Seriously, even Apple users I know rant about their slot loading Macs (you can pry my tray loading Imac G3 from my cold, dead fingers). Both ideas were stupid.
Actually, the Apple slot-loading drive was a response to durability problems experienced by students when they used Mac laptops. Apparently kids were liable to snap the DVD tray right off the laptop. (Not good.) So it wasn't a stupid idea. More like an attempt to balance out a variety of needs.
That being said, you could always get a MacBook Air. Nothing says "high technology" like a complete lack of an optical drive.;-)
that doesn't work, all they have to know is that some ip address is serving up copyrighted material on a given port and shut of that port for that server.
I think you misunderstand how a Virtual Private Network works. The first thing you must understand is that there is not spoon^W ports. Once you realize that there are no ports, then you only need to route packets over a secure channel that's indistinguishable from valid business. Is this user networking with his small-business employer, or a pirate spreading illegal wares? Impossible to tell from the traffic itself.
I use iTunes, so for the most part I can't identify with your problem.:-P
But I agree. Television on-demand is a growing concern. While not perfect, the TV industry has been fairly good about responding with Tivo, iTunes, NBC.com, etc. There's still more progress to be made there, but it's moving right along. I'd say the Movie industry is currently the one lagging the greatest while the RIAA (which may or may not represent the companies they're SUPPOSED to represent) kicks and screams the most.
I searched the text looking for that term (since it was out of context) and didn't get any results when I checked. Ah, the wonders of the find function.:-/
In any case, my point still holds. Especially here:
The preciously few times that digital content is loosed upon the populace at a fair price and fair terms, it blooms and propers.
Fair price and fair terms are the cornerstone of the capitalist market. Combined they make for a valuable product. If you offer DRMed content at a price above what the market is willing to pay for it, then you can expect that no one will purchase it. As an example, this happened with several MovieLink titles when they were testing the waters for newer movies. The rental pricing was set higher than the nearest Blockbuster, thereby ensuring failure.
That's what I'm referring to when I speak of overpricing and fair prices. I'm NOT referring to the complaints about iTunes music being too expensive at 99 cents a track or other nonsense arguments. I believe that content producers have a right to make money as well. My only point is that it should be what the market can bear under terms that provide value to the market. Which is why I referred to your argument as a "strawman" as it was not the intended meaning at all.
Because they're wary of things that would facilitate illegal distribution [...] Because if they "rented" it online, they'd have to have really powerful DRM.
That's a silly argument. It's pitifully easy to rip a DVD and share it online. I know for a fact that I could go and download 300 off of Pirate Bay if I wanted. But I don't want to. I *want* to do the right thing. I *want* to purchase the movie legally from the content owner. I *want* MovieLink to have a better selection than when I was using it. I *want* iTunes to carry more blockbusters other than just Disney movies.
As a consumer, I want those things and have a track record of being willing to pay for them. The infrastructure exists in the form of MovieLink, iTunes, Vongo, etc., and are no more dangerous than a DVD. (In fact, it's quite a bit easier to rip from a DVD.) In most cases, they also generate the same revenue per copy. Yet studios are blind to these simple facts.
I think you'll find that it is customary to use brackets around an inferred term if it does not appear in the source material. In this particular case, I think you'll also find that I never stated nor inferred that overpricing was the problem. I stated that high price in concert with unfair terms lead to a devaluing of the product that made it undesirable to the consumer.
iTunes was successful despite its DRM. Part of the key to its success was that the DRM was not intrusive and thus not devaluing to the product.
At the risk of sounding cliche, all you have done is produce a strawman argument and then successfully knock it down.
That's not ironic. It's stupid and contrarian. This is how you add to a discussion:
Those who suggest that technological protections are not needed must, if they are intellectually honest, acknowledge, confront and speak to the tidal wave of unlawful, wholesale reproduction and distribution of copyrighted content that is currently occurring in the digital world on the broadband internet.
If we are truly to be intellectually honest, then we must address the problem of supply versus demand. Rampant piracy suggests that the demand for content delivered over the Internet is obvious. Yet digital content has traditionally been held hostage by physical media. In many of the instances that content is provided digitally, it is further held hostage behind walls of incompatibilities, digital restrictions, overpricing, poor terms of services, and other devaluing options. All in the name of "protecting" digital content.
