tranquility is simple to learn, yet takes months to master.
Playing through all it's levels takes most players over 100 hours.
It's a great way to show off what your G5 can do and looks amazing on a big Cinema Display. It's good for you, it's cheap, and if you talk to it nice it might wash your car.
There's no other game like it (and there's probably a reason for that...)
Why is this modded as troll. It just states the most common opinion on Global Warming. Actually, it's the most common opinion on pretty much everything in the U.S.
I always thought that Linux felt most like v7. That's why I could never figure out why there was so much excitement about it, other than access to source. And back then, the early '80s, I had a fully stocked/usr/src directory. Don't tell that to Darl...
The "experienced Unix user" can handle different directory structures, GUIs that aren't X, having to pick up sets of favorite tools, and learning to best adapt to what's unfamiliar.
After all, IRIX != Solaris != HPUX != AIX != SCO != Linux != OS X != n...
I wish that Terry Gilliam would have been chosen as director. This movie treatment deserves to be something special/spectacular.
also
DNA narrated all of his books for Dove audio, and added (again) something special. It would be lovely if they would his voiceover for narration or for the guide itself.
Currently, the iPod owns the mp3 market in the $300 to $500 range. Apple wants to at least retain, better yet to grow, that share.
They see the market and consumer perception as features.vs price; "If I pay a little more, I can get this! -or- If I pay a little less, I can still get that."
If Apple announced a player in $125 to $200 space, they would now be fighting the market on several fronts. $125 on down, $200 on up. Plus the current battle of $300 on down. (there's not much competition in $500 space).
By moving their front down slowly, now iPods are in $250 to $500, they limit the number of competitors. Look at what many of these discussions are about; "For only $50 more, I can get different, better iPod!" (which is fine as far as Apple is concerned).
As long as they were bothering with moving down to $250 space, they might as well have offered a new, but similar design instead of just selling the current iPod design with a 4Gb drive. More market potential that way.
After the iPodmini establishes itself as the leader in $250 space, Apple will make the next move down to $200, and attempt to take that market. If they can't meet expectations in units shipped and profits earned, that's where they will stop. If they do well in the $200 market, maybe then we'll see a $150 iPodmicro.
I predict that they'll sell all of the mini's they can make and in number of units shipped, it will be Apple's most popular product ever.
There's more to the iPod than it's storage capacity and physical size. And I don't mean the intangible things like the "cool" factor.
The interface works well for the task at hand and is intuitive enough that it all of it's features can be easily learned and enjoyed without a great deal of study, by the majority of it's customers.
It also feels good. Smooth and solid with your hand falling to the controls almost perfectly.
The rest of the total package, iTunes and the Music Store also are well integrated, reliable and intuitive to the majority of customers.
On one hand, you say that Apple gets it "right" yet don't want to pay the extra amount that this forethought requires in engineering time and effort. On the other, you state that Apple could use "a little healthy competition" when, other than in music player space, the have a low single digit market share (or at least thats what's constantly reported).
I'm not sure what you are really after but it seems that a small market share, combined with rip-offs from taiwan would kill that Golden Goose completely and you would only be left with Microsoft to show you what "good" is.
With 100M download codes, and the need to keep them short because they're printed on bottle caps, how long until scripters start probing for music codes....
Yes folks, another shameless plug for tranquility.
It's so much the "anti-game" that we've got more non-gamers playing than anyone else. Much of our email feedback tells us that. We get a lot of comments like: "I don't normally play video games, but tranquility is great, I just had to write you...".
Over one third of our players are women. In fact, the big hole in our demographic seems to be where other computer games are popular. Guys under 20 just don't get us at all.
We are also very big with technical professionals. A bunch of players come from.gov sites like NASA JPL, NIH, and the Dept. of Energy. There are at least two doctors that we know of that use the game as part of a therapy regimen for treating post-stress, trauma, and sleep disorders.
