine, but suffers in a couple of areas; namely, extra cost for DVD playback, controllers, no mouse support, size, game library (though this is slowly changing).
Did the PS2 meet my expectations. Yes, and there is more to see yet.
Sony has gotten enough right for two consoles in a row now to make me have little reason not to purchase a PS3. I will wait until a bit after launch though.
Remote display situations allow for true multi-user computing with a GUI.
:)
Vnc exports an entire desktop session, which is pretty useful, but it falls way short of what X can do.
Want to share an application? Host it on one common application server. Better, want to allow 10 people to use an expensive application requiring expensive hardware? You could just buy them all nice boxes, then get a floating license, then install it everywhere... or get one nice box, install the app, then let users remote it to where they are. The second way is a lot cheaper from both an admin and hardware standpoint.
X allows the administrator and user to make best use of all computing resources on the network however they see fit. Solutions like VNC let people share single user desktops and can create many single user desktops for many users to use, but they do not allow multi-user computing to happen the way X does.
Remote display combined with true multi-user design allows X to play hard in the enterprise computing space. Take a hard look at LTSP for one example of this. Read about the city of largo for another couple.
At home here, I have several machines that all run UNIX. I have them all integrated onto one desktop. It is hard to tell which machine is doing what --it just works.
With X you can have one machine serve fonts, another manage your windows, yet another handle the actual physical display, yet another serve an application....
My point is this:
There are *lots* of people using remote display. It saves them time and money because they can design compute environments that suit their needs and budget where single-user systems cannot. (win32 is single user, for example)
Most folks that think others don't use multi-user display systems simply have not been exposed to them.
VNC will not serve as a replacement for a large number of situations. It does do what it does well however, I am not knocking VNC
The problems with X are presentation, for the most part. We need to work hard on good tools to configure the environment for those that don't know how today. The powerful multi-user features of X are probably one of the best features Linux (and UNIX in general) has to offer. Why throw a serious advantage, along with years of software away, only to produce another broken display system?
We already have lots of those. --They don't really do anything that helps people save time and money. X does that.
Do produce the trance and I agree about the opponent. If you are both very good, it does happen.
You know you are there when both parties, slam the 'next round' button so fast, you don't even think about the replay.
My favorite of these is Tekken 2.
One day soon, I will give the Japanese games a try, thanks for the tip.
For a quick trance, there is always Kaboom!
The guys in the front of the field *are* really excited.
It is amazing stuff really, but it also sounds pretty giddy. Oh well, we all paid for it, I hope they are getting our moneys worth. If they are not, its a shame.
Heh!
That sounds about right.
Now, I am going to have to breakout MAME a little bit this evening.
The very rapid thrust, long drift and knob for direcion made that a fun game.
Real aggressive play balance too. First few screens (waves) were just fine for most people, then mayhem!
Or, goofy things like: "If you drive the tank far enough (in Battlezone), you can reach the volcano."
Dorks.
Agreed. I was pretty young when Breakout, Night Driver, and Fire Truck hit the scene.
Probably should have said "the first wave I identify with, or some such."
Fire Truck does stick out though. I played the back wheel a few times with an older relative. I did wonder at the time, why they looked the way they did. The visuals did not impress as the classics did. Could have been age too. I did enjoy being able to play with someone though.
Later, in high school, I got hold of an old 4 player pong table. Should have kept it, but didn't. Anyway, it was the type of game that used a creative mix of logic chips to make the game go. Folded inside was a schematic that detailed all of the gates and triggers. Hand drawn no less. The only board inside had perhaps 200 16 pin DIP chips inside, connected to the control knobs and coin slot. It did have a wierd bus connector on one end, I assume it was to accept different game logic boards.
The best part was the 'monitor'. It was an old B & W tv, with the back cut off. (literally, it looked like somebody took a saw to it) No tuner, game signal went right into the IF port on the main electronics part of the TV! I suppose this kept both the cost and the noise down. That was the only time I ever saw a TV being used in that way. At the time, it struck be as being a cheap hack.