The preciously few times that digital content is loosed upon the populace at a fair price and fair terms, it blooms and propers. Which (if we are to be "intellectually honest") means that the failure to prevent copyright infringement is a failure to provide what the average consumer wants. When the content producers fail, many consumers take matters into their own hands.
My dear Warner Bros., why has the DVD of 300 been available for over 6 months, yet it is impossible to purchase or rent online? BBC, why are you not catering to your international audience by providing quality shows like Doctor Who on services like iTunes? NBC, thank you for your website. We very much enjoy the television content you provide. Now why are you backing out of the lucrative iTunes deal? You don't need exclusivity in this business. Viacom, CBS makes a killing on promoting their Late Late Show on YouTube. Why are you cutting off promotion of your excellent Comedy Central series rather than embracing it? (And thereby having some modicum of control over it.)
No. If we are to be "intellectually honest", we must face the fact that content producers are afraid. The world has changed, yet content producers cling to any false sense of control they can find. Each of these walls crumble under the might of economic demand, for which content producers only call for a bigger wall. Your customer is not your enemy. As with the barbarians at the gates of Rome who only wanted the land and crops originally promised to them by the emperor, your customers only want easy access to the content you promise them. No one has proven that they are not willing to pay for that privilege.
This keyboard is meant to put the keyboard in as comfortable of a position as possible. You can move the different sections to different angles, as well as take them apart and put them on your lab.
I agree that the PCjr's chicklet keyboard was the worst, if you look only at the keyboard.
Have you ever tried using it? It was pretty horrid. It wasn't just the keys. The IR was the worst "innovation" known to mankind. Not only did you have to change the batteries on a regular basis, but the IR transmitters/sensors were receded; thus ensuring that the keyboard and computer had to be in perfect alignment. There's nothing more "fun" (*cough*( than being in the middle of a game and suddenly finding that your keyboard no longer works.
I'll agree that a full up crash because you moved the keyboard is worse, but that was more of a flaw of the computer's design as a whole. As far as just the keyboard went, the PCjr took the cake.
As I understood it, the real problem was that their upper management didn't have any vision whatsoever
That's pretty much it there. No need to quantify further. Commodore's success was entirely predicated on Jack Tramiel's vision for cheap and ubiquitous computing. When he caused a price war that killed half the computer industry and crashed the game console industry outright, the board freaked and gave him the boot. After that, they didn't know what to do with themselves. (Thus the poor market position of computers like the Plus/4.)
Honestly, the board should have seen it coming. Tramiel always said, "Business is war. I intend to win."
I can't believe that the C64's keyboard was given a worse rating than the Atari 400?
The article is in reverse order. The C64 was the best of the "worst" and the PCjr was the worst of the worst. Which, having been an owner of both, sounds like a good lineup to me.:)
It's a good thing that the Ataris were built like tanks. The amount of pressure that kids put on those membrane keyboards to "get them to work" was insane.
I dunno. Looking at the device on the website, I can't help but wonder if this isn't overhyped. It appears to only have 2 generic snap-in ports on top with the rest of the ports defining a more specific interface. What that means is not so much, "You define the final product", but more along the lines of, "You can use these attachements... or not."
It really doesn't seem all that different than your average embedded dev-kit + a USB hub. Certainly the comparison to LEGO does not hold. LEGOs are based on a key component of classical construction: The brick. Toys of its nature existed long before the LEGO was invented. The key innovation to the LEGO was the "snap-together" interface which gave the bricks a structural stability that their real-world counterpart lacked.
What you have here is not so much a key innovation on top of existing, generic components, but rather a repackaging of components that can be found in a variety of products. Of course, there's always the possibility that I'm underestimating this design. In which case I look forward to BUG proving me wrong.:-)
Actually, to correct myself, I'm confusing Y with U. (I don't know what the heck I'm smoking on that one.) U gets overloaded with an "oo" sound. Y is overloaded with an "ee" sound. Both U and Y have a common ancestry, having evolved from the same character (Upsilon). So Y and P sort have the same compatibility status.
Y and Y are fully equal in the historical sense. They derive from the same letter, and even convey the same sound in their respective languages. English overloads Y with a few different allographs, but pronouncing Y as "oo" is a common form.