We're also highly addictive (once you find out about us, and "get it"). Our game levels are generated on-the-fly uniquely for each player from our servers, so we can track who's playing and for how long. We've got one player in particular that signed up back in 2001 and has played the game for over 1200 hours at last count. Much of that is due to the hallucinogenic and vertigo inducing effects of playing the game. Many of the reviews on the 'net about tranquility talk about how it gets you quite stoned, dizzy, and disoriented. (That was the real point of the game). Many liken it to that game on the Star Trek episode that got the crew hooked. We agree.
Our biggest problem is with marketing a game that's targeted at non-gamers. This happens with every publisher we have had contact with. Some publisher staffer falls in love with our game, then when it comes time for Mr. Type-A Decision Maker to take a look at it, it's so unlike any other game, they just don't get it. This reaction happens every time, and it's due to the design of the game itself. Tranquility actually attempts to induce a tranquilizing effect in the player.
If you play aggressively and start thrashing around with the mouse, the engine tightens up and makes it more difficult to play. You have to relax to make the game work. Unfortunately, the upper-level execs got to that position by primal aggression, so when they sit down to give us a try, they can't play the game at all and refuse to let go and submit to the game.
So we're stuck with mainly word of mouth marketing, which is why I end up writing posts like this.
I saw somebody using these at a trade show booth 8 years ago. There's also a scene in the movie Philadelphia where Andy goes into the board room (to get fired) and they flip a switch and the windows go from clear to frosty. As I remember, they Foley'ed in a big "clunk" when the switch is thrown. I guess it needed an audio cue so you would notice that it happened.
Slashdot Mirror
Not only the home of the Bandettes, but now internet for everyone!
My kind of town.
Besides, you could poke an eye out with that thing.
Your right.
It's so obvious that all the best developers write for Windows.
What were we thinking?
(chuckle..)
Sad little boy.
tranquility is simple to learn, yet takes months to master.
Playing through all it's levels takes most players over 100 hours.
It's a great way to show off what your G5 can do and looks amazing on a big Cinema Display.
It's good for you, it's cheap, and if you talk to it nice it might wash your car.
There's no other game like it (and there's probably a reason for that...)
Don't worry about citizenship, it's not a requirement to be a soldier
I didn't know that. So does that mean that Bush's new initiative to allow
illegals into the US would make them eligible for service?
Why is this modded as troll.
It just states the most common opinion on Global Warming.
Actually, it's the most common opinion on pretty much everything in the U.S.
Hey, who gives a shit when there's a quick buck to be made?
I always thought that Linux felt most like v7. /usr/src directory.
That's why I could never figure out why there was so much excitement about it,
other than access to source. And back then, the early '80s, I had a fully stocked
Don't tell that to Darl...
The "experienced Unix user" can handle different directory structures, GUIs that aren't X,
having to pick up sets of favorite tools, and learning to best adapt to what's unfamiliar.
After all, IRIX != Solaris != HPUX != AIX != SCO != Linux != OS X != n...
I wish that Terry Gilliam would have been chosen as director.
This movie treatment deserves to be something special/spectacular.
also
DNA narrated all of his books for Dove audio, and added (again) something special.
It would be lovely if they would his voiceover for narration or for the guide itself.
The Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider??
It's nothing compared to the Great Hyperlobic Omni-Cognate Neutron Wrangler of Ciceronicus Twelve.
You're point was expensive stuff is of questionable value,
but you can solve that by buying a Lexus?
A $35,000 Toyota is somehow immune to your argument?
I like to ride the bus. Can I sit next to you?
The strategy of the iPodmini makes perfect sense.
.vs price;
Currently, the iPod owns the mp3 market in the $300 to $500 range.
Apple wants to at least retain, better yet to grow, that share.
They see the market and consumer perception as features
"If I pay a little more, I can get this! -or- If I pay a little less, I can still get that."
If Apple announced a player in $125 to $200 space, they would now be
fighting the market on several fronts. $125 on down, $200 on up.
Plus the current battle of $300 on down. (there's not much competition
in $500 space).
By moving their front down slowly, now iPods are in $250 to $500,
they limit the number of competitors. Look at what many of these
discussions are about; "For only $50 more, I can get different, better iPod!"
(which is fine as far as Apple is concerned).
As long as they were bothering with moving down to $250 space, they
might as well have offered a new, but similar design instead of just selling
the current iPod design with a 4Gb drive. More market potential that way.