Too bad the signal was so poor. (A scope revealed fairly normal SYNC with black and white clamped to the extremes of the NTSC standard.) Using the IF directly would have likely been able to render some nice images, for the time.
All the other products I saw then either RM modulated through the tuner, or used a more expensive design that could accept composite input.
The TV actually had good resolution, once I attached a tuner. My first, and only cabinet mod to date involved putting a 2600 inside, and wiring the paddles to play Warlords. The cabinet did not have any buttons, just the paddles, so we used handheld switches for the button function needed for the Warlords game.
In my house, MAME on the computer, and the NES emulator, running on Dreamcast gets the most attention over PS2.
Every year, I break out the old Atari collection. The kids will play that for hours each time. (2600 with about 200 games + all controllers + Atari 400)
Old arcades. Musty places, the smell of electronics mixed with the high hum of monitors all sprinkled with the 60Hz buzz from the neons lighting the place.
The first wave of games was the most interesting to me. Vector games, like Rip-Off, Crystal Castles, Asteroids, Tail Gunner, Armor Attack, and later Tempest!, all provided sharp clear visuals. Color cycling, or the intense bright spot used for bullets. These things made the games look exciting from a distance. That and the sounds... Walking in was always a good experience. The wierd sounds. You would hear the patterns and listen a bit more. It reminds me of whistling to a dog. They sense something in the sound that begs their attention. --That's how the old game sounds worked.
Some raster games were good too. Galaxian, Defender (I am going to build a cabinet for that one, I swear), PacMan, Sinistar, Cloak and Dagger, Wizard of Wor, Gorf, all were plenty of fun.
Most all of these games rewarded skill with playtime. This caused some problems, but hour limits took care of that for the most part. One arcade I played in would only enforce the limit if players were waiting; otherwise, you could play all day long. They did appreciate you buying a couple of sodas though.
Handwritten high score boards were one feature I miss today. Simple name, date, time, score. Was a chance for a geek to get a bit of attention. Being on that board was cool --that also drove lots of sales because 'there could only be one' --per game.
Thinking back about all of this makes me want to say a bit more about the experience I really miss, and that is the Trance!
Old games, with their patterns and simple play, trigger, in me at least, a sort of high that comes with experienced play. You reach a spot where thought is action, and reaction. For a while, you forget the ongoing din around you and focus on the task at hand --what ever that may be.
Early on, I remember discussions about the addictive nature of video games. Well, the old ones have it over most newer games today, in this area. (Many of the interactive games are close though. You can trance and burn calories at the same time playing DDR!)
Almost all of the great old games, allowed good players to play long enough to really enjoy the experience. Game play balance was more in favor of the player then. Today, it is calculated to the 95th percentile (my guess, but I doubt I am wrong). Only a few players ever have the skill or the money to prevail. Almost like a casino.
I remember Nintendo appearing on the scene about the same time I began to resent the Arcade a bit. They made games that actually ended. --Sometimes the ending was a long way coming, other times it happened right as you were beginning to reach mastery of the game. (Can't trance on a finished game, you know.)
Today, we know that trend has lasted. Seems the arcade has diminished in that time as well. Could they possibly be missing something here?
This dollars / per hour / experience thing is a mistake in the business model --at least at the amounts set here in the states. It simply costs too much to really enjoy the experience.
seems the hype on this thing is way out of scale. I am not trying to marginalize NASA accomplishments, though I do find some statements pretty funny.
When they cut into one of the rocks:
"It went deeper than we ever imagined!" (Few millimeters)
Assessing the landing site:
"We can't believe our luck!" (Flat, with a few rocks)
etc.
Now, I think the rover is cool, and want the science just as much as anyone else does, but the statements from the scientists (or their PR person) are just giddy.
I am more into the SGI side of things, but I understand what you are saying.
Workstation class graphics cards are *accurate* in the little details. I feel the same way about my O2 and Indigo2.
With regard to vendor supported configurations, you would be surprised at the number of people that do the cheap card anyway because its cheaper.