P and P are different graphemes due to the evolution of the modern glyph by way of the Latin language. The Romans had already evolved a P symbol from Greek/Semitics, so when faced with P "Er" they chose to add a line to differentiate it; thus forming the modern letter R. P (ru) and R (en) are compatible graphemes, but incompatible symbols. P (ru) and P (en) are compatible symbols, but incompatible graphemes.
The fact that support.NET as part of Mono is hard and ongoing doesn't make Mono a "piece of crap".
Agreed. Mono is a piece of crap on its own merits. I apologize if I gave any other impression.
Mono doesn't work well on OS X because Apple is playing their own games with deliberate incompatibilities.
Your argument of deliberate X11 incompatibilities is nice (though difficult to accept at face value), but ignores the fact that 90% of my rant centered around the craptactular development environment that is shipped as "Mono". It's decidedly developer-unfriendly, and using it on a Mac was not the cause of that.
On a system where Java is installed, things are easy to build and run. I can run "ant all" and everything magically compiles. I can look at the documentation and understand what every class and method does. If it runs on one system, I can expect it to run on the rest. Dependencies are clearly defined and easy to resolve. (And explicitly clear when tied to a given OS due to JNI dependencies.)
None of that describes Mono. Mono is a piece of crap that simply perpetuates a poor state of dependency hell, while wrapping your core software in a semi-portable bytecode that provides no real-world advantage in portability.
I was actually wondering about that. I'm well aware that "Bank" is "baHK" (bahnk) in Russian, but Babelfish insisted that Kren Russee was a proper translation for "the bank of Russia". I wonder which "bank" it was thinking of. Stupid Babelfish.:-/
And yes, they are the same character, historically speaking. Both characters were borrowed from a common Greek/Semitic ancestry. Cross pollination of Latin and Cyrillic languages have lead to Cyrillic renderings of the letter that are more or less the same as the Latin rendering.
As I said, it depends on your font. In Arial, they are pixel for pixel. In Courier, they have slightly different shapes. Either way, it doesn't really matter. Very few people will notice the font differences. Why? Because they are the same characters. The fact that a computer provides two copies of the same character, actually causes as many problems as it solves.
I don't think you understand what I mean. I'm not saying that they are the same computer code. I'm saying that they are literally the same characters. Just used differently between Cyrillics and English. The fact that computers have different character codes for the languages is beside the point. In an international environment py is going to equal py. Which can create a bit of a problem. Did I just receive a legitimate email from bankofrussia.py or a phishing attempt from bankofrussia.py?
Can you tell the difference? I sure as hell can't. The only clue I have is that the browser encoded ErOo in the URL, while PY was spelled out in the URL. Otherwise I'd need to start looking for subtle differences that some character sets provide over others. (Sorry, in Arial they are the same pixel for pixel. Try Courier New.)
It's great that nations can use their own languages instead of being forced to use alien Latin-English characters.
In this case, the characters are exactly the same. It's just that 'p' (pronounced 'pee' in English) is the letter 'er' in Russian, and 'y' (pronouced 'why' in English) is the letter 'oo' in Russian. So.ru to us is literally.py to them.
Cyrillics has a number of Greek letters sprinkled in, but in this instance it is of no help.
When I finally got it up and running, I had as many problems with the API set as I did with the documentation. Mono is junk that gives people a false impression that.NET is portable. Nothing could be further from the truth. At best, it's an alternative development environment for Linux/Unix that just happens to be based on the ECMA-334 and ECMA-335 standards.
In that context, I think the author meant that we'll see Java-derived OpenJava become a competitor to.NET-derived Mono. Which is kind of silly anyway, as they would only be competing over the mindshare of the OSS community. Both are likely to be included in future Linux distributions, though OpenJava will have the mild advantage of running all Java software out of the box. Mono is still struggling to be fully compatible with its parent platform. (Not that full compatibility was ever really the goal.)
Still, the exact turn of phrase was rather amusing.:-)
Urine is sterile, and dog piss smells just as bad as human piss
Actually, that smell is bacteria getting a foothold on the once sterile urine.
Once it leaves your body, it's not going to be sterile for long. Thus urine is actually quite a bit of a health hazard. It's "okay" for a dog to piss on the street because no one has figured out a good alternative yet. Ideally you'd want your dog to use the grass instead (where it gets absorbed into the ground and becomes plant nutrients), but grass is hard to find in many parts of New York (especially Manhattan).