After the iPodmini establishes itself as the leader in $250 space, Apple will
make the next move down to $200, and attempt to take that market. If they
can't meet expectations in units shipped and profits earned, that's where
they will stop. If they do well in the $200 market, maybe then we'll see a
$150 iPodmicro.
I predict that they'll sell all of the mini's they can make and in number of
units shipped, it will be Apple's most popular product ever.
What percentage of iPod customers would want ethernet, or know what to do with it?
There's more to the iPod than it's storage capacity and physical size.
And I don't mean the intangible things like the "cool" factor.
The interface works well for the task at hand and is intuitive enough
that it all of it's features can be easily learned and enjoyed without
a great deal of study, by the majority of it's customers.
It also feels good. Smooth and solid with your hand falling to the
controls almost perfectly.
The rest of the total package, iTunes and the Music Store also are
well integrated, reliable and intuitive to the majority of customers.
You're saying that all of that has no value?
On one hand, you say that Apple gets it "right" yet don't want to pay the extra amount that this forethought
requires in engineering time and effort. On the other, you state that Apple could use "a little healthy
competition" when, other than in music player space, the have a low single digit market share (or
at least thats what's constantly reported).
I'm not sure what you are really after but it seems that a small market share, combined with
rip-offs from taiwan would kill that Golden Goose completely and you would only be left with
Microsoft to show you what "good" is.
Apple's got no competition? Eh?
That's got to be the first Alan Sherman reference on ./
I'd be more intrested on being able to run OS X apps on desktop intel...
Oh Lord, not this thread again.
With 100M download codes, and the need to keep them short because they're
printed on bottle caps, how long until scripters start probing for music codes....
Damn pirates.
Yes folks, another shameless plug for tranquility.
.gov sites like
It's so much the "anti-game" that we've got more non-gamers playing than anyone else.
Much of our email feedback tells us that. We get a lot of comments like: "I don't normally play
video games, but tranquility is great, I just had to write you...".
Over one third of our players are women. In fact, the big hole in our demographic seems to
be where other computer games are popular. Guys under 20 just don't get us at all.
We are also very big with technical professionals. A bunch of players come from
NASA JPL, NIH, and the Dept. of Energy. There are at least two doctors that we know of
that use the game as part of a therapy regimen for treating post-stress, trauma, and sleep disorders.
We're also highly addictive (once you find out about us, and "get it"). Our game levels are
generated on-the-fly uniquely for each player from our servers, so we can track who's playing
and for how long. We've got one player in particular that signed up back in 2001 and has
played the game for over 1200 hours at last count. Much of that is due to the hallucinogenic
and vertigo inducing effects of playing the game. Many of the reviews on the 'net about tranquility
talk about how it gets you quite stoned, dizzy, and disoriented. (That was the real point of the game).
Many liken it to that game on the Star Trek episode that got the crew hooked. We agree.
Our biggest problem is with marketing a game that's targeted at non-gamers. This happens
with every publisher we have had contact with. Some publisher staffer falls in love with our game,
then when it comes time for Mr. Type-A Decision Maker to take a look at it, it's so unlike any
other game, they just don't get it. This reaction happens every time, and it's due to the design
of the game itself. Tranquility actually attempts to induce a tranquilizing effect in the player.
If you play aggressively and start thrashing around with the mouse, the engine tightens up
and makes it more difficult to play. You have to relax to make the game work.
Unfortunately, the upper-level execs got to that position by primal aggression, so when they sit
down to give us a try, they can't play the game at all and refuse to let go and submit to the game.
So we're stuck with mainly word of mouth marketing, which is why I end up writing posts like this.
I saw somebody using these at a trade show booth 8 years ago.
There's also a scene in the movie Philadelphia where Andy
goes into the board room (to get fired) and they flip a switch and
the windows go from clear to frosty. As I remember, they Foley'ed
in a big "clunk" when the switch is thrown. I guess it needed an audio
cue so you would notice that it happened.
Are those shortcomings Apple's fault?
Your key phrase: "second-rate Windows"
So New Yorkers should buy that new iPod on credit...