Poop is actually easier because you can pick it up and dispose of it. One of the coolest (and quite amusing) solutions I've heard of is to stick a paper plate under the dog when he starts to squat. That way it will all be collected on a disposable dish that's easier to collect and get rid of.
Go ahead and try using the arrow keys. Last time I checked, they worked as a backup.:-)
FWIW, a lot of Flash games are hardcoded with WASD or ASD controls. This has always had me a bit concerned due to the issues surrounding international keyboards. Of course, the solution at WiiCade is to just play on a Wii. But that belies the much larger issue. An issue that I'm afraid I have very little say in fixing.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the Apple slot-loading drive was a response to durability problems experienced by students when they used Mac laptops. Apparently kids were liable to snap the DVD tray right off the laptop. (Not good.) So it wasn't a stupid idea. More like an attempt to balance out a variety of needs.
That being said, you could always get a MacBook Air. Nothing says "high technology" like a complete lack of an optical drive.
Should have got her a Coleco Adam. Nothing like a computer that's tied its printer at the hip!
I think you misunderstand how a Virtual Private Network works. The first thing you must understand is that there is not spoon^W ports. Once you realize that there are no ports, then you only need to route packets over a secure channel that's indistinguishable from valid business. Is this user networking with his small-business employer, or a pirate spreading illegal wares? Impossible to tell from the traffic itself.
I use iTunes, so for the most part I can't identify with your problem. :-P
But I agree. Television on-demand is a growing concern. While not perfect, the TV industry has been fairly good about responding with Tivo, iTunes, NBC.com, etc. There's still more progress to be made there, but it's moving right along. I'd say the Movie industry is currently the one lagging the greatest while the RIAA (which may or may not represent the companies they're SUPPOSED to represent) kicks and screams the most.
Fair enough.
I searched the text looking for that term (since it was out of context) and didn't get any results when I checked. Ah, the wonders of the find function.
In any case, my point still holds. Especially here:
Fair price and fair terms are the cornerstone of the capitalist market. Combined they make for a valuable product. If you offer DRMed content at a price above what the market is willing to pay for it, then you can expect that no one will purchase it. As an example, this happened with several MovieLink titles when they were testing the waters for newer movies. The rental pricing was set higher than the nearest Blockbuster, thereby ensuring failure.
That's what I'm referring to when I speak of overpricing and fair prices. I'm NOT referring to the complaints about iTunes music being too expensive at 99 cents a track or other nonsense arguments. I believe that content producers have a right to make money as well. My only point is that it should be what the market can bear under terms that provide value to the market. Which is why I referred to your argument as a "strawman" as it was not the intended meaning at all.
That's a silly argument. It's pitifully easy to rip a DVD and share it online. I know for a fact that I could go and download 300 off of Pirate Bay if I wanted. But I don't want to. I *want* to do the right thing. I *want* to purchase the movie legally from the content owner. I *want* MovieLink to have a better selection than when I was using it. I *want* iTunes to carry more blockbusters other than just Disney movies.
As a consumer, I want those things and have a track record of being willing to pay for them. The infrastructure exists in the form of MovieLink, iTunes, Vongo, etc., and are no more dangerous than a DVD. (In fact, it's quite a bit easier to rip from a DVD.) In most cases, they also generate the same revenue per copy. Yet studios are blind to these simple facts.
I think you'll find that it is customary to use brackets around an inferred term if it does not appear in the source material. In this particular case, I think you'll also find that I never stated nor inferred that overpricing was the problem. I stated that high price in concert with unfair terms lead to a devaluing of the product that made it undesirable to the consumer.
iTunes was successful despite its DRM. Part of the key to its success was that the DRM was not intrusive and thus not devaluing to the product.
At the risk of sounding cliche, all you have done is produce a strawman argument and then successfully knock it down.
If we are truly to be intellectually honest, then we must address the problem of supply versus demand. Rampant piracy suggests that the demand for content delivered over the Internet is obvious. Yet digital content has traditionally been held hostage by physical media. In many of the instances that content is provided digitally, it is further held hostage behind walls of incompatibilities, digital restrictions, overpricing, poor terms of services, and other devaluing options. All in the name of "protecting" digital content.
The preciously few times that digital content is loosed upon the populace at a fair price and fair terms, it blooms and propers. Which (if we are to be "intellectually honest") means that the failure to prevent copyright infringement is a failure to provide what the average consumer wants. When the content producers fail, many consumers take matters into their own hands.
My dear Warner Bros., why has the DVD of 300 been available for over 6 months, yet it is impossible to purchase or rent online? BBC, why are you not catering to your international audience by providing quality shows like Doctor Who on services like iTunes? NBC, thank you for your website. We very much enjoy the television content you provide. Now why are you backing out of the lucrative iTunes deal? You don't need exclusivity in this business. Viacom, CBS makes a killing on promoting their Late Late Show on YouTube. Why are you cutting off promotion of your excellent Comedy Central series rather than embracing it? (And thereby having some modicum of control over it.)
No. If we are to be "intellectually honest", we must face the fact that content producers are afraid. The world has changed, yet content producers cling to any false sense of control they can find. Each of these walls crumble under the might of economic demand, for which content producers only call for a bigger wall. Your customer is not your enemy. As with the barbarians at the gates of Rome who only wanted the land and crops originally promised to them by the emperor, your customers only want easy access to the content you promise them. No one has proven that they are not willing to pay for that privilege.
ROVER! Come back here! I was typing, darn you!
Have you ever tried using it? It was pretty horrid. It wasn't just the keys. The IR was the worst "innovation" known to mankind. Not only did you have to change the batteries on a regular basis, but the IR transmitters/sensors were receded; thus ensuring that the keyboard and computer had to be in perfect alignment. There's nothing more "fun" (*cough*( than being in the middle of a game and suddenly finding that your keyboard no longer works.
I'll agree that a full up crash because you moved the keyboard is worse, but that was more of a flaw of the computer's design as a whole. As far as just the keyboard went, the PCjr took the cake.
That's pretty much it there. No need to quantify further. Commodore's success was entirely predicated on Jack Tramiel's vision for cheap and ubiquitous computing. When he caused a price war that killed half the computer industry and crashed the game console industry outright, the board freaked and gave him the boot. After that, they didn't know what to do with themselves. (Thus the poor market position of computers like the Plus/4.)
Honestly, the board should have seen it coming. Tramiel always said, "Business is war. I intend to win."
The article is in reverse order. The C64 was the best of the "worst" and the PCjr was the worst of the worst. Which, having been an owner of both, sounds like a good lineup to me.
It's a good thing that the Ataris were built like tanks. The amount of pressure that kids put on those membrane keyboards to "get them to work" was insane.
I dunno. Looking at the device on the website, I can't help but wonder if this isn't overhyped. It appears to only have 2 generic snap-in ports on top with the rest of the ports defining a more specific interface. What that means is not so much, "You define the final product", but more along the lines of, "You can use these attachements... or not."
:-)
It really doesn't seem all that different than your average embedded dev-kit + a USB hub. Certainly the comparison to LEGO does not hold. LEGOs are based on a key component of classical construction: The brick. Toys of its nature existed long before the LEGO was invented. The key innovation to the LEGO was the "snap-together" interface which gave the bricks a structural stability that their real-world counterpart lacked.
What you have here is not so much a key innovation on top of existing, generic components, but rather a repackaging of components that can be found in a variety of products. Of course, there's always the possibility that I'm underestimating this design. In which case I look forward to BUG proving me wrong.
Actually, to correct myself, I'm confusing Y with U. (I don't know what the heck I'm smoking on that one.) U gets overloaded with an "oo" sound. Y is overloaded with an "ee" sound. Both U and Y have a common ancestry, having evolved from the same character (Upsilon). So Y and P sort have the same compatibility status.
Sorry about the brainfart.
Y and Y are fully equal in the historical sense. They derive from the same letter, and even convey the same sound in their respective languages. English overloads Y with a few different allographs, but pronouncing Y as "oo" is a common form.
P and P are different graphemes due to the evolution of the modern glyph by way of the Latin language. The Romans had already evolved a P symbol from Greek/Semitics, so when faced with P "Er" they chose to add a line to differentiate it; thus forming the modern letter R. P (ru) and R (en) are compatible graphemes, but incompatible symbols. P (ru) and P (en) are compatible symbols, but incompatible graphemes.
Don'tcha just love allography and etymology? =D
Agreed. Mono is a piece of crap on its own merits. I apologize if I gave any other impression.
Your argument of deliberate X11 incompatibilities is nice (though difficult to accept at face value), but ignores the fact that 90% of my rant centered around the craptactular development environment that is shipped as "Mono". It's decidedly developer-unfriendly, and using it on a Mac was not the cause of that.
On a system where Java is installed, things are easy to build and run. I can run "ant all" and everything magically compiles. I can look at the documentation and understand what every class and method does. If it runs on one system, I can expect it to run on the rest. Dependencies are clearly defined and easy to resolve. (And explicitly clear when tied to a given OS due to JNI dependencies.)
None of that describes Mono. Mono is a piece of crap that simply perpetuates a poor state of dependency hell, while wrapping your core software in a semi-portable bytecode that provides no real-world advantage in portability.
I was actually wondering about that. I'm well aware that "Bank" is "baHK" (bahnk) in Russian, but Babelfish insisted that Kren Russee was a proper translation for "the bank of Russia". I wonder which "bank" it was thinking of. Stupid Babelfish. :-/
And yes, they are the same character, historically speaking. Both characters were borrowed from a common Greek/Semitic ancestry. Cross pollination of Latin and Cyrillic languages have lead to Cyrillic renderings of the letter that are more or less the same as the Latin rendering.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0
As I said, it depends on your font. In Arial, they are pixel for pixel. In Courier, they have slightly different shapes. Either way, it doesn't really matter. Very few people will notice the font differences. Why? Because they are the same characters. The fact that a computer provides two copies of the same character, actually causes as many problems as it solves.
I don't think you understand what I mean. I'm not saying that they are the same computer code. I'm saying that they are literally the same characters. Just used differently between Cyrillics and English. The fact that computers have different character codes for the languages is beside the point. In an international environment py is going to equal py. Which can create a bit of a problem. Did I just receive a legitimate email from bankofrussia.py or a phishing attempt from bankofrussia.py?
Can you tell the difference? I sure as hell can't. The only clue I have is that the browser encoded ErOo in the URL, while PY was spelled out in the URL. Otherwise I'd need to start looking for subtle differences that some character sets provide over others. (Sorry, in Arial they are the same pixel for pixel. Try Courier New.)
In this case, the characters are exactly the same. It's just that 'p' (pronounced 'pee' in English) is the letter 'er' in Russian, and 'y' (pronouced 'why' in English) is the letter 'oo' in Russian. So
Cyrillics has a number of Greek letters sprinkled in, but in this instance it is of no help.
Oh! Oh! I have! I have!
.NET is portable. Nothing could be further from the truth. At best, it's an alternative development environment for Linux/Unix that just happens to be based on the ECMA-334 and ECMA-335 standards.
It's a piece of crap.
When I finally got it up and running, I had as many problems with the API set as I did with the documentation. Mono is junk that gives people a false impression that
In that context, I think the author meant that we'll see Java-derived OpenJava become a competitor to .NET-derived Mono. Which is kind of silly anyway, as they would only be competing over the mindshare of the OSS community. Both are likely to be included in future Linux distributions, though OpenJava will have the mild advantage of running all Java software out of the box. Mono is still struggling to be fully compatible with its parent platform. (Not that full compatibility was ever really the goal.)
:-)
Still, the exact turn of phrase was rather amusing.
Actually, that smell is bacteria getting a foothold on the once sterile urine.
Once it leaves your body, it's not going to be sterile for long. Thus urine is actually quite a bit of a health hazard. It's "okay" for a dog to piss on the street because no one has figured out a good alternative yet. Ideally you'd want your dog to use the grass instead (where it gets absorbed into the ground and becomes plant nutrients), but grass is hard to find in many parts of New York (especially Manhattan).
Poop is actually easier because you can pick it up and dispose of it. One of the coolest (and quite amusing) solutions I've heard of is to stick a paper plate under the dog when he starts to squat. That way it will all be collected on a disposable dish that's easier to collect and get rid of.
Go ahead and try using the arrow keys. Last time I checked, they worked as a backup. :-)
FWIW, a lot of Flash games are hardcoded with WASD or ASD controls. This has always had me a bit concerned due to the issues surrounding international keyboards. Of course, the solution at WiiCade is to just play on a Wii. But that belies the much larger issue. An issue that I'm afraid I have very little say in fixing.